London backed up DIA

Sergey Pugachev's assets have been left under arrest. 
Trying former Industrial Bank of the beneficiary (the largest Russian bank bankrupt) Sergei Pugachev to challenge the seizure of its assets by $ 2 billion in worldwide failure. Thus, the chances of attracting the ex-banker to pay its creditors, which the bank owes about 80 billion rubles., Preserved. But for this to the Agency the appropriate action in Russia must win the Deposit Insurance.

Yesterday in London court refused to grant the application of ex-beneficiary Sergei Pugachev bankrotyaschegosya IIB to lift the attachment of its assets worldwide. A hearing took place from November 11 to 18 inclusive, a decision on it only appeared today. The court ordered the freezing of assets was pronounced English court on July 11 in support of the Agency for Deposit Insurance claim (DIA) about bringing Mr. Pugachev and three senior bank executives to vicarious liability for its bankruptcy in a Russian court. The amount of Russian action - 75 billion rubles. In fact, he had not considered, although was still filed in December 2013. The arrest of the English Court imposed on the ex-banker's assets totaling £ 1,2 billion (about US $ 2 billion).

"DIA atdovletvoreno court decision, intends to continue during the 2015 trial against SV Pugachev in a Russian court, and take steps to return the assets in the bankrupt bank's mass, "- said in a statement the agency This implies that the agency is likely to pause. trial with Mr. Pugachev in London on the merits for the withdrawal of the bank's assets (other than an action for seizure of property in the UK Agency has been filed, and such an action, too). it is expected that the suspension will last until the resolution of the Russian claim Russian as the court on the merits. Earlier, Sergei Pugachev pledged accept the jurisdiction of the Russian courts, and his lawyers have promised to submit a review on the merits to the next hearing in a Russian court in late January.

Oddly enough, the pros in yesterday's court decision and found the losing side. "According to Mr. Pugachev lawyers, of course, this decision will play a positive role in resolving questions about the recovery of damages caused to Mr. Pugachev and the abolition of politically motivated charges." Thus, the respondent in the nextoh reiterated the position chosen to protect them: he denies any involvement in the management of the bank and its bankruptcy and the collapse of his business empire (United Industrial Corporation entered except IIB has a number of major industrial assets) considers a political raiding.

These same arguments, as follows from the decision of the court yesterday, Sergei Pugachev and lawyers cited in support of the application for the arrest of assets around the world at the November hearing.

But judging by the decision of the court they are not convinced. Although he pointed out to the claimant on a number of not fully disclosed the circumstances in this case - in particular, the different estimates of the shipbuilding assets of Mr. Pugachev (the price at which these assets were sold, he said low, and assets, thus expropriated by the state). However, insufficient disclosure of these circumstances, the court considered unintentional and does not prove the defendant's attorney's argument about the raider seizure of its Russian business by the authorities.

Unable to prove the lawyer Sergei Pugachev and bad faith, in their opinion, the DIA - "unclean hands" of the plaintiff.As stated in the decision, in the absence of evidence of "hands" can be cleaned with the same probability as unclean - so that the weight of the argument in the proceedings has not.

In favor of lifting the arrest from the assets Sergei Pugachev did not work and the defense's argument that the assets of the ex-banker, only $ 70 million, so their arrest in the amount of $ 2 billion does not make sense. The issue of proportionality is irrelevant, according to the court decision. In addition, in the fullness of disclosure of all assets Sergei Pugachev (that demanded the English court) questioned the DIA (there believe that a large part of the assets of the trusts). Information about these assets Sergei Pugachev is not revealed, although there is a corresponding decision of the court. But even without that, and $ 70 million - a considerable sum, and the fact that this is just a small part of the total requirements of the DIA, this does not diminish the significance is indicated in the decision. Also, do not load the defendant's argument on the absence of risks of hiding assets. According to the Court, such risks are, as well as evidence of a certain Mr. Pugachev control over the bank.