A. LEGISLATION, TRENDS AND TENDENCIES
A.1 Legislation
In December 2013, the Kyrgyzstan Parliament adopted
amendments to the Civil Procedure Code that allow parties to
arbitration proceedings to seek the assistance of state courts in
applying interim measures to secure their claims.
In order to file this type of application, a party must provide the
court with a copy of the statement of claim certified by the
arbitration institution reviewing the claim and a notarized copy
of the arbitration agreement. While it is not entirely clear, the
above provisions could be interpreted as a ban on parties
involved in ad hoc arbitration seeking the assistance of a state
court.
A.2 Investment Arbitration
Recently, a number of investors began arbitration proceedings
against Kyrgyzstan. Most of them relate to the expropriation of
foreign and domestic investments by the government of
Kyrgyzstan that came to power as a result of the April 2010
Revolution.
Two of the most-discussed cases were heard by the International
Arbitration Court at the Moscow Chamber of Commerce. In
these cases, the claimants stated that the Moscow Chamber of
Commerce had the right to review investment claims against
Kyrgyzstan based on provisions of the 1997 CIS Moscow
Convention for the Protection of Investor Rights. Specifically,
the claimants stated that the general dispute resolution provisions
of the Convention, which establish the rights of foreign investors
to seek resolution of investment disputes in international
arbitration institutions, must be interpreted as the consent of the
parties to this Convention to solve investment disputes in any
international arbitration institution chosen by foreign investors.
This Convention was ratified by most CIS countries, including
Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Belarus. In at least one of
these cases, the tribunal agreed with the claimant’s argument.