The conflict between the basic owner of group “coke” Eugene Zubitskiy and his sister-in-law Victoria and the Cossack moved with financial issues on the redistribution of assets. We are talking about control of the plant “Tulachermet-Steel”, one of the group companies, which invested 55 billion roubles Ms. Kazak is disputing the sale of a stake in it “Metallfinans” Eugene with Zubitsky 39.2 million RUB over the Courts accept one or the other direction, now the ball is in the court of appeal. Lawyers say that the chances of the plaintiff is, and the case itself can become important for practice in corporate disputes.The arbitration court of the Central district July 16, will consider the dispute with Zubitsky Eugene and Victoria Cossack relating to the ownership of the plant “Tulachermet-Steel”. We are talking about the approval at the General meeting of participants of LLC “Steel” in February 2019 transaction for the sale of one-third in the company “Tulachermet-Steel” (owns factory) in favor of the company “Metallfinans” (100% owned by Eugene tubectomy). Ms. Kazak, from may 2018, which owns a 24.5% interest in Stal, and did not participate in the Assembly trying to challenge this decision.”OOO Tulachermet-Steel” created on the basis of JSC “Tulachermet” in 2013 for the project for smelting high-quality carbon steel. In may 2018, the company made a special investment contract with the Ministry of industry and the Tula region, involving the construction of casting and rolling complex and the development of production. Ceremonial opening of the plant in the presence of Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev took place in July 2019. The project invested 55 billion rubles, the Plant produces different types of rolled products both from ordinary grades of steel and of steels for engineering.Two-thirds of the shares in “Tulachermet-Steel” was the major asset of “Steel”. However, the court cancelled the acquisition of the company in the first third of the plant, and she returned to the “Tulachermet”. Then according to the decision of meeting of participants of “Steel” was sold to second and third. Shares of both ended up at the “Metallfinans”.Share of 24.5% “Became” Ms. Putilova gave Andrew Zubitsky (brother of Eugene) in June 2018, and then Evgeny Zubitsky gave another 0.1%, which allowed it alone to assemble a quorum at the meeting and to approve the deal. Mister Zubitsky (owns 50.9 per cent “Steel”) could not vote as an interested party. In addition, the plaintiff calls the low sales price (RUB 39.2 million).The transfer of 0.1% in the “Steel” Elena Putilova explained in order to avoid deadlock in the presence of equal shares from minority shareholders. MS Putilova said in court, that is an independent member of the company and shall vote at their discretion and to sell the share need for funding to another project. Representative Eugene with Zubitsky also objected to the claim.The arbitration court of Tula region in August 2019, the acknowledged approval of the transaction invalid, agreeing that ELena Putilova being the “family lawyer” family zubitskih affiliated with the majority party “Steel”, and the transfer of 0.1% of shares was aimed to provide the right solution. But the appeal in February dismissed the suit, deciding that the fact of affiliation with Zubitsky Eugene and Elena Putilova not proven and, in principle, has no legal significance because the law on LLC does not limit participation in voting of persons affiliated with the interested party.Victoria Cossack told “Kommersant” that in case of victory “Steel” will regain share in the largest investment project, otherwise “Yevgeny Zubitsky will be close to consolidate all 100% in “Tulachermet-Steel” only 120 million rubles.”. Mister Zubitsky said only: “the court will decide, and will decide”. To comment on plaintiff’s claim, he refused. In “Steel” did not respond to a request “b”.”The actual affiliation of individuals massively applied by the courts only in bankruptcy cases because of the creativity and resourcefulness of the beneficiaries of insolvent debtors”— says Mr. Grigoriev. But, in his opinion, this concept can be applied “to the corporate conflict, which is very similar to the confrontation between debtors and bankruptcy creditors”.Yurbureau partner of the “Padva and Epshtein” Pavel Gerasimov believes that the courts ought to perform, what purpose Andrew Zubitsky donated expensive asset in favor of his “family lawyer”. According to Mr. Gerasimov, such a goal could be “the alienation of the share to the person who would not meet the criteria allowing it to be regarded as affiliated”. The Director of the corporate law Department of a law firm RKT Elena Kravtsova noted that the appeal came formally to establish the status of controlling persons is contrary to the evidence submitted, therefore, the Complainant has a chance of success in the court of cassation.The arbitral panel
