Originally from European International Arbitration Review (EIAR)

(Stena RoRo AB v. OAO Baltiyskiy zavod, Supreme Arbitrazh Court, 13 September 2011, No. VAS-9899/2009 and OAO Holdingovaya Kompaniya “Sibirskiy Cement”, OOO Finansovo-promyshlennyy soyuz “Sibkonkord”& İstanbul Çimento Yatırımları Anonim Şirketi v. Ciments Français, Supreme Arbitrazh Court, 5 June 2012, No. VAS-76/2012)

I. Introduction

Discussions about how to effectively deal with “guerrilla tactics” in arbitration have intensified in recent years.1 One author defines guerrilla tactics as “…all attempts to deliberately manipulate and thereby obstruct the arbitration proceedings by inappropriate means”.2 Another author concludes that what it takes to counter guerrilla tactics during the arbitration “…are arbitrators who stand firm more often and resist the temptation to dodge critical issues or hide behind burden of proof questions when certain tactics and strategies are employed that go against the very spirit of international arbitration.”3