Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T00:26:37.871Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do Repeat Players Behave Differently in Russia? Contractual and Litigation Behavior of Russian Enterprises

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Kathryn Hendley ,
Randi Ryterman  and
Peter Murrell
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We examine whether Galanter's repeat player (RP) concept helps in deciphering the law-related behavior of Russian enterprises. We adapt the RP concept to the Russian context defining the Russian repeat player (RRP). Using data from 328 enterprises, we examine whether RRP-ness explains the use of protokols of disagreement, petitioning to freeze assets, contractual prepayment, and litigation activity. RRPs are very different from Galanter's RPs, generally exhibiting less aggression and innovativeness, but suing other RRPs frequently. Examination of factors other than RRP-ness suggests the presence of lawyers is important in determining law-related activity, a result not necessarily expected in Russia.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 33 , Issue 4: Do the “Haves” Still Come Out Ahead? , 1999 , pp. 833 - 867
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by the Law and Society Association

Footnotes

Thanks are due to Alla V. Mozgovaya of the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, who coordinated the survey throughout Russia, and to James H. Anderson and Berta Heybey for research assistance. We gratefully acknowledge the support of the National Council for Eurasian and East European Research, the World Bank, and the U.S. Agency for International Development under Cooperative Agreement No. DHR-0015-A-00-0031-00 to the Center on Institutional Reform and the Informal Sector (IRIS). The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the World Bank, its Executive Directors, or the countries they represent.

References

Arbitrazhnyi protsessual'nyi kodeks Rossiiskoi Federatsii [The Arbitrazh Procedural Code of the Russian Federation] [1992 APK] (1992) Vestnik Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo Suda (no. 1) 5–47.Google Scholar
Arbitrazhnyi protsesual'nyi kodeks Rossiiskoi Federatsii [The Arbitrazh Procedure Code of the Russian Federation] [1995 APK] (1995) Vestnik Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo Suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii (no. 6) 25–79.Google Scholar
Black, Bernard, & Kraakman, Reinier (1996) “A Self-Enforcing Model of Corporate Law,” 109 Harvard Law Rev. 1911–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boycko, Maxim, & Shleifer, Andrei (1995) “Next Steps in Privatization: Six Major Challenges,” in Lieberman, I. W. & Karlova, J. Nellis with E., Mukherjee, J., and Rahuja, S., eds., Russia: Creating Private Enterprises and Efficient Markets. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1974) “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change,” 9 Law & Society Rev. 95–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grazhdanskii kodeks RF (chast' pervaya) [The Civil Code of the RF (first part)] [GK] (1994) Sobranie zakonodatel'stva Rossiiskoi Federatsii, no. 32, item 3301.Google Scholar
Grazhdanskii protsessual'nyi kodeks RSFSR (1997) [The Civil Procedure Code of the RSFSR] [GPK]. [The Civil Procedure Code of the RSFSR] [GPK]: INFRA.Google Scholar
Hazard, John (1994) “Is Russian Case Law Becoming Significant as a Source of Law?” 1 Parker School J. of East European Law 23–46.Google Scholar
Hendley, Kathryn (1996) Trying to Make Law Matter: Legal Reform and Labor Law in the Soviet Union. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendley, Kathryn (1998a) “Growing Pains: Balancing Justice and Efficiency in the Russian Economic Courts,” 12 Temple International and Comparative Law J., 302–32.Google Scholar
Hendley, Kathryn (1998b) “Remaking an Institution: The Transition in Russia from State Arbitrazh to Arbitrazh Courts,” 46 American J. of Comparative Law 93–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendley, Kathryn (1998c) “Temporal and Regional Patterns of Commercial Litigation in Post-Soviet Russia,” 39 Post-Soviet Geography & Economics 379–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendley, Kathryn, Ickes, Barry, Murrell, Peter, & Ryterman, Randi (1997) “Observations on the Use of Law by Russian Enterprises,” 13 Post-Soviet Affairs 19–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merryman, John Henry (1985) The Civil Law Tradition. 2d Ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Murrell, Peter (1992) “Evolution in Economics and in the Economic Reform of the Centrally Planned Economies,” in Clague, C. C. & Rausser, G., eds., Emerging Market Economies in Eastern Europe. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Nelson, Richard R., & Winter, Sidney G. (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
“O vnesenii izmenenii i dopolnenii v Zakon RF ‘O gosudarstvennoi poshline’ [On the introductions of amendments and additions to the Law of the RF ‘On State Fees‘]” (1996) Sobranie Zakonodatel'stva RF, no. 1.Google Scholar
Pomorski, Stanislaw (1977) “State Arbitrazh in the U.S.S.R.: Development, Functions, Organization,” 9 Rutgers-Camden Law J. 61–116.Google Scholar
Solomon, Peter (1995) “The Limits of Legal Order in Post-Soviet Russia,” 11 Post-Soviet Affairs 89–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasil'eva, Marina (1996) “Nel'zia zhit' po zakonam dzhunglei [It Is Impossible to Live by the Laws of the Jungle],” Chelovek i zakon (no. 7) 54–59.Google Scholar
Yakovlev, V. F., & Iukov, M. K., eds. (1996) Kommentarii k Arbitrazhnomu protses-sual'nomu kodeksu Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Commentary on the Arbitrazh Procedure Code of the Russian Federation]. Moscow: Kontrakt.Google Scholar