Where are the success stories of business resisting corruption? | Orest Stasyuk , Compliance Periscope
According to the surveys from previous years, majority of around one hundred participating companies reported that they have faced corruption while working in Ukraine (81% in 2016 and 88% in 2015). Here is the slide from ACC’s last report showing the most widespread forms of corruption: It is safe to assume that most of the participants encountered at least one of the above-mentioned types of graft during the recent years.
Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners provide legal advice on sale of shares in National Media Group company | The Lawyer
A team of associates from the Corporate and M&A Practice at Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners provided legal advice on a transaction involving the sale of shares in one of the companies belonging to National Media Group.
Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners Ukraine criminal law team recently defended a global producer and distributor of crop protection products in criminal proceedings initiated by the enforcement and customs authorities with respect to import of its products to Ukraine.
On 2 June, on the sidelines of the 21st St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, a cooperation agreement was signed between the Government of Leningrad Region and joint stock company Knauf Petrobord, a member of the Knauf Group. The agreement includes an investment by Knauf of at least RUB3.5bn to renovate production facilities for cardboard facing over the period to 2020, and provision of investor support by the Government of Leningrad Region.
EPAM Successful for Private Individual in Claim Before Russian Constitutional Court | CEE Legal Matters
The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has accepted arguments made by Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners Partner Dmitry Stepanov and found Article 302, Paragraph 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation unconstitutional.
EPAM Supports Knauf in RUB 3.5 billion Investment Agreement with Leningrad Regional Government | CEE Legal Matters
Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners has assisted Knauf Petrobord on its June 2, 2017 entrance into an agreement with the Government of Leningrad Region involving Leningrad's funding of at least RUB 3.5 billion to renovate production facilities for cardboard facing before 2020.
Anti-corruption framework under construction in Ukraine | contribution to IBA Anti-Corruption Committee Update by Sergiy Grebenyuk and Orest Stasiuk
Ukraine has, for the past few decades, suffered from widespread corruption. The country has been consistently listed towards the bottom end of Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, and those appointed to enforce anti-corruption laws have themselves been among the worst offenders. Cases which have emerged have focused almost exclusively upon low level officials, and convictions have been few and far between. So much so, offenders have hitherto operated with almost complete impunity.
Some of Russia's super-rich have given up residency to escape a 2014 law requiring them to disclose offshore assets, wealthy businessmen told Reuters, a practice that could keep billions of dollars hidden from Moscow's tax authorities.
Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev and Partners has acted as legal advisor to the special committee on the rights of Russian bondholders in the international debt restructuring of the Roust Corporation, which the firm describes as "one of the largest producers of vodka in the world."
On toughening of compensation for non-resident transport services in Ukraine | commentary of Oleksandr Maydanyk, Bloomberg BNA
Non-resident taxpayers in Ukraine will incur a 15 percent tax on compensation for international transportation services when they act as intermediaries for these services, the Ukrainian State Fiscal Service (SFS) has said.
GCR Know how – Information Exchange 2017 – Russia Chapter | by Evgeny Bolshakov and Oksana Akhmedova
The information exchange, as such, is not prohibited by the effective Russian Federal Law On Protection of Competition (the Competition Law or Law), but the content of the information exchange between business entities and its consequences are important. Generally, a confirmed exchange of any commercially important information (about prices, production volumes, etc) may be treated as showing that there is an anticompetitive arrangement between companies that will be qualified as a cartel, if the information is exchanged between competitors and if the exchange agreement has resulted in variation of prices, lowering the number of market players or gaining a competitive advantage (article 11 of the Competition Law).