Upside down

Russia files a lawsuit against Nessim Gaon's company

The Russian government has filed a lawsuit in France against the Swiss company Noga. Representatives of the Russian Ministry of Finance reported yesterday that the Russian authorities have launched a counter-offensive on the legal front against this now notorious company. Moscow demands that Noga and the French bailiff who assisted it be obliged to compensate for the damage caused by the unlawful seizure of Russian property abroad. The amount of the claim is not disclosed. Thus, Russia once again tried to throw the ball to the opponent’s side: for almost 15 years, the head of Noga, Nessim Gaon, has been successfully suing the Russian government in European courts, which, he believes, owes him tens of millions of euros under contracts from the 90s.

In January of this year, Noga arrested assets in France belonging to the Central Bank, RIA Novosti, the Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) and the TsSKB-Progress enterprise. As the Ministry of Finance notes, all accounts of Russian companies blocked in France at that time have now been released from seizure based on decisions of four French courts. The courts ruled that the arrests were unlawful, "since Russian structures, in principle, do not bear legal responsibility for the debts of the Russian government." The Ministry of Finance specifically points out that the January seizures were illegal due to the fact that Noga did not have the right to seize this type of property. And Noga knew this, because in relation to the Bank of Russia, the French courts had previously ruled that its assets were subject to immunity from seizure, since in all civilized countries there is the principle of independence of central banks that are not liable for government debts.

According to the Russian side, Noga’s January demarche, which led to the seizure of the assets of the Central Bank and RIA Novosti, became possible only because Noga misled the French judicial authorities.

When seizing Russian assets, the company relied on decisions of the Stockholm Arbitration Court made in favor of Noga back in 1997. The arbitration then decided that there was no debt on the part of Russia, and our country’s only obligation was a payment of $20 million, which arose after filing a lawsuit for a unilateral refusal to supply petroleum products. The Russian side reminds that the right to claim under this decision does not currently belong to the Swiss.

The scandalous conflict between Noga and the Russian government began on June 1, 1993. According to the concluded agreement on the supply of food products to Russia, Russia had to pay the Swiss with oil. According to the text of the agreements between the Russian government and Noga, Russia had to answer with its property for their failure. The further story with deliveries turned out to be quite murky. The supply agreements were not fully implemented due to the fact that the Swiss did not provide the Russian side with some documents, and the agreement was unilaterally terminated. NOGA billed Russia hundreds of millions of dollars. There were no signs of trouble when the Swiss company filed a lawsuit against the Russian government in the district court of distant Luxembourg. However, that first claim was satisfied, which marked the beginning of a series of endless proceedings. Noga began seizing Russian ships, planes and paintings located abroad. Noga tried to remove Russian fighters from the air show in Le Bourget, and at the Swiss border they detained fifty paintings by Picasso, Matisse, Gauguin and other impressionists, taken by Russian museums for an exhibition.

Soon, during the bankruptcy process of Noga, the rights to claim Russia's debt were transferred to the company's creditors - four Swiss banks. In 2006, the debt was bought by an American businessman, ex-USSR citizen Alexander Kogan, who resold it to the Russian Federation. In this regard, the Russian side believes that Noga no longer has the right to make any financial claims against Russia. Mr. Kogan has repeatedly stated this. According to Russia, this should have closed the circle, but Noga believes otherwise, emphasizing the fact that almost all conflict situations involving the seizure of property were resolved through diplomatic negotiations, and not through judicial decisions. This is the chapter Noga has managed to play on so far. European courts very actively support Mr. Gaon’s position, “every other time” making decisions either in favor of the Swiss or in favor of Russia. The Gaon reacts to unfavorable decisions every time in the same way, commenting in the local press that he gives priority to the ten-year-old decision of the Stockholm International Court, for which Russia has allegedly not yet paid. And then he sues again.

Irina SKLYAROVA