Drawing on concrete examples from arbitration practice, the author examines problems that arise in the hearing of complaints against arbitration court decisions by appellate and cassational instances.
In the contemporary science of international private law there are the legislative (conventional) and non-legislative (non-conventional) methods for the unification of the law of international commercial agreements.
The article deals with the procedure for the conclusion of international commercial agreements regulated by the principles of UNIDROIT – a document drawn up by the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) which formulates a code of provisions of a legal nature and is addressed directly to partners in international transactions.
The Bar is one of the key institutions of the legal system in Switzerland, its main function being to maintain the link between the public and the state.
Discussion of the main theme of the article is preceded by a comparative analysis of the provisions of the 1874 Constitution of Switzerland concerning the judicial system and the new Constitution that came into force on 1 January 2000.
It is unfortunate that that the Federal law of the Russian Federation “On international commercial arbitration” does not regulate all the problems arising in connection with the examination of petitions for the revocation of arbitration decisions, and also their acknowledgement and execution.
On the basis of an analysis of concrete court cases, this article demonstrates the practice of Russian courts in examining claims requesting authorization for the enforced execution of decisions reached in international commercial arbitration, and also petitions for the revocation of court decisions.
