Дело "Орловского тоннеля": 10 лет спустя

Предпринимательское право. 2025. № 3. С. 44–49.

Eremin V., Бауэр Р. Э.

The article analyses some of the arguments that formed the basis for the refusal to enforce the arbitral award in the so-called 'Orlovski Tunnel' case. The author considers the issues of prejudice, the admissibility of referring disputes from concession agreements to arbitration and the consequences in terms of hypothetically possible enforcement of an arbitral award against a public-law entity. The authors tried to emphasise the relevance of certain aspects of the case 10 years after the arbitral award was made and the ambiguity of the wording contained in the Law on Concession Agreements regarding the dispute resolution procedure. The article pays special attention to the concept of 'Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation', which is not disclosed in the domestic legislation, but creates a number of uncertain aspects. The authors also discuss the issue of enforceability of decisions against public-law entities, taking into account the immunity of budgets established by article 239 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation.

Keywords: концессионное соглашение, международный коммерческий арбитраж, concession agreement, arbitration agreement, преюдиция, international commercial arbitration, арбитражное соглашение, prejudice, immunity of budgets, иммунитет бюджетов