Category: Russia

  • Alexey Kostovarov Promoted to Partner at Liniya Prava

    Alexey Kostovarov Promoted to Partner at Liniya Prava

    Liniya Prava has promoted Alexey Kostovarov, the firm’s Head of Antitrust Law and Procurement, to Partner.

    According to Liniya Prava, Kostovarov “has been representing clients in courts of all levels for over 11 years, he specializes in resolving civil disputes and supporting bankruptcy proceedings, and is also a recognized specialist in the field of antitrust law. ” According to the firm, he “accompanied a number of major and significant disputes, including the Transneft vs Sberbank currency options case and the Bashkirskoe antitrust case.”

    Before joining Liniya Prava in June, 2009, Kostovarov spent a little over a year at the Padva & Epshtein law firm.

  • Alexander Rymko Joins Alrud as Head of Banking and Finance

    Alexander Rymko Joins Alrud as Head of Banking and Finance

    Alexander Rymko, former International Senior Counsel at Harney’s, has joined Alrud to head the firm’s Banking and Finance practice.

    Rymko studied at Moscow State Institute of International Relations and specialized in International Law. He has worked in the financial services sector for more than 20 years, and has represented lenders and borrowers in cross-border syndicated financings across many industry sectors, with a particular emphasis on structured trade and export finance. According to Alrud, “he is experienced in advising both domestic and international clients on Russian financial services regulation.”

    Before joining Harney’s in February 2018, Rymko spent ten and a half years at Hogan Lovells, a year and a half at Denton Wilde Sapte (now Dentons), four years as Head of Legal at HSBC Bank (RR), a year and a half with Credit Lyonnais Rusbank, and a year with Bank Menatep.

    According to Alrud, “Alexander’s arrival strengthens the firm’s practice and builds up the firm’s capabilities in Russian financial services regulation.

  • Compliance in Russia: Takeaways from 2019

    2019 has been an eventful year for anti-corruption compliance in Russia with an extension of enforcement actions against companies, the strengthening of anti-corruption laws and new domestic compliance requirements. The crucial developments for companies are summarised below:

    Investigation of large-scale bribery. Until recently, it was one of the peculiarities of Russian enforcement practice that companies were prosecuted almost exclusively for small and mid-scale bribery1. Recent cases indicate that Russian enforcement actions, finally, may extend to more severe offences as well: To date, ten convictions of companies for large-scale or extra large-scale bribery with penalty payments of RUB 20 million (EUR 290,000) or more have been disclosed in 2019 – compared to only four cases in the whole of 2018. While the disclosed maximum penalty in 2018 was RUB 30.5 million, the current year has already seen a penalty payment of RUB 50 million (EUR 700,000)2.

    Punishment of bigger companies. Until recently, Russian authorities also used to look the other way when bribery offences were committed by bigger companies. This may change now as well: In July 2019, AO Russian Standard Bank, which is among Russia’s 200 largest companies according to Forbes Russia3, had to pay a penalty of RUB 26.5 million (EUR 380,000) for bribing bailiffs in Crimea in order to speed up enforcement proceedings against defaulted debtors4. This is the first time that a large Russian bank has been convicted for bribery in Russia.

    Foreign companies in focus. Also foreign companies so far were mostly exempted from prosecution for bribery5. There could be a change of political course now: Legislative changes entering into force in December 2019 provide for an extension of the investigation term to up to twelve months in cases where international judicial assistance is required6. The express purpose of this extension is to prosecute foreign companies for bribery7. The question arises whether this is only a symbolic reaction to foreign enforcement actions against Russian companies (e.g. the punishment of MTS by U.S. authorities8) or whether foreign companies will now indeed be targeted by domestic investigations.

    Extended scope of corporate liability. As in previous years, the legislator has strengthened anti-corruption laws. In particular, legislative changes which entered into force in February 2019 closed gaps in the liability of companies for bribery: Bribery became equally punishable if it was committed for the benefit of related companies. The changes also clarified that bribery includes payments to third parties designated by the bribe taker to receive the bribe9. At the same time, the rather questionable initiative provided by the National Anti-Corruption Plan for 2018 to 2020, according to which anti-corruption rules may not apply in certain cases of “force majeure”10, currently seems to be on hold.

    Scope of anti-corruption measures. Considering the increased liability risks for companies, implementing a compliance management system in accordance with the Russian requirements is becoming more important. Based on the mandatory requirement of the Russian Anti-corruption Law to take anti-corruption measures11, in September 2019 the Russian Labour Ministry again issued detailed recommendations for their implementation12. However, also in 2019 authorities and courts failed to answer the decisive question: to what extent the implementation of these measures may exempt companies from liability, or reduce their liability, in a specific bribery investigation.

    First self-reporting cases. Court practice from 2019 for the first time allows an assessment of how the new self-reporting rules for corporate bribery which were introduced in August 201813 work in practice. Due to the current restriction of enforcement actions to smaller bribery cases, none of the available court decisions deals with the reporting of large-scale bribery. However, these cases confirm that self-reporting may generally be an option to exempt companies from liability14. At the same time, given the general concerns regarding reliable cooperation with Russian authorities, the benefits and risks of self-reporting should be calculated in each individual case.

    No whistleblower protection. In June 2019, the legislative initiative aimed at the protection of whistleblowers in corruption cases ultimately failed15. The draft law, which had been adopted at the first reading in December 2017, provided for comprehensive rights of whistleblowers, and responsibilities of employers and law enforcement authorities. Since August 2018, Russian authorities have been authorised to pay whistleblowers rewards which may exceed RUB 3 million (EUR 40,000)16. However, rewards alone will hardly suffice to incentivise whistleblowing. Russia’s fight against corruption is therefore further falling behind the EU, which adopted their Whistleblowing Directive in October 2019 and Ukraine, in which a comparable whistleblower law will enter into force next year17.

    Restricted cross-border data transfer. Finally, foreign companies which have integrated their Russian subsidiaries into group-wide compliance procedures may now face additional difficulties. These are caused by fines for violations of Russian data localisation rules of up to RUB 18 million (EUR 250,000) which were introduced in December 201918. These fines could also apply to whistleblower channels from Russia abroad and data transfers during corporate investigations. In these cases, group-wide procedures may have to be adjusted. Another legislative initiative of May 2019 proposing the punishment of individuals for cross-border data transfers potentially leading to new anti-Russia sanctions seems to be less critical19. To date, none of the draft laws against sanctions compliance in Russia has become law.

     

    1 Please see Corporate liability for corruption in Russia: Enforcement and developments 2018/2019.

    2 http://genproc.gov.ru/smi/news/archive/news-1693570/

    3 https://www.forbes.ru/profile/350749-russkiy-standart

    4 http://genproc.gov.ru/smi/news/archive/news-1658840/

    5 In 2018, only one foreign company was convicted for bribery (a Polish company active in the mining industry). To date, no conviction has been published for 2019.

    6 http://kremlin.ru/acts/news/62183

    7 Please see explanations to Draft Law No. 711643-7.

    8 https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/mobile-telesystems-pjsc-and-its-uzbek-subsidiary-enter-resolutions-850-million-department

    9 For these and other changes please see Corporate liability for corruption in Russia: Enforcement and developments 2018/2019.

    10 Please see Item I.1.c) of the National Anti-Corruption Plan for 2018-20 dated 29 July 2018.

    11 According to Article 13.3 of the Russian Anti-corruption Law.

    12 https://rosmintrud.ru/uploads/magic/ru-RU/Ministry-0-106-src-1568817692.8748.pdf

    13 Please see Corporate liability for corruption in Russia: Enforcement and developments 2018/2019.

    14 Please see e.g. Ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 30 July 2019 No. 29-AD19-4.

    15 https://sozd.duma.gov.ru/bill/286313-7

    16 According to Resolution of the Ministry of Interior dated 6 June 2018 No. 356.

    17 Please see Ukraine adopts comprehensive whistleblower law.

    18 Please see Russian data localization: welcome increased fines.

    19 Please see Russian State Duma takes new counter-sanctions into summer break.

    By Hannes Lubitzsch, Associated Partner, Noerr

  • Yulia Yarnykh Promoted to Partner at Gowling WLG Moscow Office

    Yulia Yarnykh Promoted to Partner at Gowling WLG Moscow Office

    Yulia Yarnykh has been promoted to Partner at Gowling WLG as part of a promotion round involving a total of 36 promotions to the firm’s partnership around the world.

    According to Gowling WLG, “the incoming partners possess a wide range of expertise across the firm’s business law, litigation, and intellectual property practices. They are located in the firm’s seven offices in Canada, as well as its office in Moscow.”

    “I am delighted to congratulate our new partners on this significant career milestone,” said Peter Lukasiewicz, CEO of Gowling WLG Canada. “We look forward to their ongoing contributions to the success of Gowling WLG and its clients across Canada, Russia, China and around the world.”

    Yarnykh graduated from the Lomonosov Moscow State University. Prior to joining Gowling WLG she practiced law for over four years with Hogan & Hartson

  • Arbitration Expert Baiju Vasani Joins Ivanyan & Partners

    Arbitration Expert Baiju Vasani Joins Ivanyan & Partners

    Baiju Vasani has joined Russia’s Ivanyan & Partners, where he will head the firm’s newly-formed International Arbitration practice.

    Vasani will also become Managing Partner of the firm’s international office, which is to be established somewhere in Europe in early 2020, according to Ivanyan & Partners.

    According to the firm, “Vasani has served as lead trial counsel and arbitrator in international arbitrations across a range of sectors and industries involving ICSID, ICC, LCIA, ICDR, SIAC, UNCITRAL, BITs, the Energy Charter Treaty, and public international law. He has also advised states on negotiating and drafting investment treaties, and investors on (re)structuring their investments for maximum treaty protection consonant with tax and corporate governance strategies.” 

    “Welcoming a lawyer of Baiju’s expertise and caliber to Ivanyan & Partners marks a new horizon for our firm’s dispute capabilities and the representation of our clients overseas,” commented Partner Khristofor Ivanyan. “He will lead our new international arbitration practice and our very first international office in Europe to be established shortly, both of which will allow us to serve more effectively than ever our key clients in their disputes worldwide. This move validates the exceptional efforts our existing lawyers have made over the last decade to place us among the leading law firms in Russia in Public International Law and global dispute resolution.”

    “I’m truly delighted to join Ivanyan & Partners and grateful to be invited to build on the sterling work the firm has already accomplished in developing a market-leading international disputes practice,” stated Vasani. “Khristofor’s inspiring vision for the future of the firm internationally, along with the impressive portfolio of international arbitration casework already existing for key firm clients, rendered this a perfectly synergistic opportunity for the firm and for me. I look forward to working with my new colleagues in Moscow and St. Petersburg in building our first international office in Europe in 2020 and beyond.”

    Vasani holds an LL.B. from King’s College, an LL.M. from LSE, a BVC from City University London, a JD from Northwestern, and a BCL from Oxford. Prior to joining Ivanyan & Partners he spent two years in-house with AON, then almost four years with Norton Rose Fulbright in Houston, Texas, over five years with Cromwell & Moring in Washington D.C., and seven and a half years with Jones Day in London.

  • Alevtina Kamelkova Leaves Ivanyan and Partners

    Alevtina Kamelkova Leaves Ivanyan and Partners

    Alevtina Kamelkova, former Partner and Head of FinTech and IT at Ivanyan and Partners, has left the firm.

    According to Ivanyan and Partners, Kamelkova leaves to “focus on her our own projects in the field of technologies. We are grateful to Alevtina for the time that she worked in the firm and wish her success and new achievements.”

    Kamelkova graduated from the European Humanities University with an LL.B. in law and holds an LL.M. from the Radboud Universiteit. She spent two years in-house with Alpha Bank in Belarus, and held the same position for another two years with Unitary Enterprise Velcom, then spent ten years with Nokia. Before joining Ivanyan & Partners in 2018, Kamelkova spent over three years  at Baker McKenzie.

  • EPAM Helps BlaBlaCar Obtain Clearance from FAS Russia for Purchase of Busfor

    EPAM Helps BlaBlaCar Obtain Clearance from FAS Russia for Purchase of Busfor

    Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners had helped BlaBlaCar to obtain clearance from Russia’s competition authority for its purchase of Busfor, an online bus ticker aggregator.

    According to EPAM, the firm “successfully demonstrated that the merger would have a favorable social and economic effect and that the synergy of the Busfor’s GDS service (an innovative system of tickets distribution, reservation, and booking) and BlaBlaCar’s consumers (over 20 million users in Russia) would facilitate the growth and digitalization of the Russian market for bus tickets, which still lags behind the Russian air and railway ticket markets.”

    The EPAM team included Partner Anna Numerova, Senior Associate Ksenia Firsova, and Associates Karin Ovakimyan and Alexander Silakov.

  • Sergey Kalinin, Vera Rikhterman, and Andrey Mashkovtsev Join EPAM Partnership in Russia

    Sergey Kalinin, Vera Rikhterman, and Andrey Mashkovtsev Join EPAM Partnership in Russia

    Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners’ lawyers Sergey Kalinin, Vera Rikhterman, and Andrey Mashkovtsev will join the firm’s partnership on January 1st, 2020.

    Sergey Kalinin, who joined EPAM in 2016, is Head of Tax at the firm, and he advises clients on various matters of Russian and international taxation, specifically as related to the tax structuring of deals and investments, as well as taxation of financial instruments and derivatives. He is also experienced in advising private clients on de-offshorization and capital amnesty. Before joining EPAM in 2016, he spent three and a half years as a Tax Partner at Liniya Prava, three and a half years as a Senior Associate at Goltsblat BLP (now Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner), a year and a half at Deloitte, a year and a half at Pepeliaev, Goltsblat & Partners, and three years at United Counselors FDP.

    Vera Rikhterman, who joined EPAM in 2006 after graduating from the Kutafin Moscow State Law University, represents Russian and foreign companies in Russian courts, including the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. She specializes in corporate disputes, disputes arising out of contractual relations, disputes arising out of corporate or individual bankruptcies, and bringing management bodies  to liability, as well as intellectual property disputes. She has successfully represented clients in comprehensive multi-jurisdictional litigations, including disputes involving foreign parties.

    Andrey Mashkovtsev, who joined EPAM in 2007 after graduating from the Saint Petersburg State University, specializes in corporate/M&A, establishing joint ventures, corporate restructuring, and private equity, as well as corporate governance and corporate conflicts. He advises clients on asset deals, merger control matters, foreign investment control, and commercial contracts.

  • Rustam Kurmaev & Partners Successful for Former Governor of Chelyabinsk in Dispute with Antimonopoly Service of Russia

    Rustam Kurmaev & Partners Successful for Former Governor of Chelyabinsk in Dispute with Antimonopoly Service of Russia

    Rustam Kurmaev & Partners has successfully represented Boris Dubrovskiy, the former governor of Russia’s Chelyabinsk region, in a dispute with the Antimonopoly Service of Russia.

    The Moscow City Arbitrazh Court overruled the decision of the FAS, which had found Dubrovskiy guilty of entering into an anticompetitive agreement with a commercial entity and improperly restricting road-building competition in the Chelyabinsk region.

    According to Rustam Kurmaev & Partners, “this dispute is unique for Russia, for heads of Russian regions have never before in the history of the modern Russia been held liable for violating the Competition Law.”

    The Rustam Kurmaev & Partners team included Managing Partner Rustam Kurmaev and lawyers Vasiliy Malinin and Zaur Tsarakov.

  • RK&P Successful for Russian Standard Bank in Russian Administrative Dispute

    RK&P Successful for Russian Standard Bank in Russian Administrative Dispute

    Rustam Kurmaev & Partners has successfully represented Russian Standard Bank JSC in Russia’s 4th Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction in an administrative case instituted by the Russian Prosecutor’s Office.

    According to RK&P, “the supervisory instance took into account the lawyers’ arguments proving that the actions of their client did not contain elements of the offense it was charged with and reversed all the previous rulings of the lower courts imposing a large penalty on Russian Standard Bank JSC.”

    Rustam Kurmaev & Partners did not reply to our inquiry on the matter.