21 May 2015 Moscow Jane Fedotova Solicitor, Simmons & Simmons LLP

1. Emergency Arbitrator:
Overseas Experience and
Russian Arbitration Law
21 May 2015
Moscow
Jane Fedotova
Solicitor, Simmons & Simmons LLP
jane.fedotova@simmons-simmons.com
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/janef
edotova

2. 2 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 Why was the concept of emergency procedures introduced and what
are its origins?
 The Republic of Congo Case
 How do the rules of international arbitration institutions compare?
 What standards should be met to succeed in an application for
emergency relief?
 Is an emergency decision enforceable?
 How does the concept of emergency procedures interrelate within the
current Russian Arbitration Law?
 Should you apply for emergency relief and what are the consequences
of failure to comply with emergency decision?
Introduction

3. 3 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may, at the request
of a party, grant interim measures – Article 17 of UNCITRAL Model Law 2006
 Such measures are not available until formation of the arbitral tribunal
 Although the claimant may at any time apply for interim measures to the court,
it might be reluctant to do so for the following reasons:
– publicity
– reputational risks which may lead to loss of profits, it will take years to
rebuild the lost reputation
– absence of highly skilled and specialised judges
– inflexible and bureaucratic court procedures
– interference of the courts in private dispute resolution
 Solution: introduction of emergency procedures which allow in urgent
circumstances to apply for an emergency relief before formation of the tribunal
Reasons for Introduction of Emergency Procedures

4. 4 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 For the first time emergency procedures were introduced in the ICC Pre-Arbitral
Referee Procedure 1990 (the “Rules”)
 However, the Rules were not popular for the following reasons:
– they required parties to sign a separate agreement (opt-in), and
– there was uncertainty with regards to enforceability of decisions of a referee
 The Republic of Congo 2003 case was the first case to consider the nature of
the pre-arbitral procedures
 The Republic of Congo applied to set aside the order of the referee under
Article 1504 of the French New Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the
arbitral awards
 The other side opposed the application on the basis that (a) the Rules did not
provide for arbitration and (b) the order was not a binding and final award
The Republic of Congo Case

5. 5 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 The Court of Appeal of Paris noted that:
– the preamble of the Rules referred to the referee as a third party
– the Rules did not refer to the referee as an arbitrator
– there was no reference in the Procedure to arbitration
– the referee ordered not to obstruct the performance of the contract
– referred the underlying dispute to the arbitral tribunal
 The Court held that:
– the referee was not an arbitrator
– the binding nature of the order derived from the agreement
– the order had no more binding effect than a contractual provision as
opposed to the binding effect of a decision having res judicata
 The ruling was criticised because of its formalistic approach and since then
there were attempts to rectify the position
The Republic of Congo Case

6. 6 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
How Do
the Rules
about
Emergency
Procedures
Compare?

7. 7 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 The LCIA Rules provide for both expedited formation of a tribunal and
emergency procedures. The emergency arbitrator may grant both orders and
awards
 The ICC Rules allow the emergency arbitrator to grant only orders
 In SIAC and HKIAC arbitrations seated in Singapore and Hong Kong
respectively decisions of emergency arbitrators are enforceable under local
arbitration law
 Swiss Rules allow an emergency application to be submitted without notice to
the other side
 ICDR Rules do not require payment of a special fee for emergency procedures
 SCC Rules state that an emergency decision shall be made not later than 5
days from the date of transfer of the file to the emergency arbitrator, and such
time limit may be extended by the Board, if necessary
How Do the Rules Compare?

8. 8 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 The application must comply with the formal requirements, such as:
– name and contact details of the parties and their representatives
– confirmation of the payment of a special fee
– comments on the language, seat of arbitration and applicable law
– enclose arbitration agreement and other relevant documents
– enclose a Request for Arbitration (LCIA, SIAC, HKIAC) or a confirmation
that the claim will be issued shortly (ICC, SCC, Swiss Rules), and other
 The applicant must also demonstrate that:
– it has a prima facie case
– it may suffer “irreparable harm” unless the emergency relief is granted
– the circumstances are of an urgent nature which cannot await the
constitution of an arbitral tribunal / final decision
– the emergency relief does not prejudge the merits of the case
What Makes a Successful Application?

9. 9 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 The SCC Practice Paper about Emergency Arbitrator Decisions made in 1
January 2010 – 31 December 2013 (by Johan Lundstedt)
 Practical Examples
What Makes a Successful Application?

10. 10 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 Enforcement of an emergency decision involves:
– consideration of particular arbitration rules
– interrelation of the arbitration rules with the provisions of the New York
Convention 1958
– relevant local arbitration legislation
 Article 2a of the Singapore International Arbitration Act definition of “arbitral
tribunal” includes an emergency arbitrator and his decisions are enforced as
any other decisions of the arbitral tribunal
 Part 3A of the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance allows the recognition and
enforcement of “any emergency relief granted, whether in or outside Hong
Kong, by an emergency arbitrator under the relevant arbitration rules”
 a Singapore-seated emergency arbitrator order would enjoy recognition and
enforcement in Hong Kong, but not vice versa
Is an Emergency Decision Enforceable?

11. 11 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 In Chinmax Medical Systems Inc. v Alere San Diego Inc. the US court held that
the court will not interfere where the decision of an emergency arbitrator may be
reviewed by the arbitral tribunal under Article 37 of the ICDR Rules
 But the court decision in the Yahoo ! Inc. v Microsoft Corp. case confirms that it
is possible to enforce a decision of an emergency arbitrator in the US
 In this case the emergency decision was granted under the AAA Optional Rules
of Emergency Measures of Protection 1999, which provide limited options for
review of an emergency decision
 The Agreement, in the same provision that adopted the Emergency Measures,
stated “the parties agree that the arbitrator is authorised to compel and award
interim injunctive or emergency relief … and the arbitrator may compel and
award specific performance (in addition to any other remedies and including in
connection with claims for interim, injunctive or emergency relief)”.
Is an Emergency Decision Enforceable?

12. 12 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 Russian law distinguishes between domestic and international arbitration
 There is no reference to any pre-arbitral procedures in either current domestic
or international arbitration law
 However, the Arbitration Bill relating to domestic arbitration provides that the
arbitration institution may grant interim measures before formation of the
tribunal
 Article 9 of the Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1993 permits
applications to the court for interim measures before or after the constitution of
the tribunal
 According to Russian legal doctrine interim measures obtained in arbitration
may be either voluntary (ordered by the Tribunal) or compulsory (ordered by the
court)
Emergency Procedures and Russian Arbitration Law

13. 13 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 It is unlikely that Russian courts will enforce emergency decisions for the
following reasons:
– according to paragraph 33 of the Ruling No. 55 of the Plenum of the former
Supreme Commercial Court “On application of the interim measures”
foreign court decisions granting interim measures are not regarded as
final in a sense that they do not determine the merits of the case
– according to paragraph 26 of the Information Letter No. 78 of Presidium of
the former Supreme Commercial Court, dated 07 July 2004
“other” court decisions granted before or after the determination of the
merits of the dispute are not enforceable because they are not final and
are made without review of all evidence in the case
Emergency Procedures and Russian Arbitration Law

14. 14 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
 You should apply, unless interim measures are sought against third parties
 If there is a risk of non-enforceability, apply simultaneously for an emergency
decision and to the court
 If you apply to the court in parallel, immediately notify the emergency arbitrator,
secretariat and the other side
 If a party fails to comply with an emergency decision the Tribunal may draw
negative inferences
 Failure to comply with an emergency decision may be taken into account by the
Tribunal in determining costs
Should You Apply and What Are the Consequences of
Failure to Comply with the Emergency Decision?

15. 15 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009
Jane Fedotova, MCIArb, LL.M.
jane.fedotova@simmons-simmons.com
Jane is a solicitor at Simmons & Simmons and a Russian qualified lawyer. She
works closely with the CIS practice group and focuses on commercial litigation
and international arbitration. Jane has completed a secondment at the LCIA
where she was responsible for administration of the CIS cases. Jane graduated
from the Lomonosov Moscow State University and obtained an LL.M. degree
from the University College London. She is a Member of the Chartered Institute
of Arbitrators. Jane regularly writes articles and participates in conferences
relating to arbitration. Jane speaks Russian, English, Lithuanian, German and
Polish.
Any Questions?

16. 16 / L_LIVE_EMEA1:26497045v1
© Simmons & Simmons 2009