In Memoriam. Сборник воспоминаний, статей, иных материалов. Сергей Лебедев
control? Sergei Lebedev says “I have been involved in Russian maritime arbitration for over 50 years and for over 30 years as the President of the MAC – to my knowledge there has been no case where the outcome of the case has been determined by political pressure. The State had no interest in interfering with purely commercial cases that were not politically connected. After all, whether cargo had been damaged by seawater or which party was right in a more complicated dispute was not a political matter. Moreover, in terms of transparency the MAC in 1932 became one of the first arbitral institutions in the world to publish arbitral awards notwithstanding principles of confidentiality. This was to show the outside world that a correct decision had been reached without the influence of any superiors. Surprisingly perhaps, maritime arbitrators were different to State judges – they were private persons, dispensing private justice in private arbitrations.” To mark the 80th anniversary of the Commission, a new book has been published with a summary of recent MAC awards in Russian and English.
There have, of course, been great changes since the Soviet era. “As well as the development of principles such as human rights and freedom of speech, one of the most significant changes is the right to private property now enshrined in the Russian Constitution.” Although Lebedev clearly does not think that all the changes have been positive: “Previously, the commercial institutions, such as the major shipping companies, in the Soviet State had very good legal departments exercising very strong control on all aspects of shipping and chartering. Now there are fewer larger shipping companies, but many medium/small shipping companies having sometimes 2–3 vessels. Frankly, the standard of their legal work can be very poor: the managers are not concerned with the legal detail such as where disputes might be arbitrated but think more in terms of commercial risk.”
Interestingly, the Maritime Arbitration Commission in Moscow attracts disputes from parties based outside Russia. Lebedev gives a recent example of a case where a consignee from Turkey brought a cargo claim against a Turkish shipowner in relation to a voyage from the Ukraine to Turkey based on an “old Russian form of bill of lading.” Also, the Commission has a number of foreign arbitrators on its list. A party is free to appoint an arbitrator, Russian or foreign, who is not on the list. Lebedev thinks “The international credentials of the Arbitration Commission were greatly strengthened when in 1993 Russia introduced a new international arbitration code based on UNCITRAL’s model law both of which I had a hand in preparing.”
Sergei Lebedev’s childhood was spent in Sebastopol where his parents met (his mother was born in the Ukraine). His main interest in his youth was chess, which he describes as an “intellectual form of sport.” So while his friends were playing football, and other popular Soviet era sports at the Young Pioneer’s Camp on the Black Sea, he was winning the International Chess Championship. Lebedev’s wife is an artist and industrial designer. His daughter is an economist, while his grandson has followed him into the legal profession and travels with his grandfather assisting in relation to international arbitrations.
Sergei Lebedev has been widely published and in 2009 his colleagues published a book selection from his works. Among other awards, in 2003 Sergei Lebedev received from Sweden’s King Karl Gustaf the order of the “Polar Star” for his contribution to the development of international commercial arbitration.
С.Н. Лебедев: Мне чрезвычайно приятно, что в Лондоне, США, Стокгольме, Париже в составе адвокатов присутствуют наши выпускники…
[выдержки из интервью для кафедрального сборника, 2013 г.]
<…>
Сергей Николаевич, мы задаем этот вопрос людям с колоссальным опытом преподавания. Интересно, на Ваш взгляд, происходят ли какие-то изменения аудитории? Каковы Ваше восприятие, Ваши ощущения от новых поколений студентов? Или разительных перемен нет? И основные вещи сохраняются теми же, какими они были 40–50 лет назад? Каковы взаимоотношения «преподаватель – студент»?
Количественный фактор играет определенную роль: когда они учились, – а это 1970-е гг. и раньше – группы были небольшими, как и сам факультет. Поэтому, скажем, на семинарском занятии должны были присутствовать все, потому что если кого-то не было, то преподаватель сразу обращал внимание: а почему нет такого-то студента? Он что, заболел? И вот этот фактор играл большую роль. Сегодня студенческая аудитория очень большая. Преподавателю даже трудно уследить, сколько там человек, сориентироваться, все ли пришли. Утрачен этот фактор. Его можно назвать дисциплинарным фактором, но он играл очень важную роль.
И он обеспечивал более тесный контакт, взаимоотношения?
Да, и у студента возникала необходимость тщательнее готовиться к занятиям. Это тоже очень важный момент. В небольшой группе это происходило более эффективно.
Это объективный момент. Но ведь нельзя избежать увеличения количественного состава.
Конечно. Потребность в наших студентах очень велика. Я сейчас участвую в ряде арбитражных процессов в Лондоне, США, Стокгольме, Париже. И мне чрезвычайно приятно, потому что там выступают наши организации и в составе адвокатов присутствуют наши выпускники. Это показывает, что мы не зря трудились. Ведь они уже вышли на международную арену, их привлекают иностранные компании. Для меня это радостно.
<…>