• Рус
    • Eng
  • Dorogomilovsky Court vs. English High Court

  • Извините, этот техт доступен только в “Американский Английский”. For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.

    Sovcomflot has not commented on the verdict of the Dorogomolovsky Court in Moscow that sentenced former Sovcomflot and Novoship top managers, Yury Nikitin, Dmitry Skarga and Tagir Izmailov, to various prison terms in absentia.

    SeaNews has asked Mike Lax, Partner with Lax & Co, the lawyer who represented Yury Nikitin in the English High Court, to comment on the judgement. Quoting:

    Dorogomilovsky Court vs. English High Court“I’m afraid I haven’t seen any judgment of the Dorogomilovsky Court so it is difficult to comment in detail. I recall that the allegations in the Dorogomilovsky Court looked very similar to some of the allegations made against the same Defendants in the English High Court.  You will recall that with the exception of some of the commission claims made against Mr Nikitin, Clarksons and Galbraiths, all of those allegations by Sovcomflot were dismissed by the English High Court as well as by the Court of Appeal.  Indeed, the English High Court and Court of Appeal even went so far as to Order Sovcomflot to pay compensation to Mr Niktin of approximately $75 million for wrongfully freezing Mr Nikitin’s assets”.

    “So if the Dorogomilovsky Court has now found Mr Nikitin guilty of being the head of a criminal gang that defrauded Sovcomflot and for which he should serve 15 years, it is a curious state of affairs that the victims of the crime should be ordered by the English High Court to pay the head of the criminal gang $75m. One of the Courts must therefore be in error. Which one?”

    “Well, the English High Court heard oral and written evidence from numerous witnesses and from experts instructed by both sides; the Judge was a very experienced shipping and commercial judge; a transcript of the proceedings was published every day for everyone to review; and at the end of the case, the judge published a judgment which was fully reasoned and summarised the evidence; it was a few hundred pages long”.

    “The Moscow Court was by contrast presided over by a Judge whose knowledge and experience of shipping contracts governed by English Law is unknown; experts in shipping and accounting were not apparently called to give evidence and be cross-examined; there was no transcript and we have seen no judgment let alone detailed reasoning.  We leave it to your readers to decide which of the Courts most likely got it right and which got it wrong”.

    According to reports, this Monday the Dorogomilovsky Court announced its verdict, according to which the defendants were found guilty of organizing and participating in a criminal gang, abuse of authority, misappropriation and legalizing of monetary proceeds of the crime. Y.Nikitin was sentenced to 15 years in prison, D.Skarga to 12 years and T.Izmailov to 11 years. The Court also imposed upon them fines ranging from 2.5 mn rubles to 5 mn rubles and ordered their property arrested earlier (money, stock, flats) to be seized.

  • Комментарии: 0

    Добавить комментарий

    Новости по теме
    2017МСФОСовкомфлотФинансы 20.03.2018 Совкомфлот в минусе по МСФО
    ПАО «Совкомфлот» опубликовала финансовые показатели за 2017 год по международным стандартам финансовой отчетности. Валовая выручка группы увеличилась на […]
    0
    ИмянаречениеНовостройСовкомфлот 05.02.2018 На передовых геополитических рубежах
    В Петербурге прошла торжественная церемония имянаречения многофункционального судна ледового класса «Евгений Примаков», построенного на верфи Arctech Helsinki по […]
    0
    НефтьСахалинСахалин-1Совкомфлот 14.03.2018 100-милионная тонна с Сахалина-1
    12 марта танкер «Совкомфлота» «Виктор Конецкий» принял на борт юбилейную 100-миллионную тонну нефти, добытую на сахалинских месторождениях (Чайво, […]
    0
    FinnlinesПортовые сборыСудФинляндия 19.02.2018 Finnlines отказали в апелляции
    Верховный суд Финляндии отказал Finnlines в праве подать апелляцию на решение Апелляционного суда Хельсинки по иску Finnlines к […]
    0
    DP WorldАрбитражКонтейнерный терминалСуд 26.02.2018 Джибути против DP World
    Правительство африканского государства Джибути установило незаконный контроль над контейнерным терминалом Doraleh Container Terminal S.A., которым управляет принадлежащая Dubai […]
    0
    Hyundai Heavy Industries ГосзаказСудТендер 29.01.2018 HHI закрыли доступ к госзаказу
    По строительству военных кораблей
    0
    СовкомфлотСудТаможня 20.03.2018 Совкомфлот отсудил пошлины у таможни
    Но потерял деньги в британских судах
    0
    Hyundai Merchant MarineСделкаСуд 16.01.2018 HMM подала в суд
    На бывших руководителей и акционера
    0









  • Поля помеченные * обязательны для заполнения

    Запросить аналитическое исследование

    Вы получите письмо на указанный email со сгенерированным паролем



  • Поля помеченные * обязательны для заполнения

    Подписка на закрытую аналитику

    Help Text

    Сумма руб. (НДС не облагается):   90,000

  • Поля помеченные * обязательны для заполнения

    Приобретение подписки на Сервис ВЭД