Luiza Movsisyan

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 a client, who recently provided audit reports for one of the largest Russian retail chains, in proceedings aimed to declare audit reports misleading on the claim of one of the shareholders of the chain who considers that the reports didn’t address important issues affecting financial performance. Thanks to the firm's efforts, the opponent dropped the claim.

Representing a client in a dispute over the recognition and enforcement of an ICAC award before the Commercial Court of Belgrade (Serbia). The ICAC ruled in favour of the client recovering tens of millions of euros in unpaid advances and accrued interest. The defendant, a foreign contractor, refused to execute the award voluntarily and made unsuccessful attempts to have the ruling annulled by the Russian court. We defended the client by convincing the Russian court to uphold the ICAC award, and now we are in the process of having the arbitral award recognised and, simultaneously, having interim measures imposed on the debtor’s property in Serbia.

Providing legal support in a dispute in the courts of appeal and cassation in Turkey, in which our client is one of the defendants. The claimant, a Turkish subcontractor, is seeking to invalidate bank guarantees issued by a Turkish bank (the second defendant in the case) to secure the opponent’s obligations to the client. The opponent, referring to the UN Resolutions and letters of the Turkish Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency, claims that the bank guarantees are unenforceable and demands their invalidation. The client’s position is that the claim should be dismissed because the arbitration clause between the client and the opponent prevents the case from being heard in Turkey.

Participation in preparing an expert report for Autostore Technology AS v Ocado Group PLC & ors case (Top 20 Cases of 2020 according to The Lawyer). The client (Ocado) was sued by rival company Autostore in connection with an alleged patent infringement. The claim was aimed at blocking the import, manufacture, sale, and use of the client’s invention, which Autostore claims infringes its patents. Our client’s defence strategy was built on the absence of patentability criteria (i.e., “novelty”) of the invention under dispute, which can be established if the claimant had previously, before the patent priority date, disclosed information about the invention to any third parties who are not bound by a duty of confidence – thus, the previous disclosure point is of paramount importance. Following the hearing, the English court found the report and testimony of Maxim Kulkov convincing and, in 2023, ruled in favour of the client.

Participation in preparing an expert report on Russian law issues for LCIA proceedings in relation to a dispute concerning the recovery of US$1.3bn of debt under a loan agreement. The case was complicated by the respondent’s extraordinary argument that the Board of Directors of the client’s parent company lacked authority to approve commencement of the arbitration proceedings. Thanks to the expert report and persuasive testimony of Maxim Kulkov, the Tribunal issued a preliminary ruling in favour of the client and did not terminate the proceedings.

Participation in preparing an expert report for an LCIA arbitration arising out of a credit line agreement. The report covers complex issues of invalidity of foreclosure of an LLC share by leaving it with the pledgee; fiduciary duties of the pledgee towards the company whose shares are pledged to it and unjust enrichment allegedly arising on its side; interpretation of an arbitration clause and applicable law clause in a situation where a pledge agreement and a financing agreement contain diametrically opposed clauses.

Representing the client in a dispute in ICC arbitration over the client’s claim against its counterparty, one of the world’s largest manufacturers of wind turbines. The client won tenders for the production of “green” electricity and started the construction of wind farms. The wind turbines were to be produced, supplied and maintained by the opponent. However, due to the sanctions, the respondent terminated its contracts with the client, that resulted in substantial losses for the client.

Advising a major Russian bank on a number of issues related to restoring the client’s corporate control over one of Russia’s largest airports. Due to sanctions imposed and loss of control over the previous pledgee, the bank was unable to complete the pledge agreement and lost control over the pledged stake. As a result of the proposed strategy, the client was able to successfully regain corporate rights over the company by obtaining a pledge of 100% of its share.

Assessing the risks of the client's participation in the tender for the acquisition of debtor's assets in insolvency proceedings for a total amount of US$40m. We propose a detailed step-by-step plan to mitigate or eliminate the risks and support the client within the negotiations with the tender organiser and debtor’s creditor.