One Contract, Two Arbitrations: Maxim Kulkov on the Application of Lis Pendens in an ICAC Case

What happens when a single contract becomes the subject of two arbitration proceedings in different countries? Can an arbitral tribunal stay its proceedings in favour of an earlier-commenced arbitration if Russian law does not expressly regulate the application of the lis pendens doctrine?

These questions are explored by Maxim Kulkov, Managing Partner of KK&P Trial Lawyers, and Nikita Chernyshenko of Melling, Voitishkin & Partners, in their article “The Lis Pendens Doctrine and Arbitration: A Case Study from the ICAC”, published in Arbitration Panorama (edited by R.O. Zykov, Russian Arbitration Association, 2026).

The article examines a real dispute between a Russian buyer and a Turkish supplier. Their contract contained an alternative arbitration clause providing for the buyer’s claims to be heard by the International Commercial Arbitration Court (ICAC) in Moscow and the supplier’s claims by the Istanbul Arbitration Centre (ISTAC).

Following a disagreement, the parties initiated parallel arbitration proceedings in Moscow and Istanbul. Although the claims differed, both proceedings involved the same key issues, creating a risk of conflicting arbitral awards.

Can the ICAC apply a principle that is not expressly recognised under Russian law? This question became central to the supplier’s application for a stay of the Moscow proceedings.

Drawing on this case, the authors examine the application of lis pendens in international commercial arbitration and offer practical guidance on the risks associated with alternative arbitration clauses, how to establish the existence of parallel proceedings, and the factors that may influence a tribunal’s decision to stay proceedings.

Read the full article (in Russian): The Lis Pendens Doctrine and Arbitration: A Case Study from the ICAC