The standards of the foreign defendants notification in the economic disputes resolution

Author:

Mokhova Elena V.ORCID,Butakova Iana S.ORCID

Abstract

Notification of a foreign defendant is of fundamental importance for the effective realization of the right to a fair trial. At the same time judicial practice identifies controversial issues concerning the assessment of such notification. In the new geopolitical conditions, the situation is complicated by the sanctions imposed by the states, thus reinforcing the relevance of the research. The purpose is to examine the standards of foreign defendants’ notification established in the Russian court practice, as well as to analyze the sanctions impact on the conventional notification mechanisms on the example of one of the high-profile cases. The authors rely on general scientific research methods (analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, dialectical method) and special methods (formal legal, comparative legal). The article concludes that in the Russian court practice a different standard - the so-called standard of effective notification based on evidence of the actual awareness of the party about the foreign proceedings - is formed as a counterbalance to the strictly formal standard of notification. The authors note that the standard of effective notification, fulfilling its useful function, should not lead to unjustified refusal to follow the international conventions on foreign persons notification. These conventions retain their binding effect including exclusive situations where they should be applicable. The authors conclude that it is necessary to clarify both the conditions for effective notification standard application and the requirements for the effective notification standard. The sanctions have affected the application of notification mechanisms: Russian courts recognize a foreign court request to notify a Russian sanctioned person as contrary to public policy in a situation where an anti-suit injunction on a foreign proceeding was previously issued.

Publisher

Peoples' Friendship University of Russia

Reference25 articles.

1. Anthimos, A. (2017) Fictitious service of process in the EU - requiem for a nightmare? Czech Yearbook of international law. VIII, 3-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2782431

2. Bessonova, A.I. (2021) Notification of parties to a procedure located abroad in the digital technology era. Arbitrazh and civil procedure. (8), 53-54. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-383X-2021-8-53-54 (in Russian).

3. Bonilla, M.K. (2022) Rethinking the process of service of process. St. Mary's Law Journal. 53(1), 255-285 Available at: https://commons.stmarytx.edu/thestmaryslawjournal/vol53/iss1/6 [Accessed 11th February 2023].

4. Campbell, C.B. (2010) No Sirve: The Invalidity of Service of Process Abroad by Mail or Private Process Server on Parties in Mexico Under the Hague Service Convention. Minnesota Journal of International Law. 19(1), 107-136.

5. Torremans, P. (ed.). (2017) Cheshire, North & Fawcett on Private International Law. Fifteenth Edition. Oxford University Press. NY.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3