19 June 2020, Moscow, Russia - The Principal of KIAP, Attorneys at Law, who appeared as a contractor, engaged a subcontractor to perform part of the work on the building site. The subcontractor performed the work improperly, so the contract with it was terminated and the subcontractor had to recover of losses to the Principal of KIAP.
The subcontracting agreement stipulated that all disputes between the parties are subject to consideration in court of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).
To prevent the ICC from considering a dispute on the recovery of losses from it, the subcontractor attempted to invalidate the arbitration clause and filed a corresponding claim in the Moscow City Arbitration Court. The claimant gave numerous arguments as to why the arbitration clause should be declared invalid. Such tactics were typical enough for unscrupulous potential defendants.
However, the Russian courts, taking heed of the arguments of the KIAP lawyers, refused to recognize the clause as invalid, thus demonstrating a pro-arbitration approach. Russian courts confirmed that a party that agreed without disagreements and claims has no right, after several years, to refer to the fact that the terms of the agreement were allegedly incomprehensible to the party and the arbitration clause could not be executed.
The Principal's interests in the project were represented by Partner Anna Grishchenkova and Senior Associate Natalia Kisliakova.