Category: Serbia

NKO Partners has advised the Dr. Max Group on its acquisition of the AU Medis Lek pharmacy chain in Serbia. Stanivuk & Manasijevski advised AU Medis Lek’s shareholder on the sale.

The Dr. Max Group is a Prague-headquartered pharmacy chain operating in Central and Eastern Europe. The company has over 2,200 pharmacies in six countries, including the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Romania, Serbia, and Italy.

AU Medis Lek is a Nis-based pharmacy chain in Serbia.

NKO Partners, just last year, advised the Dr. Max Group on its acquisition of the Sveti Sava Pharmacies (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on December 7, 2022), the K-Pharma chain (as reported on June 8, 2022), the Janja pharmacy chain (as reported on March 28, 2022), and the Zlatni Lav pharmacies (as reported on January 5, 2022).

The NKO Partners team included Partner Djordje Nikolic and Senior Associate Branko Jankovic.

The Stanivuk & Manasijevski team was led by Partner Bojan Stanivuk and included Partner Bojan Manasijevski and Attorney-at-Law Marko Perovic.

The European Union is fast-tracking the road to a greener future as EU institutions reach provisional agreements on the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (“CBAM”) and the EU Emissions Trading System (“ETS”). After round-the-clock negotiations between EU officials, the “Fit for 55” legislative package with the ultimate goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2050 is now being finalized. What are the implications for non-EU countries?

EU’s Climate Action
Recognizing the threats of climate change, the European Union adopted a range of climate laws, which includes the ETS and the CBAM, as part of the revolutionary “Fit for 55” legislative package. In contrast to the Emissions Trading System, a directive only EU member states have implemented since 2005, CBAM is extraordinary as it also concerns countries outside the EU’s borders. Following the implementation of the ETS, which established strict emissions trading rules within the EU, the phenomenon of “carbon leakage” became evident – companies moved their production outside the EU to avoid paying the carbon price. The CBAM emerged in response to this occurrence and will impose a levy on CO2 emissions embedded in goods imported into the EU single market. Other than this, its primary role is to establish, on paper, a level playing field, foster competition, and create a “polluter pays” principle across the board. In this respect, the ETS and CBAM are two complementing systems, working hand in hand.

CBAM is likely to create a tectonic shift in international trade with far-reaching implications for businesses and economies worldwide, especially developing countries that rely heavily on exports to the EU. Unless they adapt, they fear facing significant challenges, including a less favorable competitive position of their products in the EU internal market, which may significantly affect their overall economies.

Adoption Process
Due to its importance, potential clashes with international trade rules, and disagreements between EU member states, the adoption of CBAM could have been more routine and straightforward. Nevertheless, despite the delay, geopolitical events, and numerous challenges this revolutionary climate regulation brings, it is finally here to stay.

The EU Commission presented its proposal for CBAM Regulation on 14 July 2021. and the EU Council reached a general approach to the proposed regulation on 15 March 2022. The fact that the EU Parliament voted its position from the second attempt on 22 June 2022 after the vote resulted in a fiasco, the plenary session speaks volumes about the rocky road of legislative procedure. Trialogue negotiations between the co-legislators started on 11 July 2022. They ended on 13 December 2022, when the EU Council and the EU Parliament reached provisional agreements on the CBAM and ETS. The provisional agreement must get approval from the representatives of the EU governments and the EU Parliament’s environment committee meeting in January 2023 before being finally approved by the EU Council and the EU Parliament.

CBAM Scope
CBAM will initially cover a range of specific products imported into the customs territory of the EU in some of the most carbon-intensive sectors: Iron and steel, including a limited number of downstream products such as screws, bolts, and nuts (i.e., products that consist of 100% metal), cement, fertilizers, aluminum, electricity, hydrogen, and precursors (i.e., agglomerated iron ores, ferromanganese, ferronickel, ferrochromium, kaolinite, and other kaolinite clays).

The price of CBAM certificates will be calculated based on embedded emissions, but the scope will be extended to indirect emissions under certain conditions. Compared to the earlier proposals of the EU Commission and the EU Parliament, it is noticeable that certain goods remained outside the scope of CBAM. Still, the scope has now added hydrogen, indirect emissions, downstream products, and precursors. The scope of CBAM will be assessed before the end of the transitional period. It may then expand to products such as organic chemicals and polymers, with the overall aim for the scope to include all goods covered under the EU ETS by 2030.

CBAM Entry into Force
CBAM will start to apply as early as October 2023, with a transitional period that will last until the end of 2025. During this period, importers will not be obliged to pay the CO2 levy. They will receive free CBAM certificates, but they must report their CO2 emissions to the competent EU authority. After the transitional period between 2026 and 2034, free CBAM certificates will gradually phase out, with purchased certificates representing a more significant share each year. Finally, after 2034, CBAM will be fully implemented as there will be no free CBAM certificates, and everyone operating in the EU will have to pay for the CO2 emissions embedded in imported goods.

CBAM Chain Reaction
So now it is up to the EU’s global trading partners to take the necessary steps. The CBAM import levy will apply in proportion to the carbon price already paid in the country of origin. In other words, there will be no double charging.

Therefore, the EU’s trading partners must decide whether to pay CBAM or establish their own carbon pricing system.

In this sense, CBAM is also a unique mechanism that aims to encourage countries to introduce carbon pricing systems like the ETS. In this regard, the EU’s CBAM should create a chain reaction, where national CBAMs will ensue, and the original CBAM will become the “golden standard” for international green trade.

What to expect?
CBAM will have substantial ramifications for businesses and economies throughout the world. Companies must make strategic decisions such as reducing emissions, switching to green technology, and carbon offsetting and include these considerations along their supply chains.

The economies of the Western Balkans are likely to be among the most affected, as more than 80% of the region’s exports are to the EU, with significant exposure in the directly affected sectors. One major change is that in the transitional period (October 2023 – December 2025), impacted companies will have to measure, monitor, and report their CO2 emissions. This provision means that businesses must prepare by building effective mechanisms for measuring their emissions well in advance to gather accurate data and submit their reports.

After the transitional period, companies will have to start buying a part of CBAM certificates, whereby one CBAM certificate is equivalent to one ton of emitted CO2. The price of one CBAM certificate will equal the price of one ETS allowance, which currently amounts to EUR 85. Due to ambitious climate goals, this price is likely to increase further in the coming years.

For companies worldwide, this will translate into additional costs for their businesses. Companies will face multiple fines if they avoid paying the carbon price and continue selling their products to the EU market. Repeated violations may result in a complete ban on imports.

In conclusion…
CBAM is likely to contribute to a broader battle to reduce the effects of climate change. Still, it will bring numerous challenges in international trade, especially in terms of compliance with the rules of this unique regulation. There is a low level of awareness amongst governments and businesses of the critical changes that are about to take place, and they need to prepare to face the challenges ahead. The adaptation needs to be swift, as there is little time left.

There is, however, a system of checks and balances in place. Following the transitional period, the EU Commission will conduct a thorough and complete analysis of CBAM’s progress in international negotiations on climate change and the impact on developing countries’ exports. Nevertheless, the transition to carbon neutrality continues, and CBAM will be integral to the overall formula.

By Branko Gabric, Counsel, Vasilije Boskovic, and Nikola Ivkovic, Associates, Gecic Law

Amendments to the Law on Electronic Invoicing (Off. Gazette of RS no. 44/2021 and 129/2021), the Law on Fiscalisation (Off. Gazette of RS no. 153/2020, 96/2021 and 138/2022) and the Law on Deadlines for Settlement of Monetary Obligations in Commercial Transactions (Off. Gazette of RS no. 119/2012, 68/2015, 113/2017, 91/2019, 44/2021, 44/2021 – other law, 130/2021 and 129/2021 – other law) have been published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia no. 138/2022 of December 12, 2022.

Law on Electronic Invoicing

The key amendments of this regulation are as follows:

• It is specified that provisions of the law shall not apply to natural persons who are not subject to personal income tax for self-employment (in terms of the law regulating personal income tax).
• Special obligations are stipulated as regards VAT recording; namely, VAT taxpayers shall be obliged to electronically record VAT calculation in the system of electronic invoices, as well as the persons who are not VAT taxpayers – public sector entities and voluntary users of electronic invoicing system.

It is also stipulated that electronic recording of VAT calculation shall be done cumulatively, for all liabilities, by expressing the information regarding the basis and calculated VAT, separately by tax rates. Exceptionally, electronic recording shall be done individually per liability, by expressing the information on the basis, tax rate and calculated VAT, for:

• turnover of goods and services, including an advance payment for which the recipient of goods and services is obliged to pay taxes; and
• turnover of goods and services which is done with remuneration to the taxpayer for income from self-employment and taxpayer of corporate income tax, including the received advance payment that the supplier of goods and/or provider of services is obliged to pay taxes for.

If the transactions that are not subject to mandatory electronic invoicing are nevertheless electronically invoiced, there is no obligation to record the VAT calculation.

• In addition, a possibility for subsequent acceptance of a rejected electronic invoice is prescribed, as well as the moment of receipt of an electronic invoice issued when there is a temporary interruption in the operations of electronic invoicing system. Namely, it is now stipulated that the rejected electronic invoice may be subsequently accepted, whereas the electronic invoice shall be considered submitted at the time of issuance according to this law, unless there is temporary interruption in the operations of electronic invoicing system, in which case the electronic invoice shall be considered delivered at the time of re-establishment of the operations of electronic invoicing system. Proceeding in case of temporary interruption in the operations of electronic invoicing system shall be regulated in detail by a bylaw.

These amendments shall enter into force on January 1, 2023.

Law on Fiscalisation

By amendments to this regulation:

• A term of retail is specified and prescribed that retail (that is subject to fiscalisation) shall not include trade outside retail shop if the user of supplied goods and rendered services and/or goods and services that will be supplied or rendered in case of received advance payment is a legal entity, i.e., payer of tax based on income from self-employment. In relation thereto, it is also prescribed that a retail shop shall mean any business premises that are primarily used for trade in goods and rendering services to natural persons, as well as headquarters of fiscalisation taxpayer that performs retail in form of online remote trading.
• Mandatory content of fiscal receipt is changed by deletion of provision under which this receipt needs to contain the value of turnover by tax rates.
• It is prescribed that all information from the Fiscalisation Management System (a software application of the Tax Administration that collects all data from the fiscal receipts processors), which refer to fiscal receipts issued to legal entities, i.e., payers of tax for income from self-employment, shall be transferred to the prescribed electronic invoice system upon fulfilment of technical requirements, which will be regulated by passing a bylaw.

These amendments have entered into force on the eighth day upon their publishing i.e., on December 20, 2022.

Law on Deadlines for Settlement of Monetary Obligations in Commercial Transactions

In relation to the previously mentioned amendments to the Law on Electronic Invoicing and Law on Fiscalisation, certain adjustments have also been made in the Law on Deadlines for Settlement of Monetary Obligations in Commercial Transactions, i.e.:

• It is stipulated that this law regulates registration of electronic invoices and other payment requirements in electronic form in the central invoice register, which were issued by creditors in commercial transactions between public sector and commercial entities, i.e., between public sector entities where the said entities are debtors, on basis of information obtained from the electronic invoices system.
• In relation thereto, certain terminological specifications have been made by stipulating that electronic invoice and electronic invoice system shall have the meaning established in the Law on Electronic Invoicing.
• It is prescribed that the deadline for settlement of monetary obligations (regulated by a contract between commercial entities, legally prescribed deadline of 60 days and deadline defined with respect to contractual obligations requiring payment in instalments for the delivered goods and/or rendered services, which may not exceed 90 days) shall start on the first day following the day of issuance of electronic invoice through electronic invoice system, when it shall be deemed that the debtor received electronic invoice from the creditor which fulfilled its agreed obligation.
• It is also prescribed that the minister in charge of finance shall more closely regulate the manner and procedure of registering electronic invoices in the central invoice register, as well as the manner of keeping and the content of this register.

These amendments have also entered into force on December 20, 2022.

This article is to be considered as exclusively informative, with no intention to provide legal advice. If you should need additional information, please contact us directly.

By Lara Maksimovic, Senior Associate, PR Legal

On December 8, CEE Legal Matters reported that BDK Advokati had advised MediGroup on its acquisition of Konzilijum. CEE In-House Matters spoke with Mihailo Obucina, Director of Strategy, M&A, and Business Development at MediGroup, to learn more about the acquisition.

CEEIHM: To start, tell us about MediGroup and its operations in Serbia

Obucina: MediGroup is the largest fully integrated private medical system in Serbia, having one general hospital, two special hospitals, 12 health centers, four imaging centers, and 77 blood collection points with more than 1,600 full-time employees and 1,000 consultants. We are the only privately held healthcare provider with professional management and a national presence in the four largest cities. The majority of the company is owned by the PE fund MidEuropa Partners, based in the UK.

CEEIHM: You were recently advised on the acquisition of Konzilijum. What made the target appealing for you?

Obucina: Market leadership, strong reputation, and medical quality since Konzilijum is recognized as the best laboratory in the country both by our patients and the medical community. This is our third acquisition in this sub-segment over the past four years and we managed to achieve one of our strategic objectives to become the #1 medical laboratory in all aspects (revenue, number of tests, number of locations, number of employees, etc.).

CEEIHM: What was the most complex aspect of this deal from a legal perspective?

Obucina: The deal structure was complex due to the equity/asset carveouts which had to be completed within a very limited timeframe and healthcare legislation which was challenging to navigate through.

CEEIHM: How was the legal work split between your in-house legal team and that of BDK’s?

Obucina: We consider BDK as a thorough partner throughout the process and there is no clear line between them and our legal team. BDK was fully involved in all aspects of the transaction, from legal due diligence until closing.

CEEIHM: Lastly, why did you pick BDK to advise you on this matter?

Obucina: Expertise, flexibility, and previous experience in the healthcare sector, as this is the sixth acquisition for MediGroup since 2018 that we completed together with BDK as our legal advisors.

Originally reported by CEE In-House Matters.

As the terms “hunger” and “benefits” in most cases exclude each other and expectations of all interested parties are high on both ends, we spent hours listening carefully
to what lecturers and panelists of our data protection conference were saying, to summarise ideas and solutions to a complex question from the headline.

Valuable solutions result from different approaches and expectations of different stakeholders – citizens, scientists, projects, digitalisation and technology leaders, regulators and commerce. Is Serbia, as a regional digitalisation leader, capable of aligning the hunger for (personal) data, dignity and well-being of its citizens? It is a difficult ‘exam’ to pass.

As it was the case throughout the past, hunger has always represented the primary condition for any kind of innovation. Some might call it by many different names such asthe birth of an idea, the desire for improvement, and the intention to contribute to the community, but in its essence, it is hunger.

Although in the literal and etymological sense, hunger and benefits are mutually exclusive terms, in the specific case, the global community has waited for this type of ‘’starvation’’ to appear as it is a conditio sine qua non when it comes to improving all those aspects that we had the opportunity to hear about at the conference.

The main idea of the policymakers is to collect, i.e. to transfer genetic and biomedical data from the state institutions carrying out genome sequencing and processing biomedical data and store them on an online platform managed by the Office for Technological Development and E-Government – forming genetic and biomedical repository with an aim:

• to connect collected data with patients’ health electronic records to be used by
HCPs;
• to (pseudo) anonymise personal data and to enable access to data, data sharing, and manipulation by researchers and commerce.

Biomedical data which are to be collected are: patient therapy and realised prescriptions data, patient laboratory analysis/report data, medical documentation related to the patient, and radiology reports. The following benefits are expected: development of precision medicine and better patient treatment, early diagnostics, improved registries of diseases, increase of NGS capacities, development of genetic data standards, integration of various electronic healthcare systems, increase of the number of clinical studies conducted in Serbia, etc.

Yet, the regulatory framework to implement the above stated objectives is still unknown
and vague.

Issues identified:

a. Legal ground for processing genetic and biomedical data

i. As an online platform will be used by participants in research to register and provide consents (both “medical” and for processing of personal data), the platform shall be structured in the manner that both consents shall be managed by participants and data subjects. The particular question is how to obtain both consents for new research (in case the concept of broad consent cannot be applied, i.e., the next purpose substantially differentiates from the previous one). Some lecturers and panellists from institutions carrying out research confirmed that they obtain new consent each time when the purpose of processing/research is different, i.e., contact participants to ask for consent. In cases where thousands of participants are involved, the option to implement the concept of dynamic consent, i.e., to provide participants/data subjects with a possibility to opt-out (in case of implementing “broad consent”). The results of the research (personal data) can be used for further research in line with Article 5 (1) (b) and Article 9 (2) (j) of GDPR – the same arguments can be applied to further processing of personal data for scientific and research purposes, resulting from conducted clinical trials. Article 9 (2) (j) of GDPR shall be transposed in the Serbian national framework as this provision requires form Member States to specify the scope of its applicability of this legal basis, i.e. when this legal basis can be applied;

ii. As per collection, storage and further processing of genetic and biomedical data transferred by state institutions, legal grounds such as legitimate interest or task carried out in the public interest (Article 6) and Article 9 (2) g)-j) may be considered. In case the processing is based on legitimate interest, controller(s) shall carry out a
legitimate interest test to evaluate whether such interest is overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subjects, which require protection of personal data (using the Commissioner model – available its website). In case the processing is performed in a task carried out in the public interest, conditions set out in Article 14 of the Serbian Data Protection Act must be met – this means that public interest shall be envisaged by the law including the general conditions governing the lawfulness of processing by the controller; the types of data which are subject to the processing; the data subjects concerned; the entities to, and the purposes for which, the personal data may be disclosed; the purpose limitation; storage periods; processing operations and processing procedures, including measures to ensure lawful and fair processing. As per research purposes, the same arguments as in item i) shall be applied.

b. Data Protection Impact Assessment

Controllers shall carry out Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) in case of:
i. processing on a large scale of special categories of data;
ii. use of new technologies or technological solutions for the processing of personal data with the possibility of use of personal data for analysis or prediction of the health of natural persons;
iii. processing of personal data by crossing, connecting or checking congruency from more sources.

The controller shall, prior to processing, carry out DPIA which shall contain:
a. a systematic description of the envisaged processing operations and the purposes of the processing, including, where applicable, the legitimate interest pursued by the controller;
b. an assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the processing operations irelation to the purposes;
c. an assessment of the risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects; and
d. the measures envisaged addressing the risks, including safeguards, security measures, and mechanisms to ensure the protection of personal data and to demonstrate compliance with the Serbian Data Protection Act, taking into account the rights and legitimate interests of data subjects and other persons concerned.

According to the opinion of the Commissioner presented at the conference, the most common mistakes the controllers make when carrying out are the following:
i. not all AI systems pose risks for personal data and rights and freedoms of data subjects;
ii. capacities of the parties involved – controllers, joint controllers, processors in all phases of the processing activity including development, deployment, and use of AI systems. It would be of particular importance for controllers/s and/or processors to understand their roles in the course of implementation of the concept of policymakers;
iii. wrong legal ground for processing;
iv. “function creep” – undefined or poorly defined purpose of the processing;
v. lack of responsibilities for processing posing additional risks;
vi. insufficiently diverse trained data or inappropriate data for the intended purpose which may lead to discrimination of citizens.

The Commissioner should issue DPIA guidelines at the beginning of next year.

c. Anonymisation

In case of being used for developing algorithms or another kind of research either by researchers from state institutions or commerce, personal data must be anonymised. The question is which anonymisation technics to apply, who will perform anonymisation technics and which requirements these legal entities shall fulfil, and which competent body decides makes the decision whether applied anonymisation technics really make the personal data anonymised to prevent abuse of personal data.

On the other side, experts at the conference stressed that completely anonymised data may not meet the requirements of the intended research (“garbage in – garbage out”) and for this reason, controllers should apply one or more legal basis (above) when sharing personal data for the purpose of research and development of IA algorithms.

d. Pending regulatory framework

The Serbian Government formed Working Group with the task to draft Guidelines for Development, Application and Use of Trustworthy and Responsible Artificial Intelligence. The draft is recently finalised and could be found at the following link The Guidelines should serve as transitional solution – until enactment of the law governing IA. Experts at the conference mentioned that Law on Repository of Genetic and Biomedical Data shall be enacted next year.

By Ivan Milosevic, Partner, JPM Jankovic Popovic Mitic

BDK Advokati, working with Gernandt & Danielsson, has advised Catena Media on the sale of its AskGamblers business and associated casino brands to the Gaming Innovation Group for EUR 45 million.

The transaction is expected to close in the first quarter of 2023.

Catena Media is a company specializing in online gambling.

The Gaming Innovation Group is an Oslo Stock Exchange-listed gaming company offering cloud-based product and platform services and performance marketing to its B2B partners.

According to BDK Advokati, “by this transaction, Catena Media is selling two wholly owned subsidiaries in Malta and Serbia that operate the AskGamblers brand and the associated online casino brands JohnSlots and NewCasinos.”

“Today’s agreement is a major step on our journey to focus the business on online sports betting and casino affiliation in high-growth, regulated markets in the Americas,” said Catena Media CEO Michael Daly. “I am confident that in the Gaming Innovation Group, we have found a buyer that will provide a strong environment for AskGamblers and the other brands and their talented people to develop and grow.”

“We are extremely excited to take over the AskGamblers brand,” added Gaming Innovation Group CEO Richard Brown. “Combining it with our media technology and operational capabilities provides a great opportunity to expand our global reach and to deliver a path for AskGamblers to continue with its strong evolution. We look forward to integrating the staff and website assets into GiG.”

BDK Advokati’s team included Senior Partner Vladimir Dasic, Counsel Tomislav Popovic, and Senior Associates Marija Gligorevic and Djordje Zejak.

BDK Advokati was unable to provide additional information on the deal.

Bojovic Draskovic Popovic & Partners has advised graphene nanotube manufacturer OCSiAl on starting its business operations in Serbia.

“OCSiAl plans to open a center for the production of graphene nanotubes and its derivatives in Stara Pazova,” BD2P informed. “OCSiAl became the first company to develop graphene nanotube scalable technology to synthesize them in industrial volumes, at high quality and affordable prices. As a result, graphene nanotubes revolutionize transportation, aerospace, construction, and other industries by developing next-generation products.”

“The nanotubes synthesis unit in Stara Pazova will be the pivotal point of the industrial center of graphene nanotubes, 200 people of various education and experience levels will be employed,” the firm reported. “The construction is ongoing, and the facility should be put into operation during 2023.”

OCSiAl is a Luxembourg-headquartered graphene nanotube manufacturer.

The BD2P team was led by Partner Uros Popovic and Senior Associate Milos Andrejevic.

Zivkovic Samardzic has been appointed the Republic of Equatorial Guinea’s legal advisor for the negotiation and conclusion of commercial agreements with Serbian companies and for the country’s business operations in Serbia.

According to the firm, “earlier this year, the highest state officials of the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Equatorial Guinea held several meetings during official visits to the countries and announced that the two countries were to sign important agreements on cooperation in different industries. As a result, the two countries raised the level of economic cooperation and, at the same time, achieved benefits from mutual cooperation, exchange of experiences, and improvement of economic and trade exchange.”

“Within that cooperation, numerous commercial agreements for the purchase of food products, household, and consumer goods produced by various Serbian companies were concluded these last few days, while it is expected that the agreements which currently are in the negotiation process will also be realized this month,” Zivkovic Samardzic reported.

The Zivkovic Samardzic team included Partner Igor Zivkovski and Associate Teodora Milosevic.

Karanovic & Partners has advised Switzerland’s GlobalGlass on its acquisition of Srpska Fabrika Stakla. The Manic Gojic Law Office advised SFS’s insolvency administrator on the sale.

“Srpska Fabrika Stakla was put on sale in September 2022,” Karanovic & Partners informed. “As quoted in a Serbian government press release, the Swiss company plans to invest over USD 300 million in the next six years.”

“The company was sold as a legal entity within the bankruptcy procedure,” Manic-Gojic reported.

GlobalGlass is a Swiss company that owns glass products trader Steklarna Hrastnik. Paracin-based Srpska Fabrika Stakla is a Serbian glass maker.

The Karanovic & Partners team included Partner Ivan Nonkovic, Senior Associate Sava Draca, and Associate Filip Susulic.

The Manic-Gojic team included Partner Veselin Gojic.

Jovana Velickovic has joined Gecic Law in Belgrade as a Partner and Head of the firm’s Dispute Resolution team.

According to the firm, Velickovic has “more than a decade of experience focusing on commercial litigation” and is well-versed in alternative dispute resolution methods.

Prior to joining Gecic law, Velickovic spent two years as a solo practitioner. Before that, she spent almost five years with Karanovic & Partners as an Attorney at Law. Earlier, she spent three and a half years with JPM Jankovic Popovic Mitic, between 2012 and 2016.

“I am excited to join the firm and head its Dispute Resolution team,” Velickovic commented. “Gecic Law is already recognized as a regional powerhouse, and I look forward to building on the remarkable results, going from strength to strength.”

“With Jovana’s arrival as a new partner, our Dispute Resolution practice further strengthens its presence on the regional legal market and helps us expand our offering in this area in both depth and breadth,” added Partner Bogdan Gecic. “We will work together to enhance our support for existing clients’ growing needs and continue to broaden our client base.”