Our Team

Evgeniya Rubinina
  • Commercial Arbitration
  • Investment Arbitration
  • Коммерческий Арбитраж
  • Инвестиционный Арбитраж
Qualifications & Education
  • MJur & MPhil in Law, University of Oxford
  • LLM, Harvard Law School
  • Moscow State Institute of International Relations, Russia (MGIMO – University) (specialist, with highest honours)
  • Law Society of England and Wales
  • New York State Bar
  • Russia
  • English
  • Russian
  • French
  • Spanish

Evgeniya is an international arbitration lawyer with over 15 years of experience. She has acted as advocate in international commercial disputes under LCIA, ICC and SCC rules and has represented both investors and states in investment treaty cases. She has also sat as arbitrator. She has experience of disputes in the metals and mining, oil and gas, banking, manufacturing and consumer goods sectors.

In addition to being admitted to practise in England & Wales as a solicitor-advocate, Evgeniya is admitted in New York and Russia.

Evgeniya joined Enyo Law after 10 years at a Magic Circle firm in Paris and London. She has also worked for the World Bank Group’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes and the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague. She speaks English, Russian, French and some Spanish.

Evgeniya has been consistently ranked as a leading practitioner in international arbitration by major directories such as Who’s Who Legal and The Legal 500. Peers and clients have described her as a “commercial, thorough and extremely detailed advocate” whose “knowledge of ISDS practice and procedures is unparalleled” (Who’s Who Legal International Arbitration 2022).

Evgeniya speaks English, Russian, French and some Spanish.

Representative cases:

International arbitration
  • Ascent Resources in its ICSID arbitration under the ECT against Slovenia in relation to the development of a gas field.
  • IMC Invest in its ICSID arbitration against Kyrgyzstan in relation to the ban on uranium mining.
  • PETRONAS in its successful defence of a USD1.14 billion claim for fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of contract arising out of the termination of its investment in a Brazilian off-shore oil project. PETRONAS as aarded a USD15 million in costs. ICC, Rio de Janeiro Seat, English law.
  • A Russian banker in a London-seated ICC arbitration arising from a dispute with another Russian individual concerning the acquisition of a shareholding in an eastern European bank, as well as in related English court proceedings.
  • A US energy company in a post-acquisition London-seated LCIA arbitration with an Asian party.
  • A consortium of regional and international energy companies in a multibillion LCIA arbitration against a regional government in the Middle East in relation to the ownership and commercial operation of two petroleum fields.
  • A Ukrainian businessman in a dispute with another Ukrainian businessman arising out of a joint venture in the metals sector.
  • The government of Romania in the Micula -v- Romania ICSID arbitration concerning Romania’s repeal of customs duty exemptions in order to join the European Union.
  • Swisslion in an ICSID arbitration against the Republic of Macedonia concerning the privatisation of a food production company.
Jun 13, 2024
Fair winds favour plaintiffs in wasted expenditure cases
A recent judgment of the High Court of Australia has clarified aspects of contract law and the availability of damages...
Jun 3, 2024
LIDW 2024: The Impact of Satoshi Nakamoto on English law
Over the past few years, the novel Blockchain technology has had a significant disruptive impact on many areas, not least...
May 20, 2024
LIDW 2024: Clash of Jurisdictions – era of sanctions, anti-suit and anti-anti-suit injunctions?
Enyo Law is co-hosting an event at London International Disputes Week 2024 alongside One Essex Court, ALRUD law firm, and...
May 16, 2024
MUR Shipping: Force Majeure and Reasonable Endeavours – Contractual Certainty and how to Foresee the Unforeseeable
This week, the Supreme Court issued its decision in the highly anticipated RTI Ltd (Respondent) v MUR Shipping BV (Appellant)...