Category: Russia

  • DLA Piper Advises Sber on Acquisition of FuelUp

    DLA Piper has advised Russian financial services company Sber on its acquisition of FuelUp.

    FuelUp is a Russian company offering online services for refueling cars at gas stations.

    “Using FuelUp’s capabilities, Sber intends to develop its own fuel platform for corporate and individual clients, which will be fully integrated into Sber’s digital ecosystem,” the firm informed. “The new fuel platform will improve existing and create new online and offline services for refueling at gas stations and will provide Sber’s partners in the retail fuel market with tools to attract customers and improve the customer experience.”

    The DLA Piper team was led by Partner Leo Batalov and included Legal Director Andrei Sheetkin, Associate Alexandra Braterskaya, and Paralegal Alexandra Khvorostyanova.

    DLA Piper did not respond to our inquiry on the matter.

  • DLA Piper Advises YouDo on USD 5 Million Investment from HeadHunter

    DLA Piper has advised Russian online freelancing marketplace YouDo on a USD 5 million investment round from Russian online recruitment platform HeadHunter.

    Founded in 2012, YouDo offers horizontal online service marketplaces matching freelance labor demand and supply in the customer-to-customer and business-to-business segments. The service has nearly 9 million verified users. HeadHunter operates job and employee search sites and mobile apps using artificial intelligence.

    “The investment is in line with HeadHunter’s strategy to further expand beyond the core recruitment market and enter promising adjacent segments within the entire HR value chain,” DLA Piper informed. “It will enable HeadHunter to access the rapidly developing gig economy market and provide resources to accelerate YouDo’s expansion in the business-to-business segment.”

    The DLA Piper team was led by Partner Leo Batalov and included Senior Associates Georgy Vinogradov and Azalia Mukminova.

    DLA Piper did not respond to our inquiry on the matter.

  • Antitrust Practice in Russia Strives to Find a Balance

    Antitrust practice in Russia is currently striving to strike the right balance, with less regulation of business in general and increased scrutiny in certain key areas.

    Russian law does not set sufficient antitrust barriers for small and medium businesses. For example, it allows companies to enter into ‘vertical’ agreements if each company’s share of the product market for the respective goods does not exceed 20%. There are also discussions about raising the thresholds for merger control filings, which would eliminate merger control for a number of acquisitions that have no real impact on competition.

    At the same time, large market players are facing more attention from the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS). The FAS is currently implementing an enhanced anti-cartel policy and actively monitors economic markets which are “strategically important” for Russia and potentially most susceptible to monopolization. A notable example is a recent investigation initiated by the FAS against the largest metallurgical companies in Russia which were suspected of artificially increasing their prices. Other examples are the food and medical markets (pharma, medical devices), which were scrutinized by the FAS during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    To effectively combat violations in these areas, the Russian government is entitled to set maximum retail prices for certain medicines and medical devices for up to 90 days during the pandemic.

    The FAS is also closely monitoring the e-commerce and sharing economy. Discussions continue on the introduction of antimonopoly restrictions for digital giants, including online retailers and carsharing services, and potentially social networks, search engines, and the like, while also increasing their potential liability.

    In particular, the definition of a dominant position may be modified by adding a reference to the concept of ‘network effect,’ defined as receipt of economic benefits from a number of users through data collection and processing. At the same time, antitrust restrictions will not apply to start-ups with annual revenue of less than RUB 400 million, since they cannot significantly affect the market.

    Another legislative innovation is related to the opportunity to implement an internal antitrust compliance system. Companies are encouraged to implement such a system, which consists of internal policies governing the evaluation, monitoring, and mitigation of antitrust risks. It is voluntary, but, if an antitrust investigation is launched, having an antitrust compliance system may serve as a good argument that the company is acting in good faith.

    In recent years, the FAS and the Supreme Court have adopted a number of key resolutions and clarifications on widely debated antitrust issues. For example, in 2021, the FAS expressly allowed non-compete clauses in agreements for the sale-purchase of a business, provided that all the following conditions are met: (1) the non-compete clause is consistent with the purpose of the agreement; (2) the non-compete clause does not apply to a product market and adjacent markets where parties and/or an acquired entity do not operate; (3) the duration of the non-compete clause does not exceed the time necessary to ensure return on investment; and (4) the non-compete clause does not provide for an exchange of information, which may facilitate anti-competitive arrangements.

    In addition, in 2021, the Supreme Court issued other important clarifications on highly debated issues, including the allocation of the burden of proof in cases relating to abuse of dominance, the need to take into account the legitimate economic interests of a dominant entity, and a list of significant procedural violations leading to the cancellation of a decision in antimonopoly cases, among others.

    All of these are signs that extensive work has been done to make antitrust policy in Russia more transparent and predictable.

    By Alexey Nikitin, Specialist Partner, and Alexander Poychenko, Associate, Borenius Russia

    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.

  • Sergey Dmitriev Joins Volga-Dnepr Group as General Counsel

    Sergey Dmitriev has joined the Volga-Dnepr Group in Moscow as its Global Group General Counsel.

    Dmitriev moved from Norilsk Nickel where he has been serving as the companies Deputy Director, Head of Legal Support for Major and Strategic Projects since July 2018. Between April 2017 and July 2018, he was the Deputy Director, Head of Legal Support of Projects with the same company. Prior to that, he was the Director, International Legal at Proxima Capital Group between March 2014 and October 2016, preceded by working as Division Manager and Legal Support of Investment Projects with the NVision Group between April 2013 and April 2014.

    Before moving in-house, Dmitriev was an Associate with Dentons between 2010 and 2013, with Noerr between 2009 and 2010, and with Clifford Chance between 2006 and 2009.

    Originally reported by CEE In-House Matters.

  • DLA Piper and Baker McKenzie Advise on Typhoon Digital’s Sale of Brain4Net to Kaspersky

    DLA Piper has advised Russian network solutions provider Brain4Net’s major shareholder Typhoon Digital Development on the sale of a majority stake in the company to global cybersecurity and digital privacy company Kaspersky. Baker McKenzie advised Kaspersky.

    According to DLA Piper, “established in 2015, Brain4Net has been developing solutions and services to help enterprises and service providers adapt modern technologies, such as software-defined wide-area network and network functions virtualization, with existing network infrastructure. By acquiring Brain4Net, Kaspersky aims to bring a completely new Secure Access Service Edge offering to the market as a unified platform, which will combine Kaspersky’s best-in-class security solutions and technologies with Brain4Net’s network orchestration and control capabilities and expertise.”

    DLA Piper’s team was led by Partner Leo Batalov and included Senior Associate Georgy Vinogradov and Associate Tatiana Askarova.

    Baker McKenzie’s team included Partners Sergey Krokhalev, Margarita Divina, Marina Tokunova, and David Duncan, Associates Roman Vlasov, Ekaterina Karunets, Marina Kuptsova, Andrei Lebedev, Anton Nazarenko, Olga Pankova, Elena Pitirimova, and Ekaterina Sorokina, and Legal Assistant Svetlana Portugal.

  • DLA Piper Advises Capsula on Series A Investment Round

    DLA Piper has advised Russian personal styling company Capsula on its Series A investment round.

    The funds are being raised from ExpoCapital, angel investor Oleg Maslennikov, Carprice’s marketing director Dmitry Ryzhov, and other investors.

    According to DLA Piper, “the new funds will be used to develop the IT platform, strengthen the team, and scale up the service.”

    Founded in 2019, Capsula offers a personal styling service. In July 2020, the company raised USD 150,000 from angel investors.

    The DLA Piper team was led by Partner Leo Batalov and included Legal Director Andrei Sheetkin, Associate Alexandra Braterskaya, and Paralegal Alexandra Khvorostyanova.

  • Alexandra Karachurina, Maria Borodina, and Vyacheslav Yugai Join Balayan Group

    Alexandra Karachurina, Maria Borodina, and Vyacheslav Yugai have joined the Balayan Group as Partners in the firm’s Corporate & Transactions practice.

    The Balayan Group opened its doors in Russia in April 2021 (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on January 19, 2021).

    According to the firm, “Karachurina has a stellar track record of over 20 years working in leading global law firms. Alexandra has represented key industry players, across multiple sectors, in market-defining cross-border transactions. Alexandra’s unique expertise in international equity markets and compelling M&A background will help clients implement their growth, investment, and financing strategies.” Prior to joining Balayan, Karachurina was a Partner at Linklaters, where she spent over 18 years. She has also spent over five years with White & Case.

    According to the Balayan Group, Borodina “has attained over 15 years of experience in corporate matters through implementing numerous domestic and cross-border mergers and acquisitions as well as joint ventures deals of different magnitudes and structures. Maria was educated in Russia and at Columbia Law School in the United States. Employing her dual qualification in Russia and New York, her practice will continue to concentrate on high-profile transformational cross-border deals for Russian and international clients.” Before joining Balayan, Borodina spent over 20 years with Freshfields and a year with Danone.

    According to the firm, Yugai, who will also lead the Digital Transformation practice, “brings a unique blend of strategic thinking, remarkable transactional experience, and Asian cultural values to the team. [He] is qualified to practice law in three major jurisdictions: New York, England & Wales, and Russia. [He] focuses on complex corporate transactions such as mergers and acquisitions and joint ventures. He has built an impressive M&A practice with considerable cross-border experience.” Yugai spent over eight years with Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners and over two years with Noerr, before joining the Balayan Group.

    “I am honored and proud that such exceptional professionals are joining me and my amazing colleagues at Balayan Group on this spectacular journey,” said Oxana Balayan, Founder & Chair. “What a great team and a team of greats. We are delighted to have them on board.”

  • EPAM Advises HTS Tentiq on Currency Control Issues

    Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners has provided legal support to Germany’s HTS Tentiq on contractual and currency control issues in Russia.

    Established in 2001, HTS Tentiq is a German marquee and structure supplier, manufacturing temporary and semi-permanent event tents and temporary structures for the private and public sectors.

    According to EPAM, “the firm advised on the preparation of contractual documents to meet Russian currency control regulations. As a result, the currency control department of the counterparty’s bank released the payments, and the counterparty started to pay off the outstanding amounts.”

    The EPAM team was led by Partner Ilona Zekely and included Counsels Elena Agaeva and Alexey Karchiomov, Associate Yulia Beliakova, and Junior Associate Arina Nikulushkina.

  • The Main Cultural Protection Challenges Investors Can Face in St. Petersburg

    Investors planning construction or reconstruction in St. Petersburg must consider the strict restrictions of Russian and international legislation for the protection of cultural heritage sites. These restrictions can roughly be divided into two levels: (1) those stipulated by Russian legislation for the protection of cultural heritage sites and (2) those stipulated by UNESCO legislation.

    Penalties for non-compliance can be high. For example, those who breach protection regulations and fail to comply with restrictions within cultural heritage site protection zones could be charged an administrative fine of from EUR 2,400 to EUR 60,000. The fine is up to EUR 240,000 for highly valuable cultural heritage sites and those on the UNESCO World Heritage List. Another penalty is withdrawal of the cultural heritage site for failing to comply with the requirements to preserve it or for taking actions that jeopardize its preservation or cause it to lose its significance. 

    Russian law grants the city of St. Petersburg the special status of a historical settlement of federal significance. A recent change has made the regulation of the construction/reconstruction process less controversial: this summer, the boundaries of the historical settlement and the list of protected elements of St. Petersburg as a historical settlement were legally defined.

    St. Petersburg’s entire historic centre is within the boundaries of the historic settlement of St. Petersburg, which is divided into several zones with specific parameters of permitted construction (e.g., height, number of floors). Some other St. Petersburg territories outside the historic centre are also classed as cultural protection zones with certain construction requirements (e.g., the territory near Pulkovo Observatory). 

    There is a list of protected elements of the historic settlement of St. Petersburg. It lists sites’ characteristics that must be preserved: not only the cultural heritage sites themselves but also compositional and visual connections (panoramas), views of the urban landscape and the main visual directions (e.g., the panorama of the Neva River water area, the view of Peter and Paul Cathedral from the Birzhevoy ramp to the Neva River, the view of Palace Square and the Winter Palace from the General Staff Building, the panorama of the circular view from the colonnade of St. Isaac’s Cathedral).

    Key practical requirements for construction/reconstruction within the historic settlement of St. Petersburg and other cultural protection zones outside of the historic settlement include the following:

    • the need to obtain a conclusion from the Committee for State Control, Use and Protection of Historical and Cultural Landmarks (the “Cultural Protection Committee”) on compliance with the requirements for construction within the cultural heritage protection zones (both for the historic settlement and for other cultural protection zones);
    • the need to obtain approval for the architectural and urban planning appearance of the real property from the Committee on Urban Planning and Architecture (both for the historic settlement and for other cultural protection zones);
    • the need to obtain a conclusion from the Cultural Protection Committee on compliance with the section of the design documentation containing architectural solutions, the subject of protection of the historic settlement and the requirements of urban planning regulations to architectural solutions in relation to the territory of the historic settlement where construction works are planned (for the historic settlement only);
    • the need to obtain approval from the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation for the site development plan and the site survey plan (the “Planning Documentation“) in cases where Russian Federation laws require that Planning Documentation be developed (for the historic settlement only).

    Protection of historic settlements also means that they absolutely cannot deviate from certain parameters. These include the maximum parameters of permitted construction/reconstruction of capital facilities in terms of the maximum number of stories, the maximum height of buildings, and requirements for architectural solutions for capital facilities within the boundaries of such territories. As for land plots located outside of a historic settlement, owners may apply for a variance from the maximum parameters of permitted construction/reconstruction. 

    It is inevitable that Russia’s protective laws will continue to evolve and become stricter considering that the condition of historic sites deteriorates every year. 

    Thorough due diligence of the land plot for a planned investment project is needed to grasp all of the subtle aspects of the rules for various territories, whether there are specific requirements for construction/reconstruction, and to avoid potential liability and financial losses.

    By Arina Dovzhenko, Specialist Partner, and Zara Russkikh, Associate, Borenius

  • EPAM Successful for LabQuestTechnology in Corporate Dispute

    Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners has successfully represented LabQuestTechnology in a joint-venture-related corporate dispute.

    According to EPAM, the dispute followed LabQuestTechnology’s 2019 agreement with an investment company to develop a chain of medical offices providing laboratory services under the LabQuest brand. The case consisted of more than 20 legal proceedings, including counterclaims from the company’s second shareholder.

    “The parties decided to resolve all disputes through negotiations,” EPAM informed. “An agreement was reached to split the joint business and to settle the outstanding claims, whereunder the LabQuest brand and the related business entities would pass into LabQuestTechnology’s control.”

    The EPAM team included Partner Vera Rikhterman, Counsel Alexander Mandzhiev, Senior Associate Anna Rodygina, Associates Alexey Artemenko, Alexandra Mednikova, and Alexandra Idrisova, and Junior Associates Larisa Garmashova and Daniil Mogilevsky.