The arbitration agreement.

It is a well-established rule that commercial arbitration stems from an agreement to arbitrate, which is a prerequisite and a basis for the arbitral procedure. The entire process, from its inception to the award, originates in the agreement of the parties. A valid agreement determines whether the courts can assist arbitration, e.g. in adopting interim measures, obtaining evidence, and enforcing arbitral awards

Yukos case: background and the main themes.

Arbitral awards in investor-state disputes are often so extensively commented upon that, for those who take an interest in the area, it can become hard to say which is more voluminous - the actual case record or it's academic and media coverage. Such attention is understandable; the subject of investment arbitration is fascinating, and cases like Yukos only reinforce this point. After ten years which the parties spent arguing in front of various courts and tribunals, the three final awards of 18 July 2014 awarded Yukos's former majority shareholders an all-time record amount in compensation for investment arbitration - more than {dollar}50 billion (to put this number in perspective, this is roughly equivalent to 13% of Russia's federal budget revenue for 2014 ). The Yukos affair is also intricately interwoven with Russian politics and modern Russian history, which makes it even more interesting at times like the present, when Russia frequently makes headlines in international news. This paper, without an ambition of providing a comprehensive account, aims to give the reader a brief summary of the facts, to outline the history of legal proceedings, and to point out some of the recurring themes surrounding the discussions of Yukos case

Contracts affected by economic sanctions: Russian and international perspectives.

Economic sanctions, particularly unilateral ones, are an increasingly popular instrument of foreign policy. Some states have extensive experience in adopting them and in resolving private disputes arising from such measures. For other countries, this practice is more recent and their sanction regimes are not as mature. Against the background of post-2014 sanction regimes targeting Russia and its counter-sanctions, this article considers the primary aspects of the impact sanctions have on the private contractual sphere. These include qualification of sanctions as a ground for invalidity of contracts and as impediment excusing debtors from the performance of their obligations. The article begins by analysing the theoretical framework developed in international doctrine and practice. It highlights the differences between the application of sanctions by domestic courts and by arbitral tribunals and considers their significance. Alongside its international counterparts, the article considers Russian domestic statutory regulation, which is well-developed and similar to that in other civil law European jurisdictions. Although it is possible to hypothesise on the possible judicial approaches, available Russian case law on this subject remains scarce and occasionally inconsistent. The avenues for further development of fundamental approaches in the practice of courts and arbitral tribunals are explored in the conclusion

Economic sanctions arbitrability and public policy.

This article, through an overview of international experience, considers the interplay between economic sanctions and international commercial arbitration, in particular, the effect of sanctions on the arbitrability of disputes and the public policy exception. Both arbitrability and public policy have previously been used to address the sanctions issue in arbitration, and the courts will likely have to deal with them again in the future. The article argues that any impact of sanctions on arbitrability of disputes is unjustified, but the use of public policy as a ground to challenge awards and to refuse their recognition and enforcement, as well as to invalidate arbitral agreements, has to remain the primary tool of control for the competent national courts. It also considers how, in the atmosphere of high foreign policy tension, even a court decision to recognise and enforce an arbitral award does not always guarantee the payment of an award debt. Where an an overseas government subject to economic sanctions is involved in such a case, this raises a host of additional questions related to sovereign immunity, and may provide other creditors of that state with additional opportunities for the debt recovery

Award.

An arbitral award is the ultimate result of the proceedings, and parties normally expect their arbitration to end in a final and binding award. It is therefore unsurprising that Article 2 of the Arbitration Act 2015 defines arbitration as a process whereby the tribunal resolves a dispute and renders an award. This definition places a special emphasis on two aspects of the arbitral mechanism: the process and the award