The arbitration procedure

Commencement and notice

The agreement, law and applicable rules determine commencement. The claimant states its claims and grounds; the respondent receives documents and an opportunity to respond. Addresses, dispatch methods and evidence of delivery or attempted delivery matter.

Tribunal, jurisdiction and objections

The tribunal is constituted under the applicable procedure. Independence, impartiality, jurisdiction and the agreement’s scope are considered. Procedural objections must be raised in time under the applicable rules.

The tribunal-jurisdiction guide explains when to object and how the tribunal’s response affects the next step.

Submissions, evidence and hearings

Each party must have an opportunity to present its case and access submitted materials. Proceedings may include oral hearings or be conducted on documents under Article 27 of 382-FZ and the agreed procedure. The tribunal evaluates evidence within its jurisdiction.

Making and receiving the award

Russian law requires a written award signed by the tribunal. Article 34 of 382-FZ and Article 31 of the International Commercial Arbitration Law set content requirements. Jurisdiction, claims, findings and costs are addressed under the applicable rules. A signed copy is sent to each party.

What follows

Voluntary compliance, compulsory enforcement and a separate setting-aside application are possible. They involve different grounds, court jurisdiction and procedural time limits.

Procedure and the opportunity to be heard

Statutory basis: Articles 18–19 and 27 of 382-FZ; Articles 18–19 and 24 of Law 5338-1. The agreement and rules operate within mandatory requirements. Each party must receive the other party’s materials and an opportunity to respond; an expert report should not first emerge in the award.

Unless the parties have expressly dispensed with oral hearings, a party’s request engages the statutory hearing requirement. Domestic Article 27 also provides for advance notice and a hearing record by default; videoconferencing is available by agreement. Non-appearance or failure to defend is not itself an admission of the claim.

Evidence, experts and timely objections

Statutory basis: Articles 26 and 29 of 382-FZ. Parties prove the facts supporting their claims and defences. Expert appointment raises questions of identity, remit, disclosure and questioning. Court-assisted collection has separate eligibility conditions, explained in the evidence guide.

Case law: Supreme Court 10 September 2026, 305-ES25-4373(2,3) remanded the part refusing annulment of an ICAC domestic-dispute award: expert appointment, payment, challenge and questioning needed examination. This concerned the overall circumstances, not a ban on every direct expert contract. Paragraph 49 of Plenum 53 concerns material impairment of a fair hearing and timely objections.

What an award must contain

Statutory basis: Article 34 of 382-FZ. The award is written and signed; a majority of panel signatures suffices if omitted signatures are explained. Unless otherwise agreed, it identifies date and seat, tribunal and formation, parties, jurisdiction, claims and defences, facts, evidence, law, disposition of each claim and costs. Each party receives a signed copy.

International commercial awards separately follow Article 31 of Law 5338-1: writing and signatures, reasons, date and seat, and delivery. The two statutes do not prescribe word-for-word identical content lists. Record receipt because it affects subsequent deadlines.

Read more: award contents, receipt, correction and supplementation across countries.

Correction, interpretation and additional awards

Statutory basis: Article 37 of 382-FZ and Article 33 of Law 5338-1. Unless a different period is agreed, applications are generally made within 30 days of receipt with notice to the other party. Correction concerns computational, clerical and similar errors; interpretation requires the parties’ agreement. An additional award concerns a submitted claim left unresolved.

The statutory periods are 30 days for correction or interpretation and 60 days for an additional award following receipt of the request, subject to tribunal extension. These mechanisms are not merits appeals. See the review guide for setting-aside conditions, deadlines and consequences.

Tribunal-appointed experts and reports submitted by a party

Specialist knowledge may be needed to assess the extent and cost of work, the technical condition of property or a disputed document. Distinguish an expert appointed by the tribunal from a specialist whose report a party obtains and submits independently. Calling a document an expert report does not make it a tribunal-appointed examination. Its submission and assessment follow the applicable evidentiary and procedural rules: Article 26 and Article 19 of Law 382-FZ.

Tribunal appointments are governed by Article 29 of Law 382-FZ for domestic arbitration and Article 26 of Law 5338-1 for international commercial arbitration seated in Russia. Both confer a power to appoint; they do not require every request to be granted. These provisions do not make an examination compulsory in every technically complex dispute. Mandatory rules, the parties’ agreement and the arbitration rules must also be checked. Refusal to appoint an expert alone does not establish a setting-aside ground.

Selection, questions and participation by both parties

Under Article 29(2) of Law 382-FZ, unless otherwise agreed, the tribunal selects the expert and determines the questions after considering the parties’ views. Practical preparation should address relevant qualifications and experience, possible party connections, the instructions and source materials, methodology, timetable and payment. These are procedural planning questions, not an additional statutory qualification test. An objection concerning dependence should identify specific circumstances and be raised promptly; the applicable rules govern its resolution.

Reports on which the tribunal may rely must be communicated to both parties: Article 27(3) of Law 382-FZ and Article 24(3) of Law 5338-1. Each party needs a meaningful opportunity to examine the conclusions, challenge the underlying data and methodology and respond. Unless the parties agree otherwise, Article 29(3) of Law 382-FZ and Article 26(2) of Law 5338-1 require the expert to attend a hearing after reporting if a party requests it or the tribunal considers it necessary. Parties may question the expert; the international statute also expressly allows them to present specialists to testify on disputed issues.

The report assists fact-finding; it does not transfer the power to decide the dispute to the expert. The tribunal assesses admissibility, relevance and weight within the agreed procedure and statute (Article 19 of Law 382-FZ; Article 19 of Law 5338-1). Recording requests, objections, answers and reasons for accepting or rejecting conclusions helps make that process traceable. Obtaining material through a state court is a separate mechanism: court assistance with evidence.

When expert-evidence defects matter on court review

In Supreme Court case 305-ES25-4373 (2,3), 10 September 2026, review was required of direct expert contracts and payment contrary to the applicable ICAC rules, an unresolved challenge and the inability to question all experts. The case was governed by the ICAC Rules for Domestic Disputes and Law 382-FZ; the institution’s name does not itself bring a dispute within Law 5338-I. The Court quashed the challenged parts of the state court orders and remitted the case; it did not itself set aside the entire award. The reasoning concerns that procedure, not a universal ban on direct expert contracts. The full determination is available as a GARANT reproduction.

For procedural non-compliance with the agreement or statute, paragraph 49 of Supreme Court Plenum 53 requires a substantial impairment of fair-hearing rights and timely objections. Court supervision is not a fresh expert examination or a general evidentiary rehearing. Identify the undisclosed material, questioning prevented or request left unresolved, and explain the effect on procedural rights. See setting aside and refusal of enforcement for the grounds and limits of review.

Confidentiality and handling documents

Under Article 21 of Law 382-FZ, arbitration is confidential and hearings are closed unless the parties agree otherwise or federal law provides an exception. Parties can establish in advance who receives documents, how experts and representatives obtain access and which information may be disclosed.

In international cases, confidentiality depends on the applicable statute, agreement and rules. Documents submitted to a state court for assistance, setting aside or enforcement are also subject to that court’s procedural rules.

A closed hearing, a duty not to disclose information and the prohibition on examining an arbitrator as a witness are distinct rules. Article 21(2)–(3) of Law 382-FZ separately prohibits arbitrators and institution staff from disclosure without the parties’ consent and protects the arbitrator from witness examination. That protection does not automatically extend to every representative, expert or witness. Access and confidentiality obligations for those persons should be established before documents are shared.

An application to a Russian state court does not automatically carry over the arbitration’s closed-hearing regime. Under Commercial Procedure Code Article 11 and Civil Procedure Code Article 10, hearings are public by default. Protected commercial or other secrets—and, under the Civil Procedure Code, private-life information and other specified circumstances—must be addressed through the relevant statutory ground. The court orders closure of all or part of the hearing. A confidentiality clause alone does not automatically close the court proceedings.

Disclosure limits also depend on the country. For example, Armenian Law Article 24(4) expressly allows exceptions under statute, court order or agreement, and disclosure necessary for judicial recognition, enforcement or annulment. A promise that documents will never leave the arbitration is therefore inaccurate. An agreement can identify permitted disclosures, their purposes and extent, and protective arrangements, without displacing mandatory law or court requirements.

Costs and allocation

For Russian domestic arbitration, Article 22 of Law 382-FZ covers arbitrator fees, experts and translators, evidence examination, witnesses, representatives and procedural administration. Institutional and ad hoc arbitration have different arrangements for determining and paying charges.

Parties should address expert-fee advances, document their expenses and request allocation of costs. The agreement, applicable rules and statute govern the outcome. Arbitration costs are distinct from costs incurred in subsequent state-court proceedings.

Advance funding and final cost allocation answer different questions. The costs guide covers ad hoc fees, unpaid deposits, costs submissions, UNCITRAL fee review and separate state-court costs.

Settlement and awards on agreed terms

Article 33 of Law 382-FZ provides for termination following settlement and, at the parties’ request, an award on agreed terms. It is issued as an arbitral award and follows the same enforcement route as an award on the merits.

For international commercial arbitration, Article 30 of Law 5338-1 permits an award on agreed terms if the parties request one and the tribunal does not object. Precise obligations, deadlines, costs and partial-performance consequences should be settled before the award is issued.

Distinguish three documents: a settlement signed by the parties, an order terminating proceedings and an arbitral award on agreed terms. The first does not by itself become an award; the second ends the proceedings but does not by itself award the agreed payment. Enforcement as an arbitral award requires the tribunal’s award in the statutory form. Law 382-FZ Article 33 and Law 5338-I Article 30 give that award the effect of a merits award; judicial enforcement review still applies.

Before termination, the parties should choose the intended outcome and make a joint request to the tribunal. Settlement terms should identify the obligor and recipient, amount and currency, timing and method of performance, treatment of payments already made, interest and costs, and the claims being settled. Any default consequences or acceleration of the outstanding balance should be explicit: the enforcement document should not require a new dispute to establish what was promised.

Withdrawal and termination without a payment award

Under Law 382-FZ Article 36 and Law 5338-I Article 32, withdrawal normally leads to termination, subject to protection for the respondent: if it objects and the tribunal recognises a legitimate interest in final determination, withdrawal alone is insufficient. The parties may also agree to termination; another ground is the tribunal’s conclusion that continuation is unnecessary or impossible. These are distinct procedural grounds and the order should identify the applicable one.

Termination ends the tribunal’s mandate, apart from functions expressly preserved by Law 382-FZ Article 37, or Law 5338-I Article 33 and Article 34(4). Parties should therefore not close the case through withdrawal and assume that the same tribunal must later turn the respondent’s promise into a consent award. If the settlement is breached, the remedy depends on its terms, the arbitration agreement and applicable law. The termination order does not itself become an enforceable title for the promised amount.

A state-court settlement after arbitration

Paragraph 58 of Supreme Court Plenum Resolution 53 of 10 December 2019 expressly permits a settlement during proceedings for a writ to enforce an arbitral award. The state court may approve it after checking legality and the rights and legitimate interests of others. This is a judicial settlement procedure, rather than the state court issuing a new arbitral award.

Form and contents are assessed under Commercial Procedure Code Article 140 or Civil Procedure Code Article 153.9: a written document, signatures of the parties or specially authorised representatives, and defined obligations, amounts and deadlines. Approval follows Article 141 of the former Code or Article 153.10 of the latter. The court cannot rewrite the agreed terms itself or approve only selected parts of the settlement.

If the court-approved settlement is not performed, a writ is available under Commercial Procedure Code Article 142 or Civil Procedure Code Article 153.11. The basis is the court’s approval and the terms it records, which must be distinguished from obtaining a writ for the original arbitral award. Payments already made must be accounted for to prevent double recovery. See enforcement and the different enforcement models.

Settlement in Armenia, Belarus and Kyrgyzstan

In Armenia, Article 30 provides for an award on agreed terms at the parties’ request if the tribunal does not object. Paragraph 1.1, added in 2023, expressly allows refusal where the settlement exceeds the tribunal’s jurisdiction or is unlawful. Both parties’ signatures therefore do not require the arbitrators to approve any proposed terms. Article 31 also governs the award itself.

Belarus has two relevant statutes. In domestic arbitration, Law 301-Z Article 36 provides, on the parties’ application, for an award approving a lawful settlement that does not infringe third-party rights; the award sets out its terms. In international arbitration, Law 279-Z Article 39 provides for recording the settlement as an award on agreed terms with the same effect and enforcement regime as a merits award. Conditions from one regime should not be transferred mechanically to the other.

In Kyrgyzstan, Law 135 Article 30 concerns settlement before the merits award: with the tribunal’s consent, it issues an award approving the settlement and simultaneously an order terminating proceedings. This illustrates why the instrument establishing obligations and the act closing the procedure are distinct. Subsequent enforcement still requires compliance with national procedure and, if sought abroad, the applicable international recognition regime.

Illustrative scenarios: choosing the right document

Instalments before the award. A supplier and buyer agree three payments. If they want an arbitral award, they request an award on agreed terms before the proceedings end and specify the amounts and dates. Missing the first payment does not by itself make all future instalments immediately recoverable: the agreed provision and applicable law must be checked.

Withdrawal in return for a promise. The claimant withdraws after a promise to pay, and the tribunal terminates the case. If no payment award exists, the termination order does not substitute for one. Before withdrawal, compare performance of the settlement, an award on agreed terms and simple procedural termination, including costs and any remaining claims.

Compromise at the writ stage. After an arbitral award, the parties agree a new schedule while a Russian court considers the writ application. They may seek approval of a settlement under Plenum Resolution 53, paragraph 58. Subsequent enforcement focuses on the court-approved terms and proven payments; that mechanism does not authorise the former tribunal simply to rewrite its final award. These three scenarios are educational illustrations, not accounts of decided cases.

Foreign practice: tribunal experience and a new factual issue

In CAJ v CAI · SGCA 102 (2021), the Singapore court preserved partial setting aside: the tribunal entertained a new fact-sensitive defence at closing submissions and relied on unarticulated experience in calculating an extension. The breach affected the real opportunity to respond and present evidence.

Expert evidence raises a related question: does professional knowledge assist assessment of the record, or supply an independent new factual basis? Where a substantial technical issue emerges late, address the amendment process, expose the issue to the parties and organise the response, including any necessary expert material. The finding of a particular violation depends on the law of the seat and the agreed procedure.

When proceedings commence and how to establish notice

Unless otherwise agreed, Law 382-FZ Article 23 and Law 5338-I Article 21 connect commencement with the respondent’s receipt of the statement of claim. This need not be the date of filing with an institution, paying a fee or constituting the tribunal. The selected rules may establish a different agreed trigger; check their edition and conditions in advance.

Preserve the address, agreed communication method, contents and delivery evidence. Under Law 382-FZ Article 3, the agreed procedure applies; its default provides for dispatch to the last known address with recorded delivery or attempted delivery even if the party has left. The international statute’s Article 3 has a different structure: dispatch to the last known address is provided for where the relevant location or address cannot be established after reasonable inquiry. Arbitration communication rules do not replace state-court service rules.

A procedural calendar can record dates for the defence, counterclaims, documents, witnesses, expert evidence, hearing and post-hearing submissions. Address acknowledgements and extension applications too. It is a working instrument within each statute’s Article 19 and the agreed rules, rather than a universally mandatory document with fixed deadlines.

Amendments, counterclaims and set-off

Distinguish an independent counterclaim, a defence to the claim and a set-off. Under Law 382-FZ Article 25(7)–(9), unless otherwise agreed, a counterclaim must relate to the claimant’s demands and fall within the arbitration agreement. It may be brought before the award unless another deadline is agreed; the claimant may respond. Paragraph 10 connects set-off of homogeneous claims with civil law and the conditions in paragraphs 7–9.

Paragraph 6 permits amendments to claims and defences and additional evidence, but the tribunal may refuse them in light of delay. In the international framework, Law 5338-I Article 23 has its own submission and amendment rules, while Article 2 addresses references to claims and counterclaims. The detailed domestic provisions should not be assumed to be the international statute’s wording.

Where a new position requires new factual inquiry, determine whether it is admissible and give the opponent an opportunity to respond with the necessary evidence. In CAJ v CAI, a late fact-sensitive defence without proper amendment led to partial setting aside. This Singapore example illustrates procedural risk; the particular law and rules determine applicable grounds and deadlines.

If a party supplies no documents or fails to attend

First establish proper notice and the reasons for non-participation. Under Law 382-FZ Article 28, unless otherwise agreed, missing documents or the absence of a properly notified party does not prevent proceedings and an award where the tribunal finds the reason insufficient. Failure to submit a defence is not itself an admission of the claim.

Law 5338-I Article 25 distinguishes defaults without sufficient cause: failure to submit the statement of claim as Article 23 requires leads to termination; an absent defence permits continuation without admitting the claimant’s assertions; non-attendance or missing documentary evidence permits continuation and a decision on the available record. These are different procedural consequences, rather than an automatic victory for the attending party.