- You are here:
- Home
- Court Decisions
- RUSSIAN FEDERATION 61
RUSSIAN FEDERATION 61
First Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction, Judicial Board for Civil Cases, 26 January 2023, Case No. 88-1507/2023 (3m-16/2022)
(Sberbank Investments LLC v. Mr. ... Read more
First Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction, Judicial Board for Civil Cases, 26 January 2023, Case No. 88-1507/2023 (3m-16/2022)
(Sberbank Investments LLC v. Mr. Garkusha)
RUSSIAN FEDERATION 61
The Court affirmed the lower courts’ decisions to recognize and enforce an ICC award rendered in London, which ordered the defendant, who had commenced the arbitration but whose claims had been denied, to pay Sberbank’s arbitration costs. The Court denied the defendant’s argument that exequatur would be in violation of public policy because the arbitral tribunal did not take into account the principles of proportionality and reasonableness of costs. The Court noted that the arbitrators had decided on costs in accordance with the ICC Arbitration Rules, and that the defendant had not raised any objections.
The court discusses the determination and relevance of the place where the award was made (in a foreign State or another contracting State.
The court discusses the principle that the procedure for the enforcement of awards under the Convention is governed by the lex fori, as well as procedural issues (such as the competent enforcement court) not falling under the specific cases of ¶¶ 302-307.
The court discusses the general conditions the Convention imposes on a petitioner for seeking recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award – namely, the submission of the original arbitration agreement or arbitral award or a certified copy thereof – and examines in general whether these conditions were complied in the case at issue.
The court discusses how to determine whether the document supplied is an award capable of being recognized and enforced, including whether the award is duly authenticated, and whether a copy is duly certified; whether a prior interim and/or partial award should be supplied together with the final award.
The court discusses the overall scheme and/or pro-enforcement bias of the Convention.
The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.
Public policy: The court discusses the meaning of (international as compared to domestic) public policy, generally defined as the basic notions of morality and justice of the enforcement State.
Public policy: The court discusses the effect of other alleged violations of public policy on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, such as contradictory reasons, manifest disregard of the law (US), etc.