Lecture 1.

State arbitration courts in Russia were designated to resolve the disputes related to commercial activity (both domestic and foreign).

The second meaning of arbitration is the voluntary system to resolve the disputes.

Arbitrazh as a voluntary form is the synonim of третейский суд. But in English arbitration means only voluntary form. There are no state arbitration courts in England, for example.

If we say 'arbitrazhniy sud' in Russia we mean state arbitration. If we say the same in England we mean only voluntary form of dispute resolution.

Art.11 of Civil Code - judicial protection is provided by state courts (of general jurisdiction and state arbitration courts) and voluntary arbitration courts (!).

What it means - voluntary arbitral proceedings? The question is not simple. The main task of volutary arbitration forms is dispute resolution. But dispute resolution is a main task of state court system. When dealing with the disputes both state and voluntary courts shall apply may be the same rules of law. They perform justice. And here we should bear in mind, firstly, our constitution, and, secondly, positions of our constitutional court.

Art.119 (?) of the Constituion - Judicial power shall be performed through constitutional, civil, administrative and criminal procedures. So the Constitution means only state courts.

But voluntary arbitration is on a kind of state courts. The question arises - whether activities of these voluntary institutions with regard to dispute resolution may be qualified as the perfomance of justice?

ICAC is the most authoritative arbitration in our country. The claimant and the respondent pay some amount of money - arbitration fee. In state courts it is called 'gosudarstvennaya poshlina'. ICAC is not a separate legal entity. It is an element of the Chamber of commerce and industry, which is a separate legal entity.

In the beginning of 90s the federal tax service required to pay VAT and profit tax from the amount of the arbitration fee obtained by the Chamber. The Chamber refused to pay voluntarely. Tax service initiated legal proceedings in the state arbitration court of Moscow. The court in the first instance the claim was satisfied. The Chamber was not happy with such judgment and it was appealed. The Chamber instructed prof. Sukhanov to represent the Chamber in the second instance. He succeeded.

When that disputed was resolved there was APK of 1991. Presidium of State Arbitration Court could able to review the decision through court supervision. But in 1991 supervision of proceedings could only be initiated by some top officials of Supreme Arbitration Court (chief justice of Supreme Arbitration Court, his deputies, and by Head district attorney). It was their discretion to submit the protest and not to submit.

Current situation is quite different. Supervision procedure may be initiated by litigants.

So in that case tax service submit an application to chief justice of SCA to initiate supervision proceedings. This application was rejected. And there was some explanation why it was rejected. It was as follows. In spite of the fact, that international commercial arbitration court (ICAC) is a private institution and it doesn't belong to state court system still its activities cannot be deemed as a kind of civil law service. Since activities of voluntary arbitration should not be deemed as this kind of civil law services no tax should be payed.