“PrivatBank”: From April 2013 to August 2014, Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov organized the roguish scheme for providing loans to borrowers 46
In the High court in London 31 July ended a five-day hearing on the suit of “PrivatBank” against the former shareholders of financial institutions Igor Kolomoisky and Gennady Bogolyubov, and six controlled companies, the press service of the Bank on 1 August.
“Shortly before the hearing, the defendants refused almost half of the arguments they planned to present. Such concessions include the recognition that the Bank has “sufficient for the trial of the case” against them for fraud and that there was a risk that they will squander its assets, if it is not prohibited by court order about the arrest of assets”, – stated in the message.
The hearing in the High court of London held under the chairmanship of judge of the justice of Pancreta.
“During the hearing the Bank presented to the High court to the detailed arguments and evidence on the claim and the court order of a world-wide seizure of assets, which was issued for securing a claim. Action as a basis for a court order about the arrest of assets includes statements that Mr Kolomoisky and Mr Bogolyubov misappropriated from the Bank $1.9 billion in 2014 through the conclusion of a number of alleged trades, which had the consequence of the transfer of funds to companies they secretly owned or controlled. During the hearing, the lead counsel of “PrivatBank” Stephen Smith explained that in the period from April 2013 to August 2014, Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov organized the roguish scheme for the provision of 46 loans to borrowers payments for 54 phantom “supply contracts” to supply incredible quantities of commodities such as manganese ore, pet and Apple juice concentrate and schemes of lending, to hide fraudulent actions”, – note in “PrivatBank”.
The report stresses that the loans were provided without the approval or checks, while the supply contracts were signed as cover.
This allowed us to pay $1.9 billion to six companies: Teamtrend limited, Trade point limited agro and Collyer limited (established in UK), as well as Rossyn investing corp, Milbert ventures inc. and Zao Ukrtransitservice ltd (established in the British virgin Islands).
“None of the companies has a web page, offices, employees, warehouses, labor, or any other public presence. This scheme was the embodiment of the idea of Messrs Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov, which at that time were the owners of more than 90% of the shares of the Bank and members of its Supervisory Board.
As stated by the head of direction of legal support of “PrivatBank” Yaroslav Matuska, it was an important hearing and “a significant step by the Bank in obtaining appropriate compensation funds that were illegally awarded by his former owners.”
According to the company partner “, Hogan Lovells,” Richard Lewis, representing the interests of “PrivatBank”, “the power of the Bank’s claims reflected in the recognition by the defendants that the Bank has sufficient for the trial the case against them of fraud”.
“The Bank is fully trusted by the English courts in the administration of justice in the case,” added Lewis.
19 December 2017, a London court issued an order on a worldwide seizure of assets Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov and six companies, which they presumably belong to or are under their control. The determination was made on the basis of the claim nationalized “PrivatBank”. The plaintiffs argue that the businessmen are taken out of the Bank, about $2 billion, through a series of illegal operations. 19 January 2018, the court extended the order on a worldwide seizure of assets Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov worth more than $2.5 bn before the next respective order.
In mid-March 2018, London’s High court ordered the structures associated with Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov, detailing information about the operations of the Bank by $1.9 billion received from others.
The national Bank of Ukraine in July 2017 has published a report financial audit of “PrivatBank”, conducted by Ernst&Young according to which on the eve of the nationalization of the Bank was a financial pyramid.
After that, the ex-Bank owners, as well as associated offshore and individuals have begun to file dozens of lawsuits in the Ukrainian courts in which to appeal against the procedure of nationalization and demand compensation for related financial losses.
In April 2018 Kolomoisky said that London’s High court will consider essentially the case of “PrivatBank” not earlier than 2020. The former shareholders of the “PrivatBank” dispute the applicability of the jurisdiction of the High court of London when considering the claim of Ukraine nationalized financial institutions.