Analytics Publications

16
July
2020

The ownership of Tulachermet-steel has turned out to be in question. the fate of one of the assets of koks group will be decided by a court of cassation

A dispute between Evgeniy Zubitskiy, the majority shareholder of Koks group, and his daughter-in-law Viktoria Kazak has changed from financial issues to re-division of assets. This is about control over Tulachermet-Steel plant, one of the group companies, in which RUB 55 billion has been invested. Mrs Kazak challenges the sale of a participatory interest therein to Metallfinance owned by Evgeniy Zubitskiy for RUB 39.2 million. One day the courts take the sides of one party, another day the courts take the sides of the other party; the ball is now in the court of cassation. Lawyers say that the plaintiff has a chance to win and that the case itself may become important for the practice concerning corporate disputes. Maxim Grigoryev is commenting on it.

Maxim Grigoryev, Partner, Head of Southern directorate, Head of special projects
Kommersant
15
November
2017

Special investment contracts in the Russian Federation

Starting in 2015, for the first time a new form of cooperation between the state and private investors became available – the special investment contract (hereinafter SPIC). The goal of implementing it is to stimulate the attraction of large-scale investment to help create and upgrade industrial production facilities inside Russia by providing industry incentives, credits, and stable conditions in which to conduct business. What advantages does this investment mechanism have, and what additional obligations must a party that is investing take upon itself in order to enjoy them?

Maxim Grigoryev, Partner, Head of Southern directorate, Head of special projects
EZH-Yurist
17
January
2018

Pausing when a statute of limitations runs out: five criteria that indicate the assumption of debt

Almost two years have passed since the Russian Federation Supreme Court Plenary Assembly adopted a resolution on issues concerning statutes of limitations. Over that time, express approaches to applying these interpretations have taken shape in judicial practice. We will gain an understanding of how the mechanism works nowadays for pausing when a statute of limitations runs out.

Maxim Grigoryev, Partner, Head of Southern directorate, Head of special projects
Artem Gasparyan, Senior associate of Southern directorate
Arbitration practice
14
December
2016

Recovery of damages from the issuer and registrar for improper cancellation of shares

The “heyday” of corporate conflicts, related to theft and other cases of improper cancellation of shares, took place in the 2000s. Back then was formed the main layer of legal approaches of the courts to such disputes, and the nuances of protecting the victim shareholders. If unable to get back their shares from the issuer, the affected shareholders, in general, resorted to the universal path of defending their legitimate interests – seeking damages to be reimbursed by the company and/or the registrar. Today, cases involving the recovery of such losses have become much fewer. However, in practice, during consideration of similar disputes arising today, the courts still can view such issues differently. Always remain relevant the questions of correctly determining the amount of compensation that should or may be recovered through the court for unreasonable transactions with shares in the shareholders register.

Maxim Grigoryev, Partner, Head of Southern directorate, Head of special projects
Joint Stock Company

Apply to participate

Agreement

Apply to participate

Оценка:

Agreement