The relevance of the problem under consideration is determined by the lack of unified approaches in the legal literature and judicial practice to the issue of recognition and enforcement of interim court decisions. This creates serious problems in the regulation of cross-border bankruptcy, where many judicial acts are intermediate only in form, but in essence entail important substantive legal consequences. The main purpose of the study is to determine the trends in the development of Russian judicial practice and evaluate them from the point of view of their compliance with the modern model of cross-border bankruptcy, legality and rationality. The paper considers international standards of cross-border bankruptcy and the practice of Russian courts related to the recognition and enforcement of decisions of foreign courts opening bankruptcy cases. The author comes to the conclusion that the judicial practice on the issue of recognition of interim foreign judgments in bankruptcy cases is evolving. Single judicial innovations coming from the doctrine of universalism do not meet with much support. On the contrary, there are more and more decisions where their recognition and application is denied; the range of grounds for such a refusal is also expanding; the international competence of Russian courts is changing. Under the conditions of sanctions pressure and the economic crisis, it is unlikely that another way can now be found to protect the interests of Russian creditors. However, in the long term, the campaign, according to which the effect of foreign law on Russian territory is severely limited, and the effect of Russian law is assumed to be unlimited, is not a rational choice.