PRACTICE OF DISPUTES RESOLUTION CONCERNING COMPETENCE OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION

The article analysis the latest court decisions of the new Supreme Court in cases of recognition and granting permission to enforce awards of international commercial arbitrations, which concerned the existence of jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals. The analysed cases covered disputes where a party to an arbitration agreement, against which an arbitral award was granted by an international commercial arbitral tribunal, alleged that the arbitral tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider the dispute; therefore, a ground existed for refusing to recognize and authorize the execution of the international commercial arbitral award. Particular attention was paid to controversial situations in terms of formal interpretation of the law and the contract provisions and when it was not obvious what conclusion the Supreme Court could make based on the results of the case. In particular, the Supreme Court decisions in the following cases were analyzed: № 796/32/2018 on the application of Closed Joint-Stock Company «Belarusian Oil Company», № 796/188/2018 on the application of Limited Liability Company «Rusmetali», № 824/126/20 on the application of Enermash Handels GmbH, and the conclusions formulated by the Supreme Court in other cases. In general, we noted that in disputable situations, the Supreme Court usually ruled in favor of the jurisdiction of international commercial arbitration, respectively, the arbitral award was recognized enforced in Ukraine. Thus, we noted that pro-arbitration court practice is being formed in Ukraine. The study concluded about the root causes of disputes over the jurisdiction of international commercial arbitration to consider the disputes between the parties. Based on these conclusions, it is possible to provide practical recommendations that the parties must follow when drawing up arbitration clauses.