header-logo header-logo

26 November 2020 / Daniel Burbeary , Irina Buydova
Issue: 7912 / Categories: Features , Profession , International justice , ADR
printer mail-detail

Multi-jurisdictional cases in England & Russia

32878
Daniel Burbeary & Irina Buydova highlight the differences between Russian and English dispute resolution
  • Differences exist between Russian and English court and arbitration proceedings in terms of the role of the judge, evidence and use of experts.

Many of the international, cross-border litigation and arbitration cases that find their way to England concern Russia. Particular challenges may arise due to the conceptual differences between dispute resolution processes in the two jurisdictions. While England is a common law jurisdiction, with an adversarial system, Russia is a civil law jurisdiction, with an inquisitorial system.

In English-style proceedings, parties compete with each other to convince the impartial judge or arbitrator that their case is more meritorious than their opponent’s. The parties are given a good deal of freedom (within the confines of the procedural rules) as to how to present their case, and a judge or arbitrator will not generally enquire beyond the facts presented by the parties and will not look to identify legal causes

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll