Arbitration rules
Disputes are settled by the platform arbiter, and they follow these rules rather than their own judgement. The outcome depends on how fully the points of the brief were done. The arbiter can depart from the calculation only under rule 8 and only with a separate explanation.
This is a translation provided for convenience. The Russian version of the rules is legally binding.
1. The ruling follows the job terms
A dispute is settled only on the job terms in the version in force at the moment of the disputed event: acceptance criteria (ac-N), proof-of-process conditions (vc-N), scope, price and deadline. Chat agreements that did not become an accepted change of terms do not change the ruling — neither extra wishes of the client nor promises of the freelancer. The arbiter assesses the result against the items of the terms; their personal opinion of the quality of the work does not matter.
2. How a brief item is assessed
Each brief item gets one assessment: done, partly done or not done. • A measurable item (quantity, presence of a section or feature, keywords, format, scope, duration, resolution) is checked by counting or testing. Scope counts as met if it deviates by no more than 10% from the stated range. • An item made of several listed parts is partly done if only some of them are present; the completion share is the number of completed parts divided by the number of parts. • An item with an evaluative wording and no measurable criterion (“interesting”, “lively”, “persuasive”) counts as done unless the result clearly contradicts it. Any doubt in interpreting an item is resolved in favour of the freelancer. • Text uniqueness is checked only if the item names the checking service and the threshold; otherwise — under rule 6.
3. Proof of the work process
If the proof-of-process conditions are required, item vc-N is done when the freelancer has provided the requested material and its content matches the request (for example, the version history belongs to this very work). The authenticity of materials is not established by expert analysis: technical analysis, “AI detectors” and their results are not grounds for a ruling. If materials for the required conditions are provided or the live defence is confirmed, the argument “the work was not made by a human” is not accepted without evidence under rule 6. If the proof conditions are wishes or not set, the dispute is settled only on the brief items.
4. Deadlines and non-delivery
The deadline is the payment date plus the delivery period from the version of the terms, taking into account extensions by accepted changes. The deadline is extended by the time the freelancer waited for the client to answer a question asked in the job chat without which the work could not continue. If the work is not delivered by the deadline for reasons on the freelancer’s side, or the freelancer withdrew before delivery, the client gets a full refund. Delivery after the deadline but before a dispute is opened is assessed as a normal delivery.
5. The outcome follows the completion degree
The completion degree C is the average over the brief items (ac-N): done — 1, not done — 0, partly done — the completion share. The outcome is determined in order: 1) C = 1 — payout to the freelancer; 2) C < 1, no revision by the arbiter has been ordered yet and at least the revision period plus 10 days remain until the end of the deal term — a revision of the unfinished items only: 7 days, up to 14 if the unfinished items make up more than half of the work; 3) C = 0 — full refund to the client; 4) otherwise, if partial refunds are enabled — the client gets back the share (1 − C), rounded to a whole percent (from 1 to 99%), the rest goes to the freelancer minus the platform fee; 5) otherwise — payout to the freelancer if C ≥ 0.5, full refund to the client if C < 0.5. After a revision, its result is assessed by the same rules, but no new revision is ordered.
6. Bad faith
The result does not count (C = 0), no revision is ordered and the client gets the full amount back if it is proven: (a) borrowing someone else’s work without attribution or in breach of its licence — for text, verbatim matches with previously published materials in more than 30% of the text; for code, images, video, audio, 3D models and other work — a substantial part of the result matching someone else’s work; using libraries, fonts, stock and other materials under their licence is not borrowing; (b) forgery of process materials — the material belongs to another work or contradicts itself. Proof is a link to the source or to a specific contradiction in the materials; suspicion without proof is not grounds. Bad faith of either party may lead to a warning or a block under the sanctions catalogue — only after the party has had a chance to explain.
7. Review procedure
Before the ruling, each party may state its position and attach evidence; the arbiter examines the materials of both parties. The ruling is made within 3 business days of the dispute being opened; time spent waiting for a party’s explanation does not count. The arbiter does not review a dispute if connected with one of the parties and does not communicate with the parties outside the platform. The ruling contains an assessment of each item, the calculation under rule 5, the numbers of the rules applied and reasons of at least 100 characters, and is communicated to both parties. Dispute materials are available only to the parties and arbiters.
8. Departing from the calculation and enhanced review
The arbiter may adopt an outcome different from the calculation under rule 5 only if the circumstances of the dispute are not covered by rules 1–6 — with enhanced review, separate written reasons and a note in the ruling. Enhanced review (a comment on each item and confirmation of the checklist) is also required when the job price is ₽30,000 or more, all three revisions are used up, a party has an active warning, a sanction is proposed, the case type changes, or a partial refund is made. Rulings with a departure go into the precedent base: similar disputes must be decided alike.
9. Legal status of the ruling
The dispute resolution procedure is part of the user agreement: the parties instruct the platform to distribute the money held in the secure deal based on the outcome of the dispute review. The platform’s ruling is not an arbitral award and does not deprive the parties of the right to go to court in the manner established by the laws of the Russian Federation; consumer rights provided by law are not limited by this procedure.