Category: Uncategorized

  • Privatization: A Driving Force in the Adriatic

    Privatization: A Driving Force in the Adriatic

    We asked Uros Ilic, the Managing Partner at the ODI Law Firm, to give us an update on the privatization process in the South Eastern Europe markets the firm covers, as well as his expectations for the future. Ilic leads ODI’s privatization practice, which is coordinated by Partners Matjaz Jan in Slovenia, Branko Iliz in Croatia, Milos Curovic in Serbia, and Gjorgji Georgievski in Macedonia.

    CEELM:

    Let’s start with ODI’s bona fides. What experience does the firm have working on Privatizations across Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, and Macedonia?

    Uros Ilic, ODI Law Firm

    U.I.: Privatizations have seen a reboot in the last few years, as South-Eastern European countries have been selling their assets in order to counter increases in their debt/GDP levels. The trend is especially visible in the SEE region, where countries in general have retained ownership of a relatively high share of their domestic companies even after the first privatization wave in the 90s. Privatizations thus represent a significant portion of the region’s M&A activity and consequently also a significant portion of ODI’s transaction experience.

    ODI has participated in many of the recent multi-million privatizations, the most prominent being the ongoing privatization of Telekom Slovenia, Slovenia’s largest telecommunication provider. Its anticipated purchase price is more than EUR 1 billion, setting it up to be the biggest privatization as well as the biggest M&A transaction in the country’s history. This is a landmark transaction in which ODI offices in all of its 4 jurisdictions have participated.

    CEELM:

    What major privatizations in those markets are expected to be completed in 2015? 

    U.I.: Regarding Slovenia: On May 9, 2013, the Slovenian Government adopted the decision of the National Assembly’s consent for privatization of a number of state-owned companies. Aerodrom Ljubljana, Fotona, and Helios have already been sold. The privatization processes of Telekom Slovenia, NKBM, Adria Airways, Adria Airways Tehnika, Aero, Cinkarna Celje, Elan and Zito are currently ongoing, while the list also includes Gospodarsko razstavisce, Paloma, Terme Olimia and Unior.

    Telekom Slovenia’s future will be decided in the coming weeks. Although the prime minister is set on selling Telekom Slovenia, and a failure to conclude its privatization process might diminish Slovenia’s international reputation in financial markets, the transaction still might not close, as a significant share of the public as well as members of parliament oppose the sale and are actively trying to block it, for various reasons. In addition, of course, the offered price might not meet expectations. The other Slovenian company closest to being sold is NKBM. The Slovenian Sovereign Holding (SDH) is selling a 100% share of the bank on behalf of the Republic of Slovenia and received binding offers on January 20, 2015. NKBM was brought back from the brink of collapse with a state-funded EUR 870 million bailout in late 2013 and is intended for privatization by the end of 2016 at the latest. After offloading non-performing loans onto the Bank Asset Management Company, the bank is now financially solid.

    The Croatian government has categorized its state-owned companies in the following four categories: The first is the 27 companies with strategic importance for the state, mainly in the infrastructure and energy distribution sector, that are not meant to be privatized. The second is companies with special importance for the state and in which the state owns more than 55%. The third group includes six companies with special importance for the state in which the state owns less than 50% of the shares. And the fourth group includes 558 companies with no special importance for the state, of which 41 are in the majority ownership of the state and 90 are expected to be privatized in 2015. Currently, only two privatization procedures are ongoing: the process of the Luka Vukovar Ltd. seaport company’s public call for offers has been initiated, while the Koncar electricity company’s privatization procedure has just begun and is in the early stages.

    Serbia has recently adopted a new privatization act, which is introducing asset deals and strategic partnerships and is to provide legal grounds for the privatization of 502 Serbian state-owned companies, of which 160 have been in the process of organizational and financial restructuring for quite some time. These companies include the Simpo Vranje furniture company, the Prva Iskra, Zorka, Petrohemijam, and Azotara chemical companies, the Krusik and Magnohrom special-purpose production companies, and several others. Companies in line for privatization also include the Galenika pharmaceutical company, the HIP Azotara fertilizer manufacturer, the Serbian Lottery, and a large copper mine at Bor. The mandatory deadline for privatization of these companies is rather ambitiously set for December 31, 2015. In the near future, the focus will be on privatization of the most profitable companies, such as Telekom Serbia, parts of the Elektroprivreda Srbije electricity company, Belgrade’s Nikola Tesla Airport, and the Dunav osiguranje insurance company.

    The privatization process in Montenegro is in its final phase. The privatization procedures of the Dr Simo Miloevic Health Institute and assets of Montenegro Airlines are considered to be the most significant and are expected to materially upgrade the quality of Montenegro’s tourist offering. Preparations for publishing public tenders for privatization of the Montecargo rail transport company, Montenegro Airlines, the Ulcinj Riviera hotel and tourist complexes, the Institute of Ferrous Metallurgy, and the Electrode Factory in Pluzine are underway. Tourism is also the sector of most companies being privatized through public-private partnerships.

    Due to the specific administration and division in Bosnia and Herzegovina, privatization has been conducted separately in its two entities: the Republic of Srpska (RS), and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH). In RS, most of the few profitable state-owned companies have already been privatized and an official privatization plan for 2015 has not been adopted yet. It seems likely that the plan for 2015 will involve, first and foremost, actually completing the privatizations that were intended for 2014 (as only five of the 33 companies included on that year’s state-owned company privatization plan were actually privatized). Thus, the focus will presumably be on privatizing four strategic companies: “Fabrika motora za specijalne namjene” a.d. I. Sarajevo, “FAMOS – Fabrika motora“ a.d. I.Sarajevo, “Kosmos” a.d. Banja Luka, and “Krajinapetrol” a.d. Banja Luka. All of these companies have been operating at a loss, however, so their business futures are uncertain.

    In FBiH, the goal of privatizing a number of companies has been announced, including the Sipad wood processing and timber company, the Energoinvest engineering companies, the Bosnalijek pharmaceutical company, the Energopetrol oil company, and several others.

    In Macedonia, the process of privatization is almost complete. Out of the larger scale transactions, only the privatization of JSC Macedonian Power Plants is ongoing – and it is on hold. The media reports indicate that the government has engaged a consultant for appraisal of the value of the company; however, no further details as to the status of this process are available.

    CEELM:

    Is there a difference between the countries that you cover in terms of sophistication of the privatization processes?

    U.I.: No, there are no significant differences between the countries regarding the sophistication of their privatization processes. The countries have a joint legal heritage and have utilized similar privatization methods. However, the overall level of privatization is a different story. The privatization processes in Macedonia and Montenegro are almost complete, which leads to the conclusion that political will and public support are at least as important, if not more important, than the sophistication of the legal instruments.

    CEELM:

    Voucher privatization was once the method of choice in CEE. Is voucher privatization the most common form of privatization in the former Yugoslavia as well? 

    U.I.: Voucher privatization was popular in the 90’s, but it has been abandoned in most SEE countries since it was determined to be a method that failed to ensure good enterprise management. The current wave of privatization is mostly executed through methods such as securities disposal via public offering (non-binding offer), public auctions, public calls for tenders, and direct sales of securities. Asset deal and strategic partnership methods are also used, but are less common. And as a significant share of privatized companies struggle financially, securities disposal is often also combined with restructuring and capital increase procedures, which makes law firms specialized in restructuring and insolvency especially valuable for handling these complex procedures.

    CEELM:

    The potential for corruption or self-dealing in privatizations is well known, and in some markets has been an unfortunate reality. Can potential investors proceed with full confidence in the markets you cover, or are cronyism and behind-the-scenes deals still a reality?

    U.I.: Corruption risks cannot be excluded as some of these countries still rank relatively high on the corruption indexes. Slovenia placed 39th out of 174 countries on the Corruption Perception Index 2014 by Transparency International. Croatia placed 61st, Macedonia 64th, Montenegro 76th, Serbia 78th and Bosnia and Herzegovina 80th. A former Croatian Prime Minister was convicted and sentenced to prison due to corruption in the majority share sale of the INA oil company, and a Serbian businessman was arrested for alleged abuses in the privatization of a road construction and maintenance company; therefore the risk was and still is indeed real. All of these countries have made fighting corruption a priority, and we anticipate circumstances will improve even further in the near future.

    This Article was originally published in Issue 2.2. of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • White Collar Crime in the Czech Republic; or Will Prosecutions Be Tamed by Politicians?

    White Collar Crime in the Czech Republic; or Will Prosecutions Be Tamed by Politicians?

    White collar crime in the Czech Republic is a closely monitored topic, particularly when it comes to the prosecution of certain publicly-active persons – among others, politicians.

    There are two legal areas where the illegal acts referred to as “white collar crimes” are committed most frequently. The first relates to public contracting and drawing upon state budget funds and European Union funds, where manipulation and bribery are frequent occurrences. The other area involves insolvency proceedings and their manipulation.

    A number of suspicious cases ended up fading away in the past, and it seemed that there was no political will to investigate and prosecute crimes connected with persons from upper political or social spheres.

    Over the past several years, however, things have begun to change, and the public prosecutor’s offices and the police are beginning to work more effectively.

    Of the numerous media-hounded cases of bribery involving publicly known persons, we reference that of David Rath, M.D., the former CEO of the Central Bohemia Region and a former member of the Czech Parliament and former Czech Minister of Health, who has been accused of accepting a bribe, causing harm to the interests of the European Union, corruption, and obtaining benefits from public contracts. The case began in May 2012, when David Rath was detained carrying a briefcase with CZK 7 million in cash. Rath insisted that he was carrying wine in a box; the police, on the other hand, asserted that the funds were obtained as a bribe in connection with the awarding of a public contract for reconstruction of a municipal mansion near Prague. In Dr. Rath’s house, the police found another approximately CZK 10 million in cash. During the course of the investigation, it was determined that a number of other public contracts in the healthcare and building industry had been influenced as well. The matter is now in court, and the case is close to being concluded. The former member of Parliament and Minister of Health may be punished with imprisonment of up to 12 years.

    The case of Dr. Rath is just one of many over the past several years where Czech police have begun prosecuting even high-profile persons, including members of Parliament or former Government Ministers.

    As far as criminal activities relating to insolvency are concerned, there have been cases where a vexatious insolvency petition was filed against a relatively prosperous company on grounds of a fictitious claim, insolvency proceedings were initiated, and the court appointed an insolvency trustee. Other fictitious claims were subsequently registered in the insolvency proceedings by some of the creditors (most often those with anonymous owners and based in Cyprus or the Seychelles). The insolvency trustee then acknowledged these fictitious claims while rejecting the legitimate claims of other creditors. Creditors of the fictitious – but acknowledged – receivables then had rights to vote in the insolvency proceedings and were able to influence the course of the insolvency, unlike those creditors whose claims had been unreasonably rejected by the insolvency trustee. In this way, the so-called insolvency mafia gained influence over developments in the insolvency and the subsequent sale of assets of the company so attacked. 

    Why is it that also cases dating back several years have now come under investigation? The credit for this goes mainly to Chief Public Prosecutor Pavel Zeman (appointed in 2011) and his subordinates Lenka Bradacova and Ivo Istvan – young and highly apt public prosecutors who have made full use of the authority conferred upon them by the current Act on Public Prosecution. The question is whether or not this trend will continue.

    Robert Pelikan was appointed the new Minister of Justice in March of 2015. In his previous engagement as Deputy Minister of Justice, this young and ambitious lawyer and former attorney conceived and is now striving to implement his idea of a new Act on Public Prosecution. Until recently he wanted to restrict the independence of state prosecutors and make them report to the Ministry of Justice; he also proposed that the Ministry should have the right to obtain information from “live cases” as well as the right to appoint head public prosecutors. While appointments of head public prosecutors should be preceded by a tender organized by the Ministry of Justice, the Minister of Justice would not be obligated to respect the results of the tender. This proposed form of the Act on Public Prosecution has met with strong opposition on the part of state prosecutors, led by the Chief Public Prosecutor, Pavel Zeman, and some political parties – all of whom maintain that the bill will compromise the independence of state prosecutors and increase the influence politicians have upon investigations. The Ministry of Justice is now trying to find a compromise and has recently presented a less controversial version of the Act on Public Prosecution.

    To conclude, the future form of the Act on Public Prosecution will be crucial for the ability of Czech authorities to investigate and prosecute serious corruption cases and other white collar crime.

    By Alexandr Cesar, Partner, Petra Ledvinkova, Associate, Baker & McKenzie

    This Article was originally published in Issue 2.2. of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • White Collar Crime in Austria

    White Collar Crime in Austria

    There has been an increase in public awareness of white  collar crime in Austria in recent years. Several court decisions in particular have been reported on extensively by the media and the proceedings in question resulted in long custodial sentences for directors and managers of a number of well-known Austrian companies. There are several reasons for this.

    First, Austria has taken steps to reform its institutions to fight white collar crime. The Central Public Prosecutor’s Office for White Collar Crime and Corruption (Zentrale Staatsanwaltschaft zur Verfolgung von Wirtschaftsstrafsachen und Korruption) was established in 2011 to conduct criminal investigations into white collar crimes over a certain economic threshold. In 2013 this institution unveiled a web-based reporting system which makes it possible for individuals to report suspected white collar crime anonymously (whistleblowing). 

    Second, several anti-corruption-related amendments were adopted into the Criminal Code in 2009 and 2012, prohibiting public officials from improperly benefitting from their positions in the business sector. For instance, an offense consisting of offering, promising, or granting an advantage that is not related to a specific official act, such as granting small favors to a public official (baiting), was introduced in the Act. Furthermore, the Criminal Code now makes a distinction between an “advantage”, “no undue advantage,” and a “minor advantage” granted to public officials, and thus specifies under which conditions a person is said to have committed a criminal corruption offence. Only so-called due benefits can be legally offered to public officials in cases where no particular decision by them is pending. A public official is allowed to accept: (i) advantages which may be accepted by law, or if the acceptance of advantages is within the context of the performance of duties and/or participation in events in which there exists an official interest; (ii) advantages which are provided for charitable purposes and are only subject to criminal prosecution if they are actively requested; (iii) small gifts of minor value which are characteristic of the particular place or country. According to the official explanations in the legislative project, an advantage is deemed to be of minor value if the amount does not exceed EUR 100. 

    Moreover, it should also be mentioned that since the 2012 amendment of the Criminal Code, the definition of a “public official” has been extended to include members of parliament and directors and employees of companies owned or governed by the state, but not directors and employees of a legal entity governed by public law. 

    In addition, Austria passed the “Party Funding Act” (Parteiengesetz 2012), the “Financing of Parties Act” (Parteienfoerderungsgesetz 2012), and specific lobbying legislation. The Lobbying Act lays down the basic principles of lobbying. In this context, a compulsory register which is publicly available was introduced. 

    Moreover, a leniency program was introduced in 2011. Under this program, a suspect who agrees to give evidence may receive amnesty from prosecution or a reduced sentence. In 2013, amnesty was granted for the first time in a corruption case involving the communications sector. 

    In recent years, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of proceedings for white collar crime. For example, directors and managers of banks and a telecommunications provider were accused (and convicted) of fraud, embezzlement, and money laundering. A former member of the Austrian government was found guilty of bribery because he agreed to table amendments in exchange for disproportional advantages from journalists who posed as lobbyists.

    Accordingly, companies dedicate time, effort, and funds to compliance management in order to prevent white collar crime. In these modern times, a company needs a compatible organizational structure to prevent legal misconduct. Thus, to minimize business liability risks, Austrian companies – particularly companies listed on the stock exchange – have established compliance management systems. Specially trained staff (i.e., one or more compliance officers) provide advice on all compliance matters. 

    In addition, internal investigations are conducted with more frequency in order to detect compliance deficiencies. 

    Finally, white collar crime legislation will also be affected by the latest proposal to amend the Criminal Code, which increases the thresholds for value-related crimes (such as embezzlement), and harmonizes several laws regulating crimes related to the incorrect representation of a company’s financial situation.

    It can be assumed that white collar crimes will continue to attract attention.

    By Stefan Huber, Partner, CHSH Cerha Hempel Spiegelfeld Hlawati

    This Article was originally published in Issue 2.2. of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • The Buzz: February – April

    “The Buzz” is a short summary of the major and relevant topics of interest in Central and Eastern Europe, provided by those best positioned to know: law firm partners and legal journalists/commentators on the ground in each CEE country. 

    Albania

    “How To (Not) Attract FDIs”

    One positive aspect highlighted by Eris Hoxha, Partner at Hoxha, Memi & Hoxha in Tirana, is the solvency reached in terms of CEZ’s exit from the Albanian market. An agreement was finally reached several months ago that, according to Hoxha, will send the message to potential investors that “the Albanian government can be reasonable and reach a good deal” even in troubled situations. He explained that, at the end of the day, CEZ left the market with a deal that allowed it to recover its investment in full [CEZ will get EUR 100 million in annual installments until 2018, which is similar to the initial investment it spent on the Albanian distribution company CEZ Shperndarje]. On a related note, Hoxha reports that it seems like “people have started paying their dues in terms of the electricity they consume, making the industry more liquid.” According to him, collection was an issue that CEZ had a big problem with in the country. 

    There are, however, several developments that make Hoxha “less excited.” On January 1, 2015, an increase income tax on dividends came into effect, preceded by an increase in the corporate tax last year, which, he points out, “are less than attractive for potential investors.” At the same time, there are ongoing discussions related to a draft new labor code, which, according to Hoxha, is considerably more conservative than the current one, and, if implemented, stands to “cancel the comparative advantage in attracting FDIs that results from having a relatively cheap labor force.” Other pending legislation includes an updated civil code – Hoxha calls the current one “considerably outdated” – but, at this point, he says, these are “more discussions than actual legislative initiatives.”

    Belarus

    “Workload Is The Same But Different”

    Geopolitics is taking its toll on Belarus, caught as it is between the rock of the sanctions imposed by both Russia and the West on the other, and the hard place of the Ukrainian crisis, according to Kiryl Apanasevich, the Office Managing Partner in Belarus at Sorainen. According to him, M&A is “almost dead” in Belarus, which, despite possessing a number of opportunities for both local and international investors caused in light of exits, is still “plagued by a shortage of buyers.” The other type of “traditional work” – Banking/Finance – is also slowing down considerably due to currency devaluations and the potential currency risks posed to potential borrowers. In fact, currency is impacting the economy as a whole, according to Apanasevich, with devaluations tending to create shortages of hard currency (EUR, USD, etc.) locally, which, in turn, affects the operations of businesses. And the red tape required to purchase hard currencies via the currency stock market, available only after securing a difficult-to-obtain permit from the central bank, also does not help.

    The “traditional” types of law firm work are being replaced with other streams of business, with Apanasevich pointing to compliance, regulatory, and corporate restructurings in particular.

    Finally, Apanasevich described an increased consolidation of the Belarusian law firm market, which Apanasevic says is “common in turbulent times.” He pointed to the merger between Sysouev Bondar Khrapoutski and Archer Legal and said he believes others are likely to follow.

    Bulgaria

    “A Depressing New Law And Exiting Reform Talks”

    Partners Ivan Markov and Svetlin Adrianov of Penkov, Markov & Partners  reported several notable deals in what they described as an otherwise-relatively slow market. The first is the acquisition of single control over the Bulgarian operations of Heineken (which, according to Adrianov, was until recently jointly owned with Coca-Cola Hellenic). The second is the ongoing sale of the Tokuda Bank (a medium-sized commercial bank, according to Markov) to Industrial Holding Bulgaria.

    In terms of legislation that the market is buzzing over, Markov pointed to the new Bank Bankruptcy law which was adopted at the end of March. The face that the legislation was required was described as “depressing” by Markov, since it follows the bank run of last year in a country which took pride in recording no bank bankruptcies since the crisis in 1996. The second “exciting bit of legislation talks” regards proposed reforms in the judicial system. According to Markov, the proposed legislation is meant to address ongoing issues highlighted by the EU Commission, which has “been closely monitoring problems in the country’s courts and prosecution systems.” He went on to explain that there are three different packages currently under discussion, pushed by different “circles in the parliament” and he said he is excited to see which direction the talks will take. 

    In terms of potentially promising industries in the short-/mid-term, the PM&P pointed towards real estate, to a lesser extent in terms of large residential assets, but primarily regarding those assets related to agriculture, which seem to have a lot of investors scouting the market. 

    Czech Republic  

    “The Dust Is Settling”

    One of the trends going on in the Czech Republic, according to Partner Stanislav Dvorak of Dvorak, Hager & Partners, is the increasing amount of work firms are doing helping family companies with single shareholders transition to a formal corporate structure and install formal corporate governance. Dvorak attributes this to the natural aging of the first generation of businessmen who set up companies following the fall of Communism. As they start to approach retirement age and begin to think about handing the reins over to the next generation, the need for formal corporate structures becomes more acute. Dvorak believes law firms in the market are starting to realize the potential of this practice.

    Otherwise, Dvorak believes, the market is fairly stable at the moment. He believes the waves of consolidation and international law firm exits that dominated the news last summer, when both Hogan Lovells and Norton Rose Fullbright pulled out of the market, are over. The market is, as a result, calmer now, and he doesn’t expect to see any more international law firms pulling out anytime soon.

    Another significant trend, the DH&P Managing Partner believes, is the increasing comfort clients have with seeing tax and legal practices come together. He referred to the resurgence of the Big 4 in particular – a phenomenon described in this magazine back in February – but said the trend is noticeable below that level as well. 

    Finally, Dvorak suggested, it appears that “the dust is really settling” on the no-longer-quite-so-new Czech Civil Code, and it appears that some revisions will happen – but the scope is likely to be more limited than some once imagined, and will probably be limited to those problems that turned out to be most obvious.

    Hungary  

    “Bitter Sweet Banking”

    Banking is again in the spotlight in Hungary with the sector being marked by what Csilla Andreko, Managing Partner for Budapest at Kinstellar, describes as “two developments in opposite directions.”

    On the one hand, the market was rejoicing at the potential solution to the Non-Performing Loans in the country – which Andreko described as “a systematic issue in Hungary that is freezing the lending market.” Specifically, an Asset Management Company – MARK Zrt – was set up with the goal of purchasing the top 500 NPLs at market rates in an effort to free up lending capabilities of banks in Hungary. Another positive sign was the agreement – reached together with the EBRD and involving the banking association as well – to start reducing the bank tax over the upcoming years. According to Andreko, the tax cut – expected to be as much as 50% of the current tax over the next few years – is not insignificant.

    These two developments have led to a series of positive signs, including a noticeable uptake in pitches for new money investments in the country. However, the positive outlook was suddenly placed under a question mark following what Andreko called simply “the Brokerage Scandal” that shook the market. Several weeks ago, the National Bank of Hungary suspended the licenses of three brokerage companies: Buda-Cash Brokerage, Hungaria Securities, and Questor. According to the Kinstellar Managing Partner, both investors in the brokerage companies’ products and clients with deposits lost everything overnight amid claims of fraud involving manipulation of their information system, separate record keeping, and, in Questor’s case, sale of fictive bonds. This prompted the Hungarian Government to commit to covering, at least partially, the “loss of life savings and good faith investments” out of two protection funds (OBA and BEVA). The ramification for the banking sector as a whole is that, as a result of this, the yearly membership fee for the funds for the rest of the financial institutions jumped from HUF 15 billion to HUF 35 billion – an increase which, according to Andreko, will likely counter-balance the potential positive impact of the planned tax cut.

    At the end of the day, most M&A work in Hungary is still public-sector driven, and Q1 showed promise that the private sector would pick up as well. The question now is which of the changes will impact the market more in the upcoming months.

    Kosovo

    “State Building At Its Best (?)”

    Kosovo was described as a country in its infant stages of statehood and struggling with a difficult and cumbersome process of state building by Dastid Pallaska, the Managing Partner of Pallaska & Associates. This has been reflected in the past months, according to him, both in the economy overall and in the government’s failure to finalize several large deals, including the privatization of several large companies. He believes that such failures not only have a negative effect on the perception of potential investors but also raise questions about the integrity of the tender processes themselves. Indeed, Pallaska noted that there seems to be a shift by the new Government towards abandoning tender processes in favor of so-called “direct strategic discussions” – while making sure that this process is kept as transparent as possible.

    Another characteristic shaping the market in Pallaska’s view is the unilateral adoption of EU legislations without them being “accompanied by the economic benefits that normally would follow.” This creates a lot of “new obligations without benefits,” though Pallaska conceded that some preferential benefits do exist for the country, and that trade, in particular, has benefited from them.

    In terms of specific legislative updates impacting the market, Pallaska pointed towards the reintroduction of taxes on dividends (ironically, coming from a government that positions itself as being center-right), as well as the introduction of several benefits for companies in terms of the taxing regime (such as recognizing certain costs as tax deductible).

    In terms of what is keeping lawyers busy in the market, Pallaska explained that due to the economic slowdown many deals have ended up in court, causing dispute resolution teams to grow despite the best efforts of transactional firms like his to mitigate risks for litigation. 

    Lithuania

    “A New Dispute Instrument.”

    There are two notable legislative updates in the Lithuanian market according to Ramunas Audzevicius, Partner and Co-Head of the Dispute Resolution practice at Motieka & Audzevicius. The first is the introduction of class actions as a fresh instrument in the country, which is a welcome update, according to Audzevicius, as it “will allow those not able to finance litigations on their own to join forces and have one firm represent their interests – which would also increase the liability exposure of the defendant.” The Motieka & Audzevicius Partner stated that, despite the urgent need for the new instrument, it will take years before its impact will be truly visible in the market, as the likely types of cases to employ it take a long time to play out: “They will likely revolve around consumer rights and competition infringements. In the latter, for example, one has to wait for an investigation by the competition authority, a decision, and an appeal from the highest courts before individual claims can establish a legal basis.”

    The second legislative update is related to the labor code. According to Audzevicius, a new labor law is being proposed to make the market more flexible and attractive for employers and FDIs. One way this might happen is a proposed reduction of the employment termination notice period from 6 months to 1.

    Lawyers in Lithuania are quite busy on a number of fronts, Audzevicius explained. In terms of disputes, some of the most important ones – both in terms of volume and value – tend to be energy/energy security related. Two bankrupt banks (SNORAS Bank and Ukio Bank) have “also generated plenty of ongoing litigation around them, giving a lot of work to law firms.” Finally, there are several exciting infrastructure projects related to Rail Baltica which, according to Audzevicius, always tend to provide a steady stream of work “for all ranges of lawyers from general corporate lawyers, to construction, and even for litigation ones as there is always room for disputes in such big ventures.”

    Romania 

    “Infrastructure should be a priority!”

    2015 started off with high expectations, according to Andreea Toma, Partner at Leroy si Asociatii. “Unfortunately, the public sector did not move as fast as … foreign investors expected,” she said, explaining that several large public PPP projects – the kinds of projects which are “really a driving force, both directly and indirectly,” in Romania – were put on hold at the end of the year. She added that the question of reactivating those PPPs is not necessarily a matter of attracting new investors, but one of retention, with existing foreign investors “potentially re-considering their stay in Romania if proper infrastructure for their business is not provided.” 

    By contrast, Toma noted, there is “some movement on the private M&A transactions side, especially in the medical services sector, likely involving private equity firms – the usual suspects in such matters.” She also pointed to some movement in the oil & gas industry, most recently with the Carlyle Group purchasing the entire Romanian business of Sterling Resources. 

    On the legislative side, Toma pointed out that a new draft fiscal code is under discussion, which is supposed to bring some material changes. This comes however in the context of overly frequent changes in the tax legislation, which has adversely impacted predictability in this sector. Another notable legislative change is related to capital markets in general and to the implementation of the AIFM Directive, in particular. 

    Russia 

    “Old Talks, New Twists”

    The deoffsorization of the Russian economy continues to be a major subject of discussion for Russian lawyers, according to Maxim Kulkov, Managing Partner of the recently launched Freshfields spin-off boutique Kulkov Kolotilov & Partners. This is not a new topic, according to Kulkov, since it is a concept that President Putin talked about three years ago, and the Law on Deoffsorization came into force on January 1, 2015, but the draft Amnesty Law – which in “return for returning Russian capital from off-shores will not penalize potential associated tax offenses” – was recently published and is expected to be passed soon.

    Another discussion taking place in the country at the moment follows last year’s merger of the Supreme Commercial Court, which handled commercial matters (between commercial entities), and the Supreme Court, which handled “general jurisdiction” matters (either between individuals or between individuals and commercial entities). Ongoing talks revolve around generating a common procedural code for both types of matters (though merging the lower levels of the two courts is not yet being considered). This, according to Kulkov, has businesses concerned, as, while the courts currently responsible for commercial matters tend to be business-oriented (such as factoring equity ownership), the “general jurisdiction” courts tend to factor in more individual-focused aspects, which often favor the weaker party. At the moment, this is in a “concept stage,” with a bill draft expected by autumn.

    Ukraine

    “High Time To Buy in Ukraine”

    According to Maksym Lavrynovych, Managing Partner at Lavrynovych & Partners, it is now the “high time to buy” in Ukraine when it comes to real estate assets. According to him, investors have come to the realization that prices have hit their lowest possible point – with some assets being valued at even 5 times lower the price of 5-7 years ago. As a result, Lavrynovych reported, there is strong and growing interest from investors in Austria, Germany, Poland, the US and “ironically, from Russia.” This trend was also facilitated, according to Lavrynovych, by business magnate George Soros’ recent statement that “Ukraine presents the best interest for his billion-dollar investment this year.”

    Another positive trend in the country that Lavrynovych pointed to was the digitalization of several otherwise bureaucratic processes such as business registrations, accessing land registers, etc. These things are increasingly being made available to business people “without having to have direct interactions with public representatives.” At the same time, several powers are being transferred away from the public sector to notaries, which, Lavrynovych claims, “tend to be more business oriented and business friendly.” 

    In terms of what is keeping law firms busy, the Lavrynovych & Partners Managing Partner noted that a notable uptake in demand from the banking industry has been registered in recent months, both because of legislative changes and because of an increase in the number of restructurings and loans in the market. 

    Thank you!

    We thank the following for sharing their opinions and analysis on the news:

    • Stanislav Dvorak, Partner, Dvorak Hager & Partners
    • Eris Hoxha, Partner, Hoxha, Memi & Hoxha
    • Csilla Andreko, Managing Partner, Kinstellar Budapest
    • Maxim Kulkov, Managing Partner, Kulkov Kolotilov & Partners
    • Maksym Lavrynovych, Managing Partner, Lavrynovych & Partners 
    • Andreea Toma, Partner, Leroy si Asociatii
    • Ramunas Audzevicius, Partner, Motieka & Audzevicius
    • Dastid Pallaska, Managing Partner, Pallaska & Associates
    • Ivan Markov and Svetlin Adrianov, Partners Penkov, Markov & Partners
    • Kiryl Apanasevich, Office Managing Partner, Sorainen Belarus

    This Article was originally published in Issue 2.2. of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • Tackling White Collar Criminality in Slovenia

    Tackling White Collar Criminality in Slovenia

    In the past decade, Slovenia passed several laws aiming to provide a more suitable regulatory framework and greater tools for authorities to tackle white collar criminality. The state was particularly active at strengthening integrity and transparency, preventing corruption, combating money laundering, and confiscating the proceeds of crime.

    White collar criminality was approached with different methods, but in general they could be divided into two categories: preventive and curative. 

    Among preventive measures, we may mention the Integrity and Prevention of Corruption Act (“ZIntPK”), which was adopted in 2010, and the Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Act (“ZPPDFT”), the skeleton of which dates to 2007 but which has been amended several times since then, most recently in 2014. 

    ZIntPK provides for measures and methods to strengthen integrity and transparency, to prevent corruption, and to avoid and eliminate conflicts of interest. It primarily addresses the public sector, though also, where explicitly stipulated, the private sector. Strengthening integrity includes raising standards of conduct and levels of responsibility expected from individuals and organizations in the prevention and elimination of risks related to the use of any authority, office, mandate, or any other decision-making power contrary to the law, legally admissible objectives, and codes of ethics. 

    ZIntPK also regulates lobbying, which has not been regulated before. 

    ZPPDFT provides a number of measures aimed at the prevention of money laundering and determines the expected activities of credit and financial institutions and other persons involved in trading and other transactions involving money transfers. In the scope of preventive anti-money laundering activities, addressees of the mentioned act, i.e., the financial sector, comprising credit institutions and a wide range of other financial institutions, are required to identify their customers, keep appropriate records, establish internal procedures to train staff and guard against money laundering, and to report any indications of money laundering to the competent authorities. In limited scope, the act applies also to attorneys and notaries.

    As money laundering is frequently carried out in an international context, it is important that the measures are not adopted solely at the national but rather on the international level. We believe that Slovenian national legislation on anti money laundering is compliant with EU regulations and that it, in fact, represents the implementation of EU regulations. Therefore, the framework for international cooperation is enabled.

    Most of the criminal offenses which are typically considered white collar crimes were incorporated into the Criminal Code in its version from 1994. However, in the past couple of years it has been established that simply sanctioning perpetrators is not sufficient for effective prosecution and future prevention of white collar criminality. Although the legislation allowed confiscation of the proceeds of crime, practice showed that the burden of proof, which required that the prosecuting office establish that specific proceeds arise from criminal offense, was too demanding for effective confiscation of unlawfully gained proceeds. 

    As a reaction to this finding, the Confiscation of Proceeds from Crime Act (“ZOPNI”) was adopted in 2011. As a major change brought into the legal procedures concerning confiscation of unlawfully gained assets, the burden of proof was reversed. It was established as a rule that the asset is of unlawful origin unless it is proven that it has been acquired from lawfully obtained incomes or was acquired in another lawful way. In addition, if there is an obvious disproportion between the asset and incomes of the person being investigated, ZOPNI sets forth a legal presumption that the asset does not arise from lawful incomes or was not obtained lawfully. The concerned person may challenge the presumption, but must, to be successful, prove that the asset was obtained lawfully. 

    In order to collect evidence and information relevant for the decision on confiscation of proceeds of crime and to decide on the initiation of a proceeding of confiscation of such asset, the State Prosecution Office may order a financial investigation. After the investigation, the State Prosecution Office may initiate a legal proceeding for the confiscation of the assets, in which case the court shall decide on the confiscation. Before this proceeding is initiated, the court may – upon the request of the State Prosecution Office – order temporary protection of confiscation or temporary confiscation of the assets likely to be found unlawfully gained.

    According to the Report of the State Prosecution Office for 2013, that office carried out 107 criminal proceedings, in which the courts ordered temporary confiscation of unlawfully acquired assets amounting to EUR 418 million. 

    The general impression, which has to a large extent also been supported in the statistical reports of the Police and the State Prosecution Office, is that the authorities are fighting white collar criminality more successfully than in the past. However, the forms and ways of white collar criminality are changing constantly and are becoming more and more complex. This has an impact on the work of authorities involved in investigation and prosecution, which is also becoming more demanding and requires expert knowledge.

    By Matej Perpar,, Partner, Kirm Perpar

    This Article was originally published in Issue 2.2. of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • June Issue Available to Subscribers

    Our June issue, which focuses on the Baltic States and includes an Experts Review section dedicated to Life Sciences, is now out! With the publication of this Issue 2.3, the April one becomes available to non-subscribers as well.

    The main titles in Issue 2.3. are:

    • Prominent International Disputes Lawyer Joins US IDR Team Of Squire Patton Boggs
    • Breaking Patterns: Interview with Ion Dragne, Newly Elected Dean of The Bucharest Bar
    • Czeching the Legal Market: Leading Czech Lawyers Discuss Client Service, Strategy, and Changes
    • The Ace In The Hole: Ronald Given is Wolf Theiss’s Secret Weapon
    • Guest Editorial by Aku Sorainen: A Quarter Century of Baltic Legal Market
    • CEE Writ Small & Reshuffling the Deck as part of our Market Spotlight section
    • Market Snapshots covering competition, life sciences, data privacy, energy, and tax in the Baltics
    • Inside Insight Interviews with Jurate Kuzborska-Girce (Head of Legal – Baltic States at Phillip Morris), Priit Lepasepp (General Counsel at Nelja Energia), and Ilze Slakota (General Counsel at UralChem, Latvia)
    • “Expat on the Market” interview with Matthias Strohmayer of Varul in Latvia
    • CEE “Experts Review” analyses on Life Sciences across CEE jurisdictions

    Subscribers can access all these and more in the electronic version here. If you are not yet registered to access the CEE Legal Matters magazine, you can sign up here.

    As our readers know, this also means that our previous issue is now available. 

    The April (2.2) Issue Contains: 

    • A Guest Editorial by Denise Hamer, new Partner at DLA Piper International: “Go East, Young Woman!”
    • The Summary of Deals and Moves for February-April 2015
    • A review of the convoluted and controversial Hypo Group Alpe-Adria Bank crisis
    • A report on the move by White & Case’s Budapest office to Dentons, and White & Case’s subsequent withdrawal from Hungary;
    • A review of Privatizations across South Eastern Europe
    • “Market Snapshots” containing an overview of various practice areas in Russia and Ukraine
    • A Round Table conversation with Senior and Managing Partners at the leading firms in Kyiv about the challenges they’re facing
    • A report on how partners at firms with offices in both Ukraine and Russia manage the potential for distraction during a time of conflict
    • An interview with leading legal recruiters in Russia to understand how the current financial crisis in that country is affecting lateral moves in that country
    • A humorous review of surreal and silly disputes in Russia over the past year
    • Guest Market Spotlight Editorials by the Olga Binda, Counselor to the President of Federal Chamber of Advocates of the Russian Federation, and Olga Usenko, the Chief Editor and Head of Research Programs at the Ukrainian Journal of Business Law
    • The Buzz — a review of the issues and subjects dominating conversation among lawyers across CEE
    • “Inside Insight” interviews with senior in-house counsel from Carlsberg Ukraine, Henkel, ING Bank, Food City, Virgin Connect, and the Co-Chairman of the Compliance Club under the American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine
    • “Expat on the Market” interviews with Peter Teluk in Kyiv and Matthew Keats in Moscow
    • CEE “Experts Review” analyses of White Collar Crime across all CEE jurisdictions

    The full electronic version of the April Issue can be found here and the pdf version can be downloaded from here.

     

  • Dentons Advises Morgal Investments on Planetograd Project Near St. Petersburg

    Dentons has advised Israeli developer Morgal Investments on the successful completion of the first stage of the sale of part of the land intended for the implementation of the Planetograd project.

    The Planetograd project involves the construction of approximately 1.5 million square meters of low-rise residential housing, as well as multiple forms of transportation, utility, social, and commercial infrastructure, all on a 240 hectare area on Pulkovskoe Shosse, not far from the Pulkovo Observatory, near St. Petersburg. The cooperation agreement for the project was signed by Morgal Investments and the Governor of St. Petersburg during the 2014 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.

    The buyer and developer of the residential areas of the Planetograd project is the SOZIDANIE Agency for Land Development – a subsidiary of the major Russian developer Setl City. The developer has estimated completion of the project in 14 years. The transaction is valued at approximately USD 500 million.

    “The Planetograd project is one of the most strategically important low-rise residential construction projects in our city today and is being personally overseen by the Governor of St. Petersburg,” stated Karina Chichkanova, who Heads Dentons’ St. Petersburg Real Estate practice, and who is leading Morgal Investments’ legal team for the project. “We’re delighted that we have the opportunity to represent Morgal Investments in the structuring of and preparation for such a complex and multi-phase transaction. In the first stage alone we signed more than 30 different agreements and related documents.”

    Chichkanova’s team included Associates Arina Dovzhenko, Tair Suleymanov, and Svetlana Shlyunko.

  • VKP Successfully Represents Interests of Dragon Ukrainian Properties & Development Subsidiary

    Vasil Kisil & Partners has successfully represented the interests of Budynok Pobutu Obolon PrJSC (BPO), a subsidiary of Dragon Ukrainian Properties & Development, in a dispute with the State Emergency Service of Ukraine regarding termination of the construction of a residential and office complex in the Obolonskyi District of Kyiv.

    Dragon-Ukrainian Properties & Development plc (DUPD) is a real estate investment company incorporated in the United Kingdom. DUPD’s shares have been listed on the London Stock Exchange since June 2007. DUPD was established by Dragon Capital to invest in the real estate market in Ukraine.

    The local administrative court dismissed the claim of the State Emergency Service of Ukraine in its entirety. The court found that there were no statutory grounds for termination of BPO’s construction, as all violations of the fire safety regulations that had been identified in an inspection has been rectified before the hearing date.

    VKP’s team was supervised by Partner Oleg Alyoshin, and included Counsellor Oleg Kachmar and Leading Associate Yuriy Kolos.

  • Open Call for all Heads of Legal: The 2015 CEE GC Survey and Summit

    Consistent with its mission to inform and serve in-house counsel across the region, CEE Legal Matters has initiated the 2015 version of its highly regarded CEE Corporate Counsel Best Practices survey, once again inviting over 3000 General Counsel and Heads of Legal across Central and Eastern Europe to fill out a short online questionnaire about best practices, key strategies, and personal preferences.

    Some 698 senior in-house counsel participated in last year’s survey, and their responses resulted in the widely-read CEE Corporate Counsel Best Practices Handbook. David Stuckey, the Executive Editor of CEE Legal Matters, expects this year’s report to be even more popular. “As we’ve grown, our network has grown,” he said, “and we’re now in close contact with even more lawyers, both in-house and in private practice, than we were at this point last year. In addition, those who participated in last year’s survey found the results extremely useful. As word spreads, I have no doubt that this year’s report will be even better.”

    Participants who complete the survey will, as last year, receive a free hard copy of the report itself — and a 25% discount on tickets to the September 10-11 General Counsel Summit in Budapest: An unprecedented event, designed exclusively for General Counsel and Heads of Legal, who alone will be able to register to attend. Guest speakers announced so far include Pal Kara, the Vice President and Group General Counsel at MOL, Judith Gliniecki, the General Counsel at CEE Equity Partners, Andras Mohasci, the Commercial Compliance Counsel (Global) at British American Tobacco, Gergo Budai, the General Counsel and Deputy CEO at Invitel, and many others. In addition, Marie-Anne Birken, the General Counsel at the EBRD, will give the keynote presentation covering how General Counsels can be agents of law reforms. 

    The survey is available here and we welcome input from all General Counsel and Heads of Legal and/or Compliance.

    Information can be found at the event microsite, here.

    Radu Cotarcea, the Managing Editor of CEE Legal Matters, which is organizing the GC Summit, believes the event — the first of what is expected to be an annual event in CEE — fills an obvious gap. “For years now we’ve had in-house counsel complain to us that they have limited opportunities for networking, idea exchange, and simple communication about how best to manage their time and address the many challenges they face each day,” Cotarcea says. “It became clear to us that a dedicated event, created specifically for them and with their needs in mind, would be extremely useful.” It may be more than that. “We also,” Cotarcea says with a smile, “frankly, think it will be fun.”

    Gide Loyrette Nouel is a partner of both the survey and summit with more to be announced soon — we thank them for their support!

  • Paksoy, Yarsuvat, and Linklaters Advise on Triton Sale to Goat Bidco

    Paksoy has advised funds advised by Triton on the sale of Compo’s Expert division — one of the leading suppliers of specialty fertilizer products for professional applications — to Goat Bidco (a subsidiary of the XIO Group). Compo was advised by Linklaters as international counsel, and Goat Bidco was advised by the Yarsuvat Law Firm.

    Triton retains ownership of Compo’s consumer business unit, which Paksoy describes as “the European market leader in high-quality home and garden products.”

    Paksoy’s team was led by Partner Togan Turan, who was assisted by Associate Zeynep Sehoglu.