⚖️ Another indicator of a permanent arbitral institution without the status of a PAI – a "turnkey" enforcer of arbitral awards

LLC "Bizaps" (the applicant), as the service provider, and LLC "Aller Group" (the interested party), as the customer, entered into a service agreement containing an alternative dispute resolution clause (the contract). Under the clause, the claimant could choose between a state court and an ad hoc arbitral tribunal with the well‑known arbitrator A.V. Kravtsov 👀

Relying on an alleged debt under the contract, the applicant initiated arbitration. A.V. Kravtsov granted the claims in full ☕ The applicant then applied to the Commercial Court of the City of the city of Moscow for a writ of execution on Kravtsov's award.

The Commercial Court of the City of the city of Moscow refused to issue the writ – a frequent outcome with Kravtsov's awards.

The court established, as a matter of course, that the arbitral tribunal exhibited objective characteristics of a permanent arbitral institution without the status of a Permanent Arbitration Institution (PAI).

The court relied, as usual, on the fact that signs of a permanent arbitral tribunal are evident from the website of the tribunal, established in 2010, with sections such as "Chairman of the Court", "Presidium", "Expert Council", and "Fees". Notably, the website offers, on a fee‑based basis, services for facilitating the enforcement of awards, including those rendered by Kravtsov himself – effectively a "turnkey" arbitration award.

Furthermore, during the arbitral proceedings, the interested party acknowledged the claims in full without any substantive objections. The court noted that this fact, in itself, does not disprove the existence of a debt, but neither does it allow the court to compensate for the lack of substantive scrutiny of the issue by the arbitral tribunal.

The Commercial Court of the City of the city of Moscow also took into account that the applicant in this case was represented by an individual who serially represents various unrelated applicants in proceedings for enforcement of Kravtsov's awards.

Thus, the court held that enforcement of the arbitral award would contravene the Russian public policy and dismissed the application for a writ of execution.

📎 The ruling is available here.

TRANSLATED BY AI
Original see here