The article examines the legal issues arising in the adjustment of marine insurance claims. The author analyses the features of the legal framework of marine insurance, addresses current issues in judicial practice, reviews significant Russian court judgments, and provides practical recommendations for minimising risks for parties involved in maritime carriage.

The article deals with the sue & labour clause in marine insurance contracts. With reference to historical development and modern judicial practice, the author analyses the balance of interests between the parties. The author undertakes a comparative legal analysis and demonstrates the variety of approaches to compensation of damages under the sue & labour clause.

This article examines breach of the safe port warranty as one of the principal risks covered by charterers’ liability insurance. It analyses the safe port criteria developed under English case law, and their impact on a charterer’s liability in damages. Attention is paid to the handling of insurance claims arising from breach of the safe port warranty, and to the steps to be taken by charterers and their insurers upon receipt of a claim from the shipowner.

The 12th Summer School for Young Scholars, entitled “Maritime Law: Safeguarding Russia’s State Sovereignty, Security and Economic Development,” was held at Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL) from 2 to 5 June 2026. The event brought together 70 participants under the age of 35. Members of our Association were also among them.

The Colloquium and General Assembly of the Comité Maritime International (CMI) took place in Rio de Janeiro from 12 to 15 May 2026. Over the course of four days, around 400 delegates from national maritime law associations and industry representatives from around the world covered the issues currently at the forefront of their agenda, from the decarbonisation of shipping to fraudulent ship registries and the shadow fleet. The Russian Maritime Law Association (RUMLA) was represented by its president, Konstantin Krasnokutskiy.

Numerous studies have been devoted to the issue of the application of international treaties, particularly conventions, by Russian commercial courts. However, these studies primarily address situations where a foreign element is present in the dispute. No scholarly works analysing the use of international treaties in maritime disputes in the absence of a foreign element have been identified. In light of the above, this article will attempt to present such an analysis.

It has become increasingly clear to policyholders of late that war risks need not only to be insured separately, but also to be specified far more precisely in insurance contracts. At the same time, the established trend in the application of Article 964 of the Russian Civil Code does not prohibit insurers from including clauses in insurance terms that define the scope of covered and excluded risks. An Associate Professor at the S.S. Alekseev Private Law Research Centre reflects on how insurance practices are changing as war risks increase.

A new large-scale armed conflict broke out in late February 2026. The US and Israel launched a military operation against Iran, which responded by blocking the Strait of Hormuz: a third of the world’s liquefied natural gas, nearly a quarter of the world’s oil consumption, and many other goods are transported through this strait. Following several days of hostilities, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps stated that only vessels with specific permission from Iranian authorities could expect to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. At the time of publication, around 30 vessels of various types, including container ships, bulk carriers and tankers, had been affected by hostilities in the Strait of Hormuz.

In late March, the Maritime Law Association held a scholarly seminar for its members on the regulation of container carriage by sea. The presentation was delivered by Mustafa Yilmaz, a specialist from the University of Liverpool (PhD in Maritime Law). He was a research fellow at the Centre for Maritime Law at the National University of Singapore, worked at the Ankara University, and taught as a visiting lecturer at the University of Hertfordshire. Mustafa Yilmaz is also the author of the first Turkish monograph on autonomous shipping.

This article examines whether storm conditions may serve as a basis for exempting the carrier from liability in the carriage of goods by sea. The author demonstrates that Russian courts apply a strict approach to the burden of proving “perils and accidents of the sea” and “force majeure,” taking into account the geography and season, the strength and duration of the storm’s impact, and the master’s awareness of weather conditions during the voyage. The concluding section outlines the key arguments on the basis of which courts typically refuse to exempt carriers from liability.

The essay examines jurisdictional clauses in bills of lading in the context of Russian and Spanish legislation. It analyses the impact of such clauses on legal proceedings and the correlation between contractual autonomy and exclusive jurisdiction. A comparison of legal systems reveals problems with the unification of norms, reflecting the relevance of the topic for the development of international maritime law and the activities of the Russian Maritime Law Association.

Issues of causation, within the framework of civil liability in contract and tort law, have been sufficiently developed. At the same time, not all of these concepts can be used for the purposes of marine insurance. Nevertheless, the issue of causation has not been thoroughly addressed in Russian scholarship. In connection with the above, this paper attempts to provide an overview of existing Russian and foreign sources on the determination of causality in marine insurance. In addition, an analysis of domestic judicial practice will be provided.

Sanctions have radically reshaped the landscape of marine insurance, creating new challenges for international arbitration: the nature of disputes and associated risk allocation is evolving, contractual clauses are being reconfigured, and claims to handling mechanisms are being recalibrated. This article examines conflict-of-laws issues “law, jurisdiction, and public policy” and contemporary dispute-resolution practice, including the enforceability of arbitration clauses and the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards under the 1958 New York Convention. Emphasis is given to the London market. Through selected examples, the article demonstrates how sanctions and compliance requirements transform the allocation of risks between insureds and insurers, including P&I Clubs.

The essay is devoted to analysis of rules applicable to shipbuilding contracts. It examines legal solutions based on the contractual typology of the shipbuilding contract under English and Russian law, and it also provides an analysis of certain aspects of international shipbuilding standard contracts from the standpoint of Russian law. The study emphasises the importance of comparative analysis in shaping legal standards in the field of international shipbuilding.

On 31 October 2025, around a hundred guests assembled at Wawelberg Hall for a conference hosted by the Russian Maritime Law Association (RUMLA). The choice of venue was far from coincidental: before the 1917 Revolution, the building had served as the main hall of the Trading Bank and was frequently visited by members of the Russian Maritime Law Society (RMLS). In the opening session, RUMLA’s executive secretary, Alexey Malakhovskiy, outlined some of the most striking episodes in the Society’s history and presented a substantial research project undertaken by the Association over the past four years.

The transport practice group of Denuo joined RUMLA in the summer of 2025. Partner Anna Otkina and Counsel Anna Antonova are now among the members. In an exclusive interview, they shared the story of how they came into the field of maritime law. They also discussed the potential benefits that Lex Maritima could bring to the sector and pointed out a number of problematic challenges from the fraudulent registration of vessels to ensuring the principle of freedom of navigation is upheld.

This article studies, analyses and systematises the institution of ship Angary, with greater emphasis, but not limited to historiographical aspects, with a dual focus: on the one hand, determining, analysing and conceptualising its characteristics from the perspective of international law and maritime law; and on the other, understanding its impact – possibly still relevant today – on maritime hull insurance coverage and charters.

In early August, the Maritime Law Association hosted a seminar at which experts examined when a shipowner can be deprived of the right to limit their liability. The discussion was led by Anna Arkhipova, Vice-President of the MAC under the Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, alongside RUMLA President Konstantin Krasnokutskiy and his deputy, Konstantin Putrya, PhD (Law).

At the heart of any institution’s history lie the people whose commitment and determination gave it life and carried it forward. The 95-year history of the Maritime Arbitration Commission (MAC), Russia’s oldest specialised arbitration, is not just a timeline of procedural rules and decisions, but a complex and often dramatic chronicle of human destinies.

The note deals with the problematic aspects of ship arrest in Russia. Analysis is based on the recent judicial practice of Russian commercial courts. The author briefly describes the arrest procedure and discusses the issues arising from violating time limits stipulated by law, alternative security measures, and the consequences of economic sanctions. To conclude, the author reflects on the specifics of ship arrest regulation in Russia and provides general characteristics of ship arrest.

In our previous article, we explored the origins of the Russian Maritime Law Society, the goals it pursued, and how effectively it fulfilled them. This article continues that research, now through the lens of personal stories. Presented here are the biographies of members of the Society and Russian honorary members of the Comité Maritime International (CMI), whose identities we have been able to establish. Their lives have been reconstructed piece by piece from archival documents, family recollections, and rare online sources.

The article examines the institution of general average, focusing on the development of the concept and its key characteristics. The author explores the historical stages of the institution’s formation and the modern approach to its application.

This article offers a detailed historical overview of the Russian Maritime Law Society, drawing upon previously unpublished archival materials. It provides a comprehensive analysis of the historical and social background in which the foundations were laid for the establishment of the first association of its kind within the Russian Empire. The article examines rules of maritime law of that period and cites correspondence between the Comité Maritime International (hereinafter referred to as CMI or the Committee) and Russian ministers, in which the supranational organization makes a compelling case for the rationale behind the formation of a national Maritime Law Society. The publication also briefly outlines the history of the Society, revealing the procedures by which new members joined, how meetings were held, and how the members prepared for the Comité Maritime International conferences. Furthermore, for the very first time, we are unveiling a complete list of Society members as of 1913.

The article analyses the legal consequences of the accident on the Deepwater Horizon oil platform. The author investigates the existing mechanism for compensation for sea oil pollution damage established by the Convention on Liability for Oil Pollution at Sea – CLC Convention and the Convention on the Establishment of the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund. The paper examines the shortcomings of compensation for damages for oil pollution at sea established by the aforementioned acts and the reasons for the non-application of the CLC Convention in this litigation. Based on the dispute, it examines how the domestic law of the United States is applied in resolving oil spill cases.

“Our object was to give to the sea, which is the natural tie between the nations, the benefit of a uniform law, which will be rational, deliberated, equitable in its inception and practical in its text. We have considered that in our work, the shipowner, the merchant, the underwriter, the average adjuster, the banker, the parties directly interested should have the leading part: that the task of the lawyer was to discern what in this maritime community was the general feeling, which, among these divergent interests, is common to all; to discern also which of the various solutions is the best; to contribute to the common work his science and his experience, but that ultimately the lawyer should hold the pen and that the man of practice should dictate the solutions.”

The article is devoted to establishing the legal nature of the freight forwarding contract. For this purpose, the author analyses the economic nature of the said contract, its subject matter and liability for its breach. In addition, the article provides foreign experience of regulation of the said institute in the legal orders of England, Germany and France. The author compares some aspects of the legal concept of the freight forwarding in Russia and in the legal orders mentioned above. The conclusion of the study is that the freight forwarding contract in the Russian law is formulated not based on the subject matter of the contract but based on its object. The result of this approach is that a rather large number of binding relations may be covered by the definition of the freight forwarding. This, in turn, may lead to adverse consequences for the legal order and civil turnover since, under Russian law, the freight forwarder’s liability is limited.

This article examines the establishment of those legal principles that have historically evolved in this area under French civil law. The article also traces the development of the practice of the French courts, which is gradually moving away from the limitations contained in previous decisions concerning the validity of jurisdictional clauses.

The article deals with the legal nature of the contract of carriage of goods. For this purpose, the author defines the economic purpose of the contract, its subject matter and the liability for its breach. According to these three components, the article is divided into three parts. The author also examines the regulation of the contract of carriage in foreign jurisdictions, namely English, German and French law. On the basis of the material analysed, the author concludes that it is possible to subdivide the obligations under the contract of carriage into obligations on the cargo and obligations on the vessel. It is pointed out in the article that Russian legal doctrine has a view of carriage which is a bit unique from the other legal systems while there are no actual grounds for such understanding. The author concludes that the contract of carriage in Russian law is an obligation on the cargo which includes an obligation on the vessel.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the concept and importance of mediation in the legal system. The author introduces the stages of planning and conducting mediation, highlights the key functions of the mediator. The article also examines the use of mediation as a way to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens.

The article examines the problem of expropriation of foreign vessels during the *** in Ukraine. The authors consider expropriation without monetary compensation and not on the grounds of a court judgement is an illegal and Unfavourable act. The point is that vessels are registered in the registers, which are usually kept by ports all over the world. The registration is a condition of vessels’ operation. In case of illegal expropriation, it is impossible to change the entry for a vessel in a foreign register. Consequently, the vessel cannot leave the port of any state since she will be arrested. Vessels, which were expropriated illegally, cannot be operated for their intended purpose in the modern world.

Russian court refused to provide information to a shareholder owning 43% of the voting shares of the Russian joint-stock company Kaliningrad Commercial Seaport because the claimant was a UK resident. The UK authorities have adopted regulations allowing the imposition of restrictive measures on Russian entities operating in the transport sector and a wide range of others. The defendant carries on activities in the field of transport and is the operator of a marine terminal, therefore, the provision of documents and information to the plaintiff in accordance with the requirements of the Joint Stock Companies Act may lead to the introduction of new restrictive measures against the Port and/or other persons, of which the plaintiff learns from the documents of the defendant.

Interview with senior lecturer of the National Research University «Higher School of Economics», Saint-Petersburg Konstantin Putrya

This article is essentially a historical review of the Russian Maritime Law Society. The text is divided into four parts. The first part deals with the foundation of the Society and the role of Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich Romanov, who approved the Charter of the Society. The second part describes the purpose of the Society, namely, to unite the efforts of lawyers to study, develop and unify maritime law; this part also describes the international analogue of the Society, the Comite Maritime International. The Russian Society was its member. The third part describes the activities of the Comite Maritime International in developing international conventions in the field of maritime law. The lack of information regarding the Russian Society of Maritime Law in the Russian archives is made up for through the archives of Comite Maritime International, namely, the minutes of the negotiations of the conventions drafts. The fourth part deals with the personalities and their activities in the Society.

The article examines the main problems that arise in determining the citizenship of a child born onboard a ship. It is concluded that even among the states that use the «right of blood» as a general principle for determining citizenship, the «right of soil» is actively used as an optional method for determining the child’s right to citizenship. Russian legislation requires precising the regulations with respect the status of children born onboard a ship flying the flag of the Russian Federation.

The article deals with the new proforma BIMCO SHIPSALE 22, developed for the secondary ship market. At the beginning of the article, a general idea is given of what the proforma is. Having briefly reviewed the proforma that preceded SHIPSALE 22, which were used in practice for the sale of ships, the author offers an analysis of the main changes in the new proforma and gives them a short commentary based on his own experience.

The article studies the real effect of the abandonment in Russian maritime insurance. On the one hand, the author examines the reasons why the institution of the abandonment arose in English maritime insurance and the goals which it was intended to fulfil. On the other hand, she analyses the mechanism for the emergence of title (ownership) under the Russian Civil Code. As a result, the author concludes that the need to preserve the real effect of the declaration of abandonment in Russian maritime law is highly questionable.

The commercial court concluded that the risk of loss of the cargo sealed was borne by the carrier and not by the shipowner. Unless the property insurance contract provides otherwise, the insurer who paid the indemnity shall be entitled to claim the damages by way of subrogation.

In this article, the author continues the study of the allocation of tortious liability between the shipowner and software developer in the case of harm to third parties due to an error of the artificial intelligence of an autonomous vessel. Now the focus of attention shifts to the second of the two previously formulated model situations, namely the infliction of harm due to a ship collision (on the basis of Russian law). This analysis provides a new perspective on the standard of shipowner’s liability in a collision. Where harm is caused by a software error of an autonomous vessel, it is more equitable to impose the burden of strict liability on the shipowner for program errors. This approach should be pursued explicitly to avoid a mixture of de jure strict liability and de facto strict liability imputed under the guise of a fault-based breach of a duty to make a ship seaworthy. This does not exclude further recourse by the shipowner against the software developer. On the contrary, as regards the liability of the software developer towards third parties, the conclusions of the first part of the study remain valid: the software developer may bear the liability for fault-based violations committed while creating the IT product. At the same time, the question as to how far such a link between the software and its creator can be established remains open.

In December 2021 a bill on autonomous shipping has been introduced into the Russian State Duma. The article analyzes whether it is time to adopt legislation on this subject. The author describes international experience in the field of autonomous shipping and sets out various scenarios according to which Russian legislation on this matter can be developed. Some concerns are raised in relation to the Bill’s terminology, its provisions on classification of autonomous vessels, status of remote crew, and performance of shipping contracts. The article points out that adoption of the Bill in its current wording, especially without detailed provisions on autonomous vessels’ liability and its insurance, may result in serious problems.

The article is devoted to the history of the institution of the judicial letters (Richterbriefe), the implementation of which was one of the measures of the German Reform of 1942 of justice institutions and judicial system. According to the idea of its creators, this institution was supposed to form a «correct» view of judicial manpower concerning the judicial practice, corresponding to the needs of society and of the state, by means of the selective publications of extracts from judgements on specific cases. The Imperial Ministry of Justice was assigned to make the systematisation of the judicial practice for its «streamlining» and «direction». Law reviews and generalisations were published in a specially created press organ with a Ministry’s assessment of the correctness of the judgements. The task of the judicial letters was not to create direct, meaningful directives on the judgements to be made in specific cases, but indirectly to formulate principles for evaluating positive law through the prism of society’s needs in certain adjudication. The article describes the conditions for the establishment of the institution of judicial letters in Nazi Germany, defines also the causes and the motives of the reform of justice announced in 1942, its goals and objectives, as well as its measures to overcome the «crisis of justice». Concerning the institution of judicial letters, the article represents the provided by the reform process of the collection and systematisation of judicial practice, the selection criteria for publication of court decisions, analyses the methodological impact of judicial letters on the law enforcement process, describes the introduction of this institute into practice, including the distribution of judicial letters, and related complications relating to this history. Such a way of influencing the process of administration of justice was not accepted by the German judiciary. It was manifested in the large-scale evasion of judges from fulfiling the obligation to send copies of judgements to the Ministry for systematisation of judicial practice, strengthening with the end of the war approaching. More experienced and old judges interpreted the judicial letters as an instrument for intrusion into their exclusive competence area, which

Commentary to case No. A40-33406/2021 (DHL Global Forwarding LLC v ATP No. 99-SPb LLC)

Commentary to case No. A70-14648/2021 (FSUE “Atomflot” v. Zapsibgazprom-Gasification Ltd.)

Whilst numerous information in the English language is available on sanctions imposed on Russia, foreign parties are less informed on countersanctions enacted by the Russian government. The latter have serious implications on parties dealing with Russia.

The article analyses the legal nature of “dead freight” as losses caused by the failure default to execute the obligation of the charterer to provide the volume of cargo agreed under the contract of carriage of goods by sea. The author gives examples of approaches to the qualification of “dead freight” in Russian and foreign judicial practice, emphasizes the practical relevance of the correct legal qualification of “dead freight”, and also highlights the features of the “dead freight” institute.

The relations on transshipment (reloading) of goods remain poorly studied, questions arise about the possibility of separating transshipment (reloading) into the class of independent, but related to carriage, transport obligations. Transshipment (reloading) cannot be considered outside the form and content of civil law regulation and be identified only with a technical operation in transport. The legal regulation of transshipment (reloading) in Russian and foreign legislation is not uniform, the legislator is faced with the difficulty of harmonizing the interests of all persons in the law, whose rights may be affected by its implementation. The Russian legislation initiated an approach requiring discussion to the regulation of offshore transshipments with the inclusion of special articles in the Merchant Shipping Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter – MSC RF), although no fewer interesting questions about determining the nature of obligations for transshipment (reloading) of goods in private maritime law remain on the agenda.

Case No. A33-15874/2020 (FSUE “Rosmorport” v JSC “Khatanga Commercial Seaport”)

Case No. A05-3827/2021 (PJSC “Rosgosstrakh” v JSC “Northern River Shipping”)

Commentary to the Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 3, 2021, No. 307-ЭС21-1344 in case No. А21-4281/2018 (Rosprirodnadzor v “Global-Flot”)

The article examines the current state and the main problems of international legal regulation of combating maritime piracy. The conclusion about the necessity of implementation of provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is made. Also examined the prospects of creating an international tribunal on piracy and concluded that the creation of an international permanent tribunal on piracy would significantly improve the situation in the sphere of bringing persons who have committed acts of piracy to criminal liability. In addition, the creation of such a tribunal would ensure the security of navigation and additional protection of the constitutional rights of Russian citizens, crew members of merchant ships, as well as promote the economic interests of Russian merchant shipping entities.

The problem of the allocation of liability between the shipowner and the software developer in case of harm to third parties due to an error of the artificial intelligence of an autonomous vessel presents a serious challenge for private maritime law. There are mainly two possible situations here: 1) infliction of loss without a ship collision; 2) infliction of loss due to a ship collision. This article, being based on Russian law, is concerned with the first case. The author comes to the conclusion that the shipowner bears under all circumstances the non-contractual liability as the possessor of a source of increased danger (autonomous vessel). Further allocation of losses is most likely to be provided for in the contract between the shipowner and the software developer. At the same time, the injured party is entitled to bring a claim directly against the software developer if the latter committed faulty actions when creating an IT product. Moreover, de lege lata such a developer is not entitled to limitations of liability under the maritime law in force. The results of this article will be useful primarily for shipowners, IT companies and other leading market players – pioneers of autonomous shipping.

Commentary to the Case No. А51-9022/2020 (LLC “Fesco Service” v LLC “Avers”)

Commentary to the Case No. А51-10555/2016 (“SL Marine Co., Ltd.” v LLC “Ostrov”)

Commentary to the Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 20, 2021, No. 305-ES21-10216 in case No. A40-328885/2019 (“OTEKO-Portservice” v “Kaproben”)

Part 2 of this article deals with in rem arrests, known in the US as Rule C arrests. This type of proceeding means action is brought directly against the vessel as defendant in order to enforce a maritime lien. Drawing on US case law and legislation, the author considers the peculiarities of maritime liens in general and the special features of these liens in the US, in particular. The article then goes on to discuss several scenarios where Rule C arrests are most effective against one-ship companies.

The article discusses what mediation is, and what mediation clauses can be recommended for mediation.

The article deals with specific features of private maritime disputes arbitration in Russia. The analysis is based on the Law of the Russian Federation of July 7, 1993, No. 5358-O “On International Commercial Arbitration”, Regulation on Maritime Arbitration Commission at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation (hereinafter – MAC), which is an appendix to this Law, and the 2017 MAC Rules.

Case No. А24-3915/2020 (LLC “Kamchatskenergo” v LLC “NIKO”)

Judgement of the Commercial (“Arbitrazh”) Court of the North Caucasus District dated 13 May 2021 in case No. A53-42452/2019 (LLC “Management Company “River-Sea”” v LLC “Vastness”)

Case No. А73-7921/2020 (LLC “Alliance-DV Kamchatka” v LLC “Ventura”)

Case No. А40-127542/2020 (JSC “Belomortrans” v LLC “Neva-Charter”)

Noble Chartering Inc v Priminds Shipping Hong Kong Co Ltd (“Tai Prize”) [2021] EWCA Civ 87 (28 January 2021)

Pacific Gulf Shipping Co. v Vigorous Shipping & Trading S.A., No. 20-35159 (9th Cir. 2021)

Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd v Nautical Challenge Ltd [2021] UKSC 6 (19 February 2021)

The Resolution of the Commercial (“Arbitrazh”) Court of the Far-Eastern District dated 17 February 2021 in case No. F03-104/2021 (FSOE “Border Administration of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation in the Primorsky Region” v “Korea Surim Trading Corporation”)

Judgement of the Commercial (“Arbitrazh”) Court of the North-Western District dated 3 March 2021 in case No. A21-1117/2020 (Fishing collective farm “Worker of the Sea” v FSUE “National Fish Resources”, FSBI “Administration of Seaports of the Baltic Sea”, LLC “Northern Marine Technologies”)[1]

Ruling of the Commercial (“Arbitrazh”) Court of the Krasnodarskyi Region dated 12 March 2021 in case No. А32-9548/2021 (FGBI “Morspassluzjba” v “April Shipping Company”)

Herculito Maritime Ltd. and others v Gunvor International BV and others (m/v “Polar”), [2020] EWHC 3318 (Comm)

SK Shipping Europe PLC v (3) Capital VLCC 3 Corp and (5) Capital Maritime and Trading Corp (C Challenger), [2020] EWHC 3448 (Comm)

Argentum Exploration Ltd. v The Silver and all persons claiming to be interested in and/or to have rights in respect of the silver, [2020] EWHC 3434 (Admty)

Ruling of the Commercial Court of North-West District dated 21 January 2021 in case No. A56-79050/2019 ((FGBU) Administration of Sea Ports of the Baltic Sea, LLC Kontur SPb v Marathi Shipping, The Standard P&I Club)

Resolution of the 13th Commercial Court of Appeal dated January 18, 2021 No. 13AP-33576/2020 in case No. A56-11369/2020 (LLC Mortrans v LLC Detotex)

Judgement of the 9th Commercial Court of Appeal dated January 18, 2021 No. 09АП-69250/2020 in case No. А40-40737/2020 (Federal state budgetary institution (FSBI) “Northern UGMS” v Rosmorrechflot)

Judgement of the 5th Commercial Court of Appeal dated January 18, 2021 No. 05AP-7234/2020 in case No. A51-3969/2020 (LLC Far Eastern Sea Transportation v LLC Vostok-Mor-Stroy)

Judgement of the 5th Commercial Court of Appeal dated January 20, 2021 No. 05AP-7848/2020 in case No. A59-1512/2020 (FGUP Rosmorport v LLC Sakhmorflot)

Judgement of the Commercial Court of the Krasnodar Territory dated November 20, 2020 in case No. А32-22897/2020 (PJSC IC Ukrainian Insurance Group v Post Holding Assets Ltd.)

Ruling of the Commercial Court of the Primorsky Territory dated November 25, 2020 in case No. A51-18495/2020 (FSUE Morspasluzhba v OJSC Concern ASPOL-BALTIC / NWS5 Balt Shipping Co. Ltd.)

Judgement of the Commercial Court of the Vologda Region dated October 6, 2020 in case No. A13-20252/2019 (LLC P.TransKo v PJSC Severstal)

Judgement of the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region dated October 24, 2020 in case No. А56-53602/2020 (Marshell Oil LLP v Federal Bailiff Service)

Judgement of the Commercial Court of Primorsky Region dated November 26, 2020 in case No. А51-9725/2020 (Atlas Marine Co. Ltd. v LLC “PrimPortService”)