Telecom, media and IT


Challenging additional assessments in favour of a major telecommunication company

Pepeliaev Group’s lawyers represented a client to which a tax authority had assessed additional profit tax on several grounds based on the results of a field tax audit. In doing so, the tax authority did not recognise a court decision which had been previously handed down in favour of the company, insisting that it had a right to specify additional grounds and ignore the previous court decision. Our lawyers managed to defend the client’s position on this point. The court stated that the tax authority should in any case comply with the previous decision of the court. And therefore the court has defended one of the fundamental principles of law that all state authorities should comply with court decisions. The total amount in dispute exceeded RUB 90 million.

Legal due diligence of the reports and accounts of one of the largest telecommunications companies

Pepeliaev Group’s lawyers conducted legal due diligence of the company's tax and accounting reporting documents and identified potential tax risks, offering recommendations for mitigating them. This allowed significant claims from the tax authorities to be avoided when a field tax audit was conducted.

Provided comprehensive defence of the interests of a group of companies: assets worth RUB 2 billion have been preserved

As part of a bankruptcy case, Pepeliaev Group's lawyers represented major telecommunications company Sitronics as a creditor, a former shareholder and a counterparty of the debtor, as well as acted for other companies within the group. Our lawyers successfully defended the client in nine proceedings in which transactions were contested. This made it possible to retain the group's assets worth RUB 2 billion. Moreover, our specialists managed to have a claim denied for secondary liability to be imposed on the client and on the debtor's director. The project is interesting because it involves multiple aspects and it forms case law relating to the regulations on secondary liability being applied over time. 

Developing and implementing a system of antitrust compliance for MTS

The firm’s Antitrust Practice provided legal support to a major Russian mobile operator when it developed and implemented a compliance system. The project handled by Pepeliaev Group’s lawyers for MTS was among the first of its kind in Russia. It is now a positive illustrative case promoting the institution of antitrust compliance on the Russian market.

Developing optimal algorithm

Our lawyers and IT specialists have developed the optimal way to obtain a licence for the technical protection of confidential information with minimal cost outlay on the equipment and technical means needed for this. In the opinion of the Russian Federal Service for Technical and Export Control (FSTEC), every company which uses technical means to process confidential information needs such a licence. Administrative liability as well as criminal liability are stipulated for conducting licensed types of activity without licence. 

Claims worth over USD 895,000 raised against our client were dismissed The lawyers in Pepeliaev Group’s dispute resolution practice successfully represented a major telecommunication company at the International Commercial Arbitration Court under the Russian Federation Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
The case involved a dispute with a counterparty under a contract for services which was governed by German law. The claimant submitted a claim against the client to recover debt for international telecommunication services provided in an amount exceeding USD 895,000. The Claimant’s claims were based on two agreements. Of these, one is governed by Russian law and contains a jurisdiction clause that all disputes should be submitted for consideration to the State Commercial (‘Arbitration’) Court for the city of Moscow. The second agreement is governed by German law and, in our client's opinion, contains an ad hoc arbitration clause, which does not allow a conclusion to be made that the Parties had agreed that the International Court of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) under the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation will be the arbitration institute to consider contractual disputes. Owing to the well-grounded position developed by our specialists the claimant reduced the amount of its claims to USD 648,000 to the extent based on the agreement with a jurisdiction clause, agreeing that this part of the dispute was outside of the competence of the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Russian Federation Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The client's position in essence was based on the fact that the claimant had missed the limitation period and that there were no grounds to reinstate (interrupt or suspend) the limitation period pursuant to the applicable provisions of the German Civil Code. The panel of the tribunal concluded that it had the competence to consider the part of the dispute asserted by the claimant; however, the panel agreed with our client’s arguments that the limitation period had been missed, and based on this fact the claims were dismissed. The project is interesting in terms of learning aspects of German legislation touched upon in the dispute.
<br />
Licensing activity Advised a major manufacturer of mobile telephones on personal data issues relating to licensing activity.

Вход | Регистрация


Click here to subscribe our English newsletters