Angelina specialises in the resolution of commercial disputes in state courts of the Russian Federation and in complex insolvency cases. She also represents clients in separate insolvency disputes, including defence against subsidiary liability and protection against transaction invalidation.
Projects:
Domestic Litigation
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.
ЧитатьDefending 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.
ЧитатьDefending 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.
ЧитатьInsolvency
Participation in the Metrostroy insolvency case. The project is critical, both for the continuation of the construction of the metro in St Petersburg and for the satisfaction of lenders’ claims by way of the return and sale of assets worth more than US$200m and the subsidiary liability of the debtor’s shareholders. The team ensured that the client’s claims of almost US$50m were included in Metrostroy’s register, despite the actions of opponents in three instances. In addition, the team prevented the inclusion of unjustified claims for US$45m in the register, which will contribute to a fair distribution of the bankruptcy estate.
ЧитатьRepresenting Shell as one of the major creditors in the Mari Refinery insolvency case, as well as representing the client in separate disputes worth over US$70m concerning the challenging of transactions.
ЧитатьSuccessfully defending one of the richest Russian businessmen in a dispute initiated by a major state-owned bank to bring him to subsidiary liability. The bank wanted to recover more than RUB 3.5bn from the client in a development company bankruptcy case. The case was complex due to the bank having a debtor’s disclosure statement in which the client is named as beneficiary. The bank also held the client responsible for a significant number of episodes that covered an extended period of time, which further complicated the client’s defence.
ЧитатьSuccessfully defending a law firm in disputes over the challenging of transactions under legal services contracts on the basis of unequal counter-provision to the debtor. The team presented an impressive amount of evidence of the fact of rendering services and their equivalence, including three specialist opinions. As a result, the court dismissed the receiver’s claims in full.
ЧитатьDomestic Litigation
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.
ЧитатьDefending 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.
ЧитатьDefending 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.
ЧитатьInsolvency
Participation in the Metrostroy insolvency case. The project is critical, both for the continuation of the construction of the metro in St Petersburg and for the satisfaction of lenders’ claims by way of the return and sale of assets worth more than US$200m and the subsidiary liability of the debtor’s shareholders. The team ensured that the client’s claims of almost US$50m were included in Metrostroy’s register, despite the actions of opponents in three instances. In addition, the team prevented the inclusion of unjustified claims for US$45m in the register, which will contribute to a fair distribution of the bankruptcy estate.
ЧитатьRepresenting Shell as one of the major creditors in the Mari Refinery insolvency case, as well as representing the client in separate disputes worth over US$70m concerning the challenging of transactions.
ЧитатьSuccessfully defending one of the richest Russian businessmen in a dispute initiated by a major state-owned bank to bring him to subsidiary liability. The bank wanted to recover more than RUB 3.5bn from the client in a development company bankruptcy case. The case was complex due to the bank having a debtor’s disclosure statement in which the client is named as beneficiary. The bank also held the client responsible for a significant number of episodes that covered an extended period of time, which further complicated the client’s defence.
ЧитатьSuccessfully defending a law firm in disputes over the challenging of transactions under legal services contracts on the basis of unequal counter-provision to the debtor. The team presented an impressive amount of evidence of the fact of rendering services and their equivalence, including three specialist opinions. As a result, the court dismissed the receiver’s claims in full.
Читать