Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica (AUC Iuridica) is a legal journal published since 1955, which presents longer essays as well as short articles on topics relevant for legal theory and international, European and Czech law. It also publishes works concerning current legislative problems.
Although intended primarily for domestic audience, AUC Iuridica is useful also for foreign experts, who can take advantage of summaries in foreign languages (English, German and French) and key words, which are systematically added to the main articles and essays.
The published articles are subject to peer reviews. If necessary, reviewed texts are sent back to the author for revision.
AUC Iuridica accepts contributions from any contributor on any current legal topic.
The journal is registered in the Czech National Bibliography (kept by the National Library of the Czech Republic) and in the Index to Foreign Legal Periodicals (kept by the American Association of Law Libraries).
The journal is archived in Portico.
–––
We are pleased to inform you that the journal Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica was the first journal of the Faculty of Law of Charles University to be included in the prestigious international database SCOPUS. This Elsevier database is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature in the world. The editors of the journal expect from the inclusion in the elite SCOPUS database not only an increase in the readership of the journal, but also an increase in interest in the publication of papers by both Czech and foreign authors.
AUC IURIDICA, Vol 68 No 3 (2022), 123–138
International Commercial Arbitration as a Modern Self-Regulation Tool in Hybrid War
Olena M. Honcharenko, Olga O. Bakalinska, Olena A. Belianevych, Svitlana I. Bevz, Olena A. Chernenko
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2022.40
published online: 14. 09. 2022
abstract
One of the tools of self-regulation, which helps to settle a dispute between commercial counterparties from different states is international commercial arbitration. International commercial arbitration is an alternative to the dispute resolution process in state courts, that is – it is an alternative to the mechanisms of the state process. The problem of considering international commercial arbitration through the prism of self-regulation has not been studied from all perspectives and diversity. This issue is especially relevant when businesses seek protection of their violated rights to international commercial arbitration in a hybrid war. It is important to examine: how a self-regulatory instrument is able to implement protection when war is waged. The question arises whether private jurisdiction can provide adequate protection to commercial entities. What is the role of international commercial arbitration? How the public authorities will implement the decisions made by the arbitration against the aggressor state (the state violating investment obligations). Settlement of disputes in a hybrid war can be called “hybrid investment disputes” or “hybrid commercial disputes” depending on the object of the dispute.
keywords: international arbitration; hybrid investment disputes; commercial disputes; businesses seek protection; international chambers of commerce
references (40)
1. About the SCC [online]. 2020 [cit. 2021-09-03]. Available at: https://sccinstitute.com/about-the-scc/.
2. Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Moldova on the Encouragement and Mutual Protection of Investments [online]. 1998 [cit. 2021-09-04]. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/901788244.
3. Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine on the Encouragement Mutual Protection of Investments [online]. 1998 [cit. 2021-09-05]. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/643_101.
4. American Arbitration Association International Centre for Dispute Resolution [online]. 2020 [cit. 2021-09-04]. Available at: https://www.adr.org/about.
5. APPELBAUM, R. P. - FELSTINER, W. L. F. - GESSNER, V. Rules and networks: the legal culture of global business transactions. Portland: Hart Pub, 2001.
6. Arbitration Between JSC CB Privatbank and the Financial Company Finillon LLC as Claimants by The Russian Federation [online]. 2019 [cit. 2021-09-04]. Available at: https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw10354.pdf.
7. BANTEKAS, I. Equal treatment of parties in international commercial arbitration. International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 2020, Vol. 69, No. 4, pp. 991-1011. CrossRef
8. BARBERIĆ, L. - ČOLAK, D. - DOLMAGIĆ, J. Prosecuting war crimes and meeting obligations under the convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the same time - the case of Croatia. Croatian International Relations Review. 2015, Vol. 21, pp. 41-46. CrossRef
9. BERMANN, G. A. Recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards: the interpretation and application of the New York convention by national courts. New York: Springer International Publishing, 2017. CrossRef
10. CAMERON, P. International energy investment law: the pursuit of stability. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
11. Decision No. А41-15132/2018 [online]. 2019 [cit. 2021-09-05]. Available at: https://sudact.ru/vsrf/doc/QDufuquWk15u/?vsrf-txt=международный+коммерческий+арбитраж&vsrf-case_doc=&vsrf-lawchunkinfo=&vsrf-doc_type=&vsrf-date_from=&vsrf-date_to=&.
12. Decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. А40-169144/17 [online]. 2013 [2021-09-03]. Available at: https://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/980715r1.html.
13. DEZALAY, Y. - GARTH, B. G. Dealing in virtue: international commercial arbitration and the construction of a transnational legal order. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
14. England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) Decisions [online]. 2011 [cit. 2021-09-06]. Available at: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2011/1957.html.
15. England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) Decisions [online]. 2018 [cit. 2021-09-06]. Available at: https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2018/1797.html&query=(Ukraine-Russia)+AND+(BIT).
16. FARAH, A. Q. - HATTAB, R. M. The application of shariah finance rules in international commercial arbitration. Utrecht Law Review. 2020, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 117-139. CrossRef
17. FERREIRA, A. Intertwined paths of globalization and international investment law. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy. 2020, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 85-99. CrossRef
18. FIADJOE, A. Alternative dispute resolution: a developing world perspective. Abingdon: Routledge Cavendish, 2013. CrossRef
19. GONCHARENKO, O. - NESKORODZHENA, L. Self-regulation of culture: the role of public associations and electronic communication. Herald National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts. 2018, Vol. 4, pp. 121-126. CrossRef
20. HAUFLER, V. A public role for the private sector: industry self-regulation in a global economy. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2001.
21. HELLERSTEIN, J. United states district court southern district of New York [online]. 2009 [cit. 2021-09-04]. Available at: http://www.pravo.ru/store/interdoc/doc/131/Yukos.pdf.
22. HONCHARENKO, О. M. International commercial arbitration. Nizhyn: Nizhyn Mykola Gogol State University Publishing House, 2014.
23. INCHAKOVA, A. - KAZACHENOK, S. To principles in the jurisprudence of international commercial arbitration: a comparative study of the London Court of international arbitration and the international commercial arbitration court at the chamber of commerce and industry of the Russian Federation. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues. 2018, Vol. 21, No. 3, article number 12.
24. Interinstitutional agreement on better law-making (2003/C 321/01). The European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities [online]. 2003 [2021-09-03]. Available at: www.legislationline.org/.../EU%20Interinstitutional%20Agre.
25. JEMIELNIAK, J. Comparative analysis as an autonomization strategy in international commercial arbitration. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law. 2018, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 155-173. CrossRef
26. JONES, Т. Russia held liable again over Crimean assets [online]. 2019 [cit. 2021-09-05]. Available at: https://globalarbitrationreview.com/article/1180413/russia-held-liable-again-over-crimean-assets.
27. KELLOR, F. American arbitration: its history, functions and achievements. Washington, BeardBooks, 1999.
28. MAZARAKI, N. A. Effective system of commercial disputes resolution as a prerequisite of economic progress. Scientific Bulletin of Polissia. 2018, Vol. 2, pp. 181-187. CrossRef
29. Naftogaz Wins Case in Hague Arbitration over Property Lost due to Crimea Occupation [online]. 2019 [cit. 2021-09-03]. Available at: https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/naftogaz-wins-hague-arbitration-over-property-lost-in-crimea-annexation.html.
30. NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine, PJSC State Joint Stock Company Chornomornaftogaz, PJSC Ukrtransgaz, Subsidiary Company Likvo, PJSC Ukrgasvydobuvannya, PJSC Ukrtransnafta, and Subsidiary Company Gaz Ukraiiny v the Russian Federation [online]. 1998 [cit. 2021-09-03]. Available at: https://www.italaw.com/cases/4381.
31. ORLOV, M. Protecting investments in the occupied territories [online]. 2018 [cit. 2021-09-06]. Available at: http://yur-gazeta.com/publications/practice/inshe/zahist-investiciy-na-okupovanih-teritoriyah.html.
32. Oschadbank Wins in International Arbitration USD 1.3 Billion from Russia as Compensation of Losses from Crimea Annexation [online]. 2018 [cit. 2021-09-05]. Available at: https://ukranews.com/en/news/598200-oschadbank-wins-in-international-arbitration-usd-13-billion-from-russia-as-compensation-of-losses.
33. PERRY, S. Enforcement of Crimea award upheld in Ukraine [online]. 2019 [cit. 2021-09-04]. Available at: https://globalarbitrationreview.com/article/1180117/enforcement-of-crimea-award-upheld-in-ukraine.
34. PIASNA, A. - BURCHELL, B. - SEHNBRUCH, K. Job quality in European employment policy: one step forward, two steps back? Transfer. 2019, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 165-180. CrossRef
35. Russia Refuses to Recognize the Hague Arbitration Court Decision on Ukraine's Assets in Crimea [online]. 2019 [cit. 2021-09-04]. Available at: https://uawire.org/russia-refuses-to-recognize-the-hague-arbitration-court-ruling-on-ukraine-s-assets-in-crimea#.
36. SANDERS, P. New York convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Arbitration. 1959, Vol. XXV, No. 3, pp. 109-110.
37. SOWMAN, M. - SUNDE, J. Social impacts of marine protected areas in South Africa on coastal fishing communities. Ocean and Coastal Management. 2018, Vol. 157, pp. 168-179. CrossRef
38. The Administration of Investment Disputes. SCC [online]. 2019 [cit. 2021-09-04]. Available at: https://sccinstitute.com/dispute-resolution/investment-disputes/.
39. Ukraine's Naftogaz Achieves Interim Victory in the Crimean Asset's Lawsuit against Russia [online]. 2019 [cit. 2021-09-06]. Available at: http://uawire.org/ukraine-s-naftogaz-achieves-interim-victory-in-the-crimean-assets-lawsuit-against-russia.
40. VINNYK, O. M. - SHAPOVALOVA, O. V. - PATSURIIA, N. B. - HONCHARENKO, O. M. - YEFREMOVA, K. V. Problem of ensuring the social direction of the legislation of Ukraine on the digital economy. Asia Life Sciences. 2020, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 142-145.
International Commercial Arbitration as a Modern Self-Regulation Tool in Hybrid War is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
230 x 157 mm
periodicity: 4 x per year
print price: 65 czk
ISSN: 0323-0619
E-ISSN: 2336-6478
