Международное движение судей за независимость арбитров. Обзор Постановления Европейского Суда по правам человека от 26 ноября 2024 года по делу «ЭнДиАй Сопот» против Северной Македонии (жалоба № 6035/17)

Международное правосудие. 2025. Т. 15. № 1(53). С. 40–55.

Galperin M.

The article, using the example of recent judgments s of the European Court of Human Rights, including in the case of NDI Sopot S.A. v. North Macedonia, analyzes the current practice of assessing attempts by some national courts to refuse recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in commercial and investment cases, including on the basis of the alleged impartiality of foreign arbitrators. Such attempts are being made today by the Russian Supreme Court, which is trying by any means to protect domestic business from foreign arbitration rulings. The author comes to the conclusion that such attempts, explained by the high goal of protecting domestic business and ensuring social justice, in the absence of reliable normative grounds for refusing to recognize a foreign decision, usually ignore not only the norms of international law, but also the actual circumstances of the case. It is noteworthy that at the same time, national judges themselves (as in the commented case at the ECHR) are not ready to follow the same rules of impartiality, the strict observance of which they demand from international arbitrators. Even timid hints of the ECHR’s readiness to support plaintiffs in such international cases attract interest of the legal community, however, as the analysis undertaken shows, there is still no talk of turning the Strasbourg Court into a faithful “defender” of arbitration. The ECtHR is not ready in such cases to consider the issue of the applicant’s actual losses, and often prefers to limit itself to symbolic compensation for moral damage only for procedural violations committed at the national level. Taking into account the fact that it is not yet possible to recognize the practice of different chambers of the ECtHR in such cases as uniform, it seems plausible that at a certain point the Grand Chamber will intervene and determine the standard of attitude of European judges to violations of the rights of investors to enforce arbitration decisions made in their favor (including international ones).

Keywords: беспристрастность и независимость судей, international arbitration, международный арбитраж, protection of property rights, impartiality of arbitrators, European Court for Human Rights, Европейский суд по правам человека, защита собственности