Vladislav Zaytsev (matters, p. 2)

	<<< 1 2 3 4 >>>
— »	Advised a Russian company on English law issues and on an arbitration clause of the agreement for pipeline inspection surveys at a Russian dry section and shore approach (Nord Stream project);
— »	Advised a Russian company on several issues of arbitrations under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC);
— »	Advised a Russian company on issues of arbitrations under the Arbitration Rules of the Dubai International Arbitration Centre and under the DIFC-LCIA Arbitration Rules;
— »	Advised a large Russian developer and manufacturer of energy systems in a dispute subject to arbitration under the ICC Arbitration Rules, concerning the performance of a Finnish company of a contract of sale of energy equipment;
— »	Represented a Russian company (claimant) in arbitration administered by the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ICAC) against a U.S. respondent on a contract on a geological and geophysical survey for the construction of the Black Sea Oil Export Terminal. The tribunal found for the claimant holding that the respondent is liable for the non-performance of the contract and ordering to pay to the claimant the full sum requested by the latter;
— »	Represented a Russian IT-company (respondent) in Moscow district (commercial) courts litigation against a U.S. based company in a dispute related to a software development contract under which the software were to be created for Tractor Plants Group (Russia). Instructions were taken from the respondent at the appellate stage after the client had lost the case in the first instance court. Having been upheld by the appellate instance, the decisions of the lower courts were then reversed by the cassation court which remitted the case for reconsideration. Following this judgement, both courts of the first and the appellate instances found for the respondent; no further appeal was advanced by the adversaries;
— »	Advised a large Russian food factory in a dispute subject to arbitration under the Swiss Rules of International Arbitration, against a Dutch company and its Italian subsidiary on a supply of equipment contract;
— »	Advised a large Russian construction group in a dispute subject to arbitration under the arbitration rules of the Vienna International Arbitral Centre, against an Italian company on a supply of building equipment contract;
— »	Represented a Russian company in Moscow district (commercial) court litigation against a reseller of a large Chinese engineering group on an alleged breach of a sales contract;
— »	Represented a Russian company in an ICAC arbitration against an Icelandic respondent related to a contract on navigation and geodesic services for the operation of an underwater vehicle in the Baltic Sea. In the course of arbitral proceedings the parties settled the dispute and the respondent paid the agreed sum;
— »	Represented a large German group (respondent) in an ICAC arbitration against a Russian claimant on the issuance of bank guarantees. The tribunal dismissed the claim;
— »	Advised an Italian company on several issues in ICC arbitration against a Russian factory on a supply of equipment contract;
— »	Advised a consortium of the largest Russian banks on a complex arbitration agreement (with consolidation and joinder provisions therein) between the banks, a borrower and the Russian Federation in connection with a PPP-project;
— »	Advised a large Russian construction company in a dispute subject to arbitration under the ICC Rules of Arbitration, against an international hotel group on the construction of a luxury hotel in Moscow;
— »	Advised a large Russian state company on the possible outcome of a litigation in Russian state (commercial) courts on the construction of Olympic buildings;
— »	Advised a Finnish logistics company in a dispute subject to Russian state (commercial) court litigation against one of the largest Russian insurers on an insurable event;
— »	Advised a large Russian company on a claim brought by a number of individuals before the High Court of Justice of England and Wales against an owner of the Russian company;
— »	Advised one of the leading Russian banks on the arbitration rules of a domestic arbitration institute, drafted proposals and amendments thereto;
— »	Represented a respondent (not affiliated with Gazprom) in arbitral proceedings administered by the Gazprom Arbitration Court against a claimant, Gazprom's subsidiary, which sought damages for the alleged non-performance of a contract on navigational and geodetic services. The arbitral tribunal dismissed the claim in its entirety and ordered the claimant to pay the sum requested by the respondent in its counterclaim;
— »	Represented a Russian oil-refining factory (respondent) in an ICAC arbitration against a German design company (claimant) which sought damages arising out of a design contract early termination. The respondent prevailed on major issues;
— »	Represented Gazprom neftekhim Salavat JSC in Moscow district (commercial) courts litigation of a VAT related dispute against Interregional Tax Office No. 1 for the largest taxpayers. The tax office's decisions to set-off allegedly outstanding debts against a VAT rebate to the amount of over RUB 159 million were declared invalid;
— »	Represented Gazprom neftekhim Salavat JSC in Moscow district (commercial) courts litigation of a VAT related dispute against Interregional Tax Office No. 1 for the largest taxpayers. The tax office was ordered to reimburse the claimant VAT to the amount of RUB 10.3 million and pay interest to the amount of RUB 18.9 million for the delay in VAT reimbursement;
— »	Represented Gazprom neftekhim Salavat JSC in Moscow district (commercial) courts litigation of a VAT related dispute against Interregional Tax Office No. 1 for the largest taxpayers. The tax office was ordered to reimburse the claimant VAT to the amount of over RUB 500 thousand and pay interest to the amount of RUB 4.1 million for the delay in VAT reimbursement;
— »	Represented a claimant in an ICAC arbitration against a large Armenian gas company on several gas supply contracts. The main controversy stemmed from the mechanism which was used by the parties as an alternative to direct payments for the gas supplied (complex financial transactions involving third parties not privies to the contract). The respondent argued that the debt had been closed, however the tribunal found for the claimant and ordered the respondent to pay over $3.5 million;
— »	Represented a claimant in an ICAC arbitration against a Ukrainian respondent on a gas supply contract. The tribunal found for the claimant and ordered the respondent to pay over $1.9 million;
— »	Represented a Russian claimant in an ICAC arbitration against a Swiss respondent on a gasoil supply contract. The tribunal found for the claimant and ordered the respondent to pay over $3.5 million;
	<<< 1 2 3 4 >>>

E-mail