Highlights

20 april 2016

The Ninth Arbitrazh Court of Appeals agreed with the position of Jus Aureum in rejecting the complaint against the ruling to abandon a suit

In December 2015, lawyers from Jus Aureum were successful in achieving the abandonment by the Arbitrazh Court of the city of Moscow of a statement of claim by UK Sodruzhestvo LLC in case No. А40-139187/2015 for the recovery of unjust enrichment from Giproplast Engineering JSC by proving that this case was identical to case No. А40-29304/2015, which had been considered earlier.
17 march 2016

Jus Aureum Wins Thin Capitalization Case in the Russian Supreme Court

Now, however, the Russian Supreme Court concluded in Case No. А40-87775/2015 that as interest is paid to a Russian recipient, the Russian borrower should not be expected to pay dividends as a tax agent (Article 269.4 of the Tax Code). The interest in such cases is not to be treated as dividends.
3 december 2015

Jus Aureum successfully defended the interests of the general director of one of the largest companies in Russia as part of a series of five court cases concerning administrative offences under part 1 Article 15.6 KoAP

In court, the lawyers of Jus Aureum managed to prove the absence of grounds for bringing the general director to administrative liability for the alleged violation, as the list and the deadline for presenting the documents requested had been set by the tax authority itself, rather than by the legislation on taxes and duties.