Anastasiya Petrova

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.

Defending a contractor in a dispute over the recovery of unjust enrichment (unearned advance) and penalties in excess of RUB 900m. The contractor built business-class apartments in Moscow, but the customer refused the contract, claiming that the work was done poorly and with missed deadlines. The contractor filed a counterclaim to recover more than RUB 700m in arrears from its opponent in payment for work performed.

Successful inclusion of an international fund (the client) in the register of creditors’ claims. The client provided loans to oil trading companies totalling almost RUB600m to finance the purchase and sale of oil and petroleum products. The debtors did not repay the loans, and third parties initiated bankruptcy proceedings against the debtors. The case was complicated by the fact that the client is a foreign organisation and the loan agreements are subject to Swiss law, in connection with which opponents argued that Presidential Decrees allegedly forbid creditors from unfriendly countries to include their claims in the register of creditors of Russian debtors. Moreover, some circumstances of the case indirectly evidenced the actual affiliation of the client and the debtors, which could lead to subordination of the client’s claim.

Successful defence of the interests of the chairman of the board of directors of a bank in bankruptcy proceedings in a dispute over the subordination of his claims and the return of more than RUB 400m in funds paid to the bank. The opponent’s claims were denied in full after we proved that the placement of funds in the bank on deposits by persons controlling the bank is not in itself compensatory financing.

Defending of a board member and chief accountant of a bank against being held subsidiarily liable for more than RUB 7bn.
The bank issued more than 70 loans to borrowers with an unsatisfactory balance sheet structure. Before bankruptcy, the security for these loans was terminated through a number of unprofitable – in the opinion of the bankruptcy trustee – transactions made without the approval of the bank’s board of directors. The goal of the project was to prevent the client from being held subsidiarily liable by proving the absence of losses for the bank and identifying the real beneficiaries responsible for bringing the bank to bankruptcy.
The dispute is complicated by a large number of case materials (more than 100 volumes) and registration files from Rosreestr, confirming the availability of liquid collateral at the time the loans were issued. The team analysed the financial condition of each borrower, which showed that, at the time the loans were issued, the borrowers had a positive balance sheet structure.

Participation in preparing an expert opinion for the BVI court in a dispute initiated by a major Russian bank (the client) against the former owner of the client’s predecessor bank to recover damages caused by the opponent in the amount of more than US$1.9bn. The expert report is required by the client to counter the arguments of the opponent that its notice of the BVI trial is not valid, since it does not comply with the formal procedure of the Hague Convention. Moreover, the opponent is trying to challenge the jurisdiction of the BVI court, since Russian courts are already considering identical cases with the same subject matter and participants. In his conclusion, with the help of the firm’s team Maxim Kulkov examined a set of issues regarding the procedure and terms for serving foreign documents on Russian persons in accordance with the Hague Convention of 1965, the practice of applying the doctrine of effective service by Russian courts, and also compared Russian disputes with the BVI case from the point of view of the principles of res judicata and lis pendens (tools for preventing identical claims), in order to prove the correctness of determining the BVI court as having jurisdiction.