Tasks Arbitration process

Exercise 1
The Prosecutor´s Office of the Volgograd Region in the interests of the Chernushka farm appealed to the Arbitration Court of the Volgograd Region with a lawsuit against the State Tax Inspectorate for the Frolovsky District of the Volgograd Region to recover damages in the form of lost profits that arose due to unreasonable write-off of funds by the decision of the tax inspection.
The arbitration court refused to satisfy the claim. At the same time, the arbitration court pointed out that the plaintiff did not prove the causal relationship between the losses incurred and the actions of the tax inspection.
How is the burden of proof in the arbitration process distributed? Were the mistakes made by the arbitration court, and if so, which ones?
Activity 2
The joint venture Baltik-Mylkhan-Leningrad appealed to the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region with a request to issue a writ of execution for the enforcement of the decision of the permanent arbitration court of the St. Petersburg Juridical Society of June 4, 2010 to recover from JSC Baltic Sea Shipping Company the cost of works performed, materials supplied, commission, penalties and interest for the use of other people´s money in the total amount of 6,364,107 euros, the amount of 254 564 euros.
According to clause 14.1 of the agreement of 06.07.10, all disputes arising between the parties under the above-mentioned contract are subject to consideration in the arbitration court of the St. Petersburg Juridical Society in accordance with its rules. In accordance with clause 22 of the Rules of the above-mentioned arbitration court, the composition of the court was appointed solely by the chairman of the arbitration court; when resolving a dispute, the court was guided by the norms of German substantive law.
What is the competence of the arbitral tribunal when deciding whether to issue a writ of execution?
Is the application for issuance of the writ of execution subject to satisfaction in this case?