Recognition and Enforcement of Saudi Commercial Court Judgments in the Russian Federation

A judgment rendered by a commercial court in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is not automatically enforceable in the Russian Federation. Instead, it requires a formal recognition and enforcement procedure (exequatur) conducted by a Russian state arbitration (commercial) court. While there is currently no bilateral treaty on mutual legal assistance between Russia and Saudi Arabia, enforcement is possible under the principles of international comity and reciprocity. This procedure is governed by Chapter 31 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (APC RF), which sets forth strict requirements for the applicant, including the necessity to prove that the foreign judgment does not violate Russian public policy and that the debtor was properly notified of the proceedings.

What is the legal basis for recognizing a Saudi court judgment in Russia?

The primary legal framework for this procedure is contained in the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Article 241 of the APC RF establishes that decisions of foreign courts in commercial disputes are recognized and enforced in Russia if this is provided for by an international treaty or federal law. Since there is no bilateral treaty between Russia and Saudi Arabia on this matter, enforcement relies on the principle of reciprocity.

Reciprocity means that a Russian court will enforce a Saudi judgment if it is proven that Saudi courts similarly enforce judgments issued by Russian courts. This principle was highlighted in a recent landmark case in the North Caucasus District, where the court stated that the absence of an international agreement does not preclude a party from seeking enforcement (№ А53-23536/2024). In this case, the court enforced a judgment from Dubai, emphasizing that the principle of international comity should be respected and that the debtor failed to prove the enforcement would violate Russian public policy.

Which Russian court has jurisdiction over the application?

According to Article 242(1) of the APC RF, the application for recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment must be filed with the arbitration court of a Russian region (subject of the Russian Federation) at the place of residence or location of the debtor. If the debtor's location is unknown, the application is filed at the location of the debtor's property.

The application is considered by a single judge within one month of its receipt by the court, without the right to review the substance of the foreign judgment (Article 243 of the APC RF).

What documents must be submitted to the Russian court?

The applicant (the party in whose favor the Saudi court ruled) must submit a comprehensive package of documents. Article 242(3) of the APC RF mandates the inclusion of:

• A duly certified copy of the foreign court judgment.
• A document confirming the judgment has entered into legal force (unless this is stated in the judgment itself).
• A document confirming that the debtor was properly and timely notified of the proceedings in the foreign court.
• A power of attorney for the representative signing the application.
• Proof that a copy of the application has been sent to the debtor.
• A duly certified translation of all these documents into Russian.

In practice, for a Saudi judgment, the translation must be notarized, and the documents themselves often require legalization (apostille) to be recognized as authentic in Russia.

What are the grounds for refusing enforcement?

A Russian arbitration court will refuse enforcement only on the grounds explicitly listed in Article 244 of the APC RF. The primary grounds for refusal include:

• Lack of proper notice:If the debtor was not properly and timely notified of the case, enforcement will be denied.
• Lack of finality:If the foreign judgment has not entered into legal force.
• Exclusive jurisdiction:If the case falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of a Russian court.
• Res judicata:If there is already a final Russian judgment on the same dispute between the same parties, or a case between them is already pending in Russia.
• Statute of limitations:If the deadline for enforcement has expired and has not been restored.
• Public policy (ordre public):This is the most critical ground. Enforcement will be denied if it would violate the fundamental principles of the Russian legal order (public policy).

The public policy exception is applied sparingly. As clarified by the Russian courts, a violation of public policy is an "extraordinary measure" used only when there is a threat to the sovereignty and security of the state or a violation of constitutional rights. Mere differences in legal systems, such as the application of Sharia principles in commercial matters, do not automatically constitute a violation of Russian public policy. However, the risk of refusal increases if the judgment is based on sanctions that are clearly illegal in Russia (e.g., penalties contrary to criminal law) or was rendered with gross procedural violations.

Can the court's decision on enforcement be appealed?

Yes. The determination of the arbitration court on the recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment can be appealed. Article 245 of the APC RF states that the court's ruling may be appealed to the cassation instance (the arbitration court of the district) within one month of its issuance.

What practical steps should be taken to ensure success?

Proving reciprocity is often the most challenging hurdle. To satisfy the court of the existence of reciprocity, the applicant must present evidence of prior cases where Saudi courts have enforced Russian judgments. Given the limited number of such cases, this requires thorough research and expert opinions.

Another critical step is the preparation of the dossier for the debtor's proper notification. Russian courts strictly scrutinize whether the defendant was given a real opportunity to defend themselves in the Saudi court. It is essential to secure official confirmations of service from the Saudi judicial authorities and have them translated and notarized.

Finally, the applicant must be prepared to counter the debtor's potential public policy objections. The debtor will likely argue that the application of Saudi procedural or substantive law violates Russian public policy. The applicant should preemptively gather materials to demonstrate that the Saudi court proceedings were fair, that the judgment does not conflict with fundamental Russian legal principles, and that the principle of international comity should prevail.

Legal assistance

Navigating the complex terrain of cross-border enforcement, especially between jurisdictions with distinct legal traditions like Saudi Arabia and Russia, demands a precise understanding of both procedural codes and the nuances of judicial practice. At the law firm 'Economic Disputes', we specialize in guiding businesses through such complex international disputes. Since 2019, our team of 15 lawyers and specialists, with collective experience ranging from 15 to 25 years, has been dedicated to B2B client support. Our managing partner, Sergey Belyavsky, brings 20 years of experience in economic courts, including a decade as a judge, and serves as a recommended arbitrator at the ICAC at the BelCCI. This deep-seated knowledge allows us to develop robust strategies for enforcing foreign judgments, from gathering critical evidence of reciprocity to articulating compelling arguments against public policy objections. We maintain a network of partners across 160 countries and, as members of the AEA since June 2025, we stay at the forefront of international legal developments. With a bank account in PKO Bank Polski and offices in Minsk (Kulman St., 11) and Grodno (Kalyuchinskaya St., 23), we are well-positioned to assist with your international enforcement needs.

If your business requires professional support in recognizing and enforcing a foreign court judgment in Russia or other jurisdictions, submit a request – we will offer a realistic action plan.