The wave of Russian sanctions imposed since the invasion of Ukraine has led to counter measures by the Russian state which are now having significant practical consequences for parties caught up in disputes with Russian entities. The English High Court decision in Google LLC and others v. Nao Tsargrad Media and others1 provides a particularly noteworthy example.
After the sanctions were introduced, the Russian Arbitrazh Court Procedural Code (Code) was amended to give the Arbitrazh Courts in Russia exclusive jurisdiction to hear claims where a sanctioned Russian entity is involved. This allows sanctioned entities to avoid contractual dispute resolution provisions that require disputes to be litigated in foreign courts or in foreign seated arbitration.
This provision of the Code led to several contractual claims being brought by Russian media entities in the Russian courts against various Google entities alleging the improper termination of their YouTube content agreements by Google. Judgment was entered by the Russian courts against Google, and compounding fines were levied that now (incredibly) exceed 1.8 octillion US dollars. The Russian courts have also enforced the judgments against Google’s Russian operating entity, which was not party to the relevant contracts.
Google therefore turned to the English courts for an anti-enforcement order against the Russian entities. The English courts accepted jurisdiction given that the jurisdiction clauses in the various contracts provided for English court litigation or London seated arbitration. The High Court readily granted the orders sought by Google given the clear breach of these contractual dispute resolution provisions by the Russian entities.
The Russian parties are reportedly seeking to enforce the Russian judgments in Turkey, Serbia, Kyrgyzstan, and South Africa. While Google hopes that the English court’s anti-enforcement order will inhibit enforcement, this issue is likely to play out for some time to come in courts around the world.
This article is available in the Jenner & Block Japan Newsletter. / この記事はJenner & Blockニュースレターに掲載されています。
Footnotes
1[2024] EWHC 2212 (Comm)
Related Attorneys
Related Articles
Related Capabilities
© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.