В поисках евразийского механизма разрешения трансграничных споров: пределы арбитража и роль Суда ЕАЭС

Закон. 2026. № 6. С. 123–132.

Бронякина Е. О.

This article examines the institutional framework for resolving cross-border commercial and investment disputes within the Eurasian Economic Union. The relevance of this study is driven by the growing burden of sanctions, the diminishing practical accessibility of a number of traditional international arbitration forums for economic entities in EAEU member states, and the persistent shortage of specialized regional mechanisms for resolving private-law cross-border disputes. Furthermore, the creation of new jurisdictional institutions should be considered within the existing judicial architecture within the EAEU, whereby the Court of the EAEU is responsible for ensuring the uniform application of Union law. The article analyzes the limits of permissible institutional development of arbitration mechanisms within the EAEU legal order. It is argued that the model of an independent supranational "hybrid" arbitration court, which combines commercial and investment disputes and is simultaneously capable of formulating its own interpretation of EAEU law, is fraught with the risk of competing law enforcement and therefore is inconsistent with the logic of the Treaty on the EAEU. Taking this into account, a more restrained and legally consistent model is proposed: a specialized Eurasian arbitration center for cross-border commercial disputes, functioning while the Court of the EAEU unconditionally retains its exclusive role in ensuring a uniform interpretation of Union law. The potential for conflict in investment arbitration within the EAEU legal order is examined separately, and it is concluded that it would be premature to include investor-state dispute settlement within the jurisdiction of such a center without first adjusting the Union's treaty framework.

Keywords: международный коммерческий арбитраж, трансграничные споры, ЕАЭС, право ЕАЭС, Суд ЕАЭС, инвестиционный арбитраж, арбитрабельность, единообразное применение права, интеграционный публичный порядок