Sign up for our free daily newsletter
YOUR PRIVACY - PLEASE READ CAREFULLY DATA PROTECTION STATEMENT
Below we explain how we will communicate with you. We set out how we use your data in our Privacy Policy.
Global City Media, and its associated brands will use the lawful basis of legitimate interests to use
the
contact details you have supplied to contact you regarding our publications, events, training,
reader
research, and other relevant information. We will always give you the option to opt out of our
marketing.
By clicking submit, you confirm that you understand and accept the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
Writing in the Financial Times, Berwin Leighton Paisner partner Roman Khodykin says: '… the reform bill introduced into parliament [to create the merger] provides for only six months to sort everything out, effectively leaving Russia in a state of turmoil.' Several judges have resigned from the arbitration side, which appears to be the junior side to the merger even though it was seen as being more innovative.
Pros and cons
Running the dual system had its advantages and disadvantages, according to Mr Khodykin. For instance, the same cases were sometimes run in both courts and resulted in different decisions. But it was the arbitration side which introduced the doctrine of precedent into Russian law, as well as allowing e-filing and video-conferencing.
Email your news and story ideas to: [email protected]