Risks of "Pocket Arbitration" Ad Hoc : Intermediate Results of the Arbitration Reform in Russia

A. Kurnosov
{"title":"Risks of \"Pocket Arbitration\" Ad Hoc : Intermediate Results of the Arbitration Reform in Russia","authors":"A. Kurnosov","doi":"10.21603/2542-1840-2022-6-4-333-341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article deals with the arbitration court formed to resolve a specific dispute. One-party court, or the so-called \"pocket arbitration\", is a situation where arbitrators cannot comply with the principle of impartiality due to the fact that the arbitral tribunal is a structural unit of one of the parties or part of the same holding company. As a result of the reform of arbitration proceedings in Russia, the niche of \"pocket\" permanent arbitration courts has been filled with situational arbitration, where the party with a stronger negotiating position determine the arbitrator and the rules. This phenomenon is becoming popular in disputes between microfinance organizations and borrowers, which, given the particular sensitivity of this area, requires public law intervention. The freedom of the parties to the contract is limited in order to prevent infringement of the rights and legitimate interests of the economically weaker party. Arbitration model is liberal as it is based on the autonomy of will. Arbitration ad hoc has its advantages in unique disputes where the parties are ready to determine the figure of the arbitrator and the rules for considering the dispute. However, this institution demonstrates signs of distortion, which means it needs restrictions. The existing regulatory restrictions and clarifications were defined by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, but they proved ineffective in practice. The author proposes to ban situational arbitration in case of loan agreements with microfinance organizations.","PeriodicalId":33387,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21603/2542-1840-2022-6-4-333-341","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article deals with the arbitration court formed to resolve a specific dispute. One-party court, or the so-called "pocket arbitration", is a situation where arbitrators cannot comply with the principle of impartiality due to the fact that the arbitral tribunal is a structural unit of one of the parties or part of the same holding company. As a result of the reform of arbitration proceedings in Russia, the niche of "pocket" permanent arbitration courts has been filled with situational arbitration, where the party with a stronger negotiating position determine the arbitrator and the rules. This phenomenon is becoming popular in disputes between microfinance organizations and borrowers, which, given the particular sensitivity of this area, requires public law intervention. The freedom of the parties to the contract is limited in order to prevent infringement of the rights and legitimate interests of the economically weaker party. Arbitration model is liberal as it is based on the autonomy of will. Arbitration ad hoc has its advantages in unique disputes where the parties are ready to determine the figure of the arbitrator and the rules for considering the dispute. However, this institution demonstrates signs of distortion, which means it needs restrictions. The existing regulatory restrictions and clarifications were defined by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, but they proved ineffective in practice. The author proposes to ban situational arbitration in case of loan agreements with microfinance organizations.
临时“口袋仲裁”的风险:俄罗斯仲裁改革的中间结果
该条涉及为解决具体争议而成立的仲裁法院。一党制法院,即所谓的“口袋仲裁”,是指仲裁庭是一方当事人的结构单位或同一控股公司的组成部分,仲裁员无法遵守公正原则的情况。由于俄罗斯仲裁程序改革的结果,“口袋”常设仲裁法院的利基被具有更强谈判地位的一方决定仲裁员和规则的情景仲裁所填补。这种现象在小额信贷组织和借款人之间的纠纷中越来越普遍,鉴于这一领域的特殊敏感性,需要公法干预。合同各方的自由是有限的,以防止侵犯经济实力较弱一方的权利和合法利益。仲裁模式是自由的,因为它是以意志自治为基础的。临时仲裁在独特的争议中有其优势,因为当事方已经准备好确定仲裁员的人数和审议争议的规则。但是,这个制度出现了扭曲的迹象,这意味着需要限制。现有的管制限制和澄清是由俄罗斯联邦最高法院全体会议确定的,但在实践中证明是无效的。作者建议禁止与小额信贷机构签订贷款协议时的情景仲裁。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
107
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信