Определение подсудности в делах при оспаривании обязательств  по договору, в котором не определено место его исполнения

Ахрамеева Ольга Владимировна

doi:10.7256/2305-9699.2013.7.8939


	Journal Menu > Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Council of editors > Redaction > Peer-review process > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Online First Pre-Publication > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Open access publishing costs > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy


	Journals in science databases


	About the Journal

Публикация за 72 часа - теперь это реальность!

При необходимости издательство предоставляет авторам услугу сверхсрочной полноценной публикации. Уже через 72 часа статья появляется в числе опубликованных на сайте издательства с DOI и номерами страниц.

По первому требованию предоставляем все подтверждающие публикацию документы!

MAIN PAGE > Back to contents

Legal Studies

Reference:

Akhrameeva O.V. — Establishing jurisdiction of a court in cases on challenging contractual obligations in a contract with an undefined place of performance. // Legal Studies. – 2013. – № 7. – P. 168 - 176. DOI: 10.7256/2305-9699.2013.7.8939 URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=8939

Establishing jurisdiction of a court in cases on challenging contractual obligations in a contract with an undefined place of performance.

Akhrameeva Ol'ga Vladimirovna

PhD in Law

assistant professor, Department of Law, Stavropol State Agricultural University

355001, Russia, g. Stavropol', ul. Pushkina, 1, korp. 20

akhray-ova@yandex.ru

Другие публикации этого автора

DOI:

10.7256/2305-9699.2013.7.8939

Review date:

17-06-2013

Publish date:

1-7-2013

Abstract.

Stability and predictability serve as a basis for the relations among economic subject. And one may refer to stability also with the references to the judicial cases on disputes among the contractual parties, when the possibility for such conflict resolution is provided in the contract. However, some parties make mistakes in this respect, such as failure to mention the place of contractual performance, forming an obstacle to lawful conflict resolution. Most of contracts for sale of goods, performance of work, and provision of paid services do not refer to place of performance under the contract. Usually the parties mention a place where the contract was concluded as well as the place of factual performance of an obligation - handing the goods over to a buyer, provision of results of work to a customer, provision of services. It might seem that there is no practical need to refer to a place of performance under a contract. However, presence of such a clause in a contract allows to use the right for alternative place of jurisdiction instead of filing a claim at the place of residence of a respondent. On the opposite, in the absence of such a clause the possibilities for the use of alternative jurisdiction are often misunderstood.
Keywords: jurisdiction, place of performance under a contact, place where works are performed, general rules of jurisdiction, jurisdiction clause, alternative jurisdiction, place of performance of an obligation, violating the rules on jurisdiction, contractual jurisdiction, exclusive jurisdiction
This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References

1.	Opredelenie Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii ot 15.01.2009 № 144-O-P / SPS Konsul'tant Plyus (29.03.2013).
2.	Osipov A.O. Mesto ispolneniya obyazatel'stva kak osnovanie mezhdunarodnoi podsudnosti // Arbitrazhnyi i grazhdanskii protsess. 2012. № 6 / SPS Konsul'tant Plyus (29.03.2013).
3.	Muratova N.G., Chelyshev M.Yu. O mezhotraslevoi teorii protsessual'nykh soglashenii: voprosy grazhdan-skogo prava, tsivilisticheskogo i ugolovnogo protsessa // Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa. 2012. № 4 / SPS Konsul'tant Plyus (29.03.2013).
4.	Postanovleniya FAS Severo-Kavkazskogo okruga ot 18.02.2010 po delu № A63-7861/2009; FAS Zapadno-Sibirskogo okruga ot 16.04.2010 po delu № A75-11320/2009; Dvenadtsatogo arbitrazhnogo apellyatsionnogo suda ot 17.04.2012 po delu № A06-357/2012. Trinadtsatogo arbitrazhnogo apellyatsionnogo suda ot 30.01.2013 po delu № A56-61319/2012; Chetyrnadtsatogo arbitrazhnogo apellyatsionnogo suda ot 17.01.2013 po delu № A44-6701/2012; Odinnadtsatogo arbitrazhnogo apellyatsionnogo suda ot 14.08.2012 po delu № A65-13152/2012; Devyatnadtsatogo arbitrazhnogo apellyatsionnogo suda ot 06.02.2012 po delu № A64-10923/2011; Pyatnadtsatogo arbitrazhnogo apellyatsionnogo suda ot 08.07.2011 № 15AP-7658/2011 po delu № A53-9048/2011 / SPS Konsul'tant Plyus (29.03.2013).
5.	Postanovleniem Shestnadtsatogo arbitrazhnogo apellyatsionnogo suda ot 05.12.2012 po delu № A63-13742/2012 otmeneno reshenie Arbitrazhnogo suda Stavropol'skogo kraya ot 14.11.2012 / SPS Konsul'tant Plyus (29.03.2013).

Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.