Facts
In a challenge to an ICAC domestic lease-dispute award, the applicant raised expert-payment arrangements, an unresolved expert challenge and inability to question all experts. The applicable framework was the ICAC Rules for Domestic Disputes approved by Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Order 6 of 11 January 2017 and Law 382-FZ.
Holding
The Supreme Court required assessment of procedural safeguards and the institution’s applicable rules. It quashed the court orders insofar as they refused to set aside the award and remitted that part.
Limits
The review concerned procedure and public policy. This determination did not itself annul the entire award; its grounds concern the particular facts.
What required examination
The Court linked expert evidence to the agreed procedure: the applicable rules and agreements did not authorise the parties’ direct contracts with the expert organisation. The expert challenge and opportunity to question the expert under Law 382-FZ Article 29(3) also required assessment. Reviewing these safeguards does not entail rehearing the underlying dispute.
Using the holding
Compare the applicable rules, appointment order, payment arrangements and responses to objections. The determination creates no universal ban on direct payment for expert evidence; its conclusion depends on the governing procedure. The Supreme Court did not itself annul the entire arbitral award.
General information. The applicable legal framework depends on the particular dispute, seat and enforcement country.