Legal counsel for businesses trading
in and with Russia

Our client paid a supplier RUB 3,029,440 in advance for goods manufactured in China. Instead of delivery came a further invoice for RUB 3,174,601 and word that the cargo was already in Russia, sitting in a warehouse. Two instances dismissed the claim: the goods had been imported, so the supplier had performed. We came in at the cassation stage, once the judgment had taken effect, and raised the question no court had examined: which goods had been agreed, and whether they could have been delivered for the sum already paid.

Our client faced a trade mark infringement claim concerning parallel-imported goods. The case law in this area is unsettled and a major trading platform was joined to the proceedings. The matter ran for a year across six hearings, with parallel negotiations between all parties.

In 2025 we filed an application to register the trade mark MARKBOSS. The proprietor of a similar sign opposed the application in order to block registration. We prepared submissions analysing the absence of any likelihood of confusion, establishing distinctive character and evidencing good-faith use.

A composer and performer discovered that a third-party collective had adapted and released his song without permission, on a streaming service and a social network. We obtained interim relief from the Moscow City Court before issuing proceedings, had access to the recordings restricted through the telecommunications regulator, and then brought the claim.

Our client paid for access to an educational platform operated by a Skolkovo resident company, but the services were only partly delivered. The first instance court dismissed the claim, treating the platform as software supplied under licence. On appeal we established that the grant of software rights was merely the means of delivering the service to the consumer.

Our client had paid in full, but the counterparty failed to perform for a year. Negotiations went nowhere. We issued proceedings in the commercial court on a simple and uncompromising basis: payment was made, no service was provided, and there was no ground to retain the money.

A developer completed an online shop project worth RUB 500,000; the customer underpaid and counterclaimed for delay penalties. We had the matter moved from the simplified to the ordinary procedure, which created room to negotiate, and brought the parties to a settlement instead of years of litigation.