Settlement - Chapter 17 - Arbitration Law of Russia: Practice and Procedure
Mr. Khodykin holds a Ph.D in Law and, from 2005 to 2012 he was an associate professor at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO), in addition to being in private practice.
Recognised as a rising star by Chambers & Partners, Mr. Khodykin is a frequent speaker at seminars and conferences and has authored numerous publications on international commercial arbitration and conflict of laws.
He has acted as arbitrator in cases under the ICC Rules and the Rules of the Court of Arbitration for Sport at the Russian Olympic Committee. Based in London, Mr. Khodykin advises on a wide range of litigation and arbitration matters, including commercial cases, repossession of aircraft, real estate litigation, corporate disputes and oil and gas industry cases. Mr. Khodykin has represented a broad range of clients in national and cross-border matters, including matters before the LCIA, ICSID and the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Russian Federation Chamber of Commerce and Industry. He has experience litigating cases before various Russian courts, including the Russian Federation Constitutional Court, the Supreme Arbitrazh Court (the highest judicial authority in Russia for commercial courts) and the Supreme Court.
17.1. SETTLEMENT BY AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES WITH OR WITHOUT SUPPORT OF THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL
If the parties are prepared to consider an amicable arrangement there is nothing to prevent the arbitrators from postponing the proceedings and giving the parties time to discuss the terms of the settlement agreement. The arbitrators are also free to raise such issues as future forms of cooperation, the importance of rapid resolution and so on.1
The Arbitration Act does not specifically regulate whether statements made during settlement discussions should be admissible into evidence if the parties have neglected to declare that the communications were to be made without prejudice. In some cases, tribunals have held settlement communications to be inadmissible and have disregarded them while considering the dispute but it is still advisable to make appropriate reservations. It is interesting to note that arbitral proceedings are more flexible in this regard because the Russian courts do not apply the concept of “without prejudice” and may take settlement documents into consideration in making their decisions even if they are clearly marked “without prejudice”.
17.1 Settlement by Agreement of the Parties with or without Support of the Arbitral Tribunal
17.2 “Private Settlement” and Impact on the Arbitral Tribunal
17.3 Form and Effect of a Settlement and Award on Agreed Terms