Category: Uncategorized

  • Polish Banking Sector Overview

    Polish Banking Sector Overview

    Over the last few years, the Polish banking sector has gone from strength to strength, benefiting from stable economic growth in Poland. In 2014, banks hit record-high net profits of over PLN 16 billion for the whole sector. Profits in 2015 are expected to be slightly lower but still close to the record of 2014. However, prospects for the coming year are definitely less promising.

    The external environment is posing more and more challenges for Polish banks, which they will increasingly need to face in 2016. These challenges are likely to result in much lower profits than the banks have become used to.

    For the last three years, banks have been struggling with steadily falling interest rates. The basic interest rate decreased from 4.75% at the end of 2012 to 1.50% at the end of 2015. As deflation in Poland continues, it is expected that by mid-2016 interest rates may drop even further. 

    Polish banks are also subject to higher contributions to the Bank Guarantee Fund, which has recently begun protecting funds deposited in savings and loan associations as well.

    Cooperative Savings and Credit Unions (SKOKs) began to be overseen by the Polish Financial Supervision Authority only last year, and recent audits have revealed a large number of problems which need to be resolved with some financial help from banks. This help is provided either directly (through the acquisition of some SKOKs) or indirectly (through payments from the Bank Guarantee Fund), and has proved necessary in a few cases to stabilize the broader financial sector.

    Apart from this, there are also some politically driven risk factors that may have a devastating effect on the short-term profitability of the banking sector. First, there is the prospect of a bank tax, which is expected to be imposed in Q1 2016. The new tax is likely to be imposed on financial institutions’ assets at an expected rate of 0.39%. The costs of the new tax are estimated at about PLN 6 billion. Second, in 2016 banks may be hit by the problem of mortgage loan portfolios denominated in Swiss francs. The new government seems determined to introduce legislation allowing borrowers to convert their CHF-denominated loans into PLN at the exchange rate as of the date of the loan agreement. The costs would then be shared between the bank and the borrower, but the question of proportionality is unsettled. In a relatively moderate model of 50:50, this might cost the banks about PLN 9 billion.

    Together with increasing regulatory requirements, all this makes it much harder for banks to be profitably run in the short term. To face this challenge, banks will continue to put high pressure on costs. They will also continue to focus more and more on compliance functions to mitigate potential regulatory risks.

    Another trend will be consolidation. Several banks are already declared to be up for sale. In addition, we can clearly see a desire to build a large financial group around state-controlled insurer PZU, which took over Alior Bank this year and is declaring an interest in other bank acquisitions. The ambitious investment plans of PZU will definitely be a strong driver for consolidation in the banking sector next year.

    Despite all these risks and challenges, a positive thing is that banks will be facing them in relatively friendly macroeconomic conditions. GDP growth continues and may become even faster. The unemployment rate is under 10% (compared to 17.6% ten years ago). Additionally, in the next few years Poland is expected to benefit from unprecedented EU financial support, which will also require support from lending institutions. This should help banks restructure their operations and return to profitability equilibrium, despite the adverse market conditions they now face.

    By Krzysztof Haladyi, Partner, Wierzbowski Eversheds

    This Article was originally published in Issue 2.6. of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • Condition of Capital Markets in Poland

    Condition of Capital Markets in Poland

    2015 for Polish capital markets reflected reduced interest among investors and a decrease in the amount of concluded transactions.

    One of the factors that influenced this slowdown in activity was the reform of open-end pension funds (OFE), which resulted in a reduction of capital that they could allocate to investments in shares listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange (WSE). The OFE reform, particularly in view of parliamentary elections and the change of government in Poland, raised serious doubts as to the future condition of the stock market and the institutional framework of trading in financial instruments.

    Over the passing year, the capital market was not the subject of significant legislative changes. However, recently, the Polish financial regulatory authority – the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) – announced its position on the amendments to the prospectus approval procedure which entered into force in September. For issuers it mostly means increased cooperation with the KNF in setting a timeframe for approval proceedings. According to the KNF’s position, prospectus approval proceedings shall be shorter and last not more than six to eight weeks in the case of properly prepared documentation. In addition, in order to gain investors’ trust, the KNF makes information on the course of ongoing administrative proceedings regarding the approval of the prospectuses public (the information is published on the KNF website).

    The Polish capital market did not surprise its participants with significant developments. Market activity mostly revolved around companies’ transfers from NewConnect – an alternative trading system to the main market of the WSE. Nonetheless, several notable transactions, both mid and high value, were conducted during the last few months. One of the biggest transactions conducted recently (with a value of approximately PLN 121 million) which ended with a huge success, was the IPO of InPost S.A. – an independent Polish postal operator. It is worth mentioning that the major investor in the InPost IPO was the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which acquired 20 per cent of offered shares. Other successful debuts on the WSE included Wittchen S.A. – a Polish manufacturer of luxury leather products (with a value of approximately PLN 55 million) and Poznanska Korporacja Budowlana PEKABEX S.A. – a leading manufacturer of prefabricated structures in Poland (with a value of approximately PLN 74 million). Transactions such as these demonstrate that there is still a place for financially stable companies on the market.

    Even if 2015 was not the best year for capital markets in the classical sense, there was a noticeable increase in the activity of private equity funds on those markets, particularly in debuts and sales of shares of selected PE funds’ portfolio companies, as well as with regard to refreshing portfolios and planning new investments. A perfect example is the purchase of the state-owned company PKP Energetyka S.A. – the energy unit of Polish National Railways (Polskie Koleje Panstwowe S.A.) by the CVC Capital Partners private equity fund, which – at approximately EUR 477 million – was one of the largest private equity transactions in Poland (CMS was legal counsel to CVC Capital Partners in the transaction). Compared to other PE funds’ investments on the Polish market, only the purchase of Emitel – the leading terrestrial radio and TV broadcast infrastructure operator in Poland – by Alinda Capital Partners in 2014 was of a similar scale.  

    Another transaction that is worth mentioning was the July 2015 sale of Home.pl – one of the largest providers of Internet services in Central and Eastern Europe – to the Value4Capital private equity fund for approximately EUR 150 million. Considering the scale of interest in the target company, the competition in the sale process, the return on investment to the PE fund, and the price, this was another of the most prominent deals in Poland this year.

    In conclusion, 2015 was characterized by a lower number of major transactions on the WSE and thus medium activity in the capital markets area. Nevertheless, recent IPOs are a good basis for sustaining the upward trend in 2016, and they indicate that the Warsaw Stock Exchange will remain one of the most prominent trading floors among European exchanges. 

    By Michal Pawlowski, Partner, and Rafal Wozniak, Of Counsel, CMS

    This Article was originally published in Issue 2.6. of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • Filling the Gap: Regional Firms Stepping Up in CEE as International Firms Turn Away

    Filling the Gap: Regional Firms Stepping Up in CEE as International Firms Turn Away

    In the decade or so after the Berlin Wall came down – and in a few select cases even before the German pick-axes began to swing – international law firms (ILFs) flooded into CEE, eager to participate in the big profits accompanying the region’s awkward transition to a market economy. Especially at first, local law firms were woefully unprepared to compete, and had neither the capacity nor the skills to offer modern and highly-skilled services Western investors required.

    Number-of-offices-of-regional-and-international-firms-in-CEE-by-year

    Times, it can be said, have changed. And while many ILFs find themselves more interested in the larger economies of the Far East, Middle East, or Africa, the quality of local offerings has significantly increased – leading not only to stronger independent firms, but to the rapid rise of CEE-based Regional law firms. We decided to take a closer look at this phenomenon.

    ILFs Are Picking Up and Moving On

    By this point the news that another international firm has decided to close an office in CEE and retract one of its tentacles from the region is no longer surprising. Indeed, stories of such withdrawals have become common-place.

    Here’s a quick run-down of some of the more notable departures:

    • Freshfields withdrew from the Czech Republic (2002)
    • Freshfields withdrew from Hungary (2007)
    • Linklaters pulled out of Romania, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia (all 2008)
    • Clifford Chance pulled out of Hungary (2009)
    • Freshfields withdrew from Slovakia (2009)
    • Simmons & Simmons pulled out of Russia (2009)
    • DLA Piper pulled out of Bulgaria (2011)
    • Beiten Burkhardt pulled out of Poland (2012) 
    • Skadden Arps pulled out of Austria (2013)
    • Beiten Burkhardt pulled out of Ukraine (2013)
    • White & Case left Bucharest (January 2014)
    • Gide Loyrette Nouel left Bucharest (February 2014)
    • Norton Rose left Prague (May 2014)
    • Hogan Lovells left Prague (June 2014)
    • Chadbourne & Parke left Kyiv (October, 2014)
    • DLA Piper left Istanbul (November 2014)
    • White & Case left Budapest (April 2015)
    • Eversheds left Prague (January 2015)
    • Gide Loyrette Nouel left Budapest (November 2015)
    • Gide Loyrette Nouel left Kyiv (November 2015)
    • Clifford Chance left Kyiv (December 2015)

    Some ILFs, concededly, are swimming against the tide – primarily in Turkey, which in recent years has proven irresistible to firms such as Clifford Chance, Baker & McKenzie, DLA Piper, Chadbourne & Parke, and Allen & Overy. Though even by the Bosphorus the bloom may be off the rose, as DLA Piper concluded its relationship with YukselKarkinKucuk and withdrew from turkey last year – a mere four years after arriving. Rumors abound that other international firms may follow suit before long as well.

    Regardless, of the 17 law firms with significant CEE footprints, only one has opened an office in CEE outside of Turkey since 2009 – Eversheds, which opened up in Romania in 2011. In that same time, those same firms have shut the doors to 13 offices in the region.

    Number-of-offices-of-regional-and-international-firms-in-CEE

    Your Loss is Our Gain

    While the ILFs pull back from CEE, Regional law firms seem to be spreading like wildfire. A full list of new office of Regional law firms in CEE would fill the page, but a list of regional firms with offices in 4 or more CEE jurisdictions includes Wolf Theiss (in 13), Schoenherr (12), CMS Reich-Rohrwig Hainz (9), Peterka & Partners (9), bnt (9), CHSH (8), Karanovic & Nikolic (7), Kinstellar (7), ENWC/Taylor Wessing CEE (7), and ODI (4). 

    And only one office of a Regional firm has been closed in recent years (Schoenherr’s, in Kyiv, earlier in 2015).

    What does this all mean? Does it mean international law firms are turning to more fertile markets? Does it mean regional firms have strengths the international law firms are unable to match? Does it indicate that, as technology grows and travel becomes ever-easier, international law firms are better able to compete from a distance, obviating the need for extensive on-the-ground presences? 

    As with all things, it depends on who you ask. So that’s what we did.

    Definitions and Explanations

    Any article like this requires clarifications, qualifications, and exceptions – but, if you’re not careful, they start to overwhelm the article itself. So we’ll keep this short:

    For the purposes of this article, “International Law Firms” are those law firms headquartered in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, or France, while “Regional law firms” are those firms which are headquartered in CEE (which we define to include Turkey, Greece, Austria, and Russia, among other countries). For this article and supporting data, we focus only on those firms with offices in at least three CEE countries. 

    There is one exception to the above: When calculating which firms qualify as Regional, we do not include those based in the Baltics. This is not to diminish their importance or the significance of their distinct historical, political, cultural, or linguistic nature of Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia, but simply because there are so many firms that cover all three (and, often, Belarus) that including them in the analysis risks warping it altogether. In addition, as we reported in our June 2015 issue, at the moment there is only one truly integrated pan-Baltic law firm (Sorainen), with others claiming various levels of integration, adding an additional complicating factor. 

    CMS and Taylor Wessing CEE are problems as, in one incarnation or another, they qualify as both international law firms and regional law firms, simultaneously. Why ILFs? Well, Taylor Wessing and CMS Cameron McKenna are both based in London. Why Regional law firms? Well, CMS Reich Rohrwig Hainz and Taylor Wessing CEE (the former ENWC) are headquartered in Vienna, with 9 offices (not including its shares in CMS offices in Istanbul and Moscow), and 6 offices in CEE, respectively. Ultimately, both are wild cards, making it difficult to include them in any one analysis without multiple asterisks. Thus, Partners from those two firms must not take offense at generalizations that seem to ignore them.

    We’re also not addressing the arrivals, departures, and re-arrivals of the Big 4. An analysis of their renewed presence in CEE can be found in the December 2014 issue.

    This is, obviously, an introduction and 10,000 meter overview of the subject, and we are not able to address philosophical or even legal questions about what is or is not a law firm (compared to some other slightly different classification with legal significance), which local practices or affiliates of international law firms are required to register as wholly independent in which jurisdictions, and so on. In short, we accept without reservation any distinctions various firms wish to make, and this article should not be relied on for any accusations or technical findings, by a bar association or anybody else.

    International-and-regional-firms-office-openings-and-exits.jpg

    International-and-regional-firms-office-openings-and-exits-2

    Ondrej Peterka, Founding and Managing Partner, Peterka & Partners:

    “The international firms suffer because the privatization work which drew them to the region is more or less over, and their high fees (and high salaries) makes them uncompetitive. Especially as many of their local offices are unable to generate their own business, and do not receive much work from London, they offer no real extra value for the higher fees they demand. As a result, many of them are making a strategic choice not to subsidize CEE operations anymore, and are instead turning their attention to China, Brazil, or Africa. By contrast, regional firms – especially truly integrated regional firms – offer strong local roots and local knowledge, competitive pricing, and the same (or sometimes better) quality than international firms. General Counsel of global corporations are looking for a genuinely regional solution, and understand perfectly the difference between a truly integrated firm and all other schemes.”

    Hugh Owen, Partner, Allen & Overy:

    [Speaking about how A&O has maintained its footprint in the region, while other ILFs have shrunk theirs] “I think that it is a combination of factors, all of which need to be present for it to work. For us it is a combination of a clear strategy, including a genuine commitment to the CEE region; diverse (but still high end) product line expertise (meaning we can flex with the market with the ups and downs of for example corporate, finance, capital markets and regulatory work); and finally our culture, which I believe is a collegiate culture enabling us to resolve problems and avoid internally-generated existential threats.”

    David Childs, former Global Managing Partner of Clifford Chance:

    [Explaining in a 2009 press release why the firm was withdrawing from Hungary] “As the leading international and regional firm in Central and Eastern Europe, we see a huge amount of potential for us in the region. However, our strategy is to develop our firm in those areas that are most important to our major international clients and this is where we must concentrate our investment. While our Budapest office is a successful, highly-regarded, top-tier practice that has been involved in most of Hungary’s ground-breaking transactions over the years, we believe that a standalone Clifford Chance operation is no longer needed in Hungary and that we will be best able to meet the needs of our strategic clients through this ‘best friends’ arrangement.”

    Andrew Kozlowski, Managing Partner, CMS Warsaw:

    “CMS because of its critical mass is able to employ mid-level lawyers with a high degree of specialization that can perform legal tasks in fewer hours. I believe law firms with smaller teams in CEE that can not offer such efficiencies struggle to maintain high profits and are forced to scale back their number of lawyers.”

    Markus Piuk, Partner, Schoenherr:

    “CEE-based firms are here to stay. Market movements will not make them consider moving out of individual markets, but rather to respond to changes in the market environment. That is obviously also easier for firms headquartered in the region – decisions are taken in the region rather than in London or on the other side of the Atlantic. At the same time, Magic Circle firms have a more impressive ability to bring deals globally to the region. In particular those clients with no previous exposure to CEE might choose to turn to a Magic Circle firm they have already worked with elsewhere in the world rather than to reach out to a CEE-based firm.”

    Patricia Gannon, Founding and Managing Partner, Karanovic & Nikolic:

    “What I see as key is the flexibility of a smaller more entrepreneurial system.” 

    Willibald Plesser, Partner and Co-Head of CEE/CIS, Freshfields:

    “Freshfields has a long history in the region, and we have had our own offices in Hungary (founded 1989), the Czech Republic (founded 1990) and Slovakia (founded 1991). Through these offices, we capitalized on the massive investments from Austria, Germany and other Western European markets into CEE in the mid-90’s. Soon after the merger with Freshfields in 2000 we looked at the region and realized that we could not have offices in all markets that were booming at the time. For example, Poland was a huge market but was already flooded in terms of legal services. We also reached the conclusion that it was not realistic to expect to successfully grow what we believed to be a ‘real Freshfields’ office in each of these markets – a true full service firm, top ranked across the board. It would have also implied a lot of handholding of local teams, which we did not feel worked with our overall strategy. We changed our strategy to cooperating with 2 or 3 top firms in each of the CEE countries, which allows us to bring the best qualified people to each job, a must for a firm like ours. Freshfields was, as we all know, not the only international firm to take this approach. Our current model – which we practice on a worldwide level – is working very well for us, and a third of our global revenue comes from jurisdictions where we do not have offices.” 

    David Plch, Executive Partner in Prague, White & Case:

     “We continually review our strategy to ensure the firm is best aligned with the needs of our clients, and that’s no different in CEE. As a leading global law firm, White & Case wants to have global clients and serve them globally. The changes we’ve made to our presence in the region over the past couple of years have enabled us to focus on high end and non-commoditized work. We’re now better aligned with our clients and playing to our strengths in handling the complex, cross-border matters as well as top tier local work for which we are a recognized market leader in the region.”

    Jason Mogg, Managing Partner, Kinstellar:

    “CEE markets are relatively uninteresting for major international law firms because the markets are small and the fees achievable are lower than they achieve most everywhere else. As such, major international law firms cannot make the investments in quality that they typically make elsewhere and at the same time give real opportunities for career growth to their people. They will not be able to make reasonable numbers of true equity partners in the region. This means they cannot offer longer-term career prospects for the best and brightest in their markets. By contrast, local firms often don’t offer real career progression prospects for many people outside the founder group and struggle to invest in know-how, training and learning – that is, in their people and in their ability to deliver high quality service. This has opened a gap in the market for regional firms that both seriously invest in those things which allow a firm to deliver consistent high quality service and provide a longer-term and real career prospect to their up and coming people.” 

    Uros Ilic, Founding and Managing Partner, ODI Law Firm:

    “Clients have slowly come to understand that local and regional firms have on offer a large and locally-grown talent pool, which keeps growing so that in terms of winning business, it is all coming down to cost efficiency and fee management. A continuous market pressure on legal costs is somewhat better absorbed by regional firms which are better at operating at reduced costs than global firms which have high expat and office costs to contend with. The knowledge and understanding of the local market and culture may also work in our favor.” 

    This Article was originally published in Issue 2.6. of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • The Buzz: October – December

    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.

    Austria

    “Intense movement in the banking sector, with others likely to follow”

    A lot of movement in the banking sector was reported by Willibald Plesser, Partner and Co-Head for CEE/CIS at Freshfields. According to Plesser, the topic of HETA remains very hot. Despite the fact that matters between BayernLB [which Freshfields represented in the dispute] and HETA (former Hypo Alpe Adria), “have reached a partial settlement, there are still many creditors out there trying to get their money from HETA or the State of Carinthia. This has set off a wave of instructions of both Austrian and foreign law firms. A number of law suits have already been filed against HETA and Carinthia, including a large number of claims against HETA before the courts of Frankfurt.”

    The banking sector is looking at other potential moves, as UniCredit has announced a substantial restructuring of its operations in Austria, with its CEE business likely to be transferred to Milan. At the same time, there are rumors that Raiffeisen was planning to change its structure (in particular, a potential merger of so-called “sector banks” was reported), while in Poland the exit of Raiffeisen seems to be on hold due to regulatory requirements. Erste is selling off NPL portfolios, and the owners of BAWAG seem to be looking for a potential exit – although Plesser noted how difficult it was to sell a bank in the region these days. The general feeling seems to be that the Austrian market is, at the moment, highly competitive and over-banked, and some of the moves above would reflect the difficulty resulting from that. 

    Aside from banking, compliance issues “are all over the place” with the Volkswagen case being just one of the ongoing issues in a practice area which is rapidly growing these days. 

    Plesser pointed to other promising practice areas. The first was Disputes, where a number of arbitrations have already popped up, and others are likely to follow, all revolving around breaches of investment treaties by states. Some of these disputes result from recent pieces of legislation on fixed-rate conversions of Swiss franc loans (such as in Hungary, Croatia, or potentially Poland). The second potentially growing practice is Private Equity. Plesser explained that there is “substantial ongoing activity in the market,” not only from the classic investment funds that have been active in the region for a long time but also from pension funds (e.g., Canadian or Australian funds) who are looking around the region for long term investments in the infrastructure sector.

    Bosnia and Herzegovina

    “Legal updates abound, complemented by several big projects keeping the market on its toes”

    Bosnia and Herzegovina’s legislators have had a fruitful period, according to Emina Saracevic, Partner at SGL – Saracevic & Gazibegovic Lawyers, with several notable legal updates being passed recently.

    Specifically, a new labor code entered into force at the end of August with a lot of work pending to harmonize it with internal acts of companies (such as rulebooks and employment agreements where applicable), all to be completed by February 2016. According to Saracevic, the main goal of the new piece of legislation is to “abolish unfounded employee benefits that primarily existed in the public sector, and create a positive environment in the private sector with the market dictating employment terms and conditions rather than number of post-communist relicts that were complicating business and employment in general.”

    A new law on companies was published in December and is due to come into force on December 22, 2015, closely following the new law on foreigners which came into force on November 25. This law introduced a blue card framework, and many of the legal updates reflect an overall drive to harmonize national legislation with EU legislation, according to Saracevic.

    On the business side, several power plant developments are keeping the market excited, with the Government seeking to set up several strategic partnerships in 2016. The top bids at the moment, for a total project value of EUR 1 billion, are coming from Chinese companies.

    At the same time, several infrastructure projects are developing quickly, both in terms of highways and railways, and that will likely continue to keep the market busy into the first half of 2016.

    Estonia

    “Regulatory work heating up”

    Against the background of the Big 4 law firms entering the legal services market at both local and international levels, “news items number 1 and 2 in terms of what is most discussed in the legal market in Estonia is the merger between Cobalt and Borenius,” according to Risto Agur, Managing Partner of KPMG Legal Estonia. The main question is whether the teams “will be able to make the merger work, as 1+1 might not always make 3, or even 2, in a small market like Estonia,” explained the KPMG Partner. “Making synergies work is always the tricky part in such mergers so the market is now looking at it to see how it will play out,” he concluded.

    In terms of what’s actually keeping lawyers busy in the country, Agur said that “while there does not seem to be a lot of M&A work going on in Estonia, regulatory, and in particular financial regulatory work is picking up considerably.” Agur explained that much of that work is coming from EU-driven regulations with financial institutions, in particular, “struggling to meet the new regulations that are coming into play (e.g., the Fourth AML Directive, MiFID2, etc.) which keeps lawyers rather busy.” Aside from banks, Agur pointed to 30 or 40 entrepreneurs in the lending market in Estonia that are “going through extensive preparations to meet new requirements arising from the Creditors and Credit Intermediaries Act that, in broad terms, resemble regulations on banks despite them only operating as lending businesses (and not raising deposits from the public like banks).” Despite the flow of regulations, Agur reported that the market is seeing a number of new potential financial institutions looking to set up in Estonia.

    Latvia 

    “Tax and a bit of politics to talk about in Latvia”

    According to Eva Berlaus, Office Managing Partner of Sorainen in Latvia, Tax is the buzzing topic in Latvia. “Our Government is adopting the budget for next year and it is coming up with creative solutions to increase tax revenue,” Berlaus commented, while explaining that the regulators have set themselves an interesting challenge within the ongoing tax overhaul: “Try to be the most competitive jurisdiction in terms of taxes in the EU, while raising more funds.”

    One aspect of the tax overhaul is the tax on micro-companies in Latvia, which would increase in 2016. Furthermore, there are plans to make companies from a number of industries ineligible for the micro-company tax regime. At the same time, a solidarity tax will be introduced. Berlaus explained that for the last few years salaries past EUR 4,000 per month were exempted from additional social security payments (for any part above EUR 4,000). The rationale behind the approach was that the social security services that the state can provide are finite and, past the value of the taxes due on a salary of that level, there are no services that the state can provide to match the value. Subject to considerable discussions, that concept will be replaced, not by taxing above the threshold as a social security tax, but as a “solidarity tax.”

    The Sorainen Managing Partner mentioned that “the Government might be falling,” but clarified that it is really just a matter of tensions within the governing coalition at this stage and that it’s not clear how things will work out.

    Romania

    “Socio-politics raising question marks for lawyers”

    According to Octavian Popescu, Partner at Musat & Asociatii, the intense activity of the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) and of the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism (DIICOT) in the recent period is one of the main recurring points of discussion among lawyers, especially litigators, from both purely legal and socio-political perspectives, and even from a business angle. 

    In this context, Popescu pointed out that criminal procedure is commonly discussed among practitioners in Romania and passed through the lens of fundamental rights, which these days tend to be increasingly blurry lines.

    He explained that, against the background of emotional reactions to recent tragedies in Paris and Bucharest [where 60 people died as a result of an October 30 fire in a popular nightclub – “Colectiv” – which demonstrated serious flaws in the safety checks conducted by authorities, generating significant criticism], increased demands are being placed on the state to deliver quick and dramatic changes, leading to a temptation to push limits that would not be felt in calmer times. Popescu suggested that important questions are being raised about how the law is applied and interpreted in these circumstances – reflected in a realignment of the penal procedure practice with direct implications for the right to defense.

    Last but not least, Popescu said that the topic of professional advertising is again in the spotlight within the Bar Association, and he said that it is critical to achieve a balance when it comes to regulations on the matter within an ever-more dynamic and continuously modernizing profession. 

    Turkey

    “Where’s the market going?”

    One of the favorite topics of conversation among lawyers in Turkey these days is about the legal market landscape overall, explained Gonenc Gurkaynak, Managing Partner of ELIG, Attorneys-at-Law. Specifically, the common question is whether the market is getting bigger or not. Gurkaynak’s view is that, on the litigation side, things are definitely looking up, which he linked to increased confidence as “litigation is taken more seriously in Turkey and there is less of a fear of corruption disrupting the process.” A positive sign of this phenomenon is the increased involvement in litigation cases from what the ELIG Managing Partner described as the “institutional firm side” since these are the players who will have hard policies in place giving guidance “on the way things are handled.”

    The story is a bit less optimistic on the transactional side, with Gurkaynak explaining that between the increased degree of turbulence in Turkey and the decreased levels of freedom, the country is registering fluctuations on the volume of deals. “Many potential investors are feeling insecure and are in a wait-and-see mode,” he said. What is going on at the moment are usually small and mid-sized deals that leave less room for transactional lawyers to show their talents.

    Gurkaynak explained that a number of foreign law firms in Turkey have positioned themselves as only carrying out transactional or banking/finance work. “While it might be the way to go in other countries, in Turkey it is a much more difficult approach with most local firms, including us, taking the full service firm approach, since it is easier to hedge if one practice area turns out to be not as hot within a specific period. International firms might then tend to have all their eggs in one basket, making their lives more difficult,” Gurkaynak said. 

    He concluded by comparing the environment to that of other Middle Eastern countries: “I think people are comparing Turkey with the markets of Abu Dhabi or Dubai, where many firms are performing well in a ‘transactional mode’-only scenario, but our capital markets are smaller and the level of finance work is simply not the same – there just isn’t the same amount of loose money floating around as in those markets. Yes, there are other benefits, including a generally more stable and predictable legal environment in relative terms, but it does not change the fact that the volume of transactions is, at this point in time, low, both in terms of volume and value.”

    Ukraine

    “A fruitful November”

    The month of November was a busy one for Ukrainian legislators, with a total of 12 pieces of legislation being passed, according to Tatiana Timchenko, Partner and Director for Ukraine at Peterka & Partners. Many of the bills were required by the EU to simplify accession to the EU market and the visa regimes for Ukraine, and, Timchenko said, if passed in their current form, “they will bring about revolutionary changes for the legal market.” 

    One of the most important updates in Timchenko’s view is that of the labor code. “The previous one hailed from a Soviet heritage and was extremely protective of employees and trade unions,” she explained. The new one, which has not yet been finally adopted, while still keeping an overall protective-of-employees approach, will significantly diminish the role of trade unions. In addition, should the new Code come into force, single mothers will no longer be 100% immune to dismissal, as in several situations such dismissals will be possible (e.g., in case of liquidation of an enterprise). Other changes will include a notice period decrease from two months to one, the statute of limitations increased to one year from three months, paid leave increased to four weeks, and the establishment of a requirement to formalize any agreement in written form. Perhaps the most controversial new provision, in Timchenko’s view, is an anti-discrimination provision for gay people, which prompted protests in front of the Parliament. 

    Timchenko described the month as a “fruitful one for the Parliament,” with notable pieces of amended legislation addressing state registration of businesses and NGOs, state registration of property rights to immovable property, an extension of the moratorium on the sale of agriculture land, the introduction of a new electronic system for public procurement meant to make tenders more transparent, and amendments to key provisions of the tax code (which she described as “perhaps one for which the whole business world is holding its breath”). The tax code seems to have been altered every year recently, and even now two draft bills are in discussions: one from the Government, and a “more business-friendly” one from the Parliament 

    Timchenko summed it all up as “a lot of material for newsletters, client alerts, and a lot of work for all lawyers in the country.”

    Thank you!

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

    • Risto Agur; Managing Partner; KPMG Legal Estonia
    • Eva Berlaus; Managing Partner; Sorainen
    • Gonenc Gurkaynak; Managing Partner; ELIG, Attorneys-at-Law
    • Willibald Plesser; Partner and Co-Head of The CEE/CIS Region; Freshfields 
    • Octavian Popescu; Partner; Musat & Asociatii
    • Emina Saracevic; Partner; SGL – Saracevic & Gazibegovic Lawyers
    • Tatiana Timchenko; Managing Partner; Peterka & Partners

    This Article was originally published in Issue 2.6. of the CEE Legal Matters Magazine. If you would like to receive a hard copy of the magazine, you can subscribe here.

  • CMS Advises on Global Settlement of FiT Reduction Disputes with TSO in Bulgaria

    CMS Advises on Global Settlement of FiT Reduction Disputes with TSO in Bulgaria

    CMS has successfully advised three of the key renewable energy companies operating in Bulgaria on a global out-of-court settlement with the Bulgarian Transmission System Operator (“ESO” EAD) regarding the Feed-In-Tariff (“FiT”) reduction recovery.

    The photovoltaic power producers with installed capacity exceeding 100 MWp were represented by CMS regarding the successful repayment of the grid access fees that CMS reports were “illegally imposed” by the Bulgarian State Energy and Water Regulatory Commission and collected by “ESO” EAD between September 2012 and December 2013.

    CMS reports that it initiated the negotiations on behalf of the biggest Bulgarian photovoltaic power producers in May 2014, relating to a principal amount exceeding EUR 20 million, following the success of the global settlement reached with EVN Bulgaria, another renewable energy company from Bulgarian market, earlier that year. According to CMS, “following 18 months of constant legal and regulatory assistance, the first set of settlement agreements has been signed for photovoltaic projects in Bulgaria, but wind energy companies and other renewable energy producers can also be affected by the same terms and conditions.”

    The CMS team working on the settlement was led by Partner Kostadin Sirleshtov, the firm’s head for energy in CEE, and included Partner Assen Georgiev, head of disputes in CMS Sofia. Also involved were CMS Bulgaria lawyers Iliyan Petrov, Maria Lazarova, Borislava Pokrass, Pavlin Stoyanoff, Deyan Dragiev, Elena Yotova, Dimitar Dimitrov, and Zornitsa Stoykova.

  • Partner Promotions at EPAP Ukraine

    Partner Promotions at EPAP Ukraine

    Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners Ukraine (EPAP) has announced the promotion of Oleg Boichuk and Sergiy Grebenyuk to Partner, increasing its partnership in Ukraine to 8, and the total number of Partners at the firm worldwide to 36. Boichuk will continue as a Head of the firm’s Real Estate Practice and Co-head of Corporate and M&A. Sergiy Grebenyuk will act as a Head of the firm’s Criminal Law Practice.

    Boichuk, who joined EPAP in 2004, focuses on M&A and real estate matters, as well as on compliance issues, including antimonopoly regulation. According to EPAP, he “is especially experienced in [the] structuring and protection of real estate investments, as well as transactional real estate matters. He also provides legal advice through all stages of complex cross-border and local transactions, including full scope legal due diligence, structuring, drafting and negotiation of agreements and other transaction documents, ensuring necessary regulatory approvals, closing and post-closing support.” In 2006 he obtained a Master’s degree in International Private Law at the Institute of International Relations of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, and in 2005 a Bachelor’s degree in legal studies at the State Tax Service Academy of Ukraine.

    Grebenyuk, who joined EPAP in 2006, represents clients in criminal cases, court procedures, and other dispute-related matters. According to EPAP, “he has extensive experience in legal security for businesses, internal corporate investigations of possible violations, in corruption and compliance-related cases. He holds a 2002 honors degree from Yaroslav the Wise National Law Academy of Ukraine.

    EPAP Ukraine Managing Partner Serhii Sviriba commented on new promotions: “We are delighted to support the tradition of raising own talents and welcome our newly promoted Partners who successfully represent diverse challenges faced by the firm’s clients. We are sure – our clients are in good hands.”

  • Motieka & Audzevicius and TGS Advise on Lietuvos Energija Acquisition of Lithuanian and Estonian Wind Parks

    Motieka & Audzevicius and TGS Advise on Lietuvos Energija Acquisition of Lithuanian and Estonian Wind Parks

    Lithuania’s Motieka & Audzevicius law firm has advised Renagro and BaltCap Lithuania SME Fund (BLF) in selling their 75% stake in Eurakras, the owner of a 24 MW wind park in Lithuania, to Lithuanian state energy provider Lietuvos Energija – which, at the same time, also acquired a 100% stake in the Tuuluenergia wind park in Estonia from BLF and minority shareholders. Tark Grunte Sutkiene advised Lietuvos Energija on both deals. The RASK law firm advised BLF in Estonia.

    The Lithuanian company Eurakras operates 8 wind plants of 24 MW in capacity in the Geisiai and Rotuliai II villages, in the Jurbarkas district of the country. The Eurakras wind park is completely new – both the construction completion certificate and permission for the power generation were issued in late December 2015. 

    “This transaction marks the first exit of BaltCap’s Lithuania SME Fund, part of [the] JEREMIE initiative in Lithuania,” said Sarunas Stepukonis, Associate Director at BaltCap. “Strong and experienced team of co-investors and management played a key role to a successful wind farm development in Jurbarkas. It is within our expectations that the experience gained in this project will translate into new pan-Baltic infrastructure investments.”

    Estonia’s Tuulueenergia wind park consists of 6 wind power plants of 18.3 MW in capacity in Varbla, Estonia. The construction of the Mali and Tamba wind park was completed in February 2015. According to a RASK statement, “BaltCap invested in the wind farm in 2012 through the BaltCap Private Equity Fund. Their aim as private investors was to establish and support the development of the wind farm, and this phase reached completion in 2015 when the wind farm came online.”

    “Mali & Tamba wind farms have one of the best wind conditions in Estonia,” said BaltCap Investment Director Kristjan Kalda. “Combined with the right choice of technology, the wind farm had the best load factor in Estonia last year. BaltCap’s role as a private equity investor was to finance the development the wind farm and we are happy to hand over the farm to a reputable strategic investor.”

    The Baltic wind energy market, including both developed projects and those under development, is currently made up of wind power plants with a total capacity of around 860 MW. 

    The acquisition increased Lietuvos Energija’s energy production capacities by an additional 42.3 megawatts, and Lietuvos Energija will now produce 136,000 megawatt-hours of electricity per year. 

    “One of the strategic directions of Lietuvos Energija is the growth and diversification of power generation,” said Dalius Misiunas, Chairman of the Board and CEO of Lietuvos Energija. “Naturally, based on the current environment and future prospects, we chose wind energy as one of the development directions. Assessing the market, along with development projects we have identified opportunities to acquire already existing wind parks. We are pleased that we have successfully managed to acquire two wind parks. It is the first wind power capacity of Lietuvos Energija and also first investment outside Lithuania – in Estonia. We see Baltic and Nordic energy market as one, and so we will continue the development in the region. Our wind power development plans is not limited to these two wind parks – we will evaluate other acquisition opportunities, as well as the development of our own wind power projects.”

    The total price of the two transactions is EUR 28 million, adjusted for the financial indebtedness of the companies, the enterprise value and EBITDA multiple ranges between 9 and 10 times,” said Darius Kasauskas, Director of Finance and Treasury of Lietuvos Energija. “The transactions were to a large extent financed with borrowed funds, taking advantage of the beneficial borrowing terms and the sustainable balance sheet of Lietuvos Energija. Only one tenth of the transaction value was funded from own resources. This will increase the investment’s equity return which is expected to exceed the 9% provided for in the strategy of Lietuvos Energija.”

    Motieka & Audzevicius advised Renagro and BaltCap in negotiations and in drafting the share purchase agreement, along with all supporting documents and necessary schedules. The firm also “provided legal assistance in negotiating and drafting the shareholders agreement, which shall be the guidelines to conducting the future activities of the target.” The firm’s team was led by Partner Giedrius Kolesnikovas, supported by Senior Associate Michail Parchimovic, Associate Sigita Adomaityte, and Associate Rokas Jankus.

    The Tark Grunte Sutkiene team in Lithuania was led by Partner Marius Matonis and Senior Associate Aurimas Pauliukevicius. The firm’s Estonian team was led by Senior Associate Tanel Tark.

    The RASK team consisted of Partner Simon Rask, Lawyer Sirli Pattai, and Attorneys Karl-Morten Jogi and Marina Lapidus.

    The deals were financed by SEB.

  • Biris Goran Advises Vastint on Real Estate Acquisition

    Biris Goran Advises Vastint on Real Estate Acquisition

    Biris Goran has advised Vastint Romania on a 48-hectare land acquisition in Bucharest.

    Vastint Romania (a member of the Inter IKEA Property Division), intends to develop the site at 194 Gheorghe Ionescu Sisesti Road into a mixed-use development, with a focus on residential. 

    Antoniu Panait, Managing Director, Vastint Romania, commented: “This is a major step for Vastint Romania. The transaction represents a strategic long-term investment, with a view to develop a mixed use, primarily residential development. During the coming period we will start working with the urban planning.”

    The Biris Goran team consisted of Partner Victor Constantinescu, Senior Associate Mariana Signeanu, and Associate Radu Jianu. The seller’s identity was not disclosed and, when contacted by CEE Legal Matters, Biris Goran declined to identify the law firm advising it. 

    Image Source: Sogodel Vlad / Shutterstock.com

  • Spenser & Kauffmann Successful for Zhytomyr Furniture Factory in Tax Dispute

    Spenser & Kauffmann Successful for Zhytomyr Furniture Factory in Tax Dispute

    Spenser & Kauffmann has successfully represented PJSC Zhytomyr Furniture Factory in proceedings against the Zhytomyr United State Tax Inspectorate of Center Department of the State Fiscal Service of Ukraine regarding an alleged tax debt of UAH 26.3 million.

    “Tax notice-decisions were made based on the results of a planned documentary on-site inspection of the company, which established overestimation of the negative value of the object of taxation with income tax and underestimation of value-added tax,” explained Spenser & Kauffmann Aleksandra Fedotova in an announcement distributed by the firm. “The tax authority contended that the company had wrongly calculated rent costs, which, in its opinion, were not related to the business activities.”

    According to the Spenser & Kauffmann announcement, “the court agreed with the arguments provided by Spenser & Kauffmann regarding the absence of legal grounds for tax authority’s conclusions.”

  • A&O and Baker & McKenzie Advise on Rosneft-Alltech Joint Venture in Russia

    A&O and Baker & McKenzie Advise on Rosneft-Alltech Joint Venture in Russia

    Allen & Overy has advised Rosneft on a joint venture between member company RN-Gas LLC and the Alltech Group for the development of gas deposits and construction of an LNG facility in the Nenets Autonomous District of Russia. Baker & McKenzie advised Alltech Group.

    According to Baker & McKenzie, “mineral licenses for the Kumzhinskoye and Korovinskoye fields as well as funds for the development of the project were contributed to the JV. 

    The Baker & McKenzie team was led by Partner Alexey Frolov, assisted by Moscow-based Partner Alexander Gomonov and Associate Kirill Manshin, and London-based Partner Hugh Stewart and Associate Mark Richardson.

    A&O declined to confirm their role or offer details.