Anna Grishchenkova on the suit of international organization Interelectro

RBK Daily reports that tomorrow the Higher Arbitration Court, as a matter of oversight will consider a suit of Moscow Property Department towards international organization Interelectro.

The main issue that the Higher Arbitration Court is to resolve: what the legal immunity of an international organization means, i.e. when it cannot be a respondent in Russian courts? The publication reminds that in majority of cases international organizations may not respond to civil suits, this is stipulated both by local and international law. In September 2006 a Moscow representative office filed a request to return non-residential premises as it rejected the lease contract. Three judges who submitted the case to the Higher Arbitration Court as a matter of oversight, considered that since in the Interelectro incorporation contract the location was indicated as “Moscow, USSR”, premises lease contract is subjected to the legal immunity. The difference between functional and commercial activities is not always clear, which is well-illustrated by FBK Legal’s corporate and M&A practice manager Anna Grishchenkova. “On the one hand, premises lease are civil legal affairs based on the freedom of contract, not being Interelectro main operations”, - the expert reasons. “On the other hand, since disputed premises are Interelectro official headquarters, using them under the lease contract can be referred to the company’s main operations”. If the Higher Arbitration Court supports the position of the three judges, a certain extension of the field of legal immunity can be considered, Ms. Grishchenkova notes. “On the other hand, this will mean considerable decrease of the number of cases when Russian companies will be able to defend their rights in our court, those that were violated by international entities”, the lawyer concluded.