Day 1

Bank St Petersburg v Vitaly Arkhangelsky [Master]
Day 1

Contents

1 :1 Thursday, 28 January 2016
2 (12.00 pm)
3 (Proceedings delayed)
4 (12.09 pm)
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
6 MR LORD: Not a very promising start, my Lord. Sorry about
7 that.
8 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Can you switch on your voice, please?
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Arkhangelsky, can you hear us?
10 MR ARKHANGELSKY: No any voice on your side.
11 NEW SPEAKER: Can you start again; can you say «Hello»?
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Hello?
13 MR ARKHANGELSKY: We cannot hear you.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Hello?
15 (Pause).
16 NEW SPEAKER: Hello.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Can you hear us at all?
18 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, now we have started, yes.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You can still hear us?
20 MR ARKHANGELSKY: We can hear you but it is so slow signal,
21 so I cannot really hear what is …
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Good afternoon, at any rate.
23 Mr Lord, how shall we proceed?
24 MR LORD: May it please your Lordship, I appear for the Bank
25 with my learned friends Mr Birt QC and Mr Eschwege.

2 :1 Mr Stroilov is obviously here in some capacity for the
2 defendants, and Mr Arkhangelsky is linked up by video
3 link.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
5 MR LORD: Your Lordship, this is a preliminary —
6 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I’m sorry, there is no signal, no voice.
7 We cannot hear anything at all absolutely.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: May I ask, who is with you in the room
9 that you are sitting in, Mr Arkhangelsky?
10 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Sorry?
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Who is sitting with you in that room?
12 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I don’t know. I don’t know.
13 NEW SPEAKER: Can you hear me?
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
15 NEW SPEAKER: I am actually mandated by the lawyer in
16 Marseille, so BMC lawyer. You were supposed to know
17 about that. I am just supposed to be here and be
18 present, that’s all. I just have been employed for the
19 payment.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are for the Bank, are you?
21 NEW SPEAKER: It is Marc Bernie, the lawyer, the French
22 lawyer, who asked me to be here.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that for the Bank?
24 MR LORD: Can you hear us?
25 NEW SPEAKER: Thank you, but when we did the trial, the test

3 :1 earlier, we could hear you perfectly, because there was
2 nobody in the room, but now it is a bit loud so we can’t
3 hear properly the conversation. So as long as everybody
4 tries to be very quiet, I think the person here that
5 I don’t know will be able to hear you. Thank you very
6 much.
7 MR ARKHANGELSKY: So far it is impossible to hear anything,
8 so it is just a picture, that’s it.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Can you hear now, Mr Arkhangelsky?
10 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Very, very slow — very slow signal, as
11 I said. I think it is a problem connection. You know
12 I already asked the question about possible earphones
13 and personal devices, because without devices it doesn’t
14 work.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m trying to understand how bad this
16 is, as to whether you can hear at all or whether you are
17 both saying that it is very indistinct.
18 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I’m sorry, I didn’t get all what you are
19 saying.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Lord, it doesn’t appear very
21 satisfactory at the minute.
22 MR LORD: No, but it is slightly hard to test, my Lord. It
23 is slightly hard to test, to gauge the extent of any
24 problem and therefore, what, if any, would be the
25 remedy.

4 :1 I do apologise. Would your Lordship rise for 10
2 minutes and see if we can make some technical progress?
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I think that would be best, and
4 I think you need a general view from that room as to how
5 bad it is.
6 MR LORD: Yes, I understand.
7 (12.17 pm)
8 (A short break)
9 (12.28 pm)
10 MR LORD: My Lord, thank you for the extra time, and
11 I apologise for that delay. We have used the time to
12 establish that the link to Nice is sufficiently clear,
13 provided that the speakers speak slowly and don’t
14 overspeak.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is there meant to be a real time flow
16 on my screen.
17 MR LORD: There should be, my Lord.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Maybe I am doing something wrong.
19 MR LORD: I think, my Lord, you may have to log-in to
20 activate your Opus account.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Got it.
22 MR LORD: There is a tab labelled «realtime», I think,
23 my Lord.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
25 And Mr Arkhangelsky has that and Mr Stroilov has

5 :1 that; is that right.
2 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Sorry, what should I have?
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You should have a screen in front of
4 you which shows the words as they are spoken.
5 MR ARKHANGELSKY: You mean I have to log on in the Magnum
6 system? This, you mean?
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, on the Magnum system as we speak,
8 so the type should emerge.
9 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Okay, I will try to connect. We just got
10 a connection.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I would hope that that will supplement
12 any deficiencies in the sound quality.
13 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Okay, thank you.
14 Housekeeping
15 MR LORD: My Lord, this is the housekeeping day at the
16 beginning of the trial. Your Lordship should have
17 received a note from the claimants, setting out what we
18 understand to be the business to transact at this
19 hearing. Your Lordship should also have two bundles
20 prepared for that purpose.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I have.
22 MR LORD: Your Lordship will see that what’s on the agenda,
23 and the first matter, in my respectful submission, is
24 the question of representation.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

6 :1 MR LORD: And your Lordship will have seen what was said in
2 the letter that I hope found its way through to
3 your Lordship in response the inquiry as to what the
4 claimants’ position was in that regard. Does
5 your Lordship have a copy of that letter?
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I’ve read it but I can’t quite
7 remember where it is. Is it in this bundle as well?
8 MR LORD: It should be on your Lordship’s desk because,
9 unfortunately, it was not put in at the time. It will
10 need to be inserted at a point that your Lordship
11 directs. It is on Magnum, my Lord, but it has not found
12 its way, I think, in hard copy to the bundle
13 your Lordship has. So it is really a question of
14 your Lordship directing where you would like it to be
15 popped.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t really mind. I should think
17 it could go in as an attachment to your skeleton, to
18 your note.
19 MR LORD: Thank you, my Lord.
20 Your Lordship will see from that letter the
21 claimants’ position. It is obviously the defendants’
22 application, or the first part of that application, and
23 I would want to make some submissions, but I will be
24 guided by your Lordship as to the order, and obviously
25 it is the defendants’ application, so I was really just

7 :1 introducing today’s business, not in any way meaning to
2 deprive the defendants of being able to speak to and
3 open what is their application, which your Lordship
4 will, of course, find behind divider 4 of the first
5 bundle for today.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, thank you very much, Mr Lord.
7 Mr Arkhangelsky, under our rules, as under many
8 courts’ rules, I dare say, one person is not allowed to
9 speak on behalf of another or to conduct the process of
10 litigation on behalf of another unless they are
11 qualified and admitted to the relevant Bar or other
12 means of court access.
13 The reason for that is obvious; that the court is
14 keen to ensure that it listens only either to persons in
15 their own right or to persons who are subject to
16 the rules which apply to professionals, and who have the
17 requisite training. That is why we have to go through
18 this process, to determine whether an exception to that
19 general rule should be made in this case.
20 Now, my understanding — but I would invite you
21 formally to confirm, please — is that you would wish
22 Mr Stroilov to speak here on your behalf in these
23 proceedings; is that correct?
24 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, please, your Lordship. I kindly ask
25 you to grant to Mr Stroilov rights of audience, because

8 :1 he is the only person who is really able to present my
2 case in the UK court. So I really need him, as long as
3 I am absolutely not a specialist, I am not familiar with
4 all the documents, and I was not really able to read all
5 of them either.
6 So I am kindly asking you to consider the
7 possibility to grant him this right of audience.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
9 The second, rather different request, is what
10 I understand to be your request to me to allow
11 Mr Stroilov not only to speak on your behalf, but also
12 to conduct the process of litigation on your behalf;
13 that is to say, to be responsible for the documentation
14 and for correspondence between the parties, and for all
15 the various ancillary things which arise in the ordinary
16 course of a case; am I right in thinking that?
17 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, yes, you are absolutely right, and
18 I would be grateful if you would grant this possibility.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Why is it that you feel unable to
20 undertake the correspondence and other ancillary matters
21 which you have, to some extent, at least, performed in
22 the past?
23 MR ARKHANGELSKY: There are many different issues. First of
24 all, and they are very simple, that my language is not
25 that perfect as his; second, I cannot read and react as

9 :1 fast as him; third, as I told on the previous hearing,
2 I am occupied whole day with the work to feed my big
3 family: I have to work to have money to survive. So it
4 means that I cannot really devote that much my personal
5 time towards the UK process, considering that still
6 I have a lot of French processes and a lot of family
7 engagements.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, this is a matter which I will
9 also wish to discuss with Mr Stroilov, but is it your
10 understanding that Mr Stroilov can give his full time on
11 your behalf in these proceedings?
12 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, I hope so, and, in fact, we agreed
13 that in case he would have some personal difficulties or
14 having any health problems, I would be replacing him if
15 it’s required.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But otherwise, subject to health or
17 unforeseen circumstance, you are asking and he, so far
18 as you are aware, has agreed, to represent you
19 throughout the case?
20 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, absolutely.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, that is, if I may say so, very
22 good of him. I shall ask Mr Stroilov —
23 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, I am very grateful to him, yes.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. I shall ask Mr Stroilov some
25 questions now and then revert to you, and then I shall

10 :1 ask Mr Lord for his observations, although ultimately
2 I think this is a matter simply for the court to
3 determine.
4 Mr Stroilov, I imagine that you confirm what
5 Mr Arkhangelsky has said; is that right?
6 MR STROILOV: I think I have just one qualification, to
7 avoid any misunderstanding. I don’t think it is
8 proposed that ultimate responsibility for conduct of
9 litigation is taken away from the defendants and given
10 to me altogether. Really what we mean is we would
11 like — I would like to have the right to exchange
12 letters and then do all other things which may amount to
13 conduct of litigation, to share these rights with the
14 defendants, simply because it creates quite unnecessary
15 logistical problems on top of everything else when I am
16 not able to respond to some urgent inquiry, send
17 an e-mail back, then just for the sake of complying with
18 formalities we have to wait for hours, or perhaps days,
19 until it can be organised for a letter to be sent by
20 Mr Arkhangelsky when it is quite unnecessary, because,
21 obviously, I am very heavily involved.
22 And I think I should also qualify this, I think
23 Mr Arkhangelsky made that clear enough: I don’t think
24 either I or he or Mrs Arkhangelskaya can quite commit
25 ourselves for any given day or any given task which will

11 :1 arise on that day, three months in advance. We are
2 simply not in a position to do that. We have to put all
3 our lives in jeopardy to be able to do what we can to
4 assist the court in this trial. But obviously for
5 people doing this on top of their own lives, it’s
6 difficult. So we will do what we can.
7 It is proposed, well, I will do my best to do as
8 many cross-examinations of the claimants’ witnesses as
9 possible, just to see how it goes and if I am able to
10 help more. I don’t want you to quite rely on me to be
11 here every day and to conduct litigation every day.
12 We would like to have that right.
13 I am going to address you on various other points
14 raised in the claimants’ evidence and various criticisms
15 of that.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, well, before we come to that, my
17 concern is that, whilst I fully appreciate your own life
18 and commitments, and whilst I am extremely grateful and
19 admiring of your agreement in this regard, the fact is
20 that the court is put in a difficult position if it
21 cannot know from day-to-day whether there will be
22 representation, as it were, or not. That’s the first
23 point.
24 The second point, as to conduct of the litigation,
25 I think you would have to agree some ground rules: for

12 :1 example, it must be clear whether a letter written to
2 you is, on receipt of it, to be treated as written to
3 Mr and Mrs Arkhangelsky.
4 Furthermore, it must be clear whether you have
5 Mr Arkhangelsky’s authority, here and now, to agree
6 various matters on their behalf. I think there has to
7 be what might, excessively grandly, be called
8 a protocol, so that you focus on these things and get
9 the requisite authority in writing so as to avoid
10 problems in the future; do you see what I mean?
11 MR STROILOV: Well, my Lord, there has been the latest
12 e-mail in correspondence on this issue, is something
13 where Mr Arkhangelsky precisely confirms on behalf of
14 both defendants and OMG Ports that they have full
15 authority to exercise rights of audience and conduct
16 litigation. So, so long as you are interested in
17 substance, that is there, and I don’t think there has
18 been any problem in the four years in which I have been
19 involved in one way or the other. There has been no
20 confusion whatsoever about the letters written by me
21 then being denounced by the defendant, so about letters
22 sent to either of us not reaching anyone. Generally
23 letters are sent to both addresses, and that, I even
24 think, is in your Lordship’s order on alternative
25 service and it actually mentions the mode for

13 :1 correspondence.
2 I don’t think the problem is practical; it’s more of
3 a formal point being made about whether it is right for
4 you to exercise this discretion at all.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think that there are two purposes in
6 inviting you to focus on a protocol. The first is that
7 unless and until you focus on the detail of it, the
8 enormity of it may not quite emerge.
9 The second is that in these circumstances where
10 there are no professional rules in the background, it is
11 best, I think, if it is to be permitted, for as much
12 certainty to be brought to the relationship as is
13 practical.
14 That may strike you as excessively cautious, but it
15 is, especially as regards conduct of a litigation on
16 behalf of another person, and the more so when that
17 conduct may not be seamless because you have to drop out
18 for whatever reason or another, that there should be
19 clarity as to the position.
20 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I hear what you say. I am not
21 really sure what, in practice, is required, obviously
22 within the reason, if there is anything the claimants
23 don’t understand, obviously we are quite prepared to
24 agree the procedure.
25 Frankly, the reason, in practical terms, we are

14 :1 asking for that is simply that sometimes it is necessary
2 for me to send out an e-mail to disclose a document
3 rather than delay it for another day, possibly, if
4 Mr Arkhangelsky is unavailable or there is a computer
5 problem or whatever. Then my sending out an e-mail does
6 not become a major issue in this litigation, because
7 there are enough of them.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, we will return to the details,
9 but I understand the substance of your application in
10 each aspect.
11 MR STROILOV: If I may say a couple of words in terms of
12 advance commitment, as your Lordship has raised?
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR STROILOV: Well, unfortunately we can only do this much:
15 we obviously will try to give as much advance notice as
16 possible, as soon as we know that, for instance,
17 I cannot appear on such and such a date, or … we will
18 be trying to keep the court and the claimants informed.
19 But for the moment all we can say is that I will —
20 unless something unexpected happens, I will attend on
21 the first week to do cross-examinations, if the court
22 gives permissions for that, and then subsequently we
23 will try to arrange for me to do as many
24 cross-examinations as possible, although it will be
25 quite fortunate if I manage to do all of them. Well,

15 :1 I don’t want to complain, but it requires quite a lot of
2 sacrifice in terms of all other commitments.
3 So we will try to do that. I don’t anticipate being
4 able to go to Paris and be present at Mr and
5 Mrs Arkhangelsky’s cross-examinations. Probably there
6 won’t be anyone, and there won’t be any proper
7 re-examination, so all we will ask for is for them to be
8 allowed to make some kind of statement in if they feel
9 they need to do any qualification.
10 Then I am afraid we will just have to update you
11 further, we need to survive this month and then think
12 how we proceed. It is, really, obviously — well,
13 I don’t think I need to stress again how difficult the
14 task is for us, as well as your Lordship.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Please understand that whatever I say
16 is made in the context of admiration for your
17 performance in the past and for your commitment for the
18 future, everything is subject to that overall approach.
19 However, I do have to tie things down a little bit and
20 I have to try and make sure that I understand the ground
21 rules.
22 You have given me an assurance, subject to
23 the caveats you have expressed for the first week, but
24 how about the second week, where some quite important
25 witnesses are scheduled to attend, especially

16 :1 Ms Mironova and Mr Savelyev?
2 MR STROILOV: At the moment the plan is I will try to do
3 that, but if it changes, which it may, because
4 I literally had to neglect everything else in my life in
5 order to be able to assist with this trial, and if one
6 of these things suddenly comes back to me, I will have
7 to ask and we will see if anything can be done, or if it
8 has to be Mr Arkhangelsky.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is a harsh thing for me to say, and
10 please understand the reasons for it, but to some
11 extent, with some flexibility you either have to accept
12 the role or not. I cannot really contemplate that as
13 early as the second week, when we get to some of
14 the major attending witnesses, I can’t, I think, be on
15 tenterhooks, can I, as to whether there is to be or
16 isn’t to be cross-examination or whether there is going
17 to be a great brouhaha as to whether it is possible at
18 all.
19 I think, given the imminence of all this, that would
20 be a difficult thing for me to accept.
21 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. Unfortunately I can only commit
22 myself this far, subject to — I will do my best to do
23 the first week and the second week. It is possible that
24 for some particular witnesses I will have to leave the
25 cross-examination to Mr Arkhangelsky.

17 :1 We do intend, between ourselves, to do our best to
2 actually carry out cross-examinations, so it is subject
3 to any catastrophic emergencies, it is very unlikely
4 that you will be told: well, actually this witness is
5 coming but they aren’t going to have any proper
6 cross-examination.
7 Really, as far as the division of functions between
8 Mr Arkhangelsky and me is concerned, I am afraid we have
9 to reserve, really, the right, or to request the
10 permission, rather, to change at some point.
11 What we are aiming for is really for me to do as
12 many of them as possible, and if we are fortunate —
13 well, in terms of all other factors which are probably
14 unnecessary to go through here, factors of our own
15 lives — if we are fortunate I will be able to do week
16 one and week two, and hopefully, whatever is — at least
17 some of the witnesses which are passed on to March. But
18 that’s as far as it goes, I am afraid.
19 Of course we have also the question of the timetable
20 and how much time you are prepared to give us is also,
21 in one sense, has been left open by your Lordship. And,
22 in a way, it depends: if we have longer breaks, there is
23 more flexibility, and if I cannot do Wednesday on week
24 two, then it can be made a reading day and we squeeze
25 everything in.

18 :1 But if it is as tight as it is now and we only have
2 four weeks, it is going to be more difficult and
3 possibly that makes it likely that Mr Arkhangelsky will
4 be doing it himself.
5 I appreciate it is inconvenient and annoying, but
6 I am afraid that is inherent in a trial of this size
7 being conducted by litigants in person. We are just
8 trying to pull in all the resources we have, including
9 my willingness to help, and to do our best to assist.
10 We will do all we can, but you know that in a way we are
11 not particularly optimistic about our ability to conduct
12 the trial properly as litigants in person.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would this be a fair summary as
14 regards the first two weeks, at any rate: that, absent
15 some unexpected event or ill health, you would be
16 expecting to cross-examine the witnesses in those two
17 weeks?
18 MR STROILOV: Yes, that’s right. That’s the intention for
19 the moment.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I cannot have «for the moment» too
21 often. It is just a huge amount of effort goes into
22 these trials and I think in weighing what to do, I need
23 to have a clear picture, which is the picture I had
24 understood Mr Arkhangelsky to be giving me, that absent
25 some unexpected circumstance or ill health, he was

19 :1 thinking that you would do the lot, but I am simply
2 clarifying by way of test that you would do the first
3 two weeks, and the important witnesses which are there.
4 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I am afraid the question is how
5 unexpected is unexpected.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
7 MR STROILOV: I am neglecting my own life altogether.
8 I think with horror of about 12 things which might come
9 back to me now. So it is not quite unexpected that we
10 will just have to attend to something else.
11 Subject to that, I will just do my best. I am
12 afraid I can’t be more definite than that. It is right,
13 I just don’t want to — I hope it really goes without
14 saying that it is monstrously difficult for me and the
15 defendants to meaningfully participate in this trial, to
16 prepare for cross-examination of 13 witnesses of fact,
17 and then three to five pairs of experts on thousands of
18 documents. I do think it is pretty much without
19 precedent if you discount cases which were held to be in
20 breach of Article 6. So this trial may well set the
21 record in that regard.
22 We are just going to do this superhuman effort and
23 see if we succeed to any extent, or die in the effort.
24 I’m sorry to sound dramatic, but that’s really how we
25 feel.

20 :1 My Lord, should I address, now, various criticisms
2 made by the claimants of the application, or would you
3 like, really, to keep it more to questions which you
4 have?
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you wish to address anything
6 particular, do go ahead. I mean, my general attitude,
7 which Mr Lord can have a go at if he wants, is that you
8 have in the past, and I have confidence will, for the
9 future, be of very considerable assistance to the court.
10 It is not only me that has found that: it is the courts
11 at every level that have found that, and I have not, for
12 example, detected in you any indifference to the facts
13 for the sake of your political principles or anything
14 like that. I understand that you have a view, and that
15 is what may motivate you, but I have not noticed it
16 impinging on your explanation of matters to the court.
17 I am anxious to give Mr and Mrs Arkhangelsky any
18 legitimate assistance that I can, and I certainly do not
19 want to put road blocks in their way simply for the sake
20 of conformity with a norm which is inapplicable in this
21 case. Put shortly, subject to my concerns as to the
22 conduct of the litigation, I am fairly strongly in
23 favour of Mr and Mrs Arkhangelsky having the benefit of
24 you speaking on their behalf: indeed, I think it is
25 difficult to know how to proceed without it, in all the

21 :1 circumstances.
2 Having disclosed my provisional position, and though
3 assuring Mr Lord I will, of course, listen as well as
4 read what he wishes to say, are there points that you
5 would wish to bring out which have been made against you
6 and to which you have answers which you would wish to
7 supply?
8 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord. Firstly, it is very
9 kind of you to say all the things you have just said.
10 Yes, I am concerned about several points that have
11 been made, in particular if you look at the eighth
12 witness statement of Mr McGregor, and that’s at 13 {G4/111/12}.
14 I am just testing the system as well. I was told it
15 is going to come up on the screen once I have referred
16 to it clearly.
17 Is your Lordship looking at it through the computer?
18 We can actually do it old style and look at it in
19 the bundle if that assists, but that may be seen as
20 somewhat wasteful in terms of the money and effort that
21 has gone into Magnum.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: There is an unseen hand which is doing
23 things for me. I don’t know whether it will result in
24 my seeing anything.
25 MR STROILOV: Yes, I have the same. I wonder.

22 :1 Should we do it on paper?
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, there we are.
3 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord. Then if we could go to
4 paragraph 36.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, that’s the conditions.
6 MR STROILOV: It is at tab 7 of the paper bundle anyway.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I have that. I was just
8 interested to see whether the machine is going to work.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes. (Pause)
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It has worked. Has it worked for you?
11 MR STROILOV: Yes, and the paragraph —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Arkhangelsky, do you have that? Do
13 you see paragraph 35 of Mr McGregor’s eighth witness
14 statement?
15 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, yes, yes, I opened it, yes.
16 MR STROILOV: Thank you, my Lord. What I am concerned is
17 paragraph 36 which suggests I am downplaying my own
18 background and experience, and there is then
19 a suggestion that I have appeared in other proceedings
20 but haven’t disclosed that to the court.
21 Well, with respect, that is a very serious
22 allegation. Downplaying is a species of misleading, and
23 it happens to be entirely untrue.
24 If your Lordship looks at the transcript of
25 the hearing where that application was first made, which

23 :1 is at {L3/14/1}, 14 February 2013.
2 I think there are two points. At page 4, that is
3 the internal page 4. At the bottom of page 4, one of
4 the things I say at line 25, I begin:
5 «I did this before; I was granted on a couple of
6 occasions, I was granted rights of audience as McKenzie
7 friend.»
8 Then I just make the application.
9 While we are looking at this transcript, I think
10 I should also correct a slight, and I am sure,
11 unintentional, inaccuracy in Mr McGregor’s statement.
12 It has been said that the claimants’ position on that
13 has always been reserved, whereas if you look at page 1,
14 starting at line 16, you will see Mr Marshall saying:
15 «I should say, we don’t oppose that application. In
16 fact, we welcome the application, because it would help
17 your Lordship in the conduct of the proceedings to have
18 a representative here.»
19 My Lord, if you recall that was the position that
20 was taken for years, really, until — and then until
21 Withers came on the record. It is only now, very close
22 to the trial, that they start opposing it.
23 I am not saying, of course, that the court is in any
24 sense bound by the previous orders, but I do submit that
25 this goes to the credibility of the claimants’ professed

24 :1 concerns in relation to this.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Could we have a look at page 5 of that
3 transcript, please {L3/14/2}.
4 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You indicated that you had attended as
6 a permitted McKenzie friend on two occasions, a couple
7 of occasions. Is that?
8 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I think that was the position
9 then. Now there have been a few more.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see. It was a couple of occasions
11 in these proceedings?
12 MR STROILOV: No, that’s not right. That was the first time
13 it was in these proceedings. I think I explained that
14 in some more detail in my first — you will remember
15 there was a detailed witness statement on this subject.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
17 MR STROILOV: And I wanted to refer to this as well, because
18 really a lot of matters which are said to have not been
19 covered have, in fact, been covered in that witness
20 statement. So that would be in the trial bundle — I am
21 sorry, my Lord, it takes some …
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s all right.
23 MR STROILOV: That is … it takes me some time to find my
24 way through.
25 Here we are. It will be {G2/69/1}. That is my

25 :1 first witness statement.
2 Then if you go to paragraph 16 you will see what
3 I say there, that’s paragraph 16 at {G2/69/6}. If you
4 just read paragraph 16. Not the whole one, but to
5 the bottom of the page and the first line on the next 6 page {G2/69/7}.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We will need the next page. Thank
8 you.
9 MR STROILOV: Ending there.
10 Sir, I’m obviously concerned, insofar as it is
11 suggested that I was, at any point, less than candid
12 with the court on that, I totally reject that
13 allegation.
14 My Lord, I think simply one point I would like to
15 make very briefly, if you see my sixth statement made in
16 support of the present application on this. You will
17 see that I set out in quite some detail the fact that on
18 occasions I am able, really, to ask friends who happen
19 to be professional, for advice.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
21 MR STROILOV: Something I want to stress is that I am not
22 saying this because I feel there is some fine line and,
23 in a sense, these people are really involved in
24 conducting the litigation. It is nothing of that kind.
25 It would be occasionally I just happen to have a drink

26 :1 with someone who happens to be a lawyer, and I am
2 sometimes in a position to say something like: well,
3 Mr Lord keeps going about employer being not liable if
4 it is a victim of a fraud, what’s all that about. And
5 that person will say: well, look, the House of Lords
6 decision in such and such … that is the level of
7 involvement. It does not go further than that, in
8 substance. I simply think I have to set out these
9 things insofar as they happen.
10 But, in reality, I am the only one who does the
11 work, and the claimants seem simply not to accept the
12 truth of it. I do say that is the truth and that is the
13 dispute between us.
14 So far as it is suggested that I would be using this
15 court for political speeches —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Before you go there, what sort of
17 proportion of your time have you spent in other
18 matters — not this matter — acting as a McKenzie
19 friend, would you say, as a guesstimate?
20 MR STROILOV: Well, generally it has never been anything
21 compared to what I do in this case. I think it would
22 be — in every case it would just be a particular
23 hearing, for instance if someone has some — but
24 I recall the case, for instance, the claimants referred
25 to in their opening submissions, I think, as anonymous

27 :1 proceedings in the family division.
2 What happened was a friend of mine, just a personal
3 friend, was unfortunately going through a divorce, he
4 had to dismiss his solicitors abruptly because he became
5 dissatisfied with them for a good reason. He was warned
6 by the judge that: well, it is all right but I am not
7 going to adjourn the hearing if you just do that.
8 He didn’t even speak English so he simply asked me
9 to speak —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How many such cases? That’s a divorce
11 case; how many others?
12 MR STROILOV: Roughly, I am just trying to recall, well
13 I think in total it would be half a dozen, in each case
14 it would be just one hearing, I think. I don’t think
15 there was ever two hearings.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So this is the only time you have sort
17 of had sustained appearances?
18 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, and when it all started three
19 years ago I hoped it would be a lot less. But I don’t
20 think in that sense, I was consistently really assisting
21 anyone on a continuous basis.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would it follow from that you had not
23 previously undertaken the function of conducting the
24 litigation, as opposed to speaking?
25 MR STROILOV: I don’t think I ever did, no.

28 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Except in this case?
2 MR STROILOV: Except in this case.
3 Right, my Lord, I think I just have a couple of
4 points in response to the suggestions that I would be
5 asking unfairly political questions to witnesses.
6 It seems to me, rightly or wrongly, that where this
7 is going to actually has nothing to do with me. It was
8 suggested that all allegations concerning the role of
9 Russian officials in the alleged conspiracy should be
10 excluded from this trial. So, in a way, this is
11 an attempt to really argue the application which
12 your Lordship may recall you have rejected
13 in March 2014.
14 So, insofar as this is suggested, we don’t accept
15 that, you have rejected the application. Well,
16 obviously these allegations relating to any public
17 officials, they are not the centre of our case, but they
18 are part of our case, such as it is, and so we reserve
19 the right to ask anything that is relevant and
20 reasonable to ask generally. As your Lordship said on
21 other occasions, there is nothing special about anyone
22 being a public official.
23 In due course I might refer your Lordship to
24 the judgment on that point, and possibly to
25 the transcript, but perhaps it is better to do it by way

29 :1 of reply in case my learned friend is about to say it is
2 not suggested and he is quite relaxed about it.
3 My Lord, I suppose that’s all I have to say.
4 I mean, I would like — I am keen, obviously, to clear
5 any suggestion in terms of my appearing on other cases.
6 I do believe that I have been 100 per cent candid at all
7 times about this. If there are any concerns, I would
8 really ask you to put them to me.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
10 Mr Lord, time has galloped on somewhat. How long do
11 you need for this? Shall we try and finish this and
12 then break or should we break now and finish, or what do
13 you suggest to me?
14 MR LORD: My Lord, it might be too much to do it all before
15 the break. I wonder if I could just make one or two
16 short points, which might save time.
17 My Lord, there are two aspects: there’s the conduct
18 points and there’s the rights of representation.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
20 MR LORD: Our position, with respect, remains that
21 conduct — there is no basis for allowing the conduct of
22 this case —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What’s the basis for opposing it?
24 Surely it is to your advantage if you can communicate
25 with someone in this jurisdiction and accept what they

30 :1 say in court on behalf of Mr Arkhangelsky and
2 Mrs Arkhangelsky, surely that’s all to the good,
3 provided that there is reasonable clarity as to what
4 Mr Stroilov is authorised to do and what he is not
5 authorised to do.
6 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, perhaps I should be clear about
7 why we are concerned.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
9 MR LORD: Which is the question of rights without
10 responsibility. That’s what we are concerned about.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s, if I may say so, sort of
12 obviously — it goes without saying that there is
13 a danger where you have rights without professional
14 training and the back-up of a professional system. But
15 it is not impossible to give these rights, and the
16 question is, in a very difficult circumstance, what the
17 objection is in these circumstances?
18 MR LORD: Well, my Lord, the idea that you would give
19 conduct to somebody who isn’t committing to be present
20 at the trial throughout, would be wholly exceptional.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It’s a wholly exceptional case. Which
22 would you prefer? You would prefer to have to
23 communicate with Mr Arkhangelsky and only to receive his
24 say-so as to what is and what is not authorised on his
25 and his wife’s behalf?

31 :1 MR LORD: My Lord, can I explain the practical concern that
2 I have?
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
4 MR LORD: And your Lordship can then see what lies behind
5 the objections that I invite you to consider.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
7 MR LORD: Your Lordship has seen the sorts of allegations
8 that are made by the defendants.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR LORD: In an ordinary case, those would be advanced by
11 professionals and there would have to be — and certain
12 restraints and policing would apply to them, in terms of
13 basis for them and the way they are put, and answering
14 difficult questions from the bench, and so on.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is more difficult when they are
16 litigants in person; there is no doubt about it.
17 MR LORD: And I am coming to why there is a practical
18 concern here, because what would not be fair, on the
19 administration of justice, or on my clients, is for
20 there to be some gap, for issues to fall between two
21 stools. So let’s say there is a real issue, a really
22 important issue about whether a witness should be chased
23 around the court about something, and the court has
24 a real concern about it and wants to know whether
25 a document is really a basis for this, or what is the

32 :1 answer to this document.
2 What would be completely unacceptable is for the
3 answer to come back: well, I don’t really know, it’s
4 Mr Stroilov, and he’s not here today. Or: I don’t
5 really know, I’m doing the best I can but, actually,
6 Mr Arkhangelsky would have to explain that schedule and
7 he is not here today. Right, back to the witness in
8 cross-examination. That would be wholly, wholly
9 unacceptable.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s speaking rights, isn’t it?
11 That’s not conducting litigation.
12 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, back to conduct. Conduct is not
13 just writing letters: it is taking responsibility for
14 the allegations that are being made and the way the
15 matter is being prosecuted, which includes, for example,
16 answering difficult points, points that you don’t
17 particularly want to have to answer, whether put by the
18 other side in a letter or whether posed by your Lordship
19 from the bench.
20 The problem with this passing the baton, this game
21 of tag which appears to be what is suggested, is the
22 cherry-picking could become rife, and however it is
23 dressed up, that is a real concern. That if, in fact,
24 there isn’t a proper basis for something, or if
25 a document should be explained to the court so the court

33 :1 can really understand what the defendant’s case is on
2 this, that should be answered there and then, not with
3 adjournments and not with passing the buck.
4 And coming back to conduct, it is, with respect, not
5 simply — in litigation of this size, with a claim for
6 upwards of US $500 million, the idea that the
7 defendants, whether they are Mr Arkhangelsky or
8 the chairman of ICI, wouldn’t be present for the vast
9 majority of even a three-month trial, in my submission,
10 they would always be present. The court would look
11 askance if there was this sort of claim being made and
12 it was just lawyers in the room; they would expect the
13 businessmen to be there.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t know about that. I do lots of
15 cases where there are a great many — there’s a lot of
16 money involved but I don’t necessarily see the client
17 every day. He may very well have a difficult task of
18 keeping his business afloat.
19 MR LORD: Your Lordship can see that the concern is the
20 question of responsibility and conduct.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But it is all so esoteric. You urge
22 me, do you, to cut off the prospect of simpler means of
23 communication and answer through Mr Stroilov in favour
24 of dealing with Mr Arkhangelsky, through this medium in
25 a language which, although he is admirably capable at,

34 :1 is not his first language and may well stump him on
2 occasions. That’s what you want, is it?
3 MR LORD: No, my Lord, I was dealing with two different
4 facets to this application. One is conduct, and one 5 is —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m on conduct at the moment. The
7 truth of the matter is that the correspondence, as has
8 been admitted by Mr Arkhangelsky, and as is obvious from
9 the differing tone where Mr Arkhangelsky has written and
10 Mr Stroilov has ghostwritten, is that Mr Stroilov is
11 taking on the responsibility for the conduct of
12 the litigation.
13 Now, you want to put that to an end, do you?
14 MR LORD: My Lord, that, with respect, is — the court has
15 to approach it a different way, which is how is the
16 conduct — how is this litigation, effectively — it is
17 being delegated to Mr Stroilov. If your Lordship is
18 satisfied, given all the rules and requirements, that
19 that is an appropriate delegation, then I will take
20 instruction on that.
21 But that carries with it — if you have a lawyer
22 delegated, with implied authority to conduct the case,
23 to write a letter, to seek instruction when he needs to
24 and to answer questions from the bench when he sees fit,
25 that carries with it responsibility: to be sure of your

35 :1 ground, to ascertain the position and so on.
2 Now, if your Lordship is proposing in this protocol
3 to build in these sorts of safeguards so we all know
4 that when the conducting representative says something
5 or answers something or puts a point, he has signed up
6 to a series of responsibilities about bases and
7 authority and instruction and so on, then I will take
8 instruction on that. But so far it appears to be the
9 case that difficult questions have fallen by the
10 wayside, and the points that the defendants would like
11 to pursue have been pursued.
12 So if, in fact, we had had a history of the last six
13 weeks of engagement across the piece, conscientiously
14 and responsibly to get this trial on, including
15 answering proper questions about mirror companies and so
16 on, which would be in the ordinary, that would be one
17 position. But what we have really had is a series of,
18 if you like, little cameos when it seems to suits the
19 defendants to take a particular stance.
20 So if your Lordship, in this protocol, if we can
21 work towards some practical way of ensuring fairness to
22 the administration of justice and all parties, ie my
23 clients, then of course, we will not stand in the way of
24 any assistance that your Lordship would derive from
25 Mr Stroilov.

36 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, the comparator you offer is, of
2 course, nice, but theoretical. Of course I should like
3 to wave a wand and endow Mr Stroilov with all the
4 back-up and professional training and responsibilities,
5 and of course, I could say since I cannot do that
6 I shall simply rely on Mr Arkhangelsky to do it, and
7 I shall preclude Mr Stroilov doing any such thing.
8 It is sort of pie in the sky, really, isn’t it?
9 MR LORD: Your Lordship will recollect that as recently
10 as October, Mr Stroilov, when he was applying for an
11 interim payment hearing, said the court should proceed
12 on the basis that he wouldn’t be giving any assistance
13 during the trial.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I know, I know, I think they
15 have occasionally said one thing, done another,
16 et cetera. It is puzzling in some ways but here we are,
17 and we have a long trial ahead of us. I should have
18 thought that a protocol which is signed up by
19 Mr Arkhangelsky to determine those matters which
20 Mr Stroilov is able to do on his behalf and those
21 matters which he is not able to do, and a certain
22 realistic appreciation on your part that there may come
23 a time when, say, a question from the bench is put to
24 Mr Stroilov which he simply does not feel in good
25 conscience which he can answer with sufficient

37 :1 certainty, or which he needs to have instructions on,
2 then I will urge him to say so and you must accept the
3 flip side, that there may be a delay.
4 MR LORD: Yes, and is your Lordship also minded to make it
5 plain that someone who is entrusted with the conduct of
6 the case has to have a basis for what they say, a proper
7 basis, and must not knowingly mislead the court. So if
8 they are aware of something, that they can’t —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It can be spelt out. I must say that
10 I have not noticed, other than, really rather
11 commendable anxiety to ensure that what he says is
12 clear, and so far as he is aware, accurate. I think it
13 is an exceptional case. Mr Stroilov has, in the past,
14 performed an exceptional service, to my way of thinking.
15 MR LORD: Would your Lordship also keep this, whatever
16 protocol, under review?
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, of course.
18 MR LORD: Because if it becomes — giving an obvious
19 example —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And if I may say so, I think perhaps
21 you are approaching it the wrong way around. I am not
22 saying: I hereby endow you with conduct of the case.
23 I am saying: these are the things which have been
24 approved to be done on his behalf. There’s no way that
25 I can magic any more formal responsibility on anyone,

38 :1 even on Mr Arkhangelsky.
2 MR LORD: I understand that, but your Lordship knows that my
3 client’s position is that the resource available is not
4 as it has been presented to the bench. I’m not going —
5 I don’t want to argue with my Lord, I just want to make
6 plain why we have the scepticism that we do. I am not
7 wanting to make submissions, I’m simply asking you to
8 accept that. I’m not trying to press that home at the
9 moment.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
11 MR LORD: But my client’s position is that the defendants
12 have greater resource and, therefore, the position that
13 they present to your Lordship —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: More friends or more finances.
15 MR LORD: More friends and more finances. I’m not asking —
16 when we get into the trial, and your Lordship will have
17 seen on the business for today the questions about
18 City Centre. Your Lordship will have seen those
19 letters. Three different companies in Mr Arkhangelsky’s
20 stable of companies seem to have taken substantial
21 amounts of money — sorry, City Centre has had money
22 from three companies that we cannot fathom. City Centre
23 is a company that Mr Arkhangelsky says he has no
24 recollection about at all. That is a very simple
25 matter.

39 :1 We are going to, obviously, investigate that with
2 Mr Arkhangelsky. So your Lordship understands my
3 clients’ position, there is substantial, unexplained,
4 monies have gone away.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand your point.
6 MR LORD: And, therefore, my Lord, in a situation where you
7 have a debtor trying to keep creditors at bay, it would
8 not be the first time that they are not necessarily
9 presenting exactly their asset position to the outside
10 world.
11 So to wind back, we have Co France, we have all
12 sorts of things, we have Mr Arkhangelsky, the various
13 things that he does. We don’t accept that the position
14 is that he really is as impoverished and enfeebled as he
15 presents.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But must I not bear in mind the fact
17 that there is a certain oddness that Mr Arkhangelsky
18 would pursue a $500 million counterclaim advisedly with
19 at least one of his arms tied behind his back.
20 MR LORD: Not at all, my Lord. Because if, in fact, the
21 counterclaim has no merit — I’m not asking
22 your Lordship to try it, but if, hypothetically, this
23 counterclaim is built on the most monstrous deceit from
24 start to finish in terms of the way the businesses were
25 run and the prospects and what’s really happened here,

40 :1 and what we are talking about is somebody, to use
2 Professor Guriev’s phrase, a debtor who is gambling for
3 resurrection, if you assume that for one minute, but you
4 also assume, without deciding, that there are
5 significant resources sheltered away, it is not at all
6 surprising that a gambler, weighing up the odds, decides
7 to keep certain chips safe, away from sight. I am not
8 saying I want your Lordship to find that. Your Lordship
9 asked me hypothetically, and so we will obviously
10 explore the accounts and we will explore all that at the
11 proper time. We have had no satisfactory explanation to
12 why City Centre, a company we can’t identify — we can’t
13 track it down, why it seems to have been the beneficiary
14 of money from LPK Scandinavia, PetroLes and the
15 Scandinavia insurers.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Both of you have things to say. You
17 are quite right in observing that we can’t make
18 adjudications now, but if I thought that the
19 counterclaim put forward was completely baseless then
20 that might be one thing. But there are issues, Mr Lord,
21 particularly with respect to valuations, and to
22 the rather curious arrangements with respect to
23 the record investment group which seem to me to lend
24 some credence to complaint, whether they allow a claim
25 under Russian law, a difficult matter, but it is a very

41 :1 curious concatenation.
2 As I thought before, I think in 2014, the
3 insouciance with which it is announced that the entire
4 contents of the apartment were sold for peanuts is
5 unsettling.
6 MR LORD: I take your Lordship’s point. Your Lordship will
7 go through the story and I was not suggesting that your
8 Lordship should decide the matter. I made it plain why
9 we had that scepticism and, my Lord, a good example of
10 the practical point will be forgery. That is a good
11 example of a practical matter that is not very far away
12 in this trial.
13 Your Lordship knows the way that has waxed and
14 waned.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
16 MR LORD: And the issue would be, normally, is there a basis
17 to allege fabrication of documents or not? If there is,
18 then obviously it will be put, and if not, it would be
19 withdrawn.
20 Now, I am not asking your Lordship to prejudge that.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
22 MR LORD: I am just giving an example of quite a significant
23 part of this litigation where responsibility and
24 accountability for what case is positively advanced on
25 behalf of the Arkhangelskys is important, because if

42 :1 they choose to advance it and put it to witnesses, that
2 will lead to a certain set of —
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That claim was maintained while there
4 were solicitors on the record.
5 MR LORD: I’m not asking your Lordship to prejudge it.
6 Your Lordship has seen the document. Your Lordship has
7 seen, for example —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, I understand your point. Mr Lord,
9 you said that you would have some other points and we
10 are now at 1.30, and I am conscious of other people who
11 may want a break, but where is a suitable breaking
12 point?
13 MR LORD: My Lord, can I leave it this way: I will think
14 about the protocol and I will think about the practical
15 safeguards that we might ask your Lordship, if not to
16 build in formally, at least to direct or endorse so that
17 we know where we stand.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is always salutary, I am told, for
19 example, when directors take office, that they should
20 read, digest and sign up to the rules of the game. That
21 may look obsessive, but it is often useful, and so
22 I shall certainly require some form of definition so
23 that Mr Stroilov and Mr Arkhangelsky know the basis on
24 which I am proceeding on their assurance. But I have no
25 reason not to credit Mr Stroilov with an ability to

43 :1 understand and adhere to it.
2 MR LORD: No, my Lord, but it should probably be something
3 that is in writing so there is a record of this.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, yes.
5 MR LORD: Your Lordship will recollect the practice note,
6 recollect the order that was made by your Lordship, and
7 the various points that were going to be explained.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
9 MR LORD: And, with respect, various matters should be
10 reduced into writing, so the questions of experience and
11 so on are understood —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are quite right.
13 MR LORD: My Lord, we’re obviously not going to stand in
14 the way of something your Lordship wants. Your Lordship
15 understands I would never do that.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
17 MR LORD: But at the same time, we are entitled, with
18 respect, to have matters, not really just in this, dare
19 I say, rather informal sort of Q & A type session, we
20 are entitled to have this reduced to writing, so if it
21 turns out that that isn’t right, your Lordship knows
22 that, actually, this was earnestly and verifiably signed
23 up to; in other words, this was the position that was
24 presented to the court, and if, in a month’s time, it is
25 clear that isn’t right, then various reviews might

44 :1 actually take place, as opposed to: well, I didn’t
2 really mean that, Mr Arkhangelsky didn’t really
3 understand the question.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I very much understand that Mr Lord
5 and, if I may say so, it is the reason why I suggested
6 it and it is the reason why I wanted it in writing.
7 I have not noted from your clients any effort to proceed
8 along that more constructive route than simply objecting
9 to it root and branch.
10 So I am very aware of the need, as I perceive it, to
11 define these things in writing and to see, as far as one
12 can, without it becoming a disproportionate exercise,
13 that basic ground rules as to the division between them
14 are agreed. They are not meant to replicate the
15 relationship between a solicitor and his client.
16 I would love that, but I cannot do it. So there we are.
17 I think that you are quite right in identifying that
18 writing is necessary, which is precisely why I raised
19 it.
20 Now, how much more do we need on this?
21 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord?
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How much more time would you like on
23 this?
24 MR LORD: Well, I understood your Lordship wanted to rise
25 and let me take instructions and think about it.

45 :1 The one other point, my Lord, is obviously any
2 financial interest that Mr Stroilov has, whether there
3 is one, that should be —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I will ask Mr Stroilov to tell me
5 about that. I have asked, in the past, and he has given
6 me fairly detailed assurances with that respect. If
7 they have changed, then he must identify them.
8 Good. We will have a short break, I am afraid,
9 until 2.15 pm, shall we say? Is that all right for
10 everybody? I am so sorry, but otherwise we won’t get
11 things done, I think.
12 Mr Lord, can you answer me this: where would I find
13 in the documentation, any internal guidance notes or
14 protocols by the bank, or its various departments,
15 identifying for its officers the rules that they must
16 apply in lending or enforcing any defaults?
17 MR LORD: Can I take my …
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That would be very helpful to me.
19 Thanks very much. 2.15. 20 (1.40 pm)
21 (The Luncheon Adjournment) 22 (2.15 pm)
23 MR LORD: May it please your Lordship. Your Lordship asked
24 about a document before the short adjournment. There is
25 a credit policy for lending at {D11/262/1}. I am not

46 :1 sure the whole document is uploaded. If that could be
2 brought up so your Lordship can see what that is. If
3 you can just scroll down, please, kindly, not too fast.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
5 MR LORD: There are extracts there, my Lord, which I think
6 do deal with problem debts. It may not be exactly what
7 your Lordship has in mind. We will check overnight
8 whether there are any further documents that can be
9 found that meet that, but we think that probably any
10 protocols or guidance would be in this document. But we
11 will check.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s very helpful.
13 MR LORD: If I can help as well, my Lord, the experts on
14 Russian banking — I’m sorry to bob around a bit, but if
15 your Lordship has E2, we have some hard copies, I think
16 they are on your Lordship’s carousel. E2.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
18 MR LORD: If your Lordship would be kind enough to go behind
19 divider 11, there is the joint statement from the
20 Russian banking experts. It is actually the last page, 21 {E2/11/7}.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
23 MR LORD: Your Lordship can see there is a heading «Standard
24 practice and procedure of the enforcement of a pledge of
25 real estate in security of a loan following a default.»

47 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am being stupid about that …
2 MR LORD: I am afraid it is been punched the wrong way. It
3 is not very easy to read, I apologise. It is the last
4 page in divider 11.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. The procedure and practice of
6 public auction sales?
7 MR LORD: Yes. It is number 4, and the experts were asked,
8 Professor Guriev and Mr Turetsky were asked about the
9 practice and procedure in and about the realisation of
10 pledged security. Your Lordship can see they have
11 largely agreed.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
13 MR LORD: I thought that would probably be relevant to
14 your Lordship’s question.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, that’s helpful. One of
16 the things I had in mind, for example, is that in your
17 skeleton argument at paragraph 253, you deal with the
18 question of the bank’s typical practice with respect to
19 obtaining personal guarantees from borrowers.
20 Now, it may be that the document you showed me first
21 will explain that general practice, or support it, but
22 if there were any other document for that sort of
23 practice, then obviously I would like to know where it
24 is.
25 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord. Back to representation.

48 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Just for your note, I think there is
2 another. You refer in paragraph 266 in the second
3 sentence:
4 «As part of its internal regulations, the Bank
5 required spousal consents when an individual gave
6 a personal guarantee.»
7 Maybe these are the internal regulations, but if
8 there are any others, I would like to know where they
9 are.
10 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord.
11 Sorry, back to representation.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
13 MR LORD: Your Lordship is obviously minded to accede to
14 the application, and we in no way sought to be other
15 than constructive, and I don’t accept that we were being
16 obstructive in our position. It is really, in those
17 circumstances, a matter for your Lordship as to what, if
18 any, additional reassurance in protocols or otherwise
19 should be forthcoming from the defendants and the person
20 who is going to be given these various rights. It is
21 not really for us to be drafting that, it is really
22 a question, in our submission, of what sort of mandate
23 or division of responsibility is going to be suggested
24 and perhaps, also, questions about interests and so on,
25 one might expect those to be covered. We don’t want to

49 :1 be prescriptive, we don’t want to stand in the way of
2 what your Lordship may find helpful, and we obviously
3 want to get on with the evidence.
4 So if I could close my submissions on that aspect
5 like that, my Lord, I trust that that will be found to
6 be a constructive position.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. I read the practice note, though
8 curiously it says that the practice note isn’t
9 a practice direction, it is simply guidance. One can
10 understand why that should be so, and I have read
11 carefully, the central message is: you shouldn’t do it
12 for mere convenience and you must think hard about the
13 point. That’s as I understand it. And you must
14 separate out the rights — the ad hoc rights of audience
15 and the right to conduct litigation as being slightly
16 separate things.
17 MR LORD: Just on that, my Lord, perhaps I didn’t make
18 myself clear. We had understood conduct to be a sort of
19 term of art in this case. We were not suggesting that
20 there wouldn’t be things that could be done in and about
21 the rights of audience, of course there will be some
22 ancillary matters, but it was really conduct in this
23 rather term of art sense in, if you like, entrusting
24 your claim to somebody else is how we had understood the
25 phrase in the note. If we had understood it, and in

50 :1 fact it is dealing with the rather more minor ancillary
2 assistances that might be given in and about the other
3 right, then I apologise if I have misunderstood that.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, I am not saying you did. I think
5 that it is not for me to say so, I dare say, but I don’t
6 think it is entirely clear in the guidance quite what is
7 meant, but I think you are quite right in identifying
8 that if it is a term of art whereby all those things
9 which would be expected to be done by a duly instructed
10 solicitor, including an implied authority, then I do not
11 hereby intend to infer that, and I am not sure
12 Mr Stroilov would welcome that.
13 It seems to me that we need a more tailor-made —
14 MR LORD: A more flexible approach.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — approach to determine as regards
16 the non-court hearing responsibilities of Mr Stroilov on
17 Mr Arkhangelsky and Mrs Arkhangelsky’s behalf, so that
18 we are all clear what they can do and what they can’t
19 do, and that is, I think, for Mr Stroilov, it is in his
20 interests as well, because it would be difficult without
21 the infrastructure of a solicitor’s firm to undertake
22 all that a solicitor does, and it would be invidious,
23 I think, to require him to assume all the implied
24 obligations which a solicitor might. I think we just
25 have to have a tailor-made solution.

51 :1 MR LORD: That was obviously my fault, my Lord. I had
2 understood that a more thoroughgoing delegation or
3 subcontraction was being proposed and I was, I must say,
4 I was more concerned about that.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
6 Well, subject to any more from either of you, my
7 feeling is that we should deal with this, as with all
8 matters of housekeeping or case management. It is
9 something which I will keep under review, and that is
10 simply to reserve for myself some flexibility, but also
11 because it is a good discipline to remind everyone
12 concerned that the court’s obligation is to try and get
13 to the truth of the matter, and to the fair result, and
14 it has to be assisted in that respect by both sides and
15 not just one.
16 As I say, having read the guidance in the practice
17 note, I consider that I would be assisted by the
18 participation of Mr Stroilov, to whom I am extremely
19 grateful, and I direct that there be a protocol in
20 writing drawn up by consensual and constructive work
21 between you, so that I may know that Mr Arkhangelsky has
22 signed up to certain delegations, that Mr Stroilov has
23 accepted them, that they are proper and that you know
24 where the boundaries are, and I shall review them and if
25 there are any other matters I shall raise them.

52 :1 I wish Mr Stroilov to know that I take well on board
2 his anxieties as regards to the suggestions made. I say
3 no more about that beyond what I have said.
4 It goes without saying that this is not a political
5 trial, it is not a question of determining what the
6 rights and wrongs of Russian procedures are in a vacuum.
7 All we have to do is decide the case. Nothing grander
8 than that, I am afraid.
9 MR LORD: And that’s our position, my Lord, in terms of
10 the point that was put, and whether I was relaxed or
11 not, I’m obviously relaxed if we approach it in the way
12 that your Lordship suggests, that seems to be, with
13 respect, the right way to approach it.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, is there anything you
15 wish to add or are you content with that?
16 MR STROILOV: I am not sure in terms of what. I have a few
17 points to make in reply, that is to say in terms of —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But you have got what you want,
19 haven’t you?
20 MR STROILOV: I think I have. I am concerned about several
21 suggestions that have been made. It has been insinuated
22 that there are grounds for believing I wouldn’t comply
23 with the duty of not misleading the court. I totally
24 reject that. It has been insinuated that
25 Mr Arkhangelsky has some undisclosed assets, references

53 :1 were made to City Centre LLC, to various mirror
2 companies, and I dare say these things have either to be
3 proven with evidence, and the claimants have spent years
4 trying to prove that there is evidence, or not
5 insinuated in a submission relating to a particular
6 application.
7 This is precisely the kind of thing which I believe
8 anyone appearing before the court should avoid, and that
9 is the kind of self imposed duty I have taken, as
10 I said, in my first witness statement, to avoid this
11 kind of submission.
12 But I regret to say, I don’t feel I am shown a very
13 great example of how a proper representative should
14 behave.
15 My Lord, obviously, again, I confirm what I have
16 said in my first witness statement: I have no financial
17 interest whatsoever in the outcome of that. I think
18 I have confirmed in my witness statement that I know
19 this to be a criminal offence, and I haven’t committed
20 that criminal offence. I can’t think of a more
21 persuasive mode of denial.
22 My Lord, as far as the practicalities are concerned,
23 obviously in terms of conduct of litigation all we are
24 asking for is really for me to be able to exchange
25 an occasional letter without there being any problem

54 :1 about it.
2 In terms of protocol, well, I would suggest that the
3 claimants should draft — that’s something I would ask
4 you to constantly keep in mind, that we have an enormous
5 burden of preparing to cross-examine 13 witnesses on
6 thousands of documents.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, you must explain to them, in
8 conjunction with Mr Arkhangelsky, what it is that you
9 wish to be done — what he wishes you to do on his
10 behalf and on behalf of Mrs Arkhangelsky, and the
11 writing of it I can entrust to the claimants in
12 the first instance, but they cannot, I think, be
13 required to guess the level of authority given to you.
14 Equally, I accept that they have better resource to
15 commit it to writing. So I think with a bit of will
16 there should be a way here, and I commend that process
17 to you.
18 So far as your other points are concerned, Mr Lord
19 has mentioned the question of mirror companies. There
20 are companies with very similar names.
21 MR STROILOV: Quite, I accept that.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: He has mentioned — what I am trying
23 to get at is each of you, with a slightly different
24 emphasis and spin, will introduce me to the same facts
25 and it is for me to determine what their import is.

55 :1 Please understand, I am not a jury. I try and weigh
2 things dispassionately and make up my mind at the end of
3 the day.
4 MR STROILOV: Quite, and I think one more suggestion which
5 I totally reject is, again, I was anything other than
6 frank —
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, I have said, but in case
8 it reassures you and encourages you, I repeat: you have
9 been of great assistance to this court, to other courts
10 in the same proceedings. I have come to respect and
11 admire the way you put things. I have no reason to
12 suggest that you are other than candid with me and I am
13 relying on that to continue.
14 MR STROILOV: I am grateful, my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
16 MR STROILOV: Should I now give way to my learned friend?
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I am in your combined hands as
18 to how we deal with the next item on the agenda which,
19 in effect, is your amendments. It is a matter of
20 indifference to me, but I should have thought that we
21 shall simply need to plough through the various
22 paragraphs which have been identified in the skeleton
23 arguments and in Mr McGregor’s eighth witness statement,
24 and see whether they are acceptable or whether something
25 more needs to be done to make them so.

56 :1 MR STROILOV: Should I — is this —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They are your amendments, and you can
3 move them. Whichever you think will be quickest.
4 MR STROILOV: I am quite relaxed about that, if Mr Lord
5 prefers to start it is all right with us. I think it is
6 logical for us to start, because it is our application.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s fine, because it is your
8 application, and it is your burden.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, quite.
10 I think if we just go to Mr McGregor’s statement,
11 which is at — I am told I must always name the full
12 address so that it comes up on screen.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: {G4/111/1}.
14 MR STROILOV: Yes, I am grateful, my Lord.
15 MR LORD: I don’t mean to interrupt, but in our note we had
16 tried to slim down or distil the points. I am not
17 interrupting, but in terms of an agenda of what
18 objections we are still making, we have tried to set
19 them out as crisply as we could to save time. So they
20 are in the note.
21 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I think I just need to answer,
22 as briefly as I can, two rather more general and
23 preliminary points made by Mr McGregor, because that
24 way, that might clarify the general approach which
25 should be taken.

57 :1 I think in paragraph 43, that’s at {G4/111/14} of
2 the same tab, he cites the transcript of the hearing on
3 23 October, which suggests that your Lordship has
4 excluded liability of the bank on the basis of
5 the pleadings, liability of the bank by reference to
6 some other person not before the court.
7 I would like to look at that actual transcript, at 8 {L8/39/81}.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Why do you want to?
10 MR STROILOV: What I am saying is your Lordship actually did
11 not give that interpretation to pleadings conclusively.
12 It is rather in the context of discussion, and of
13 course, if taken in isolation, with respect that is
14 a strange comment to make about the conspiracy case. So
15 I just want to be quite clear that this is not the
16 court’s —
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But your case is that, pursuant to a
18 conspiracy, in some cases between persons unknown and in
19 other cases pursuant to later joiners to the same plot,
20 assets were sold at a very considerable undervalue,
21 whereby your clients, as I shall call them for
22 convenience, exposure under the personal guarantee was,
23 in effect, extended: it was greater than it would have
24 been had not the assets been undersold. That is the
25 case which you have put forward, and you say that that

58 :1 machinery, which would otherwise inure to
2 the disadvantage of the bank, is to be explained by some
3 side deal, which you can’t elaborate or adumbrate, which
4 may explain why the Bank’s officers were prepared to go
5 along with it.
6 MR STROILOV: My Lord, obviously there is some distinction
7 between defence and counterclaim. Counterclaim simply
8 claims damages for conspiracy, rather than — without
9 particular reference to personal guarantees.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
11 MR STROILOV: So there is a dispute between Russian law
12 experts, which I don’t think is very material, whether
13 the Russian liability for conspiracy is quite the same
14 as in common law jurisdictions. It might or not come to
15 that.
16 But generally, simply to say that any actions by
17 Renord or by a bank’s employee are neither here nor
18 there or they only address of what the Bank did
19 directly. It’s not correct: it’s in the nature of
20 a conspiracy case that you look at what all conspirators
21 are alleged to have done. Obviously we have to focus on
22 the Bank and whether it was acting honestly or
23 dishonestly. That I think that we have identified as
24 pretty much the crucial issue when —
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But it is a corollary consequence of

59 :1 your case, if right, that the Bank received less than it
2 should have done from the realisation of its pledges.
3 You say that the knock-on disadvantaged Mr Arkhangelsky,
4 but the Bank had two recourses: one was against the
5 pledged assets, and the other was against
6 Mr Arkhangelsky if he did give personal guarantees which
7 are binding on him. On your case, it undid its rights
8 to some degree under the first and is left with what, on
9 your case, is a very poor substitute by way of personal
10 claim against Mr Arkhangelsky.
11 MR STROILOV: That’s part of the defence. Apart from that
12 there is a counterclaim, obviously, where we say that as
13 a result of the Bank’s actions, jointly with other
14 parties, he was deprived of very substantial assets,
15 well in excess of the entire indebtedness.
16 What I am saying is that, by definition, where
17 a conspiracy is alleged, really liability is determined
18 by looking at the conduct of all alleged conspirators
19 and then seeing whether this particular conspirator is
20 liable, rather than simply taking the Bank’s actions in
21 isolation. So in that sense, the counterclaim is —
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you say that the Bank through these
23 people was a conspirator or not?
24 MR STROILOV: We do say that, yes.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So it was conspiring to rip itself

60 :1 off?
2 MR STROILOV: My Lord, this —
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s the problem, isn’t it?
4 MR STROILOV: There are several points I make about that.
5 I think I slightly deviate from the structure I had in
6 mind, but I might address that first.
7 Firstly, this has never been an issue in this case.
8 The Bank’s defence to what was pleaded has always been:
9 yes, these actions were done. They were not fraudulent.
10 What we did through the executives we appointed to deal
11 with this was to try and maximise recovery. It was
12 perfectly commercial, perfectly above board.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR STROILOV: They’ve never said that: we are victims of
15 that fraud. There is fraud, but we are victims of it
16 rather than perpetrators.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do they rely on it as a counter
18 indication to what you suggest, and in order to bring
19 home the point that if these activities took place, the
20 Bank should not be held liable for them?
21 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I suppose this can be made as
22 a forensic evidential point.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, it is not forensic; it is a legal
24 point. The thing is, in order, whether by defence or
25 counterclaim, to reduce the Bank’s claim or to enhance

61 :1 the claim against it, you have to show some liability or
2 responsibility, which is visited on the Bank, and the
3 question is whether you can do that if you show that
4 some people who happen to work at the Bank, and who, on
5 your case, ripped it off, whether their activities are
6 to be visited on the Bank. And they say that that’s
7 sort of unlikely. That’s what they say.
8 MR STROILOV: My Lord, if this is made as a legal point, and
9 since we discussed it last time —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is a legal point, yes.
11 MR STROILOV: The first thing I note is that obviously it
12 doesn’t arise on the pleadings, and Russian law experts
13 did not address this kind of defence, whereas — well,
14 in substance, these allegations have always been what
15 they have been.
16 In that case, unless some further evidence is — you
17 give permission — some further evidence is served on
18 that late stage, then the presumption is that the
19 English law applies.
20 Obviously I’m always hesitant to address you on
21 points of English law, and especially company law,
22 because I know so little about it, and I think I have
23 overestimated the capabilities of Magnum, so I probably
24 can’t upload the case on it as we speak.
25 The case I was thinking about is this year’s House

62 :1 of Lords decision in Bilta Ltd v Nazir.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. But this is attribution to
3 the corporate entity of activities of its errant
4 employees or officers.
5 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. I think towards the end —
6 I am sorry to put it in my own words without being able
7 to hand it up, but the way I read the judgment, and
8 I will invite you, obviously, to read it for yourself —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR STROILOV: But the way I read it, what it suggests,
11 towards the end, that will be starting approximately at
12 paragraph 200, from memory, it suggests that the
13 position is different in relation to a claim by
14 a company against its directors, on the one hand, and
15 the claim by a third party against the company.
16 In the first case, the so-called fraud exception
17 applies in that the directors can’t use the shield of —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They can’t insulate themselves by
19 saying: well, you are us and, therefore, you can’t claim
20 against us.
21 MR STROILOV: Quite. But in the context of a third parties
22 claim, there is no such exception. Now, the normal
23 rules, under English law — and Russian may be
24 different, but under English law the normal rules of
25 agency apply.

63 :1 In the Russian Civil Code, you may recall from
2 a previous occasion, there is simply an article which
3 states that the employee is liable for the actions done
4 by an employee in the course of their duties.
5 Alternatively, there is the concept of directing
6 will and mind of a company for a specific purpose, and
7 it is quite clearly the Bank’s own case that
8 Mrs Maylsheva or at an earlier instance Mr Savelyev,
9 were acting on its behalf with apparent and actual
10 authority. So I simply don’t accept that this issue
11 arises.
12 In any event, if it does, it is not quite fair to
13 take it as a pleading point against us.
14 Now, we have alleged what we knew has happened. We
15 said the Bank did it. They said: yes, we did it, we did
16 it through Mrs Maylsheva, it was honest, it wasn’t
17 fraud, and then they need to amend their pleadings if
18 they want to run this defence, if there is really
19 an issue.
20 So that’s what we say about this point, my Lord.
21 I think, if I may move on, unless you would like me
22 to elaborate on that in any sense. I think also if we
23 turn back to Mr McGregor’s statement in paragraph 44.
24 So that’s over the page, page 15 on the same tab.
25 Now, I think, again, there is a slight inaccuracy in

64 :1 stating that {G4/111/15}:
2 «At no stage prior to 5 January did the Defendant
3 indicate any intention of producing a draft amendment.»
4 Then if you look at the letter he refers to at
5 {I20/23/17}, there is a reference to it, at the end of
6 this paragraph. He actually quotes the relevant passage
7 from the skeleton argument.
8 So at page — it is numbered in some odd way. Yes,
9 sir, that’s at page 18 on that tab {I20/23/18}. So
10 that’s the skeleton of 14 December where we set out what
11 we say about the pleading points.
12 I think, my Lord, it will be helpful to read these
13 through. It is a few pages, but I think it will be
14 helpful.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think I have read this.
16 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, but the point I particularly had
17 in mind is at the end of this quotation, paragraph 42 on
18 page 21, {I20/23/21}, we actually say in the second part
19 of that paragraph, the fourth line from the bottom, we
20 said:
21 «… the defendants and OMGP should be allowed to
22 review their pleadings in the light of all the
23 developments (disclosure, admissions in evidence, and
24 new arguments advanced on behalf of the claimants) and
25 make such amendments as are necessary to protect

65 :1 themselves from these unfair tactics.»
2 So it is not correct, and obviously that is
3 a substantial point in this context. It is not that we
4 haven’t given any warning of this prior to the day
5 before the trial. We have raised this concern, we have
6 indicated the nature of amendments we would like to
7 make, and that I appreciate it is a late stage, but it
8 is not as bad as it is presented.
9 Now, my Lord, turning to the substance. Generally
10 speaking, none of these amendments, or perhaps almost
11 none of these amendments, actually widen our case in any
12 respect. They are all directed at narrowing down what
13 has been said previously, it’s often said these are
14 qualifications, that we are not in a position to
15 particularise these, that full disclosure is sought, and
16 the like.
17 We have taken it as a principle, that we are not
18 trying to add anything to the case; we are trying to
19 narrow it down, to add particulars, and really to make
20 it helpful to everyone, including the other party.
21 So with this in mind, if we turn to the actual
22 draft, I think it may be — I don’t know if it may be
23 more helpful for me to follow the hard copy, while you
24 may prefer to go to —
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is this tab 6, or is it tab 9?

66 :1 MR STROILOV: Tab 9 is a newer version. In response to
2 criticisms made, we have sought to make a few further
3 amendments which I think have removed some of
4 the objections.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you think we should just go through
6 the paragraphs, or what do you advise?
7 MR STROILOV: I think we will follow the skeleton argument,
8 the note of the claimants identifies seven points, so
9 I think we just visit them one by one.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
11 MR STROILOV: So first I believe the objection is taken to
12 paragraph 150, so I suppose you can see the old text in
13 the end of it.
14 I do apologise, I can’t quite understand what letter
15 is at the start. Is it {J20/26/57.40}? I am sorry,
16 I just want us to take full advantage of the technology,
17 rather than just get into things we are used to. At
18 tab 9 of the hard copy bundle, then there is page 223.
19 MR LORD: I think it might be I.
20 MR STROILOV: Is it I? I20.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is not evident on mine.
22 MR STROILOV: It is a kind of odd script. Let me try and
23 find it on the system.
24 MR LORD: Can we try {I20/26/57.40}. There it is.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You think it is an I file, do you?

67 :1 MR LORD: Yes, I think it is an I file.
2 MR STROILOV: So, my Lord, if we look at paragraph 150 — so
3 I think it is better to look over the page. I think it
4 is clear what is the old version and what is the new
5 version.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mm hmm.
7 MR STROILOV: My Lord, what was said in the old version was
8 that all those transactions were sham, and all that the
9 ultimate beneficiaries of these transactions were the
10 Bank, Mr Savelyev and the other co-conspirators and/or
11 those connected with them.
12 Now, having deleted that engine we have simply
13 sought to particularise this in the light of
14 the disclosure which we had. I simply don’t see how
15 this widens the case; it simply tries to say what we
16 have always said with some precision.
17 There is a reference to Mr McGregor’s statement.
18 I just want to be sure there are no points I have failed
19 to answer, so there is a reference to Mr McGregor’s
20 paragraph 57.
21 I think in terms of the appendix 2, perhaps if
22 your Lordship looks at this, because an issue has been
23 taken about it, I think we have taken the point about
24 the words «without limitation».
25 I beg your pardon, that will be on the same tab at

68 :1 page 57.90, and if you could keep paragraph 150 still on
2 the screen but at the same time look at {I20/26/57.90}.
3 So we have added some new words at the top of
4 the schedule to address Mr McGregor’s concerns, and
5 again we don’t see it as any change of the case, it is
6 just that the schedule was out of date: it was pleaded,
7 as you see, in the struck out text below, it was pleaded
8 as a very preliminary schedule. They are just trying to
9 really set out the assets on which we will focus in
10 these proceedings.
11 Obviously in regard to the vessels, there used to be
12 a footnote at the end of the schedule saying:
13 «Value agreed with the claimants for the purposes of
14 these proceedings; however no inferences should be drawn
15 as to the adequacy of valuations of other assets by Lair
16 LLC and/or other valuers, or as to the proprietary of
17 realisation of other securities.»
18 So we don’t accept, really, that the reservation
19 which is now at the top of the page, is anything
20 different in substance.
21 We could try and find the then correspondence with
22 Baker & McKenzie where you will see how exactly we
23 formulated this agreement in relation to vessels, but in
24 substance, that was a pragmatic agreement that we
25 considered as disproportionate to go and examine who did

69 :1 what for the vessels. That doesn’t amount to our
2 admission that the value necessarily was what was
3 recovered.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They are fixing on the three vessels,
5 are they? Originally the three vessels were in your
6 appendix 2 and now you have removed them.
7 MR STROILOV: Yes.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And they say the removal is
9 unexplained. I don’t know whether they are complaining
10 about it or what?
11 MR STROILOV: Yes, because it was originally in appendix 2
12 and it was accompanied by this footnote that the value
13 is agreed for the purposes of these proceedings.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So now the position is, as
15 I understand it, that you are not complaining and you
16 don’t say that they were fraudulent or in any other way
17 impugnable, the three vessels sold after their arrest.
18 MR STROILOV: No, we didn’t complain then, as you see from
19 the footnote, and we don’t complain now. Just for the
20 sake of good order, we have tried to use —
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is a bit of a storm in a teacup,
22 although Mr Lord will explain otherwise. You do not
23 complain about any undervalue in the sales achieved for
24 the vessels, which were arrested and sold pursuant to
25 the various jurisdictions’ order for sale pursuant

70 :1 to arrest.
2 MR STROILOV: We don’t make this complaint. At the same
3 time, we make no admissions. We simply say we have
4 agreed with the other party long ago that this is not
5 an issue, we are not disputing it in these proceedings
6 for pragmatic reasons. That’s why —
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They are not part of your complaint.
8 MR STROILOV: They are not part of our complaint, but the
9 reservation I am trying to make is simply that we don’t
10 want it to be said later: well, you have been
11 complaining about vessels, you now can see that the
12 complaint was unfounded and all your other complaints
13 are unfounded.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, no, you are just not pursuing it.
15 MR STROILOV: We didn’t pursue it in the old version either.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
17 MR STROILOV: So it was just simply there — I’m not sure
18 what purpose, and now we’ve decided to limit this to
19 assets on which we do complain.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And when you say all of them were
21 fraudulent, you mean all of the transactions indicated
22 in appendix 2 were, but they do not include the arrested
23 ship sales.
24 MR STROILOV: Well, quite, my Lord, yes, that’s right.
25 Again, when we say all of them, we make this reservation

71 :1 that if we don’t know about something as a result of
2 the failure to give disclosure, we reserve the right to
3 make a further application.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You would have to take that as you
5 found it when it arose, if it does.
6 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But at the moment these are your
8 complaints, and you say the assets listed in appendix 2,
9 which do not now include the arrested vessels, were all
10 the subject of undervalued sales.
11 MR STROILOV: Yes, quite, my Lord.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And you say that they were so in
13 a manner which was, you say, fraudulent.
14 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: On point of pleading that is it, isn’t
16 it?
17 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I don’t understand anything else
18 to be complained of, and I don’t think — well, we
19 didn’t intend to change anything in substance in this,
20 and just tried to put things in a better order and,
21 I think, which reflect the disclosure.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you want to deal with that,
23 Mr Lord?
24 MR LORD: The simple point, really, is this: that we had not
25 understood there was any issue about the sale process

72 :1 concerning the three vessels.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
3 MR LORD: In other words, we had not understood there ever
4 to have been a suggestion that there had been any fraud
5 or dishonesty in and about the realisation of those
6 three assets, which were realised by the Estonian,
7 French and English courts respectively. We are not
8 clear from the — and the values were set out in the old
9 annex 2. So we had the values in play, as it were, and
10 we thought at least there was some fixity in and about
11 some of the collateral that had been realised in this
12 case.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR LORD: What appears to be — our concern was that if one
15 looks at appendix 2 and the new paragraph, the big
16 paragraph starting:
17 «This schedule identifies …»
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
19 MR LORD: It is a little hard to follow, but it isn’t clear
20 whether there is some reservation of a potential case
21 that there was some fraud or dishonesty or conspiracy in
22 and about the sale of those three assets.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I see. You are worried that the
24 italicised words seem to lurk as if there might be
25 introduced a suggestion at a subsequent occasion that

73 :1 even these sales were bad sales.
2 Mr Stroilov, I think, has explained that the three
3 ship sales were deleted, and it is no part of —
4 whatever their reservations might be, it is no part of
5 these proceedings to complain about the values achieved
6 on the sales of the arrested vessels, pursuant to court
7 orders in the various jurisdictions.
8 MR LORD: My Lord, if that is expressly confirmed, then that
9 clears up —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s right.
11 MR STROILOV: It’s not part of the case.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And, just by way of warning, I would
13 say this: that having confirmed that, we mustn’t hear
14 any more about it. Those ship sales are not on the
15 agenda for review.
16 MR STROILOV: That’s what we mean. We just don’t want this
17 to be treated as an admission, that is all.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t know why that should be, but
19 that’s fine. As between new parties in these
20 proceedings, from hereon in, I note as a historical fact
21 that there were those sales and that it is not suggested
22 that they were other than full value in these
23 proceedings.
24 MR STROILOV: No, no, I don’t think that is the correct
25 formula. We have agreed not to look at these sales. We

74 :1 don’t say they were for full value —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, you are not admitting that
3 it was full value, in some other, I don’t know, in some
4 other context, but I am not going to listen to argument
5 or suggestion or inference, however vague, that these
6 sales were impugnable in any way, and that’s that from
7 hereon in.
8 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, but the other side of it is that
9 you are not going to hear any suggestion that these
10 sales were proper and for full value and this undermines
11 our case in relation to other assets.
12 Now, that was something we agreed really long ago,
13 and that was reflected in the footnote to the old
14 appendix 2. We simply agreed with the claimants at the
15 time, Baker & McKenzie were on the record, that we are
16 not looking at this for pragmatic reasons. We don’t
17 admit they were sold properly. We don’t complain about
18 them being sold improperly. We simply have to confine
19 these proceedings only to so many issues. I think that
20 is the point we are making.
21 I am not sure if there is any problem with the way
22 it is formulated here.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, Mr Lord is not going to suggest,
24 as I understand it, that because these sales were not
25 improper, therefore none of the sales were improper; he

75 :1 is going to deal with the other sales and show that they
2 were proper.
3 MR LORD: That’s right, my Lord, but it is fair to note, and
4 this is what Mr Stroilov really wants to eliminate —
5 your Lordship will see the values that were realised for
6 these three ships which until these latest amendments we
7 had understood to be agreed.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They were much less than had been
9 imagined when they were pledged.
10 MR LORD: And that’s where we are going with this. Because
11 Mr Stroilov doesn’t want the Bank to be able to say:
12 well, you complain the sale of the chattels and
13 everything else —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am sorry, I am being slow-witted.
15 MR LORD: And the ship sales were for a very low percentage
16 of their original, non-distressed value, but were sold
17 by the Estonian, French and English admiralty courts.
18 So it is an important point because of course it doesn’t
19 mean that because that was all right, everything —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand that.
21 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, and that’s the reservation
22 we’ve always made.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But you have to, I am afraid, show the
24 colour of your money: you either say that those sales
25 were improper or unsuccessful for some reason or not.

76 :1 I can’t have it sort of — they can’t be put in sort of
2 no man’s land. They took place, they achieved those —
3 the salient fact which I feel I can take into account is
4 they were arrested vessels, they were sales pursuant to
5 the sales directed by the jurisdictions in which the
6 arrests were made. The sales took place and they
7 achieved a certain sum. Those sums were, in each case,
8 less than the value the pledge suggested they would
9 have, and that’s that.
10 MR STROILOV: If you are going to go into this, and they
11 will dare to make inferences, we should be entitled to
12 rebut that. I don’t think — that wasn’t — I believe
13 I have to —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not saying other, but we can’t
15 argue forever on this point. If you say that those
16 sales were, for some reason, improper sales which did
17 not achieve as much for those assets as at that time
18 should have been achieved, you must say so, and you must
19 say why.
20 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. That’s what I mean. They are
21 not making admissions that they were correct. We agreed
22 with the other side. I am afraid I will have to find
23 the correspondence on that.
24 We agreed with the other side at the time that we
25 are not looking — they are in no man’s land.

77 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Sorry?
2 MR STROILOV: These sales are in no man’s land. As far as
3 I remember that is pretty much the substance of —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you made some binding side
5 agreement that the court was simply not to have regard
6 to the values achieved, you must show me that. But at
7 the moment, you can’t sort of say: we are not
8 criticising them as long as they can’t refer to them.
9 Unless you have agreed that expressly, frankly, I am
10 not going to proceed on that footing.
11 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I can try. It was quite a few years
12 ago, so I will have to find the correspondence.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We will come back to that. But at the
14 moment unless there was correspondence yielding a
15 binding agreement or estoppel, they are entitled to rely
16 on those sales as being sales of which you do not make
17 complaint?
18 MR STROILOV: Well, no, my Lord, I don’t think so. If you
19 look — really, I think the real issue for today is
20 a little more narrow, and I’ve been trying to change
21 what has been now on schedule 2.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
23 MR STROILOV: I again ask you to look at the footnote at the
24 bottom of old schedule 2 which is now (inaudible):
25 «Value agreed with the Claimants for the purposes of

78 :1 these proceedings, however no inference should be drawn
2 as to the adequacy of valuations of other assets by Lair
3 LLC and/or other valuers or as to the —»
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s a matter for me. I don’t know
5 whether they should or shouldn’t, but you can’t dictate
6 to them or to me.
7 MR STROILOV: The point I am making is that really — we are
8 not really keen on deleting these vessels. We are
9 simply trying to confine the pleadings to what our
10 complaint is.
11 At least by making this reservation now we are not
12 changing our case, that’s the point I am making. We are
13 looking as to whether they can raise this now, that may
14 be a debate for another day, and I may have a chance,
15 really, to find the relevant correspondence.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, in point of pleading you
17 are not impugning those sales?
18 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And I have warned you if you are not
20 impugning them now, it will take a lot to persuade me
21 that they should have impugned later, because otherwise
22 this argument will have been sterile.
23 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. It is not pleaded.
24 I think on the pleading principles, just to make
25 this reservation now.

79 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
2 MR STROILOV: If they advance any assertions on that, for
3 instance, if it is put to our witnesses in
4 cross-examination: well, the ships are properly realised
5 at only 10 per cent of their value, and does this mean
6 all your values were wrong; we are entitled to object to
7 that and to explain —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: At the moment I don’t see why you are,
9 but if there is some side agreement which was struck to
10 prevent you doing so, you must show it to me. At the
11 moment they are entitled to put to your witnesses the
12 fact that in non-impugned sales, values far less than
13 the values indicated when pledged were achieved. They
14 will then put that to me and they will say: you can draw
15 this inference and that inference, and I will decide.
16 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, but when it is put to
17 witnesses we are entitled to give an explanation why it
18 happened with the ships and it doesn’t mean that
19 inferences should be drawn about other assets.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, there are all sorts of things
21 you could put forward without impugning. You may say
22 that the values between the pledge date and the arrested
23 sale date had completely collapsed. I don’t know what
24 you will say.
25 MR STROILOV: I simply don’t want, really, if, as they say

80 :1 things about ships, I don’t want us to be, in a sense,
2 prohibited to respond to that. We are not making this
3 complaint as part of the counterclaim.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You can’t, I am afraid, ringfence
5 things off and not talk about — you can’t simply say:
6 because I am not talking about, you are not allowed to
7 talk about it.
8 MR STROILOV: That’s right.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s not the way things proceed.
10 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord, but we can’t be held to
11 an obligation never to talk about it, even if points are
12 made against us on this subject.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You can talk about it as much as you
14 want within the confines of the rules of evidence, but
15 you cannot make it an allegation in these proceedings,
16 such as to undermine those sales, or impugn them.
17 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: As far as I am concerned, the sales
19 are not impugned and they fetched what they fetched,
20 pursuant to the processes which will or will not be
21 looked at.
22 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that right?
24 MR STROILOV: I think we are on the same page on that.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Good. Okay. If you want to say more

81 :1 than that by reference to correspondence, you must
2 identify that correspondence very soon.
3 MR STROILOV: I will need to look at that, but it is not
4 really a pleading issue.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
6 MR STROILOV: I must confess, I don’t quite remember it very
7 well. I remember there was an agreement which was more
8 or less —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s fine. Have a look. Don’t say
10 any more about it in case I get the wrong end of
11 the stick.
12 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
13 Shall I move on to paragraph 154? Now, in that,
14 I think this complaint that a new claim has been
15 advanced, that has, really, a rather — you will see it
16 is quite lengthy, but I think I need to explain the
17 history of it by way of introduction and then perhaps
18 refer you to the relevant documents.
19 You may recall that at one point, at the happier
20 time when there was legal representation, there was
21 an amendment to pleadings to introduce a new head of
22 loss, which as they characterise, as a new claim, in
23 relation to the loss of business of Onega.
24 The permission was given, subject to further
25 particulars being provided by letter. Pursuant to that

82 :1 order, these particulars were duly provided. So all we
2 do by this amendment is simply move the contents of this
3 letter into the pleadings, which is a place, and it is
4 not very convenient to try and define the substance of
5 a party’s case by looking through the run of
6 correspondence on that.
7 So this is not new. This is, effectively, simply
8 a matter of convenience to keep all the pleadings of
9 what is effectively the pleadings in one document.
10 So I don’t think it is right to explain that this is
11 another new claim being advanced. It has been — there
12 was an objection to this claim in terms of it being
13 a new claim, and I think a number of issues have been
14 reserved, such as limitation and whether it is really
15 a new claim. But that’s it. We are not trying to make
16 any new pleadings in substance.
17 I think it is separately suggested that, actually,
18 these particulars go beyond what has been added to
19 the pleadings in the summer of last year, in that there
20 is a claim for — or a new head of loss for the loss of
21 land previously owned by LPK Scandinavia rather than the
22 business. So that is one half of Onega Terminal, rather
23 than the business.
24 To that we say that: well, we are not proposing to
25 introduce any new claim, but it is not quite correct

83 :1 that the sale of this part of Onega Terminal has not
2 previously been part of the counterclaim. If you look
3 at the earlier part of the pleadings, then if you go to
4 paragraph 54, and that’s at the same tab, page 57.14. 5 {I20/26/57.14}.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is this part of the defence or the
7 counterclaim?
8 MR STROILOV: That is part of the defence, but later on
9 I will show you it is incorporated into the counterclaim
10 in the text of the counterclaim. But that is part of
11 the defence still, and that pleads out on paragraph 54
12 various pledges that go there, including in (e) the
13 relevant land which was used by Onega.
14 Then I think there is a further pleading on the
15 recover of pledges. I will try to find it.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So what I think they really say in
17 this regard, although they will correct me if I am
18 wrong, is that you must distinguish between its use as
19 a defence and its use as a counterclaim. In the defence
20 you are saying that your exposure under the personal
21 guarantee — if there was one — should be much less
22 than is claimed because they should have got much more
23 for the assets they sold; and if they had got more, by
24 that amount, your liability would have been reduced.
25 In the counterclaim, you are seeking recovery from

84 :1 the Bank on the footing of some fraud in respect of
2 these sales. You then have to ask: well, whose property
3 was it that was undersold? At that point, you have to
4 show that the person whose property it was is a party to
5 the proceedings and may bring the claim.
6 MR STROILOV: I see the point, but it is not really
7 an objection to amendment to pleadings, because this
8 part of —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, it is, because I can’t have
10 a counterclaim, insofar as you rely on a counterclaim,
11 brought by the defendants if it was not their property,
12 or if the claim was properly brought by the person whose
13 property it was and the shareholder may not bring
14 a claim because of reflective loss.
15 It is slightly difficult because the defence
16 counterclaim point, do you see what I mean?
17 MR STROILOV: Yes, absolutely, I take your points.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
19 MR STROILOV: I think I have several points to make in
20 response to that. Firstly, just so that you have the
21 position clear, if you go to page 57.25 of the same
22 document that is where the counterclaim begins. 23 {I20/26/57.25}.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
25 MR STROILOV: Then over the page, page 26 —

85 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sorry, yes, the counterclaim. So
2 it is all in the counterclaim, is it?
3 MR STROILOV: Yes, that’s the counterclaim {I20/26/57.26}.
4 That is slightly later than the passage —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But is it in the defence as well?
6 MR STROILOV: The passage I previously showed to you was in
7 the defence in relation to LPK land.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right, so is that 154, that’s only in
9 the counterclaim, is it?
10 MR STROILOV: 154 is in the counterclaim. Between them
11 there is at page 26 —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Where is this assertion in
13 the defence, or something like this?
14 MR STROILOV: That was at paragraph 54, {I20/26/57.14}, and
15 subsequent paragraphs. That’s part of the defence.
16 Then, in paragraph 102.2, and that’s — you see the
17 text crossed out. That’s a very old amendment. That’s
18 not something we are trying to introduce now. So that’s
19 where, I think, the 2013 amendment just survived.
20 So it incorporates all matters pleaded in
21 the defence and to the counterclaim.
22 My Lord, I accept we have these difficulties in
23 terms of LPK not being a party to the proceedings and
24 the shareholder of LPK not being a party to
25 the proceedings.

86 :1 There may be an issue of quantum in the end if we
2 establish — well, supposing there is any liability of
3 Mr Arkhangelsky under the guarantees, then part of
4 the — so far as it was the guarantee under the LPK
5 loan, it was extinguished, or should have been
6 extinguished by the realisation of the pledge, but we
7 can’t go any further because there is no liability.
8 This may be a point for another day.
9 For the point, I simply say that even if this
10 pleading of the loss of business somehow seems to
11 introduce a complaint about the land of LPK Scandinavia,
12 that’s not something that had been pleaded in
13 the counterclaim. So I don’t — I take as a point that
14 there is a difficulty in this respect, but I realise
15 that is something that will need to be looked into more
16 closely at another day. That is not an objection to
17 pleadings. There is no substantive change of pleadings.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Your point is that 154, which is only
19 in the counterclaim, has been in the counterclaim, as
20 pleaded, for some time, and all you are doing is putting
21 some more detail, reflective of correspondence between
22 the parties.
23 I will ask Mr Lord about that, because it is the
24 fact that they shouldn’t be punished, as it were, for
25 their reticence in the past in objecting to pleading.

87 :1 If you wish to rely on the matters which were, you
2 told me, in the correspondence, and which are now
3 proposed to be in 154, in those parts of your pleading
4 where you say that the Onega land, or the LPK land was
5 undersold, then they are not there, and if you are
6 relying on them, they need to be there.
7 MR STROILOV: We are not proposing to introduce the LPK land
8 as a head of loss. We are not really proposing to do
9 any more than was there; that is to say that we pleaded
10 that as a defence and we incorporated this as a fact in
11 the counterclaim.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but it isn’t pleaded as
13 a defence. The counterclaim repeats everything in
14 the defence, but the defence doesn’t repeat everything
15 in the counterclaim.
16 If you want these details as to the basis on which
17 you say that those sales were undervalue, it is not in
18 your defence.
19 MR STROILOV: I am sorry, I am not sure I follow.
20 MR LORD: Sorry to interrupt. Can I short circuit this?
21 My Lord, we think there are two points here, and we
22 could be wrong but we don’t think that this LPK land
23 that we are now talking about, the Onega land, we don’t
24 think that was pledged collateral for the 2008 —
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, well that is the answer.

88 :1 MR LORD: So that’s an answer on any view as opposed to
2 the 2007 loan for LPK. As your Lordship knows, there
3 are certain loans that are in issue on the guarantees
4 herein and there are some other loans and guarantees
5 that are not in issue herein, but concern the same
6 party. So that’s arguably an answer on the facts
7 whichever way you run at it, but the other point is
8 your Lordship’s point that if we are wrong about that
9 there will be a difference between being able to invoke
10 an arguably unlawful — some unlawful increase of
11 the guarantee exposure on the one hand that would be
12 a defence, and claiming for some damages on the other.
13 We take that point.
14 There are two points. There’s an anterior point on
15 whether this was relevant collateral.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand that if the LPK land was
17 not part of the pledges which have the effect of
18 increasing or decreasing your exposure under the
19 guarantee, then they are irrelevant to the defence and
20 they cannot be made any more relevant by repetition.
21 So far as they are counterclaim, that’s to say you
22 are seeking to bring home liability in respect of
23 the undersale, then the only person who can bring home
24 liability is the person who owned them, or some person
25 who is entitled to sue derivatively of that person.

89 :1 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, we are not suggesting that we
2 are suing for the value of the land. Really it has been
3 pleaded for quite a difference purpose, or rather, the
4 particulars were provided. If I remember correctly,
5 literally in those very words whether we can change the
6 (inaudible) if there any very slight changes to make
7 sense of the pleadings.
8 These particulars were provided pursuant to your
9 order giving permission to introduce the head of loss,
10 or a new claim — it is characterised differently by the
11 two parties — for the loss of business of Onega which
12 was owned by OMG Ports. These are obviously relevant
13 facts which show how the business was lost.
14 So we are not suggesting that we should be entitled
15 to recover the value of LPK land, but how exactly —
16 what exactly is the interplay between this and the
17 pleadings in the defence, well we may reach a stage when
18 that becomes relevant, or we may never reach that stage.
19 But that’s — well, what I’m saying is that we are not
20 trying to introduce any such new claim, that the claim
21 for which you have already permission is simply being
22 transposed from a letter to the proper pleadings so that
23 we just don’t forget the particulars which we are given
24 clearly in connection with the previous permission to
25 amend the pleadings.

90 :1 MR LORD: Can we perhaps leave it that if and insofar as
2 this land — the realisation of this bit of land has
3 unlawfully or actionably increased the exposure under
4 relevant guarantee, that is in play. But it can’t be
5 a counterclaim by LPK Scandinavia, not a party, still
6 less because the shareholder there we understand is
7 Ms Tarasova which is, we think, Mr Arkhangelsky’s
8 mother-in-law. So we think that there are a number of
9 reasons why this claim is several steps removed in terms
10 of a counterclaim from being privy to anybody who is
11 currently party to this litigation.
12 So we accept, one: If it is made out, it is
13 a pleading, it is in play, but the second should not be
14 allowed to be in play.
15 Under the amendments to annex 2, appendix 2, the
16 real estate list refers to Onega Terminal and therefore
17 it is unclear whether that would come in, but I hope to
18 be constructive and try and allow things to move on on
19 that basis.
20 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, and I also don’t want, really,
21 to go into any debate on the merits, because we will
22 have a trial for that, and I simply want to show they
23 are not trying to plead any new case. Hopefully that is
24 not …
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I am slower than you lot.

91 :1 Mr Lord is saying if it could have relevance to
2 the defence they will treat it as relevant, but it
3 won’t, because this wasn’t a pledged asset, full stop.
4 As to the counterclaim, any claim for undervalued
5 sale of this land does not lie in the mouth or cannot be
6 brought home as a liability and cannot be suggested that
7 it should. You say, as I understand it, that the
8 undervalued sale may have had an effect on a business of
9 which you were a shareholder and which you may — and
10 I don’t know the rules for shareholder suit in Russia
11 yet — may give you a claim, and you are simply pleading
12 it as a relevant fact in your diminution in value of
13 shares claim; is that correct?
14 MR STROILOV: Precisely. That’s correct, my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And I am afraid I haven’t got to
16 the Russian expert and I don’t know whether it is
17 competent for the shareholder to bring a claim in
18 respect of that loss.
19 MR STROILOV: There is a dispute on that. I think this
20 particular claim doesn’t quite — I’m not entirely sure,
21 thinking aloud, really, whether it is quite diminution
22 of value of shareholding because as a result of this
23 event the company went bankrupt eventually, so it may be
24 a loss or may be a diminution.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand. It is not a head of

92 :1 claim for the loss of the value of the property; it is
2 the injury done to the company in which it were
3 a share(?) by the fact that it had property which was
4 undersold?
5 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, yes.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, and that plea has always
7 been in, and I think Mr Lord is saying: well, so be it,
8 it is in, and we will make our submissions as to its
9 irrelevance at the end of the day, is that right?
10 MR LORD: My Lord, to be clear, the evidence is that this
11 collateral was not registered as against the 2008 loan,
12 so it couldn’t be —
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s your defence. I had understood
14 originally there were two points: one was defence.
15 We’ve done that. One was counterclaim, which, if it was
16 for a loss of the value of this land per se, it couldn’t
17 be claimed because there was no one who owned the land
18 or could bring the claim.
19 But they say there is a third way in which they rely
20 on this, which is that the undervalued sale of this
21 property had a knock-on effect in terms of the business
22 propensities and position of the company in which they
23 do hold a share, and they say there is an arguable point
24 under Russian law that that shareholder can recover in
25 respect of that business impairment. That’s as

93 :1 I understand it.
2 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord. I just want to be
3 clear: this is not the amendment for which we are
4 seeking permission. That’s an amendment made some time
5 ago, so just to be clear on that.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I understand that.
7 MR LORD: My Lord, the simple point is that a claim for the
8 value of the land owned by LPK Scandinavia can only be
9 made — for that loss — by LPK Scandinavia. They are
10 not a party to this litigation, nor is their
11 shareholder, Ms Tarasova.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think Mr Stroilov accepts that, but
13 he says that the impairment by reference to
14 the undersold asset had a knock-on effect on the
15 business position or propensities of the company in
16 which he does own shares, and that is the purpose for
17 which it is pleaded, as I understand it.
18 He will either make that good or not.
19 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord, yes.
20 MR LORD: My Lord, it shouldn’t really be in the appendix.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I accept that, because the appendix is
22 meant to be pledged assets.
23 MR LORD: It is, it is, but on that basis, we could move on.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Can we record for the transcript that,
25 really, these assets ought not to be part of

94 :1 the appendix because they are not 2008 pledged assets.
2 MR STROILOV: I don’t think the appendix actually purports
3 to be limited to pledged assets. If we look, again, at
4 page —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is assets lost by the part 20 claim
6 as a result of the conspiracy. I don’t think you can
7 say they were, because they weren’t the claimants’
8 assets.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes, that is correct, yes. So Onega Terminal.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, we have that.
11 MR STROILOV: The trouble is — so long as this reservation
12 is made, I accept that’s a valid point. The difficulty
13 is the terminal was —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You wish to plead these as a fact.
15 You say that the only claim on which you rely has long
16 been on the pleadings and the further fact is simply
17 borrowed from correspondence between the parties and
18 Mr Lord is prepared to accept that for present purposes,
19 but makes clear that you cannot make a claim in respect
20 of the ownership interest in those assets.
21 MR STROILOV: Yes, quite, my Lord. I don’t argue with that.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
23 MR STROILOV: Now, my Lord, then I think the point 3 in his
24 skeleton, and paragraph 62 in Mr McGregor 8. I’m just
25 trying to think how best to — you have to follow three

95 :1 documents, really.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is this 177 we are now on?
3 MR STROILOV: No, I think we are still on 154, (i) to (k).
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see.
5 MR STROILOV: I think while Mr McGregor’s complaint in his
6 statement, or rather the complaint on behalf of the
7 claimants, really, is that there is no proper basis for
8 that. So I just want to show you that there is a basis.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
10 MR STROILOV: Sorry, my Lord, I am slightly lost in my own
11 documents.
12 So that is at page 46, still of the same tab
13 {I20/26/57.46}, so the next part of these pleadings.
14 Starting at paragraph (i):
15 «On or around 8 July 2011, the shareholding in
16 Mercury LLC was sold to ROK N1 Prichaly, which is
17 averred to be a company connected to the claimants
18 and/or to the conspiracy.»
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You have not previously suggested or
20 alleged that Rok N1 Prichaly is a company connected to
21 the claimants and/or to the conspiracy.
22 MR STROILOV: Yes, that is what I think is suggested but
23 that is not quite the position.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, so you say you did say that
25 before but not in such crisp terms.

96 :1 MR STROILOV: Let me explain, again, we can look at the old
2 version which was in the introduction to this section,
3 and in what is now paragraph 151.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: In your pleading?
5 MR STROILOV: Yes. So that’s still at page 41.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I have that.
7 MR STROILOV: So then we crossed out:
8 «It is averred that the purported public auction
9 sales of the seized assets were conducted not in
10 accordance with the Russian law, but as fraudulent
11 insider dealings and/or fraudulently at a gross
12 undervalue. For example, and without limitations.» 13 {I20/26/57.41}
14 I think slightly above there is a complaint that
15 adequate disclosure hasn’t been given in relation to
16 these sales.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But where in your original plea did
18 you suggest that this company was connected with the
19 conspirators?
20 MR STROILOV: No, I don’t recall it being pleaded
21 specifically.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, I think that’s their complaint.
23 They say you haven’t previously suggested that this
24 company had anything to do with the conspirators.
25 MR STROILOV: Yes, and I don’t accept it, let me explain how

97 :1 it appears really from their own disclosure. I think
2 the general complaint made previously.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you have facts to sustain it, you
4 must plead them. At the moment you have just averred,
5 you have just said it is connected, and they have said:
6 no, it’s not, you haven’t suggested that. So on what
7 basis do you say they are connected? If you have
8 a basis, you must plead it.
9 MR STROILOV: My Lord, that’s where I am getting to.
10 I don’t think that’s quite their complaint that we
11 have to particularise each connection, they say.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think so, because —
13 MR STROILOV: What is suggested —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think a lot of their overall
15 position is simply that they need to know who you say
16 were the conspirators, point one, and what assets were
17 connected with them, and what the connection was.
18 They are saying they need to know that because
19 otherwise, take the example they give of the witnesses:
20 for you to say there were lots of conspirators, could
21 have included you, you and you, but you don’t say which
22 one of them, and they turn up in the box and you say:
23 you were a conspirator, weren’t you? And they say: you
24 never said that before, I had no idea I was accused of
25 that.

98 :1 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I understand what they are saying,
2 I am just trying to answer, perhaps not as quickly as
3 I can — let me make my points.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But they are entitled to know whether
5 you say — before they get into that witness box they
6 are entitled to know whether you say that person was
7 a conspirator, and if you do say that, they have to know
8 the grounds on which you say that they were
9 a conspirator, because it is not fair for them just to
10 be bombarded, or ambushed with a series of allegations
11 which they really had no proper idea they were accused
12 of.
13 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I quite understand the principle, I’m
14 just keen to keep going through this point by point.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: This is an important point, I think,
16 because it may explain to you more generally why it is
17 that an averment won’t do, particularly at this stage.
18 It is not good enough to say something without
19 disclosing the material facts on which you rely as the
20 basis for saying it; do you see?
21 MR STROILOV: Yes.
22 My Lord, there is obviously, in a way there is
23 a limit to that principle, that is to say, really, about
24 any averment in the pleadings. It can’t be said: you
25 must now plead all the particulars of that, literally

99 :1 about every sentence, and this comes to the point when
2 we have really to set out all the evidence. I am not
3 quite required to do that.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am afraid that the rules here —
5 and, you know, I will be flexible, but there is
6 a difference not always easy to discern, between
7 material fact and evidence of the material fact. You
8 must plead the material facts. You are entitled and
9 should hold back your proof, your evidence for those
10 material facts during the course of the trial. But
11 people must know what it is you say.
12 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Because that’s — if I may say so,
14 I had a slight feeling possibly you may have conceived
15 of the process as a bit more of a surprise than it
16 should be. No one should be taken by surprise really.
17 MR STROILOV: No, my Lord, that’s not that.
18 Let me try to explain it point by point, if I may,
19 my Lord.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
21 MR STROILOV: Now, first, the old pleadings, generally
22 I think they can be fairly summarised as follows, that
23 these companies were taken from us, then there was
24 a long series of transactions, notably the public sales,
25 for which we haven’t been given proper disclosure. We

100 :1 don’t know much about them, but from what we know, we
2 aver they were collusive deals at gross undervalue.
3 Since then, certain disclosure was given and it was
4 analysed. Now, my Lord, from which, we have identified
5 a number of particular transactions he actually didn’t
6 know about, including these transactions with
7 ROK N1 Prichaly.
8 My Lord, we do say, I think the complaint which is
9 being made, and I will be corrected if I am wrong, is
10 not that there should be more particulars pleaded. It
11 is said that the pleading of fraud may only be made if
12 there is sufficient evidence for fraud, if there were
13 legal representatives they wouldn’t have allowed this to
14 go in, and there is no evidence of this connection and,
15 therefore, it cannot be pleaded.
16 My Lord, I want to show to you that there is some
17 sufficient evidence to infer fraud as a matter of — or
18 for us to infer connection as a matter of pleadings, and
19 from that connection in turn to infer fraud.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If there is, why haven’t you stated
21 the material elements of it?
22 MR STROILOV: My Lord, because that’s evidence.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, that is what I was trying to
24 explain — not very well — that there is a difference
25 between stating the material facts on which you rely,

101 :1 and the means by which you are going to prove those
2 facts.
3 So, for example, if you plead that one company is
4 connected with a person, you have to state he was
5 connected in the following ways: he had a shareholding;
6 his niece was, aged 3, the chairman. Whatever it is,
7 you have to identify what you say gives rise to
8 the supposition of a connection.
9 When you have to then prove the matter, you are
10 going to have to bring forward some evidence to show
11 that his niece was aged 3, never heard of the company,
12 and said «Yes Dada», whenever asked. Do you see what I
13 mean?
14 MR STROILOV: Yes.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you see?
16 MR STROILOV: What we say to that is that as a matter of
17 principle, there is a different way to — an alternative
18 way which we can be entitled to plead a connection
19 without actually pleading these specific things; and
20 that is if we do demonstrate that this transaction takes
21 place (a) at gross undervalue, (b) in the context of
22 a series of similar transactions, about 15 or 20 of
23 them, where we can show they were two connected parties
24 and also at gross undervalue; where it is logically
25 clear that this series of transactions was part of

102 :1 a plan, rather than addendum transactions happening on
2 the market. And then from those facts it is right we
3 are properly entitled, the court to infer, that this
4 particular transaction was also to a connected party
5 without actually particularising the connection, because
6 the issue in this case is not whether it was connected,
7 we are not bringing a claim against ROK Prichaly, it is
8 whether, on the balance of probabilities, the Bank was
9 acting fraudulently throughout this process.
10 Another matter from which we will invite inference,
11 I think that is fundamentally important, is the lack of
12 disclosure on ROK N1 Prichaly, in breach of
13 your Lordship’s order, we say. Obviously it may be that
14 there are no documents on this transaction, but the
15 situation is: they have been specifically directed to
16 disclose all documents going to this sale.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think we are wandering into more
18 general criticism now.
19 If your case is that the fact of a connection is
20 demonstrated by there being no other explanation of
21 the poor price obtained than that there was such
22 an explanation, and that this was all part of
23 the general conspiracy, you must say so. It is
24 a difficult case, for reasons I tried to identify for
25 you on the previous occasion, which is — I think I did,

103 :1 anyway, my recollection may be wrong, that the general
2 rule here is that the last thing that is inferred is
3 fraud. If there is any rational explanation other than
4 dishonesty, the court will ordinarily adopt that as the
5 explanation. That may not always be realistic, but it
6 is the approach of the court, if all you are relying on
7 is that a certain act gives rise to the inference of
8 dishonesty.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, there are certain — I don’t
10 think we have any problem, really, particularising this.
11 I think that’s not quite the complaint the claimants
12 make. They don’t say we must particularise this in
13 further subparagraphs. They say we cannot plead this at
14 all, because there is not sufficient evidence for
15 such pleadings.
16 We say there is, there are matters from which we
17 will invite this inference, and if they want to attack
18 the strengths of that case, that obviously is a matter
19 for a trial and it’s not a pleaded matter.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I thought they simply said it is
21 a bare, late averment for which no justification has
22 been provided.
23 MR STROILOV: I am not sure, maybe it will help if Mr Lord
24 clarifies it now. My understanding was it was the rule
25 on pleadings of fraud.

104 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right.
2 Mr Lord, does it go beyond that? You haven’t known
3 that they are part of the ring until now?
4 MR LORD: That is the point, and it appears to be the
5 case — it’s a sort of bootstraps argument: wherever
6 somebody comes into play, or a company comes into play,
7 it is presumed they are a conspirator and that becomes
8 the basis for saying they are a conspirator but that is
9 not the right way around. What we are really saying is:
10 the rules come at it a different way around. You have
11 to show what is the basis for saying that they are part
12 of the conspiracy without simply relying upon the fact
13 that you say that they are a conspirator, and that is
14 what seems to be here, because this company is not
15 connected, has never been suggested to be connected with
16 the Bank. Mr Arkhangelsky’s witness evidence talks
17 about it being part of a neighbouring the Sea Fish Port
18 being a neighbouring business, and there were
19 negotiations — he had negotiations with them in 2008.
20 So we hadn’t really understood there was any real
21 possibility of suggesting that this particular entity
22 could be said to be a part of the Bank, and therefore
23 part of the conspiracy.
24 My Lord, it is a serious point, because it can’t be
25 fair that the defendants could just say: anybody, any

105 :1 person or employee or company or business anywhere that
2 gets caught up in this narrative should be presumed to
3 be a conspirator until the contrary is established, and
4 that’s sufficient to make any allegation to anybody.
5 That’s not the way the rules work here. We have to come
6 back at it from a different way. So we ask
7 your Lordship to intervene in that, because that’s
8 a fairness point and it will flow into another point
9 your Lordship rightly picked up about employment.
10 MR STROILOV: I am sorry I must have completely
11 misunderstood the objection made to that amendment.
12 I thought it was a point on the principles of pleading
13 fraud. My Lord, if it is complained that it is too new
14 for such a late stage, then I will have to ask you —
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, no, no, that may come subsequently
16 but it is not coming now.
17 Do you say that this company was part of
18 the conspiracy?
19 MR STROILOV: Well, I think we say what we say. We say it
20 was a connected party, in this particular —
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, on what ground do you say it was
22 connected? Previously your evidence has been not that
23 it was connected.
24 MR STROILOV: We didn’t say that previously.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You said it didn’t say it was. It

106 :1 appeared to present it as an independent company. Now,
2 on what grounds do you reverse that?
3 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I am afraid that’s not — I’m just
4 trying to think of an effective —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Don’t worry about being polite: what
6 do you say?
7 MR STROILOV: Now, my Lord, what we said was there are
8 a number of transfers for which we haven’t been given
9 the proper disclosure, so we can’t plead this out in
10 detail until proper disclosure is given and, my Lord,
11 that was an old version of our pleadings, in substance.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think Mr Lord is right in this: that
13 you can’t implicate people simply on the basis that they
14 happen to be involved in a transaction impugned. You
15 can’t suggest that they should be there because you
16 can’t, for the moment, think why they would have been
17 involved were they not fraudsters. You can’t say that.
18 Otherwise every party to every agreement here would have
19 to be mentioned. You have to have good grounds for
20 saying: you were naughty.
21 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, but that is really very much
22 a forensic point in terms of trying to ridicule our case
23 and a real point of substance.
24 On evidential principles they are perfectly entitled
25 to infer the parties’ involvement in a fraudulent

107 :1 transaction on the basis of (a) undervalue, (b) as
2 a context in which this takes place and the pattern of
3 other transactions, and if there are other 15
4 transactions where he can prove they are to connected
5 parties, we can invite that.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand — yes.
7 MR STROILOV: Thirdly, from non disclosure in relation to
8 that, in breach of the court’s order, we say they may
9 say there are no documents. Well, we will try to
10 demonstrate that is not true.
11 So in that respect, we are entitled to plead and to
12 ask the court to infer that this was a fraudulent deal
13 similar to the other deals in which we hope to prove
14 they are fraudulent from these matters.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Part of the pleadings is to clarify
16 the case that you have put. You accept that you are
17 unable to justify the allegation that they are
18 connected, except that you say that no unconnected party
19 would have agreed to such a deal.
20 MR STROILOV: I don’t think that’s — I don’t think that’s
21 quite right. From a number of other facts pleaded in
22 the counterclaim, we invite, really, a finding — well,
23 there will be a complex series of inferences, obviously,
24 as is always in a fraud case, but we — I’m just trying
25 to think of the way to construct this.

108 :1 No, I think another matter from which we will invite
2 a connection is that simply if they were dealing at
3 arm’s length —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If what?
5 MR STROILOV: If they were dealing at an arm’s length, then
6 there would have been proper disclosure on that,
7 pursuant to your Lordship’s order. From their failure 8 to —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If they were an independent party, why
10 should they have anything to do with the case?
11 MR STROILOV: Because your Lordship ordered that.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I ordered them, did I? I didn’t think
13 they had been mentioned before.
14 MR STROILOV: No, my Lord, that’s the point I’m trying to
15 make.
16 If you look at your Lordship’s order of 23 September 17 at {J1/20/12}.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What did I say then?
19 MR STROILOV: That’s schedule C of your Lordship’s order.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
21 MR STROILOV: And if you then look at paragraph 7 of that
22 order, (g) {J1/20/13}, the last subparagraph of
23 paragraph 7.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Oh yes, ROK N1 Prichaly.
25 MR STROILOV: Then, my Lord, if you go a little further down

109 :1 no paragraph 8, there is an order for various sales of
2 assets, and any dealings or communications, then at (i)
3 there is ROK N1 Prichaly.
4 My Lord, from that we draw a few points: firstly,
5 there could be, at least since September, when the
6 application was made, there could be no doubt this was
7 one of the transactions the court was interested in in
8 this context.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR STROILOV: And, secondly, from the fact that I think —
11 I fear to be incorrect, and I think I will be corrected,
12 I think pursuant to these two particular points of
13 the order, not a single document has been disclosed, and
14 we will say that it is simply not credible that there
15 are no documents.
16 I think from earlier disclosure, I believe there is
17 only — there is perhaps only one substantive document.
18 Perhaps it makes sense — it is not very big, but it
19 perhaps makes sense to look at it now. That’s at
20 {D146/2436.2/1}, that’s one document that has been
21 disclosed to us as an MS Excel page and it has been
22 translated, it is just one electronic document. It is
23 literally all we have on that transaction.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Why does that give rise to an
25 inference that they were connected?

110 :1 MR STROILOV: My Lord, if you just read that further. Then
2 there is a plan — have you reached as far as the
3 eight-stage plan?
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m at Stage 1; is that bad?
5 MR STROILOV: Yes, there are eight stages.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, you tell me what page this stage
7 is, but I’ve tried to read Stage 1 and I haven’t got
8 a lot from it. If there is something else I should be
9 reading, you tell me.
10 MR STROILOV: I beg your pardon, my Lord.
11 Yes, there is Stage 1, and then there is «Order of
12 steps» at the bottom of the page, and then there are
13 eight points at the beginning of Stage 2 14 {D146/2436.2/2}.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So you rely on this sequence, do you,
16 as demonstrating that they are a controlled entity?
17 MR STROILOV: As demonstrating, my Lord, that the bank was
18 planning, clearly and carefully, to a complex series of
19 steps designed to bring all Onega Terminal assets within
20 the control of ROK N1 Prichaly. We say this was a gross
21 undervalue, and we are going to show that with expert
22 evidence, and from that and from the lack of disclosure
23 in relation to that loan, which we say was a breach of
24 your Lordship’s order, we will invite to infer that it
25 was a connected party; and really from the pattern of

111 :1 their actions in quite a number of other transactions.
2 It may be criticised as being a weaker case than one
3 would have liked, but we say it is a proper case, and
4 really it is difficult to criticise us for making this
5 amendment late, in circumstances where we began by
6 complaining we were not given about this disclosure —
7 proper disclosure about this transaction. The court
8 accepted that and ordered further disclosure, and it
9 only became apparent very recently that no disclosure
10 was given.
11 So, my Lord, we say — well, we were not supposed to
12 plead it earlier because we didn’t have enough
13 information. Now they have been ordered to give us
14 information, they haven’t given it, well, we are
15 entitled to rely on that failure to disclose, along with
16 a multitude of other relevant factors. So that’s what
17 we say on this point.
18 Should I move on and then give my learned friend
19 an opportunity to reply?
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How are we doing? I feel that our
21 progress is not as quick as it could be.
22 MR LORD: No, my Lord, there is a question of translations,
23 which might be a shorter point. I am asked if that
24 could be dealt with today because that may have some
25 logistical implications in terms of tomorrow.

112 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Which is why I wanted it today rather
2 than tomorrow.
3 How are you doing? You must be pretty exhausted
4 down there.
5 How much do you have to say on this point, on the
6 Prichaly point?
7 MR LORD: Well, if there is a basis, it should be pleaded.
8 If there is a basis —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not going to decide it —
10 Mr Stroilov, I know you are very, very heavily pressed,
11 but if it is a point you attach important to, you must
12 jot down — don’t worry about the elegance of it
13 immediately — you must jot down all those circumstances
14 and facts on which you rely as giving rise to the fact
15 or inference of a connection.
16 MR STROILOV: I think that can be done. If that is really
17 the complaint, I thought it was suggested that it
18 mustn’t go in at all.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not going to waste time in
20 deciding whether it is too late or not. If you can
21 provide a proper demonstration which enables Mr Lord and
22 his clients to understand the basis, and the only basis,
23 on which you say they were connected, I’m not going to
24 throw it out at this stage.
25 MR STROILOV: Yes. I think I can deal with that, my Lord.

113 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would that be a good pause, for the
2 sake of everybody? Then I think we must break off from
3 this and we must decide the issue of translations, and
4 I want, first of all, you to be able to guide me as to
5 how big, how large the problem is; what sort of amount
6 of documentation are we talking about? You can tell me
7 about that on my return. I shall much look forward to
8 that. Five minutes. 9 (4.00 pm)
10 (A short break)
11 (4.05 pm)
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Translations.
13 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, on translations, I am afraid it
14 is part of the problem that we are not quite in
15 a position to define the size or the amount of
16 the documents we will, in practice, require. What is
17 happening, we are frantically preparing for
18 cross-examination, and obviously every other 15 minutes
19 we identify one or another document which needs to be
20 put to the witnesses. We look whether it is in
21 the bundle, sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t. Nearly
22 always it is not properly translated; it’s just a poor
23 translation which is nearly always incomprehensible and
24 quite often misleading. So that is obviously
25 unsatisfactory.

114 :1 So it will have to be really on a rolling basis,
2 literally, and throughout the trial, as well as in
3 the remaining weekend, simply because we haven’t had —
4 I am afraid we haven’t had adequate time. So we hope,
5 really, to be preparing during such breaks between the
6 witnesses, as you have indicated you might be prepared
7 to give us. Otherwise evenings, weekends and so on.
8 So from that, obviously, and our concern is — so if
9 we have to identify all the translations and all
10 additions to the bundle to the claimants on a rolling
11 basis, that gives them very nearly all our
12 cross-examination, simply as if they were in the room
13 and they are looking over my shoulder. I don’t think
14 that’s quite fair, and we would like some assurances
15 that this is not going to the witness now so that they
16 are given another week to think about the best answer.
17 Obviously this is a case with some factual disputes, and
18 a lot of witnesses are going to be challenged in terms
19 of credibility and honesty.
20 So that’s …
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But under their professional
22 obligations, whilst they may go through the documents
23 with the witnesses, or ensure that they do, they can’t
24 coach the witness: that is not permissible under our
25 rules.

115 :1 MR STROILOV: Still it would amount to the same thing as
2 something you on one day invited my learned friend to
3 do, and which he refused, and we absolutely take no
4 issue with his refusal; that is to say to disclose the
5 cross-examination bundle. That is not what is normally
6 done, that is not what they are prepared to do.
7 Incidentally we wouldn’t be assisted by that because we
8 wouldn’t have time to look at it. But that is not the
9 point. That is further inequality.
10 So we would like some arrangement, in practical
11 terms we simply want some arrangement whereby this
12 inequality wouldn’t be created.
13 If they refuse — I think they initially refused to
14 make any translations on our requests at all, or they
15 said: it is your documents, you rely on them, you
16 arrange translations in a way you like, and if you can’t
17 afford it, it is your problem.
18 I think now they have slightly resiled from that
19 position, but if we are left to do the translations,
20 we still want permission not to have to identify them on
21 a rolling basis because, again, that’s simply putting
22 that to witnesses, or effectively that’s identifying it
23 to witnesses and we are concerned that that puts us at
24 a disadvantage.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Have you identified the documents

116 :1 which will need translation in respect of your
2 cross-examination of the witnesses next week and the
3 week after?
4 MR STROILOV: Some, and by far not all. I am afraid I am
5 focusing on week one now, and one would be terrified to
6 see how little progress I have made. Some of them are
7 identified, some of them are being translated now. But
8 there will be more tomorrow, I hope, there will be more
9 during the weekend, there will be more each evening as
10 we progress, because I will have to keep preparing them
11 and I am afraid it’s going to be pretty chaotic.
12 I think I don’t need to press the amount of work. You
13 have a general idea of how much work there is.
14 So I am afraid it is difficult. Well, it is
15 a difficult task, but some practical solution must be
16 found out.
17 I don’t think I need to trouble your Lordship with
18 addressing you on whose fault it is.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No. Let’s see what Mr Lord suggests.
20 Mr Lord, one thing is for sure, which is that if
21 a document is to be put to the witness, and if I am to
22 get anything from it, the document must have been
23 translated in a manner which is accepted by the parties
24 to be accurate and which can be properly contained in
25 the record of the proceedings.

117 :1 MR LORD: Yes.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I must say that machine translations,
3 whilst they might assist you in the process of
4 disclosure to see whether it has any relevance at all,
5 are simply not documents worthy of inclusion in
6 the court record. They are not satisfactory. What are
7 we going to do about it?
8 MR LORD: My Lord, may I just take it in stages?
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR LORD: The first point is this: that relevant documents,
11 or a translation of a relevant document, are
12 a disclosable document.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR LORD: And there’s no basis, even for a litigant in
15 person, to suspend those rules. We shouldn’t give
16 a litigant in person a sort of extra, a sort of opt-out
17 from that.
18 So if there are documents that should be disclosed
19 inter partes, then they should really be disclosed; and
20 if there are translations, existing translations, then
21 they are disclosable, Mr Stroilov accepts that.
22 So, just taking it in sort of bite-sized chunks, it
23 would be a breach by the defendant not to be disclosing
24 that material. That’s one category. We have two sort
25 of sub categories; the two are never seen before, and

118 :1 translations of material that has been seen before, and
2 that should be the end of that, with respect.
3 As to translating other documents, your Lordship
4 will know that what normally happens with foreign
5 language material is the parties agree, as part of
6 the trial bundle preparation process, which documents
7 are going to be translated, and there is an exchange and
8 usually the parties share the cost, and not every single
9 disclosed document is translated because that would
10 prohibitively expensive, and then parties, if you like,
11 request documents be translated. Obviously that
12 involves a degree of identifying a document of which use
13 is going to be made at the trial, but that’s just what
14 happens.
15 There’s no reason here to suspend that. There’s
16 absolutely no basis for that. And it is not right to
17 say that the claimants have refused to help. What they
18 have said is: you appear to have a translator, you
19 appear to have translations. There are machine
20 translations and we have done some of our own
21 translations of material that we wanted translated, eg
22 for the opening. Now, you play your part, you send us
23 your translations —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So there were, for the purposes of
25 your opening, quite a few documents which you had relied

119 :1 on from machine translations which, actually, when you
2 were presented them out of the court, you needed
3 a proper translation?
4 MR LORD: Yes, and there were 89, I think, out of a huge
5 number of documents, and I would hope some credit would
6 be given for the comprehensive nature of that opening
7 and the number of documents which were, in my
8 submission, fairly identified.
9 So it is not right to say that we are keeping all
10 our cards —
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t want to get into the blame
12 game. What I am trying to do is manage the problem and
13 its solution.
14 At first blush, although I understand there were
15 different pressures in this case, to be told that they
16 are worthy of inclusion in the court bundle and being
17 uploaded onto Magnum and everything else that they are
18 not worthy of translation appears contradictory.
19 MR LORD: But your Lordship will recollect the background to
20 this: that, with respect, is not a fair criticism of my
21 clients. We tried. There were several hearings where
22 we plaintively —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s what I said: the special
24 circumstances may explain that. That the trial bundles
25 are not a collation of documents agreed likely to be

120 :1 relevant, they are just a collation of documents.
2 MR LORD: Yes, and your Lordship will understand in this
3 case that the bank are likely to be more criticised for
4 not putting material — you can imagine the complaint
5 that would be made if material was out there, disclosed,
6 and it wasn’t in the trial bundle.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let us try and look at solutions,
8 Mr Lord, if you please. They are reliant, as
9 I understand it, on pro bono translations. I know you
10 say they have pots of money elsewhere in a mirror
11 company —
12 MR LORD: I won’t press that.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — but at the moment let’s proceed on
14 the footing that they are dependent on pro bono
15 translations. Now, my estimate of that is it is likely
16 not to be very quick, or, at least, it is likely to be
17 subject to the vagaries of the availability of that
18 particular translator, which is going to slow up the
19 orderly presentation of the trial. What are we going to
20 do about that?
21 MR LORD: The first point is this: if there are existing
22 translations, they should be disclosed. We should have
23 those, because that will save time. They can be
24 uploaded.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I want to see where the game ends, not

121 :1 where intermediate bits of it are. How are we going to
2 deal with the cross-examination of these witnesses on
3 the footing of documents worthy to be included in
4 a court record?
5 MR LORD: My Lord, the solution is, if Mr Stroilov thinks
6 that there are documents that are inadequately
7 translated, on the —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Are you saying he is coming across
9 them all the time, because there are so few that have
10 been properly translated? I can’t tell. I haven’t even
11 looked.
12 MR LORD: And I can’t tell either because I don’t know what
13 Mr Stroilov has been up to. I don’t know whether there
14 are 1 or 1,000 documents. But, my Lord, one deduces
15 from that that he has established a cohort of material
16 that meet that complaint; in other words, whether it is
17 1 or 100 or 10, there are documents on Magnum in Russian
18 that are inadequately translated.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How many are there, Mr Stroilov, so
20 far?
21 MR LORD: He knows the answer to that and he should tell
22 your Lordship.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So far. I know it is accelerating all
24 the time, but what is the number so far?
25 MR STROILOV: Well, it is difficult to say off-hand.

122 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, you must know. You have a pile
2 of them, haven’t you?
3 MR STROILOV: Generally speaking, I think I have identified
4 about 20, roughly speaking. That is to say, I have
5 tried to keep it as low as possible because I have had
6 to work on the assumption that we have to rely on one
7 pro bono translator.
8 I have just to get rid of this point: we don’t
9 have — we are not sitting on any undisclosed
10 translations now. Obviously the translator had to work
11 on two quite —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Are you sitting on any undisclosed
13 documents.
14 MR STROILOV: No, of course not — that’s a non point.
15 I think I made it very clear in correspondence —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right. Now you confirm to me that
17 there are no documents in any language, the originals of
18 which have not been disclosed, or copies of
19 the originals of which have not been disclosed.
20 MR STROILOV: That’s right, there soon will be translations,
21 for the reasons which I have given, of fairness in terms
22 of cross-examination —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but you don’t have any documents,
24 not translations of documents, but documents in your
25 possession which you need to disclose because you are

123 :1 liable to do so?
2 MR STROILOV: No.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right. So all we are talking
4 about is translations?
5 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, yes.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And at the moment there are about 20,
7 you haven’t got them in your possession, but you wish,
8 upon them coming into your possession, to be released
9 from the disclosure?
10 MR STROILOV: The translator is working on them.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Sorry?
12 MR STROILOV: The translator is working on them. I hope
13 they will be ready by Monday.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sorry, have you lost us?
15 MR ARKHANGELSKY: No. We will lose you in a minute, but go
16 on.
17 NEW SPEAKER: We have to re-start the TV in a minute, but
18 that’s all right.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
20 MR STROILOV: So they are being finalised or worked on, so
21 I think we will have these translations by Monday. If
22 we disclose them, and if, additionally, we identify
23 documents in the bundle, or later which need to be
24 included in the bundle, that will give the claimants
25 a very clear picture of what we intend to put to

124 :1 the first witnesses on the list. That very much signals
2 their cross-examination —
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And it’s about 20 so far?
4 MR STROILOV: I think it is about 20 so far, yes. I’m
5 speaking from the top of my head. I’ve made the search,
6 it may be 15.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but in that sort of — under 50.
8 MR STROILOV: In that order, yes, my Lord. I think so. But
9 then I stress that I have made much less progress than
10 I hoped, and I will keep working on this throughout the
11 weekend, and then in the evenings throughout the week
12 and then until I am able … And then there will be new
13 documents coming up all this time. So it is more
14 a problem for the future, in a way.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
16 Yes, Mr Lord.
17 MR LORD: We would suggest that the normal rules should
18 apply, so if there are translations at the moment, there
19 are existing translations, they should be disclosed,
20 because if they are adequate that will dispense with the
21 need to worry about them.
22 If there are further documents that need
23 translating, we would suggest that Mr Arkhangelsky
24 should identify them so that we don’t waste time on
25 Monday and Tuesday. The complaint is made that there is

125 :1 insufficient time for cross-examination. If we are
2 going to have to wait ages to translate a document line
3 by line, because it is not in English satisfactorily,
4 that would be a pity.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How long does it take to load up on
6 Magnum? Supposing he produces them, supposing the
7 translation is produced on a rolling basis as and when
8 the witnesses are cross-examined. How long does it take
9 to load up onto Magnum.
10 MR LORD: I think it can take anywhere between half an hour
11 and two hours, and it may depend on the volume, whether
12 they are doing one or a number.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And is there any real problem in some
14 documents being dealt with as paper documents rather
15 than Magnum documents? The only person who might,
16 I suppose, be slightly inconvenienced by that is
17 Mr Arkhangelsky, who wouldn’t have them, but he might be
18 prepared to waive that.
19 MR LORD: I suppose in theory, my Lord, that’s right.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand your point on the rules,
21 but this is such a weird case, why do you really need
22 these? Logistically we can get over it by the paper
23 document route: why do you actually need them? You have
24 had a chance to look at any documents, do any
25 translations you want.

126 :1 MR LORD: That’s right, my Lord, but the paper documents
2 would be here. Ordinarily in a Magnum trial, the
3 documents are put on to Magnum, people operate on
4 Magnum, the transcript shows Magnum, they have to be put
5 in bundles. The efficient conduct of a case would
6 normally not allow for this sort of activity.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, it is not perfect, but I am
8 getting the impression — I thought there might be
9 thousands of documents.
10 MR LORD: If your Lordship thinks that fairness requires
11 that the usual rules allow this inefficiency so that
12 Mr Stroilov can, essentially, surprise my client’s
13 witnesses, then we will obviously go along with that,
14 my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t think they are surprising your
16 witnesses, because you have the documents, you just
17 haven’t got the translations. If there were documents
18 which were being held back, then I think that is quite
19 inappropriate. But if they are translations which are
20 being held back and they are so finite that they might
21 give an inkling into the way in which he wishes to
22 conduct his cross-examination, then I think the balance
23 of fairness is that they be produced, with sufficient
24 copies so that you can follow them, and so the witness
25 can follow them, and then at some point at the end of

127 :1 proceedings that day, they must be loaded up in some way
2 into Magnum.
3 MR LORD: I am content with that, subject to your Lordship
4 reviewing that process as we go along, because if it
5 turns out that the inefficiency and disruption is out of
6 all proportion to the forensic advantage that
7 your Lordship feels should properly be reserved for the
8 defendants — I’m not being pejorative, I’m being
9 succinct — then I would ask your Lordship to review it.
10 If we waste a lot of time and it looks like, really,
11 it is not worth the candle, I would invite some review
12 to take place.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: This trial has to be looked at day by
14 day as to whether it is progressing properly or not.
15 MR LORD: Very well.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is on a knife-edge, in some ways.
17 MR LORD: Yes, and the point is made that there will be
18 no opportunity for us to check the translations, so we
19 will do the best we can in those circumstances.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. It is unsatisfactory, it is, in
21 my view, as I indicated through my clerk, the product
22 of insufficient focus on the part of the defendants in
23 objective terms on the bundles, but they say the
24 insufficiency was not their choice, but simply the
25 consequence of their predicament. There we are.

128 :1 I can’t gainsay that. All I have to try and do is do
2 the least unfair thing, and I think that is the least
3 unfair thing.
4 I quite take your point, I would be totally
5 different in my view if there are any documents which
6 have not been disclosed, which are not translations but
7 are actual documents. There won’t be exception for
8 those, those must be disclosed as soon as they come into
9 the possession of the party, on both sides.
10 MR LORD: Yes, there just is one further point. I think it
11 follows that all the documents that Mr Stroilov has in
12 mind are, at least, on Magnum, have been uploaded.
13 Obviously, my Lord, my clients have uploaded a lot
14 of material, I’m assuming that they are on Magnum.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see what you mean. They might have
16 been disclosed but have gone under the radar?
17 MR LORD: They may have gone under the radar. I am assuming
18 that the Russian document — for these purposes there
19 must be a Russian document — is somewhere in the…
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think you should confirm that. You
21 can’t pluck out — we are to take as the disclosed
22 relevant documents that which is in the bundle.
23 MR STROILOV: No, that’s the trouble. There are documents
24 which are not in the bundle and they are concerned about
25 that, and if we have to upload them on the rolling

129 :1 basis, that has virtually the same effect in the sense
2 of showing the sequence of our cross-examination.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see, so there is a third category,
4 is there, of documents which were disclosed but which
5 are not in the bundles?
6 MR STROILOV: Yes, quite a few. Yes, my Lord.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Quite a few?
8 MR STROILOV: Quite of few of them, yes.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What sort of numbers are we talking
10 about here?
11 MR STROILOV: Again, it is out of — I would say that, as we
12 identify the documents which need to be added,
13 approximately half of them are not in the bundle at all,
14 the other half are in the bundle, accompanied by Google
15 translations. So roughly that’s the split.
16 So out of 20, which is a rough figure, 10 will be
17 not be in the bundle, 10 will be in the bundle, not
18 adequately translated.
19 I think we are descending into a bit of a blame
20 game, but I must say, obviously we have made a large and
21 unsuccessful application and then a large, unsuccessful
22 appeal and we can be, by definition, criticised for not
23 getting our priorities right. Subject to that, really,
24 do the claimants really need people like Mr Arkhangelsky
25 and me to tell them that if the document is being

130 :1 brought to the court’s attention, it must be made
2 intelligible and reliable.
3 So the starting point is that everything they
4 thought they need to include in the trial bundle should
5 have been translated. So in that respect they are at
6 fault, and now in addition to us being able really to
7 obtain such translations as we can without having to put
8 all of our cards on the table in terms of
9 cross-examination, in addition to that I would expect
10 some help from them in terms of resources being made
11 available.
12 I don’t see any legitimate grounds for refusing to
13 give an undertaking not to forewarn the witnesses. If
14 they insist on that, I’m not sure your Lordship can
15 quite order that to them.
16 MR LORD: Shall we just go with this for now. If it is of
17 this order, we didn’t know. If it was going to be 2,000
18 documents, next week would have gone to pot within about
19 half an hour. If it is 20 and we have copies and
20 Mr Stroilov is prepared, despite all his problems, to
21 make copies so we can all follow fairly, shall we see
22 how we go. Sorry to interrupt.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think we will, and if there comes
24 a time when a document, for whatever reason, the
25 significance of was not appreciated when the bundles

131 :1 were compiled, and you need to have a think about it or
2 the witness does, then that will just be, hopefully,
3 a one-off. If it becomes a two, three, four, five-off,
4 then we will have to take another view.
5 MR LORD: Yes.
6 MR STROILOV: I do fear we won’t be quite up to speed in
7 terms of burdening the pro bono translator who has apart
8 from doing pro bono —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The thing is, if you want them to do
10 the translation, and I haven’t asked them whether they
11 would, you have to identify them and I think there is
12 a limit to which I can handcuff them in what they tell
13 their client.
14 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I see that.
15 I don’t want to go too much about fairness, because
16 I don’t want to talk about it every day, but I simply do
17 flag this as something to go into your continuous
18 review list.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We are going to approach this, as with
20 many things in this case, in a slightly crab-like way.
21 You are going to continue your efforts to identify and
22 to obtain translations. You will obtain copies of both
23 the document and its translated version in such numbers
24 as you and Mr Lord discuss. The reason the burden is on
25 you is because otherwise they would have sight of

132 :1 the documents that you seek, so I am afraid that’s
2 a necessary consequence of the way you want to approach
3 the matter.
4 The documents will then be put to the witnesses in
5 hard copy rather than on Magnum. I must have a copy as
6 well, of course. They will only subsequently, that
7 night, or whenever, be uploaded onto Magnum and become
8 part of the Magnum record.
9 If there are any documents in their original which
10 you have not disclosed previously, you must disclose
11 them forthwith upon finding that fact, and there is no
12 release of that obligation. This is a pragmatic
13 solution to a difficult issue. I will keep it under
14 review if I think that, frankly, more harm than good
15 will flow from it.
16 MR STROILOV: But we are released from the obligation in
17 relation to translations only? We don’t have —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are released in terms of
19 the translations only until put to the witness, yes.
20 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
21 Well, I am troubled, it is 4.30 and there are still
22 a few items on the agenda.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, is there anything else on
24 translation or the assembly of the documentation, which
25 you have had to take very much the lion’s share of, and

133 :1 therefore I’m particularly anxious to assist now rather
2 than tomorrow when the weekend will be upon us?
3 MR LORD: I don’t think so, my Lord. There’s obviously the
4 disclosure, a couple of disclosure matters.
5 Just in terms of getting things done tomorrow,
6 that’s all.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How are you placed tomorrow? How long
8 do we need tomorrow?
9 MR STROILOV: Frankly, if we are to choose, my preference,
10 really, would be to sacrifice an hour on Monday simply
11 because I was hoping to spend tomorrow preparing
12 my cross-examinations.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But these witnesses are coming from
14 far and wide, aren’t they?
15 MR STROILOV: They are, my Lord, that’s right.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t think we can, just because
17 that would be a preference, dislodge that timetable.
18 Would you like to start early tomorrow in order that you
19 finish early and can go and prepare?
20 MR STROILOV: Well, my Lord, I don’t really know. In a way
21 any hour is as good as another. My trouble is I have to
22 travel from Cambridge, so that takes me approximately
23 two hours.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: When would you prefer to start? What
25 I find is that continuous work is often more productive

134 :1 than sort of, you know, an hour here and an hour there.
2 That is not necessarily the case with everybody. I want
3 to assist as best as I can. I have tomorrow, which
4 I would very much prefer to be thinking about the case,
5 but if there are matters which still have to be
6 addressed, as obviously there will be, I will fit in
7 with your schedules as to how best to deal with that in
8 order to give you maximum time.
9 MR LORD: My Lord, the pleading points and protocol should
10 be addressed before we start the trial on Monday, and
11 I respectfully suggest that we can’t take time out from
12 Monday with witnesses coming from Russia.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, we can’t, we have to do them.
14 MR LORD: And the fairness points are the ones such the
15 employees’ point. If various other Bank personnel or,
16 anybody, really, but particularly witnesses, are going
17 to be said to be conspirators, then that should be
18 clearly set out, tomorrow, as the absolute latest, the
19 trial is starting on Monday. So this needs to be
20 addressed and cleared away.
21 If, in fact, Mr Stroilov wanted to go through our
22 points and indicate briefly where things are no longer
23 pursued or what would happen, then we could decide how
24 much time was required. It can’t wait until Monday.
25 MR STROILOV: Okay, then we have to do it tomorrow. I think

135 :1 we have narrowed down —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I will do my best to re-read these.
3 I was looking at an old pleading, I have various notes
4 on those and I will transport them over and try and
5 reduce the amount of questions, but I think if you are
6 suggesting any individuals as having been or become
7 party to the conspiracy you alleged, you must identify
8 them.
9 MR STROILOV: Perhaps I had better address you on that
10 tomorrow. I think that’s subject to certain exceptions,
11 even though I must say I don’t profess to be an expert
12 on this and, in a way, I am relying on the common sense
13 of the thing.
14 What I say, well, what we see from outside the
15 alleged conspiracy, is that things A, B, and C are done
16 by the Bank, and we have pleaded that these things are
17 fraudulent.
18 Now, from disclosure we see that committees X, Y and
19 Z met on that and approved these things by such and such
20 road.
21 Now, a member of that committee who voted for that
22 thing to be done is coming to give evidence. He may
23 say: well, I did so just because Mrs Maylsheva didn’t
24 visit and I didn’t feel I was in a position to argue
25 with her on that, that was her area.

136 :1 Or he may say: well, no, it’s something — he may
2 start arguing and say it was honest and proper, and from
3 that we will invite different inferences.
4 So this being a claim against the Bank and
5 Mr Savelyev, and obviously the allegations are against
6 them, but in a way I don’t see how and why our hands
7 should be tied, and why it is fair we are precluded from
8 alleged dishonesty —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am afraid it is the rule. I quite
10 take your point that there may be ancillary players who
11 participated in the various events, but the primary
12 actors to the conspiracy must be identified and you must
13 say what their objective was and how they agreed it, and
14 if you say that the law enables you also to bring into
15 the fold people who were not part of the original
16 conspiracy but subsequently were brought into the fold
17 and signed up to its objectives, you must identify them
18 and you must say when they joined the conspiracy and by
19 what means.
20 It is only fair, Mr Stroilov. It is not fair to
21 hold over people the very fact that they were caught up
22 in the events means that though you haven’t named them,
23 they are at peril in this regard.
24 MR STROILOV: At the same time, if we allege that it was the
25 Bank who committed fraud, we cannot be expected to know

137 :1 each executive who was involved.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You don’t have to know each to
3 succeed. You have to know the principal actors and name
4 them.
5 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. What we are concerned about
6 is: well. you have named Mr Savelyev, you have named
7 Ms Maylsheva. Apart from that, it is not open to
8 you suggest that any of the executives was acting
9 dishonestly —
10 MR LORD: My Lord, the reason this is a very important point
11 is fairness to anybody who is said to be a conspirator,
12 it is basic fairness that people should know that,
13 wherever they are in the world, this is how English
14 proceedings run. You have a basis — it may be that
15 what’s going to be said is that simply because you were
16 in St Petersburg and you happened across the Bank, you
17 must be a dishonest conspirator. It may be that that is
18 the basis that’s going to be put in play. But there has
19 to be identification of somebody, anybody, accused of
20 fraud/dishonesty, whether they are a party or not,
21 a fortiori, where they are a witness coming along to
22 these proceedings, they will have to be told: am I being
23 accused of dishonesty and, if so, on what basis.
24 The particular importance here is not just fairness
25 to the Bank’s witnesses who are coming, but because it

138 :1 will distil the nature of the conspiracy case, because
2 it will identify who is said to be in on this
3 conspiracy, because what will be unacceptable is to have
4 this nebulous: it may be other people, we are not quite
5 sure, because people are coming from Russia to meet
6 these very serious charges on this very large claim, and
7 it needs to be identified whether they are being said to
8 be a dishonest member of the conspiracy or not, because
9 it will be important whether they are or are not,
10 because if they are not said to be, and we would say in
11 parentheses, rightly, that will have its own effect.
12 So it is sort of decision time now, really. How
13 many people are said to be in on this conspiracy,
14 because — so your Lordship knows where this is going —
15 if the defendants are right, we would submit there can’t
16 be anybody in St Petersburg who wasn’t privy to this,
17 let alone the Bank. So if that is where this is going
18 to go, we need to know exactly who coming next week, if
19 anybody, is said to be a fraudulent conspirator.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The thing is, that is broadly right,
21 Mr Stroilov, they must know.
22 Just for your reassurance, you don’t have, in order
23 to succeed, to have successfully identified every member
24 of the conspiracy. You don’t have to name everybody and
25 to succeed — it doesn’t defeat your claim for someone

139 :1 to stand up and say: actually, they didn’t get me,
2 therefore there was no conspiracy.
3 All you have to do is say who the people were who
4 you say were primarily responsible for hatching this
5 plot.
6 MR STROILOV: Primarily responsible, that I accept.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
8 MR STROILOV: Apart from that — as I say, I think that’s
9 really a practical problem.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Who was in on hatching the plot. You
11 know, there are lots of people who may unwittingly or
12 wittingly have been involved in it. That’s possible.
13 You don’t have to say that. It can be a conspiracy
14 between X and Y and persons unknown, and still be
15 competent at law. But to get off the ground you must
16 show that there were at least two people who hatched
17 a plot, and that the plot had a certain outline which
18 was subsequently put into place.
19 My reading of your case is that’s all you need,
20 because you are not — because they are not parties,
21 there’s no point in anything else.
22 MR STROILOV: Yes, well quite.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you see what I mean?
24 Mr Lord, is that —
25 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord, but the point still remains that the

140 :1 conspiracy witnesses are coming, and if it would be
2 expected that those witnesses would know about the
3 conspiracy, then it must be put to them, because in
4 closing — so Mr Stroilov is under no misapprehension —
5 a lot of Bank people are coming who filled in forms and
6 were aware of things. If it is going to be suggested
7 that this happened then it had better be put fairly. It
8 would not do in closing to say: well, actually, lots of
9 other bureaucrats were involved but I didn’t at the time
10 in the trial think I should really say that. That will
11 not be acceptable.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You do have to identify them for that
13 purpose, Mr Stroilov.
14 MR STROILOV: But, my Lord, let me just set out the
15 practical problem: we hear, say, witness X, given
16 a witness statement which reads all right. At the same
17 time, we find a dozen of documents in the bundle signed
18 by that person seen to us which relate to what we say is
19 a fraudulent transaction and for which that witness
20 gives no explanation.
21 Now, all we can do is put these documents to
22 the witness in cross-examination and see whether that
23 witness can give an innocent explanation or not, and
24 then we can, in closing submissions, we say: well, the
25 witness’s responses have indicated that, clearly, he was

141 :1 just really doing this fraud and clearly on behalf of
2 the Bank.
3 Or, alternatively, we can say: well, as the witness
4 has explained, he did it innocently or he did it under
5 the direction of somebody else. He just signed it
6 without really thinking of it.
7 I don’t feel — obviously, I haven’t ever been in
8 a position to research, there must be lots of law on
9 that point, but I don’t see how, so long as we infer, we
10 have, we say, facts from which to infer fraud on behalf
11 of the Bank, we cannot be forced to identify each, to
12 say in relation to each of the Bank’s executives
13 involved, whether they were dishonest. I agree we have
14 to identify the primary movers of the fraud. We’ve
15 identified two or three, from memory, but we can’t be
16 forced to say that in relation to each witness because
17 they might give — we don’t want to accuse people before
18 we’ve —
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You don’t have to. You have to show
20 what the conspiracy at the very least comprised, and
21 that needs more than one person to be a conspiracy. If
22 you wish to put to other witnesses whether they knew
23 about this and knew about that, then I can’t stop you.
24 MR LORD: No, my Lord, but it appears from Mr Stroilov’s
25 submissions that he thinks that what can happen is you

142 :1 can sort of see how you go, you can fish a bit for some
2 dishonesty from a witness.
3 Obviously, my Lord, our rules don’t allow that. You
4 have to come at it from the other end. You have to say
5 in advance whether you are going to put a case to
6 somebody that they are dishonest or fraudulent or
7 a conspirator. You have to have a basis, and it has to
8 be clear.
9 True enough, you might say to somebody, I suppose:
10 did you hear about the conspiracy, and they might say
11 yes, you might get lucky. But you can’t say to them:
12 you were part of the conspiracy, weren’t you? If you
13 are going to say that to them, wave a document around
14 and say: you were, look at this minute, you were at the
15 meeting. That has to be pleaded and set out with
16 a basis, and I am getting increasingly concerned that
17 what appears to be proposed as part of the translations
18 and all the other submissions is that there is going to
19 be, in effect, an ambush on a lot of Bank witnesses who
20 have never been identified before as being conspirators
21 or dishonest. That would be, in my respectful
22 submission, not just unfair, but an abuse of the process
23 and an abuse of the help and assistance that has been
24 accorded to the defendants, because this would not be
25 permissible if they had barristers and solicitors on the

143 :1 record, and that would be to actually turn this
2 situation on its head and be profoundly unfair to
3 Bank of St Petersburg. I will object to that if that is
4 what is proposed and that happens on Monday.
5 In my submission, if there are any other
6 conspirators within the Bank that are going to be
7 alleged on Monday, they should be identified by
8 lunchtime tomorrow.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, there we are. If you are going
10 to put it to any witness, confront them with your
11 suggestion that they were part of the conspiracy, you
12 must identify who they were. We will have to deal, in
13 the normal crab-like way, if you say that the answers
14 you get justify some further claim then we will have to
15 deal with that at that time.
16 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I’m sorry, that’s stupid. I mean,
17 I don’t see, in a way — I don’t see why I may need to
18 put to anyone except Mr Savelyev that they are
19 a conspirator.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well if you are not going to, Mr Lord
21 is not going to worry.
22 MR LORD: Fine.
23 MR STROILOV: I mean, I don’t need to —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s a different matter. But what
25 Mr Lord says is if you are going to, as part of your

144 :1 case, put to the witness that they were part of the
2 conception and implementation of the conspiracy, you
3 must say so now. You must identify them, because they
4 need to know that that is your case.
5 MR STROILOV: I think there is a slightly different point,
6 as I was going to say. Well, what I do need to put to
7 witnesses, or many of the witnesses, is that the Bank
8 was acting fraudulently.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Was acting?
10 MR STROILOV: The Bank was acting fraudulently.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The Bank is just a legal concept. The
12 Bank acts through individuals. You must say which of
13 the individuals within the Bank you say plotted and
14 implemented the plot.
15 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord, but what I will need to
16 put to a witness, say: well, you were at that committee
17 meeting, you took that decision, clearly the purpose of
18 the decision was fraudulent. I’m not saying that
19 a person individually is fraudulent. I’m saying that
20 the Bank, acting by its committee, acted fraudulently.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How are they to know that? If they,
22 personally, were fraudulent, you must say so. If they
23 weren’t personally fraudulent, why were they to know
24 other people were?
25 MR STROILOV: In a way that depends on their answers.

145 :1 I accept, obviously, that if their answers are such from
2 which I am going to tell your Lordship in due course
3 that witness Y was not telling the truth —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How far does this go? Do you say that
5 everyone within the Bank was fraudulent?
6 MR STROILOV: No, there are obviously a number of people
7 about whom we don’t know.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Anyone who attended meetings at which
9 any part of this took place or was implemented was
10 a fraudster?
11 MR STROILOV: Exactly. We don’t want to say that. That’s
12 why we don’t plead that.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
14 MR STROILOV: On the other hand, if we say a transaction on
15 such and such date, whereby the asset was transferred
16 from company X to company Y was fraudulent, the Bank,
17 acting by its committee where there were nine members
18 and four of them are witnesses, approved the
19 transaction, and therefore the Bank is responsible for
20 that.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, we will return to this
22 tomorrow, but if you are going to say to any witness any
23 of the following: you got together with X to do
24 something which was, to your knowledge, wrong; you got
25 together with X or made further arrangements for what

146 :1 you knew to be wrong to be implemented; you knew that
2 other people in the bank had hatched a conspiracy which
3 you knew to be wrong, you must say so. Any of those
4 three.
5 MR STROILOV: But there is —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you are saying they were actors or
7 conscious of other actors, you must say so.
8 MR STROILOV: Yes.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: By «conscious», I mean they knew jolly
10 well that there were some people doing these things and
11 they knew it was wrong. Many people in banks over the
12 years, not just now, will have been party, in
13 the broadest sense, to something that was wrong, but
14 with having no conscious wish to do wrong or to enable
15 anyone else to do wrong. There are millions of people
16 like that.
17 MR STROILOV: I find that very problematic in a practical
18 sense. I don’t quite understand.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right. I shall dwell on it. You,
20 please, dwell on it. But we simply can’t have
21 an entirely different set of rules in these proceedings.
22 MR LORD: My Lord, can I just hand in, we have found the
23 exchange of correspondence about the vessels.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: About the vessels?
25 MR LORD: About the vessels and the values. Mr Stroilov

147 :1 wasn’t sure if his recollection —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Ah, yes.
3 MR LORD: Can I hand those to your Lordship, because they
4 won’t take long to look at. (Handed).
5 There was an exchange of e-mails in November 2013,
6 and Mr Stroilov was e-mailing Mr Winter of
7 Baker & McKenzie. If your Lordship reads that, you will
8 see this went slightly further than —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, you may, having read the
10 second paragraph of the first e-mail, reckon that we
11 must proceed in the way I indicated, but I will leave it
12 to you if you wish to make another submission.
13 Please don’t think that I think this reflects badly.
14 All it does is reflect on the frailty of recollection.
15 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
16 MR LORD: What time would your Lordship like to start
17 tomorrow?
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, now, as I said, trying to be as
19 helpful as I can knowing that you each have a lot to do,
20 when would you like? You live in Cambridge, you are not
21 staying up, you need to get up. I don’t know, it is
22 about 40 minutes on the train, is it?
23 MR STROILOV: Yes, 50, but then it is also getting from
24 station to station.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: There are bits and bobs between. When

148 :1 do you say?
2 MR STROILOV: I can do 9ish or I can do 10.30.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would it assist you both and would you
4 urge me to start at 9.30, or do you wish to start at
5 10.30, or 10.00?
6 MR LORD: 10.00 would be a fair compromise.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Done. 10.00 am tomorrow. 8 (4.52 pm)
9 (The court adjourned until 10.00 am on
10 Friday, 29 January 2016) 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

149 :1 INDEX
2 PAGE
3 Housekeeping 5
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

0
150 :1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

$
$500 ( 2 ) 33:6 39:18

A

address ( 10 ) 11:13
20:1 20:5 56:12 58:18
60:6 61:13 61:20 68:4
135:9
addressed, ( 3 ) 134:6
134:10 134:20
addresses,12:23

77:25 107:19 119:25
136:13
agreement ( 8 ) 11:19
68:23 68:24 77:5
77:15 79:9 81:7
106:18
ahead. ( 2 ) 20:6 36:17

another ( 19 ) 7:9 7:10
13:16 13:18 14:3
36:15 48:2 78:14
82:11 86:8 86:16
102:10 105:8 108:1
113:19 114:16 131:4
133:21 147:12

approach. ( 10 ) 15:18
34:15 50:14 50:15
52:11 52:13 56:24
103:6 131:19 132:2
approaching37:21 appropriate34:19 approved ( 3 ) 37:24

asked ( 11 ) 2:22 3:12
27:8 40:9 45:5 45:23
47:7 47:8 101:12
111:23 131:10
asking ( 10 ) 8:6 9:17
14:1 28:5 38:7 38:15
39:21 41:20 42:5

addressing116:18
adequacy ( 2 ) 68:15

aiming17:11
allegation. ( 5 ) 22:22

answer ( 15 ) 32:1 32:3
32:17 33:23 34:24

135:19 145:18
approximately ( 3 )

53:24
aspect. ( 2 ) 14:10 49:4

ability ( 2 ) 18:11 42:25
above ( 2 ) 60:12 96:14
abruptly27:4
absent ( 2 ) 18:14 18:24 absolute134:18 absolutely. ( 7 ) 2:7 8:3
8:17 9:20 84:17 115:3
118:16
abuse ( 2 ) 142:22
142:23
accede48:13 accelerating121:23 accept ( 22 ) 16:11
16:20 26:11 28:14
29:25 37:2 38:8 39:13
48:15 54:14 54:21
63:10 68:18 85:22
90:12 93:21 94:12
94:18 96:25 107:16
139:6 145:1
acceptable ( 2 ) 55:24
140:11
accepted ( 3 ) 51:23
111:8 116:23
accepts ( 2 ) 93:12
117:21
access.7:12 accompanied ( 2 )
69:12 129:14
accordance96:10 accorded142:24 account. ( 2 ) 4:20 76:3 accountability41:24 accounts40:10 accurate. ( 2 ) 37:12
116:24
accuse141:17 accused ( 4 ) 97:24
98:11 137:19 137:23
achieve76:17 achieved ( 7 ) 69:23
73:5 76:2 76:7 76:18
77:6 79:13
across ( 3 ) 35:13 121:8
137:16
acted144:20 acting ( 10 ) 26:18
58:22 63:9 102:9
137:8 144:8 144:9
144:10 144:20 145:17
actionably90:3 actions ( 6 ) 58:16
59:13 59:20 60:9 63:3
111:1
activate4:20 activities ( 3 ) 60:19
61:5 62:3
activity.126:6 actors ( 4 ) 136:12
137:3 146:6 146:7
acts144:12
actual ( 4 ) 57:7 63:9
65:21 128:7
added ( 3 ) 68:3 82:18
129:12
addendum102:1 addition ( 2 ) 130:6
130:9
additional48:18 additionally,123:22 additions114:10

78:2
adequate ( 3 ) 96:15
114:4 124:20
adequately129:18 adhere43:1 adjourn27:7 adjourned148:9 Adjournment) ( 2 )
45:21 45:24
adjournments33:3 adjudications40:18 administration ( 2 )
31:19 35:22
admirably33:25 admiralty75:17 admiration15:16 admire55:11 admiring11:19 admission ( 2 ) 69:2
73:17
admissions ( 3 ) 64:23
70:3 76:21
admit74:17
admitted ( 2 ) 7:11 34:8 admitting74:2 adopt103:4 adumbrate,58:3 advance. ( 6 ) 11:1
14:12 14:15 42:1 79:2
142:5
advanced ( 5 ) 31:10
41:24 64:24 81:15
82:11
advantage ( 3 ) 29:24
66:16 127:6
advice.25:19 advise?66:6 advisedly39:18 afford115:17 afloat.33:18
afraid ( 22 ) 15:10 17:8
17:18 18:6 19:4 19:12
45:8 47:2 52:8 75:23
76:22 80:4 91:15 99:4
106:3 113:13 114:4
116:4 116:11 116:14
132:1 136:9
after ( 2 ) 69:17 116:3
afternoon,1:22
again; ( 12 ) 1:11 15:13
53:15 55:5 63:25 68:5
70:25 77:23 94:3 96:1
115:21 129:11
against ( 14 ) 21:5 59:4
59:5 59:10 61:1 62:14
62:15 62:20 63:13
80:12 92:11 102:7
136:4 136:5
aged ( 2 ) 101:6 101:11
agency62:25
agenda, ( 5 ) 5:22 55:18
56:17 73:15 132:22
ages125:2
ago ( 5 ) 27:19 70:4
74:12 77:12 93:5
agree ( 5 ) 11:25 12:5
13:24 118:5 141:13
agreed ( 18 ) 9:12 9:18
44:14 47:11 68:13
69:13 70:4 73:25
74:12 74:14 75:7
76:21 76:24 77:9

25:13 80:15 105:4
107:17
allegations ( 7 ) 28:8
28:16 31:7 32:14
61:14 98:10 136:5
allege ( 2 ) 41:17 136:24
alleged ( 10 ) 28:9 58:21
59:17 59:18 63:14
95:20 135:7 135:15
136:8 143:7
allow ( 6 ) 8:10 40:24
90:18 126:6 126:11
142:3
allowed ( 6 ) 7:8 15:8
64:21 80:6 90:14
100:13
allowing29:21 almost65:10 alone138:17
along ( 6 ) 44:8 58:5
111:15 126:13 127:4
137:21
aloud,91:21
already ( 2 ) 3:12 89:21
also ( 18 ) 5:19 8:11 9:9
10:22 17:19 17:20
23:10 37:4 37:15 40:4
48:24 51:10 63:22
90:20 101:24 102:4
136:14 147:23
alternative ( 2 ) 12:24
101:17
Alternatively, ( 2 ) 63:5
141:3
although ( 6 ) 10:1
14:24 33:25 69:22
83:17 119:14
altogether. ( 2 ) 10:10
19:7
always ( 15 ) 23:13
33:10 42:18 56:11
60:8 61:14 61:20
67:16 75:22 92:6 99:6
103:5 107:24 113:22
113:23
ambush142:19 ambushed98:10 amend ( 2 ) 63:17 89:25
amendment.» ( 10 )
64:3 81:21 82:2 84:7
85:17 85:19 93:3 93:4
105:11 111:5
amendments. ( 9 )
55:19 56:2 64:25 65:6
65:10 65:11 66:3 75:6
90:15
amount ( 9 ) 10:12
18:21 69:1 83:24
113:5 113:15 115:1
116:12 135:5
amounts38:21 analysed.100:4 ancillary ( 5 ) 8:15 8:20
49:22 50:1 136:10
and/or ( 6 ) 67:10 68:16
78:3 95:18 95:21
96:11
annex ( 2 ) 72:9 90:15
announced41:3 annoying,18:5 anonymous26:25

36:25 45:12 56:21
67:19 87:25 88:1 88:6
98:2 114:16 121:21
answered33:2 answering ( 3 ) 31:13
32:16 35:15
answers ( 5 ) 21:6 35:5
143:13 144:25 145:1
anterior88:14 anticipate15:3 anxieties52:2 anxiety37:11 anxious ( 2 ) 20:17
133:1
anybody ( 8 ) 90:10
104:25 105:4 134:16
137:11 137:19 138:16
138:19
anyone. ( 9 ) 12:22 15:6
27:21 28:21 37:25
53:8 143:18 145:8
146:15
anything ( 20 ) 2:7 3:7
13:22 16:7 20:5 20:13
21:24 26:20 28:19
52:14 55:5 65:18
68:19 71:17 71:19
96:24 108:10 116:22
132:23 139:21
anyway. ( 2 ) 22:6 103:1
anywhere ( 2 ) 105:1
125:10
Apart ( 4 ) 59:11 131:7
137:7 139:8
apartment41:4 apologise. ( 5 ) 4:1 4:11
47:3 50:3 66:14
apparent ( 2 ) 63:9
111:9
appeal129:22 appear ( 5 ) 1:24 3:20
14:17 118:18 118:19
appearances?27:17 appeared ( 2 ) 22:19
106:1
appearing ( 2 ) 29:5
53:8
appears ( 8 ) 32:21 35:8
72:14 97:1 104:4
119:18 141:24 142:17
appendix ( 12 ) 67:21
69:6 69:11 70:22 71:8
72:15 74:14 90:15
93:20 93:21 94:1 94:2
application, ( 21 ) 6:22
6:22 6:25 7:3 14:9
20:2 22:25 23:8 23:15
23:16 25:16 28:11
28:15 34:4 48:14 53:6
56:6 56:8 71:3 109:6
129:21
applies. ( 2 ) 61:19
62:17
apply ( 5 ) 7:16 31:12
45:16 62:25 124:18
applying36:10 appointed60:10 appreciate ( 3 ) 11:17
18:5 65:7
appreciated130:25 appreciation36:22

62:11 129:13 133:22
area.135:25
aren’t ( 2 ) 17:5 133:14
arguable92:23 arguably ( 2 ) 88:6
88:10
argue ( 5 ) 28:11 38:5
76:15 94:21 135:24
arguing136:2 argument ( 6 ) 47:17
64:7 66:7 74:4 78:22
104:5
arguments ( 2 ) 55:23
64:24
arise ( 3 ) 8:15 11:1
61:12
arises.63:11 Arkhangelskaya10:24 ARKHANGELSKY:
( 72 ) 1:8 1:9 1:10
1:13 1:18 1:20 2:2
2:6 2:9 2:10 2:12 3:7
3:9 3:10 3:18 4:25
5:2 5:5 5:9 5:13 7:7
7:24 8:17 8:23 9:12
9:20 9:23 10:5 10:20
10:23 12:3 12:13 14:4
16:8 16:25 17:8 18:3
18:24 20:17 20:23
22:12 22:15 30:1 30:2
30:23 32:6 33:7 33:24
34:8 34:9 36:6 36:19
38:1 38:23 39:2 39:12
39:17 42:23 44:2
50:17 51:21 52:25
54:8 54:10 59:3 59:6
59:10 86:3 123:15
124:23 125:17 129:24
Arkhangelsky’s ( 6 )
12:5 15:5 38:19 50:17
90:7 104:16
Arkhangelskys41:25 arm’s ( 2 ) 108:3 108:5
arms39:19 arose,71:5
around ( 7 ) 31:23 37:21
46:14 95:15 104:9
104:10 142:13
arrange ( 2 ) 14:23
115:16
arrangement, ( 2 )
115:10 115:11
arrangements ( 2 )
40:22 145:25
arrest. ( 2 ) 69:17 70:1
arrested ( 6 ) 69:24
70:22 71:9 73:6 76:4
79:22
arrests76:6
art ( 3 ) 49:19 49:23
50:8
Article ( 2 ) 19:20 63:2
ascertain35:1
ask, ( 21 ) 2:8 7:24 9:22
9:24 10:1 15:7 16:7
25:18 28:19 28:20
29:8 42:15 45:4 54:3
77:23 84:2 86:23
105:6 105:14 107:12
127:9
askance33:11

aspects:29:17 assembly132:24 assertion85:12 assertions79:2 asset ( 4 ) 39:9 91:3
93:14 145:15
assets, ( 27 ) 52:25
57:20 57:24 59:5
59:14 68:9 68:15
70:19 71:8 72:6 72:22
74:11 76:17 78:2
79:19 83:23 93:22
93:25 94:1 94:3 94:5
94:8 94:20 96:9 97:16
109:2 110:19
assist ( 7 ) 11:4 16:5
18:9 117:3 133:1
134:3 148:3
assistance ( 6 ) 20:9
20:18 35:24 36:12
55:9 142:23
assistances50:2 assisted ( 3 ) 51:14
51:17 115:7
assisting27:20 assists,21:19
assume ( 3 ) 40:3 40:4
50:23
assuming ( 2 ) 128:14
128:17
assumption122:6 assurance, ( 2 ) 15:22
42:24
assurances ( 2 ) 45:6
114:14
assuring21:3 attach112:11 attachment6:17 attack103:17 attempt28:11
attend ( 3 ) 14:20 15:25
19:10
attended ( 2 ) 24:5
145:8
attending16:14 attention,130:1 attitude,20:6 attribution62:2 auction ( 2 ) 47:6 96:8
audience, ( 6 ) 7:25
8:7 12:15 23:6 49:14
49:21
authorised ( 3 ) 30:4
30:5 30:24
authority, ( 8 ) 12:5
12:9 12:15 34:22 35:7
50:10 54:13 63:10
availability120:17 available ( 2 ) 38:3
130:11
aver100:2 averment ( 3 ) 98:17
98:24 103:21
averred ( 3 ) 95:17 96:8
97:4
avoid ( 4 ) 10:7 12:9
53:8 53:10
aware, ( 5 ) 9:18 37:8
37:12 44:10 140:6
away ( 6 ) 10:9 39:4
40:5 40:7 41:11
134:20

B
back, ( 17 ) 10:17 16:6
19:9 32:3 32:7 32:12
33:4 39:11 39:19
47:25 48:11 63:23
77:13 99:9 105:6
126:18 126:20
back-up ( 2 ) 30:14 36:4
background, ( 3 ) 13:10
22:18 119:19
bad ( 5 ) 3:15 4:5 65:8
73:1 110:4
badly.147:13
Baker ( 3 ) 68:22 74:15
147:7
balance ( 2 ) 102:8
126:22
Bank ( 48 ) 1:24 2:20
2:23 45:14 48:4 57:4
57:5 58:2 58:18 58:22
59:1 59:4 59:22 60:20
61:2 61:4 61:6 63:15
67:10 75:11 84:1
102:8 104:16 104:22
110:17 120:3 134:15
135:16 136:4 136:25
137:16 138:17 140:5
141:2 141:11 142:19
143:3 143:6 144:7
144:10 144:11 144:12
144:13 144:20 145:5
145:16 145:19 146:2
bank’s ( 10 ) 47:18
58:4 58:17 59:13
59:20 60:8 60:25 63:7
137:25 141:12
banking ( 2 ) 46:14
46:20
bankrupt91:23 banks146:11 Bar7:11
bare,103:21 barristers142:25 baseless40:19 bases35:6
basic ( 2 ) 44:13 137:12
basis. ( 40 ) 27:21 29:21
29:23 31:13 31:25
32:24 36:12 37:6
37:7 41:16 42:23 57:4
87:16 90:19 93:23
95:7 95:8 97:7 97:8
98:20 104:8 104:11
106:13 107:1 112:7
112:8 112:22 112:22
114:1 114:11 115:21
117:14 118:16 125:7
129:1 137:14 137:18
137:23 142:7 142:16
baton,32:20 bay,39:7 bear39:16
became ( 2 ) 27:4 111:9
become ( 4 ) 14:6 32:22
132:7 135:6
becomes ( 4 ) 37:18
89:18 104:7 131:3
becoming44:12
before ( 18 ) 11:16 23:5
26:16 29:14 41:2
45:24 53:8 57:6 65:5
95:25 97:24 98:5
108:13 117:25 118:1
134:10 141:17 142:20
beg ( 2 ) 67:25 110:10
began111:5 begin:23:4

beginning ( 2 ) 5:16
110:13
begins.84:22
behalf ( 23 ) 7:9 7:10
7:22 8:11 8:12 9:11
12:6 12:13 13:16
20:24 30:1 30:25
36:20 37:24 41:25
50:17 54:10 54:10
63:9 64:24 95:6 141:1
141:10
behave.53:14 behind ( 4 ) 7:4 31:4
39:19 46:18
believe ( 5 ) 29:6 53:7
66:11 76:12 109:16
believing52:22 below,68:7
bench, ( 5 ) 31:14 32:19
34:24 36:23 38:4
beneficiaries67:9 beneficiary40:13 benefit20:23 Bernie,2:21
best, ( 14 ) 4:3 11:7
13:11 16:22 17:1
18:9 19:11 32:5 94:25
114:16 127:19 134:3
134:7 135:2
better ( 6 ) 28:25 54:14
67:3 71:20 135:9
140:7
between ( 25 ) 8:14
17:1 17:7 26:13 31:20
44:13 44:15 51:21
57:18 58:7 58:11
73:19 79:22 83:18
85:10 86:21 88:9
89:16 94:17 99:6
100:25 114:5 125:10
139:14 147:25
beyond ( 3 ) 52:3 82:18
104:2
big ( 4 ) 9:2 72:15
109:18 113:5
Bilta62:1
binding ( 3 ) 59:7 77:4
77:15
Birt1:25
bit ( 9 ) 3:2 15:19 46:14
54:15 69:21 90:2
99:15 129:19 142:1
bite-sized117:22
bits ( 2 ) 121:1 147:25
blame ( 2 ) 119:11
129:19
blocks20:19 blush,119:14 BMC2:16
board ( 2 ) 52:1 60:12
bob46:14 bobs147:25 bombarded,98:10
bono ( 5 ) 120:9 120:14
122:7 131:7 131:8
bootstraps104:5 borrowed94:17 borrowers.47:19 both ( 8 ) 3:17 12:14
12:23 40:16 51:14
128:9 131:22 148:3
bottom ( 5 ) 23:3 25:5
64:19 77:24 110:12
bound23:24 boundaries51:24 box ( 2 ) 97:22 98:5
branch.44:9 breach ( 5 ) 19:20
102:12 107:8 110:23
117:23

break) ( 8 ) 4:8 29:12
29:12 29:15 42:11
45:8 113:2 113:10
breaking42:11 breaks, ( 2 ) 17:22
114:5
briefly, ( 3 ) 25:15 56:22
134:22
bring ( 11 ) 21:5 60:18
84:5 84:13 88:22
88:23 91:17 92:18
101:10 110:19 136:14
bringing102:7 broadest146:13 broadly138:20
brought ( 7 ) 13:12 46:2
84:11 84:12 91:6
130:1 136:16
brouhaha16:17 buck.33:3
build ( 2 ) 35:3 42:16
built39:23
bundle ( 23 ) 6:7 6:12
7:5 21:19 22:6 24:20
66:18 113:21 114:10
115:5 118:6 119:16
120:6 123:23 123:24
128:22 128:24 129:13
129:14 129:17 129:17
130:4 140:17
bundles ( 6 ) 5:19
119:24 126:5 127:23
129:5 130:25
burden ( 3 ) 54:5 56:8
131:24
burdening131:7 bureaucrats140:9 business ( 16 ) 5:18 7:1
33:18 38:17 81:23
82:22 82:23 86:10
89:11 89:13 91:8
92:21 92:25 93:15
104:18 105:1
businesses39:24 businessmen33:13

C
call57:21 called12:7
Cambridge, ( 2 ) 133:22
147:20
cameos35:18
can’t ( 49 ) 3:2 6:6 16:14
19:12 37:8 40:12
40:12 40:17 50:18
53:20 58:3 61:24
62:17 62:18 62:19
66:14 76:1 76:1 76:14
77:7 77:8 78:5 80:4
80:5 80:10 84:9 86:7
90:4 98:24 104:24
106:9 106:13 106:15
106:16 106:17 114:23
115:16 121:10 121:12
128:1 128:21 134:11
134:13 134:24 138:15
141:15 141:23 142:11
146:20
candid ( 3 ) 25:11 29:6
55:12
candle,127:11
cannot ( 23 ) 1:13 1:21
2:7 8:25 9:4 11:21
14:17 16:12 17:23
18:20 36:5 38:22
44:16 54:12 80:15
88:20 91:5 91:6 94:19
100:15 103:13 136:25
141:11

capabilities61:23 capable33:25 capacity2:1
cards ( 2 ) 119:10 130:8
carefully, ( 2 ) 49:11
110:18
carousel.46:16
carries ( 2 ) 34:21 34:25
carry17:2
cases ( 6 ) 19:19 27:10
29:5 33:15 57:18
57:19
catastrophic17:3 categories;117:25 category. ( 2 ) 117:24
129:3
caught ( 2 ) 105:2
136:21
cautious,13:14 caveats15:23
cent ( 2 ) 29:6 79:5
central49:11
centre ( 6 ) 28:17 38:18
38:21 38:22 40:12
53:1
certain ( 13 ) 31:11
36:21 39:17 40:7 42:2
51:22 76:7 88:3 100:3
103:7 103:9 135:10
139:17
certainty ( 2 ) 13:12
37:1
cetera.36:16 chairman ( 2 ) 33:8
101:6
challenged114:18 chance, ( 2 ) 78:14
125:24
change ( 6 ) 17:10 68:5
71:19 77:20 86:17
89:5
changed,45:7 changes, ( 2 ) 16:3 89:6 changing78:12 chaotic.116:11 characterise,81:22 characterised89:10 charges138:6 chased31:22 chattels75:12
check ( 3 ) 46:7 46:11
127:18
cherry-picking32:22 chips40:7 choice,127:24
choose ( 2 ) 42:1 133:9 chunks,117:22 circuit87:20 circumstance, ( 3 ) 9:17
18:25 30:16
circumstances ( 8 )
13:9 21:1 30:17 48:17
111:5 112:13 119:24
127:19
cites57:2
City ( 5 ) 38:18 38:21
38:22 40:12 53:1
Civil63:1
claimants, ( 29 ) 5:17
6:4 6:21 11:8 11:14
13:22 14:18 20:2
23:12 23:25 26:11
26:24 53:3 54:3 54:11
64:24 66:8 68:13
74:14 77:25 94:7 95:7
95:17 95:21 103:11
114:10 118:17 123:24
129:24
claimed ( 2 ) 83:22
92:17
claiming88:12

claims58:8 clarifies103:24 clarify ( 2 ) 56:24
107:15
clarifying19:2
clarity ( 2 ) 13:19 30:3
clear, ( 25 ) 4:12 10:23
12:1 12:4 18:23 29:4
30:6 37:12 43:25
49:18 50:6 50:18
57:15 67:4 72:8 72:19
84:21 92:10 93:3 93:5
94:19 101:25 122:15
123:25 142:8
cleared134:20
clearly. ( 8 ) 21:16 63:7
89:24 110:18 134:18
140:25 141:1 144:17
clears73:9 clerk,127:21
client ( 3 ) 33:16 44:15
131:13
client’s ( 3 ) 38:3 38:11
126:12
clients, ( 8 ) 31:19
35:23 39:3 44:7 57:21
112:22 119:21 128:13
close ( 2 ) 23:21 49:4
closely86:16 closing ( 3 ) 140:4
140:8 140:24
co-conspirators67:10 coach114:24 Code,63:1 cohort121:15 collapsed.79:23 collateral ( 4 ) 72:11
87:24 88:15 92:11
collation ( 2 ) 119:25
120:1
collusive100:2 colour75:24 combined55:17
come ( 14 ) 11:16 19:8
21:15 32:3 36:22
55:10 58:14 77:13
90:17 104:10 105:5
105:15 128:8 142:4
comes ( 6 ) 16:6 56:12
99:1 104:6 104:6
130:23
coming ( 16 ) 17:5
31:17 33:4 105:16
121:8 123:8 124:13
133:13 134:12 135:22
137:21 137:25 138:5
138:18 140:1 140:5
commend54:16 commendable37:11 comment57:14 commercial,60:12 commit ( 3 ) 10:24
16:21 54:15
commitment, ( 2 ) 14:12
15:17
commitments, ( 2 )
11:18 15:2
committed ( 2 ) 53:19
136:25
committee ( 4 ) 135:21
144:16 144:20 145:17
committees135:18 committing30:19 common ( 2 ) 58:14
135:12
communicate ( 2 )
29:24 30:23
communication33:23 communications,109:2 companies ( 8 ) 35:15
38:19 38:20 38:22

53:2 54:19 54:20
99:23
company ( 24 ) 38:23
40:12 61:21 62:14
62:15 63:6 91:23 92:2
92:22 93:15 95:17
95:20 96:18 96:24
101:3 101:11 104:6
104:14 105:1 105:17
106:1 120:11 145:16
145:16
comparator36:1 compared26:21 competent ( 2 ) 91:17
139:15
compiled,131:1 complain, ( 8 ) 15:1
69:18 69:19 69:23
70:19 73:5 74:17
75:12
complained ( 2 ) 71:18
105:13
complaining ( 4 ) 69:9
69:15 70:11 111:6
complaint, ( 22 ) 40:24
70:2 70:7 70:8 70:12
77:17 78:10 80:3
81:14 86:11 95:5
95:6 96:14 96:22 97:2
97:10 100:8 103:11
112:17 120:4 121:16
124:25
complaints ( 2 ) 70:12
71:8
completely ( 4 ) 32:2
40:19 79:23 105:10
complex ( 2 ) 107:23
110:18
comply52:22 complying10:17 comprehensive119:6 comprised,141:20 compromise.148:6 computer ( 2 ) 14:4
21:17
concatenation.41:1 conceived99:14 concept ( 2 ) 63:5
144:11
conception144:2 concern ( 10 ) 11:17
31:1 31:18 31:24
32:23 33:19 65:5
72:14 88:5 114:8
concerned, ( 16 ) 17:8
21:10 22:16 25:10
30:7 30:10 51:4 51:12
52:20 53:22 54:18
80:18 115:23 128:24
137:5 142:16
concerning ( 2 ) 28:8
72:1
concerns ( 4 ) 20:21
24:1 29:7 68:4
conclusively.57:11 conditions.22:5 conduct ( 34 ) 7:9 8:12
10:8 10:13 11:11
11:24 12:15 13:15
13:17 18:11 20:22
23:17 29:17 29:21
29:21 30:19 32:12
32:12 33:4 33:20
34:4 34:6 34:11 34:16
34:22 37:5 37:22
49:15 49:18 49:22
53:23 59:18 126:5
126:22
conducted ( 2 ) 18:7
96:9

conducting ( 4 ) 25:24
27:23 32:11 35:4
confess,81:6 confidence20:8 confine ( 2 ) 74:18 78:9 confines80:14 confirm, ( 5 ) 7:21 10:4
53:15 122:16 128:20
confirmed ( 3 ) 53:18
73:8 73:13
confirms12:13 conformity20:20 confront143:10 confusion12:20 conjunction54:8 connect.5:9 connected ( 22 ) 67:11
95:17 95:20 96:18
97:5 97:7 97:17 101:4
101:5 101:23 102:4
102:6 104:15 104:15
105:20 105:22 105:23
107:4 107:18 109:25
110:25 112:23
connection. ( 14 ) 3:11
5:10 89:24 97:11
97:17 100:14 100:18
100:19 101:8 101:18
102:5 102:19 108:2
112:15
conscience36:25 conscientiously35:13 conscious ( 4 ) 42:10
146:7 146:9 146:14
consensual51:20 consents48:5 consequence ( 3 )
58:25 127:25 132:2
consider ( 3 ) 8:6 31:5
51:17
considerable ( 2 ) 20:9
57:20
considered68:25 considering9:5 consistently27:20 conspiracy ( 36 ) 28:9
57:14 57:18 58:8
58:13 58:20 59:17
72:21 94:6 95:18
95:21 102:23 104:12
104:23 105:18 135:7
135:15 136:12 136:16
136:18 138:1 138:3
138:8 138:13 138:24
139:2 139:13 140:1
140:3 141:20 141:21
142:10 142:12 143:11
144:2 146:2
conspirator ( 14 ) 59:19
59:23 97:23 98:7 98:9
104:7 104:8 104:13
105:3 137:11 137:17
138:19 142:7 143:19
conspirators ( 9 ) 58:20
59:18 96:19 96:24
97:16 97:20 134:17
142:20 143:6
conspiring59:25 constantly54:4 construct107:25 constructive ( 5 ) 44:8
48:15 49:6 51:20
90:18
contained116:24 contemplate16:12 content ( 2 ) 52:15
127:3
contents ( 2 ) 41:4 82:2
context ( 8 ) 15:16
57:12 62:21 65:3 74:4
101:21 107:2 109:8

continue. ( 2 ) 55:13
131:21
continuous ( 3 ) 27:21
131:17 133:25
contradictory.119:18 contrary105:3 control110:20 controlled110:16 convenience ( 3 ) 49:12
57:22 82:8
convenient82:4 conversation.3:3 copies, ( 6 ) 46:15
122:18 126:24 130:19
130:21 131:22
copy ( 6 ) 6:5 6:12 65:23
66:18 132:5 132:5
corollary58:25 corporate62:3 correct? ( 11 ) 7:23
23:10 58:19 65:2
73:24 76:21 82:25
83:17 91:13 91:14
94:9
corrected ( 2 ) 100:9
109:11
correctly,89:4 correspondence ( 18 )
8:14 8:20 12:12 13:1
34:7 68:21 76:23
77:12 77:14 78:15
81:1 81:2 82:6 86:21
87:2 94:17 122:15
146:23
cost,118:8 couldn’t ( 2 ) 92:12
92:16
counter60:17 counterclaim ( 38 )
39:18 39:21 39:23
40:19 58:7 58:7 59:12
59:21 60:25 80:3 83:2
83:7 83:9 83:10 83:19
83:25 84:10 84:10
84:16 84:22 85:1 85:2
85:3 85:9 85:10 85:21
86:13 86:19 86:19
87:11 87:13 87:15
88:21 90:5 90:10 91:4
92:15 107:22
couple ( 6 ) 14:11 23:5
24:6 24:10 28:3 133:4
course, ( 19 ) 7:4 8:16
17:19 21:3 23:23
28:23 35:23 36:2
36:2 36:5 37:17 49:21
57:13 63:4 75:18
99:10 122:14 132:6
145:2
court’s ( 4 ) 51:12 57:16
107:8 130:1
courts’ ( 5 ) 7:8 20:10
55:9 72:7 75:17
covered ( 3 ) 24:19
24:19 48:25
crab-like ( 2 ) 131:20
143:13
created.115:12 creates10:14 credence40:24 credibility ( 2 ) 23:25
114:19
credible109:14
credit ( 3 ) 42:25 45:25
119:5
creditors39:7 criminal ( 2 ) 53:19
53:20
crisp95:25 crisply56:19 criticise111:4

criticised ( 3 ) 111:2
120:3 129:22
criticising77:8 criticism ( 2 ) 102:18
119:20
criticisms ( 3 ) 11:14
20:1 66:2
cross-examination ( 18 ) 16:16 16:25
17:6 19:16 32:8 79:4
113:18 114:12 115:5
116:2 121:2 122:22
124:2 125:1 126:22
129:2 130:9 140:22
cross-examinations
( 6 ) 11:8 14:21 14:24
15:5 17:2 133:12
cross-examine ( 2 )
18:16 54:5
cross-examined.125:8 crossed ( 2 ) 85:17 96:7 crucial58:24
curious ( 2 ) 40:22 41:1 curiously49:8 currently90:11 cut33:22

D
{D11/262/1}.45:25
{D146/2436.2/1},109:20
{D146/2436.2/2}.110:14 Dada»,101:12
damages ( 2 ) 58:8
88:12
danger30:13
dare ( 5 ) 7:8 43:18 50:5
53:2 76:11
date, ( 5 ) 14:17 68:6
79:22 79:23 145:15
day ( 20 ) 5:15 9:2 10:25
11:1 11:11 11:11 14:3
17:24 33:17 55:3 65:4
78:14 86:8 86:16 92:9
115:2 127:1 127:13
127:14 131:16
day-to-day11:21 days,10:18
deal ( 15 ) 46:6 47:17
51:7 55:18 58:3 60:10
71:22 75:1 107:12
107:19 112:25 121:2
134:7 143:12 143:15
dealing ( 5 ) 33:24 34:3
50:1 108:2 108:5
dealings ( 2 ) 96:11
109:2
deals ( 2 ) 100:2 107:13
dealt ( 2 ) 111:24 125:14
debate ( 2 ) 78:14 90:21
debtor ( 2 ) 39:7 40:2 debts.46:6 deceit39:23 December64:10 decide ( 6 ) 41:8 52:7
79:15 112:9 113:3
134:23
decided70:18 decides40:6 deciding, ( 2 ) 40:4
112:20
decision ( 5 ) 26:6 62:1
138:12 144:17 144:18
decreasing88:18 deduces121:14 default.»46:25 defaults?45:16 defeat138:25 defendant, ( 3 ) 12:21
64:2 117:23

defendant’s33:1 defendants, ( 21 ) 2:2
6:21 6:25 7:2 10:9
10:14 12:14 19:15
31:8 33:7 35:10 35:19
38:11 48:19 64:21
84:11 104:25 127:8
127:22 138:15 142:24
deficiencies5:12 define ( 3 ) 44:11 82:4
113:15
definite19:12 definition ( 3 ) 42:22
59:16 129:22
degree ( 2 ) 59:8 118:12
delay. ( 3 ) 4:11 14:3
37:3
delayed)1:3 delegated ( 2 ) 34:17
34:22
delegation, ( 2 ) 34:19
51:2
delegations,51:22 deleted ( 2 ) 67:12 73:3 deleting78:8 demonstrate ( 2 )
101:20 107:10
demonstrated102:20 demonstrating ( 2 )
110:16 110:17
demonstration112:21 denial.53:21 denounced12:21 departments,45:14 depend125:11 dependent120:14 depends: ( 2 ) 17:22
144:25
deprive7:2 deprived59:14 derivatively88:25 derive35:24 descending129:19 designed110:19 desk6:8 despite130:20
detail ( 5 ) 13:7 24:14
25:17 86:21 106:10
detailed ( 2 ) 24:15 45:6
details, ( 2 ) 14:8 87:16 detected20:12 determine ( 5 ) 7:18
10:3 36:19 50:15
54:25
determined59:17 determining52:5 developments64:23 deviate60:5
devices, ( 2 ) 3:13 3:13
devote9:4 dictate78:5
didn’t ( 18 ) 3:18 27:8
44:1 44:2 49:17 69:18
70:15 71:19 100:5
105:24 105:25 108:12
111:12 130:17 135:23
135:24 139:1 140:9
die19:23
difference ( 4 ) 88:9
89:3 99:6 100:24
different ( 18 ) 8:9 8:23
34:3 34:15 38:19
54:23 62:13 62:24
68:20 101:17 104:10
105:6 119:15 128:5
136:3 143:24 144:5
146:21
differently89:10 differing34:9 difficult. ( 22 ) 11:6
11:20 15:13 16:20

18:2 19:14 20:25
30:16 31:14 31:15
32:16 33:17 35:9
40:25 50:20 84:15
102:24 111:4 116:14
116:15 121:25 132:13
difficulties ( 2 ) 9:13
85:22
difficulty ( 2 ) 86:14
94:12
digest42:20 diminution ( 3 ) 91:12
91:21 91:24
direct ( 2 ) 42:16 51:19
directed ( 3 ) 65:12 76:5
102:15
directing ( 2 ) 6:14 63:5
direction, ( 2 ) 49:9
141:5
directly.58:19 directors ( 3 ) 42:19
62:14 62:17
directs.6:11 disadvantage ( 2 ) 58:2
115:24
disadvantaged59:3 discern,99:6 discipline51:11 disclosable ( 2 ) 117:12
117:21
disclose ( 7 ) 14:2
102:16 111:15 115:4
122:25 123:22 132:10
disclosed ( 18 ) 21:2
22:20 109:13 109:21
117:18 117:19 118:9
120:5 120:22 122:18
122:19 124:19 128:6
128:8 128:16 128:21
129:4 132:10
disclosing ( 2 ) 98:19
117:23
(disclosure, ( 25 ) 64:23
65:15 67:14 71:2
71:21 96:15 97:1
99:25 100:3 102:12
106:9 106:10 107:7
108:6 109:16 110:22
111:6 111:7 111:8
111:9 117:4 123:9
133:4 133:4 135:18
discount19:19 discretion13:4
discuss ( 2 ) 9:9 131:24 discussed61:9 discussion,57:12 dishonest ( 5 ) 137:17
138:8 141:13 142:6
142:21
dishonestly. ( 2 ) 58:23
137:9
dishonesty ( 7 ) 72:5
72:21 103:4 103:8
136:8 137:23 142:2
dislodge133:17 dismiss27:4 dispassionately55:2 dispense124:20 disproportionate ( 2 )
44:12 68:25
dispute ( 3 ) 26:13
58:11 91:19
disputes,114:17 disputing70:5 disruption127:5 dissatisfied27:5 distil ( 2 ) 56:16 138:1 distinction58:6 distinguish83:18 divider ( 3 ) 7:4 46:19
47:4

division ( 4 ) 17:7 27:1
44:13 48:23
divorce, ( 2 ) 27:3 27:10
document ( 31 ) 14:2
31:25 32:1 32:25
42:6 45:24 46:1 46:10
47:20 47:22 82:9
84:22 109:13 109:17
109:20 109:22 113:19
116:21 116:22 117:11
117:12 118:9 118:12
125:2 125:23 128:18
128:19 129:25 130:24
131:23 142:13
documentation ( 4 )
8:13 45:13 113:6
132:24
documents, ( 61 ) 8:4
19:18 41:17 46:8
54:6 81:18 95:1 95:11
102:14 102:16 107:9
109:15 113:16 114:22
115:15 115:25 117:5
117:10 117:18 118:3
118:6 118:11 118:25
119:5 119:7 119:25
120:1 121:3 121:6
121:14 121:17 122:13
122:17 122:23 122:24
122:24 123:23 124:13
124:22 125:14 125:14
125:15 125:24 126:1
126:3 126:9 126:16
126:17 128:5 128:7
128:11 128:22 128:23
129:4 129:12 130:18
132:1 132:4 132:9
140:17 140:21
Does ( 19 ) 6:4 14:5
26:7 26:10 36:24
39:13 50:22 63:12
71:5 79:5 91:5 93:16
104:2 109:24 125:5
125:8 131:2 145:4
147:14
doesn’t ( 10 ) 3:13 3:20
61:12 69:1 75:11
75:18 79:18 87:14
91:20 138:25
doing ( 14 ) 4:18 11:5
18:4 21:22 32:5 36:7
79:10 86:20 111:20
112:3 125:12 131:8
141:1 146:10
don’t ( 123 ) 2:12 2:12
3:5 4:13 6:16 10:7
10:23 11:10 12:17
13:2 13:23 15:1 15:3
15:13 19:13 21:23
23:15 27:14 27:19
27:25 28:14 32:3
32:4 32:16 33:14
33:16 38:5 39:13
48:15 48:25 49:1 50:5
53:12 56:15 58:12
63:10 65:22 67:14
68:5 68:18 69:9 69:16
69:19 70:2 70:9 71:1
71:17 71:18 73:16
73:18 73:24 74:1 74:3
74:16 74:17 76:12
77:18 78:4 79:8 79:23
79:25 80:1 81:6 81:9
82:10 86:13 87:22
87:23 89:23 90:20
91:10 91:16 94:2 94:6
94:21 96:20 96:25
97:10 97:21 100:1
103:9 103:12 106:5
107:20 107:20 112:12
114:13 116:12 116:17

119:11 121:12 121:13
122:8 122:23 124:24
126:15 130:12 131:15
131:16 132:17 133:3
133:16 133:20 135:11
136:6 137:2 138:22
138:24 139:13 141:7
141:9 141:17 141:19
142:3 143:17 143:17
143:23 145:7 145:11
145:12 146:18 147:13
147:21
done, ( 21 ) 16:7 36:15
37:24 45:11 49:20
50:9 54:9 55:25 58:21
59:2 60:9 63:3 92:2
92:15 112:16 115:6
118:20 133:5 135:15
135:22 148:7
doubt ( 2 ) 31:16 109:6
down ( 11 ) 15:19 40:13
46:3 56:16 65:12
65:19 108:25 112:4
112:12 112:13 135:1
downplaying ( 2 ) 22:17
22:22
dozen, ( 2 ) 27:13
140:17
draft ( 3 ) 54:3 64:3
65:22
drafting48:21 dramatic,19:24
draw ( 2 ) 79:14 109:4
drawn ( 4 ) 51:20 68:14
78:1 79:19
dressed32:23 drink25:25 drop13:17
due ( 2 ) 28:23 145:2
duly ( 2 ) 50:9 82:1
during ( 4 ) 36:13 99:10
114:5 116:9
duties.63:4
duty ( 2 ) 52:23 53:9
dwell ( 2 ) 146:19
146:20

E
e-mail ( 5 ) 10:17 12:12
14:2 14:5 147:10
e-mailing147:6 e-mails147:5
{E2/11/7}.46:21
earlier, ( 5 ) 3:1 63:8
83:3 109:16 111:12
early ( 3 ) 16:13 133:18
133:19
earnestly43:22 earphones3:12 easy ( 2 ) 47:3 99:6
effect, ( 9 ) 55:19 57:23
88:17 91:8 92:21
93:14 129:1 138:11
142:19
effective106:4 effectively ( 4 ) 34:16
82:7 82:9 115:22
efficient126:5
effort ( 5 ) 18:21 19:22
19:23 21:20 44:7
efforts131:21
eight ( 2 ) 110:5 110:13
eight-stage110:3 eighth ( 3 ) 21:11 22:13
55:23
either ( 11 ) 7:14 8:5
10:24 12:22 16:11
51:6 53:2 70:15 75:24
93:18 121:12

elaborate ( 2 ) 58:3
63:22
electronic109:22 elegance112:12 elements100:21 eliminate75:4
else ( 12 ) 10:15 16:4
19:10 49:24 71:17
75:13 110:8 119:17
132:23 139:21 141:5
146:15
elsewhere120:10 emerge. ( 2 ) 5:8 13:8 emergencies,17:3 emphasis54:24 employed2:18 employee ( 4 ) 58:17
63:3 63:4 105:1
employees ( 2 ) 62:4
134:15
employer26:3 employment.105:9 enable146:14 enables ( 2 ) 112:21
136:14
encourages55:8 end, ( 14 ) 34:13 55:2
62:5 62:11 64:5
64:17 66:13 68:12
81:10 86:1 92:9 118:2
126:25 142:4
Ending25:9 endorse42:16
endow ( 2 ) 36:3 37:22
ends,120:25 enfeebled39:14 enforcement46:24 enforcing45:16 engagement35:13 engagements.9:7 engine67:12
English ( 9 ) 27:8 61:19
61:21 62:23 62:24
72:7 75:17 125:3
137:13
enhance60:25 enormity13:8 enormous54:4
enough: ( 6 ) 10:23 14:7
46:18 98:18 111:12
142:9
ensure ( 3 ) 7:14 37:11
114:23
ensuring35:21
entire ( 2 ) 41:3 59:15
entirely ( 4 ) 22:23 50:6
91:20 146:21
entitled, ( 17 ) 43:17
43:20 76:11 77:15
79:6 79:11 79:17
88:25 89:14 98:4 98:6
99:8 101:18 102:3
106:24 107:11 111:15
entity ( 3 ) 62:3 104:21
110:16
entrust54:11 entrusted37:5 entrusting49:23 Equally,54:14 errant62:3 Eschwege.1:25 esoteric.33:21 especially ( 3 ) 13:15
15:25 61:21
essentially,126:12 establish ( 2 ) 4:12 86:2
established, ( 2 ) 105:3
121:15
estate ( 2 ) 46:25 90:16
estimate120:15

Estonian, ( 2 ) 72:6
75:17
estoppel,77:15
even ( 10 ) 12:23 27:8
33:9 38:1 73:1 80:11
86:9 117:14 121:10
135:11
evening116:9 evenings, ( 2 ) 114:7
124:11
event ( 3 ) 18:15 63:12
91:23
events, ( 2 ) 136:11
136:22
eventually,91:23 ever ( 4 ) 27:15 27:25
72:3 141:7
every ( 12 ) 11:11 11:11
20:11 26:22 33:17
99:1 106:18 106:18
113:18 118:8 131:16
138:23
everybody ( 5 ) 3:3
45:10 113:2 134:2
138:24
everyone ( 3 ) 51:11
65:20 145:5
everything ( 10 ) 10:15
15:18 16:4 17:25
75:13 75:19 87:13
87:14 119:17 130:3
evidence ( 22 ) 11:14
49:3 53:3 53:4 61:16
61:17 64:23 80:14
92:10 99:2 99:7 99:9
100:12 100:14 100:17
100:22 101:10 103:14
104:16 105:22 110:22
135:22
evident66:21 evidential ( 2 ) 60:22
106:24
exactly ( 7 ) 39:9 46:6
68:22 89:15 89:16
138:18 145:11
examine68:25 example, ( 14 ) 12:1
20:12 32:15 37:19
41:9 41:11 41:22 42:7
42:19 47:16 53:13
96:12 97:19 101:3
Excel109:21
Except ( 4 ) 28:1 28:2
107:18 143:18
exception ( 4 ) 7:18
62:16 62:22 128:7
exceptional. ( 4 ) 30:20
30:21 37:13 37:14
exceptions,135:10 excess59:15 excessively ( 2 ) 12:7
13:14
exchange ( 5 ) 10:11
53:24 118:7 146:23
147:5
excluded ( 2 ) 28:10
57:4
executive137:1 executives ( 3 ) 60:10
137:8 141:12
exercise ( 3 ) 12:15 13:4
44:12
exhausted112:3 existing ( 3 ) 117:20
120:21 124:19
expect ( 3 ) 33:12 48:25
130:9
expected ( 3 ) 50:9
136:25 140:2
expecting18:16 expensive,118:10

experience, ( 2 ) 22:18
43:10
expert ( 3 ) 91:16
110:21 135:11
experts ( 6 ) 19:17
46:13 46:20 47:7
58:12 61:12
explain ( 15 ) 31:1 32:6
47:21 54:7 58:4 69:22
79:7 81:16 82:10 96:1
96:25 98:16 99:18
100:24 119:24
explained ( 6 ) 24:13
32:25 43:7 58:2 73:2
141:4
explanation ( 9 ) 20:16
40:11 79:17 102:20
102:22 103:3 103:5
140:20 140:23
explore ( 2 ) 40:10
40:10
exposure ( 5 ) 57:22
83:20 88:11 88:18
90:3
expressed15:23 expressly ( 2 ) 73:8
77:9
extended:57:23 extent ( 4 ) 3:23 8:21
16:11 19:23
extinguished, ( 2 ) 86:5
86:6
extra ( 2 ) 4:10 117:16
extracts46:5 extremely ( 2 ) 11:18
51:18

F
fabrication41:17 facets34:4
factors ( 3 ) 17:13 17:14
111:16
factual114:17 failed67:18
failure ( 3 ) 71:2 108:7
111:15
fair ( 13 ) 18:13 31:18
51:13 63:12 75:3 98:9
104:25 114:14 119:20
136:7 136:20 136:20
148:6
fairly ( 6 ) 20:22 45:6
99:22 119:8 130:21
140:7
fairness ( 10 ) 35:21
105:8 122:21 126:10
126:23 131:15 134:14
137:11 137:12 137:24
fall31:20 fallen35:9 familiar8:3
family: ( 3 ) 9:3 9:6 27:1
far ( 26 ) 3:7 9:17 16:22
17:7 17:18 26:14 35:8
37:12 41:11 44:11
53:22 54:18 77:2
79:12 80:18 86:4
88:21 110:2 116:4
121:20 121:23 121:24
124:3 124:4 133:14
145:4
fast ( 2 ) 9:1 46:3
fathom.38:22
fault, ( 3 ) 51:1 116:18
130:6
favour ( 2 ) 20:23 33:23
fear ( 2 ) 109:11 131:6
February23:1 feed9:2

feel ( 10 ) 8:19 15:8
19:25 25:22 36:24
53:12 76:3 111:20
135:24 141:7
feeling ( 2 ) 51:7 99:14
feels127:7 fetched ( 2 ) 80:19
80:19
few ( 12 ) 24:9 52:16
64:13 66:2 77:11
109:4 118:25 121:9
129:6 129:7 129:8
132:22
figure,129:16
file, ( 2 ) 66:25 67:1
filled140:5 finalised123:20 finances. ( 2 ) 38:14
38:15
financial ( 2 ) 45:2
53:16
find ( 14 ) 7:4 24:23
40:8 45:12 49:2 66:23
68:21 76:22 77:12
78:15 83:15 133:25
140:17 146:17
finding ( 2 ) 107:22
132:11
fine ( 5 ) 25:22 56:7
73:19 81:9 143:22
finish ( 4 ) 29:11 29:12
39:24 133:19
finite126:20 firm50:21
first ( 34 ) 5:23 6:22
7:4 8:23 11:22 13:6
14:21 15:23 16:23
18:14 19:2 22:25
24:12 24:14 25:1 25:5
34:1 39:8 47:20 53:10
53:16 54:12 59:8 60:6
61:11 62:16 66:11
99:21 113:4 117:10
119:14 120:21 124:1
147:10
Firstly, ( 4 ) 21:8 60:7
84:20 109:4
Fish ( 2 ) 104:17 142:1
fit, ( 2 ) 34:24 134:6
five ( 2 ) 19:17 113:8
five-off,131:3 fixing69:4 fixity72:10 flag131:17 flexibility ( 3 ) 16:11
17:23 51:10
flexible ( 2 ) 50:14 99:5
flip37:3
flow ( 3 ) 4:15 105:8
132:15
focus ( 6 ) 12:8 13:6
13:7 58:21 68:9
127:22
focusing116:5
fold ( 2 ) 136:15 136:16
follow ( 9 ) 27:22 65:23
66:7 72:19 87:19
94:25 126:24 126:25
130:21
following ( 3 ) 46:25
101:5 145:23
follows, ( 2 ) 99:22
128:11
footing. ( 4 ) 77:10 84:1
120:14 121:3
footnote ( 5 ) 68:12
69:12 69:19 74:13
77:23
forced ( 2 ) 141:11
141:16
foreign118:4

forensic ( 4 ) 60:22
60:23 106:22 127:6
forever76:15 forewarn130:13 forgery.41:10 forget89:23 form42:22
formal ( 2 ) 13:3 37:25 formalities10:18 formally ( 2 ) 7:21 42:16 forms140:5 formula.73:25 formulated ( 2 ) 68:23
74:22
forthcoming48:19 forthwith132:11 fortiori,137:21 fortunate ( 3 ) 14:25
17:12 17:15
forward ( 5 ) 40:19
57:25 79:21 101:10
113:7
found ( 9 ) 6:2 6:11
20:10 20:11 46:9 49:5
71:5 116:16 146:22
four ( 4 ) 12:18 18:2
131:3 145:18
fourth64:19 frailty147:14 France,39:11 frank55:6
Frankly, ( 4 ) 13:25 77:9
132:14 133:9
frantically113:17 fraud, ( 20 ) 26:4 60:15
60:15 62:16 63:17
72:4 72:21 84:1
100:11 100:12 100:17
100:19 103:3 103:25
105:13 107:24 136:25
141:1 141:10 141:14
fraud/
dishonesty,137:20 fraudster?145:10 fraudsters.106:17 fraudulent. ( 18 ) 60:9
69:16 70:21 71:13
96:10 106:25 107:12
107:14 135:17 138:19
140:19 142:6 144:18
144:19 144:22 144:23
145:5 145:16
fraudulently ( 5 ) 96:11
102:9 144:8 144:10
144:20
French ( 4 ) 2:21 9:6
72:7 75:17
Friday,148:10
friends ( 4 ) 1:25 25:18
38:14 38:15
front5:3
full ( 10 ) 9:10 12:14
56:11 65:15 66:16
73:22 74:1 74:3 74:10
91:3
fully11:17 function27:23 functions17:7 fundamentally102:11 further, ( 21 ) 15:11
26:7 46:8 61:16 61:17
66:2 71:3 81:24 83:14
86:7 94:16 103:13
108:25 110:1 111:8
115:9 124:22 128:10
143:14 145:25 147:8
Furthermore,12:4 future; ( 4 ) 12:10 15:18
20:9 124:14

G
{G2/69/1}.24:25
{G2/69/6}.25:3
{G2/69/7}.25:6
{G4/111/1}.56:13
{G4/111/12}.21:13
{G4/111/14}57:1
{G4/111/15}:64:1
gainsay128:1 galloped29:10 gambler,40:6 gambling40:2
game ( 5 ) 32:20 42:20
119:12 120:25 129:20
gap,31:20 gauge3:23 gave48:5
general ( 11 ) 4:4 7:19
20:6 47:21 56:22
56:24 97:2 102:18
102:23 103:1 116:13
Generally ( 8 ) 12:22
26:20 28:20 58:16
65:9 98:16 99:21
122:3
get ( 21 ) 3:18 12:8
16:13 35:14 38:16
45:10 49:3 51:12
54:23 66:17 81:10
98:5 116:22 119:11
122:8 125:22 139:1
139:15 142:11 143:14
147:21
gets105:2
getting ( 6 ) 97:9 126:8
129:23 133:5 142:16
147:23
ghostwritten,34:10 give ( 26 ) 9:10 14:15
17:20 20:17 30:15
30:18 55:16 57:11
59:6 61:17 71:2 79:17
91:11 97:19 109:24
111:13 111:18 114:7
117:15 123:24 126:21
130:13 134:8 135:22
140:23 141:17
given ( 25 ) 10:9 10:25
10:25 15:22 16:19
34:18 45:5 48:20
50:2 54:13 65:4 81:24
89:23 96:15 99:25
100:3 106:8 106:10
111:6 111:10 111:14
114:16 119:6 122:21
140:15
gives ( 5 ) 14:22 101:7
103:7 114:11 140:20
giving ( 6 ) 18:24 36:12
37:18 41:22 89:9
112:14
gone ( 5 ) 21:21 39:4
128:16 128:17 130:18
Good ( 17 ) 1:22 9:22
27:5 30:2 36:24 41:9
41:10 45:8 51:11
69:20 80:25 93:18
98:18 106:19 113:1
132:14 133:21
Google129:14 grander52:7 grandly,12:7
grant ( 3 ) 7:25 8:7 8:18
granted ( 2 ) 23:5 23:6
grateful ( 6 ) 8:18 9:23
11:18 51:19 55:14
56:14

great ( 4 ) 16:17 33:15
53:13 55:9
greater ( 2 ) 38:12 57:23
gross ( 5 ) 96:11 100:2
101:21 101:24 110:20
ground ( 6 ) 11:25 15:20
35:1 44:13 105:21
139:15
grounds ( 5 ) 52:22 98:8
106:2 106:19 130:12
group40:23 guarantee.» ( 7 ) 48:6
57:22 83:21 86:4
88:11 88:19 90:4
guarantees ( 6 ) 47:19
58:9 59:6 86:3 88:3
88:4
guess54:13 guesstimate?26:19 guidance ( 5 ) 45:13
46:10 49:9 50:6 51:16
guide113:4 guided6:24 Guriev47:8 Guriev’s40:2

H
hadn’t104:20
half ( 6 ) 27:13 82:22
125:10 129:13 129:14
130:19
hand ( 7 ) 21:22 62:7
62:14 88:11 145:14
146:22 147:3
handcuff131:12 (Handed).147:4
hands ( 2 ) 55:17 136:6
happened ( 6 ) 27:2
39:25 63:14 79:18
137:16 140:7
happening ( 2 ) 102:1
113:17
happens, ( 6 ) 14:20
22:23 26:1 118:4
118:14 143:4
happier81:19
hard ( 9 ) 3:22 3:23 6:12
46:15 49:12 65:23
66:18 72:19 132:5
harm132:14 harsh16:9 hasn’t96:15 hatched ( 2 ) 139:16
146:2
hatching ( 2 ) 139:4
139:10
haven’t ( 22 ) 22:20
52:19 53:19 65:4
91:15 96:23 97:6
99:25 100:20 104:2
106:8 110:7 111:14
114:3 114:4 121:10
122:2 123:7 126:17
131:10 136:22 141:7
he’s32:4
head ( 7 ) 81:21 82:20
87:8 89:9 91:25 124:5
143:2
heading46:23 health ( 4 ) 9:14 9:16
18:15 18:25
hear ( 20 ) 1:9 1:13 1:17
1:19 1:20 1:21 2:7
2:13 2:24 3:1 3:3 3:5
3:7 3:9 3:16 13:20
73:13 74:9 140:15
142:10
heard101:11

hearing. ( 9 ) 5:19 9:1
22:25 26:23 27:7
27:14 36:11 50:16
57:2
hearings. ( 2 ) 27:15
119:21
heavily ( 2 ) 10:21
112:10
held ( 5 ) 19:19 60:20
80:10 126:18 126:20
«Hello»? ( 4 ) 1:11 1:12
1:14 1:16
help ( 8 ) 11:10 18:9
23:16 46:13 103:23
118:17 130:10 142:23
helpful ( 9 ) 45:18 46:12
47:15 49:2 64:12
64:14 65:20 65:23
147:19
here ( 29 ) 2:1 2:17 2:22
3:4 7:22 11:11 12:5
17:14 23:18 24:25
31:18 32:4 32:7 36:16
39:25 54:16 58:17
74:22 87:21 99:4
103:2 104:14 105:5
106:18 118:15 126:2
129:10 134:1 137:24
hereby ( 2 ) 37:22 50:11
herein ( 2 ) 88:4 88:5
hereon ( 2 ) 73:20 74:7 hesitant61:20 HILDYARD: ( 342 ) 1:5
1:9 1:12 1:14 1:17
1:19 1:22 2:4 2:8 2:11
2:14 2:20 2:23 3:9
3:15 3:20 4:3 4:15
4:18 4:21 4:24 5:3
5:7 5:11 5:21 5:25 6:6
6:16 7:6 8:8 8:19 9:8
9:16 9:21 9:24 11:16
13:5 14:8 14:13 15:15
16:9 18:13 18:20 19:6
20:5 21:22 22:2 22:5
22:7 22:10 22:12 24:2
24:5 24:10 24:16
24:22 25:7 25:20
26:16 27:10 27:16
27:22 28:1 29:9 29:19
29:23 30:8 30:11
30:21 31:3 31:6 31:9
31:15 32:10 33:14
33:21 34:6 36:1 36:14
37:9 37:17 37:20
38:10 38:14 39:5
39:16 40:16 41:15
41:21 42:3 42:8 42:18
43:4 43:8 43:12 43:16
44:4 44:22 45:4 45:18
46:4 46:12 46:17
46:22 47:1 47:5 47:12
47:15 48:1 48:12 49:7
50:4 50:15 51:5 52:14
52:18 54:7 54:22 55:7
55:15 55:17 56:2 56:7
56:13 57:9 57:17
58:10 58:25 59:22
59:25 60:3 60:13
60:17 60:23 61:10
62:2 62:9 62:18 64:15
65:25 66:5 66:10
66:21 66:25 67:6 69:4
69:8 69:14 69:21 70:7
70:14 70:16 70:20
71:4 71:7 71:12 71:15
71:22 72:2 72:13
72:18 72:23 73:10
73:12 73:18 74:2
74:23 75:8 75:14
75:20 75:23 76:14
77:1 77:4 77:13 77:22

78:4 78:16 78:19 79:1
79:8 79:20 80:4 80:9
80:13 80:18 80:23
80:25 81:5 81:9 83:6
83:16 84:9 84:18
84:24 85:1 85:5 85:8
85:12 86:18 87:12
87:25 88:16 90:25
91:15 91:25 92:6
92:13 93:6 93:12
93:21 93:24 94:5
94:10 94:14 94:22
95:2 95:4 95:9 95:19
95:24 96:4 96:6 96:17
96:22 97:3 97:12
97:14 98:4 98:15 99:4
99:13 99:20 100:20
100:23 101:15 102:17
103:20 104:1 105:15
105:21 105:25 106:5
106:12 107:6 107:15
108:4 108:9 108:12
108:18 108:20 108:24
109:9 109:24 110:4
110:6 110:15 111:20
112:1 112:9 112:19
113:1 113:12 114:21
115:25 116:19 117:2
117:9 117:13 118:24
119:11 119:23 120:7
120:13 120:25 121:8
121:19 121:23 122:1
122:12 122:16 122:23
123:3 123:6 123:11
123:14 123:19 124:3
124:7 124:15 125:5
125:13 125:20 126:7
126:15 127:13 127:16
127:20 128:15 128:20
129:3 129:7 129:9
130:23 131:9 131:19
132:18 132:23 133:7
133:13 133:16 133:24
134:13 135:2 136:9
137:2 138:20 139:7
139:10 139:23 140:12
141:19 143:9 143:20
143:24 144:9 144:11
144:21 145:4 145:8
145:13 145:21 146:6
146:9 146:19 146:24
147:2 147:9 147:18
147:25 148:3 148:7
himself.18:4 historical73:20
history ( 2 ) 35:12 81:17
hmm.67:6 hoc49:14
hold ( 3 ) 92:23 99:9
136:21
home ( 5 ) 38:8 60:19
88:22 88:23 91:6
honest, ( 2 ) 63:16
136:2
honestly58:22 honesty.114:19 hope ( 10 ) 5:11 6:2
9:12 19:13 90:17
107:13 114:4 116:8
119:5 123:12
hoped ( 2 ) 27:19
124:10
hopefully, ( 3 ) 17:16
90:23 131:2
hoping133:11 horror19:8
hour ( 6 ) 125:10 130:19
133:10 133:21 134:1
134:1
hours, ( 3 ) 10:18
125:11 133:23

House ( 2 ) 26:5 61:25
Housekeeping ( 4 )
5:14 5:15 51:8 149:3
However, ( 5 ) 15:19
32:22 68:14 74:5 78:1
huge ( 2 ) 18:21 119:4
hypothetically, ( 2 )
39:22 40:9

I
I’m ( 40 ) 2:6 3:15 3:18
19:24 25:10 32:5 34:6
38:4 38:7 38:8 38:15
39:21 42:5 46:14
52:11 61:20 70:17
76:14 85:1 89:19
91:20 94:24 98:13
106:3 107:24 108:14
110:4 112:9 112:19
112:23 123:14 124:4
127:8 127:8 128:14
130:14 133:1 143:16
144:18 144:19
I’ve ( 4 ) 6:6 77:20 110:7
124:5
I20.66:20
{I20/23/17},64:5
{I20/23/18}.64:9
{I20/23/21},64:18
{I20/26/57.14}. ( 2 ) 83:5
85:14
{I20/26/57.25}.84:23
{I20/26/57.26}.85:3
{I20/26/57.40}.66:24
{I20/26/57.41}96:13
{I20/26/57.46},95:13
{I20/26/57.90}.68:2 ICI,33:8
idea ( 5 ) 30:18 33:6
97:24 98:11 116:13
identification137:19 identified ( 13 ) 55:22
58:23 100:4 115:25
116:7 119:8 122:3
136:12 138:7 138:23
141:15 142:20 143:7
identifies ( 2 ) 66:8
72:17
identify ( 21 ) 40:12
45:7 81:2 101:7
102:24 113:19 114:9
115:20 123:22 124:24
129:12 131:11 131:21
135:7 136:17 138:2
140:12 141:11 141:14
143:12 144:3
identifying ( 5 ) 44:17
45:15 50:7 115:22
118:12
ill ( 2 ) 18:15 18:25
imagine ( 2 ) 10:4 120:4 imagined75:9 immediately112:13 imminence16:19 impairment. ( 2 ) 92:25
93:13
impinging20:16 implementation144:2 implemented ( 3 )
144:14 145:9 146:1
implicate106:13 implications111:25 implied ( 3 ) 34:22
50:10 50:23
import54:25 importance137:24 important ( 10 ) 15:24
19:3 31:22 41:25

75:18 98:15 102:11
112:11 137:10 138:9
imposed53:9 impossible ( 2 ) 3:7
30:15
impoverished39:14 impression126:8 improper, ( 4 ) 74:25
74:25 75:25 76:16
improperly.74:18 impugn80:16 impugnable, ( 2 ) 69:17
74:6
impugned ( 3 ) 78:21
80:19 106:14
impugning ( 3 ) 78:17
78:20 79:21
inaccuracy ( 2 ) 23:11
63:25
inadequately ( 2 ) 121:6
121:18
inapplicable20:20 inappropriate.126:19 (inaudible): ( 2 ) 77:24
89:6
Incidentally115:7 include ( 3 ) 70:22 71:9
130:4
included ( 3 ) 97:21
121:3 123:24
includes,32:15 including ( 6 ) 18:8
35:14 50:10 65:20
83:12 100:6
inclusion ( 2 ) 117:5
119:16
incomprehensible113:23 inconvenienced125:16 inconvenient18:5 incorporated ( 2 ) 83:9
87:10
incorporates85:20 incorrect,109:11 increase88:10 increased90:3 increasing88:18 increasingly142:16 indebtedness.59:15 independent ( 2 ) 106:1
108:9
INDEX149:1
indicate ( 2 ) 64:3
134:22
indicated ( 8 ) 24:5 65:6
70:21 79:13 114:6
127:21 140:25 147:11
indication60:18 indifference ( 2 ) 20:12
55:20
indistinct.3:17 individual48:5 individually144:19 individuals ( 3 ) 135:6
144:12 144:13
inefficiency ( 2 ) 126:11
127:5
inequality. ( 2 ) 115:9
115:12
infer ( 10 ) 50:11 100:17
100:18 100:19 102:3
106:25 107:12 110:24
141:9 141:10
inference, ( 9 ) 74:5
78:1 79:15 79:15
102:10 103:7 103:17
109:25 112:15
inferences ( 5 ) 68:14
76:11 79:19 107:23
136:3
inferred103:2 informal43:19

information. ( 2 )
111:13 111:14
informed.14:18 infrastructure50:21 inherent18:6 initially115:13 injury92:2 inkling126:21 innocent140:23 innocently141:4 inquiry ( 2 ) 6:3 10:16 inserted6:10 insider96:11 insinuated ( 3 ) 52:21
52:24 53:5
insist130:14
insofar ( 5 ) 25:10 26:9
28:14 84:10 90:1
insouciance41:3 instance, ( 6 ) 14:16
26:23 26:24 54:12
63:8 79:3
instructed50:9 instruction ( 4 ) 34:20
34:23 35:7 35:8
instructions ( 2 ) 37:1
44:25
insufficiency127:24 insufficient ( 2 ) 125:1
127:22
insulate62:18 insurers.40:15 intelligible130:2 intend, ( 4 ) 17:1 50:11
71:19 123:25
intention ( 2 ) 18:18
64:3
inter117:19
interest ( 3 ) 45:2 53:17
94:20
interested ( 3 ) 12:16
22:8 109:7
interests ( 2 ) 48:24
50:20
interim36:11 intermediate121:1 internal ( 4 ) 23:3 45:13
48:4 48:7
interplay89:16 interpretation57:11 interrupt, ( 3 ) 56:15
87:20 130:22
interrupting,56:17 intervene105:7
into ( 26 ) 18:21 21:21
38:16 43:10 66:17
76:3 76:10 82:3 83:9
86:15 90:21 98:5
102:17 104:6 104:6
105:8 119:11 123:8
126:21 127:2 128:8
129:19 131:17 136:14
136:16 139:18

involved. ( 10 ) 10:21
12:19 25:23 33:16
106:14 106:17 137:1
139:12 140:9 141:13
involvement. ( 2 ) 26:7
106:25
involves118:12 irrelevance92:9 irrelevant88:19
isn’t ( 13 ) 16:16 30:19
32:10 32:24 36:8
43:21 43:25 49:8 60:3
71:15 72:19 87:12
113:21
isolation, ( 2 ) 57:13
59:21
issues. ( 5 ) 8:23 31:20
40:20 74:19 82:13
it’s ( 16 ) 9:15 11:5 13:2
30:21 32:3 58:19
58:19 65:13 73:11
97:6 103:19 104:5
113:22 116:11 124:3
136:1
italicised72:24 item55:18 items132:22
its ( 20 ) 6:2 6:12 45:14
45:15 48:4 59:2 59:7
62:3 62:14 63:9 83:18
83:19 92:8 119:13
131:23 136:17 138:11
143:2 144:20 145:17
itself59:25

J
{J1/20/12}.108:17
{J1/20/13},108:22
{J20/26/57.40}?66:15
January ( 3 ) 1:1 64:2
148:10
jeopardy11:3 joined136:18 joiners57:19 joint46:19 jointly59:13 jolly146:9
jot ( 2 ) 112:12 112:13
judge27:6 judgment ( 2 ) 28:24
62:7
July95:15 jurisdiction29:25 jurisdictions. ( 4 ) 58:14
69:25 73:7 76:5
jury.55:1 justification103:21 justify ( 2 ) 107:17
143:14

K

knew ( 8 ) 63:14 141:22
141:23 146:1 146:1
146:3 146:9 146:11
knife-edge,127:16 knock-on ( 3 ) 59:3
92:21 93:14
know. ( 68 ) 2:12 2:12
2:16 3:5 3:11 11:21
14:16 18:10 20:25
21:23 31:24 32:3
32:5 33:14 35:3 36:14
36:14 42:17 42:23
47:23 48:8 51:21
51:23 52:1 53:18
61:22 65:22 69:9
71:1 73:18 74:3 78:4
79:23 91:10 91:16
97:15 97:18 98:4 98:6
98:7 99:5 99:11 100:1
100:1 100:6 112:10
118:4 120:9 121:12
121:13 121:23 122:1
130:17 133:20 134:1
136:25 137:2 137:3
137:12 138:18 138:21
139:11 140:2 144:4
144:21 144:23 145:7
147:21
knowing147:19 knowingly37:7 knowledge,145:24 known104:2
knows ( 6 ) 38:2 41:13
43:21 88:2 121:21
138:14

L
{L3/14/1},23:1
{L3/14/2}.24:3
{L8/39/81}.57:8
labelled4:22
lack ( 2 ) 102:11 110:22
Lair ( 2 ) 68:15 78:2
land. ( 21 ) 76:2 76:25
77:2 82:21 83:13 85:7
86:11 87:4 87:4 87:7
87:22 87:23 88:16
89:2 89:15 90:2 90:2
91:5 92:16 92:17 93:8
language ( 5 ) 8:24
33:25 34:1 118:5
122:17
large ( 4 ) 113:5 129:20
129:21 138:6
largely47:11
last ( 7 ) 35:12 46:20
47:3 61:9 82:19 103:2
108:22
late ( 6 ) 61:18 65:7
103:21 105:14 111:5
112:20

legal ( 6 ) 60:23 61:8
61:10 81:20 100:13
144:11
legitimate ( 2 ) 20:18
130:12
lend40:23
lending ( 2 ) 45:16
45:25
length ( 2 ) 108:3 108:5
lengthy,81:16
less ( 10 ) 25:11 27:19
59:1 75:8 76:8 79:12
81:8 83:21 90:6 124:9
let ( 9 ) 44:25 66:22
96:1 96:25 98:3 99:18
120:7 138:17 140:14
let’s ( 3 ) 31:21 116:19
120:13
letter ( 13 ) 6:2 6:5 6:20
10:19 12:1 32:18
34:23 53:25 64:4
66:14 81:25 82:3
89:22
letters ( 6 ) 10:12 12:20
12:21 12:23 32:13
38:19
level ( 3 ) 20:11 26:6
54:13
liability ( 11 ) 57:4 57:5
58:13 59:17 61:1
83:24 86:2 86:7 88:22
88:24 91:6
liable ( 5 ) 26:3 59:20
60:20 63:3 123:1
lie91:5 lies31:4
life ( 3 ) 11:17 16:4 19:7
light ( 2 ) 64:22 67:13
like ( 32 ) 6:14 10:11
10:11 11:12 20:3
20:14 25:14 26:2
29:4 35:10 35:18 36:2
44:22 47:23 48:8 49:5
49:23 57:7 63:21 65:6
65:16 85:13 114:14
115:10 115:16 118:10
127:10 129:24 133:18
146:16 147:16 147:20
liked,111:3
likely ( 5 ) 18:3 119:25
120:3 120:15 120:16
limit ( 3 ) 70:18 98:23
131:12
limitation». ( 2 ) 67:24
82:14
limitations.»96:12 limited94:3
line ( 7 ) 23:4 23:14 25:5
25:22 64:19 125:2
125:3
link. ( 2 ) 2:3 4:12
linked2:2 lion’s132:25

49:15 53:23 90:11
93:10
little ( 7 ) 15:19 35:18
61:22 72:19 77:20
108:25 116:6
live147:20
lives ( 3 ) 11:3 11:5
17:15
LLC, ( 4 ) 53:1 68:16
78:3 95:16
load ( 2 ) 125:5 125:9
loaded127:1
loan ( 5 ) 46:25 86:5
88:2 92:11 110:23
loans ( 2 ) 88:3 88:4
log5:5
log-in4:19 logical56:6 logically101:24 logistical ( 2 ) 10:15
111:25
Logistically125:22 long ( 16 ) 3:3 8:2 12:16
29:10 36:17 70:4
74:12 77:8 94:11
94:15 99:24 125:5
125:8 133:7 141:9
147:4
longer ( 2 ) 17:22
134:22
look ( 31 ) 21:11 21:18
23:13 24:2 26:5 33:10
42:21 57:7 58:20 64:4
67:2 67:3 68:2 73:25
77:19 77:23 81:3 81:9
83:2 94:3 96:1 108:16
108:21 109:19 113:7
113:20 115:8 120:7
125:24 142:14 147:4
looked ( 4 ) 80:21 86:15
121:11 127:13
looking ( 9 ) 21:17 23:9
59:18 74:16 76:25
78:13 82:5 114:13
135:3
looks ( 4 ) 22:24 67:22
72:15 127:10
Lords ( 2 ) 26:5 62:1
Lordship, ( 93 ) 1:24 2:5
4:1 5:16 5:19 5:22 6:1
6:3 6:5 6:10 6:13 6:14
6:20 6:24 7:3 7:24
14:12 15:14 17:21
21:17 22:24 23:17
28:12 28:20 28:23
31:4 31:7 32:18 33:19
34:17 35:2 35:20
35:24 36:9 37:4 37:15
38:2 38:13 38:16
38:18 39:2 39:22 40:8
40:8 41:6 41:8 41:13
41:20 42:5 42:6 42:6
42:15 43:5 43:6 43:14

loss, ( 14 ) 81:22 81:23
82:20 82:20 84:14
86:10 87:8 89:9 89:11
91:18 91:24 92:1
92:16 93:9
lost. ( 4 ) 89:13 94:5
95:10 123:14
lot ( 17 ) 9:6 9:6 15:1
19:1 24:18 27:19
33:15 78:20 90:25
97:14 110:8 114:18
127:10 128:13 140:5
142:19 147:19
lots ( 5 ) 33:14 97:20
139:11 140:8 141:8
loud3:2 love44:16
low ( 2 ) 75:15 122:5
LPK ( 16 ) 40:14 82:21
85:7 85:23 85:24 86:4
86:11 87:4 87:7 87:22
88:2 88:16 89:15 90:5
93:8 93:9
Ltd62:1
lucky.142:11 Luncheon45:21 lunchtime143:8 lurk72:24

M

machine ( 4 ) 22:8
117:2 118:19 119:1
machinery,58:1 magic37:25
Magnum ( 20 ) 5:5 5:7
6:11 21:21 61:23
119:17 121:17 125:6
125:9 125:15 126:2
126:3 126:4 126:4
127:2 128:12 128:14
132:5 132:7 132:8
maintained42:3 major ( 2 ) 14:6 16:14
majority33:9
makes ( 4 ) 18:3 94:19
109:18 109:19
making, ( 8 ) 56:18
74:20 76:21 78:7
78:11 78:12 80:2
111:4
man’s ( 3 ) 76:2 76:25
77:2
manage ( 2 ) 14:25
119:12
management.51:8 mandate48:22 mandated2:15 manner ( 2 ) 71:13
116:23
many ( 14 ) 7:7 8:23
11:8 14:23 17:12

introduce ( 8 ) 54:24 later ( 6 ) 57:19 70:10

list ( 3 ) 90:16 124:1

43:14 43:21 44:24

27:10 27:11 33:15

81:21 82:25 85:18
86:11 87:7 89:9 89:20
introduced72:25 introducing7:1 introduction ( 2 ) 81:17
96:2
inure58:1 investigate39:1 investment40:23 invidious,50:22 invite ( 11 ) 7:20 31:5
62:8 102:10 103:17
107:5 107:22 108:1
110:24 127:11 136:3
invited115:2 inviting13:6 invoke88:9

keen ( 4 ) 7:14 29:4 78:8
98:14
keep ( 14 ) 14:18 20:3
37:15 39:7 40:7 51:9
54:4 68:1 82:8 98:14
116:10 122:5 124:10
132:13
keeping ( 2 ) 33:18
119:9
keeps26:3
kind ( 9 ) 15:8 21:9
25:24 46:18 53:7 53:9
53:11 61:13 66:22
kindly ( 3 ) 7:24 8:6 46:3

78:21 83:8 85:4
123:23
latest ( 3 ) 12:11 75:6
134:18
lawyer ( 6 ) 2:15 2:16
2:21 2:22 26:1 34:21
lawyers33:12 lead42:2
least, ( 13 ) 8:21 17:16
39:19 42:16 72:10
78:11 109:5 120:16
128:2 128:2 128:12
139:16 141:20
leave ( 4 ) 16:24 42:13
90:1 147:11
left ( 3 ) 17:21 59:8
115:19

131:18
listed71:8
listen ( 2 ) 21:3 74:4
listens7:14
literally ( 5 ) 16:4 89:5
98:25 109:23 114:2
litigant ( 2 ) 117:14
117:16
litigants ( 3 ) 18:7 18:12
31:16
litigation ( 21 ) 7:10
8:12 10:9 10:13 11:11
11:24 12:16 13:15
14:6 20:22 25:24
27:24 32:11 33:5
34:12 34:16 41:23

45:23 45:23 46:2 46:7
46:15 46:18 46:23
47:10 48:13 48:17
49:2 52:12 57:3 57:10
67:22 75:5 88:2 105:7
105:9 108:11 116:17
118:3 119:19 120:2
121:22 126:10 127:3
127:7 127:9 130:14
138:14 145:2 147:3
147:7 147:16
Lordship’s ( 11 ) 6:8
12:24 41:6 46:16
47:14 88:8 102:13
108:7 108:16 108:19
110:24
lose123:15

74:19 121:19 131:20
138:13 144:7 146:11
Marc2:21
March. ( 2 ) 17:17 28:13
market.102:2 Marseille,2:16 Marshall23:14 material, ( 16 ) 58:12
98:19 99:7 99:7 99:8
99:10 100:21 100:25
117:24 118:1 118:5
118:21 120:4 120:5
121:15 128:14
matter, ( 25 ) 5:23 9:8
10:2 26:18 32:15
34:7 38:25 40:25
41:8 41:11 48:17

51:13 55:19 78:4 82:8
100:17 100:18 101:9
101:16 102:10 103:18
103:19 108:1 132:3
143:24
matters ( 18 ) 8:20 12:6
20:16 24:18 26:18
36:19 36:21 43:9
43:18 49:22 51:8
51:25 85:20 87:1
103:16 107:14 133:4
134:5
maximise60:11 maximum134:8 Maybe ( 3 ) 4:18 48:7
103:23
Maylsheva ( 4 ) 63:8
63:16 135:23 137:7
McGregor, ( 3 ) 21:12
56:23 94:24
McGregor’s ( 9 ) 22:13
23:11 55:23 56:10
63:23 67:17 67:19
68:4 95:5
McKenzie ( 6 ) 23:6
24:6 26:18 68:22
74:15 147:7
mean ( 21 ) 5:5 5:6
10:10 12:10 20:6
29:4 44:2 56:15 70:21
73:16 75:19 76:20
79:5 79:18 84:16
101:13 128:15 139:23
143:16 143:23 146:9
meaning7:1 meaningfully19:15 means ( 6 ) 7:12 9:4
33:22 101:1 136:19
136:22
meant ( 4 ) 4:15 44:14
50:7 93:22
medium33:24
meet ( 3 ) 46:9 121:16
138:5
meeting. ( 2 ) 142:15
144:17
meetings145:8 member ( 3 ) 135:21
138:8 138:23
members145:17 memory, ( 2 ) 62:12
141:15
mentioned ( 4 ) 54:19
54:22 106:19 108:13
mentions12:25 Mercury95:16 mere49:12 merit39:21 merits,90:21 message49:11 met135:19
might, ( 29 ) 12:7 19:8
28:23 29:14 29:16
40:20 42:15 43:25
48:25 50:2 50:24
56:24 58:14 60:6
66:19 72:24 73:4
111:23 114:6 117:3
125:15 125:17 126:8
126:20 128:15 141:17
142:9 142:10 142:11
million, ( 2 ) 33:6 39:18
millions146:15
mind. ( 11 ) 6:16 39:16
46:7 47:16 54:4 55:2
60:6 63:6 64:17 65:21
128:12
minded ( 2 ) 37:4 48:13
mine, ( 2 ) 27:2 66:21
minor50:1

minute. ( 5 ) 3:21 40:3
123:15 123:17 142:14
minutes ( 4 ) 4:2 113:8
113:18 147:22
Mironova16:1
mirror ( 4 ) 35:15 53:1
54:19 120:10
misapprehension140:4 mislead37:7 misleading, ( 3 ) 22:22
52:23 113:24
misunderstanding.10:7 misunderstood ( 2 )
50:3 105:11
mode ( 2 ) 12:25 53:21
moment ( 16 ) 14:19
16:2 18:19 18:20
34:6 38:9 71:7 77:7
77:14 79:8 79:11 97:4
106:16 120:13 123:6
124:18
Monday. ( 10 ) 123:13
123:21 124:25 133:10
134:10 134:12 134:19
134:24 143:4 143:7
money ( 8 ) 9:3 21:20
33:16 38:21 38:21
40:14 75:24 120:10
monies39:4 monstrous39:23 monstrously19:14 month15:11 month’s43:24 months11:1 mother-in-law.90:8 motivate20:15 mouth91:5
move ( 7 ) 56:3 63:21
81:13 82:2 90:18
93:23 111:18
movers141:14 multitude111:16 must ( 63 ) 12:1 12:4
37:2 37:7 37:9 39:16
45:7 45:15 49:12
49:13 51:3 54:7 56:11
76:18 76:18 77:6
79:10 81:1 81:6 83:18
97:4 97:8 98:25 99:8
99:11 102:23 103:12
105:10 112:3 112:11
112:13 113:2 113:3
116:15 116:22 117:2
122:1 127:1 128:8
128:19 129:20 130:1
132:5 132:10 135:7
135:11 136:12 136:12
136:17 136:18 137:17
138:21 139:15 140:3
141:8 143:12 144:3
144:3 144:12 144:22
146:3 146:7 147:11
mustn’t ( 2 ) 73:13
112:18
myself ( 3 ) 16:22 49:18
51:10

N
name ( 3 ) 56:11 137:3
138:24
named ( 3 ) 136:22
137:6 137:6
names.54:20 narrative105:2
narrow ( 2 ) 65:19 77:20 narrowed135:1 narrowing65:12
nature ( 4 ) 58:19 65:6
119:6 138:1

naughty.106:20 Nazir.62:1
Nearly ( 3 ) 113:21
113:23 114:11
nebulous:138:4 necessarily ( 4 ) 33:16
39:8 69:2 134:2
necessary ( 4 ) 14:1
44:18 64:25 132:2
need ( 43 ) 4:4 6:10
8:2 15:9 15:11 15:13
18:22 25:7 29:11
44:10 44:20 50:13
55:21 56:21 63:17
81:3 81:16 86:15 87:6
97:15 97:18 116:1
116:12 116:17 122:25
123:23 124:21 124:22
125:21 125:23 129:12
129:24 130:4 131:1
133:8 138:18 139:19
143:17 143:23 144:4
144:6 144:15 147:21
needed119:2
needs ( 7 ) 34:23 37:1
55:25 113:19 134:19
138:7 141:21
neglect16:4 neglecting19:7 negotiations ( 2 )
104:19 104:19
neighbouring ( 2 )
104:17 104:18
neither58:17
never ( 11 ) 26:20 43:15
60:7 60:14 80:11
89:18 97:24 101:11
104:15 117:25 142:20
newer66:1
next ( 7 ) 25:5 25:7
55:18 95:13 116:2
130:18 138:18
Nice ( 2 ) 4:12 36:2
niece ( 2 ) 101:6 101:11
night,132:7 nine145:17 nobody3:2
non ( 2 ) 107:7 122:14
non-court50:16
non-distressed75:16 non-impugned79:12 none ( 3 ) 65:10 65:11
74:25
nor ( 2 ) 58:17 93:10
norm20:20
normal ( 4 ) 62:22 62:24
124:17 143:13
normally, ( 4 ) 41:16
115:5 118:4 126:6
notably99:24
note ( 14 ) 5:17 6:18
43:5 48:1 49:7 49:8
49:25 51:17 56:15
56:20 61:11 66:8
73:20 75:3
noted44:7
notes ( 2 ) 45:13 135:3
nothing ( 4 ) 25:24 28:7
28:21 52:7
notice14:15 noticed ( 2 ) 20:15
37:10
November147:5 number ( 12 ) 47:7
82:13 90:8 100:5
106:8 107:21 111:1
119:5 119:7 121:24
125:12 145:6
numbered64:8 numbers ( 2 ) 129:9
131:23

O
object ( 2 ) 79:6 143:3
objecting ( 2 ) 44:8
86:25
objection ( 6 ) 30:17
66:11 82:12 84:7
86:16 105:11
objections ( 3 ) 31:5
56:18 66:4
objective ( 2 ) 127:23
136:13
objectives,136:17 obligation ( 4 ) 51:12
80:11 132:12 132:16
obligations ( 2 ) 50:24
114:22
observations,10:1 observing40:17 obsessive,42:21 obstructive48:16 obtain ( 3 ) 130:7
131:22 131:22
obtained102:21 obtaining47:19 obvious; ( 3 ) 7:13 34:8
37:18
obviously ( 54 ) 2:1
6:21 6:24 10:21 11:4
13:21 13:23 14:15
15:12 25:10 28:16
29:4 30:12 39:1 40:9
41:18 43:13 45:1
47:23 48:13 49:2 51:1
52:11 53:15 53:23
58:6 58:21 59:12
61:11 61:20 62:8 65:2
68:11 89:12 98:22
102:13 103:18 107:23
113:18 113:24 114:8
114:17 118:11 122:10
126:13 128:13 129:20
133:3 134:6 136:5
141:7 142:3 145:1
145:6
occasion, ( 3 ) 63:2
72:25 102:25
occasional53:25 occasionally ( 2 ) 25:25
36:15
occasions, ( 7 ) 23:6
24:6 24:7 24:10 25:18
28:21 34:2
occupied9:2 October, ( 2 ) 36:10
57:3
odd ( 2 ) 64:8 66:22
oddness39:17 odds,40:6
off-hand.121:25 offence, ( 2 ) 53:19
53:20
offer36:1 office,42:19
officers ( 3 ) 45:15 58:4
62:4
official.28:22
officials ( 2 ) 28:9 28:17
often. ( 5 ) 18:21 42:21
65:13 113:24 133:25
Okay, ( 12 ) 5:9 5:13
66:10 77:22 80:25
81:5 87:25 94:22
95:24 105:21 110:6
134:25
old ( 13 ) 21:18 66:12
67:4 67:7 70:15 72:8
74:13 77:24 85:17

96:1 99:21 106:11
135:3
OMG ( 2 ) 12:14 89:12
OMGP64:21
once21:15 one-off.131:3
Onega. ( 10 ) 81:23
82:22 83:1 83:13 87:4
87:23 89:11 90:16
94:9 110:19
ones134:14
onto ( 3 ) 119:17 125:9
132:7
open ( 3 ) 7:3 17:21
137:7
opened22:15 opening ( 4 ) 26:25
118:22 118:25 119:6
operate126:3 opportunity ( 2 ) 111:19
127:18
oppose23:15 opposed ( 3 ) 27:24
44:1 88:1
opposing ( 2 ) 23:22
29:23
opt-out117:16 optimistic18:11 Opus4:20
order, ( 27 ) 6:24 12:24
16:5 43:6 60:18 60:24
69:20 69:25 71:20
82:1 89:9 102:13
107:8 108:7 108:16
108:19 108:22 109:1
109:13 110:11 110:24
124:8 130:15 130:17
133:18 134:8 138:22
ordered ( 4 ) 108:11
108:12 111:8 111:13
orderly120:19
orders, ( 2 ) 23:24 73:7
ordinarily ( 2 ) 103:4
126:2
ordinary ( 3 ) 8:15 31:10
35:16
organised10:19 original, ( 4 ) 75:16
96:17 132:9 136:15
Originally ( 3 ) 69:5
69:11 92:14
originals ( 2 ) 122:17
122:19
others? ( 2 ) 27:11 48:8
otherwise, ( 10 ) 9:16
45:10 48:18 58:1
69:22 78:21 97:19
106:18 114:7 131:25
ought93:25 ourselves ( 2 ) 10:25
17:1
outcome53:17 outline139:17 outside ( 2 ) 39:9
135:14
over ( 8 ) 63:24 67:3
84:25 114:13 125:22
135:4 136:21 146:11
overall ( 2 ) 15:18 97:14 overestimated61:23 overnight46:7 overspeak.4:14
own ( 13 ) 7:15 11:5
11:17 17:14 19:7
22:17 62:6 63:7 93:16
95:10 97:1 118:20
138:11
owned ( 5 ) 82:21 88:24
89:12 92:17 93:8
ownership94:20

P

pages,64:13 pairs19:17
paper? ( 5 ) 22:1 22:6
125:14 125:22 126:1
pardon, ( 2 ) 67:25
110:10
parentheses,138:11 Paris15:4
part ( 47 ) 6:22 28:18
36:22 41:23 48:4
59:11 64:18 70:7 70:8
73:3 73:4 73:11 80:3
83:1 83:2 83:3 83:6
83:8 83:10 84:8 85:15
86:3 88:17 93:25 94:5
95:13 101:25 102:22
104:3 104:11 104:17
104:22 104:23 105:17
107:15 113:14 118:5
118:22 127:22 132:8
136:15 142:12 142:17
143:11 143:25 144:1
145:9
partes,117:19 participate19:15 participated136:11 participation51:18 particular ( 16 ) 16:24
20:6 21:11 26:22
35:19 53:5 58:9 59:19
91:20 100:5 102:4
104:21 105:20 109:12
120:18 137:24
particularise ( 4 ) 65:15
67:13 97:11 103:12
particularising ( 2 )
102:5 103:10
particularly ( 7 ) 18:11
32:17 40:21 64:16
98:17 133:1 134:16
particulars, ( 9 ) 65:19
81:25 82:1 82:18
89:4 89:8 89:23 98:25
100:10
parties, ( 16 ) 8:14
35:22 59:14 62:21
73:19 86:22 89:11
94:17 101:23 106:25
107:5 116:23 118:5
118:8 118:10 139:20
parts87:3
party ( 20 ) 62:15 65:20
70:4 84:4 85:23 85:24
88:6 90:5 90:11 93:10
102:4 105:20 106:18
107:18 108:9 110:25
128:9 135:7 137:20
146:12
party’s82:5
passage ( 3 ) 64:6 85:4
85:6
passed17:17
passing ( 2 ) 32:20 33:3
past? ( 6 ) 8:22 15:17
20:8 37:13 45:5 86:25
pattern ( 2 ) 107:2
110:25
(Pause). ( 3 ) 1:15 22:9
113:1
payment. ( 2 ) 2:19
36:11
peanuts41:4 pejorative,127:8 people ( 26 ) 11:5 25:23
42:10 59:23 61:4
99:11 106:13 126:3
129:24 136:15 136:21

137:12 138:4 138:5
138:13 139:3 139:11
139:16 140:5 141:17
144:24 145:6 146:2
146:10 146:11 146:15
per ( 3 ) 29:6 79:5 92:16
perceive44:10 percentage75:15 perfect ( 2 ) 8:25 126:7
perfectly, ( 4 ) 3:1 60:12
60:12 106:24
performance15:17 performed ( 2 ) 8:21
37:14
perhaps ( 15 ) 10:18
28:25 30:6 37:20
48:24 49:17 65:10
67:21 81:17 90:1 98:2
109:17 109:18 109:19
135:9
peril136:23 permissible ( 2 ) 114:24
142:25
permission, ( 8 ) 17:10
61:17 81:24 89:9
89:21 89:24 93:4
115:20
permissions14:22 permitted, ( 2 ) 13:11
24:6
perpetrators.60:16 person ( 25 ) 3:4 7:8 8:1
13:16 18:7 18:12 26:5
31:16 48:19 57:6 84:4
84:12 88:23 88:24
88:24 88:25 98:6
101:4 105:1 117:15
117:16 125:15 140:18
141:21 144:19
personal ( 11 ) 3:13 9:4
9:13 27:2 47:19 48:6
57:22 58:9 59:6 59:9
83:20
personally, ( 2 ) 144:22
144:23
personnel134:15 persons ( 4 ) 7:14 7:15
57:18 139:14
persuade78:20 persuasive53:21 Petersburg ( 3 ) 137:16
138:16 143:3
PetroLes40:14
phrase, ( 2 ) 40:2 49:25
picked105:9
picture, ( 4 ) 3:8 18:23
18:23 123:25
pie36:8 piece,35:13 pile122:1 pity.125:4
place, ( 10 ) 44:1 60:19
76:2 76:6 82:3 101:21
107:2 127:12 139:18
145:9
placed133:7
plain ( 3 ) 37:5 38:6 41:8
plaintively119:22 plan ( 4 ) 16:2 102:1
110:2 110:3
planning,110:18 play, ( 8 ) 72:9 90:4
90:13 90:14 104:6
104:6 118:22 137:18
players136:10
plea ( 2 ) 92:6 96:17
plead ( 13 ) 90:23 94:14
97:4 97:8 98:25 99:8
101:3 101:18 103:13
106:9 107:11 111:12
145:12

pleaded ( 19 ) 60:8 68:6
68:7 78:23 85:20
86:12 86:20 87:9
87:12 89:3 93:17
96:20 100:10 100:15
103:19 107:21 112:7
135:16 142:15
pleading ( 18 ) 63:13
64:11 71:15 78:16
78:24 81:4 83:14
86:10 86:25 87:3
90:13 91:11 96:4
100:11 101:19 105:12
134:9 135:3
pleadings, ( 29 ) 57:5
57:11 61:12 63:17
64:22 78:9 81:21 82:3
82:8 82:9 82:16 82:19
83:3 84:7 86:17 86:17
89:7 89:17 89:22
89:25 94:16 95:13
98:24 99:21 100:18
103:15 103:25 106:11
107:15
pleads83:11
pledge ( 4 ) 46:24 76:8
79:22 86:6
pledged ( 9 ) 47:10 59:5
75:9 79:13 87:24 91:3
93:22 94:1 94:3
pledges. ( 4 ) 59:2
83:12 83:15 88:17
plot, ( 6 ) 57:19 139:5
139:10 139:17 139:17
144:14
plotted144:13 plough55:21 pluck128:21
points ( 34 ) 11:13 21:4
21:10 23:2 28:4 29:16
29:18 32:16 32:16
35:10 42:9 43:7 52:17
54:18 56:16 56:23
60:4 61:21 64:11 66:8
67:18 80:11 84:17
84:19 87:21 88:14
92:14 98:3 109:4
109:12 110:13 134:9
134:14 134:22
policing31:12 policy45:25 polite:106:5 political ( 4 ) 20:13
26:15 28:5 52:4
poor ( 3 ) 59:9 102:21
113:22
popped.6:15 Port104:17
Ports ( 2 ) 12:14 89:12
posed32:18
position ( 35 ) 6:4 6:21
11:2 11:20 13:19 21:2
23:12 23:19 24:8 26:2
29:20 35:1 35:17 38:3
38:11 38:12 39:3 39:9
39:13 43:23 48:16
49:6 52:9 62:13 65:14
69:14 84:21 92:22
93:15 95:23 97:15
113:15 115:19 135:24
141:8
positively41:24 possession ( 4 ) 122:25
123:7 123:8 128:9
possibility ( 3 ) 8:7 8:18
104:21
possible ( 9 ) 3:12 11:9
14:16 14:24 16:17
16:23 17:12 122:5
139:12

possibly, ( 4 ) 14:3 18:3
28:24 99:14
pot130:18 potential72:20 pots120:10 practical; ( 14 ) 13:2
13:13 13:25 31:1
31:17 35:21 41:10
41:11 42:14 115:10
116:15 139:9 140:15
146:17
practicalities53:22 practice, ( 13 ) 13:21
43:5 46:24 47:5 47:9
47:18 47:21 47:23
49:7 49:8 49:9 51:16
113:16
pragmatic ( 4 ) 68:24
70:6 74:16 132:12
precedent19:19 precisely ( 4 ) 12:13
44:18 53:7 91:14
precision.67:16 preclude36:7 precluded136:7 predicament.127:25 prefer? ( 5 ) 30:22 30:22
65:24 133:24 134:4
preference, ( 2 ) 133:9
133:17
prefers56:5 prejudge ( 2 ) 41:20
42:5
preliminary ( 3 ) 2:5
56:23 68:8
preparation118:6 prepare ( 2 ) 19:16
133:19
prepared ( 9 ) 5:20
13:23 17:20 58:4
94:18 114:6 115:6
125:18 130:20
preparing ( 5 ) 54:5
113:17 114:5 116:10
133:11
prescriptive,49:1 present, ( 10 ) 2:18 8:1
15:4 25:16 30:19 33:8
33:10 38:13 94:18
106:1
presentation120:19 presented ( 4 ) 38:4
43:24 65:8 119:2
presenting39:9 presents.39:15
press ( 3 ) 38:8 116:12
120:12
pressed,112:10 pressures119:15 presumed ( 2 ) 104:7
105:2
presumption61:18 pretty ( 5 ) 19:18 58:24
77:3 112:3 116:11
prevent79:10
previous ( 5 ) 9:1 23:24
63:2 89:24 102:25
previously ( 11 ) 27:23
65:13 82:21 83:2
85:6 95:19 96:23 97:2
105:22 105:24 132:10
price102:21 Prichaly, ( 9 ) 95:16
95:20 100:7 102:7
102:12 108:24 109:3
110:20 112:6
primarily ( 2 ) 139:4
139:6
primary ( 2 ) 136:11
141:14
principal137:3

principle, ( 4 ) 65:17
98:13 98:23 101:17
principles ( 4 ) 20:13
78:24 105:12 106:24
prior ( 2 ) 64:2 65:4
priorities129:23
privy ( 2 ) 90:10 138:16
pro ( 5 ) 120:9 120:14
122:7 131:7 131:8
probabilities,102:8 Probably ( 6 ) 15:5
17:13 43:2 46:9 47:13
61:23
problem ( 19 ) 3:11 3:24
12:18 13:2 14:5 32:20
46:6 53:25 60:3 74:21
103:10 113:5 113:14
115:17 119:12 124:14
125:13 139:9 140:15
problematic146:17 problems, ( 4 ) 9:14
10:15 12:10 130:20
procedure. ( 4 ) 13:24
46:24 47:5 47:9
procedures52:6 proceed? ( 9 ) 1:23
15:12 20:25 36:11
44:7 77:10 80:9
120:13 147:11
proceeding42:24 (Proceedings ( 27 )
1:3 7:23 9:11 22:19
23:17 24:11 24:13
27:1 55:10 68:10
68:14 69:13 70:5 73:5
73:20 73:23 74:19
78:1 80:15 84:5 85:23
85:25 116:25 127:1
137:14 137:22 146:21
process ( 12 ) 7:9 7:18
8:12 9:5 54:16 71:25
99:15 102:9 117:3
118:6 127:4 142:22
processes ( 2 ) 9:6
80:20
produced ( 2 ) 125:7
126:23
produces125:6 producing64:3 product127:21 productive133:25 profess135:11 professed23:25 professional ( 6 ) 13:10
25:19 30:13 30:14
36:4 114:21
professionals, ( 2 ) 7:16
31:11
Professor ( 2 ) 40:2
47:8
profoundly143:2 progress? ( 5 ) 4:2
111:21 116:6 116:10
124:9
progressing127:14 prohibited80:2 prohibitively118:10 promising1:6 proof,99:9 propensities ( 2 ) 92:22
93:15
proper ( 22 ) 15:6 17:5
32:24 35:15 37:6
40:11 51:23 53:13
74:10 75:2 89:22 95:7
98:11 99:25 106:9
106:10 108:6 111:3
111:7 112:21 119:3
136:2
properly ( 11 ) 3:3 18:12
74:17 79:4 84:12

102:3 113:22 116:24
121:10 127:7 127:14
property ( 7 ) 84:2 84:4
84:11 84:13 92:1 92:3
92:21
proportion ( 2 ) 26:17
127:6
proposed ( 6 ) 10:8
11:7 51:3 87:3 142:17
143:4
proposing ( 4 ) 35:2
82:24 87:7 87:8
proprietary68:16 prosecuted,32:15 prospect33:22 prospects39:25 protect64:25 protocol, ( 10 ) 12:8
13:6 35:2 35:20 36:18
37:16 42:14 51:19
54:2 134:9
protocols ( 3 ) 45:14
46:10 48:18
prove ( 5 ) 53:4 101:1
101:9 107:4 107:13
proven53:3 provide112:21 provided ( 7 ) 4:13 30:3
81:25 82:1 89:4 89:8
103:22
provisional21:2
public ( 5 ) 28:16 28:22
47:6 96:8 99:24
pull18:8 punched47:2 punished,86:24 purported96:8 purports94:2
purpose. ( 7 ) 5:20 63:6
70:18 89:3 93:16
140:13 144:17
purposes ( 7 ) 13:5
68:13 69:13 77:25
94:18 118:24 128:18
pursuant ( 11 ) 57:17
57:19 69:24 69:25
73:6 76:4 80:20 81:25
89:8 108:7 109:12
pursue ( 3 ) 35:11 39:18
70:15
pursued. ( 2 ) 35:11
134:23
pursuing70:14
puts ( 2 ) 35:5 115:23
putting ( 3 ) 86:20
115:21 120:4
puzzling36:16

Q
qualification, ( 2 ) 10:6
15:9
qualifications,65:14 qualified7:11 qualify10:22 quality.5:12 quantum86:1 question ( 17 ) 3:12
5:24 6:13 17:19 19:4
30:9 30:16 33:20
36:23 44:3 47:14
47:18 48:22 52:5
54:19 61:3 111:22
questions ( 11 ) 9:25
20:3 28:5 31:14 34:24
35:9 35:15 38:17
43:10 48:24 135:5
quick ( 2 ) 111:21
120:16
quickest.56:3

quickly98:2 quiet,3:4
quite ( 75 ) 6:6 10:14
10:20 10:24 11:10
13:8 13:23 14:25
15:1 15:24 19:9 25:17
27:18 29:2 40:17
41:22 43:12 44:17
50:6 50:7 54:21 55:4
56:4 56:9 57:15 58:13
62:5 62:21 63:7 63:12
66:14 70:24 71:11
75:21 76:20 77:11
78:23 79:16 80:17
80:22 81:6 81:16
82:25 89:3 90:20
91:20 91:21 92:5
94:21 95:23 97:10
98:13 99:3 103:11
106:21 107:21 111:1
113:14 113:24 114:14
118:25 122:11 123:5
126:18 128:4 129:6
129:7 129:8 130:15
131:6 136:9 137:5
138:4 139:22 146:18
quotation,64:17 quotes64:6

R

radar? ( 2 ) 128:16
128:17
raise ( 2 ) 51:25 78:13
raised ( 4 ) 11:14 14:12
44:18 65:5
rate. ( 2 ) 1:22 18:14
rather ( 24 ) 8:9 14:3
17:10 37:10 40:22
43:19 49:23 50:1
56:22 57:12 58:8
59:20 60:16 66:17
81:15 82:21 82:22
89:3 95:6 102:1 112:1
125:14 132:5 133:1
rational103:3
re-examination,15:7 re-read135:2
re-start123:17
reach ( 2 ) 89:17 89:18
reached110:2 reaching12:22 react8:25
read ( 18 ) 6:6 8:4 8:25
21:4 25:4 42:20 47:3
49:7 49:10 51:16 62:7
62:8 62:10 64:12
64:15 110:1 110:7
147:9
reading ( 3 ) 17:24
110:9 139:19
reads ( 2 ) 140:16 147:7
ready123:13
real ( 10 ) 4:15 31:21
31:24 32:23 46:25
77:19 90:16 104:20
106:23 125:13
realisation ( 6 ) 47:9
59:2 68:17 72:5 86:6
90:2
realise86:14
realised ( 4 ) 72:6 72:11
75:5 79:4
realistic ( 2 ) 36:22
103:5
reality,26:10 «realtime»,4:22
reason ( 15 ) 7:13 13:18
13:22 13:25 27:5
42:25 44:5 44:6 55:11

75:25 76:16 118:15
130:24 131:24 137:10
reasonable ( 2 ) 28:20
30:3
reasons ( 6 ) 16:10 70:6
74:16 90:9 102:24
122:21
reassurance ( 2 ) 48:18
138:22
reassures55:8 rebut76:12
recall ( 7 ) 23:19 26:24
27:12 28:12 63:1
81:19 96:20
receipt12:2 receive30:23
received ( 2 ) 5:17 59:1
recently ( 2 ) 36:9 111:9
reckon147:10 recollect ( 4 ) 36:9 43:5
43:6 119:19
recollection ( 4 ) 38:24
103:1 147:1 147:14
record ( 12 ) 19:21
23:21 40:23 42:4 43:3
74:15 93:24 116:25
117:6 121:4 132:8
143:1
recourses:59:4 recover ( 3 ) 83:15
89:15 92:24
recovered.69:3 recovery. ( 2 ) 60:11
83:25
reduce ( 2 ) 60:25 135:5
reduced ( 3 ) 43:10
43:20 83:24
refer ( 5 ) 24:17 28:23
48:2 77:8 81:18
reference ( 7 ) 57:5 58:9
64:5 67:17 67:19 81:1
93:13
references52:25 referred ( 2 ) 21:15
26:24
reflect ( 2 ) 71:21
147:14
reflected74:13 reflective ( 2 ) 84:14
86:21
reflects147:13 refusal;115:4 refuse115:13 refused, ( 3 ) 115:3
115:13 118:17
refusing130:12 regard. ( 7 ) 6:4 11:19
19:21 68:11 77:5
83:17 136:23
regards ( 4 ) 13:15
18:14 50:15 52:2
registered92:11 regret53:12 regulations, ( 2 ) 48:4
48:7
reject ( 3 ) 25:12 52:24
55:5
rejected ( 2 ) 28:12
28:15
relate140:18
relating ( 2 ) 28:16 53:5
relation ( 12 ) 24:1
62:13 68:23 74:11
81:23 85:7 96:15
107:7 110:23 132:17
141:12 141:16
relationship ( 2 ) 13:12
44:15
relaxed ( 4 ) 29:2 52:10
52:11 56:4
release132:12

released ( 3 ) 123:8
132:16 132:18
relevance ( 2 ) 91:1
117:4
relevant ( 19 ) 7:11
28:19 47:13 64:6
78:15 81:18 83:13
88:15 88:20 89:12
89:18 90:4 91:2 91:12
111:16 117:10 117:11
120:1 128:22
reliable.130:2 reliant,120:8 relied118:25
rely ( 15 ) 11:10 36:6
60:17 77:15 84:10
87:1 92:19 94:15
98:19 100:25 110:15
111:15 112:14 115:15
122:6
relying ( 5 ) 55:13 87:6
103:6 104:12 135:12
remaining114:3 remains ( 2 ) 29:20
139:25
remedy.3:25 remember ( 6 ) 6:7
24:14 77:3 81:6 81:7
89:4
remind51:11 removal69:8
removed ( 3 ) 66:3 69:6
90:9
Renord58:17
repeat: ( 2 ) 55:8 87:14 repeats87:13 repetition.88:20 replacing9:14 replicate44:14
reply ( 3 ) 29:1 52:17
111:19
represent9:18 representation. ( 6 )
5:24 11:22 29:18
47:25 48:11 81:20
representative ( 3 )
23:18 35:4 53:13
representatives100:13 request, ( 4 ) 8:9 8:10
17:9 118:11
requests115:14
require ( 3 ) 42:22 50:23
113:16
required. ( 6 ) 9:15
13:21 48:5 54:13 99:3
134:24
requirements,34:18 requires ( 2 ) 15:1
126:10
requisite ( 2 ) 7:17 12:9 research,141:8 reservation ( 8 ) 68:18
70:9 70:25 72:20
75:21 78:11 78:25
94:11
reservations73:4 reserve, ( 4 ) 17:9 28:18
51:10 71:2
reserved, ( 3 ) 23:13
82:14 127:7
resiled115:18 resource ( 3 ) 38:3
38:12 54:14
resources ( 3 ) 18:8
40:5 130:10
respect, ( 26 ) 22:21
29:20 33:4 34:14
40:21 40:22 43:9
43:18 45:6 47:18
51:14 52:13 55:10
57:13 65:12 84:1

86:14 88:22 91:18
92:25 94:19 107:11
116:1 118:2 119:20
130:5
respectful ( 2 ) 5:23
142:21
respectfully134:11 respectively.72:7 respond ( 2 ) 10:16 80:2
response ( 4 ) 6:3 28:4
66:1 84:20
responses140:25 responsibilities ( 3 )
35:6 36:4 50:16
responsibility ( 10 )
10:8 30:10 32:13
33:20 34:11 34:25
37:25 41:23 48:23
61:2
responsible ( 4 ) 8:13
139:4 139:6 145:19
responsibly35:14 restraints31:12
result ( 6 ) 21:23 51:13
59:13 71:1 91:22 94:6
resurrection,40:3 reticence86:25 return ( 3 ) 14:8 113:7
145:21
reverse106:2 revert9:25
review? ( 9 ) 37:16 51:9
51:24 64:22 73:15
127:9 127:11 131:18
132:14
reviewing127:4 reviews43:25 rid122:8 ridicule106:22 rife,32:22
rightly ( 3 ) 28:6 105:9
138:11
rights ( 15 ) 7:25 10:13
12:15 23:6 29:18 30:9
30:13 30:15 32:10
48:20 49:14 49:14
49:21 52:6 59:7
ring104:3 ringfence80:4 rip59:25 ripped61:5
rise ( 6 ) 4:1 44:24 101:7
103:7 109:24 112:14
road ( 2 ) 20:19 135:20
ROK ( 8 ) 95:16 95:20
100:7 102:7 102:12
108:24 109:3 110:20
role ( 2 ) 16:12 28:8
rolling ( 5 ) 114:1
114:10 115:21 125:7
128:25
room ( 6 ) 2:8 2:11 3:2
4:4 33:12 114:12
root44:9 rough129:16 Roughly, ( 3 ) 27:12
122:4 129:15
route ( 2 ) 44:8 125:23
rules, ( 24 ) 7:7 7:8 7:16
11:25 13:10 15:21
34:18 42:20 44:13
45:15 62:23 62:24
80:14 91:10 99:4
104:10 105:5 114:25
117:15 124:17 125:20
126:11 142:3 146:21
run ( 5 ) 39:25 63:18
82:5 88:7 137:14
Russia ( 3 ) 91:10
134:12 138:5

Russian ( 16 ) 28:9
40:25 46:14 46:20
52:6 58:11 58:13
61:12 62:23 63:1
91:16 92:24 96:10
121:17 128:18 128:19

S
sacrifice ( 2 ) 15:2
133:10
safe,40:7 safeguards ( 2 ) 35:3
42:15
sake ( 5 ) 10:17 20:13
20:19 69:20 113:2
sale ( 10 ) 69:25 71:25
72:22 75:12 79:23
83:1 91:5 91:8 92:20
102:16
sales? ( 36 ) 47:6 69:23
70:23 71:10 73:1 73:1
73:3 73:6 73:14 73:21
73:25 74:6 74:10
74:24 74:25 75:1
75:15 75:24 76:4 76:5
76:6 76:16 76:16 77:2
77:16 77:16 78:17
79:12 80:16 80:18
84:2 87:17 96:9 96:16
99:24 109:1
salient76:3 salutary,42:18
same. ( 20 ) 21:25 43:17
54:24 55:10 57:2
57:19 58:13 63:24
67:25 68:2 70:2 80:24
83:4 84:21 88:5 95:12
115:1 129:1 136:24
140:16
satisfactorily,125:3 satisfactory ( 3 ) 3:21
40:11 117:6
satisfied,34:18
save ( 3 ) 29:16 56:19
120:23
Savelyev? ( 6 ) 16:1
63:8 67:10 136:5
137:6 143:18
say-so30:24
saying ( 32 ) 3:17 3:19
19:14 23:14 23:23
25:22 30:12 37:22
37:23 40:8 50:4 52:4
57:10 59:16 62:19
68:12 76:14 83:20
89:19 91:1 92:7 97:18
98:1 98:20 104:8
104:9 104:11 106:20
121:8 144:18 144:19
146:6
Scandinavia, ( 7 ) 40:14
40:15 82:21 86:11
90:5 93:8 93:9
scepticism ( 2 ) 38:6
41:9
schedule ( 9 ) 32:6 68:4
68:6 68:8 68:12 72:17
77:21 77:24 108:19
scheduled15:25 schedules134:7 screen. ( 5 ) 4:16 5:3
21:15 56:12 68:2
script.66:22 scroll46:3 Sea104:17
seamless13:17 search,124:5
second, ( 11 ) 8:9 8:25
11:24 13:9 15:24

16:13 16:23 48:2
64:18 90:13 147:10
secondly,109:10 section,96:2 securities.»68:17 security ( 2 ) 46:25
47:10
see ( 59 ) 4:2 5:22 6:20
11:9 12:10 16:7 19:23
22:8 22:13 23:14
24:10 25:2 25:15
25:17 31:4 33:16
33:19 44:11 46:2
46:23 47:10 55:24
66:12 67:14 68:5 68:7
68:22 69:18 70:11
72:23 75:5 79:8 81:15
84:6 84:16 85:16 95:4
98:20 101:12 101:15
116:6 116:19 117:4
120:25 128:15 129:3
130:12 130:21 131:14
135:14 135:18 136:6
139:23 140:22 141:9
142:1 143:17 143:17
147:8
seeing ( 2 ) 21:24 59:19
seek ( 2 ) 34:23 132:1
seeking ( 3 ) 83:25
88:22 93:4
seem ( 4 ) 26:11 38:20
40:23 72:24
seems ( 7 ) 28:6 35:18
40:13 50:13 52:12
86:10 104:14
seen ( 10 ) 6:1 21:19
31:7 38:17 38:18 42:6
42:7 117:25 118:1
140:18
sees34:24 seized96:9 self53:9
send ( 3 ) 10:16 14:2
118:22
sending14:5 sense, ( 15 ) 17:21
23:24 25:23 27:20
49:23 59:21 63:22
80:1 89:7 109:18
109:19 129:1 135:12
146:13 146:18
sent ( 3 ) 10:19 12:22
12:23
sentence: ( 2 ) 48:3
99:1
separate ( 2 ) 49:14
49:16
separately82:17 September ( 2 ) 108:16
109:5
sequence, ( 2 ) 110:15
129:2
series ( 8 ) 35:6 35:17
98:10 99:24 101:22
101:25 107:23 110:18
serious ( 3 ) 22:21
104:24 138:6
served61:17
service ( 2 ) 12:25 37:14
session,43:19
set ( 13 ) 19:20 25:17
26:8 42:2 56:18 64:10
68:9 72:8 99:2 134:18
140:14 142:15 146:21
setting5:17 seven66:8 several ( 6 ) 21:10
52:20 60:4 84:19 90:9
119:21
shall ( 18 ) 1:23 9:22
9:24 9:25 29:11 36:6

36:7 42:22 45:9 51:24
51:25 55:21 57:21
81:13 113:7 130:16
130:21 146:19
sham,67:8
share ( 5 ) 10:13 92:3
92:23 118:8 132:25
shareholder ( 8 ) 84:13
85:24 90:6 91:9 91:10
91:17 92:24 93:11
shareholding ( 3 )
91:22 95:15 101:5
shares ( 2 ) 91:13 93:16 sheltered40:5 shield62:17
ship ( 4 ) 70:23 73:3
73:14 75:15
ships ( 4 ) 75:6 79:4
79:18 80:1
short ( 6 ) 4:8 29:16
45:8 45:24 87:20
113:10
shorter111:23 shortly,20:21
should ( 86 ) 4:17 5:2
5:3 5:8 5:16 5:19 6:8
6:16 7:19 10:22 13:18
20:1 22:1 23:10 23:15
28:9 29:12 30:6 31:22
32:25 33:2 36:2 36:11
36:17 41:8 42:19 43:2
43:9 45:3 48:19 49:10
51:7 53:8 53:13 54:3
54:16 55:16 55:20
56:1 56:25 59:2 60:20
64:21 66:5 68:14
73:18 76:11 76:18
78:1 78:5 78:21 79:19
83:21 83:22 86:5
89:14 90:13 91:7 99:9
99:16 99:16 100:10
105:2 106:15 108:10
110:8 111:18 112:7
117:18 117:19 118:2
120:22 120:22 121:21
124:17 124:19 124:24
127:7 128:20 130:4
134:9 134:17 136:7
137:12 140:10 143:7
shoulder.114:13 shouldn’t ( 5 ) 49:11
78:5 86:24 93:20
117:15
show ( 18 ) 61:1 61:3
75:1 75:23 77:6 79:10
83:9 84:4 89:13 90:22
95:8 100:16 101:10
101:23 104:11 110:21
139:16 141:19
showed ( 2 ) 47:20 85:6 showing129:2 shown53:12
shows ( 2 ) 5:4 126:4
side. ( 9 ) 1:10 32:18
37:3 58:3 74:8 76:22
76:24 77:4 79:9
sides ( 2 ) 51:14 128:9
sight. ( 2 ) 40:7 131:25
sign42:20
signal, ( 3 ) 1:20 2:6
3:10
signals124:1
signed ( 7 ) 35:5 36:18
43:22 51:22 136:17
140:17 141:5
significance130:25 significant ( 2 ) 40:5
41:22
similar ( 3 ) 54:20
101:22 107:13

simple, ( 4 ) 8:24 38:24
71:24 93:7
simpler33:22
since ( 4 ) 36:5 61:9
100:3 109:5
single ( 2 ) 109:13 118:8
Sir, ( 2 ) 25:10 64:9
sitting ( 4 ) 2:9 2:11
122:9 122:12
situation ( 3 ) 39:6
102:15 143:2
six35:12 sixth25:15
size ( 3 ) 18:6 33:5
113:15
skeleton, ( 7 ) 6:17
47:17 55:22 64:7
64:10 66:7 94:24
sky,36:8
slight, ( 4 ) 23:10 63:25
89:6 99:14
slightly ( 14 ) 3:22 3:23
49:15 54:23 60:5
84:15 85:4 95:10
96:14 115:18 125:16
131:20 144:5 147:8
slim56:16
slow ( 4 ) 1:20 3:10 3:10
120:18
slow-witted.75:14 slower90:25 slowly4:13
so-called62:16 sold ( 9 ) 41:4 57:20
69:17 69:24 74:17
74:18 75:16 83:23
95:16
solicitor ( 4 ) 44:15
50:10 50:22 50:24
solicitor’s50:21 solicitors ( 3 ) 27:4 42:4
142:25
solution. ( 5 ) 50:25
116:15 119:13 121:5
132:13
solutions,120:7 somebody ( 8 ) 30:19
40:1 49:24 104:6
137:19 141:5 142:6
142:9
somehow86:10 someone ( 5 ) 26:1
26:23 29:25 37:5
138:25
something ( 29 ) 4:18
12:12 14:20 19:10
25:21 26:2 31:23
32:24 35:4 35:5 37:8
43:2 43:14 51:9 54:3
55:24 71:1 74:12
85:13 85:18 86:12
86:15 98:18 110:8
115:2 131:17 136:1
145:24 146:13
sometimes ( 4 ) 14:1
26:2 113:21 113:21
somewhat ( 2 ) 21:20
29:10
somewhere128:19 soon ( 4 ) 14:16 81:2
122:20 128:8
sort ( 25 ) 26:16 27:16
30:11 33:11 36:8
43:19 47:22 48:22
49:18 61:7 76:1 76:1
77:7 104:5 113:5
117:16 117:16 117:22
117:24 124:7 126:6
129:9 134:1 138:12
142:1

sorts ( 4 ) 31:7 35:3
39:12 79:20
sought ( 4 ) 48:14 65:15
66:2 67:13
sound ( 2 ) 5:12 19:24
speak ( 9 ) 4:13 5:7 7:2
7:9 7:22 8:11 27:8
27:9 61:24
SPEAKER: ( 7 ) 1:11
1:16 2:13 2:15 2:21
2:25 123:17
speakers4:13 speaking ( 7 ) 20:24
27:24 32:10 65:10
122:3 122:4 124:5
special ( 2 ) 28:21
119:23
specialist,8:3 species22:22 specific ( 2 ) 63:6
101:19
specifically. ( 2 ) 96:21
102:15
speeches26:15 speed131:6 spelt37:9 spend133:11
spent ( 2 ) 26:17 53:3
spin,54:24 split.129:15 spoken.5:4 spousal48:5 squeeze17:24 stable38:20
stage, ( 13 ) 61:18 64:2
65:7 89:17 89:18
98:17 105:14 110:4
110:6 110:7 110:11
110:13 112:24
stages. ( 2 ) 110:5 117:8
stance.35:19
stand ( 5 ) 35:23 42:17
43:13 49:1 139:1
«Standard46:23 start, ( 14 ) 1:6 1:11
23:22 39:24 56:5 56:6
66:15 133:18 133:24
134:10 136:2 147:16
148:4 148:4
started, ( 2 ) 1:18 27:18
starting ( 6 ) 23:14
62:11 72:16 95:14
130:3 134:19
stated100:20 statement ( 18 ) 15:8
21:12 22:14 23:11
24:15 24:20 25:1
25:15 46:19 53:10
53:16 53:18 55:23
56:10 63:23 67:17
95:6 140:16
states63:3
stating ( 2 ) 64:1 100:25
station ( 2 ) 147:24
147:24
staying147:21
steps ( 3 ) 90:9 110:12
110:19
sterile.78:22 stick.81:11
still ( 15 ) 1:19 9:5 56:18
68:1 83:11 90:5 95:3
95:12 96:5 115:1
115:20 132:21 134:5
139:14 139:25
stools.31:21
stop. ( 2 ) 91:3 141:23
storm69:21 story41:7 strange57:14 strengths103:18

stress ( 3 ) 15:13 25:21
124:9
strike13:14
Stroilov ( 269 ) 2:1 4:25
7:22 7:25 8:11 9:9
9:10 9:22 9:24 10:4
10:6 12:11 13:20
14:11 14:14 16:2
16:21 18:18 19:4
19:7 21:8 21:25 22:3
22:6 22:9 22:11 22:16
24:4 24:8 24:12 24:17
24:23 25:9 25:21
26:20 27:12 27:18
27:25 28:2 30:4 32:4
33:23 34:10 34:10
34:17 35:25 36:3
36:7 36:10 36:20
36:24 37:13 42:23
42:25 45:2 45:4 50:12
50:16 50:19 51:18
51:22 52:1 52:14
52:16 52:20 54:21
55:4 55:7 55:14 55:16
56:1 56:4 56:9 56:14
56:21 57:10 58:6
58:11 59:11 59:24
60:2 60:4 60:14 60:21
61:8 61:11 62:5 62:10
62:21 64:16 66:1 66:7
66:11 66:20 66:22
67:2 67:7 69:7 69:11
69:18 70:2 70:8 70:15
70:17 70:24 71:6
71:11 71:14 71:17
73:2 73:11 73:16
73:24 74:8 75:4 75:11
75:21 76:10 76:20
77:2 77:11 77:18
77:23 78:7 78:18
78:23 79:2 79:16
79:25 80:8 80:10
80:17 80:22 80:24
81:3 81:6 81:12 83:8
84:6 84:17 84:19
84:25 85:3 85:6 85:10
85:14 87:7 87:19 89:1
90:20 91:14 91:19
92:5 93:2 93:12 93:19
94:2 94:9 94:11 94:21
94:23 95:3 95:5 95:10
95:22 96:1 96:5 96:7
96:20 96:25 97:9
97:13 98:1 98:13
98:21 99:12 99:17
99:21 100:22 101:14
101:16 103:9 103:23
105:10 105:19 105:24
106:3 106:7 106:21
107:7 107:20 108:5
108:11 108:14 108:19
108:21 108:25 109:10
110:1 110:5 110:10
110:17 112:10 112:16
112:25 113:13 115:1
116:4 117:21 121:5
121:13 121:19 121:25
122:3 122:14 122:20
123:2 123:5 123:10
123:12 123:20 124:4
124:8 126:12 128:11
128:23 129:6 129:8
129:11 130:20 131:6
131:14 132:16 132:20
133:9 133:15 133:20
134:21 134:25 135:9
136:20 136:24 137:5
138:21 139:6 139:8
139:22 140:4 140:13
140:14 143:16 143:23
144:5 144:10 144:15

144:25 145:6 145:11
145:14 145:21 146:5
146:8 146:17 146:25
147:6 147:9 147:15
147:23 148:2
Stroilov’s141:24 strongly20:22 struck ( 2 ) 68:7 79:9 structure60:5 stump34:1
stupid ( 2 ) 47:1 143:16
style21:18 sub117:25 subcontraction51:3
subject ( 17 ) 7:15 9:16
15:18 15:22 16:22
17:2 19:11 20:21
24:15 51:6 71:10
80:12 81:24 120:17
127:3 129:23 135:10
submit ( 2 ) 23:24
138:15
subparagraph108:22 subparagraphs.103:13 subsequent ( 2 ) 72:25
85:15
subsequently ( 5 )
14:22 105:15 132:6
136:16 139:18
substance, ( 13 ) 12:17
14:9 26:8 61:14 65:9
68:20 68:24 71:19
77:3 82:4 82:16
106:11 106:23
substantial ( 4 ) 38:20
39:3 59:14 65:3
substantive ( 2 ) 86:17
109:17
substitute59:9 succeed ( 4 ) 19:23
137:3 138:23 138:25
successfully138:23 succinct127:9 suddenly16:6 sue88:25
sufficient ( 6 ) 36:25
100:12 100:17 103:14
105:4 126:23
sufficiently4:12 suggest ( 11 ) 29:13
54:2 55:12 60:18
74:23 96:18 106:15
124:17 124:23 134:11
137:8
suggested ( 20 ) 25:11
26:14 28:8 28:14
29:2 32:21 44:5 48:23
73:21 76:8 82:17 91:6
95:19 95:22 96:23
97:6 97:13 104:15
112:17 140:6
suggesting ( 6 ) 41:7
49:19 89:1 89:14
104:21 135:6
suggestion ( 8 ) 22:19
29:5 55:4 72:4 72:25
74:5 74:9 143:11
suggestions ( 3 ) 28:4
52:2 52:21
suggests ( 6 ) 22:17
52:12 57:3 62:10
62:12 116:19
suing89:2 suit91:10 suitable42:11 suits35:18 sum.76:7 summarised99:22 summary18:13 summer82:19 sums76:7

superhuman19:22 supplement5:11 supply?21:7 support ( 2 ) 25:16
47:21
suppose ( 6 ) 29:3
60:21 66:12 125:16
125:19 142:9
supposed ( 3 ) 2:16
2:17 111:11
supposing ( 3 ) 86:2
125:6 125:6
supposition101:8 sure ( 17 ) 13:21 15:20
23:10 34:25 46:1
50:11 52:16 67:18
70:17 74:21 87:19
91:20 103:23 116:20
130:14 138:5 147:1
Surely ( 2 ) 29:24 30:2
surprise ( 3 ) 99:15
99:16 126:12
surprising ( 2 ) 40:6
126:15
survive. ( 2 ) 9:3 15:11 survived.85:19 suspend ( 2 ) 117:15
118:15
sustain97:3 sustained27:17 switch1:8
system? ( 5 ) 5:6 5:7
21:14 30:14 66:23

T
tab ( 12 ) 4:22 22:6 57:2
63:24 64:9 65:25
65:25 66:1 66:18
67:25 83:4 95:12
table130:8 tactics.»65:1 tag32:21
tailor-made ( 2 ) 50:13
50:25
taken ( 12 ) 10:9 23:20
38:20 53:9 56:25
57:13 65:17 66:11
67:23 67:23 99:16
99:23
takes ( 5 ) 24:21 24:23
101:20 107:2 133:22
taking ( 4 ) 32:13 34:11
59:20 117:22
talk ( 5 ) 80:5 80:7 80:11
80:13 131:16
talking ( 6 ) 40:1 80:6
87:23 113:6 123:3
129:9
talks104:16 Tarasova ( 2 ) 90:7
93:11
task ( 4 ) 10:25 15:14
33:17 116:15
teacup,69:21 technical4:2 technology,66:16 telling145:3 tenterhooks,16:15 term ( 3 ) 49:19 49:23
50:8
Terminal, ( 6 ) 82:22
83:1 90:16 94:9 94:13
110:19
terms, ( 31 ) 13:25
14:11 15:2 17:13
21:20 29:5 31:12
39:24 52:9 52:16
52:17 53:23 54:2
56:17 67:21 82:12

85:23 90:9 92:21
95:25 106:22 111:25
114:18 115:11 122:21
127:23 130:8 130:10
131:7 132:18 133:5
terrified116:5
test ( 4 ) 2:25 3:22 3:23
19:2
testing21:14
text ( 4 ) 66:12 68:7
83:10 85:17
Thanks45:19
that’s ( 122 ) 2:18 3:8
11:22 17:18 18:18
18:18 19:24 21:8
21:12 22:3 22:5 24:12
24:22 25:3 27:10 29:3
30:2 30:10 30:11
32:10 32:11 34:2
46:12 47:15 49:13
52:9 54:3 56:7 57:1
59:11 60:3 61:6 61:7
63:20 63:24 64:9
64:10 70:6 70:24
73:10 73:16 73:19
74:6 75:3 75:10 75:21
76:9 76:20 78:4 78:12
78:18 80:8 80:9 80:10
81:9 82:15 83:4 85:3
85:8 85:15 85:16
85:17 85:17 85:18
86:12 88:1 88:6 88:21
89:19 91:14 92:13
92:25 93:2 93:4 93:19
94:12 96:5 96:22 97:9
97:10 99:12 99:13
99:17 100:22 103:11
105:4 105:5 105:7
106:3 107:20 107:20
108:14 108:19 109:19
109:20 111:16 114:14
114:20 115:21 115:22
117:24 118:13 119:23
122:14 122:20 123:18
125:19 126:1 128:23
129:15 132:1 133:6
133:15 135:10 137:18
139:8 139:12 139:19
143:16 143:24 144:15
145:11
themselves ( 2 ) 62:18
65:1
theoretical.36:2 theory,125:19 there’s ( 10 ) 29:17
29:18 33:15 37:24
88:14 117:14 118:15
118:15 133:3 139:21
therefore, ( 11 ) 3:24
38:12 39:6 62:19
74:25 90:16 100:15
104:22 133:1 139:2
145:19
They’ve60:14
thing ( 17 ) 16:9 16:20
36:7 36:15 40:20 53:7
60:24 61:11 103:2
115:1 116:20 128:2
128:3 131:9 135:13
135:22 138:20
thinking ( 7 ) 8:16 19:1
37:14 61:25 91:21
134:4 141:6
thinks ( 3 ) 121:5
126:10 141:25
third, ( 5 ) 9:1 62:15
62:21 92:19 129:3
Thirdly,107:7 thoroughgoing51:2 though ( 4 ) 21:2 49:7
135:11 136:22

thought ( 11 ) 36:18
40:18 41:2 47:13
55:20 72:10 103:20
105:12 112:17 126:8
130:4
thousands ( 3 ) 19:17
54:6 126:9
three ( 17 ) 11:1 19:17
27:18 38:19 38:22
69:4 69:5 69:17 72:1
72:6 72:22 73:2 75:6
94:25 131:3 141:15
146:4
three-month33:9 through ( 21 ) 6:2 7:17
17:14 21:17 24:24
27:3 33:23 33:24 41:7
55:21 59:22 60:10
63:16 64:13 66:5 82:5
98:14 114:22 127:21
134:21 144:12
throughout ( 6 ) 9:19
30:20 102:9 114:2
124:10 124:11
throw112:24 Thursday,1:1 tie15:19
tied ( 2 ) 39:19 136:7
tight18:1
time, ( 49 ) 4:10 4:11
4:15 6:9 9:5 9:10
17:20 24:12 24:23
26:17 27:16 29:10
29:16 36:23 39:8
40:11 43:17 43:24
44:22 56:19 61:9
68:2 70:3 74:15 76:17
76:24 81:20 86:20
93:4 112:19 114:4
115:8 120:23 121:9
121:24 124:13 124:24
125:1 127:10 130:24
134:8 134:11 134:24
136:24 138:12 140:9
140:17 143:15 147:16
times29:7
timetable ( 2 ) 17:19
133:17
today. ( 7 ) 7:5 32:4
32:7 38:17 77:19
111:24 112:1
today’s7:1
together ( 2 ) 145:23
145:25
told ( 8 ) 9:1 17:4 21:14
42:18 56:11 87:2
119:15 137:22
tomorrow. ( 17 ) 111:25
112:2 116:8 133:2
133:5 133:7 133:8
133:11 133:18 134:3
134:18 134:25 135:10
143:8 145:22 147:17
148:7
tone34:9
too ( 6 ) 18:20 29:14
46:3 105:13 112:20
131:15
took ( 5 ) 60:19 76:2
76:6 144:17 145:9
total27:13
totally ( 4 ) 25:12 52:23
55:5 128:4
towards ( 4 ) 9:5 35:21
62:5 62:11
track40:13 train,147:22
training. ( 3 ) 7:17 30:14
36:4
transact5:18

transaction ( 10 )
101:20 102:4 102:14
106:14 107:1 109:23
111:7 140:19 145:14
145:19
transactions ( 13 ) 67:8
67:9 70:21 99:24
100:5 100:6 101:22
101:25 102:1 107:3
107:4 109:7 111:1
transcript ( 8 ) 22:24
23:9 24:3 28:25 57:2
57:7 93:24 126:4
transferred145:15 transfers106:8 translate125:2 translated, ( 14 ) 109:22
113:22 116:7 116:23
118:7 118:9 118:11
118:21 121:7 121:10
121:18 129:18 130:5
131:23
translating ( 2 ) 118:3
124:23
translation ( 8 ) 113:23
116:1 117:11 119:3
119:18 125:7 131:10
132:24
translations, ( 38 )
111:22 113:3 113:12
113:13 114:9 115:14
115:16 115:19 117:2
117:20 117:20 118:1
118:19 118:20 118:21
118:23 119:1 120:9
120:15 120:22 122:10
122:20 122:24 123:4
123:21 124:18 124:19
125:25 126:17 126:19
127:18 128:6 129:15
130:7 131:22 132:17
132:19 142:17
translator, ( 7 ) 118:18
120:18 122:7 122:10
123:10 123:12 131:7
transport135:4 transposed89:22 travel133:22 treat91:2
treated ( 2 ) 12:2 73:17
trial, ( 35 ) 2:25 5:16
11:4 16:5 18:6 18:12
19:15 19:20 23:22
24:20 28:10 30:20
33:9 35:14 36:13
36:17 38:16 41:12
52:5 65:5 90:22 99:10
103:19 114:2 118:6
118:13 119:24 120:6
120:19 126:2 127:13
130:4 134:10 134:19
140:10
trials18:22
tried ( 8 ) 56:16 56:18
69:20 71:20 102:24
110:7 119:21 122:5
tries ( 2 ) 3:4 67:15
trouble ( 4 ) 94:11
116:17 128:23 133:21
troubled,132:21
true. ( 2 ) 107:10 142:9
trust49:5
truth ( 5 ) 26:12 26:12
34:7 51:13 145:3
try ( 23 ) 5:9 14:15
14:23 15:3 15:20 16:2
29:11 39:22 51:12
55:1 60:11 66:22
66:24 68:21 77:11
82:4 83:15 90:18

99:18 107:9 120:7
128:1 135:4
trying ( 27 ) 3:15 14:18
18:8 27:12 38:8 39:7
53:4 54:22 65:18
65:18 68:8 70:9 77:20
78:9 82:15 85:18
89:20 90:23 94:25
98:2 100:23 106:4
106:22 107:24 108:14
119:12 147:18
Tuesday.124:25 Turetsky47:8
turn ( 5 ) 63:23 65:21
97:22 100:19 143:1
turning65:9
turns ( 2 ) 43:21 127:5
type ( 2 ) 5:8 43:19
typical47:18

U
ultimate ( 2 ) 10:8 67:9
ultimately10:1
unable ( 2 ) 8:19 107:17
unacceptable ( 3 ) 32:2
32:9 138:3
unavailable14:4 unclear90:17 unconnected107:18 undermine80:16 undermines74:10 undersale,88:23 undersold. ( 5 ) 57:24
84:3 87:5 92:4 93:14
understand ( 41 ) 3:15
4:6 5:18 8:10 13:23
14:9 15:15 15:20
16:10 20:14 33:1 38:2
39:5 42:8 43:1 44:3
44:4 49:10 49:13 55:1
66:14 69:15 71:17
74:24 75:20 88:16
90:6 91:7 91:25 93:1
93:6 93:17 98:1 98:13
107:6 112:22 119:14
120:2 120:9 125:20
146:18
understanding ( 3 )
7:20 9:10 103:24
understands ( 2 ) 39:2
43:15
understood ( 12 ) 18:24
43:11 44:24 49:18
49:24 49:25 51:2
71:25 72:3 75:7 92:13
104:20
undertake ( 2 ) 8:20
50:21
undertaken27:23 undertaking130:13 undervalue, ( 9 ) 57:20
69:23 87:17 96:12
100:2 101:21 101:24
107:1 110:21
undervalued ( 4 ) 71:10
91:4 91:8 92:20
undid59:7 undisclosed ( 3 ) 52:25
122:9 122:12
unexpected ( 6 ) 14:20
18:15 18:25 19:5 19:5
19:9
unexplained, ( 2 ) 39:3
69:9
unfair ( 5 ) 65:1 128:2
128:3 142:22 143:2
unfairly28:5 unforeseen9:17

unfortunately, ( 4 ) 6:9
14:14 16:21 27:3
unfounded ( 2 ) 70:12
70:13
unintentional,23:11 unknown ( 2 ) 57:18
139:14
unlawfully90:3 unless ( 7 ) 7:10 13:7
14:20 61:16 63:21
77:9 77:14
unlikely ( 2 ) 17:3 61:7
unnecessary ( 3 ) 10:14
10:20 17:14
unsatisfactory. ( 2 )
113:25 127:20
unseen21:22 unsettling.41:5 unsuccessful ( 3 )
75:25 129:21 129:21
untrue.22:23 unwittingly139:11 update15:10 upload ( 2 ) 61:24
128:25
uploaded. ( 6 ) 46:1
119:17 120:24 128:12
128:13 132:7
upwards33:6
urge ( 3 ) 33:21 37:2
148:4
urgent10:16
used ( 4 ) 4:11 66:17
68:11 83:13
useful,42:21 using26:14 usual126:11 usually118:8

V
vacuum.52:6 vagaries120:17 vague,74:5 valid94:12 valuations, ( 3 ) 40:21
68:15 78:2
«Value ( 18 ) 68:13 69:2
69:12 73:22 74:1
74:3 74:10 75:16 76:8
77:25 79:5 89:2 89:15
91:12 91:22 92:1
92:16 93:8
valuers, ( 2 ) 68:16 78:3
values ( 10 ) 72:8 72:9
73:5 75:5 77:6 79:6
79:12 79:13 79:22
146:25
various ( 20 ) 8:15
11:13 11:14 12:6
20:1 39:12 43:7 43:9
43:25 45:14 48:20
53:1 55:21 69:25 73:7
83:12 109:1 134:15
135:3 136:11
vast33:8 verifiably43:22 version. ( 8 ) 66:1 67:4
67:5 67:7 70:15 96:2
106:11 131:23
vessels, ( 16 ) 68:11
68:23 69:1 69:4 69:5
69:17 69:24 70:11
71:9 72:1 73:6 76:4
78:8 146:23 146:24
146:25
victim26:4
victims ( 2 ) 60:14 60:15
video2:2 virtually129:1

visit ( 2 ) 66:9 135:24
visited ( 2 ) 61:2 61:6
voice, ( 3 ) 1:8 1:10 2:6
volume,125:11 voted135:21

W
wait ( 3 ) 10:18 125:2
134:24
waive125:18 wand36:3 wandering102:17 waned.41:14 wanting38:7
wants, ( 4 ) 20:7 31:24
43:14 75:4
warned ( 2 ) 27:5 78:19
warning ( 2 ) 65:4 73:12
wasn’t ( 6 ) 63:16 76:12
91:3 120:6 138:16
147:1
waste ( 3 ) 112:19
124:24 127:10
wasteful21:20
wave ( 2 ) 36:3 142:13
waxed41:13
way ( 65 ) 6:2 6:12 7:1
12:19 17:22 18:10
19:2 20:19 24:24
28:10 28:25 31:13
32:14 34:15 35:21
35:23 37:14 37:21
37:24 39:24 41:13
42:13 43:14 47:2
48:14 49:1 52:11
52:13 54:16 55:11
55:16 56:24 59:9
62:7 62:10 64:8 69:16
73:12 74:6 74:21
80:9 81:17 88:7 92:19
98:22 101:17 101:18
104:9 104:10 105:5
105:6 107:25 115:16
124:14 126:21 127:1
131:20 132:2 133:20
135:12 136:6 143:13
143:17 144:25 147:11
ways ( 3 ) 36:16 101:5
127:16
wayside,35:10 we’re43:13
we’ve ( 5 ) 70:18 75:22
92:15 141:14 141:18
weaker111:2 Wednesday17:23 week ( 16 ) 14:21 15:23
15:24 16:13 16:23
16:23 17:15 17:16
17:23 114:16 116:2
116:3 116:5 124:11
130:18 138:18
weekend, ( 4 ) 114:3
116:9 124:11 133:2
weekends114:7 weeks, ( 5 ) 18:2 18:14
18:17 19:3 35:13
weigh55:1 weighing ( 2 ) 18:22
40:6
weird125:21 welcome ( 2 ) 23:16
50:12
weren’t ( 4 ) 94:7 97:23
142:12 144:23
what’s ( 5 ) 5:22 26:4
29:23 39:25 137:15
whatever ( 8 ) 13:18
14:5 15:15 17:16

37:15 73:4 101:6
130:24
whatsoever ( 2 ) 12:20
53:17
whenever ( 2 ) 101:12
132:7
whereas ( 2 ) 23:13
61:13
whereby ( 4 ) 50:8
57:21 115:11 145:15
wherever ( 2 ) 104:5
137:13
Whichever ( 2 ) 56:3
88:7
whilst ( 4 ) 11:17 11:18
114:22 117:3
whole ( 3 ) 9:2 25:4 46:1
wholly ( 4 ) 30:20 30:21
32:8 32:8
whom ( 2 ) 51:18 145:7
whose ( 4 ) 84:2 84:4
84:12 116:18
wide,133:14 widen65:11 widens67:15 wife’s30:25 willingness18:9 wind39:11 Winter147:6
wish ( 15 ) 7:21 9:9 20:5
21:5 21:6 52:1 52:15
54:9 87:1 94:14 123:7
141:22 146:14 147:12
148:4
wishes ( 3 ) 21:4 54:9
126:21
withdrawn.41:19 Withers23:21 witness ( 34 ) 17:4
21:12 22:13 24:15
24:19 25:1 31:22 32:7
53:10 53:16 53:18
55:23 98:5 104:16
114:15 114:24 116:21
126:24 131:2 132:19
137:21 140:15 140:16
140:19 140:22 140:23
141:3 141:16 142:2
143:10 144:1 144:16
145:3 145:22
witness’s140:25 witnesses ( 40 ) 11:8
15:25 16:14 16:24
17:17 18:16 19:3
19:16 28:5 42:1 54:5
79:3 79:11 79:17
97:19 113:20 114:6
114:18 114:23 115:22
115:23 116:2 121:2
124:1 125:8 126:13
126:16 130:13 132:4
133:13 134:12 134:16
137:25 140:1 140:2
141:22 142:19 144:7
144:7 145:18
wittingly139:12 won’t ( 9 ) 15:6 15:6
45:10 91:3 98:17
120:12 128:7 131:6
147:4
wonder. ( 2 ) 21:25
29:15
work. ( 14 ) 3:14 9:2
9:3 22:8 26:11 35:21
51:20 61:4 105:5
116:12 116:13 122:6
122:10 133:25
worked. ( 3 ) 22:10
22:10 123:20
working ( 3 ) 123:10
123:12 124:10

world. ( 2 ) 39:10
137:13
worried72:23
worry ( 4 ) 106:5 112:12
124:21 143:21
worth127:11 worthy ( 4 ) 117:5
119:16 119:18 121:3
wouldn’t ( 9 ) 33:8
36:12 49:20 52:22

4

(4.00113:9
(4.05113:11
4.30132:21
(4.52148:8

5

100:13 115:7 115:8
115:12 125:17

write34:23
writing ( 11 ) 12:9 32:13
43:3 43:10 43:20 44:6
44:11 44:18 51:20
54:11 54:15

57.14.83:4
57.2584:21
57.90,68:1

9

written ( 4 ) 12:1 12:2

12:20 34:9
wrong. ( 17 ) 4:18 37:21
47:2 79:6 81:10 83:18
87:22 88:8 100:9
103:1 145:24 146:1
146:3 146:11 146:13
146:14 146:15
wrongly,28:6 wrongs52:6

9.30,148:4
9ish148:2

Y
year,82:19 year’s61:25
years ( 6 ) 12:18 23:20
27:19 53:3 77:11
146:12
yielding77:14 yourself62:8

1
1,000121:14
1.30,42:10
(1.4045:20
10.00? ( 4 ) 148:5 148:6
148:7 148:9
10.30. ( 2 ) 148:2 148:5
100 ( 2 ) 29:6 121:17
102.2,85:16
(12.001:2
(12.091:4
(12.174:7
(12.284:9
150, ( 3 ) 66:12 67:2
68:1
151.96:3
154? ( 6 ) 81:13 85:8
85:10 86:18 87:3 95:3
17795:2

2
2,000130:17
2.15 ( 3 ) 45:9 45:19
45:22
200,62:12
200788:2
2008 ( 4 ) 87:24 92:11
94:1 104:19
2011,95:15
2013. ( 3 ) 23:1 85:19
147:5
2014. ( 2 ) 28:13 41:2
2016 ( 2 ) 1:1 148:10
223.66:18
253,47:17
26648:2

Bank St Petersburg v Vitaly Arkhangelsky [RPC]

Contents
transcript_427574. 2

Magnum services provided by Opus2 International Ltd
+44 (0)20 3008 5900
www.opus2international.com

Bank St Petersburg v Vitaly Arkhangelsky [Master]
Day 1

Contents

1 :1 Thursday, 28 January 2016
2 (12.00 pm)
3 (Proceedings delayed)
4 (12.09 pm)
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
6 MR LORD: Not a very promising start, my Lord. Sorry about
7 that.
8 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Can you switch on your voice, please?
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Arkhangelsky, can you hear us?
10 MR ARKHANGELSKY: No any voice on your side.
11 NEW SPEAKER: Can you start again; can you say «Hello»?
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Hello?
13 MR ARKHANGELSKY: We cannot hear you.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Hello?
15 (Pause).
16 NEW SPEAKER: Hello.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Can you hear us at all?
18 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, now we have started, yes.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You can still hear us?
20 MR ARKHANGELSKY: We can hear you but it is so slow signal,
21 so I cannot really hear what is …
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Good afternoon, at any rate.
23 Mr Lord, how shall we proceed?
24 MR LORD: May it please your Lordship, I appear for the Bank
25 with my learned friends Mr Birt QC and Mr Eschwege.

2 :1 Mr Stroilov is obviously here in some capacity for the
2 defendants, and Mr Arkhangelsky is linked up by video
3 link.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
5 MR LORD: Your Lordship, this is a preliminary —
6 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I’m sorry, there is no signal, no voice.
7 We cannot hear anything at all absolutely.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: May I ask, who is with you in the room
9 that you are sitting in, Mr Arkhangelsky?
10 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Sorry?
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Who is sitting with you in that room?
12 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I don’t know. I don’t know.
13 NEW SPEAKER: Can you hear me?
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
15 NEW SPEAKER: I am actually mandated by the lawyer in
16 Marseille, so BMC lawyer. You were supposed to know
17 about that. I am just supposed to be here and be
18 present, that’s all. I just have been employed for the
19 payment.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are for the Bank, are you?
21 NEW SPEAKER: It is Marc Bernie, the lawyer, the French
22 lawyer, who asked me to be here.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that for the Bank?
24 MR LORD: Can you hear us?
25 NEW SPEAKER: Thank you, but when we did the trial, the test

3 :1 earlier, we could hear you perfectly, because there was
2 nobody in the room, but now it is a bit loud so we can’t
3 hear properly the conversation. So as long as everybody
4 tries to be very quiet, I think the person here that
5 I don’t know will be able to hear you. Thank you very
6 much.
7 MR ARKHANGELSKY: So far it is impossible to hear anything,
8 so it is just a picture, that’s it.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Can you hear now, Mr Arkhangelsky?
10 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Very, very slow — very slow signal, as
11 I said. I think it is a problem connection. You know
12 I already asked the question about possible earphones
13 and personal devices, because without devices it doesn’t
14 work.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m trying to understand how bad this
16 is, as to whether you can hear at all or whether you are
17 both saying that it is very indistinct.
18 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I’m sorry, I didn’t get all what you are
19 saying.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Lord, it doesn’t appear very
21 satisfactory at the minute.
22 MR LORD: No, but it is slightly hard to test, my Lord. It
23 is slightly hard to test, to gauge the extent of any
24 problem and therefore, what, if any, would be the
25 remedy.

4 :1 I do apologise. Would your Lordship rise for 10
2 minutes and see if we can make some technical progress?
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I think that would be best, and
4 I think you need a general view from that room as to how
5 bad it is.
6 MR LORD: Yes, I understand.
7 (12.17 pm)
8 (A short break)
9 (12.28 pm)
10 MR LORD: My Lord, thank you for the extra time, and
11 I apologise for that delay. We have used the time to
12 establish that the link to Nice is sufficiently clear,
13 provided that the speakers speak slowly and don’t
14 overspeak.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is there meant to be a real time flow
16 on my screen.
17 MR LORD: There should be, my Lord.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Maybe I am doing something wrong.
19 MR LORD: I think, my Lord, you may have to log-in to
20 activate your Opus account.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Got it.
22 MR LORD: There is a tab labelled «realtime», I think,
23 my Lord.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
25 And Mr Arkhangelsky has that and Mr Stroilov has

5 :1 that; is that right.
2 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Sorry, what should I have?
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You should have a screen in front of
4 you which shows the words as they are spoken.
5 MR ARKHANGELSKY: You mean I have to log on in the Magnum
6 system? This, you mean?
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, on the Magnum system as we speak,
8 so the type should emerge.
9 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Okay, I will try to connect. We just got
10 a connection.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I would hope that that will supplement
12 any deficiencies in the sound quality.
13 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Okay, thank you.
14 Housekeeping
15 MR LORD: My Lord, this is the housekeeping day at the
16 beginning of the trial. Your Lordship should have
17 received a note from the claimants, setting out what we
18 understand to be the business to transact at this
19 hearing. Your Lordship should also have two bundles
20 prepared for that purpose.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I have.
22 MR LORD: Your Lordship will see that what’s on the agenda,
23 and the first matter, in my respectful submission, is
24 the question of representation.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

6 :1 MR LORD: And your Lordship will have seen what was said in
2 the letter that I hope found its way through to
3 your Lordship in response the inquiry as to what the
4 claimants’ position was in that regard. Does
5 your Lordship have a copy of that letter?
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I’ve read it but I can’t quite
7 remember where it is. Is it in this bundle as well?
8 MR LORD: It should be on your Lordship’s desk because,
9 unfortunately, it was not put in at the time. It will
10 need to be inserted at a point that your Lordship
11 directs. It is on Magnum, my Lord, but it has not found
12 its way, I think, in hard copy to the bundle
13 your Lordship has. So it is really a question of
14 your Lordship directing where you would like it to be
15 popped.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t really mind. I should think
17 it could go in as an attachment to your skeleton, to
18 your note.
19 MR LORD: Thank you, my Lord.
20 Your Lordship will see from that letter the
21 claimants’ position. It is obviously the defendants’
22 application, or the first part of that application, and
23 I would want to make some submissions, but I will be
24 guided by your Lordship as to the order, and obviously
25 it is the defendants’ application, so I was really just

7 :1 introducing today’s business, not in any way meaning to
2 deprive the defendants of being able to speak to and
3 open what is their application, which your Lordship
4 will, of course, find behind divider 4 of the first
5 bundle for today.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, thank you very much, Mr Lord.
7 Mr Arkhangelsky, under our rules, as under many
8 courts’ rules, I dare say, one person is not allowed to
9 speak on behalf of another or to conduct the process of
10 litigation on behalf of another unless they are
11 qualified and admitted to the relevant Bar or other
12 means of court access.
13 The reason for that is obvious; that the court is
14 keen to ensure that it listens only either to persons in
15 their own right or to persons who are subject to
16 the rules which apply to professionals, and who have the
17 requisite training. That is why we have to go through
18 this process, to determine whether an exception to that
19 general rule should be made in this case.
20 Now, my understanding — but I would invite you
21 formally to confirm, please — is that you would wish
22 Mr Stroilov to speak here on your behalf in these
23 proceedings; is that correct?
24 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, please, your Lordship. I kindly ask
25 you to grant to Mr Stroilov rights of audience, because

8 :1 he is the only person who is really able to present my
2 case in the UK court. So I really need him, as long as
3 I am absolutely not a specialist, I am not familiar with
4 all the documents, and I was not really able to read all
5 of them either.
6 So I am kindly asking you to consider the
7 possibility to grant him this right of audience.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
9 The second, rather different request, is what
10 I understand to be your request to me to allow
11 Mr Stroilov not only to speak on your behalf, but also
12 to conduct the process of litigation on your behalf;
13 that is to say, to be responsible for the documentation
14 and for correspondence between the parties, and for all
15 the various ancillary things which arise in the ordinary
16 course of a case; am I right in thinking that?
17 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, yes, you are absolutely right, and
18 I would be grateful if you would grant this possibility.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Why is it that you feel unable to
20 undertake the correspondence and other ancillary matters
21 which you have, to some extent, at least, performed in
22 the past?
23 MR ARKHANGELSKY: There are many different issues. First of
24 all, and they are very simple, that my language is not
25 that perfect as his; second, I cannot read and react as

9 :1 fast as him; third, as I told on the previous hearing,
2 I am occupied whole day with the work to feed my big
3 family: I have to work to have money to survive. So it
4 means that I cannot really devote that much my personal
5 time towards the UK process, considering that still
6 I have a lot of French processes and a lot of family
7 engagements.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, this is a matter which I will
9 also wish to discuss with Mr Stroilov, but is it your
10 understanding that Mr Stroilov can give his full time on
11 your behalf in these proceedings?
12 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, I hope so, and, in fact, we agreed
13 that in case he would have some personal difficulties or
14 having any health problems, I would be replacing him if
15 it’s required.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But otherwise, subject to health or
17 unforeseen circumstance, you are asking and he, so far
18 as you are aware, has agreed, to represent you
19 throughout the case?
20 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, absolutely.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, that is, if I may say so, very
22 good of him. I shall ask Mr Stroilov —
23 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, I am very grateful to him, yes.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. I shall ask Mr Stroilov some
25 questions now and then revert to you, and then I shall

10 :1 ask Mr Lord for his observations, although ultimately
2 I think this is a matter simply for the court to
3 determine.
4 Mr Stroilov, I imagine that you confirm what
5 Mr Arkhangelsky has said; is that right?
6 MR STROILOV: I think I have just one qualification, to
7 avoid any misunderstanding. I don’t think it is
8 proposed that ultimate responsibility for conduct of
9 litigation is taken away from the defendants and given
10 to me altogether. Really what we mean is we would
11 like — I would like to have the right to exchange
12 letters and then do all other things which may amount to
13 conduct of litigation, to share these rights with the
14 defendants, simply because it creates quite unnecessary
15 logistical problems on top of everything else when I am
16 not able to respond to some urgent inquiry, send
17 an e-mail back, then just for the sake of complying with
18 formalities we have to wait for hours, or perhaps days,
19 until it can be organised for a letter to be sent by
20 Mr Arkhangelsky when it is quite unnecessary, because,
21 obviously, I am very heavily involved.
22 And I think I should also qualify this, I think
23 Mr Arkhangelsky made that clear enough: I don’t think
24 either I or he or Mrs Arkhangelskaya can quite commit
25 ourselves for any given day or any given task which will

11 :1 arise on that day, three months in advance. We are
2 simply not in a position to do that. We have to put all
3 our lives in jeopardy to be able to do what we can to
4 assist the court in this trial. But obviously for
5 people doing this on top of their own lives, it’s
6 difficult. So we will do what we can.
7 It is proposed, well, I will do my best to do as
8 many cross-examinations of the claimants’ witnesses as
9 possible, just to see how it goes and if I am able to
10 help more. I don’t want you to quite rely on me to be
11 here every day and to conduct litigation every day.
12 We would like to have that right.
13 I am going to address you on various other points
14 raised in the claimants’ evidence and various criticisms
15 of that.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, well, before we come to that, my
17 concern is that, whilst I fully appreciate your own life
18 and commitments, and whilst I am extremely grateful and
19 admiring of your agreement in this regard, the fact is
20 that the court is put in a difficult position if it
21 cannot know from day-to-day whether there will be
22 representation, as it were, or not. That’s the first
23 point.
24 The second point, as to conduct of the litigation,
25 I think you would have to agree some ground rules: for

12 :1 example, it must be clear whether a letter written to
2 you is, on receipt of it, to be treated as written to
3 Mr and Mrs Arkhangelsky.
4 Furthermore, it must be clear whether you have
5 Mr Arkhangelsky’s authority, here and now, to agree
6 various matters on their behalf. I think there has to
7 be what might, excessively grandly, be called
8 a protocol, so that you focus on these things and get
9 the requisite authority in writing so as to avoid
10 problems in the future; do you see what I mean?
11 MR STROILOV: Well, my Lord, there has been the latest
12 e-mail in correspondence on this issue, is something
13 where Mr Arkhangelsky precisely confirms on behalf of
14 both defendants and OMG Ports that they have full
15 authority to exercise rights of audience and conduct
16 litigation. So, so long as you are interested in
17 substance, that is there, and I don’t think there has
18 been any problem in the four years in which I have been
19 involved in one way or the other. There has been no
20 confusion whatsoever about the letters written by me
21 then being denounced by the defendant, so about letters
22 sent to either of us not reaching anyone. Generally
23 letters are sent to both addresses, and that, I even
24 think, is in your Lordship’s order on alternative
25 service and it actually mentions the mode for

13 :1 correspondence.
2 I don’t think the problem is practical; it’s more of
3 a formal point being made about whether it is right for
4 you to exercise this discretion at all.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think that there are two purposes in
6 inviting you to focus on a protocol. The first is that
7 unless and until you focus on the detail of it, the
8 enormity of it may not quite emerge.
9 The second is that in these circumstances where
10 there are no professional rules in the background, it is
11 best, I think, if it is to be permitted, for as much
12 certainty to be brought to the relationship as is
13 practical.
14 That may strike you as excessively cautious, but it
15 is, especially as regards conduct of a litigation on
16 behalf of another person, and the more so when that
17 conduct may not be seamless because you have to drop out
18 for whatever reason or another, that there should be
19 clarity as to the position.
20 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I hear what you say. I am not
21 really sure what, in practice, is required, obviously
22 within the reason, if there is anything the claimants
23 don’t understand, obviously we are quite prepared to
24 agree the procedure.
25 Frankly, the reason, in practical terms, we are

14 :1 asking for that is simply that sometimes it is necessary
2 for me to send out an e-mail to disclose a document
3 rather than delay it for another day, possibly, if
4 Mr Arkhangelsky is unavailable or there is a computer
5 problem or whatever. Then my sending out an e-mail does
6 not become a major issue in this litigation, because
7 there are enough of them.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, we will return to the details,
9 but I understand the substance of your application in
10 each aspect.
11 MR STROILOV: If I may say a couple of words in terms of
12 advance commitment, as your Lordship has raised?
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR STROILOV: Well, unfortunately we can only do this much:
15 we obviously will try to give as much advance notice as
16 possible, as soon as we know that, for instance,
17 I cannot appear on such and such a date, or … we will
18 be trying to keep the court and the claimants informed.
19 But for the moment all we can say is that I will —
20 unless something unexpected happens, I will attend on
21 the first week to do cross-examinations, if the court
22 gives permissions for that, and then subsequently we
23 will try to arrange for me to do as many
24 cross-examinations as possible, although it will be
25 quite fortunate if I manage to do all of them. Well,

15 :1 I don’t want to complain, but it requires quite a lot of
2 sacrifice in terms of all other commitments.
3 So we will try to do that. I don’t anticipate being
4 able to go to Paris and be present at Mr and
5 Mrs Arkhangelsky’s cross-examinations. Probably there
6 won’t be anyone, and there won’t be any proper
7 re-examination, so all we will ask for is for them to be
8 allowed to make some kind of statement in if they feel
9 they need to do any qualification.
10 Then I am afraid we will just have to update you
11 further, we need to survive this month and then think
12 how we proceed. It is, really, obviously — well,
13 I don’t think I need to stress again how difficult the
14 task is for us, as well as your Lordship.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Please understand that whatever I say
16 is made in the context of admiration for your
17 performance in the past and for your commitment for the
18 future, everything is subject to that overall approach.
19 However, I do have to tie things down a little bit and
20 I have to try and make sure that I understand the ground
21 rules.
22 You have given me an assurance, subject to
23 the caveats you have expressed for the first week, but
24 how about the second week, where some quite important
25 witnesses are scheduled to attend, especially

16 :1 Ms Mironova and Mr Savelyev?
2 MR STROILOV: At the moment the plan is I will try to do
3 that, but if it changes, which it may, because
4 I literally had to neglect everything else in my life in
5 order to be able to assist with this trial, and if one
6 of these things suddenly comes back to me, I will have
7 to ask and we will see if anything can be done, or if it
8 has to be Mr Arkhangelsky.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is a harsh thing for me to say, and
10 please understand the reasons for it, but to some
11 extent, with some flexibility you either have to accept
12 the role or not. I cannot really contemplate that as
13 early as the second week, when we get to some of
14 the major attending witnesses, I can’t, I think, be on
15 tenterhooks, can I, as to whether there is to be or
16 isn’t to be cross-examination or whether there is going
17 to be a great brouhaha as to whether it is possible at
18 all.
19 I think, given the imminence of all this, that would
20 be a difficult thing for me to accept.
21 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. Unfortunately I can only commit
22 myself this far, subject to — I will do my best to do
23 the first week and the second week. It is possible that
24 for some particular witnesses I will have to leave the
25 cross-examination to Mr Arkhangelsky.

17 :1 We do intend, between ourselves, to do our best to
2 actually carry out cross-examinations, so it is subject
3 to any catastrophic emergencies, it is very unlikely
4 that you will be told: well, actually this witness is
5 coming but they aren’t going to have any proper
6 cross-examination.
7 Really, as far as the division of functions between
8 Mr Arkhangelsky and me is concerned, I am afraid we have
9 to reserve, really, the right, or to request the
10 permission, rather, to change at some point.
11 What we are aiming for is really for me to do as
12 many of them as possible, and if we are fortunate —
13 well, in terms of all other factors which are probably
14 unnecessary to go through here, factors of our own
15 lives — if we are fortunate I will be able to do week
16 one and week two, and hopefully, whatever is — at least
17 some of the witnesses which are passed on to March. But
18 that’s as far as it goes, I am afraid.
19 Of course we have also the question of the timetable
20 and how much time you are prepared to give us is also,
21 in one sense, has been left open by your Lordship. And,
22 in a way, it depends: if we have longer breaks, there is
23 more flexibility, and if I cannot do Wednesday on week
24 two, then it can be made a reading day and we squeeze
25 everything in.

18 :1 But if it is as tight as it is now and we only have
2 four weeks, it is going to be more difficult and
3 possibly that makes it likely that Mr Arkhangelsky will
4 be doing it himself.
5 I appreciate it is inconvenient and annoying, but
6 I am afraid that is inherent in a trial of this size
7 being conducted by litigants in person. We are just
8 trying to pull in all the resources we have, including
9 my willingness to help, and to do our best to assist.
10 We will do all we can, but you know that in a way we are
11 not particularly optimistic about our ability to conduct
12 the trial properly as litigants in person.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would this be a fair summary as
14 regards the first two weeks, at any rate: that, absent
15 some unexpected event or ill health, you would be
16 expecting to cross-examine the witnesses in those two
17 weeks?
18 MR STROILOV: Yes, that’s right. That’s the intention for
19 the moment.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I cannot have «for the moment» too
21 often. It is just a huge amount of effort goes into
22 these trials and I think in weighing what to do, I need
23 to have a clear picture, which is the picture I had
24 understood Mr Arkhangelsky to be giving me, that absent
25 some unexpected circumstance or ill health, he was

19 :1 thinking that you would do the lot, but I am simply
2 clarifying by way of test that you would do the first
3 two weeks, and the important witnesses which are there.
4 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I am afraid the question is how
5 unexpected is unexpected.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
7 MR STROILOV: I am neglecting my own life altogether.
8 I think with horror of about 12 things which might come
9 back to me now. So it is not quite unexpected that we
10 will just have to attend to something else.
11 Subject to that, I will just do my best. I am
12 afraid I can’t be more definite than that. It is right,
13 I just don’t want to — I hope it really goes without
14 saying that it is monstrously difficult for me and the
15 defendants to meaningfully participate in this trial, to
16 prepare for cross-examination of 13 witnesses of fact,
17 and then three to five pairs of experts on thousands of
18 documents. I do think it is pretty much without
19 precedent if you discount cases which were held to be in
20 breach of Article 6. So this trial may well set the
21 record in that regard.
22 We are just going to do this superhuman effort and
23 see if we succeed to any extent, or die in the effort.
24 I’m sorry to sound dramatic, but that’s really how we
25 feel.

20 :1 My Lord, should I address, now, various criticisms
2 made by the claimants of the application, or would you
3 like, really, to keep it more to questions which you
4 have?
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you wish to address anything
6 particular, do go ahead. I mean, my general attitude,
7 which Mr Lord can have a go at if he wants, is that you
8 have in the past, and I have confidence will, for the
9 future, be of very considerable assistance to the court.
10 It is not only me that has found that: it is the courts
11 at every level that have found that, and I have not, for
12 example, detected in you any indifference to the facts
13 for the sake of your political principles or anything
14 like that. I understand that you have a view, and that
15 is what may motivate you, but I have not noticed it
16 impinging on your explanation of matters to the court.
17 I am anxious to give Mr and Mrs Arkhangelsky any
18 legitimate assistance that I can, and I certainly do not
19 want to put road blocks in their way simply for the sake
20 of conformity with a norm which is inapplicable in this
21 case. Put shortly, subject to my concerns as to the
22 conduct of the litigation, I am fairly strongly in
23 favour of Mr and Mrs Arkhangelsky having the benefit of
24 you speaking on their behalf: indeed, I think it is
25 difficult to know how to proceed without it, in all the

21 :1 circumstances.
2 Having disclosed my provisional position, and though
3 assuring Mr Lord I will, of course, listen as well as
4 read what he wishes to say, are there points that you
5 would wish to bring out which have been made against you
6 and to which you have answers which you would wish to
7 supply?
8 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord. Firstly, it is very
9 kind of you to say all the things you have just said.
10 Yes, I am concerned about several points that have
11 been made, in particular if you look at the eighth
12 witness statement of Mr McGregor, and that’s at 13 {G4/111/12}.
14 I am just testing the system as well. I was told it
15 is going to come up on the screen once I have referred
16 to it clearly.
17 Is your Lordship looking at it through the computer?
18 We can actually do it old style and look at it in
19 the bundle if that assists, but that may be seen as
20 somewhat wasteful in terms of the money and effort that
21 has gone into Magnum.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: There is an unseen hand which is doing
23 things for me. I don’t know whether it will result in
24 my seeing anything.
25 MR STROILOV: Yes, I have the same. I wonder.

22 :1 Should we do it on paper?
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, there we are.
3 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord. Then if we could go to
4 paragraph 36.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, that’s the conditions.
6 MR STROILOV: It is at tab 7 of the paper bundle anyway.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I have that. I was just
8 interested to see whether the machine is going to work.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes. (Pause)
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It has worked. Has it worked for you?
11 MR STROILOV: Yes, and the paragraph —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Arkhangelsky, do you have that? Do
13 you see paragraph 35 of Mr McGregor’s eighth witness
14 statement?
15 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, yes, yes, I opened it, yes.
16 MR STROILOV: Thank you, my Lord. What I am concerned is
17 paragraph 36 which suggests I am downplaying my own
18 background and experience, and there is then
19 a suggestion that I have appeared in other proceedings
20 but haven’t disclosed that to the court.
21 Well, with respect, that is a very serious
22 allegation. Downplaying is a species of misleading, and
23 it happens to be entirely untrue.
24 If your Lordship looks at the transcript of
25 the hearing where that application was first made, which

23 :1 is at {L3/14/1}, 14 February 2013.
2 I think there are two points. At page 4, that is
3 the internal page 4. At the bottom of page 4, one of
4 the things I say at line 25, I begin:
5 «I did this before; I was granted on a couple of
6 occasions, I was granted rights of audience as McKenzie
7 friend.»
8 Then I just make the application.
9 While we are looking at this transcript, I think
10 I should also correct a slight, and I am sure,
11 unintentional, inaccuracy in Mr McGregor’s statement.
12 It has been said that the claimants’ position on that
13 has always been reserved, whereas if you look at page 1,
14 starting at line 16, you will see Mr Marshall saying:
15 «I should say, we don’t oppose that application. In
16 fact, we welcome the application, because it would help
17 your Lordship in the conduct of the proceedings to have
18 a representative here.»
19 My Lord, if you recall that was the position that
20 was taken for years, really, until — and then until
21 Withers came on the record. It is only now, very close
22 to the trial, that they start opposing it.
23 I am not saying, of course, that the court is in any
24 sense bound by the previous orders, but I do submit that
25 this goes to the credibility of the claimants’ professed

24 :1 concerns in relation to this.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Could we have a look at page 5 of that
3 transcript, please {L3/14/2}.
4 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You indicated that you had attended as
6 a permitted McKenzie friend on two occasions, a couple
7 of occasions. Is that?
8 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I think that was the position
9 then. Now there have been a few more.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see. It was a couple of occasions
11 in these proceedings?
12 MR STROILOV: No, that’s not right. That was the first time
13 it was in these proceedings. I think I explained that
14 in some more detail in my first — you will remember
15 there was a detailed witness statement on this subject.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
17 MR STROILOV: And I wanted to refer to this as well, because
18 really a lot of matters which are said to have not been
19 covered have, in fact, been covered in that witness
20 statement. So that would be in the trial bundle — I am
21 sorry, my Lord, it takes some …
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s all right.
23 MR STROILOV: That is … it takes me some time to find my
24 way through.
25 Here we are. It will be {G2/69/1}. That is my

25 :1 first witness statement.
2 Then if you go to paragraph 16 you will see what
3 I say there, that’s paragraph 16 at {G2/69/6}. If you
4 just read paragraph 16. Not the whole one, but to
5 the bottom of the page and the first line on the next 6 page {G2/69/7}.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We will need the next page. Thank
8 you.
9 MR STROILOV: Ending there.
10 Sir, I’m obviously concerned, insofar as it is
11 suggested that I was, at any point, less than candid
12 with the court on that, I totally reject that
13 allegation.
14 My Lord, I think simply one point I would like to
15 make very briefly, if you see my sixth statement made in
16 support of the present application on this. You will
17 see that I set out in quite some detail the fact that on
18 occasions I am able, really, to ask friends who happen
19 to be professional, for advice.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
21 MR STROILOV: Something I want to stress is that I am not
22 saying this because I feel there is some fine line and,
23 in a sense, these people are really involved in
24 conducting the litigation. It is nothing of that kind.
25 It would be occasionally I just happen to have a drink

26 :1 with someone who happens to be a lawyer, and I am
2 sometimes in a position to say something like: well,
3 Mr Lord keeps going about employer being not liable if
4 it is a victim of a fraud, what’s all that about. And
5 that person will say: well, look, the House of Lords
6 decision in such and such … that is the level of
7 involvement. It does not go further than that, in
8 substance. I simply think I have to set out these
9 things insofar as they happen.
10 But, in reality, I am the only one who does the
11 work, and the claimants seem simply not to accept the
12 truth of it. I do say that is the truth and that is the
13 dispute between us.
14 So far as it is suggested that I would be using this
15 court for political speeches —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Before you go there, what sort of
17 proportion of your time have you spent in other
18 matters — not this matter — acting as a McKenzie
19 friend, would you say, as a guesstimate?
20 MR STROILOV: Well, generally it has never been anything
21 compared to what I do in this case. I think it would
22 be — in every case it would just be a particular
23 hearing, for instance if someone has some — but
24 I recall the case, for instance, the claimants referred
25 to in their opening submissions, I think, as anonymous

27 :1 proceedings in the family division.
2 What happened was a friend of mine, just a personal
3 friend, was unfortunately going through a divorce, he
4 had to dismiss his solicitors abruptly because he became
5 dissatisfied with them for a good reason. He was warned
6 by the judge that: well, it is all right but I am not
7 going to adjourn the hearing if you just do that.
8 He didn’t even speak English so he simply asked me
9 to speak —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How many such cases? That’s a divorce
11 case; how many others?
12 MR STROILOV: Roughly, I am just trying to recall, well
13 I think in total it would be half a dozen, in each case
14 it would be just one hearing, I think. I don’t think
15 there was ever two hearings.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So this is the only time you have sort
17 of had sustained appearances?
18 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, and when it all started three
19 years ago I hoped it would be a lot less. But I don’t
20 think in that sense, I was consistently really assisting
21 anyone on a continuous basis.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would it follow from that you had not
23 previously undertaken the function of conducting the
24 litigation, as opposed to speaking?
25 MR STROILOV: I don’t think I ever did, no.

28 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Except in this case?
2 MR STROILOV: Except in this case.
3 Right, my Lord, I think I just have a couple of
4 points in response to the suggestions that I would be
5 asking unfairly political questions to witnesses.
6 It seems to me, rightly or wrongly, that where this
7 is going to actually has nothing to do with me. It was
8 suggested that all allegations concerning the role of
9 Russian officials in the alleged conspiracy should be
10 excluded from this trial. So, in a way, this is
11 an attempt to really argue the application which
12 your Lordship may recall you have rejected
13 in March 2014.
14 So, insofar as this is suggested, we don’t accept
15 that, you have rejected the application. Well,
16 obviously these allegations relating to any public
17 officials, they are not the centre of our case, but they
18 are part of our case, such as it is, and so we reserve
19 the right to ask anything that is relevant and
20 reasonable to ask generally. As your Lordship said on
21 other occasions, there is nothing special about anyone
22 being a public official.
23 In due course I might refer your Lordship to
24 the judgment on that point, and possibly to
25 the transcript, but perhaps it is better to do it by way

29 :1 of reply in case my learned friend is about to say it is
2 not suggested and he is quite relaxed about it.
3 My Lord, I suppose that’s all I have to say.
4 I mean, I would like — I am keen, obviously, to clear
5 any suggestion in terms of my appearing on other cases.
6 I do believe that I have been 100 per cent candid at all
7 times about this. If there are any concerns, I would
8 really ask you to put them to me.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
10 Mr Lord, time has galloped on somewhat. How long do
11 you need for this? Shall we try and finish this and
12 then break or should we break now and finish, or what do
13 you suggest to me?
14 MR LORD: My Lord, it might be too much to do it all before
15 the break. I wonder if I could just make one or two
16 short points, which might save time.
17 My Lord, there are two aspects: there’s the conduct
18 points and there’s the rights of representation.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
20 MR LORD: Our position, with respect, remains that
21 conduct — there is no basis for allowing the conduct of
22 this case —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What’s the basis for opposing it?
24 Surely it is to your advantage if you can communicate
25 with someone in this jurisdiction and accept what they

30 :1 say in court on behalf of Mr Arkhangelsky and
2 Mrs Arkhangelsky, surely that’s all to the good,
3 provided that there is reasonable clarity as to what
4 Mr Stroilov is authorised to do and what he is not
5 authorised to do.
6 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, perhaps I should be clear about
7 why we are concerned.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
9 MR LORD: Which is the question of rights without
10 responsibility. That’s what we are concerned about.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s, if I may say so, sort of
12 obviously — it goes without saying that there is
13 a danger where you have rights without professional
14 training and the back-up of a professional system. But
15 it is not impossible to give these rights, and the
16 question is, in a very difficult circumstance, what the
17 objection is in these circumstances?
18 MR LORD: Well, my Lord, the idea that you would give
19 conduct to somebody who isn’t committing to be present
20 at the trial throughout, would be wholly exceptional.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It’s a wholly exceptional case. Which
22 would you prefer? You would prefer to have to
23 communicate with Mr Arkhangelsky and only to receive his
24 say-so as to what is and what is not authorised on his
25 and his wife’s behalf?

31 :1 MR LORD: My Lord, can I explain the practical concern that
2 I have?
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
4 MR LORD: And your Lordship can then see what lies behind
5 the objections that I invite you to consider.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
7 MR LORD: Your Lordship has seen the sorts of allegations
8 that are made by the defendants.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR LORD: In an ordinary case, those would be advanced by
11 professionals and there would have to be — and certain
12 restraints and policing would apply to them, in terms of
13 basis for them and the way they are put, and answering
14 difficult questions from the bench, and so on.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is more difficult when they are
16 litigants in person; there is no doubt about it.
17 MR LORD: And I am coming to why there is a practical
18 concern here, because what would not be fair, on the
19 administration of justice, or on my clients, is for
20 there to be some gap, for issues to fall between two
21 stools. So let’s say there is a real issue, a really
22 important issue about whether a witness should be chased
23 around the court about something, and the court has
24 a real concern about it and wants to know whether
25 a document is really a basis for this, or what is the

32 :1 answer to this document.
2 What would be completely unacceptable is for the
3 answer to come back: well, I don’t really know, it’s
4 Mr Stroilov, and he’s not here today. Or: I don’t
5 really know, I’m doing the best I can but, actually,
6 Mr Arkhangelsky would have to explain that schedule and
7 he is not here today. Right, back to the witness in
8 cross-examination. That would be wholly, wholly
9 unacceptable.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s speaking rights, isn’t it?
11 That’s not conducting litigation.
12 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, back to conduct. Conduct is not
13 just writing letters: it is taking responsibility for
14 the allegations that are being made and the way the
15 matter is being prosecuted, which includes, for example,
16 answering difficult points, points that you don’t
17 particularly want to have to answer, whether put by the
18 other side in a letter or whether posed by your Lordship
19 from the bench.
20 The problem with this passing the baton, this game
21 of tag which appears to be what is suggested, is the
22 cherry-picking could become rife, and however it is
23 dressed up, that is a real concern. That if, in fact,
24 there isn’t a proper basis for something, or if
25 a document should be explained to the court so the court

33 :1 can really understand what the defendant’s case is on
2 this, that should be answered there and then, not with
3 adjournments and not with passing the buck.
4 And coming back to conduct, it is, with respect, not
5 simply — in litigation of this size, with a claim for
6 upwards of US $500 million, the idea that the
7 defendants, whether they are Mr Arkhangelsky or
8 the chairman of ICI, wouldn’t be present for the vast
9 majority of even a three-month trial, in my submission,
10 they would always be present. The court would look
11 askance if there was this sort of claim being made and
12 it was just lawyers in the room; they would expect the
13 businessmen to be there.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t know about that. I do lots of
15 cases where there are a great many — there’s a lot of
16 money involved but I don’t necessarily see the client
17 every day. He may very well have a difficult task of
18 keeping his business afloat.
19 MR LORD: Your Lordship can see that the concern is the
20 question of responsibility and conduct.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But it is all so esoteric. You urge
22 me, do you, to cut off the prospect of simpler means of
23 communication and answer through Mr Stroilov in favour
24 of dealing with Mr Arkhangelsky, through this medium in
25 a language which, although he is admirably capable at,

34 :1 is not his first language and may well stump him on
2 occasions. That’s what you want, is it?
3 MR LORD: No, my Lord, I was dealing with two different
4 facets to this application. One is conduct, and one 5 is —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m on conduct at the moment. The
7 truth of the matter is that the correspondence, as has
8 been admitted by Mr Arkhangelsky, and as is obvious from
9 the differing tone where Mr Arkhangelsky has written and
10 Mr Stroilov has ghostwritten, is that Mr Stroilov is
11 taking on the responsibility for the conduct of
12 the litigation.
13 Now, you want to put that to an end, do you?
14 MR LORD: My Lord, that, with respect, is — the court has
15 to approach it a different way, which is how is the
16 conduct — how is this litigation, effectively — it is
17 being delegated to Mr Stroilov. If your Lordship is
18 satisfied, given all the rules and requirements, that
19 that is an appropriate delegation, then I will take
20 instruction on that.
21 But that carries with it — if you have a lawyer
22 delegated, with implied authority to conduct the case,
23 to write a letter, to seek instruction when he needs to
24 and to answer questions from the bench when he sees fit,
25 that carries with it responsibility: to be sure of your

35 :1 ground, to ascertain the position and so on.
2 Now, if your Lordship is proposing in this protocol
3 to build in these sorts of safeguards so we all know
4 that when the conducting representative says something
5 or answers something or puts a point, he has signed up
6 to a series of responsibilities about bases and
7 authority and instruction and so on, then I will take
8 instruction on that. But so far it appears to be the
9 case that difficult questions have fallen by the
10 wayside, and the points that the defendants would like
11 to pursue have been pursued.
12 So if, in fact, we had had a history of the last six
13 weeks of engagement across the piece, conscientiously
14 and responsibly to get this trial on, including
15 answering proper questions about mirror companies and so
16 on, which would be in the ordinary, that would be one
17 position. But what we have really had is a series of,
18 if you like, little cameos when it seems to suits the
19 defendants to take a particular stance.
20 So if your Lordship, in this protocol, if we can
21 work towards some practical way of ensuring fairness to
22 the administration of justice and all parties, ie my
23 clients, then of course, we will not stand in the way of
24 any assistance that your Lordship would derive from
25 Mr Stroilov.

36 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, the comparator you offer is, of
2 course, nice, but theoretical. Of course I should like
3 to wave a wand and endow Mr Stroilov with all the
4 back-up and professional training and responsibilities,
5 and of course, I could say since I cannot do that
6 I shall simply rely on Mr Arkhangelsky to do it, and
7 I shall preclude Mr Stroilov doing any such thing.
8 It is sort of pie in the sky, really, isn’t it?
9 MR LORD: Your Lordship will recollect that as recently
10 as October, Mr Stroilov, when he was applying for an
11 interim payment hearing, said the court should proceed
12 on the basis that he wouldn’t be giving any assistance
13 during the trial.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I know, I know, I think they
15 have occasionally said one thing, done another,
16 et cetera. It is puzzling in some ways but here we are,
17 and we have a long trial ahead of us. I should have
18 thought that a protocol which is signed up by
19 Mr Arkhangelsky to determine those matters which
20 Mr Stroilov is able to do on his behalf and those
21 matters which he is not able to do, and a certain
22 realistic appreciation on your part that there may come
23 a time when, say, a question from the bench is put to
24 Mr Stroilov which he simply does not feel in good
25 conscience which he can answer with sufficient

37 :1 certainty, or which he needs to have instructions on,
2 then I will urge him to say so and you must accept the
3 flip side, that there may be a delay.
4 MR LORD: Yes, and is your Lordship also minded to make it
5 plain that someone who is entrusted with the conduct of
6 the case has to have a basis for what they say, a proper
7 basis, and must not knowingly mislead the court. So if
8 they are aware of something, that they can’t —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It can be spelt out. I must say that
10 I have not noticed, other than, really rather
11 commendable anxiety to ensure that what he says is
12 clear, and so far as he is aware, accurate. I think it
13 is an exceptional case. Mr Stroilov has, in the past,
14 performed an exceptional service, to my way of thinking.
15 MR LORD: Would your Lordship also keep this, whatever
16 protocol, under review?
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, of course.
18 MR LORD: Because if it becomes — giving an obvious
19 example —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And if I may say so, I think perhaps
21 you are approaching it the wrong way around. I am not
22 saying: I hereby endow you with conduct of the case.
23 I am saying: these are the things which have been
24 approved to be done on his behalf. There’s no way that
25 I can magic any more formal responsibility on anyone,

38 :1 even on Mr Arkhangelsky.
2 MR LORD: I understand that, but your Lordship knows that my
3 client’s position is that the resource available is not
4 as it has been presented to the bench. I’m not going —
5 I don’t want to argue with my Lord, I just want to make
6 plain why we have the scepticism that we do. I am not
7 wanting to make submissions, I’m simply asking you to
8 accept that. I’m not trying to press that home at the
9 moment.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
11 MR LORD: But my client’s position is that the defendants
12 have greater resource and, therefore, the position that
13 they present to your Lordship —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: More friends or more finances.
15 MR LORD: More friends and more finances. I’m not asking —
16 when we get into the trial, and your Lordship will have
17 seen on the business for today the questions about
18 City Centre. Your Lordship will have seen those
19 letters. Three different companies in Mr Arkhangelsky’s
20 stable of companies seem to have taken substantial
21 amounts of money — sorry, City Centre has had money
22 from three companies that we cannot fathom. City Centre
23 is a company that Mr Arkhangelsky says he has no
24 recollection about at all. That is a very simple
25 matter.

39 :1 We are going to, obviously, investigate that with
2 Mr Arkhangelsky. So your Lordship understands my
3 clients’ position, there is substantial, unexplained,
4 monies have gone away.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand your point.
6 MR LORD: And, therefore, my Lord, in a situation where you
7 have a debtor trying to keep creditors at bay, it would
8 not be the first time that they are not necessarily
9 presenting exactly their asset position to the outside
10 world.
11 So to wind back, we have Co France, we have all
12 sorts of things, we have Mr Arkhangelsky, the various
13 things that he does. We don’t accept that the position
14 is that he really is as impoverished and enfeebled as he
15 presents.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But must I not bear in mind the fact
17 that there is a certain oddness that Mr Arkhangelsky
18 would pursue a $500 million counterclaim advisedly with
19 at least one of his arms tied behind his back.
20 MR LORD: Not at all, my Lord. Because if, in fact, the
21 counterclaim has no merit — I’m not asking
22 your Lordship to try it, but if, hypothetically, this
23 counterclaim is built on the most monstrous deceit from
24 start to finish in terms of the way the businesses were
25 run and the prospects and what’s really happened here,

40 :1 and what we are talking about is somebody, to use
2 Professor Guriev’s phrase, a debtor who is gambling for
3 resurrection, if you assume that for one minute, but you
4 also assume, without deciding, that there are
5 significant resources sheltered away, it is not at all
6 surprising that a gambler, weighing up the odds, decides
7 to keep certain chips safe, away from sight. I am not
8 saying I want your Lordship to find that. Your Lordship
9 asked me hypothetically, and so we will obviously
10 explore the accounts and we will explore all that at the
11 proper time. We have had no satisfactory explanation to
12 why City Centre, a company we can’t identify — we can’t
13 track it down, why it seems to have been the beneficiary
14 of money from LPK Scandinavia, PetroLes and the
15 Scandinavia insurers.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Both of you have things to say. You
17 are quite right in observing that we can’t make
18 adjudications now, but if I thought that the
19 counterclaim put forward was completely baseless then
20 that might be one thing. But there are issues, Mr Lord,
21 particularly with respect to valuations, and to
22 the rather curious arrangements with respect to
23 the record investment group which seem to me to lend
24 some credence to complaint, whether they allow a claim
25 under Russian law, a difficult matter, but it is a very

41 :1 curious concatenation.
2 As I thought before, I think in 2014, the
3 insouciance with which it is announced that the entire
4 contents of the apartment were sold for peanuts is
5 unsettling.
6 MR LORD: I take your Lordship’s point. Your Lordship will
7 go through the story and I was not suggesting that your
8 Lordship should decide the matter. I made it plain why
9 we had that scepticism and, my Lord, a good example of
10 the practical point will be forgery. That is a good
11 example of a practical matter that is not very far away
12 in this trial.
13 Your Lordship knows the way that has waxed and
14 waned.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
16 MR LORD: And the issue would be, normally, is there a basis
17 to allege fabrication of documents or not? If there is,
18 then obviously it will be put, and if not, it would be
19 withdrawn.
20 Now, I am not asking your Lordship to prejudge that.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
22 MR LORD: I am just giving an example of quite a significant
23 part of this litigation where responsibility and
24 accountability for what case is positively advanced on
25 behalf of the Arkhangelskys is important, because if

42 :1 they choose to advance it and put it to witnesses, that
2 will lead to a certain set of —
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That claim was maintained while there
4 were solicitors on the record.
5 MR LORD: I’m not asking your Lordship to prejudge it.
6 Your Lordship has seen the document. Your Lordship has
7 seen, for example —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, I understand your point. Mr Lord,
9 you said that you would have some other points and we
10 are now at 1.30, and I am conscious of other people who
11 may want a break, but where is a suitable breaking
12 point?
13 MR LORD: My Lord, can I leave it this way: I will think
14 about the protocol and I will think about the practical
15 safeguards that we might ask your Lordship, if not to
16 build in formally, at least to direct or endorse so that
17 we know where we stand.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is always salutary, I am told, for
19 example, when directors take office, that they should
20 read, digest and sign up to the rules of the game. That
21 may look obsessive, but it is often useful, and so
22 I shall certainly require some form of definition so
23 that Mr Stroilov and Mr Arkhangelsky know the basis on
24 which I am proceeding on their assurance. But I have no
25 reason not to credit Mr Stroilov with an ability to

43 :1 understand and adhere to it.
2 MR LORD: No, my Lord, but it should probably be something
3 that is in writing so there is a record of this.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, yes.
5 MR LORD: Your Lordship will recollect the practice note,
6 recollect the order that was made by your Lordship, and
7 the various points that were going to be explained.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
9 MR LORD: And, with respect, various matters should be
10 reduced into writing, so the questions of experience and
11 so on are understood —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are quite right.
13 MR LORD: My Lord, we’re obviously not going to stand in
14 the way of something your Lordship wants. Your Lordship
15 understands I would never do that.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
17 MR LORD: But at the same time, we are entitled, with
18 respect, to have matters, not really just in this, dare
19 I say, rather informal sort of Q & A type session, we
20 are entitled to have this reduced to writing, so if it
21 turns out that that isn’t right, your Lordship knows
22 that, actually, this was earnestly and verifiably signed
23 up to; in other words, this was the position that was
24 presented to the court, and if, in a month’s time, it is
25 clear that isn’t right, then various reviews might

44 :1 actually take place, as opposed to: well, I didn’t
2 really mean that, Mr Arkhangelsky didn’t really
3 understand the question.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I very much understand that Mr Lord
5 and, if I may say so, it is the reason why I suggested
6 it and it is the reason why I wanted it in writing.
7 I have not noted from your clients any effort to proceed
8 along that more constructive route than simply objecting
9 to it root and branch.
10 So I am very aware of the need, as I perceive it, to
11 define these things in writing and to see, as far as one
12 can, without it becoming a disproportionate exercise,
13 that basic ground rules as to the division between them
14 are agreed. They are not meant to replicate the
15 relationship between a solicitor and his client.
16 I would love that, but I cannot do it. So there we are.
17 I think that you are quite right in identifying that
18 writing is necessary, which is precisely why I raised
19 it.
20 Now, how much more do we need on this?
21 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord?
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How much more time would you like on
23 this?
24 MR LORD: Well, I understood your Lordship wanted to rise
25 and let me take instructions and think about it.

45 :1 The one other point, my Lord, is obviously any
2 financial interest that Mr Stroilov has, whether there
3 is one, that should be —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I will ask Mr Stroilov to tell me
5 about that. I have asked, in the past, and he has given
6 me fairly detailed assurances with that respect. If
7 they have changed, then he must identify them.
8 Good. We will have a short break, I am afraid,
9 until 2.15 pm, shall we say? Is that all right for
10 everybody? I am so sorry, but otherwise we won’t get
11 things done, I think.
12 Mr Lord, can you answer me this: where would I find
13 in the documentation, any internal guidance notes or
14 protocols by the bank, or its various departments,
15 identifying for its officers the rules that they must
16 apply in lending or enforcing any defaults?
17 MR LORD: Can I take my …
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That would be very helpful to me.
19 Thanks very much. 2.15. 20 (1.40 pm)
21 (The Luncheon Adjournment) 22 (2.15 pm)
23 MR LORD: May it please your Lordship. Your Lordship asked
24 about a document before the short adjournment. There is
25 a credit policy for lending at {D11/262/1}. I am not

46 :1 sure the whole document is uploaded. If that could be
2 brought up so your Lordship can see what that is. If
3 you can just scroll down, please, kindly, not too fast.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
5 MR LORD: There are extracts there, my Lord, which I think
6 do deal with problem debts. It may not be exactly what
7 your Lordship has in mind. We will check overnight
8 whether there are any further documents that can be
9 found that meet that, but we think that probably any
10 protocols or guidance would be in this document. But we
11 will check.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s very helpful.
13 MR LORD: If I can help as well, my Lord, the experts on
14 Russian banking — I’m sorry to bob around a bit, but if
15 your Lordship has E2, we have some hard copies, I think
16 they are on your Lordship’s carousel. E2.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
18 MR LORD: If your Lordship would be kind enough to go behind
19 divider 11, there is the joint statement from the
20 Russian banking experts. It is actually the last page, 21 {E2/11/7}.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
23 MR LORD: Your Lordship can see there is a heading «Standard
24 practice and procedure of the enforcement of a pledge of
25 real estate in security of a loan following a default.»

47 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am being stupid about that …
2 MR LORD: I am afraid it is been punched the wrong way. It
3 is not very easy to read, I apologise. It is the last
4 page in divider 11.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. The procedure and practice of
6 public auction sales?
7 MR LORD: Yes. It is number 4, and the experts were asked,
8 Professor Guriev and Mr Turetsky were asked about the
9 practice and procedure in and about the realisation of
10 pledged security. Your Lordship can see they have
11 largely agreed.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
13 MR LORD: I thought that would probably be relevant to
14 your Lordship’s question.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, that’s helpful. One of
16 the things I had in mind, for example, is that in your
17 skeleton argument at paragraph 253, you deal with the
18 question of the bank’s typical practice with respect to
19 obtaining personal guarantees from borrowers.
20 Now, it may be that the document you showed me first
21 will explain that general practice, or support it, but
22 if there were any other document for that sort of
23 practice, then obviously I would like to know where it
24 is.
25 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord. Back to representation.

48 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Just for your note, I think there is
2 another. You refer in paragraph 266 in the second
3 sentence:
4 «As part of its internal regulations, the Bank
5 required spousal consents when an individual gave
6 a personal guarantee.»
7 Maybe these are the internal regulations, but if
8 there are any others, I would like to know where they
9 are.
10 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord.
11 Sorry, back to representation.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
13 MR LORD: Your Lordship is obviously minded to accede to
14 the application, and we in no way sought to be other
15 than constructive, and I don’t accept that we were being
16 obstructive in our position. It is really, in those
17 circumstances, a matter for your Lordship as to what, if
18 any, additional reassurance in protocols or otherwise
19 should be forthcoming from the defendants and the person
20 who is going to be given these various rights. It is
21 not really for us to be drafting that, it is really
22 a question, in our submission, of what sort of mandate
23 or division of responsibility is going to be suggested
24 and perhaps, also, questions about interests and so on,
25 one might expect those to be covered. We don’t want to

49 :1 be prescriptive, we don’t want to stand in the way of
2 what your Lordship may find helpful, and we obviously
3 want to get on with the evidence.
4 So if I could close my submissions on that aspect
5 like that, my Lord, I trust that that will be found to
6 be a constructive position.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. I read the practice note, though
8 curiously it says that the practice note isn’t
9 a practice direction, it is simply guidance. One can
10 understand why that should be so, and I have read
11 carefully, the central message is: you shouldn’t do it
12 for mere convenience and you must think hard about the
13 point. That’s as I understand it. And you must
14 separate out the rights — the ad hoc rights of audience
15 and the right to conduct litigation as being slightly
16 separate things.
17 MR LORD: Just on that, my Lord, perhaps I didn’t make
18 myself clear. We had understood conduct to be a sort of
19 term of art in this case. We were not suggesting that
20 there wouldn’t be things that could be done in and about
21 the rights of audience, of course there will be some
22 ancillary matters, but it was really conduct in this
23 rather term of art sense in, if you like, entrusting
24 your claim to somebody else is how we had understood the
25 phrase in the note. If we had understood it, and in

50 :1 fact it is dealing with the rather more minor ancillary
2 assistances that might be given in and about the other
3 right, then I apologise if I have misunderstood that.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, I am not saying you did. I think
5 that it is not for me to say so, I dare say, but I don’t
6 think it is entirely clear in the guidance quite what is
7 meant, but I think you are quite right in identifying
8 that if it is a term of art whereby all those things
9 which would be expected to be done by a duly instructed
10 solicitor, including an implied authority, then I do not
11 hereby intend to infer that, and I am not sure
12 Mr Stroilov would welcome that.
13 It seems to me that we need a more tailor-made —
14 MR LORD: A more flexible approach.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — approach to determine as regards
16 the non-court hearing responsibilities of Mr Stroilov on
17 Mr Arkhangelsky and Mrs Arkhangelsky’s behalf, so that
18 we are all clear what they can do and what they can’t
19 do, and that is, I think, for Mr Stroilov, it is in his
20 interests as well, because it would be difficult without
21 the infrastructure of a solicitor’s firm to undertake
22 all that a solicitor does, and it would be invidious,
23 I think, to require him to assume all the implied
24 obligations which a solicitor might. I think we just
25 have to have a tailor-made solution.

51 :1 MR LORD: That was obviously my fault, my Lord. I had
2 understood that a more thoroughgoing delegation or
3 subcontraction was being proposed and I was, I must say,
4 I was more concerned about that.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
6 Well, subject to any more from either of you, my
7 feeling is that we should deal with this, as with all
8 matters of housekeeping or case management. It is
9 something which I will keep under review, and that is
10 simply to reserve for myself some flexibility, but also
11 because it is a good discipline to remind everyone
12 concerned that the court’s obligation is to try and get
13 to the truth of the matter, and to the fair result, and
14 it has to be assisted in that respect by both sides and
15 not just one.
16 As I say, having read the guidance in the practice
17 note, I consider that I would be assisted by the
18 participation of Mr Stroilov, to whom I am extremely
19 grateful, and I direct that there be a protocol in
20 writing drawn up by consensual and constructive work
21 between you, so that I may know that Mr Arkhangelsky has
22 signed up to certain delegations, that Mr Stroilov has
23 accepted them, that they are proper and that you know
24 where the boundaries are, and I shall review them and if
25 there are any other matters I shall raise them.

52 :1 I wish Mr Stroilov to know that I take well on board
2 his anxieties as regards to the suggestions made. I say
3 no more about that beyond what I have said.
4 It goes without saying that this is not a political
5 trial, it is not a question of determining what the
6 rights and wrongs of Russian procedures are in a vacuum.
7 All we have to do is decide the case. Nothing grander
8 than that, I am afraid.
9 MR LORD: And that’s our position, my Lord, in terms of
10 the point that was put, and whether I was relaxed or
11 not, I’m obviously relaxed if we approach it in the way
12 that your Lordship suggests, that seems to be, with
13 respect, the right way to approach it.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, is there anything you
15 wish to add or are you content with that?
16 MR STROILOV: I am not sure in terms of what. I have a few
17 points to make in reply, that is to say in terms of —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But you have got what you want,
19 haven’t you?
20 MR STROILOV: I think I have. I am concerned about several
21 suggestions that have been made. It has been insinuated
22 that there are grounds for believing I wouldn’t comply
23 with the duty of not misleading the court. I totally
24 reject that. It has been insinuated that
25 Mr Arkhangelsky has some undisclosed assets, references

53 :1 were made to City Centre LLC, to various mirror
2 companies, and I dare say these things have either to be
3 proven with evidence, and the claimants have spent years
4 trying to prove that there is evidence, or not
5 insinuated in a submission relating to a particular
6 application.
7 This is precisely the kind of thing which I believe
8 anyone appearing before the court should avoid, and that
9 is the kind of self imposed duty I have taken, as
10 I said, in my first witness statement, to avoid this
11 kind of submission.
12 But I regret to say, I don’t feel I am shown a very
13 great example of how a proper representative should
14 behave.
15 My Lord, obviously, again, I confirm what I have
16 said in my first witness statement: I have no financial
17 interest whatsoever in the outcome of that. I think
18 I have confirmed in my witness statement that I know
19 this to be a criminal offence, and I haven’t committed
20 that criminal offence. I can’t think of a more
21 persuasive mode of denial.
22 My Lord, as far as the practicalities are concerned,
23 obviously in terms of conduct of litigation all we are
24 asking for is really for me to be able to exchange
25 an occasional letter without there being any problem

54 :1 about it.
2 In terms of protocol, well, I would suggest that the
3 claimants should draft — that’s something I would ask
4 you to constantly keep in mind, that we have an enormous
5 burden of preparing to cross-examine 13 witnesses on
6 thousands of documents.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, you must explain to them, in
8 conjunction with Mr Arkhangelsky, what it is that you
9 wish to be done — what he wishes you to do on his
10 behalf and on behalf of Mrs Arkhangelsky, and the
11 writing of it I can entrust to the claimants in
12 the first instance, but they cannot, I think, be
13 required to guess the level of authority given to you.
14 Equally, I accept that they have better resource to
15 commit it to writing. So I think with a bit of will
16 there should be a way here, and I commend that process
17 to you.
18 So far as your other points are concerned, Mr Lord
19 has mentioned the question of mirror companies. There
20 are companies with very similar names.
21 MR STROILOV: Quite, I accept that.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: He has mentioned — what I am trying
23 to get at is each of you, with a slightly different
24 emphasis and spin, will introduce me to the same facts
25 and it is for me to determine what their import is.

55 :1 Please understand, I am not a jury. I try and weigh
2 things dispassionately and make up my mind at the end of
3 the day.
4 MR STROILOV: Quite, and I think one more suggestion which
5 I totally reject is, again, I was anything other than
6 frank —
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, I have said, but in case
8 it reassures you and encourages you, I repeat: you have
9 been of great assistance to this court, to other courts
10 in the same proceedings. I have come to respect and
11 admire the way you put things. I have no reason to
12 suggest that you are other than candid with me and I am
13 relying on that to continue.
14 MR STROILOV: I am grateful, my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
16 MR STROILOV: Should I now give way to my learned friend?
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I am in your combined hands as
18 to how we deal with the next item on the agenda which,
19 in effect, is your amendments. It is a matter of
20 indifference to me, but I should have thought that we
21 shall simply need to plough through the various
22 paragraphs which have been identified in the skeleton
23 arguments and in Mr McGregor’s eighth witness statement,
24 and see whether they are acceptable or whether something
25 more needs to be done to make them so.

56 :1 MR STROILOV: Should I — is this —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They are your amendments, and you can
3 move them. Whichever you think will be quickest.
4 MR STROILOV: I am quite relaxed about that, if Mr Lord
5 prefers to start it is all right with us. I think it is
6 logical for us to start, because it is our application.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s fine, because it is your
8 application, and it is your burden.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, quite.
10 I think if we just go to Mr McGregor’s statement,
11 which is at — I am told I must always name the full
12 address so that it comes up on screen.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: {G4/111/1}.
14 MR STROILOV: Yes, I am grateful, my Lord.
15 MR LORD: I don’t mean to interrupt, but in our note we had
16 tried to slim down or distil the points. I am not
17 interrupting, but in terms of an agenda of what
18 objections we are still making, we have tried to set
19 them out as crisply as we could to save time. So they
20 are in the note.
21 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I think I just need to answer,
22 as briefly as I can, two rather more general and
23 preliminary points made by Mr McGregor, because that
24 way, that might clarify the general approach which
25 should be taken.

57 :1 I think in paragraph 43, that’s at {G4/111/14} of
2 the same tab, he cites the transcript of the hearing on
3 23 October, which suggests that your Lordship has
4 excluded liability of the bank on the basis of
5 the pleadings, liability of the bank by reference to
6 some other person not before the court.
7 I would like to look at that actual transcript, at 8 {L8/39/81}.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Why do you want to?
10 MR STROILOV: What I am saying is your Lordship actually did
11 not give that interpretation to pleadings conclusively.
12 It is rather in the context of discussion, and of
13 course, if taken in isolation, with respect that is
14 a strange comment to make about the conspiracy case. So
15 I just want to be quite clear that this is not the
16 court’s —
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But your case is that, pursuant to a
18 conspiracy, in some cases between persons unknown and in
19 other cases pursuant to later joiners to the same plot,
20 assets were sold at a very considerable undervalue,
21 whereby your clients, as I shall call them for
22 convenience, exposure under the personal guarantee was,
23 in effect, extended: it was greater than it would have
24 been had not the assets been undersold. That is the
25 case which you have put forward, and you say that that

58 :1 machinery, which would otherwise inure to
2 the disadvantage of the bank, is to be explained by some
3 side deal, which you can’t elaborate or adumbrate, which
4 may explain why the Bank’s officers were prepared to go
5 along with it.
6 MR STROILOV: My Lord, obviously there is some distinction
7 between defence and counterclaim. Counterclaim simply
8 claims damages for conspiracy, rather than — without
9 particular reference to personal guarantees.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
11 MR STROILOV: So there is a dispute between Russian law
12 experts, which I don’t think is very material, whether
13 the Russian liability for conspiracy is quite the same
14 as in common law jurisdictions. It might or not come to
15 that.
16 But generally, simply to say that any actions by
17 Renord or by a bank’s employee are neither here nor
18 there or they only address of what the Bank did
19 directly. It’s not correct: it’s in the nature of
20 a conspiracy case that you look at what all conspirators
21 are alleged to have done. Obviously we have to focus on
22 the Bank and whether it was acting honestly or
23 dishonestly. That I think that we have identified as
24 pretty much the crucial issue when —
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But it is a corollary consequence of

59 :1 your case, if right, that the Bank received less than it
2 should have done from the realisation of its pledges.
3 You say that the knock-on disadvantaged Mr Arkhangelsky,
4 but the Bank had two recourses: one was against the
5 pledged assets, and the other was against
6 Mr Arkhangelsky if he did give personal guarantees which
7 are binding on him. On your case, it undid its rights
8 to some degree under the first and is left with what, on
9 your case, is a very poor substitute by way of personal
10 claim against Mr Arkhangelsky.
11 MR STROILOV: That’s part of the defence. Apart from that
12 there is a counterclaim, obviously, where we say that as
13 a result of the Bank’s actions, jointly with other
14 parties, he was deprived of very substantial assets,
15 well in excess of the entire indebtedness.
16 What I am saying is that, by definition, where
17 a conspiracy is alleged, really liability is determined
18 by looking at the conduct of all alleged conspirators
19 and then seeing whether this particular conspirator is
20 liable, rather than simply taking the Bank’s actions in
21 isolation. So in that sense, the counterclaim is —
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you say that the Bank through these
23 people was a conspirator or not?
24 MR STROILOV: We do say that, yes.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So it was conspiring to rip itself

60 :1 off?
2 MR STROILOV: My Lord, this —
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s the problem, isn’t it?
4 MR STROILOV: There are several points I make about that.
5 I think I slightly deviate from the structure I had in
6 mind, but I might address that first.
7 Firstly, this has never been an issue in this case.
8 The Bank’s defence to what was pleaded has always been:
9 yes, these actions were done. They were not fraudulent.
10 What we did through the executives we appointed to deal
11 with this was to try and maximise recovery. It was
12 perfectly commercial, perfectly above board.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR STROILOV: They’ve never said that: we are victims of
15 that fraud. There is fraud, but we are victims of it
16 rather than perpetrators.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do they rely on it as a counter
18 indication to what you suggest, and in order to bring
19 home the point that if these activities took place, the
20 Bank should not be held liable for them?
21 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I suppose this can be made as
22 a forensic evidential point.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, it is not forensic; it is a legal
24 point. The thing is, in order, whether by defence or
25 counterclaim, to reduce the Bank’s claim or to enhance

61 :1 the claim against it, you have to show some liability or
2 responsibility, which is visited on the Bank, and the
3 question is whether you can do that if you show that
4 some people who happen to work at the Bank, and who, on
5 your case, ripped it off, whether their activities are
6 to be visited on the Bank. And they say that that’s
7 sort of unlikely. That’s what they say.
8 MR STROILOV: My Lord, if this is made as a legal point, and
9 since we discussed it last time —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is a legal point, yes.
11 MR STROILOV: The first thing I note is that obviously it
12 doesn’t arise on the pleadings, and Russian law experts
13 did not address this kind of defence, whereas — well,
14 in substance, these allegations have always been what
15 they have been.
16 In that case, unless some further evidence is — you
17 give permission — some further evidence is served on
18 that late stage, then the presumption is that the
19 English law applies.
20 Obviously I’m always hesitant to address you on
21 points of English law, and especially company law,
22 because I know so little about it, and I think I have
23 overestimated the capabilities of Magnum, so I probably
24 can’t upload the case on it as we speak.
25 The case I was thinking about is this year’s House

62 :1 of Lords decision in Bilta Ltd v Nazir.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. But this is attribution to
3 the corporate entity of activities of its errant
4 employees or officers.
5 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. I think towards the end —
6 I am sorry to put it in my own words without being able
7 to hand it up, but the way I read the judgment, and
8 I will invite you, obviously, to read it for yourself —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR STROILOV: But the way I read it, what it suggests,
11 towards the end, that will be starting approximately at
12 paragraph 200, from memory, it suggests that the
13 position is different in relation to a claim by
14 a company against its directors, on the one hand, and
15 the claim by a third party against the company.
16 In the first case, the so-called fraud exception
17 applies in that the directors can’t use the shield of —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They can’t insulate themselves by
19 saying: well, you are us and, therefore, you can’t claim
20 against us.
21 MR STROILOV: Quite. But in the context of a third parties
22 claim, there is no such exception. Now, the normal
23 rules, under English law — and Russian may be
24 different, but under English law the normal rules of
25 agency apply.

63 :1 In the Russian Civil Code, you may recall from
2 a previous occasion, there is simply an article which
3 states that the employee is liable for the actions done
4 by an employee in the course of their duties.
5 Alternatively, there is the concept of directing
6 will and mind of a company for a specific purpose, and
7 it is quite clearly the Bank’s own case that
8 Mrs Maylsheva or at an earlier instance Mr Savelyev,
9 were acting on its behalf with apparent and actual
10 authority. So I simply don’t accept that this issue
11 arises.
12 In any event, if it does, it is not quite fair to
13 take it as a pleading point against us.
14 Now, we have alleged what we knew has happened. We
15 said the Bank did it. They said: yes, we did it, we did
16 it through Mrs Maylsheva, it was honest, it wasn’t
17 fraud, and then they need to amend their pleadings if
18 they want to run this defence, if there is really
19 an issue.
20 So that’s what we say about this point, my Lord.
21 I think, if I may move on, unless you would like me
22 to elaborate on that in any sense. I think also if we
23 turn back to Mr McGregor’s statement in paragraph 44.
24 So that’s over the page, page 15 on the same tab.
25 Now, I think, again, there is a slight inaccuracy in

64 :1 stating that {G4/111/15}:
2 «At no stage prior to 5 January did the Defendant
3 indicate any intention of producing a draft amendment.»
4 Then if you look at the letter he refers to at
5 {I20/23/17}, there is a reference to it, at the end of
6 this paragraph. He actually quotes the relevant passage
7 from the skeleton argument.
8 So at page — it is numbered in some odd way. Yes,
9 sir, that’s at page 18 on that tab {I20/23/18}. So
10 that’s the skeleton of 14 December where we set out what
11 we say about the pleading points.
12 I think, my Lord, it will be helpful to read these
13 through. It is a few pages, but I think it will be
14 helpful.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think I have read this.
16 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, but the point I particularly had
17 in mind is at the end of this quotation, paragraph 42 on
18 page 21, {I20/23/21}, we actually say in the second part
19 of that paragraph, the fourth line from the bottom, we
20 said:
21 «… the defendants and OMGP should be allowed to
22 review their pleadings in the light of all the
23 developments (disclosure, admissions in evidence, and
24 new arguments advanced on behalf of the claimants) and
25 make such amendments as are necessary to protect

65 :1 themselves from these unfair tactics.»
2 So it is not correct, and obviously that is
3 a substantial point in this context. It is not that we
4 haven’t given any warning of this prior to the day
5 before the trial. We have raised this concern, we have
6 indicated the nature of amendments we would like to
7 make, and that I appreciate it is a late stage, but it
8 is not as bad as it is presented.
9 Now, my Lord, turning to the substance. Generally
10 speaking, none of these amendments, or perhaps almost
11 none of these amendments, actually widen our case in any
12 respect. They are all directed at narrowing down what
13 has been said previously, it’s often said these are
14 qualifications, that we are not in a position to
15 particularise these, that full disclosure is sought, and
16 the like.
17 We have taken it as a principle, that we are not
18 trying to add anything to the case; we are trying to
19 narrow it down, to add particulars, and really to make
20 it helpful to everyone, including the other party.
21 So with this in mind, if we turn to the actual
22 draft, I think it may be — I don’t know if it may be
23 more helpful for me to follow the hard copy, while you
24 may prefer to go to —
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is this tab 6, or is it tab 9?

66 :1 MR STROILOV: Tab 9 is a newer version. In response to
2 criticisms made, we have sought to make a few further
3 amendments which I think have removed some of
4 the objections.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you think we should just go through
6 the paragraphs, or what do you advise?
7 MR STROILOV: I think we will follow the skeleton argument,
8 the note of the claimants identifies seven points, so
9 I think we just visit them one by one.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
11 MR STROILOV: So first I believe the objection is taken to
12 paragraph 150, so I suppose you can see the old text in
13 the end of it.
14 I do apologise, I can’t quite understand what letter
15 is at the start. Is it {J20/26/57.40}? I am sorry,
16 I just want us to take full advantage of the technology,
17 rather than just get into things we are used to. At
18 tab 9 of the hard copy bundle, then there is page 223.
19 MR LORD: I think it might be I.
20 MR STROILOV: Is it I? I20.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is not evident on mine.
22 MR STROILOV: It is a kind of odd script. Let me try and
23 find it on the system.
24 MR LORD: Can we try {I20/26/57.40}. There it is.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You think it is an I file, do you?

67 :1 MR LORD: Yes, I think it is an I file.
2 MR STROILOV: So, my Lord, if we look at paragraph 150 — so
3 I think it is better to look over the page. I think it
4 is clear what is the old version and what is the new
5 version.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mm hmm.
7 MR STROILOV: My Lord, what was said in the old version was
8 that all those transactions were sham, and all that the
9 ultimate beneficiaries of these transactions were the
10 Bank, Mr Savelyev and the other co-conspirators and/or
11 those connected with them.
12 Now, having deleted that engine we have simply
13 sought to particularise this in the light of
14 the disclosure which we had. I simply don’t see how
15 this widens the case; it simply tries to say what we
16 have always said with some precision.
17 There is a reference to Mr McGregor’s statement.
18 I just want to be sure there are no points I have failed
19 to answer, so there is a reference to Mr McGregor’s
20 paragraph 57.
21 I think in terms of the appendix 2, perhaps if
22 your Lordship looks at this, because an issue has been
23 taken about it, I think we have taken the point about
24 the words «without limitation».
25 I beg your pardon, that will be on the same tab at

68 :1 page 57.90, and if you could keep paragraph 150 still on
2 the screen but at the same time look at {I20/26/57.90}.
3 So we have added some new words at the top of
4 the schedule to address Mr McGregor’s concerns, and
5 again we don’t see it as any change of the case, it is
6 just that the schedule was out of date: it was pleaded,
7 as you see, in the struck out text below, it was pleaded
8 as a very preliminary schedule. They are just trying to
9 really set out the assets on which we will focus in
10 these proceedings.
11 Obviously in regard to the vessels, there used to be
12 a footnote at the end of the schedule saying:
13 «Value agreed with the claimants for the purposes of
14 these proceedings; however no inferences should be drawn
15 as to the adequacy of valuations of other assets by Lair
16 LLC and/or other valuers, or as to the proprietary of
17 realisation of other securities.»
18 So we don’t accept, really, that the reservation
19 which is now at the top of the page, is anything
20 different in substance.
21 We could try and find the then correspondence with
22 Baker & McKenzie where you will see how exactly we
23 formulated this agreement in relation to vessels, but in
24 substance, that was a pragmatic agreement that we
25 considered as disproportionate to go and examine who did

69 :1 what for the vessels. That doesn’t amount to our
2 admission that the value necessarily was what was
3 recovered.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They are fixing on the three vessels,
5 are they? Originally the three vessels were in your
6 appendix 2 and now you have removed them.
7 MR STROILOV: Yes.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And they say the removal is
9 unexplained. I don’t know whether they are complaining
10 about it or what?
11 MR STROILOV: Yes, because it was originally in appendix 2
12 and it was accompanied by this footnote that the value
13 is agreed for the purposes of these proceedings.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So now the position is, as
15 I understand it, that you are not complaining and you
16 don’t say that they were fraudulent or in any other way
17 impugnable, the three vessels sold after their arrest.
18 MR STROILOV: No, we didn’t complain then, as you see from
19 the footnote, and we don’t complain now. Just for the
20 sake of good order, we have tried to use —
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is a bit of a storm in a teacup,
22 although Mr Lord will explain otherwise. You do not
23 complain about any undervalue in the sales achieved for
24 the vessels, which were arrested and sold pursuant to
25 the various jurisdictions’ order for sale pursuant

70 :1 to arrest.
2 MR STROILOV: We don’t make this complaint. At the same
3 time, we make no admissions. We simply say we have
4 agreed with the other party long ago that this is not
5 an issue, we are not disputing it in these proceedings
6 for pragmatic reasons. That’s why —
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They are not part of your complaint.
8 MR STROILOV: They are not part of our complaint, but the
9 reservation I am trying to make is simply that we don’t
10 want it to be said later: well, you have been
11 complaining about vessels, you now can see that the
12 complaint was unfounded and all your other complaints
13 are unfounded.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, no, you are just not pursuing it.
15 MR STROILOV: We didn’t pursue it in the old version either.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
17 MR STROILOV: So it was just simply there — I’m not sure
18 what purpose, and now we’ve decided to limit this to
19 assets on which we do complain.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And when you say all of them were
21 fraudulent, you mean all of the transactions indicated
22 in appendix 2 were, but they do not include the arrested
23 ship sales.
24 MR STROILOV: Well, quite, my Lord, yes, that’s right.
25 Again, when we say all of them, we make this reservation

71 :1 that if we don’t know about something as a result of
2 the failure to give disclosure, we reserve the right to
3 make a further application.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You would have to take that as you
5 found it when it arose, if it does.
6 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But at the moment these are your
8 complaints, and you say the assets listed in appendix 2,
9 which do not now include the arrested vessels, were all
10 the subject of undervalued sales.
11 MR STROILOV: Yes, quite, my Lord.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And you say that they were so in
13 a manner which was, you say, fraudulent.
14 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: On point of pleading that is it, isn’t
16 it?
17 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I don’t understand anything else
18 to be complained of, and I don’t think — well, we
19 didn’t intend to change anything in substance in this,
20 and just tried to put things in a better order and,
21 I think, which reflect the disclosure.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you want to deal with that,
23 Mr Lord?
24 MR LORD: The simple point, really, is this: that we had not
25 understood there was any issue about the sale process

72 :1 concerning the three vessels.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
3 MR LORD: In other words, we had not understood there ever
4 to have been a suggestion that there had been any fraud
5 or dishonesty in and about the realisation of those
6 three assets, which were realised by the Estonian,
7 French and English courts respectively. We are not
8 clear from the — and the values were set out in the old
9 annex 2. So we had the values in play, as it were, and
10 we thought at least there was some fixity in and about
11 some of the collateral that had been realised in this
12 case.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR LORD: What appears to be — our concern was that if one
15 looks at appendix 2 and the new paragraph, the big
16 paragraph starting:
17 «This schedule identifies …»
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
19 MR LORD: It is a little hard to follow, but it isn’t clear
20 whether there is some reservation of a potential case
21 that there was some fraud or dishonesty or conspiracy in
22 and about the sale of those three assets.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I see. You are worried that the
24 italicised words seem to lurk as if there might be
25 introduced a suggestion at a subsequent occasion that

73 :1 even these sales were bad sales.
2 Mr Stroilov, I think, has explained that the three
3 ship sales were deleted, and it is no part of —
4 whatever their reservations might be, it is no part of
5 these proceedings to complain about the values achieved
6 on the sales of the arrested vessels, pursuant to court
7 orders in the various jurisdictions.
8 MR LORD: My Lord, if that is expressly confirmed, then that
9 clears up —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s right.
11 MR STROILOV: It’s not part of the case.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And, just by way of warning, I would
13 say this: that having confirmed that, we mustn’t hear
14 any more about it. Those ship sales are not on the
15 agenda for review.
16 MR STROILOV: That’s what we mean. We just don’t want this
17 to be treated as an admission, that is all.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t know why that should be, but
19 that’s fine. As between new parties in these
20 proceedings, from hereon in, I note as a historical fact
21 that there were those sales and that it is not suggested
22 that they were other than full value in these
23 proceedings.
24 MR STROILOV: No, no, I don’t think that is the correct
25 formula. We have agreed not to look at these sales. We

74 :1 don’t say they were for full value —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, you are not admitting that
3 it was full value, in some other, I don’t know, in some
4 other context, but I am not going to listen to argument
5 or suggestion or inference, however vague, that these
6 sales were impugnable in any way, and that’s that from
7 hereon in.
8 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, but the other side of it is that
9 you are not going to hear any suggestion that these
10 sales were proper and for full value and this undermines
11 our case in relation to other assets.
12 Now, that was something we agreed really long ago,
13 and that was reflected in the footnote to the old
14 appendix 2. We simply agreed with the claimants at the
15 time, Baker & McKenzie were on the record, that we are
16 not looking at this for pragmatic reasons. We don’t
17 admit they were sold properly. We don’t complain about
18 them being sold improperly. We simply have to confine
19 these proceedings only to so many issues. I think that
20 is the point we are making.
21 I am not sure if there is any problem with the way
22 it is formulated here.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, Mr Lord is not going to suggest,
24 as I understand it, that because these sales were not
25 improper, therefore none of the sales were improper; he

75 :1 is going to deal with the other sales and show that they
2 were proper.
3 MR LORD: That’s right, my Lord, but it is fair to note, and
4 this is what Mr Stroilov really wants to eliminate —
5 your Lordship will see the values that were realised for
6 these three ships which until these latest amendments we
7 had understood to be agreed.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They were much less than had been
9 imagined when they were pledged.
10 MR LORD: And that’s where we are going with this. Because
11 Mr Stroilov doesn’t want the Bank to be able to say:
12 well, you complain the sale of the chattels and
13 everything else —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am sorry, I am being slow-witted.
15 MR LORD: And the ship sales were for a very low percentage
16 of their original, non-distressed value, but were sold
17 by the Estonian, French and English admiralty courts.
18 So it is an important point because of course it doesn’t
19 mean that because that was all right, everything —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand that.
21 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, and that’s the reservation
22 we’ve always made.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But you have to, I am afraid, show the
24 colour of your money: you either say that those sales
25 were improper or unsuccessful for some reason or not.

76 :1 I can’t have it sort of — they can’t be put in sort of
2 no man’s land. They took place, they achieved those —
3 the salient fact which I feel I can take into account is
4 they were arrested vessels, they were sales pursuant to
5 the sales directed by the jurisdictions in which the
6 arrests were made. The sales took place and they
7 achieved a certain sum. Those sums were, in each case,
8 less than the value the pledge suggested they would
9 have, and that’s that.
10 MR STROILOV: If you are going to go into this, and they
11 will dare to make inferences, we should be entitled to
12 rebut that. I don’t think — that wasn’t — I believe
13 I have to —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not saying other, but we can’t
15 argue forever on this point. If you say that those
16 sales were, for some reason, improper sales which did
17 not achieve as much for those assets as at that time
18 should have been achieved, you must say so, and you must
19 say why.
20 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. That’s what I mean. They are
21 not making admissions that they were correct. We agreed
22 with the other side. I am afraid I will have to find
23 the correspondence on that.
24 We agreed with the other side at the time that we
25 are not looking — they are in no man’s land.

77 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Sorry?
2 MR STROILOV: These sales are in no man’s land. As far as
3 I remember that is pretty much the substance of —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you made some binding side
5 agreement that the court was simply not to have regard
6 to the values achieved, you must show me that. But at
7 the moment, you can’t sort of say: we are not
8 criticising them as long as they can’t refer to them.
9 Unless you have agreed that expressly, frankly, I am
10 not going to proceed on that footing.
11 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I can try. It was quite a few years
12 ago, so I will have to find the correspondence.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We will come back to that. But at the
14 moment unless there was correspondence yielding a
15 binding agreement or estoppel, they are entitled to rely
16 on those sales as being sales of which you do not make
17 complaint?
18 MR STROILOV: Well, no, my Lord, I don’t think so. If you
19 look — really, I think the real issue for today is
20 a little more narrow, and I’ve been trying to change
21 what has been now on schedule 2.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
23 MR STROILOV: I again ask you to look at the footnote at the
24 bottom of old schedule 2 which is now (inaudible):
25 «Value agreed with the Claimants for the purposes of

78 :1 these proceedings, however no inference should be drawn
2 as to the adequacy of valuations of other assets by Lair
3 LLC and/or other valuers or as to the —»
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s a matter for me. I don’t know
5 whether they should or shouldn’t, but you can’t dictate
6 to them or to me.
7 MR STROILOV: The point I am making is that really — we are
8 not really keen on deleting these vessels. We are
9 simply trying to confine the pleadings to what our
10 complaint is.
11 At least by making this reservation now we are not
12 changing our case, that’s the point I am making. We are
13 looking as to whether they can raise this now, that may
14 be a debate for another day, and I may have a chance,
15 really, to find the relevant correspondence.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, in point of pleading you
17 are not impugning those sales?
18 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And I have warned you if you are not
20 impugning them now, it will take a lot to persuade me
21 that they should have impugned later, because otherwise
22 this argument will have been sterile.
23 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. It is not pleaded.
24 I think on the pleading principles, just to make
25 this reservation now.

79 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
2 MR STROILOV: If they advance any assertions on that, for
3 instance, if it is put to our witnesses in
4 cross-examination: well, the ships are properly realised
5 at only 10 per cent of their value, and does this mean
6 all your values were wrong; we are entitled to object to
7 that and to explain —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: At the moment I don’t see why you are,
9 but if there is some side agreement which was struck to
10 prevent you doing so, you must show it to me. At the
11 moment they are entitled to put to your witnesses the
12 fact that in non-impugned sales, values far less than
13 the values indicated when pledged were achieved. They
14 will then put that to me and they will say: you can draw
15 this inference and that inference, and I will decide.
16 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, but when it is put to
17 witnesses we are entitled to give an explanation why it
18 happened with the ships and it doesn’t mean that
19 inferences should be drawn about other assets.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, there are all sorts of things
21 you could put forward without impugning. You may say
22 that the values between the pledge date and the arrested
23 sale date had completely collapsed. I don’t know what
24 you will say.
25 MR STROILOV: I simply don’t want, really, if, as they say

80 :1 things about ships, I don’t want us to be, in a sense,
2 prohibited to respond to that. We are not making this
3 complaint as part of the counterclaim.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You can’t, I am afraid, ringfence
5 things off and not talk about — you can’t simply say:
6 because I am not talking about, you are not allowed to
7 talk about it.
8 MR STROILOV: That’s right.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s not the way things proceed.
10 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord, but we can’t be held to
11 an obligation never to talk about it, even if points are
12 made against us on this subject.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You can talk about it as much as you
14 want within the confines of the rules of evidence, but
15 you cannot make it an allegation in these proceedings,
16 such as to undermine those sales, or impugn them.
17 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: As far as I am concerned, the sales
19 are not impugned and they fetched what they fetched,
20 pursuant to the processes which will or will not be
21 looked at.
22 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that right?
24 MR STROILOV: I think we are on the same page on that.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Good. Okay. If you want to say more

81 :1 than that by reference to correspondence, you must
2 identify that correspondence very soon.
3 MR STROILOV: I will need to look at that, but it is not
4 really a pleading issue.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
6 MR STROILOV: I must confess, I don’t quite remember it very
7 well. I remember there was an agreement which was more
8 or less —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s fine. Have a look. Don’t say
10 any more about it in case I get the wrong end of
11 the stick.
12 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
13 Shall I move on to paragraph 154? Now, in that,
14 I think this complaint that a new claim has been
15 advanced, that has, really, a rather — you will see it
16 is quite lengthy, but I think I need to explain the
17 history of it by way of introduction and then perhaps
18 refer you to the relevant documents.
19 You may recall that at one point, at the happier
20 time when there was legal representation, there was
21 an amendment to pleadings to introduce a new head of
22 loss, which as they characterise, as a new claim, in
23 relation to the loss of business of Onega.
24 The permission was given, subject to further
25 particulars being provided by letter. Pursuant to that

82 :1 order, these particulars were duly provided. So all we
2 do by this amendment is simply move the contents of this
3 letter into the pleadings, which is a place, and it is
4 not very convenient to try and define the substance of
5 a party’s case by looking through the run of
6 correspondence on that.
7 So this is not new. This is, effectively, simply
8 a matter of convenience to keep all the pleadings of
9 what is effectively the pleadings in one document.
10 So I don’t think it is right to explain that this is
11 another new claim being advanced. It has been — there
12 was an objection to this claim in terms of it being
13 a new claim, and I think a number of issues have been
14 reserved, such as limitation and whether it is really
15 a new claim. But that’s it. We are not trying to make
16 any new pleadings in substance.
17 I think it is separately suggested that, actually,
18 these particulars go beyond what has been added to
19 the pleadings in the summer of last year, in that there
20 is a claim for — or a new head of loss for the loss of
21 land previously owned by LPK Scandinavia rather than the
22 business. So that is one half of Onega Terminal, rather
23 than the business.
24 To that we say that: well, we are not proposing to
25 introduce any new claim, but it is not quite correct

83 :1 that the sale of this part of Onega Terminal has not
2 previously been part of the counterclaim. If you look
3 at the earlier part of the pleadings, then if you go to
4 paragraph 54, and that’s at the same tab, page 57.14. 5 {I20/26/57.14}.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is this part of the defence or the
7 counterclaim?
8 MR STROILOV: That is part of the defence, but later on
9 I will show you it is incorporated into the counterclaim
10 in the text of the counterclaim. But that is part of
11 the defence still, and that pleads out on paragraph 54
12 various pledges that go there, including in (e) the
13 relevant land which was used by Onega.
14 Then I think there is a further pleading on the
15 recover of pledges. I will try to find it.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So what I think they really say in
17 this regard, although they will correct me if I am
18 wrong, is that you must distinguish between its use as
19 a defence and its use as a counterclaim. In the defence
20 you are saying that your exposure under the personal
21 guarantee — if there was one — should be much less
22 than is claimed because they should have got much more
23 for the assets they sold; and if they had got more, by
24 that amount, your liability would have been reduced.
25 In the counterclaim, you are seeking recovery from

84 :1 the Bank on the footing of some fraud in respect of
2 these sales. You then have to ask: well, whose property
3 was it that was undersold? At that point, you have to
4 show that the person whose property it was is a party to
5 the proceedings and may bring the claim.
6 MR STROILOV: I see the point, but it is not really
7 an objection to amendment to pleadings, because this
8 part of —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, it is, because I can’t have
10 a counterclaim, insofar as you rely on a counterclaim,
11 brought by the defendants if it was not their property,
12 or if the claim was properly brought by the person whose
13 property it was and the shareholder may not bring
14 a claim because of reflective loss.
15 It is slightly difficult because the defence
16 counterclaim point, do you see what I mean?
17 MR STROILOV: Yes, absolutely, I take your points.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
19 MR STROILOV: I think I have several points to make in
20 response to that. Firstly, just so that you have the
21 position clear, if you go to page 57.25 of the same
22 document that is where the counterclaim begins. 23 {I20/26/57.25}.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
25 MR STROILOV: Then over the page, page 26 —

85 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sorry, yes, the counterclaim. So
2 it is all in the counterclaim, is it?
3 MR STROILOV: Yes, that’s the counterclaim {I20/26/57.26}.
4 That is slightly later than the passage —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But is it in the defence as well?
6 MR STROILOV: The passage I previously showed to you was in
7 the defence in relation to LPK land.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right, so is that 154, that’s only in
9 the counterclaim, is it?
10 MR STROILOV: 154 is in the counterclaim. Between them
11 there is at page 26 —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Where is this assertion in
13 the defence, or something like this?
14 MR STROILOV: That was at paragraph 54, {I20/26/57.14}, and
15 subsequent paragraphs. That’s part of the defence.
16 Then, in paragraph 102.2, and that’s — you see the
17 text crossed out. That’s a very old amendment. That’s
18 not something we are trying to introduce now. So that’s
19 where, I think, the 2013 amendment just survived.
20 So it incorporates all matters pleaded in
21 the defence and to the counterclaim.
22 My Lord, I accept we have these difficulties in
23 terms of LPK not being a party to the proceedings and
24 the shareholder of LPK not being a party to
25 the proceedings.

86 :1 There may be an issue of quantum in the end if we
2 establish — well, supposing there is any liability of
3 Mr Arkhangelsky under the guarantees, then part of
4 the — so far as it was the guarantee under the LPK
5 loan, it was extinguished, or should have been
6 extinguished by the realisation of the pledge, but we
7 can’t go any further because there is no liability.
8 This may be a point for another day.
9 For the point, I simply say that even if this
10 pleading of the loss of business somehow seems to
11 introduce a complaint about the land of LPK Scandinavia,
12 that’s not something that had been pleaded in
13 the counterclaim. So I don’t — I take as a point that
14 there is a difficulty in this respect, but I realise
15 that is something that will need to be looked into more
16 closely at another day. That is not an objection to
17 pleadings. There is no substantive change of pleadings.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Your point is that 154, which is only
19 in the counterclaim, has been in the counterclaim, as
20 pleaded, for some time, and all you are doing is putting
21 some more detail, reflective of correspondence between
22 the parties.
23 I will ask Mr Lord about that, because it is the
24 fact that they shouldn’t be punished, as it were, for
25 their reticence in the past in objecting to pleading.

87 :1 If you wish to rely on the matters which were, you
2 told me, in the correspondence, and which are now
3 proposed to be in 154, in those parts of your pleading
4 where you say that the Onega land, or the LPK land was
5 undersold, then they are not there, and if you are
6 relying on them, they need to be there.
7 MR STROILOV: We are not proposing to introduce the LPK land
8 as a head of loss. We are not really proposing to do
9 any more than was there; that is to say that we pleaded
10 that as a defence and we incorporated this as a fact in
11 the counterclaim.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but it isn’t pleaded as
13 a defence. The counterclaim repeats everything in
14 the defence, but the defence doesn’t repeat everything
15 in the counterclaim.
16 If you want these details as to the basis on which
17 you say that those sales were undervalue, it is not in
18 your defence.
19 MR STROILOV: I am sorry, I am not sure I follow.
20 MR LORD: Sorry to interrupt. Can I short circuit this?
21 My Lord, we think there are two points here, and we
22 could be wrong but we don’t think that this LPK land
23 that we are now talking about, the Onega land, we don’t
24 think that was pledged collateral for the 2008 —
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, well that is the answer.

88 :1 MR LORD: So that’s an answer on any view as opposed to
2 the 2007 loan for LPK. As your Lordship knows, there
3 are certain loans that are in issue on the guarantees
4 herein and there are some other loans and guarantees
5 that are not in issue herein, but concern the same
6 party. So that’s arguably an answer on the facts
7 whichever way you run at it, but the other point is
8 your Lordship’s point that if we are wrong about that
9 there will be a difference between being able to invoke
10 an arguably unlawful — some unlawful increase of
11 the guarantee exposure on the one hand that would be
12 a defence, and claiming for some damages on the other.
13 We take that point.
14 There are two points. There’s an anterior point on
15 whether this was relevant collateral.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand that if the LPK land was
17 not part of the pledges which have the effect of
18 increasing or decreasing your exposure under the
19 guarantee, then they are irrelevant to the defence and
20 they cannot be made any more relevant by repetition.
21 So far as they are counterclaim, that’s to say you
22 are seeking to bring home liability in respect of
23 the undersale, then the only person who can bring home
24 liability is the person who owned them, or some person
25 who is entitled to sue derivatively of that person.

89 :1 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, we are not suggesting that we
2 are suing for the value of the land. Really it has been
3 pleaded for quite a difference purpose, or rather, the
4 particulars were provided. If I remember correctly,
5 literally in those very words whether we can change the
6 (inaudible) if there any very slight changes to make
7 sense of the pleadings.
8 These particulars were provided pursuant to your
9 order giving permission to introduce the head of loss,
10 or a new claim — it is characterised differently by the
11 two parties — for the loss of business of Onega which
12 was owned by OMG Ports. These are obviously relevant
13 facts which show how the business was lost.
14 So we are not suggesting that we should be entitled
15 to recover the value of LPK land, but how exactly —
16 what exactly is the interplay between this and the
17 pleadings in the defence, well we may reach a stage when
18 that becomes relevant, or we may never reach that stage.
19 But that’s — well, what I’m saying is that we are not
20 trying to introduce any such new claim, that the claim
21 for which you have already permission is simply being
22 transposed from a letter to the proper pleadings so that
23 we just don’t forget the particulars which we are given
24 clearly in connection with the previous permission to
25 amend the pleadings.

90 :1 MR LORD: Can we perhaps leave it that if and insofar as
2 this land — the realisation of this bit of land has
3 unlawfully or actionably increased the exposure under
4 relevant guarantee, that is in play. But it can’t be
5 a counterclaim by LPK Scandinavia, not a party, still
6 less because the shareholder there we understand is
7 Ms Tarasova which is, we think, Mr Arkhangelsky’s
8 mother-in-law. So we think that there are a number of
9 reasons why this claim is several steps removed in terms
10 of a counterclaim from being privy to anybody who is
11 currently party to this litigation.
12 So we accept, one: If it is made out, it is
13 a pleading, it is in play, but the second should not be
14 allowed to be in play.
15 Under the amendments to annex 2, appendix 2, the
16 real estate list refers to Onega Terminal and therefore
17 it is unclear whether that would come in, but I hope to
18 be constructive and try and allow things to move on on
19 that basis.
20 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, and I also don’t want, really,
21 to go into any debate on the merits, because we will
22 have a trial for that, and I simply want to show they
23 are not trying to plead any new case. Hopefully that is
24 not …
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I am slower than you lot.

91 :1 Mr Lord is saying if it could have relevance to
2 the defence they will treat it as relevant, but it
3 won’t, because this wasn’t a pledged asset, full stop.
4 As to the counterclaim, any claim for undervalued
5 sale of this land does not lie in the mouth or cannot be
6 brought home as a liability and cannot be suggested that
7 it should. You say, as I understand it, that the
8 undervalued sale may have had an effect on a business of
9 which you were a shareholder and which you may — and
10 I don’t know the rules for shareholder suit in Russia
11 yet — may give you a claim, and you are simply pleading
12 it as a relevant fact in your diminution in value of
13 shares claim; is that correct?
14 MR STROILOV: Precisely. That’s correct, my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And I am afraid I haven’t got to
16 the Russian expert and I don’t know whether it is
17 competent for the shareholder to bring a claim in
18 respect of that loss.
19 MR STROILOV: There is a dispute on that. I think this
20 particular claim doesn’t quite — I’m not entirely sure,
21 thinking aloud, really, whether it is quite diminution
22 of value of shareholding because as a result of this
23 event the company went bankrupt eventually, so it may be
24 a loss or may be a diminution.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand. It is not a head of

92 :1 claim for the loss of the value of the property; it is
2 the injury done to the company in which it were
3 a share(?) by the fact that it had property which was
4 undersold?
5 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, yes.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, and that plea has always
7 been in, and I think Mr Lord is saying: well, so be it,
8 it is in, and we will make our submissions as to its
9 irrelevance at the end of the day, is that right?
10 MR LORD: My Lord, to be clear, the evidence is that this
11 collateral was not registered as against the 2008 loan,
12 so it couldn’t be —
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s your defence. I had understood
14 originally there were two points: one was defence.
15 We’ve done that. One was counterclaim, which, if it was
16 for a loss of the value of this land per se, it couldn’t
17 be claimed because there was no one who owned the land
18 or could bring the claim.
19 But they say there is a third way in which they rely
20 on this, which is that the undervalued sale of this
21 property had a knock-on effect in terms of the business
22 propensities and position of the company in which they
23 do hold a share, and they say there is an arguable point
24 under Russian law that that shareholder can recover in
25 respect of that business impairment. That’s as

93 :1 I understand it.
2 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord. I just want to be
3 clear: this is not the amendment for which we are
4 seeking permission. That’s an amendment made some time
5 ago, so just to be clear on that.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I understand that.
7 MR LORD: My Lord, the simple point is that a claim for the
8 value of the land owned by LPK Scandinavia can only be
9 made — for that loss — by LPK Scandinavia. They are
10 not a party to this litigation, nor is their
11 shareholder, Ms Tarasova.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think Mr Stroilov accepts that, but
13 he says that the impairment by reference to
14 the undersold asset had a knock-on effect on the
15 business position or propensities of the company in
16 which he does own shares, and that is the purpose for
17 which it is pleaded, as I understand it.
18 He will either make that good or not.
19 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord, yes.
20 MR LORD: My Lord, it shouldn’t really be in the appendix.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I accept that, because the appendix is
22 meant to be pledged assets.
23 MR LORD: It is, it is, but on that basis, we could move on.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Can we record for the transcript that,
25 really, these assets ought not to be part of

94 :1 the appendix because they are not 2008 pledged assets.
2 MR STROILOV: I don’t think the appendix actually purports
3 to be limited to pledged assets. If we look, again, at
4 page —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is assets lost by the part 20 claim
6 as a result of the conspiracy. I don’t think you can
7 say they were, because they weren’t the claimants’
8 assets.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes, that is correct, yes. So Onega Terminal.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, we have that.
11 MR STROILOV: The trouble is — so long as this reservation
12 is made, I accept that’s a valid point. The difficulty
13 is the terminal was —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You wish to plead these as a fact.
15 You say that the only claim on which you rely has long
16 been on the pleadings and the further fact is simply
17 borrowed from correspondence between the parties and
18 Mr Lord is prepared to accept that for present purposes,
19 but makes clear that you cannot make a claim in respect
20 of the ownership interest in those assets.
21 MR STROILOV: Yes, quite, my Lord. I don’t argue with that.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
23 MR STROILOV: Now, my Lord, then I think the point 3 in his
24 skeleton, and paragraph 62 in Mr McGregor 8. I’m just
25 trying to think how best to — you have to follow three

95 :1 documents, really.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is this 177 we are now on?
3 MR STROILOV: No, I think we are still on 154, (i) to (k).
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see.
5 MR STROILOV: I think while Mr McGregor’s complaint in his
6 statement, or rather the complaint on behalf of the
7 claimants, really, is that there is no proper basis for
8 that. So I just want to show you that there is a basis.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
10 MR STROILOV: Sorry, my Lord, I am slightly lost in my own
11 documents.
12 So that is at page 46, still of the same tab
13 {I20/26/57.46}, so the next part of these pleadings.
14 Starting at paragraph (i):
15 «On or around 8 July 2011, the shareholding in
16 Mercury LLC was sold to ROK N1 Prichaly, which is
17 averred to be a company connected to the claimants
18 and/or to the conspiracy.»
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You have not previously suggested or
20 alleged that Rok N1 Prichaly is a company connected to
21 the claimants and/or to the conspiracy.
22 MR STROILOV: Yes, that is what I think is suggested but
23 that is not quite the position.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, so you say you did say that
25 before but not in such crisp terms.

96 :1 MR STROILOV: Let me explain, again, we can look at the old
2 version which was in the introduction to this section,
3 and in what is now paragraph 151.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: In your pleading?
5 MR STROILOV: Yes. So that’s still at page 41.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I have that.
7 MR STROILOV: So then we crossed out:
8 «It is averred that the purported public auction
9 sales of the seized assets were conducted not in
10 accordance with the Russian law, but as fraudulent
11 insider dealings and/or fraudulently at a gross
12 undervalue. For example, and without limitations.» 13 {I20/26/57.41}
14 I think slightly above there is a complaint that
15 adequate disclosure hasn’t been given in relation to
16 these sales.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But where in your original plea did
18 you suggest that this company was connected with the
19 conspirators?
20 MR STROILOV: No, I don’t recall it being pleaded
21 specifically.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, I think that’s their complaint.
23 They say you haven’t previously suggested that this
24 company had anything to do with the conspirators.
25 MR STROILOV: Yes, and I don’t accept it, let me explain how

97 :1 it appears really from their own disclosure. I think
2 the general complaint made previously.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you have facts to sustain it, you
4 must plead them. At the moment you have just averred,
5 you have just said it is connected, and they have said:
6 no, it’s not, you haven’t suggested that. So on what
7 basis do you say they are connected? If you have
8 a basis, you must plead it.
9 MR STROILOV: My Lord, that’s where I am getting to.
10 I don’t think that’s quite their complaint that we
11 have to particularise each connection, they say.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think so, because —
13 MR STROILOV: What is suggested —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think a lot of their overall
15 position is simply that they need to know who you say
16 were the conspirators, point one, and what assets were
17 connected with them, and what the connection was.
18 They are saying they need to know that because
19 otherwise, take the example they give of the witnesses:
20 for you to say there were lots of conspirators, could
21 have included you, you and you, but you don’t say which
22 one of them, and they turn up in the box and you say:
23 you were a conspirator, weren’t you? And they say: you
24 never said that before, I had no idea I was accused of
25 that.

98 :1 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I understand what they are saying,
2 I am just trying to answer, perhaps not as quickly as
3 I can — let me make my points.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But they are entitled to know whether
5 you say — before they get into that witness box they
6 are entitled to know whether you say that person was
7 a conspirator, and if you do say that, they have to know
8 the grounds on which you say that they were
9 a conspirator, because it is not fair for them just to
10 be bombarded, or ambushed with a series of allegations
11 which they really had no proper idea they were accused
12 of.
13 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I quite understand the principle, I’m
14 just keen to keep going through this point by point.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: This is an important point, I think,
16 because it may explain to you more generally why it is
17 that an averment won’t do, particularly at this stage.
18 It is not good enough to say something without
19 disclosing the material facts on which you rely as the
20 basis for saying it; do you see?
21 MR STROILOV: Yes.
22 My Lord, there is obviously, in a way there is
23 a limit to that principle, that is to say, really, about
24 any averment in the pleadings. It can’t be said: you
25 must now plead all the particulars of that, literally

99 :1 about every sentence, and this comes to the point when
2 we have really to set out all the evidence. I am not
3 quite required to do that.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am afraid that the rules here —
5 and, you know, I will be flexible, but there is
6 a difference not always easy to discern, between
7 material fact and evidence of the material fact. You
8 must plead the material facts. You are entitled and
9 should hold back your proof, your evidence for those
10 material facts during the course of the trial. But
11 people must know what it is you say.
12 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Because that’s — if I may say so,
14 I had a slight feeling possibly you may have conceived
15 of the process as a bit more of a surprise than it
16 should be. No one should be taken by surprise really.
17 MR STROILOV: No, my Lord, that’s not that.
18 Let me try to explain it point by point, if I may,
19 my Lord.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
21 MR STROILOV: Now, first, the old pleadings, generally
22 I think they can be fairly summarised as follows, that
23 these companies were taken from us, then there was
24 a long series of transactions, notably the public sales,
25 for which we haven’t been given proper disclosure. We

100 :1 don’t know much about them, but from what we know, we
2 aver they were collusive deals at gross undervalue.
3 Since then, certain disclosure was given and it was
4 analysed. Now, my Lord, from which, we have identified
5 a number of particular transactions he actually didn’t
6 know about, including these transactions with
7 ROK N1 Prichaly.
8 My Lord, we do say, I think the complaint which is
9 being made, and I will be corrected if I am wrong, is
10 not that there should be more particulars pleaded. It
11 is said that the pleading of fraud may only be made if
12 there is sufficient evidence for fraud, if there were
13 legal representatives they wouldn’t have allowed this to
14 go in, and there is no evidence of this connection and,
15 therefore, it cannot be pleaded.
16 My Lord, I want to show to you that there is some
17 sufficient evidence to infer fraud as a matter of — or
18 for us to infer connection as a matter of pleadings, and
19 from that connection in turn to infer fraud.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If there is, why haven’t you stated
21 the material elements of it?
22 MR STROILOV: My Lord, because that’s evidence.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, that is what I was trying to
24 explain — not very well — that there is a difference
25 between stating the material facts on which you rely,

101 :1 and the means by which you are going to prove those
2 facts.
3 So, for example, if you plead that one company is
4 connected with a person, you have to state he was
5 connected in the following ways: he had a shareholding;
6 his niece was, aged 3, the chairman. Whatever it is,
7 you have to identify what you say gives rise to
8 the supposition of a connection.
9 When you have to then prove the matter, you are
10 going to have to bring forward some evidence to show
11 that his niece was aged 3, never heard of the company,
12 and said «Yes Dada», whenever asked. Do you see what I
13 mean?
14 MR STROILOV: Yes.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you see?
16 MR STROILOV: What we say to that is that as a matter of
17 principle, there is a different way to — an alternative
18 way which we can be entitled to plead a connection
19 without actually pleading these specific things; and
20 that is if we do demonstrate that this transaction takes
21 place (a) at gross undervalue, (b) in the context of
22 a series of similar transactions, about 15 or 20 of
23 them, where we can show they were two connected parties
24 and also at gross undervalue; where it is logically
25 clear that this series of transactions was part of

102 :1 a plan, rather than addendum transactions happening on
2 the market. And then from those facts it is right we
3 are properly entitled, the court to infer, that this
4 particular transaction was also to a connected party
5 without actually particularising the connection, because
6 the issue in this case is not whether it was connected,
7 we are not bringing a claim against ROK Prichaly, it is
8 whether, on the balance of probabilities, the Bank was
9 acting fraudulently throughout this process.
10 Another matter from which we will invite inference,
11 I think that is fundamentally important, is the lack of
12 disclosure on ROK N1 Prichaly, in breach of
13 your Lordship’s order, we say. Obviously it may be that
14 there are no documents on this transaction, but the
15 situation is: they have been specifically directed to
16 disclose all documents going to this sale.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think we are wandering into more
18 general criticism now.
19 If your case is that the fact of a connection is
20 demonstrated by there being no other explanation of
21 the poor price obtained than that there was such
22 an explanation, and that this was all part of
23 the general conspiracy, you must say so. It is
24 a difficult case, for reasons I tried to identify for
25 you on the previous occasion, which is — I think I did,

103 :1 anyway, my recollection may be wrong, that the general
2 rule here is that the last thing that is inferred is
3 fraud. If there is any rational explanation other than
4 dishonesty, the court will ordinarily adopt that as the
5 explanation. That may not always be realistic, but it
6 is the approach of the court, if all you are relying on
7 is that a certain act gives rise to the inference of
8 dishonesty.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, there are certain — I don’t
10 think we have any problem, really, particularising this.
11 I think that’s not quite the complaint the claimants
12 make. They don’t say we must particularise this in
13 further subparagraphs. They say we cannot plead this at
14 all, because there is not sufficient evidence for
15 such pleadings.
16 We say there is, there are matters from which we
17 will invite this inference, and if they want to attack
18 the strengths of that case, that obviously is a matter
19 for a trial and it’s not a pleaded matter.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I thought they simply said it is
21 a bare, late averment for which no justification has
22 been provided.
23 MR STROILOV: I am not sure, maybe it will help if Mr Lord
24 clarifies it now. My understanding was it was the rule
25 on pleadings of fraud.

104 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right.
2 Mr Lord, does it go beyond that? You haven’t known
3 that they are part of the ring until now?
4 MR LORD: That is the point, and it appears to be the
5 case — it’s a sort of bootstraps argument: wherever
6 somebody comes into play, or a company comes into play,
7 it is presumed they are a conspirator and that becomes
8 the basis for saying they are a conspirator but that is
9 not the right way around. What we are really saying is:
10 the rules come at it a different way around. You have
11 to show what is the basis for saying that they are part
12 of the conspiracy without simply relying upon the fact
13 that you say that they are a conspirator, and that is
14 what seems to be here, because this company is not
15 connected, has never been suggested to be connected with
16 the Bank. Mr Arkhangelsky’s witness evidence talks
17 about it being part of a neighbouring the Sea Fish Port
18 being a neighbouring business, and there were
19 negotiations — he had negotiations with them in 2008.
20 So we hadn’t really understood there was any real
21 possibility of suggesting that this particular entity
22 could be said to be a part of the Bank, and therefore
23 part of the conspiracy.
24 My Lord, it is a serious point, because it can’t be
25 fair that the defendants could just say: anybody, any

105 :1 person or employee or company or business anywhere that
2 gets caught up in this narrative should be presumed to
3 be a conspirator until the contrary is established, and
4 that’s sufficient to make any allegation to anybody.
5 That’s not the way the rules work here. We have to come
6 back at it from a different way. So we ask
7 your Lordship to intervene in that, because that’s
8 a fairness point and it will flow into another point
9 your Lordship rightly picked up about employment.
10 MR STROILOV: I am sorry I must have completely
11 misunderstood the objection made to that amendment.
12 I thought it was a point on the principles of pleading
13 fraud. My Lord, if it is complained that it is too new
14 for such a late stage, then I will have to ask you —
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, no, no, that may come subsequently
16 but it is not coming now.
17 Do you say that this company was part of
18 the conspiracy?
19 MR STROILOV: Well, I think we say what we say. We say it
20 was a connected party, in this particular —
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, on what ground do you say it was
22 connected? Previously your evidence has been not that
23 it was connected.
24 MR STROILOV: We didn’t say that previously.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You said it didn’t say it was. It

106 :1 appeared to present it as an independent company. Now,
2 on what grounds do you reverse that?
3 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I am afraid that’s not — I’m just
4 trying to think of an effective —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Don’t worry about being polite: what
6 do you say?
7 MR STROILOV: Now, my Lord, what we said was there are
8 a number of transfers for which we haven’t been given
9 the proper disclosure, so we can’t plead this out in
10 detail until proper disclosure is given and, my Lord,
11 that was an old version of our pleadings, in substance.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think Mr Lord is right in this: that
13 you can’t implicate people simply on the basis that they
14 happen to be involved in a transaction impugned. You
15 can’t suggest that they should be there because you
16 can’t, for the moment, think why they would have been
17 involved were they not fraudsters. You can’t say that.
18 Otherwise every party to every agreement here would have
19 to be mentioned. You have to have good grounds for
20 saying: you were naughty.
21 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, but that is really very much
22 a forensic point in terms of trying to ridicule our case
23 and a real point of substance.
24 On evidential principles they are perfectly entitled
25 to infer the parties’ involvement in a fraudulent

107 :1 transaction on the basis of (a) undervalue, (b) as
2 a context in which this takes place and the pattern of
3 other transactions, and if there are other 15
4 transactions where he can prove they are to connected
5 parties, we can invite that.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand — yes.
7 MR STROILOV: Thirdly, from non disclosure in relation to
8 that, in breach of the court’s order, we say they may
9 say there are no documents. Well, we will try to
10 demonstrate that is not true.
11 So in that respect, we are entitled to plead and to
12 ask the court to infer that this was a fraudulent deal
13 similar to the other deals in which we hope to prove
14 they are fraudulent from these matters.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Part of the pleadings is to clarify
16 the case that you have put. You accept that you are
17 unable to justify the allegation that they are
18 connected, except that you say that no unconnected party
19 would have agreed to such a deal.
20 MR STROILOV: I don’t think that’s — I don’t think that’s
21 quite right. From a number of other facts pleaded in
22 the counterclaim, we invite, really, a finding — well,
23 there will be a complex series of inferences, obviously,
24 as is always in a fraud case, but we — I’m just trying
25 to think of the way to construct this.

108 :1 No, I think another matter from which we will invite
2 a connection is that simply if they were dealing at
3 arm’s length —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If what?
5 MR STROILOV: If they were dealing at an arm’s length, then
6 there would have been proper disclosure on that,
7 pursuant to your Lordship’s order. From their failure 8 to —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If they were an independent party, why
10 should they have anything to do with the case?
11 MR STROILOV: Because your Lordship ordered that.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I ordered them, did I? I didn’t think
13 they had been mentioned before.
14 MR STROILOV: No, my Lord, that’s the point I’m trying to
15 make.
16 If you look at your Lordship’s order of 23 September 17 at {J1/20/12}.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What did I say then?
19 MR STROILOV: That’s schedule C of your Lordship’s order.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
21 MR STROILOV: And if you then look at paragraph 7 of that
22 order, (g) {J1/20/13}, the last subparagraph of
23 paragraph 7.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Oh yes, ROK N1 Prichaly.
25 MR STROILOV: Then, my Lord, if you go a little further down

109 :1 no paragraph 8, there is an order for various sales of
2 assets, and any dealings or communications, then at (i)
3 there is ROK N1 Prichaly.
4 My Lord, from that we draw a few points: firstly,
5 there could be, at least since September, when the
6 application was made, there could be no doubt this was
7 one of the transactions the court was interested in in
8 this context.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR STROILOV: And, secondly, from the fact that I think —
11 I fear to be incorrect, and I think I will be corrected,
12 I think pursuant to these two particular points of
13 the order, not a single document has been disclosed, and
14 we will say that it is simply not credible that there
15 are no documents.
16 I think from earlier disclosure, I believe there is
17 only — there is perhaps only one substantive document.
18 Perhaps it makes sense — it is not very big, but it
19 perhaps makes sense to look at it now. That’s at
20 {D146/2436.2/1}, that’s one document that has been
21 disclosed to us as an MS Excel page and it has been
22 translated, it is just one electronic document. It is
23 literally all we have on that transaction.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Why does that give rise to an
25 inference that they were connected?

110 :1 MR STROILOV: My Lord, if you just read that further. Then
2 there is a plan — have you reached as far as the
3 eight-stage plan?
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m at Stage 1; is that bad?
5 MR STROILOV: Yes, there are eight stages.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, you tell me what page this stage
7 is, but I’ve tried to read Stage 1 and I haven’t got
8 a lot from it. If there is something else I should be
9 reading, you tell me.
10 MR STROILOV: I beg your pardon, my Lord.
11 Yes, there is Stage 1, and then there is «Order of
12 steps» at the bottom of the page, and then there are
13 eight points at the beginning of Stage 2 14 {D146/2436.2/2}.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So you rely on this sequence, do you,
16 as demonstrating that they are a controlled entity?
17 MR STROILOV: As demonstrating, my Lord, that the bank was
18 planning, clearly and carefully, to a complex series of
19 steps designed to bring all Onega Terminal assets within
20 the control of ROK N1 Prichaly. We say this was a gross
21 undervalue, and we are going to show that with expert
22 evidence, and from that and from the lack of disclosure
23 in relation to that loan, which we say was a breach of
24 your Lordship’s order, we will invite to infer that it
25 was a connected party; and really from the pattern of

111 :1 their actions in quite a number of other transactions.
2 It may be criticised as being a weaker case than one
3 would have liked, but we say it is a proper case, and
4 really it is difficult to criticise us for making this
5 amendment late, in circumstances where we began by
6 complaining we were not given about this disclosure —
7 proper disclosure about this transaction. The court
8 accepted that and ordered further disclosure, and it
9 only became apparent very recently that no disclosure
10 was given.
11 So, my Lord, we say — well, we were not supposed to
12 plead it earlier because we didn’t have enough
13 information. Now they have been ordered to give us
14 information, they haven’t given it, well, we are
15 entitled to rely on that failure to disclose, along with
16 a multitude of other relevant factors. So that’s what
17 we say on this point.
18 Should I move on and then give my learned friend
19 an opportunity to reply?
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How are we doing? I feel that our
21 progress is not as quick as it could be.
22 MR LORD: No, my Lord, there is a question of translations,
23 which might be a shorter point. I am asked if that
24 could be dealt with today because that may have some
25 logistical implications in terms of tomorrow.

112 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Which is why I wanted it today rather
2 than tomorrow.
3 How are you doing? You must be pretty exhausted
4 down there.
5 How much do you have to say on this point, on the
6 Prichaly point?
7 MR LORD: Well, if there is a basis, it should be pleaded.
8 If there is a basis —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not going to decide it —
10 Mr Stroilov, I know you are very, very heavily pressed,
11 but if it is a point you attach important to, you must
12 jot down — don’t worry about the elegance of it
13 immediately — you must jot down all those circumstances
14 and facts on which you rely as giving rise to the fact
15 or inference of a connection.
16 MR STROILOV: I think that can be done. If that is really
17 the complaint, I thought it was suggested that it
18 mustn’t go in at all.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not going to waste time in
20 deciding whether it is too late or not. If you can
21 provide a proper demonstration which enables Mr Lord and
22 his clients to understand the basis, and the only basis,
23 on which you say they were connected, I’m not going to
24 throw it out at this stage.
25 MR STROILOV: Yes. I think I can deal with that, my Lord.

113 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would that be a good pause, for the
2 sake of everybody? Then I think we must break off from
3 this and we must decide the issue of translations, and
4 I want, first of all, you to be able to guide me as to
5 how big, how large the problem is; what sort of amount
6 of documentation are we talking about? You can tell me
7 about that on my return. I shall much look forward to
8 that. Five minutes. 9 (4.00 pm)
10 (A short break)
11 (4.05 pm)
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Translations.
13 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, on translations, I am afraid it
14 is part of the problem that we are not quite in
15 a position to define the size or the amount of
16 the documents we will, in practice, require. What is
17 happening, we are frantically preparing for
18 cross-examination, and obviously every other 15 minutes
19 we identify one or another document which needs to be
20 put to the witnesses. We look whether it is in
21 the bundle, sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t. Nearly
22 always it is not properly translated; it’s just a poor
23 translation which is nearly always incomprehensible and
24 quite often misleading. So that is obviously
25 unsatisfactory.

114 :1 So it will have to be really on a rolling basis,
2 literally, and throughout the trial, as well as in
3 the remaining weekend, simply because we haven’t had —
4 I am afraid we haven’t had adequate time. So we hope,
5 really, to be preparing during such breaks between the
6 witnesses, as you have indicated you might be prepared
7 to give us. Otherwise evenings, weekends and so on.
8 So from that, obviously, and our concern is — so if
9 we have to identify all the translations and all
10 additions to the bundle to the claimants on a rolling
11 basis, that gives them very nearly all our
12 cross-examination, simply as if they were in the room
13 and they are looking over my shoulder. I don’t think
14 that’s quite fair, and we would like some assurances
15 that this is not going to the witness now so that they
16 are given another week to think about the best answer.
17 Obviously this is a case with some factual disputes, and
18 a lot of witnesses are going to be challenged in terms
19 of credibility and honesty.
20 So that’s …
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But under their professional
22 obligations, whilst they may go through the documents
23 with the witnesses, or ensure that they do, they can’t
24 coach the witness: that is not permissible under our
25 rules.

115 :1 MR STROILOV: Still it would amount to the same thing as
2 something you on one day invited my learned friend to
3 do, and which he refused, and we absolutely take no
4 issue with his refusal; that is to say to disclose the
5 cross-examination bundle. That is not what is normally
6 done, that is not what they are prepared to do.
7 Incidentally we wouldn’t be assisted by that because we
8 wouldn’t have time to look at it. But that is not the
9 point. That is further inequality.
10 So we would like some arrangement, in practical
11 terms we simply want some arrangement whereby this
12 inequality wouldn’t be created.
13 If they refuse — I think they initially refused to
14 make any translations on our requests at all, or they
15 said: it is your documents, you rely on them, you
16 arrange translations in a way you like, and if you can’t
17 afford it, it is your problem.
18 I think now they have slightly resiled from that
19 position, but if we are left to do the translations,
20 we still want permission not to have to identify them on
21 a rolling basis because, again, that’s simply putting
22 that to witnesses, or effectively that’s identifying it
23 to witnesses and we are concerned that that puts us at
24 a disadvantage.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Have you identified the documents

116 :1 which will need translation in respect of your
2 cross-examination of the witnesses next week and the
3 week after?
4 MR STROILOV: Some, and by far not all. I am afraid I am
5 focusing on week one now, and one would be terrified to
6 see how little progress I have made. Some of them are
7 identified, some of them are being translated now. But
8 there will be more tomorrow, I hope, there will be more
9 during the weekend, there will be more each evening as
10 we progress, because I will have to keep preparing them
11 and I am afraid it’s going to be pretty chaotic.
12 I think I don’t need to press the amount of work. You
13 have a general idea of how much work there is.
14 So I am afraid it is difficult. Well, it is
15 a difficult task, but some practical solution must be
16 found out.
17 I don’t think I need to trouble your Lordship with
18 addressing you on whose fault it is.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No. Let’s see what Mr Lord suggests.
20 Mr Lord, one thing is for sure, which is that if
21 a document is to be put to the witness, and if I am to
22 get anything from it, the document must have been
23 translated in a manner which is accepted by the parties
24 to be accurate and which can be properly contained in
25 the record of the proceedings.

117 :1 MR LORD: Yes.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I must say that machine translations,
3 whilst they might assist you in the process of
4 disclosure to see whether it has any relevance at all,
5 are simply not documents worthy of inclusion in
6 the court record. They are not satisfactory. What are
7 we going to do about it?
8 MR LORD: My Lord, may I just take it in stages?
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR LORD: The first point is this: that relevant documents,
11 or a translation of a relevant document, are
12 a disclosable document.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR LORD: And there’s no basis, even for a litigant in
15 person, to suspend those rules. We shouldn’t give
16 a litigant in person a sort of extra, a sort of opt-out
17 from that.
18 So if there are documents that should be disclosed
19 inter partes, then they should really be disclosed; and
20 if there are translations, existing translations, then
21 they are disclosable, Mr Stroilov accepts that.
22 So, just taking it in sort of bite-sized chunks, it
23 would be a breach by the defendant not to be disclosing
24 that material. That’s one category. We have two sort
25 of sub categories; the two are never seen before, and

118 :1 translations of material that has been seen before, and
2 that should be the end of that, with respect.
3 As to translating other documents, your Lordship
4 will know that what normally happens with foreign
5 language material is the parties agree, as part of
6 the trial bundle preparation process, which documents
7 are going to be translated, and there is an exchange and
8 usually the parties share the cost, and not every single
9 disclosed document is translated because that would
10 prohibitively expensive, and then parties, if you like,
11 request documents be translated. Obviously that
12 involves a degree of identifying a document of which use
13 is going to be made at the trial, but that’s just what
14 happens.
15 There’s no reason here to suspend that. There’s
16 absolutely no basis for that. And it is not right to
17 say that the claimants have refused to help. What they
18 have said is: you appear to have a translator, you
19 appear to have translations. There are machine
20 translations and we have done some of our own
21 translations of material that we wanted translated, eg
22 for the opening. Now, you play your part, you send us
23 your translations —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So there were, for the purposes of
25 your opening, quite a few documents which you had relied

119 :1 on from machine translations which, actually, when you
2 were presented them out of the court, you needed
3 a proper translation?
4 MR LORD: Yes, and there were 89, I think, out of a huge
5 number of documents, and I would hope some credit would
6 be given for the comprehensive nature of that opening
7 and the number of documents which were, in my
8 submission, fairly identified.
9 So it is not right to say that we are keeping all
10 our cards —
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t want to get into the blame
12 game. What I am trying to do is manage the problem and
13 its solution.
14 At first blush, although I understand there were
15 different pressures in this case, to be told that they
16 are worthy of inclusion in the court bundle and being
17 uploaded onto Magnum and everything else that they are
18 not worthy of translation appears contradictory.
19 MR LORD: But your Lordship will recollect the background to
20 this: that, with respect, is not a fair criticism of my
21 clients. We tried. There were several hearings where
22 we plaintively —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s what I said: the special
24 circumstances may explain that. That the trial bundles
25 are not a collation of documents agreed likely to be

120 :1 relevant, they are just a collation of documents.
2 MR LORD: Yes, and your Lordship will understand in this
3 case that the bank are likely to be more criticised for
4 not putting material — you can imagine the complaint
5 that would be made if material was out there, disclosed,
6 and it wasn’t in the trial bundle.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let us try and look at solutions,
8 Mr Lord, if you please. They are reliant, as
9 I understand it, on pro bono translations. I know you
10 say they have pots of money elsewhere in a mirror
11 company —
12 MR LORD: I won’t press that.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — but at the moment let’s proceed on
14 the footing that they are dependent on pro bono
15 translations. Now, my estimate of that is it is likely
16 not to be very quick, or, at least, it is likely to be
17 subject to the vagaries of the availability of that
18 particular translator, which is going to slow up the
19 orderly presentation of the trial. What are we going to
20 do about that?
21 MR LORD: The first point is this: if there are existing
22 translations, they should be disclosed. We should have
23 those, because that will save time. They can be
24 uploaded.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I want to see where the game ends, not

121 :1 where intermediate bits of it are. How are we going to
2 deal with the cross-examination of these witnesses on
3 the footing of documents worthy to be included in
4 a court record?
5 MR LORD: My Lord, the solution is, if Mr Stroilov thinks
6 that there are documents that are inadequately
7 translated, on the —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Are you saying he is coming across
9 them all the time, because there are so few that have
10 been properly translated? I can’t tell. I haven’t even
11 looked.
12 MR LORD: And I can’t tell either because I don’t know what
13 Mr Stroilov has been up to. I don’t know whether there
14 are 1 or 1,000 documents. But, my Lord, one deduces
15 from that that he has established a cohort of material
16 that meet that complaint; in other words, whether it is
17 1 or 100 or 10, there are documents on Magnum in Russian
18 that are inadequately translated.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How many are there, Mr Stroilov, so
20 far?
21 MR LORD: He knows the answer to that and he should tell
22 your Lordship.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So far. I know it is accelerating all
24 the time, but what is the number so far?
25 MR STROILOV: Well, it is difficult to say off-hand.

122 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, you must know. You have a pile
2 of them, haven’t you?
3 MR STROILOV: Generally speaking, I think I have identified
4 about 20, roughly speaking. That is to say, I have
5 tried to keep it as low as possible because I have had
6 to work on the assumption that we have to rely on one
7 pro bono translator.
8 I have just to get rid of this point: we don’t
9 have — we are not sitting on any undisclosed
10 translations now. Obviously the translator had to work
11 on two quite —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Are you sitting on any undisclosed
13 documents.
14 MR STROILOV: No, of course not — that’s a non point.
15 I think I made it very clear in correspondence —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right. Now you confirm to me that
17 there are no documents in any language, the originals of
18 which have not been disclosed, or copies of
19 the originals of which have not been disclosed.
20 MR STROILOV: That’s right, there soon will be translations,
21 for the reasons which I have given, of fairness in terms
22 of cross-examination —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but you don’t have any documents,
24 not translations of documents, but documents in your
25 possession which you need to disclose because you are

123 :1 liable to do so?
2 MR STROILOV: No.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right. So all we are talking
4 about is translations?
5 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, yes.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And at the moment there are about 20,
7 you haven’t got them in your possession, but you wish,
8 upon them coming into your possession, to be released
9 from the disclosure?
10 MR STROILOV: The translator is working on them.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Sorry?
12 MR STROILOV: The translator is working on them. I hope
13 they will be ready by Monday.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sorry, have you lost us?
15 MR ARKHANGELSKY: No. We will lose you in a minute, but go
16 on.
17 NEW SPEAKER: We have to re-start the TV in a minute, but
18 that’s all right.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
20 MR STROILOV: So they are being finalised or worked on, so
21 I think we will have these translations by Monday. If
22 we disclose them, and if, additionally, we identify
23 documents in the bundle, or later which need to be
24 included in the bundle, that will give the claimants
25 a very clear picture of what we intend to put to

124 :1 the first witnesses on the list. That very much signals
2 their cross-examination —
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And it’s about 20 so far?
4 MR STROILOV: I think it is about 20 so far, yes. I’m
5 speaking from the top of my head. I’ve made the search,
6 it may be 15.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but in that sort of — under 50.
8 MR STROILOV: In that order, yes, my Lord. I think so. But
9 then I stress that I have made much less progress than
10 I hoped, and I will keep working on this throughout the
11 weekend, and then in the evenings throughout the week
12 and then until I am able … And then there will be new
13 documents coming up all this time. So it is more
14 a problem for the future, in a way.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
16 Yes, Mr Lord.
17 MR LORD: We would suggest that the normal rules should
18 apply, so if there are translations at the moment, there
19 are existing translations, they should be disclosed,
20 because if they are adequate that will dispense with the
21 need to worry about them.
22 If there are further documents that need
23 translating, we would suggest that Mr Arkhangelsky
24 should identify them so that we don’t waste time on
25 Monday and Tuesday. The complaint is made that there is

125 :1 insufficient time for cross-examination. If we are
2 going to have to wait ages to translate a document line
3 by line, because it is not in English satisfactorily,
4 that would be a pity.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How long does it take to load up on
6 Magnum? Supposing he produces them, supposing the
7 translation is produced on a rolling basis as and when
8 the witnesses are cross-examined. How long does it take
9 to load up onto Magnum.
10 MR LORD: I think it can take anywhere between half an hour
11 and two hours, and it may depend on the volume, whether
12 they are doing one or a number.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And is there any real problem in some
14 documents being dealt with as paper documents rather
15 than Magnum documents? The only person who might,
16 I suppose, be slightly inconvenienced by that is
17 Mr Arkhangelsky, who wouldn’t have them, but he might be
18 prepared to waive that.
19 MR LORD: I suppose in theory, my Lord, that’s right.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand your point on the rules,
21 but this is such a weird case, why do you really need
22 these? Logistically we can get over it by the paper
23 document route: why do you actually need them? You have
24 had a chance to look at any documents, do any
25 translations you want.

126 :1 MR LORD: That’s right, my Lord, but the paper documents
2 would be here. Ordinarily in a Magnum trial, the
3 documents are put on to Magnum, people operate on
4 Magnum, the transcript shows Magnum, they have to be put
5 in bundles. The efficient conduct of a case would
6 normally not allow for this sort of activity.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, it is not perfect, but I am
8 getting the impression — I thought there might be
9 thousands of documents.
10 MR LORD: If your Lordship thinks that fairness requires
11 that the usual rules allow this inefficiency so that
12 Mr Stroilov can, essentially, surprise my client’s
13 witnesses, then we will obviously go along with that,
14 my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t think they are surprising your
16 witnesses, because you have the documents, you just
17 haven’t got the translations. If there were documents
18 which were being held back, then I think that is quite
19 inappropriate. But if they are translations which are
20 being held back and they are so finite that they might
21 give an inkling into the way in which he wishes to
22 conduct his cross-examination, then I think the balance
23 of fairness is that they be produced, with sufficient
24 copies so that you can follow them, and so the witness
25 can follow them, and then at some point at the end of

127 :1 proceedings that day, they must be loaded up in some way
2 into Magnum.
3 MR LORD: I am content with that, subject to your Lordship
4 reviewing that process as we go along, because if it
5 turns out that the inefficiency and disruption is out of
6 all proportion to the forensic advantage that
7 your Lordship feels should properly be reserved for the
8 defendants — I’m not being pejorative, I’m being
9 succinct — then I would ask your Lordship to review it.
10 If we waste a lot of time and it looks like, really,
11 it is not worth the candle, I would invite some review
12 to take place.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: This trial has to be looked at day by
14 day as to whether it is progressing properly or not.
15 MR LORD: Very well.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is on a knife-edge, in some ways.
17 MR LORD: Yes, and the point is made that there will be
18 no opportunity for us to check the translations, so we
19 will do the best we can in those circumstances.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. It is unsatisfactory, it is, in
21 my view, as I indicated through my clerk, the product
22 of insufficient focus on the part of the defendants in
23 objective terms on the bundles, but they say the
24 insufficiency was not their choice, but simply the
25 consequence of their predicament. There we are.

128 :1 I can’t gainsay that. All I have to try and do is do
2 the least unfair thing, and I think that is the least
3 unfair thing.
4 I quite take your point, I would be totally
5 different in my view if there are any documents which
6 have not been disclosed, which are not translations but
7 are actual documents. There won’t be exception for
8 those, those must be disclosed as soon as they come into
9 the possession of the party, on both sides.
10 MR LORD: Yes, there just is one further point. I think it
11 follows that all the documents that Mr Stroilov has in
12 mind are, at least, on Magnum, have been uploaded.
13 Obviously, my Lord, my clients have uploaded a lot
14 of material, I’m assuming that they are on Magnum.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see what you mean. They might have
16 been disclosed but have gone under the radar?
17 MR LORD: They may have gone under the radar. I am assuming
18 that the Russian document — for these purposes there
19 must be a Russian document — is somewhere in the…
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think you should confirm that. You
21 can’t pluck out — we are to take as the disclosed
22 relevant documents that which is in the bundle.
23 MR STROILOV: No, that’s the trouble. There are documents
24 which are not in the bundle and they are concerned about
25 that, and if we have to upload them on the rolling

129 :1 basis, that has virtually the same effect in the sense
2 of showing the sequence of our cross-examination.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see, so there is a third category,
4 is there, of documents which were disclosed but which
5 are not in the bundles?
6 MR STROILOV: Yes, quite a few. Yes, my Lord.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Quite a few?
8 MR STROILOV: Quite of few of them, yes.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What sort of numbers are we talking
10 about here?
11 MR STROILOV: Again, it is out of — I would say that, as we
12 identify the documents which need to be added,
13 approximately half of them are not in the bundle at all,
14 the other half are in the bundle, accompanied by Google
15 translations. So roughly that’s the split.
16 So out of 20, which is a rough figure, 10 will be
17 not be in the bundle, 10 will be in the bundle, not
18 adequately translated.
19 I think we are descending into a bit of a blame
20 game, but I must say, obviously we have made a large and
21 unsuccessful application and then a large, unsuccessful
22 appeal and we can be, by definition, criticised for not
23 getting our priorities right. Subject to that, really,
24 do the claimants really need people like Mr Arkhangelsky
25 and me to tell them that if the document is being

130 :1 brought to the court’s attention, it must be made
2 intelligible and reliable.
3 So the starting point is that everything they
4 thought they need to include in the trial bundle should
5 have been translated. So in that respect they are at
6 fault, and now in addition to us being able really to
7 obtain such translations as we can without having to put
8 all of our cards on the table in terms of
9 cross-examination, in addition to that I would expect
10 some help from them in terms of resources being made
11 available.
12 I don’t see any legitimate grounds for refusing to
13 give an undertaking not to forewarn the witnesses. If
14 they insist on that, I’m not sure your Lordship can
15 quite order that to them.
16 MR LORD: Shall we just go with this for now. If it is of
17 this order, we didn’t know. If it was going to be 2,000
18 documents, next week would have gone to pot within about
19 half an hour. If it is 20 and we have copies and
20 Mr Stroilov is prepared, despite all his problems, to
21 make copies so we can all follow fairly, shall we see
22 how we go. Sorry to interrupt.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think we will, and if there comes
24 a time when a document, for whatever reason, the
25 significance of was not appreciated when the bundles

131 :1 were compiled, and you need to have a think about it or
2 the witness does, then that will just be, hopefully,
3 a one-off. If it becomes a two, three, four, five-off,
4 then we will have to take another view.
5 MR LORD: Yes.
6 MR STROILOV: I do fear we won’t be quite up to speed in
7 terms of burdening the pro bono translator who has apart
8 from doing pro bono —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The thing is, if you want them to do
10 the translation, and I haven’t asked them whether they
11 would, you have to identify them and I think there is
12 a limit to which I can handcuff them in what they tell
13 their client.
14 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I see that.
15 I don’t want to go too much about fairness, because
16 I don’t want to talk about it every day, but I simply do
17 flag this as something to go into your continuous
18 review list.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We are going to approach this, as with
20 many things in this case, in a slightly crab-like way.
21 You are going to continue your efforts to identify and
22 to obtain translations. You will obtain copies of both
23 the document and its translated version in such numbers
24 as you and Mr Lord discuss. The reason the burden is on
25 you is because otherwise they would have sight of

132 :1 the documents that you seek, so I am afraid that’s
2 a necessary consequence of the way you want to approach
3 the matter.
4 The documents will then be put to the witnesses in
5 hard copy rather than on Magnum. I must have a copy as
6 well, of course. They will only subsequently, that
7 night, or whenever, be uploaded onto Magnum and become
8 part of the Magnum record.
9 If there are any documents in their original which
10 you have not disclosed previously, you must disclose
11 them forthwith upon finding that fact, and there is no
12 release of that obligation. This is a pragmatic
13 solution to a difficult issue. I will keep it under
14 review if I think that, frankly, more harm than good
15 will flow from it.
16 MR STROILOV: But we are released from the obligation in
17 relation to translations only? We don’t have —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are released in terms of
19 the translations only until put to the witness, yes.
20 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
21 Well, I am troubled, it is 4.30 and there are still
22 a few items on the agenda.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, is there anything else on
24 translation or the assembly of the documentation, which
25 you have had to take very much the lion’s share of, and

133 :1 therefore I’m particularly anxious to assist now rather
2 than tomorrow when the weekend will be upon us?
3 MR LORD: I don’t think so, my Lord. There’s obviously the
4 disclosure, a couple of disclosure matters.
5 Just in terms of getting things done tomorrow,
6 that’s all.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How are you placed tomorrow? How long
8 do we need tomorrow?
9 MR STROILOV: Frankly, if we are to choose, my preference,
10 really, would be to sacrifice an hour on Monday simply
11 because I was hoping to spend tomorrow preparing
12 my cross-examinations.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But these witnesses are coming from
14 far and wide, aren’t they?
15 MR STROILOV: They are, my Lord, that’s right.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t think we can, just because
17 that would be a preference, dislodge that timetable.
18 Would you like to start early tomorrow in order that you
19 finish early and can go and prepare?
20 MR STROILOV: Well, my Lord, I don’t really know. In a way
21 any hour is as good as another. My trouble is I have to
22 travel from Cambridge, so that takes me approximately
23 two hours.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: When would you prefer to start? What
25 I find is that continuous work is often more productive

134 :1 than sort of, you know, an hour here and an hour there.
2 That is not necessarily the case with everybody. I want
3 to assist as best as I can. I have tomorrow, which
4 I would very much prefer to be thinking about the case,
5 but if there are matters which still have to be
6 addressed, as obviously there will be, I will fit in
7 with your schedules as to how best to deal with that in
8 order to give you maximum time.
9 MR LORD: My Lord, the pleading points and protocol should
10 be addressed before we start the trial on Monday, and
11 I respectfully suggest that we can’t take time out from
12 Monday with witnesses coming from Russia.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, we can’t, we have to do them.
14 MR LORD: And the fairness points are the ones such the
15 employees’ point. If various other Bank personnel or,
16 anybody, really, but particularly witnesses, are going
17 to be said to be conspirators, then that should be
18 clearly set out, tomorrow, as the absolute latest, the
19 trial is starting on Monday. So this needs to be
20 addressed and cleared away.
21 If, in fact, Mr Stroilov wanted to go through our
22 points and indicate briefly where things are no longer
23 pursued or what would happen, then we could decide how
24 much time was required. It can’t wait until Monday.
25 MR STROILOV: Okay, then we have to do it tomorrow. I think

135 :1 we have narrowed down —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I will do my best to re-read these.
3 I was looking at an old pleading, I have various notes
4 on those and I will transport them over and try and
5 reduce the amount of questions, but I think if you are
6 suggesting any individuals as having been or become
7 party to the conspiracy you alleged, you must identify
8 them.
9 MR STROILOV: Perhaps I had better address you on that
10 tomorrow. I think that’s subject to certain exceptions,
11 even though I must say I don’t profess to be an expert
12 on this and, in a way, I am relying on the common sense
13 of the thing.
14 What I say, well, what we see from outside the
15 alleged conspiracy, is that things A, B, and C are done
16 by the Bank, and we have pleaded that these things are
17 fraudulent.
18 Now, from disclosure we see that committees X, Y and
19 Z met on that and approved these things by such and such
20 road.
21 Now, a member of that committee who voted for that
22 thing to be done is coming to give evidence. He may
23 say: well, I did so just because Mrs Maylsheva didn’t
24 visit and I didn’t feel I was in a position to argue
25 with her on that, that was her area.

136 :1 Or he may say: well, no, it’s something — he may
2 start arguing and say it was honest and proper, and from
3 that we will invite different inferences.
4 So this being a claim against the Bank and
5 Mr Savelyev, and obviously the allegations are against
6 them, but in a way I don’t see how and why our hands
7 should be tied, and why it is fair we are precluded from
8 alleged dishonesty —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am afraid it is the rule. I quite
10 take your point that there may be ancillary players who
11 participated in the various events, but the primary
12 actors to the conspiracy must be identified and you must
13 say what their objective was and how they agreed it, and
14 if you say that the law enables you also to bring into
15 the fold people who were not part of the original
16 conspiracy but subsequently were brought into the fold
17 and signed up to its objectives, you must identify them
18 and you must say when they joined the conspiracy and by
19 what means.
20 It is only fair, Mr Stroilov. It is not fair to
21 hold over people the very fact that they were caught up
22 in the events means that though you haven’t named them,
23 they are at peril in this regard.
24 MR STROILOV: At the same time, if we allege that it was the
25 Bank who committed fraud, we cannot be expected to know

137 :1 each executive who was involved.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You don’t have to know each to
3 succeed. You have to know the principal actors and name
4 them.
5 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. What we are concerned about
6 is: well. you have named Mr Savelyev, you have named
7 Ms Maylsheva. Apart from that, it is not open to
8 you suggest that any of the executives was acting
9 dishonestly —
10 MR LORD: My Lord, the reason this is a very important point
11 is fairness to anybody who is said to be a conspirator,
12 it is basic fairness that people should know that,
13 wherever they are in the world, this is how English
14 proceedings run. You have a basis — it may be that
15 what’s going to be said is that simply because you were
16 in St Petersburg and you happened across the Bank, you
17 must be a dishonest conspirator. It may be that that is
18 the basis that’s going to be put in play. But there has
19 to be identification of somebody, anybody, accused of
20 fraud/dishonesty, whether they are a party or not,
21 a fortiori, where they are a witness coming along to
22 these proceedings, they will have to be told: am I being
23 accused of dishonesty and, if so, on what basis.
24 The particular importance here is not just fairness
25 to the Bank’s witnesses who are coming, but because it

138 :1 will distil the nature of the conspiracy case, because
2 it will identify who is said to be in on this
3 conspiracy, because what will be unacceptable is to have
4 this nebulous: it may be other people, we are not quite
5 sure, because people are coming from Russia to meet
6 these very serious charges on this very large claim, and
7 it needs to be identified whether they are being said to
8 be a dishonest member of the conspiracy or not, because
9 it will be important whether they are or are not,
10 because if they are not said to be, and we would say in
11 parentheses, rightly, that will have its own effect.
12 So it is sort of decision time now, really. How
13 many people are said to be in on this conspiracy,
14 because — so your Lordship knows where this is going —
15 if the defendants are right, we would submit there can’t
16 be anybody in St Petersburg who wasn’t privy to this,
17 let alone the Bank. So if that is where this is going
18 to go, we need to know exactly who coming next week, if
19 anybody, is said to be a fraudulent conspirator.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The thing is, that is broadly right,
21 Mr Stroilov, they must know.
22 Just for your reassurance, you don’t have, in order
23 to succeed, to have successfully identified every member
24 of the conspiracy. You don’t have to name everybody and
25 to succeed — it doesn’t defeat your claim for someone

139 :1 to stand up and say: actually, they didn’t get me,
2 therefore there was no conspiracy.
3 All you have to do is say who the people were who
4 you say were primarily responsible for hatching this
5 plot.
6 MR STROILOV: Primarily responsible, that I accept.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
8 MR STROILOV: Apart from that — as I say, I think that’s
9 really a practical problem.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Who was in on hatching the plot. You
11 know, there are lots of people who may unwittingly or
12 wittingly have been involved in it. That’s possible.
13 You don’t have to say that. It can be a conspiracy
14 between X and Y and persons unknown, and still be
15 competent at law. But to get off the ground you must
16 show that there were at least two people who hatched
17 a plot, and that the plot had a certain outline which
18 was subsequently put into place.
19 My reading of your case is that’s all you need,
20 because you are not — because they are not parties,
21 there’s no point in anything else.
22 MR STROILOV: Yes, well quite.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you see what I mean?
24 Mr Lord, is that —
25 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord, but the point still remains that the

140 :1 conspiracy witnesses are coming, and if it would be
2 expected that those witnesses would know about the
3 conspiracy, then it must be put to them, because in
4 closing — so Mr Stroilov is under no misapprehension —
5 a lot of Bank people are coming who filled in forms and
6 were aware of things. If it is going to be suggested
7 that this happened then it had better be put fairly. It
8 would not do in closing to say: well, actually, lots of
9 other bureaucrats were involved but I didn’t at the time
10 in the trial think I should really say that. That will
11 not be acceptable.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You do have to identify them for that
13 purpose, Mr Stroilov.
14 MR STROILOV: But, my Lord, let me just set out the
15 practical problem: we hear, say, witness X, given
16 a witness statement which reads all right. At the same
17 time, we find a dozen of documents in the bundle signed
18 by that person seen to us which relate to what we say is
19 a fraudulent transaction and for which that witness
20 gives no explanation.
21 Now, all we can do is put these documents to
22 the witness in cross-examination and see whether that
23 witness can give an innocent explanation or not, and
24 then we can, in closing submissions, we say: well, the
25 witness’s responses have indicated that, clearly, he was

141 :1 just really doing this fraud and clearly on behalf of
2 the Bank.
3 Or, alternatively, we can say: well, as the witness
4 has explained, he did it innocently or he did it under
5 the direction of somebody else. He just signed it
6 without really thinking of it.
7 I don’t feel — obviously, I haven’t ever been in
8 a position to research, there must be lots of law on
9 that point, but I don’t see how, so long as we infer, we
10 have, we say, facts from which to infer fraud on behalf
11 of the Bank, we cannot be forced to identify each, to
12 say in relation to each of the Bank’s executives
13 involved, whether they were dishonest. I agree we have
14 to identify the primary movers of the fraud. We’ve
15 identified two or three, from memory, but we can’t be
16 forced to say that in relation to each witness because
17 they might give — we don’t want to accuse people before
18 we’ve —
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You don’t have to. You have to show
20 what the conspiracy at the very least comprised, and
21 that needs more than one person to be a conspiracy. If
22 you wish to put to other witnesses whether they knew
23 about this and knew about that, then I can’t stop you.
24 MR LORD: No, my Lord, but it appears from Mr Stroilov’s
25 submissions that he thinks that what can happen is you

142 :1 can sort of see how you go, you can fish a bit for some
2 dishonesty from a witness.
3 Obviously, my Lord, our rules don’t allow that. You
4 have to come at it from the other end. You have to say
5 in advance whether you are going to put a case to
6 somebody that they are dishonest or fraudulent or
7 a conspirator. You have to have a basis, and it has to
8 be clear.
9 True enough, you might say to somebody, I suppose:
10 did you hear about the conspiracy, and they might say
11 yes, you might get lucky. But you can’t say to them:
12 you were part of the conspiracy, weren’t you? If you
13 are going to say that to them, wave a document around
14 and say: you were, look at this minute, you were at the
15 meeting. That has to be pleaded and set out with
16 a basis, and I am getting increasingly concerned that
17 what appears to be proposed as part of the translations
18 and all the other submissions is that there is going to
19 be, in effect, an ambush on a lot of Bank witnesses who
20 have never been identified before as being conspirators
21 or dishonest. That would be, in my respectful
22 submission, not just unfair, but an abuse of the process
23 and an abuse of the help and assistance that has been
24 accorded to the defendants, because this would not be
25 permissible if they had barristers and solicitors on the

143 :1 record, and that would be to actually turn this
2 situation on its head and be profoundly unfair to
3 Bank of St Petersburg. I will object to that if that is
4 what is proposed and that happens on Monday.
5 In my submission, if there are any other
6 conspirators within the Bank that are going to be
7 alleged on Monday, they should be identified by
8 lunchtime tomorrow.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, there we are. If you are going
10 to put it to any witness, confront them with your
11 suggestion that they were part of the conspiracy, you
12 must identify who they were. We will have to deal, in
13 the normal crab-like way, if you say that the answers
14 you get justify some further claim then we will have to
15 deal with that at that time.
16 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I’m sorry, that’s stupid. I mean,
17 I don’t see, in a way — I don’t see why I may need to
18 put to anyone except Mr Savelyev that they are
19 a conspirator.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well if you are not going to, Mr Lord
21 is not going to worry.
22 MR LORD: Fine.
23 MR STROILOV: I mean, I don’t need to —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s a different matter. But what
25 Mr Lord says is if you are going to, as part of your

144 :1 case, put to the witness that they were part of the
2 conception and implementation of the conspiracy, you
3 must say so now. You must identify them, because they
4 need to know that that is your case.
5 MR STROILOV: I think there is a slightly different point,
6 as I was going to say. Well, what I do need to put to
7 witnesses, or many of the witnesses, is that the Bank
8 was acting fraudulently.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Was acting?
10 MR STROILOV: The Bank was acting fraudulently.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The Bank is just a legal concept. The
12 Bank acts through individuals. You must say which of
13 the individuals within the Bank you say plotted and
14 implemented the plot.
15 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord, but what I will need to
16 put to a witness, say: well, you were at that committee
17 meeting, you took that decision, clearly the purpose of
18 the decision was fraudulent. I’m not saying that
19 a person individually is fraudulent. I’m saying that
20 the Bank, acting by its committee, acted fraudulently.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How are they to know that? If they,
22 personally, were fraudulent, you must say so. If they
23 weren’t personally fraudulent, why were they to know
24 other people were?
25 MR STROILOV: In a way that depends on their answers.

145 :1 I accept, obviously, that if their answers are such from
2 which I am going to tell your Lordship in due course
3 that witness Y was not telling the truth —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How far does this go? Do you say that
5 everyone within the Bank was fraudulent?
6 MR STROILOV: No, there are obviously a number of people
7 about whom we don’t know.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Anyone who attended meetings at which
9 any part of this took place or was implemented was
10 a fraudster?
11 MR STROILOV: Exactly. We don’t want to say that. That’s
12 why we don’t plead that.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
14 MR STROILOV: On the other hand, if we say a transaction on
15 such and such date, whereby the asset was transferred
16 from company X to company Y was fraudulent, the Bank,
17 acting by its committee where there were nine members
18 and four of them are witnesses, approved the
19 transaction, and therefore the Bank is responsible for
20 that.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, we will return to this
22 tomorrow, but if you are going to say to any witness any
23 of the following: you got together with X to do
24 something which was, to your knowledge, wrong; you got
25 together with X or made further arrangements for what

146 :1 you knew to be wrong to be implemented; you knew that
2 other people in the bank had hatched a conspiracy which
3 you knew to be wrong, you must say so. Any of those
4 three.
5 MR STROILOV: But there is —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you are saying they were actors or
7 conscious of other actors, you must say so.
8 MR STROILOV: Yes.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: By «conscious», I mean they knew jolly
10 well that there were some people doing these things and
11 they knew it was wrong. Many people in banks over the
12 years, not just now, will have been party, in
13 the broadest sense, to something that was wrong, but
14 with having no conscious wish to do wrong or to enable
15 anyone else to do wrong. There are millions of people
16 like that.
17 MR STROILOV: I find that very problematic in a practical
18 sense. I don’t quite understand.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right. I shall dwell on it. You,
20 please, dwell on it. But we simply can’t have
21 an entirely different set of rules in these proceedings.
22 MR LORD: My Lord, can I just hand in, we have found the
23 exchange of correspondence about the vessels.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: About the vessels?
25 MR LORD: About the vessels and the values. Mr Stroilov

147 :1 wasn’t sure if his recollection —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Ah, yes.
3 MR LORD: Can I hand those to your Lordship, because they
4 won’t take long to look at. (Handed).
5 There was an exchange of e-mails in November 2013,
6 and Mr Stroilov was e-mailing Mr Winter of
7 Baker & McKenzie. If your Lordship reads that, you will
8 see this went slightly further than —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, you may, having read the
10 second paragraph of the first e-mail, reckon that we
11 must proceed in the way I indicated, but I will leave it
12 to you if you wish to make another submission.
13 Please don’t think that I think this reflects badly.
14 All it does is reflect on the frailty of recollection.
15 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
16 MR LORD: What time would your Lordship like to start
17 tomorrow?
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, now, as I said, trying to be as
19 helpful as I can knowing that you each have a lot to do,
20 when would you like? You live in Cambridge, you are not
21 staying up, you need to get up. I don’t know, it is
22 about 40 minutes on the train, is it?
23 MR STROILOV: Yes, 50, but then it is also getting from
24 station to station.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: There are bits and bobs between. When

148 :1 do you say?
2 MR STROILOV: I can do 9ish or I can do 10.30.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would it assist you both and would you
4 urge me to start at 9.30, or do you wish to start at
5 10.30, or 10.00?
6 MR LORD: 10.00 would be a fair compromise.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Done. 10.00 am tomorrow. 8 (4.52 pm)
9 (The court adjourned until 10.00 am on
10 Friday, 29 January 2016) 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

149 :1 INDEX
2 PAGE
3 Housekeeping 5
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

0
150 :1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

$
$500 ( 2 ) 33:6 39:18

A

address ( 10 ) 11:13
20:1 20:5 56:12 58:18
60:6 61:13 61:20 68:4
135:9
addressed, ( 3 ) 134:6
134:10 134:20
addresses,12:23

77:25 107:19 119:25
136:13
agreement ( 8 ) 11:19
68:23 68:24 77:5
77:15 79:9 81:7
106:18
ahead. ( 2 ) 20:6 36:17

another ( 19 ) 7:9 7:10
13:16 13:18 14:3
36:15 48:2 78:14
82:11 86:8 86:16
102:10 105:8 108:1
113:19 114:16 131:4
133:21 147:12

approach. ( 10 ) 15:18
34:15 50:14 50:15
52:11 52:13 56:24
103:6 131:19 132:2
approaching37:21 appropriate34:19 approved ( 3 ) 37:24

asked ( 11 ) 2:22 3:12
27:8 40:9 45:5 45:23
47:7 47:8 101:12
111:23 131:10
asking ( 10 ) 8:6 9:17
14:1 28:5 38:7 38:15
39:21 41:20 42:5

addressing116:18
adequacy ( 2 ) 68:15

aiming17:11
allegation. ( 5 ) 22:22

answer ( 15 ) 32:1 32:3
32:17 33:23 34:24

135:19 145:18
approximately ( 3 )

53:24
aspect. ( 2 ) 14:10 49:4

ability ( 2 ) 18:11 42:25
above ( 2 ) 60:12 96:14
abruptly27:4
absent ( 2 ) 18:14 18:24 absolute134:18 absolutely. ( 7 ) 2:7 8:3
8:17 9:20 84:17 115:3
118:16
abuse ( 2 ) 142:22
142:23
accede48:13 accelerating121:23 accept ( 22 ) 16:11
16:20 26:11 28:14
29:25 37:2 38:8 39:13
48:15 54:14 54:21
63:10 68:18 85:22
90:12 93:21 94:12
94:18 96:25 107:16
139:6 145:1
acceptable ( 2 ) 55:24
140:11
accepted ( 3 ) 51:23
111:8 116:23
accepts ( 2 ) 93:12
117:21
access.7:12 accompanied ( 2 )
69:12 129:14
accordance96:10 accorded142:24 account. ( 2 ) 4:20 76:3 accountability41:24 accounts40:10 accurate. ( 2 ) 37:12
116:24
accuse141:17 accused ( 4 ) 97:24
98:11 137:19 137:23
achieve76:17 achieved ( 7 ) 69:23
73:5 76:2 76:7 76:18
77:6 79:13
across ( 3 ) 35:13 121:8
137:16
acted144:20 acting ( 10 ) 26:18
58:22 63:9 102:9
137:8 144:8 144:9
144:10 144:20 145:17
actionably90:3 actions ( 6 ) 58:16
59:13 59:20 60:9 63:3
111:1
activate4:20 activities ( 3 ) 60:19
61:5 62:3
activity.126:6 actors ( 4 ) 136:12
137:3 146:6 146:7
acts144:12
actual ( 4 ) 57:7 63:9
65:21 128:7
added ( 3 ) 68:3 82:18
129:12
addendum102:1 addition ( 2 ) 130:6
130:9
additional48:18 additionally,123:22 additions114:10

78:2
adequate ( 3 ) 96:15
114:4 124:20
adequately129:18 adhere43:1 adjourn27:7 adjourned148:9 Adjournment) ( 2 )
45:21 45:24
adjournments33:3 adjudications40:18 administration ( 2 )
31:19 35:22
admirably33:25 admiralty75:17 admiration15:16 admire55:11 admiring11:19 admission ( 2 ) 69:2
73:17
admissions ( 3 ) 64:23
70:3 76:21
admit74:17
admitted ( 2 ) 7:11 34:8 admitting74:2 adopt103:4 adumbrate,58:3 advance. ( 6 ) 11:1
14:12 14:15 42:1 79:2
142:5
advanced ( 5 ) 31:10
41:24 64:24 81:15
82:11
advantage ( 3 ) 29:24
66:16 127:6
advice.25:19 advise?66:6 advisedly39:18 afford115:17 afloat.33:18
afraid ( 22 ) 15:10 17:8
17:18 18:6 19:4 19:12
45:8 47:2 52:8 75:23
76:22 80:4 91:15 99:4
106:3 113:13 114:4
116:4 116:11 116:14
132:1 136:9
after ( 2 ) 69:17 116:3
afternoon,1:22
again; ( 12 ) 1:11 15:13
53:15 55:5 63:25 68:5
70:25 77:23 94:3 96:1
115:21 129:11
against ( 14 ) 21:5 59:4
59:5 59:10 61:1 62:14
62:15 62:20 63:13
80:12 92:11 102:7
136:4 136:5
aged ( 2 ) 101:6 101:11
agency62:25
agenda, ( 5 ) 5:22 55:18
56:17 73:15 132:22
ages125:2
ago ( 5 ) 27:19 70:4
74:12 77:12 93:5
agree ( 5 ) 11:25 12:5
13:24 118:5 141:13
agreed ( 18 ) 9:12 9:18
44:14 47:11 68:13
69:13 70:4 73:25
74:12 74:14 75:7
76:21 76:24 77:9

25:13 80:15 105:4
107:17
allegations ( 7 ) 28:8
28:16 31:7 32:14
61:14 98:10 136:5
allege ( 2 ) 41:17 136:24
alleged ( 10 ) 28:9 58:21
59:17 59:18 63:14
95:20 135:7 135:15
136:8 143:7
allow ( 6 ) 8:10 40:24
90:18 126:6 126:11
142:3
allowed ( 6 ) 7:8 15:8
64:21 80:6 90:14
100:13
allowing29:21 almost65:10 alone138:17
along ( 6 ) 44:8 58:5
111:15 126:13 127:4
137:21
aloud,91:21
already ( 2 ) 3:12 89:21
also ( 18 ) 5:19 8:11 9:9
10:22 17:19 17:20
23:10 37:4 37:15 40:4
48:24 51:10 63:22
90:20 101:24 102:4
136:14 147:23
alternative ( 2 ) 12:24
101:17
Alternatively, ( 2 ) 63:5
141:3
although ( 6 ) 10:1
14:24 33:25 69:22
83:17 119:14
altogether. ( 2 ) 10:10
19:7
always ( 15 ) 23:13
33:10 42:18 56:11
60:8 61:14 61:20
67:16 75:22 92:6 99:6
103:5 107:24 113:22
113:23
ambush142:19 ambushed98:10 amend ( 2 ) 63:17 89:25
amendment.» ( 10 )
64:3 81:21 82:2 84:7
85:17 85:19 93:3 93:4
105:11 111:5
amendments. ( 9 )
55:19 56:2 64:25 65:6
65:10 65:11 66:3 75:6
90:15
amount ( 9 ) 10:12
18:21 69:1 83:24
113:5 113:15 115:1
116:12 135:5
amounts38:21 analysed.100:4 ancillary ( 5 ) 8:15 8:20
49:22 50:1 136:10
and/or ( 6 ) 67:10 68:16
78:3 95:18 95:21
96:11
annex ( 2 ) 72:9 90:15
announced41:3 annoying,18:5 anonymous26:25

36:25 45:12 56:21
67:19 87:25 88:1 88:6
98:2 114:16 121:21
answered33:2 answering ( 3 ) 31:13
32:16 35:15
answers ( 5 ) 21:6 35:5
143:13 144:25 145:1
anterior88:14 anticipate15:3 anxieties52:2 anxiety37:11 anxious ( 2 ) 20:17
133:1
anybody ( 8 ) 90:10
104:25 105:4 134:16
137:11 137:19 138:16
138:19
anyone. ( 9 ) 12:22 15:6
27:21 28:21 37:25
53:8 143:18 145:8
146:15
anything ( 20 ) 2:7 3:7
13:22 16:7 20:5 20:13
21:24 26:20 28:19
52:14 55:5 65:18
68:19 71:17 71:19
96:24 108:10 116:22
132:23 139:21
anyway. ( 2 ) 22:6 103:1
anywhere ( 2 ) 105:1
125:10
Apart ( 4 ) 59:11 131:7
137:7 139:8
apartment41:4 apologise. ( 5 ) 4:1 4:11
47:3 50:3 66:14
apparent ( 2 ) 63:9
111:9
appeal129:22 appear ( 5 ) 1:24 3:20
14:17 118:18 118:19
appearances?27:17 appeared ( 2 ) 22:19
106:1
appearing ( 2 ) 29:5
53:8
appears ( 8 ) 32:21 35:8
72:14 97:1 104:4
119:18 141:24 142:17
appendix ( 12 ) 67:21
69:6 69:11 70:22 71:8
72:15 74:14 90:15
93:20 93:21 94:1 94:2
application, ( 21 ) 6:22
6:22 6:25 7:3 14:9
20:2 22:25 23:8 23:15
23:16 25:16 28:11
28:15 34:4 48:14 53:6
56:6 56:8 71:3 109:6
129:21
applies. ( 2 ) 61:19
62:17
apply ( 5 ) 7:16 31:12
45:16 62:25 124:18
applying36:10 appointed60:10 appreciate ( 3 ) 11:17
18:5 65:7
appreciated130:25 appreciation36:22

62:11 129:13 133:22
area.135:25
aren’t ( 2 ) 17:5 133:14
arguable92:23 arguably ( 2 ) 88:6
88:10
argue ( 5 ) 28:11 38:5
76:15 94:21 135:24
arguing136:2 argument ( 6 ) 47:17
64:7 66:7 74:4 78:22
104:5
arguments ( 2 ) 55:23
64:24
arise ( 3 ) 8:15 11:1
61:12
arises.63:11 Arkhangelskaya10:24 ARKHANGELSKY:
( 72 ) 1:8 1:9 1:10
1:13 1:18 1:20 2:2
2:6 2:9 2:10 2:12 3:7
3:9 3:10 3:18 4:25
5:2 5:5 5:9 5:13 7:7
7:24 8:17 8:23 9:12
9:20 9:23 10:5 10:20
10:23 12:3 12:13 14:4
16:8 16:25 17:8 18:3
18:24 20:17 20:23
22:12 22:15 30:1 30:2
30:23 32:6 33:7 33:24
34:8 34:9 36:6 36:19
38:1 38:23 39:2 39:12
39:17 42:23 44:2
50:17 51:21 52:25
54:8 54:10 59:3 59:6
59:10 86:3 123:15
124:23 125:17 129:24
Arkhangelsky’s ( 6 )
12:5 15:5 38:19 50:17
90:7 104:16
Arkhangelskys41:25 arm’s ( 2 ) 108:3 108:5
arms39:19 arose,71:5
around ( 7 ) 31:23 37:21
46:14 95:15 104:9
104:10 142:13
arrange ( 2 ) 14:23
115:16
arrangement, ( 2 )
115:10 115:11
arrangements ( 2 )
40:22 145:25
arrest. ( 2 ) 69:17 70:1
arrested ( 6 ) 69:24
70:22 71:9 73:6 76:4
79:22
arrests76:6
art ( 3 ) 49:19 49:23
50:8
Article ( 2 ) 19:20 63:2
ascertain35:1
ask, ( 21 ) 2:8 7:24 9:22
9:24 10:1 15:7 16:7
25:18 28:19 28:20
29:8 42:15 45:4 54:3
77:23 84:2 86:23
105:6 105:14 107:12
127:9
askance33:11

aspects:29:17 assembly132:24 assertion85:12 assertions79:2 asset ( 4 ) 39:9 91:3
93:14 145:15
assets, ( 27 ) 52:25
57:20 57:24 59:5
59:14 68:9 68:15
70:19 71:8 72:6 72:22
74:11 76:17 78:2
79:19 83:23 93:22
93:25 94:1 94:3 94:5
94:8 94:20 96:9 97:16
109:2 110:19
assist ( 7 ) 11:4 16:5
18:9 117:3 133:1
134:3 148:3
assistance ( 6 ) 20:9
20:18 35:24 36:12
55:9 142:23
assistances50:2 assisted ( 3 ) 51:14
51:17 115:7
assisting27:20 assists,21:19
assume ( 3 ) 40:3 40:4
50:23
assuming ( 2 ) 128:14
128:17
assumption122:6 assurance, ( 2 ) 15:22
42:24
assurances ( 2 ) 45:6
114:14
assuring21:3 attach112:11 attachment6:17 attack103:17 attempt28:11
attend ( 3 ) 14:20 15:25
19:10
attended ( 2 ) 24:5
145:8
attending16:14 attention,130:1 attitude,20:6 attribution62:2 auction ( 2 ) 47:6 96:8
audience, ( 6 ) 7:25
8:7 12:15 23:6 49:14
49:21
authorised ( 3 ) 30:4
30:5 30:24
authority, ( 8 ) 12:5
12:9 12:15 34:22 35:7
50:10 54:13 63:10
availability120:17 available ( 2 ) 38:3
130:11
aver100:2 averment ( 3 ) 98:17
98:24 103:21
averred ( 3 ) 95:17 96:8
97:4
avoid ( 4 ) 10:7 12:9
53:8 53:10
aware, ( 5 ) 9:18 37:8
37:12 44:10 140:6
away ( 6 ) 10:9 39:4
40:5 40:7 41:11
134:20

B
back, ( 17 ) 10:17 16:6
19:9 32:3 32:7 32:12
33:4 39:11 39:19
47:25 48:11 63:23
77:13 99:9 105:6
126:18 126:20
back-up ( 2 ) 30:14 36:4
background, ( 3 ) 13:10
22:18 119:19
bad ( 5 ) 3:15 4:5 65:8
73:1 110:4
badly.147:13
Baker ( 3 ) 68:22 74:15
147:7
balance ( 2 ) 102:8
126:22
Bank ( 48 ) 1:24 2:20
2:23 45:14 48:4 57:4
57:5 58:2 58:18 58:22
59:1 59:4 59:22 60:20
61:2 61:4 61:6 63:15
67:10 75:11 84:1
102:8 104:16 104:22
110:17 120:3 134:15
135:16 136:4 136:25
137:16 138:17 140:5
141:2 141:11 142:19
143:3 143:6 144:7
144:10 144:11 144:12
144:13 144:20 145:5
145:16 145:19 146:2
bank’s ( 10 ) 47:18
58:4 58:17 59:13
59:20 60:8 60:25 63:7
137:25 141:12
banking ( 2 ) 46:14
46:20
bankrupt91:23 banks146:11 Bar7:11
bare,103:21 barristers142:25 baseless40:19 bases35:6
basic ( 2 ) 44:13 137:12
basis. ( 40 ) 27:21 29:21
29:23 31:13 31:25
32:24 36:12 37:6
37:7 41:16 42:23 57:4
87:16 90:19 93:23
95:7 95:8 97:7 97:8
98:20 104:8 104:11
106:13 107:1 112:7
112:8 112:22 112:22
114:1 114:11 115:21
117:14 118:16 125:7
129:1 137:14 137:18
137:23 142:7 142:16
baton,32:20 bay,39:7 bear39:16
became ( 2 ) 27:4 111:9
become ( 4 ) 14:6 32:22
132:7 135:6
becomes ( 4 ) 37:18
89:18 104:7 131:3
becoming44:12
before ( 18 ) 11:16 23:5
26:16 29:14 41:2
45:24 53:8 57:6 65:5
95:25 97:24 98:5
108:13 117:25 118:1
134:10 141:17 142:20
beg ( 2 ) 67:25 110:10
began111:5 begin:23:4

beginning ( 2 ) 5:16
110:13
begins.84:22
behalf ( 23 ) 7:9 7:10
7:22 8:11 8:12 9:11
12:6 12:13 13:16
20:24 30:1 30:25
36:20 37:24 41:25
50:17 54:10 54:10
63:9 64:24 95:6 141:1
141:10
behave.53:14 behind ( 4 ) 7:4 31:4
39:19 46:18
believe ( 5 ) 29:6 53:7
66:11 76:12 109:16
believing52:22 below,68:7
bench, ( 5 ) 31:14 32:19
34:24 36:23 38:4
beneficiaries67:9 beneficiary40:13 benefit20:23 Bernie,2:21
best, ( 14 ) 4:3 11:7
13:11 16:22 17:1
18:9 19:11 32:5 94:25
114:16 127:19 134:3
134:7 135:2
better ( 6 ) 28:25 54:14
67:3 71:20 135:9
140:7
between ( 25 ) 8:14
17:1 17:7 26:13 31:20
44:13 44:15 51:21
57:18 58:7 58:11
73:19 79:22 83:18
85:10 86:21 88:9
89:16 94:17 99:6
100:25 114:5 125:10
139:14 147:25
beyond ( 3 ) 52:3 82:18
104:2
big ( 4 ) 9:2 72:15
109:18 113:5
Bilta62:1
binding ( 3 ) 59:7 77:4
77:15
Birt1:25
bit ( 9 ) 3:2 15:19 46:14
54:15 69:21 90:2
99:15 129:19 142:1
bite-sized117:22
bits ( 2 ) 121:1 147:25
blame ( 2 ) 119:11
129:19
blocks20:19 blush,119:14 BMC2:16
board ( 2 ) 52:1 60:12
bob46:14 bobs147:25 bombarded,98:10
bono ( 5 ) 120:9 120:14
122:7 131:7 131:8
bootstraps104:5 borrowed94:17 borrowers.47:19 both ( 8 ) 3:17 12:14
12:23 40:16 51:14
128:9 131:22 148:3
bottom ( 5 ) 23:3 25:5
64:19 77:24 110:12
bound23:24 boundaries51:24 box ( 2 ) 97:22 98:5
branch.44:9 breach ( 5 ) 19:20
102:12 107:8 110:23
117:23

break) ( 8 ) 4:8 29:12
29:12 29:15 42:11
45:8 113:2 113:10
breaking42:11 breaks, ( 2 ) 17:22
114:5
briefly, ( 3 ) 25:15 56:22
134:22
bring ( 11 ) 21:5 60:18
84:5 84:13 88:22
88:23 91:17 92:18
101:10 110:19 136:14
bringing102:7 broadest146:13 broadly138:20
brought ( 7 ) 13:12 46:2
84:11 84:12 91:6
130:1 136:16
brouhaha16:17 buck.33:3
build ( 2 ) 35:3 42:16
built39:23
bundle ( 23 ) 6:7 6:12
7:5 21:19 22:6 24:20
66:18 113:21 114:10
115:5 118:6 119:16
120:6 123:23 123:24
128:22 128:24 129:13
129:14 129:17 129:17
130:4 140:17
bundles ( 6 ) 5:19
119:24 126:5 127:23
129:5 130:25
burden ( 3 ) 54:5 56:8
131:24
burdening131:7 bureaucrats140:9 business ( 16 ) 5:18 7:1
33:18 38:17 81:23
82:22 82:23 86:10
89:11 89:13 91:8
92:21 92:25 93:15
104:18 105:1
businesses39:24 businessmen33:13

C
call57:21 called12:7
Cambridge, ( 2 ) 133:22
147:20
cameos35:18
can’t ( 49 ) 3:2 6:6 16:14
19:12 37:8 40:12
40:12 40:17 50:18
53:20 58:3 61:24
62:17 62:18 62:19
66:14 76:1 76:1 76:14
77:7 77:8 78:5 80:4
80:5 80:10 84:9 86:7
90:4 98:24 104:24
106:9 106:13 106:15
106:16 106:17 114:23
115:16 121:10 121:12
128:1 128:21 134:11
134:13 134:24 138:15
141:15 141:23 142:11
146:20
candid ( 3 ) 25:11 29:6
55:12
candle,127:11
cannot ( 23 ) 1:13 1:21
2:7 8:25 9:4 11:21
14:17 16:12 17:23
18:20 36:5 38:22
44:16 54:12 80:15
88:20 91:5 91:6 94:19
100:15 103:13 136:25
141:11

capabilities61:23 capable33:25 capacity2:1
cards ( 2 ) 119:10 130:8
carefully, ( 2 ) 49:11
110:18
carousel.46:16
carries ( 2 ) 34:21 34:25
carry17:2
cases ( 6 ) 19:19 27:10
29:5 33:15 57:18
57:19
catastrophic17:3 categories;117:25 category. ( 2 ) 117:24
129:3
caught ( 2 ) 105:2
136:21
cautious,13:14 caveats15:23
cent ( 2 ) 29:6 79:5
central49:11
centre ( 6 ) 28:17 38:18
38:21 38:22 40:12
53:1
certain ( 13 ) 31:11
36:21 39:17 40:7 42:2
51:22 76:7 88:3 100:3
103:7 103:9 135:10
139:17
certainty ( 2 ) 13:12
37:1
cetera.36:16 chairman ( 2 ) 33:8
101:6
challenged114:18 chance, ( 2 ) 78:14
125:24
change ( 6 ) 17:10 68:5
71:19 77:20 86:17
89:5
changed,45:7 changes, ( 2 ) 16:3 89:6 changing78:12 chaotic.116:11 characterise,81:22 characterised89:10 charges138:6 chased31:22 chattels75:12
check ( 3 ) 46:7 46:11
127:18
cherry-picking32:22 chips40:7 choice,127:24
choose ( 2 ) 42:1 133:9 chunks,117:22 circuit87:20 circumstance, ( 3 ) 9:17
18:25 30:16
circumstances ( 8 )
13:9 21:1 30:17 48:17
111:5 112:13 119:24
127:19
cites57:2
City ( 5 ) 38:18 38:21
38:22 40:12 53:1
Civil63:1
claimants, ( 29 ) 5:17
6:4 6:21 11:8 11:14
13:22 14:18 20:2
23:12 23:25 26:11
26:24 53:3 54:3 54:11
64:24 66:8 68:13
74:14 77:25 94:7 95:7
95:17 95:21 103:11
114:10 118:17 123:24
129:24
claimed ( 2 ) 83:22
92:17
claiming88:12

claims58:8 clarifies103:24 clarify ( 2 ) 56:24
107:15
clarifying19:2
clarity ( 2 ) 13:19 30:3
clear, ( 25 ) 4:12 10:23
12:1 12:4 18:23 29:4
30:6 37:12 43:25
49:18 50:6 50:18
57:15 67:4 72:8 72:19
84:21 92:10 93:3 93:5
94:19 101:25 122:15
123:25 142:8
cleared134:20
clearly. ( 8 ) 21:16 63:7
89:24 110:18 134:18
140:25 141:1 144:17
clears73:9 clerk,127:21
client ( 3 ) 33:16 44:15
131:13
client’s ( 3 ) 38:3 38:11
126:12
clients, ( 8 ) 31:19
35:23 39:3 44:7 57:21
112:22 119:21 128:13
close ( 2 ) 23:21 49:4
closely86:16 closing ( 3 ) 140:4
140:8 140:24
co-conspirators67:10 coach114:24 Code,63:1 cohort121:15 collapsed.79:23 collateral ( 4 ) 72:11
87:24 88:15 92:11
collation ( 2 ) 119:25
120:1
collusive100:2 colour75:24 combined55:17
come ( 14 ) 11:16 19:8
21:15 32:3 36:22
55:10 58:14 77:13
90:17 104:10 105:5
105:15 128:8 142:4
comes ( 6 ) 16:6 56:12
99:1 104:6 104:6
130:23
coming ( 16 ) 17:5
31:17 33:4 105:16
121:8 123:8 124:13
133:13 134:12 135:22
137:21 137:25 138:5
138:18 140:1 140:5
commend54:16 commendable37:11 comment57:14 commercial,60:12 commit ( 3 ) 10:24
16:21 54:15
commitment, ( 2 ) 14:12
15:17
commitments, ( 2 )
11:18 15:2
committed ( 2 ) 53:19
136:25
committee ( 4 ) 135:21
144:16 144:20 145:17
committees135:18 committing30:19 common ( 2 ) 58:14
135:12
communicate ( 2 )
29:24 30:23
communication33:23 communications,109:2 companies ( 8 ) 35:15
38:19 38:20 38:22

53:2 54:19 54:20
99:23
company ( 24 ) 38:23
40:12 61:21 62:14
62:15 63:6 91:23 92:2
92:22 93:15 95:17
95:20 96:18 96:24
101:3 101:11 104:6
104:14 105:1 105:17
106:1 120:11 145:16
145:16
comparator36:1 compared26:21 competent ( 2 ) 91:17
139:15
compiled,131:1 complain, ( 8 ) 15:1
69:18 69:19 69:23
70:19 73:5 74:17
75:12
complained ( 2 ) 71:18
105:13
complaining ( 4 ) 69:9
69:15 70:11 111:6
complaint, ( 22 ) 40:24
70:2 70:7 70:8 70:12
77:17 78:10 80:3
81:14 86:11 95:5
95:6 96:14 96:22 97:2
97:10 100:8 103:11
112:17 120:4 121:16
124:25
complaints ( 2 ) 70:12
71:8
completely ( 4 ) 32:2
40:19 79:23 105:10
complex ( 2 ) 107:23
110:18
comply52:22 complying10:17 comprehensive119:6 comprised,141:20 compromise.148:6 computer ( 2 ) 14:4
21:17
concatenation.41:1 conceived99:14 concept ( 2 ) 63:5
144:11
conception144:2 concern ( 10 ) 11:17
31:1 31:18 31:24
32:23 33:19 65:5
72:14 88:5 114:8
concerned, ( 16 ) 17:8
21:10 22:16 25:10
30:7 30:10 51:4 51:12
52:20 53:22 54:18
80:18 115:23 128:24
137:5 142:16
concerning ( 2 ) 28:8
72:1
concerns ( 4 ) 20:21
24:1 29:7 68:4
conclusively.57:11 conditions.22:5 conduct ( 34 ) 7:9 8:12
10:8 10:13 11:11
11:24 12:15 13:15
13:17 18:11 20:22
23:17 29:17 29:21
29:21 30:19 32:12
32:12 33:4 33:20
34:4 34:6 34:11 34:16
34:22 37:5 37:22
49:15 49:18 49:22
53:23 59:18 126:5
126:22
conducted ( 2 ) 18:7
96:9

conducting ( 4 ) 25:24
27:23 32:11 35:4
confess,81:6 confidence20:8 confine ( 2 ) 74:18 78:9 confines80:14 confirm, ( 5 ) 7:21 10:4
53:15 122:16 128:20
confirmed ( 3 ) 53:18
73:8 73:13
confirms12:13 conformity20:20 confront143:10 confusion12:20 conjunction54:8 connect.5:9 connected ( 22 ) 67:11
95:17 95:20 96:18
97:5 97:7 97:17 101:4
101:5 101:23 102:4
102:6 104:15 104:15
105:20 105:22 105:23
107:4 107:18 109:25
110:25 112:23
connection. ( 14 ) 3:11
5:10 89:24 97:11
97:17 100:14 100:18
100:19 101:8 101:18
102:5 102:19 108:2
112:15
conscience36:25 conscientiously35:13 conscious ( 4 ) 42:10
146:7 146:9 146:14
consensual51:20 consents48:5 consequence ( 3 )
58:25 127:25 132:2
consider ( 3 ) 8:6 31:5
51:17
considerable ( 2 ) 20:9
57:20
considered68:25 considering9:5 consistently27:20 conspiracy ( 36 ) 28:9
57:14 57:18 58:8
58:13 58:20 59:17
72:21 94:6 95:18
95:21 102:23 104:12
104:23 105:18 135:7
135:15 136:12 136:16
136:18 138:1 138:3
138:8 138:13 138:24
139:2 139:13 140:1
140:3 141:20 141:21
142:10 142:12 143:11
144:2 146:2
conspirator ( 14 ) 59:19
59:23 97:23 98:7 98:9
104:7 104:8 104:13
105:3 137:11 137:17
138:19 142:7 143:19
conspirators ( 9 ) 58:20
59:18 96:19 96:24
97:16 97:20 134:17
142:20 143:6
conspiring59:25 constantly54:4 construct107:25 constructive ( 5 ) 44:8
48:15 49:6 51:20
90:18
contained116:24 contemplate16:12 content ( 2 ) 52:15
127:3
contents ( 2 ) 41:4 82:2
context ( 8 ) 15:16
57:12 62:21 65:3 74:4
101:21 107:2 109:8

continue. ( 2 ) 55:13
131:21
continuous ( 3 ) 27:21
131:17 133:25
contradictory.119:18 contrary105:3 control110:20 controlled110:16 convenience ( 3 ) 49:12
57:22 82:8
convenient82:4 conversation.3:3 copies, ( 6 ) 46:15
122:18 126:24 130:19
130:21 131:22
copy ( 6 ) 6:5 6:12 65:23
66:18 132:5 132:5
corollary58:25 corporate62:3 correct? ( 11 ) 7:23
23:10 58:19 65:2
73:24 76:21 82:25
83:17 91:13 91:14
94:9
corrected ( 2 ) 100:9
109:11
correctly,89:4 correspondence ( 18 )
8:14 8:20 12:12 13:1
34:7 68:21 76:23
77:12 77:14 78:15
81:1 81:2 82:6 86:21
87:2 94:17 122:15
146:23
cost,118:8 couldn’t ( 2 ) 92:12
92:16
counter60:17 counterclaim ( 38 )
39:18 39:21 39:23
40:19 58:7 58:7 59:12
59:21 60:25 80:3 83:2
83:7 83:9 83:10 83:19
83:25 84:10 84:10
84:16 84:22 85:1 85:2
85:3 85:9 85:10 85:21
86:13 86:19 86:19
87:11 87:13 87:15
88:21 90:5 90:10 91:4
92:15 107:22
couple ( 6 ) 14:11 23:5
24:6 24:10 28:3 133:4
course, ( 19 ) 7:4 8:16
17:19 21:3 23:23
28:23 35:23 36:2
36:2 36:5 37:17 49:21
57:13 63:4 75:18
99:10 122:14 132:6
145:2
court’s ( 4 ) 51:12 57:16
107:8 130:1
courts’ ( 5 ) 7:8 20:10
55:9 72:7 75:17
covered ( 3 ) 24:19
24:19 48:25
crab-like ( 2 ) 131:20
143:13
created.115:12 creates10:14 credence40:24 credibility ( 2 ) 23:25
114:19
credible109:14
credit ( 3 ) 42:25 45:25
119:5
creditors39:7 criminal ( 2 ) 53:19
53:20
crisp95:25 crisply56:19 criticise111:4

criticised ( 3 ) 111:2
120:3 129:22
criticising77:8 criticism ( 2 ) 102:18
119:20
criticisms ( 3 ) 11:14
20:1 66:2
cross-examination ( 18 ) 16:16 16:25
17:6 19:16 32:8 79:4
113:18 114:12 115:5
116:2 121:2 122:22
124:2 125:1 126:22
129:2 130:9 140:22
cross-examinations
( 6 ) 11:8 14:21 14:24
15:5 17:2 133:12
cross-examine ( 2 )
18:16 54:5
cross-examined.125:8 crossed ( 2 ) 85:17 96:7 crucial58:24
curious ( 2 ) 40:22 41:1 curiously49:8 currently90:11 cut33:22

D
{D11/262/1}.45:25
{D146/2436.2/1},109:20
{D146/2436.2/2}.110:14 Dada»,101:12
damages ( 2 ) 58:8
88:12
danger30:13
dare ( 5 ) 7:8 43:18 50:5
53:2 76:11
date, ( 5 ) 14:17 68:6
79:22 79:23 145:15
day ( 20 ) 5:15 9:2 10:25
11:1 11:11 11:11 14:3
17:24 33:17 55:3 65:4
78:14 86:8 86:16 92:9
115:2 127:1 127:13
127:14 131:16
day-to-day11:21 days,10:18
deal ( 15 ) 46:6 47:17
51:7 55:18 58:3 60:10
71:22 75:1 107:12
107:19 112:25 121:2
134:7 143:12 143:15
dealing ( 5 ) 33:24 34:3
50:1 108:2 108:5
dealings ( 2 ) 96:11
109:2
deals ( 2 ) 100:2 107:13
dealt ( 2 ) 111:24 125:14
debate ( 2 ) 78:14 90:21
debtor ( 2 ) 39:7 40:2 debts.46:6 deceit39:23 December64:10 decide ( 6 ) 41:8 52:7
79:15 112:9 113:3
134:23
decided70:18 decides40:6 deciding, ( 2 ) 40:4
112:20
decision ( 5 ) 26:6 62:1
138:12 144:17 144:18
decreasing88:18 deduces121:14 default.»46:25 defaults?45:16 defeat138:25 defendant, ( 3 ) 12:21
64:2 117:23

defendant’s33:1 defendants, ( 21 ) 2:2
6:21 6:25 7:2 10:9
10:14 12:14 19:15
31:8 33:7 35:10 35:19
38:11 48:19 64:21
84:11 104:25 127:8
127:22 138:15 142:24
deficiencies5:12 define ( 3 ) 44:11 82:4
113:15
definite19:12 definition ( 3 ) 42:22
59:16 129:22
degree ( 2 ) 59:8 118:12
delay. ( 3 ) 4:11 14:3
37:3
delayed)1:3 delegated ( 2 ) 34:17
34:22
delegation, ( 2 ) 34:19
51:2
delegations,51:22 deleted ( 2 ) 67:12 73:3 deleting78:8 demonstrate ( 2 )
101:20 107:10
demonstrated102:20 demonstrating ( 2 )
110:16 110:17
demonstration112:21 denial.53:21 denounced12:21 departments,45:14 depend125:11 dependent120:14 depends: ( 2 ) 17:22
144:25
deprive7:2 deprived59:14 derivatively88:25 derive35:24 descending129:19 designed110:19 desk6:8 despite130:20
detail ( 5 ) 13:7 24:14
25:17 86:21 106:10
detailed ( 2 ) 24:15 45:6
details, ( 2 ) 14:8 87:16 detected20:12 determine ( 5 ) 7:18
10:3 36:19 50:15
54:25
determined59:17 determining52:5 developments64:23 deviate60:5
devices, ( 2 ) 3:13 3:13
devote9:4 dictate78:5
didn’t ( 18 ) 3:18 27:8
44:1 44:2 49:17 69:18
70:15 71:19 100:5
105:24 105:25 108:12
111:12 130:17 135:23
135:24 139:1 140:9
die19:23
difference ( 4 ) 88:9
89:3 99:6 100:24
different ( 18 ) 8:9 8:23
34:3 34:15 38:19
54:23 62:13 62:24
68:20 101:17 104:10
105:6 119:15 128:5
136:3 143:24 144:5
146:21
differently89:10 differing34:9 difficult. ( 22 ) 11:6
11:20 15:13 16:20

18:2 19:14 20:25
30:16 31:14 31:15
32:16 33:17 35:9
40:25 50:20 84:15
102:24 111:4 116:14
116:15 121:25 132:13
difficulties ( 2 ) 9:13
85:22
difficulty ( 2 ) 86:14
94:12
digest42:20 diminution ( 3 ) 91:12
91:21 91:24
direct ( 2 ) 42:16 51:19
directed ( 3 ) 65:12 76:5
102:15
directing ( 2 ) 6:14 63:5
direction, ( 2 ) 49:9
141:5
directly.58:19 directors ( 3 ) 42:19
62:14 62:17
directs.6:11 disadvantage ( 2 ) 58:2
115:24
disadvantaged59:3 discern,99:6 discipline51:11 disclosable ( 2 ) 117:12
117:21
disclose ( 7 ) 14:2
102:16 111:15 115:4
122:25 123:22 132:10
disclosed ( 18 ) 21:2
22:20 109:13 109:21
117:18 117:19 118:9
120:5 120:22 122:18
122:19 124:19 128:6
128:8 128:16 128:21
129:4 132:10
disclosing ( 2 ) 98:19
117:23
(disclosure, ( 25 ) 64:23
65:15 67:14 71:2
71:21 96:15 97:1
99:25 100:3 102:12
106:9 106:10 107:7
108:6 109:16 110:22
111:6 111:7 111:8
111:9 117:4 123:9
133:4 133:4 135:18
discount19:19 discretion13:4
discuss ( 2 ) 9:9 131:24 discussed61:9 discussion,57:12 dishonest ( 5 ) 137:17
138:8 141:13 142:6
142:21
dishonestly. ( 2 ) 58:23
137:9
dishonesty ( 7 ) 72:5
72:21 103:4 103:8
136:8 137:23 142:2
dislodge133:17 dismiss27:4 dispassionately55:2 dispense124:20 disproportionate ( 2 )
44:12 68:25
dispute ( 3 ) 26:13
58:11 91:19
disputes,114:17 disputing70:5 disruption127:5 dissatisfied27:5 distil ( 2 ) 56:16 138:1 distinction58:6 distinguish83:18 divider ( 3 ) 7:4 46:19
47:4

division ( 4 ) 17:7 27:1
44:13 48:23
divorce, ( 2 ) 27:3 27:10
document ( 31 ) 14:2
31:25 32:1 32:25
42:6 45:24 46:1 46:10
47:20 47:22 82:9
84:22 109:13 109:17
109:20 109:22 113:19
116:21 116:22 117:11
117:12 118:9 118:12
125:2 125:23 128:18
128:19 129:25 130:24
131:23 142:13
documentation ( 4 )
8:13 45:13 113:6
132:24
documents, ( 61 ) 8:4
19:18 41:17 46:8
54:6 81:18 95:1 95:11
102:14 102:16 107:9
109:15 113:16 114:22
115:15 115:25 117:5
117:10 117:18 118:3
118:6 118:11 118:25
119:5 119:7 119:25
120:1 121:3 121:6
121:14 121:17 122:13
122:17 122:23 122:24
122:24 123:23 124:13
124:22 125:14 125:14
125:15 125:24 126:1
126:3 126:9 126:16
126:17 128:5 128:7
128:11 128:22 128:23
129:4 129:12 130:18
132:1 132:4 132:9
140:17 140:21
Does ( 19 ) 6:4 14:5
26:7 26:10 36:24
39:13 50:22 63:12
71:5 79:5 91:5 93:16
104:2 109:24 125:5
125:8 131:2 145:4
147:14
doesn’t ( 10 ) 3:13 3:20
61:12 69:1 75:11
75:18 79:18 87:14
91:20 138:25
doing ( 14 ) 4:18 11:5
18:4 21:22 32:5 36:7
79:10 86:20 111:20
112:3 125:12 131:8
141:1 146:10
don’t ( 123 ) 2:12 2:12
3:5 4:13 6:16 10:7
10:23 11:10 12:17
13:2 13:23 15:1 15:3
15:13 19:13 21:23
23:15 27:14 27:19
27:25 28:14 32:3
32:4 32:16 33:14
33:16 38:5 39:13
48:15 48:25 49:1 50:5
53:12 56:15 58:12
63:10 65:22 67:14
68:5 68:18 69:9 69:16
69:19 70:2 70:9 71:1
71:17 71:18 73:16
73:18 73:24 74:1 74:3
74:16 74:17 76:12
77:18 78:4 79:8 79:23
79:25 80:1 81:6 81:9
82:10 86:13 87:22
87:23 89:23 90:20
91:10 91:16 94:2 94:6
94:21 96:20 96:25
97:10 97:21 100:1
103:9 103:12 106:5
107:20 107:20 112:12
114:13 116:12 116:17

119:11 121:12 121:13
122:8 122:23 124:24
126:15 130:12 131:15
131:16 132:17 133:3
133:16 133:20 135:11
136:6 137:2 138:22
138:24 139:13 141:7
141:9 141:17 141:19
142:3 143:17 143:17
143:23 145:7 145:11
145:12 146:18 147:13
147:21
done, ( 21 ) 16:7 36:15
37:24 45:11 49:20
50:9 54:9 55:25 58:21
59:2 60:9 63:3 92:2
92:15 112:16 115:6
118:20 133:5 135:15
135:22 148:7
doubt ( 2 ) 31:16 109:6
down ( 11 ) 15:19 40:13
46:3 56:16 65:12
65:19 108:25 112:4
112:12 112:13 135:1
downplaying ( 2 ) 22:17
22:22
dozen, ( 2 ) 27:13
140:17
draft ( 3 ) 54:3 64:3
65:22
drafting48:21 dramatic,19:24
draw ( 2 ) 79:14 109:4
drawn ( 4 ) 51:20 68:14
78:1 79:19
dressed32:23 drink25:25 drop13:17
due ( 2 ) 28:23 145:2
duly ( 2 ) 50:9 82:1
during ( 4 ) 36:13 99:10
114:5 116:9
duties.63:4
duty ( 2 ) 52:23 53:9
dwell ( 2 ) 146:19
146:20

E
e-mail ( 5 ) 10:17 12:12
14:2 14:5 147:10
e-mailing147:6 e-mails147:5
{E2/11/7}.46:21
earlier, ( 5 ) 3:1 63:8
83:3 109:16 111:12
early ( 3 ) 16:13 133:18
133:19
earnestly43:22 earphones3:12 easy ( 2 ) 47:3 99:6
effect, ( 9 ) 55:19 57:23
88:17 91:8 92:21
93:14 129:1 138:11
142:19
effective106:4 effectively ( 4 ) 34:16
82:7 82:9 115:22
efficient126:5
effort ( 5 ) 18:21 19:22
19:23 21:20 44:7
efforts131:21
eight ( 2 ) 110:5 110:13
eight-stage110:3 eighth ( 3 ) 21:11 22:13
55:23
either ( 11 ) 7:14 8:5
10:24 12:22 16:11
51:6 53:2 70:15 75:24
93:18 121:12

elaborate ( 2 ) 58:3
63:22
electronic109:22 elegance112:12 elements100:21 eliminate75:4
else ( 12 ) 10:15 16:4
19:10 49:24 71:17
75:13 110:8 119:17
132:23 139:21 141:5
146:15
elsewhere120:10 emerge. ( 2 ) 5:8 13:8 emergencies,17:3 emphasis54:24 employed2:18 employee ( 4 ) 58:17
63:3 63:4 105:1
employees ( 2 ) 62:4
134:15
employer26:3 employment.105:9 enable146:14 enables ( 2 ) 112:21
136:14
encourages55:8 end, ( 14 ) 34:13 55:2
62:5 62:11 64:5
64:17 66:13 68:12
81:10 86:1 92:9 118:2
126:25 142:4
Ending25:9 endorse42:16
endow ( 2 ) 36:3 37:22
ends,120:25 enfeebled39:14 enforcement46:24 enforcing45:16 engagement35:13 engagements.9:7 engine67:12
English ( 9 ) 27:8 61:19
61:21 62:23 62:24
72:7 75:17 125:3
137:13
enhance60:25 enormity13:8 enormous54:4
enough: ( 6 ) 10:23 14:7
46:18 98:18 111:12
142:9
ensure ( 3 ) 7:14 37:11
114:23
ensuring35:21
entire ( 2 ) 41:3 59:15
entirely ( 4 ) 22:23 50:6
91:20 146:21
entitled, ( 17 ) 43:17
43:20 76:11 77:15
79:6 79:11 79:17
88:25 89:14 98:4 98:6
99:8 101:18 102:3
106:24 107:11 111:15
entity ( 3 ) 62:3 104:21
110:16
entrust54:11 entrusted37:5 entrusting49:23 Equally,54:14 errant62:3 Eschwege.1:25 esoteric.33:21 especially ( 3 ) 13:15
15:25 61:21
essentially,126:12 establish ( 2 ) 4:12 86:2
established, ( 2 ) 105:3
121:15
estate ( 2 ) 46:25 90:16
estimate120:15

Estonian, ( 2 ) 72:6
75:17
estoppel,77:15
even ( 10 ) 12:23 27:8
33:9 38:1 73:1 80:11
86:9 117:14 121:10
135:11
evening116:9 evenings, ( 2 ) 114:7
124:11
event ( 3 ) 18:15 63:12
91:23
events, ( 2 ) 136:11
136:22
eventually,91:23 ever ( 4 ) 27:15 27:25
72:3 141:7
every ( 12 ) 11:11 11:11
20:11 26:22 33:17
99:1 106:18 106:18
113:18 118:8 131:16
138:23
everybody ( 5 ) 3:3
45:10 113:2 134:2
138:24
everyone ( 3 ) 51:11
65:20 145:5
everything ( 10 ) 10:15
15:18 16:4 17:25
75:13 75:19 87:13
87:14 119:17 130:3
evidence ( 22 ) 11:14
49:3 53:3 53:4 61:16
61:17 64:23 80:14
92:10 99:2 99:7 99:9
100:12 100:14 100:17
100:22 101:10 103:14
104:16 105:22 110:22
135:22
evident66:21 evidential ( 2 ) 60:22
106:24
exactly ( 7 ) 39:9 46:6
68:22 89:15 89:16
138:18 145:11
examine68:25 example, ( 14 ) 12:1
20:12 32:15 37:19
41:9 41:11 41:22 42:7
42:19 47:16 53:13
96:12 97:19 101:3
Excel109:21
Except ( 4 ) 28:1 28:2
107:18 143:18
exception ( 4 ) 7:18
62:16 62:22 128:7
exceptional. ( 4 ) 30:20
30:21 37:13 37:14
exceptions,135:10 excess59:15 excessively ( 2 ) 12:7
13:14
exchange ( 5 ) 10:11
53:24 118:7 146:23
147:5
excluded ( 2 ) 28:10
57:4
executive137:1 executives ( 3 ) 60:10
137:8 141:12
exercise ( 3 ) 12:15 13:4
44:12
exhausted112:3 existing ( 3 ) 117:20
120:21 124:19
expect ( 3 ) 33:12 48:25
130:9
expected ( 3 ) 50:9
136:25 140:2
expecting18:16 expensive,118:10

experience, ( 2 ) 22:18
43:10
expert ( 3 ) 91:16
110:21 135:11
experts ( 6 ) 19:17
46:13 46:20 47:7
58:12 61:12
explain ( 15 ) 31:1 32:6
47:21 54:7 58:4 69:22
79:7 81:16 82:10 96:1
96:25 98:16 99:18
100:24 119:24
explained ( 6 ) 24:13
32:25 43:7 58:2 73:2
141:4
explanation ( 9 ) 20:16
40:11 79:17 102:20
102:22 103:3 103:5
140:20 140:23
explore ( 2 ) 40:10
40:10
exposure ( 5 ) 57:22
83:20 88:11 88:18
90:3
expressed15:23 expressly ( 2 ) 73:8
77:9
extended:57:23 extent ( 4 ) 3:23 8:21
16:11 19:23
extinguished, ( 2 ) 86:5
86:6
extra ( 2 ) 4:10 117:16
extracts46:5 extremely ( 2 ) 11:18
51:18

F
fabrication41:17 facets34:4
factors ( 3 ) 17:13 17:14
111:16
factual114:17 failed67:18
failure ( 3 ) 71:2 108:7
111:15
fair ( 13 ) 18:13 31:18
51:13 63:12 75:3 98:9
104:25 114:14 119:20
136:7 136:20 136:20
148:6
fairly ( 6 ) 20:22 45:6
99:22 119:8 130:21
140:7
fairness ( 10 ) 35:21
105:8 122:21 126:10
126:23 131:15 134:14
137:11 137:12 137:24
fall31:20 fallen35:9 familiar8:3
family: ( 3 ) 9:3 9:6 27:1
far ( 26 ) 3:7 9:17 16:22
17:7 17:18 26:14 35:8
37:12 41:11 44:11
53:22 54:18 77:2
79:12 80:18 86:4
88:21 110:2 116:4
121:20 121:23 121:24
124:3 124:4 133:14
145:4
fast ( 2 ) 9:1 46:3
fathom.38:22
fault, ( 3 ) 51:1 116:18
130:6
favour ( 2 ) 20:23 33:23
fear ( 2 ) 109:11 131:6
February23:1 feed9:2

feel ( 10 ) 8:19 15:8
19:25 25:22 36:24
53:12 76:3 111:20
135:24 141:7
feeling ( 2 ) 51:7 99:14
feels127:7 fetched ( 2 ) 80:19
80:19
few ( 12 ) 24:9 52:16
64:13 66:2 77:11
109:4 118:25 121:9
129:6 129:7 129:8
132:22
figure,129:16
file, ( 2 ) 66:25 67:1
filled140:5 finalised123:20 finances. ( 2 ) 38:14
38:15
financial ( 2 ) 45:2
53:16
find ( 14 ) 7:4 24:23
40:8 45:12 49:2 66:23
68:21 76:22 77:12
78:15 83:15 133:25
140:17 146:17
finding ( 2 ) 107:22
132:11
fine ( 5 ) 25:22 56:7
73:19 81:9 143:22
finish ( 4 ) 29:11 29:12
39:24 133:19
finite126:20 firm50:21
first ( 34 ) 5:23 6:22
7:4 8:23 11:22 13:6
14:21 15:23 16:23
18:14 19:2 22:25
24:12 24:14 25:1 25:5
34:1 39:8 47:20 53:10
53:16 54:12 59:8 60:6
61:11 62:16 66:11
99:21 113:4 117:10
119:14 120:21 124:1
147:10
Firstly, ( 4 ) 21:8 60:7
84:20 109:4
Fish ( 2 ) 104:17 142:1
fit, ( 2 ) 34:24 134:6
five ( 2 ) 19:17 113:8
five-off,131:3 fixing69:4 fixity72:10 flag131:17 flexibility ( 3 ) 16:11
17:23 51:10
flexible ( 2 ) 50:14 99:5
flip37:3
flow ( 3 ) 4:15 105:8
132:15
focus ( 6 ) 12:8 13:6
13:7 58:21 68:9
127:22
focusing116:5
fold ( 2 ) 136:15 136:16
follow ( 9 ) 27:22 65:23
66:7 72:19 87:19
94:25 126:24 126:25
130:21
following ( 3 ) 46:25
101:5 145:23
follows, ( 2 ) 99:22
128:11
footing. ( 4 ) 77:10 84:1
120:14 121:3
footnote ( 5 ) 68:12
69:12 69:19 74:13
77:23
forced ( 2 ) 141:11
141:16
foreign118:4

forensic ( 4 ) 60:22
60:23 106:22 127:6
forever76:15 forewarn130:13 forgery.41:10 forget89:23 form42:22
formal ( 2 ) 13:3 37:25 formalities10:18 formally ( 2 ) 7:21 42:16 forms140:5 formula.73:25 formulated ( 2 ) 68:23
74:22
forthcoming48:19 forthwith132:11 fortiori,137:21 fortunate ( 3 ) 14:25
17:12 17:15
forward ( 5 ) 40:19
57:25 79:21 101:10
113:7
found ( 9 ) 6:2 6:11
20:10 20:11 46:9 49:5
71:5 116:16 146:22
four ( 4 ) 12:18 18:2
131:3 145:18
fourth64:19 frailty147:14 France,39:11 frank55:6
Frankly, ( 4 ) 13:25 77:9
132:14 133:9
frantically113:17 fraud, ( 20 ) 26:4 60:15
60:15 62:16 63:17
72:4 72:21 84:1
100:11 100:12 100:17
100:19 103:3 103:25
105:13 107:24 136:25
141:1 141:10 141:14
fraud/
dishonesty,137:20 fraudster?145:10 fraudsters.106:17 fraudulent. ( 18 ) 60:9
69:16 70:21 71:13
96:10 106:25 107:12
107:14 135:17 138:19
140:19 142:6 144:18
144:19 144:22 144:23
145:5 145:16
fraudulently ( 5 ) 96:11
102:9 144:8 144:10
144:20
French ( 4 ) 2:21 9:6
72:7 75:17
Friday,148:10
friends ( 4 ) 1:25 25:18
38:14 38:15
front5:3
full ( 10 ) 9:10 12:14
56:11 65:15 66:16
73:22 74:1 74:3 74:10
91:3
fully11:17 function27:23 functions17:7 fundamentally102:11 further, ( 21 ) 15:11
26:7 46:8 61:16 61:17
66:2 71:3 81:24 83:14
86:7 94:16 103:13
108:25 110:1 111:8
115:9 124:22 128:10
143:14 145:25 147:8
Furthermore,12:4 future; ( 4 ) 12:10 15:18
20:9 124:14

G
{G2/69/1}.24:25
{G2/69/6}.25:3
{G2/69/7}.25:6
{G4/111/1}.56:13
{G4/111/12}.21:13
{G4/111/14}57:1
{G4/111/15}:64:1
gainsay128:1 galloped29:10 gambler,40:6 gambling40:2
game ( 5 ) 32:20 42:20
119:12 120:25 129:20
gap,31:20 gauge3:23 gave48:5
general ( 11 ) 4:4 7:19
20:6 47:21 56:22
56:24 97:2 102:18
102:23 103:1 116:13
Generally ( 8 ) 12:22
26:20 28:20 58:16
65:9 98:16 99:21
122:3
get ( 21 ) 3:18 12:8
16:13 35:14 38:16
45:10 49:3 51:12
54:23 66:17 81:10
98:5 116:22 119:11
122:8 125:22 139:1
139:15 142:11 143:14
147:21
gets105:2
getting ( 6 ) 97:9 126:8
129:23 133:5 142:16
147:23
ghostwritten,34:10 give ( 26 ) 9:10 14:15
17:20 20:17 30:15
30:18 55:16 57:11
59:6 61:17 71:2 79:17
91:11 97:19 109:24
111:13 111:18 114:7
117:15 123:24 126:21
130:13 134:8 135:22
140:23 141:17
given ( 25 ) 10:9 10:25
10:25 15:22 16:19
34:18 45:5 48:20
50:2 54:13 65:4 81:24
89:23 96:15 99:25
100:3 106:8 106:10
111:6 111:10 111:14
114:16 119:6 122:21
140:15
gives ( 5 ) 14:22 101:7
103:7 114:11 140:20
giving ( 6 ) 18:24 36:12
37:18 41:22 89:9
112:14
gone ( 5 ) 21:21 39:4
128:16 128:17 130:18
Good ( 17 ) 1:22 9:22
27:5 30:2 36:24 41:9
41:10 45:8 51:11
69:20 80:25 93:18
98:18 106:19 113:1
132:14 133:21
Google129:14 grander52:7 grandly,12:7
grant ( 3 ) 7:25 8:7 8:18
granted ( 2 ) 23:5 23:6
grateful ( 6 ) 8:18 9:23
11:18 51:19 55:14
56:14

great ( 4 ) 16:17 33:15
53:13 55:9
greater ( 2 ) 38:12 57:23
gross ( 5 ) 96:11 100:2
101:21 101:24 110:20
ground ( 6 ) 11:25 15:20
35:1 44:13 105:21
139:15
grounds ( 5 ) 52:22 98:8
106:2 106:19 130:12
group40:23 guarantee.» ( 7 ) 48:6
57:22 83:21 86:4
88:11 88:19 90:4
guarantees ( 6 ) 47:19
58:9 59:6 86:3 88:3
88:4
guess54:13 guesstimate?26:19 guidance ( 5 ) 45:13
46:10 49:9 50:6 51:16
guide113:4 guided6:24 Guriev47:8 Guriev’s40:2

H
hadn’t104:20
half ( 6 ) 27:13 82:22
125:10 129:13 129:14
130:19
hand ( 7 ) 21:22 62:7
62:14 88:11 145:14
146:22 147:3
handcuff131:12 (Handed).147:4
hands ( 2 ) 55:17 136:6
happened ( 6 ) 27:2
39:25 63:14 79:18
137:16 140:7
happening ( 2 ) 102:1
113:17
happens, ( 6 ) 14:20
22:23 26:1 118:4
118:14 143:4
happier81:19
hard ( 9 ) 3:22 3:23 6:12
46:15 49:12 65:23
66:18 72:19 132:5
harm132:14 harsh16:9 hasn’t96:15 hatched ( 2 ) 139:16
146:2
hatching ( 2 ) 139:4
139:10
haven’t ( 22 ) 22:20
52:19 53:19 65:4
91:15 96:23 97:6
99:25 100:20 104:2
106:8 110:7 111:14
114:3 114:4 121:10
122:2 123:7 126:17
131:10 136:22 141:7
he’s32:4
head ( 7 ) 81:21 82:20
87:8 89:9 91:25 124:5
143:2
heading46:23 health ( 4 ) 9:14 9:16
18:15 18:25
hear ( 20 ) 1:9 1:13 1:17
1:19 1:20 1:21 2:7
2:13 2:24 3:1 3:3 3:5
3:7 3:9 3:16 13:20
73:13 74:9 140:15
142:10
heard101:11

hearing. ( 9 ) 5:19 9:1
22:25 26:23 27:7
27:14 36:11 50:16
57:2
hearings. ( 2 ) 27:15
119:21
heavily ( 2 ) 10:21
112:10
held ( 5 ) 19:19 60:20
80:10 126:18 126:20
«Hello»? ( 4 ) 1:11 1:12
1:14 1:16
help ( 8 ) 11:10 18:9
23:16 46:13 103:23
118:17 130:10 142:23
helpful ( 9 ) 45:18 46:12
47:15 49:2 64:12
64:14 65:20 65:23
147:19
here ( 29 ) 2:1 2:17 2:22
3:4 7:22 11:11 12:5
17:14 23:18 24:25
31:18 32:4 32:7 36:16
39:25 54:16 58:17
74:22 87:21 99:4
103:2 104:14 105:5
106:18 118:15 126:2
129:10 134:1 137:24
hereby ( 2 ) 37:22 50:11
herein ( 2 ) 88:4 88:5
hereon ( 2 ) 73:20 74:7 hesitant61:20 HILDYARD: ( 342 ) 1:5
1:9 1:12 1:14 1:17
1:19 1:22 2:4 2:8 2:11
2:14 2:20 2:23 3:9
3:15 3:20 4:3 4:15
4:18 4:21 4:24 5:3
5:7 5:11 5:21 5:25 6:6
6:16 7:6 8:8 8:19 9:8
9:16 9:21 9:24 11:16
13:5 14:8 14:13 15:15
16:9 18:13 18:20 19:6
20:5 21:22 22:2 22:5
22:7 22:10 22:12 24:2
24:5 24:10 24:16
24:22 25:7 25:20
26:16 27:10 27:16
27:22 28:1 29:9 29:19
29:23 30:8 30:11
30:21 31:3 31:6 31:9
31:15 32:10 33:14
33:21 34:6 36:1 36:14
37:9 37:17 37:20
38:10 38:14 39:5
39:16 40:16 41:15
41:21 42:3 42:8 42:18
43:4 43:8 43:12 43:16
44:4 44:22 45:4 45:18
46:4 46:12 46:17
46:22 47:1 47:5 47:12
47:15 48:1 48:12 49:7
50:4 50:15 51:5 52:14
52:18 54:7 54:22 55:7
55:15 55:17 56:2 56:7
56:13 57:9 57:17
58:10 58:25 59:22
59:25 60:3 60:13
60:17 60:23 61:10
62:2 62:9 62:18 64:15
65:25 66:5 66:10
66:21 66:25 67:6 69:4
69:8 69:14 69:21 70:7
70:14 70:16 70:20
71:4 71:7 71:12 71:15
71:22 72:2 72:13
72:18 72:23 73:10
73:12 73:18 74:2
74:23 75:8 75:14
75:20 75:23 76:14
77:1 77:4 77:13 77:22

78:4 78:16 78:19 79:1
79:8 79:20 80:4 80:9
80:13 80:18 80:23
80:25 81:5 81:9 83:6
83:16 84:9 84:18
84:24 85:1 85:5 85:8
85:12 86:18 87:12
87:25 88:16 90:25
91:15 91:25 92:6
92:13 93:6 93:12
93:21 93:24 94:5
94:10 94:14 94:22
95:2 95:4 95:9 95:19
95:24 96:4 96:6 96:17
96:22 97:3 97:12
97:14 98:4 98:15 99:4
99:13 99:20 100:20
100:23 101:15 102:17
103:20 104:1 105:15
105:21 105:25 106:5
106:12 107:6 107:15
108:4 108:9 108:12
108:18 108:20 108:24
109:9 109:24 110:4
110:6 110:15 111:20
112:1 112:9 112:19
113:1 113:12 114:21
115:25 116:19 117:2
117:9 117:13 118:24
119:11 119:23 120:7
120:13 120:25 121:8
121:19 121:23 122:1
122:12 122:16 122:23
123:3 123:6 123:11
123:14 123:19 124:3
124:7 124:15 125:5
125:13 125:20 126:7
126:15 127:13 127:16
127:20 128:15 128:20
129:3 129:7 129:9
130:23 131:9 131:19
132:18 132:23 133:7
133:13 133:16 133:24
134:13 135:2 136:9
137:2 138:20 139:7
139:10 139:23 140:12
141:19 143:9 143:20
143:24 144:9 144:11
144:21 145:4 145:8
145:13 145:21 146:6
146:9 146:19 146:24
147:2 147:9 147:18
147:25 148:3 148:7
himself.18:4 historical73:20
history ( 2 ) 35:12 81:17
hmm.67:6 hoc49:14
hold ( 3 ) 92:23 99:9
136:21
home ( 5 ) 38:8 60:19
88:22 88:23 91:6
honest, ( 2 ) 63:16
136:2
honestly58:22 honesty.114:19 hope ( 10 ) 5:11 6:2
9:12 19:13 90:17
107:13 114:4 116:8
119:5 123:12
hoped ( 2 ) 27:19
124:10
hopefully, ( 3 ) 17:16
90:23 131:2
hoping133:11 horror19:8
hour ( 6 ) 125:10 130:19
133:10 133:21 134:1
134:1
hours, ( 3 ) 10:18
125:11 133:23

House ( 2 ) 26:5 61:25
Housekeeping ( 4 )
5:14 5:15 51:8 149:3
However, ( 5 ) 15:19
32:22 68:14 74:5 78:1
huge ( 2 ) 18:21 119:4
hypothetically, ( 2 )
39:22 40:9

I
I’m ( 40 ) 2:6 3:15 3:18
19:24 25:10 32:5 34:6
38:4 38:7 38:8 38:15
39:21 42:5 46:14
52:11 61:20 70:17
76:14 85:1 89:19
91:20 94:24 98:13
106:3 107:24 108:14
110:4 112:9 112:19
112:23 123:14 124:4
127:8 127:8 128:14
130:14 133:1 143:16
144:18 144:19
I’ve ( 4 ) 6:6 77:20 110:7
124:5
I20.66:20
{I20/23/17},64:5
{I20/23/18}.64:9
{I20/23/21},64:18
{I20/26/57.14}. ( 2 ) 83:5
85:14
{I20/26/57.25}.84:23
{I20/26/57.26}.85:3
{I20/26/57.40}.66:24
{I20/26/57.41}96:13
{I20/26/57.46},95:13
{I20/26/57.90}.68:2 ICI,33:8
idea ( 5 ) 30:18 33:6
97:24 98:11 116:13
identification137:19 identified ( 13 ) 55:22
58:23 100:4 115:25
116:7 119:8 122:3
136:12 138:7 138:23
141:15 142:20 143:7
identifies ( 2 ) 66:8
72:17
identify ( 21 ) 40:12
45:7 81:2 101:7
102:24 113:19 114:9
115:20 123:22 124:24
129:12 131:11 131:21
135:7 136:17 138:2
140:12 141:11 141:14
143:12 144:3
identifying ( 5 ) 44:17
45:15 50:7 115:22
118:12
ill ( 2 ) 18:15 18:25
imagine ( 2 ) 10:4 120:4 imagined75:9 immediately112:13 imminence16:19 impairment. ( 2 ) 92:25
93:13
impinging20:16 implementation144:2 implemented ( 3 )
144:14 145:9 146:1
implicate106:13 implications111:25 implied ( 3 ) 34:22
50:10 50:23
import54:25 importance137:24 important ( 10 ) 15:24
19:3 31:22 41:25

75:18 98:15 102:11
112:11 137:10 138:9
imposed53:9 impossible ( 2 ) 3:7
30:15
impoverished39:14 impression126:8 improper, ( 4 ) 74:25
74:25 75:25 76:16
improperly.74:18 impugn80:16 impugnable, ( 2 ) 69:17
74:6
impugned ( 3 ) 78:21
80:19 106:14
impugning ( 3 ) 78:17
78:20 79:21
inaccuracy ( 2 ) 23:11
63:25
inadequately ( 2 ) 121:6
121:18
inapplicable20:20 inappropriate.126:19 (inaudible): ( 2 ) 77:24
89:6
Incidentally115:7 include ( 3 ) 70:22 71:9
130:4
included ( 3 ) 97:21
121:3 123:24
includes,32:15 including ( 6 ) 18:8
35:14 50:10 65:20
83:12 100:6
inclusion ( 2 ) 117:5
119:16
incomprehensible113:23 inconvenienced125:16 inconvenient18:5 incorporated ( 2 ) 83:9
87:10
incorporates85:20 incorrect,109:11 increase88:10 increased90:3 increasing88:18 increasingly142:16 indebtedness.59:15 independent ( 2 ) 106:1
108:9
INDEX149:1
indicate ( 2 ) 64:3
134:22
indicated ( 8 ) 24:5 65:6
70:21 79:13 114:6
127:21 140:25 147:11
indication60:18 indifference ( 2 ) 20:12
55:20
indistinct.3:17 individual48:5 individually144:19 individuals ( 3 ) 135:6
144:12 144:13
inefficiency ( 2 ) 126:11
127:5
inequality. ( 2 ) 115:9
115:12
infer ( 10 ) 50:11 100:17
100:18 100:19 102:3
106:25 107:12 110:24
141:9 141:10
inference, ( 9 ) 74:5
78:1 79:15 79:15
102:10 103:7 103:17
109:25 112:15
inferences ( 5 ) 68:14
76:11 79:19 107:23
136:3
inferred103:2 informal43:19

information. ( 2 )
111:13 111:14
informed.14:18 infrastructure50:21 inherent18:6 initially115:13 injury92:2 inkling126:21 innocent140:23 innocently141:4 inquiry ( 2 ) 6:3 10:16 inserted6:10 insider96:11 insinuated ( 3 ) 52:21
52:24 53:5
insist130:14
insofar ( 5 ) 25:10 26:9
28:14 84:10 90:1
insouciance41:3 instance, ( 6 ) 14:16
26:23 26:24 54:12
63:8 79:3
instructed50:9 instruction ( 4 ) 34:20
34:23 35:7 35:8
instructions ( 2 ) 37:1
44:25
insufficiency127:24 insufficient ( 2 ) 125:1
127:22
insulate62:18 insurers.40:15 intelligible130:2 intend, ( 4 ) 17:1 50:11
71:19 123:25
intention ( 2 ) 18:18
64:3
inter117:19
interest ( 3 ) 45:2 53:17
94:20
interested ( 3 ) 12:16
22:8 109:7
interests ( 2 ) 48:24
50:20
interim36:11 intermediate121:1 internal ( 4 ) 23:3 45:13
48:4 48:7
interplay89:16 interpretation57:11 interrupt, ( 3 ) 56:15
87:20 130:22
interrupting,56:17 intervene105:7
into ( 26 ) 18:21 21:21
38:16 43:10 66:17
76:3 76:10 82:3 83:9
86:15 90:21 98:5
102:17 104:6 104:6
105:8 119:11 123:8
126:21 127:2 128:8
129:19 131:17 136:14
136:16 139:18

involved. ( 10 ) 10:21
12:19 25:23 33:16
106:14 106:17 137:1
139:12 140:9 141:13
involvement. ( 2 ) 26:7
106:25
involves118:12 irrelevance92:9 irrelevant88:19
isn’t ( 13 ) 16:16 30:19
32:10 32:24 36:8
43:21 43:25 49:8 60:3
71:15 72:19 87:12
113:21
isolation, ( 2 ) 57:13
59:21
issues. ( 5 ) 8:23 31:20
40:20 74:19 82:13
it’s ( 16 ) 9:15 11:5 13:2
30:21 32:3 58:19
58:19 65:13 73:11
97:6 103:19 104:5
113:22 116:11 124:3
136:1
italicised72:24 item55:18 items132:22
its ( 20 ) 6:2 6:12 45:14
45:15 48:4 59:2 59:7
62:3 62:14 63:9 83:18
83:19 92:8 119:13
131:23 136:17 138:11
143:2 144:20 145:17
itself59:25

J
{J1/20/12}.108:17
{J1/20/13},108:22
{J20/26/57.40}?66:15
January ( 3 ) 1:1 64:2
148:10
jeopardy11:3 joined136:18 joiners57:19 joint46:19 jointly59:13 jolly146:9
jot ( 2 ) 112:12 112:13
judge27:6 judgment ( 2 ) 28:24
62:7
July95:15 jurisdiction29:25 jurisdictions. ( 4 ) 58:14
69:25 73:7 76:5
jury.55:1 justification103:21 justify ( 2 ) 107:17
143:14

K

knew ( 8 ) 63:14 141:22
141:23 146:1 146:1
146:3 146:9 146:11
knife-edge,127:16 knock-on ( 3 ) 59:3
92:21 93:14
know. ( 68 ) 2:12 2:12
2:16 3:5 3:11 11:21
14:16 18:10 20:25
21:23 31:24 32:3
32:5 33:14 35:3 36:14
36:14 42:17 42:23
47:23 48:8 51:21
51:23 52:1 53:18
61:22 65:22 69:9
71:1 73:18 74:3 78:4
79:23 91:10 91:16
97:15 97:18 98:4 98:6
98:7 99:5 99:11 100:1
100:1 100:6 112:10
118:4 120:9 121:12
121:13 121:23 122:1
130:17 133:20 134:1
136:25 137:2 137:3
137:12 138:18 138:21
139:11 140:2 144:4
144:21 144:23 145:7
147:21
knowing147:19 knowingly37:7 knowledge,145:24 known104:2
knows ( 6 ) 38:2 41:13
43:21 88:2 121:21
138:14

L
{L3/14/1},23:1
{L3/14/2}.24:3
{L8/39/81}.57:8
labelled4:22
lack ( 2 ) 102:11 110:22
Lair ( 2 ) 68:15 78:2
land. ( 21 ) 76:2 76:25
77:2 82:21 83:13 85:7
86:11 87:4 87:4 87:7
87:22 87:23 88:16
89:2 89:15 90:2 90:2
91:5 92:16 92:17 93:8
language ( 5 ) 8:24
33:25 34:1 118:5
122:17
large ( 4 ) 113:5 129:20
129:21 138:6
largely47:11
last ( 7 ) 35:12 46:20
47:3 61:9 82:19 103:2
108:22
late ( 6 ) 61:18 65:7
103:21 105:14 111:5
112:20

legal ( 6 ) 60:23 61:8
61:10 81:20 100:13
144:11
legitimate ( 2 ) 20:18
130:12
lend40:23
lending ( 2 ) 45:16
45:25
length ( 2 ) 108:3 108:5
lengthy,81:16
less ( 10 ) 25:11 27:19
59:1 75:8 76:8 79:12
81:8 83:21 90:6 124:9
let ( 9 ) 44:25 66:22
96:1 96:25 98:3 99:18
120:7 138:17 140:14
let’s ( 3 ) 31:21 116:19
120:13
letter ( 13 ) 6:2 6:5 6:20
10:19 12:1 32:18
34:23 53:25 64:4
66:14 81:25 82:3
89:22
letters ( 6 ) 10:12 12:20
12:21 12:23 32:13
38:19
level ( 3 ) 20:11 26:6
54:13
liability ( 11 ) 57:4 57:5
58:13 59:17 61:1
83:24 86:2 86:7 88:22
88:24 91:6
liable ( 5 ) 26:3 59:20
60:20 63:3 123:1
lie91:5 lies31:4
life ( 3 ) 11:17 16:4 19:7
light ( 2 ) 64:22 67:13
like ( 32 ) 6:14 10:11
10:11 11:12 20:3
20:14 25:14 26:2
29:4 35:10 35:18 36:2
44:22 47:23 48:8 49:5
49:23 57:7 63:21 65:6
65:16 85:13 114:14
115:10 115:16 118:10
127:10 129:24 133:18
146:16 147:16 147:20
liked,111:3
likely ( 5 ) 18:3 119:25
120:3 120:15 120:16
limit ( 3 ) 70:18 98:23
131:12
limitation». ( 2 ) 67:24
82:14
limitations.»96:12 limited94:3
line ( 7 ) 23:4 23:14 25:5
25:22 64:19 125:2
125:3
link. ( 2 ) 2:3 4:12
linked2:2 lion’s132:25

49:15 53:23 90:11
93:10
little ( 7 ) 15:19 35:18
61:22 72:19 77:20
108:25 116:6
live147:20
lives ( 3 ) 11:3 11:5
17:15
LLC, ( 4 ) 53:1 68:16
78:3 95:16
load ( 2 ) 125:5 125:9
loaded127:1
loan ( 5 ) 46:25 86:5
88:2 92:11 110:23
loans ( 2 ) 88:3 88:4
log5:5
log-in4:19 logical56:6 logically101:24 logistical ( 2 ) 10:15
111:25
Logistically125:22 long ( 16 ) 3:3 8:2 12:16
29:10 36:17 70:4
74:12 77:8 94:11
94:15 99:24 125:5
125:8 133:7 141:9
147:4
longer ( 2 ) 17:22
134:22
look ( 31 ) 21:11 21:18
23:13 24:2 26:5 33:10
42:21 57:7 58:20 64:4
67:2 67:3 68:2 73:25
77:19 77:23 81:3 81:9
83:2 94:3 96:1 108:16
108:21 109:19 113:7
113:20 115:8 120:7
125:24 142:14 147:4
looked ( 4 ) 80:21 86:15
121:11 127:13
looking ( 9 ) 21:17 23:9
59:18 74:16 76:25
78:13 82:5 114:13
135:3
looks ( 4 ) 22:24 67:22
72:15 127:10
Lords ( 2 ) 26:5 62:1
Lordship, ( 93 ) 1:24 2:5
4:1 5:16 5:19 5:22 6:1
6:3 6:5 6:10 6:13 6:14
6:20 6:24 7:3 7:24
14:12 15:14 17:21
21:17 22:24 23:17
28:12 28:20 28:23
31:4 31:7 32:18 33:19
34:17 35:2 35:20
35:24 36:9 37:4 37:15
38:2 38:13 38:16
38:18 39:2 39:22 40:8
40:8 41:6 41:8 41:13
41:20 42:5 42:6 42:6
42:15 43:5 43:6 43:14

loss, ( 14 ) 81:22 81:23
82:20 82:20 84:14
86:10 87:8 89:9 89:11
91:18 91:24 92:1
92:16 93:9
lost. ( 4 ) 89:13 94:5
95:10 123:14
lot ( 17 ) 9:6 9:6 15:1
19:1 24:18 27:19
33:15 78:20 90:25
97:14 110:8 114:18
127:10 128:13 140:5
142:19 147:19
lots ( 5 ) 33:14 97:20
139:11 140:8 141:8
loud3:2 love44:16
low ( 2 ) 75:15 122:5
LPK ( 16 ) 40:14 82:21
85:7 85:23 85:24 86:4
86:11 87:4 87:7 87:22
88:2 88:16 89:15 90:5
93:8 93:9
Ltd62:1
lucky.142:11 Luncheon45:21 lunchtime143:8 lurk72:24

M

machine ( 4 ) 22:8
117:2 118:19 119:1
machinery,58:1 magic37:25
Magnum ( 20 ) 5:5 5:7
6:11 21:21 61:23
119:17 121:17 125:6
125:9 125:15 126:2
126:3 126:4 126:4
127:2 128:12 128:14
132:5 132:7 132:8
maintained42:3 major ( 2 ) 14:6 16:14
majority33:9
makes ( 4 ) 18:3 94:19
109:18 109:19
making, ( 8 ) 56:18
74:20 76:21 78:7
78:11 78:12 80:2
111:4
man’s ( 3 ) 76:2 76:25
77:2
manage ( 2 ) 14:25
119:12
management.51:8 mandate48:22 mandated2:15 manner ( 2 ) 71:13
116:23
many ( 14 ) 7:7 8:23
11:8 14:23 17:12

introduce ( 8 ) 54:24 later ( 6 ) 57:19 70:10

list ( 3 ) 90:16 124:1

43:14 43:21 44:24

27:10 27:11 33:15

81:21 82:25 85:18
86:11 87:7 89:9 89:20
introduced72:25 introducing7:1 introduction ( 2 ) 81:17
96:2
inure58:1 investigate39:1 investment40:23 invidious,50:22 invite ( 11 ) 7:20 31:5
62:8 102:10 103:17
107:5 107:22 108:1
110:24 127:11 136:3
invited115:2 inviting13:6 invoke88:9

keen ( 4 ) 7:14 29:4 78:8
98:14
keep ( 14 ) 14:18 20:3
37:15 39:7 40:7 51:9
54:4 68:1 82:8 98:14
116:10 122:5 124:10
132:13
keeping ( 2 ) 33:18
119:9
keeps26:3
kind ( 9 ) 15:8 21:9
25:24 46:18 53:7 53:9
53:11 61:13 66:22
kindly ( 3 ) 7:24 8:6 46:3

78:21 83:8 85:4
123:23
latest ( 3 ) 12:11 75:6
134:18
lawyer ( 6 ) 2:15 2:16
2:21 2:22 26:1 34:21
lawyers33:12 lead42:2
least, ( 13 ) 8:21 17:16
39:19 42:16 72:10
78:11 109:5 120:16
128:2 128:2 128:12
139:16 141:20
leave ( 4 ) 16:24 42:13
90:1 147:11
left ( 3 ) 17:21 59:8
115:19

131:18
listed71:8
listen ( 2 ) 21:3 74:4
listens7:14
literally ( 5 ) 16:4 89:5
98:25 109:23 114:2
litigant ( 2 ) 117:14
117:16
litigants ( 3 ) 18:7 18:12
31:16
litigation ( 21 ) 7:10
8:12 10:9 10:13 11:11
11:24 12:16 13:15
14:6 20:22 25:24
27:24 32:11 33:5
34:12 34:16 41:23

45:23 45:23 46:2 46:7
46:15 46:18 46:23
47:10 48:13 48:17
49:2 52:12 57:3 57:10
67:22 75:5 88:2 105:7
105:9 108:11 116:17
118:3 119:19 120:2
121:22 126:10 127:3
127:7 127:9 130:14
138:14 145:2 147:3
147:7 147:16
Lordship’s ( 11 ) 6:8
12:24 41:6 46:16
47:14 88:8 102:13
108:7 108:16 108:19
110:24
lose123:15

74:19 121:19 131:20
138:13 144:7 146:11
Marc2:21
March. ( 2 ) 17:17 28:13
market.102:2 Marseille,2:16 Marshall23:14 material, ( 16 ) 58:12
98:19 99:7 99:7 99:8
99:10 100:21 100:25
117:24 118:1 118:5
118:21 120:4 120:5
121:15 128:14
matter, ( 25 ) 5:23 9:8
10:2 26:18 32:15
34:7 38:25 40:25
41:8 41:11 48:17

51:13 55:19 78:4 82:8
100:17 100:18 101:9
101:16 102:10 103:18
103:19 108:1 132:3
143:24
matters ( 18 ) 8:20 12:6
20:16 24:18 26:18
36:19 36:21 43:9
43:18 49:22 51:8
51:25 85:20 87:1
103:16 107:14 133:4
134:5
maximise60:11 maximum134:8 Maybe ( 3 ) 4:18 48:7
103:23
Maylsheva ( 4 ) 63:8
63:16 135:23 137:7
McGregor, ( 3 ) 21:12
56:23 94:24
McGregor’s ( 9 ) 22:13
23:11 55:23 56:10
63:23 67:17 67:19
68:4 95:5
McKenzie ( 6 ) 23:6
24:6 26:18 68:22
74:15 147:7
mean ( 21 ) 5:5 5:6
10:10 12:10 20:6
29:4 44:2 56:15 70:21
73:16 75:19 76:20
79:5 79:18 84:16
101:13 128:15 139:23
143:16 143:23 146:9
meaning7:1 meaningfully19:15 means ( 6 ) 7:12 9:4
33:22 101:1 136:19
136:22
meant ( 4 ) 4:15 44:14
50:7 93:22
medium33:24
meet ( 3 ) 46:9 121:16
138:5
meeting. ( 2 ) 142:15
144:17
meetings145:8 member ( 3 ) 135:21
138:8 138:23
members145:17 memory, ( 2 ) 62:12
141:15
mentioned ( 4 ) 54:19
54:22 106:19 108:13
mentions12:25 Mercury95:16 mere49:12 merit39:21 merits,90:21 message49:11 met135:19
might, ( 29 ) 12:7 19:8
28:23 29:14 29:16
40:20 42:15 43:25
48:25 50:2 50:24
56:24 58:14 60:6
66:19 72:24 73:4
111:23 114:6 117:3
125:15 125:17 126:8
126:20 128:15 141:17
142:9 142:10 142:11
million, ( 2 ) 33:6 39:18
millions146:15
mind. ( 11 ) 6:16 39:16
46:7 47:16 54:4 55:2
60:6 63:6 64:17 65:21
128:12
minded ( 2 ) 37:4 48:13
mine, ( 2 ) 27:2 66:21
minor50:1

minute. ( 5 ) 3:21 40:3
123:15 123:17 142:14
minutes ( 4 ) 4:2 113:8
113:18 147:22
Mironova16:1
mirror ( 4 ) 35:15 53:1
54:19 120:10
misapprehension140:4 mislead37:7 misleading, ( 3 ) 22:22
52:23 113:24
misunderstanding.10:7 misunderstood ( 2 )
50:3 105:11
mode ( 2 ) 12:25 53:21
moment ( 16 ) 14:19
16:2 18:19 18:20
34:6 38:9 71:7 77:7
77:14 79:8 79:11 97:4
106:16 120:13 123:6
124:18
Monday. ( 10 ) 123:13
123:21 124:25 133:10
134:10 134:12 134:19
134:24 143:4 143:7
money ( 8 ) 9:3 21:20
33:16 38:21 38:21
40:14 75:24 120:10
monies39:4 monstrous39:23 monstrously19:14 month15:11 month’s43:24 months11:1 mother-in-law.90:8 motivate20:15 mouth91:5
move ( 7 ) 56:3 63:21
81:13 82:2 90:18
93:23 111:18
movers141:14 multitude111:16 must ( 63 ) 12:1 12:4
37:2 37:7 37:9 39:16
45:7 45:15 49:12
49:13 51:3 54:7 56:11
76:18 76:18 77:6
79:10 81:1 81:6 83:18
97:4 97:8 98:25 99:8
99:11 102:23 103:12
105:10 112:3 112:11
112:13 113:2 113:3
116:15 116:22 117:2
122:1 127:1 128:8
128:19 129:20 130:1
132:5 132:10 135:7
135:11 136:12 136:12
136:17 136:18 137:17
138:21 139:15 140:3
141:8 143:12 144:3
144:3 144:12 144:22
146:3 146:7 147:11
mustn’t ( 2 ) 73:13
112:18
myself ( 3 ) 16:22 49:18
51:10

N
name ( 3 ) 56:11 137:3
138:24
named ( 3 ) 136:22
137:6 137:6
names.54:20 narrative105:2
narrow ( 2 ) 65:19 77:20 narrowed135:1 narrowing65:12
nature ( 4 ) 58:19 65:6
119:6 138:1

naughty.106:20 Nazir.62:1
Nearly ( 3 ) 113:21
113:23 114:11
nebulous:138:4 necessarily ( 4 ) 33:16
39:8 69:2 134:2
necessary ( 4 ) 14:1
44:18 64:25 132:2
need ( 43 ) 4:4 6:10
8:2 15:9 15:11 15:13
18:22 25:7 29:11
44:10 44:20 50:13
55:21 56:21 63:17
81:3 81:16 86:15 87:6
97:15 97:18 116:1
116:12 116:17 122:25
123:23 124:21 124:22
125:21 125:23 129:12
129:24 130:4 131:1
133:8 138:18 139:19
143:17 143:23 144:4
144:6 144:15 147:21
needed119:2
needs ( 7 ) 34:23 37:1
55:25 113:19 134:19
138:7 141:21
neglect16:4 neglecting19:7 negotiations ( 2 )
104:19 104:19
neighbouring ( 2 )
104:17 104:18
neither58:17
never ( 11 ) 26:20 43:15
60:7 60:14 80:11
89:18 97:24 101:11
104:15 117:25 142:20
newer66:1
next ( 7 ) 25:5 25:7
55:18 95:13 116:2
130:18 138:18
Nice ( 2 ) 4:12 36:2
niece ( 2 ) 101:6 101:11
night,132:7 nine145:17 nobody3:2
non ( 2 ) 107:7 122:14
non-court50:16
non-distressed75:16 non-impugned79:12 none ( 3 ) 65:10 65:11
74:25
nor ( 2 ) 58:17 93:10
norm20:20
normal ( 4 ) 62:22 62:24
124:17 143:13
normally, ( 4 ) 41:16
115:5 118:4 126:6
notably99:24
note ( 14 ) 5:17 6:18
43:5 48:1 49:7 49:8
49:25 51:17 56:15
56:20 61:11 66:8
73:20 75:3
noted44:7
notes ( 2 ) 45:13 135:3
nothing ( 4 ) 25:24 28:7
28:21 52:7
notice14:15 noticed ( 2 ) 20:15
37:10
November147:5 number ( 12 ) 47:7
82:13 90:8 100:5
106:8 107:21 111:1
119:5 119:7 121:24
125:12 145:6
numbered64:8 numbers ( 2 ) 129:9
131:23

O
object ( 2 ) 79:6 143:3
objecting ( 2 ) 44:8
86:25
objection ( 6 ) 30:17
66:11 82:12 84:7
86:16 105:11
objections ( 3 ) 31:5
56:18 66:4
objective ( 2 ) 127:23
136:13
objectives,136:17 obligation ( 4 ) 51:12
80:11 132:12 132:16
obligations ( 2 ) 50:24
114:22
observations,10:1 observing40:17 obsessive,42:21 obstructive48:16 obtain ( 3 ) 130:7
131:22 131:22
obtained102:21 obtaining47:19 obvious; ( 3 ) 7:13 34:8
37:18
obviously ( 54 ) 2:1
6:21 6:24 10:21 11:4
13:21 13:23 14:15
15:12 25:10 28:16
29:4 30:12 39:1 40:9
41:18 43:13 45:1
47:23 48:13 49:2 51:1
52:11 53:15 53:23
58:6 58:21 59:12
61:11 61:20 62:8 65:2
68:11 89:12 98:22
102:13 103:18 107:23
113:18 113:24 114:8
114:17 118:11 122:10
126:13 128:13 129:20
133:3 134:6 136:5
141:7 142:3 145:1
145:6
occasion, ( 3 ) 63:2
72:25 102:25
occasional53:25 occasionally ( 2 ) 25:25
36:15
occasions, ( 7 ) 23:6
24:6 24:7 24:10 25:18
28:21 34:2
occupied9:2 October, ( 2 ) 36:10
57:3
odd ( 2 ) 64:8 66:22
oddness39:17 odds,40:6
off-hand.121:25 offence, ( 2 ) 53:19
53:20
offer36:1 office,42:19
officers ( 3 ) 45:15 58:4
62:4
official.28:22
officials ( 2 ) 28:9 28:17
often. ( 5 ) 18:21 42:21
65:13 113:24 133:25
Okay, ( 12 ) 5:9 5:13
66:10 77:22 80:25
81:5 87:25 94:22
95:24 105:21 110:6
134:25
old ( 13 ) 21:18 66:12
67:4 67:7 70:15 72:8
74:13 77:24 85:17

96:1 99:21 106:11
135:3
OMG ( 2 ) 12:14 89:12
OMGP64:21
once21:15 one-off.131:3
Onega. ( 10 ) 81:23
82:22 83:1 83:13 87:4
87:23 89:11 90:16
94:9 110:19
ones134:14
onto ( 3 ) 119:17 125:9
132:7
open ( 3 ) 7:3 17:21
137:7
opened22:15 opening ( 4 ) 26:25
118:22 118:25 119:6
operate126:3 opportunity ( 2 ) 111:19
127:18
oppose23:15 opposed ( 3 ) 27:24
44:1 88:1
opposing ( 2 ) 23:22
29:23
opt-out117:16 optimistic18:11 Opus4:20
order, ( 27 ) 6:24 12:24
16:5 43:6 60:18 60:24
69:20 69:25 71:20
82:1 89:9 102:13
107:8 108:7 108:16
108:19 108:22 109:1
109:13 110:11 110:24
124:8 130:15 130:17
133:18 134:8 138:22
ordered ( 4 ) 108:11
108:12 111:8 111:13
orderly120:19
orders, ( 2 ) 23:24 73:7
ordinarily ( 2 ) 103:4
126:2
ordinary ( 3 ) 8:15 31:10
35:16
organised10:19 original, ( 4 ) 75:16
96:17 132:9 136:15
Originally ( 3 ) 69:5
69:11 92:14
originals ( 2 ) 122:17
122:19
others? ( 2 ) 27:11 48:8
otherwise, ( 10 ) 9:16
45:10 48:18 58:1
69:22 78:21 97:19
106:18 114:7 131:25
ought93:25 ourselves ( 2 ) 10:25
17:1
outcome53:17 outline139:17 outside ( 2 ) 39:9
135:14
over ( 8 ) 63:24 67:3
84:25 114:13 125:22
135:4 136:21 146:11
overall ( 2 ) 15:18 97:14 overestimated61:23 overnight46:7 overspeak.4:14
own ( 13 ) 7:15 11:5
11:17 17:14 19:7
22:17 62:6 63:7 93:16
95:10 97:1 118:20
138:11
owned ( 5 ) 82:21 88:24
89:12 92:17 93:8
ownership94:20

P

pages,64:13 pairs19:17
paper? ( 5 ) 22:1 22:6
125:14 125:22 126:1
pardon, ( 2 ) 67:25
110:10
parentheses,138:11 Paris15:4
part ( 47 ) 6:22 28:18
36:22 41:23 48:4
59:11 64:18 70:7 70:8
73:3 73:4 73:11 80:3
83:1 83:2 83:3 83:6
83:8 83:10 84:8 85:15
86:3 88:17 93:25 94:5
95:13 101:25 102:22
104:3 104:11 104:17
104:22 104:23 105:17
107:15 113:14 118:5
118:22 127:22 132:8
136:15 142:12 142:17
143:11 143:25 144:1
145:9
partes,117:19 participate19:15 participated136:11 participation51:18 particular ( 16 ) 16:24
20:6 21:11 26:22
35:19 53:5 58:9 59:19
91:20 100:5 102:4
104:21 105:20 109:12
120:18 137:24
particularise ( 4 ) 65:15
67:13 97:11 103:12
particularising ( 2 )
102:5 103:10
particularly ( 7 ) 18:11
32:17 40:21 64:16
98:17 133:1 134:16
particulars, ( 9 ) 65:19
81:25 82:1 82:18
89:4 89:8 89:23 98:25
100:10
parties, ( 16 ) 8:14
35:22 59:14 62:21
73:19 86:22 89:11
94:17 101:23 106:25
107:5 116:23 118:5
118:8 118:10 139:20
parts87:3
party ( 20 ) 62:15 65:20
70:4 84:4 85:23 85:24
88:6 90:5 90:11 93:10
102:4 105:20 106:18
107:18 108:9 110:25
128:9 135:7 137:20
146:12
party’s82:5
passage ( 3 ) 64:6 85:4
85:6
passed17:17
passing ( 2 ) 32:20 33:3
past? ( 6 ) 8:22 15:17
20:8 37:13 45:5 86:25
pattern ( 2 ) 107:2
110:25
(Pause). ( 3 ) 1:15 22:9
113:1
payment. ( 2 ) 2:19
36:11
peanuts41:4 pejorative,127:8 people ( 26 ) 11:5 25:23
42:10 59:23 61:4
99:11 106:13 126:3
129:24 136:15 136:21

137:12 138:4 138:5
138:13 139:3 139:11
139:16 140:5 141:17
144:24 145:6 146:2
146:10 146:11 146:15
per ( 3 ) 29:6 79:5 92:16
perceive44:10 percentage75:15 perfect ( 2 ) 8:25 126:7
perfectly, ( 4 ) 3:1 60:12
60:12 106:24
performance15:17 performed ( 2 ) 8:21
37:14
perhaps ( 15 ) 10:18
28:25 30:6 37:20
48:24 49:17 65:10
67:21 81:17 90:1 98:2
109:17 109:18 109:19
135:9
peril136:23 permissible ( 2 ) 114:24
142:25
permission, ( 8 ) 17:10
61:17 81:24 89:9
89:21 89:24 93:4
115:20
permissions14:22 permitted, ( 2 ) 13:11
24:6
perpetrators.60:16 person ( 25 ) 3:4 7:8 8:1
13:16 18:7 18:12 26:5
31:16 48:19 57:6 84:4
84:12 88:23 88:24
88:24 88:25 98:6
101:4 105:1 117:15
117:16 125:15 140:18
141:21 144:19
personal ( 11 ) 3:13 9:4
9:13 27:2 47:19 48:6
57:22 58:9 59:6 59:9
83:20
personally, ( 2 ) 144:22
144:23
personnel134:15 persons ( 4 ) 7:14 7:15
57:18 139:14
persuade78:20 persuasive53:21 Petersburg ( 3 ) 137:16
138:16 143:3
PetroLes40:14
phrase, ( 2 ) 40:2 49:25
picked105:9
picture, ( 4 ) 3:8 18:23
18:23 123:25
pie36:8 piece,35:13 pile122:1 pity.125:4
place, ( 10 ) 44:1 60:19
76:2 76:6 82:3 101:21
107:2 127:12 139:18
145:9
placed133:7
plain ( 3 ) 37:5 38:6 41:8
plaintively119:22 plan ( 4 ) 16:2 102:1
110:2 110:3
planning,110:18 play, ( 8 ) 72:9 90:4
90:13 90:14 104:6
104:6 118:22 137:18
players136:10
plea ( 2 ) 92:6 96:17
plead ( 13 ) 90:23 94:14
97:4 97:8 98:25 99:8
101:3 101:18 103:13
106:9 107:11 111:12
145:12

pleaded ( 19 ) 60:8 68:6
68:7 78:23 85:20
86:12 86:20 87:9
87:12 89:3 93:17
96:20 100:10 100:15
103:19 107:21 112:7
135:16 142:15
pleading ( 18 ) 63:13
64:11 71:15 78:16
78:24 81:4 83:14
86:10 86:25 87:3
90:13 91:11 96:4
100:11 101:19 105:12
134:9 135:3
pleadings, ( 29 ) 57:5
57:11 61:12 63:17
64:22 78:9 81:21 82:3
82:8 82:9 82:16 82:19
83:3 84:7 86:17 86:17
89:7 89:17 89:22
89:25 94:16 95:13
98:24 99:21 100:18
103:15 103:25 106:11
107:15
pleads83:11
pledge ( 4 ) 46:24 76:8
79:22 86:6
pledged ( 9 ) 47:10 59:5
75:9 79:13 87:24 91:3
93:22 94:1 94:3
pledges. ( 4 ) 59:2
83:12 83:15 88:17
plot, ( 6 ) 57:19 139:5
139:10 139:17 139:17
144:14
plotted144:13 plough55:21 pluck128:21
points ( 34 ) 11:13 21:4
21:10 23:2 28:4 29:16
29:18 32:16 32:16
35:10 42:9 43:7 52:17
54:18 56:16 56:23
60:4 61:21 64:11 66:8
67:18 80:11 84:17
84:19 87:21 88:14
92:14 98:3 109:4
109:12 110:13 134:9
134:14 134:22
policing31:12 policy45:25 polite:106:5 political ( 4 ) 20:13
26:15 28:5 52:4
poor ( 3 ) 59:9 102:21
113:22
popped.6:15 Port104:17
Ports ( 2 ) 12:14 89:12
posed32:18
position ( 35 ) 6:4 6:21
11:2 11:20 13:19 21:2
23:12 23:19 24:8 26:2
29:20 35:1 35:17 38:3
38:11 38:12 39:3 39:9
39:13 43:23 48:16
49:6 52:9 62:13 65:14
69:14 84:21 92:22
93:15 95:23 97:15
113:15 115:19 135:24
141:8
positively41:24 possession ( 4 ) 122:25
123:7 123:8 128:9
possibility ( 3 ) 8:7 8:18
104:21
possible ( 9 ) 3:12 11:9
14:16 14:24 16:17
16:23 17:12 122:5
139:12

possibly, ( 4 ) 14:3 18:3
28:24 99:14
pot130:18 potential72:20 pots120:10 practical; ( 14 ) 13:2
13:13 13:25 31:1
31:17 35:21 41:10
41:11 42:14 115:10
116:15 139:9 140:15
146:17
practicalities53:22 practice, ( 13 ) 13:21
43:5 46:24 47:5 47:9
47:18 47:21 47:23
49:7 49:8 49:9 51:16
113:16
pragmatic ( 4 ) 68:24
70:6 74:16 132:12
precedent19:19 precisely ( 4 ) 12:13
44:18 53:7 91:14
precision.67:16 preclude36:7 precluded136:7 predicament.127:25 prefer? ( 5 ) 30:22 30:22
65:24 133:24 134:4
preference, ( 2 ) 133:9
133:17
prefers56:5 prejudge ( 2 ) 41:20
42:5
preliminary ( 3 ) 2:5
56:23 68:8
preparation118:6 prepare ( 2 ) 19:16
133:19
prepared ( 9 ) 5:20
13:23 17:20 58:4
94:18 114:6 115:6
125:18 130:20
preparing ( 5 ) 54:5
113:17 114:5 116:10
133:11
prescriptive,49:1 present, ( 10 ) 2:18 8:1
15:4 25:16 30:19 33:8
33:10 38:13 94:18
106:1
presentation120:19 presented ( 4 ) 38:4
43:24 65:8 119:2
presenting39:9 presents.39:15
press ( 3 ) 38:8 116:12
120:12
pressed,112:10 pressures119:15 presumed ( 2 ) 104:7
105:2
presumption61:18 pretty ( 5 ) 19:18 58:24
77:3 112:3 116:11
prevent79:10
previous ( 5 ) 9:1 23:24
63:2 89:24 102:25
previously ( 11 ) 27:23
65:13 82:21 83:2
85:6 95:19 96:23 97:2
105:22 105:24 132:10
price102:21 Prichaly, ( 9 ) 95:16
95:20 100:7 102:7
102:12 108:24 109:3
110:20 112:6
primarily ( 2 ) 139:4
139:6
primary ( 2 ) 136:11
141:14
principal137:3

principle, ( 4 ) 65:17
98:13 98:23 101:17
principles ( 4 ) 20:13
78:24 105:12 106:24
prior ( 2 ) 64:2 65:4
priorities129:23
privy ( 2 ) 90:10 138:16
pro ( 5 ) 120:9 120:14
122:7 131:7 131:8
probabilities,102:8 Probably ( 6 ) 15:5
17:13 43:2 46:9 47:13
61:23
problem ( 19 ) 3:11 3:24
12:18 13:2 14:5 32:20
46:6 53:25 60:3 74:21
103:10 113:5 113:14
115:17 119:12 124:14
125:13 139:9 140:15
problematic146:17 problems, ( 4 ) 9:14
10:15 12:10 130:20
procedure. ( 4 ) 13:24
46:24 47:5 47:9
procedures52:6 proceed? ( 9 ) 1:23
15:12 20:25 36:11
44:7 77:10 80:9
120:13 147:11
proceeding42:24 (Proceedings ( 27 )
1:3 7:23 9:11 22:19
23:17 24:11 24:13
27:1 55:10 68:10
68:14 69:13 70:5 73:5
73:20 73:23 74:19
78:1 80:15 84:5 85:23
85:25 116:25 127:1
137:14 137:22 146:21
process ( 12 ) 7:9 7:18
8:12 9:5 54:16 71:25
99:15 102:9 117:3
118:6 127:4 142:22
processes ( 2 ) 9:6
80:20
produced ( 2 ) 125:7
126:23
produces125:6 producing64:3 product127:21 productive133:25 profess135:11 professed23:25 professional ( 6 ) 13:10
25:19 30:13 30:14
36:4 114:21
professionals, ( 2 ) 7:16
31:11
Professor ( 2 ) 40:2
47:8
profoundly143:2 progress? ( 5 ) 4:2
111:21 116:6 116:10
124:9
progressing127:14 prohibited80:2 prohibitively118:10 promising1:6 proof,99:9 propensities ( 2 ) 92:22
93:15
proper ( 22 ) 15:6 17:5
32:24 35:15 37:6
40:11 51:23 53:13
74:10 75:2 89:22 95:7
98:11 99:25 106:9
106:10 108:6 111:3
111:7 112:21 119:3
136:2
properly ( 11 ) 3:3 18:12
74:17 79:4 84:12

102:3 113:22 116:24
121:10 127:7 127:14
property ( 7 ) 84:2 84:4
84:11 84:13 92:1 92:3
92:21
proportion ( 2 ) 26:17
127:6
proposed ( 6 ) 10:8
11:7 51:3 87:3 142:17
143:4
proposing ( 4 ) 35:2
82:24 87:7 87:8
proprietary68:16 prosecuted,32:15 prospect33:22 prospects39:25 protect64:25 protocol, ( 10 ) 12:8
13:6 35:2 35:20 36:18
37:16 42:14 51:19
54:2 134:9
protocols ( 3 ) 45:14
46:10 48:18
prove ( 5 ) 53:4 101:1
101:9 107:4 107:13
proven53:3 provide112:21 provided ( 7 ) 4:13 30:3
81:25 82:1 89:4 89:8
103:22
provisional21:2
public ( 5 ) 28:16 28:22
47:6 96:8 99:24
pull18:8 punched47:2 punished,86:24 purported96:8 purports94:2
purpose. ( 7 ) 5:20 63:6
70:18 89:3 93:16
140:13 144:17
purposes ( 7 ) 13:5
68:13 69:13 77:25
94:18 118:24 128:18
pursuant ( 11 ) 57:17
57:19 69:24 69:25
73:6 76:4 80:20 81:25
89:8 108:7 109:12
pursue ( 3 ) 35:11 39:18
70:15
pursued. ( 2 ) 35:11
134:23
pursuing70:14
puts ( 2 ) 35:5 115:23
putting ( 3 ) 86:20
115:21 120:4
puzzling36:16

Q
qualification, ( 2 ) 10:6
15:9
qualifications,65:14 qualified7:11 qualify10:22 quality.5:12 quantum86:1 question ( 17 ) 3:12
5:24 6:13 17:19 19:4
30:9 30:16 33:20
36:23 44:3 47:14
47:18 48:22 52:5
54:19 61:3 111:22
questions ( 11 ) 9:25
20:3 28:5 31:14 34:24
35:9 35:15 38:17
43:10 48:24 135:5
quick ( 2 ) 111:21
120:16
quickest.56:3

quickly98:2 quiet,3:4
quite ( 75 ) 6:6 10:14
10:20 10:24 11:10
13:8 13:23 14:25
15:1 15:24 19:9 25:17
27:18 29:2 40:17
41:22 43:12 44:17
50:6 50:7 54:21 55:4
56:4 56:9 57:15 58:13
62:5 62:21 63:7 63:12
66:14 70:24 71:11
75:21 76:20 77:11
78:23 79:16 80:17
80:22 81:6 81:16
82:25 89:3 90:20
91:20 91:21 92:5
94:21 95:23 97:10
98:13 99:3 103:11
106:21 107:21 111:1
113:14 113:24 114:14
118:25 122:11 123:5
126:18 128:4 129:6
129:7 129:8 130:15
131:6 136:9 137:5
138:4 139:22 146:18
quotation,64:17 quotes64:6

R

radar? ( 2 ) 128:16
128:17
raise ( 2 ) 51:25 78:13
raised ( 4 ) 11:14 14:12
44:18 65:5
rate. ( 2 ) 1:22 18:14
rather ( 24 ) 8:9 14:3
17:10 37:10 40:22
43:19 49:23 50:1
56:22 57:12 58:8
59:20 60:16 66:17
81:15 82:21 82:22
89:3 95:6 102:1 112:1
125:14 132:5 133:1
rational103:3
re-examination,15:7 re-read135:2
re-start123:17
reach ( 2 ) 89:17 89:18
reached110:2 reaching12:22 react8:25
read ( 18 ) 6:6 8:4 8:25
21:4 25:4 42:20 47:3
49:7 49:10 51:16 62:7
62:8 62:10 64:12
64:15 110:1 110:7
147:9
reading ( 3 ) 17:24
110:9 139:19
reads ( 2 ) 140:16 147:7
ready123:13
real ( 10 ) 4:15 31:21
31:24 32:23 46:25
77:19 90:16 104:20
106:23 125:13
realisation ( 6 ) 47:9
59:2 68:17 72:5 86:6
90:2
realise86:14
realised ( 4 ) 72:6 72:11
75:5 79:4
realistic ( 2 ) 36:22
103:5
reality,26:10 «realtime»,4:22
reason ( 15 ) 7:13 13:18
13:22 13:25 27:5
42:25 44:5 44:6 55:11

75:25 76:16 118:15
130:24 131:24 137:10
reasonable ( 2 ) 28:20
30:3
reasons ( 6 ) 16:10 70:6
74:16 90:9 102:24
122:21
reassurance ( 2 ) 48:18
138:22
reassures55:8 rebut76:12
recall ( 7 ) 23:19 26:24
27:12 28:12 63:1
81:19 96:20
receipt12:2 receive30:23
received ( 2 ) 5:17 59:1
recently ( 2 ) 36:9 111:9
reckon147:10 recollect ( 4 ) 36:9 43:5
43:6 119:19
recollection ( 4 ) 38:24
103:1 147:1 147:14
record ( 12 ) 19:21
23:21 40:23 42:4 43:3
74:15 93:24 116:25
117:6 121:4 132:8
143:1
recourses:59:4 recover ( 3 ) 83:15
89:15 92:24
recovered.69:3 recovery. ( 2 ) 60:11
83:25
reduce ( 2 ) 60:25 135:5
reduced ( 3 ) 43:10
43:20 83:24
refer ( 5 ) 24:17 28:23
48:2 77:8 81:18
reference ( 7 ) 57:5 58:9
64:5 67:17 67:19 81:1
93:13
references52:25 referred ( 2 ) 21:15
26:24
reflect ( 2 ) 71:21
147:14
reflected74:13 reflective ( 2 ) 84:14
86:21
reflects147:13 refusal;115:4 refuse115:13 refused, ( 3 ) 115:3
115:13 118:17
refusing130:12 regard. ( 7 ) 6:4 11:19
19:21 68:11 77:5
83:17 136:23
regards ( 4 ) 13:15
18:14 50:15 52:2
registered92:11 regret53:12 regulations, ( 2 ) 48:4
48:7
reject ( 3 ) 25:12 52:24
55:5
rejected ( 2 ) 28:12
28:15
relate140:18
relating ( 2 ) 28:16 53:5
relation ( 12 ) 24:1
62:13 68:23 74:11
81:23 85:7 96:15
107:7 110:23 132:17
141:12 141:16
relationship ( 2 ) 13:12
44:15
relaxed ( 4 ) 29:2 52:10
52:11 56:4
release132:12

released ( 3 ) 123:8
132:16 132:18
relevance ( 2 ) 91:1
117:4
relevant ( 19 ) 7:11
28:19 47:13 64:6
78:15 81:18 83:13
88:15 88:20 89:12
89:18 90:4 91:2 91:12
111:16 117:10 117:11
120:1 128:22
reliable.130:2 reliant,120:8 relied118:25
rely ( 15 ) 11:10 36:6
60:17 77:15 84:10
87:1 92:19 94:15
98:19 100:25 110:15
111:15 112:14 115:15
122:6
relying ( 5 ) 55:13 87:6
103:6 104:12 135:12
remaining114:3 remains ( 2 ) 29:20
139:25
remedy.3:25 remember ( 6 ) 6:7
24:14 77:3 81:6 81:7
89:4
remind51:11 removal69:8
removed ( 3 ) 66:3 69:6
90:9
Renord58:17
repeat: ( 2 ) 55:8 87:14 repeats87:13 repetition.88:20 replacing9:14 replicate44:14
reply ( 3 ) 29:1 52:17
111:19
represent9:18 representation. ( 6 )
5:24 11:22 29:18
47:25 48:11 81:20
representative ( 3 )
23:18 35:4 53:13
representatives100:13 request, ( 4 ) 8:9 8:10
17:9 118:11
requests115:14
require ( 3 ) 42:22 50:23
113:16
required. ( 6 ) 9:15
13:21 48:5 54:13 99:3
134:24
requirements,34:18 requires ( 2 ) 15:1
126:10
requisite ( 2 ) 7:17 12:9 research,141:8 reservation ( 8 ) 68:18
70:9 70:25 72:20
75:21 78:11 78:25
94:11
reservations73:4 reserve, ( 4 ) 17:9 28:18
51:10 71:2
reserved, ( 3 ) 23:13
82:14 127:7
resiled115:18 resource ( 3 ) 38:3
38:12 54:14
resources ( 3 ) 18:8
40:5 130:10
respect, ( 26 ) 22:21
29:20 33:4 34:14
40:21 40:22 43:9
43:18 45:6 47:18
51:14 52:13 55:10
57:13 65:12 84:1

86:14 88:22 91:18
92:25 94:19 107:11
116:1 118:2 119:20
130:5
respectful ( 2 ) 5:23
142:21
respectfully134:11 respectively.72:7 respond ( 2 ) 10:16 80:2
response ( 4 ) 6:3 28:4
66:1 84:20
responses140:25 responsibilities ( 3 )
35:6 36:4 50:16
responsibility ( 10 )
10:8 30:10 32:13
33:20 34:11 34:25
37:25 41:23 48:23
61:2
responsible ( 4 ) 8:13
139:4 139:6 145:19
responsibly35:14 restraints31:12
result ( 6 ) 21:23 51:13
59:13 71:1 91:22 94:6
resurrection,40:3 reticence86:25 return ( 3 ) 14:8 113:7
145:21
reverse106:2 revert9:25
review? ( 9 ) 37:16 51:9
51:24 64:22 73:15
127:9 127:11 131:18
132:14
reviewing127:4 reviews43:25 rid122:8 ridicule106:22 rife,32:22
rightly ( 3 ) 28:6 105:9
138:11
rights ( 15 ) 7:25 10:13
12:15 23:6 29:18 30:9
30:13 30:15 32:10
48:20 49:14 49:14
49:21 52:6 59:7
ring104:3 ringfence80:4 rip59:25 ripped61:5
rise ( 6 ) 4:1 44:24 101:7
103:7 109:24 112:14
road ( 2 ) 20:19 135:20
ROK ( 8 ) 95:16 95:20
100:7 102:7 102:12
108:24 109:3 110:20
role ( 2 ) 16:12 28:8
rolling ( 5 ) 114:1
114:10 115:21 125:7
128:25
room ( 6 ) 2:8 2:11 3:2
4:4 33:12 114:12
root44:9 rough129:16 Roughly, ( 3 ) 27:12
122:4 129:15
route ( 2 ) 44:8 125:23
rules, ( 24 ) 7:7 7:8 7:16
11:25 13:10 15:21
34:18 42:20 44:13
45:15 62:23 62:24
80:14 91:10 99:4
104:10 105:5 114:25
117:15 124:17 125:20
126:11 142:3 146:21
run ( 5 ) 39:25 63:18
82:5 88:7 137:14
Russia ( 3 ) 91:10
134:12 138:5

Russian ( 16 ) 28:9
40:25 46:14 46:20
52:6 58:11 58:13
61:12 62:23 63:1
91:16 92:24 96:10
121:17 128:18 128:19

S
sacrifice ( 2 ) 15:2
133:10
safe,40:7 safeguards ( 2 ) 35:3
42:15
sake ( 5 ) 10:17 20:13
20:19 69:20 113:2
sale ( 10 ) 69:25 71:25
72:22 75:12 79:23
83:1 91:5 91:8 92:20
102:16
sales? ( 36 ) 47:6 69:23
70:23 71:10 73:1 73:1
73:3 73:6 73:14 73:21
73:25 74:6 74:10
74:24 74:25 75:1
75:15 75:24 76:4 76:5
76:6 76:16 76:16 77:2
77:16 77:16 78:17
79:12 80:16 80:18
84:2 87:17 96:9 96:16
99:24 109:1
salient76:3 salutary,42:18
same. ( 20 ) 21:25 43:17
54:24 55:10 57:2
57:19 58:13 63:24
67:25 68:2 70:2 80:24
83:4 84:21 88:5 95:12
115:1 129:1 136:24
140:16
satisfactorily,125:3 satisfactory ( 3 ) 3:21
40:11 117:6
satisfied,34:18
save ( 3 ) 29:16 56:19
120:23
Savelyev? ( 6 ) 16:1
63:8 67:10 136:5
137:6 143:18
say-so30:24
saying ( 32 ) 3:17 3:19
19:14 23:14 23:23
25:22 30:12 37:22
37:23 40:8 50:4 52:4
57:10 59:16 62:19
68:12 76:14 83:20
89:19 91:1 92:7 97:18
98:1 98:20 104:8
104:9 104:11 106:20
121:8 144:18 144:19
146:6
Scandinavia, ( 7 ) 40:14
40:15 82:21 86:11
90:5 93:8 93:9
scepticism ( 2 ) 38:6
41:9
schedule ( 9 ) 32:6 68:4
68:6 68:8 68:12 72:17
77:21 77:24 108:19
scheduled15:25 schedules134:7 screen. ( 5 ) 4:16 5:3
21:15 56:12 68:2
script.66:22 scroll46:3 Sea104:17
seamless13:17 search,124:5
second, ( 11 ) 8:9 8:25
11:24 13:9 15:24

16:13 16:23 48:2
64:18 90:13 147:10
secondly,109:10 section,96:2 securities.»68:17 security ( 2 ) 46:25
47:10
see ( 59 ) 4:2 5:22 6:20
11:9 12:10 16:7 19:23
22:8 22:13 23:14
24:10 25:2 25:15
25:17 31:4 33:16
33:19 44:11 46:2
46:23 47:10 55:24
66:12 67:14 68:5 68:7
68:22 69:18 70:11
72:23 75:5 79:8 81:15
84:6 84:16 85:16 95:4
98:20 101:12 101:15
116:6 116:19 117:4
120:25 128:15 129:3
130:12 130:21 131:14
135:14 135:18 136:6
139:23 140:22 141:9
142:1 143:17 143:17
147:8
seeing ( 2 ) 21:24 59:19
seek ( 2 ) 34:23 132:1
seeking ( 3 ) 83:25
88:22 93:4
seem ( 4 ) 26:11 38:20
40:23 72:24
seems ( 7 ) 28:6 35:18
40:13 50:13 52:12
86:10 104:14
seen ( 10 ) 6:1 21:19
31:7 38:17 38:18 42:6
42:7 117:25 118:1
140:18
sees34:24 seized96:9 self53:9
send ( 3 ) 10:16 14:2
118:22
sending14:5 sense, ( 15 ) 17:21
23:24 25:23 27:20
49:23 59:21 63:22
80:1 89:7 109:18
109:19 129:1 135:12
146:13 146:18
sent ( 3 ) 10:19 12:22
12:23
sentence: ( 2 ) 48:3
99:1
separate ( 2 ) 49:14
49:16
separately82:17 September ( 2 ) 108:16
109:5
sequence, ( 2 ) 110:15
129:2
series ( 8 ) 35:6 35:17
98:10 99:24 101:22
101:25 107:23 110:18
serious ( 3 ) 22:21
104:24 138:6
served61:17
service ( 2 ) 12:25 37:14
session,43:19
set ( 13 ) 19:20 25:17
26:8 42:2 56:18 64:10
68:9 72:8 99:2 134:18
140:14 142:15 146:21
setting5:17 seven66:8 several ( 6 ) 21:10
52:20 60:4 84:19 90:9
119:21
shall ( 18 ) 1:23 9:22
9:24 9:25 29:11 36:6

36:7 42:22 45:9 51:24
51:25 55:21 57:21
81:13 113:7 130:16
130:21 146:19
sham,67:8
share ( 5 ) 10:13 92:3
92:23 118:8 132:25
shareholder ( 8 ) 84:13
85:24 90:6 91:9 91:10
91:17 92:24 93:11
shareholding ( 3 )
91:22 95:15 101:5
shares ( 2 ) 91:13 93:16 sheltered40:5 shield62:17
ship ( 4 ) 70:23 73:3
73:14 75:15
ships ( 4 ) 75:6 79:4
79:18 80:1
short ( 6 ) 4:8 29:16
45:8 45:24 87:20
113:10
shorter111:23 shortly,20:21
should ( 86 ) 4:17 5:2
5:3 5:8 5:16 5:19 6:8
6:16 7:19 10:22 13:18
20:1 22:1 23:10 23:15
28:9 29:12 30:6 31:22
32:25 33:2 36:2 36:11
36:17 41:8 42:19 43:2
43:9 45:3 48:19 49:10
51:7 53:8 53:13 54:3
54:16 55:16 55:20
56:1 56:25 59:2 60:20
64:21 66:5 68:14
73:18 76:11 76:18
78:1 78:5 78:21 79:19
83:21 83:22 86:5
89:14 90:13 91:7 99:9
99:16 99:16 100:10
105:2 106:15 108:10
110:8 111:18 112:7
117:18 117:19 118:2
120:22 120:22 121:21
124:17 124:19 124:24
127:7 128:20 130:4
134:9 134:17 136:7
137:12 140:10 143:7
shoulder.114:13 shouldn’t ( 5 ) 49:11
78:5 86:24 93:20
117:15
show ( 18 ) 61:1 61:3
75:1 75:23 77:6 79:10
83:9 84:4 89:13 90:22
95:8 100:16 101:10
101:23 104:11 110:21
139:16 141:19
showed ( 2 ) 47:20 85:6 showing129:2 shown53:12
shows ( 2 ) 5:4 126:4
side. ( 9 ) 1:10 32:18
37:3 58:3 74:8 76:22
76:24 77:4 79:9
sides ( 2 ) 51:14 128:9
sight. ( 2 ) 40:7 131:25
sign42:20
signal, ( 3 ) 1:20 2:6
3:10
signals124:1
signed ( 7 ) 35:5 36:18
43:22 51:22 136:17
140:17 141:5
significance130:25 significant ( 2 ) 40:5
41:22
similar ( 3 ) 54:20
101:22 107:13

simple, ( 4 ) 8:24 38:24
71:24 93:7
simpler33:22
since ( 4 ) 36:5 61:9
100:3 109:5
single ( 2 ) 109:13 118:8
Sir, ( 2 ) 25:10 64:9
sitting ( 4 ) 2:9 2:11
122:9 122:12
situation ( 3 ) 39:6
102:15 143:2
six35:12 sixth25:15
size ( 3 ) 18:6 33:5
113:15
skeleton, ( 7 ) 6:17
47:17 55:22 64:7
64:10 66:7 94:24
sky,36:8
slight, ( 4 ) 23:10 63:25
89:6 99:14
slightly ( 14 ) 3:22 3:23
49:15 54:23 60:5
84:15 85:4 95:10
96:14 115:18 125:16
131:20 144:5 147:8
slim56:16
slow ( 4 ) 1:20 3:10 3:10
120:18
slow-witted.75:14 slower90:25 slowly4:13
so-called62:16 sold ( 9 ) 41:4 57:20
69:17 69:24 74:17
74:18 75:16 83:23
95:16
solicitor ( 4 ) 44:15
50:10 50:22 50:24
solicitor’s50:21 solicitors ( 3 ) 27:4 42:4
142:25
solution. ( 5 ) 50:25
116:15 119:13 121:5
132:13
solutions,120:7 somebody ( 8 ) 30:19
40:1 49:24 104:6
137:19 141:5 142:6
142:9
somehow86:10 someone ( 5 ) 26:1
26:23 29:25 37:5
138:25
something ( 29 ) 4:18
12:12 14:20 19:10
25:21 26:2 31:23
32:24 35:4 35:5 37:8
43:2 43:14 51:9 54:3
55:24 71:1 74:12
85:13 85:18 86:12
86:15 98:18 110:8
115:2 131:17 136:1
145:24 146:13
sometimes ( 4 ) 14:1
26:2 113:21 113:21
somewhat ( 2 ) 21:20
29:10
somewhere128:19 soon ( 4 ) 14:16 81:2
122:20 128:8
sort ( 25 ) 26:16 27:16
30:11 33:11 36:8
43:19 47:22 48:22
49:18 61:7 76:1 76:1
77:7 104:5 113:5
117:16 117:16 117:22
117:24 124:7 126:6
129:9 134:1 138:12
142:1

sorts ( 4 ) 31:7 35:3
39:12 79:20
sought ( 4 ) 48:14 65:15
66:2 67:13
sound ( 2 ) 5:12 19:24
speak ( 9 ) 4:13 5:7 7:2
7:9 7:22 8:11 27:8
27:9 61:24
SPEAKER: ( 7 ) 1:11
1:16 2:13 2:15 2:21
2:25 123:17
speakers4:13 speaking ( 7 ) 20:24
27:24 32:10 65:10
122:3 122:4 124:5
special ( 2 ) 28:21
119:23
specialist,8:3 species22:22 specific ( 2 ) 63:6
101:19
specifically. ( 2 ) 96:21
102:15
speeches26:15 speed131:6 spelt37:9 spend133:11
spent ( 2 ) 26:17 53:3
spin,54:24 split.129:15 spoken.5:4 spousal48:5 squeeze17:24 stable38:20
stage, ( 13 ) 61:18 64:2
65:7 89:17 89:18
98:17 105:14 110:4
110:6 110:7 110:11
110:13 112:24
stages. ( 2 ) 110:5 117:8
stance.35:19
stand ( 5 ) 35:23 42:17
43:13 49:1 139:1
«Standard46:23 start, ( 14 ) 1:6 1:11
23:22 39:24 56:5 56:6
66:15 133:18 133:24
134:10 136:2 147:16
148:4 148:4
started, ( 2 ) 1:18 27:18
starting ( 6 ) 23:14
62:11 72:16 95:14
130:3 134:19
stated100:20 statement ( 18 ) 15:8
21:12 22:14 23:11
24:15 24:20 25:1
25:15 46:19 53:10
53:16 53:18 55:23
56:10 63:23 67:17
95:6 140:16
states63:3
stating ( 2 ) 64:1 100:25
station ( 2 ) 147:24
147:24
staying147:21
steps ( 3 ) 90:9 110:12
110:19
sterile.78:22 stick.81:11
still ( 15 ) 1:19 9:5 56:18
68:1 83:11 90:5 95:3
95:12 96:5 115:1
115:20 132:21 134:5
139:14 139:25
stools.31:21
stop. ( 2 ) 91:3 141:23
storm69:21 story41:7 strange57:14 strengths103:18

stress ( 3 ) 15:13 25:21
124:9
strike13:14
Stroilov ( 269 ) 2:1 4:25
7:22 7:25 8:11 9:9
9:10 9:22 9:24 10:4
10:6 12:11 13:20
14:11 14:14 16:2
16:21 18:18 19:4
19:7 21:8 21:25 22:3
22:6 22:9 22:11 22:16
24:4 24:8 24:12 24:17
24:23 25:9 25:21
26:20 27:12 27:18
27:25 28:2 30:4 32:4
33:23 34:10 34:10
34:17 35:25 36:3
36:7 36:10 36:20
36:24 37:13 42:23
42:25 45:2 45:4 50:12
50:16 50:19 51:18
51:22 52:1 52:14
52:16 52:20 54:21
55:4 55:7 55:14 55:16
56:1 56:4 56:9 56:14
56:21 57:10 58:6
58:11 59:11 59:24
60:2 60:4 60:14 60:21
61:8 61:11 62:5 62:10
62:21 64:16 66:1 66:7
66:11 66:20 66:22
67:2 67:7 69:7 69:11
69:18 70:2 70:8 70:15
70:17 70:24 71:6
71:11 71:14 71:17
73:2 73:11 73:16
73:24 74:8 75:4 75:11
75:21 76:10 76:20
77:2 77:11 77:18
77:23 78:7 78:18
78:23 79:2 79:16
79:25 80:8 80:10
80:17 80:22 80:24
81:3 81:6 81:12 83:8
84:6 84:17 84:19
84:25 85:3 85:6 85:10
85:14 87:7 87:19 89:1
90:20 91:14 91:19
92:5 93:2 93:12 93:19
94:2 94:9 94:11 94:21
94:23 95:3 95:5 95:10
95:22 96:1 96:5 96:7
96:20 96:25 97:9
97:13 98:1 98:13
98:21 99:12 99:17
99:21 100:22 101:14
101:16 103:9 103:23
105:10 105:19 105:24
106:3 106:7 106:21
107:7 107:20 108:5
108:11 108:14 108:19
108:21 108:25 109:10
110:1 110:5 110:10
110:17 112:10 112:16
112:25 113:13 115:1
116:4 117:21 121:5
121:13 121:19 121:25
122:3 122:14 122:20
123:2 123:5 123:10
123:12 123:20 124:4
124:8 126:12 128:11
128:23 129:6 129:8
129:11 130:20 131:6
131:14 132:16 132:20
133:9 133:15 133:20
134:21 134:25 135:9
136:20 136:24 137:5
138:21 139:6 139:8
139:22 140:4 140:13
140:14 143:16 143:23
144:5 144:10 144:15

144:25 145:6 145:11
145:14 145:21 146:5
146:8 146:17 146:25
147:6 147:9 147:15
147:23 148:2
Stroilov’s141:24 strongly20:22 struck ( 2 ) 68:7 79:9 structure60:5 stump34:1
stupid ( 2 ) 47:1 143:16
style21:18 sub117:25 subcontraction51:3
subject ( 17 ) 7:15 9:16
15:18 15:22 16:22
17:2 19:11 20:21
24:15 51:6 71:10
80:12 81:24 120:17
127:3 129:23 135:10
submit ( 2 ) 23:24
138:15
subparagraph108:22 subparagraphs.103:13 subsequent ( 2 ) 72:25
85:15
subsequently ( 5 )
14:22 105:15 132:6
136:16 139:18
substance, ( 13 ) 12:17
14:9 26:8 61:14 65:9
68:20 68:24 71:19
77:3 82:4 82:16
106:11 106:23
substantial ( 4 ) 38:20
39:3 59:14 65:3
substantive ( 2 ) 86:17
109:17
substitute59:9 succeed ( 4 ) 19:23
137:3 138:23 138:25
successfully138:23 succinct127:9 suddenly16:6 sue88:25
sufficient ( 6 ) 36:25
100:12 100:17 103:14
105:4 126:23
sufficiently4:12 suggest ( 11 ) 29:13
54:2 55:12 60:18
74:23 96:18 106:15
124:17 124:23 134:11
137:8
suggested ( 20 ) 25:11
26:14 28:8 28:14
29:2 32:21 44:5 48:23
73:21 76:8 82:17 91:6
95:19 95:22 96:23
97:6 97:13 104:15
112:17 140:6
suggesting ( 6 ) 41:7
49:19 89:1 89:14
104:21 135:6
suggestion ( 8 ) 22:19
29:5 55:4 72:4 72:25
74:5 74:9 143:11
suggestions ( 3 ) 28:4
52:2 52:21
suggests ( 6 ) 22:17
52:12 57:3 62:10
62:12 116:19
suing89:2 suit91:10 suitable42:11 suits35:18 sum.76:7 summarised99:22 summary18:13 summer82:19 sums76:7

superhuman19:22 supplement5:11 supply?21:7 support ( 2 ) 25:16
47:21
suppose ( 6 ) 29:3
60:21 66:12 125:16
125:19 142:9
supposed ( 3 ) 2:16
2:17 111:11
supposing ( 3 ) 86:2
125:6 125:6
supposition101:8 sure ( 17 ) 13:21 15:20
23:10 34:25 46:1
50:11 52:16 67:18
70:17 74:21 87:19
91:20 103:23 116:20
130:14 138:5 147:1
Surely ( 2 ) 29:24 30:2
surprise ( 3 ) 99:15
99:16 126:12
surprising ( 2 ) 40:6
126:15
survive. ( 2 ) 9:3 15:11 survived.85:19 suspend ( 2 ) 117:15
118:15
sustain97:3 sustained27:17 switch1:8
system? ( 5 ) 5:6 5:7
21:14 30:14 66:23

T
tab ( 12 ) 4:22 22:6 57:2
63:24 64:9 65:25
65:25 66:1 66:18
67:25 83:4 95:12
table130:8 tactics.»65:1 tag32:21
tailor-made ( 2 ) 50:13
50:25
taken ( 12 ) 10:9 23:20
38:20 53:9 56:25
57:13 65:17 66:11
67:23 67:23 99:16
99:23
takes ( 5 ) 24:21 24:23
101:20 107:2 133:22
taking ( 4 ) 32:13 34:11
59:20 117:22
talk ( 5 ) 80:5 80:7 80:11
80:13 131:16
talking ( 6 ) 40:1 80:6
87:23 113:6 123:3
129:9
talks104:16 Tarasova ( 2 ) 90:7
93:11
task ( 4 ) 10:25 15:14
33:17 116:15
teacup,69:21 technical4:2 technology,66:16 telling145:3 tenterhooks,16:15 term ( 3 ) 49:19 49:23
50:8
Terminal, ( 6 ) 82:22
83:1 90:16 94:9 94:13
110:19
terms, ( 31 ) 13:25
14:11 15:2 17:13
21:20 29:5 31:12
39:24 52:9 52:16
52:17 53:23 54:2
56:17 67:21 82:12

85:23 90:9 92:21
95:25 106:22 111:25
114:18 115:11 122:21
127:23 130:8 130:10
131:7 132:18 133:5
terrified116:5
test ( 4 ) 2:25 3:22 3:23
19:2
testing21:14
text ( 4 ) 66:12 68:7
83:10 85:17
Thanks45:19
that’s ( 122 ) 2:18 3:8
11:22 17:18 18:18
18:18 19:24 21:8
21:12 22:3 22:5 24:12
24:22 25:3 27:10 29:3
30:2 30:10 30:11
32:10 32:11 34:2
46:12 47:15 49:13
52:9 54:3 56:7 57:1
59:11 60:3 61:6 61:7
63:20 63:24 64:9
64:10 70:6 70:24
73:10 73:16 73:19
74:6 75:3 75:10 75:21
76:9 76:20 78:4 78:12
78:18 80:8 80:9 80:10
81:9 82:15 83:4 85:3
85:8 85:15 85:16
85:17 85:17 85:18
86:12 88:1 88:6 88:21
89:19 91:14 92:13
92:25 93:2 93:4 93:19
94:12 96:5 96:22 97:9
97:10 99:12 99:13
99:17 100:22 103:11
105:4 105:5 105:7
106:3 107:20 107:20
108:14 108:19 109:19
109:20 111:16 114:14
114:20 115:21 115:22
117:24 118:13 119:23
122:14 122:20 123:18
125:19 126:1 128:23
129:15 132:1 133:6
133:15 135:10 137:18
139:8 139:12 139:19
143:16 143:24 144:15
145:11
themselves ( 2 ) 62:18
65:1
theoretical.36:2 theory,125:19 there’s ( 10 ) 29:17
29:18 33:15 37:24
88:14 117:14 118:15
118:15 133:3 139:21
therefore, ( 11 ) 3:24
38:12 39:6 62:19
74:25 90:16 100:15
104:22 133:1 139:2
145:19
They’ve60:14
thing ( 17 ) 16:9 16:20
36:7 36:15 40:20 53:7
60:24 61:11 103:2
115:1 116:20 128:2
128:3 131:9 135:13
135:22 138:20
thinking ( 7 ) 8:16 19:1
37:14 61:25 91:21
134:4 141:6
thinks ( 3 ) 121:5
126:10 141:25
third, ( 5 ) 9:1 62:15
62:21 92:19 129:3
Thirdly,107:7 thoroughgoing51:2 though ( 4 ) 21:2 49:7
135:11 136:22

thought ( 11 ) 36:18
40:18 41:2 47:13
55:20 72:10 103:20
105:12 112:17 126:8
130:4
thousands ( 3 ) 19:17
54:6 126:9
three ( 17 ) 11:1 19:17
27:18 38:19 38:22
69:4 69:5 69:17 72:1
72:6 72:22 73:2 75:6
94:25 131:3 141:15
146:4
three-month33:9 through ( 21 ) 6:2 7:17
17:14 21:17 24:24
27:3 33:23 33:24 41:7
55:21 59:22 60:10
63:16 64:13 66:5 82:5
98:14 114:22 127:21
134:21 144:12
throughout ( 6 ) 9:19
30:20 102:9 114:2
124:10 124:11
throw112:24 Thursday,1:1 tie15:19
tied ( 2 ) 39:19 136:7
tight18:1
time, ( 49 ) 4:10 4:11
4:15 6:9 9:5 9:10
17:20 24:12 24:23
26:17 27:16 29:10
29:16 36:23 39:8
40:11 43:17 43:24
44:22 56:19 61:9
68:2 70:3 74:15 76:17
76:24 81:20 86:20
93:4 112:19 114:4
115:8 120:23 121:9
121:24 124:13 124:24
125:1 127:10 130:24
134:8 134:11 134:24
136:24 138:12 140:9
140:17 143:15 147:16
times29:7
timetable ( 2 ) 17:19
133:17
today. ( 7 ) 7:5 32:4
32:7 38:17 77:19
111:24 112:1
today’s7:1
together ( 2 ) 145:23
145:25
told ( 8 ) 9:1 17:4 21:14
42:18 56:11 87:2
119:15 137:22
tomorrow. ( 17 ) 111:25
112:2 116:8 133:2
133:5 133:7 133:8
133:11 133:18 134:3
134:18 134:25 135:10
143:8 145:22 147:17
148:7
tone34:9
too ( 6 ) 18:20 29:14
46:3 105:13 112:20
131:15
took ( 5 ) 60:19 76:2
76:6 144:17 145:9
total27:13
totally ( 4 ) 25:12 52:23
55:5 128:4
towards ( 4 ) 9:5 35:21
62:5 62:11
track40:13 train,147:22
training. ( 3 ) 7:17 30:14
36:4
transact5:18

transaction ( 10 )
101:20 102:4 102:14
106:14 107:1 109:23
111:7 140:19 145:14
145:19
transactions ( 13 ) 67:8
67:9 70:21 99:24
100:5 100:6 101:22
101:25 102:1 107:3
107:4 109:7 111:1
transcript ( 8 ) 22:24
23:9 24:3 28:25 57:2
57:7 93:24 126:4
transferred145:15 transfers106:8 translate125:2 translated, ( 14 ) 109:22
113:22 116:7 116:23
118:7 118:9 118:11
118:21 121:7 121:10
121:18 129:18 130:5
131:23
translating ( 2 ) 118:3
124:23
translation ( 8 ) 113:23
116:1 117:11 119:3
119:18 125:7 131:10
132:24
translations, ( 38 )
111:22 113:3 113:12
113:13 114:9 115:14
115:16 115:19 117:2
117:20 117:20 118:1
118:19 118:20 118:21
118:23 119:1 120:9
120:15 120:22 122:10
122:20 122:24 123:4
123:21 124:18 124:19
125:25 126:17 126:19
127:18 128:6 129:15
130:7 131:22 132:17
132:19 142:17
translator, ( 7 ) 118:18
120:18 122:7 122:10
123:10 123:12 131:7
transport135:4 transposed89:22 travel133:22 treat91:2
treated ( 2 ) 12:2 73:17
trial, ( 35 ) 2:25 5:16
11:4 16:5 18:6 18:12
19:15 19:20 23:22
24:20 28:10 30:20
33:9 35:14 36:13
36:17 38:16 41:12
52:5 65:5 90:22 99:10
103:19 114:2 118:6
118:13 119:24 120:6
120:19 126:2 127:13
130:4 134:10 134:19
140:10
trials18:22
tried ( 8 ) 56:16 56:18
69:20 71:20 102:24
110:7 119:21 122:5
tries ( 2 ) 3:4 67:15
trouble ( 4 ) 94:11
116:17 128:23 133:21
troubled,132:21
true. ( 2 ) 107:10 142:9
trust49:5
truth ( 5 ) 26:12 26:12
34:7 51:13 145:3
try ( 23 ) 5:9 14:15
14:23 15:3 15:20 16:2
29:11 39:22 51:12
55:1 60:11 66:22
66:24 68:21 77:11
82:4 83:15 90:18

99:18 107:9 120:7
128:1 135:4
trying ( 27 ) 3:15 14:18
18:8 27:12 38:8 39:7
53:4 54:22 65:18
65:18 68:8 70:9 77:20
78:9 82:15 85:18
89:20 90:23 94:25
98:2 100:23 106:4
106:22 107:24 108:14
119:12 147:18
Tuesday.124:25 Turetsky47:8
turn ( 5 ) 63:23 65:21
97:22 100:19 143:1
turning65:9
turns ( 2 ) 43:21 127:5
type ( 2 ) 5:8 43:19
typical47:18

U
ultimate ( 2 ) 10:8 67:9
ultimately10:1
unable ( 2 ) 8:19 107:17
unacceptable ( 3 ) 32:2
32:9 138:3
unavailable14:4 unclear90:17 unconnected107:18 undermine80:16 undermines74:10 undersale,88:23 undersold. ( 5 ) 57:24
84:3 87:5 92:4 93:14
understand ( 41 ) 3:15
4:6 5:18 8:10 13:23
14:9 15:15 15:20
16:10 20:14 33:1 38:2
39:5 42:8 43:1 44:3
44:4 49:10 49:13 55:1
66:14 69:15 71:17
74:24 75:20 88:16
90:6 91:7 91:25 93:1
93:6 93:17 98:1 98:13
107:6 112:22 119:14
120:2 120:9 125:20
146:18
understanding ( 3 )
7:20 9:10 103:24
understands ( 2 ) 39:2
43:15
understood ( 12 ) 18:24
43:11 44:24 49:18
49:24 49:25 51:2
71:25 72:3 75:7 92:13
104:20
undertake ( 2 ) 8:20
50:21
undertaken27:23 undertaking130:13 undervalue, ( 9 ) 57:20
69:23 87:17 96:12
100:2 101:21 101:24
107:1 110:21
undervalued ( 4 ) 71:10
91:4 91:8 92:20
undid59:7 undisclosed ( 3 ) 52:25
122:9 122:12
unexpected ( 6 ) 14:20
18:15 18:25 19:5 19:5
19:9
unexplained, ( 2 ) 39:3
69:9
unfair ( 5 ) 65:1 128:2
128:3 142:22 143:2
unfairly28:5 unforeseen9:17

unfortunately, ( 4 ) 6:9
14:14 16:21 27:3
unfounded ( 2 ) 70:12
70:13
unintentional,23:11 unknown ( 2 ) 57:18
139:14
unlawfully90:3 unless ( 7 ) 7:10 13:7
14:20 61:16 63:21
77:9 77:14
unlikely ( 2 ) 17:3 61:7
unnecessary ( 3 ) 10:14
10:20 17:14
unsatisfactory. ( 2 )
113:25 127:20
unseen21:22 unsettling.41:5 unsuccessful ( 3 )
75:25 129:21 129:21
untrue.22:23 unwittingly139:11 update15:10 upload ( 2 ) 61:24
128:25
uploaded. ( 6 ) 46:1
119:17 120:24 128:12
128:13 132:7
upwards33:6
urge ( 3 ) 33:21 37:2
148:4
urgent10:16
used ( 4 ) 4:11 66:17
68:11 83:13
useful,42:21 using26:14 usual126:11 usually118:8

V
vacuum.52:6 vagaries120:17 vague,74:5 valid94:12 valuations, ( 3 ) 40:21
68:15 78:2
«Value ( 18 ) 68:13 69:2
69:12 73:22 74:1
74:3 74:10 75:16 76:8
77:25 79:5 89:2 89:15
91:12 91:22 92:1
92:16 93:8
valuers, ( 2 ) 68:16 78:3
values ( 10 ) 72:8 72:9
73:5 75:5 77:6 79:6
79:12 79:13 79:22
146:25
various ( 20 ) 8:15
11:13 11:14 12:6
20:1 39:12 43:7 43:9
43:25 45:14 48:20
53:1 55:21 69:25 73:7
83:12 109:1 134:15
135:3 136:11
vast33:8 verifiably43:22 version. ( 8 ) 66:1 67:4
67:5 67:7 70:15 96:2
106:11 131:23
vessels, ( 16 ) 68:11
68:23 69:1 69:4 69:5
69:17 69:24 70:11
71:9 72:1 73:6 76:4
78:8 146:23 146:24
146:25
victim26:4
victims ( 2 ) 60:14 60:15
video2:2 virtually129:1

visit ( 2 ) 66:9 135:24
visited ( 2 ) 61:2 61:6
voice, ( 3 ) 1:8 1:10 2:6
volume,125:11 voted135:21

W
wait ( 3 ) 10:18 125:2
134:24
waive125:18 wand36:3 wandering102:17 waned.41:14 wanting38:7
wants, ( 4 ) 20:7 31:24
43:14 75:4
warned ( 2 ) 27:5 78:19
warning ( 2 ) 65:4 73:12
wasn’t ( 6 ) 63:16 76:12
91:3 120:6 138:16
147:1
waste ( 3 ) 112:19
124:24 127:10
wasteful21:20
wave ( 2 ) 36:3 142:13
waxed41:13
way ( 65 ) 6:2 6:12 7:1
12:19 17:22 18:10
19:2 20:19 24:24
28:10 28:25 31:13
32:14 34:15 35:21
35:23 37:14 37:21
37:24 39:24 41:13
42:13 43:14 47:2
48:14 49:1 52:11
52:13 54:16 55:11
55:16 56:24 59:9
62:7 62:10 64:8 69:16
73:12 74:6 74:21
80:9 81:17 88:7 92:19
98:22 101:17 101:18
104:9 104:10 105:5
105:6 107:25 115:16
124:14 126:21 127:1
131:20 132:2 133:20
135:12 136:6 143:13
143:17 144:25 147:11
ways ( 3 ) 36:16 101:5
127:16
wayside,35:10 we’re43:13
we’ve ( 5 ) 70:18 75:22
92:15 141:14 141:18
weaker111:2 Wednesday17:23 week ( 16 ) 14:21 15:23
15:24 16:13 16:23
16:23 17:15 17:16
17:23 114:16 116:2
116:3 116:5 124:11
130:18 138:18
weekend, ( 4 ) 114:3
116:9 124:11 133:2
weekends114:7 weeks, ( 5 ) 18:2 18:14
18:17 19:3 35:13
weigh55:1 weighing ( 2 ) 18:22
40:6
weird125:21 welcome ( 2 ) 23:16
50:12
weren’t ( 4 ) 94:7 97:23
142:12 144:23
what’s ( 5 ) 5:22 26:4
29:23 39:25 137:15
whatever ( 8 ) 13:18
14:5 15:15 17:16

37:15 73:4 101:6
130:24
whatsoever ( 2 ) 12:20
53:17
whenever ( 2 ) 101:12
132:7
whereas ( 2 ) 23:13
61:13
whereby ( 4 ) 50:8
57:21 115:11 145:15
wherever ( 2 ) 104:5
137:13
Whichever ( 2 ) 56:3
88:7
whilst ( 4 ) 11:17 11:18
114:22 117:3
whole ( 3 ) 9:2 25:4 46:1
wholly ( 4 ) 30:20 30:21
32:8 32:8
whom ( 2 ) 51:18 145:7
whose ( 4 ) 84:2 84:4
84:12 116:18
wide,133:14 widen65:11 widens67:15 wife’s30:25 willingness18:9 wind39:11 Winter147:6
wish ( 15 ) 7:21 9:9 20:5
21:5 21:6 52:1 52:15
54:9 87:1 94:14 123:7
141:22 146:14 147:12
148:4
wishes ( 3 ) 21:4 54:9
126:21
withdrawn.41:19 Withers23:21 witness ( 34 ) 17:4
21:12 22:13 24:15
24:19 25:1 31:22 32:7
53:10 53:16 53:18
55:23 98:5 104:16
114:15 114:24 116:21
126:24 131:2 132:19
137:21 140:15 140:16
140:19 140:22 140:23
141:3 141:16 142:2
143:10 144:1 144:16
145:3 145:22
witness’s140:25 witnesses ( 40 ) 11:8
15:25 16:14 16:24
17:17 18:16 19:3
19:16 28:5 42:1 54:5
79:3 79:11 79:17
97:19 113:20 114:6
114:18 114:23 115:22
115:23 116:2 121:2
124:1 125:8 126:13
126:16 130:13 132:4
133:13 134:12 134:16
137:25 140:1 140:2
141:22 142:19 144:7
144:7 145:18
wittingly139:12 won’t ( 9 ) 15:6 15:6
45:10 91:3 98:17
120:12 128:7 131:6
147:4
wonder. ( 2 ) 21:25
29:15
work. ( 14 ) 3:14 9:2
9:3 22:8 26:11 35:21
51:20 61:4 105:5
116:12 116:13 122:6
122:10 133:25
worked. ( 3 ) 22:10
22:10 123:20
working ( 3 ) 123:10
123:12 124:10

world. ( 2 ) 39:10
137:13
worried72:23
worry ( 4 ) 106:5 112:12
124:21 143:21
worth127:11 worthy ( 4 ) 117:5
119:16 119:18 121:3
wouldn’t ( 9 ) 33:8
36:12 49:20 52:22

4

(4.00113:9
(4.05113:11
4.30132:21
(4.52148:8

5

100:13 115:7 115:8
115:12 125:17

write34:23
writing ( 11 ) 12:9 32:13
43:3 43:10 43:20 44:6
44:11 44:18 51:20
54:11 54:15

57.14.83:4
57.2584:21
57.90,68:1

9

written ( 4 ) 12:1 12:2

12:20 34:9
wrong. ( 17 ) 4:18 37:21
47:2 79:6 81:10 83:18
87:22 88:8 100:9
103:1 145:24 146:1
146:3 146:11 146:13
146:14 146:15
wrongly,28:6 wrongs52:6

9.30,148:4
9ish148:2

Y
year,82:19 year’s61:25
years ( 6 ) 12:18 23:20
27:19 53:3 77:11
146:12
yielding77:14 yourself62:8

1
1,000121:14
1.30,42:10
(1.4045:20
10.00? ( 4 ) 148:5 148:6
148:7 148:9
10.30. ( 2 ) 148:2 148:5
100 ( 2 ) 29:6 121:17
102.2,85:16
(12.001:2
(12.091:4
(12.174:7
(12.284:9
150, ( 3 ) 66:12 67:2
68:1
151.96:3
154? ( 6 ) 81:13 85:8
85:10 86:18 87:3 95:3
17795:2

2
2,000130:17
2.15 ( 3 ) 45:9 45:19
45:22
200,62:12
200788:2
2008 ( 4 ) 87:24 92:11
94:1 104:19
2011,95:15
2013. ( 3 ) 23:1 85:19
147:5
2014. ( 2 ) 28:13 41:2
2016 ( 2 ) 1:1 148:10
223.66:18
253,47:17
26648:2