Domestic Litigation

Defending ATAC (Auchan Group) in a dispute over a property owner’s claim against a client as an allegedly dishonest tenant seeking compensation for use of the premises for the entire rental period. We have proved that charging exorbitant inspection standards can disrupt the rental market. Anyone in the market would have to conduct a full investigation to see if the owner of the leased item has any problems that could lead to a future challenge to its title to the item. Having lost in the first and second rounds of the case in the courts of the first and appeal instances, we nevertheless twice proved the inconsistency of the claimant’s arguments in the court of cassation, which returned the case for a new round. After six court hearings and almost a year of consideration of the case in the third round in the first instance, the Commercial Court of the City of Moscow refused to satisfy the opponent’s claim in full.

Successfully defending a major holding in a dispute over the exclusion of foreign companies from its membership. Foreign entities, following the sanctions, stopped participating in general meetings, which made it impossible for the client to make key decisions. Due to their inaction, the opponents caused harm to the client by disrupting the implementation of a major investment project worth tens of billions of roubles. Thanks to the team’s efforts, the client’s claim was fully satisfied.

Successfully defending a major audit firm in a dispute over a claim brought by the opponent, who declared that the audit reports prepared by the client were misleading. The complexity of the dispute is due to the fact that such cases are extremely rare in Russia, and there is no relevant detailed regulation or settled court practice. The claimant’s actions posed a serious threat to the client’s reputation as they cast doubt on the quality of the client’s services and may lead to the cancellation of the auditor’s qualification certificate.

Successfully defending a leading global producer and supplier of HBI and iron ore products in a dispute over the dissemination by certain media and anonymous internet resources regarding allegedly unlawful actions during the client’s share buyout from minority shareholders. We succeeded in having the information disseminated recognised as inaccurate and discrediting the client’s business reputation, as well as in having the information refuted and removed.

Successfully defending the business reputation of Modum-Trans due to the fact that inaccurate, defamatory information was disseminated regarding alleged wrongdoing during the conduct of business by the client, its participants and management. In order toTo defend the client, we proved that the Telegram channel where the inaccurate information was published belongs to the defendant, a media outlet that had previously disseminated inaccurate information about the client.
Thanks to the team’s efforts, the disseminated information was recognised as inaccurate and defamatory, and was refuted and removed.

Successfully defending a client in a dispute over the enforcement of a contract for the sale and purchase of land plots worth appr. US$7m. The claim was brought by a counterparty with whom the client had failed to agree on the list of land plots to be transferred. The firm’s team succeeded in getting the interim measures against almost all the land plots demanded by the claimant lifted, as well as in convincing the court that the disputed contract was not concluded due to non-compliance with the requirements for individualisation of the subject matter of the contract.

Successfully defending a client in the cassation court in a case initiated by a foreign contractor. The claimant applied to have an ICAC award of over EUR2.5m in favour of the client annulled, citing violations of UN Security Council Resolutions. We proved that there was no violation of public policy referred to by the claimant, as the UN Resolution was not applicable to the parties’ relations and did not affect the contested ICAC award. The court took into account the firm’s arguments and upheld the ICAC decision in favour of the client.

Developing a defence strategy for a major international bank in four legal proceedings initiated by Moscow City Hall demanding demolition of a business centre complex located on a land plot owned by the city and securing loans extended by our client to borrowers in the amount of US$120m. In three of the four cases, the defendant (borrower) and the client successfully used the defence proposed by the firm's team, achieving a rejection of the claim.

Defending Shell’s subsidiaries in a dispute with GPN-Salym Projects LLC (GPN, a subsidiary of Gazpromneft) over the reorganisation of a branch of foreign company Salym Petroleum Development N.V. (SPD) into the Russian company Salym Development LLC, which became possible as a result of Russia’s introduction of counter-sanctions measures against companies intending to leave the Russian market. The dispute has become a precedent on this issue in the Russian legal system.

Defending Goldman Sachs in a number of disputes over the claims brought by a major bank and a Russian state corporation seeking recognition of the competence of Russian courts to hear the disputes (Article 248.1 of the Russian Commercial Procedure Code) arising out of the agreements on financial transactions and a cross-currency interest rate swap concluded between the parties. The claimants were sanctioned, the parties terminated the agreements on condition that the client would provide the termination amount to the claimants but, due to the prohibition on transactions with sanctioned parties, the client was unable to fulfil the obligations. Despite the arbitration clause, the opponents asked the Russian court to change the jurisdiction.

Defending Commerzbank, Landesbank Baden-Württemberg, Bayerische Landesbank (major German banks) in disputes against a Gazprom subsidiary relating to the refusal of clients to make payments to the opponent under bank guarantees due to sanctions restrictions. The claimant is currently attempting to recover funds from the clients through a Russian court despite the fact that the guarantees are subject to English law and contain an arbitration clause.

Defending Commerzbank in a dispute against a large Russian bank. The opponent commenced a dispute in connection with the freezing of his funds in accounts opened with the depository, whose funds were in turn frozen in a German bank due to European sanctions. The complexity of the dispute is based on the claim’s nature, i.e., the probability of qualification of the claim as of contractual or of tort nature.

Defending a major US bank in a dispute with a Russian bank which is subject to sanctions. The dispute is connected with a client’s transfer of US$7m from the opponent’s correspondent account to a special blocked account. Despite the fact that the dispute is under the jurisdiction of US courts, the claimant filed a claim in a Russian court under Article 248.1 of the RF CPC.

Defending a major bank's subsidiary in a dispute against Sovcombank (a major Russian sanctioned bank). The client’s UK affiliate and the opponent entered into agreements under which the opponent was allegedly owed RUB1.4bn. The funds were transferred to a blocked account. The agreements contain arbitration clauses and are governed by English law, but the claimant is seeking to recognise the exclusive jurisdiction of Russian courts as well as apply Russian law due to sanctions. The project is complicated by the fact that the claimant intends to recover the debt not only from the client’s UK affiliate, as a counterparty to the agreements, but also from a Russian bank that is part of the client’s conglomerate, however, has nothing to do with the agreements in question.

Representing one of the ten largest transport companies in Russia in a dispute against the Department of Presidential Affairs of Russia, which claimed $30m in compensation for harm caused by the client’s allegedly illegal privatisation and disposal of Russian real estate assets located abroad (UK, India, Portugal, Bulgaria, Finland).

Defending Agrosnabsakhar and Trio in a dispute over a claim by Russia’s largest agricultural holding, Rusagro, for US$19m-worth of damages for a breach of a sugar supply contract, allegedly concluded by electronic communication. Through our efforts, the parties entered into a settlement that reduced the amount of the original claim by 60%.

Preparing a legal opinion on the prospects for a dispute with a major Russian bank arising out of a futures transaction agreement (forward agreement). As a result of the bank’s actions, the client was unable to convert foreign currency into roubles at a favourable exchange rate and incurred more than US$18m in losses. Despite the lack of court practice on the issue, the team offered the client a number of options for defending its interests.

Representing Orion – a defendant in a corporate dispute (worth over US$13m) relating to the invalidation of an issue of shares in a Russian IT company and the challenging of the SPA. The claimant alleged that she was a beneficiary of the company and that the shares were disposed of without her consent. The claim was dropped.

Successfully defending T Plus, a major Russian company operating in the field of electricity and heat generation, in connection with Volga Paper Company’s claim for damages of US$11.5m arising out of the sale and purchase contract for a thermal power plant.

Defending Sibanthracite Logistic in six interconnected disputes in the Moscow Commercial Court against Novotrans Group’s claims for recovery of fines totalling about US$9m for excessive idle time of railcars and excessive presence of railcars on the territory of foreign countries (Lithuania, Latvia, Finland, Belarus).

Representing RBC, one of the largest Russian media holdings, in a dispute over a claim by Independent Oil and Gas Company (NNK) for the recovery of RUB500m for damage to business reputation allegedly caused by an article published by RBC about a transactions between NNK and Rosneft. The firm’s efforts helped to defeat the claim against our client.

Representing Raiffeisenbank in a dispute over the demolition of a shopping mall (pledged in favour of the bank) based on the claim of a municipal authority. The parties entered into a lease agreement for a municipal land plot, which nullified the opponent’s claims, as the basis for its demolition claims was the lack of title to the land. The court upheld our arguments and dismissed the opponent’s claim.

Representing Caterpillar Financial, a finance company and subsidiary of the US specialist machine manufacturer, Cat, in 11 cases concerning claims issued against the Client by the Lessee for unjust enrichment which arose out of the redemption value of machinery.

Representing ING bank in a dispute initiated by Russian debt collectors over the recovery of damages allegedly caused by the client due to the alleged violation of the priority of satisfaction of the creditors’ claims, namely, the procedure for discharge of creditors’ claims if there is no sufficient money in the debtor’s account.

Representing Yamal LNG (Russia’s largest liquefied natural gas plant, named Project of the Year by Forbes in 2018) in a dispute over the quality of aviation fuel.

Representing a former shareholder of one of the leading research and production enterprises in the Chuvash Republic in a dispute over a claim for the recovery of over RUB600m of the actual value of the share in the authorised capital of the company.

Defending the client in a dispute over a claim by NLMK, the largest producer of rolled steel for the construction industry in Russia, regarding reclamation of a land plot owned by the client and invalidation of that plot’s sale and purchase agreement.

Defending a strategic company engaged in fishing for aquatic biological resources in a dispute on the invalidation of the conclusion of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation that the client was under the control of a foreign investor.

Defending a client who recently provided audit reports for one of the largest Russian retail chains in proceedings aimed at declaring the audit reports misleading on the basis of a claim of one of the shareholders of the chain who considers that the reports failed to address important issues affecting financial performance.

Participating in over 30 court cases in connection with the illegal dissipation of assets worth US$6bn controlled by Mukhtar Ablyazov.

Representing MDM Bank, Rost Bank, and Politeks as lenders with claims totalling RUB4.7bn in insolvency proceedings in the Commercial Court of the City of Moscow and the Commercial Court of St Petersburg and the Leningrad Oblast against 33 debtors incorporated into four separate electronic supplier company groups. The case includes a whole range of measures for the out of court settlement of debt, parallel investigations under criminal cases against several debtors and measures to trace and attach the debtors’ assets.

Representing Brunswick Rail, a company which leases freight railcars on the Russian market, in three instances of Moscow Region commercial courts in connection with the recovery of US$7m from the rolling stock manufacturer, Armavir Heavy Engineering Plant, comprising an advance payment, penalties and interest under the agreement for the supply of 80 railcars. The case was complicated by the fact that the advance payment was in Russian roubles while the amount subject to recovery was in US dollars and a sharp change in exchange rates had occurred. It was necessary to counter the respondent’s argument that the armed hostilities in Ukraine amounted to force majeure circumstances (releasing it from liability) in order to prove that Brunswick Rail was entitled to recover penalties, and to obtain interim relief.

Representing Togliattiazot in dozens of cases, including in relation to shareholders’ claims challenging general meetings of shareholders, decisions of the board of directors, information disclosure, and administrative liability for breaching corporate legislation.
For example, we successfully represented the client in the Povolzhsky Region commercial courts in relation to a claim by minority shareholders for the recovery of damages allegedly caused to the company by the management company as a result of a lowering of sales prices on foreign markets.

Representing Caterpillar Financial, a finance company and subsidiary of the US specialist machine manufacturer, Cat, in eight court cases arising out of lease agreements at the Commercial Court of the City of Moscow. The first series of cases involved two claims by lessees against Caterpillar Financial for the recovery of the repurchase price of self-propelled vehicles amounting to US$10m in connection with the termination of the lease purchase agreements.
The second series of cases involved six Caterpillar Financial claims against companies in the Mechel group on the recovery of lease payments amounting to US$8m, the termination of lease agreements and the return of leased assets.

Defending one of the world’s largest auditing and consulting companies in a dispute with an advisory services customer. The dispute arose in relation to a consulting services agreement for analysis of the effectiveness of the implementation of an investment project relating to a major construction project. Pursuant to the services agreement, our client audited the cost of the construction work. The customer declined to accept the results of the services rendered, and subsequently decided to collect the transferred advance from our client.
During the hearings in the Moscow Arbitration Court, we managed to prove that the results of the services were actually used by the customer. On this ground, the court dismissed the claim against our client and satisfied our client’s counterclaim against the customer for the recovery of debts for the services provided under the services agreement.
Thanks to the active participation of the KK&P team, the parties eventually reached an amicable settlement.

Representing Togliattiazot in a commercial court case challenging the actions of the Krasnodar Region administration which increased the lease rates for land plots more than 50 fold. This case became the basis for the dismissal of subsequent claims by the same administration to increase lease rates.

Defending the TV channel, 2×2, against a suit brought against it by the prosecutor’s office prohibiting the broadcast of the South Park cartoon in connection with accusations of incitement of religious and racial hatred.

Representing a senior executive in a dispute relating to a claim by a major bank for recovery from our client of US$0.5m allegedly arising from American Express services payments. During negotiations with the bank we achieved settlement between our client and the opponent.

Challenging a FAS of Russia decision in relation to OJSC Novorossiysk Sea Port in connection with alleged abuse of a dominant market position.

Representing IKEA in a claim against its neighbour regarding the demolition of IKEA’s logistics centre.

Settlement of a dispute relating to the construction of a shopping centre in Volgograd for Castorama after initiating and winning several court cases against the developer (debtor).

Representing a Russian investment company in a dispute in relation to a 25% share in a Russian mobile operator. The dispute was settled.