Оbjective arbitrability of antitrust disputes in Belarus and abroad
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21564/2225-6555.2020.17.206533Keywords:
arbitration, arbitration court, arbitrability, antitrust regulation, antitrust dispute, arbitration agreementAbstract
The article discusses approaches to objective arbitrability of antitrust disputes in the European Union, other foreign states and the Republic of Belarus. Particular attention is paid to the landmark cases Mitsubishi v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Eco Swiss China Time Ltd v Benetton International NV, CDC v. Akzo Nobel. Based on the results of the analysis made, the authors conclude that, in the absence of a direct prohibition on the consideration of antitrust disputes in the Belarusian legislation by arbitration and lack of law enforcement practice in this area, arising of such disputes and inclusion of arbitration clauses on their settlement in contracts largely depend on the level of the development of the market as well as on the position of arbitration courts. They do not exclude the possibility of revising the national legislation on arbitration so that it included direct provisions on arbitrability of antitrust disputes as it is made in Lithuania and Sweden, at the same time admitting that for a positive attitude to arbitrability of antitrust disputes in the Republic of Belarus the appearance of relevant jurisprudence in this sphere will be enoughReferences
Korzun, V. (2016). Arbitrating Antitrust Claims: From Suspicion to Trust. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, vol. 48, 3, 867–931.
Böckstiegel, K.-H. (2008). Public Policy as a Limit to Arbitration and its Enforcement. IBA Journal of Dispute resolution. Sp. Issue. The New York Convention – 50 Years, 123 seq. URL: https://www.arbitration-icca.org/media/4/44543421599110/media012277202358270bckstiegel_ public_policy...iba_unconfererence_2008.pdf.
Konvencija o priznanii i privedenii v ispolnenie inostrannyh arbitrazhnyh reshenij ot 10.06.1958 g. (1958). URL: http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/russian/texts/arbitration/ NY-conv/New-York-Convention-R.pdf [in Russian].
Evropejskaja konvencija o vneshnetorgovom arbitrazhe ot 21.04.1961 g. (1961). URL: https://www.etalonline.by/document/?regnum=i06100004 [in Russian].
Kolomiec, A.I., Grigor’ev, T.Ju. (2016). Arbitrabel’nost’ sporov, voznikajushhih iz narushenija antimonopol’nogo zakonodatel’stva. Vestnik arbitrazhnoj praktiki, 5 (66), 25–36. URL: http://www.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc&base=CJI&n=102228#012960758247073678 [in Russian].
Blanke, G. (2015). Entrusting antitrust issues to arbitration – some personal thoughts and considerations. Arbitration International, vol. 32, issue 2, 275–285.
Fuglsang, E.J. (1997). The Arbitrability of Domestic Antitrust Disputes: Where Does the Law Stand? DePaul Law Review, vol. 46, issue 3, 779–822.
Levin, R.C. (2018). On Arbitration of Competition/Antitrust Disputes: A Tribute to Mitsubishi. Dispute Resolution Journal, vol. 73, 4, 39–60.
Pepeljugoski. V., Pepeljugoska. A. (2018). Arbitrability of competition law (antitrust) disputes. Balkan Social Science Review, vol. 11, 7–23.
Ragazzo, K., Binder, M. (2015). Antitrust and International Arbitration. Business Law Journal, vol. 15, issue 2, 173–200.
Rogers, C., Landi, N. (2007). Arbitration of Antitrust Claims in the United Statesand Europe: Bocconi University Institute of Comparative Law «Angelo Sraffa». Research Paper No. 07-01. URL: https://ssrn.com/404.cfm?404;http://ssrn.com:80/abstract=.
Sendetska, O. (2018). Arbitrating Antitrust Damages Claims: Access to Arbitration. Journal of International Arbitration, Kluwer Law International, vol. 35, issue 3, 357–370.
Carbonneau, T.E. (1986). Mitsubishi: the Folly of Quixotic Internationalism. Arbitration International, vol. 2, issue 2, 116–139.
Lowenfeld, A.F. (1986). The Mitsubishi Case: Another View. Arbitration International, vol. 2, issue 3, 178–190.
Mitsubishi v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, 473 U.S.614 (1985). URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/473/614/.
Figurov, P. (2015). Arbitrazh po-amerikanski. Vol. 1. Arbitrabel’nost’ antimonopol’nyh sporov. Delo Mitsubishi. URL: https://zakon.ru/blog/2015/8/30/arbitrazh_poamerikanski_ vol_1_delo_mitsubishi [in Russian].
TheBremenv. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407U.S.1 (1972). URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/407/1/.
Directive 2014/104/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2014 on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union. (2014). URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2014.349.01.0001.01.ENG.
Case C-126/97: Judgment of the Court of 1 June 1999. (1997). URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A61997CJ0126.
Minina, A.I. (2014). Arbitrabil’nost’: teorija i praktika mezhdunarodnogo kommercheskogo arbitrazha. Moscow: Infotropik Media. URL: http://base.garant.ru/57480444/ [in Russian].
Idot, L. (2010). Arbitration and Competition / Arbitration and competition. Directorate for financial and enterprise affairs competition committee. Daf/comp. 40, 56–57. URL: https://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/abuse/49294392.pdf.
Skvorcov, O.Ju. et al. (2010). Tretejskoe razbiratel’stvo v Rossijskoj Federacii. O.Ju. Skvorcov (Ed.). Moscow: Volters Kluver [in Russian].
TheRepublicofLithuaniaLaw «On Commercial Arbitration» of June 21, 2012. No. I-1274. (2012). URL: https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalActPrint/lt?jfwid=wd7z7zum0& documentId=35954312dcb311e6be918a531b2126ab&category=TAD.
Zakon Shvecii «Ob arbitrazhe» s izm. i dop., vstupivshimi v silu 01.03.2019 g. (2019). URL: https://sccinstitute.com/media/408925/swedish-arbitration-act-2019_ru.pdf [in Russian].
Hospodarskyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy: Zakon Ukrainy vid 06.11.1991 r. № 1798-XII. (1991). URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1798-12 [in Ukrainian].
Perepelinskaja, E. Kakie spory (ne) mogut byt’ peredany v mezhdunarodnyj arbitrazh po zakonodatel’stvu Ukrainy? URL: https://www.integrites.com/ru/publications/kakie-spory-ne-mogut-byt-peredany-v-mezhdunarodnyj-arbitrazh-po-zakonodatelstvu-ukrainy/.
Jur’ev, E.E. (2006). Uslovija dejstvitel’nosti arbitrazhnogo soglashenija. Arbitrazhnyj i grazhdanskij process, 6, 37–43. URL: http://www.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req= doc&base= CJI&n=12883#04537909302601444 [in Russian].
John, W., Cheng, G., Mengzhen, W. The Arbitrability of Antitrust Civil Disputes inChina. URL: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0cb7b498-12fd-4b8c-9db4-b1a8cac1b93c.
Zhan, H., Song, Y. Supreme Court decision on non-arbitrability of antitrust civil disputes. URL: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=427d13ee-b58a-4612-b7a8-827d21e0ea1c.
Ross, L., Liu, T. China: Anti-Monopoly Disputes Are Not Arbitrable According ToChinese Court. URL: http://www.mondaq.com/china/x/525908/Antitrust+Competition/ AntiMonopoly+Disputes+Are+Not+Arbitrable+According+to+Chinese+Court.
Case C-352/13: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 May 2015. (2015). URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/GA/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62013CA0352/.
O mezhdunarodnom arbitrazhnom (tretejskom) sude: Zakon Respubliki Belarus’ ot 09.07.1999 g. № 279-Z. (1999). URL: http://pravo.by/document/?guid=3871&p0=h19900279 [in Russian].
O tretejskih sudah: Zakon Respubliki Belarus’ ot 18.07.2011 g. № 301-Z. (2011). URL: http://pravo.by/document/?guid=3871&p0=H11100301 [in Russian].
Hozjajstvennyj processual’nyj kodeks Respubliki Belarus’ ot 15.12.1998 g. № 219-Z. (1998). URL: https://etalonline.by/document/?regnum=HK9800219 [in Russian].
O protivodejstvii monopolisticheskoj dejatel’nosti i razvitii konkurencii : Zakon Respubliki Belarus’ ot 12.12.2013 g. № 94-Z. (2013). URL: http://www.pravo.by/document/?guid=3871&p0=h11300094 [in Russian].
Goronkov, M.P. Proizvodstvo po delam o priznanii i privedenii v ispolnenie reshenij inostrannyh sudov i inostrannyh arbitrazhnyh reshenij (kommentarij k glave 28 Hozjajstvennogo processual’nogo kodeksa Respubliki Belarus’) (chast’ 3). URL: Konsul’tantPljus: Belarus’ [in Russian].
Funk, Ja.I. Mezhdunarodnyj arbitrazh v Respublike Belarus’. URL: Konsul’tantPljus: Belarus’ [in Russian].
Funk, Ja.I., Pererva, I.V. Reglament Mezhdunarodnogo arbitrazhnogo suda pri BelTPP. Istorija sozdanija i pravovoe regulirovanie dejatel’nosti Mezhdunarodnogo arbitrazhnogo suda pri BelTPP. URL: Konsul’tantPljus: Belarus’ [in Russian]
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Theory and practice of jurisprudence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
