The Supreme Court has brought reasonableness into focus The Russian Supreme Court’s Plenum has prepared a clarification on the most controversial issues of the application of anti-trust legislation by courts. On the one hand, the Court has ensured consistency with the approaches it developed previously: its Resolution No. 2 dated 4 March 2021 (the “New Resolution”) almost completely replaced Resolution No. 30 “On certain issues arising in connection with commercial courts applying antitrust legislation” dated 30 June 2008 of the Plenum of the Russian Supreme Commercial Court (the “SCC Plenum's Resolution”), except for the provisions regarding administrative liability, which remained unchanged. On the other, a striking feature of the clarifications was a signal of the need to follow the principle of reasonableness, which implies that business entities’ conduct should be assessed from the perspective of economic strategy and effectiveness.
Lessons of the Market Division Case The Eurasian Economic Commission (the “Commission”) is becoming ever more significant as a platform for antimonopoly authorities in the member states of the Eurasian Economic Union (“EAEU”) to engage with each other in the area of investigations, information exchange and the reviewing of cases that show signs of a breach of general competition rules for cross-border markets. Although the Commission’s administrative and judicial practice is not yet sufficiently extensive, it has already shaped the principal approaches to analysing such markets and helped to identify the areas where regulation requires further improvement and various tools need to be used for the closer collaboration of the Union’s controlling bodies.
Note on the application of the collective dominance rule The concept of “collective dominance” is reflected in the Federal Law “On the Protection of Competition” (the “Competition Law”). Despite the concept of “collective dominance” not being directly used in the legislation, the criteria creating the conditions for it to emerge are set out in Part 3 of Article 5 of the Competition Law. Qualitative and quantitative criteria are distinguished.
Protecting tenants of commercial property against the backlash from the covid-19 pandemic in russia and abroad Economies across the globe have experienced the grave consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak. A long-lasting decline in business activity, remote work and in some cases even a full suspension of operations are looming for tenants and landlords in many countries. In response to the threats of the pandemic, state authorities are stepping up measures to protect tenants who have suffered from the pandemic and who are traditionally viewed as more the vulnerable party to a lease agreement.Natalia SteninaOlga Yadrikhinskaya
A moratorium on bankruptcy in russia and abroad The restrictions that have been introduced in Russia correspond to those introduced abroad. However, for many companies these may only delay bankruptcy if measures of support for business during the pandemic prove to be insufficient.Leonid Barkov
The coronavirus of obligations First it is necessary to assess whether the coronavirus pandemic influences a specific company’s performance of its obligations under a specific contract, since the mere fact of the pandemic does not release all the parties to civil relationships from liability for the non-performance or improper performance of obligations.Elena RybalchenkoEkaterina Baranova