Category: Bulgaria

CMS has advised Toshiba International on a repair and rehabilitation agreement with the Bulgarian state-owned National Electricity Company for the pumping storage hydro power plant Chaira Unit 1.

According to CMS, PSHPP Chaira represents “infrastructure of paramount importance, part of the major Belmeken–Sestrimo–Chaira Hydropower Cascade. PSHPP Chaira has a generating capacity of 864 megawatts and a pumping capacity of 788 megawatts. Units 1 and 2 have been in operation since 1995, and at that time Chaira was the largest pumped-storage plant in Southeast Europe with the highest head in the world for a single-stage pump turbine. Units 3 and 4 came online in 1999. Toshiba Energy Systems & Solutions Corporation is the manufacturer and supplier of the equipment for Chaira PSHPP and the owner of the technical and design documentation for the project.”

The CMS team included Managing Partner Kostadin Sirleshtov, Counsel Borislava Piperkova, Senior Associate Diyan Georgiev, Associate Viktoriya Dimitrova–Toneva, and Trainee Boris Kirov.

Many M&A practitioners are optimistic and predict a better year, higher deal values and volumes.

We think that better will not be distributed evenly. Some countries and regions will fare well and outperform others. It is fairly safe to assume that South East Europe and Bulgaria in particular will face headwinds. The unfavourable factors include negligible economic growth and risk of recession in the EU/Eurozone’s larger Western European economies, which are the main trading partners and investors in the region, tax increases, trade restrictions such as tariffs, stricter FDI and merger control regimes, etc.

Where predictions are uncertain, the best law firms will prepare for as many as possible eventualities, strive to excel in execution, and work to manage the related risks.

By and large, dealmaking in Bulgaria will be influenced by the prevailing local context:

• political instability, disfunctional Parliament and sporadic and delayed lawmaking;
• most of the regulators function beyond their term of office, thus they will continue to be inactive and inert, often open to political influence
• variables like interest rates, inflation, leverage, capital markets, GDP growth, will have less impact (unlike in the US and Western Europe)
  – opportunistic deals will dominate over strategic acquisitions (more mid- and small-market M&A advisors enter the market and actively promote local businesses internationally)
  – valuation gaps will persist
  – consolidation in industries will be slow paced and many will miss the momentum to grow inorganically and expand exponentially: as an example the booming local bicycle production totally lost momentum in 2023-2024 and largely remained a near shoring low margin appendix to the Western brands they serviced – growth and profitability sunk dramatically after their sponsors ruthlessly cut their orders.

By Pavel Hristov and Dragomir Stefanov, Partners, Hristov & Partners

Navigating the challenges of Bulgaria’s legal and regulatory environment requires a careful balance, particularly in light of ongoing political instability, according to Karushkov Legal Solutions Founder Mitko Karushkov who takes aim at systemic issues affecting legislative processes, judicial stability, and regulatory reliability, while highlighting the importance of proactive risk management and the potential for growth amidst uncertainty.

“Bulgaria must be understood within the context of its ongoing political instability,” Karushkov begins. “This directly affects the legislative process, delaying the adoption of crucial laws while rushing others through parliament, often at the expense of quality and clarity. We’re seeing critical pieces of legislation left in limbo, which undermines confidence and predictability in the legal framework,” he goes on to say. Furthermore, Karushkov says that “sometimes some regulators state that the EU legislation is ‘vague’ and ‘too broad,’ which triggers the necessity of passing national laws in addition to the EU regulations. This, along with the political instability and the resulting cumbersome legislative process, sometimes leads to a lack of comprehensive guidance businesses need to operate securely.” In particular, he indicates that “technology regulation has suffered from this instability, with delays in implementing necessary legislation causing challenges for businesses operating in these sectors.”

Focusing on the specific challenges this poses for businesses and investors, Karushkov stresses that “the instability creates a significant challenge for businesses, both domestic and international. For one, the judicial system is far from stable, and the regulators are not immune to these broader systemic issues. While not all decisions or regulatory bodies are questionable, the system as a whole is shaken, leaving room for uncertainty.” This is why a thorough risk analysis is absolutely essential for businesses operating in Bulgaria. “It’s not enough to evaluate the financial or operational aspects of a deal – companies must also consider potential legal disputes and prepare for worst-case scenarios.” Additionally, he stresses that “many regulators face challenges due to expired terms and delayed appointments, which raise questions about their capacity and competence. This gap in regulatory oversight has led some regulators to avoid addressing factually complex cases, compounding uncertainty for businesses.”

Crucially, when it comes to mitigating risks, Karushkov indicates that “businesses should factor in the potential for disputes and the likelihood of challenges within Bulgaria’s judicial system.” To that end, he indicates that arbitration clauses are becoming increasingly important, as they provide an alternative to the local courts. “Companies should also focus on robust due diligence, ensuring that every aspect of their operations – from regulatory compliance to contractual obligations – is carefully scrutinized. Proactive legal and operational strategies are crucial for navigating this environment.” Specifically, he adds that “some non-EU clients are increasingly introducing self-insurance clauses, offering more flexibility and security for investments. This approach has gained traction among local businesses as well, reflecting a shift in risk management practices.”

Still, with all this being said, there is a silver lining. “While the challenges are significant, there are still opportunities for growth,” Karushkov says. “Bulgaria remains a key market in the region, with a strategic location and an economy that continues to attract attention despite the hurdles. Businesses that approach the market with caution, leveraging strong legal advice and risk management practices, can still find success,” he opines. Moreover, political and judicial reforms are topics of active discussion in the country, and if implemented effectively, Karushkov believes they could restore confidence and stability in the years to come. “In a landscape defined by uncertainty, careful planning, and strategic risk management are not just advisable – they’re essential. However, I remain optimistic that things will start looking up soon,” Karushkov concludes.

On December 6, 2024, Kinstellar announced that UEG’s acquisition of the 250-megawatt Simeonovgrad-Polyanovo PV project (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on April 10, 2024) has now closed.

According to Kinstellar, “the Simeonovgrad-Polyanovo PV project, located in southern Bulgaria, has a forecasted capacity of 250 megawatts. The acquisition, which was finalized on November 15, 2024, marks a significant expansion for UEG, a Hong Kong-based producer of traditional and renewable energy.”

As previously reported, Kinstellar has advised the United Energy Group on its acquisition of Green Profit – the company developing the 250-megawatt Simeonovgrad-Polyanovo photovoltaic project. Wolf Theiss advised Delcho Nikolaev Pehlivanov on the sale.

UEG is a Hong Kong-based producer of traditional and renewable energy.

Green Profit is the developer of the Simeonovgrad-Polyanovo photovoltaic project located in southern Bulgaria, with a forecasted capacity of 250 megawatts.

The Kinstellar team included Partners Nina Tsifudina, Antonia Mavrova, and Sava Savov, Counsels Atanas Mihaylov and Mladen Minev, and Senior Associates Simeon Vachev and Nikolay Gergov.

The Wolf Theiss team included Partners Richard Clegg and Radoslav Mikov and Senior Associate Staniella Todorova.

The European Union’s Network and Information Systems Directive (NIS2) was introduced to enhance cybersecurity across the EU, aiming to protect critical infrastructure and essential services such as energy, transportation, and healthcare. NIS2 sets a high bar for all EU Member States, requiring them to improve their cybersecurity resilience, implement strong risk management practices, and report incidents within strict timelines. Yet, despite these clear guidelines, Bulgaria, like many other EU countries, has been slow to adopt the necessary changes and was unable to meet the deadline for transposing NIS2 (i.e., the 17^th of October this year). The delay has left Bulgaria facing several legal and operational challenges, compounded by the absence of a functioning Parliament.

While many EU countries are struggling with the complexities of implementing NIS2, Bulgaria’s situation is particularly dire because of its current political vacuum. The country has been without a stable government for months, leaving it unable to pass new laws, including the transposition of NIS2. Without a Parliament to debate and approve the necessary legislative changes, Bulgaria finds itself unable to comply with EU requirements for cybersecurity, although the draft law is already presented to the public.

The lack of a clear national cybersecurity framework due to the delay in adopting NIS2 has created uncertainty for businesses and government agencies in Bulgaria. Sectors like energy, transport, and finance, which are directly impacted by NIS2, have found themselves in a legal gray area. In the absence of the required national laws, these sectors are unsure of what specific obligations they must meet. Furthermore, Bulgaria’s lack of legal clarity could lead to inconsistencies in how different companies interpret the need to comply with NIS2, further complicating the overall cybersecurity landscape.

The delay also places Bulgaria in violation of EU law. NIS2 is legally binding for all Member States, and failure to comply with it has already led to open criminal proceedings against Bulgaria and 22 other EU countries for failing to implement European cybersecurity rules fully. The lack of progress has sparked concerns about the country’s commitment to EU-wide cybersecurity efforts. Non-compliance with such a key legislative text not only risks legal action but also damages Bulgaria’s reputation within the EU and could, in turn, discourage foreign investment and collaboration, especially in industries like technology, where cybersecurity is a top priority.

Bulgaria’s political crisis exacerbates the situation. While this is a unique challenge for Bulgaria, it is not entirely uncommon across the EU. Many Member States have faced delays in meeting the NIS2 deadline, fighting with bureaucracy, political inertia, or simply lacking the necessary expertise in cybersecurity to implement the new requirements. But Bulgaria’s political deadlock presents a more immediate and severe challenge.

The situation also highlights a wider challenge within the EU: while cybersecurity is becoming an ever more critical priority, the complexity of implementing NIS2 has left many Member States grappling to stay on track. The wide-ranging requirements—covering everything from risk management to incident reporting—demand significant changes in national laws and regulatory practices.

Looking ahead, Bulgaria must prioritize resolving its political crisis and forming a stable government to move forward with NIS2 transposition. Once a government is in place, swift action will be needed to draft and pass the necessary laws, establish a national cybersecurity strategy, and ensure that critical sectors are fully compliant with NIS2. While the delay is unfortunate, it also presents an opportunity for Bulgaria to reassess its cybersecurity infrastructure and ensure that it is better prepared to address future challenges.

On a side note, despite the delays, there is a silver lining for Bulgaria’s cybersecurity future. The draft law for transposing NIS2 is already on the table and, in an ambitious twist, it actually proposes some stricter requirements than NIS2 itself. This demonstrates Bulgaria’s commitment to not just meeting the EU’s expectations but exceeding them in the effort to strengthen its cybersecurity framework. We don’t know, of course, whether this will not be seen as yet another over-regulation for the business. Looks like there are many unknowns on the threshold of 2025, and like every year we can only wish everyone involved “Keep calm and tighten your seatbelts!”.

By Irena Georgieva, Managing Partner, PPG Lawyers

On 7 November 2024, Boyanov & Co. with the support of the European Investment Bank organised the international conference “Life-Cycle Challenges of the Start-Ups”. The event focused on navigating the landscape of the Bulgarian start-up ecosystem through its major challenges in 2025; government programs, grants, and EU funds for financing start-ups in 2025; and broadening horizons for international expansion of the CEE start-ups and venture capital funds. With this conference, Boyanov & Co. reaffirmed its commitment to supporting the start-up ecosystem in Bulgaria.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the event:

The increase in the number of high-tech startups in Bulgaria is a significant trend. There is a high potential for the development of startups in the coming years in the following sectors: biotechnology, fintech, Internet of Things, smart cities, artificial intelligence (AI), virtual and augmented reality, robotics, electric vehicles (EVs) and autonomous cars, drones, 3D printing, process digitalization. To achieve more results in the long term, the Government of Bulgaria continues to make efforts to improve the conditions for doing business, and for the development of startups in Bulgaria: the legislative regulation of the “Variable Capital Company” – as a form of startup business with advantages for equity investors; the “Startup visa” – as a measure to attract entrepreneurs from third countries to the Bulgarian market, to create enterprises that use high technology and implement research and development activities; Bulgaria’s accession to the Declaration on the introduction of the “EU Startup Nations Standard of Excellence”.

From the viewpoint of the Bulgarian Government, all this makes Bulgaria one of the best countries in Europe to start a new business. Bulgaria also has all the prerequisites to establish itself as a startup center. The strategic documents and the programs that are being implemented: the Program “Competitiveness and Innovation in Enterprises” 2021-2027, and the Recovery and Resilience Plan, give priority to implementing measures for improving access to financing, diversifying sources and instruments for financing, promoting the use of alternative sources of funding, and overcoming the shortage of qualified personnel.

Southeastern Europe (SEE) is the fastest-growing region in Europe in terms of funding start-ups over the period 2019-2023. In Bulgaria, the anticipated injection of 520-620 million EUR public capital over 2025-2029, alongside the Eurozone joining, is expected to leverage the start-up ecosystem development to the next level. Bulgaria leads the charts in terms of start-up density across SEE.

The Bulgarian Fund of Funds (Fund Manager of Financial Instruments in Bulgaria – FMFIB) will triple its resources for equity instruments until 2027 (from EUR 125 million to EUR 345 million). Approximately 7-10 new equity funds supported with EUR 345 million from FMFIB will be available in the next few years in the following fields: Innovation and R&D (Equity Fund “Innovation in Enterprises” and Venture Debt), Digitalization and Industry 4.0 (Fund for High-Risk Projects for Digitalization and Start-Up Fund for Digitalization); Entrepreneurship (Family of Funds “Entrepreneurship”); Education (“Equity for Students/PhDs); Technology Transfer (“Technology Transfer Fund” amounted to 56.6 million EUR).

The main challenges, lessons learned and the way forward for FMFIB could be summarized as follows: build capacity and expertise for managing financial instruments at the national level; complex regulatory framework (public procurement, European Structural and Investment Funds or ESIF management rules, state aid, regulation of alternative investment funds, anti-money laundering legislation, etc.); invest in the capacity building of other key stakeholders in their better understanding of financial instruments (managing authorities, ministries/commissions, etc.); possibility to award resources through open, transparent and non-discriminatory procedures outside of public procurement rules; stimulate private institutional investors (pension funds, insurance companies, asset managers, etc.) to invest in Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs).

The conference emphasized the necessity for start-ups and venture capital funds to navigate complex legal and regulatory landscapes effectively. Establishing holding companies in jurisdictions with favorable legal frameworks and ensuring compliance with evolving regulations are crucial steps in facilitating growth and securing investment in start-ups. Selecting an appropriate legal structure that aligns with the start-up’s goals and facilitates future investment opportunities is crucial for its success. Safeguarding IP assets is a matter of vital importance. Venture capital funds should comply with relevant regulations, including securities and anti-money laundering requirements. Start-ups need to structure their capital to attract investment while start-up entrepreneurs retain control. For both start-ups and VC funds, planning an exit strategy is a significant legal challenge in terms of legal considerations such as the sale structure, the protection of minority stakeholders, and the management of due diligence processes.

Additional challenges and current problems were identified as follows: lack of funding at the end of 2024 with hopes for new sources of funding in 2025; necessity for restoration of the competitive edge of the Bulgarian start-ups; need for Bulgarian institutions to take more active role in removal of obstacles for pension funds to invest in start-ups and VC funds; need for a stable government with a horizon of more than 3 months; significant portion of the investment in start-ups are related to AI, while greater diversification of the local start-up ecosystem may be positive in the long term; need for attracting more private investors; positioning of Bulgarian start-ups on the international markets and customers’ perceptions (given Bulgaria’s limited local market); R&D centers should play a significant role in supporting start-ups; need for in-depth knowledge on the side of the start-ups on picking up the right partner; increase of the access to international capital; presentation of more attractive projects related to start-ups and overcoming the current situation with a deficit of projects of high quality.

Other important points discussed could be summarized as follows: the need for a legislative initiative to lift some of the restrictions on pension funds investments (pension funds to invest in open-end investment funds) and pension funds assets; developing special visas for digital nomads renewed annually.

By Borislav Boyanov, Managing Partner, and Nikolay Zisov, Partner, Boyanov & Co

In today’s digital age, social media has become a ubiquitous presence in our personal and professional lives. For employers, these platforms offer a valuable yet complex tool in the hiring process. While the potential to gather additional insights about job candidates is enticing, it also raises significant legal questions regarding privacy and data protection.

This article explores the legal boundaries surrounding employers’ use of social media in the recruitment process, particularly under the framework of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). By gaining this understanding, employers can navigate the recruitment process more effectively, ensuring they respect candidates’ privacy while making informed hiring decisions.

Legal Basis for Collection of Information from Job Candidates’ Public Social Media Profiles by Employers

The collection of information about job candidates from their publicly accessible social media profiles constitutes personal data processing. Employers can engage in this activity only if they have a legal basis and have duly informed the candidates.

Typically, this processing is grounded in the so-called “legitimate interest” of the employer, acting as a data controller. Legitimate interest is one of the six legal bases allowing for the lawful processing of personal data under the GDPR.

For an employer to claim legitimate interest, they must conduct and document a “balancing test.” This involves weighing their legal interests against the rights and freedoms of the data subject (the job candidate), considering the candidate’s reasonable expectations. This test must be done before data collection, and its outcome determines whether the employer can lawfully use this basis for processing.

The employer’s interest will be justified if the data processing includes only relevant, limited, and necessary information for the recruitment purposes, and it aligns with the candidates’ reasonable expectations. This typically involves information about education, professional experience, and other relevant data publicly shared by candidates on professional networks like LinkedIn.

Next, consent can also be an appropriate basis for personal data processing provided that the data subject has a genuine choice to grant or withhold consent without facing negative consequences. If these conditions are not met, the consent is not considered freely given and is therefore invalid.

Given the imbalance of power in the relationship between employer and (future) employee, it is unlikely that the data subject would be able to refuse to give their consent to the employer for data processing without fearing adverse consequences as a result of that refusal (e.g., the risk of their application being rejected and losing the job opportunity). Consequently, the European Data Protection Board finds it problematic for employers to process the personal data of current or future employees based on consent.

Notification Obligations and Right to Object

It is advisable to notify candidates that their social media activity (and on which platforms) will be checked before they enter the recruitment process – for example, by including this information in the privacy notice accompanying the job advertisement. If this has not been done, or if the candidate applies “spontaneously” without there being a published job advertisement, the notice should be provided during the initial contact after receiving the application, before any checks and corresponding data processing begin.

It should be noted that a job candidate can object to checks of their social media activity, and the employer must inform them of this right.

Upon objection, the employer must cease the processing unless they can demonstrate compelling legal grounds that outweigh the candidate’s interests, rights, and freedoms.

Employers should not exclude candidates from the recruitment process for objecting to social media checks. Doing so would excessively infringe upon the candidate’s rights and interests. It would be challenging for the employer to justify that no other methods, less intrusive than social media checks, could achieve the same processing purposes.

Data Minimization

The employer has the right to collect only such data that are relevant and limited to what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which they are processed – this is the so-called “data minimization” principle outlined in the GDPR. Collecting information about marital status and personal opinions on various public topics will generally violate this principle, and the employer is not entitled to do so. Moreover, processing such data poses a risk of discrimination in the selection process based on, for example, ethnic origin, religion, or beliefs, as a result of obtaining personal information.

Enforcement and Sanctions

The GDPR has gained notoriety for its stringent sanctions, which can amount to €20 million or 4% of a company’s global annual turnover, whichever is higher, underscoring the critical importance of data protection compliance.

So far, based on the publicly available information regarding the practices of data protection authorities in EU member states, no sanctions have been imposed on employers for unlawfully collecting information from candidates’ social media profiles.

However, issues related to the lawfulness of such checks by employers (or recruitment agencies) have caught the attention of supervisory authorities, leading to clarifications in various opinions, guidelines, and other documents. For instance, Italy has an approved code of conduct for recruitment agencies, stating that checks should be conducted only on candidates’ profiles in professional networks, and information collection should be limited to relevant professional qualifications.

Key Takeaways

In conclusion, it should be noted that the internet offers employers vast opportunities to access information about candidates that they would not have the right to request during recruitment, such as “sensitive” data about political views, religious beliefs, health status, or sexual orientation. Although the employer does not have the right to use such information, learned for example from a candidate’s personal Facebook profile, the hiring decision may still be influenced by it. Therefore, it is important for individuals to be aware that they can have control over the information about them on the internet and to be mindful of the “digital footprint” they leave behind.

When it comes to employers, the integration of social media checks into the recruitment process presents both opportunities and challenges. It is essential for them to navigate this area with caution, adhering to legal requirements and respecting the privacy rights of candidates. 

This article is subject to copyright. It expresses the opinion of the author and should not be considered as a recommendation to take certain actions or legal advice.

By Irena Koleva, Senior Associate, Deloitte Legal

Kinstellar has advised Eleven Ventures on an investment in Cloud Office.

Cloud Office is a Google Cloud Partner serving over 650 customers across EMEA, with a team of over 60 engineers.

Eleven Ventures is an early-stage venture capital firm in Central and Eastern Europe.

In 2021, Kinstellar advised Eleven Ventures on a USD 2 million Investment in Romanian startup Frisbo (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on December 16, 2021).

The Kinstellar team included Partner Nina Tsifudina, Managing Associate Georgi Kanev, Senior Associate Nikolay Gergov, and Junior Associate Simona Damyanova.

Kinstellar did not respond to our inquiry on the matter.

As Schonherr Head of Intellectual Property and Dispute Resolution practices in Bulgaria Ventsislav Tomov explains, Bulgaria’s delicate political situation and unreliable judicial system are creating a challenging environment for both local and international businesses. Amid these uncertainties, internal corporate investigations are on the rise, driven by cultural clashes between Western investors and Bulgarian management as well as growing concerns over compliance and governance.

“Bulgaria’s political situation is quite delicate,” Tomov begins. “We are likely facing our eighth consecutive election, and the parliament is essentially nonfunctional, which means no meaningful legislative amendments are being passed. This creates a ripple effect across various sectors, contributing to legal uncertainties and weakening the enforcement of laws.” As he puts it, the court system remains unreliable, and public prosecution and police authorities are often unable – or unwilling – to address key issues. “This lack of effective law enforcement fosters a sense of impunity among corporate managers, making internal corporate investigations increasingly common.”

Focusing on why internal corporate investigations have become such a common trend, Tomov says that “there are several reasons, but the cultural differences between Western and US investors and Bulgarian managers stand out. Western investors often bring decades – or even centuries – of corporate governance traditions and strict compliance policies, which can clash with local practices.” According to him, Bulgaria’s historical background as an ex-communist state plays a role here. “While we’ve transitioned to a market economy, cultural shifts are much slower. Many managers struggle to align with the high expectations of international investors, leading to governance issues like financial leakages or even infringements on employees’ rights.”

To provide a more specific image of the situation, Tomov says that “most cases arise from whistleblower reports or financial discrepancies discovered by investors. These investigations aim to uncover the truth behind possible crimes, fraud, or civil and administrative infringements. Sometimes, the issues are clear-cut, like embezzlement, but often they stem from cultural misunderstandings or unconventional business practices.” For instance, “what may appear as mismanagement to an international investor might simply be a local manager’s interpretation of how to handle a situation,” he says.

Furthermore, Tomov reports that internal corporate investigations require a very delicate approach. “As local lawyers, we need not only legal expertise but also an understanding of Bulgaria’s cultural nuances. These cases often involve assessing compliance with internal corporate rules, which can be complex and may conflict with local customs.” Moreover, he adds that “data protection and legal privilege are also major considerations, as we must carefully navigate access to internal communications while respecting privacy laws.”

Finally, Tomov adds that “patent litigation – particularly in the pharmaceutical sector – has been on the rise over the last two to three years. Large companies are increasingly fighting over patent rights, both in court and through extrajudicial measures.” According to him, “this reflects a broader trend across the region, but it has become especially prominent in Bulgaria recently.” In conclusion, Tomov stresses that internal investigations and patent disputes are likely to continue growing in prominence, driven by globalization and the increasing influence of international investors. “The challenge will be aligning Bulgaria’s legal and corporate practices with global standards while respecting local cultural nuances. It’s a complex but fascinating dynamic to navigate.”

CMS has advised the Czech Skoda Group on winning a second order from Bulgaria’s Ministry of Transportation for five four-car electric trains.

According to CMS, the deal is valued at over EUR 100 million. “These trains will be fully serviced for 15 years under the terms of the contract. The introduction of these new electric trains is part of a wider initiative to modernize Bulgaria’s railways. The existing fleet, which includes older Skoda locomotives, will be replaced by vehicles that comply with the latest Technical Specifications for Interoperability and European standards.”

“Winning this order confirms that our products can compete internationally and strengthens our position in the modernization of European rail transport,” said Skoda Group CEO and Executive Chairman Petr Novotny. “Bulgaria joins the list of countries where our trains contribute to the attractiveness and accessibility of rail travel.”

Earlier this year, CMS advised the Skoda Group on winning the initial tender for 20 units (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on September 13, 2024).

The CMS team included Managing Partner Kostadin Sirleshtov, Senior Associate Diyan Georgiev, and Trainee Boris Kirov.