Anastasiya focuses on resolving commercial and corporate disputes, as well as bankruptcy cases.
Projects:
Domestic Litigation
Defending Sibanthracite Group companies in disputes related to improper fulfilment of obligations by a contractor. The contractor developed and supplied the client with unique coal sorting equipment for Russia, and also had to build a hydraulic sorting complex and a mobile modular installation. However, the supplied equipment turned out to be of poor quality, and construction deadlines and technologies were violated, as a result of which the client suffered losses, and the contractor is insisting payment be made. The team won the first of six cases (the others are still being considered), convincing the court that:
- the equipment, installation and commissioning do not meet state standards and specifications;
- the equipment failed due to the fault of the Contractor, and not due to improper operation;
- in view of the relevant shortcomings, the Contractor is not entitled to demand payment for installation and commissioning.
Defending 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.
Читать Successfully defending a French bank (the Client) in a dispute between a Russian bank (the Claimant) and a large Russian leasing company (the Defendant). The Defendant’s European subsidiary issued Eurobonds. The Client ordered the foreign depository to register the transfer of Eurobonds to the Claimant, but the depository did not execute it and blocked the transaction due to the fact that the Claimant was under sanctions.
The Claimant appealed to the court, requesting to be recognised as a creditor for the claims against the Defendant, who is the guarantor of the fulfillment of obligations of a foreign issuer (the Defendant’s European subsidiary). In the first instance court the team proved that the Client has properly fulfilled its obligations to transfer Eurobonds to the Claimant, and that the parties to the case had no grounds for making any claims against the Client.
Domestic Litigation
Defending Sibanthracite Group companies in disputes related to improper fulfilment of obligations by a contractor. The contractor developed and supplied the client with unique coal sorting equipment for Russia, and also had to build a hydraulic sorting complex and a mobile modular installation. However, the supplied equipment turned out to be of poor quality, and construction deadlines and technologies were violated, as a result of which the client suffered losses, and the contractor is insisting payment be made. The team won the first of six cases (the others are still being considered), convincing the court that:
- the equipment, installation and commissioning do not meet state standards and specifications;
- the equipment failed due to the fault of the Contractor, and not due to improper operation;
- in view of the relevant shortcomings, the Contractor is not entitled to demand payment for installation and commissioning.
Defending 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.
Читать Successfully defending a French bank (the Client) in a dispute between a Russian bank (the Claimant) and a large Russian leasing company (the Defendant). The Defendant’s European subsidiary issued Eurobonds. The Client ordered the foreign depository to register the transfer of Eurobonds to the Claimant, but the depository did not execute it and blocked the transaction due to the fact that the Claimant was under sanctions.
The Claimant appealed to the court, requesting to be recognised as a creditor for the claims against the Defendant, who is the guarantor of the fulfillment of obligations of a foreign issuer (the Defendant’s European subsidiary). In the first instance court the team proved that the Client has properly fulfilled its obligations to transfer Eurobonds to the Claimant, and that the parties to the case had no grounds for making any claims against the Client.