The head of Otkritie Bank, Mikhail Zadornov, asked the Chairman of the Supreme Court to “give instructions” in his favor regarding a claim for 150 billion rubles

The head of Otkritie Bank, Mikhail Zadornov, wrote a letter to the Chairman of the Supreme Court, Vyacheslav Lebedev, in which he demanded to “instruct” the court to take his side in the claim for 150 billion rubles. about this writes The Bell with reference to a copy of the letter .

Otkritie is trying to sue the insurance company Capital Life for this amount for using the trademark.

In 2017, businessman Danil Khachaturov exchanged Rosgosstrakh for a stake in Otkritie Bank. Soon the Central Bank sanitized it, and Khachaturov received nothing. The entrepreneur still had another insurance company - RGS Life. He sold it, the new owner renamed the company Capital Life Insurance.

At first, Rosgosstrakh allowed the second insurance company to use 13 of its trademarks for only 15 thousand rubles each and accepted this money for a year and a half. In mid-2018, Rosgosstrakh demanded 2 billion rubles for 2017 and 148.7 billion rubles in compensation.

In the first two instances, the court sided with Capital Life. Then Rosgosstrakh won the dispute over the ownership of intellectual rights, and the case was returned to the arbitration court. Capital Life is appealing the decision to return the case to the Supreme Court.

The head of Otkritie, Zadornov, asked in a letter to refuse to satisfy the complaint, since, according to his version, the deal was obviously unprofitable for his insurance company. “Taking into account the above, we ask you, dear Vyacheslav Mikhailovich, to give instructions to consider the arguments set out in this letter and leave the cassation appeal of Capital Life Insurance LLC without satisfaction,” wrote Zadornov (spelling preserved).

The head of Rosgosstrakh, Gennady Galperin, also sent a letter with exactly the same text to the chairman of the Supreme Court, The Bell reports , citing the press service of his company. Representatives of Capital Life called the purpose of these appeals “to exert direct pressure on the court.”

As a result, the court sided with Capital Life, RBC reports .

Updated at 2:47 p.m. RBC information added.