Category: Uncategorized

Spenser & Kauffmann has announced that Nikolay Likhachov is joining the team as Head of the Corporate and M&A practice, replacing outgoing Head Iryna Selianko.

Likhachov, who joins as Counsel, has over 10 years of experience with CMS Cameron McKenna, Levenets, Matsiv and Partners, as well as in-house in the banking sector. He specializes in structuring and M&A transaction support, due diligence procedures, corporate restructurings, corporate law and finance, private international law, and international arbitration. He  graduated with honors from Kyiv International University.

Valentyn Zagariya, the Managing Partner of Spenser & Kauffmann, commented on bringing Likhachov on board: “Nikolays’s appointment at Spenser & Kauffmann is the recognition of his high professional level.  We expect his experience will help to make a formula for success for our team that consolidates its position in the spheres of Corporate Law and International Arbitration.”

Drakopoulos has successfully represented Daimler in trademark litigation requesting that the defendant, a former Mercedes-Benz Hellas distributor, cease and desist from any and all further use of Daimler’s “Mercedes” and “Smart” trademarks.

According to Drakopoulos, “the case involved [the defendant’s] unauthorized use of the internationally known trademarks in materials originally authorized (e.g. signage, printed material etc.) during the term of the defendant’s collaboration with the claimant.”

The court ruled in favor of Daimler with an additional award of “moral damages.”

Image Source: Alexander Tolstykh / Shutterstock.com

The Mihaj, Ilic & Milanovic Law Firm — describing itself as “one of the first dispute resolution boutiques in the region” — had opened its doors in Belgrade. The firm was founded by former Karanovic & Nikolic lawyers Nemanja Ilic, Senka Mihaj, and Marko Milanovic.

According to a statement distributed to the media the firm states that “by combining unique depth of knowledge, business-savvy approach and extensive experience in Serbia, Montenegro and throughout the region, Mihaj, Ilic & Milanovic … is at the cutting edge of leading commercial and corporate dispute resolution.”

The firm will specialize in Arbitration, Litigation, Insolvency & Restructuring, Labor Disputes, White Collar Defense & Criminal Proceedings, Civil Enforcement Proceedings, Constitutional Appeals & ECHR, Commercial Offenses, Misdemeanor and Administrative Proceedings.  

In that statement sent to the media, Ilic, Mihaj, and Milanovic offer their thanks to “our colleagues and friends at Karanovic & Nikolic, whom we wish every success in the future.”

Ukraine’s Antika Law Firm has successfully defended the interests of Energobank PJSC in liquidation in a dispute over the recognition of a loan agreement obligation as terminated, recovery of funds from the bank, and recognition of the pledge agreement as terminated. The total value of the dispute was estimated at “about USD 1.3 million.”

According to Antika, “the bank debtor initiated the court dispute with the aim of terminating his contractual relations with the bank and to get rid of considerable debt citing the fact that due to the assignment agreement society acquired the property claim rights of the third party to the bank. In this regard, according to the plaintiff’s opinion, the mutual financial obligations of the debtor and Energobank PJSC were terminated, consequently, the pledge agreement was also terminated.” 

Antika Partner Andrey Kuznetsov and Senior Associate Maxim Korchagin succeeded in persuading the court of first instance and the court of appeal that the plaintiff’s argument was incorrect, and that his claim was ultimately intended to void his own debt obligations in contradiction of special rules on the bank’s liquidation.

Stepanovski, Papakul and Partners has introduced a new practice — what it calls “the criminal law protection of business.”

According to the firm, “following the market demand and needs of our clients, we have decided to link our understanding of business specifics and potential risks faced by owners and managers with our experience in criminal case management. For that purpose our team has been joined by Natalia Shekina, a criminal attorney with 17 years of experience.”

According to Alexander Stepanovski, the Managing Partner of the firm, “practice shows that the vast majority of business managers and owners do not realize that in that very moment, when they commit legally significant acts, or sign business documents, they become potential perpetrators of misfeasance in office. Our goal is both solve the existing situations and, more importantly, prevent or minimize their occurrence in future. Same as tax risk assessment, which has always been a part of all our consultations, the criminal law compliance, as it is called by business, or, in simple words, risk assessment, will become yet another obligatory component of our team work.”

Shekina describes two categories of economic cases entailing criminal liability that occur most commonly:” malfeasance in office and economic crimes mostly related with tax violations.” She explains: “Speaking about malfeasance, such facts may take place without the official’s action, for example, in case of the official’s act of omission. As regards economic crimes, even an accountant’s error may entail unpleasant consequences for business managers and owners. Unfortunately, a criminal law attorney is usually called after meeting with law enforcement agencies. However, many aspects could have been addressed earlier, during business process planning, and one could get prepared for them or avoid their occurrence.”

The Warsaw and Bucharest offices of Wolf Theiss have advised Pfisterer Holding AG in connection with its acquisition of 100% of the shares in Lapp Insulators Holding GmbH — the third-largest supplier of high voltage insulators in the world. The transaction closed on October 2, 2015. German law advice was provided by Heymann & Partner Rechtsanwalte. Wolf Theiss did not respond to an inquiry about the identity of the sellers or the firm representing them.

Lapp Holding produces porcelain and composite products used in high voltage and railway grids, switchgear, and power equipment in over 70 countries.   

Wolf Theiss conducted due diligence on the Polish and Romanian subsidiaries of Lapp Insulators, located in Jedlina (Poland) and Turda (Romania). The firm’s Prague and Kiev offices also provided advice on Czech and Ukrainian legal aspects in relation to the transaction, and the firm assisted its client on various aspects of the SPA negotiations and anti-trust issues.

Two Polish firms — Zimmerman & Partners Law Offices and FilipiakBabicz — have merged, resulting in what they call “a new entrant on the market — Zimmerman Filipiak Restructuring SA.” According to a statement released by the new firm, the merger came as a response “to changes in the market for the restructuring and bankruptcy proceedings that take place after January 1, 2016.”

The statement by the firm announced that “the greatest value for customers will be a unique team of experienced experts headed by Peter Zimmerman and Patrick Filipiak, co-authors of the new law [on] restructuring. We guarantee a unique combination of vast legal knowledge and experience with the competence of financial and capital.”

The new firm currently has offices in both Warsaw and Poznan.

CHSH Cerha Hempel Spiegelfeld Hlawati has advised Switzerland-based Agri Holding AG on its acquisition of 100% of the shares in the Slovenian company Istrabenz Hoteli Portoroz, with its registered office in Portoroz, Slovenia, from the Slovenian company Istrabenz Turizem. Istrabenz Turizem was advised by Jadek & Pensa. The assets held by Istrabenz Hoteli Portoroz include the five-star Hotel Kempinski Palace Portoroz.

Istrabenz Turizem sold Istrabenz Hoteli Portoroz as part of a disinvestment plan agreed with creditor banks.

According to CHSH, “the complex transaction was subject to a number of conditions precedent and required official authorization and consent.” It closed on October 28, 2015. 

The CHSH team consisted of Managing Partner Albert Birkner and attorney Sarah Wared.

Editorial Note: After this article was published, Rojs, Peljan, Prelesnik & partners informed CEE Legal Matters that it had been involved in the deal as well. According to the firm: “The main creditor TCK d.o.o., which is a legal successor of Hypo Alpe-Adria Bank d.d. (as of 1 October 2014) and now forms part of the Hypo Asset Resolution (HETA) group, was represented by Rojs, Peljhan, Prelesnik & partners. HETA was the only creditor holding a pledge over the 100% of the shares in Istrabenz Hoteli Portoroz and, therefore, was the economic owner of the said company. HETA in a parallel deal to the share sale and share pledge release sold also its remaining receivables towards Istrabenz Turizem to Agri Holding AG. The team which was led by partner Bojan Sporar advised HETA on the sale and release of pledge over the 100% of the shares in Istrabenz Hoteli Portoroz and with respect to the sale of its remaining receivables to Agri Holding AG.”

Bird & Bird has announced the promotions of Prague-based Counsel Vojtech Chloupek and Warsaw-based Counsel Piotr Dynowski to Partner, both effective from November 1st.

According to the firm, the appointments of Chloupek and Dynowski (along with the simultaneous promotion of new Brussels-based Partner Brent Springael), “occurred as an exception outside the usual May promotion round to address a strategic gap in the market.”

Dynowski heads Bird & Bird’s Polish IP, Tech & Comms, and Media groups. His practice covers IP, media and advertising, IT and e-commerce, gambling law, data protection, unfair competition, public procurement, protection of goodwill, and pharmaceutical law. He earned his law degree from the University of Warsaw in 2002, and followed that up with an LL.M. from Maastricht University in 2003. He began his legal career as a Junior Lawyer at the Jakubowski i Pluta law firm in 2000, where he stayed until moving to Lesnodorski, Sludarek i Wspolnicy in 2005. In February 2008 he joined Drzewiecki, Tomaszek i Wspolnicy, and moved over to Bird & Bird nine months later.

From 2005 to 2010, Dynowski lectured in intellectual property at the Polish Marketing Communication Association SAR. He also lectured at the Academy of Fine Arts in Warsaw, the Higher School of Liberal Arts and Journalism, and Concordia Design in Poznan. Currently, he is a lecturer at the Hugo Grotius Intellectual Property Law Centre in Warsaw and post-graduate program on protection of goodwill in information society at the Jagiellonian University in Cracow.

“This is a great achievement, a significant milestone in Piotr’s professional career, and a reflection of his tremendous efforts during his seven years with us building and developing our Intellectual Property but also Media and Telecoms practice,” said Maciej Gawronski, Managing Partner of Bird & Bird’s Warsaw office. “Piotr’s dedicated efforts in working tirelessly towards promoting Warsaw office have been recognised each year in our office’s rankings and reputation. This is testament to his hardworking and innovative approach, as well as his firm performance. I hope that Piotr’s new partner title will bring further recognition to our IP team and practice.” 

Chloupek leads Bird & Bird’s Intellectual Property Group in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. He is expertised in contentious and non-contentious IP matters in various sectors, and also assists clients in connection with various competition matters. He joined Bird & Bird in 2009 after spending almost 5 years at Allen & Overy in Prague. He graduated from Charles University in 2004, and earned a Master’s from the University of Oxford that same year.

David Kerr, the CEO of Bird & Bird, commented on the firm’s new Partners: “I’d like to congratulation our new partners and wish them all the best in their new role. It is great to see talent developing in these areas and I look forward to seeing their continued progression.”

The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine (the “CMU”) has introduced new reduced time terms for the expedited state registration of proprietary rights to real estate and their encumbrances.

As soon as the new rules become effective, the state registration of proprietary rights to real estate will be performed within five, three or one business day(s) or even within two hours from the moment of acceptance of an application, and subject to different amounts of fees payable for such expedited service. Previously, the expedited registration against a higher registration fee was possible only within three business days from the moment of registration of the application.

The changes in terms of state registration of proprietary rights to real estate and their encumbrances were provided by the Resolution of the CMU No. 669 dated 2 September 2015 “On Introduction of Amendments to Annex to Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 190 dated 8 April 2015” (the “Resolution”). 

In particular, according to the Resolution the expedited state registration of proprietary rights to real estate will be performed: (1) within five business days (for applications where a standard term of registration is 14 business days) for a double standard registration fee; (2) within three business days for a double standard registration fee; (3) within one day for five times the amount of the standard registration fee; and (4) within two hours for ten times the amount of the standard registration fee. 

Whereby the standard amount of registration fee payable by legal entities ranges from approx. EUR 14 to EUR 65 depending on various criteria of a property, such as the area of the premises, type of property right subject to registration (to a building or a land plot), type of registration action, and some other criteria.

The government has also doubled the amount of fee for the state registration of encumbrances of proprietary rights to real estate on an expedited basis. In this case, the expedited state registration has to be performed within two hours from the moment of acceptance of the relevant application for twice the amount of the standard registration fee.

In addition, shorter terms have been determined for the provision of information in paper form from the State Register of Proprietary Rights to Real Estate and their Encumbrances. Specifically, the information can be received within 30 minutes from the time of the acceptance of an application against a registration fee which is three times the amount of the standard fee. 

It should be noted that in any event the regular registration terms and fees for registration of proprietary rights to real estate and their encumbrances will still be available to those applicants who are not interested in the expedited state registration. 

By Taras Dumych, Partner and Olena Kravtsova, Associate, Wolf Theiss