The Judgment says, in particular, that:

- the judge may not deny the citizens access to the courtroom if they want to be present at the hearings, even when the courtroom is not spacious enough (para 1);

- no permission from the judge is required for audio recording of court session and for online text publications on court hearings in social networks (para 2);

- filming, photographing, video recording, live coverage of commercial court hearings via radio, TV or Internet may be performed with the permission of the presiding judge. The denial of permission must be reasoned (this requirement effectively rules out arbitrary prohibitions). It may not be based on the unwillingness of persons participating in the case to give publicity to the circumstances of the case, to divulge the information related to their activities, if such information was not made secret in a lawful procedure. In cases of such filming, recording, etc the consent of citizens for publication and further use of their images is unnecessary (para 7).

Besides, the Judgment regulates in great detail the opportunity of and procedures for closed court hearings. In particular, it points out that:

- if the commercial court determines that the holder of certain information has failed to introduce the regime of commercial secrecy or has introduced it for information which by law may not constitute commercial secret, his motion to close court hearings must be dismissed (para 19);

- closed hearings should not be recorded by way of audio or video registration, photographing, as well as TV, radio or Internet translation (para 22.2);

- consideration of a case behind closed doors due to the need to preserve State secret shall be held in a specially equipped room (para 23.2);

- judicial acts involving the examination of data related to the State security or constituting commercial or another legally protected secrecy shall not be placed in the Internet (para 27).