⚖️ When "fraud" committed by filing an application for enforcement of an arbitral award, fabricated arbitrator challenges, and a Russian Ministry of Justice warning did not help: scandals, intrigues, and investigations in the Arbitrazh Court of the Tomsk Region
LLC "Gazprom Methanol" (the Claimant), as the customer, and LLC "Tomskneftegazproekt" (the Interested Party), as the contractor, entered into a contract for design and survey work. The contract contained an arbitration clause in favor of the Arbitration Center under the Autonomous Non-Profit Organization "NIRA TEK" (ANO "NIRA TEK")
The Claimant initiated arbitration proceedings at the Arbitration Center under ANO "NIRA TEK" seeking recovery of penalties, registration and arbitration fees, and termination of the contract. The arbitral tribunal rendered a decision fully satisfying the Claimant's claims.
The Claimant applied to the Commercial Court of the Tomsk Region for a writ of execution to enforce the arbitral award. The Interested Party objected to the issuance of the writ, citing the following circumstances:
👀 The application for a writ of execution constitutes "fraud";
👀 The arbitral tribunal ignored the application for challenge of arbitrators;
👀 The arbitral tribunal also did not consider the Interested Party's application for the application of Article 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation;
👀 The Russian Ministry of Justice issued a warning to the Arbitration Center under ANO "NIRA TEK" regarding violations of the deadlines for notifying the parties of the commencement of arbitration and the formation of the arbitral tribunal;
👀 The information contained in the arbitral award does not correspond to reality.
The Commercial Court of the Tomsk Region rejected the Interested Party's arguments based on the following circumstances of the case:
🔘 The Interested Party did not challenge the arbitrators and did not prove any interest of the arbitral tribunal in the outcome of the dispute. Likewise, it did not submit a written petition for the application of Article 333 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The Interested Party did not file a response to the statement of claim in the arbitration, did not request an extension of the deadline for submitting it, and did not prove that it was unable to submit a response;
🔘 The Interested Party was duly notified of the commencement of the arbitration proceedings and of the scheduled hearing. A representative of the Interested Party participated in the oral hearing via video conference;
🔘 The warning issued by the Russian Ministry of Justice to the Arbitration Center under ANO "NIRA TEK" regarding violations of the deadlines for notifying the parties of the commencement of arbitration and the formation of the arbitral tribunal does not indicate that "the arbitral tribunal prevented the Interested Party from exercising its right to judicial protection";
🔘 Criminal proceedings against the arbitrators were dismissed, which was confirmed by the Interested Party;
🔘 The Interested Party relies on new evidence that was not presented in the arbitration proceedings. Consequently, the Interested Party's arguments are aimed at reassessing the findings of the arbitral tribunal, which is impermissible.
Thus, the Commercial Court of the Tomsk Region issued a writ of execution for the enforcement of the arbitral award.
📎 The court's decision can be accessed via the link.
TRANSLATED BY AI
Original see here
Post #177
22
- ❤ 2