Author: admin

  • SCC: In Case of Reduced Working Hours, Remuneration Due Depends on the Actual Duration of Working Time

    Our team achieved significant success defending a client before the Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC) in an employment dispute related to the amount of remuneration in the event of reduced working hours established by the employer in the event of a declared state of emergency or emergency epidemic situation (Article 138a, para. 2 of the Labour Code).

    The Court held that in this case the general rule set out in Article 247, para. 1 of the Labour Code shall apply. As per the said rule the amount of remuneration depends on the actual duration of working time. This decision not only protected our client’s interests but also contributed to clarifying the new legal regulation of employment relations during the period of a declared state of emergency or a declared epidemic situation.

    In connection with the declaration of the state of emergency in Bulgaria and the need to regulate labour relations, a new paragraph 2 has been introduced to Article 138a of the Labour Code, effective from 13.03.2020. The new paragraph provides the employer with the possibility to unilaterally establish reduced working time for full-time employees in the enterprise or at unit thereof for the entire period of the declared state of emergency or for part of this period. The aim pursued by the new paragraph 2 of Article 138a of the Labour Code is to preserve employment by giving the employer the possibility to reorganize its activities during the state of emergency or the epidemic situation. Subsequently, an amendment to Article 138a, para. 2 of the Labour Code was adopted, with effect from 14.05.2020. The amendment provides that an employer may introduce reduced working time in the enterprise or at a unit thereof not only in the event of a declared state of emergency but also in the event of a declared epidemic situation.

    A legal dispute arose between parties in an employment relationship concerning the amount of remuneration due to an employee who worked reduced hours under the terms of Article 138a, para. 2 of the Labour Code. Given the absence of case law on the matter and pursuant to Article 280, item 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, the case was admitted to cassation appeal. With a decision dated from January 22.01.2025, the SCC definitively resolved the issue of the amount of remuneration due to an employee who worked under the terms of Article 138a, para. 2 of the Labour Code.

    According to the decision of the SCC, in case of unilateral establishment of reduced working time on the basis of Article 138a, para. 2 of the Labour Code, the general rule set forth in Article 247, para. 1 of the Labour Code shall apply. As per the said general rule the amount of remuneration depends on the actual duration of the hours worked. The arguments supporting the decision of the SCC is the absence of a special law derogating the application of the general provision and the rule against unmerited gain.

    In the case of Art. 138a, para. 2 of the Labour Code, the provision of Art. 267a of the Labour Code, according to which the employee is entitled to his/her gross remuneration for the period of cessation of work during a declared state of emergency or epidemic situation (Art. 120c of the Labour Code), could not be applied. The provision of Art. 267a of the Labour Code is a special norm and compulsory and cannot be interpreted broadly, nor applied by analogy to other situations not expressly provided for by the law.

    Teodora Shopova, Senior Associate, Gugushev & Partners, PONTES

  • Law No. 4213-IX: Revolutionary Changes in Grid Connection

    On 6 February 2025, the President of Ukraine signed Law No. 4213-IX dated 14 January 2025 “On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine in the Field of Energy and in the Field of Heat Supply to Clarify Provisions Related to the Martial Law in Ukraine” (the Law).

    The Law comes into force and is enacted on the day following the day of its publication, except for certain provisions. The adopted Law provides for significant changes that will affect technical conditions and grid connection agreements, create new business opportunities and promote infrastructure development.

    One of the key innovations is the introduction of a capacity booking mechanism that can minimise investors’ risks when implementing large-scale wind energy projects in Ukraine.

    The conditions for extending the validity of agreements and technical conditions for grid connection have also been introduced. The adopted changes also affect already concluded grid connection agreements.

    Furthermore, the Law contains provisions that may make “green” auctions more attractive. The Law also includes a number of provisions that will be in force during the martial law regime in Ukraine.

    Read more about the key changes in the review below.

    Capacity booking

    The new Law allows customers planning to connect wind power plants with a capacity of 20 MW or more to book technical solutions for the connection scheme of generating facilities under a capacity booking agreement for up to two years.

    To reserve capacity, the customer should apply to the transmission system operator (NPC Ukrenergo) with a relevant application and a package of documents in accordance with the procedure to be approved by the Regulator (NEURC).

    The cost of booking the capacity will be EUR 5,000 per 1 MW by depositing it into the TSO’s escrow account, which will be included in the connection cost.

    If the customer fails to submit an application for connection and conclude the main agreement before the expiry of the capacity booking agreement, such agreement will be terminated, and the paid funds will not be returned to such customer but will be credited to the TSO’s account.

    The NEURC shall develop the relevant forms of documents and the procedure for capacity booking within 6 months from the date of publication of this Law, i.e. by 9 August 2025.

    Extension of technical conditions

    The Law amends the Law of Ukraine “On Regulation of Urban Development”, according to which the validity of technical conditions for connection to power grids is now determined considering the Law of Ukraine “On the Electricity Market”.

    The validity period of the technical conditions may be extended for the period necessary to complete construction, but the total validity period of the technical conditions may not exceed 6 years from the date of the connection agreement.

    To extend the validity of the technical conditions, the following conditions should be met:

    • the project documentation has been approved
    • the cost of connection has been paid
    • documents granting the right to perform construction work have been received

    The technical conditions that were in force at the time of the introduction of martial law on 24 February 2022 are automatically extended for three years if, as of the date of entry into force of this Law, the customer has:

    • developed and approved the project documentation
    • transferred the project documentation to the system operator
    • paid the connection fee according to the terms of the agreement

    Advance payments under the connection agreement

    The Law also introduces a mandatory payment of a part of the connection cost, which is made in the amount of EUR 10,000 per 1 MW of ordered capacity in two stages:

    • 50% within 30 days from the date of receipt of the technical conditions for connection
    • 50% within 12 months from the date of receipt of the technical conditions for connection

    The paid part of the cost is included in the total fee for connection to the transmission system operator’s power grids.

    The customer is entitled to a refund of this amount if he terminates the agreement within six months from the date of receipt of the technical conditions.

    At the same time, if the project documentation is not submitted and approved within twelve months, the agreement is automatically terminated, and the amount paid is non-refundable.

    Important: already concluded connection agreements with a TSO should be brought in line with the adopted amendments within three months from the date of entry into force of the Law, i.e. by 9 May 2025.

    For already concluded agreements, part of the connection fee is paid in the following order:

    • 50% within 30 days from the date of receipt of the invoice issued by the TSO no later than 100 days after the Law enters into force
    • 50% within six months after the first payment

    Within nine months, the customer should hand over the project documentation to the TSO or initiate termination of the agreement.

    If these requirements are not met, such agreements are automatically terminated on the day following the expiry of the nine-month period.

    This rule does not apply to customers who, as of the date of entry into force of this Law, have already developed and approved project documentation and paid the connection fee in full as stipulated in the agreement.

    New opportunities for customers of non-standard connection to distribution system operator (DSO)

    The adopted amendments open up new opportunities for customers of services for non-standard connection to the distribution system operators with a capacity of more than 1 MW.

    Now, customers who independently design the linear part of the connection have the right to take responsibility for the entire range of works, including:

    • design of power grid equipment
    • construction, installation and commissioning works
    • capacity generation works

    The amount of the customer’s expenses related to the above works shall be included in the total connection fee. At the same time, such costs may not exceed the cost of the non-standard connection service determined by the operator.

    Cable pooling

    With the amendments, the customer can connect different electrical installations operating on different energy sources at one connection point, even if their installed capacity exceeds the permitted capacity. At the same time, such a customer will be able to supply power to the grid only within the permitted capacity, while ensuring separate commercial metering for each type of installation.

    Annual support quotas for “green” auctions  

    According to the adopted amendments, the annual quota for participation in “green” auctions has been increased. In particular, based on the results of the auctions held in the relevant year for the allocation of the annual support quota, a business entity, either alone or together with other business entities with which it has a common ultimate beneficial owner, is entitled to receive no more than 50% of the annual support quota for the relevant year, instead of the previous 25%.

    Changes for the period of martial law in Ukraine

    The following changes were adopted for the period of martial law in Ukraine:

    • Suspension of enforcement actions and measures to enforce decisions in enforcement proceedings arising between 24 February 2022 and 1 September 2024 in terms of recovery of the inflation index, recovery of 3% annual fee or other interest, recovery of fines for late fulfilment of monetary obligations, the payment of which is stipulated by the relevant agreements between all participants in the electricity market, including between the State Enterprise “Guaranteed Buyer” and RES producers.
    • An active consumer may install generating facilities of up to 20 MW without obtaining a licence to carry out economic activities to produce electricity.
    • The total amount of excess income received based on the results of dispatch (operational and technological) management activities in 2023 and 2024 is used by the transmission system operator for the following purposes

    45% – to repay the transmission system operator’s debt, which was formed in the balancing market

    45% – to cover expenses and repay the transmission system operator’s debt to the guaranteed buyer

    10% – to cover expenses and repay the transmission system operator’s debt to universal service providers under service agreements to ensure an increase in the share of electricity generation from alternative sources for the purpose of further payment by universal service providers for electricity generated by private households using alternative energy sources

    Conclusion

    The adopted amendments will significantly impact the development of renewable energy projects. The Law provides certain incentives to improve the conditions for connecting wind projects, stimulates auctions, opens up opportunities for implementing hybrid projects based on different types of generation through cable pooling, etc. On the other hand, the Law will be a certain stress for companies developing projects in the TSO’s grids, as it introduces a requirement to pay significant upfront fees, which may be difficult to meet under martial law. As a result, many projects may lose their technical conditions, but this may also stimulate the implementation of new projects due to capacity release. At the same time, for the successful implementation of the adopted changes, the Government and the NEURC should adopt a number of secondary legislations to implement these changes.

    By Yaroslav Petrov, Partner, and Marta Halabala, Counsel, Asters

  • Turunc Advises Bogazici Ventures on Investment in GameChanger Worldwide

    Turunc has advised Bogazici Ventures on its investment in GameChanger Worldwide.

    GameChanger Worldwide is a Korea-based company specializing in gaming-specific IP extension platforms. 

    Bogazici Ventures is a Turkish Capital Markets Board-regulated venture capital fund focused on fintech, health tech, retail tech, and gaming.

    The Turunc team included Managing Partner Kerem Turunc, Partner Esin Camlibel, Managing Associates Beste Yildizili Ergul and Naz Esen, Associates Baran Ezeli, Yagmur Aker, and Batuhan Eraslan.

  • Essential Infrastructure for Artificial Intelligence: Data Centres

    The world of data centres is evolving at an unprecedented pace, driven by the ever-increasing demand for AI solutions. At the same time, sustainability challenges, energy efficiency and security of supply are becoming increasingly in focus due to the significant energy demands of data centres. The growth potential of the sector remains attractive, with 70% of investors expecting further growth over the next two years, according to a recent international report* by DLA Piper.

    Increasing investment and dynamic M&A activity

    The spread of AI-based solutions is driving demand for data centres, which could lead to a 30-50% increase in the investment volume in the future. Despite the challenges, data centres will continue to play a key role in the evolution of digital services. In the US, in particular, we have seen a strong recovery, driven by significant investments from large technology companies such as Microsoft and BlackRock. There has also been significant growth in both deal volume and deal value, with the number of global data centre acquisition deals up with 52% over the past year and the average deal value up with 42%.

    Sustainability and ESG challenges

    The rapid expansion of data centres poses a significant challenge, as providing an operational environment for AI applications is energy-intensive. Goldman Sachs Research estimates that the industry will require 160% more energy by 2030, which will require that regulations governing data centre development and related investments to address sustainability and ESG considerations.

    In recent years, the European Union has taken a number of measures that focus on ESG aspects for large EU companies, including data centres. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Taxonomy Regulation impose reporting requirements covering a range of environmental issues. Under the latest Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), companies are required to put in place comprehensive due diligence policies and procedures to mitigate the adverse environmental and social impacts they identify.

    The EU regulatory framework can provide a solid basis for more sustainable data centre operations, helping to increase their energy efficiency and reduce their environmental footprint. If operators effectively integrate these requirements into their ESG strategies and operations, data centres can become key elements in achieving the EU’s climate and environmental goals, not least to benefit from the growing demand for sustainable and responsible business practices.

    Regional differences and future prospects

    Data centres have different characteristics around the world: while in the US rapid growth and large investments have already strained the existing electricity grid to the point where new projects are prohibited in certain regions, in Europe the market is shaped by the regulatory environment and sustainability concerns, and developers have not faced similar constraints. While it is true that the Nordic countries are located further away from areas traditionally considered key for data centres, the typically cooler climate results in lower energy costs, while the essential high stability of the electricity grid, the wide range of renewable energy sources and the availability of development sites provide additional advantages. The Asia-Pacific region, particularly Japan, South Korea and Australia, also offers significant growth opportunities. In the Middle East, governments are increasingly investing to reduce their dependence on fossil fuel-based economies. One example is Khazna’s 100 MW artificial intelligence-optimised data centre in the UAE.

    According to our report, the global data centre market is expected to reach USD 300 billion in the near future, and the industry participants surveyed expect growth by 10% per year over the next five years. Innovations such as more advanced cooling systems and more energy-efficient servers will be key to future growth.

    The evolution of data centres is driven by the increasing demand for AI technologies and digital transformation. However, addressing the challenges of sustainability and energy supply will be key to long-term success. Industry players will need to continuously innovate to meet the changing market and regulatory environment while ensuring efficient and sustainable data centre operations. As technology continues to evolve, the role of data centres in the global economy may become more prominent, and companies that can adapt to, or even to predict, future trends will gain a significant competitive advantage.

    * TMT Finance was commissioned by DLA Piper to conduct a survey in Q3 2024 of 176 industry leaders on data centre investment opportunities, emerging trends and the impact of artificial intelligence (AI). Respondents included industry leaders, investors, financiers, data centre operators and telecoms companies

    By Tamas Balogh, Counsel, Real Estate Service Stream Leader, and Eniko Nyikes, Intern, Real Estate Group, DLA Piper Hungary

  • Andreea Serban Joins Stratulat Albulescu as Partner

    Former Reff & Associates Senior Managing Associate Andreea Serban has joined Stratulat Albulescu as a Partner in the firm’s Financial Services and Mergers & Acquisitions departments.

    Before the move, Serban spent more than 13 years with Deloitte Legal’s affiliate law firm Reff & Associates, first as an Associate between 2011 and 2014, then as a Senior Associate between 2014 and 2017, as a Managing Associate between 2017 and 2019, and, finally, as a Senior Managing Associate between 2019 and 2025.

    “I am truly honored and excited to join SAA as a Partner in the M&A and Financial Services Regulation practices,” Serban said. “I am excited to collaborate with SAA’s team, known for its depth of resources and experience across a wide range of sectors.”

  • Thomas Hartl and Christoph Schober Make Partner at Binder Groesswang

    Thomas Hartl and Christoph Schober have been promoted to Partner at Binder Groesswang.

    Hartl focuses primarily on white-collar crime. He has been with Binder Groesswang since 2014 when he joined as an Associate. He became an Attorney at Law in 2017. Earlier, he was an Associate with Graf & Pitkowitz between 2013 and 2014.

    Schober’s primary areas of focus are corporate and commercial matters. He has been with the firm since 2021 as a Senior Associate and has also had an earlier stint as an Associate between 2015 and 2018. He worked for Hogan Lovells as a Lawyer between 2019 and 2021.

    “The appointment of new partners and counsels is a clear sign of confidence in the talent and commitment of the next generation of lawyers,” said Managing Partner Stefan Tiefenthaler. “They bring new perspectives and innovative approaches to our work, which will not only strengthen our firm in the long term but also provide our clients with optimal support.”

  • Navigating the New Recording and Custody System for LLC Shares

    In 2022, the Parliament of Ukraine passed legislation introducing an alternative method for recording and holding shares in limited liability companies (LLCs) and additional liability companies (ALCs). This development allows LLC and ALC shareholders (participants) to transfer recording of their shares from the State Register of Legal Entities, Private Entrepreneurs and Civic Associations (“State Register“) to the PJSC “National Depository of Ukraine” acting as the Central Securities Depository (“CSD“). This shift promises enhanced transparency, security and efficiency in share ownership, marking a new chapter for businesses and investors alike.

    The CSD is a more sophisticated and institutionalised system compared to the State Register. However, it is also more complex, as its primary function is to serve as the depository for securities such as joint stock company (JSC) shares, stocks, corporate bonds and investment certificates. Unlike these assets, LLC shares are not classified as securities.

    A key difference between the two systems is accessibility. While the State Register is generally accessible through notaries acting as its agents, only a limited number of authorised depository institutions (complying with CSD requirements) can act as intermediaries between shareholders and the CSD. This restriction aims to mitigate the risk of corporate raiding, which has often occurred through corrupt or fraudulent State Register agents. By limiting access to regulated financial institutions, such as banks and professional capital market participants, the CSD system is expected to provide greater security and reduce these risks.

    This article analyses the advantages of the CSD system for Ukrainian and foreign investors and entrepreneurs, as well as the challenges associated with its practical implementation.

    Who can benefit from the new system?

    The involvement of a selected depository institution, which must be a regulated financial institution, provides additional security for LLC and ALC shareholders, investors and creditors. Given that LLCs are the most common corporate entity type in Ukraine, the range of potential beneficiaries of this new system is quite broad.

    As the new CSD system adds more costs vis-à-vis the traditional State Register system (migration costs in particular should be taken into account), the new system should be of express interest to companies with significant business operations and valuable assets. However, such companies and their shareholders should be prepared to go through relatively complex clearance, compliance and ultimate beneficiary owners (UBOs) disclosure procedures.

    Beyond offering enhanced protection of ownership rights to LLC and ALC shareholders, the new system is also relevant for companies seeking to raise financing that is secured by assets and shares, as well as for the creditors of such companies. In this regard, the system introduces a mechanism for enforcing security over shares through an extrajudicial process. This process is based on a tripartite agreement between the shareholder (as the security provider), the security holder (such as a bank) and the CSD or depository institution.

    Although pledging LLC shares is a common practice in financing Ukrainian borrowers or business groups with assets in Ukraine, the extrajudicial enforcement of such a security has historically been ineffective. The new system successfully addresses this issue by providing a practical and legally sound solution.

    Share accounts and agreements

    The recording of shares in the depository system of Ukraine contemplates opening special accounts for share recording as well as reflecting other related information in these accounts, as regulated by the Procedure for Maintaining the Recording System of Shares of Limited Liability Companies and Companies with Additional Liability, which was adopted by decision no.525 (“Procedure no.525“) of the National Securities and Stock Market Commission (the “Commission“) on 17 May 2023, as well as respective regulations adopted by the CSD. The CSD opens share accounts for both a company (LLC/ALC) as well as for its shareholders.

    A company wishing to opt for the new system will need to enter into an agreement (the “Share Recording Agreement“) with the CSD in order to record its shares in it. In terms of the company’s existing and perspective shareholders, they may opt either for agreements on servicing a shareholder’s account(s) directly with CSD or an authorised depository institution (the “Account Servicing Agreement“).

    A separate share account is opened for the recording of shares of a particular company. If a person holds shares in different companies, said shares will be recorded in separate share accounts. These accounts are serviced based on a sole Account Servicing Agreement, provided that all these accounts are opened with one institution (either the CSD or an authorised depository institution).

    Under Procedure no.525, the share accounts belonging to either a company or shareholder cannot be closed if there are any shares still recorded in it. At the same time, Procedure no.525 provides that the share recording in the depository system can be terminated (i) at the request of the company, acting based on the shareholder(s) decision and (ii) upon termination of the Share Recording Agreement.

    Procedure no.525 provides that the Share Recording Agreement cannot be terminated if (i) the recorded shares are subject to escrow (except in the case of a company’s termination due to liquidation or reorganisation) or (ii) the recorded shares are subject to pledge, in which case the agreement can be terminated only upon the consent of the security holder (except in the case of a company’s termination due to the liquidation or reorganisation).

    With respect to the grounds and conditions of termination of the Share Recording Agreement and the Account Servicing Agreement, Procedure no.525 does not provide specifics, leaving it to the discretion of the CSD/depository institutions. As a practical example, such grounds are provided in the CSD regulations and include (i) the failure to perform contractual obligations including to pay for the CSD’s services and (ii) the CSD’s decision to refuse to establish/maintain business relations (due to AML law requirements, the CSD rules).

    Steps for the transfer of share recording to the CSD

    Based on the Law of Ukraine “On Limited and Additional Liability Companies” dated 6 February 2018, as well as Procedure no.525, the transfer to the CSD accounting system is at the discretion of the shareholders, which requires the company to complete the following steps:

    1. Shareholders decision. As a first step in the process, the shareholders must (i) make a unanimous decision on the recording of all shares in the company’s authorised capital in the CSD’s recording system and (ii) supplement the company’s charter (articles of association) with the relevant wording, providing for this option of share recording, if not already done.
      Agreement with the CSD. The company should enter into the Share Recording Agreement by accession to the contractual terms and conditions proposed by the CSD, which are available on its website.
    2. Submission of documents. The company is required to submit a set of documents to the CSD based on the list provided in Procedure no.525 and on CSD regulations. It is important to note that the company will be required to submit documents for the financial monitoring due diligence by the CSD, including the company’s shareholding structure and disclosure of all persons indicated in the structure.
    3. The next step, which is subject to the CSD’s satisfaction with regards to the documents submitted, is for the CSD to submit an application on the state registration of transfer of share recording to the CSD system to the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, which is the state authority responsible for maintaining the State Register.

    The date of registration of this information in the State Register is the starting date for the share recording by the CSD. Once cleared, the CSD will (i) open accounts for the company and its shareholders, (ii) credit the shares to the company’s account and shareholder(s)’ account(s), (iii) reflect information with respect to the shares, including registered encumbrance (using the entries from the State Register of Encumbrances over Movable Assets, the “Encumbrances Register“), as well as restrictive measures (sanctions) imposed based on the sanctions law, if applicable.

    Shareholders’ accounts in the system remain inactive, they only indicate the share, encumbrance (provided that it was registered with the Encumbrances Register) and sanctions. For shareholders to be able to conduct transactions (including share transfer and creating an encumbrance over the share) in their accounts opened with the CSD, they are required to enter into an Account Servicing Agreement with either the CSD or an authorised depository institution. For this purpose, the shareholder is also required to submit a set of documents for the financial monitoring due diligence to be carried out by the respective institution.

    Finally, the CSD and authorised depository institutions are required to notify tax authorities about opening/closing shareholder accounts, including escrow accounts. The CSD are also required to notify the tax authorities about accepting the shares for accounting in its system and entering amendments into the system with respect to the shareholder(s)/share(s).

    KYC checks and CRS compliance

    As mentioned above, both the company and its shareholder(s) are required to submit sufficient documentation to the CSD/authorised depository institution in order to comply with AML law requirements. The CSD/authorised depository institution must refuse to enter into the agreement/terminate existing contractual relations if it is unable to conduct identification and/or verification of the client/its representative, determine UBOs and otherwise comply with financial monitoring compliance requirements.

    Furthermore, the CSD/authorised depository institution is obligated to refuse to enter into the agreement/open share accounts if the provided documents and information are inconsistent with the information about the company’s shareholding structure/UBO that is recorded in the State Register. This implies a proper disclosure of the UBOs and the shareholding structure of the company/shareholder in the State Register and their accuracy as of the submission of the documents to the CSD/authorised depository institution.

    Another issue in this context is the identification and verification procedurethat the CSD/authorised depository institution must conduct while entering into the agreement with the company/shareholders. Specifically, the CSD/authorised depository institution must verify their client’s authorised representatives (i.e. persons authorised to sign and submit instructions to the CSD/authorised depository institution). These procedures require the physical presence of the respective individuals and their personal submission of identifying documents or running a remote verification procedure subject to the internal regulations of the institutions. Obviously, this makes the process more complex and bureaucratic.

    For the purposes of compliance with the Common Reporting Standard (CRS), the CSD/authorised depository institution may also request the information required to carry out due diligence of financial accounts and identify persons who are tax residents of the CRS participating jurisdictions among account holders and submit reports to the tax authorities.

    Pledge over the shares

    It is well known that security over shares is a popular instrument within secured financing in Ukraine. However, it is also very well known that enforcement of security over shares in an LLC may be complex and problematic for a security holder. That is why banks and other creditors do not consider security over shares in an LLC as a “bullet-proof” or easily enforceable security.

    Procedure no.525 provides for the conditions for extra-judicial enforcement of security over LLC/ALC shares, which exclude the involvement of the security provider (i.e. the shareholder) and/or the company. The new system will allow creditors to rely on the enforceability of an agreement providing for an extra-judicial enforcement, which must be executed by the shareholder (as a security provider), the security holder and the CSD/authorised depository institution.

    Further security enforcement documents and steps will depend on (i) the chosen method of the extra-judicial enforcement and the provisions of the mentioned tripartite agreement, as well as (ii) the rules and respective procedures of the CSD/authorised depository institution.

    To ensure the rights of the security holder, Procedure no.525 requires the security holder’s consent for (i) the release of shares from the encumbrance (blocking) and (ii) termination of the recording of shares in the depository system. At the same time, in cases of non-payment for the services of the CSD/authorised depository institution or failure to provide AML related documents and information, the latter may suspend servicing such an account and refuse to perform instructions in relation to the share/account or even terminate/withdraw from the agreement.

    Procedure no.525 does not prevent termination of the Account Servicing Agreement in cases where the existing encumbrance is reflected in such an account. Thus, if the agreement is terminated, the encumbrance over the shares will remain but the transactions with respect to these shares, including for the purposes of extra-judicial enforcement, will not be possible. In order for creditors to mitigate or avoid these risks, they should be addressed in the above-mentioned tripartite agreement.

    Moreover, the enforcement of encumbrance requires prior notification of the security provider and/or debtor, as set forth in the Law of Ukraine “On Securing Creditors’ Claims and Registration of Encumbrance” dated 18 November 2003 no.1255-IV. Whether or not the CSD/authorised depository institution will verify compliance with this requirement should be clarified in advance, specifically when transferring shares into pledge, preparing a share pledge agreement, identifying and verifying the security holder and so on.

    Other benefits

    In addition to the transactional possibilities discussed above, the recording of shares with the CSD grants companies and their shareholders access to several new and ancillary services. These services include the convening and conducting of general meetings of the companies’ shareholders in electronic form; the exchange of notices and supporting documentation between the company and its shareholders; pre-emptive rights related notifications; implementation of escrow account arrangements and payment of dividends with respect to the shares through the depository recording system.

    By Oksana Volynets, Senior Associate, Wolf Theiss

  • Calls for Directional Changes in Selected Aspects of the Offset Act in Poland

    The development of the defense industry is an urgent priority for the Polish government. Undoubtedly, it is in Poland’s interest to have a solid industrial base for the defense sector, not only to enhance national security but also as a lever for the further transformation of the entire economy.

    As demonstrated by countries such as South Korea and Türkiye, which have made significant strides in developing their national defense industries, cooperation with foreign entities can be a successful strategy. Offsetting is a common tool for ensuring such cooperation, especially in the case of technology transfers. That said, making offsetting more flexible would make it more effective, if only by better balancing the scope of protection of the state’s legal interests (contractual risk), and thus reducing the factors that generate excessive costs that are ultimately borne by the Polish side.

    Ways to do this include, for example, the liability of foreign suppliers for breaching offset obligations and the form and scope of performance bonds. Below, we take a look some of the key considerations of both.

    Liability

    First, under the Offset Act, a foreign supplier’s liability for the non-performance or improper performance of an offset contract is based on the principle of strict liability, so it is independent of fault.

    Second, in the event of non-performance or improper performance of an offset obligation, foreign suppliers are required to pay a contractual penalty. It is worth noting at this point that, under Polish law, contractual penalties are due regardless of the existence and extent of damage caused by a breach of contract. Although it is rare, a foreign supplier would thus be obliged to pay the penalty, even if the Polish party suffered no damage; it is sufficient for there to be merely a failure to perform or improper performance of an obligation. Thus, this is the most convenient security available to the creditor.

    Third, under the Offset Act, 100 percent of the contract value must be reserved to cover penalties for the breach of an offset obligation.

    In addition, in practice, contractual penalties are set at amounts above 100 percent of contract values.

    Notwithstanding the stipulated contractual penalties, the foreign supplier also bears supplementary indemnity liability to the extent that it exceeds the stipulated contractual penalties. At the same time, Poland’s Offset Act (contrary to practice) does not provide for an upper limit of such liability.

    Moreover, regardless of liability to the Treasury for the non-performance or improper performance of an offset contract (as a framework contract), foreign suppliers are expected to bear supplementary indemnity liability to offset recipients (offset beneficiaries), potentially up to 100 percent of the value of the executory contracts concluded. In addition, this “requirement” appears at the stage of negotiating executive contracts, without the possibility of taking it into account at the stage of preparing offset offers, which explains in part why offset negotiations can be quite lengthy.

    It seems that such principles of liability of foreign suppliers (even above 200 percent of the value of the offset contract)—although partly understandable given the need to secure the legal interests (contractual risk) of the state—generate excessive costs ultimately borne by the Polish side. The state is thus paying for legal comfort in the event of a potential (and rather rare in practice) breach of contract.

    • In this regard, it is worth considering making the level of liability of the foreign supplier to the Treasury more flexible while providing compensation for damage of the offset recipient companies (beneficiaries of the offset) or counting both levels of liability together and relating them to the value of the offset commitment.
    • It might also be worth considering linking liability to the insurance coverage of foreign suppliers.
    • It would also be worth introducing a statutory preference for substitute performance of the offset commitment in lieu of payment of contractual penalties.

    Performance bond

    According to the Offset Act, a foreign supplier is required to provide a performance bond in an amount not less than the value of the offset contract, i.e. at least 100 percent.

    Moreover, although the law does not require it, the security should cover the entire performance period of the offset contract, which is usually 10 years.

    Moreover, in terms of the form of security, despite the formally open catalog of possible collateral, the foreign supplier must choose one of the forms specified by law; in practice, this means a choice between only a statement on voluntary submission to enforcement proceedings, a blank promissory note with a declaration or a bank guarantee.

    It is worth pointing out in this regard that despite the existence of other forms of performance bond, in the international legal system the bank guarantee is by far the most common. But it is a costly security, especially considering the significant value and potentially extremely long duration of the collateral. Therefore, practice has also developed the possibility of providing two securities: one cost-free for the entire period of contract performance and a bank guarantee at certain milestones and for certain obligations for a specified, shorter period.

    • Notwithstanding the above, it is worth introducing openness to “less costly” forms of security, including those used in international trade, such as insurance guarantees, sureties (including intra-group ones) or letters of credit.
    • Above all, however, it is worth statutorily linking the maturity of collateral to the achievement of certain milestones or the final date of performance of the offset agreement, without the need to provide collateral for the entire, long period of performance of the offset agreement.

    Other structural changes to ensure more efficient technology transfer

    Independent of the above issues related to the cost of providing contractual security, it is also worth noting the need for other changes to the offset mechanism, particularly to increase the efficiency of offset technology transfer.

    This includes:

    • Ensuring the financing of investments by Polish companies related to the absorption of technology, as there are currently no clear instruments for such support. In this context, it is worth noting the possible state aid, as, further to Article 346 TFEU, the measures taken by the state must not adversely affect the conditions of competition in the internal market “only” for products that are not intended exclusively for military purposes.
    • Making it possible to locate offsets (technologies) in Polish entities other than “state-owned companies,” including private companies or joint ventures created for this purpose.
    • More strategic approaches to offsets, including in terms of:
      • identification of optimal (reasonable and feasible) areas of expected technology transfer,
      • adoption of clearer criteria for confirming offset performance, or
      • greater openness to standard solutions operating in international legal transactions, if only in the nature of expected licenses, governing law or jurisdiction.

    Making offsets more flexible by properly balancing the benefits of broad protection of legal interests with the costs involved in providing them—along with the adoption of instruments to enable more effective technology transfer—can restore the effectiveness and legitimacy of using offsets as an instrument for developing the defense industrial base, which is used extensively by many other economies around the world.

    By Jaroslaw Witek, Partner, Dentons

  • Sayenko Kharenko Defends Ukraine in ECT Award Challenge before Swedish Court

    Sayenko Kharenko, working with Latham & Watkins and Westerberg & Partners, has successfully represented Ukraine before the Svea Court of Appeal in setting aside the challenge of a USD 6 billion Energy Charter Treaty award.

    According to Sayenko Kharenko, the proceedings stemmed from SCC Arbitration No. V 2015/092 which “was the largest investment dispute involving Ukraine. It centered on claims brought by the minority shareholders of Ukrnafta regarding natural gas produced by Ukrnafta, Ukraine’s largest oil and gas producer. The case involved allegations of governmental interference with gas pricing, increased extraction taxes, and legislative amendments affecting the rights of shareholders in joint-stock companies.”

    According to the firm, “on January 31, 2025, the Swedish court upheld the ECT tribunal’s finding that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the claims brought by three Cypriot claimants, Littop Enterprises, Bridgemont Ventures, and Bordo Management. The Swedish court confirmed that the claimants had failed to establish a protected investment under the ECT. Although the Svea Court of Appeal determined that the tribunal should have examined allegations of bribery and corruption, as well as denial of benefits, as part of the merits of the case rather than jurisdictional issues, this did not change the final outcome, which resulted in a jurisdictional victory for Ukraine. In addition, the Svea Court of Appeal amended the original cost decision of the tribunal, awarding Ukraine USD 18.9 million plus costs of the setting-aside proceedings.”

    The Sayenko Kharenko team included Partner Olexander Droug, Special Advisor Tatyana Slipachuk, Senior Associate Alina Danyleiko, and Associates Katalina Shkuro, Maksym Melnyk, and Henrietta Yaitska.

  • Closing: Sennder’s Acquisition of C.H. Robinson’s European Surface Transportation Operations Now Closed

    On February 18, 2025, Taylor Wessing announced that Sennder’s acquisition of C.H. Robinson’s European surface transportation operations (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on August 5, 2024) is now closed.

    According to Taylor Wessing, “after all regulatory clearances were received for the acquisition of C.H. Robinson’s EST operations, Sennder [has become] one of the top 5 full truck load players in the European market with a footprint spanning over 20 locations and a team of 1,600 people.”

    As previously reported, Taylor Wessing, Stratulat Albulescu, and Moral Kinikoglu Pamukkale, working with PedersoliGattai, advised Sennder Technologies on the acquisition of the European surface transportation operations of C.H. Robinson Worldwide. HVG Law reportedly advised C.H. Robinson.

    Sennder Technologies is a European digital road freight forwarder.

    C.H. Robinson Worldwide is a provider of logistics solutions with a freight volume of USD 22 billion.

    The Taylor Wessing team included Poland-based Partners Olav Nemling and Krystian Stanasiuk, Counsel Katarzyna Matusiak, and Associate Michal Zabost, Hungary-based Partner Torsten Braner, Counsel Gabor Helembai, and Senior Associate Zsombor Lenner, Czech Republic-based Partner Thomas Rechberger and Senior Associate David Volek, as well as further team members in Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, the UK, Spain, and France.

    The Stratulat Albulescu team included Managing Partner Silviu Stratulat, Counsel Raluca Gabor, Senior Associate Bogdan Florea, and Associate Adriana Ion.

    The Moral Kinikoglu Pamukkale team included Managing Partner Vefa Resat Moral, Partner Serra Haviyo, Senior Associate Dilara Kaymaz, and Associate Selen Akgun.