In a recent digest of case law, the Supreme Court found that Russian courts should assume jurisdiction over disputes under contracts, that would otherwise be decided by a foreign court, where Russian parties are unable to enter the relevant foreign country because of foreign sanctions or restrictive measures and the contract has a “close connection” to Russian territory.

According to the Supreme Court, the imposition of sanctions by foreign states against Russian persons negatively impacts their rights, at least reputationally, and thus knowingly puts them in a position unequal to that of foreign parties.

In the case considered in the Supreme Court’s digest of case law, Lithuania was said to have banned the entry of Russian nationals to its territory, which the Supreme Court found to be a matter of public knowledge that does not require positive proof. As this travel ban restricts the ability of a Russian party to participate in a court hearing in Lithuania, the Supreme Court found that Russian courts should not defer to the jurisdiction of Lithuanian courts.

Instead, as the relevant contract was executed as part of the Lithuanian−Russian Cross-Border Cooperation Program for 2014−2020, the Supreme Court found that the contract has a “close connection” with the Russian territory. As a result, Russian courts should assume jurisdiction over the relevant dispute and prevent its adjudication abroad (paragraph 31 of the Case Law Digest of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 3 (2023)).