Preview

Actual Problems of Russian Law

Advanced search

Arbitration and compliance verification

https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2019.101.4.070-079

Abstract

The article is devoted to the analysis of arbitration proceedings in the context of its participation in the implementation of judicial regulatory compliance verification. The fact that the arbitration court is bound by the requirement of legality and the need to implement casual regulatory control in accordance with the existing conflict of laws rules is substantiated based on the idea of the universal nature of the constitutional imperative of the rule of law and the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the understanding of the threefold nature of the arbitration court that combines social and jurisdictional, self-regulatory (law-forming) and mediation (conciliation) principles. At the same time, the legal nature of the arbitration proceedings should, in the author’s opinion, be disclosed not in a formal dogmatic manner or through commitment to the requirements of legal discipline as strict as in the state court, but on the basis of judicial activism and development of law in the context of social and business practice. The arbitration court may act contra legem to enhance the protection of the rights of the parties to the proceedings based on general, constitutional and sectoral principles of law. Faced with the applicable rule that violates the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the arbitration court must have the right to request the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (also in the form of a request obligation, if the decision of the arbitration court is final).

About the Author

O. A. Benedskaya
Muranov, Chernyakov & Partners law firm
Russian Federation

Attorney, Senior Associate;

presenter at the International Commercial Arbitration Court and the Maritime Arbitration Commission at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation,

119991, Moscow, ul. Denisovskiy per., d. 23, str. 6



References

1. Baleevskih L. S. Tretejskij sud kak zayavitel’ v Konstitucionnom Sude Rossii // Tretejskij sud. — 2014. — № 6.

2. Bondar’ N. S. Sudebnyj konstitucionalizm: doktrina i praktika. — 2-e izd, pererab. — M., 2015.

3. Zor’kin V. D. Konstitucionno-pravovoe razvitie Rossii. — M. : Norma, 2011.

4. Kruss V. I. Konstitucionalizaciya pravosudiya i konstitucionno-pravovye predely neposredstvennoj demokratii v Rossijskoj Federacii // Rossijskij yuridicheskij zhurnal. — 2013. — № 3.

5. Kurochkin S. A. Tretejskoe razbiratel’stvo i mezhdunarodnyj kommercheskij arbitrazh. — M. : Statut, 2017.

6. Miryasheva E. V., Pavlikov S. G., Safonov V. E. Sudebnyj konstitucionnyj kontrol’ v Rossii i zarubezhnyh stranah: istoriya i sovremennost’ : monografiya. — M. : Rossijskij gosudarstvennyj universitet pravosudiya, 2015.

7. Nikitin S. V. Kosvennyj sudebnyj normokontrol’: ponyatie i problemy realizacii // Zhurnal rossijskogo prava. — 2014. — № 1.

8. Nikitin S. V. Sudebnyj kontrol’ za zakonnost’yu normativnyh pravovyh aktov : ucheb. posobie dlya bakalavriata i magistratury. — M. : Yurajt, 2018.

9. Orlova K. A. Teoretiko-pravovye aspekty statusa sud’i kak sub»ekta prava : avtoref. dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk. — Kaliningrad, 2017.

10. Pokrovskij I. A. Osnovnye problemy grazhdanskogo prava. — 3-e izd., stereotip. — M., 2001.

11. Yasus M. V. Voprosy ekonomicheskoj effektivnosti novogo zakonodatel’stva ob arbitrazhe v Rossii // Vestnik arbitrazhnoj praktiki. — 2017. — № 1.


Review

For citations:


Benedskaya O.A. Arbitration and compliance verification. Actual Problems of Russian Law. 2019;(4):70-79. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2019.101.4.070-079

Views: 502


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1994-1471 (Print)
ISSN 2782-1862 (Online)