Oligarch v. Oligarch: London's Courts Attract Litigious Tycoons
Berezovsky v. Abramovich is the highest-profile (and highest-paying) case to date in a London legal trend that only seems to keep gaining steam. An estimated 60 percent of the cases in England's commercial and chancery courts now have ties to Russia or other former Soviet bloc countries--including many that involve oligarchs like Abramovich and Berezovsky, who have long-standing grudges and are making London their arena of choice in which to battle things out. English lawyers like to point out that their courts are incorruptible, in contrast to a Russian system that is often described as being open to influence, both political and financial, especially where the biggest fish are concerned. But it also seems to be a sort of fashion statement among oligarchs these days. "It's almost like a designer tie," says Brian Zimbler, one of the longest-practicing Western lawyers in Moscow. "These oligarchs like to dress well, they like fancy cars, they have houses in the south of France. And if there are lawsuits, they like them to be in the London courts."
The London legal scene has been happy to oblige. Competition for oligarch clients is fierce, and the firms who win them are raking in record fees. (The fee for Abramovich's lead counsel is rumored to be between $4.7 million and $15 million, an astronomical price tag even at the lower end.) Meanwhile, booming cottage industries have sprung up for things like Russian court translators and paralegals specializing in Russian law. This has been a boon to a struggling economy that has seen law as one of the few sources of growth-legal services accounted for 1.8 percent of Britain's GDP in 2009.
.....
And so oligarchs in London must stay on the alert for writs, on occasion from one another. ("Sometimes oligarchs try to serve other oligarchs," one CIS lawyer in London says.) Private investigators are employed to track oligarchs' time in London, in hopes of making the case for residency, which allows jurisdiction in English courts-by British standards, just a few weeks in town annually can be enough to make the case. Even divorce lawyers in on the CIS game. This promises more high-profile cases on the way, often featuring the headline-grabbing marriage of brass-knuckle Russian businessmen and the British high society scene. "The docket looks full for years to come," Shaw says.
.....
Rupert D'Cruz, who is secretary of the British-Russian Law Association and is one of England's top experts on CIS cases, says the English courts, with their long history of settling complex international disputes, are uniquely suited to handle convoluted cases like the oligarchs battles, which are often based on handshake agreements-saunas are said to be the Russian equivalent to the golf course for sealing deals. "It's often done on trust," he says. "And when things go wrong there is a great problem of putting together the jigsaw of who said what, and what was agreed."
.....
The big guys often aren't used to playing nice, which can make things tough for lawyers. London CIS specialists report working on cases where they suspect the key documents are forged, and where clients have to be reminded that they can't try to buy the judge. Often they worry that their offices are bugged. Adam Greaves, a lawyer in London who has tried a long line of high-profile CIS cases, says he's had clients with bullet wounds and knife scars, including one who had an old wound running all the way up his neck. Cases have been filled with tales of things like illegal share dilutions and staged bankruptcies. "You've got to hand it to the Russians. They know how to develop a convoluted fraud," he says.
The oligarchs also are used to getting what they want, and not afraid to take grudges against their opponents as far as they can, sometimes happy to tarnish a rival's reputation even if it means hurting their own case. "They are generally extremely aggressive litigators. They don't take no for an answer," Greaves says. "They will litigate every point, including bad ones, and frequently against your advice-either to spill out information, or cause the other side grief, or make spurious or defamatory statements."
