Skip to main content
International Arbitration Forum

Rinat Akhmetov and Investio LLC v. Russian Federation

Case summary

At a glance

Parties
Rinat Akhmetov and Investio LLC v. the Russian Federation
Case no.
PCA Case No 2019-34; Paris Court of Appeal RG 23/06872
Forum and rules
UNCITRAL Rules arbitration administered by the PCA, seated in Paris
Treaty
Russia–Ukraine BIT of 27 November 1998
Court
Paris Court of Appeal, Pôle 5 – Chambre 16; Daniel Barlow, magistrate in charge of case management (magistrat chargé de la mise en état)
Underlying award(s)
Procedural Order No. 2 of 10 March 2020 (constitution of the tribunal); Partial Award on jurisdiction of 16 August 2022
Outcome
Russia's action to annul Procedural Order No. 2 was declared inadmissible because the order is not an arbitral award (21 May 2024).
Amount
Russia ordered to pay EUR 10,000 under Article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure, plus costs (claimants had sought EUR 30,000).

The dispute

The claimants, Mr Akhmetov and Investio LLC, started a PCA-administered arbitration against Russia on 20 February 2019. They relied on the 1998 Russia–Ukraine BIT and the UNCITRAL Rules. When the tribunal was constituted, Russia objected to how the presiding arbitrator, Professor Siegfried Elsing, had been appointed. In Procedural Order No. 2 of 10 March 2020, the tribunal held the objection unfounded and found that it was properly constituted under the UNCITRAL Rules. On 6 April 2023 Russia filed an action in the Paris Court of Appeal to annul that order. It argued that the order had finally decided a question of the tribunal's jurisdictional power and was therefore in substance an award. The claimants asked the court to declare the action inadmissible under Article 1518 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Key holdings

  1. Only true arbitral awards can be annulled under Article 1518 of the Code of Civil Procedure. A true award is an act of the arbitrators that finally decides all or part of the dispute, whether on the merits, on jurisdiction, or on a procedural plea that ends the proceedings. ¶¶ 15–16
  2. Procedural Order No. 2 dealt only with whether the tribunal had been properly constituted under the UNCITRAL Rules. It did not touch the merits, did not end the proceedings and did not rule on jurisdiction. Jurisdiction, which concerns the nature or subject of the dispute and the arbitrators' power to hear it, must be distinguished from the conditions of the arbitrators' appointment. The order is therefore not an award open to annulment. ¶¶ 17–18
  3. The annulment action was declared inadmissible. The court noted that the regularity of the tribunal's constitution was already before it in Russia's annulment action against the Partial Award on jurisdiction of 16 August 2022. ¶ 19; Dispositif 1
  4. Russia lost and was ordered to pay the costs (dépens) and EUR 10,000 to the claimants under Article 700. Its own Article 700 claim was rejected. ¶¶ 20–21; Dispositif 2–3

Procedural history

  1. 20 February 2019Request for arbitration filed under the Russia–Ukraine BIT.
  2. 10 March 2020Procedural Order No. 2: the tribunal rejects Russia's objection to the appointment of Professor Siegfried Elsing as presiding arbitrator.
  3. 16 August 2022Partial Award: the tribunal upholds its jurisdiction.
  4. 14 November 2022Russia files an action to annul the Partial Award in the Paris Court of Appeal (RG 22/18397).
  5. 6 April 2023Russia files an action to annul Procedural Order No. 2 (RG 23/06872).
  6. 7 February 2024The claimants file a procedural motion asking the court to declare that action inadmissible. The motion is heard on 23 April 2024.
  7. 21 May 2024Order of the case-management magistrate: the action against Procedural Order No. 2 is declared inadmissible.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by
  • Daniel Barlow Judge, Paris Court of Appeal (magistrate in charge of case management)
  • Siegfried Elsing President (Russia's objection to his appointment rejected in Procedural Order No. 2)
For the claimant
SELARL Pellerin - De Maria - Guerre · Darrois Villey Maillot Brochier
For the respondent
SELARL LX Paris-Versailles-Reims · Andrea Pinna

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.

Case ID
PCA Case No 2019-34
Treaty
Russian Federation - Ukraine BIT (1998)