|
|
|
Home
|
Projects
|
To represent the interests of the insurance company in an arbitration dispute on a lawsuit entered to recover insurance indemnification as a result of the collapse of SOK Transvaal Park.
OJSC ROSNO
The ROSNO Group is one of the biggest insurance groups in Russia. It includes the universal, federal level insurance company OJSC ROSNO and its subsidiaries: ROSNO MS, ROSNO Centre, SK Medexpress, Allianz ROSNO Zhizn, Allianz ROSNO Asset Management and Allianz Ukraina. The main shareholder in ROSNO is the leading international insurance company Allianz SE (holding 97% of the shares). Insurance policies and agreements with GK ROSNO are held by over 17 million people and more than 50 thousand enterprises and organisations.
The Project:
To represent the interests of the insurance company in an arbitration dispute on a lawsuit entered to recover insurance indemnification as a result of the collapse of SOK Transvaal Park.
Project term:
2006 - 2007
Project description:
CJSC ETS (the owner of SOK Transvaal Park) filed a lawsuit with the Court of Arbitration of the City of Moscow to require OJSC Russian insurance people’s company ROSNO to recognise an event (collapse of the roof of the Transvaal Park Sports and Health Complex) as an insurance event in relation to harm caused to CJSC ETS by malicious actions of third parties for the purpose of partial damage to and partial destruction of insured property belonging to CJSC ETS and to oblige the company to pay insurance indemnification.
The given insurance event drew considerable public attention in the Russian Federation but, as the court established, the architect Nodar V. Kanchelia was recognised as being responsible for the destruction. At the same time, in filing the given lawsuit, the owners of SOK Transvaal Park calculated that the main damage was caused to the building by the search and rescue services in clearing the rubble and demanded that OJSC ROSNO pay for all the damage incurred.
As a result of the work carried out by the specialists of Law Firm Vegas Lex on the case, all the court instances were won in favour of the Client - the plaintiff was refused satisfaction of the claims in full, which meant complete satisfaction of the interests of our Client.
|
