Russian court enforces ICC award confirming assignment of claim by company in “unfriendly state” does not violate Russian public policy (Commercial Court of the Ural Circuit)

In Case No A60-26002/2026, the Commercial Court of Ural Circuit confirmed the enforcement of an ICC award, issued by a sole Russian arbitrator, against a Russian company and in favour of a Russian law firm, to which the claims had been assigned from a Dutch company. The court held that the issuance of the award by one Russian arbitrator under ICC rules is lawful and that the assignment of the claim by a company in an “unfriendly state” does not constitute violation of Russian public policy.

Authors: Maxim Kulkov (Managing partner) and Maria Ivanova (Associate), KK&P Trial Lawyers

The dispute arose out of a supply agreement concluded between Brimium LLC (Brimium) and a Dutch company, Dema Baarn BV (Dema), which contained an ICC arbitration clause. Brimium did not pay for the supplied goods, and Dema assigned its claims to a Russian law firm, Baltalex. Baltalex’s initial claim for recovery of the debt under the supply agreement from Brimium before a Russian court was dismissed due to the arbitration clause. Therefore, Baltalex initiated ICC arbitration, obtained an award in its favour and applied to a Russian court for enforcement of the award. The first instance court ordered enforcement and Brimium appealed.

The Cassation Court confirmed the lower court’s judgment enforcing the award and ruled that:

  • The assignment of the claim did not circumvent Russian counter-sanctions regulations, since supply agreements were not subject to them.
  • The fact that the award was issued on claims assigned to Baltalex by an entity incorporated in an “unfriendly” state such as the Netherlands did not, by itself, indicate a violation of public policy.
  • The determination of the case by a sole arbitrator under the ICC Rules was lawful and did not violate Brimium’s rights, as it resulted in lower arbitration costs.

 

This case provides a rare example of a Russian court enforcing an ICC award for a debt owed by a Russian company to a European company. The court’s position also develops the approach outlined in the Russian Supreme Court’s recent Review No 8/2026 on sanctions-related disputes (Legal update, Russian Supreme Court publishes review of court cases on sanctions- related disputes). While that Review confirms that the foreign citizenship of an arbitrator from an “unfriendly” state gives rise to a presumption of a lack of independence and impartiality, the present case confirms that where an award is issued by a sole Russian arbitrator, that presumption does not arise.

Case No A60-26002/2026 (Commercial Court of Ural Circuit) (19 October 2026) (in Russian).

You can find the link to the full text of the article here or download the pdf of the article here.

The PDF files are reproduced from Practical Law Arbitration with the permission of the publisher. For further information, please visit www.practicallaw.com or call +44 (0)20 7542 6664.