In the context of escalating geopolitical confrontation and the widespread use of unilateral economic sanctions, judicial decisions have increasingly become not only instruments for dispute settlement but also strategic tools for ensuring economic security. This article presents a comparative analysis of the approaches adopted by international judicial bodies – the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) – and the national judiciary of the Russian Federation in resolving disputes related to economic security. Special attention is given to the evolution of legal doctrine, the legislative framework of Russia’s «anti-sanctions» jurisdiction, and the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and arbitrazh (commercial) courts. Through the analysis of case law, international treaties, and scholarly sources, the study identifies fundamental differences in the interpretation of sovereignty, proportionality, and good faith, and evaluates the effectiveness of competing legal models.