The money and reputation of the fighter with the regime left Berezovsky

In the summer in London they spoke only about the Olympics and the court decision in the Berezovsky case against Abramovich. And it seems that the respected judge Elizabeth Gloucester specifically guided the announcement of the decision at the end of summer to show that the main newsmakers in the UK are still not athletes, but lawyers. As you understand, we are talking about the “case of the century”, during which Boris Berezovsky tried to sue more than $ 5.5 billion for losses from unprofitable transactions for a share in Rusal and Sibneft. So, Berezovsky lost, Abramovich won. A brief presentation of the arguments on which the decision read by the judge is based indicates that the main issue of the case was the establishment of relevant facts, and not the application of the rule of law as such. According to Judge Gloucester, the testimonies of witnesses that concerned transactions and actions in a rather remote Russian past in the absence of any evidence of the Oral Assets of Sibneft and Rusala, which Berezovsky so actively referred to the testimony of the Activities. Having rejected all Berezovsky’s claims, the judge especially indicated that Boris Abramovich looked like an unreliable, inconsistent witness, whose testimony could not rely on. He created his versions of events and believed in them. In contrast to him, Abramovich, according to the court, was very careful in what he said, and impressed the witness that deserves the trust. “He does not look cynical, as the representatives of the plaintiff stated,” the judge said, “and the level of his preparation as a witness does not prevent him from asking him any questions.” Both in relation to Sibneft, and in relation to transactions for Rusal shares, the court concluded that there was no partner agreement on the norms of Russian law, which means that there is no need to investigate its alleged conditions.

Room in the root!

What is still not clear to anyone is why Boris Abramovich started this whole non -cheap legal booth. Really hoped to get hold of five billion? Do not laugh. Two to three highly qualified barristers in the QC rank would be easily explained by the analysis of existing precedents for Boris Abramovich for some hundred thousand pounds that his “seams” case from the very beginning, if, of course, the court is not Moscow city. Tell the whole world about the lawlessness that are happening in Russia from the times of Vladimir Putin? Well, firstly, it means to carve yourself as a “political father” of GDP and just the “oligarch of all Rus'” and, secondly, it is simply pointlessly expensive. For a similar budget, one could come up with something much more funny and informative than to tell the British again, that all entrepreneurs in Russia of the 90s lived under the “roof” and paid “rollbacks”. It remains only to assume that Boris Abramych simply wanted to carry out with Roman Arkadyevich a forced legal operation called "Comparative measurement of the length of the genitals in the British court." Well, transferring from legal to the Central Russian: it became boring to a person in the absence of the usual political turning and adrenaline. And whoever does not risk, he, as you know, does not drink champagne in Lensboro and sleeps only with his (first-second-third-fourth) wife.

Was Vova?

Judge Gloucester resolved the most important “political” issue of the case: whether Putin and Abramovich Berezovsky threatened, forcing him to sell assets. “No,” the judge was completely unambiguous. - Berezovsky did not prove it. And Voloshin’s testimony (ex-head of the presidential administration) can be believed. ” As for the so -called payment for the Sibneft shares of one of the offshore companies organized by the deceased Stephen Curtis, he, according to the court, was made on the basis of a fictitious agreement prepared exclusively with the aim of bypassing the legislation on countering money laundering. The issues that arise in connection with the decision made, the judge promised to resolve in the near future. All this leaves a legally dual feeling. According to a bearded joke, “dual feeling” is when your mother -in -law falls into your new car in front of your eyes. But the legal “dual feeling”: this is when one oligarch “shods” the other oligarch in the court in the section of huge money taken out by cunning feint from the pocket of the whole country. It should be noted that, according to rumors, the team of lawyers Abramovich celebrated its victory before the sentence - immediately at the end of the hearing. And this is not the impudent arrogance or British legal snobbery. It’s just that this very predictable justice, which we, in Russia, are so longing: when a good lawyer on the basis of an analysis of the case file and existing precedents with a ninety percent probability may indicate the winner of the dispute. Although this is a plus only to the British and their courts, and not to the plaintiffs and defendants.

The price of a dispute

It is clear that in the very loud process of the decade, the group of “oligarchs in exile” formally lost in Berezovsky, Nevznin and Co., hoping to “pinch the tail” with the dedicated near -Putin oligarchs, which at one time contributed to the removal of concessionaires from the country and removing a significant part of the capital from them. The decision of the judge that Putin “did not scare” Berezovsky and did not twist his hands, should have strongly upset them. As a result, Boris Abramych lost something more important than just money, namely, the reputation of an invincible fighter with Putinism in British ships. Roman Arkadievich retained, even as much as he increased “acquired by overwhelming labor on Russian oil galleys”. Plus, he actually legitimized the well -known scheme for the purchase of Sibneft for borrowed “pennies” in the process of dashing privatization and subsequent sale of it for full billions, ultimately, the same state in the person of its “national treasure”. However, he significantly gave way to reputation, not only his own, but also the All -Russian one. So his paper victory is very, very conditional. Unless he proved to himself that in English courts no “no worse than Uncle Bori”. And who else won? She won, of course, British jurisprudence. She convincingly proved that she could resolve the purely conceptual disputes of the Russian oligarchs about the “roofs” and “kickbacks” in civilized legal terms and so that there is no doubt about the validity and impartiality of the decision made. Thus, once again showed everyone where the Russian final (not to confuse with the supreme) court is located. Secondly, with a well-known British endurance and dignity, a couple of hundred million pounds earned, which, you see, a trifle, but also nice. Although, having taken a closer look, in the eyes of the Barristers wise by many years of experience, one could read: “Guys, come to us with your circus ...” I won, no matter how regrettable it is, and Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, who convincingly showed Roman Arkadyevich and other Politburo, while “you will be able to protect you and your money even in the bubbled with me. Western ships, ”and without me,“ different Berezovsky will tear you on straps. ” And this is who is on the sidelines with mournful faces? And this, dear, we are with you. Before our eyes in a fair London court, ours have just divided the money with you (our parents, grandfathers, and so on). Which for some reason are now transferred from Boris Abramovich’s shallow pocket into the bottomless pocket of Roman Arkadyevich. It seems that it was funny, it seems to have spoiled with the heart, touched the blogs, but in the end it feels like we still visited the booth at Karabas-Barabas ... In short, not a British court, but some kind of “field of miracles” some kind of ...

An inconsolable diluted bankrupt

One could try to console Boris Abramovich with an old Olympic proverb that "the main thing is not victory, but participation." But it will not work. In addition to those five billions of dollars that Berezovsky longed to take away from Roman Arkadyevich, in the case there is such a small but very unpleasant thing as the “legal expenses of the parties”, which, according to the general rule, the court must (taking into account, of course, a large number of circumstances established by law) to the loser. According to unverified, but stubbornly circulating rumors, the costs of the parties have already been running out of one hundred and fifty million pounds. And be sure that this money is well -stimulated by Abramovich’s well -stimulated lawyers from Boris Abramovich Berezovsky along with the remnants of his own skin. Of course, it is not necessary to hope that through a year the ubiquitous Russian tourists will be able to see a familiar figure at one of Herrod’s door in a slightly faded suit “from Brioni” and with a butterfly in their hands, shyly laid in bad English: “Serve for food who appointed Vladimir Putin the president ...” Knowledgeable people hint that the next (after bankrupt) post Boris Abramovich may be something like "managing the estate of his ex-wife." No wonder the women divorced so in time. Will there be an appeal? Well, if the court resolves (and here in the UK this is just that), then, of course, there will be. Boris Abramovich never gives up. But here there is again one small British legal nuance: the winning side has the right and, most likely, will require the plaintiff to make a deposit to cover the likely expenses of appeal, which will also be not pennies without a doubt. And recalling Boris Abramovich’s stories pressing a tear, how he raised funds to finance the main process “with the world on the thread”, there are doubts that at least one of the former “colleagues in the workshop” would want to finance the new judicial enterprise of the former “main oligarch of Russia”. Too risky investment is to invest in the court of appeal. PS Agree, it is insulting that they didn’t put anyone ...