Up
Decision of The Hague court on YUKOS case
21.04.2016
The Hague district court relieved Russia from payment of $50 billion compensation to former YUKOS shareholders. The court held invalid six arbitration awards of The Hague Court of Arbitration. Ex-shareholders of the oil company intend to defend their claims in courts of higher instances.
“The arguments brought up by the Russian party which were reflected in the judgment are sufficient not to make any arbitration award against it. And it was basically made “for revocation”, managing partner of YUST Law Firm Evgeny Zhilin told Pravo.ru portal. Of course, the shareholders will not stop and will reach higher court instances, and will also try to enforce the arbitration award in other countries, the lawyer added. The case is that revocation of a decision does not automatically mean impossibility to enforce it in the territories of other countries. “For example, in its time a Russian arbitration award against Rosneft was enforced in the Netherlands despite the fact it was later revoked by Russian arbitration courts”, Evgeny Zhilin clarified.
“The judgment of The Hague district court is not a reason to relax, as it is only one episode of a long-term judicial conflict”, Evgeny Zhilin mentioned. At the same time, the arguments of the Russian party are in his opinion rather clear and understandable, while the arguments of the plaintiffs seem rather artificial. “A decision should not be made against a sovereign state based on a treaty (Energy Charter Treaty) that did not become part of its legal system,” the lawyer underlined. “Another issue is that the arbitrators who unanimously made this decision might have taken into account some politically biased arguments of the plaintiffs (in particular, the fact that the Russian legal system does not comply with international standards)”.
Read more
The Hague district court relieved Russia from payment of $50 billion compensation to former YUKOS shareholders. The court held invalid six arbitration awards of The Hague Court of Arbitration. Ex-shareholders of the oil company intend to defend their claims in courts of higher instances.“The arguments brought up by the Russian party which were reflected in the judgment are sufficient not to make any arbitration award against it. And it was basically made “for revocation”, managing partner of YUST Law Firm Evgeny Zhilin told Pravo.ru portal. Of course, the shareholders will not stop and will reach higher court instances, and will also try to enforce the arbitration award in other countries, the lawyer added. The case is that revocation of a decision does not automatically mean impossibility to enforce it in the territories of other countries. “For example, in its time a Russian arbitration award against Rosneft was enforced in the Netherlands despite the fact it was later revoked by Russian arbitration courts”, Evgeny Zhilin clarified.
“The judgment of The Hague district court is not a reason to relax, as it is only one episode of a long-term judicial conflict”, Evgeny Zhilin mentioned. At the same time, the arguments of the Russian party are in his opinion rather clear and understandable, while the arguments of the plaintiffs seem rather artificial. “A decision should not be made against a sovereign state based on a treaty (Energy Charter Treaty) that did not become part of its legal system,” the lawyer underlined. “Another issue is that the arbitrators who unanimously made this decision might have taken into account some politically biased arguments of the plaintiffs (in particular, the fact that the Russian legal system does not comply with international standards)”.
Read more
Rankings and Partners
