[2025] EWHC 2036 (Comm)

This stated that Mr Gutseriev was not the controlling person of Neftisa; he did not have the right directly or indirectly (through persons under his control) to dispose of more than 50% its voting shares; he does not have the right to appoint the sole executive body and (or) more than 50% of its Board of Directors; he is not a Board member and there were no other grounds in the current legislation of the Russian Federation for Mr Gutseriev establishing control over the company. [Trial bundle 3526]

The Claimant makes the following observations on that letter. Everything in it was said to be stated “based on information provided by the sole shareholder of … “Neftisa”, THE COMPANY DOLMER ENTERPRISES LIMITED”. No indication was given of what form that information took or of what if any documents had been provided to the “Deputy Director General on corporate issues” who signed the letter. It was said that Mr Gutseriev was not a member of Neftisa’s Board of Directors, but no instrument of resignation, or any other document, signed by him (or indeed any other director of Neftisa) was provided. No Companies House or equivalent official form of any sort was provided. Views were expressed about the extent of Mr Gutseriev’s ownership and control, but they were said to be “in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation” and, again, on the basis of unexplained ‘information’ said to have been provided. No competent lawyer could reasonably have advised the Claimant that this letter provided a sound basis for discounting the Refinitiv reports.