Category: Latvia

Former Specialist Counsel Edgars Lodzins has become a Partner in Cobalt’s Latvia office.

According to the firm, Lodzins, who specializes in banking and finance and has been with the firm for 15 years, becomes the 41st Partner at Cobalt.

Before joining Cobalt, Lodzins spent over five years with Swedbank. Prior to that, he has been a Prosecutor’s Assistant with the Prosecutors Office of the Republic of Latvia for over three years.

“Brick by brick he has been cementing his expertise and reputation in banking and finance, and we have been witnesses of his consistent path to success,” comments Managing Partner of Cobalt’s Latvia office Lauris Liepa. “Edgars is a true embodiment of Cobalt values and corporate culture and we find him a perfect addition to our partnership.”

Former TGS Baltics Partner Nauris Grigals has joined Sorainen as Partner and Co-Head of the firm’s Corporate and M&A practice.

Specializing in corporate and M&A, employment, corporate dispute resolution, and insolvency & restructuring, Grigals previously spent over 12 years at TGS Baltic. He first joined the firm as a Senior Associate in 2009 and was promoted to Associate Partner in 2018 and to a Partner in 2019. Prior to joining the firm, he was operating an individual practice between 2008 and 2009 and was an Associate at Visa Verte Law Firm between 2005 and 2007. He also worked as Judge Assistant at Administrative District Court from 2004 to 2005.

“The specifics of the field of business transactions envisage a period of very intensive effort when we work with our clients on large acquisitions,” Sorainen Latvia Managing Partner Eva Berlaus commented. “We wish to ensure that the needs of clients in the course of such projects can be met by both the team and especially the partners. In the future, I will lead the Corporate and M&A group of the Latvian office together with Nauris. His long years of experience will be a significant benefit to our team and will allow us to work with more capacity to offer new services to our clients.”

On February 18, 2021, following a five-year preparation period, the Saeima – the parliament of the Republic of Latvia – adopted amendments to the country’s Advocacy Law, addressing, inter alia, the proper corporate form for law firms. Going forward, in Latvia, a law firm must either be a partnership (either general or limited) or a limited liability company. CEE Legal Matters spoke with several Latvian lawyers about the newly amended law.

A ‘Vague’ and ‘Outdated’ Law

The relevant portions of Latvia’s Advocacy Law, according to BDO Latvia Managing Partner Vita Liberte, stipulated that “sworn advocates may establish offices of sworn advocates who are registered in the Council of Sworn Advocates of Latvia” and were well over 17 years old. “Since 2004, Article 116(2) of the Advocacy Law remained unchanged,” says Liberte, noting that, in the absence of any elaboration or detail, civil law provisions had to be applied by analogy to resolve the problems that arose.

Liga Merwin, the Managing Partner of Ellex Klavins, highlights the challenges law firms faced under that original law. According to her, “technically, law firms, including the large ones, were formed not as legal entities, but as civil law partnerships.” Back then, she says, “each individual attorney was registered as a taxpayer, and annual accounts were not publicly accessible. In addition, the old model led to several unresolved issues, including how to liquidate a law firm and its consequences on employees and technical staff.”

In addition, Fort Legal Partner Sandis Bertaitis says, under the previous law, even though law firms were registered as taxpayers, they were not recognized as full legal entities. “However, in everyday life, law firms acted like such, e.g., they used to open and operate bank accounts, own registered property (such as vehicles), conclude a variety of agreements (for office supplies, etc.), and even conclude employment agreements.” As a result, he says, law firms were de facto legal entities. Still, Bertaitis explains, it was necessary “to unify and give legal shape to existing practices by explicitly defining the legal status of law firms.”

The Latvian Ministry of Justice started preparing to amend the Advocacy Law about five years ago, reports Janis Esenvalds, Partner at RER Lextal in Riga, with the country’s bar association and representatives from various government and judicial bodies also involved in the process. Law firms were consulted during the drafting of the amendments as well, he says, providing them with “the opportunity to express their views on the current situation as well as their vision for its improvement.”

Feedback from other countries, including Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Switzerland, France, and the Czech Republic, was also taken into account, says Head of PwC Legal Janis Lagzdins. “It was concluded that in similar legal systems there is a clear regulation regarding the legal status of law firms, [allowing them to] be established as capital companies or other forms of legal persons.”

The declared purpose of the amendments’ authors, Liberte says, was simple: it was to prevent “contradictory interpretations of the law on the alignment of law offices with a legal person, as well as [to provide] recognition as a rights-holder.”

The amendments to the Advocacy Law were adopted by the Saeima on February 18, 2021, and entered into force on March 16, 2021. According to Bertaitis, “the amendments specify some qualification and education requirements for advocates, introduce conditions for compulsory professional insurance, and finally, stipulate the most essential changes – the legal status of law firms.” The amendments set a transitional period of six months, he says, during which existing law firms were required to register in the Commercial Register to continue their practice.

Clearing Transitional Hurdles

Lagzdins says that the “re-registration process was [treated] as a reorganization, as a result of which all rights and liabilities of the old law firm were automatically transferred to the new law firm.”

In general, Esenvalds explains, “given that the newly established law firm is the successor of the rights and obligations of the law firm established before the effective date of the amendments, the transfer of assets and liabilities to the law firm was not considered a disposal of assets and liabilities.” As a result, according to him, “this transfer of assets and liabilities to a new legal entity did not have any tax consequences.” In fact, he reports, adapting to the requirements was relatively easy, “as the transition period for re-registering the law firm was quite long, and the upcoming changes were announced in advance.”

For Merwin, one of the most challenging elements of the transition involved accounting. “It was a fairly complex exercise,” she says. “We had to register a new company, resolve issues related to the tax regime, decide how much money partners could take out as dividends, etc. We are still in the process of adapting to the new reality and the coming years will show how it develops.” 

The re-registration process necessitated several (often slow) administrative and bureaucratic steps, such as the opening of a new bank account and acquiring a new status as a VAT payer, says Lagzdins. “Banks in Latvia did not fully understand the legal view of this process, and accordingly, the banks were not always forthcoming in allowing the use of old bank accounts for new law firms.”

“The banks, at least initially, treated re-registered law firms as new legal entities, and thus required them to open completely new bank accounts and fulfill other formalities,” agreed Bertaitis, adding that “the resulting changes to registration codes and other banking details caused practical problems in the invoicing process and other management situations.”

Another set of issues was related to tax administration, Lagzdins says – in particular, registering as a VAT payer. “Although our law firm was registered as VAT payer before, we had to prove all over again that the new entity could be considered a VAT payer and indeed would have active business activities, by submitting a lot of explanations, documents, and so on.”

The rules, it appears, were not always clear. Bertaitis reports that “there were no clear instructions and understanding of how the migration of accounting records should be done.” According to him, “law firms can only hope that the State Revenue Service will not view the unavoidable change of bank accounts and other formalities as a deviation from the accountancy rules.”

The changes in name and status generated additional requirements in some unexpected areas as well. According to Esenvalds, for instance, “all law firms in whose names vehicles were registered with the Road Traffic Safety Directorate were required to register changes of owner/holder with the directorate within five days after the change of status.”

And the amended law requires that names of firms be changed to reflect the new status as well. “According to the provisions of the Advocacy Law, a law firm’s name must include the term ‘zverinatu advokatu birojs’ (‘sworn attorney’s office’) or the ‘ZAB’ abbreviation,” Esenvalds explains. “Failure to comply with this requirement is one of the grounds for the council to refuse to consent to the establishment of a law firm.”

It appears that the re-registration requirement did not have a significant impact on clients, at least. “Clients pay no attention to the legal status of the firm,” says Merwin. “We only had to notify [them] about changes in information about the law firm (such as the name, registration number, and bank account details),” adds Lagzdins. Esenvalds agrees: “clients were only affected to the extent that all invoices had to be paid with different company details after the law firm was re-registered.” Thus, he says, “if the law firm did not register in the Commercial Register by September 16, 2021, and continued to issue invoices for legal services, the client could not recognize such invoices in their accounts, as this law firm is considered liquidated.”

All Things Considered

While overcoming bureaucratic hurdles might be a challenge, the long-term effects of the amendments are difficult to gauge. “For now, it is difficult to say how the amendments will affect other fundamental aspects of advocates’ daily obligations,” Liberte says, “and there are still a lot of technical issues with the ‘reorganization’ process.” Opinions remain divided, she explains: “some believe that it is a big step in providing more transparency on law firms’ financial data, while others believe that it could hinder the very essence of the advocate’s role in our judicial system, and that these amendments could suggest that advocates only provide services, like any other company, thereby weakening their role in protecting the fundamental freedoms of their clients.”

Merwin is more confident that the law will have a positive effect. “Definitely, the amendments reflect progress in the Latvian legal system,” and allow firms “to move towards a modern setup.” According to her, the procedures relating to banks and corporate partners will be simplified, and, ultimately, “the law enables more transparency and a clear structure for clients and corporate partners.”

Esenvalds agrees. “In the long run, the legal status of law firms, the tax regime, and the administrative process are expected to be regulated in a more transparent and comprehensible manner, which is a positive step.”

This Article was originally published in Issue 8.11 of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

Senior Associate Marta Cera was appointed Co-Head of Ellex’s Finance and Tax practice group in Latvia, alongside Associate Partner Valters Diure.

According to Ellex, Cera joined the Ellex team in Latvia in 2017 and specializes in banking & finance and corporate M&A. She focuses on cross-border structured financing and M&A/private equity transactions and also advises clients on AML/CTF related matters.

Cera joined Ellex as an Associate and was promoted to Senior Associate in 2020. Before that, she spent one year as an Associate with Deloitte Legal (2016-2017) and another three with PwC Legal (2013-2016).

“I highly appreciate the opportunity to begin this year in a new and responsible position,” comments Cera. “I view these new responsibilities as a challenge and also as an opportunity to prove myself by contributing to the development of the Finance and Tax practice group.”

TGS Baltic has advised Tet on its acquisition of shares in Telia Latvija. Ellex advised the sellers on the deal.

The transaction value is EUR 10.75 million, including refinancing of a Telia Company loan.

Tet is a technology and entertainment company. The Tet Group also includes Citrus Solutions, Data Experts, Helio Media, Lattelecom, and Baltijas Datoru Akademija (Baltic Computer Academy).

Telia is a telecommunications company operating in the Nordic and Baltic countries.

TGS Baltic’s team was led by Partner Nauris Grigals.

The Ellex team in Latvia included Senior Partner Raimonds Slaidins, Associate Partner Maris Brizgo, Senior Associate Edvijs Zandars, and Junior associate Gabriela Fomina.

Walless has advised KS Holding on the sale of the Ozols shopping center, located in Riga, to Titanium Baltic Real Estate. Sorainen advised Titanium Baltic Real Estate on the deal.

Titanium Baltic Real Estate is a Finnish special mutual fund.

KS Holding is a real estate company co-owned by Kesko, Arturas Rakauskas, and Zabolis Partners.

According to Walless, the shopping center has approximately 27,000 square meters of gross leasable area and was reconstructed by the developer in 2018-2019. 

Walless’ team included Partners Kristine Gaigule-Saveja and Indre Jonaityte-Grice and Associate Baiba Krievina Sutora.

Sorainen’s team included Managing Partner Eva Berlaus, Partner Rudolfs Engelis, Counsel Janis Bite, Senior Associates Maris Simulis and Andris Vilisons, Associates Ieva Zarina and Julija Terjuhana, and Assistant Lawyer Julija Triscuka.

TGS Baltic has advised Wermuth Asset Management platform Green Gateway Fund on its exit from Primekss. Sorainen advised Primekss.

According to TGS Baltic, the Green Gateway Fund made a capital investment in Primekss and provided financing in the amount of EUR 10 million in 2014. “The investment helped the Primekss Group to develop its unique concrete technology and strategically improve and further expand its business in the new markets,” the firm informed.

Wermuth Asset Management is a German asset manager with a focus on high-risk-adjusted financial returns. Its platform Green Gateway Fund invested EUR 5–30 million per company, in Western Europe, between 2013 and 2016.

Founded in 1997, Primekss is a Riga-headquartered company producing concrete floors, logistics centers, shopping malls, DIY stores, and foundations of buildings. The company has direct subsidiaries in ten countries.

The TGS Baltic team included Partners Andra Rubene and Nauris Grigals and Associate Anna Vaivade.

Sorainen’s team included Managing Partner Eva Berlaus and Senior Associate Liva Aleksejeva.

COVID-19 remains one of the most prominent factors, directly and indirectly impacting the overall political, legal, and economic scenes in Latvia, according to Cobalt Partner Guntars Zile.

“Latvia was one of the first countries in Europe to encounter the fourth wave of the pandemic, which led to another lockdown,” Zile says. “Last week, a large part of the restrictions was lifted but, undeniably, there are considerable implications. To name a few, issues such as vaccination and restrictions impacting business stir public debate. Therefore, COVID-19 remains a continuously discussed topic,” he adds.

“One of the most acute political and legal issues is the partially mandatory vaccination rule,” he explains. “According to this rule, public sector employees, inter alia state and municipality officials and healthcare workers, are required to get vaccinated, and vaccination refusal is a ground for dismissal. Since the rule’s adoption, hundreds of constitutional, administrative, and civil claims have already been filed in the courts, challenging the compatibility of the regulation with human rights and the legality of dismissals on this ground.” According to Zile, due to scale, it’s a new and unique legal challenge for all jurisdictions where mandatory vaccination, in one form or another, is already in place or is being discussed. One of the most controversial topics is the potential ‘dismissal’ of Members of the European Parliament who refuse to undergo mandatory vaccination. “Elected officials enjoy special constitutional guarantees against dismissal, which adds another unique layer of complexity to such cases,” he adds.

Zile points out that initial rulings from the courts show that the mandatory vaccination rule is upheld and it is more likely for that to be the case in the future, while only in a very few exceptional cases, due to specific circumstances, persons would be exempted from the vaccination mandate.

Zile highlights that, aside from COVID-19 measures, there are rather few updates in the political and legal sphere. Despite regular discussions regarding the potential instability of the “government and criticism of the government’s actions throughout the pandemic, so far the government remains relatively stable. One of the positive signs is Parliament passing the annual budget law for next year, which is an annual ‘test’ for the government” he adds.

Zile points out that this year was characterized by a continuously active corporate transactions scene as well as the long-overdue revival of interest in the local stock market. “After quite a long period of silence, there are now a number of new companies going for and succeeding with local IPOs. In the last couple of months alone, two new companies – fuel retailer Virsi A and financial services provider Delphin Group – had successful IPOs,” he says.

“Of course we have also seen exits from the stock exchange. For instance, Olainfarm, a local manufacturer of pharmaceuticals, decided to leave the stock exchange just last month. This comes as the most recent move after a number of other exits earlier this year. However, hardly any of those was a surprise to anyone, as these companies mostly landed on the stock exchange during their privatization process, and becoming part of the regulated market was never an organic and natural process, which is very different when compared to the new breed of companies that are embracing the opportunities offered for long-term growth prospects by entering the stock exchange,” he explains. “There were also lots of private bond placements recently, and we can hope that these positive trends will continue and expand in the following years,” Zile concludes.

The real estate market in all three Baltic States is closely related and, although the legal systems vary a bit, buyers face the same or similar issues. Although important details concerning the purchase of real estate are brought forth in the sale contract drawn up by a notary (in Estonia and Lithuania) or attorney at law (in Latvia), in practice various nuances still tend to be left unattended.

The quality of real estate sale contracts depends directly on the knowledge of the buyer and the buyer’s ability to ask the right questions, and where necessary, fixing these questions in the agreements. Often, the parties agree on the content of some clauses of the contract at the time of concluding the transaction, but vague wording can lead to disputes in the future. It is, therefore, advisable to entrust the negotiations of the terms of the purchase contract to an experienced and professional lawyer.

Recommendations for real estate buyers vary depending on the targeted property. For example, if you buy a land plot with the intention of erecting a building, it is very important to investigate construction possibilities. If you want to buy a newly built apartment or house, construction quality, building, and registration completion are important. Different nuances should also be taken into account if you buy a property for your individual needs, as opposed to commercial purposes.

Nonetheless, in this article we aim to name the 12 most important aspects for buyers that need to be taken into consideration before executing a real estate purchase contract:

1) First of all, investigate public registers to find out all possible information on real estate encumbrances, mortgages, servitude rights, agreements on usage order of the property, co-owners (i.e., anything that may apply to you as a new owner);

2) It is always necessary to look into the territory plans of the property and its surroundings, such as municipality general plans, detail plans, and others. There you can find information on the possible usage of the property, new construction possibilities, building intensity, whether it is possible to split the land plot, how tall can the building or surrounding buildings be built, etc. Territory planning documents also give information on new roads, other infrastructure, or demolition plans in the neighborhood for the next few years. If, for example, it’s expected that certain nearby land will be acquired for public needs, it’s likely that certain public services will be provided in that area;

3) Take a look at the envisaged or existing transport and infrastructure schemes to find out about possible problems in reaching the plot or building, and pay attention to the availability of electricity, water, sewerage, gas, and other necessary infrastructure;

4) If you buy a land plot, you should always check the state registers concerning ecological and other buffer zones (e.g. water, forest, infrastructure protection zones, biological reserves, etc.), and thoroughly analyze their content and influence on the property itself. For example, an ecological reserve can prohibit setting up a local sewage treatment system, and, therefore, the water supply can be restricted in some places. In most cases, these restrictions may include the prohibition to build or excavate, logging prohibitions, etc. One should also be cautious about protected birds and animals who might inhabit the area of the property (i.e. forest land), and make sure to analyze the concrete restrictions concerning their breeding;

5) Investigate what the intended use of the nearby property is, as this can have a direct influence on the price of real estate. For example, for someone who is in search of a peaceful environment, a restaurant, nightclub, or a pub in a neighboring building can be a major problem. A new factory construction next to the village can be an unpleasant surprise for newcomers. At the same time, establishing a new mall, parking house, or a commercial building can, conversely, raise the value of certain existing property;

6) If a property is bought for commercial use, it is important to find out about the neighbors’ plans and how likely is it to have a competitor next door;

7) In case of purchase of a building or other built property, use the opportunity to invite construction experts to determine its technical condition. Buyers pay more and more attention to heating, conditioning, recuperation systems, as well as on sustainability, eco-friendly solutions, comfort level, etc. All these technical conditions of the property can be examined by experts. If it is not possible to investigate certain parts or qualities of the property, such as laid infrastructure lines, or fully checking heating systems in summer, always ask the seller to state in the contract that everything is built following all legal requirements and is suitable for use;

8) There are many examples when a property is built in former manufacturing areas, therefore, it is important to investigate if all dangerous substances have been cleaned from the area and to include provisions on the seller’s liability in case it turns out that some dangerous substances are left, and the property needs cleaning;

9) When buying a property with a sea or forest view, it is important to confirm how many other registered land plots there are between the sea or forest and the property to be purchased, and what is permitted to be built on them;

10) Although utility expenses might seem irrelevant to consider at first, in reality, the conditions and prices of utilities differ significantly in different municipalities and for different properties;

11) In Latvia, as a result of privatization processes, there are properties where the buildings are built on land owned by another person. Most often in such cases, there is a ‘forced lease relationship’ between the owners of the land and those of the building. This can lead to disputes regarding the terms of the lease and other aspects. Therefore, it is advised to clarify the ownership of the land before purchasing the building. Take into account that in some situations where land is separated from the building the owner of the building can lose their rights to the real estate in favor of the land plot owner;

12) In Latvia and Lithuania, never underestimate the importance of the preliminary agreement. Many make the mistake of thinking that everything can be renegotiated when signing the main agreement in the notary office. The seller can legally argue that what was agreed in the preliminary agreement should go into the main contract. This is not as relevant in Estonia, where even preliminary agreements have to be notarized.

It is useful to take the time to examine all the above-mentioned nuances or include experts who will do it for you. This will save you time and any expenses incurred from possible future disputes.

Finally, to find out what construction is being planned or performed nearby, check the website www.citify.eu, which provides information on real estate projects under development in Riga, Tallinn, Vilnius, Kaunas, and Klaipeda.

By Marge Manniko, Managing Partner and Head of Real Estate and Construction, Lextal Estonia, Jolanta Liukaitye-Stoniene, Partner and Head of Real Estate and Construction, Ilaw Lextal Lithuania, and Janis Esenvalds, Managing Partner and Head of Real Estate and Construction, RER Lextal

This Article was originally published in Issue 8.9 of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

An interview with Charles Clarke of Vilgerts, about his path from the UK to Latvia.

CEELM: Run us through your background, and how you ended up in Latvia.

Clarke: Shortly after completing my LLM in Competition at King’s College London, back in 2014, I was afforded the opportunity to kick-start my legal career in Big Law at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher’s Brussels office, practicing EU competition law. After a couple of years, I moved on to Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer’s Brussels office, as an Associate in competition law, and a couple of years later to Willkie Farr & Gallagher’s office in London. During these periods of my career, I was afforded the unique opportunity to learn and work with some of the industry’s most renowned and experienced competition lawyers. The valuable experience and knowledge acquired have guided me throughout my career to date and gifted me with life-long friendships.

Towards the end of 2019, I decided to set up a base in Latvia, as my wife is based in Riga and I saw an opportunity to bring my practice, as well as international experience to the table. While I was commuting back and forth from London to Riga for a period, it did not appear sustainable in the long run. I was very sad to leave the Willkie competition team in London (and they know that!), but I decided to give this phase in life a go, as being with family is just as important as progressing with your career. Upon my permanent arrival to Latvia, I began searching for a position in a Riga-based law firm that had an international sphere and was likely to be able to cater to my specialty and skill-set. Given my previous interactions with the leading pan-Baltic firms, these were natural choices of where I might be able to fit in, however, I landed no apparent success. This is likely to have been due to the start of the global pandemic – very unfortunate timing. After a couple of months scouting the marketplace, I was introduced to Gints Vilgerts and his top-tier competition team at the Vilgerts law firm, who invited me to join the team as Counsel and I accepted. The strength, reputation, and depth of experience of the Vilgerts’ competition team provided for a very solid and welcoming entry into the Latvian legal marketplace. After a year, I have had the opportunity to practice my area of specialty in Latvia and have worked on some very interesting international and local competition law matters.

CEELM: Was it always your goal to work abroad?

Clarke: Although it was never my ultimate goal, opportunities presented themselves and I decided to take hold of them.

CEELM: How would clients describe your working style? What about management style? How do you think it varies from the “common” Latvian one, if at all?

Clarke: One of the most valuable lessons I learned was being able to adapt to different working styles, sought after by both colleagues and clients. If you are robotic in your approach it is difficult to adapt. Although not my place to say, clients attach value to my understanding of the underlying issues and more importantly, providing a concise and direct response. The latter is imperative – if there is no trust in a relationship then there is nothing. Efficient and complete research abilities, as well as keeping up to date with legal developments, something which I have developed over the years, also carry a value of importance for clients. Final work product quality is also essential – if there is a single typo, clients will pick up on it and I can tell you, there is no worse feeling. I would say I have carried over the Big Law gene into the firm, which is providing a very valuable asset to both colleagues and clients (except for the late-night emails!). Management is always difficult, and more so when you come from a completely different working culture. This is something you have to work with and mold into.

CEELM: Are there any significant differences between the judicial systems and legal markets in your home country and Latvia? Which stand out the most?

Clarke: Primarily, the civil vs. common law system.

The legal market here is very small, competitive, and relatively stable at the top end. Most of the international workstreams are funneled through the larger pan-Baltic firms, making it very difficult for other local firms to access and gain visibility. Conflicts here can also be an issue given the size of the marketplace, which presents its own set of challenges. Fixed budget caps appear to be much more common than hourly fees. There is also certainly not the same movement of lawyers between firms as in the UK – it appears to be virtually non-existent.

CEELM: What about the cultures? Which differences strike you as most resonant and significant? 

Clarke: In Latvia, there is a very clear work-life balance that is heavily respected at all levels. While not a large city, Riga is very multi-cultural and very welcoming to all foreigners. Ligo is by far and large one of the most fascinating cultural differences – it is like having another Christmas in the summer!

CEELM: Do you have any plans to move back?

Clarke: At this particular stage in life, you should always keep your options open. We never know what is around the corner and when opportunities may present themselves.    

CEELM: Outside of Latvia, which CEE country do you enjoy visiting the most, and why?

Clarke: No particular preference, they equally have left wonderful memories.

CEELM: What’s your favorite place to take visitors to in Riga?

Clarke: Riga Central Market is a must and so is the Old Town. Riga Central Market is one of a kind and a great experience all around.

The Old Town has some wonderful restaurants and there is even a Belgian beer bar, which cannot be missed!

This Article was originally published in Issue 8.9 of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.