Document:-
A/CN.4/36
Memorandum on the Soviet Doctrine and Practice with Respect to Arbitral Procedure,
prepared by the Secretariat
Topic:
Arbitral Procedure
Downloaded from the web site of the International Law Commission
(http://www.un.org/law/ilc/index.htm)
Copyright © United Nations
GEN.ERAL
i
A/CN.4/36
21 November 1950
ORIGINAL:
ENGLISH
IN'fJmNATIONAL lAW COMMISSION
Second session
MEMORANDUM
ON
TB:E
SOVIE~
PRACTICE
DOOTRm: AND
wrm
RESP.B~T
TO
ARBITRAL PROCEDURE
(Prepared by the Secretariat)
/TABIJ3: OF
A/CN)~/36
I.
" _.• t'o' , ".
A/CN.4/36
Page 2
TABLE OF CO:NT.ENrS
I •
~!rEJC1r WR.I~S
•••••
0
•
•
•
•
•
••
• ••••••••••• "
3
6
positi
15
of law
COMl.\1ERCIAL ARBITRATION •••••••••••••••••••••
17
of ProJ.
v. THE PEACE TREATIES •••..•...••..•..•.....•..
21
of Hig]
II.
lIT.
IV.
-mFJ\.TIES. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
u •
• •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Q
•
COMMERCIAL AGREEMENTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
0' •• 4 •
•
•
•
•
•
Facult'
VI •
'THF~
DICTIOlIAR.IES •.•••••••••
0
•••••••••••••
IJ
•
23
. ~,"
Russi
le,
VII.
BECAJ?ITrJIATION ••••.••••••••
0
•
0
•••••••••••••
,,1
24
1
r,
f
al'
u.
~
.1
I
:~
"j
/SOVIF!r
th
19
Th
this hi
has tak
authors
througr..
cases 0
Justice
existen
Th
have be
powers
Entente
aeparat
It is r
were ay
~
"
"( ••,' • , 'oH •
'
'.
A/CN.4/36
Page 3
S9YI;ET DOCTRINE AIm PRACTICE WI:pH RESPECT TO ARBITRAL PROCEDlJRE
I.
THE
1rRl(T
vlRITE..."tS
~~O
post-war Soviet text-books on international law state the U.S.S.R.'s
position with respect to arbitration.
The more comprehensive of the two texts, published in 1947 by the Institute
of Law of the Aoademy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R. under the general editorship
of Professor V. N. Durdenevskii and Judge S. B. ~ylov, ~nd issued by the Ministry
of Higher Edu0ati~n of the U.S.S.R. as a text-book for Juridical Institutes and
Faculties, stf1.tes the Soviet positj.on briefly', as follows (in translation from the
Russian):
Pos1tj_on of the U.S ..S.R. with rela.tion
to questio~s of arbitration.
9. ~!le U.S.S.R. and-l!lternationaJ.:...~~bitration. The U.S.S.R., tal~ing.
into consideration tl1j,s character of internatj,Ol1C:.l justice, has been
reserved towerd internationa.l arbitration both as to its permanent Hague
forms and as to ad hoc courts; not shunning in maI~ cases settlement through
arbitration of diiputes concerning questions of private internatiOllal law, the
U.S.S.R. prefers ,for jnter-govarnmental disputes related to political mattere
the procedure of diplomatic action and conciliatory commissions.
(Institut Prava Akademii Nauk S.S.S.R., lVIez:ldUnarodnoe Pravo, Moscow,
1947, p. 475)
The para&~aph is preceded b~ a seven-page history of arbitration. It is to
this historical sketch that the authors refer when they state that the U.S.S.R•
has taken into consideration "this character" of international justice. The
autho~st conclusions, as ~ result of their historical presentation, are that
througr...Ollt its life the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague has heard
cases of a rather secondary 1mporta~ce, whiie the Permanent 'Court of International
Justice was not the recipient of a single really :important dispute during its
0
,.
!j
1".;
'1
I
existence.
The decisions of the Permanent Court of International Justice are found to
have been characterized generally by protection of the interests of the great
powers which directed the League of Nations and of the powers of the Little
Entente. Only in those cases in which the interests of the great powers went
separate ways were decisions found to have been registered againat one of them.
It is remarked that the cla.:ims of minorities in Poland, Rumania and elset'lhere
were sytematically dismissed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction or lack of
/definiteness.
A/CN.4/36
Page 4
I
I
i
defin itene ss.
The Second World 1var is held to have prove d Lenin corre ct
when he
said thnt no inter natio nal court of arbit ratio n could , of
itsel f, save mankind
fram new im~erialist wars (Leni n, Colle cted Works, Second
and Third Btlssi an
editio ns, 'Vol. 25, p. 281). It is noted that the UoS.S.R.
has not adher ed to the
Convo!"!tic.ns for tt.e Paclf 'ic Settle ment of Inter natio nal Dispu
tes, signe d at
The Hague.
~.
i
h
!
A Iwarl y simila.'t' attitu de is expresS-ed in the other text,
writt en by
Profe ssor ~o I. Kozhevnikov and beari ng the note that it has
been appro ved by the
All-U nion Jurid ical ?art-+ Jme Insti tute of the Minis try of
Justi ce of the U.S.S .R.
as a study aid for part- time stude nts. Sovie t and Russi an
L"llperial pract ice, the
latte r of which is not menti oned at all in the other text-b
ook discu ssed above ,
is sketc hed in brief . Not all of the same concl usion s are
reach ed, howev er.
The Permanent Court of Arbit ratio n is thoug ht to have decid
ed a consi derab le
number of "rath er impor tant cases , as for example that of
11 Nover:J.ber 1912
..
campensatil~ Russi an sU~je cts 8uffe rir~
losse s dl~i1~ the Russo -Turk ish'W ar of
1871-1878 and t~~t of 6 ~~y 1913, on the detai ning by the Itelia ns
of the Frenc h
Mail Steam ship tCarth age t. or (pc 202). It is also remarked
(in trans latio n fram
the Russi an):
It must be emphasized that Russi a exert ed serio us affirm
on the incul catio n of the idea of a court of arbit ratio n in ative influe nce
inter natio nal
pract ice (p. 198). - -- One can affirm boldl;)'" that in the develo
pment of an
inter natio nal legal proce dure and court system Russi a unque
stiona
bly playe d
a leadi ng role
(p. 199).
(]'. l·, KozheVl~ikov, Uchebnoe, Posob ie po Mezhdunarod
nomu Publiclmorn.u
Pravu . /Ocherki/~ ~oscow, 1947).
The ~elation betwe en the parti cipat ion in inter natio nal arbit
ratio n by the
Impe rial Russi an Goverrment and its forei gn polic y is set
forth as follow s:
It goes wit.holtt sayin g that it ,vould be very naive to overe
stima te fram
this fact as well as fram other s, the since rity for pacif ism
prs-:i :'8vol utiona ry TI'.lssia anp. of bourg eois diplom acy in gener on the part of
al in these ,
times ~p. 199).
. .
'
The UQS. S.R.'s attitu de tow~rd arbit ratio n at the prese nt
time is set forth
in brief, but in great er detai l than in the other volum.e,
as follow s:
Sovie t .diplomaoy has not repud iated in princ iple under all
the insti tutio n of arbit ratio n' /arbi trazh ! as one of the peace circum stanc es
settli ng inter natio nal dispu tes. On the contr ary, the Sovie ful means of
t Government
think s it fully possi ble (unde r certa in circ~tnnces) to
apply
even tIlis
proce dure for settli ng peace fully dispu tes arisin g betwe en
the Sovie t state
and indiv idual capi talis tstat 6s.
/Thus , the
..
' -
b~n
of S
Amer
Koro
inte
posi
~";,,. . •1 ..•' i!!!!Ol!£""""'-...........,"""p5Li=~_i,iIiIL"'."="''''i"...:;,.,,,''''¥-'''''·_;l\i''~~\£'ji."llid'liii'<jh'Ol,...:>l\lji';"";;"';·"'''"''''''-~'::''''_''''":''~'"''i~'ili<~-:<,,"
A/CN.4/36
Page 5
I
i
[
I
I'
/;
Thus, the Sov:f.et Government"agreed at the meeting of the Executive
Camm.1ttee of' tho Moscmv Conference for Reduction of Armaments of'
8 D€'cer:tbel~ 1922 to accept a draft convention on ncm-aggreseion and erbltr~tiou
/tret"Jiskoe razbiratelfstvo!.' The parties to this convention agreed that if
a dis?ute arose among thGm concerning qusat1cns alre~dy decided by the peace
treatj0s, or concern'~ territorial 'questions" the question giving rise to
the oispute would be referred to arbitration ltretelskoe razbiratel!stvo/
:Y,n the event that it was fOU11d to be impossible 'bo settle the dispute through
dipl~tlc channelso
'
r
I~
I
In entering the League of Nations in 1934 the U.. SoS.R. likewise a.ccepted
in ge::'10ral the pr1nci:ple of ar'bitration /arbitrazh/ provided for in the
,
Covenant of that organiz~t10n. The U.S.S.B. , however, in this case mad~ a
, substantial reservation to this effect -- that arbitrat:too /tre-te:t.skoe
.
razbiratel'stvo/ or judicial settlement, pToviq,ed for by Arti.... le.G 12 and :t.3
of the Covenant of the j~ague, could not be applied to confliots relating to
questions whioh had arisen befo~e ita entrance into the league.
,
"'
Finally" participation of the UaB..S.:R. in the United Nations Organizatj.on
once again confirms Soviet diplomacy's p081tive ,approach ,in principle, to
arbit:t'ation / a r b i t r a z h ! . .
'
It goes without saying 'that ul'lder all circumstances there will re;ma.in
unchar..ged that general principle of Soviet foreign policy, under which
Sovle't diplomacy will always seek 'to obtain such a bench for the arbitration
/treteiekie/ tribunals or for other eiIli1lar agencies as Will guar8.rite~ to
the U.S.SFB. the same meaSl~e of disinterestedness and Justice as is assured
other states (1'. 2 0 4 ) . ,
'
Both
I:
I'
i;
[!
i
of
the volumes, f.'ran which the quotations have been
selE)ct~,
have
b~n
seriously criticized by the Director of the Institute of 'Law of the Academy
of Sciences,,' Professor Eugene A. Koro.vin (see -his reView tranahted in ]?art in
American Journa.l of Intel'national law, Vol. 43 (1949), pp. 381-389).
Korov:tn, who has long been one of the most noted
or
Soviet
w:rit~,:s
Professor
on
international ~~w, criticizes his colleagues for fai~ing to portray the Soviet
position toward international law with sufficient patriotic-pathos, and, in'
particular, for failing to explain the Soviet feeling that same states ~e trying
to subordinate the Security Cou.ucil of the thited. Na.tions to the Internat:t.ona.1
Court of Justice.
He doee not, however, comment criticaJ.ly on the trea:anent' of
the subject of arbitra.tion in either VOlUme.
S:1mil~ ~riticism of United States
of
I)
Ii
I1;
'j
and British attitudes toward the, Inte;rnationa.1 Court
Justice has be,en m&:t,e ~
Foreign Minister Vysh1nsky (see this article "Internat,ionalL9.w and International
Organization" (in Russian), Sovetskoe Qosudarstvo i Pravo, (1948)., No.. 1, p. 1).
I
"
q
<i
';,1
1
/Il..
TREATIFS
A/CN.4/36
Page 6
.1
!
··II•. ·~·
, '.
The record .of Soviet :p::'actice
'in' ·ti'eatles of th~ 1nt.er-war years re~t1rlg
..'
.
to the :pse.oeful:- s~ttlemont of .t4s);lUtes' :1n:d1~.B:tes. extellf3ive proviai~e 'for
~
~
' . ,
Mixed COllImidSiQIlS, h".1.t arb1tJ:'ai:;ion ·procedJ,lres· under which a third party' ls
a:pIlo:i.rl~ed.as a 11 super arbiterh , as .umP1:r,-e" ..in aC;01'~ce 'W1 tli provisions .
similar to those set forth in the Hague Conventions, have not b'een ·fOl.Lt."'ld.
.
EI'he
.si~1.atiQIl·
to "'which Professol"
,
.
Kozllev:nrkov.r~fer8 as·an
Soviet wiL:irigness tc? .acce:Pt- B:r~i t~tion is not ·8uf'ficient.'1y
:permit a dete-rmi:na.tion·of the str..1.cttlre of the trib'U.tlB.l
~
instance
riu.ly reported to
intende~.
An
eXarail1..~tion· of h~s cited materials 'reV-ears'the :rollomng: .
The article of the itDraj"b' Convention on Non-Aggress101land an A,rbi t~'tion
" -:;trete~Bkoe razbirat~l f stvo/, accepted by the ExeCutive Cammi tt~e Of the
MosCOW' don:fel'~nce for Reducti~n. of '.Arma.i.ilents on 8 1)ecembe~ 1922," reB.~a
:'aa
fOl).'O\lS. (in; translation from the Russian) ~ '.
.
Articl~5 .•·· The H.igh CorrtJ:'acting Parties are agreed that i1' a dispute
... arises among' t.1l0!ll.over q~estions wl1ich have alrea~ been decided by the
pea:ce' "~r3a~ies, and 'over terri+..orial questions; the dispute which :has
er1~9n~ will be transferred. to arbi tral review /treteiskoe razbirat6;L" stNol
in ~e eV8:lt that it proves im1)ossible to settle the diapu'OO tJ1i:'otigh·
diplcrn.atic chani.wls.
"
. .'
. (See.··Kl.y'llch..~lkov ~ Y. V. and Sabanin, A. V., Mezhdunarodnaya P~11tika ..
Nave1shego v'rein.eni v Dogovorakh, l~ot~kh i DeklaratsiyaJr...h • Moscow) '1928 ~
:' ·Vol. '3, .Pa~ :r;,J;·te:r;rr No~ 112, :p. 211).
. ._
....
T:tle Dra,ft ConveJ1~inn ...' as not signed 't?Y i!he .partie!3 ·t? ,the Conferenc;e.. If
>
trib~l, .~
the parties had a procedure in miI,ld for the
a~aillil-ble
to this study.as
doclltJ.E1~~s .re~~,ting
+t
haa 'noi; been
)?ro:V.is~ofls
re:po~d1n.~ ~1c:J..aJ;1'f?oo:r.d.of·
'Whet~er ~e
to Sov1-€}t· fe:reign ]olicy.
i.nc,l,ude a ,.th:t-rd al"bit:t'ator :.i13. not
procedure ·is. ;not
indic~ted.
whi9h are typical :9'f. Soviet
. '"
tribuna],....
wa.~
';
to ,',' .....
... ' ...... .,:.'.:
M",:*ate.r8:;~ treati~s::on :~;J3~~J.~Ct.!
of ~I:1i:.~able .settlelIlen~ :ofd1sJ;l1.1te:s. a;r'~ .~Otile. ;1~' 'tth~. ~·C.~vent;i.on c01lOelT.l1ng~/ .::
C9ncil~atiC?n Procedure between ~e Unionot .Sovi.et Soc1a1,.ist R~:pub+.ics.. _and
. L.atV;i.a ~ If.. 81841.3d· in .Riga
'18 June 19~~.
.
(See . SbOl"Ilfk DeistvuYU$P.chikh Dos<?vorqv J,:
Sog~ashenii·i Konve~1ie.ii zak~yucJ:1ennykh 's,. XnC?~trannymi. J~.os:u.!3a;r'stV8IlP,:) : .o.oJ+e:~tiOfl
.
.
."
.
Treatie.s; ~ee1:J1ertf3 a~d C~yentfc>ns ,in Fo.rca" Conclu4ed. withFo!'eign,~iiate~;
"
.at:.
Peo1)le 1 s Commissariat of Foreign Affairs~ U.S.S.~. - c~ted hereafter' as '
Collection of Treaties etc.,
UoS.S~p..
- Vol. VII, i933, 1)- 8.
Also in
-:;.,
/The ;pertinent
r:: r
A/CN.4/36
Page 7
. Tli~ pei-t1nei1t art~~l~~ ~ 'setfortb "in
follows:
translation treD' the Rhssiat1 as
.J .
'
.
Article 1. The High Contracting ;Parties mutually bind themselves to
:p-1'eSe'!:.t to a CQ..'!1cil:tatory Car.md.:S,~1on /Sog.la.sitel1ne,ya Kanissiya/ for
'~lim~'l:le sst':.lement in accordance ·With the :p-":'Ov1s:.i.ons of this 'J.'reaty ell
dis:~~'I.t';'t$ af~ killd 'Which arise between them out ofcircuI!i.stances
o(\{m':j;l':ng. c..ft'e"r th~ entry into force'of the Treaty signad in JUga On
F€'lort::~::.-~r 5, 1932; between the Union of Soviet. sociai:i.ot Republics and
I,G::via: 'Which cannot be settled th!'O"J.gh Qj plomaol,.Jic chalmels within a
2'(;"asGnable period. of time. This obligation aPDlies in particular also
to· GiD~llteB concere:J.rl..g t.he l."1.t.el"Pretaticn and execution of Treaties and
Agreep-;C'n:ts already concluded er to be ~oncluded between· the H~gh ContractiDg
Part.;ies.
Artiole 2~ 'The Conciliatory Commission provi.ded for,1nArtiele J. shall
not be :permanellt $ -but shall be formed apecia.l1y for each session. It shall
meet an.."1.;JeJ.1y' in r9gl.11ar sessIon, on a date set each t:lJ:n.e in agreement
'With bot..~ High Contracting J?13.rties.,
' .
Special sessio!lS shall be held., i f in tPe opinion af
parties 'same urgent spec:tfic s< :.nation requires them..
.'
in
One
of the WA'O
All sessions of the Conciliatory Ccumss'ion shall be held aJ.ternative17
and R:i.ga. "The place of the first sess1'()jl shall be'· chosen by
.
MOEfCOW
lot~
.. As a general rule· sessions shall not last for more thall fOurteen days,.
. ,.
,. A:ctic.le 3. The Conciliatory Commission shell be c'amposed of four
members, 'two· of 'tvhich shall be named by each of the High Contracting Parties
from amohg its O'i.in citizens for each session of the Comniss1on.
'.
. Each c1' t.:ne High Contracting Fariies has the right tci call to i~s
aid e:x:p9r-~s namad by it, lmo may sit in the COllllIl1ssion With the right of
a con3'.llta-l.;,ivEl vote •.
. The Chairmanship of each session: shall ~ in one of tbe membera..or the
Comm:i.ssion from the side in whose territory it is sitting.
A.ctic~le
4. The Conciliatory CQIlllDission has the duty of clarifying
dis:9Uted. q::lesti~s put before ;f. t a;p.d of propoliSing to both High CC'ntraeting
Parties a solution of the ques"iiion "",'bieh is f~ir and satisfactory to
both .J;aI'ties and: in IJ6.r-cicuJ.ar, which shall avert the future possible
disag:!:ee:nent bet"WeeJ1, bot.'1' pa.rties on. the question concerned'. ....
:1
. If +.J1e Conciliatory Co1ll!I1issioo doe·s not reach a general IxropOSaJ.
during Que e'essl::>n on ar.:y of the questions on the agenda, 'bhe question' may
again bE:! presented to a special session of the,Conciliatory Commission,
whicli must, however, take place net later than four· months after the
first session.
' .
. :....
Th~. resUlts· or each session of ·theCanciliatar,y Commission shalJ. be
set 'forth in a report to the govel"l'lDlC!lts 0-: both IJEirtiess
.
. , Publi~ati~n of the re:po;vt in llhole or in part':may
consent of both govermnent8'~:
.
~cur. only
..'ArticJ.e ,.
With the
,;t,
1
A/CN.4/36
Page 8
I
Art:Lcl~ 5. Not later than f1fte$.l daYEI, before the date set for, a
regular session" of the' Conciliatory COmmission each of' the parties shall
notify the other through dip::'ar::J;ltic cha.J1Ilels ef the list of questions
'W.Dic:i1 it wlEhes revie'W'Qd at, ~e se8s~on to, be held.
,
I·;
r
I
:~
I
In the event of notice or the calli.Jg of a special session, the party
gt v1::Je.3 tb.9 n.otice :must declare to the ()ther :PSI'ty ths circumata.'J.ces of
i.:,-:--~e t'~',g6nt spscific si tuaticn, which are the basis for tl1.6 call. The
C('i!:i'.:liL.sion 12.i.st assemble not late~" than one month after the notice had
rec0ivei.
~
" Article 6. Each High contracting Party
b~en
ob~.igates itself' to provide
the Got!!lllission wt th all facts useful to thl;i case and to assist it in every
way in c~~"'.t'Yir<iS out its tasks.
Jo_1:'tic:'.e 7. Both High Contracting Parties obligate themselves to
from an:r measure "Which coUld influence in an ~desi~ble manner
the discussion 'of a::.ry q'....estion in t..'lJ.e Conciliatory Commission. In
particular" th~y declare their reacUness to take into cmsiQ.eration for
this :PUI1J~se the question of pre'Ven~ive measures.
'
refra~1
Article 8.
A q~orum of the Conciliatory Conmlission shall be present
onlY' lw"hen all meml'Jers c~J..led in t.he req'.l1'red manr..er are present.
If one of t.ne members is not 1.."1 a conditio..11 to partic:J.pate in the
of the Coirrn:l.ssiro, the intere~ted party shall name a BUDst'itute for
hjm not less thai.l thirty days a...fter the impediment has been established.
'Wor~
The, decision of the Comm:l,3sion shall be ad0pted on the general
agreement of all ~ i ts membe~"s.
I,.
I
~i
~
,J~
I
c(
".l
'i
j"-,
r:
It
F
r'~
, , Article 9" ~~he Conciliatory Commission shall present to both
governments a report on all dis!"lltes referred to it for l1eview. 'The
report shall be p~esented. before the end of the session dtU'ing which the
disputed questiolls ha'\"e been review:ed, unless the contracting :Parties have
agreed to exter.tltne period.
I
l
(
h-
II
i:
I~,
The repcrt ohall contain a draft for the settlement of each disputed
question presented to the CoIlllIl1ssion" if this draft h!:l.s been accepted by
all members of the pomm.1ssion.
, In ;the event that the Co:nI!I1ission has been unable t~ reach 'agreement
on ane general report, the report shall contain the proposals of both
s1Ctes of t.ne Camn1ssi9n.
" "Artiale 10. Furt..'lJ.er details of the proced:ure shall be defined to the
extent necessary by the Conciliatory C~ssion itself.
Article ll~ Each of :the High Coilt.racting Parties obJ.igatea itself
to 'inte:r.m. the ot;he~ party Within a reasonable time, b:ut not to exceed
tic-ee months, whet.aer it will accept the proposal of the Commission
contained. in the report.
.
Article 12. COIl1j)ensation of tlembers of the Conciliatory Commission,
as i'Tell as of experts' and otlLer l?ersOIle: retained by each of the High
Cont'acting Parties shall be :pa.id. out of fund.s of the party responsible.
All -(;rliher eX)?enditures, COlmected with the activity of the Ccamnission
/Shall
T
be
""""'~"''''<='''-5'~rb .'!""'>=t\b.~~=""-""",.""",,,,,,,z~~=~Cdi,','",",~~,,,li."~.~"~"il&,,,!Sili~~'<;f;wiii!""'~£§~~~!imilii!!llilli!!IllIIIII
_
A/CN.4/36
I!
Page 9
t
I
shall be divided equa.lJ.y between both parties. '
Ar1iicle 13. This Convention is an integral pu"t of the Treaty
-, ,ccm.cluded. in Bigaon 5 "Feb:t"'.lary 1932 between t..~e Union of Soviet Socialist
Repu111cs ani Labia, and is £:uoject· to ratification.
.
i
i
,<
,~
sha]~ COITl.6
It.
boto affect on the excha:nge of ratificatians of the
a:fC:'.'E,1:8:1ticnoc. t:'eaty.,
~l·~~:i.S' cor..'lJ"e.ntion she.ll' rem..~in in force for the same ter-A for 'Which the
Traaty (;f 5 Fe'bru.ary 1932 has been conclud.ed.
A:..--tic1e,140 T!1is Convention is concluded in the Russ:l.an and r..e.tvian
la:lo"U2..c;es 0 Both texts have eg.ua! force.
(Concl...l e.ing pa...""tlgraIJhs a..Tld signatures).
O+l1er
conven~ionS
concerning conciliation have been concluded by the U.S.S.R.
'W1 th the follcr-wo-lr.lg cO".mtr-lee:
92EY..:& -
"Convention Co.'lcerning a Con9iliation J?~ocedure between
the UoS.S.R" and Germany, u ~lgned
:l~ MoscOW~ 25 J aIlUar,Y
1929 ,,- (Collection
.
.
.
\
'of Treaties, etc., U.S.S.B., Vel" V, 1930,'P. 10, and XC': 219 ooS).
This Convention is in ,;Le...'"lgl.lage id.e:J:l'tiical Vi. th that of the Latyie.n
Cc:mventicrc., set fOl"th abcve 1
exc~pt
that it has no Articles similar to.Articles
6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Latvian. Convention.
It
'.. .
extend.ed 1ndefini
tely by'
El.
..
.
Protocol signefi in Moscow on 24 J'me 1931,' each par'ty retaining the right to
denounce it on OIlE;)' ye,:lr's notice, 'blit'not b~fore 30 June 1933. (Collection
of Treaties, ete:, U~S.SClR" Vol. VIII,
1935,
'WaS
p.
7 and CLVII:383 Ui-l'S).
~~K1;'1gdS:!E! - "Protocol Relative to theProce~ !.or the
Settlement' or' Q';estione outsCantling between His MaJesty' s' G~ernment in
the Un:i.ted. Kingiom 'and the Goyernment of the ~on of SoViet Socialist
Bepublics,p such Procedure to become O~rative 1Imned1ately on the Resumption
of full Diplomatic Relatj.ona between the two states, including the
Exchange of knbassadors", s~gned' '::'n ~ondon, 3 Octob~:r 1929 - (Collecti,on
! "
I
of Treaties, etc.,
U~S,S..R",
Vol.
''''I~
1931" 'p. 5; British Parliamentary
Papers J Rus'sia 'No. 1" 1929, emd•.3418, Correspan.dence regarding the
.
:Resumption of Relations nth the Gover.nmentof the Union.Qf' Soviet
"Social1s \i ':Republics, p. '7)
'~."
II i
J
I
!;
ii
I
I
<
.~
•J
It
~
•
This Protoc'ol depa.-r>ted sharply fram :the pattern of the Convention With
.
.
.
.'
Germany of 25 January 1929 in that 11; listed five B!l6c1fic subjects l1h1ch would
be regulated by it, and the procedure established for aettJ,amant of .d1spu.t,~s
f.'
~e
.
.
'
•
less ,deta.:"" "'ld. The pertinent articles read as follows, in the E%!glish text:
/Artic1e
4.
J"I
,j
....
"
•
•
~.
r
'
).
.
"
,
'
.
A/CN.4/36
Page 10
.Article 4. The plenipotentiaries of the two Gove:r:nD'lSnts shall, if
necessary, be assis~cdby joint c~ttees, the members of which shall be
; a1?1ointad in equ::u ni.Ul!.bE:lr by each Govel"DmElnt from among theiX' nat.ionals,
whet210r c!'ficial~ or not, e:pecially acquainted 1Yith the matters unc.er
t?isc1.'Gsion.
Un
Fa
19
P rticle 5Q ThElse e:t:;perts shall re;po2't to each of the plen1;potentiaries
o~ ~1~ results reached in their joint e~tion of ti1e respective
q"..1.6s1:,L:;:""1s a...-:.d on the solution the-reof which they suggest.
A::::tlcle 6.
excep-r.
All agreements resul.ting from the negotiations bet'lo<-een
6hall take the form of a treaty or treaties bei-ween
Qora.n.:!. s s
"Con"tenticn Concerning a Concilia.tion Procedti.re between the
transla
t~e rlcnj.~oten·Giaries
the tVf) GQvernme~ts.
F'i.:r..
_
......."i..?.nd:
~.
worG.ed J
Union o.f Sovi'Gt Socialist Re!lublics and Finland," signe9, in Helsinki,
22 April 1932.
br
(Collect.ion C1f Treaties, etc., U.S.SoR., Vol. VII, 1933,
p. 24 and CLVII ~ 401 LtfilS) •
This Convention contains many articles which arG worded identically 'W1 th
those of' the subsequent Convention With La....via of 18 June· 1932, but some of the
introductory Articles vary in l8J:lg'J.age from tL"1e Latvian Convention, although
they provide fcr en essen'bially similar procedure.
Est.ol'..ia:
"Ccnciliatory COJ;lvention Detween
Th
th~
Union of Soviet
follows
Socialist Republics and Est0r4a, 11 ~ig.Tleq. in MoscOW, 16 June 1932.
(Collection
or Treaties,
a
ai'
etc., U.S.S.B., Vol. VII, 1933, p. 34 and
CXXXI:309 ~ITS).
th
to that 0'£ tha Lerl.;vian
Conten!-ion, except that it omits. the details set forth in Article~ 8, 9, 11
and 12 of the Latvian Convention, stating in Article 6 (in translation): "The
of these
Conciliat.oI""J Cammissio.""l shall define its proCedure itself. 11
of Song
This Oonvent1on is in
laI\B"'1a~e
nee'f:':'.;Y identical
Tr
disputes
.!:2l~:
"Convention Concerning a Conciliation Procedure Bet"\oreen the
Union of Soviet Socialist Re:rmblics and the Polish Republic," s1gn~d in
Inyesti8
on 3Jun
Moscow, ?3 ·Novem,ber 1932. (Collection of Treaties, etc., U.S.S.R.,
Vol,,· VIr; 1933, !le 15 and CXXXVI:55 rnTS).
p. 79 8.."1
IfAgreeme
The pattern of the Convention· is similar to that of the Iatvian Convention,
although the language is not identical.
Ita article on procedure substitutes
the iollaw:tng fer the 'Words of Article 10 of th!J !.atv-ian Convention (in
translation):
Article 6. To the 3xtent i?hat the contracting parties dp not by Joint
, agreellient decide otilerv.'1se, the COnciliatiOn Commission shall t!sf1ne itself
its pJ:ocedure, preserving, however, in· doing so the regulations set forth
in this Convention.
Ilrance:
j
".l
it
'l·)
J
.~j
:~I
Bord~r
D
etc., u.
Conventi
type
of
and
for
_'
, "
•
"
'
'
,
~'.",
1"
,
,
A/CN.4/36
Page 11
'r
~.
~:,
"Convention Concemll'lg a Concilia.tion Procedure between the
,
Union of Suviet Socialist Rapubl:!.ca and ·b...'1e French ReJ:lub:'ic," signed. in
[I'1
Paris, 29 ::-:rcvembe1" 1932.
i
1933, :p. 29 anc1..
1
t.l'::e
J:a:~tern
CLVII;~·21
of ·the
(Colli3ction of Treaties" etc., U.S.S.R., Vole VII,
liiTS).
CQ~ven"l:;ion
is the
SBJl1e
as that of the I,atv:la.."1 Convention,
exce;rr. t:t:lt, a proceo:ure is not detailed (it beiI'l.g left by JU·ticle 5 to the
OOIaJllssian i tBelf to define its
0'WIl
Ilrocedure) and the basis for decision is
wore..ed", as foliows, ins.tead of as in Article ~t of the Latvian Co.nven-cion (in
trsnsle.tion): ,
Article 6. The Connnission is required to study the disputed questions
to it by both go-rel"IlI!lents and to l'econnnend to them an interpretation
wlUch it recognizes as based upon law, or an agreement which it finds just.
brou.g~t
I!aly:
"Treaty of Frieniship, Non-Aggression and Neutrality Between
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics anq. Italy," signed in Rome on
2 Se:i:?'C6mber 1933.
(C,:>113ction of Treaties, etc., U.S.S.R., Vol. VIII,
1935, p. 8, and CXLVIII: 319
L~J:1S).
This Treaty. has one article 1)ertaining to concilia.tion, this reading as
follows (in translation):
Article 6. Tb-e High Contrac'ttng Parties b:L"'ld themselves to 8'l'!.bmit to
a conciliatory :p-'l;:"C'cedIl!'6 /soglasitel~na.ra protsecllra!. ques'iilons on Which a
difforence ,of' o:r,j,ni,,:,n hB.s arisen between them, and which cannot be decided by
the cust.:>::naX';r dipJ.on:;atic cha.."'l..'1.els.
settle~nt
of border
disputes a.lid incidents are also found in the practice of t..'1e U.S.SoR.
TYIJical
Treaties establishing
c~~ciliation procedure
for the
of these ::;>;r'ocedures is ~t established in the "Convention Between the Union
of SOTI.'3ti SOi~ialist- ROpUblics and the Polish Re~blic on ~e Method of
.-
Inyest.igattr.g and Settling Frontier
on 3 June 1933.
Bet'~veen
This Convention is an eXIJS,nd.ed form of the
the U.. S.S.R. and the Polish ReF.A'blic on th,e Sett1emeni; of
Bord~r Di3putes," signed. i.."1 MOf3cOW on
3 August 1925.
etc., n.S.S ..R., Vpl. Ill, 1932" .p. 55).,
Ccnven~ion
type
Or
Disputes, If signed in Moscow
(Collection of Trea'~ies, etc., U.S.S.R., Vol. VIII, 1935"
p. 79 a"1d c..U.lI~265 n~s).
"Agreement
Inci~nts ~"1d
indicating
tpe
(Collection of Treaties,
Pertinent provisions of'the 1933
Soviet-'conciliation procedure for this particular
:Problem read as foll~lfs (in tra.."1S1ation):
Article 1. The Government' of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and t..he Covernment Of ,the"J?olish Republic shall each name Representatives
for Border Affairs,. 0.0. ",,;hOlI\. shall lie the responsibility for investigating
/and deciding
.,.
..
A/CN.4/36
,.I
Pa~
I:[I
12
l'
.
I
..
I,
and deciding border incidents and conflicts, and aJ.so dis!lutes between
bordsr authorities, o.f t..lJ.e Contr'docting Pa:r"ties,in accordance 'W1 th
.A:r.~,iole 4 of' tM.s Con"'1ention.
of
CCI
Th
The surnames and given names of tbe Re:.gresentatiYes for Bort~.er Affairs
shall 'be :mutu~ly cr.WlI!l'.m~ca'ted through diplama;tic channels as oach new
RG~:ros..}r..te.tive for Border Affairs is ap:poir.Lood.
.
In
a ""
of
The r..U:.llbe!' of Represente;I';:f.vee for B~d.er Affairs and also the
over 'W:lich they ha.ve jurisdiction ar..d the pla:Jes of peOl:".wa.i.10nt
r8sidenoo of ~~ese ?ersons shall bQ established by a Protocol affixed to
t:-:j El Go:..went1cn. Tilis Protocol may be changed on mutual agl'eemer..t t.'b.rough
d~plo]Dat1c channols during t.'1e :period in v,h1ch this Convention remains in
force.
Q:1.s~;T.~cte
Article
4. The Representatives for
:a~')!'der .Affairs
are reqUired to:
See "j~Jat the '1Jo:':"ae":" e.1):1iI1orl-1jie'6 of the Co::rf jract1:Jg Partiss
conform to '~e bou:J.da.ry treaties, cOClventiC?ns and agreements between
the Union of Smriet Socialist· Republics ?..r.d the Polish Republic
in as :!!!lch as 'borCter disp"l1tes, incidents or co..T1i'licts ':!J1ly arice in
connection lJi:l:ih these treaties, conventions and agreoments;
Aff
the
inv
48
Take ~!easures to prevent incii:3::lts or conflicts which cap. arise
On the sta te borders;
Invest:'.gate a.n..l settle incidents and cUDtlicts which have arisen
on ~he state border in ~-tictllar instances of /11 classes of cases
are li8·~ed/.
A:r.'t~.01e 5. The Orders ownich have been adopted by c-o'th ReprelJentatives
for Eot-der .Affairs or b;T their Agents based UPC>:"1 an exhaustive s'1;uo.y of
the dispute, i:nci1.ent or conflict, shall be fi.r..a].. Exceptions are Orn.ero
ado,I:ted in accordance l'iJ:lih Suo-section 11 of Article 4 of this Conve:nJliion,
if the f:lUIll :Paid exceeds the maxtmum eata"!:>lished for all ouch accountings
by t,he Con't;ractiJ-:-.g Party required to pay, as cotII:l:un1cated through
diploIils;G:J.c oha1'lr.els to the ether CO"···{vJ:'acting Party. In such cases the
decisions which he.ve beon advpted enter into force only after their
al))';Jr;,:,va.l by the People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs of the Union of
SOYlet Sooialist Republica and the Miills'cry of Foreign Affairs of the
Polish Re~~olic.
the"
may
pro
pers
expe
prec
otat
Cont
conu
Q.uestims on which agreement has not been reached by the Agents of the
Raprese:n.ta.tives for I;ord.er ACts.irs sho.ll be trBJ.ls:m.itted to these
Re:Fi."esentatives for discu~sion.
Ques"cions on which agreement has not been reached by the Representat1-ves
fo:':" :Borc.er .Affairs shall be tre.nsmitted for settlement th:rough diplomatic
.cban:nals •
.
A...~icle, 6. Each Representative for Bor.der Affairs has the right on
his o·iID. initiative to tl'a.nsf'er any cass for settlement t.lu'ough dipJ.cana.tic
chan."1els i informing the Beprasen~ative for Border A...-Pfairs of the other
CCD.tracting Party of that fact.. :N'3verth!dless, .in suc:Q. cases the
Re:p!'ese:ltatj.ves for Border Affairs must carry ont the per~iDent
investigation of the case .and set forGh the result in a Protocol.
/Arlicle 7.
particip
of busines
.j
to the mee
by tbe Pa
·HMiR
A/CN .4/36
Page 13
1.
Nrtie ie
A short Proto col shall be prepa red conce rniIlg ea.ch. meet1J.ig
of the Repre senta tives for Borde r Affai rs or of their Agen
tc, in whiCh the
CC'lt'se of 'the meetl ng and t.he decis ion adopt ed must be
set fo:::'th in brief~
The }):oto col must be propa red in two ident ical copie s in
the offic ial
Inn j'..~ae:es of thf3 Co..."1tracting Partie l3. The decis ions shall
be consi dered
. ~n F,lil.o.9ted beyc:nd tl:e posul billt y of subse quent
chang e· after signa ture
of t:' le Proto c()l by the s.forem.entiol"J.ed 1!srsol1s. .
A::-"ticle 8. The Repre senta tives for Borde r Affa irs shall
estab lish,
on ~.1.e lmsis of nutl.1al agreem ent, contr ol - trans fer point
s on the state
CC1'::1.0r thrQu Sh which excha nge of all corres ponde nce shall
take place with
relat. ion to the activ ity of the Repre senta tives for Borde
r Affai rs and
al~o tr~ou gh which tho tr~"1s fer of perso ns,
lives tock and prope rty shall
take plc.co .
A::·ti cle 9. Mooti nes and sessio ns of the Re]?r esent ativos
for Borde r
Affai rs or of their Agell ts shall take place on the propo
sal of one of
them and, if posRi blo, at the time set in the invit ation
. A reply to the
invit ation I1lltst be givon immac liately J and in any event
not later than
48 hours from the time at which the invit ation was recei ved.
The Repre senta tives for Borde r Affail "s of one Contr acting
party must
perso nally atten d the meeti ng or sessio n to which he shall
be invit ed by
~le otller Re~r0 Genta tive for Borde r Affai
rs, excep t for cases when he
canno t atten d becau se of seriou 3 reaso ns (illn ess, leave
of absen ce,
Yaca tion). In +-1ds event the Repre senta tive for Borde r
Affai rs shall be
repla ced by his Depu ty, 'toiho must advis e the Repre senta tive
for Borde r
Affai rs of the other Contr acting Pa.l,·ty of this fact in
good time. On
agree mont betwe en the Repre senta tives for Borde r Affa irs
meeti ngs and
sessio ns of their Depu ties may take place .
rn meeti ngs or at sossio ns of the Repre senta tives for Borde r Affa irs,
their Depu ties or their Agen ts, in adcli tion to the named
perso ns, there
may also partici~ate a repre senta tive of the local agenc
y of borde r
prote cti~n ,J 'With a cOnD ultati ve vote .• and
the neces sary techn ical
perso nnel (secr etari es and inteJ. .'Prete rs) and also, in the
event of neces sity,
exper tis of each Party
I
J
J
0
Artic le 10. Meeti ngs and sessi ons, to which refer ence
is made in the
prece ding artic le, Iilllst as a rule occur alter natel y on
appos ite aides of the
otate bord.e r. Neve rthele ss, the Repre senta tives for Borde
r
Contr acting Parti es may !J!l.:tually agree to depar t from this Affai rs of the
princ iple if
conui derat ians of conve nienc e sugge~totherwise.
'
AJ."1. aeend a for tho· sessio n must be estab lishe d throu
gh prelim inary
conve roatio ns or by an exchaIl.ge of 'lette rs. III extra ordin
ary situa tions ,'
upon the agree ment of both Repre senta tives for Borde r Affai
rs or of their
Agen ts, quest ions not inclu ded in the agend a may be accep
ted for revie w.
SUbse quent artic les estab lishe d a regim e gover ning the
1sSl1 ing of visas to
parti cipan ts in thE;) sessi ons, and guara nteein g inVio labili
ty of the perso n and
of busin ess paper s, toget her with the right to bring neces
sary food and tobac co
to the meeti ngs. Expen ses of each C~tract~ng Party are
to be borne fUJ..+Y
by the Party .
lA
simil ar
If
C
T
R
V
S
b
g
A/CN.4/3 6
Page 14
A siInilar pattern for resolving border disputes and 1ncidenta was
I
established by t.."J.e
fc.llo~'1LT1g Agream~!lt8:
!.a~:i;~ - tJoSoS.R", 19 July 1926 - (Collection of Treaties, etc.;
U"S,SJ;(., Vo'. IV, 1936" p. 30; LIV~155 L!~S).
?~~~.~ - U~S"S.R~; 8 AugJ.st 1921 - (Collection of Treeties, etc.,
U.S.8"i~o, \101 0
1939, p. 35; LXX:401 !MS).
rv,
T~£"~~~ - UoS.S.Rt', 6 August 19~8
U~S.So~o, Vol. VI, 1931" ~. 29).
17 A
- (Collection of Treaties, etc.,
291>1
;ri~~.d - U;,S.S.R~, 24 September 1928 - (Collection ef Treaties, etc.,
U.S ~S ..1, ~, Volo V, 1930, p. 38; LXYJCII: 63 IJfilS).
A
Carl'~';:G.l
c
t
Conci2.iation COJIIl:Iission and local Conciliation Commissions composed
of rep:"'esen'tatives of t."J.e U.S"S .. R. and Rumania was pr'Jvided for 'by a Statute
t
aigned on 20 November 1923 (Collection of Treaties, etc., U.S"SoR., Vol. I - II,
1935, p. 252).
The ]?rocedu.~:,~ estab1iGhed for this CO!lcilia'~ion CollllJlisslon,
11
which was to have Jurisdiction over border i:J.cidents on t..'l1e Dnester River,
s
follmwd. the :pattern of tohe Lat"lien Conifentioll of 18 June 19320
A mi::::ed commission to
Afghaniste..:..'l
~'re.s
Ir...9.P
established
b~r
b
c
the bOULdary between the UoS.SoR o and
an "Agreement between the Union of SOViet
r
Socialist P..eIJFb1ics and Afghanistan on Border Q,uestions," signee. 1..'11. MoscoW on
13 June 19L16.
c
It
r
a
(Vedom.osti Verkhovr.ogo Soveta, SoS.S;R., No~ 6 (460),
12 February 1941, p, 4)
c
Tho COIilIi!:tssioTJ. is to be c-::>m:posed of three
representatiV'es of each IJ8!'ty-' and. is e:rn.power'sd, to decide the owr.ership of
~,
is1antls.
The report. of the COIDlllission
1..1. th
the description of the boul"ldary and
the map is sUbj,:;;ct to al1prova1 by 'the govenr;nents of the Contraoting Parties.
No procedu!'e for the Commission
'W9.S
defined ;i.n the Agreement"
A si.'lIlilar Mixed Border Commission was prOVided for by Article 3 of the
"T:r.eai.iy BetwE:e..'l the Union of Soviet Socialist Rjpublics and the Firmish RepUblic
Concerning the Trancfer to the Territory of t:1e Soviet Th1ion of a Part of the
TerI'it/,)!'Y of F:!.=liand in the district of Yaniskoski Electric Station and the
,
.
'
Regulatory Dam of Niskakosld ," signed in Helsinki on 3 February 19J.V{ (Vedo!i1osti
Verkhovno20 Sovet.s. S"S.S.R., No. 19 (413) :I;.l June 1947, :p.
4). The Mixed
Soviet-Finnish CO!lDllissj,on Jxr.·ovided for by article 3 of the Treaty l':aa directed
by a note atJ.:;ached to the Treaty, "to set up border .marJ:.:ers and to draw up a
detailed description of the line Gerving as the border of the aforementioned
territory and to ir.8cribe ,this line on a map of the scale of 1:25;000."
line so defined by the Commission
governments. "
"laB
"subject to the approval of both
The
ia to
Betwee
signed
(5 0 9),
T
: more
A/CN.4/36
Page 15
" III.
COMMERCIN:. AG:REEM:ENTS "
Soviet practice has been to provi~ for and utilIze arbitration in
settlomnt of disputes arising out of commerce.
An example of such a provision
is to be fOlIDd in the "Treaty Concerning Trade and rravigation Between the
Un1c::l of Soviet Socialist Republics and Denmark,," signed in MoSCOW" on
17 August 1946 (Vedomosti Verkhovnogo Soveta S.S.SeR., No. 11 (465)"
29 Narch 1947; 8: 201 UNTS). The pertinent articles read (in translation):
Article 14. The settlement of disputes which have arisen over
contracts relating to tra.<le betvleen the two countries may be reached
throU&~ arbitration /arbitrazh/.
Each of the Contractipg Parties shall be prepared" at the request of
the other I to enter into negotiations for the purpose of .concluding an
agreement concerning a uniform. and the best possible procedure for
arbitration, based upon the principle of parity, and also concerning a
procedure for execution of arbitration awards. The statute setting up
such an agreed upon procedure shall be retroactive.
Article 15. All disputes relating\ to commercial agreements cOncluded
between Soviet commercial organizations and Danish individuals or
corporations are suPject" in the absence of an arbitration /treteiekoe
razbil~atel'stvo/ clause, to the jurisdiction of the Danish courts if tbe
agreement ,.;as concluded in Denmark and to the Jurisdiction of Soviet
courts if the agreement 'Yle.S concluded in the Union of Soviet Socialist
'Republics • Nevertheless, the courts of another country shall have the
right to try disputes in every instance in which their jurisdiction over
suoh disputes is established by a special condition of the oontract •
.An article, "Worded identically to Article
14 of the Danish Treaty (above)
is to be fO'U..'1d as Article 16 in the "'rreaty Concerning Trade and Navigation
Between the Union of Soviet
Soci~list
Republics and the Hungarian Republic,"
signed in Moscow on 15 July 1947 (Vedomosti Verkhovnogo Soveta S.~.S.R., No. 10
(50 9),10 March 191.'-8, p,. 4.).
The article relating to ,arbitration clauses in commercial agreements ie
:Jnore dElta-iled than in the Danish Treaty.
It reads as follows (in translation):
, Artiole 17. The Contracting Parties, obligate themselves to execute
al'bit.ral alrards /arbitrazhnye resheniya/ in disputes arising out of
'
commercial agreeDents concluded by their citizens" organizations or
enterprises" if' the settlement of the dispute by an arbitration tribunal
/arbitrazh/, whether ad hoc or perm""nent, was provided for in the
agreement itself or in a separate e~ 3ement estabiiShing a for.m;of
tribunal suitable for such a business arrangement.
Execution of an arbitral avTard" issued in accordance with the
procedure set forth above in this article" may be refused only 111 the
follOWing cases:
lea)
if the arbit;raJ,.
A/CN.~/36
Page 16
(a) if' the arbit ral award , on .the 'basis of the laws ·of
the count ry
where it was mu~e does not have the force of a final decis
ion;
.'
..
.
. .:
(b) if the arbit ral .a"lvard requi res a.par ty to do e.."1 act
forbid den
by the lalvs of the cour.: .tryin which execu tion of
the award is sough t;
. (c) if the arbit ral'aw ard 'is'co ntrar y to the p~blic polic
y
/~".blicb.r..jri porY::idok! of the count ry in which execu
tion is sough t.
The decre e on execu t.ion J as "\oTell as the execa tiol1 of the
arbit ral
a.T'1?.rds~ shall proce ed in accordaIl.c~, with
the legis latio n of the
CUJ:_traeting Party execu .ting the a'Ward~
The wordi ng of Artic :le 17 conce rning execu tion of arbit
ral awarcls of the
Hu..TJ.Garip.,:l: Treat y is fO'h'L.'ld 1..'"1 ide:lt ical form in Artic le
14 of the 'lTrea ty
Clln~er.li...""lg Trade and Navig ation Betwe en the Union
of Sovie t Susia list Repu blics
and the Czechoslova..lc Re:t>:ublic," signe d in Moscow on 11
De,cember 1947
(Vedo mosti Verkhovnogo Sovet a S.S.S .R., No. 9 (556) , 22
Febru ary 1949, p. 4).
There is, howev er, no artic le corre spond ing to Artic le
14 of the Danis h
Treat y and Artic le 16 of the Hlli1garian Treat y (prov iding
for tne settle ment of
.. dispu tes arisi ng over co:mm.ercial mo.tte l's betwe en the
coun tries conce rned by
arbit ratio n) •
. The "Trea ty Conce rning Trade and Navig ation Betwe en the
Union of Sovie t
Soci alist ,Repu blics and the Peop le's Republ-ic of Bulg aria,"
signe d in MoscoW
. on 1 April 1948 (Vedo mosti Verkhovnogo Sovet a S.S.S oR.,
No 10 (557) ,
26 Febru ary 19)+9, P. 4) is simil ar, in resl'te ot to arbl~ra't1
on, to the
Czech osla,v ak Treat y, i.e., it has a."l a:t'tic le relat ing to
theex ecut- ion of
arbit ral award s D'9tween comm ercial pe.ni es but no artic
le estab lishin g
arpit ratio n in settle ment of cOii.IJmercial dispu tes betwe en
the statss conce !'f:led .
Th3 ~'Trade T:cec.ty llet'tveen trJ.e Union of Sovie t SOCiflJ.ist
Repu blics and the
S"riss Fed$l~~tion," signe d in MOSCO"\oT on 17 March 1948 (Vedo
mosti Verkhovnogo
. Sove ta S.S.S .R 0", No. 13 (560) , 27 March 1949, p. 4)~ follow
s the form. of the
Tr3<lty "Ivith Bulg aria. There is no provi sion for ,arbi tratio
n betwe en the t1'TO
.
"
.' :
state s "I'Thieh are parti es ,to the agree ment, but only the
p!'ov isi~ of the
Treat y "Idt.h Bulga ria relat ing to the execu tion of, arbit
ral award s Iilade in
conne cticn with dispu tes involV ing cammerc~al parti es which
are corpo ration s
or indiv idual ciM.z ena of the two state s"·
C
Q
IIv.
COMMERCIAL
'1
R
.,
U
I
I
I
j
I
I
r
F
U
A/CN.4/36
Page 17
I
IV.
Co:mnerctal 81"bitration has long been a part of the commercial practice of
i
~t
,,- .
COMMJi1RCIAL ARBITRATION
Soviet s'~'~e tl~ading corporations.
ariBtr~i3 01.'.t
of transactions between indiViduals or cO'I'];lorations, ratner than
~oes
state.:! J It
Since the subject is one relating to disputes
not seem pertinent to the subject of this memorand.um.
It may be
adeCl~.';.5.t.e
to i!:',dicate only that two Arbitration
Commissions .exist in the U.S.S.R.
.
to hm:..:L:e f.:>re:tg:l !Datters. A Statute for a Maritime Al~bitration Commission of the
All-Union
C~.:£lmber
of Commerc.e was approved. by the Central
the U.S.S.R. on 13 December 1930.
No.
Execut~ve
COl'lnnittee of
(Collection of laws, U.S,S.R , 1930, Part I,
60, Article 637).
The Commission is composed of 25 members (increased from 15 by an Amendment
to the Stotute under date of 8 JClluary 1933,
Collection of laws, U.S.S.R., 1933,
Part I, No. 2, Article 12) from which each pf;lrty to a dispute names an
arbitrator.
A
t~ira.
member is not selE:cted U!'J.less the two arbitrators cannot
reach agree!!l6Ilt on the award.
Such a third member .is named by the two
arbitrators, and if they cannot agree, the Chairman of the Commission names him.
If the parties so dE:cide, a single arbitra tor !Day be named by the Chairman of
the CommisS:!.O:1 to make the award.
Appeal from the alrard lies to the Supreme
Court of the U.S.S.R., loihich may set it aside and remand it to the Connnission
i.f the lavr has not been properly applied or has been violated by the arbitrators.
Rules of p:::'ocec.urc were issued by the All-Union Chamber of Commerce of the
U.S.S ..R, on 8 Fe1>rv.ar-y 1931.',
i
,1
,
1
'j
Non-Iaaritime disputes arising in foreign commercial intercourse :may be
refer~"ed
Foreign
U.S.S.R.
tll:;'''OUgh the I!lodium of an arbi tration clause in
~"ade
8
contract to the
Arbitration Cor.mUssion of the All-Union Chamber of Commerce of the
This Arbitration Comm1ssi9n was created by decree of 17 June
(Colleetion of TJal~s, U .S.S.R., 1932, Part I, No. 48, Article 281).
1932~
The
Commission is a panel of 15 persons named for one ye!=lr terms from representatives
of Soviet treding, 1r~uBtr1el and transport organizations and others (largely
Professors of Law) having special
arbitrators by the parties
and
kno~Tledge
of foreign trade.
Appointment of
of an u:rnp1J:'s in the event of inability to reach·
an agreement on the part of the two arbitrators fo1l9ws the practice of the
Mariti:r.1e Arbitration Comm:1asion.
of the Commission.
There 119 no appeal, however, from the awards
Ru.lee of procedure detail the steps to be taken by' the
/parties
..
'$.
A/cN.4/36
Page 18
parties in submitting disputes.
(Pl.1bl:J.shed in English with a translation of the
statute in a brochure e..'"lti-cled ''0' .S.S.R. Chamber of Commerce, ]'oreign Trade
Ar"bitratio.':l COI!.ilrLission, " Moscow, no date).
pl·9.~tice
Tha
of both tribunals is indicated or.J.y partially.
Decisions for
the first f:l.'ve yeara of the Maritime Arbitration Commission are published in tl-ro
voli.llJ1.$s e::.lti..tl.ed. "Sbornik Reshenii Morskoi Arbitrs,zhnoi Kommissii pri Vsesoyuznoi
Tor[;oYoi P6lste" (Moscmr, 1936), indicnting that 65 cases were decided in the
first five J"ears, thirty-six being between Soviet organizations and
foroi~Grs.
Tho All-Ur.:.ion Chamber of Commerce of the U. S. S.R. issued an official report
in 1941 on about five years work of the Foreign Trade Arbitration Colllr!lission in
:
wh~ch
29 cases decidei during that period are reported or abstracted.
(Vneshnetorgovyi Arbitrazh, Moscow, 1941).
b~tween
The casss concernea. dis];lutes
Soviet state tradiD5 coprorations and
Egyptirm,
~glish,\l
]~lgian,
Canadisn, Dtltch,
French, German, Greek, Norwegian and SvTea.ish parties.
PElrhaps the most publicized arbi tl~ation of a commercial character was
that between Lena Goldfields ComlJ6ny, Limited, and the U.S.S.R.
The provision
relating to the Arbitration Court in the concession agreement of 30 April 1925
we 8 the follawl"e.
Parag~'a:ph
90
f.ll disputes and misund.erstand.1nGs concerning t!le interpretation or
execution of' the present agreement end all ap:pendlcee to it 8h511;> on the
representation of either party, be e::mmin~d by t:!.1e Arbitration Court.
The Arbitration Court shall be composed of tr..ree (3) members, one of
whom shall be seJ.w~ted by the Government, one by the Lam Goldfielis
C01TJ.p'8T,JT and the third., w.110 is to be the. super-arbitrator, shall be chosen
by ~u1j,e t{>TO parties together by IIIlltual a·grecment.
If
s'l;'.,:,~h
agl'ee:1lent is not rea.ched within 30 (thirty) days from the day
of re~ei];l"h by the defend.ing party of a 'lor.ritJ~en summons to the Arbitration
CC:Art) gi T.!.:r.~g an ex:pos:'Ltj.on o-Z the matters in diflpute ~ and the desigrlation of
the F!".imbcr of the Court f:el~cted by the prosecuting party,\l then, within
2 ('1:i";iO) 11~6ks 2 the Government shall nominate 6 (siX) candlCl.ates fr~I:l ameng
the tY'o:tessors of the 1're10e1'g Mining Academy or of the Royal Teclmical
Eib~ S~h0~1 of S~ockholm a~d shall reque~t the Lena Goldfields Comp3ny to
appoint O.£le of t:l(7~ a 8 . super-arbi t:rat0r within a period of 2 (two) weeks.
If tbe Lena Goldfielc.s Company fails to appoint the super-arbitrator
within the said 2 (tt~o) ~Teeks, t.herebeing no ins"J.perable obstacles to
prevent s'l1ch appoi..'"ltment, the C'-roverrunent. shall be entitled to request the
C~~cil of one of the said higher acaaemic institutions to appoint a superarbitrator from 8mo':'1g the aforesCJid 6 (siX) cand.idates nominated by the
Government.
IIf the Government
A/CN.4/36
Page 19
he
I
I
I
(
Ir
If the Government" in the absence of insuperable obstacles" fails to
nominate 'tJ.'1e 6 (six) cal1clidates for the BU.psr-arbitratorship within the
saId peried of 2 (t",O) weeks, the Lena Golo.fields CoIn.pa:n:r shall be entitled
to r9'll'!.est the Cou..'"lcil of one of the aforesaid higher academ:c
i:c.ctJ..L·...c~ions to nomi."1ste 6 (six) candidates and to appoint a BU.per-arbitrator
fr::.:u. er':.OIlg tbeir nu:aiber, as stated above.
l'TO
noi
rt
n
If upon receipt of a notice from the super-arbitra.tor giving the day
anCL
plE'.~.e of tue first
O"i.:iic.'::(;8 of inm'.perable
6\3ssion of the CO".l.rt one of the rarties, in the
obstacies, fails to send his arbitretor to the
A..;'tlc·,:,etion Cou.rt or he refuses to :Participate in the seBsion, then the
matter in dispute shall, at the request of the other party, be settled by
the surer-arbitrator and the other member of the Court, such settlement to
be %.:'::0. O.i'lly if lU13nimoua.
The Ar"!)itration Court shall appoint a permanent secretary, who shall
keep recorda of all proceedings of the Court' a sessions. The remuneration
of the prosident and the secretary of the Court, as well aa the latter's
e:x:pensos, shall be paid by both parties in equal proportions. Each of .
the parties shall pay his Oll"Il arbitrator a:'ld his eXIJenses, as well aa the
costs connected with the br:lnging of a suit before the Cou:fit.
Ma tters to be settled ·OY the Arbj.tration Court :must be presented in
written form to the preside~1.t of the Court, and. the party bringing en
action must provide the other party with a copy of its declaration to the
Court. The eupe:~-arbitrator shall appoint the place and date for the holding
of the first session of the Court.
When appointing the date and place for a. session of the Court to be
held by the Buper-arbitrator and (s1c) the Arbitration Court shall give
consideration to:
(1) the refisonable length of time required for either party to make
preparation for departure and arrival at the appointed place at the propel'
time, and
.
. (2) the accessibility of the place being auch that either pa.rty can
reach it by the date fixed.
. of
However, if either of the parties encotm.ters insuperaple obetacles'
to fue ssu0.ing of their members to the Court or of the Court president in
time to reach the appointed place at the proper time, early measures must
be taken to infor'm. the BUper-arb1t~ator of the Arbitration Court of. th1s
circumatance.
In any case, the super-arbitrator or the Arbitration Court in the
event of the absenoe of one party's representatives to the Cotll't, shall.. on
deolaring a session open, make a full statement relating to the matter in
dispute, snd the reasons for which the session has been called.
The Arbitration Court shall have full power thenceforth. to fix the
place and time of its sessions, as well as to settle methoda and order of
procedure. It shall be obligatory on each of the parties to aupply the
Court, at the time it requires, .with all poas:f.ble information and
evidence relating to the case l'1hich are at their disposition, regard being
had to such as may be of State importance.
IAll decisions
A/CN.4/36
Page 20
AJ~ decisions of the Court must in eooh case be made in written form
and a copy o~ ea~h ae~ision must i~~.ediately be sent to the two p9rties.
Ev:~:~:r n:=.jority c'lccii:!icn of the Court shall be f:i.n-al and binding for both
:p~rt~ es a.n1 shall inllediDteJ.y be put into execution.
If the .fI.l'oitro:'.::ion Court co::nes to a decision reClniring one of the
PCyt.:i.""s to dJ so:r.9t.hlng or to re::rain from cloing flo1!l8thing, it shall, at
"'1:..'3:'(I;..1e ti::ne s decide and lrarn the said :party of the cOllsequences aC0rn:'ng
i'0X' f'3i"inl'e to csrrJr out its G.t3cision, namely, it 811['11 i!!:pose the paym-3nt
ef a ~Gr-~ain ste! to t:1e other P1:::1"ty, or it. shall fluthorize the ot~lf3r rD.:i."'ty
to Cf.:r:-:y ont the n~glected work at the ex:rense of the defaulting :perty, or
it s:L:-!..l rteela~e the ngree".llE>nt cmnulled, the latter only at the reCJ.uest of
the pl.Jintiff.
(Centre.l C~l1ce8sions Comrrd.ttee of the U.SoS.R., DOCUlllenta CO!l.ce:rn:lng the
ef the Arji trn tion CO'J..rt Set up 1..">1 Co:-.nection 1d. th the Questions
Outsta::'11ing ])etiveen the Lene Goldfields Company Limit0d and the U.S. S.R. ,
Ci)~::'9 t01"l,Ce
~oocow,
1930, pp. 44-46).
I"
Iv.
THE PEACE
A/CN.4/36
Page 21
v.
,j
~m
PEACE TRE..llTlES .
Artic les of the Peace Treat ies with Italy , Finla nd, Bulga ria,
Hungary, and
Rumania provi de proce dures for the settle ment of dispu tes,
t-Thich m'a perti nent to
this study .
'llha provi sions of the Treat y with Italy , signe d
on 10 Febru ary 1947, read as
follo ~s in the EP~li sh lan~Gu age text, with
inser tion of the words used in the
Rue s ian lanGUage text for "Cone iliat ion Cammiss ion" •
Part IX
Settle ment of Dispu tes
Artic le 83.
1. Any dispu te which may arise in givin g effec t to Artic les
75 and 78
and Annexes XIV, XV, XVI and XVII, part B, of the prese nt Treat
y
shc1.ll
be
refer red to a Conc iliatio n Commission /Sogl asitel fnaya Ko~s
8iya
/
consi
sting
of one repre senta tive of the Govermllent of the Unite d Natio
n
conce
rned
and
one repre senta tive of the Government of Italy , havin g equal
withi n three months after the dispu te has been refer red to statu s. If
the Conc iliati on
Commission no agree ment has been reach ed, eithe r Government
may ask for the
addit ion to the Commission of a third member selec ted by mutua
the two Governments from natio nals of a third count ry. Shoul l agree ment of
Governments fail to agree withi n two months on the selec tion d the t:vro
member of the Co:umission, the Governments shall apply to the of a third
Rome of the Sovie t Union , of the Unite d Kingdom, of the Unite Am.bassadors in
d State s of
America, and of Franc e, who will appoi nt the third member
of
the Commission~
If the Ambassadors are U11able to agree withi n a perio
d of one month upon the
appoi ntmen t of the third member, the Secretary~eneral of
the Unite d Natior~
may be reque sted by eitlle r party to make the appoi ntnen t.
2. When any Conc iliati on Commission is estab lishe d under
above , it 9hall have Juris dictio n over all dispu tes which may parag raph 1
there~fter
arise betwe en the Unite d Natio n conce rned and Italy in the
appli catio n or
inter preta tion of Artic les 75 and 78 and Ar..nexes XIV, x:r, XVI
and XV"II,
part E, o~ the prese nt Treat y, and shall perfo rm the funct ions
attrib uted to
it by those provi sions .
3. Each Conc iliati on Commission shall determ ine its own proce
dure,
adopt ing rules confo rming to justic e and eqUit y.
4. Each Government shall pay the salar y cf the member of the
Conc iliati on Carr.m.ission wham it appoir~s and of any agent
whom it may
desi~1ate to repre sent it befor e the Comm
ission. The salar y of the third
member shall be fixed by speci al agree ment between the Gover
and this salar y, toget her with the cammon expen ses of e~ch nments conce rned
Commission, sr~ll
be paid in equal share s by the two Governments.
5. The parti es underta.ke that their autho rities shall
to the Conc iliati on Commission all nssist allCe which may be furni sh direc tly
withi n their
power.
/6.
The decis ion
.,
I
,
1
'J
:1
""·.··.'·.'.···.···1
...
~
~:
A/CN.4/36
Page 22
6. The dec:f,sion of the majorit~ of the members of the Commission shall
be the decisioll of the Commission, and shall be accepted by the parties as
definitive and biudir~.
(~. So Department of State Publication 2960, pp. 166-167).
Settlement of disputes arising under other Articles of the Treaty than those
Bet forth in Article 83 is prOVided for by Article 87 in the following words:
1. E':{06pt where another proced~ is spocificaLl;>r provided under any
A::~t:tcJ,e of the present T~eaty, any dispute concerning the interpretation or
e:c5cutj.on of 'the Treaty; which is not settled by direct diplomatic
neeotlatior~, shall be referred to the FOl~ Ambas3adors actir~ under
Article 86 except that in this case the Ambassadors will not be restricted
by t~i.e t:i.Ile 11mit provided in that Article. Any such dispute not rE-solved
by the~ withi~ a period of two months shall, unless the parties to the
dispute uutually agree upon ~~other means of settlement, be referred at the
request of either party to the digpute to a Cmmnission cc~p0ged of one
representative of each :party and a third member selected by mutual agreement
of the two parties from r4ticnals of a third cOlmtry. Shculd the two parties
fail to agree withi."1 a period of one month upon the appointment of the third
member, the Secretary-Gen3ral of the United Nations may be requested by either
party to make the appointment.
2. The decision of the majority of the members of the Connnission shall
be the decision ef the Commission, and shall be accepted by the parties as
definitive azld binding.
(ey. cit., p. 168).
Provisions in the treaties with the other defeated states are essentially
s:lmila:r, although not identical, there being no' requirement in the Bulgarian,
Finnish, Hungarian and Ih~nian Treaties that a third mamber of the Ccm~ission for
specialized problems be a national of a third country, although sucli a provision
exists in the article relating to the Camm1ssion which shall interpret the general
articles of the Treaty in the absence of agl'eement between the representatives of
the parties to the dispute.
.Three.
the subjeo
.ab'ove f:,:,(,m
.give
tllt'}
ft
I;1i';o:..
Rnssi
/Slova
arbit'
E
G. O~
Prof.
pUblis
1934-1
questi
2. A
and ra
/Trete
dispu.t
A't'';)~+'t'
--Eosh6r
J
S
concil.
Concil
/vr.
THE DrC'rrONARIES
A/CN.4/36
Page 23
VI.
TJ;IE
:PIC~ION.ARIES
.Three. 'Words· or phrases ..
appear
in Soviet
teAts and treaties concerned with
.....
.
the Bubjsc-lj of ar"bitl'ation,. T:bey mve been :L"1dicated in brackets in translations
·ab·ove f:-:-c.,m te:>.."ts and treatiss..
a..'l'J.d
"S~;g:'e.;:.:~ tePll~ya
They are "Arbitrazh", "I'!'eteiskoe Ra.zbiratel'stvo"
Kommissiya" •
Soviet dictionaries of the RU.ssian langu.age
'give tilt'} f().1.1cvrir..g definitions ..
:£~1o~!,y" o~~~.ian
ache
Laneua.eie,
compiled by S. I,. Ozhegov, Chief
~'li':;0:(,_ Ac.aG.3Illl.oia..."l Se> P .. Obn.orrucii, published by the Institute of the
Buseiarj, Language of the Academy of S~ience8 of tl1e U.S.. SoR., Noscow, 1949.
/Slova:." s I'\usS};:oBo Yazyka/.
t
AY·b1.+.r!:'.zh - The decj.sion of disputed questions by
arbi-ljr€:itrIbiinal /Tretelskii SUd/.
aJ....bitrators,
For e
De11II!a
princ
by an
arbit
~:et~~k~.! - Releting to the trial of a dispute, of a conflict, bye..
third, dl£interested ?arty.
Soglasitel 'n;yi _ Serving to remove disagreement:..
Conn:n.::.'fiSIOn IS,~glamel 'naya Komm:i.se.i;Y~8/.
I
•
the
A Concilletiori.
to re
disin
. E~':!:~~J.::c.12.!cti~!7 .of t;w .B2s9itp Ia~:!:§~, co~iled. by
G. o. Vinoku.1:', Frof. 13, A. Larln, S. I. Ozh13gov, B, V. Tomashevskii,.
Prof. D. N. Usl1akcv, under the editorship of Prof. D. N. UsN.ili:ov,
.
published by the st~te Diction3.ry - Encyclopedia Press, M08CO'W~ 4 vols'.;
1934-194o~ /To]Jrovyi Slovar i Ruaskogo Yazyka!.
.
Arhit'l:'e.lh - (French arbitrage). 1. The decision of disputed
qU6stTOziBbyarbit:::'ator,J (1ai-1). ~sfer a ~uer3~on to arbitration..:,
2. A commercial operation ba.sed upon th0 use of differences b prices
and rate3 of exchange (trade). 3. International Arbitra~ion Tribunal
/Treteiskii Sud./ (law).
~ i ~ - In meaning related to the trial of any conflict, of a
dispv.te by a third disinterested party. Arbitral judge., jT. Sud 'ya/•
A1'::>:+'t'~l Court IT.. SUd/. ~~l decision of~u.te !Treteiskoe
ltosh6:nle lConflikta/.
..
§~gJ.ftsi'tel 'llyi ... (Bookish, official language).
Sel"ving to compromise,
something, el~mi.ns.te difference of opinion" contradiction. A
Conciliation Commission jSoglasitel'naya KommisSiya/.
concil.L-~te
/VII.
BECJI.PlTOLATION
Treat
conc 1-
tradi.
the t1i
•
VII.
Sovie t text
betwe en Ert.,'l.tes.
'Writ~ rs
RECAPITULll.TION
accep t erbitr a.tion as a means of settli ng dispu tes
Sovie t dictio n'll"Y defiI'l ..ition s indic ate a use of t!J.e word
in conne ction with:~
decisj.0:_~.a of d.ispu.teci. quest ions by a third disin teres ted party . Pra.c tico
:~
inCicC'.tas,ll h0vev er" a ma.i:'ked prefe rence foI' mi:red
and even S"l1ggests
a che.ng::"llg l:Jeaning for the "'-<')l:'ds "a.::'b1trazh" and "trete iokoe
razbi ratel l stvo" .
.i
For examp le, '!';non the word "art..i trazh " is used in the recen
t treat ies with
DenmaJ.'k and :a'..m gary, there are ~~dl1.ed tlle 'Words "1.'"1 accor
dance with the
princ1 1I1e ci' parit y. 11 This modif iE.r sugge sts that the J;art:i
.es have in mind an
arbit ral proce dure which makes no provisio~ for a third
disin teres ted party to
the arbit ratio n to serve as a super -arbi trato r or umpir e.
Older treat ies use the loroj."ds "arbi trazh " and "tl'et eisko e
razbi ratel lstvo "
to refer to proce dures which m9ke no provi sion for the namin
g of a third
disin teres ted party .- Stlch a proce dure j.s proYi ded for only
in the Peace
Treat ies end. in conne ction "rith dispu tes which arise out
of connn ercial contr acts. ·
concl ~ded by iniiv iduel s and ccrpo r~Gio
ns of forei gn state s with Sovie t state
tradi ng corpo ration s. Even in these i~Elta."1ces the third
party is chose n only
the two arbit rator s named by the parti es are unabl e to reach
agree ment.
cow~ssions,
I
~