The author studies the problem of using of the terms “arbitration” and “state arbitration court” in the context of their use in relation to relevant institutions for resolution of commercial disputes. Through a comparative analysis of the term “arbitration” in the legal systems of some States, including the Russian Federation, the author identifies the differences and possible resolving ways of the problem of mixing these terms in Russia. On the basis of the research the author has arrived to the conclusion that it will be useful to change this terms in relation to state arbitration courts. In particular, the author proposes to call them economic, commercial or economic in order to prevent errors in the name of the courts in daily life and avoid the introduction of potential user confusion. The author believes that more preferable in this context the using of the term “commercial and administrative courts”. Also in the article was examined the problem of the Russian approach to the status of International Commercial Arbitration and its resolution of commercial disputes.
state arbitration court, dispute resolution, arbitration, international private law, International Commercial Arbitration, the ICAC, the Vienna International Arbitral Centre, arbitration clause, alternative dispute resolution, the Model law of UNCITRAL on International Commercial Arbitration.
1. David R. Arbitration in International Trade. Economica. 1984.
2. Doronina N. G., Semilyutina N. G. Understanding Origins and Roots of “Russian Arbitration”. Journal of the Russian Academy of Legal Sciences. Russian Law: Theory and Practice. Iss. 2. 2015.
3. John B. Oakley, Vikram D. Amar. American Civil Procedure: A Guide to Civil Adjudication in US Courts. The Netherlands, 1976.
4. Kenneth K. Stuart, Cynthia A. Savage. The Multi-Door Courthouse: How It’s Working? Colo. Law. 26. Oct. 1997.
5. Arbitrazhnye ogovorki ICC. Mediativnye ogovorki ICC. URL: http://www.iccwbo.org/Products-and-Services/Arbitration-and-ADR/Arbitration/Standard-ICC-Arbitration-clauses/Standard-ICC-Arbitration-Clauses-in-several-languages/.
6. Bruntseva E. V. Mezhdunarodnyy kommercheskiy arbitrazh. SPb., 2001.
7. Internet-interv´yu s Predsedatelem Mezhdunarodnogo kommercheskogo arbitrazhnogo suda A. S. Komarovym «Mezhdunarodnyy kommercheskiy arbitrazh v Rossii: aktual´nye voprosy praktiki razresheniya sporov». URL: http://www.consultant.ru/law/interview/komarov/.
8. Kurolesov D. Pravo sil´nogo. Delovaya gazeta «Vzglyad». 2014. 30 iyulya. URL: http://www.vz.ru/opinions/2014/7/30/697972.html.
9. Lange N. Drevnie Russkie smesnye ili vobchie sudy. M., 1882.
10. Lomakina E. V. Yuridicheskaya sila mnogourovnevykh soglasheniy ob uregulirovanii mezhdunarodnykh kommercheskikh sporov. Vestnik YuUrGU. Seriya «Pravo». 2012. № 43.
11. URL: http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/yuridicheskaya-sila-mnogourovnevyh-soglasheniyob-uregulirovanii-mezhdunarodnyh-kommercheskih-sporov (data obrashcheniya: 02.11.2015).
12. Mezhdunarodnyy kommercheskiy arbitrazh: uchebnik / B. R. Karabel´nikov. M., 2012.
13. Popova A. V. Problema patologicheskikh arbitrazhnykh ogovorok vo vneshnetorgovykh kontraktakh. Al´manakh rabot molodykh uchenykh. Pravovedenie. 2003. № 1.
14. Semkina Yu. N. Posrednichestvo kak mezhdunarodno-pravovoe sredstvo mirnogo razresheniya sporov: dis.... kand. yurid. nauk. M., 2010.
15. Khvaley V. V. Kak ubit´ arbitrazhnoe soglashenie. Treteyskiy sud. 2003. № 5.
16. Shershenevich G. F. Obshchaya teoriya prava. M., 1912. T. 2.
