header-logo header-logo

Multi-jurisdictional cases in England & Russia

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

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll