Execution of Acts of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union: Review of the First Problems and Ways for Their Solution

Abstract

The Court of the Eurasian Economic Union is an active and much-demanded international judicial body, work of which is aimed at ensuring the uniform application of the law of the Eurasian Economic Union — the integration organisation of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia in the economic sphere. On the merits of the cases under consideration and within the framework of its competence, this judicial body has the right to issue two types of judicial acts — advisory opinions and decisions — which are executed with varying degrees of success. Thus, if advisory opinions are perceived by integration actors and, as a rule, implemented, then the situation with mandatory decisions is not so favorable, since the current regulatory regulation provides for a significant degree of discretion for the disputing parties in this matter. In this article, the author identifies problems that arose in the context of the execution of decisions of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union in cases based on applications from business entities — in particular, the current practice of the Court in cases in which the applicants were Russian companies operating in the coal industry, as well as those involved in liability for an alleged violation of the Union’s competition law. The article contains an overview of the legal positions of the Constitutional and Supreme Courts of the Russian Federation on the issue of taking into account the practice of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union in the administration of justice by Russian national courts. The author states: based on the Statute of the Court, the highest judicial authorities proceed from the fact that the effect of legal positions in the national legal system of Russia is not independent and depends on the execution of the decision of the Court by the Eurasian Economic Commission. In addition, the article examines the practice of the Constitutional Court, which has developed due to the impossibility of recognizing the decisions of the Court as a new circumstance for the purpose of reviewing judicial acts of national courts that have entered into force, enshrined in the Constitution. The author offers options for improving the execution of Court decisions, including by combining trials in the Court and national courts, reforming national procedural legislation in order to give the Court's practice the status of a new circumstance for the purpose of reviewing judicial acts that have entered into legal force, creating a mechanism for monitoring the execution of decisions and advisory opinions of the Court, as well as establishing measures of responsibility for international officials for improper execution of decisions of the Court.