Day 12

(1) Bank St Petersburg PJSC (2) Alexander Savelyev v (1) Vitaly Arkhangelsky (2) Julia Arkhangelskaya (3) Oslo Marine Group Ports
LLC

Day 12 Redacted

February 18, 2016

Opus 2 International — Official Court Reporters

Phone: +44 (0)20 3008 5900

Email: transcripts@opus2.com
Website: http://www.opus2.com

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 Thursday, 18 February 2016 1 [REDACTED]
2 (10.00 am) 2
3 (Hearing in private) 3
4 [REDACTED] 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
1 3
1 [REDACTED] 1 [REDACTED]
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
2 4
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 [REDACTED] 1 [REDACTED]
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
5 7
1 [REDACTED] 1 [REDACTED]
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13 (Hearing in open court)
14 14 MR VITALY DMITRIEVICH ARKHANGELSKY (continued)
15 15 Cross-examination by MR LORD (continued)
16 16 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, I’m going to ask you about the
17 17 second Vyborg loan and the guarantees that were entered
18 18 into in relation to that. You accept, don’t you, that
19 19 the Scan and personal guarantees that you challenge in
20 20 relation to the second Vyborg loan appear on
21 21 the September debt schedule?
22 22 A. You mean that schedule you’ve given on 28,
23 23 whatever, September?
24 24 Q. 25 September, that’s right.
25 25 A. Yes. If it’s there, it’s there.
6 8
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 Q. Thank you. And you accept that the second Vyborg loan 1 Q. But there is a reference, isn’t there, to «Guarantee
2 agreement itself refers, in terms of its security, to 2 agreements»; can you see that?
3 a personal guarantee and a Scan guarantee? 3 A. You cannot understand to what kind of guarantee
4 A. Yes, if it’s written there, I accept. 4 agreement and to what agreement it’s referring, not any
5 Q. And you don’t challenge, do you, that that loan 5 references at all.
6 agreement was validly entered into by or on behalf of 6 Q. Well, the second Vyborg loan was dated 17 —
7 OMG? 7 A. I’m sorry, your Lordship, can I just ask: is it normal
8 A. As far as I understood, I was not a part of that 8 that the person there is laughing all the time and
9 agreement, so I have not been signing that, so I am not 9 playing telephone, so he is a bit disturbing me. It was
10 challenging that. 10 the same yesterday.
11 Q. And can I suggest to you that you did sign the Scan 11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I have to say that I did notice some
12 guarantee in relation to the second Vyborg loan? 12 nodding/shaking of the head and laughter, and it —
13 A. No. 13 A. So, because I just see on —
14 Q. And that you did sign the personal guarantee — 14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — is entirely inappropriate. I don’t
15 A. No. 15 know who it is. He was sitting there yesterday and
16 Q. — in relation to the second Vyborg loan. 16 I almost remarked on it.
17 Can I please look at the third Vyborg loan. You 17 This isn’t a game, nor fun show. This is a serious
18 accept, the debt schedule that we’ve just referred to, 18 business, a court of law. Please do not do it.
19 that identifies under the guarantors for the third 19 Can we have a translation of this? I wonder if we
20 Vyborg loan a personal guarantee from you — 20 should adopt the usual process of it being read out in
21 A. I suggest that we put it on the screen as long as you 21 Russian and then taking the translation from the
22 are discussing it. 22 interpreters?
23 Q. Certainly. {D74/1101/1}. Actually, before we go there, 23 MR LORD: Yes, I think this one had been —
24 sorry, there is one document I need to put to you. 24 A. Should I read it in Russian first?
25 Could we have {D40/705/1}, please, on the screen. 25 MR LORD: It’s actually not a machine translation.
9 11
1 Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, I was trying to go a bit too 1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No. I wondered about the second
2 quickly. I do apologise. 2 sentence.
3 Dr Arkhangelsky, at {D40/705/1} in English, or 3 MR LORD: Yes, of course.
4 {D40/705/2} in Russian, you can see an e-mail sent from 4 A. And the first sentence also is strange. You know, it’s
5 Ms Blinova to Ms Kirikova on 18 April 2008; can you see 5 like an SMS. It looks like an SMS with the jokes,
6 that? 6 so …
7 A. Yes. 7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would you like to read it out,
8 Q. And Ms Kirikova worked for OMG, did she? 8 Mr Arkhangelsky?
9 A. Yes, Elena Kirikova is working for OMG. 9 A. I suggest that I read it in Russian and then the
10 Q. And what was her role at OMG? 10 interpreters …
11 A. She was one of the specialists in the financing 11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
12 department. 12 A. Understood — oh sorry.
13 Q. And you can see what this e-mail purports to do: it — 13 I’m sorry, can you please stop laughing, it really
14 A. It’s very difficult to understand what is it referring 14 makes me difficult, or can you change the place.
15 to. No attachments and not any reference to any 15 I cannot — you see, he is just in front of me there and
16 particular agreements. 16 I cannot work. This person there.
17 Q. But it refers to guarantee — 17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I am sure he wouldn’t now —
18 A. It’s just a funny conversation between two girls. 18 A. No, but he is just in front of my screen and he’s
19 Q. Sorry, just a funny conversation between two girls? 19 always, you know, like in the circus. If there are any
20 A. Two girls. It looks like non-official conversation, at 20 professional obligations, if he is a lawyer, whatever.
21 least in the Russian version. 21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t know, who is it, Mr Lord?
22 Q. Right. But you agree — 22 MR LORD: I think it is a lawyer from the Bank’s Russian
23 A. Actually, the translation is very strange, because when 23 lawyers, I think.
24 you see the Russian version, it’s a lot of dots and so 24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So that there is no concern, because
25 on, so it’s like they are joking to each other. 25 you are immediately opposite him, which is unusual,
10 12
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 given the set-up of the court, move to where you are

2 less in the immediate line of sight. Normally, the

3 witness wouldn’t have to confront that, really.

4 A. Yes, please.

5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You have a sufficient barrier, have

6 you?

7 A. I hope so, yes. Because, you know, he’s been very

8 strange yesterday, so I …

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We have done that and I have given him

10 a warning, so I am quite sure that he will not do it

11 now.

12 A. Thanks. Okay, should I continue?

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, please.

14 A. So, I am reading it in Russian.

15 A. (Interpreted) «I see … [then a small letter] our

16 security is being interested … … I will soon forward

17 to you the guarantee agreements for signature and the

18 list of what has not been provided yet. Respectfully

19 yours, Ms Blinova.»

20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: (Pause) Right, it is quite similar.

21 MR LORD: I wonder, Dr Arkhangelsky, if you could be shown

22 {D40/709/1}, please. And the Russian is over the page

23 at {D40/709/2}. Can you see that, Dr Arkhangelsky?

24 A. Not yet.

25 Q. It’s an e-mail of 18 April 2008 from Ms Blinova to

1 letter in this way.

2 Q. But there are attachments, Dr Arkhangelsky, but before

3 we get there, it looks, doesn’t it, given the date and

4 the subject matter, as if it is referring to the second

5 Vyborg loan, because that —

6 A. No, the subject matter is referring just to

7 Vyborg Shipping Company.

8 Q. I know it says that, Dr Arkhangelsky, I know it says

9 that, but the context would suggest that it was in

10 relation to the second Vyborg Shipping loan?

11 A. No, I cannot see that from the context.

12 Q. All right, could you be shown {D40/709/3}, please.

13 That’s one of the attachments. It’s in Russian, I need

14 to find the translation. (Pause)

15 Dr Arkhangelsky, you can read Russian; can you

16 confirm what that document is, please, for the

17 transcript?

18 A. Yes, it’s a guarantee agreement of Insurance Company

19 Scandinavia. I don’t think it’s a signed version. It’s

20 kind of a draft, I think.

21 Q. And in relation to which loan, Dr Arkhangelsky?

22 A. To the loan number 3500-08-01279.

23 Q. And that’s the second Vyborg loan, isn’t it?

24 A. I don’t remember by number.

25 Q. If you could be shown, please, {D40/688/1}, and the

13

1 Ms Kirikova.

2 A. In the Russian version it’s corrected, or … it looks

3 a bit strange.

4 Q. Well, it’s a certified translation in English.

5 A. No, no, but it looks like some parts of the e-mail have

6 been corrected.

7 Q. Well, if you assume for the purpose of this question

8 that the document is an authentic document, just assume

9 that. It’s an e-mail from Ms Blinova, isn’t it, to

10 Ms Kirikova at OMG, and Ms Delakova; is that right? And

11 it is copied to you, isn’t it?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And the subject is «Vyborg Shipping Company», and the

14 date is 18 April 2008, isn’t it?

15 A. Just a moment. (Pause)

16 It’s not referring to any particular loan, as far as

17 I understood.

18 Q. «Attached please find the agreements and the missing

19 document for the Vyborg Shipping Company.»

20 Do you see that?

21 A. But we cannot see any attachments here; as you were

22 referring yesterday it has to be some signs of that.

23 And it’s a very strange Russian version of that, so it

24 looks like it’s been seriously corrected, especially

25 first sentences. You would never write any official

15

1 Russian version, which we can perhaps have on screen, is

2 at {D40/688/8}.

3 A. I’m sorry, on the left-hand side screen, can I see the

4 page number 2, I think, or 3, whatever? I assume it’s

5 a draft, yes?

6 Q. It was attached to the e-mail.

7 A. Yes, yes; it was not only one page, I think, attached;

8 yes?

9 Q. Right.

10 A. So I just want to see the following pages.

11 Q. Can you first confirm that it does look as if it is

12 a draft of the Scan guarantee?

13 A. Yes, it looks like draft, yes.

14 Q. For the second Vyborg loan?

15 A. For the loan number 3500-08-01279.

16 Q. Yes, and that loan agreement — I have given you the

17 signed copy of that agreement; would you like it in

18 Russian or English?

19 A. Russian, yes, because your English translation is

20 terrible.

21 Q. {D40/688/8}. So you have the front page of the signed

22 second Vyborg loan, and you also have —

23 A. Can I please see back the e-mail you were referring to,

24 to which it was attached? The e-mail from, whatever,

25 Blinova.

14 16
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You can in due course, but please

2 answer the questions that are addressed to you on this

3 document, and then if you need to qualify your answers

4 by reference to the e-mail, by all means ask for it to

5 be seen.

6 A. Yes, I want to see the e-mail.

7 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, if we take it in stages: can you

8 confirm that the first page of the signed loan

9 agreement, for the second Vyborg loan —

10 A. Sorry, this is the loan. Yes, this is the loan

11 agreement.

12 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, I am asking you — you are querying

13 whether this e-mail refers to the second Vyborg loan,

14 and I am trying to show you various documents that show

15 that it is.

16 A. Okay.

17 Q. It is a draft of the second Vyborg loan agreement, or

18 rather, it is a draft agreement relating to the second

19 Vyborg loan.

20 A. Okay.

21 Q. And if you look at the first page of the signed second

22 Vyborg loan agreement —

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. — you will be able to get the number for the loan

25 agreement and you can see the layout in Russian, and you

1 the number, that it’s the second Vyborg Shipping loan?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. So this looks like a draft of the Scan guarantee for the

4 second Vyborg loan, doesn’t it?

5 A. Looks like, yes.

6 Q. And it looks like it was attached to an e-mail that was

7 copied to you on 18 April 2008?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And that shows, doesn’t it, Dr Arkhangelsky, that you

10 had given, you had given, or you were going to give —

11 A. No, I’ve never been going to give any guarantees.

12 Q. So is it your case that you don’t think you received

13 this e-mail?

14 A. Most probably I received the e-mail but, as I said

15 yesterday, that I’ve been receiving hundreds of e-mails

16 every day and I have not been following — for sure

17 I haven’t been even following the contents of that and

18 any attachments. I have not been really opening any

19 attachments.

20 But it looks a bit strange that the agreement — the

21 loan agreement signed 17 April and the e-mail from

22 Mrs Blinova is coming next day, so it’s a bit strange.

23 So if the loan had been signed and withdrawn, so how

24 could she ask for any other documents, which is a bit

25 strange, to be signed.

17 19

1 can see the text, can’t you?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. If you go back to the first page of the attachment that

4 I showed you, the draft?

5 A. Yes, can you show me?

6 Q. Do you have {D40/688/8}?

7 A. It’s shown already, yes.

8 Q. And could you please also have {D40/709/1}.

9 The first point, Dr Arkhangelsky: can we establish

10 the number of the loan and that this is the second

11 Vyborg loan?

12 A. Yes. They are referring to the same number, yes.

13 Q. And therefore if we take that loan number, we now know

14 it is the second Vyborg loan, and we can now go back to

15 the attachment to the e-mail; are you following that?

16 A. Yes, the attachment of the e-mail on my screen, yes.

17 Q. And we know now, don’t we, that that looks as if it is

18 referring to the second Vyborg loan?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And you said, I think, a moment ago, that this looked

21 like a Scan Insurance guarantee?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Of a Vyborg Shipping loan?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And we’ve now established, haven’t we, because of

1 So we are, again, coming to your suggestion on

2 backdating of the documents, if I understood.

3 Q. If you had read this e-mail, Dr Arkhangelsky, when you

4 were copied in on it at the time —

5 A. I had not been reading that e-mail, for sure. I had not

6 been following e-mails, most of e-mails in my post box.

7 Q. But this e-mail refers to missing documents; can you see

8 that:

9 «Attached please find the agreements and the missing

10 document for the Vyborg Shipping Company.»

11 A. Yes, she’s — Mrs Blinova is missing something, but it

12 doesn’t mean that it have to be done by myself.

13 Q. And number 3:

14 «For the guarantors:

15 «- approval of the transaction with interest upon

16 the supply of the guarantee of Scandinavia …»

17 That’s Scan Insurance?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And:

20 «- consent of VD Arkhangelsky’s spouse …»

21 A. I think she is right, so these documents were missing

22 from her dossier because nobody from our office were

23 planning to sign these documents. That’s for sure and

24 that’s been agreed by Mr Savelyev personally.

25 Q. Is this e-mail not sending documents to OMG?

18 20
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 A. Sorry?

2 Q. Is this document not sending copies — is this e-mail

3 not sending copies of these documents to OMG?

4 A. Sorry, I don’t understand your question. This is

5 an e-mail from Mrs Blinova to Mrs Kirikova and

6 Mrs Delakova, and you may find draft attachments for the

7 agreement which has been signed a few days before.

8 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, I do suggest that this e-mail does show

9 that a personal guarantee from you, and a guarantee from

10 Scan Insurance, were entered into in relation to

11 the second Vyborg loan.

12 A. No, you are not right.

13 Q. No. All right.

14 If I could turn, please, to the third Vyborg loan.

15 Sorry to take you back. If you could be shown

16 {D74/1101/1}, please, which is the debt schedule.

17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sorry, can I just clarify. The

18 attached documents, especially the guarantee and the

19 spousal consent, attached to the e-mail, were they

20 signed?

21 A. No, I think this was not a spousal consent. It was

22 another documents attached.

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They refer to a spousal consent.

24 A. But it was not attached.

25 MR LORD: No. I think the attachments are the drafts,

1 MR LORD: I believe that wasn’t attached, no. Ms Blinova

2 deals with this; if we could have —

3 A. You see, they are referring, I think, at least to five

4 or six, whatever, points, but as far as I understood,

5 attaching only two drafts.

6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, all right, well, Ms Blinova,

7 I had forgotten, deals with this.

8 A. And also very strangely referring to some bank accounts,

9 numbers, so, whatever, so … This is a quite strange

10 e-mail.

11 MR LORD: Could we have {B2/9/8} on the screen, please.

12 My Lord, that is an extract from the witness statement

13 of Ms Blinova, and it is paragraph 32, and it’s the

14 second … {B2/9/6}, sorry.

15 A. Can I see her witness statement in Russian, please?

16 As far as I understood, at that time Blinova was

17 just something like a first or second year employee in

18 the Bank, so she was a quite young girl at that time and

19 was not professional at that time yet.

20 Q. Yes, the Russian version of her statement starts at

21 {B2/9/22}, so this paragraph, 32, is probably on

22 the screen, {B2/9/28}.

23 This was evidence that Ms Blinova gave in

24 paragraph 32 about the —

25 A. And she’s referring to several e-mails, but you are

21 23

1 my Lord. I think they are the drafts.

2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They are all drafts?

3 MR LORD: I think they are the drafts.

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

5 A. And I think it is not spousal consent there.

6 Can you please specify what kind of — just again,

7 show this e-mail and tell which particular document has

8 been attached there?

9 Q. You can scroll down, if you like.

10 A. I cannot do this.

11 Q. Go to the top of the e-mail.

12 A. No, you see, what they are writing here in the Russian

13 language, that: attached is the guarantee agreement by

14 insurance company and my personal guarantee. There are

15 not any drafts of any other documents which they are

16 referring to, not any spousal consent, and nothing else.

17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All I am looking at, and I haven’t got

18 the Russian, and it wouldn’t do me any good if I did,

19 but I am looking at page {D40/709/1} and I am looking at

20 the second bullet point in reference to paragraph 3, and

21 that bullet point says:

22 «- consent of VD Arkhangelsky’s spouse for the

23 granting of the guarantee.»

24 MR LORD: And that wasn’t attached, I think, my Lord.

25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That was not attached.

1 attaching just, I think, only one e-mail, so it would be

2 nice to see other e-mails there.

3 Q. No, I’ve shown you both e-mails, I think. The first one

4 you said was just a joke between people, and the second

5 one is the one I am taking you to —

6 A. Can I see that again, because …

7 Q. No, Dr Arkhangelsky, I think I have put enough to you.

8 I want to show you that this was what Ms —

9 A. No, I think it was another date, because she’s referring

10 to this one day, and this e-mails starts 8.47 in

11 the morning, so do you assume that she came to

12 the office at 8.00 or 7.00 in the morning, which is

13 a bit strange?

14 Q. The previous e-mail, I’m told, is 8.17.

15 A. 8.17, okay, which is a bit strange. The Bank starts

16 working at 9.00 at least.

17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You must focus on the answers to

18 the questions, I think.

19 MR LORD: And, Dr Arkhangelsky, Ms Blinova’s evidence in

20 this paragraph was not challenged when she came to be

21 cross-examined, so it wasn’t put to her, I think, that

22 she wasn’t being truthful about any of this, or it

23 wasn’t accurate.

24 A. I’m sorry, can you speak to me, yes?

25 Q. Yes, certainly. When Ms Blinova gave evidence in

22 24
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 court —

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. — it wasn’t suggested to her that any part of

4 paragraph 32 was wrong.

5 A. You see, I am not a specialist on cross-examination,

6 I cannot comment on that, I don’t know the procedure.

7 Q. I understand.

8 Do you have the debt schedule for {D74/1101/1},

9 please.

10 If, Dr Arkhangelsky, you would be kind enough to go

11 to the second page, so that’s {D74/1101/2}, you will see

12 four entries, numbers 18, 20, 21 and 23, which appear to

13 accord with the first, second, third and fourth

14 Vyborg Shipping loans from VSC, don’t they?

15 A. Sorry, once again, which numbers are you referring to?

16 18?

17 Q. 20, 21 and 23.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And those entries seems to refer, in other words they

20 look on their face as if what they are scheduling, are

21 the first, second, third and fourth Vyborg loans,

22 because if you look at the bank to the right, and the

23 date to the right, and then the amount, if you keep

24 going across the page, you can see what loans or debts

25 they are referring to, can’t you, Dr Arkhangelsky?

1 Q. Could you be shown, please, the third Vyborg loan

2 itself, which is in Russian, {D41/734/7}, and English,

3 {D41/734/1}, please.

4 Dr Arkhangelsky, I hope those are both up on the

5 screen, and you can see that that is the first page of

6 the third Vyborg loan; can you see that?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And it appears to have been signed on behalf of Vyborg

9 by Mr Erium, doesn’t it?

10 A. Yes, it looks like, yes.

11 Q. And there is no challenge, is there, in these

12 proceedings, to the validity or authenticity of this

13 loan agreement?

14 A. No.

15 Q. And if you would be kind enough, Dr Arkhangelsky,

16 please, to look at clause 2.4 on the first page.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. You can see there’s a reference to the security to be

19 given under the agreement, and it says this:

20 «The loan granted under the Agreement shall be

21 secured by…»

22 Then it is a pledge over the OMG Kolpino ship, and

23 then the second, 2.4.2:

24 «Guarantee of LLC ‘SO’ ‘Scandinavia’…»

25 That’s a reference to Scan Insurance, isn’t it,

25

1 A. Yes, most probably your assumptions are correct.

2 Q. So for all four of these Vyborg Shipping Company loan

3 entries in the September OMG debt schedule, which was

4 disclosed by OMG in these proceedings —

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. — in the column second from the right, marked

7 «Guarantees», it lists «IC» and «Mr Arkhangelsky» for

8 each of those four loans, doesn’t it?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And «IC» would be a reference to Scan Insurance,

11 wouldn’t it, Mr Arkhangelsky?

12 A. I assume it was a reference to Insurance Company; yes,

13 it’s like this.

14 Q. So we can agree, can’t we, that the OMG September debt

15 schedule —

16 A. Actually, if you see on the first page, there is

17 a reference to Insurance Company Scandinavia on the

18 first line, but you cannot see references to insurance

19 companies Scandinavia in other lines; so you have

20 a reference on the line first and line fourth. And if

21 you remember, I had, I think, three or four insurance

22 companies in the group, and all insurance companies,

23 when you put it in writing, it is «IC», «insurance

24 company». So there is no reference to the Scandinavia

25 name. I don’t know by which reason.

27

1 Dr Arkhangelsky?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And then 2.4.3:

4 «Guarantee of VD Arkhangelsky…»

5 Can you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. That’s a reference to you, isn’t it, Dr Arkhangelsky?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. So when Mr Erium signed this agreement on behalf of OMG,

10 he was authorised to sign it, wasn’t he?

11 A. He was a director of the company and the Bank checked if

12 he is authorised or not.

13 Q. Was he authorised on behalf of OMG to sign this loan

14 agreement, Dr Arkhangelsky?

15 A. I assume so, yes.

16 Q. So he was authorised to sign a loan agreement that had,

17 as a condition of the loan, the giving of a guarantee by

18 Scan Insurance; can you confirm that?

19 A. It’s up to him what commercial — his commercial

20 decision, how and which contract he signed, because he

21 is carrying his own liability on that.

22 Q. Could I ask the last question again. When Mr Erium

23 signed this loan agreement on behalf of OMG —

24 A. No, no, he was signing it on behalf of Vyborg Shipping

25 Company, so he was signing it on behalf of the company

26 28
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 that he was a general director. So he was never signing

2 this agreement on behalf of OMG group.

3 Q. And I am putting to you that he must have been

4 authorised to sign this agreement on behalf of

5 Vyborg Shipping; that’s right, isn’t it?

6 A. Can we see if he has got authorisation and what kind of

7 authorisation he’s got? I don’t remember the details on

8 that.

9 Q. Could we have {D41/728.4/0.1}. This is a resolution,

10 isn’t it, by Vyborg Shipping Company?

11 A. I want to see that in Russian.

12 Q. For the transcript, that is {D41/728.4/1}. The English

13 is at {D41/728.4/0.1}, for the transcript.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, that is a copy of the resolution by

16 Vyborg Shipping to enter into this loan, isn’t it?

17 A. It’s the resolution for Mr Erium to sign the loan

18 agreement based on the conditions he considered himself

19 acceptable, without any explanation of any particular

20 conditions of the loan agreement.

21 So I assume if we are referring to this loan

22 agreement, so he was not allowed to sign any obligations

23 on behalf of the third parties, as discussed yesterday.

24 Q. But, Dr Arkhangelsky, you sign this resolution, don’t

25 you?

1 «The terms and conditions of the loan are known and

2 there are no objections.»

3 Can you see that, Dr Arkhangelsky?

4 A. But it’s not attached, so I don’t know which particular

5 loan agreement I have seen when I was signing this.

6 Q. But can you see the resolution number 1?

7 A. Number 1?

8 Q. The one I just read out to you?

9 A. It’s number 5, I think.

10 Q. Sorry, paragraph number 1.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. It’s the first resolution; it’s the first paragraph of

13 this resolution.

14 A. Resolution number 5, okay. Yes.

15 Q. And it’s a resolution, isn’t it, by you as the sole

16 founder —

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. — to approve this loan agreement on these terms?

19 That’s what’s happening here, isn’t it, Dr Arkhangelsky?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And you are signing something that records that:

22 «The terms and conditions of the loan agreement are

23 known and there are no objections.»

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And we have accepted that you signed this, and you don’t

29 31
1 A. I signed this — I assume I signed that. I am not sure 1 deny that, do you?
2 if it’s an original copy or not, but I assume I was 2 A. No, I signed that, I assume.
3 allowing him to sign loan agreement — 3 Q. And do you still assert that there was some issue as to
4 Q. So you signed — 4 the authority of Mr Erium to enter into the loan
5 A. — but without entering into any third party obligation, 5 agreement?
6 because it is illegal, based on the Russian law. 6 A. No, but the only — my comment on that, that he was not
7 Q. But you signed this resolution of Vyborg Shipping, 7 allowed, based on the Russian law, to sign any
8 didn’t you? 8 obligations on behalf of the third parties in
9 A. Yes, I assume so. 9 the agreement. So they are not valid, based on the
10 Q. And you are the «sole founder», aren’t you; that’s 10 Russian law.
11 a reference to you, isn’t it? 11 As I explained to you yesterday in respect to two or
12 A. Yes. 12 three other loans with the same context, that either it
13 Q. And it says: 13 had to be a multi-party agreement, or all the provisions
14 «The Sole Founder Resolved … 14 for the third parties are not valid, and as long as
15 «To approve the following deal …» 15 everybody, especially bank lawyers, were understanding
16 Can you see that? 16 that all these provisions for the third party are not
17 A. Yes. 17 valid, but they insisted that it’s signed by Erium, even
18 Q. And the deal is the loan agreement, isn’t it, between 18 if it is not legal. So just for their purposes of
19 Vyborg — 19 reserving. That was the only explanation given by them.
20 A. Yes, but it’s not attached and no any conditions of the 20 Q. Could you be shown, please, {D41/728.2/0.1}. Can you
21 loan agreement attached and not approved by me. 21 see the Russian there, Dr Arkhangelsky?
22 Q. Can you see that the text there sets out the principal 22 A. Yes.
23 terms of the loan? 23 Q. This is a resolution on behalf of Scan Insurance, isn’t
24 A. Yes. 24 it?
25 Q. And then it says: 25 A. Yes.
30 32
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 Q. And it’s —

2 A. But I’m not sure it’s my signature, so I don’t remember

3 this agreement.

4 Q. I don’t think —

5 A. The signature looks very strange.

6 Q. I don’t think this was one of the documents in the list

7 of 28 that you positively assert are forgeries.

8 A. Maybe, but what I see it looks like, it’s not my

9 signature. At least on this copy of this document.

10 Q. But you agree that this document is a decision of

11 Scandinavia Insurance to give a guarantee to

12 Bank of St Petersburg?

13 A. Yes, it’s written like this, but I don’t remember I was

14 signing this.

15 Q. And it’s in relation to the third Vyborg loan, isn’t it?

16 A. Yes, it looks like.

17 Q. And on the face of it, it looks as if that might be your

18 signature, doesn’t it?

19 A. No, it doesn’t look that it’s my signature. It’s very

20 much different from my signature.

21 Q. Could you be shown {D42/747/0.1}, please. Do you have

22 that, Dr Arkhangelsky?

23 A. I’m waiting for the Russian version.

24 Q. Yes, I understand. That’s a copy of a direct debit

25 agreement, isn’t it?

1 me right now, number 109, or something like that.

2 Q. And I suggest that you also signed a personal guarantee

3 in favour of the Bank of St Petersburg in —

4 A. No, it’s not right.

5 Q. In relation to the third Vyborg loan?

6 A. No, it’s not correct.

7 Q. May I turn to the fourth Vyborg loan, please? Could we

8 have the debt schedule at {D74/1101/1}, please?

9 A. Yes, I have it here.

10 Q. And you will recollect, Dr Arkhangelsky, because we

11 looked at it earlier today —

12 A. So which line are you referring to now?

13 Q. Could we go to the second page, please {D74/1101/2}?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. It’s line 23.

16 A. Line 23, yes.

17 Q. Can you see the date? 21 July 2008?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And the amount?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And it looks as if that is the fourth Vyborg loan,

22 doesn’t it?

23 A. It looks like, yes.

24 Q. So it looks, doesn’t it, Dr Arkhangelsky, as if the OMG

25 debt schedule dated September 2008, disclosed from OMG’s

33 35

1 A. Yes, looks like.

2 Q. Given by Scan Insurance to Bank of St Petersburg in

3 relation to an account of Scan Insurance at V-Bank;

4 isn’t that right? On the face of it?

5 A. Yes, I’m just reading, just a moment.

6 Q. Mm. Are these documents new to you, Dr Arkhangelsky?

7 Have you not seen them before?

8 A. Most probably I’ve seen them, but I don’t remember them.

9 Q. You haven’t looked through them for the purposes of

10 checking your forgery case, for example?

11 A. I’ve been checking the forgery case a couple of years

12 ago, I think. I haven’t been looking on that recently.

13 Q. So not since two years ago?

14 A. Something like that, yes.

15 Q. And it looks, doesn’t it, as if the V-Bank seal has been

16 applied?

17 A. Yes, and it looks like the Scandinavia seal has been

18 applied after the signature, or something like that, so

19 it’s quite a strange Russian version of the document.

20 No number, and it looks like somebody has been comparing

21 the seals.

22 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, I suggest to you that you did sign the

23 Scan guarantee in relation to the third Vyborg loan.

24 A. I have not signed Scan guarantee. I could be able to

25 sign this agreement without number which you are showing

1 records in this litigation —

2 A. No, it’s not OMG records; it’s a record of

3 the Bank of St Petersburg. So as I explained yesterday,

4 my employees were not collecting any information, just

5 collecting from the Bank. Yes.

6 Q. But this document was disclosed by the defendants in

7 these proceedings?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. So it came from the —

10 A. Yes, we disclosed all the documents required by the

11 court. Absolutely.

12 Q. And entry number 23 —

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. — records — seems to record the fourth Vyborg loan,

15 doesn’t it?

16 A. Yes, but it doesn’t refer to Insurance Company

17 Scandinavia, if we are precise.

18 Q. And it looks, doesn’t it, in the second column from the

19 right, as if it is referring to Scan Insurance and to

20 you?

21 A. No, it’s not referring to Scan Insurance, because if you

22 see the whole line, the guarantees are issued; when it’s

23 referring to Insurance Company Scandinavia, it’s written

24 particularly that it’s referring to Insurance Company

25 Scandinavia.

34 36
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 I’m referring to line number 1, line number 4, line 1 insurance, and two other — I think I had at least two
2 number 5, but not any other lines. So no suggestion 2 other medical insurance companies, rather big size,
3 that we are speaking about Insurance Company 3 whose balance sheet could be considered quite, like,
4 Scandinavia. 4 quite a serious balance sheet, theoretically.
5 Q. I see, and that’s your evidence, is it, on oath today? 5 Q. Could you be shown, please, {D53/936.2/0.1}. And
6 A. Yes, what I see — it’s not my evidence, it’s what I see 6 {D53/936.2/1}, which is the Russian.
7 here. It’s no reference to Insurance Company 7 Dr Arkhangelsky, this looks, doesn’t it, as if it’s
8 Scandinavia. 8 another resolution by Scandinavia Insurance to give
9 Q. But, Dr Arkhangelsky, it’s not really just a question of 9 a guarantee in favour of Bank of St Petersburg, doesn’t
10 whether you can pick holes in something; it’s really 10 it, on the face of it?
11 whether you think — 11 A. To me, it looks that it’s absolutely not my signature
12 A. Sorry, sorry, I don’t understand what you said right 12 and I never signed this, at least this version of
13 now. 13 the document. So it’s quite a strange signature without
14 Q. I understand. Really, what I’m suggesting to you is 14 any — which is not similar to any one in
15 that, rather than just identify potential arguments on 15 the proceedings, and the same time just put stamp on the
16 a document, you ought to be considering, fairly, whether 16 most important parts of that.
17 the document does or doesn’t show what I am putting to 17 Q. But the document itself looks like it’s a resolution —
18 you; do you understand that point? 18 A. No, it looks like it’s created by somebody, but not me.
19 A. Yes, yes, I understand. When I see the document, I just 19 Q. I see, and that is your evidence, is it?
20 give my comments on that. 20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So is it your evidence that you think this refers — 21 Q. Could you be shown, please, {D55/957.1/0.1}, please.
22 «IC» is referring to another OMG company? 22 Again, Dr Arkhangelsky, this looks, doesn’t it, like
23 A. I don’t know. I don’t know. Simply it’s not mentioned 23 a direct debit agreement in relation to a guarantee by
24 anything there. I had in the group by that time, from 24 Scandinavia Insurance in favour of Bank —
25 a different time, and between three and five different 25 A. Yes, this document I could theoretically sign,
37 39

1 insurance companies, so it might be a reference to any

2 other things.

3 Q. So any of those three or four companies could be giving

4 guarantees, could they, here?

5 A. Everything is possible in this life.

6 Q. But for you to give that answer, it must follow, mustn’t

7 it, that there must have been occasions on which those

8 other OMG companies have given guarantees of loans?

9 A. No, but they could give — that could be discussed

10 always, of course, but I don’t know what people in

11 the Bank was creating and what kind of brainstorming and

12 new ideas they implemented to clear up their reserves.

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is there any company that you think

14 might be being referred to by «IC», because it has —

15 A. For example, one of the big and good companies in

16 the group was Insurance Company Medstrakhcom, for

17 example, or Insurance Company Inter-something — I don’t

18 remember the name. They’ve been quite big in volumes

19 and — theoretically anything is possible.

20 So I should say, for example, Insurance Company

21 Medstrakhcom, we had something like 100,000 clients

22 there, so it has been a leading medical insurance

23 company in the region, so it was — if Insurance Company

24 Scandinavia, it was generally industrial insurance and

25 marine insurance, and Medstrakhcom was medical

1 considering the fact that I don’t — I haven’t seen any

2 difficulty in signing that.

3 Q. So you accept that you probably did sign this?

4 A. I could sign that, yes.

5 It’s again some strange things with the signature of

6 my company and my signature, but I assume that even if

7 it — this particular document could be artificial, but

8 I think I could sign this.

9 Q. But your evidence is that it wouldn’t really matter,

10 because you hadn’t signed the guarantee agreement; is

11 that right?

12 A. Absolutely.

13 Q. So you could deny subsequently that you had entered into

14 the guarantee, although you had signed and sealed

15 a direct debit agreement in relation —

16 A. Absolutely. Absolutely.

17 As I explained you before, I’ve been quite flexible

18 to an enquiry of the Bank, and they were explaining me

19 that it would be more comfortable and more easy for them

20 to handle my file, I could sign the documents which

21 I was not considered to be an important documents.

22 Like, for example, this three-party agreement.

23 Q. And, Dr Arkhangelsky, I suggest to you that you did, or

24 rather that OMG did, or — sorry. I suggest that you

25 did enter into a personal guarantee in favour of

38 40
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 Bank of St Petersburg —

2 A. No, never.

3 Q. — in relation to the fourth —

4 A. No, never.

5 Q. In relation to the fourth Vyborg loan.

6 A. No, never.

7 Q. And, similarly, that Scan Insurance did give a guarantee

8 to Bank of St Petersburg in relation to the fourth

9 Vyborg loan?

10 A. No, never, and you cannot see that in the balance sheet

11 of Insurance Company Scandinavia.

12 Q. Could you please be shown the debt schedule again?

13 {D74/1101/1}, please. Do you have that,

14 Dr Arkhangelsky?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And if you would be kind enough, please, to go to the

17 second entry?

18 A. You mean line 2?

19 Q. Yes.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And there appears to be — yes, that’s right. There

22 appears to have been an error on the date here, because

23 it says 25 June 2007.

24 A. I’m sorry, in which company? I cannot see.

25 Q. FIC Scandinavia.

1 table?

2 A. Where?

3 Q. There isn’t —

4 A. Which line you are referring to?

5 Q. In the index.

6 A. Yes, but it is not a reference to all of the companies

7 here; just for four companies on there.

8 Q. So is it your evidence to his Lordship that you don’t

9 think the reference to IC in lines 18, 20, 21 and 23 is

10 a reference to IC Scandinavia —

11 A. I don’t know. It’s not written here and I don’t know

12 what the person who has been compiling this table was

13 really meaning, because, for example, in line number 7,

14 you have an abbreviation «SMC», but you don’t have this

15 abbreviation on the end of the page. So it means that

16 not all the nicknames been described.

17 Q. It looks, doesn’t it, as if the index, or the key,

18 explains some of the companies in the table where you

19 might not otherwise know immediately what they were; for

20 example, Petroles or Norwood or Port Vyborg, you have

21 the long name there, whereas some companies, you just

22 have initials, haven’t you?

23 A. Yes, but you are not correct. For example, line 7,

24 «SMC», and you don’t have abbreviation of that, for

25 example, at the end of the …

41

1 A. What is it?

2 Q. Well, it is a schedule from your records,

3 Dr Arkhangelsky.

4 A. Yes, but I don’t understand what it is referring to.

5 Q. Is that a reference to LPK Scandinavia?

6 Yes, if you go to the very bottom of the document,

7 if you go to the second page, please {D74/1101/2}.

8 Actually, IC is there as well, I should have seen that.

9 «IC» says Scandinavia Insurance Company, doesn’t it?

10 A. Sorry?

11 Q. If you go to the foot of the …?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. It looks as if there is a little key, there is a key,

14 there is a table, or index.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. I think a few minutes ago, you weren’t sure whether the

17 reference to «IC» …

18 A. But you don’t have here a reference to IC.

19 Q. But it is IC Scandinavia, isn’t it, Insurance Company?

20 A. Yes, and they are referring to the new claims on the

21 top, but they are not referring to IC as «IC».

22 Q. And you don’t think that the reference to IC in

23 the table is not just an abbreviation of —

24 A. No, I don’t think so.

25 Q. There isn’t another definition, is there, for IC in that

43

1 So considering your statement that SMC has to be

2 also described, because I think people in the foreign

3 banks would not understand what do you mean here.

4 Q. And if we go back, sorry, to line 2, to FIC Scandinavia.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Which we now know is Scandinavia Forest Industry

7 Company, can we agree that that is a reference to what

8 became LPK Scandinavia?

9 A. I think so, but as you mentioned right now, we now see

10 that this table has been done, I think in a hurry and

11 with a lot of mistakes, like wrong dates and the names

12 and so on. So …

13 Q. And they are —

14 A. It’s a bit strange that in line 2 they put «FIC

15 Scandinavia» and at the end they put a different name.

16 So it’s strange. It means that the person who was

17 actually compiling, he was not really understanding if

18 proper names and proper data is input there.

19 Q. And if you look at line 2, the form of credit is said to

20 be an overdraft, isn’t it?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And the amount is 145 million roubles?

23 A. But I cannot recognise the date of this contract.

24 Q. I said to you, Dr Arkhangelsky, that there is probably

25 a mistake in the date; it should be 25 June 2008. The

42 44
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 year seems to be wrongly dated; do you agree?

2 A. I don’t know. It seems to be it’s quite a number of

3 mistakes here, yes. We are just guessing on quite

4 a number of things while on this table, so it seems to

5 be quite a draft version.

6 Q. I wonder if we could have up — just give me a moment.

7 Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky. (Pause)

8 A. I’m sorry, could we have a short break, maybe, now?

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that a convenient moment?

10 MR LORD: Probably —

11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you want to finish this?

12 MR LORD: I am only two or three minutes away from finishing

13 this.

14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I would like to complete this section.

15 A. Yes.

16 MR LORD: I am not far from finishing it, but I don’t want

17 to —

18 A. Okay, no problem, no problem, no problem, no problem.

19 Q. — Dr Arkhangelsky, if you need had a break then,

20 really, I don’t mind breaking.

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I can understand your need for

22 a break, but I think it would be more convenient to have

23 two or three minutes’ worth.

24 A. No problem, no problem at all.

25 MR LORD: Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky. I do apologise for

1 Q. So you think that someone has forged Ms Tarasova’s —

2 A. Yes, yes, I know the signature of my mother-in-law and

3 it doesn’t look like it is her signature.

4 Q. This agreement is referring, isn’t it, to what was the

5 overdraft facility, which was turned into a loan, wasn’t

6 it?

7 A. Most probably, yes.

8 Q. Between Bank of St Petersburg and LPK Scandinavia?

9 A. Most probably, yes.

10 Q. And can you see on {D49/853/1}, paragraph 2.5, and in

11 the Russian {D49/853/7}, there’s a reference to this:

12 «The loan issued under the Agreement shall be

13 guaranteed by the guarantee issued by Vitaly Dmitrievich

14 Arkhangelsky according to the guarantee agreement no —»

15 A. I think this agreement is an artificial agreement, and

16 I cannot comment that, so … so I think it’s well done

17 on the Bank’s side, but the signature of — if it’s

18 a signature of my mother-in-law, it’s put a stamp there

19 and you cannot really see if it’s a real signature or

20 not.

21 Q. Yes, but Dr Arkhangelsky —

22 A. Your Lordship, if you see the signature on the top in

23 the Russian version, it looks a bit strange that

24 somebody just written a full family name of the person,

25 so it’s not really considered to be a signature, so it’s

45 47

1 holding you up. I am trying to find the document.

2 Sorry. (Pause)

3 Could you be shown, please, {D49/853/1}.

4 Can you see that?

5 A. Can I see a Russian version of that, please?

6 Q. Yes. {D49/853/7}. It’s on the screen. Thank you.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Do you have that?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. It is entitled «Additional Agreement», isn’t it?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And the date is 25 June 2008?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And who signed this? Who seems to have signed this

15 document, Dr Arkhangelsky?

16 A. I don’t know.

17 Q. If you go to {D49/853/12}, you can see, can’t you, in

18 the … it looks like it’s a Ms Tarasova; is that right?

19 A. It looks like, but I’m not sure if it is a real document

20 or artificial document. I cannot comment on that.

21 Q. Assume that it’s a real document, for the —

22 A. I’m not really sure it is a real document.

23 Q. No, but for this question, assume it is. Does that look

24 like Ms Tarasova’s signature?

25 A. Not really, I don’t think so.

1 a bit strange and funny way of doing the document. So

2 I think the people, they simply didn’t know how the real

3 signature looks like and they created this very creative

4 copy of that.

5 Q. On each page?

6 A. On two pages, yes, and you cannot see it under the seal.

7 Q. But it has been signed on every page, hasn’t it, in

8 the bottom right-hand corner?

9 A. But I cannot understand why the Bank employee couldn’t

10 sign on each and every page. So they are very creative.

11 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, your mother-in-law’s signature

12 appears to appear on the bottom right-hand of every

13 page, doesn’t it? The bottom right-hand corner?

14 A. No, no, it’s her family name, written by somebody. But

15 please show me the next page, where you have a stamp on

16 that. Under the stamp. So you cannot really check

17 that.

18 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, you have never challenged the validity

19 or authenticity of this document before, have you?

20 A. I simply don’t — I’m not able to do any judgements on

21 behalf of my mother-in-law.

22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think what is being put to you is

23 that amongst the many documents the authenticity of

24 which you have challenged, this is not one of them.

25 A. Maybe. Maybe. I am not able to comment on that now.

46 48
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 MR LORD: And could you be shown {D49/854/1}, please, which

2 is the personal guarantee given by you in relation to

3 this 2008 LPK Scan loan. Again, Dr Arkhangelsky,

4 I suggest that you did sign this guarantee.

5 A. If — I am not sure if — we are referring to

6 the guarantee which you claim has been signed by me when

7 I was not in Russia, yes? We are speaking about this

8 case?

9 Q. But you could have signed it later, couldn’t you, when

10 you got back?

11 A. No, no, no, no. I think it’s — the signature doesn’t

12 look like mine, and in my witness statements and the

13 witness statements of my wife, it’s been described and

14 discussed that we were not there at that time.

15 Q. Is it your evidence that you never, ever signed

16 a document bearing a date on it, other than on that

17 self-same date; do you understand the point? Is it your

18 evidence that you never, ever signed a document on one

19 day, even though the date on the top of the document was

20 an earlier date?

21 A. No, I cannot say so. In January 2009, the Bank produced

22 quite a number of documents with backdating and then

23 I signed that. But normally not before. As long as

24 I know.

25 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, could you be shown {C1/1/60}, please.

1 Q. I understand.

2 A. I just want to stress that there were accidents then the

3 Bank claims that I signed documents in their presence

4 when I was not in Russia.

5 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, I think I did put to you that

6 you signed the guarantees for the fourth Vyborg Shipping

7 loan. I think I put that to you, didn’t I?

8 A. No.

9 Q. No.

10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, you did not sign it?

11 A. No, I didn’t sign any of the personal guarantees or any

12 guarantees of any of the companies.

13 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, I went on a bit longer. I think

14 that would be a convenient moment. I’m probably going

15 to go onto something else now. Signature, but

16 a different section.

17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. Please might I borrow D40 over

18 the short break? (Handed)

19 We will have a ten-minute break.

20 A. Ten minutes?

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Ten minutes.

22 (11.15 am)

23 (A short break)

24 (11.29 am)

25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I had best hand back D40 in case it is

49

1 It’s your witness statement.

2 A. Sorry, which point?

3 Q. Subparagraph (4)?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Where you refer to being out of Russia on a relevant

6 date; can you see that?

7 A. Yes, that’s actually what I just told you.

8 Q. It’s not really, is it, because the LPK Scandinavia

9 guarantee is referred to in the last sentence of your

10 evidence there, and you are saying there that your wife

11 was in Bulgaria on 25 June 2008 —

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. — but you don’t say that you were?

14 A. No, no, I just don’t remember, so I know that in your

15 case, you are claiming that some documents have been

16 signed by me. At the time I was not in Russia, and

17 we’ve given that evidences, so I simply don’t remember

18 to which particular we are speaking about.

19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s a fair point, Mr Lord, if you

20 look at the second sentence. Or is that —

21 MR LORD: It’s a different loan, my Lord. It’s the fourth

22 Vyborg Shipping loan.

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

24 MR LORD: Sorry, I am not trying to be clever here.

25 A. I’m sorry, I don’t keep all these dates in my head.

51

1 required again.

2 A. Your Lordship, may I ask two small questions.

3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Sure.

4 A. The first question, I am sorry if it’s not related, we

5 found out yesterday that Mr Balandin, he was one of

6 the key witnesses for the Bank in these proceedings and

7 he was quite heavily involved in reserving and other

8 things. I’m just wondering if it’s normal that he is

9 not giving statements here — I mean that he is not

10 cross-examined. I think he is still working for the

11 Bank and playing quite a key role there and been heavily

12 involved in all these events.

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.

14 A. So that’s the first question.

15 And the second question, I know that quite a number

16 of people in France, journalists and not only,

17 theoretically they are eager to participate in these

18 events, but I came to know that you cannot find anywhere

19 on the internet the timing and the place of the sitting

20 and yesterday, when I came to the reception from the

21 official address I had been given, they were not aware

22 if any English proceedings are going on here and it’s at

23 least two levels of a control here and there you have to

24 state your name.

25 So I think it should be some information and address

50 52
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 of this hearing here in France to be on the website, at

2 least on RPC, and I think on the Bank’s website, and

3 still a quite important issue that we haven’t solved the

4 issue of transcripts. So we still have not been — done

5 anything, which is really preventing public — it’s at

6 the end of the third week already and we have not

7 decided of the dissemination of this information.

8 Thanks.

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you. I am not sure that this is

10 the right time to be dealing with any of this at length

11 but, very quickly, it is a matter for the Bank what

12 witnesses they call. Of course, it will be for you or

13 Mr Stroilov to make submissions at the end of the day if

14 you consider that some people have been held back. That

15 is your right.

16 As to the public accessibility, you have made the

17 point, and that was raised and will now be checked, but

18 I do know that on the Rolls Building website, the matter

19 is listed and people who might be interested are asked

20 to contact or speak to the listing officer. In my view,

21 there is no need to have any further listing of

22 the matter; the fact that we are in France does not mean

23 that there is any better place to publicise the fact of

24 the hearing than where it usually is, just as if we were

25 in England, we wouldn’t expect to make any notification

1 MR LORD: I accept that if it can’t be done, I will have to

2 do it tomorrow.

3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You must let me know when you would

4 like to deal with this.

5 A. We shall try to settle it during the lunch, I mean

6 with Stroilov.

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. If 2.00 suits you both, I shall

8 deal with it at 2.00. If one or other of you is not

9 ready, I will deal with it at 4.00ish.

10 A. Let’s try.

11 MR LORD: Thank you, my Lord.

12 Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, could you be shown

13 {H1/17/1}, please. This is your eighth statement in

14 these proceedings, on the screen now, I think.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And if you could please be shown {H1/17/4}, you can see

17 paragraph 14 —

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. — where you give some evidence in relation to the issue

20 of signature comparators.

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Can you see that?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And if you would be kind enough, please,

25 Dr Arkhangelsky, just to refresh your memory, just very

53 55

1 in France of where we were sitting.

2 As to the third matter, and the question of access

3 to the building, I will simply leave that to be checked.

4 MR LORD: My Lord, just while we are briefly on

5 housekeeping, on reflection, I would prefer to be able

6 to refer to aspects of yesterday this afternoon, because

7 it comes up in a section of cross-examination.

8 Obviously I won’t refer to it now in open court, and

9 I am sure there is a way of doing it that wouldn’t cause

10 any problems, but I am conscious that I suggested

11 4.30 pm. It might be that that’s leaving it too late.

12 I was anxious, really, to try and get as good a day

13 through, really, before we traversed these matters, but

14 I thought I should raise it in case your Lordship

15 thought we maybe ought to deal with it earlier than 4.30

16 in those circumstances.

17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I will deal with it whenever you both

18 are ready to deal with it, but you having said 4.30, it

19 may be that Mr Stroilov and Mr Ameli have adopted a more

20 relaxed attitude. I simply don’t know. I will deal

21 with it —

22 A. I agree that we should make it preferably faster than —

23 so maybe just after lunch if we could start it then.

24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you are able to, I think Mr Lord

25 was indicating that would be his preference.

1 quickly, of what you said there. I don’t think you need

2 to look at it in any detail, but it is really 14 (a),

3 I think.

4 A. (a)?

5 Q. Yes. Can you see that what you are describing there is

6 a process where you went through a list of

7 147 comparators and you tabulated them.

8 A. And I — sorry, what are —

9 Q. No, it’s my fault.

10 A. Why are you laughing? I cannot understand.

11 Q. No, it’s just the phone.

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m so sorry. It’s a breach of all

13 that’s important for a phone to go off. I apologise.

14 MR LORD: Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, I just heard a phone.

15 Sorry.

16 There was a list of the — you went through the list

17 of comparators, and can you see you marked them «E»,

18 «N», or «?»; can you see that?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. «E» meant:

21 «… a genuine document of a given description did

22 exist, without prejudice to the question of the

23 authenticity of the signatures on the given copies…»

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. «… ‘N’ (meaning the veracity of the document was

54 56
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 positively denied) or ‘?’ (meaning we could not remember

2 whether any such document was ever signed).»

3 A. Okay.

4 Q. Do you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And that was a statement given on 19 August 2014; can

7 you see that?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. If you could now be shown {O2/149/1}, please. You can

10 see that this is an e-mail sent by Mr Stroilov on your

11 behalf to Mr Yates, who was at Baker & McKenzie, who

12 were then the Bank’s solicitors.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Can you see what he refers to? Do you see what

15 Mr Stroilov there refers to? He says:

16 «Dear Sirs,

17 «Please see attached — 2 more to follow in

18 a separate message.»

19 Then:

20 «To reiterate …»

21 And he explains the code, «E», «N» and «?».

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And he says:

24 «‘?’ is self-evident.»

25 A. Yes.

1 your friend Mr Marshall, and we’ve been doing it in

2 a very big hurry. So — and then you have

3 147 documents, sometimes — all the signatures, when you

4 compare 147 signatures, all of them looks absolutely the

5 same on the bad quality copies. So, yes, I was not that

6 sure, I think.

7 Q. Because if you look at your code, you put down «E» where

8 you thought that a genuine document of that description

9 did exist without prejudice to the authenticity of

10 the signatures on the given copy.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. So what you were there — I think «E» connotes where you

13 accepted that there was an agreement that fitted that

14 description, but you weren’t necessarily accepting that

15 it had been validly signed on the copy you had seen;

16 would that be fair?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And I think «N» meant that the veracity of the document

19 had been positively denied. So I think you were there

20 saying that you positively asserted that the document

21 had been fabricated; that’s right, isn’t it?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And then «?» meant that you could not remember whether

24 any such document was ever signed?

25 A. Yes, it means that I remember that I have not signed

57 59
1 Q. Can you see that? And he attached some index of 1 that, so I was nearly sure that I never signed that
2 documents, and if you could be shown {O2/149/3}, I would 2 document.
3 just like to show you some question marks that you put 3 Q. Yes, but if we go —
4 down. 4 A. Which is my still understanding.
5 Do you have entry 1 there? Can you see number 1? 5 Q. But if we go to the table and to entry number 1 that
6 A. «Contract of Guarantee», yes. 6 I just took you to.
7 Q. That’s the Scan guarantee for the first Vyborg loan. 7 A. Yes.
8 A. Yes. 8 Q. That is a reference to the Scan guarantee for the first
9 Q. And it looks as if when you thought about it in August, 9 Vyborg loan.
10 or rather in 2013 — 10 A. Yes, yes.
11 A. Yes. 11 Q. And if your evidence is right, that you never — that
12 Q. — it looks as if you were not sure; you couldn’t 12 Scan Insurance never, ever gave any guarantees for any
13 remember whether you had or hadn’t entered into this 13 of these BSP loans, then why did you put a «?» down
14 guarantee; would that be right? 14 rather than an «N»?
15 A. Yes, I’m not changing my witness statement, so I don’t 15 A. Because, as I said, we’ve been under huge pressure.
16 recollect what I was thinking that time, so just please 16 I’ve been not represented and I had to do huge job
17 follow what has been discussed at that time and agreed 17 without — you know, under the big pressure and, as
18 that time. 18 I said, going through hundreds of documents, at some
19 Q. Sorry, I’ll ask again. Sorry. When you completed this 19 point you suddenly start understanding that they are
20 table in 2013 — 20 looking the same and referring also — you remember we
21 A. Yes. 21 were complaining very much a lot about the quality of
22 Q. — it looks as if you could not remember whether any 22 the documents presented by that time. So that was
23 such document was ever signed, and I am quoting there 23 just — just to prevent me from making any mistakes.
24 from your witness statement. 24 So, but now I am absolutely sure that I never signed
25 A. I’ve been under huge pressure by Baker & McKenzie and 25 these documents.
58 60
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 Q. Right. If you could look, please, at entry number 6 —

2 A. I’m sorry, have I said anything funny? Just —

3 Q. No, Dr Arkhangelsky.

4 A. No, just you are laughing all the time, so I am just

5 a bit — sorry, it is my first experience and it’s —

6 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, that is not a valid thing to say

7 at all. I exchanged a comment with my learned friend,

8 a confidential remark about what I must put.

9 A. But we are in the court, I see.

10 Q. And I smiled because he was implying I would miss

11 something out. It had nothing to do with you.

12 A. I hope so.

13 Q. Please, that’s not a fair thing to say, Dr Arkhangelsky.

14 I really take objection to that, my Lord. Really,

15 deep objection to that.

16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Arkhangelsky, it is entirely right

17 that everyone here must behave with due decorum, but it

18 is also important to be not excessively sensitive.

19 I know it is difficult for you.

20 A. But it is disappointing me, really.

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But it is — we’re going to be here

22 for a long time and the occasional smile is endurable,

23 I think, even if it happened, which I did not notice it.

24 MR LORD: And it was to my learned friend — I’m sorry,

25 my Lord, it was to my learned friend because —

1 the balance sheet of insurance company, I understood

2 that for me, the key issue that on the balance sheet we

3 never, ever had any guarantees, and for me it’s

4 confirming the fact that any of my doubts could be

5 cleaned up and I confirmed that Insurance Company

6 Scandinavia never, ever given any guarantees.

7 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, if you are right and that

8 Scandinavia Insurance never, never gave guarantees to

9 Bank of St Petersburg —

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. — then it wouldn’t really matter, would it, the quality

12 of the copy, or the quality of your signature, because

13 you would know straight away that that couldn’t possibly

14 be a genuine document, wouldn’t you?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Why not?

17 A. Because all these proceedings are quite unusual and I’ve

18 been under huge pressure by Baker & McKenzie and I had

19 to be very careful and I have not been able to get any

20 professional advice, and I had to be better secured from

21 any further attempts of your clients in these

22 proceedings.

23 Q. And could you please go to entry number 12 on

24 {O2/149/4}, please. That is a reference to the Scan

25 guarantee for the third Vyborg loan, isn’t it?

61 63

1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Neither of you must be too sensitive.

2 Let us move on.

3 MR LORD: Entry number 6, Dr Arkhangelsky. Can you see

4 that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. That’s a reference to the contract of guarantee given by

7 Scan for the second Vyborg loan, isn’t it?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And, again, the same question, you marked that as

10 a question mark.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. In other words, you couldn’t remember?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. It’s the same point, really: that if your evidence is

15 true, and that Scan Insurance never guaranteed any of

16 these loans in relation to which you are disputing the

17 guarantee in these proceedings, why did you not put

18 a different — either «N» or «E» down? Why did you say

19 that you couldn’t remember?

20 A. I don’t remember about argumentation at that time. But

21 since that time, since 2014, I have been through quite

22 a number of documents, and especially documents which

23 you disclosed, your clients disclosed, much later than

24 expected.

25 So after going through the disclosure and through

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And, again, you put a question mark down there,

3 suggesting that you don’t remember whether that document

4 did or didn’t exist?

5 A. Yes, I was really afraid because, as I said, it was

6 hundreds of document of very bad quality and they

7 were — at that time they were looking to me more or

8 less the same shape, and I decided that for my personal

9 security reasons I just take this point aside without

10 any categoric statement on that time.

11 Q. And entry number 19 is the Scan guarantee for the fourth

12 Vyborg loan; have you seen that?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And just as with the other three, the signature

15 appearing was said to be yours, wasn’t it?

16 A. Sorry?

17 Q. The signature — you can see the column marked

18 «Signature appearing on Document»?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. So you must have looked at a document that purported to

21 be a Scan guarantee of the fourth Vyborg loan on behalf

22 of Scandinavia Insurance signed by you.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And you marked it with a question mark?

25 A. Yes, I couldn’t recollect if I could sign that or not.

62 64
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 I couldn’t remember that document by that time.

2 Q. And I am putting to you that if you are right and that

3 you knew that Scandinavia Insurance Company had never

4 given guarantees to Bank of St Petersburg, then you

5 would not have put a question mark down; you would have

6 put —

7 A. Why not? I haven’t had any advice on my decisions, so

8 I just had to make a fast decision and hurry through the

9 documents which were looking, for me at that time, the

10 same, so I was not analysing the background, so I just

11 went through the papers and so on. I had not been

12 analysing the content of these documents.

13 Q. And if you could please be shown entry number 27 on

14 {O2/149/5}, that’s a reference to the Scan guarantee for

15 the first Onega loan; you see that from the date,

16 30 June 2006, don’t you, Dr Arkhangelsky?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And, again, that’s a document that seemed to bear your

19 signature; that’s right, isn’t it?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And again you put a question mark down, signifying that

22 you couldn’t remember whether such a —

23 A. Yes, yes. I couldn’t recollect anything at that time

24 and by that time we haven’t had sufficient disclosure

25 from your side and we had not came even through

1 OMG companies when they were short of funds?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Did it work in the opposite direction? Was it normal

4 for monies to go from OMG companies to you because of

5 that arrangement?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And why wouldn’t it be normal for you to give guarantees

8 for OMG companies, given that close family relationship

9 between you and the companies?

10 A. It’s very simple: because I haven’t — personally I have

11 not had — I discussed that yesterday, that I haven’t

12 had any other assets except the group. So, formally

13 speaking, there was not any need for any guarantees,

14 because all the loans, they were well secured by the

15 real assets, by the company’s assets, and by the

16 business which had been going through the Bank.

17 Q. I’m going to ask you now, Dr Arkhangelsky, about the

18 personal loan.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. I wonder, could you be shown your first affidavit in

21 the BVI, please. It is at {M1/20/1}. If you could

22 please be shown {M1/20/12}; can you see paragraph 32,

23 please, at the foot of the page?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. You refer to the personal loan, and you say this. It

65

1 disclosure which you provided, and I’m not remembering

2 each and every particular deals of many, many companies

3 I had in my group.

4 Q. Could you please be shown {G1/20/39}, Dr Arkhangelsky,

5 please. This is the second affidavit, or rather it is

6 a page from your second affidavit in these proceedings.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. If you could please be shown paragraph 161, {G1/20/39},

9 please.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. I would like you, please, to have a look at what you

12 said in this affidavit at the foot of the page, the last

13 sentence, and I am afraid it runs over to the next page.

14 {G1/20/40} You say this:

15 «Since Oslo Marine Group was essentially a family

16 business, it was normal for me to cover the expenditure

17 of OMG companies when they were short of funds, and to

18 be reimbursed later.»

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Can you see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And I assume that it was true that OMG was, essentially,

23 a family business?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And that it was normal for you to cover expenditure of

67

1 is:

2 » … a loan for 130 million roubles said to have

3 been made to me personally on 28 November 2008, secured

4 on vessel called Pechora.»

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. «I have no knowledge of any such loan and certainly did

7 not sign any loan agreement or receive any draw down of

8 this amount or any other sum.»

9 A. Absolutely.

10 Q. So were you saying there that no monies were ever

11 advanced by the Bank in relation to that alleged loan?

12 A. Not any money been advanced to me.

13 Q. Advanced — so there was an advance, but not to you; is

14 that right?

15 A. I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know anything

16 about these transactions.

17 Q. I wonder, could you be shown {G1/20/4}, please, which is

18 your second affidavit in these proceedings.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Can you see in paragraph 13, you say:

21 «The Bank seeks to recover money under seven

22 contracts: six ‘suretyship agreements’, and one

23 ‘personal loan agreement’.»

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. «In fact, none of those contracts have ever been made.

66 68
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 The corporate loans of OMG companies were secured by 1 Can you see that?
2 corporate assets (subsequently seized by the Bank) and 2 A. Yes.
3 not by ‘personal guarantees’.» 3 Q. Then if you go over the page to 1.1.7, at {D107/1537/2}
4 A. Absolutely. 4 for the transcript, you can see a reference to:
5 Q. «The ‘personal loan’ was never agreed, given or taken.» 5 «Arkhangelsky VD under the loan contract …
6 A. Absolutely. Everything correct. 6 November 28, 2008 in the amount of [13 million]
7 Q. Can I please ask you to look at the 30 December 7 roubles…»
8 memorandum. 8 Can’t you?
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What’s the date of this affidavit? 9 A. Yes.
10 A. Sorry? 10 Q. And that’s a reference, isn’t it, to the personal loan
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So sorry, I am asking Mr Lord 11 of November —
12 a question. I’m sorry to speak over you. 12 A. Alleged personal loan.
13 Can you remember what the date of the second 13 Q. The alleged personal loan.
14 affidavit is? 14 You signed this document, didn’t you?
15 MR LORD: 20 June 2012. 15 A. Yes.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you. 16 Q. And his Lordship can take it, can’t he, that you would
17 MR LORD: Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, I wonder if you could 17 have read this document?
18 please be shown the 30 December memorandum. 18 A. I’ve been under so huge pressure and I’ve been under the
19 A. Yes. 19 threat, and the conditions were extraordinary, and
20 Q. That’s at {D107/1537/1}. Do you see that, 20 I signed this document in the office of Mrs Malysheva,
21 Dr Arkhangelsky? 21 so I’ve been really afraid of me and myself and
22 A. Yes. 22 I haven’t had any chance to get any advice from even
23 Q. And the Russian is at {D107/1537/3}. 23 in-house lawyers. So I had — either I had to sign that
24 A. Yes. 24 or I would not survive during the Christmas holidays.
25 Q. And it looks as if there has been a certified 25 Q. Mm. You see, Dr Arkhangelsky, I’m not sure it’s quite
69 71

1 translation by Ms Bidault.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. You accept, don’t you, Dr Arkhangelsky, that this is

4 a document that you did sign?

5 A. A memorandum, yes.

6 Q. And it consisted of two pages, didn’t it?

7 A. Yes, even three pages; a third page, I think, has been

8 signed behind.

9 Q. And it was signed by you —

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. — after a very significant meeting with the Bank to

12 discuss OMG’s finances?

13 A. Absolutely.

14 Q. And presumably, in those circumstances, you would have

15 taken some trouble to read through this carefully?

16 A. No, I’ve been under so huge pressure, so I haven’t had

17 any chance to go through the documents. So I had any

18 chance under the personal threat by Mr Savelyev to argue

19 about anything. So I was really afraid and I’ve been

20 under huge personal pressure and family pressure, so

21 I had to sign whatever I got.

22 Q. So if we look, please, on the first page, you can see in

23 paragraph 1.1, the memorandum reads as follows:

24 «The group is the Bank’s debtor under the following

25 contracts…»

1 right that you didn’t have any legal advice, because if

2 you go in your witness statement, please, to {C1/1/38},

3 and you look at paragraph 147, you say this:

4 «After my meeting with Mr Savelyev I had a short

5 meeting with Mrs Malysheva at which we discussed how the

6 Group’s and the Bank’s respective lawyers would execute

7 the necessary documentation regarding the transfers of

8 the shares.»

9 Can you see that, Dr Arkhangelsky?

10 A. Yes, here it’s a discussion about the contracts of —

11 with respective bank companies.

12 Q. So your evidence is that you didn’t seek any advice from

13 your lawyers in relation to the memorandum; is that

14 right?

15 A. Yes, that’s right.

16 Q. I wonder if we could have on screen, please,

17 {D105/1454/0.1}. Do you have that, Dr Arkhangelsky?

18 A. Yes, I’m still waiting for the Russian version.

19 Q. All right.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. The Russian version is at {D105/1454/1}.

22 A. If — these are attachments for BVI proceedings, or …?

23 Q. No, these are copies of e-mails disclosed in these

24 proceedings.

25 A. Okay.

70 72
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 Q. And you are right that it was disclosed in the BVI?

2 A. Yes, I think so, yes.

3 Q. And it was exhibited to your affidavit, wasn’t it?

4 A. Yes, I think so.

5 Q. So there can’t be any question about the authenticity of

6 these e-mails, can there?

7 A. No, but the translation on the right-hand side, what is

8 this? Because on the left-hand side you have both

9 translations; on the right-hand side — what is it on

10 the right-hand side?

11 Q. Work from the Russian if you want to.

12 A. I suggest to use the left-hand side, yes, just to be

13 correct.

14 And actually, the text is different. In English and

15 Russian version, it’s absolutely different text.

16 Q. You see, Dr Arkhangelsky, I am looking for the Russian

17 version of what’s in English at {D105/1454/0.1}.

18 A. Yes, so we just close down the page on the right-hand

19 side because it is an absolutely different document.

20 Q. Yes, but you may have to have the hard copy — I am

21 sorry — just so you can compare the two, because I want

22 to make sure that you have the right document. It’s

23 page 2. {D105/1454/2}.

24 Dr Arkhangelsky, this is a document that —

25 A. I’m sorry, just let me know which documents we are

1 Q. And it’s from Ms Stalevskaya at BSP to Mr Vasiliev at

2 Oslo.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Mr Vasiliev was one of your lawyers, wasn’t he?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And who was I Vasilenko?

7 A. I think it was his lawyer or assistant or secretary or

8 something like that.

9 Q. Yes. So, on 29 December 2008, so four days after the

10 meeting on the 25th, it looks, doesn’t it, as if

11 Ms Stalevskaya sent this e-mail to your lawyers?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Can you see that she looks to be discussing with them,

14 in this e-mail, certain documents?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And can you see number 3 on the list?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Could you read it in Russian? It comes on

19 {D105/1454/2}; it’s by the lower hole punch,

20 Dr Arkhangelsky.

21 A. Yes, and if — I don’t remember if the memorandum is

22 attached there or not.

23 Q. But just confirm first that number 3 says, in Russian,

24 «Memorandum».

25 A. It says memorandum, yes.

73 75

1 discussing because it is four different documents now.

2 Q. If you begin at page 1, {D105/1454/1}, you can see —

3 A. So now we are discussing my attachments to the first BVI

4 statement?

5 Q. That’s right, yes. You are right.

6 A. Okay, and here you have a text in English and Russian at

7 the same time?

8 Q. That’s right.

9 A. Okay.

10 Q. That’s right. I think that’s a translation you must

11 have had done when you made this exhibit —

12 A. Yes, yes. No, no, I’m just considering that it’s

13 a proper translation and the proper document.

14 Q. All right. And you can see, can’t you, that this is

15 a chain of e-mails —

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. — at the end of December 2008?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Can you see that? Can you look at number 2, please, the

20 second e-mail?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Which is {D105/1454/1}; do you have that?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And that’s an e-mail of 29 December 2008.

25 A. Yes.

1 It says memorandum, but it doesn’t specify which

2 particular memorandum and which particular text, and as

3 far as I understood, no attachments, and as

4 Mrs Stalevskaya said to you under cross-examination,

5 there were different versions of possible memorandum.

6 Q. Yes, but the only document that was being considered at

7 that time by the parties concerned, called «memorandum»,

8 was the 30 December memorandum, wasn’t it?

9 A. Yes. Yes.

10 Q. And it looks, doesn’t it, from this e-mail, as if there

11 was some exchange between the Bank and your lawyers

12 concerning the memorandum?

13 A. I assume so, but we have not discussed the final

14 version, because a final version of the memorandum

15 I signed in the office of Malysheva, 30 December, and

16 I signed the document she given to me. So not any

17 looked on by the lawyers or anybody else, we haven’t had

18 a chance to do that, because I either had to sign or

19 I had to create a problem to myself.

20 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, do you want to revise your evidence as

21 to —

22 A. No, I don’t want.

23 Q. No.

24 I wonder if you could please be shown {D104/1429/1},

25 and {D104/1429/2} is the Russian.

74 76
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 A. By the way, if your clients disclosed the similar 1 A. Yes.
2 document, similar to correspondence, as far as 2 Q. «— 130 million roubles.»
3 I understood, not. So your clients decided to delete 3 A. Yes.
4 this correspondence from the proceedings. 4 Q. That would be the personal loan, wouldn’t it?
5 Q. Could you be shown {D104/1429/1}, please. 5 A. I think so, yes.
6 A. Yes, I see. It’s here, yes. 6 Q. Did you, or anybody on your behalf, send back an e-mail
7 Q. Do you have the Russian, Dr Arkhangelsky? 7 challenging that and saying: what’s that entry all
8 A. Sorry? 8 about?
9 Q. Do you have the Russian on the screen? 9 A. I don’t know, just see the disclosure.
10 A. I have the Russian version, yes. 10 Q. I wonder if you could be shown, please —
11 Q. Good. Can you see this looks to be an e-mail from 11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It’s a silly point, but after «Mood:
12 Ms Blinova at Bank of St Petersburg? 12 Normal», in Russian, before the exclamation mark, what
13 A. Yes. 13 does that say?
14 Q. To some people at OMG? 14 A. It’s also strange for me. It’s …
15 A. Yes. 15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Could you read it in Russian?
16 Q. On 19 December 2008. 16 MR LORD: It says «Good afternoon», or «Good day», doesn’t
17 A. Yes. 17 it?
18 Q. And it is copied to you? 18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: «Good day», is it?
19 A. Yes. 19 A. No, no, no, what you are referring to?
20 Q. And the subject is headed, «Repayments 20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The very first —
21 in December 2008». 21 A. You are referring to «Mood: Normal»; I don’t know what
22 A. Yes. 22 does it mean.
23 Q. Did you occasionally get reminders from the Bank as to 23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The first piece of Russian in
24 the repayments that were due at the end of the month? 24 the substantive e-mail, before the exclamation mark: two
25 A. No. 25 words.
77 79

1 Q. So this would have been an unusual document for you,

2 would it?

3 A. What do you mean? So it’s quite normal that every month

4 several different employees of the Bank were sending

5 different letters to directors of each and every

6 company, as well as to financial department, with their

7 calculations of exact volume of interest and so on. So

8 it was a kind of such type of e-mails we were receiving

9 for each and every company and it was kind of standard

10 spam sending by the Bank, and I think it’s a more

11 technical way, and I have never been inside these

12 e-mails.

13 Q. So you think that this e-mail probably went into your

14 spam box, do you?

15 A. No, no, I don’t say this. I considered that I — there

16 were some subjects which I definitely had to read, but

17 not all of them, so I technically couldn’t read hundreds

18 of e-mails every day.

19 Q. This e-mail purports to set out repayments due at the

20 end of December 2008 by OMG, doesn’t it?

21 A. Yes, most probably.

22 Q. And can you see the first of the entries under the

23 heading, «Repayments»?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. «The loan to Arkhangelsky VD —»

1 MR LORD: Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, do you not know — the

2 first two words under «Mood: Normal», in Russian. Could

3 you —

4 A. «Mood: Normal». I don’t know what does it mean, «Mood:

5 Normal».

6 Q. No, the Russian underneath. Read on; the very first two

7 Russian words underneath?

8 A. «Good day». Yes, «Good day». But it is again quite

9 strange, an e-mail that — the time of the

10 sending e-mail is 7.41 in the morning, which is — you

11 know, banks are not starting in Russia like this. So

12 it’s some strange here.

13 Q. I wonder, could you be shown, please, {D104/1424/1}.

14 Dr Arkhangelsky, have you got {D104/1424/2}?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Which is a Russian version of what seems to be a letter

17 from and signed by you to the Bank on 18 December 2008;

18 can you see that?

19 A. I’m not sure that it’s my signature. I don’t think that

20 I signed this document.

21 Q. No?

22 A. And it also looks very strange because if it’s any

23 official — if it would be official document at that

24 time, it would have to be some stamps of the Bank with

25 dates, with number and so on. So it looks like a very

78 80
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 artificial document.

2 Q. Do you agree that on the face of the letter, it looks to

3 be a letter from you asking for an extension of

4 the personal loan given in November 2008?

5 A. No. Normally in such type of documents, my name have to

6 be mentioned in the beginning of the document, and it

7 looks like that my name was created afterwards, at

8 least, and signed afterwards. But, again, any such type

9 of document have to be registered by the Bank. So

10 normally if you do this document, they put a stamp that

11 they got it or made this transaction or accepted this

12 document. So this document’s absolutely strange.

13 Q. But do you at least agree that the credit agreement

14 that’s being referred to in this letter is the alleged

15 personal loan agreement?

16 A. I think so, yes.

17 Q. Because I can show you it, but take it from me that the

18 numbers match up —

19 A. I believe you.

20 Q. Yes. So we can agree, can’t we, that on the face of

21 the text, at least, the two lines, it is referring there

22 to the personal loan agreement of November 2008?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And if this is a genuine document —

25 A. Which I think it’s not a genuine document.

1 a very strong requirement of ISO certification, and

2 insurance company and the most group companies went

3 through this ISO certification and quality — total

4 quality management standards have been implemented and

5 confirmed by the international registry.

6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Not your own personal — your personal

7 letters, you didn’t have —

8 A. But I always, you know — I have not been doing any

9 similar documents myself. So I had two personal

10 assistants who was, you know, organising all these

11 things and organising all my life and so on. So I would

12 not, you know, have like this.

13 And normally, you see, if we see the Russian

14 version, so here would be from whom, my passport details

15 and so on, if it’s done in the professional banking way

16 of handling such type of documents. Address and

17 personal address and so on, contact details, and …

18 MR LORD: Can I please —

19 A. But I said the key issue there, that any documents

20 coming to the Bank have to have a number and stamp on

21 that; otherwise it’s not an official handling of

22 the papers.

23 Q. Can I please ask you to go to your first affidavit in

24 the BVI, please, at {M1/20/23}. Dr Arkhangelsky, if you

25 could go, please, to paragraph 60 on that page.

81 83

1 Q. No, I’ll say it again: if this is a genuine document —

2 A. No, it’s not a genuine document.

3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: He is putting a hypothetical to you;

4 he is asking you to assume that it is and then he is

5 going to ask a question.

6 A. Okay.

7 MR LORD: If this is a genuine document, an authentic

8 document, then it is a letter from you, asking the Bank

9 to grant an extension in relation to the November 2008

10 personal loan, isn’t it?

11 A. Yes.

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Did your companies have headed

13 notepaper?

14 A. Of course. Of course we had rather — you know, as long

15 as we’ve been under ISO 9000 certified, and as long as

16 we’ve been under the rating arrangements, so we, you

17 know — we tried to be very English-American style,

18 let’s put it this way, so with logo and trademarks, all

19 the logos and trademarks been registered and so on. So

20 we — I’ve been taking that very carefully.

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you have headed notepaper for your

22 own personal affairs?

23 A. No, but all the papers have been done always on the

24 group documents, all my personal documents, because most

25 of my documents have been registered — again, it was

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. You give some evidence in this affidavit —

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. — about the personal loan.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. You say:

7 «I also note that the Memorandum makes reference to

8 a personal loan having been made to me on or about

9 28 November 2008 in an amount of 130 million roubles,

10 apparently expiring on 31 December 2008 but extendable

11 for one year. Whilst this was something which had been

12 discussed at a general level, in passing with

13 Mr Savelyev at an earlier meeting, there was never any

14 agreement on this and it was not taken further.»

15 Can you see that?

16 A. Yes, absolutely. Absolutely.

17 Q. So was it your recollection when you swore this

18 affidavit back in June 2011 —

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. — that you had discussed at a general level with

21 Mr Savelyev a personal loan to you around about this

22 period?

23 A. I discussed many, many different issues with Savelyev,

24 so we had quite productive meetings, and I had to search

25 for any opportunity, and he was discussing and offering

82 84
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 some solutions he had been offering to other clients and 1 A. Yes.
2 so on. 2 Q. It actually looks, Dr Arkhangelsky, as if paragraph 145
3 So, you know, we’ve been discussing many, many 3 has basically copied paragraph 60, doesn’t it?
4 issues and I sent letters to the Bank with some 4 A. Yes.
5 solutions, like a purchase of the share, for example, in 5 Q. But the one sentence that has been left out of your
6 Vyborg Shipping Company and so on. 6 witness statement, paragraph 145, is the one that
7 But for me, from my point of view, to take 7 referred to a discussion at a general level with
8 a personal loan of, whatever, $4 million or $5 million 8 Mr Savelyev of a personal loan?
9 for two weeks, you know, it looks a bit strange. 9 A. Yes.
10 Q. I’ll ask the question again: was it your recollection 10 Q. Can you explain to his Lordship why that sentence was
11 when you gave this evidence on oath in June 2011 that 11 missed out from this witness statement —
12 you had discussed a personal loan at a general level 12 A. As always —
13 with Mr Savelyev at or around — 13 Q. Sorry, may I finish the question, please?
14 A. I discussed — I discussed this option among hundreds of 14 A. Yes.
15 any other options, because the loans of the group have 15 Q. Can you explain to his Lordship why that sentence was
16 been quite numerous and quite differently organised, so 16 left out from paragraph 145 of your witness statement,
17 we had to find a solution and I didn’t want to create 17 since you accept that your recollection was the same
18 troubles for the Bank with their reserves, and wanted to 18 when you gave the witness statement as it was
19 create restructuring, proper restructuring in due time 19 in June 2011?
20 and not overdue. 20 A. I’m not sure why, you know. I’ve been drafting, writing
21 Q. So the answer is yes, is it, to my question; that that 21 this witness statement — the date of the witness
22 was your recollection? 22 statement is August; yes? August last year?
23 A. Yes, it is. It’s still my recollection, yes. 23 Q. Yes.
24 Q. That you had that general discussion with Mr Savelyev — 24 A. Yes, so I’ve been writing — doing it with Mr Milner,
25 A. Yes. 25 and I haven’t actually, myself, checked the previous

85

1 Q. — in relation to a personal loan?

2 A. Yes, but it was refused immediately because, for me

3 personally, there was not any sense or value to get the

4 $4 million or $5 million for two, three weeks, which was

5 absolutely unacceptable. And it was rejected from the

6 very beginning.

7 Q. And presumably your recollection of matters in 2008

8 would have been better in June 2011 than it would be in

9 2015?

10 A. No, I have the same recollection.

11 Q. The same?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. I wonder if we could keep that page open on the screen,

14 please, and have on the other screen your witness

15 statement number 16 in these proceedings at {C1/1/37}.

16 I would like you, Dr Arkhangelsky, if you don’t mind, to

17 look at paragraph 145 in your 16th witness statement

18 that you gave for this trial, and you compare it with

19 paragraph 60 of your June 2011 BVI affidavit. Could you

20 do that, please?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And you will see, if you compare those two paragraphs,

23 that the text is very similar, save that one sentence

24 has been omitted from the paragraph 60; can you see

25 that?

87

1 statements. I was just trying to put on the paper my

2 latest recollection and information I was considering

3 important on that time.

4 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, I suggest that the reason that you

5 omitted that sentence from your BVI affidavit, from your

6 witness statement last August, is because you

7 appreciated that a reference to a general discussion

8 with Mr Savelyev about a personal loan tended to

9 undermine your denial that you had ever received

10 a personal loan?

11 A. No, it’s not right. I simply can confirm absolutely

12 surely that I simply have not been — while writing

13 a new affidavit, I have not been reading the BVI

14 affidavit. So I’ve just been doing all this from my

15 personal memory and that’s it. So I technically, and

16 practically, was not able to handle so huge volumes of

17 information, and my 16th affidavit was done from the,

18 let’s say, clean page, without any copying and pasting,

19 and so on.

20 Q. So you came up with exactly the same — almost exactly

21 the same words from memory, except for that one

22 sentence?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Could you be shown, please, {D99/1282/1}. That is the

25 English, and {D99/1282/2} is the Russian.

86 88
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And this looks, Dr Arkhangelsky, as if it is

3 an application by you dated 28 November 2008 requesting

4 the transfer of 130 million roubles?

5 A. It looks like, but I never, ever signed such document.

6 Q. Is this a document that you have previously alleged to

7 be a forgery?

8 A. It’s still a forgery, yes.

9 Q. Yes. If his Lordship finds that this is a genuine

10 document, you would agree that in this document, you

11 were applying for a transfer of the personal loan

12 monies, weren’t you?

13 A. It depends for his Lordship’s understanding of that.

14 Q. Yes.

15 A. But I am confirming to the court that I never, ever

16 signed such document.

17 Q. And the application asks for the Bank of St Petersburg

18 to transfer 130 million roubles to an account of Re-Gata

19 LLC, doesn’t it?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And Re-Gata LLC was one of your companies, wasn’t it,

22 Dr Arkhangelsky?

23 A. Yes, and the keys for the accounts was held by

24 Mr Berezin, who was a witness — who is your witness in

25 these proceedings, so I think you better address — you

1 Q. Could you look, please, at the signatures on the Russian

2 version?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Are those your signatures?

5 A. No. As far as I understood, Mr Platonov has not given

6 any evidence that he signed it with me, so, which is

7 also a bit strange.

8 Q. Could you be shown, please, {A1/2/58}. Mr Arkhangelsky,

9 can you see what you say in this defence at

10 paragraph (d)?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. You are alleging that Ms Mironova and Mr Balandin gave

13 false evidence in the BVI?

14 A. Yes, and which he didn’t reject, by the way.

15 Q. Do you have any basis for saying that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. What is it?

18 A. You mean — can you explain the question?

19 Q. What’s your basis for alleging that these people

20 knowingly gave false evidence? What are you talking

21 about there?

22 A. Because they are employed by the Bank and they wanted to

23 clear up the proceedings in BVI, so they have been lying

24 in the court, and …

25 Q. And that’s your basis for saying that, is it?

89 91
1 better could address this issue to him about these 1 A. You know, I am not that deep personally in amended
2 operations, and his cooperation with the 2 defence and counterclaim, so I’ve been doing it with
3 Bank of St Petersburg. 3 Mr Stroilov and so I cannot come deeper on that. So if
4 Q. And the Re-Gata company account was the one that I think 4 you want, I can discuss it with him and come back with
5 you used in October 2008 for the receipt of a loan from 5 any ideas. So I’m not really sure —
6 Tekno; that’s right, isn’t it? 6 Q. No, that wouldn’t really be appropriate.
7 A. I have not been personally involved in this Tekno loan, 7 A. I’m not really sure about the technical — you know,
8 so again, it is a question for Mr Berezin to be 8 technical value of amended defence and counterclaim. As
9 answered. 9 far as I understand, we just created this document.
10 Q. But you understand that there was a loan made to — 10 I am not sure about the legal basis for such type of
11 A. I have not been in details on that so I cannot comment 11 document.
12 on that. I think it is some internal banking things, 12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think the document records your
13 which they organised together with Mr Berezin. 13 case —
14 Q. Can you be shown, please, the personal loan. It’s 14 A. Yes.
15 {D98/1263/1}; the Russian is at {D98/1263/8}. 15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — that two individuals, Ms Mironova
16 A. Yes. It looks like the Bank created this agreement 16 and Mr Balandin, gave false evidence, the one in
17 11 December 2008, based on their stamp on the Russian 17 the BVI, the other in this claim.
18 version. Again, the translation in English is very much 18 A. Yes.
19 different from the Russian text. 19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And I think you are being asked on
20 Q. And I suggest, Dr Arkhangelsky — 20 what — which of their evidence do you say is false and
21 A. Yes. 21 why do you say it is false?
22 Q. — that you did sign this document — 22 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, I didn’t put it very well.
23 A. No. 23 A. You see, I have to try and remember what it was and why
24 Q. — to take out a personal loan on 28 November 2008. 24 we were writing that. So if it’s an important issue,
25 A. No. 25 I can — you know, I have to re-read these parts of
90 92
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 documents and we can continue our discussion. But I’m

2 absolutely sure that Kristina Mironova is the mistress

3 of Mr Savelyev, which she is not rejecting any more; and

4 Konstantin Balandin, who is surprisingly not giving

5 evidence in these proceedings any more, he is also

6 a very special person, so he had been my classmate at

7 university and he is absolutely negative to myself.

8 So they have personal interests; Kristina Mironova

9 on a family basis, as a part of the fraud by the Bank,

10 and Konstantin Balandin, he is also employed by the Bank

11 and he is personally negatively oriented to me and my

12 case.

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: At most that would — just so you

14 should be aware of what will be required of you, most of

15 the things you say, even if established, might give them

16 a reason, but it doesn’t demonstrate which parts of

17 their evidence you say are untrue.

18 A. You see, if it’s necessary — as far as my

19 understanding, these issues are more, maybe, on

20 submissions, and we can —

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, I don’t think so. I think that

22 you are right that they might be by way of

23 cross-examination, and Ms Mironova, of course, is still

24 to come, but I think you having positively asserted that

25 they have given false evidence, it is necessary for you

1 MR LORD: So, as far as you are concerned at the moment,

2 that is your best evidence as to the basis: that

3 Ms Mironova, you say, is the mistress of Mr Savelyev,

4 and Mr Balandin still works for the Bank. That is

5 basically your basis for alleging they have given false

6 evidence; is that right?

7 A. Yes, and they — I assume they made good money out of my

8 case, and my assets, so they have personal interests in

9 the value of my business, which they somehow obtained.

10 Q. What do you mean by «making good money» out of your

11 case?

12 A. They sold my assets, which, as you know, cost enormous

13 amounts of money, and they are benefiting out of this,

14 and Mr Balandin has been disclosing his salaries and his

15 money he is obtaining even as a Bank employee out of

16 this case, and during this case. So the same relates to

17 Mironova. So they made a huge career in the Bank, and

18 personally were involved in the sale of the assets.

19 Q. I wonder if you could be shown {A1/2/10}, please. Can

20 you see paragraph 39?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky. You say:

23 «A senior employee of the Bank, Mr Balandin, has

24 given evidence to the effect that Disputed Documents 1,

25 2 and 3 were signed by Mr Arkhangelsky in the presence

93 95
1 to identify in each case what the false evidence you say 1 of the Bank’s employees. That evidence is false, and
2 was. 2 leaves no room for a notion that the Bank somehow
3 A. You want me to do it right now, or? 3 innocently believed the Disputed Documents to be
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t want you to guess now, 4 genuine.»
5 because — 5 A. Yes.
6 MR LORD: My Lord, I was going to take him to it after that 6 Q. That’s your basis, is it, for saying that Mr Balandin
7 question. 7 has perjured himself?
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am so sorry. 8 A. That’s also, yes, among others. So, he had been giving
9 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord. It’s my fault. I don’t want your 9 quite a number of evidences in these proceedings and he
10 Lordship to … 10 didn’t show up for cross-examination, so that was really
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No. Very good — 11 surprising for us. So we wanted to have
12 A. No, we definitely have reasons, so … 12 a cross-examination of him.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — I’m sorry, I have waded in 13 Q. This morning, when you asked his Lordship about
14 unnecessarily. 14 Mr Balandin, it sounded as if that was a recent idea,
15 MR LORD: No. I wanted to ask the basis and then I was 15 that he should come, and you said he had been discussing
16 going to put to the witness — 16 it with Mr Stroilov; is that right?
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Very good, okay, well, then it will 17 A. No. It’s not a recent idea. He has been in these
18 be — 18 proceedings from the very beginning. He was the person,
19 A. No, we don’t have a basis for this, so theoretically we 19 as far as I remember, who signed the witness statements
20 can discuss — 20 for the freezing injunction and he had been running all
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think I have waded in when 21 these proceedings for quite a while. He was
22 I shouldn’t and I think Mr Lord is going to ask you 22 disseminating the results of the proceedings for at
23 about various bits of their evidence to see whether you 23 least three years.
24 say it is true or false, I suspect. 24 So I assumed that he was a key person in these
25 A. Okay. 25 proceedings on behalf of the Bank, and not only in
94 96
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 the English proceedings, but also in the French

2 proceedings, and for us it’s really surprising that he

3 is not coming.

4 Q. But he was just running the litigation, wasn’t he,

5 Dr Arkhangelsky?

6 A. I don’t know. He was responsible for relations for —

7 with investors, for shareholders, for public relations

8 and so on. So if you see his biography, he had been

9 doing quite a lot of different things, and also he had

10 been working and collecting all information. I think he

11 is personally responsible for non-disclosure of

12 important documents, and the fact that quite a number of

13 important documents have been deleted and have not been

14 shown to the court.

15 So he is one of the key witnesses, especially on

16 disclosure process also.

17 Q. Can you be shown, please, {A1/2/12}, paragraph 48.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. I think that’s where you set out what you say against

20 Ms Mironova’s evidence.

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Can you see paragraph 48? She gives evidence, can you

23 see, about the personal loan in November 2008?

24 A. Sorry, which line are you referring to?

25 Q. Paragraph 48.

1 important people responsible for the fraud.

2 Q. I don’t accept that’s the case, Dr Arkhangelsky.

3 A. It’s for the court to decide, I think.

4 Q. I’m going to ask you, please —

5 A. I’m sorry, your Lordship, can I have a break, or maybe

6 we can start earlier the second part then?

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Sorry?

8 A. Can we have a break then, and I need to speak to

9 Mr Stroilov then, and if you want, we can start, let’s

10 say, not 2.00, but let’s say 1.45, something like that?

11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is it important for you to talk to

12 Mr Stroilov now, rather than at 1.00?

13 A. No, no, no, no, I just wanted to have anyway a break.

14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, a five-minute break?

15 A. Okay, thanks.

16 (12.39 pm)

17 (A short break)

18 (12.46 pm)

19 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, please could you be shown your

20 16th witness statement, {C1/1/60}, please, at

21 paragraph 234(5).

22 A. Yes. This is absolutely correct and true, as all my

23 witness statements.

24 Q. Well, we’ve looked at the e-mail of 1 April 2009.

25 A. Yes.

97

1 A. 48, and which line?

2 Q. The third line.

3 A. So she made an unsworn witness statement. (Pause)

4 Yes.

5 Q. And can his Lordship take it that those are your

6 complaints about evidence, and the basis for it is set

7 out in the particulars?

8 A. Sorry, can you just repeat the question?

9 Q. Well, in paragraph 48, you seem to have set out some

10 allegations about false evidence —

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. — of Ms Mironova, then you have given particulars; can

13 you see that?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And do you stand by all these allegations today,

16 Dr Arkhangelsky?

17 A. Yes. Nothing changed.

18 Q. Well, I put to you that there is no basis for your

19 saying this about Ms Mironova.

20 A. I don’t agree with you.

21 Q. And no basis for your saying this about Mr Balandin.

22 A. No, I think they are one of the two key persons in

23 the Bank responsible for the fraud.

24 Q. Sorry?

25 A. They are two persons in the Bank who are one of the most

99

1 Q. The one that you exhibited in the BVI.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And the fact that certain attachments appear not to have

4 appeared in the BVI.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And I suggest, Dr Arkhangelsky, that you did get notice

7 of these demands —

8 A. No.

9 Q. — contrary to what you are saying in your witness

10 statement?

11 A. No, it’s not true.

12 Q. In paragraph 234(5) you make the point that the notice

13 of demand, which the Bank claims to have sent out,

14 seemed to have the wrong address on?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And you say that the address was ulitsa — street — as

17 opposed to prospekt, which is avenue.

18 A. Yes, my correct address is avenue, which is prospekt in

19 Russian language.

20 Q. Yes, and you mean that that was your correct address?

21 A. It was my official registered address on which all the

22 official correspondence have to be accepted, or

23 delivered, based on the Russian legislation.

24 Q. Could you be shown, please {D1/5/1}; do you have that,

25 Dr Arkhangelsky?

98 100
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 A. I want to see probably —

2 Q. Yes, and the Russian, please, as well. The Russian is

3 at {D1/5/3}.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. This is a points of defence filed on your behalf by,

6 I think, Mr Vasiliev; is that right?

7 A. Maybe.

8 Q. If you go to the second page, I think you can see that;

9 can you see the foot of the page? {D1/5/2}

10 A. Yes. I think he filed that, yes, absolutely.

11 Q. And he was your attorney, wasn’t he?

12 A. Yes, he had a power of attorney to represent me, yes.

13 Q. And this was a defence, wasn’t it, in one of the Russian

14 proceedings?

15 A. Yes, he made it himself without any real knowledge on my

16 side. I think he had a power of attorney, so that’s why

17 he’s been representing myself. I have not been reading

18 this document.

19 Q. And this was a challenge that you were making to a claim

20 by the Bank under the fourth Vyborg loan, wasn’t it?

21 A. Most probably, yes.

22 Q. You can see that from the loan agreement?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. You can see the reference to Vyborg Shipping —

25 A. Yes.

1 complaining in your witness statement —

2 A. Yes, absolutely. I think the only explanation I have,

3 either Mr Vasiliev made a mistake or, most probably,

4 he just simply copied it from the application done by

5 the Bank. I think Mr Vasiliev he was not really

6 considering anything, because this was a reply to

7 the application done absolutely the same way by the

8 Bank. So can you please show us the application of

9 the Bank?

10 Q. I’m going to show you first the fourth Vyborg — the

11 actual documents of the contracts, if I may, before I go

12 to that. Yes, it’s {D55/949/1}, please.

13 A. Just, I want to comment for your Lordship, that in

14 Russia the address, the official address, the only place

15 where you can find official address is the passport, the

16 Russian passport. So in the Russian internal passport,

17 in which you have a stamp by the police office, where it

18 is stated that this person is registered at that

19 particular address.

20 So all other documents or information or any

21 notaries or whatever should pick up this information

22 from the Russian passport, Russian internal passport,

23 and in my Russian internal passport is prospekt, which

24 is avenue, Dobrolyubova, and Ulitsa Dobrolyubova, which

25 is Street Dobrolyubova is also existing in St

101 103

1 Q. — and that’s what the first respondent, and you can see

2 the date of the loan —

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. — and you can see the number?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. So his Lordship can take it, can’t he, that this was

7 a defence that was filed on your behalf in Russia to

8 the claim by the Bank in relation to the default under

9 the fourth Vyborg Shipping loan?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And the address, can you see that there are a number of

12 respondents: Vyborg Shipping Company, that was the

13 borrower; number 2, Scandinavia Insurance Company, which

14 I know you dispute it, but the Bank says was

15 a guarantor, and; number 3, you.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Can you see that? And number 4 —

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. — Western Terminal. If you go, please, in the Russian

20 at {D1/5/3} and look under number 3, which is your

21 entry, the third respondent.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Doesn’t that give the ulitsa address?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. But that’s the one that you complain about. You are

1 Petersburg, and I assume, considering the fact that

2 the Bank always had copies of my passport, and that’s

3 the key issue for any bank operations, to have

4 a passport, so I assumed that they done that on purpose.

5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: This is an identity card, an internal

6 identity card?

7 A. Yes, but it consists of, let’s say, 15 pages: you have

8 a stamp for kids, so you have a stamp for family, if you

9 are married or not; you have a stamp if you are liable

10 for military service; and you have several pages for any

11 previous passports or foreign passports you ever had.

12 So …

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.

14 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, if you could please be shown

15 {D55/949/3}, and the English translation is also up on

16 the screen at {D55/949/1}.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. This is a copy — well, it’s a copy of what the Bank

19 says is the personal guarantee entered into by you

20 in July 2008 in relation to the fourth Vyborg Shipping

21 loan.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And I know that you dispute that.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. But if you could go, please, in the Russian — well,

102 104
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 we’ll go in the English first. Can you see that you are

2 named in the second paragraph on the first page?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Do you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And can you see that an address was given there?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And that’s the same address, isn’t it, that Mr Vasiliev

9 used in the defence that we have just seen?

10 A. Yes. And I assume that’s the address the Bank initially

11 used in their claim, so Mr Vasiliev decided not to check

12 the proper address and just to use the address which the

13 Bank made in their claim.

14 Q. Mr Vasiliev was your lawyer, wasn’t he?

15 A. He was, yes, amongst several others.

16 Q. And are you saying that he wouldn’t have known your

17 correct address?

18 A. He would be knowing, but I think he would not be simply

19 checking, because by that time I was not paying him

20 personally. I think in that proceedings he had been

21 representing at least three or four different companies

22 and he was not, I think, careful enough.

23 Q. And it’s right, isn’t it, that in paragraph 6 of this

24 guarantee — and I know you deny it, you say it is

25 a fabrication, but with that caveat, if you could look,

1 have to put the proper dates, proper addresses and so

2 on, otherwise it would create troubles, at least, for

3 example, with tax authorities.

4 I think this is done here on purpose and for the

5 same purpose as we have already discussed.

6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is the street far from the avenue?

7 A. I don’t know. I don’t know really, I’ve never been

8 there, and …

9 But, you know, my understanding, if they say that

10 they started to send me letters by mistake, as they say,

11 and they started to do it in — beginning of March or

12 something like that. So normally correspondence in

13 St Petersburg goes three to five days, so a registered

14 letter had to return to them, let’s say, in two weeks

15 and one month. But they started to send me mails on —

16 registered mail to my registered address only after

17 I left the country, which is for me quite unusual.

18 The most important and most interesting, what is

19 written here, that they can give me any notices

20 personally. I’ve been in the Bank every, if not second,

21 but third day for three months, March, April, May, until

22 the date I left the country. I’ve seen all these people

23 and they never, ever even tried to get — to give me any

24 documents or to ask me to sign any confirmation that

25 I got documents, which is very strange for me, why they

105 107

1 please, in clause 6.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Can you see 6.4?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Which reads:

6 «Any notices served by the parties to each other

7 shall be deemed properly served if made in writing, sent

8 by registered mail to the addresses of the parties

9 indicated in the contract.»

10 Can you see that?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And then if you look below can you see that the

13 addresses are there given out for the Bank and for the

14 guarantor?

15 A. Yes, but I cannot understand any explanation which could

16 be given by the Bank about my address, because the Bank

17 is the key person who has to control my registration and

18 official address. I cannot understand how can they have

19 not checked these documents, if you tell that it’s

20 a mistake.

21 So it’s — as far as I understand, in all the Bank

22 databases it has to be a centralised input for the

23 personal data and, by the way, your Lordship, they have

24 to inform tax authorities and control organisations

25 about my income and so on, and then they inform — they

1 were continuing to send reminders to the wrong address.

2 MR LORD: I wonder, could you be shown the transcript,

3 please, Dr Arkhangelsky, from day 5 of these

4 proceedings. Page 35 {Day5/35:1}.

5 A. So whose — whom —

6 Q. I’ll come to it, Dr Arkhangelsky, in just a minute. You

7 have just given evidence that you came to the Bank very

8 often in the spring of 2008; is that right?

9 A. I’ve been visiting the Bank at least twice a week,

10 different offices of the Bank.

11 Q. On {Day5/35:1} you will find an extract from the

12 cross-examination of Ms Blinova.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. By Mr Stroilov.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And you can see at {Day5/35:5} Ms Blinova was asked, or

17 it was put to her that you went into the Bank regularly

18 between March and July 2008 —

19 A. Yes, I’ve been in the Bank for —

20 Q. Sorry, March 2009, sorry.

21 A. — frequently, yes, in 8 and 7 and 6.

22 Q. Yes, and this was 2009, sorry, wasn’t it?

23 A. Yes, I think so, yes.

24 Q. My mistake: it was the spring of 2009, wasn’t it?

25 A. Yes.

106 108
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 Q. And what Mr Stroilov said to Ms Blinova, or put to her,

2 was that nobody in the Bank ever gave you notice that

3 you were in default and must pay, despite the fact you

4 were coming into the Bank regularly?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And can you see what Ms Blinova said, starting at line

7 10, please, down to line 20 {Day5/35:10-20}?

8 A. Yes. (Pause).

9 Q. She seemed to have a recollection —

10 A. Just let me finish.

11 Q. Sorry. (Pause)

12 A. No, it’s not correct. Definitely Mrs Blinova would not

13 be my contact person for sure. I’ve been speaking to

14 the head of the office, deputy head of the office and so

15 on, and definitely for the Bank, the fact of non payment

16 is quite a crucial fact, and Blinova or anybody else,

17 they could give me documents if they wanted to on any

18 level, because I think in case she is right, it had been

19 a real accident for the Bank and they had to fulfil all

20 obligations in case they wanted to go to the court.

21 Q. You see, Ms Blinova gave evidence that certainly on one

22 occasion she met you in passing and she said to you:

23 take these letters, these notices.

24 A. No, it’s not correct.

25 Q. And that you said, in effect, that you didn’t want them;

1 to use an hour and a half, I would like to use some of

2 that time to try to progress, to finish some of

3 the forgery questions.

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What do you want?

5 MR LORD: I could press on now for a bit. My understanding

6 is that this submission is not yet filed.

7 A. No, no, no, it is important that I — you know, I don’t

8 want to keep Mr Stroilov waiting because he has —

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Have you received his submission?

10 A. I received, so I have to read it and he has to finalise

11 that and then send it to you. So you would get it in

12 40, 45 minutes.

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is there any chance of

14 a written version, of a hard copy?

15 A. He will send it to you and you can print it.

16 MR LORD: Yes, if it is sent to RPC.

17 A. Yes, I think it’s at least ten pages, at least, so you

18 have to read that carefully.

19 MR LORD: They could print it out and furnish your Lordship

20 with a hard copy.

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m going to say 2.15 in the first

22 instance, but that if I need further time to give it

23 justice, I will tell you.

24 A. Okay.

25 (1.04 pm)

109 111

1 you wanted them sent by mail?

2 A. No, it’s not correct. It’s not correct. Normal

3 practice would be, even if I’m so bad person — if

4 we considered that I’m a bad person, normally you can

5 ask a notary to certify that I rejected, or you can

6 certify that to say in the presence of two employees of

7 the Bank that I reject it. But you don’t have these

8 documents.

9 Q. I suggest, Dr Arkhangelsky, that those notices did come

10 to your attention in 2009.

11 A. No, unfortunately not.

12 MR LORD: My Lord, would that be a convenient point to stop?

13 A. I’m sorry, your Lordship, just a small comment. I see

14 that I got an e-mail from Mr Stroilov and he made

15 a rather substantial submission, which I want to read

16 personally, maybe he would a bit correct it.

17 So what I suggest, let’s say in half an hour you

18 would get this e-mail, but I think — or 40 minutes —

19 but you would need 20 or 30 minutes to read and

20 understand that first. So maybe, I suggest to have

21 a break not for one hour but one hour and a half to

22 allow you to read the submissions of Mr Stroilov. It’s

23 quite important and quite substantial.

24 MR LORD: My Lord, I can make some more progress. I can

25 finish off more of this if we break now. I’m reluctant

1 (The Luncheon Adjournment)
2 (2.15 pm)
3 (Hearing in private)
4 [REDACTED]
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

110 112
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 [REDACTED] 1 [REDACTED]
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
113 115
1 [REDACTED] 1 [REDACTED]
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
114 116
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 [REDACTED] 1 [REDACTED]
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
117 119
1 [REDACTED] 1 [REDACTED]
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
118 120
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 [REDACTED]

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 (Hearing in open court)

12 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, I was asking you about {D1/5/1}

13 before the short adjournment, and this was the defence

14 that was filed by Mr Vasiliev on your behalf in Russia

15 in response to the fourth Vyborg loan claim, wasn’t it?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And the defence that was advanced in this document was

18 that the original guarantee was void because of a change

19 in the principal obligation?

20 A. So you want me to read this defence, or …?

21 Q. What I would like you to do is to confirm to his

22 Lordship that in this defence that was filed on your

23 behalf with lawyers in Russian proceedings in relation

24 to the fourth Vyborg loan, you did not allege that you

25 did not sign the original guarantee, or that the

1 unlawful.»

2 So it looks as if Mr Vasiliev is filing this,

3 certainly, at least, on behalf of you, isn’t he?

4 A. He might be filing, but without any consultations with

5 me and any information provided to me.

6 Q. And Mr Vasiliev has given evidence for you on your

7 behalf in these proceedings, hasn’t he?

8 A. Maybe, yes.

9 Q. Can you explain to his Lordship whether, in this Russian

10 defence, we see any allegation by you that the guarantee

11 itself, the original guarantee, was forged or

12 fabricated?

13 A. Me personally, I never been aware of what was going on

14 in the Russian proceedings, as long as I’ve been

15 isolated, and your friend, Lt-Colonel Levitskaya, she

16 was pressing all Russian staff who’d been previously

17 working on me, so I couldn’t really control them, and

18 they were afraid of speaking to me.

19 Q. Can I go to {D2/30/1}, please, which is a defence filed

20 by the same Mr Vasiliev in Russia, and it is filed as

21 your attorney. If you go to {D2/30/2}, there is

22 a request:

23 «That the claim be dismissed.

24 «VD Arkhangelsky’s attorney.»

25 A. I’m sorry, as far as I understood, what you show here,

121

1 original guarantee that you had given was a forgery or

2 fabrication. I just want you to confirm that that is

3 the case.

4 A. No, it’s not the case. First of all, as far as

5 I understood — and just correct me if I am wrong —

6 that by this particular defence, Mr Vasiliev was

7 representing Vyborg Shipping Company only. Isn’t that

8 right?

9 Q. No. Look at the second paragraph: {D/1/5/1}

10 «Respondent 3 disagrees with the said claim for

11 recovery from him jointly with … for the following

12 reasons.»

13 A. Just one moment, I will read that. Which paragraph?

14 Q. It’s the second paragraph on {D1/5/1}.

15 A. I’m not sure, by the way, if one person is able to

16 represent four different companies in the same

17 proceedings, so first of all; and second of all, I think

18 that I never been aware of the reasoning and I’ve never

19 seen this document before it came to the proceedings

20 here in UK.

21 Q. If you look at {D1/5/2}, the end of the second page, can

22 you see the words:

23 «Hereby requests:

24 «That the Claimant’s claim insofar as the recovery

25 from VD Arkhangelsky jointly … to be declared

123

1 that if you say that he was my representative and

2 representing me on my behalf, so he is operating against

3 me in what’s written here, so it’s very interesting.

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t have the document; do you?

5 MR LORD: {D2/30/1}. I apologise. And it is —

6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It hasn’t come up on my screen.

7 MR LORD: Sorry.

8 A. So what I see from the text here, that — can you return

9 back me the previous page {D1/5/4} — that my

10 representative, as Mr Lord says, he asks — tells that

11 I accept everything, so it’s absolutely against my

12 rights and my position, so, which is — that’s

13 absolutely done under the strong pressure and

14 orchestrated by the Bank, I think.

15 I would — whatever the situation could be, I would

16 never ask court to say that I have to accept any claims

17 from the Bank, which is really strange for me.

18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not sure I follow that.

19 MR LORD: But, Dr Arkhangelsky, this defence is filed in

20 Russia before the Russian court gave judgment, some time

21 in 2010. It must have been before the Russian court

22 gave judgment, and therefore it must be before, I think,

23 early 2010.

24 The reason I put that to you was that Mr Vasiliev

25 was giving evidence on your behalf in these

122 124
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 proceedings —

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. — I think as late as 2012?

4 A. Yes, simply at that time I was not aware of what kind of

5 documents he had been filing. So it is quite strange

6 for me that the person who seems to be representing me

7 is filing things which is absolutely against from my

8 position and what I’ve always been telling.

9 Q. So you accept that this document undermines your denial

10 that you signed the guarantee because that point is not

11 referred to in it, is it?

12 A. Sorry —

13 Q. You are suggesting that Mr Vasiliev didn’t file the

14 right pleas on your behalf, aren’t you?

15 A. Absolutely, yes, and —

16 Q. Can you explain? He was your lawyer; can you explain

17 why in 2009 he didn’t file the —

18 A. He simply — he had my power of attorney, for sure.

19 I am not sure if he was really representing — whom he

20 is representing here, because you don’t have — so it’s

21 not written whom he is representing, by the way, so

22 I think it’s either not final document, or something

23 like that. So —

24 Q. Can you be shown {H1/11/1}, please.

25 A. Your Lordship, what is written here is that Mr Vasiliev

1 authorised to do what he had done in Russia on your

2 behalf?

3 A. First of all, there are numerous proceedings in Russia

4 and each and every proceedings had to have separate

5 authority: first of all, power of attorney, and second

6 of all, the lawyer who is representing me had to get

7 instructions from me on each and every occasion.

8 From the first document shown to me on the left-hand

9 side, it’s not written whom Mr Vasiliev is representing.

10 As far as I understood, what I remember from Bulgarian

11 and French proceedings, in that particular proceedings,

12 he was representing Vyborg Shipping Company who, by that

13 time, was under the control of Bank of St Petersburg.

14 So I cannot — at least I cannot see that here that

15 he is representing me properly and based on any

16 documents, nor any power of attorney, which have to be

17 here. It’s not shown. So I assume at least it’s not

18 an original document or it’s a draft or something like

19 that.

20 In the final document, the number of the power of

21 attorney, the date of the power of attorney, and who is

22 giving power of attorney should be mentioned.

23 Q. Can you look at {D2/30/1}, please, which is a defence

24 filed by Mr Vasiliev in relation to the 2008 LPK Scan

25 loan, and he signs off as your attorney —

125 127
1 is operating on some power of attorney which is not 1 A. I just also, once again, want to mention to
2 actually mentioned, so — and in power of — so you 2 your Lordship that any Russian proceedings was not with
3 cannot represent four different parties on the same 3 any my personal participation. Indeed, some of
4 power of attorney. So I think it’s something wrong and 4 the lawyers there could have some powers of attorney,
5 it’s not what Mr Lord is telling. 5 but I assume, and I think it’s been widely discussed in
6 I don’t think that Mr Vasiliev is representing me in 6 different proceedings, that the lawyer has been under
7 these proceedings, so it’s absolutely not correct. 7 huge pressure by Colonel Levitskaya, and they were
8 Q. On the screen now at {H1/11/1} is a statement from 8 behaving not based on the rules of the Bar Associations,
9 Mr Vasiliev; can you see that? 9 or lawyers associations. They have been following some
10 A. Yes. 10 strange games authorised by the Bank of St Petersburg
11 Q. And it was made in, I think, St Petersburg, on 11 and police in St Petersburg.
12 25 October 2012, and it was filed on your behalf in 12 Q. It is right, isn’t it though, that when this defence was
13 these proceedings, wasn’t it? 13 filed, apparently on your behalf, in Russia, you didn’t
14 A. Yes. 14 allege in this document that you had not signed the
15 Q. Can you see what he says in the first paragraph? 15 original personal guarantee?
16 A. Yes. 16 A. I have not been reading these documents before filing.
17 Q. «I am a lawyer of Leningrad Regional Bar Association. 17 I have not done any instructions to anybody who was
18 I represented and I still represent the interests of 18 representing that, so I came to know all these documents
19 the First defendant in several litigations in Russia.» 19 only after the proceedings in France started.
20 I will read it again: 20 Q. And could you be shown, please, {D2/29/1}, which is
21 «… I still represent the interests of the First 21 another defence filed by Mr Vasiliev on your behalf in
22 defendant in several litigations in Russia.» 22 Russia.
23 A. Yes. 23 A. I hope that your Lordship understands that it’s
24 Q. So, Dr Arkhangelsky, why did you tell his Lordship, 24 impossible to work with the lawyer in Russia if he
25 about three minutes ago, that Mr Vasiliev was not 25 doesn’t reply on telephone and he’s simply afraid of
126 128
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 speaking to me by telephone. So that was the fact,

2 especially in 2009/2010. People were under enormous

3 pressure by the Bank’s policemen.

4 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, that’s not true, is it?

5 A. Oh, it is totally true.

6 Q. It’s right, isn’t it, that there is no reference in this

7 defence to the claim — there’s a claim on the personal

8 guarantee for the first Onega loan, and, again, there

9 was not a defence that you didn’t sign the original

10 personal guarantee, was there?

11 A. I’m not aware of any substance of this defence and

12 I have not been instructing any lawyer and nor any

13 lawyer been discussing that with me.

14 Q. It’s right, isn’t it, Dr Arkhangelsky, that you have

15 alleged in Russian proceedings in 2011 that you didn’t

16 sign the guarantees for the first, second and third

17 Vyborg loans; that’s right, isn’t it?

18 A. You see, me personally, never, ever been participating

19 in any Russian proceedings. I started the proceedings

20 against the Bank in 2011 in BVI and Cyprus, and that was

21 for me the only jurisdiction which could support my

22 opinion, considering that there are no any justice in

23 Russia.

24 Q. But you gave signatures to a handwriting expert, didn’t

25 you, in Russian —

1 A. It’s not my complaint; it’s complaint done by some

2 lawyers in Russia, without any advice received from me

3 and without any discussions with me.

4 Q. But with your authorisation and authority?

5 A. They have had powers of attorney, which I was not aware

6 how they were using these.

7 Q. So your evidence is that you signed away the right to

8 conduct Russian proceedings to a lawyer, and you played

9 no active part in that; is that right?

10 A. Yes, that’s right, but I came to know from these

11 proceedings, from your documentation, that your in-house

12 policeman, Levitskaya, she had been intimidating the

13 people involved and they were playing their own games,

14 which were not — so they were violating powers of

15 attorney and their professional obligations.

16 So as far as I understood, it’s quite normal in

17 the European world, or as in Russia, that the lawyer are

18 not — the advocate representing anybody cannot really

19 work against the rights of the client. And here, it’s

20 just the case like this.

21 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, can you please be shown your

22 16th witness statement at {C1/1/59}, please. I think

23 I put the points to you, Dr Arkhangelsky, but just in

24 case I haven’t —

25 A. Which points you are referring to?

129 131

1 A. Of course, yes, I was trying to following advice I was

2 getting from Russian lawyers. They asked me if I can

3 give a signature, so I was able to produce that at that

4 time.

5 Q. So you were taking part in proceedings in Russia, then?

6 A. I was trying to be, but I was not able to do so, due to

7 the limitation imposed by Colonel Levitskaya on my

8 ex-employees.

9 Q. Right. I see.

10 A. And Colonel Levitskaya, just to remind you, she had been

11 reporting directly to Madame Malysheva, and the Bank

12 orchestrated all the criminal things against me, my

13 staff; and my staff have been under strong pressure, and

14 as far as I understood, it’s even bigger pressure right

15 now.

16 Q. Can we look, please, at {D2/32/1}, Dr Arkhangelsky,

17 which is a defence — I think it is a counterclaim

18 filed, seemingly on your behalf, in response to a claim

19 by the Bank under the personal loan in Russian

20 proceedings. Your objection to the —

21 A. I have not had any my objections, so I assume that you

22 are referring to the files done by Mr Vasiliev or

23 whomever who signed it — it’s not written here who

24 signed it — without any advice from my side.

25 Q. In your counterclaim, your complaint is —

1 Q. I’m going to put to you that you did sign the six

2 personal guarantees that the Bank sues on in these

3 proceedings.

4 A. No, that’s absolutely not true.

5 Q. And that you know you did.

6 A. No, I never.

7 Q. And that you also signed the personal loan

8 in November 2008.

9 A. No, I never.

10 Q. And you know you did.

11 A. No, I don’t.

12 Q. And your point about not being in Russia for the fourth

13 Vyborg Shipping loan, that may or may not be right, but

14 you still signed the relevant guarantees.

15 A. Absolutely not.

16 Q. It is right, isn’t it, Dr Arkhangelsky, that your claim

17 that the Bank of St Petersburg has forged or fabricated

18 all these documents, that is a central part of your

19 conspiracy claim?

20 A. No, I don’t think so. The major target of the Bank was

21 to take care of my assets, acquire my assets, and as you

22 have seen, witnesses last week, that the only desire

23 they had — they wanted to secure that they keep assets

24 and they weren’t aware that either in BVI or Cyprus or

25 English proceedings, I can prove that my position is

130 132
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 correct, and then these assets, or money of that, could

2 be taken from the Bank and their fraudly employees.

3 Q. Your evidence is that all these documents have been

4 forged or fabricated by the Bank, isn’t it?

5 A. I assume so, yes.

6 Q. And all as part of the conspiracy?

7 A. Yes, of course.

8 Q. And despite the fact that the Bank would have to go to

9 great lengths to forge or fabricate all the —

10 A. Sorry, to?

11 Q. That would involve an awful lot of forging and

12 fabrication, wouldn’t it?

13 A. Yes, that’s what they done and they don’t care about

14 that, considering that they have police and all

15 enforcement officers under their umbrella.

16 Q. Could you please be shown {G1/18/12}, please. It’s your

17 second witness statement in these proceedings.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. You have confirmed that all your statements are true.

20 Can you look at paragraph 47, please.

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. In the third line you have said:

23 «I have always maintained that the documents were

24 forged by the Bank in furtherance of

25 the fraud/conspiracy to defraud —»

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. The last sentence:

3 «The allegations of indebtedness were fabricated in

4 aid of that conspiracy.»

5 Can you see?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And you said that that conspiracy is the:

8 «… unlawful takeover of two valuable Russian

9 companies … owned and controlled by the Defendants.»

10 A. In fact, it is much more than two companies, so …

11 Q. But that’s your —

12 A. It’s my private property and so on. So it’s quite —

13 you don’t need to reduce the volume of crime done by

14 your clients.

15 Q. But that’s your case; that these allegations of

16 indebtedness that we have gone through over the last day

17 or so —

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. — the Bank has fabricated all this indebtedness —

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. — in order to pursue a conspiracy claim against you?

22 A. Yes, you are absolutely correct. That’s your words.

23 Q. I suggest, Dr Arkhangelsky, that that’s not —

24 A. No, I agree with you.

25 Q. I suggest, Dr Arkhangelsky, that that’s not true.

133 135

1 A. Sorry, 47?

2 Q. Yes, the bottom of the page. You say this:

3 «I have always maintained that the documents were

4 forged by the Bank in furtherance of

5 the fraud/conspiracy to defraud which forms the subject

6 matter of the other part of this claim.»

7 Do you see that?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. So it is right, isn’t it, that your forgery case is

10 actually central to your conspiracy case?

11 A. No, I cannot say that. It’s a really complex case,

12 I agree, and it includes a lot of different issues,

13 starting, as you correctly noted, from extradition and

14 from acquiring of my properties; that’s true, yes.

15 And the forgery has been quite an important issue of

16 fabricating documents. They fabricated it for different

17 purposes, for different proceedings, and as you know,

18 the documents fabricated for proceedings in France are

19 under the criminal investigation of the French court,

20 and it is a big issue now that now the French court in

21 Nice are considering the option that

22 Bank of St Petersburg as a legal entity is responsible

23 for the crime in France. That’s the key issue now.

24 Q. Could you be shown {G1/20/2}, please. It’s your second

25 affidavit in these proceedings, paragraph 5.2.

1 A. I think it’s true.

2 Q. And you have no based to make those allegations.

3 A. And the fact that seven years of my active struggle

4 against your clients in different jurisdictions, and the

5 fact that most of the courts accepted my position, only

6 support me in understanding what I am doing.

7 Q. I wonder if I could ask you, please, about your second

8 witness statement — sorry, your 19th. It is {C1/9/4},

9 paragraphs 18 to 20. I think I have put this to you

10 already, Dr Arkhangelsky, but you have denied that you

11 signed documents in the presence of Ms Patrakova,

12 haven’t you?

13 A. Absolutely, and her appearance was really a beautiful

14 show done by you. It’s really impressing.

15 Q. And I suggest to you that you did sign the documents in

16 front of Ms Patrakova that she attested to.

17 A. No, it’s not true.

18 Q. And I would like to —

19 A. But as far as I understood, she correctly said to

20 the court that she doesn’t know where it was, she never

21 seen that and she couldn’t even recognise how it was

22 done. So I think you are trying to mislead the court by

23 these comments. (Pause)

24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Lord only puts questions to you,

25 and you have the chance to respond.

134 136
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 MR LORD: Can I just show you, please, Dr Arkhangelsky,

2 Ms Blinova’s evidence at {B2/9/5}.

3 Sorry for that delay, Dr Arkhangelsky, I’m just not

4 in my place.

5 A. Take your time. Enjoy.

6 Q. {B2/9/5}, paragraph 29.

7 A. So it’s the latest her statement, or before she changed

8 her mind?

9 Q. At paragraph 29 —

10 A. It’s her last statement, or …?

11 Q. It’s a statement that she confirmed to be true earlier

12 in this trial, and she gives evidence about how you and

13 your wife signed documents for the Bank, that usually

14 you sign them in the presence of a bank employee, but

15 because you were viewed as quite an important client,

16 there were occasions when you were allowed, and your

17 wife was allowed, to sign documents away from the Bank

18 and return them to the Bank’s offices, because the Bank,

19 effectively, took on trust that you and your wife would

20 faithfully and honestly sign those documents.

21 She’s right about that, isn’t she, Dr Arkhangelsky?

22 A. Absolutely not.

23 Q. And what’s wrong in that statement, Dr Arkhangelsky?

24 A. Whatever documents I’ve been signed, mostly I’ve been

25 signing in the offices of the Bank.

1 agreements, and normally all mortgage agreements have

2 been signed not even in the Bank office, but in notary

3 office. So not any important documents have been signed

4 by post.

5 But some documents, like, for example, these

6 three-party agreements, they could be signed and then

7 the Bank sent to us these documents by post. That’s

8 like this.

9 And I should confirm that the Bank, in respect to

10 the loan agreements, they’ve been quite strict and —

11 actually, I am just wondering why not you invited

12 Mr Platonov, who had been signing quite a number of

13 documents, to give a witness statement, because he was

14 one of the key persons, specially at the end of 2008,

15 beginning of 2009, so I think his witness statement

16 could be of great use to confirm that I never signed any

17 personal loans.

18 Q. Could you please be shown {Day11/163:12},

19 Dr Arkhangelsky, where I asked you:

20 «Question: Did you have give a personal guarantee

21 to V-Bank?»

22 You answered, line 13:

23 «Answer: No.»

24 And I queried that; I said.

25 «Question: Never?»

137 139

1 Q. «Mostly». So can you tell his Lordship which documents

2 you didn’t sign in —

3 A. I’ve never, ever seen any of the spousal consents of my

4 wife, which never been given to me for sure.

5 Q. Just checking that last answer, sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky.

6 (Pause)

7 No, I didn’t ask about the spousal contents; I was

8 picking up on what seemed to be your evidence that

9 implied that, at least on some occasions, you would have

10 signed documents other than at the bank’s offices?

11 A. What I should say? The Bank being rather strict in

12 the key documents, like loan agreements, because

13 normally, first you have to sign — not normally,

14 always — you have to sign a loan agreement and only

15 then, after that, the loan is paid to the company

16 account. So always any loan documents been signed in

17 the Bank offices. That’s for sure.

18 And some technical documentation, like, for example,

19 you see in the files quite a number of documents like

20 visiting of mortgage places and checking of

21 the mortgages, and I assume these three-party

22 agreements, they could be sent to us by post and signed

23 in the general way. But never, ever any important,

24 let’s say, money-related documents, like loan

25 agreements, which are the key documents, or any mortgage

1 And you said:

2 «Answer: «No.»

3 Do you want to reconsider that answer?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Can I ask you to look at Mr Ameli’s witness statement,

6 given on your behalf in these proceedings. Could you be

7 shown, please, {C1/4/2}.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You can see in paragraph 5.1 that Mr Ameli has been

10 asked to give evidence on the following matters. At

11 5.1:

12 «[His] meeting with Mr … Novikov, the General

13 Director of Vozrozhdenie Bank in St Petersburg, which

14 took place on 31 March or 1 April 2011 in his offices in

15 St Petersburg.»

16 Can you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Now, Mr Ameli has produced what he says is a note of

19 that meeting, and if we could have that up, please, it’s

20 at {D145/2424.1/1}.

21 And you can see, Dr Arkhangelsky, from the

22 heading —

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. — this looks to be a note of that meeting with V-Bank

25 and Mr Novikov?

138 140
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And it is describing the alleged process of negotiation

3 between OMG and you on the one part, and V-Bank on the

4 other, in 2009 — late 2008 into 2009.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Have you read this note before, Dr Arkhangelsky?

7 A. No.

8 Q. If you look about six paragraphs down, the note says

9 this:

10 «At that time, the bank [that’s V-Bank] began to

11 negotiate with Mr Arkhangelsky. He was given six months

12 to give us guarantees (additional mortgages) for the

13 developments that were not completed. He provided the

14 guarantees.»

15 It looks from that, doesn’t it, as if you had to

16 provide some guarantees to V-Bank?

17 A. I don’t know. They are not referring at least for

18 personal guarantees. I don’t know what they are

19 referring to.

20 Q. Sorry, I think that’s my fault. I think that’s

21 referring to a mortgage. It is the next paragraph but

22 one. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky. It says:

23 «The additional guarantees did not offer sufficient

24 coverage in any case. The bank requested a personal

25 guarantee from Mr Arkhangelsky and it obtained it. It

1 to the Bank, would it?

2 A. No, I had discussions with many banks and I was

3 comparing conditions in different banks. By the way,

4 the time I came to the Bank of St Petersburg I had good

5 relations with a bank called Promsvyazbank, and actually

6 the first loan I got from the Bank of St Petersburg was

7 refinancing — as far as I understood, refinancing of

8 most of the part of the loan to Promsvyazbank, and it

9 was something like two or three months after I got that

10 loan. So I — my companies had rather good financial

11 position at that time and I had a chance to choose

12 between the banks and their conditions, and the

13 Bank of St Petersburg was understanding my business and

14 potentials of the business and they were prepared to

15 offer me good conditions, conditions I really wanted.

16 Q. Can you be shown {M1/20/23}. This is your first BVI

17 affidavit.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And in paragraph 61, you exhibit addenda to two loans

20 provided by the Bank to Onega; can you see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Those addenda, or, rather, the signatures on those

23 addenda, came to be known as B1 to B6 in the handwriting

24 comparator process, didn’t they, Dr Arkhangelsky?

25 A. Sorry, a bit slowly, yes. Can you repeat, please?

141 143

1 is not normal practice but at that time, yes. We agreed

2 not to use it as we were certain that he would do

3 everything to achieve it.»

4 A. I don’t remember that.

5 Q. But if this note is accurate, then it looks as if you

6 did give a personal guarantee to V-Bank, back in 2009?

7 A. I don’t know, I don’t know, maybe it could be

8 some misunderstanding or whatever.

9 Q. Can I ask you, please, to be shown the transcript of

10 yesterday at page 149, please. {Day11/149:24-25}, you

11 said this:

12 «Answer: … I don’t need to sign guarantees as

13 long as I am a big client, first of all…»

14 Do you see that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. When you first came to Bank of St Petersburg, you

17 wouldn’t have been a big client, would you?

18 A. It depends. We had a big business by that time already,

19 so yes, we started maybe from comparatively small loan,

20 but it was agreed that we would have a bigger

21 calculation of the Bank of St Petersburg, so it depends

22 how you evaluate that. And the Bank of St Petersburg at

23 that time was seriously small.

24 Q. So that wouldn’t be an explanation for why the Bank

25 wouldn’t need a personal guarantee when you first came

1 Q. The addenda that you exhibit there?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. The signatures on those six addenda, they went on to

4 become B1, B2, B3, B4, B5 and B6 in the expert

5 handwriting investigation in these proceedings, didn’t

6 they?

7 A. Most probably, yes, I believe you.

8 Q. And —

9 A. What does it mean, B-whatever?

10 Q. It’s just a number given to the particular comparator in

11 the table.

12 A. Okay.

13 Q. And originally you had an expert, Mr Browne, didn’t you?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And he thought that these were agreed comparators,

16 didn’t he?

17 A. Most probably, I don’t remember that.

18 Q. Then there came a point at which you disputed that those

19 were to be agreed comparators; is that right?

20 A. Yes. I am just following you, I don’t remember that.

21 Q. Why did you do that?

22 A. What?

23 Q. Why did you dispute that these six documents could be

24 taken as handwriting comparators?

25 A. I don’t remember. It was my opinion by that time.

142 144
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 Q. Your opinion what?

2 A. If it should be or not. So I decided that for some

3 reasons, it should not be taken as comparators.

4 Q. And what reasons were those?

5 A. I don’t remember.

6 MR LORD: My Lord, I’m going to move on to a different topic

7 now, but would it be an opportunity for a short break?

8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

9 MR LORD: I can go on.

10 A. No, I would like to have a short break.

11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Five or ten minutes, that sort of

12 time.

13 (3.08 pm)

14 (A short break)

15 (3.17 pm)

16 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, I’m going to ask you some

17 questions now about OMG’s financial position.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And I am going to start with the audited accounts for

20 the year ending 31 December 2007.

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Those are at {D33/523/1}.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And we have some core bundle drawn up for some of

25 the key documents I am going to refer to and I would

1 Q. So we can take these to be the combined accounts for the

2 OMG group, can’t we?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. If we go to {D53/523/3}, you can see the auditor’s

5 report, and if you go to the note at 6.1 at {D33/523/9},

6 you can see under the heading, «General Information»,

7 various companies and groups of companies are described

8 as being within these statements, aren’t they?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. So you have at the top what we can call OMGP; that’s

11 OMG Ports and its six subsidiaries, and those include

12 Western Terminal, don’t they, Dr Arkhangelsky?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And Vyborg Port?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And the next one is the consolidated financial

17 statements of Oslo Marine Group, that’s OMG or GOM,

18 isn’t it?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And its three subsidiaries, and that’s

21 Scandinavia Insurance.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. LK Scandinavia.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And Vyborg Shipping.

145 147

1 like you to have a copy, please, and I would like his

2 Lordship to have a copy. (Handed)

3 A. Thank you.

4 Q. If you go behind divider 3, Dr Arkhangelsky.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. {D33/523/3}.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Can you see «Auditor’s Report»?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Actually, {D33/523/1}, which I am afraid isn’t in the

11 hard copy but is on Magnum, you can see the companies

12 that are comprised within this combined financial

13 statement; can you see that?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Scandinavia Stevedoring Company became known as OMGP,

16 didn’t it?

17 A. Most probably, yes.

18 Q. You are saying that you don’t know that?

19 A. No, if you say that, I believe you, yes.

20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, they are your companies.

21 A. Yes, but, you know, it’s a long time.

22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Can you remember better?

23 A. Yes.

24 MR LORD: It is OMGP, isn’t it?

25 A. Yes.

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And you can see that there are some separate financial

3 statements for Onega; can you see that? And LPK Scan

4 and YurInvest?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. You can see that the ownership is set out in the next

7 few pages.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And if you just flick through, you can see you and

10 Mrs Arkhangelskaya appear to own most of these

11 companies; is that right?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Yes? Is that right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. I would like, please, to go to the combined income

16 statement for the year ending 31 December 2007, and

17 that’s at {D33/523/5}.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Do you have that?

20 A. I just want to point to the attention of your Lordship

21 that here there is a combined statement, but it’s

22 mentioning — then combining, it’s including statements

23 of separate companies and consolidated accounts, so it’s

24 very technical. I’m not exactly sure what was the

25 purpose and the difference, but just — I don’t know

146 148
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 what Mr Lord is planning to ask, but I just want to make

2 an attention that it’s quite a number of different

3 meanings and such. So this is a combined statement of

4 independent companies and consolidated accounts. So

5 it’s very complex.

6 Q. If you look at the performance of the OMG group as shown

7 in these accounts for the year 2007 —

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. — you can see you had income, apparently, of

10 US $116 million, do you see that at the top?

11 A. Which line?

12 Q. The top. Two columns from the right.

13 A. Yes. Yes.

14 Q. And if you look down — and you can see that it gives

15 the figures in roubles and in US dollars.

16 A. Yes, sure, I see that now, yes.

17 Q. And you can see that the income is then broken down by

18 different sources.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And the biggest source of income is said to be income

21 from sale of goods, that’s 85 million; can you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And what were the goods that were being sold that are

24 referred to there?

25 A. I don’t remember.

1 don’t you?

2 A. 13, yes.

3 Q. 13?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Then you can see there is an entry, «Negative goodwill»,

6 US $50.857 million; can you see that?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And there’s a note, 6.19, and we’ll come back to that;

9 there’s an explanatory note which I will return to.

10 And then the next entry is «Change in fair value of

11 investment property», 5.12 million, isn’t it?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Can you see that?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Then if you look on down to the bottom of the page, you

16 can see «Net profit/loss» is a profit of $45,767,000;

17 can you see those figures?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Now, «Negative goodwill», that reference is explained at

20 note 6.19, which is at {D33/523/48}.

21 And it looks, Dr Arkhangelsky, as if your name is at

22 the foot of these accounts, so can his Lordship take it

23 that you would have had to sign off on them?

24 A. Yes, I think so, yes.

25 Q. And you would have therefore familiarised yourself with

149 151

1 Q. Would it include timber?

2 A. Might be, yes.

3 Q. And if you look on down that column, can you see halfway

4 down there is a profit/loss figure?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. 3799?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. So that’s US $3.8 million profit?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. That’s the gross profit, isn’t it — or the gross

11 margin, sorry, when you compare income and expenditure?

12 A. I’m not sure. I’m not a specialist in IFRS accounting.

13 Q. Right. Well, if you look on down, you can see then that

14 various other items are brought into account; can you

15 see that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. You can see financial income, interest receivable, 1725?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Financial expenses, interest payable —

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. — 14,913.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. So if you combine those figures, interest received and

24 interest paid, you have an interest payment for the

25 group for the year 2007 of just over US $13 million,

1 the contents of them?

2 A. No, my — these accounts, as far as I understood, have

3 been done by the company called MCD, which is a local

4 partner of PKF, one of the leading English auditors.

5 I don’t know how you have a full name of that, but it is

6 PK —

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Pannell Kerr Forster.

8 A. Yes, something like that. So that company is considered

9 to be one of the top auditors, at least in

10 St Petersburg, so the general director, Mr Voropaev is

11 considered to be one of the famous and important

12 businessmen in St Petersburg, so I had a — and probably

13 that was one of the biggest companies in St Petersburg.

14 So I had a full confidence in what they are doing,

15 as long as I am personally not a specialist in IFRS

16 accounts and I would not and I don’t want to be

17 a specialist in that, because people study several years

18 of obtaining this knowledge. So I had a full confidence

19 to what they have done because we provided them with

20 full assets of information, full — a number of people

21 from their office have been sitting in our office for

22 several months.

23 So I had a full confidence in what they are doing

24 and how they do it because, actually, in fact, for the

25 purposes of a rating agency, we needed these documents

150 152
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 rather fast, and signed and created by a big name. So

2 I’ve never been actually personally inside all these

3 figures.

4 MR LORD: But you would, presumably, have been able to

5 understand what the accounts were saying, wouldn’t you?

6 A. Not — not really. It’s very much — international

7 standards, they are very much different from the local

8 accounting standards and, as I said, for the purposes of

9 rating agency, it has been a rather complicated way they

10 created these assets — these accounts.

11 As far as I remember, combined accounting exclude

12 internal turnover and the second part, which is

13 consolidated, include internal turnover, so — I mean

14 operations in between the companies of the group. So it

15 is rather complicated and I had a big trust to

16 the auditors.

17 Q. Could I please ask you to be shown {I20/26/31}, and

18 your Lordship will find it behind divider 1 in the core

19 bundle. It’s a letter from RPC, dated 22 January 2016,

20 which was sent to the defendants in order to raise

21 various questions about certain financial matters ahead

22 of the trial. Can you see that letter, Dr Arkhangelsky?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Have you read it?

25 A. Yes.

1 A. I don’t know. I don’t know what does it mean for the

2 purpose of IFRS accounts and for the purpose of — to

3 reply to your question.

4 I am not able to answer on the questions here.

5 I suggest that if you have any such questions, you may

6 better address it to the auditors.

7 Q. No, I am going to ask you, Dr Arkhangelsky. You signed

8 these accounts and it is your claim, and the information

9 memorandum seems to have been based on these.

10 A. Actually, accounts are done by auditors and I just

11 confirm that I agree with what they done.

12 Q. Could you be shown yesterday’s transcript at

13 {Day11/19:18-19}.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Can you see what you say between lines 18 and 19:

16 «Answer: … so if I sign any accounts, then I am

17 personally liable or responsible.»

18 Do you stand by that answer?

19 A. Absolutely.

20 Q. So we can take it that these accounts that you signed,

21 you are personally liable or responsible for?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. If we go to the RPC letter, please, paragraph 8, you can

24 see that it explains what negative goodwill is, as we

25 understand it: {I20/26/33}

153 155
1 Q. And have you thought about the questions that are asked 1 «‘Negative goodwill’ arises when a business is
2 in it? 2 purchased below what is said to be its fair market value
3 A. No. 3 such that the buyer makes a resulting gain and it can be
4 Q. Why not? 4 accounted as income. Negative goodwill should, however,
5 A. I haven’t had time for that. 5 be treated as a non-operational item on the profit and
6 Q. All right. Well, if you go, please, to the second page, 6 loss statement because it cannot support the buyer’s
7 {I120/26/32}? 7 ability to meet any of its monetary liabilities in
8 A. Yes. 8 the short term.»
9 Q. You will see there is a heading, «OMG accounts», at the 9 Can you see that, Dr Arkhangelsky?
10 foot of the page? 10 A. Yes.
11 A. Yes. 11 Q. So what negative goodwill amounts to is, really, where
12 Q. And there is a series of paragraphs, starting at 12 you can properly say that if you bought an asset at
13 number 6 and going through to number 10 on {I20/26/33}, 13 under its market value and you can record the correct
14 which raise a series of questions and ask for 14 market value in your books and if that leads to a gain,
15 confirmations about these accounts; that’s right, isn’t 15 you can add it in; you can treat it as income in that
16 it? 16 year; do you understand that?
17 A. Yes. 17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And one of the points they ask about is negative 18 Q. But that comes with an accountancy warning, or caveat,
19 goodwill, isn’t it? 19 which is that because that is obviously — that’s not
20 A. Yes. 20 an operational or trading — usually, it’s not
21 Q. Are you familiar with the concept of negative goodwill, 21 an operational or recurring item, can you see, it should
22 Dr Arkhangelsky? 22 not be treated — or, rather, it should be treated as
23 A. Not really. 23 a non-operational item on the profit and loss statement;
24 Q. If you look at the — «not really»? So that doesn’t 24 does that make sense?
25 mean you are a bit? 25 A. Not really because, as I said, I am not a specialist on
154 156
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 IFRS accounting, because to do any IFRS accounting, you 1 Q. Was that based upon a valuation by Lair?
2 have to be aware of all the codes. There are special 2 A. It’s based on a valuation which has been ordered by the
3 rules which are big volumes rules, which you have to 3 auditors. Based on the accounting standards, auditors
4 know and so on. I never, ever been even reading such 4 have to subcontract valuation specialists and they would
5 rules. I thought that employing the top-in-the-market 5 base their calculations based on the valuation report.
6 company with a well established English name, I thought 6 And there is a special — your Lordship, I just want
7 that they are doing everything correctly and I don’t 7 to mention here, that’s quite important, that there is
8 need to be inside of this and inside of the standards. 8 a special way in evaluating — it says evaluating of
9 So I am not really able to comment on this. 9 property for the purposes of IFRS accounting, because
10 We definitely can follow some of your logic, but 10 it’s a different way compared to the market price or
11 it’s not a question of logic; it’s a question of 11 whatever.
12 knowledge. So I don’t have any particular knowledge on 12 So I assumed that in this document, PKF
13 IFRS accounting. 13 subcontracted some of the valuation specialists.
14 Q. And the concept of change in fair value of investment 14 I assume it might be Lair, I don’t know exactly, but
15 property works in a similar way; namely, it’s 15 they made a valuation for the purposes of IFRS
16 a revaluation of assets? 16 accounting.
17 A. You see it’s a question — from my point of view it’s 17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What is the last word before «Fair
18 a question for experts in valuation and for experts in 18 value»?
19 IFRS accounting. I am not a specialist in neither first 19 A. I cannot see that.
20 nor second. 20 MR LORD: «Actual». I’m not sure.
21 Q. Yes, but what I would like you to agree — well, if you 21 A. It’s nothing here.
22 go, please, to {D33/523/48}, you have got note 6.19, 22 MR LORD: We think it is «Actual», my Lord, although I am
23 which is the note that I showed you earlier — 23 not sure.
24 A. Yes. 24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Might be. Might not be.
25 Q. — to negative goodwill. And it looks from this page as 25 MR LORD: We will check.
157 159
1 if it is dealing with the acquisition of certain 1 Dr Arkhangelsky, the note at 6.7 in these accounts,
2 companies in 2007; can you see that from the top? 2 at {D33/523/28} —
3 A. Yes. 3 A. Your Lordship, I just want also just to make it clear
4 Q. And that includes Western Terminal and Vyborg Port; can 4 that I’ve never been personally reading all these things
5 you see that? 5 before. For me, it was important that the qualified
6 A. Yes. 6 company made this and we distribute it to the banks or,
7 Q. And it looks as if Western Terminal has been 7 whatever, rating agencies who do certification, and so
8 significantly valued up in these accounts, doesn’t it? 8 I’m not considered to be a specialist and I haven’t —
9 A. Sorry, Western Terminal, or — 9 I never, ever, been inside these. For me, it was just
10 Q. Western Terminal. 10 enough to read the first page, which is what number
11 A. Yes. 11 there, {D33/523/3}, which is the general auditor’s
12 Q. If you look at Western Terminal, in the middle of 12 report.
13 the page, you can see «Acquisition expenses» on the 13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think you were being asked, in case
14 left, and if you follow it along to the right, you see 14 you want to amplify your answer — I understand if you
15 «Western Terminal», 1.069 — 15 don’t — not really so much on accounting standards or
16 A. Yes. 16 their application, but what the basis was for
17 Q. — roubles. And we established yesterday, didn’t we, 17 attributing the, whatever it was, fair value of
18 Dr Arkhangelsky, that that’s about US $40 million? 18 the company a sum of 2.25 million, as opposed to
19 A. Yes. 19 the acquisition expense.
20 Q. And then you can see above it that the fair value has 20 I think it was really a sort of valuation issue
21 been calculated? 21 rather than an accountancy issue which was being asked;
22 A. Yes. 22 is that right, Mr —
23 Q. And it looks as if that has led to Western Terminal 23 A. Yes, yes, sure, sure, sure. It’s a value — as I said,
24 being increased to 2.25 million, doesn’t it? 24 it should be based on the IFRS standards. It should be
25 A. Yes. 25 an independent third party valuation for the purposes of
158 160
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 IFRS account, and you have a special code how to do this

2 valuation.

3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How to assess it. Very well.

4 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, you can see from this page that

5 total negative goodwill is assessed at US $50 million,

6 just over, 50.857?

7 A. So you are referring to 6.19 or —

8 Q. No, sorry, {D33/523/48}. Sorry. Note 6.19.

9 Note 6.19 is headed, «Acquisition of business»?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And what this note to the accounts is explaining is how

12 negative goodwill has been calculated, isn’t it?

13 A. Okay.

14 Q. And it explains that it is the result of the acquisition

15 of businesses, and it is estimated at US $50.8 million.

16 Can you see? The bottom right-hand side.

17 A. 50,857; yes? Yes.

18 Q. And if you turn back to the income statement at

19 {D33/523/5} you can see «negative goodwill» comes up to

20 the left-hand side, next to the note 6.19; can you see

21 that?

22 A. Six?

23 Q. 6.19.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And you get the figure $50.857 million.

1 Q. These are the accounts, Dr Arkhangelsky.

2 A. It should be — you know, it should be — it could not

3 be considered on a separate basis. It should be a more

4 wider explanation of expenses and so on, so I cannot

5 accept this point.

6 So, if you want, I think you better employ an expert

7 on IFRS accounts and you can ask them questions. So

8 I don’t think that it’s so primitive — that

9 international accounting standards are so primitive that

10 you can just deduct one figure and then it would work

11 for these combined, consolidated accounts.

12 Q. Well, Dr Arkhangelsky —

13 A. What is important to tell you, that combined accounts

14 also are calculating cash flows in between the

15 companies. So if you just take out one company, it has

16 to also take all the operational expenses in between all

17 the companies included in the combined accounts. So

18 it’s not that so primitive calculations, so it has to be

19 more precise, and you cannot just deduct one balance

20 sheet from combined statements for, whatever, ten

21 companies. So it has to be a much more complex approach

22 and it would not work like what you are saying. So I’m

23 not sure that you are personally specialists on that

24 level of IFRS accounting.

25 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky —

161 163

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And that figure relates to the up-valuing of certain

3 acquired businesses, doesn’t it?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And if you take that figure, that goodwill out of

6 account, OMG would have made a loss, wouldn’t it, in

7 the year ended 2007?

8 A. Yes, if you deduct this amount, yes.

9 Q. If you take $50.857 million out of this income

10 statement?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. It would wipe out the $45.767 million at the foot of

13 the page, wouldn’t it?

14 A. Maybe, yes.

15 Q. Well, it would, wouldn’t it?

16 A. Yes, but you see, I cannot calculate all this, so …

17 Q. No.

18 A. But I just accept what you are saying, yes.

19 Q. So if you take out income attributable to

20 the acquisition of certain businesses —

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. — the OMG group would have lost money in the year 2007,

23 wouldn’t it?

24 A. No, I don’t think so. It depends, you know, on the

25 accounting standards and rules, and —

1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am so sorry. Are these public

2 accounts?

3 A. Public, yes. What do you mean?

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They are registered on a public file,

5 are they?

6 A. You see, how it’s done, in Russia we have a public

7 accounts based on the Russian standards.

8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

9 A. And the auditors, they were taking these accounts and

10 the transactions in between each and every company in

11 the combined accounts and they would, what you call,

12 transfer it from one standard to another one.

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But were the IFRS compliant accounts

14 registered or otherwise made public?

15 A. I’m not sure, because in Russia for the insurance

16 companies and ports, you don’t have any registration of

17 IFRS accounts because it has been five or ten years

18 before they introduced an IFRS even to the banks.

19 So these accounts are in the files of PKF, of

20 course, and these accounts we were creating for the

21 purposes of — I think it’s — the major purpose was for

22 EBRD, because it was a standard requirement of the

23 European Bank for Reconstruction and Development; and

24 the second, we were doing it for AM Best rating in

25 London, so just to rate the insurance company, so …

162 164
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Did this bank have these accounts?

2 A. EBRD? Of course.

3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, Bank of St Petersburg.

4 A. Of course, yes, yes. Yes, yes. You know, for us in

5 2007 it was really a big achievement, because nobody in

6 Russia at that time in non financial services been doing

7 any IFRS accounts, so I think it’s only from 2008 to

8 2009 it was compulsory for the banks to do IFRS

9 accounts. So I think still in Russia it’s very seldom

10 when not a public company but a private company do IFRS

11 accounting.

12 So for me it was a real investment in this process,

13 and what is the key issue there, that you cannot just

14 start today doing IFRS accounts. So the regulation is

15 that if you start doing IFRS accounts today, you have to

16 do all the, let’s say, 2006, 2005, and all these

17 backdated, because it couldn’t just appear as you have

18 IFRS accounts; and the fact that we had a rather new

19 group of companies, so for us it was comparatively easy,

20 but it has taken quite a lot of time for the auditors

21 because they had to combine all the previous statements,

22 and the first year was the most difficult one.

23 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, you seem to know a lot about the

24 accounting process.

25 A. I know about the procedure.

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And the bottom line, as it were, is set out here, isn’t

3 it?

4 A. Yes, but combined accounts means that there is a special

5 way of calculating internal cash flows in between the

6 companies, so …

7 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, if you take out negative goodwill,

8 I think you have agreed that this business looks as if

9 it would be making a loss of about $5 million a year.

10 A. No, I cannot agree with that, no, no, no. I cannot

11 agree with that. So, as I said it is not that

12 straightforward.

13 Q. Can you explain what’s wrong with my analysis?

14 A. No, I am not a specialist. I am not a specialist in

15 IFRS accounts.

16 Q. So you can’t give any justification for why you disagree

17 with my question?

18 A. No. My justification is that you are able to discuss

19 that only in case you have passed special exam or

20 knowing the codes of IFRS.

21 So if you pass the first year school exam on

22 mathematics, it doesn’t mean that you comprise with the

23 accounting standards of IFRS. People study many, many

24 years before they can judge and they can evaluate so

25 complex statements.

165 167

1 Q. Well, I don’t accept your answer that it is as

2 complicated as that, because you can test it in this

3 way: you can test it by positing that OMG had not made

4 any acquisitions of businesses. The OMG group hadn’t

5 bought any new businesses in 2007; it was just trading

6 in the ordinary way.

7 A. No, no, no, we bought Western Terminal and Vyborg Port

8 in 2007.

9 Q. I understand that, Dr Arkhangelsky, but if you just

10 assume for one minute that OMG group had not bought

11 Western Terminal, just assume for one minute, and there

12 was no negative goodwill, so no increase in valuation as

13 a result of buying a new business, you could put nought

14 in there, couldn’t you, if there was no negative

15 goodwill? You could put nought —

16 A. No, no, no. As I said to you, the standard — you have

17 to read the code of producing IFRS accounts, and you had

18 better ask a specialist in IFRS accounts. I am

19 absolutely sure that it’s not that straightforward and

20 so primitive. So international accounting standards,

21 they are rather complex accounting which comprise

22 different industries and their speciality.

23 Q. Yes, of course, Dr Arkhangelsky, but that all feeds into

24 this combined statement, doesn’t it? All that analysis

25 you are talking about all comes into these statements.

1 So what you are saying, what I should say, that it’s

2 completely against the theory of the IFRS accounting,

3 and my personal understanding that you cannot make any

4 guess while not passing any exam on IFRS standards, even

5 at primitive level.

6 Q. Well, Dr Arkhangelsky, I suggest if you take out

7 negative goodwill from this balance sheet — sorry, from

8 this income statement, the OMG group combined have made

9 a loss of about US $5 million in the year 2007?

10 A. I don’t agree with that, and considering that you are

11 not specialist, you have not passed exams, you don’t

12 know the basis of the accounting based on IFRS accounts,

13 so you cannot make any suggestions on that.

14 Q. And if you took out the change in fair value of

15 investment property, which comes to just over

16 US $5 million, which is another revaluation of assets,

17 you would then have a loss of about US $10 million,

18 wouldn’t you?

19 A. No, I cannot agree with that. It is, again, a kind of

20 dilettante statement and trying to make any admissions

21 on my side. So I strongly believe that you are not

22 allowed to make any judgments on IFRS accounting while

23 you are not a specialist on that.

24 Q. And if you look at the interest obligations of the OMG

25 group, they were some US $13 million, weren’t they, in

166 168
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 2007?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. So if this company, if you took out negative goodwill

4 and the change in fair value, OMG would not actually be

5 able to pay its interest payments, would it, as things

6 stood?

7 A. No, it’s absolutely not true, as long as you are

8 not specialist and you cannot understand what is written

9 there.

10 Q. I’m going to take this a little bit further, this

11 negative goodwill, because it is picked up by

12 KIT Finance.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And you refer to KIT Finance in your witness statement,

15 don’t you?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And they were a Russian bank, weren’t they, that you

18 approached to help you finance in 2008?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. If we could have, please, {D68/1059/1}, please, can you

21 see that that looks like it is a model for OMG Ports;

22 can you see that?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And it is dated September 2008, isn’t it?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Can I just —

2 A. I’m not sure what does it mean exactly.

3 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, if you look at the profit and loss

4 statement, you can see the KIT Finance has carried out

5 some calculations for OMG Ports in a —

6 A. Sorry, can you explain me, what does it mean, COGS, and

7 SG&A?

8 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, this is a document that —

9 A. Yes, but I don’t know what does it mean so I cannot

10 discuss that. So if you can explain me each and every

11 point, then we can continue the discussion.

12 Q. If you just look at the net profit or loss figures that

13 are being shown in this model.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Can you see?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. You have: 2006 actual; 2007 actual; 2008 estimated; 2009

18 estimated; 2010 estimated; 2011 estimated. Can you see

19 that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Because KIT Finance were working with OMG —

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. — with a view to raising finance, weren’t they,

24 Dr Arkhangelsky?

25 A. Yes, yes, and they were completely sure and aware that

169 171

1 Q. And it was prepared by KIT Finance when they were

2 working with OMG around that time; isn’t that right?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And you’ve got no reason to doubt KIT Finance’s

5 financial expertise, have you, Dr Arkhangelsky?

6 A. No.

7 Q. And it was a modelling exercise for OMG’s benefit,

8 wasn’t it?

9 A. I think so, yes.

10 Q. And if you go to {D68/1059/2}, you can see that

11 KIT Finance have modelled some profit and loss

12 statements; can you see that?

13 A. Not yet. Which page?

14 Q. {D68/1059/2}.

15 A. Yes. Now I see that, yes. Yes.

16 Q. And they have calculated it in US dollars.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And they have run some figures for OMG Ports, haven’t

19 they?

20 A. And do you personally understand what is written here?

21 I’m really impressed by you, so do you know what COGS

22 means, or SG&A means? Are you really a specialist on

23 that? So how can we discuss that?

24 Q. It’s cost of goods, I think.

25 A. If you think, or if it’s like this?

1 we have a good potential, so that, and they were quite

2 happy and satisfied with our accounts.

3 Q. And if you look at 2007 —

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. — on KIT Finance’s model OMG Ports make a loss, don’t

6 they?

7 A. No, I cannot understand that. So if you just tell me

8 each and every point and each and every moment in this

9 table, then we can speak. I cannot really judge on this

10 table. I’m not a specialist on that.

11 Q. Okay. Well, if you look halfway down, it has «Gross

12 profit», and then it has EBITDA. Do you see «Gross

13 profit» and then it has Earnings Before Interest —

14 A. But can you tell us me what does it mean «COGS» first?

15 Q. No, don’t worry about —

16 A. No, no, how can you calculate that?

17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Arkhangelsky, you have made your

18 point that there may be areas of these accounts where

19 all our knowledge is imperfect. Now having made that

20 point, I want you to focus on the questions you are

21 asked and answer them to the best of your ability —

22 A. Yes, but —

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — or state the extent to which you

24 cannot answer them.

25 A. Your Lordship, but I cannot — if I don’t know what and

170 172
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 how …

2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not having you make conditions

3 under which questions are asked. You will answer the

4 question unless you say — to the best of your ability

5 unless you say you cannot answer it. It’s not

6 a discussion: you are being cross-examined.

7 A. Yes, yes, but what I want to tell that I am not able to

8 answer because I’m not aware of what is it and I’m not

9 a specialist in this.

10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: When you wish to make that point, do

11 so, but do not quiz Mr Lord as to his knowledge: he is

12 asking the questions, you are supplying the answers.

13 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, I was proceeding on the basis

14 that, as the head of OMG group, and OMG Ports, you would

15 be interested in the modelling results that KIT Finance

16 came up with in September 2008.

17 A. Absolutely.

18 Q. Am I wrong about that?

19 A. No, no, you are absolutely right. So that —

20 Q. So it’s a yes, Dr Arkhangelsky? No, don’t make a long

21 speech. It’s a yes, so you were interested in it, were

22 you?

23 A. Can you just repeat the full question if you want to

24 have a yes or no.

25 Q. We are establishing that you were interested in the

1 Q. Yes. And we know — and so if you look at 2007, actual,

2 OMG Ports, your ports business in the gross profit line

3 made a loss, didn’t it? Can you see?

4 A. No, I’m not sure. I’m not sure.

5 Q. US $2.3 million, gross profit; do you see in brackets?

6 A. You see, I cannot really trace this, so I don’t know.

7 Q. And if you run this on, KIT Finance then predicted

8 a profit for the ports business in 2008, 2009, 2010 and

9 2011, if you follow on that line, can you see a profit

10 of 8.172 million, 31.8 million, 75.74 million and

11 116.93 million; can you see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. But can you see about four entries down from the top,

14 there is a reference to a business called VTK; can you

15 see that, Dr Arkhangelsky?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. VTK is the Vyborg Fuel Company, isn’t it?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And that’s a company that you don’t make any mention of

20 in any of your evidence in these proceedings that we

21 have been able to find; can you confirm that’s the case?

22 A. Maybe, yes, I don’t remember, yes.

23 Q. But you know what Vyborg Fuel Company is, don’t you?

24 You are aware of the company?

25 A. Yes, I was in the process of buying this company, VTK,

173

1 KIT Financing modelling that we are seeing depicted

2 here?

3 A. No, I was interested in KIT Financing results. So I was

4 interested that KIT Finance attract funding and I was

5 not interested in the background of that. So I’ve never

6 been inside their calculations and I believed that as

7 long as they are specialist, based on the information

8 provided to them, they created a good model which would

9 allow them to attract funding, which was they were

10 telling me. So I’ve never been inside these statements

11 and I am not — telling again, I am not a specialist in

12 these financial mathematics.

13 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, this model looks at the potential

14 profit and loss of the OMG Ports business, doesn’t it?

15 A. Yes, I think so.

16 Q. And that includes Vyborg Port, Onega and Western

17 Terminal. It includes those three businesses, doesn’t

18 it?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. So it includes your OMG port businesses?

21 A. But it also includes three businesses which never been

22 bought.

23 Q. Well, I will come onto —

24 A. So it’s a kind of projection of possible acquisitions

25 and so on.

175

1 I’m not sure what VKHP, I’m not sure what that — what

2 is it. But Baltic ship repairing yard, I was also in

3 the process of buying that, but because of the activity

4 of your clients, all these transactions have been

5 withdrawn and I lost quite a lot of money out of this.

6 Q. But can you see that in KIT Finance’s model —

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. — in the 2007 accounts —

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. — there is no contribution from VTK —

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. — because OMG Ports didn’t own VTK, did they?

13 A. No. The plan to buy — the target to employ KIT Finance

14 was to attract funding to buy these three companies:

15 VTK, VKHP, BSMZ and other possible companies.

16 Q. And you can see that when KIT Finance estimated profit

17 for the ports group from 2008 onwards —

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. — you can see what contribution they were ascribing to

20 VTK; can you see that line, Dr Arkhangelsky?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. 20 million in 2008.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. 76 in 2009.

25 A. Yes.

174 176
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 Q. 103 in 2010.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And 129 in 2011.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And if you go back to the gross profit estimates of

6 KIT Finance, who were helping you in September 2008, if

7 you go back to that line, you can see that without the

8 contribution of VTK, there would have been a loss, as

9 predicted by KIT Finance, in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011.

10 A. No, it’s, again, not correct assumptions, because if you

11 want to discuss the story with VTK, we can discuss that.

12 VTK, it’s a Vyborg petroleum company —

13 Q. No, sorry, I don’t want to discuss the story. I’m going

14 to come to VTK. I don’t want you to deal with it now.

15 I’m going to come to VTK tomorrow.

16 A. No problem.

17 Q. At the moment, I want you to focus on the effect on

18 KIT Finance’s modelling —

19 A. No, I’m not sure that you are correct with what you are

20 saying —

21 Q. Sorry, please don’t interrupt. I would like you to

22 focus on the effect on KIT Finance’s modelling for

23 OMG Ports of the failure by OMG Ports to acquire VTK.

24 A. No, I think you again manipulated these figures and the

25 only explanation for me is that you don’t understand the

1 discussion on it, you have not brought him as a witness.

2 Q. Well, Dr Arkhangelsky, if you look at the bottom of this

3 model, KIT Finance seem to be predicting a loss for

4 OMG Ports in 2007, 2008, 2009, don’t they? 10 million,

5 18 million, and 17 million; do you see that?

6 A. No, I don’t think so. Again, your assumptions are not

7 correct so you have to have a complex view of

8 the picture.

9 Q. Why is that?

10 A. Because you have to be a specialist to discuss figures,

11 and you are not.

12 Q. Could you go, please, to {D68/1060/1}, which again comes

13 from your disclosure, which appears to be some note that

14 would relate to the modelling exercise by KIT Finance.

15 It’s a KIT Finance document; can you see that?

16 {D68/1060/3}

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And you can see memberships on {D68/1060/1}. Halfway

19 down, number 1: Vyborg Fuel Company and BSMZ are

20 acquired due to the means of shareholders in 2008; can

21 you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Then if you go over the page to {D68/1060/2}, you can

24 see some analysis of VTK; can you see that?

25 A. Yes.

177 179

1 figures yourself.

2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Lord, I may be wrong about this,

3 but is that fair? Do you not have to take into account

4 the costs of acquiring and running VTK at the same time?

5 MR LORD: My Lord, if you take out the —

6 A. I think it’s even much more complex because — can

7 I just spend one minute on that? VTK, it was petrol

8 stations, about 20 petrol stations, and a piece of land

9 in the port of Vyborg and the idea was that we take this

10 piece of land to grow up Vyborg Port and to sell petrol

11 stations on each and every separate — separately. So

12 that’s why it was kind of redistribution of assets, and

13 so it was a much more complex thing.

14 MR LORD: My Lord, I am taking out of account what appear to

15 be the sales for the companies in the top section of

16 the model.

17 A. Sales here means, specially for VTK, was our plan to

18 sell separately petrol stations. So it means that we

19 were planning to buy assets and then to sell them. So,

20 again, it’s not that straightforward and you have to see

21 basics for modelling and not just the final table.

22 And, by the way, the person who was creating this

23 table, he moved to work to the Bank of St Petersburg,

24 and it’s against Mr — I’ll remember the name. Again,

25 it’s a bit strange that if you want to have a better

1 Q. And can you see that there is a heading on the left-hand

2 side, about halfway down, «Negative goodwill»?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. It is spelt unusually, but I think it is negative

5 goodwill.

6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Where is that, sorry?

7 MR LORD: It is {D68/1060/2}.

8 I’m sorry, my Lord. No. {D68/1060/2.2}. Sorry,

9 my Lord.

10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Ah, I’ve got it.

11 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, KIT Finance have said this under

12 the heading «Negative goodwill»:

13 «In order to avoid distorting the data, the Negative

14 goodwill account, which increased pre-tax profits and

15 thus reported profits, was excluded from the model in

16 the Cash Flow and P&L section.»

17 Can you see that?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. «In order to avoid distorting the data…»

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. That was referring to the risk that negative goodwill

22 should not be included because it is a non-operational

23 item, isn’t that right?

24 A. If they are writing so, maybe.

25 Q. In other words, it could distort the intrinsic

178 180
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 profitability of the business by bringing in what might

2 be a one-off acquisition valuation?

3 A. Maybe, I’m not really following you, so, I am not

4 a specialist on this.

5 Q. But you understand the point: if you buy a business and

6 you think it is worth more than you paid for and you

7 value it upwards and you treat that increase in value as

8 an income for that year, as things stand, that won’t be

9 an income you are going to have in subsequent years and

10 it’s not going to be an income that’s going to be

11 available to pay any of your —

12 A. It depends on the model, so if we are speaking about

13 IFRS accounts, there are strong rules how and when to

14 apply. If there is a model for LPN which has been

15 produced by KIT Finance, they probably had some

16 background for that. So I don’t think we are in

17 a position to discuss their assumptions.

18 And now I remember the name. It was a person — the

19 head of KIT Finance was Dmitry Volkov, who immediately

20 after the collapse of KIT Finance, he went to the Bank

21 of St Petersburg. So it is, again, strange that the

22 Bank haven’t used him as an expert or witness, because

23 he probably could put more input on that, a more

24 professional basis than you are doing this.

25 Q. And if we could please go to {D71/1066/1}, tab 10 in

1 Q. «As at December 31, 2007 …»

2 Can you see that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. I want to pick up the negative goodwill and interest

5 expenses, please, because if you look towards the lower

6 hole punch, you can see it says this:

7 «Non-operating income and expense consists of

8 interest income, interest expense, negative goodwill on

9 new acquisitions, changes in fair value of investment

10 property …»

11 And so on. Can you see that paragraph?

12 A. Not really. It starts from which — okay:

13 «Non-operating …»

14 This one?

15 Q. Yes.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. So, in other words, the points that I was putting to you

18 earlier in relation to the OMG accounts, the

19 consolidated accounts, and note 6.19, seem to be points

20 that are also being made by KIT Finance in this

21 information memorandum, aren’t they?

22 A. Maybe, yes.

23 Q. And if you read on to the next paragraph, it says this:

24 «From above-mentioned accounts only Negative

25 goodwill and Interest expense had impacted sufficiently

181 183

1 your Lordship’s core bundle.

2 Dr Arkhangelsky, you can see that this is

3 an information memorandum prepared by KIT Finance —

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. — on behalf of Oslo Marine Group in 2008; can you see

6 that?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And KIT Finance were working with OMG, weren’t they,

9 with a view potentially to issuing some notes to raise

10 US $150 million?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. I’ve shown you the modelling that was done by

13 KIT Finance. I suggest to you that — well, if we look

14 at the information memorandum, we can see how

15 KIT Finance approached things.

16 Can we go, please, to {D71/1066/30}. Can you see at

17 the top, «OMG Ports Financials»; can you see that,

18 Dr Arkhangelsky?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And it has «P&L Analysis», which is profit and loss

21 analysis, isn’t it?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Can you see, then, there is a section setting out that;

24 can you see that?

25 A. Which one?

1 on the final financial results of OMG Ports.»

2 Then it says this:

3 «Interest expense increased by 238.7 times in 2007

4 to US [$10 million].»

5 Can you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Is it right that in the course of 2007, the interest

8 expenses of OMG Ports increased 238 times?

9 A. I don’t know.

10 Q. You’ve got no reason to doubt this figure, have you?

11 A. Yes, I don’t have reason to doubt. And the explanation

12 to that, that in 2007, we bought Vyborg Port and Western

13 Terminal, so that they were two big acquisitions and we

14 got quite substantial lendings. Considering that in

15 2006 we had total loans of, whatever, $3 million or

16 $4 million, and then in 2007, the total lending

17 increased 20 times, or something like that. So …

18 Q. If you go to {D71/1066/31}, please, Dr Arkhangelsky, you

19 can see that there is some analysis of OMG Ports. Can

20 you see at the top, «Fair Value of Acquired Companies»;

21 can you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And you can see that «Negative goodwill» appears, and

24 you can see it is put at $48.974 million; can you see

25 that?

182 184
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 A. 48?

2 Q. 48.974.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And you can see that each of the businesses are set out

5 there and any negative goodwill is included. Can you

6 see that Western Terminal is put down as

7 US $44.525 million?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And you can see that the total negative goodwill is put

10 at some US $50.857 million?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And then it says this:

13 «Substantial growth of ‘Pre-Tax Income’ and ‘Net

14 profit’ accounts was primarily connected with including

15 in profit and loss statement a positive difference

16 between fair value and actual acquisition costs of new

17 OMG Port’s assets.»

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. «This difference was reflected in the structure of

20 non-operating income as Negative Goodwill account.»

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Then if you look at the profit and loss statement that

23 they have set out for OMG Ports, for 2007 there was

24 a US $40 million profit, wasn’t there?

25 A. How much?

1 dilettante notes on something which you don’t know.

2 Q. If you go, please, to {D71/1066/35}, you can see a table

3 set out in this information memorandum, «Main Data of

4 OMG’s P&L Statement». Can you see for 2007, net profit

5 or loss, 45.767 million; do you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. But we know, don’t we, from the earlier table, that

8 there is some 50 million of negative goodwill.

9 So what I am putting to you, Dr Arkhangelsky, is

10 that if you took out — that this analysis by

11 KIT Finance is telling a potential lender, as

12 at September 2008, that the OMGP’s profit for 2007 is

13 based upon negative goodwill; that’s right, isn’t it?

14 A. No, I don’t think so.

15 Q. Can you explain why I am wrong to put that to you?

16 A. Yes, because you are not specialist.

17 Q. No, I’m sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, that is a personal

18 comment about me. Can you just deal with the

19 substantive point?

20 A. Yes, I am not a specialist.

21 Q. So you are unable —

22 A. Unable to judge now.

23 Q. So there is nothing in my analysis that you are able to

24 point to as being flawed?

25 A. I think everything in your analysis is just insinuation.

185 187

1 Q. US $40.653 million.

2 A. No, I cannot see that.

3 Q. It’s in the bottom table —

4 A. Yes, yes I see that.

5 Q. — can you see that, 2007?

6 A. Yes, yes.

7 Q. And the note above explains to the reader of this

8 information memorandum that the growth in income and

9 profit is primarily connected with negative goodwill;

10 can you see that?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Which is the uprating in value from the buying of new

13 businesses, isn’t it?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. So if you take out the negative goodwill that

16 KIT Finance set out in the top table, if you take that

17 revenue out of account and you look at the bottom table,

18 it’s right, isn’t it, that in 2007, OMG Ports would have

19 made a loss that year?

20 A. No, I don’t think so, no. It’s more complex accounts,

21 again. So again, we are not able to guess and judge

22 things you don’t know.

23 Q. But do you agree that on the face of it, my analysis

24 looks correct? On the face of it?

25 A. No, no, it doesn’t look correct, no, no. It’s just

1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Lord, I hope I will be clearer soon

2 where this is all going.

3 A. Yes, I agree. It’s very strange.

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I mean, you are not suggesting the

5 IFRS accounts are incorrect.

6 MR LORD: No.

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are not suggesting they weren’t

8 available to the Bank.

9 MR LORD: No.

10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are not suggesting that the

11 information memorandum prepared by KIT was false in any

12 way.

13 MR LORD: No.

14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are not suggesting that it wasn’t

15 a matter which was thought to support a plea for finance

16 to be extended on the footing of them.

17 I mean, where is it all going?

18 MR LORD: It goes to the profitability or viability of

19 the businesses, my Lord.

20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So what? The Bank had this

21 information available.

22 MR LORD: No, my Lord, it goes to the counterclaim.

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Oh, I see. It is all quantum, is it?

24 MR LORD: It goes to quantum.

25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.

186 188
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 MR LORD: It’s the viability of the underlying businesses. 1 accounts were based. If he has particular premises
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but that — isn’t that really 2 which he is worried you might disavow, then of course he
3 a matter of expert evidence? 3 must put them to you.
4 MR LORD: No, but there are assumptions built in here, 4 If, on the other hand, you accept as correct all the
5 my Lord, which I need to put to the witness. If, in 5 premises and simply rely on the experts to say where
6 fact, this is wrong, if in fact negative goodwill does 6 those premises lead, I am still a little confused as to
7 not explain, all these accounts — these accounts and 7 where we are going, but I will defer to Mr Lord if I
8 information memoranda say broadly the same thing, which 8 having exposed my ignorance, he nevertheless feels that
9 is that if you take out the revaluation of bought 9 there are matters to be addressed.
10 assets, these businesses would be loss-making. 10 A. Yes, I agree with you. I am not a specialist on this,
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I just don’t know about that. 11 and all the assumptions done by Mr Lord, I think they
12 I suspect that it is quite complex, because I suspect 12 are not professional, so it is just a waste of time of
13 you have to look on both sides of the balance. 13 the court, I believe.
14 But, in any event, this witness answered some time 14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Ultimately I just have to understand
15 ago that he wasn’t seeking to in any way question the 15 what’s happening and at the moment I am not absolutely
16 premises on which either sets of accounts were drawn up; 16 convinced that I am being assisted in this.
17 in fact, he had asked for the IFRS, which was in 17 But, Mr Lord, if you think I am, I shall, of course,
18 addition to anything required under Russian regulatory 18 defer to you.
19 norms, in order to show compliance with what by then 19 MR LORD: My Lord, the simple point is this: these documents
20 were becoming western regulatory norms. 20 suggest that the OMG Ports and OMG businesses could not
21 What those accounts demonstrate in terms of 21 survive on their operational turnover; they could only
22 the profitability, or any future profit-making ability 22 survive by borrowing more money and by increasing asset
23 of the companies is surely a matter for expert evidence, 23 valuations to support that further borrowing. And that
24 isn’t it? 24 is very relevant to the counterclaim, because
25 MR LORD: No, my Lord, it is a proper matter to cover with 25 your Lordship knows that, of all these attempted finance

189

1 the person who was running the businesses, because the

2 experts are going to go on all sorts of assumptions

3 about the businesses and I am building up to some

4 questions about the viability of the businesses.

5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right, well —

6 MR LORD: I’m sorry, my Lord. The accounts show that in

7 terms of their operational performance, they were

8 loss-making.

9 A. No, it’s not correct. Again, you are insinuating, and,

10 your Lordship, you are absolutely right and I like your

11 comment that all these documents have been properly

12 presented to the Bank in 2008 or 2007 —

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, that —

14 A. — and they’ve seen these documents. So they were not

15 making a point that time about any losses or profits or

16 whatever, so —

17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I was wrong about that. That goes to

18 the question of the lending. The question now is as to

19 the propensity of your companies to make profits in

20 the future, such as to justify the figures you put on

21 the value of which you were deprived.

22 My feeling is that ultimately this may be a matter

23 of expert evidence. Mr Lord, who knows more of

24 the detail than I, says that he has, nevertheless, to

25 test with you underlying premises on which these

191

1 initiatives, of which there were three going on in and

2 around the autumn of 2008, none of them came to

3 anything.

4 What my clients are facing is a claim for

5 $500 million or $600 million or $700 million, on the

6 basis that they conspired to steal valuable companies in

7 these circumstances, and it is clearly relevant for me

8 to test with the proprietor of these businesses what the

9 real state of those businesses was, and whether it is

10 the case that they were being propped up entirely by

11 borrowed money and asset valuation.

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, Mr Lord, my understanding,

13 possibly wrong, and I shall read them, is that

14 ultimately on the footing of its projections,

15 KIT Finance, in the model of development through to

16 2011, reckoned that by the end of that time, the

17 companies would be, in total, generating very

18 substantial surpluses.

19 MR LORD: And that is on the basis, my Lord, of buying

20 a company called VTK, Vyborg Fuel Company, which was not

21 bought, of which there is no mention by Dr Arkhangelsky

22 in this evidence. I took the witness through that.

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, you did.

24 MR LORD: And it is an important — if, in fact, if you

25 like, the white knight here — if VTK was going to ride

190 192
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 to the rescue, then that is an important point for

2 your Lordship to consider and weigh up, if that was what

3 was going to lead to profitability of OMG Ports, as that

4 modelling seemed to suggest.

5 And it is a matter I will raise with Dr Arkhangelsky

6 why VTK has not featured in his evidence; why he hasn’t

7 explained anything about it.

8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would you like to put that now?

9 MR LORD: I would like to come to it at the right point, if

10 I may, my Lord.

11 A. But, my Lordship, I cannot understand, they are

12 referring to KIT Finance and the person from

13 KIT Finance, the head of the KIT Finance investment —

14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s a matter of comment which you

15 have already made, Mr Arkhangelsky. You are saying that

16 he would have been able to provide an insight, since he

17 drew up these papers, which would have been helpful and

18 available because you say that he is still employed by

19 the Bank. But, as I explained to you, it is a matter of

20 choice for the Bank. You have made your point, I dare

21 say it will be made again, but it’s not really going to

22 help me.

23 What I want to be helped on is where this is all

24 going. Mr Lord has explained to me that there are

25 premises, which are not accounting premises but factual

1 primitivisation and I cannot accept that.

2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, Mr Arkhangelsky, I have said

3 what I have said. I think Mr Lord must be allowed to

4 take his own course.

5 A. Absolutely.

6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: He has redirected my mind as to its

7 relevance. My attention will be most clearly fixed on

8 understanding the premises, the factual premises, on

9 which these accounts, or projections, were made. I may

10 get more muddled if it is a matter of interpretation of

11 accounts, as opposed to testing the factual premises on

12 which they are made, but I leave that — if you think

13 I will get to an understanding in a different way, well

14 and good. I leave it to you, Mr Lord.

15 Is that a good time, is that what you are saying, to

16 stop?

17 MR LORD: Probably, in the circumstances.

18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. How are we doing on timing?

19 MR LORD: Not brilliantly.

20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No. What do you recommend?

21 MR LORD: I recommend we start at 10.00 tomorrow, my Lord,

22 if that’s all right, and sit until 4.30 pm.

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, well, let’s, at any rate —

24 I can’t promise 4.30, but we will see.

25 Mr Arkhangelsky, is there any reason why you can’t

193 195

1 premises, on which these projections are made, which he

2 wishes to test with you.

3 MR LORD: And I have set out what they are, my Lord.

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It’s a matter for you, but I just

5 wonder, if you segregate the factual premises from the

6 accounting premises, whether you may make matters easier

7 for me, but I leave that to you.

8 MR LORD: Well, my Lord, I had anticipated that

9 Dr Arkhangelsky, given what he lays claim to in his

10 witness statement about his business acumen and

11 experience, I had expected that he would be able to

12 answer more of these questions about financial models

13 and information memoranda that he would have been

14 involved in in 2008.

15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but so that you should know what

16 is whizzing through my tortured mind, I cannot help

17 disassociate myself from six or seven years in practice,

18 trying to understand IFRS.

19 MR LORD: Well, my Lord, one doesn’t need to know all the

20 IFRS —

21 A. IFRS.

22 MR LORD: — factors to be able to look at the bottom lines.

23 They are explaining the state of the businesses, and if

24 one takes that —

25 A. No, it’s not that straightforward. So it’s a

1 attend at 10.00 tomorrow?

2 A. No, I am just following your advice.

3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I suspect, partly because of

4 the diversion, which I encouraged, on the question of

5 the redactions or confidentiality, that we have lost

6 a bit of time and a bit of steam. I think we should

7 start at 10.00 am. I think, bearing in mind how long

8 the morning is, we should not be shy of having breaks

9 along the way, but otherwise, let us try for a 10.00 to

10 4.30 day.

11 In fact, actually, tomorrow — is tomorrow Friday?

12 I don’t know what time trains you are all taking, but

13 I shall be —

14 A. You should be really taking care about traffic jams

15 here; on Friday it will be rather messy.

16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, that is what I have been told.

17 Are you staying, or are you going back?

18 MR LORD: I am staying.

19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are staying.

20 MR LORD: Others are going though.

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It may be we will have to pause at

22 4.00 tomorrow; I just don’t know how long it takes.

23 A. It can easily take one hour or two hours to the train

24 station; the traffic on Friday is terrible.

25 MR LORD: Perhaps we should start earlier, my Lord. Perhaps

194 196
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

1 we should start at 9.45 and have the breaks and finish

2 in good time.

3 A. Maybe it is better at 10.00, so —

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 9.45?

5 A. No, why not 10.00, as agreed?

6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Arkhangelsky, we will have 9.45,

7 but we will give ourselves the luxury of pauses in

8 between.

9 A. Okay.

10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And I will ask advice as to how long

11 it really takes to get to the station under pessimistic

12 conditions.

13 Very good. Thank you.

14 (4.30 pm)

15 (The court adjourned until 9.45 am on

16 Friday, 19 February 2016)

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

197
1 INDEX
2 PAGE
3 (Hearing in private) ……………………………1

4 (Hearing in open court) …………………………8

5 MR VITALY DMITRIEVICH ARKHANGELSKY ……………….8

(continued)

6 Cross-examination by MR LORD (continued) ……8

7 (Hearing in private) ………………………….112

8 (Hearing in open court) ……………………….121

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

198
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

199

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

A

A1/2/10 (1) 95:19 A1/2/12 (1) 97:17 A1/2/58 (1) 91:8 abbreviation (4) 42:23

43:14,15,24 ability (4) 156:7 172:21 173:4

189:22

able (23) 17:24 34:24 48:20,25 54:5,24 63:19 88:16 122:15 130:3,6 153:4 155:4 157:9 167:18 169:5 173:7 175:21 186:21 187:23 193:16 194:11,22

above-mentioned (1)

183:24 absolutely (42) 36:11

39:11 40:12,16,16 59:4 60:24 68:9 69:4,6 70:13 73:15 73:19 81:12 84:16 84:16 86:5 88:11 93:2,7 99:22 101:10 103:2,7 124:11,13 125:7,15 126:7 132:4,15 135:22 136:13 137:22 155:19 166:19 169:7 173:17,19 190:10 191:15 195:5

accept (17) 8:18 9:1,4 9:18 40:3 55:1 70:3 87:17 99:2 124:11 124:16 125:9 162:18 163:5 166:1 191:4 195:1

acceptable (1) 29:19 accepted (5) 31:25

59:13 81:11 100:22 136:5

accepting (1) 59:14 access (1) 54:2 accessibility (1) 53:16 accident (1) 109:19 accidents (1) 51:2 accord (1) 25:13 account (12) 34:3

89:18 90:4 138:16 150:14 161:1 162:6 178:3,14 180:14 185:20 186:17

accountancy (2)

156:18 160:21 accounted (1) 156:4 accounting (24)

150:12 153:8,11 157:1,1,13,19 159:3,9,16 160:15 162:25 163:9,24 165:11,24 166:20 166:21 167:23 168:2,12,22 193:25 194:6

accounts (64) 23:8 89:23 145:19 147:1 148:23 149:4,7 151:22 152:2,16 153:5,10 154:9,15 155:2,8,10,16,20 158:8 160:1 161:11 163:1,7,11,13,17 164:2,7,9,11,13,17 164:19,20 165:1,7 165:9,14,15,18

166:17,18 167:4,15 agency (2) 152:25 85:21 138:5 139:23 76:20 77:7 78:25 76:13 82:4 95:7
168:12 172:2,18 153:9 140:2,3 142:12 80:1,14 83:24 104:1 105:10
176:8 181:13 ago (6) 18:20 34:12 155:4,16,18 160:14 86:16 87:2 88:4 127:17 128:5
183:18,19,24 34:13 42:16 126:25 166:1 172:21,24 89:2,22 90:20 91:8 130:21 133:5
185:14 186:20 189:15 173:3,5,8 194:12 95:22,25 97:5 138:21 159:14
188:5 189:7,7,16 agree (22) 10:22 answered (3) 90:9 98:16 99:2,19 166:10,11
189:21 190:6 191:1 26:14 33:10 44:7 139:22 189:14 100:6,25 104:14 assumed (3) 96:24
195:9,11 45:1 54:22 81:2,13 answers (3) 17:3 108:3,6 110:9 104:4 159:12
accurate (2) 24:23 81:20 89:10 98:20 24:17 173:12 121:12 122:25 assumptions (7) 26:1
142:5 134:12 135:24 anticipated (1) 194:8 124:19 126:24 177:10 179:6
achieve (1) 142:3 155:11 157:21 anxious (1) 54:12 129:4,14 130:16 181:17 189:4 190:2
achievement (1) 167:10,11 168:10 anybody (5) 76:17 131:21,23 132:16 191:11
165:5 168:19 186:23 79:6 109:16 128:17 135:23,25 136:10 attached (21) 14:18
acquire (2) 132:21 188:3 191:10 131:18 137:1,3,21,23 16:6,7,24 19:6 20:9
177:23 agreed (9) 20:24 anyway (1) 99:13 138:5 139:19 21:18,19,22,24
acquired (3) 162:3 58:17 69:5 142:1 apologise (4) 10:2 140:21 141:6,11,22 22:8,13,24,25 23:1
179:20 184:20 142:20 144:15,19 45:25 56:13 124:5 141:25 143:24 30:20,21 31:4
acquiring (2) 134:14 167:8 197:5 apparently (3) 84:10 145:16 146:4 57:17 58:1 75:22
178:4 agreement (61) 9:2,6 128:13 149:9 147:12 151:21 attaching (2) 23:5
acquisition (8) 158:1 9:9 11:4,4 15:18 appear (7) 8:20 25:12 153:22 154:22 24:1
158:13 160:19 16:16,17 17:9,11 48:12 100:3 148:10 155:7 156:9 158:18 attachment (3) 18:3
161:9,14 162:20 17:17,18,22,25 165:17 178:14 160:1 161:4 163:1 18:15,16
181:2 185:16 19:20,21 21:7 appearance (1) 163:12,25 165:23 attachments (12)
acquisitions (4) 166:4 22:13 27:13,19,20 136:13 166:9,23 167:7 10:15 14:21 15:2
174:24 183:9 28:9,14,16,23 29:2 appeared (1) 100:4 168:6 170:5 171:3 15:13 19:18,19
184:13 29:4,18,20,22 30:3 appearing (2) 64:15 171:8,24 172:17 21:6,25 72:22 74:3
active (2) 131:9 136:3 30:18,21 31:5,18 64:18 173:13,20 174:13 76:3 100:3
activity (1) 176:3 31:22 32:5,9,13 appears (6) 27:8 175:15 176:20 attempted (1) 191:25
actual (7) 103:11 33:3,25 34:25 41:21,22 48:12 179:2 180:11 182:2 attempts (1) 63:21
159:20,22 171:17 39:23 40:10,15,22 179:13 184:23 182:18 184:18 attend (1) 196:1
171:17 175:1 46:10 47:4,12,14 application (6) 89:3 187:9,17 192:21 attention (4) 110:10
185:16 47:15,15 59:13 89:17 103:4,7,8 193:5,15 194:9 148:20 149:2 195:7
acumen (1) 194:10 68:7 81:13,15,22 160:16 195:2,25 197:6 attested (1) 136:16
add (1) 156:15 84:14 90:16 101:22 applied (2) 34:16,18 198:5 attitude (1) 54:20
addenda (5) 143:19 138:14 apply (1) 181:14 Arkhangelsky’s (3) attorney (17) 101:11
143:22,23 144:1,3 agreement’ (1) 68:23 applying (1) 89:11 20:20 22:22 123:24 101:12,16 123:21
addition (1) 189:18 agreements (12) appreciated (1) 88:7 arrangement (1) 67:5 123:24 125:18
additional (3) 46:10 10:16 11:2 13:17 approach (1) 163:21 arrangements (1) 126:1,4 127:5,16
141:12,23 14:18 20:9 138:12 approached (2) 82:16 127:21,21,22,25
address (28) 52:21,25 138:22,25 139:1,1 169:18 182:15 artificial (4) 40:7 128:4 131:5,15
83:16,17 89:25 139:6,10 appropriate (1) 92:6 46:20 47:15 81:1 attract (3) 174:4,9
90:1 100:14,16,18 agreements’ (1) 68:22 approval (1) 20:15 ascribing (1) 176:19 176:14
100:20,21 102:11 Ah (1) 180:10 approve (2) 30:15 aside (1) 64:9 attributable (1)
102:23 103:14,14 ahead (1) 153:21 31:18 asked (13) 53:19 162:19
103:15,19 105:6,8 aid (1) 135:4 approved (1) 30:21 92:19 96:13 108:16 attributing (1) 160:17
105:10,12,12,17 allegation (1) 123:10 April (8) 10:5 13:25 130:2 139:19 audited (1) 145:19
106:16,18 107:16 allegations (5) 98:10 14:14 19:7,21 140:10 154:1 auditor’s (3) 146:8
108:1 155:6 98:15 135:3,15 99:24 107:21 160:13,21 172:21 147:4 160:11
addressed (2) 17:2 136:2 140:14 173:3 189:17 auditors (9) 152:4,9
191:9 allege (2) 121:24 areas (1) 172:18 asking (7) 17:12 69:11 153:16 155:6,10
addresses (3) 106:8 128:14 argue (1) 70:18 81:3 82:4,8 121:12 159:3,3 164:9
106:13 107:1 alleged (7) 68:11 argumentation (1) 173:12 165:20
adjourned (1) 197:15 71:12,13 81:14 62:20 asks (2) 89:17 124:10 August (5) 57:6 58:9
adjournment (2) 89:6 129:15 141:2 arguments (1) 37:15 aspects (1) 54:6 87:22,22 88:6
112:1 121:13 alleging (3) 91:12,19 arises (1) 156:1 assert (2) 32:3 33:7 authentic (2) 14:8
admissions (1) 168:20 95:5 Arkhangelskaya (1) asserted (2) 59:20 82:7
adopt (1) 11:20 allow (2) 110:22 148:10 93:24 authenticity (6) 27:12
adopted (1) 54:19 174:9 Arkhangelsky (173) assess (1) 161:3 48:19,23 56:23
advance (1) 68:13 allowed (6) 29:22 8:14,16 10:1,3 12:8 assessed (1) 161:5 59:9 73:5
advanced (4) 68:11,12 32:7 137:16,17 13:21,23 15:2,8,15 asset (3) 156:12 authorisation (3) 29:6
68:13 121:17 168:22 195:3 15:21 17:7,12 18:9 191:22 192:11 29:7 131:4
advice (10) 63:20 65:7 allowing (1) 30:3 19:9 20:3 21:8 24:7 assets (19) 67:12,15 authorised (7) 28:10
71:22 72:1,12 Ameli (3) 54:19 140:9 24:19 25:10,25 67:15 69:2 95:8,12 28:12,13,16 29:4
130:1,24 131:2 140:18 26:7,11 27:4,15 95:18 132:21,21,23 127:1 128:10
196:2 197:10 Ameli’s (1) 140:5 28:1,4,7,14 29:15 133:1 152:20 authorities (2) 106:24
advocate (1) 131:18 amended (2) 92:1,8 29:24 31:3,19 153:10 157:16 107:3
affairs (1) 82:22 amount (7) 25:23 32:21 33:22 34:6 168:16 178:12,19 authority (3) 32:4
affidavit (18) 66:5,6 35:19 44:22 68:8 34:22 35:10,24 185:17 189:10 127:5 131:4
66:12 67:20 68:18 71:6 84:9 162:8 37:9 39:7,22 40:23 assistant (1) 75:7 autumn (1) 192:2
69:9,14 73:3 83:23 amounts (2) 95:13 41:14 42:3 44:24 assistants (1) 83:10 available (4) 181:11
84:2,18 86:19 88:5 156:11 45:7,19,25 46:15 assisted (1) 191:16 188:8,21 193:18
88:13,14,17 134:25 amplify (1) 160:14 47:14,21 48:11,18 Association (1) 126:17 avenue (4) 100:17,18
143:17 analysing (2) 65:10,12 49:3,25 51:5 55:12 associations (2) 128:8 103:24 107:6
afraid (7) 64:5 66:13 analysis (10) 166:24 55:25 56:14 61:3,6 128:9 avoid (2) 180:13,19
70:19 71:21 123:18 167:13 179:24 61:13,16 62:3 63:7 assume (28) 14:7,8 aware (12) 52:21
128:25 146:10 182:20,21 184:19 65:16 66:4 67:17 16:4 24:11 26:12 93:14 122:18
afternoon (2) 54:6 186:23 187:10,23 69:17,21 70:3 71:5 28:15 29:21 30:1,2 123:13 125:4
79:16 187:25 71:25 72:9,17 30:9 32:2 40:6 129:11 131:5
agencies (1) 160:7 answer (19) 17:2 38:6 73:16,24 75:20 46:21,23 66:22 132:24 157:2

171:25 173:8 175:24

awful (1) 133:11

B

B-whatever (1) 144:9

B1 (2) 143:23 144:4

B2 (1) 144:4 B2/9/22 (1) 23:21 B2/9/28 (1) 23:22 B2/9/5 (2) 137:2,6 B2/9/6 (1) 23:14 B2/9/8 (1) 23:11 B3 (1) 144:4

B4 (1) 144:4

B5 (1) 144:4

B6 (2) 143:23 144:4 back (18) 16:23 18:3 18:14 21:15 44:4 49:10 51:25 53:14

79:6 84:18 92:4 124:9 142:6 151:8 161:18 177:5,7 196:17

backdated (1) 165:17 backdating (2) 20:2

49:22 background (3) 65:10

174:5 181:16 bad (4) 59:5 64:6

110:3,4

Baker (3) 57:11 58:25 63:18

balance (8) 39:3,4 41:10 63:1,2 163:19 168:7 189:13

Balandin (11) 52:5 91:12 92:16 93:4 93:10 95:4,14,23 96:6,14 98:21

Baltic (1) 176:2 bank (137) 23:8,18

24:15 25:22 28:11 32:15 33:12 34:2 35:3 36:3,5 38:11 39:9,24 40:18 41:1 41:8 47:8 48:9 49:21 51:3 52:6,11 53:11 63:9 65:4 67:16 68:11,21 69:2 70:11 72:11 76:11 77:12,23 78:4,10 80:17,24 81:9 82:8 83:20 85:4,18 89:17 90:3 90:16 91:22 93:9 93:10 95:4,15,17 95:23 96:2,25 98:23,25 100:13 101:20 102:8,14 103:5,8,9 104:2,3 104:18 105:10,13 106:13,16,16,21 107:20 108:7,9,10 108:17,19 109:2,4 109:15,19 110:7 124:14,17 127:13 128:10 129:20 130:11,19 132:2,17 132:20 133:2,4,8 133:24 134:4,22 135:19 137:13,14 137:17,18,25 138:11,17 139:2,7 139:9 140:13 141:10,24 142:16 142:21,22,24 143:1

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

200

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

143:4,5,6,13,20 164:23 165:1,3 169:17 178:23 181:20,22 188:8,20 190:12 193:19,20
bank’s (10) 12:22 47:17 53:2 57:12 70:24 72:6 96:1 129:3 137:18 138:10

banking (2) 83:15 90:12

banks (8) 44:3 80:11 143:2,3,12 160:6 164:18 165:8

Bar (2) 126:17 128:8 barrier (1) 13:5 base (1) 159:5

based (20) 29:18 30:6 32:7,9 90:17 100:23 127:15 128:8 136:2 155:9 159:1,2,3,5 160:24 164:7 168:12 174:7 187:13 191:1

basically (2) 87:3 95:5 basics (1) 178:21 basis (20) 91:15,19,25

92:10 93:9 94:15 94:19 95:2,5 96:6 98:6,18,21 160:16 163:3 168:12 173:13 181:24 192:6,19

bear (1) 65:18 bearing (2) 49:16

196:7

beautiful (1) 136:13 becoming (1) 189:20 began (1) 141:10 beginning (5) 81:6

86:6 96:18 107:11 139:15

behalf (33) 9:6 27:8 28:9,13,23,24,25 29:2,4,23 32:8,23 48:21 57:11 64:21 79:6 96:25 101:5 102:7 121:14,23 123:3,7 124:2,25 125:14 126:12 127:2 128:13,21 130:18 140:6 182:5

behave (1) 61:17 behaving (1) 128:8 believe (6) 23:1 81:19

144:7 146:19 168:21 191:13

believed (2) 96:3

174:6 benefit (1) 170:7

benefiting (1) 95:13 Berezin (3) 89:24 90:8

90:13

best (5) 51:25 95:2 164:24 172:21 173:4

better (11) 53:23 63:20 86:8 89:25 90:1 146:22 155:6 163:6 166:18 178:25 197:3

Bidault (1) 70:1

big (14) 38:15,18 39:2 59:2 60:17 134:20 142:13,17,18 153:1 153:15 157:3 165:5 184:13

bigger (2) 130:14

142:20

biggest (2) 149:20

152:13 biography (1) 97:8 bit (23) 10:1 11:9 14:3

19:20,22,24 24:13 24:15 44:14 47:23 48:1 51:13 61:5 85:9 91:7 110:16 111:5 143:25 154:25 169:10 178:25 196:6,6

bits (1) 94:23 Blinova (22) 10:5

13:19,25 14:9 16:25 19:22 20:11 21:5 23:1,6,13,16 23:23 24:25 77:12 108:12,16 109:1,6 109:12,16,21

Blinova’s (2) 24:19

137:2

books (1) 156:14 borrow (1) 51:17 borrowed (1) 192:11 borrower (1) 102:13 borrowing (2) 191:22

191:23

bottom (12) 42:6 48:8 48:12,13 134:2 151:15 161:16 167:2 179:2 186:3 186:17 194:22

bought (8) 156:12 166:5,7,10 174:22 184:12 189:9 192:21

box (2) 20:6 78:14 brackets (1) 175:5 brainstorming (1)

38:11 breach (1) 56:12

break (16) 45:8,19,22 51:18,19,23 99:5,8 99:13,14,17 110:21 110:25 145:7,10,14

breaking (1) 45:20 breaks (2) 196:8

197:1 briefly (1) 54:4

brilliantly (1) 195:19 bringing (1) 181:1 broadly (1) 189:8 broken (1) 149:17 brought (2) 150:14

179:1

Browne (1) 144:13

BSMZ (2) 176:15 179:19

BSP (2) 60:13 75:1 building (3) 53:18 54:3 190:3

built (1) 189:4 Bulgaria (1) 50:11 Bulgarian (1) 127:10 bullet (2) 22:20,21 bundle (3) 145:24

153:19 182:1 business (19) 11:18 66:16,23 67:16

95:9 142:18 143:13 143:14 156:1 161:9 166:13 167:8 174:14 175:2,8,14 181:1,5 194:10

businesses (20)

161:15 162:3,20 166:4,5 174:17,20 174:21 185:4

186:13 188:19 189:1,10 190:1,3,4 191:20 192:8,9 194:23

businessmen (1)

152:12

buy (4) 176:13,14 178:19 181:5 buyer (1) 156:3 buyer’s (1) 156:6 buying (5) 166:13 175:25 176:3

186:12 192:19 BVI (16) 67:21 72:22

73:1 74:3 83:24 86:19 88:5,13 91:13,23 92:17 100:1,4 129:20 132:24 143:16

C

C1/1/37 (1) 86:15 C1/1/38 (1) 72:2 C1/1/59 (1) 131:22 C1/1/60 (2) 49:25

99:20

C1/4/2 (1) 140:7 C1/9/4 (1) 136:8 calculate (2) 162:16

172:16

calculated (3) 158:21

161:12 170:16 calculating (2) 163:14

167:5

calculation (1) 142:21 calculations (5) 78:7

159:5 163:18 171:5 174:6

call (3) 53:12 147:10 164:11

called (6) 68:4 76:7 143:5 152:3 175:14 192:20

card (2) 104:5,6 care (3) 132:21
133:13 196:14 career (1) 95:17 careful (2) 63:19

105:22 carefully (3) 70:15
82:20 111:18 carried (1) 171:4 carrying (1) 28:21 case (30) 19:12 34:10

34:11 49:8 50:15 51:25 54:14 92:13 93:12 94:1 95:8,11 95:16,16 99:2 109:18,20 122:3,4 131:20,24 134:9,10 134:11 135:15 141:24 160:13 167:19 175:21 192:10

cash (3) 163:14 167:5 180:16

categoric (1) 64:10 cause (1) 54:9 caveat (2) 105:25

156:18 central (2) 132:18

134:10 centralised (1) 106:22 certain (7) 75:14

100:3 142:2 153:21 158:1 162:2,20

certainly (5) 9:23 24:25 68:6 109:21

123:3 64:17 150:3 144:24 145:3 152:8,11 160:8
certification (3) 83:1,3 columns (1) 149:12 compare (5) 59:4 163:3
160:7 combine (2) 150:23 73:21 86:18,22 considering (12)
certified (3) 14:4 165:21 150:11 37:16 40:1 44:1
69:25 82:15 combined (14) 146:12 compared (1) 159:10 74:12 88:2 103:6
certify (2) 110:5,6 147:1 148:15,21 comparing (2) 34:20 104:1 129:22
chain (1) 74:15 149:3 153:11 143:3 133:14 134:21
challenge (4) 8:19 9:5 163:11,13,17,20 compiling (2) 43:12 168:10 184:14
27:11 101:19 164:11 166:24 44:17 consisted (1) 70:6
challenged (3) 24:20 167:4 168:8 complain (1) 102:25 consists (2) 104:7
48:18,24 combining (1) 148:22 complaining (2) 60:21 183:7
challenging (2) 9:10 come (12) 92:3,4 103:1 consolidated (6)
79:7 93:24 96:15 108:6 complaint (3) 130:25 147:16 148:23
chance (7) 70:17,18 110:9 124:6 151:8 131:1,1 149:4 153:13
71:22 76:18 111:13 174:23 177:14,15 complaints (1) 98:6 163:11 183:19
136:25 143:11 193:9 complete (1) 45:14 conspiracy (6) 132:19
change (6) 12:14 comes (7) 54:7 75:18 completed (2) 58:19 133:6 134:10 135:4
121:18 151:10 156:18 161:19 141:13 135:7,21
157:14 168:14 166:25 168:15 completely (2) 168:2 conspired (1) 192:6
169:4 179:12 171:25 consultations (1)
changed (2) 98:17 comfortable (1) 40:19 complex (10) 134:11 123:4
137:7 coming (5) 19:22 20:1 149:5 163:21 contact (3) 53:20
changes (1) 183:9 83:20 97:3 109:4 166:21 167:25 83:17 109:13
changing (1) 58:15 comment (13) 25:6 178:6,13 179:7 content (1) 65:12
check (3) 48:16 32:6 46:20 47:16 186:20 189:12 contents (3) 19:17
105:11 159:25 48:25 61:7 90:11 compliance (1) 189:19 138:7 152:1
checked (5) 28:11 103:13 110:13 compliant (1) 164:13 context (3) 15:9,11
53:17 54:3 87:25 157:9 187:18 complicated (3) 153:9 32:12
106:19 190:11 193:14 153:15 166:2 continue (3) 13:12
checking (5) 34:10,11 comments (2) 37:20 comprise (2) 166:21 93:1 171:11
105:19 138:5,20 136:23 167:22 continued (4) 8:14,15
choice (1) 193:20 commercial (2) 28:19 comprised (1) 146:12 198:5,6
choose (1) 143:11 28:19 compulsory (1) 165:8 continuing (1) 108:1
Christmas (1) 71:24 companies (53) 26:19 concept (2) 154:21 contract (6) 28:20
circumstances (4) 26:22,22 38:1,3,8 157:14 44:23 58:6 62:6
54:16 70:14 192:7 38:15 39:2 43:6,7 concern (1) 12:24 71:5 106:9
195:17 43:18,21 51:12 concerned (2) 76:7 contracts (5) 68:22,25
circus (1) 12:19 66:2,17 67:1,4,8,9 95:1 70:25 72:10 103:11
claim (20) 49:6 92:17 69:1 72:11 82:12 concerning (1) 76:12 contrary (1) 100:9
101:19 102:8 83:2 89:21 105:21 condition (1) 28:17 contribution (3)
105:11,13 121:15 122:16 135:9,10 conditions (12) 29:18 176:10,19 177:8
122:10,24 123:23 143:10 146:11,20 29:20 30:20 31:1 control (5) 52:23
129:7,7 130:18 147:7,7 148:11,23 31:22 71:19 143:3 106:17,24 123:17
132:16,19 134:6 149:4 152:13 143:12,15,15 173:2 127:13
135:21 155:8 192:4 153:14 158:2 197:12 controlled (1) 135:9
194:9 163:15,17,21 conduct (1) 131:8 convenient (4) 45:9
Claimant’s (1) 122:24 164:16 165:19 confidence (3) 152:14 45:22 51:14 110:12
claiming (1) 50:15 167:6 176:14,15 152:18,23 conversation (3)
claims (4) 42:20 51:3 178:15 184:20 confidential (1) 61:8 10:18,19,20
100:13 124:16 189:23 190:19 confidentiality (1) convinced (1) 191:16
clarify (1) 21:17 192:6,17 196:5 cooperation (1) 90:2
classmate (1) 93:6 company (66) 14:13 confirm (12) 15:16 copied (6) 14:11 19:7
clause (2) 27:16 106:1 14:19 15:7,18 16:11 17:8 28:18 20:4 77:18 87:3
clean (1) 88:18 20:10 22:14 26:2 75:23 88:11 121:21 103:4
cleaned (1) 63:5 26:12,17,24 28:11 122:2 139:9,16 copies (6) 21:2,3
clear (3) 38:12 91:23 28:25,25 29:10 155:11 175:21 56:23 59:5 72:23
160:3 36:16,23,24 37:3,7 confirmation (1) 104:2
clearer (1) 188:1 37:22 38:13,16,17 107:24 copy (17) 16:17 29:15
clearly (2) 192:7 195:7 38:20,23,23 40:6 confirmations (1) 30:2 33:9,24 48:4
clever (1) 50:24 41:11,24 42:9,19 154:15 59:10,15 63:12
client (4) 131:19 44:7 63:1,5 65:3 confirmed (4) 63:5 73:20 104:18,18
137:15 142:13,17 78:6,9 83:2 85:6 83:5 133:19 137:11 111:14,20 146:1,2
clients (10) 38:21 90:4 102:12,13 confirming (2) 63:4 146:11
62:23 63:21 77:1,3 122:7 127:12 89:15 copying (1) 88:18
85:1 135:14 136:4 138:15 146:15 confront (1) 13:3 core (3) 145:24
176:4 192:4 152:3,8 157:6 confused (1) 191:6 153:18 182:1
close (2) 67:8 73:18 160:6,18 163:15 connected (2) 185:14 corner (2) 48:8,13
code (4) 57:21 59:7 164:10,25 165:10 186:9 corporate (2) 69:1,2
161:1 166:17 165:10 169:3 connotes (1) 59:12 correct (26) 26:1 35:6
codes (2) 157:2 175:17,19,23,24,25 conscious (1) 54:10 43:23 69:6 73:13
167:20 177:12 179:19 consent (7) 20:20 99:22 100:18,20
COGS (3) 170:21 192:20,20 21:19,21,23 22:5 105:17 109:12,24
171:6 172:14 company’s (1) 67:15 22:16,22 110:2,2,16 122:5
collapse (1) 181:20 comparatively (2) consents (1) 138:3 126:7 133:1 135:22
collecting (3) 36:4,5 142:19 165:19 consider (2) 53:14 156:13 177:10,19
97:10 comparator (2) 193:2 179:7 186:24,25
Colonel (3) 128:7 143:24 144:10 considered (11) 29:18 190:9 191:4
130:7,10 comparators (7) 55:20 39:3 40:21 47:25 corrected (3) 14:2,6
column (4) 26:6 36:18 56:7,17 144:15,19 76:6 78:15 110:4 14:24

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

201

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

correctly (3) 134:13 D107/1537/1 (1) 41:13 defence (22) 91:9 40:15 76:16 77:2 78:1
136:19 157:7 69:20 D74/1101/2 (3) 25:11 92:2,8 101:5,13 direction (1) 67:3 80:20,23 81:1,6,9
correspondence (4) D107/1537/2 (1) 71:3 35:13 42:7 102:7 105:9 121:13 directly (1) 130:11 81:10,12,24,25
77:2,4 100:22 D107/1537/3 (1) D98/1263/1 (1) 90:15 121:17,20,22 122:6 director (4) 28:11 82:1,2,7,8 89:5,6
107:12 69:23 D98/1263/8 (1) 90:15 123:10,19 124:19 29:1 140:13 152:10 89:10,10,16 90:22
cost (2) 95:12 170:24 D145/2424.1/1 (1) D99/1282/1 (1) 88:24 127:23 128:12,21 directors (1) 78:5 92:9,11,12 101:18
costs (2) 178:4 185:16 140:20 D99/1282/2 (1) 88:25 129:7,9,11 130:17 disagree (1) 167:16 121:17 122:19
counterclaim (6) 92:2 D2/29/1 (1) 128:20 dare (1) 193:20 defendant (2) 126:19 disagrees (1) 122:10 124:4 125:9,22
92:8 130:17,25 D2/30/1 (3) 123:19 data (5) 44:18 106:23 126:22 disappointing (1) 127:8,18,20 128:14
188:22 191:24 124:5 127:23 180:13,19 187:3 defendants (3) 36:6 61:20 159:12 171:8
country (2) 107:17,22 D2/30/2 (1) 123:21 databases (1) 106:22 135:9 153:20 disassociate (1) 179:15
couple (1) 34:11 D2/32/1 (1) 130:16 date (21) 14:14 15:3 defer (2) 191:7,18 194:17 document’s (1) 81:12
course (17) 12:3 17:1 D33/523/1 (2) 145:22 24:9 25:23 35:17 definitely (5) 78:16 disavow (1) 191:2 documentation (3)
38:10 53:12 82:14 146:10 41:22 44:23,25 94:12 109:12,15 disclosed (9) 26:4 72:7 131:11 138:18
82:14 93:23 130:1 D33/523/28 (1) 160:2 46:12 49:16,17,19 157:10 35:25 36:6,10 documents (85) 17:14
133:7 164:20 165:2 D33/523/3 (2) 146:6 49:20 50:6 65:15 definition (1) 42:25 62:23,23 72:23 19:24 20:2,7,21,23
165:4 166:23 184:7 160:11 69:9,13 87:21 defraud (2) 133:25 73:1 77:1 20:25 21:3,18,22
191:2,17 195:4 D33/523/48 (3) 102:2 107:22 134:5 disclosing (1) 95:14 22:15 33:6 34:6
court (24) 8:13 11:18 151:20 157:22 127:21 Delakova (2) 14:10 disclosure (6) 62:25 36:10 40:20,21
13:1 25:1 36:11 161:8 dated (6) 11:6 35:25 21:6 65:24 66:1 79:9 48:23 49:22 50:15
54:8 61:9 89:15 D33/523/5 (2) 148:17 45:1 89:3 153:19 delay (1) 137:3 97:16 179:13 51:3 58:2 59:3
91:24 97:14 99:3 161:19 169:24 delete (1) 77:3 discuss (11) 70:12 60:18,22,25 62:22
109:20 121:11 D33/523/9 (1) 147:5 dates (4) 44:11 50:25 deleted (1) 97:13 92:4 94:20 167:18 62:22 65:9,12
124:16,20,21 D40 (2) 51:17,25 80:25 107:1 delivered (1) 100:23 170:23 171:10 70:17 73:25 74:1
134:19,20 136:20 D40/688/1 (1) 15:25 day (15) 19:16,22 demand (1) 100:13 177:11,11,13 75:14 81:5 82:24
136:22 191:13 D40/688/8 (3) 16:2,21 24:10 49:19 53:13 demands (1) 100:7 179:10 181:17 82:24,25 83:9,16
197:15 198:4,8 18:6 54:12 78:18 79:16 demonstrate (2) discussed (15) 29:23 83:19 93:1 95:24
courts (1) 136:5 D40/705/1 (2) 9:25 79:18 80:8,8 93:16 189:21 38:9 49:14 58:17 96:3 97:12,13
cover (3) 66:16,25 10:3 107:21 108:3 denial (2) 88:9 125:9 67:11 72:5 76:13 103:11,20 106:19
189:25 D40/705/2 (1) 10:4 135:16 196:10 denied (3) 57:1 59:19 84:12,20,23 85:12 107:24,25 109:17
coverage (1) 141:24 D40/709/1 (3) 13:22 Day11/149:24-25 (1) 136:10 85:14,14 107:5 110:8 125:5 127:16
create (4) 76:19 85:17 18:8 22:19 142:10 deny (3) 32:1 40:13 128:5 128:16,18 132:18
85:19 107:2 D40/709/2 (1) 13:23 Day11/163:12 (1) 105:24 discussing (8) 9:22 133:3,23 134:3,16
created (8) 39:18 48:3 D40/709/3 (1) 15:12 139:18 department (2) 10:12 74:1,3 75:13 84:25 134:18 136:11,15
81:7 90:16 92:9 D41/728.2/0.1 (1) Day11/19:18-19 (1) 78:6 85:3 96:15 129:13 137:13,17,20,24
153:1,10 174:8 32:20 155:13 depends (5) 89:13 discussion (8) 72:10 138:1,10,12,16,19
creating (3) 38:11 D41/728.4/0.1 (2) Day5/35:1 (2) 108:4 142:18,21 162:24 85:24 87:7 88:7 138:24,25 139:3,5
164:20 178:22 29:9,13 108:11 181:12 93:1 171:11 173:6 139:7,13 144:23
creative (2) 48:3,10 D41/728.4/1 (1) 29:12 Day5/35:10-20 (1) depicted (1) 174:1 179:1 145:25 152:25
credit (2) 44:19 81:13 D41/734/1 (1) 27:3 109:7 deprived (1) 190:21 discussions (2) 131:3 190:11,14 191:19
crime (2) 134:23 D41/734/7 (1) 27:2 Day5/35:5 (1) 108:16 deputy (1) 109:14 143:2 doing (18) 48:1 54:9
135:13 D42/747/0.1 (1) 33:21 days (3) 21:7 75:9 described (4) 43:16 dismissed (1) 123:23 59:1 83:8 87:24
criminal (2) 130:12 D49/853/1 (2) 46:3 107:13 44:2 49:13 147:7 dispute (3) 102:14 88:14 92:2 97:9
134:19 47:10 deal (11) 30:15,18 describing (2) 56:5 104:23 144:23 136:6 152:14,23
cross-examination (9) D49/853/12 (1) 46:17 54:15,17,18,20 141:2 disputed (3) 95:24 157:7 164:24 165:6
8:15 25:5 54:7 76:4 D49/853/7 (2) 46:6 55:4,8,9 177:14 description (3) 56:21 96:3 144:18 165:14,15 181:24
93:23 96:10,12 47:11 187:18 59:8,14 disputing (1) 62:16 195:18
108:12 198:6 D49/854/1 (1) 49:1 dealing (2) 53:10 desire (1) 132:22 disseminating (1) dollars (2) 149:15
cross-examined (3) D53/523/3 (1) 147:4 158:1 despite (2) 109:3 96:22 170:16
24:21 52:10 173:6 D53/936.2/0.1 (1) deals (3) 23:2,7 66:2 133:8 dissemination (1) dossier (1) 20:22
crucial (1) 109:16 39:5 Dear (1) 57:16 detail (2) 56:2 190:24 53:7 dots (1) 10:24
Cyprus (2) 129:20 D53/936.2/1 (1) 39:6 debit (3) 33:24 39:23 details (4) 29:7 83:14 distort (1) 180:25 doubt (3) 170:4
132:24 D55/949/1 (2) 103:12 40:15 83:17 90:11 distorting (2) 180:13 184:10,11
104:16 debt (9) 8:21 9:18 development (2) 180:19 doubts (1) 63:4
D D55/949/3 (1) 104:15 21:16 25:8 26:3,14 164:23 192:15 distribute (1) 160:6 Dr (153) 8:16 10:1,3
d (1) 91:10 D55/957.1/0.1 (1) 35:8,25 41:12 developments (1) disturbing (1) 11:9 13:21,23 15:2,8,15
39:21 debtor (1) 70:24 141:13 diversion (1) 196:4 15:21 17:7,12 18:9
D/1/5/1 (1) 122:9
D68/1059/1 (1) debts (1) 25:24 difference (3) 148:25 divider (2) 146:4 19:9 20:3 21:8 24:7
D1/5/1 (3) 100:24
169:20 December (16) 69:7 185:15,19 153:18 24:19 25:10,25
121:12 122:14
D68/1059/2 (2) 69:18 74:17,24 different (34) 33:20 Dmitrievich (3) 8:14 27:4,15 28:1,7,14
D1/5/2 (2) 101:9
170:10,14 75:9 76:8,15 77:16 37:25,25 44:15 47:13 198:5 29:15,24 31:3,19
122:21
D68/1060/1 (2) 77:21 78:20 80:17 50:21 51:16 62:18 Dmitry (1) 181:19 32:21 33:22 34:6
D1/5/3 (2) 101:3
179:12,18 84:10 90:17 145:20 73:14,15,19 74:1 Dobrolyubova (3) 34:22 35:10,24
102:20
D68/1060/2 (2) 148:16 183:1 76:5 78:4,5 84:23 103:24,24,25 37:9 39:7,22 40:23
D1/5/4 (1) 124:9
179:23 180:7 decide (1) 99:3 90:19 97:9 105:21 document (95) 9:24 41:14 42:3 44:24
D104/1424/1 (1)
D68/1060/2.2 (1) decided (5) 53:7 64:8 108:10 122:16 14:8,8,19 15:16 45:7,19,25 46:15
80:13
180:8 77:3 105:11 145:2 126:3 128:6 134:12 17:3 20:10 21:2 47:21 48:11,18
D104/1424/2 (1)
D68/1060/3 (1) decision (3) 28:20 134:16,17 136:4 22:7 33:9,10 34:19 49:3,25 51:5 55:12
80:14
179:16 33:10 65:8 143:3 145:6 149:2 36:6 37:16,17,19 55:25 56:14 61:3,6
D104/1429/1 (2)
D71/1066/1 (1) decisions (1) 65:7 149:18 153:7 39:13,17,25 40:7 61:13 62:3 63:7
76:24 77:5
181:25 declared (1) 122:25 159:10 166:22 42:6 46:1,15,19,20 65:16 66:4 67:17
D104/1429/2 (1)
D71/1066/30 (1) decorum (1) 61:17 195:13 46:21,22 48:1,19 69:17,21 70:3
76:25
182:16 deduct (3) 162:8 differently (1) 85:16 49:16,18,19 56:21 71:25 72:9,17
D105/1454/0.1 (2)
D71/1066/31 (1) 163:10,19 difficult (4) 10:14 56:25 57:2 58:23 73:16,24 75:20
72:17 73:17
184:18 deemed (1) 106:7 12:14 61:19 165:22 59:8,18,20,24 60:2 76:20 77:7 80:1,14
D105/1454/1 (3)
D71/1066/35 (1) deep (2) 61:15 92:1 difficulty (1) 40:2 63:14 64:3,6,18,20 83:24 86:16 87:2
72:21 74:2,22
187:2 deeper (1) 92:3 dilettante (2) 168:20 65:1,18 70:4 71:14 88:4 89:2,22 90:20
D105/1454/2 (2)
D74/1101/1 (5) 9:23 default (2) 102:8 187:1 71:17,20 73:19,22 95:22 97:5 98:16
73:23 75:19
21:16 25:8 35:8 109:3 direct (3) 33:24 39:23 73:24 74:13 76:6 99:2,19 100:6,25

104:14 108:3,6 110:9 121:12 124:19 126:24 129:4,14 130:16 131:21,23 132:16 135:23,25 136:10 137:1,3,21,23 138:5 139:19 140:21 141:6,22 143:24 145:16 146:4 147:12 151:21 153:22 154:22 155:7 156:9 158:18 160:1 161:4 163:1,12,25 165:23 166:9,23 167:7 168:6 170:5 171:3 171:8,24 173:13,20 174:13 175:15 176:20 179:2 180:11 182:2,18 184:18 187:9,17 192:21 193:5 194:9

draft (11) 15:20 16:5 16:12,13 17:17,18 18:4 19:3 21:6 45:5 127:18

drafting (1) 87:20 drafts (6) 21:25 22:1,2

22:3,15 23:5 draw (1) 68:7 drawn (2) 145:24

189:16 drew (1) 193:17

due (7) 17:1 61:17 77:24 78:19 85:19 130:6 179:20

E

E (6) 56:17,20 57:21 59:7,12 62:18 e-mail (46) 10:4,13

13:25 14:5,9 16:6 16:23,24 17:4,6,13 18:15,16 19:6,13 19:14,21 20:3,5,7 20:25 21:2,5,8,19 22:7,11 23:10 24:1 24:14 57:10 74:20 74:24 75:11,14 76:10 77:11 78:13 78:19 79:6,24 80:9 80:10 99:24 110:14 110:18

e-mails (13) 19:15 20:6,6 23:25 24:2,3 24:10 72:23 73:6 74:15 78:8,12,18

eager (1) 52:17 earlier (10) 35:11

49:20 54:15 84:13 99:6 137:11 157:23 183:18 187:7 196:25

early (1) 124:23 Earnings (1) 172:13 easier (1) 194:6 easily (1) 196:23 easy (2) 40:19 165:19

EBITDA (1) 172:12

EBRD (2) 164:22 165:2 effect (4) 95:24

109:25 177:17,22 effectively (1) 137:19 eighth (1) 55:13 either (8) 32:12 62:18

71:23 76:18 103:3 125:22 132:24

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

202

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

189:16

Elena (1) 10:9 employ (2) 163:6

176:13

employed (3) 91:22

93:10 193:18 employee (5) 23:17 48:9 95:15,23

137:14 employees (5) 36:4

78:4 96:1 110:6 133:2

employing (1) 157:5 encouraged (1) 196:4 ended (1) 162:7 endurable (1) 61:22 enforcement (1)

133:15

England (1) 53:25

English (18) 10:3 14:4

16:18,19 27:2 29:12 52:22 73:14 73:17 74:6 88:25 90:18 97:1 104:15 105:1 132:25 152:4 157:6

English-American (1)

82:17

Enjoy (1) 137:5 enormous (2) 95:12

129:2 enquiry (1) 40:18

enter (3) 29:16 32:4 40:25

entered (6) 8:17 9:6 21:10 40:13 58:13 104:19

entering (1) 30:5 entirely (3) 11:14 61:16 192:10 entitled (1) 46:10 entity (1) 134:22 entries (5) 25:12,19

26:3 78:22 175:13 entry (13) 36:12 41:17

58:5 60:5 61:1 62:3 63:23 64:11 65:13 79:7 102:21 151:5 151:10

Erium (6) 27:9 28:9,22 29:17 32:4,17

error (1) 41:22 especially (6) 14:24

21:18 32:15 62:22 97:15 129:2

essentially (2) 66:15 66:22

establish (1) 18:9 established (4) 18:25

93:15 157:6 158:17 establishing (1)

173:25 estimated (6) 161:15

171:17,18,18,18

176:16 estimates (1) 177:5 European (2) 131:17

164:23

evaluate (2) 142:22

167:24

evaluating (2) 159:8,8 event (1) 189:14 events (2) 52:12,18 everybody (1) 32:15 evidence (53) 23:23

24:19,25 37:5,6,21 39:19 40:9 43:8 49:15,18 50:10 55:19 60:11 62:14

72:12 76:20 84:2 85:11 91:6,13,20 92:16,20 93:5,17 93:25 94:1,23 95:2 95:6,24 96:1 97:20 97:22 98:6,10 108:7 109:21 123:6 124:25 131:7 133:3 137:2,12 138:8 140:10 175:20 189:3,23 190:23 192:22 193:6

evidences (2) 50:17

96:9

ex-employees (1)

130:8 exact (1) 78:7

exactly (5) 88:20,20 148:24 159:14 171:2

exam (3) 167:19,21 168:4

example (13) 34:10 38:15,17,20 40:22 43:13,20,23,25 85:5 107:3 138:18 139:5

exams (1) 168:11 excessively (1) 61:18 exchange (1) 76:11 exchanged (1) 61:7 exclamation (2) 79:12

79:24

exclude (1) 153:11 excluded (1) 180:15 execute (1) 72:6 exercise (2) 170:7

179:14 exhibit (3) 74:11

143:19 144:1 exhibited (2) 73:3

100:1

exist (3) 56:22 59:9 64:4

existing (1) 103:25 expect (1) 53:25 expected (2) 62:24

194:11

expenditure (3) 66:16

66:25 150:11 expense (5) 160:19

183:7,8,25 184:3 expenses (6) 150:19 158:13 163:4,16

183:5 184:8 experience (2) 61:5

194:11 expert (8) 129:24

144:4,13 163:6 181:22 189:3,23 190:23

expertise (1) 170:5 experts (4) 157:18,18

190:2 191:5 expiring (1) 84:10 explain (11) 87:10,15

91:18 123:9 125:16 125:16 167:13 171:6,10 187:15 189:7

explained (7) 32:11 36:3 40:17 151:19 193:7,19,24

explaining (3) 40:18

161:11 194:23 explains (5) 43:18

57:21 155:24 161:14 186:7

explanation (8) 29:19

32:19 103:2 106:15 142:24 163:4 177:25 184:11

explanatory (1) 151:9 exposed (1) 191:8 extendable (1) 84:10 extended (1) 188:16 extension (2) 81:3

82:9

extent (1) 172:23 extract (2) 23:12

108:11 extradition (1) 134:13 extraordinary (1)

71:19

F

fabricate (1) 133:9 fabricated (8) 59:21 123:12 132:17

133:4 134:16,18 135:3,19

fabricating (1) 134:16 fabrication (3) 105:25

122:2 133:12 face (8) 25:20 33:17

34:4 39:10 81:2,20 186:23,24

facility (1) 47:5 facing (1) 192:4 fact (23) 40:1 53:22

53:23 63:4 68:25 97:12 100:3 104:1 109:3,15,16 129:1 133:8 135:10 136:3 136:5 152:24 165:18 189:6,6,17 192:24 196:11

factors (1) 194:22 factual (4) 193:25 194:5 195:8,11 failure (1) 177:23

fair (15) 50:19 59:16 61:13 151:10 156:2 157:14 158:20 159:17 160:17 168:14 169:4 178:3 183:9 184:20 185:16

fairly (1) 37:16 faithfully (1) 137:20 false (12) 91:13,20

92:16,20,21 93:25 94:1,24 95:5 96:1 98:10 188:11

familiar (1) 154:21 familiarised (1)
151:25

family (8) 47:24 48:14 66:15,23 67:8 70:20 93:9 104:8

famous (1) 152:11 far (23) 9:8 14:16 23:4

23:16 45:16 76:3 77:2 91:5 92:9 93:18 95:1 96:19 106:21 107:6 122:4 123:25 127:10 130:14 131:16 136:19 143:7 152:2 153:11

fast (2) 65:8 153:1 faster (1) 54:22 fault (3) 56:9 94:9

141:20

favour (4) 35:3 39:9 39:24 40:25 featured (1) 193:6

February (2) 1:1 110:20 111:21
197:16 122:4,17 126:15,19
feeds (1) 166:23 126:21 127:3,5,8
feeling (1) 190:22 129:8,16 138:13
feels (1) 191:8 142:13,16,25 143:6
FIC (3) 41:25 44:4,14 143:16 157:19
figure (6) 150:4 160:10 165:22
161:25 162:2,5 167:21 172:14
163:10 184:10 fitted (1) 59:13
figures (10) 149:15 five (5) 23:3 37:25
150:23 151:17 107:13 145:11
153:3 170:18 164:17
171:12 177:24 five-minute (1) 99:14
178:1 179:10 fixed (1) 195:7
190:20 flawed (1) 187:24
file (4) 40:20 125:13 flexible (1) 40:17
125:17 164:4 flick (1) 148:9
filed (14) 101:5,10 Flow (1) 180:16
102:7 111:6 121:14 flows (2) 163:14
121:22 123:19,20 167:5
124:19 126:12 focus (4) 24:17 172:20
127:24 128:13,21 177:17,22
130:18 follow (7) 38:6 57:17
files (3) 130:22 138:19 58:17 124:18
164:19 157:10 158:14
filing (5) 123:2,4 175:9
125:5,7 128:16 following (14) 16:10
final (6) 76:13,14 18:15 19:16,17
125:22 127:20 20:6 30:15 70:24
178:21 184:1 122:11 128:9 130:1
finalise (1) 111:10 140:10 144:20
finance (35) 169:12 181:3 196:2
169:14,18 170:1,11 follows (1) 70:23
171:4,21,23 173:15 foot (7) 42:11 66:12
174:4 175:7 176:13 67:23 101:9 151:22
176:16 177:6,9 154:10 162:12
179:3,14,15 180:11 footing (2) 188:16
181:15,19,20 182:3 192:14
182:8,13,15 183:20 foreign (2) 44:2
186:16 187:11 104:11
188:15 191:25 Forest (1) 44:6
192:15 193:12,13 forge (1) 133:9
193:13 forged (6) 47:1 123:11
Finance’s (5) 170:4 132:17 133:4,24
172:5 176:6 177:18 134:4
177:22 forgeries (1) 33:7
finances (1) 70:12 forgery (8) 34:10,11
financial (14) 78:6 89:7,8 111:3 122:1
143:10 145:17 134:9,15
146:12 147:16 forging (1) 133:11
148:2 150:17,19 forgotten (1) 23:7
153:21 165:6 170:5 form (1) 44:19
174:12 184:1 formally (1) 67:12
194:12 forms (1) 134:5
Financials (1) 182:17 Forster (1) 152:7
financing (3) 10:11 forward (1) 13:16
174:1,3 found (1) 52:5
find (11) 14:18 15:14 founder (3) 30:10,14
20:9 21:6 46:1 31:16
52:18 85:17 103:15 four (12) 25:12 26:2,8
108:11 153:18 26:21 38:3 43:7
175:21 74:1 75:9 105:21
finds (1) 89:9 122:16 126:3
finish (6) 45:11 87:13 175:13
109:10 110:25 fourth (20) 25:13,21
111:2 197:1 26:20 35:7,21
finishing (2) 45:12,16 36:14 41:3,5,8
first (62) 11:24 12:4 50:21 51:6 64:11
14:25 16:11 17:8 64:21 101:20 102:9
17:21 18:3,9 23:17 103:10 104:20
24:3 25:13,21 121:15,24 132:12
26:16,18,20 27:5 France (7) 52:16 53:1
27:16 31:12,12 53:22 54:1 128:19
52:4,14 58:7 60:8 134:18,23
61:5 65:15 67:20 fraud (3) 93:9 98:23
70:22 74:3 75:23 99:1
78:22 79:20,23 fraud/conspiracy (2)
80:2,6 83:23 102:1 133:25 134:5
103:10 105:1,2 fraudly (1) 133:2

freezing (1) 96:20 French (4) 97:1
127:11 134:19,20 frequently (1) 108:21 Friday (4) 196:11,15 196:24 197:16

friend (5) 59:1 61:7,24 61:25 123:15

front (4) 12:15,18 16:21 136:16 Fuel (4) 175:17,23 179:19 192:20

fulfil (1) 109:19

full (8) 47:24 152:5,14 152:18,20,20,23 173:23

fun (1) 11:17 funding (3) 174:4,9

176:14

funds (2) 66:17 67:1 funny (4) 10:18,19

48:1 61:2 furnish (1) 111:19 further (6) 53:21

63:21 84:14 111:22 169:10 191:23

furtherance (2)

133:24 134:4 future (2) 189:22

190:20

G

G1/18/12 (1) 133:16 G1/20/2 (1) 134:24 G1/20/39 (2) 66:4,8 G1/20/4 (1) 68:17 G1/20/40 (1) 66:14 gain (2) 156:3,14 game (1) 11:17 games (2) 128:10

131:13 general (12) 29:1

84:12,20 85:12,24 87:7 88:7 138:23 140:12 147:6 152:10 160:11

generally (1) 38:24 generating (1) 192:17 genuine (10) 56:21

59:8 63:14 81:24 81:25 82:1,2,7 89:9 96:4

getting (1) 130:2 girl (1) 23:18

girls (3) 10:18,19,20 give (26) 19:10,11

33:11 37:20 38:6,9 39:8 41:7 45:6 55:19 67:7 84:2 93:15 102:23 107:19,23 109:17 111:22 130:3 139:13,20 140:10 141:12 142:6 167:16 197:7

given (41) 8:22 13:1,9 15:3 16:16 19:10 19:10 27:19 32:19 34:2 38:8 49:2 50:17 52:21 56:21 56:23 57:6 59:10 62:6 63:6 65:4 67:8 69:5 76:16 81:4 91:5 93:25 95:5,24 98:12 105:6 106:13 106:16 108:7 122:1 123:6 138:4 140:6 141:11 144:10

194:9

gives (3) 97:22 137:12 149:14

giving (7) 28:17 38:3 52:9 93:4 96:8 124:25 127:22

go (51) 9:23 10:1 18:3 18:14 22:11 25:10 35:13 41:16 42:6,7 42:11 44:4 46:17 51:15 56:13 60:3,5 63:23 67:4 70:17 71:3 72:2 83:23,25 101:8 102:19 103:11 104:25 105:1 109:20 123:19,21 133:8 145:9 146:4 147:4 147:5 148:15 154:6 155:23 157:22 170:10 177:5,7 179:12,23 181:25 182:16 184:18 187:2 190:2

goes (5) 107:13 188:18,22,24 190:17

going (43) 8:16 19:10 19:11 25:24 51:14 52:22 60:18 61:21 62:25 67:16,17 82:5 94:6,16,22 99:4 103:10 111:21 123:13 132:1 145:6 145:16,19,25 154:13 155:7 169:10 177:13,15 181:9,10,10 188:2 188:17 190:2 191:7 192:1,25 193:3,21 193:24 196:17,20

GOM (1) 147:17 good (22) 22:18 38:15

54:12 77:11 79:16 79:16,18 80:8,8 94:11,17 95:7,10 143:4,10,15 172:1 174:8 195:14,15 197:2,13

goods (3) 149:21,23 170:24

goodwill (35) 151:5 151:19 154:19,21 155:24 156:4,11 157:25 161:5,12,19 162:5 166:12,15 167:7 168:7 169:3 169:11 180:2,5,12 180:14,21 183:4,8 183:25 184:23 185:5,9,20 186:9 186:15 187:8,13 189:6

goodwill’ (1) 156:1 grant (1) 82:9 granted (1) 27:20 granting (1) 22:23 great (2) 133:9 139:16 gross (7) 150:10,10

172:11,12 175:2,5 177:5

group (25) 26:22 29:2 37:24 38:16 66:3 66:15 67:12 70:24 82:24 83:2 85:15 147:2,17 149:6 150:25 153:14 162:22 165:19 166:4,10 168:8,25

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

203

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

173:14 176:17 180:1,12 42:17,18,19,21,21 indicating (1) 54:25
182:5 heard (1) 56:14 42:22,25 43:9,10 individuals (1) 92:15
Group’s (1) 72:6 hearing (10) 1:3 8:13 idea (3) 96:14,17 industrial (1) 38:24
groups (1) 147:7 53:1,24 112:3 178:9 industries (1) 166:22
grow (1) 178:10 121:11 198:3,4,7,8 ideas (2) 38:12 92:5 Industry (1) 44:6
growth (2) 185:13 heavily (2) 52:7,11 identifies (1) 9:19 inform (2) 106:24,25
186:8 held (2) 53:14 89:23 identify (2) 37:15 94:1 information (22) 36:4
guarantee (64) 9:3,3 help (3) 169:18 identity (2) 104:5,6 52:25 53:7 88:2,17
9:12,14,20 10:17 193:22 194:16 IFRS (37) 150:12 97:10 103:20,21
11:1,3 13:17 15:18 helped (1) 193:23 152:15 155:2 157:1 123:5 147:6 152:20
16:12 18:21 19:3 helpful (1) 193:17 157:1,13,19 159:9 155:8 174:7 182:3
20:16 21:9,9,18 helping (1) 177:6 159:15 160:24 182:14 183:21
22:13,14,23 27:24 HILDYARD (135) 11:11 161:1 163:7,24 186:8 187:3 188:11
28:4,17 33:11 11:14 12:1,7,11,17 164:13,17,18 165:7 188:21 189:8
34:23,24 35:2 39:9 12:21,24 13:5,9,13 165:8,10,14,15,18 194:13
39:23 40:10,14,25 13:20 17:1 21:17 166:17,18 167:15 initially (1) 105:10
41:7 47:13,14 49:2 21:23 22:2,4,17,25 167:20,23 168:2,4 initials (1) 43:22
49:4,6 50:9 58:6,7 23:6 24:17 38:13 168:12,22 181:13 initiatives (1) 192:1
58:14 60:8 62:6,17 45:9,11,14,21 188:5 189:17 injunction (1) 96:20
63:25 64:11,21 48:22 50:19,23 194:18,20,21 innocently (1) 96:3
65:14 104:19 51:10,17,21,25 ignorance (1) 191:8 input (3) 44:18 106:22
105:24 121:18,25 52:3,13 53:9 54:17 illegal (1) 30:6 181:23
122:1 123:10,11 54:24 55:3,7 56:12 immediate (1) 13:2 inside (7) 78:11 153:2
125:10 128:15 61:16,21 62:1 69:9 immediately (4) 12:25 157:8,8 160:9
129:8,10 139:20 69:11,16 79:11,15 43:19 86:2 181:19 174:6,10
141:25 142:6,25 79:18,20,23 82:3 impacted (1) 183:25 insight (1) 193:16
guaranteed (2) 47:13 82:12,21 83:6 imperfect (1) 172:19 insinuating (1) 190:9
62:15 92:12,15,19 93:13 implemented (2) insinuation (1) 187:25
guarantees (26) 8:17 93:21 94:4,8,11,13 38:12 83:4 insisted (1) 32:17
8:19 19:11 26:7 94:17,21 99:7,11 implied (1) 138:9 insofar (1) 122:24
36:22 38:4,8 51:6 99:14 104:5,13 implying (1) 61:10 instance (1) 111:22
51:11,12 60:12 107:6 111:4,9,13 important (24) 39:16 instructing (1) 129:12
63:3,6,8 65:4 67:7 111:21 124:4,6,18 40:21 53:3 56:13 instructions (2) 127:7
67:13 129:16 132:2 136:24 145:8,11 61:18 88:3 92:24 128:17
132:14 141:12,14 146:20,22 152:7 97:12,13 99:1,11 insurance (53) 15:18
141:16,18,23 159:17,24 160:13 107:18 110:23 18:21 20:17 21:10
142:12 161:3 164:1,4,8,13 111:7 134:15 22:14 26:10,12,17
guarantees’ (1) 69:3 165:1,3 172:17,23 137:15 138:23 26:18,21,22,23
guarantor (2) 102:15 173:2,10 178:2 139:3 152:11 159:7 27:25 28:18 32:23
106:14 180:6,10 188:1,4,7 160:5 163:13 33:11 34:2,3 36:16
guarantors (2) 9:19 188:10,14,20,23,25 192:24 193:1 36:19,21,23,24
20:14 189:2,11 190:5,13 imposed (1) 130:7 37:3,7 38:1,16,17
guess (3) 94:4 168:4 190:17 191:14 impossible (1) 128:24 38:20,22,23,24,25
186:21 192:12,23 193:8,14 impressed (1) 170:21 39:1,2,8,24 41:7,11
guessing (1) 45:3 194:4,15 195:2,6 impressing (1) 136:14 42:9,19 60:12
195:18,20,23 196:3 in-house (2) 71:23 62:15 63:1,5,8
H 196:16,19,21 197:4 131:11 64:22 65:3 83:2
H1/11/1 (2) 125:24 197:6,10 inappropriate (1) 102:13 147:21
holding (1) 46:1 11:14 164:15,25
126:8
hole (2) 75:19 183:6 include (3) 147:11 Inter-something (1)
H1/17/1 (1) 55:13
holes (1) 37:10 150:1 153:13 38:17
H1/17/4 (1) 55:16
holidays (1) 71:24 included (3) 163:17 interest (16) 20:15
half (3) 110:17,21
honestly (1) 137:20 180:22 185:5 78:7 150:17,19,23
111:1
hope (5) 13:7 27:4 includes (6) 134:12 150:24,24 168:24
halfway (4) 150:3
61:12 128:23 188:1 158:4 174:16,17,20 169:5 172:13 183:4
172:11 179:18
hour (5) 110:17,21,21 174:21 183:8,8,25 184:3,7
180:2
111:1 196:23 including (2) 148:22 interested (8) 13:16
hand (2) 51:25 191:4
hours (1) 196:23 185:14 53:19 173:15,21,25
Handed (2) 51:18
housekeeping (1) income (21) 106:25 174:3,4,5
146:2
54:5 148:15 149:9,17,20 interesting (2) 107:18
handle (2) 40:20
huge (10) 58:25 60:15 149:20 150:11,17 124:3
88:16
60:16 63:18 70:16 156:4,15 161:18 interests (4) 93:8 95:8
handling (2) 83:16,21
70:20 71:18 88:16 162:9,19 168:8 126:18,21
handwriting (4)
95:17 128:7 181:8,9,10 183:7,8 internal (8) 90:12
129:24 143:23
hundreds (5) 19:15 185:20 186:8 103:16,22,23 104:5
144:5,24
60:18 64:6 78:17 Income’ (1) 185:13 153:12,13 167:5
happened (1) 61:23
85:14 incorrect (1) 188:5 international (4) 83:5
happening (2) 31:19
hurry (3) 44:10 59:2 increase (2) 166:12 153:6 163:9 166:20
191:15
65:8 181:7 internet (1) 52:19
happy (1) 172:2
hypothetical (1) 82:3 increased (5) 158:24 interpretation (1)
hard (4) 73:20 111:14
180:14 184:3,8,17 195:10
111:20 146:11
I increasing (1) 191:22 Interpreted (1) 13:15
head (7) 11:12 50:25
I120/26/32 (1) 154:7 indebtedness (3) interpreters (2) 11:22
109:14,14 173:14
135:3,16,19 12:10
181:19 193:13 I20/26/31 (1) 153:17
independent (2) interrupt (1) 177:21
headed (4) 77:20 I20/26/33 (2) 154:13
149:4 160:25 intimidating (1)
82:12,21 161:9 155:25
index (5) 42:14 43:5 131:12
heading (6) 78:23 IC (16) 26:7,10,23
43:17 58:1 198:1 intrinsic (1) 180:25
140:22 147:6 154:9 37:22 38:14 42:8,9
indicated (1) 106:9 introduced (1) 164:18

investigation (2) 165:1,3 172:17,23 172:25 175:1,6,23
134:19 144:5 173:2,10 178:2 184:9 186:22 187:1
investment (6) 151:11 180:6,10 188:1,4,7 187:7 189:11
157:14 165:12 188:10,14,20,23,25 194:15,19 196:12
168:15 183:9 189:2,11 190:5,13 196:22
193:13 190:17 191:14 knowing (2) 105:18
investors (1) 97:7 192:12,23 193:8,14 167:20
invited (1) 139:11 194:4,15 195:2,6 knowingly (1) 91:20
involve (1) 133:11 195:18,20,23 196:3 knowledge (7) 68:6
involved (6) 52:7,12 196:16,19,21 197:4 101:15 152:18
90:7 95:18 131:13 197:6,10 157:12,12 172:19
194:14 justification (2) 173:11
ISO (3) 82:15 83:1,3 167:16,18 known (5) 31:1,23
isolated (1) 123:15 justify (1) 190:20 105:16 143:23
issue (15) 32:3 53:3,4 146:15
55:19 63:2 83:19 K knows (2) 190:23
90:1 92:24 104:3 keep (5) 25:23 50:25 191:25
134:15,20,23 Kolpino (1) 27:22
86:13 111:8 132:23
160:20,21 165:13 Konstantin (2) 93:4,10
Kerr (1) 152:7
issued (3) 36:22 47:12 Kristina (2) 93:2,8
key (18) 42:13,13
47:13
43:17 52:6,11 63:2
issues (4) 84:23 85:4 L
83:19 96:24 97:15
93:19 134:12 Lair (2) 159:1,14
98:22 104:3 106:17
issuing (1) 182:9
134:23 138:12,25 land (2) 178:8,10
item (4) 156:5,21,23
139:14 145:25 language (2) 22:13
180:23
165:13 100:19
items (1) 150:14
keys (1) 89:23 late (3) 54:11 125:3

kids (1) 104:8 141:4
J
kind (15) 11:3 15:20 latest (2) 88:2 137:7

jams (1) 196:14 22:6 25:10 27:15 laughing (4) 11:8
January (2) 49:21 29:6 38:11 41:16 12:13 56:10 61:4
153:19 55:24 78:8,9 125:4 laughter (1) 11:12
job (1) 60:16 168:19 174:24 law (4) 11:18 30:6
jointly (2) 122:11,25 178:12 32:7,10
joke (1) 24:4 Kirikova (6) 10:5,8,9 lawyer (13) 12:20,22
jokes (1) 12:5 14:1,10 21:5 75:7 105:14 125:16
joking (1) 10:25 KIT (39) 169:12,14 126:17 127:6 128:6
journalists (1) 52:16 170:1,4,11 171:4 128:24 129:12,13
judge (4) 167:24 171:21 172:5 131:8,17
172:9 186:21 173:15 174:1,3,4 lawyers (14) 12:23
187:22 175:7 176:6,13,16 32:15 71:23 72:6
judgements (1) 48:20 177:6,9,18,22 72:13 75:4,11
judgment (2) 124:20 179:3,14,15 180:11 76:11,17 121:23
124:22 181:15,19,20 182:3 128:4,9 130:2
judgments (1) 168:22 182:8,13,15 183:20 131:2
July (3) 35:17 104:20 186:16 187:11 layout (1) 17:25
108:18 188:11 192:15 lays (1) 194:9
June (11) 41:23 44:25 193:12,13,13 lead (2) 191:6 193:3
46:12 50:11 65:16 knew (1) 65:3 leading (2) 38:22
69:15 84:18 85:11 knight (1) 192:25 152:4
86:8,19 87:19 know (101) 11:15 leads (1) 156:14
jurisdiction (1) 129:21 12:4,19,21 13:7 learned (3) 61:7,24,25
jurisdictions (1) 136:4 15:8,8 18:13,17 leave (4) 54:3 194:7
justice (137) 11:11,14 25:6 26:25 31:4 195:12,14
12:1,7,11,17,21,24 37:23,23 38:10 leaves (1) 96:2
13:5,9,13,20 17:1 43:11,11,19 44:6 leaving (1) 54:11
21:17,23 22:2,4,17 45:2 46:16 47:2 led (1) 158:23
22:25 23:6 24:17 48:2 49:24 50:14 left (5) 87:5,16 107:17
38:13 45:9,11,14 52:15,18 53:18 107:22 158:14
45:21 48:22 50:19 54:20 55:3 60:17 left-hand (6) 16:3
50:23 51:10,17,21 61:19 63:13 68:15 73:8,12 127:8
51:25 52:3,13 53:9 68:15,15 73:25 161:20 180:1
54:17,24 55:3,7 79:9,21 80:1,4,11 legal (4) 32:18 72:1
56:12 61:16,21 82:14,17 83:8,10 92:10 134:22
62:1 69:9,11,16 83:12 85:3,9 87:20 legislation (1) 100:23
79:11,15,18,20,23 92:1,7,25 95:12 lender (1) 187:11
82:3,12,21 83:6 97:6 102:14 104:23 lending (2) 184:16
92:12,15,19 93:13 105:24 107:7,7,9 190:18
93:21 94:4,8,11,13 111:7 128:18 lendings (1) 184:14
94:17,21 99:7,11 131:10 132:5,10 length (1) 53:10
99:14 104:5,13 134:17 136:20 lengths (1) 133:9
107:6 111:4,9,13 141:17,18 142:7,7 Leningrad (1) 126:17
111:21,23 124:4,6 146:18,21 148:25 let’s (11) 55:10 82:18
124:18 129:22 152:5 155:1,1 88:18 99:9,10
136:24 145:8,11 157:4 159:14 104:7 107:14
146:20,22 152:7 162:24 163:2 165:4 110:17 138:24
159:17,24 160:13 165:23,25 168:12 165:16 195:23
161:3 164:1,4,8,13 170:21 171:9 letter (11) 13:15 15:1

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

204

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

80:16 81:2,3,14 143:6,8,10 69:11,15,17 79:16 Madame (1) 130:11 memorandum (23)
82:8 107:14 153:19 loan’ (1) 69:5 80:1 82:7 83:18 Magnum (1) 146:11 69:8,18 70:5,23
153:22 155:23 loans (15) 25:14,21,24 92:22,22 94:6,6,9,9 mail (3) 106:8 107:16 72:13 75:21,24,25
letters (5) 78:5 83:7 26:8 32:12 38:8 94:15,22 95:1 110:1 76:1,2,5,7,8,12,14
85:4 107:10 109:23 60:13 62:16 67:14 99:19 104:14 108:2 mails (1) 107:15 84:7 155:9 182:3
level (7) 84:12,20 69:1 85:15 129:17 110:12,12,24,24 Main (1) 187:3 182:14 183:21
85:12 87:7 109:18 139:17 143:19 111:5,16,19 121:12 maintained (2) 133:23 186:8 187:3 188:11
163:24 168:5 184:15 124:5,7,10,19 134:3 memory (3) 55:25
levels (1) 52:23 local (2) 152:3 153:7 126:5 136:24 137:1 major (2) 132:20 88:15,21
Levitskaya (5) 123:15 logic (2) 157:10,11 145:6,6,9,16 164:21 mention (4) 128:1
128:7 130:7,10 logo (1) 82:18 146:24 149:1 153:4 making (5) 60:23 159:7 175:19
131:12 logos (1) 82:19 159:20,22,22,25 95:10 101:19 167:9 192:21
liabilities (1) 156:7 London (1) 164:25 161:4 165:23 190:15 mentioned (5) 37:23
liability (1) 28:21 long (17) 9:21 32:14 173:11,13 178:2,5 Malysheva (4) 71:20 44:9 81:6 126:2
liable (3) 104:9 43:21 49:23 61:22 178:5,14,14 180:7 72:5 76:15 130:11 127:22
155:17,21 82:14,15 123:14 180:8,9,11 188:1,6 management (1) 83:4 mentioning (1)
life (2) 38:5 83:11 142:13 146:21 188:9,13,18,19,22 manipulated (1) 148:22
limitation (1) 130:7 152:15 169:7 188:22,24 189:1,4 177:24 message (1) 57:18
line (31) 13:2 26:18 173:20 174:7 196:7 189:5,25,25 190:6 March (5) 107:11,21 messy (1) 196:15
26:20,20 35:12,15 196:22 197:10 190:6,23 191:7,11 108:18,20 140:14 met (1) 109:22
35:16 36:22 37:1,1 longer (1) 51:13 191:17,19,19 margin (1) 150:11 middle (1) 158:12
37:1 41:18 43:4,13 look (53) 9:17 16:11 192:12,19,19,24 marine (4) 38:25 military (1) 104:10
43:23 44:4,14,19 17:21 25:20,22 193:9,10,24 194:3 66:15 147:17 182:5 million (53) 44:22
97:24 98:1,2 109:6 27:16 33:19 44:19 194:3,8,8,19,19,22 mark (7) 62:10 64:2 68:2 71:6 79:2 84:9
109:7 133:22 46:23 47:3 49:12 195:3,14,17,19,21 64:24 65:5,21 85:8,8 86:4,4 89:4
139:22 149:11 50:20 56:2 59:7 195:21 196:18,20 79:12,24 89:18 149:10,21
167:2 175:2,9 61:1 66:11 69:7 196:25,25 198:6 marked (5) 26:6 56:17 150:8,25 151:6,11
176:20 177:7 70:22 72:3 74:19 Lordship (36) 11:7 62:9 64:17,24 158:18,24 160:18
lines (6) 26:19 37:2 86:17 91:1 102:20 43:8 47:22 52:2 market (4) 156:2,13 161:5,15,25 162:9
43:9 81:21 155:15 105:25 106:12 54:14 71:16 87:10 156:14 159:10 162:12 167:9 168:9
194:22 122:9,21 127:23 87:15 89:9 94:10 marks (1) 58:3 168:16,17,25 175:5
list (6) 13:18 33:6 130:16 133:20 96:13 98:5 99:5 married (1) 104:9 175:10,10,10,11
56:6,16,16 75:16 140:5 141:8 149:6 102:6 103:13 Marshall (1) 59:1 176:22 179:4,5,5
listed (1) 53:19 149:14 150:3,13 106:23 110:13 match (1) 81:18 182:10 184:4,15,16
listing (2) 53:20,21 151:15 154:24 111:19 121:22 mathematics (2) 184:24 185:7,10,24
lists (1) 26:7 158:12 168:24 123:9 125:25 167:22 174:12 186:1 187:5,8
litigation (2) 36:1 97:4 171:3,12 172:3,11 126:24 128:2,23 matter (19) 15:4,6 192:5,5,5
litigations (2) 126:19 175:1 179:2 182:13 138:1 146:2 148:20 40:9 53:11,18,22 Milner (1) 87:24
126:22 183:5 185:22 151:22 153:18 54:2 63:11 134:6 mind (6) 45:20 86:16
little (3) 42:13 169:10 186:17,25 189:13 159:6 160:3 172:25 188:15 189:3,23,25 137:8 194:16 195:6
191:6 194:22 190:10 191:25 190:22 193:5,14,19 196:7
LK (1) 147:23 looked (6) 18:20 34:9 193:2,11 194:4 195:10 mine (1) 49:12
LLC (3) 27:24 89:19,21 35:11 64:20 76:17 Lordship’s (2) 89:13 matters (6) 54:13 86:7 minute (4) 108:6
loan (138) 8:17,20 9:1 99:24 182:1 140:10 153:21 166:10,11 178:7
9:5,12,16,17,20 looking (8) 22:17,19 loss (19) 156:6,23 191:9 194:6 minutes (9) 42:16
11:6 14:16 15:5,10 22:19 34:12 60:20 162:6 167:9 168:9 MCD (1) 152:3 45:12 51:20,21
15:21,22,23 16:14 64:7 65:9 73:16 168:17 170:11 McKenzie (3) 57:11 110:18,19 111:12
16:15,16,22 17:8,9 looks (66) 10:20 12:5 171:3,12 172:5 58:25 63:18 126:25 145:11
17:10,10,13,17,19 14:2,5,24 15:3 174:14 175:3 177:8 mean (25) 8:22 20:12 minutes’ (1) 45:23
17:22,24 18:10,11 16:13 18:17 19:3,5 179:3 182:20 41:18 44:3 52:9 Mironova (9) 91:12
18:13,14,18,23 19:6,20 27:10 33:5 185:15,22 186:19 53:22 55:5 78:3 92:15 93:2,8,23
19:1,4,21,23 21:11 33:8,16,17 34:1,15 187:5 79:22 80:4 91:18 95:3,17 98:12,19
21:14 26:2 27:1,6 34:17,20 35:21,23 loss-making (2) 95:10 100:20 144:9 Mironova’s (1) 97:20
27:13,20 28:13,16 35:24 36:18 39:7 189:10 190:8 153:13 154:25 mislead (1) 136:22
28:17,23 29:16,17 39:11,17,18,22 losses (1) 190:15 155:1 164:3 167:22 missed (1) 87:11
29:20,21 30:3,18 42:13 43:17 46:18 lost (3) 162:22 176:5 171:2,6,9 172:14 missing (5) 14:18 20:7
30:21,23 31:1,5,18 46:19 47:23 48:3 196:5 188:4,17 20:9,11,21
31:22 32:4 33:15 58:9,12,22 59:4 lot (9) 10:24 44:11 meaning (3) 43:13 mistake (5) 44:25
34:23 35:5,7,21 69:25 75:10,13 60:21 97:9 133:11 56:25 57:1 103:3 106:20
36:14 41:5,9 47:5 76:10 77:11 80:22 134:12 165:20,23 meanings (1) 149:3 107:10 108:24
47:12 49:3 50:21 80:25 81:2,7 85:9 176:5 means (10) 17:4 mistakes (3) 44:11
50:22 51:7 58:7 87:2 89:2,5 90:16 lower (2) 75:19 183:5 43:15 44:16 59:25 45:3 60:23
60:9 62:7 63:25 123:2 140:24 LPK (7) 42:5 44:8 47:8 167:4 170:22,22 mistress (2) 93:2 95:3
64:12,21 65:15 141:15 142:5 49:3 50:8 127:24 178:17,18 179:20 misunderstanding (1)
67:18,25 68:2,6,7 151:21 157:25 148:3 meant (3) 56:20 59:18 142:8
68:11,23 71:5,10 158:7,23 167:8 LPN (1) 181:14 59:23 Mm (2) 34:6 71:25
71:12,13 78:25 169:21 174:13 Lt-Colonel (1) 123:15 medical (3) 38:22,25 model (12) 169:21
79:4 81:4,15,22 186:24 lunch (2) 54:23 55:5 39:2 171:13 172:5 174:8
82:10 84:4,8,21 Lord (145) 8:15,16 Luncheon (1) 112:1 Medstrakhcom (3) 174:13 176:6
85:8,12 86:1 87:8 11:23,25 12:3,21 luxury (1) 197:7 38:16,21,25 178:16 179:3
88:8,10 89:11 90:5 12:22 13:21 17:7 lying (1) 91:23 meet (1) 156:7 180:15 181:12,14
90:7,10,14,24 21:25 22:1,3,24,24 meeting (8) 70:11 192:15
97:23 101:20,22 23:1,11,12 24:19 M 72:4,5 75:10 84:13 modelled (1) 170:11
102:2,9 104:21 45:10,12,16,25 M1/20/1 (1) 67:21 140:12,19,24 modelling (9) 170:7
121:15,24 127:25 49:1 50:19,21,21 meetings (1) 84:24 173:15 174:1
M1/20/12 (1) 67:22
129:8 130:19 132:7 50:24 51:13,13 memberships (1) 177:18,22 178:21
M1/20/23 (2) 83:24
132:13 138:12,14 54:4,4,24 55:1,11 179:18 179:14 182:12
143:16
138:15,16,24 55:11 56:14 61:14 memoranda (2) 189:8 193:4
machine (1) 11:25
139:10 142:19 61:24,25 62:3 194:13 models (1) 194:12

moment (11) 14:15 18:20 34:5 45:6,9 51:14 95:1 122:13 172:8 177:17 191:15

monetary (1) 156:7 money (11) 68:12,21 95:7,10,13,15

133:1 162:22 176:5 191:22 192:11

money-related (1)

138:24

monies (3) 67:4 68:10 89:12

month (3) 77:24 78:3 107:15

months (4) 107:21 141:11 143:9 152:22

Mood (5) 79:11,21 80:2,4,4

morning (5) 24:11,12 80:10 96:13 196:8 mortgage (4) 138:20

138:25 139:1 141:21
mortgages (2) 138:21 141:12

mother-in-law (3)

47:2,18 48:21

mother-in-law’s (1)

48:11

move (3) 13:1 62:2 145:6

moved (1) 178:23 muddled (1) 195:10 multi-party (1) 32:13 mustn’t (1) 38:6

N

N (5) 56:18 57:21 59:18 60:14 62:18
N’ (1) 56:25 name (15) 26:25

38:18 43:21 44:15 47:24 48:14 52:24 81:5,7 151:21 152:5 153:1 157:6 178:24 181:18

named (1) 105:2 names (2) 44:11,18 nearly (1) 60:1 necessarily (1) 59:14 necessary (3) 72:7

93:18,25

need (17) 9:24 15:13 17:3 45:19,21 53:21 56:1 67:13 99:8 110:19 111:22 135:13 142:12,25 157:8 189:5 194:19

needed (1) 152:25 negative (36) 93:7

151:5,19 154:18,21 155:24 156:1,4,11 157:25 161:5,12,19 166:12,14 167:7 168:7 169:3,11 180:2,4,12,13,21 183:4,8,24 184:23 185:5,9,20 186:9 186:15 187:8,13 189:6

negatively (1) 93:11 negotiate (1) 141:11 negotiation (1) 141:2 neither (2) 62:1

157:19

net (4) 151:16 171:12 185:13 187:4
never (48) 14:25 19:11 29:1 39:12 41:2,4,6,10 48:18 49:15,18 60:1,11 60:12,24 62:15 63:3,6,8,8 65:3 69:5 78:11 84:13 89:5,15 107:7,23 122:18,18 123:13 124:16 129:18 132:6,9 136:20 138:3,4,23 139:16 139:25 153:2 157:4 160:4,9 174:5,10 174:21

nevertheless (2)

190:24 191:8 new (10) 34:6 38:12

42:20 88:13 165:18 166:5,13 183:9 185:16 186:12

nice (2) 24:2 134:21 nicknames (1) 43:16 nodding/shaking (1)

11:12

non (2) 109:15 165:6 non-disclosure (1)

97:11 non-official (1) 10:20 non-operating (3)

183:7,13 185:20

non-operational (3)

156:5,23 180:22 normal (15) 11:7 52:8 66:16,25 67:3,7

78:3 79:12,21 80:2 80:4,5 110:2 131:16 142:1

normally (10) 13:2 49:23 81:5,10 83:13 107:12 110:4 138:13,13 139:1

norms (2) 189:19,20

Norwood (1) 43:20 notaries (1) 103:21 notary (2) 110:5 139:2 note (20) 84:7 140:18

140:24 141:6,8 142:5 147:5 151:8 151:9,20 157:22,23 160:1 161:8,9,11 161:20 179:13 183:19 186:7

noted (1) 134:13 notepaper (2) 82:13

82:21

notes (2) 182:9 187:1 notice (5) 11:11 61:23 100:6,12 109:2

notices (4) 106:6 107:19 109:23 110:9

notification (1) 53:25 notion (1) 96:2 nought (2) 166:13,15 November (11) 68:3

71:6,11 81:4,22 82:9 84:9 89:3 90:24 97:23 132:8

Novikov (2) 140:12,25 number (59) 15:22,24

16:4,15 17:24 18:10,12,13 19:1 20:13 31:6,7,9,10 31:14 34:20,25 35:1 36:12 37:1,1,2 43:13 45:2,4 49:22

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

205

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

52:15 58:5 60:5 61:1 62:3,22 63:23 64:11 65:13 74:19 75:16,23 80:25 83:20 86:15 96:9 97:12 102:4,11,13 102:15,17,20 127:20 138:19 139:12 144:10 149:2 152:20 154:13,13 160:10 179:19

numbers (4) 23:9 25:12,15 81:18

numerous (2) 85:16 127:3

O

O2/149/1 (1) 57:9 O2/149/3 (1) 58:2 O2/149/4 (1) 63:24 O2/149/5 (1) 65:14 oath (2) 37:5 85:11 objection (3) 61:14,15

130:20

objections (3) 31:2,23 130:21

obligation (2) 30:5 121:19

obligations (6) 12:20 29:22 32:8 109:20 131:15 168:24

obtained (2) 95:9 141:25

obtaining (2) 95:15 152:18

obviously (2) 54:8 156:19

occasion (2) 109:22 127:7

occasional (1) 61:22 occasionally (1) 77:23 occasions (3) 38:7

137:16 138:9

October (2) 90:5

126:12

offer (2) 141:23

143:15

offering (2) 84:25

85:1

office (11) 20:22 24:12 71:20 76:15 103:17 109:14,14 139:2,3 152:21,21

officer (1) 53:20 officers (1) 133:15 offices (6) 108:10

137:18,25 138:10 138:17 140:14

official (10) 14:25 52:21 80:23,23 83:21 100:21,22 103:14,15 106:18

oh (3) 12:12 129:5 188:23

okay (20) 13:12 17:16 17:20 24:15 31:14 45:18 57:3 72:25 74:6,9 82:6 94:17 94:25 99:15 111:24 144:12 161:13 172:11 183:12 197:9

OMG (69) 9:7 10:8,9 10:10 14:10 20:25 21:3 26:3,4,14 27:22 28:9,13,23 29:2 35:24 36:2

37:22 38:8 40:24 66:17,22 67:1,4,8 69:1 77:14 78:20 141:3 147:2,11,17 149:6 154:9 162:6 162:22 166:3,4,10 168:8,24 169:4,21 170:2,18 171:5,21 172:5 173:14,14 174:14,20 175:2 176:12 177:23,23 179:4 182:8,17 183:18 184:1,8,19 185:17,23 186:18 191:20,20 193:3

OMG’s (5) 35:25 70:12 145:17 170:7 187:4

OMGP (3) 146:15,24 147:10

OMGP’s (1) 187:12 omitted (2) 86:24

88:5

once (2) 25:15 128:1 one-off (1) 181:2

Onega (5) 65:15 129:8 143:20 148:3 174:16

onwards (1) 176:17 open (6) 8:13 54:8

86:13 121:11 198:4 198:8

opening (1) 19:18 operating (2) 124:2

126:1 operational (5)

156:20,21 163:16 190:7 191:21

operations (3) 90:2

104:3 153:14

opinion (3) 129:22

144:25 145:1

opportunity (2) 84:25

145:7

opposed (3) 100:17

160:18 195:11

opposite (2) 12:25

67:3

option (2) 85:14 134:21

options (1) 85:15 orchestrated (2)

124:14 130:12 order (5) 135:21

153:20 180:13,19 189:19

ordered (1) 159:2 ordinary (1) 166:6 organisations (1)

106:24 organised (2) 85:16

90:13 organising (2) 83:10

83:11 oriented (1) 93:11 original (8) 30:2

121:18,25 122:1 123:11 127:18 128:15 129:9

originally (1) 144:13

Oslo (4) 66:15 75:2

147:17 182:5

ought (2) 37:16 54:15 overdraft (2) 44:20

47:5

overdue (1) 85:20 owned (1) 135:9 ownership (1) 148:6

P

P&L (3) 180:16 182:20 187:4
page (53) 13:22 16:4 16:7,21 17:8,21 18:3 22:19 25:11 25:24 26:16 27:5 27:16 35:13 42:7 43:15 48:5,7,10,13 48:15 66:6,12,13 67:23 70:7,22 71:3 73:18,23 74:2 83:25 86:13 88:18 101:8,9 105:2 108:4 122:21 124:9 134:2 142:10 151:15 154:6,10 157:25 158:13 160:10 161:4 162:13 170:13 179:23 198:2

pages (8) 16:10 48:6 70:6,7 104:7,10 111:17 148:7

paid (3) 138:15 150:24 181:6

Pannell (1) 152:7 paper (1) 88:1 papers (4) 65:11

82:23 83:22 193:17 paragraph (47) 22:20

23:13,21,24 24:20 25:4 31:10,12 47:10 55:17 66:8 67:22 68:20 70:23 72:3 83:25 86:17 86:19,24 87:2,3,6 87:16 91:10 95:20 97:17,22,25 98:9 99:21 100:12 105:2 105:23 122:9,13,14 126:15 133:20 134:25 137:6,9 140:9 141:21 143:19 155:23 183:11,23

paragraphs (4) 86:22 136:9 141:8 154:12

part (12) 9:8 25:3 93:9 99:6 130:5 131:9 132:18 133:6 134:6 141:3 143:8 153:12

participate (1) 52:17 participating (1)

129:18 participation (1) 128:3 particular (16) 10:16

14:16 22:7 29:19 31:4 40:7 50:18 66:2 76:2,2 103:19 122:6 127:11 144:10 157:12 191:1

particularly (1) 36:24 particulars (2) 98:7,12 parties (7) 29:23 32:8 32:14 76:7 106:6,8

126:3 partly (1) 196:3

partner (1) 152:4 parts (4) 14:5 39:16

92:25 93:16 party (3) 30:5 32:16

160:25 pass (1) 167:21

passed (2) 167:19 168:11

passing (3) 84:12

109:22 168:4 126:11 127:13 pledge (1) 27:22 59:9
passport (9) 83:14 128:10,11 132:17 pm (9) 54:11 99:16,18 premises (13) 189:16
103:15,16,16,22,22 134:22 140:13,15 111:25 112:2 190:25 191:1,5,6
103:23 104:2,4 142:16,21,22 143:4 145:13,15 195:22 193:25,25 194:1,5
passports (2) 104:11 143:6,13 152:10,12 197:14 194:6 195:8,8,11
104:11 152:13 165:3 point (34) 18:9 22:20 prepared (4) 143:14
pasting (1) 88:18 178:23 181:21 22:21 37:18 49:17 170:1 182:3 188:11
Patrakova (2) 136:11 petrol (4) 178:7,8,10 50:2,19 53:17 presence (5) 51:3
136:16 178:18 60:19 62:14 64:9 95:25 110:6 136:11
pause (11) 13:20 Petroles (1) 43:20 79:11 85:7 100:12 137:14
14:15 15:14 45:7 petroleum (1) 177:12 110:12 125:10 presented (2) 60:22
46:2 98:3 109:8,11 phone (3) 56:11,13,14 132:12 144:18 190:12
136:23 138:6 pick (3) 37:10 103:21 148:20 157:17 press (1) 111:5
196:21 183:4 163:5 171:11 172:8 pressing (1) 123:16
pauses (1) 197:7 picked (1) 169:11 172:18,20 173:10 pressure (13) 58:25
pay (3) 109:3 169:5 picking (1) 138:8 181:5 187:19,24 60:15,17 63:18
181:11 picture (1) 179:8 190:15 191:19 70:16,20,20 71:18
payable (1) 150:19 piece (3) 79:23 178:8 193:1,9,20 124:13 128:7 129:3
paying (1) 105:19 178:10 points (7) 23:4 101:5 130:13,14
payment (2) 109:15 PK (1) 152:6 131:23,25 154:18 presumably (3) 70:14
150:24 PKF (3) 152:4 159:12 183:17,19 86:7 153:4
payments (1) 169:5 164:19 police (3) 103:17 prevent (1) 60:23
Pechora (1) 68:4 place (6) 12:14 52:19 128:11 133:14 preventing (1) 53:5
people (16) 24:4 53:23 103:14 137:4 policeman (1) 131:12 previous (5) 24:14
38:10 44:2 48:2 140:14 policemen (1) 129:3 87:25 104:11 124:9
52:16 53:14,19 places (1) 138:20 port (9) 43:20 147:14 165:21
77:14 91:19 99:1 plan (2) 176:13 158:4 166:7 174:16 previously (2) 89:6
107:22 129:2 178:17 174:20 178:9,10 123:16
131:13 152:17,20 planning (3) 20:23 184:12 price (1) 159:10
167:23 149:1 178:19 Port’s (1) 185:17 primarily (2) 185:14
performance (2) Platonov (2) 91:5 ports (24) 147:11 186:9
149:6 190:7 139:12 164:16 169:21 primitive (5) 163:8,9
period (1) 84:22 played (1) 131:8 170:18 171:5 172:5 163:18 166:20
perjured (1) 96:7 playing (3) 11:9 52:11 173:14 174:14 168:5
person (19) 11:8 131:13 175:2,2,8 176:12 primitivisation (1)
12:16 43:12 44:16 plea (1) 188:15 176:17 177:23,23 195:1
47:24 93:6 96:18 pleas (1) 125:14 179:4 182:17 184:1 principal (2) 30:22
96:24 103:18 please (132) 9:17,25 184:8,19 185:23 121:19
106:17 109:13 11:18 12:13 13:4 186:18 191:20 print (2) 111:15,19
110:3,4 122:15 13:13,22 14:18 193:3 private (6) 1:3 112:3
125:6 178:22 15:12,16,25 16:23 positing (1) 166:3 135:12 165:10
181:18 190:1 17:1 18:8 20:9 position (7) 124:12 198:3,7
193:12 21:14,16 22:6 125:8 132:25 136:5 probably (22) 19:14
personal (65) 8:19 9:3 23:11,15 25:9 27:1 143:11 145:17 23:21 26:1 34:8
9:14,20 21:9 22:14 27:3,16 32:20 181:17 40:3 44:24 45:10
35:2 40:25 49:2 33:21 35:7,8,13 positive (1) 185:15 47:7,9 51:14 78:13
51:11 64:8 67:18 39:5,21,21 41:12 positively (5) 33:7 78:21 101:1,21
67:25 68:23 69:3,5 41:13,16 42:7 46:3 57:1 59:19,20 103:3 144:7,17
70:18,20 71:10,12 46:5 48:15 49:1,25 93:24 146:17 152:12
71:13 79:4 81:4,15 51:17 55:13,16,24 possible (5) 38:5,19 181:15,23 195:17
81:22 82:10,22,24 57:9,17 58:16 61:1 76:5 174:24 176:15 problem (8) 45:18,18
83:6,6,9,17 84:4,8 61:13 63:23,24 possibly (2) 63:13 45:18,18,24,24
84:21 85:8,12 86:1 65:13 66:4,5,8,9,11 192:13 76:19 177:16
87:8 88:8,10,15 67:21,22,23 68:17 post (4) 20:6 138:22 problems (1) 54:10
89:11 90:14,24 69:7,18 70:22 72:2 139:4,7 procedure (2) 25:6
93:8 95:8 97:23 72:16 74:19 76:24 potential (4) 37:15 165:25
104:19 106:23 77:5 79:10 80:13 172:1 174:13 proceeding (1) 173:13
128:3,15 129:7,10 83:18,23,24,25 187:11 proceedings (60) 26:4
130:19 132:2,7 86:14,20 87:13 potentially (1) 182:9 27:12 36:7 39:15
139:17,20 141:18 88:24 90:14 91:1,8 potentials (1) 143:14 52:6,22 55:14
141:24 142:6,25 95:19 97:17 99:4 power (11) 101:12,16 62:17 63:17,22
168:3 187:17 99:19,20 100:24 125:18 126:1,2,4 66:6 68:18 72:22
personally (21) 20:24 101:2 102:19 103:8 127:5,16,20,21,22 72:24 77:4 86:15
67:10 68:3 86:3 103:12 104:14,25 powers (3) 128:4 89:25 91:23 93:5
90:7 92:1 93:11 106:1 108:3 109:7 131:5,14 96:9,18,21,22,25
95:18 97:11 105:20 123:19 125:24 practically (1) 88:16 97:1,2 101:14
107:20 110:16 127:23 128:20 practice (3) 110:3 105:20 108:4
123:13 129:18 130:16 131:21,22 142:1 194:17 121:23 122:17,19
152:15 153:2 133:16,16,20 pre-tax (2) 180:14 123:7,14 125:1
155:17,21 160:4 134:24 136:7 137:1 185:13 126:7,13 127:3,4
163:23 170:20 139:18 140:7,19 precise (2) 36:17 127:11,11 128:2,6
persons (3) 98:22,25 142:9,10 143:25 163:19 128:19 129:15,19
139:14 146:1 148:15 predicted (2) 175:7 129:19 130:5,20
pessimistic (1) 197:11 153:17 154:6 177:9 131:8,11 132:3,25
Petersburg (35) 33:12 155:23 157:22 predicting (1) 179:3 133:17 134:17,18
34:2 35:3 36:3 39:9 169:20,20 177:21 prefer (1) 54:5 134:25 140:6 144:5
41:1,8 47:8 63:9 179:12 181:25 preferably (1) 54:22 175:20
65:4 77:12 89:17 182:16 183:5 preference (1) 54:25 process (9) 11:20 56:6
90:3 104:1 107:13 184:18 187:2 prejudice (2) 56:22 97:16 141:2 143:24

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

206

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

165:12,24 175:25 176:3

produce (1) 130:3 produced (3) 49:21 140:18 181:15 producing (1) 166:17 productive (1) 84:24 professional (7) 12:20 23:19 63:20 83:15 131:15 181:24

191:12

profit (24) 150:8,10 151:16 156:5,23 170:11 171:3,12 172:12,13 174:14 175:2,5,8,9 176:16 177:5 182:20 185:15,22,24 186:9 187:4,12

profit’ (1) 185:14 profit-making (1)
189:22 profit/loss (2) 150:4

151:16 profitability (4) 181:1

188:18 189:22 193:3

profits (4) 180:14,15 190:15,19

progress (2) 110:24 111:2

projection (1) 174:24 projections (3) 192:14

194:1 195:9 promise (1) 195:24

Promsvyazbank (2)

143:5,8 propensity (1) 190:19 proper (9) 44:18,18

74:13,13 85:19 105:12 107:1,1 189:25

properly (4) 106:7 127:15 156:12 190:11

properties (1) 134:14 property (6) 135:12 151:11 157:15

159:9 168:15 183:10
propped (1) 192:10 proprietor (1) 192:8 prospekt (3) 100:17 100:18 103:23

prove (1) 132:25 provide (2) 141:16

193:16 provided (7) 13:18

66:1 123:5 141:13 143:20 152:19 174:8

provisions (2) 32:13

32:16

public (9) 53:5,16 97:7 164:1,3,4,6,14 165:10

publicise (1) 53:23 punch (2) 75:19 183:6 purchase (1) 85:5 purchased (1) 156:2 purported (1) 64:20 purports (2) 10:13

78:19 purpose (8) 14:7

104:4 107:4,5 148:25 155:2,2 164:21

purposes (9) 32:18 34:9 134:17 152:25

153:8 159:9,15 160:25 164:21 pursue (1) 135:21

put (45) 9:21,24 24:7 24:21 26:23 39:15 44:14,15 47:18 48:22 51:5,7 58:3 59:7 60:13 61:8 62:17 64:2 65:5,6 65:21 81:10 82:18 88:1 92:22 94:16 98:18 107:1 108:17 109:1 124:24 131:23 132:1 136:9 166:13,15 181:23 184:24 185:6,9 187:15 189:5 190:20 191:3 193:8

puts (1) 136:24 putting (6) 29:3 37:17

65:2 82:3 183:17 187:9

Q

qualified (1) 160:5 qualify (1) 17:3 quality (7) 59:5 60:21

63:11,12 64:6 83:3 83:4

quantum (2) 188:23 188:24

queried (1) 139:24 querying (1) 17:12 question (41) 14:7 21:4 28:22 37:9 46:23 52:4,14,15 54:2 56:22 58:3

62:9,10 64:2,24 65:5,21 69:12 73:5 82:5 85:10,21 87:13 90:8 91:18 94:7 98:8 139:20 139:25 155:3 157:11,11,17,18 167:17 173:4,23 189:15 190:18,18 196:4

questions (17) 17:2 24:18 52:2 111:3 136:24 145:17 153:21 154:1,14 155:4,5 163:7 172:20 173:3,12 190:4 194:12

quickly (3) 10:2 53:11 56:1

quite (49) 13:10,20 23:9,18 34:19 38:18 39:3,4,13 40:17 45:2,3,5 49:22 52:7,11,15 53:3 62:21 63:17 71:25 78:3 80:8 84:24 85:16,16 96:9,21 97:9,12 107:17 109:16 110:23,23 125:5 131:16 134:15 135:12 137:15 138:19 139:10,12 149:2 159:7 165:20 172:1 176:5 184:14 189:12

quiz (1) 173:11 quoting (1) 58:23

R

raise (5) 54:14 153:20

154:14 182:9 193:5 Reconstruction (1) 189:20 52:1 93:14 189:18
raised (1) 53:17 164:23 reimbursed (1) 66:18 requirement (2) 83:1
raising (1) 171:23 record (3) 36:2,14 reiterate (1) 57:20 164:22
rate (2) 164:25 195:23 156:13 reject (2) 91:14 110:7 rescue (1) 193:1
rating (5) 82:16 records (6) 31:21 36:1 rejected (2) 86:5 reserves (2) 38:12
152:25 153:9 160:7 36:2,14 42:2 92:12 110:5 85:18
164:24 recover (1) 68:21 rejecting (1) 93:3 reserving (2) 32:19
Re-Gata (3) 89:18,21 recovery (2) 122:11 relate (1) 179:14 52:7
90:4 122:24 related (1) 52:4 resolution (13) 29:9
re-read (1) 92:25 recurring (1) 156:21 relates (2) 95:16 29:15,17,24 30:7
read (28) 11:20,24 REDACTED (18) 1:4 162:2 31:6,12,13,14,15
12:7,9 15:15 20:3 2:1 3:1 4:1 5:1 6:1 relating (1) 17:18 32:23 39:8,17
31:8 70:15 71:17 7:1 8:1 112:4 113:1 relation (28) 8:18,20 Resolved (1) 30:14
75:18 78:16,17 114:1 115:1 116:1 9:12,16 15:10,21 respect (2) 32:11
79:15 80:6 110:15 117:1 118:1 119:1 21:10 33:15 34:3 139:9
110:19,22 111:10 120:1 121:1 34:23 35:5 39:23 Respectfully (1) 13:18
111:18 121:20 redactions (1) 196:5 40:15 41:3,5,8 49:2 respective (2) 72:6,11
122:13 126:20 redirected (1) 195:6 55:19 62:16 68:11 respond (1) 136:25
141:6 153:24 redistribution (1) 72:13 82:9 86:1 respondent (3) 102:1
160:10 166:17 178:12 102:8 104:20 102:21 122:10
183:23 192:13 reduce (1) 135:13 121:23 127:24 respondents (1)
reader (1) 186:7 refer (9) 21:23 25:19 183:18 102:12
reading (8) 13:14 20:5 36:16 50:5 54:6,8 relations (3) 97:6,7 response (2) 121:15
34:5 88:13 101:17 67:25 145:25 143:5 130:18
128:16 157:4 160:4 169:14 relationship (1) 67:8 responsible (7) 97:6
reads (2) 70:23 106:5 reference (36) 10:15 relaxed (1) 54:20 97:11 98:23 99:1
ready (2) 54:18 55:9 11:1 17:4 22:20 relevance (1) 195:7 134:22 155:17,21
real (10) 46:19,21,22 26:10,12,17,20,24 relevant (4) 50:5 restructuring (2)
47:19 48:2 67:15 27:18,25 28:7 132:14 191:24 85:19,19
101:15 109:19 30:11 37:7 38:1 192:7 result (2) 161:14
165:12 192:9 42:5,17,18,22 43:6 reluctant (1) 110:25 166:13
really (62) 12:13 13:3 43:9,10 44:7 47:11 rely (1) 191:5 resulting (1) 156:3
19:18 37:9,10,14 60:8 62:6 63:24 remark (1) 61:8 results (4) 96:22
40:9 43:13 44:17 65:14 71:4,10 84:7 remarked (1) 11:16 173:15 174:3 184:1
45:20 46:22,25 88:7 101:24 129:6 remember (37) 15:24 return (4) 107:14
47:19,25 48:16 151:19 175:14 26:21 29:7 33:2,13 124:8 137:18 151:9
50:8 53:5 54:12,13 references (2) 11:5 34:8 38:18 50:14 revaluation (3) 157:16
56:2 61:14,14,20 26:18 50:17 57:1 58:13 168:16 189:9
62:14 63:11 64:5 referred (7) 9:18 58:22 59:23,25 revenue (1) 186:17
70:19 71:21 92:5,6 38:14 50:9 81:14 60:20 62:12,19,20 revise (1) 76:20
92:7 96:10 97:2 87:7 125:11 149:24 64:3 65:1,22 69:13 ride (1) 192:25
103:5 107:7 123:17 referring (43) 10:14 75:21 92:23 96:19 right (92) 8:24 10:22
124:17 125:19 11:4 14:16,22 15:4 127:10 142:4 13:20 14:10 15:12
131:18 134:11 15:6 16:23 18:12 144:17,20,25 145:5 16:9 20:21 21:12
136:13,14 143:15 18:18 22:16 23:3,8 146:22 149:25 21:13 23:6 25:22
153:6 154:23,24 23:25 24:9 25:15 153:11 175:22 25:23 26:6 29:5
156:11,25 157:9 25:25 29:21 35:12 178:24 181:18 34:4 35:1,4 36:19
160:15,20 165:5 36:19,21,23,24 remembering (1) 66:1 37:12 40:11 41:21
170:21,22 172:9 37:1,22 42:4,20,21 remind (1) 130:10 44:9 46:18 52:13
175:6 181:3 183:12 43:4 47:4 49:5 reminders (2) 77:23 53:10,15 58:14
189:2 193:21 60:20 79:19,21 108:1 59:21 60:11 61:1
196:14 197:11 81:21 97:24 130:22 repairing (1) 176:2 61:16 63:7 65:2,19
reason (8) 26:25 88:4 131:25 141:17,19 repayments (4) 77:20 68:14 72:1,14,15
93:16 124:24 170:4 141:21 161:7 77:24 78:19,23 72:19 73:1,22 74:5
184:10,11 195:25 180:21 193:12 repeat (3) 98:8 143:25 74:5,8,10,14 88:11
reasoning (1) 122:18 refers (7) 9:2 10:17 173:23 90:6 93:22 94:3
reasons (5) 64:9 94:12 17:13 20:7 37:21 reply (3) 103:6 128:25 95:6 96:16 99:14
122:12 145:3,4 57:14,15 155:3 101:6 105:23 108:8
receipt (1) 90:5 refinancing (2) 143:7 report (4) 146:8 147:5 109:18 122:8
receivable (1) 150:17 143:7 159:5 160:12 125:14 128:12
receive (1) 68:7 reflected (1) 185:19 reported (1) 180:15 129:6,14,17 130:9
received (7) 19:12,14 reflection (1) 54:5 reporting (1) 130:11 130:14 131:7,9,10
88:9 111:9,10 refresh (1) 55:25 represent (5) 101:12 132:13,16 134:9
131:2 150:23 refused (1) 86:2 122:16 126:3,18,21 137:21 144:19
receiving (2) 19:15 regarding (1) 72:7 representative (2) 148:11,13 149:12
78:8 region (1) 38:23 124:1,10 150:13 154:6,15
reception (1) 52:20 Regional (1) 126:17 represented (2) 60:16 158:14 160:22
reckoned (1) 192:16 registered (11) 81:9 126:18 170:2 173:19
recognise (2) 44:23 82:19,25 100:21 representing (15) 180:23 184:7
136:21 103:18 106:8 101:17 105:21 186:18 187:13
recollect (4) 35:10 107:13,16,16 164:4 122:7 124:2 125:6 188:25 190:5,10
58:16 64:25 65:23 164:14 125:19,20,21 126:6 193:9 195:22
recollection (9) 84:17 registration (2) 127:6,9,12,15 right-hand (8) 48:8,12
85:10,22,23 86:7 106:17 164:16 128:18 131:18 48:13 73:7,9,10,18
86:10 87:17 88:2 registry (1) 83:5 request (1) 123:22 161:16
109:9 regularly (2) 108:17 requested (1) 141:24 rights (2) 124:12
recommend (2) 109:4 requesting (1) 89:3 131:19
195:20,21 regulation (1) 165:14 requests (1) 122:23 risk (1) 180:21
reconsider (1) 140:3 regulatory (2) 189:18 required (4) 36:10 role (2) 10:10 52:11

Rolls (1) 53:18 room (1) 96:2 roubles (9) 44:22 68:2

71:7 79:2 84:9 89:4 89:18 149:15 158:17

RPC (4) 53:2 111:16 153:19 155:23 rules (6) 128:8 157:3 157:3,5 162:25

181:13

run (2) 170:18 175:7 running (4) 96:20 97:4

178:4 190:1 runs (1) 66:13 Russia (26) 49:7 50:5

50:16 51:4 80:11 102:7 103:14 121:14 123:20 124:20 126:19,22 127:1,3 128:13,22 128:24 129:23 130:5 131:2,17 132:12 164:6,15 165:6,9

Russian (88) 10:4,21 10:24 11:21,24 12:9,22 13:14,22 14:2,23 15:13,15 16:1,18,19 17:25 22:12,18 23:15,20 27:2 29:11 30:6 32:7,10,21 33:23 34:19 39:6 46:5 47:11,23 69:23 72:18,21 73:11,15 73:16 74:6 75:18 75:23 76:25 77:7,9 77:10 79:12,15,23 80:2,6,7,16 83:13 88:25 90:15,17,19 91:1 100:19,23 101:2,2,13 102:19 103:16,16,22,22,23 104:25 121:23 123:9,14,16 124:20 124:21 128:2 129:15,19,25 130:2 130:19 131:8 135:8 164:7 169:17 189:18

S

salaries (1) 95:14 sale (2) 95:18 149:21 sales (2) 178:15,17 satisfied (1) 172:2 save (1) 86:23 Savelyev (12) 20:24

70:18 72:4 84:13 84:21,23 85:13,24 87:8 88:8 93:3 95:3

saying (19) 50:10 59:20 68:10 79:7 91:15,25 96:6 98:19,21 100:9 105:16 146:18 153:5 162:18 163:22 168:1 177:20 193:15 195:15

says (27) 15:8,8 22:21 27:19 30:13,25 41:23 42:9 57:15 57:23 75:23,25 76:1 79:16 102:14 104:19 124:10 126:15 140:18

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

207
February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

141:8,22 159:8 28:5 29:6,11 30:16 sending (6) 20:25 shown (56) 13:21 139:3,6,16 153:1 180:8 187:17 190:6 129:19 142:19

183:6,23 184:2 30:22 31:3,6 32:21 21:2,3 78:4,10 15:12,25 18:7 155:7,20 sort (2) 145:11 160:20 starting (4) 80:11
185:12 190:24 33:8 35:17 36:22 80:10 21:15 24:3 27:1 significant (1) 70:11 sorts (1) 190:2 109:6 134:13
Scan (31) 8:19 9:3,11 37:5,6,6,19 39:19 senior (1) 95:23 32:20 33:21 39:5 significantly (1) 158:8 sounded (1) 96:14 154:12
16:12 18:21 19:3 41:10,24 44:9 46:4 sense (2) 86:3 156:24 39:21 41:12 46:3 signifying (1) 65:21 source (1) 149:20 starts (4) 23:20 24:10
20:17 21:10 26:10 46:5,17 47:10,19 sensitive (2) 61:18 49:1,25 55:12,16 signing (10) 9:9 28:24 sources (1) 149:18 24:15 183:12
27:25 28:18 32:23 47:22 48:6 50:6 62:1 57:9 58:2 65:13 28:25 29:1 31:5,21 spam (2) 78:10,14 state (4) 52:24 172:23
34:2,3,23,24 36:19 55:16,22 56:5,17 sent (11) 10:4 57:10 66:4,8 67:20,22 33:14 40:2 137:25 speak (5) 24:24 53:20 192:9 194:23
36:21 41:7 49:3 56:18 57:4,7,10,14 75:11 85:4 100:13 68:17 69:18 76:24 139:12 69:12 99:8 172:9 stated (1) 103:18
58:7 60:8,12 62:7 57:14,17 58:1,5 106:7 110:1 111:16 77:5 79:10 80:13 signs (2) 14:22 127:25 speaking (8) 37:3 49:7 statement (53) 23:12
62:15 63:24 64:11 61:9 62:3 64:17 138:22 139:7 88:24 90:14 91:8 silly (1) 79:11 50:18 67:13 109:13 23:15,20 44:1 50:1
64:21 65:14 127:24 65:15 66:20 67:22 153:20 95:19 97:14,17 similar (7) 13:20 123:18 129:1 55:13 57:6 58:15
148:3 68:20 69:20 70:22 sentence (12) 12:2,4 99:19 100:24 39:14 77:1,2 83:9 181:12 58:24 64:10 72:2
Scandinavia (35) 71:1,4,25 72:9 50:9,20 66:13 104:14 108:2 86:23 157:15 special (7) 93:6 157:2 74:4 86:15,17 87:6
15:19 20:16 26:17 73:16 74:2,14,19 86:23 87:5,10,15 125:24 127:8,17 similarly (1) 41:7 159:6,8 161:1 87:11,16,18,21,22
26:19,24 33:11 75:13,16 77:6,11 88:5,22 135:2 128:20 131:21 simple (2) 67:10 167:4,19 88:6 98:3 99:20
34:17 36:17,23,25 78:22 79:9 80:18 sentences (1) 14:25 133:16 134:24 191:19 specialist (23) 25:5 100:10 103:1 126:8
37:4,8 38:24 39:8 83:13,13 84:15 separate (6) 57:18 139:18 140:7 142:9 simply (14) 37:23 48:2 150:12 152:15,17 131:22 133:17
39:24 41:11,25 86:22,24 91:9 127:4 148:2,23 143:16 149:6 48:20 50:17 54:3 156:25 157:19 136:8 137:7,10,11
42:5,9,19 43:10 92:23 93:18 94:23 163:3 178:11 153:17 155:12 54:20 88:11,12 160:8 166:18 137:23 139:13,15
44:4,6,8,15 47:8 95:20 97:8,22,23 separately (2) 178:11 171:13 182:12 103:4 105:18 125:4 167:14,14 168:11 140:5 146:13
50:8 63:6,8 64:22 98:13 101:1,8,9,22 178:18 shows (1) 19:9 125:18 128:25 168:23 169:8 148:16,21 149:3
65:3 102:13 146:15 101:24 102:1,4,11 September (10) 8:21 shy (1) 196:8 191:5 170:22 172:10 156:6,23 161:18
147:21,23 102:17 105:1,4,6 8:23,24 26:3,14 side (16) 16:3 47:17 Sirs (1) 57:16 173:9 174:7,11 162:10 166:24
Scandinavia’ (1) 27:24 106:3,10,12 108:16 35:25 169:24 65:25 73:7,8,9,10 sit (1) 195:22 179:10 181:4 168:8,20 169:14
schedule (11) 8:21,22 109:6,21 110:13 173:16 177:6 73:12,19 101:16 sitting (4) 11:15 52:19 187:16,20 191:10 171:4 185:15,22
9:18 21:16 25:8 122:22 123:10 187:12 127:9 130:24 54:1 152:21 specialists (4) 10:11 187:4 194:10
26:3,15 35:8,25 124:8 126:9,15 series (2) 154:12,14 161:16,20 168:21 situation (1) 124:15 159:4,13 163:23 statements (17) 49:12
41:12 42:2 127:14 129:18 serious (2) 11:17 39:4 180:2 six (10) 23:4 68:22 speciality (1) 166:22 49:13 52:9 88:1
scheduling (1) 25:20 130:9 134:7 135:5 seriously (2) 14:24 sides (1) 189:13 132:1 141:8,11 specially (2) 139:14 96:19 99:23 133:19
school (1) 167:21 138:19 140:9,16,21 142:23 sight (1) 13:2 144:3,23 147:11 178:17 147:8,17 148:3,22
screen (18) 9:21,25 142:14 143:20 served (2) 106:6,7 sign (45) 9:11,14 161:22 194:17 specify (2) 22:6 76:1 163:20 165:21
12:18 16:1,3 18:16 146:8,11,13 147:4 service (1) 104:10 20:23 28:10,13,16 size (1) 39:2 speech (1) 173:21 166:25 167:25
23:11,22 27:5 46:6 147:6 148:2,3,6,9 services (1) 165:6 29:4,17,22,24 30:3 slowly (1) 143:25 spelt (1) 180:4 170:12 174:10
55:14 72:16 77:9 149:9,10,14,16,17 set (11) 78:19 97:19 32:7 34:22,25 small (5) 13:15 52:2 spend (1) 178:7 station (2) 196:24
86:13,14 104:16 149:21 150:3,13,15 98:6,9 148:6 167:2 39:25 40:3,4,8,20 110:13 142:19,23 spousal (7) 21:19,21 197:11
124:6 126:8 150:17 151:5,6,13 185:4,23 186:16 48:10 49:4 51:10 SMC (3) 43:14,24 44:1 21:23 22:5,16 stations (4) 178:8,8
scroll (1) 22:9 151:16,17 153:22 187:3 194:3 51:11 64:25 68:7 smile (1) 61:22 138:3,7 178:11,18
seal (3) 34:15,17 48:6 154:9 155:15,24 set-up (1) 13:1 70:4,21 71:23 smiled (1) 61:10 spouse (2) 20:20 staying (3) 196:17,18
sealed (1) 40:14 156:9,21 157:17 sets (2) 30:22 189:16 76:18 90:22 107:24 SMS (2) 12:5,5 22:22 196:19
seals (1) 34:21 158:2,5,13,14,20 setting (1) 182:23 121:25 129:9,16 SO’ (1) 27:24 spring (2) 108:8,24 steal (1) 192:6
search (1) 84:24 159:19 161:4,16,19 settle (1) 55:5 132:1 136:15 sold (2) 95:12 149:23 St (35) 33:12 34:2 steam (1) 196:6
second (61) 8:17,20 161:20 162:16 seven (3) 68:21 136:3 137:14,17,20 138:2 sole (3) 30:10,14 35:3 36:3 39:9 41:1 Stevedoring (1)
9:1,12,16 11:6 12:1 164:6 169:21,22 194:17 138:13,14 142:12 31:15 41:8 47:8 63:9 65:4 146:15
15:4,10,23 16:14 170:10,12,15 171:4 SG&A (2) 170:22 151:23 155:16 solicitors (1) 57:12 77:12 89:17 90:3 stood (1) 169:6
16:22 17:9,13,17 171:15,18 172:12 171:7 signature (32) 13:17 solution (1) 85:17 103:25 107:13 stop (3) 12:13 110:12
17:18,21 18:10,14 175:3,5,6,9,11,13 shape (1) 64:8 33:2,5,9,18,19,20 solutions (2) 85:1,5 126:11 127:13 195:16
18:18 19:1,4 21:11 175:15 176:6,16,19 share (1) 85:5 34:18 39:11,13 solved (1) 53:3 128:10,11 132:17 story (2) 177:11,13
22:20 23:14,17 176:20 177:7 shareholders (2) 97:7 40:5,6 46:24 47:2,3 somebody (4) 34:20 134:22 140:13,15 straight (1) 63:13
24:4 25:11,13,21 178:20 179:5,15,18 179:20 47:17,18,19,22,25 39:18 47:24 48:14 142:16,21,22 143:4 straightforward (4)
26:6 27:23 35:13 179:21,24,24 180:1 shares (1) 72:8 48:3,11 49:11 soon (2) 13:16 188:1 143:6,13 152:10,12 166:19 167:12
36:18 41:17 42:7 180:17 182:2,5,14 sheet (7) 39:3,4 41:10 51:15 55:20 63:12 sorry (93) 9:24 10:1 152:13 165:3 178:20 194:25
50:20 52:15 62:7 182:16,17,23,24 63:1,2 163:20 64:14,17,18 65:19 10:19 11:7 12:12 178:23 181:21 strange (33) 10:23
66:5,6 68:18 69:13 183:2,6,11 184:5 168:7 80:19 130:3 12:13 16:3 17:10 staff (3) 123:16 12:4 13:8 14:3,23
74:20 99:6 101:8 184:19,20,21,23,24 ship (2) 27:22 176:2 signatures (9) 56:23 21:1,4,15,17 23:14 130:13,13 19:20,22,25 23:9
105:2 107:20 122:9 184:24 185:4,6,9 Shipping (25) 14:13 59:3,4,10 91:1,4 24:24 25:15 31:10 stages (1) 17:7 24:13,15 33:5
122:14,17,21 127:5 186:2,4,5,10 187:2 14:19 15:7,10 129:24 143:22 37:12,12 40:24 Stalevskaya (3) 75:1 34:19 39:13 40:5
129:16 133:17 187:4,5 188:23 18:23 19:1 20:10 144:3 41:24 42:10 44:4 75:11 76:4 44:14,16 47:23
134:24 136:7 195:24 25:14 26:2 28:24 signed (79) 15:19 45:7,8,25 46:2 stamp (11) 39:15 48:1 79:14 80:9,12
153:12 154:6 seeing (1) 174:1 29:5,10,16 30:7 16:17,21 17:8,21 48:11 50:2,24,25 47:18 48:15,16 80:22 81:12 85:9
157:20 164:24 seek (1) 72:12 50:22 51:6 85:6 19:21,23,25 21:7 51:5,13 52:4 55:12 81:10 83:20 90:17 91:7 107:25 124:17
secretary (1) 75:7 seeking (1) 189:15 101:24 102:9,12 21:20 27:8 28:9,20 56:8,12,14,15 103:17 104:8,8,9 125:5 128:10
section (6) 45:14 seeks (1) 68:21 104:20 122:7 28:23 30:1,1,4,7 58:19,19 61:2,5,6 stamps (1) 80:24 178:25 181:21
51:16 54:7 178:15 seemingly (1) 130:18 127:12 132:13 31:25 32:2,17 61:24 64:16 69:10 stand (3) 98:15 188:3
180:16 182:23 seen (15) 17:5 31:5 147:25 34:24 35:2 39:12 69:11,12,17 73:21 155:18 181:8 strangely (1) 23:8
secure (1) 132:23 34:7,8 40:1 42:8 short (12) 45:8 51:18 40:10,14 46:14,14 73:25 77:8 80:1 standard (4) 78:9 street (3) 100:16
secured (5) 27:21 59:15 64:12 105:9 51:23 66:17 67:1 48:7 49:6,9,15,18 87:13 92:22 94:8,9 164:12,22 166:16 103:25 107:6
63:20 67:14 68:3 107:22 122:19 72:4 99:17 121:13 49:23 50:16 51:3,6 94:13 97:24 98:8 standards (13) 83:4 stress (1) 51:2
69:1 132:22 136:21 145:7,10,14 156:8 57:2 58:23 59:15 98:24 99:5,7 153:7,8 157:8 strict (2) 138:11
security (4) 9:2 13:16 138:3 190:14 show (19) 11:17 59:24,25 60:1,24 108:20,20,22 159:3 160:15,24 139:10
27:18 64:9 segregate (1) 194:5 17:14,14 18:5 21:8 64:22 70:8,9 71:14 109:11 110:13 162:25 163:9 164:7 Stroilov (14) 53:13
see (247) 10:4,5,13,24 seized (1) 69:2 22:7 24:8 37:17 71:20 76:15,16 123:25 124:7 166:20 167:23 54:19 55:6 57:10
11:2,13 12:15 seldom (1) 165:9 48:15 58:3 81:17 80:17,20 81:8 89:5 125:12 133:10 168:4 57:15 92:3 96:16
13:15,23 14:20,21 self-evident (1) 57:24 96:10 103:8,10 89:16 91:6 95:25 134:1 136:8 137:3 start (11) 54:23 60:19 99:9,12 108:14
15:11 16:3,10,23 self-same (1) 49:17 123:25 136:14 96:19 125:10 138:5 141:20,22 99:6,9 145:19 109:1 110:14,22
17:6,25 18:1 20:7 sell (3) 178:10,18,19 137:1 189:19 190:6 128:14 130:23,24 143:25 150:11 165:14,15 195:21 111:8
22:12 23:3,15 24:2 send (6) 79:6 107:10 showed (2) 18:4 131:7 132:7,14 158:9 161:8,8 196:7,25 197:1 strong (4) 83:1 124:13
24:6 25:5,11,24 107:15 108:1 157:23 136:11 137:13,24 164:1 168:7 171:6 started (6) 107:10,11 130:13 181:13
26:16,18 27:5,6,18 111:11,15 showing (1) 34:25 138:10,16,22 139:2 177:13,21 180:6,8 107:15 128:19 strongly (1) 168:21

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

208

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

structure (1) 185:19 struggle (1) 136:3 study (2) 152:17

167:23 style (1) 82:17

subcontract (1) 159:4 subcontracted (1)

159:13

subject (5) 14:13 15:4 15:6 77:20 134:5

subjects (1) 78:16 submission (3) 110:15

111:6,9 submissions (3) 53:13

93:20 110:22

Subparagraph (1) 50:3 subsequent (1) 181:9 subsequently (2)

40:13 69:2

subsidiaries (2)

147:11,20 substance (1) 129:11 substantial (5) 110:15

110:23 184:14 185:13 192:18 substantive (2) 79:24

187:19 suddenly (1) 60:19 sues (1) 132:2 sufficient (3) 13:5

65:24 141:23 sufficiently (1) 183:25 suggest (25) 9:11,21

12:9 15:9 21:8 34:22 35:2 40:23 40:24 49:4 73:12 88:4 90:20 100:6 110:9,17,20 135:23 135:25 136:15 155:5 168:6 182:13 191:20 193:4

suggested (2) 25:3 54:10

suggesting (7) 37:14 64:3 125:13 188:4 188:7,10,14

suggestion (2) 20:1 37:2

suggestions (1)

168:13 suits (1) 55:7

sum (2) 68:8 160:18 supply (1) 20:16 supplying (1) 173:12 support (5) 129:21

136:6 156:6 188:15 191:23

sure (51) 12:17 13:10 19:16 20:5,23 30:1 33:2 42:16 46:19 46:22 49:5 52:3 53:9 54:9 58:12 59:6 60:1,24 71:25 73:22 80:19 87:20 92:5,7,10 93:2 109:13 122:15 124:18 125:18,19 138:4,17 148:24 149:16 150:12 159:20,23 160:23 160:23,23 163:23 164:15 166:19 171:2,25 175:4,4 176:1,1 177:19

surely (2) 88:12 189:23

suretyship (1) 68:22 surpluses (1) 192:18 surprising (2) 96:11

97:2 surprisingly (1) 93:4 survive (3) 71:24

191:21,22 suspect (4) 94:24

189:12,12 196:3 swore (1) 84:17

T

tab (1) 181:25 table (19) 42:14,23
43:1,12,18 44:10 45:4 58:20 60:5 144:11 172:9,10 178:21,23 186:3,16 186:17 187:2,7

tabulated (1) 56:7 take (34) 17:7 18:13

21:15 61:14 64:9 71:16 81:17 85:7 90:24 94:6 98:5 102:6 109:23 132:21 137:5 147:1 151:22 155:20 162:5,9,19 163:15 163:16 167:7 168:6 169:10 178:3,5,9 186:15,16 189:9 195:4 196:23

taken (7) 69:5 70:15 84:14 133:2 144:24 145:3 165:20

takeover (1) 135:8 takes (3) 194:24 196:22 197:11

talk (1) 99:11 talking (2) 91:20

166:25

Tarasova (1) 46:18

Tarasova’s (2) 46:24

47:1

target (2) 132:20 176:13

tax (2) 106:24 107:3 technical (5) 78:11 92:7,8 138:18

148:24 technically (2) 78:17

88:15

Tekno (2) 90:6,7 telephone (3) 11:9

128:25 129:1 tell (9) 22:7 106:19

111:23 126:24 138:1 163:13 172:7 172:14 173:7

telling (5) 125:8 126:5 174:10,11 187:11

tells (1) 124:10 ten (6) 51:20,21

111:17 145:11 163:20 164:17 ten-minute (1) 51:19

tended (1) 88:8 term (1) 156:8 Terminal (14) 102:19

147:12 158:4,7,9 158:10,12,15,23 166:7,11 174:17 184:13 185:6

terms (7) 9:2 30:23 31:1,18,22 189:21 190:7

terrible (2) 16:20 196:24

test (5) 166:2,3 190:25 192:8 194:2

testing (1) 195:11

text (10) 18:1 30:22 154:1 157:5,6
73:14,15 74:6 76:2 188:15
81:21 86:23 90:19 threat (2) 70:18 71:19
124:8 three (20) 26:21
Thank (8) 9:1 46:6 32:12 37:25 38:3
53:9 55:11 69:16 45:12,23 64:14
104:13 146:3 70:7 86:4 96:23
197:13 105:21 107:13,21
thanks (3) 13:12 53:8 126:25 143:9
99:15 147:20 174:17,21
theoretically (5) 38:19 176:14 192:1
39:4,25 52:17 three-party (3) 40:22
94:19 138:21 139:6
theory (1) 168:2 Thursday (1) 1:1
thing (4) 61:6,13 timber (1) 150:1
178:13 189:8 time (61) 11:8 20:4
things (15) 38:2 40:5 23:16,18,19 37:24
45:4 52:8 83:11 37:25 39:15 49:14
90:12 93:15 97:9 50:16 53:10 58:16
125:7 130:12 160:4 58:17,18 60:22
169:5 181:8 182:15 61:4,22 62:20,21
186:22 64:7,10 65:1,9,23
think (150) 11:23 65:24 74:7 76:7
12:22,23 15:19,20 80:9,24 85:19 88:3
16:4,7 18:20 19:12 105:19 111:2,22
20:21 21:21,25 124:20 125:4
22:1,3,5,24 23:3 127:13 130:4 137:5
24:1,3,7,9,18,21 141:10 142:1,18,23
26:21 31:9 33:4,6 143:4,11 144:25
34:12 37:11,21 145:12 146:21
38:13 39:1 40:8 154:5 165:6,20
42:16,22,24 43:9 170:2 178:4 189:14
44:2,9,10 45:22 190:15 191:12
46:25 47:1,15,16 192:16 195:15
48:2,22 49:11 51:5 196:6,12 197:2
51:7,13 52:10,25 times (3) 184:3,8,17
53:2 54:24 55:14 timing (2) 52:19
56:1,3 59:6,12,18 195:18
59:19 61:23 70:7 today (5) 35:11 37:5
73:2,4 74:10 75:7 98:15 165:14,15
78:10,13 79:5 told (3) 24:14 50:7
80:19 81:16,25 196:16
89:25 90:4,12 tomorrow (7) 55:2
92:12,19 93:21,21 177:15 195:21
93:24 94:21,22 196:1,11,11,22
97:10,19 98:22 top (14) 22:11 42:21
99:3 101:6,8,10,16 47:22 49:19 147:10
103:2,5 105:18,20 149:10,12 152:9
105:22 107:4 158:2 175:13
108:23 109:18 178:15 182:17
110:18 111:17 184:20 186:16
122:17 124:14,22 top-in-the-market (1)
125:3,22 126:4,6 157:5
126:11 128:5 topic (1) 145:6
130:17 131:22 tortured (1) 194:16
132:20 136:1,9,22 total (6) 83:3 161:5
139:15 141:20,20 184:15,16 185:9
151:24 159:22 192:17
160:13,20 162:24 totally (1) 129:5
163:6,8 164:21 trace (1) 175:6
165:7,9 167:8 trademarks (2) 82:18
170:9,24,25 174:15 82:19
177:24 178:6 179:6 trading (2) 156:20
180:4 181:6,16 166:5
186:20 187:14,25 traffic (2) 196:14,24
191:11,17 195:3,12 train (1) 196:23
196:6,7 trains (1) 196:12
thinking (1) 58:16 transaction (2) 20:15
third (25) 9:17,19 81:11
21:14 25:13,21 transactions (3) 68:16
27:1,6 29:23 30:5 164:10 176:4
32:8,14,16 33:15 transcript (7) 15:17
34:23 35:5 53:6 29:12,13 71:4
54:2 63:25 70:7 108:2 142:9 155:12
98:2 102:21 107:21 transcripts (1) 53:4
129:16 133:22 transfer (4) 89:4,11,18
160:25 164:12
thought (9) 54:14,15 transfers (1) 72:7
58:9 59:8 144:15 translation (13) 10:23

11:19,21,25 14:4 15:14 16:19 70:1 73:7 74:10,13 90:18 104:15

translations (1) 73:9 traversed (1) 54:13 treat (2) 156:15 181:7 treated (3) 156:5,22

156:22

trial (3) 86:18 137:12 153:22

tried (2) 82:17 107:23 trouble (1) 70:15 troubles (2) 85:18

107:2

true (15) 62:15 66:22 94:24 99:22 100:11 129:4,5 132:4 133:19 134:14 135:25 136:1,17 137:11 169:7

trust (2) 137:19 153:15

truthful (1) 24:22 try (6) 54:12 55:5,10

92:23 111:2 196:9 trying (10) 10:1 17:14

46:1 50:24 88:1 130:1,6 136:22 168:20 194:18

turn (3) 21:14 35:7 161:18

turned (1) 47:5 turnover (3) 153:12

153:13 191:21 twice (1) 108:9

two (35) 10:18,19,20 23:5 32:11 34:13 39:1,1 45:12,23 48:6 52:2,23 70:6 73:21 79:24 80:2,6 81:21 83:9 85:9 86:4,22 92:15 98:22,25 107:14 110:6 135:8,10 143:9,19 149:12 184:13 196:23

type (5) 78:8 81:5,8 83:16 92:10

U

UK (1) 122:20 ulitsa (3) 100:16
102:23 103:24 ultimately (3) 190:22

191:14 192:14 umbrella (1) 133:15 unable (2) 187:21,22 unacceptable (1) 86:5 underlying (2) 189:1

190:25

undermine (1) 88:9 undermines (1) 125:9 underneath (2) 80:6,7 understand (35)

10:14 11:3 21:4 25:7 33:24 37:12 37:14,18,19 42:4 44:3 45:21 48:9 49:17 51:1 56:10 90:10 92:9 106:15 106:18,21 110:20 153:5 155:25 156:16 160:14 166:9 169:8 170:20 172:7 177:25 181:5 191:14 193:11 194:18

understanding (14)

32:15 44:17 60:4 60:19 89:13 93:19 107:9 111:5 136:6 143:13 168:3 192:12 195:8,13

understands (1)

128:23 understood (18) 9:8

12:12 14:17 20:2 23:4,16 63:1 76:3 77:3 91:5 122:5 123:25 127:10 130:14 131:16 136:19 143:7 152:2

unfortunately (1)

110:11 university (1) 93:7 unlawful (2) 123:1

135:8

unnecessarily (1)

94:14 unsworn (1) 98:3 untrue (1) 93:17 unusual (4) 12:25

63:17 78:1 107:17 unusually (1) 180:4 up-valuing (1) 162:2 uprating (1) 186:12 upwards (1) 181:7 use (6) 73:12 105:12

111:1,1 139:16 142:2

usual (1) 11:20 usually (3) 53:24

137:13 156:20

V

V-Bank (8) 34:3,15 139:21 140:24 141:3,10,16 142:6

valid (4) 32:9,14,17 61:6

validity (2) 27:12 48:18

validly (2) 9:6 59:15 valuable (2) 135:8

192:6

valuation (13) 157:18 159:1,2,4,5,13,15 160:20,25 161:2 166:12 181:2 192:11

valuations (1) 191:23 value (21) 86:3 92:8

95:9 151:10 156:2 156:13,14 157:14 158:20 159:18 160:17,23 168:14 169:4 181:7,7 183:9 184:20 185:16 186:12 190:21

valued (1) 158:8 various (5) 17:14

94:23 147:7 150:14 153:21

Vasilenko (1) 75:6

Vasiliev (23) 75:1,4

101:6 103:3,5

105:8,11,14 121:14 122:6 123:2,6,20 124:24 125:13,25 126:6,9,25 127:9 127:24 128:21 130:22

VD (7) 20:20 22:22 28:4 71:5 78:25

122:25 123:24 veracity (2) 56:25

59:18

version (25) 10:21,24 14:2,23 15:19 16:1 23:20 33:23 34:19 39:12 45:5 46:5 47:23 72:18,21 73:15,17 76:14,14 77:10 80:16 83:14 90:18 91:2 111:14

versions (1) 76:5 vessel (1) 68:4 viability (3) 188:18 189:1 190:4

view (6) 53:20 85:7 157:17 171:23 179:7 182:9 viewed (1) 137:15 violating (1) 131:14

visiting (2) 108:9 138:20

Vitaly (3) 8:14 47:13

198:5

VKHP (2) 176:1,15 void (1) 121:18 Volkov (1) 181:19 volume (2) 78:7

135:13 volumes (3) 38:18

88:16 157:3

Voropaev (1) 152:10

Vozrozhdenie (1)

140:13

VSC (1) 25:14

VTK (20) 175:14,17,25 176:10,12,15,20 177:8,11,12,14,15 177:23 178:4,7,17 179:24 192:20,25 193:6

Vyborg (85) 8:17,20 9:1,12,16,17,20 11:6 14:13,19 15:5 15:7,10,23 16:14 16:22 17:9,13,17 17:19,22 18:11,14 18:18,23 19:1,4 20:10 21:11,14 25:14,21 26:2 27:1 27:6,8 28:24 29:5 29:10,16 30:7,19 33:15 34:23 35:5,7 35:21 36:14 41:5,9 43:20 50:22 51:6 58:7 60:9 62:7 63:25 64:12,21 85:6 101:20,24 102:9,12 103:10 104:20 121:15,24 122:7 127:12 129:17 132:13 147:14,25 158:4 166:7 174:16 175:17,23 177:12 178:9,10 179:19 184:12 192:20

W

waded (2) 94:13,21 waiting (3) 33:23
72:18 111:8 want (44) 16:10 17:6

24:8 29:11 45:11 45:16 51:2 73:11 73:21 76:20,22 85:17 92:4 94:3,4,9 99:9 101:1 103:13

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

209

February 18, 2016 Day 12 Redacted

109:25 110:15 111:4,8 121:20 122:2 128:1 140:3 148:20 149:1 152:16 159:6 160:3 160:14 163:6 172:20 173:7,23 177:11,13,14,17 178:25 183:4 193:23

wanted (10) 85:18 91:22 94:15 96:11 99:13 109:17,20 110:1 132:23 143:15

warning (2) 13:10

156:18 wasn’t (26) 22:24

23:1 24:21,22,23 25:3 28:10 47:5 64:15 73:3 75:4 76:8 89:21 97:4 101:11,13,20 105:14 108:22,24 121:15 126:13 170:8 185:24 188:14 189:15

waste (1) 191:12 way (27) 15:1 48:1

54:9 77:1 78:11 82:18 83:15 91:14 93:22 103:7 106:23 122:15 125:21 138:23 143:3 153:9 157:15 159:8,10 166:3,6 167:5 178:22 188:12 189:15 195:13 196:9

we’ll (2) 105:1 151:8 we’re (1) 61:21 we’ve (9) 9:18 18:25

50:17 59:1 60:15 82:15,16 85:3 99:24

website (3) 53:1,2,18 week (3) 53:6 108:9

132:22

weeks (3) 85:9 86:4 107:14

weigh (1) 193:2 went (9) 51:13 56:6

56:16 65:11 78:13 83:2 108:17 144:3 181:20

weren’t (9) 42:16 59:14 89:12 132:24 168:25 169:17 171:23 182:8 188:7

western (15) 102:19 147:12 158:4,7,9 158:10,12,15,23 166:7,11 174:16 184:12 185:6 189:20

Whilst (1) 84:11 white (1) 192:25 whizzing (1) 194:16 widely (1) 128:5 wider (1) 163:4 wife (6) 49:13 50:10

137:13,17,19 138:4 wipe (1) 162:12

wish (1) 173:10 wishes (1) 194:2 withdrawn (2) 19:23

176:5 witness (40) 13:3

23:12,15 49:12,13

50:1 58:15,24 72:2 86:14,17 87:6,11 87:16,18,21,21 88:6 89:24,24 94:16 96:19 98:3 99:20,23 100:9 103:1 131:22 133:17 136:8 139:13,15 140:5 169:14 179:1 181:22 189:5,14 192:22 194:10

witnesses (4) 52:6 53:12 97:15 132:22

wonder (15) 11:19 13:21 45:6 67:20 68:17 69:17 72:16 76:24 79:10 80:13 86:13 95:19 108:2 136:7 194:5

wondered (1) 12:1 wondering (2) 52:8

139:11 word (1) 159:17 words (10) 25:19

62:12 79:25 80:2,7 88:21 122:22 135:22 180:25 183:17

work (8) 12:16 67:3 73:11 128:24 131:19 163:10,22 178:23

worked (1) 10:8 working (8) 10:9

24:16 52:10 97:10 123:17 170:2 171:21 182:8

works (2) 95:4 157:15 world (1) 131:17 worried (1) 191:2 worry (1) 172:15 worth (2) 45:23 181:6 wouldn’t (23) 12:17

13:3 22:18 26:11 40:9 53:25 54:9 63:11,14 67:7 79:4 92:6 105:16 133:12 142:17,24,25 153:5 162:6,13,15,23 168:18

write (1) 14:25 writing (8) 22:12

26:23 87:20,24 88:12 92:24 106:7 180:24

written (15) 9:4 33:13 36:23 43:11 47:24 48:14 107:19 111:14 124:3 125:21,25 127:9 130:23 169:8 170:20

wrong (14) 25:4 44:11 100:14 108:1 122:5 126:4 137:23 167:13 173:18 178:2 187:15 189:6 190:17 192:13

wrongly (1) 45:1

X

Y

yard (1) 176:2 Yates (1) 57:11 year (17) 23:17 45:1

84:11 87:22 145:20

148:16 149:7 150:25 156:16 162:7,22 165:22 167:9,21 168:9 181:8 186:19
years (9) 34:11,13 96:23 136:3 152:17 164:17 167:24 181:9 194:17

yesterday (14) 11:10 11:15 13:8 14:22 19:15 29:23 32:11 36:3 52:5,20 54:6 67:11 142:10 158:17

yesterday’s (1) 155:12 young (1) 23:18 YurInvest (1) 148:4

Z

0

1

1 (14) 31:6,7,10 37:1 58:5,5 60:5 74:2 95:24 99:24 140:14 153:18 179:19 198:3

1.0 (1) 99:12

1.4 (1) 111:25

1.069 (1) 158:15

1.1 (1) 70:23

1.1.7 (1) 71:3

1.45 (1) 99:10

10 (6) 109:7 154:13 168:17 179:4 181:25 184:4

10.0 (7) 1:2 195:21 196:1,7,9 197:3,5
100,000 (1) 38:21

103 (1) 177:1

109 (1) 35:1

11 (1) 90:17

11.15 (1) 51:22

11.29 (1) 51:24

112 (1) 198:7

116 (1) 149:10

116.93 (1) 175:11

12 (1) 63:23

12.39 (1) 99:16

12.46 (1) 99:18

121 (1) 198:8

129 (1) 177:3

13 (7) 68:20 71:6 139:22 150:25 151:2,3 168:25

130 (5) 68:2 79:2 84:9 89:4,18
14 (2) 55:17 56:2

14,913 (1) 150:21

145 (5) 44:22 86:17 87:2,6,16
147 (4) 56:7 59:3,4 72:3
149 (1) 142:10

15 (1) 104:7

150 (1) 182:10

16 (1) 86:15

161 (1) 66:8

16th (4) 86:17 88:17 99:20 131:22
17 (3) 11:6 19:21 179:5
1725 (1) 150:17

18 (12) 1:1 10:5 13:25 14:14 19:7 25:12 25:16 43:9 80:17

136:9 155:15 179:5 19 (5) 57:6 64:11

77:16 155:15 197:16

19th (1) 136:8

2

2 (10) 16:4 41:18 44:4 44:14,19 57:17 73:23 74:19 95:25 102:13

2.00 (3) 55:7,8 99:10

2.15 (2) 111:21 112:2

2.25 (2) 158:24 160:18

2.3 (1) 175:5

2.4 (1) 27:16

2.4.2 (1) 27:23 2.4.3 (1) 28:3
2.5 (1) 47:10

20 (10) 25:12,17 43:9 69:15 109:7 110:19 136:9 176:22 178:8 184:17
2005 (1) 165:16
2006 (4) 65:16 165:16
171:17 184:15
2007 (29) 41:23
145:20 148:16
149:7 150:25 158:2 162:7,22 165:5 166:5,8 168:9 169:1 171:17 172:3 175:1 176:8 179:4 183:1 184:3,7,12 184:16 185:23 186:5,18 187:4,12 190:12

2008 (54) 10:5 13:25 14:14 19:7 35:17 35:25 44:25 46:12 49:3 50:11 68:3 71:6 74:17,24 75:9 77:16,21 78:20 80:17 81:4,22 82:9 84:9,10 86:7 89:3 90:5,17,24 97:23 104:20 108:8,18 127:24 132:8 139:14 141:4 165:7 169:18,24 171:17 173:16 175:8 176:17,22 177:6,9 179:4,20 182:5 187:12 190:12 192:2 194:14

2009 (17) 49:21 99:24 108:20,22,24 110:10 125:17 139:15 141:4,4 142:6 165:8 171:17 175:8 176:24 177:9 179:4

2009/2010 (1) 129:2

2010 (6) 124:21,23 171:18 175:8 177:1 177:9

2011 (13) 84:18 85:11 86:8,19 87:19 129:15,20 140:14 171:18 175:9 177:3 177:9 192:16

2012 (3) 69:15 125:3 126:12

2013 (2) 58:10,20

2014 (2) 57:6 62:21

2015 (1) 86:9

2016 (3) 1:1 153:19

197:16
21 (4) 25:12,17 35:17
43:9
22 (1) 153:19
23 (6) 25:12,17 35:15
35:16 36:12 43:9
234(5) (2) 99:21
100:12
238 (1) 184:8
238.7 (1) 184:3
25 (6) 8:24 41:23
44:25 46:12 50:11
126:12
25th (1) 75:10
27 (1) 65:13
28 (7) 8:22 33:7 68:3
71:6 84:9 89:3
90:24
29 (4) 74:24 75:9
137:6,9

3
3 (11) 16:4 20:13
22:20 75:16,23
95:25 102:15,20
122:10 146:4
184:15

3.08 (1) 145:13

3.17 (1) 145:15

3.8 (1) 150:8

30 (6) 65:16 69:7,18
76:8,15 110:19
31 (5) 84:10 140:14
145:20 148:16
183:1
31.8 (1) 175:10
32 (5) 23:13,21,24
25:4 67:22
35 (1) 108:4
3500-08-01279 (2)
15:22 16:15
3799 (1) 150:6
39 (1) 95:20

4

4 (6) 37:1 50:3 85:8 86:4 102:17 184:16
4.00 (1) 196:22 4.00ish (1) 55:9

4.30 (7) 54:11,15,18 195:22,24 196:10 197:14

40 (4) 110:18 111:12 158:18 185:24

40.653 (1) 186:1

44.525 (1) 185:7

45 (1) 111:12

45,767,000 (1) 151:16

45.767 (2) 162:12 187:5

47 (2) 133:20 134:1

48 (6) 97:17,22,25 98:1,9 185:1

48.974 (2) 184:24

185:2

5

5 (9) 31:9,14 37:2 85:8 86:4 108:3 167:9 168:9,16

5.1 (2) 140:9,11

5.12 (1) 151:11

5.2 (1) 134:25

50 (2) 161:5 187:8

50,857 (1) 161:17

50.8 (1) 161:15

50.857 (5) 151:6 161:6,25 162:9

185:10

500 (1) 192:5

6

6 (6) 61:1 62:3 105:23 106:1 108:21 154:13

6.1 (1) 147:5

6.19 (9) 151:8,20 157:22 161:7,8,9 161:20,23 183:19

6.4 (1) 106:3

6.7 (1) 160:1

60 (4) 83:25 86:19,24 87:3

600 (1) 192:5

61 (1) 143:19

7

7 (3) 43:13,23 108:21

7.00 (1) 24:12

7.41 (1) 80:10

700 (1) 192:5

75.74 (1) 175:10

76 (1) 176:24

8

8 (5) 108:21 155:23 198:4,5,6
8.00 (1) 24:12

8.17 (2) 24:14,15

8.172 (1) 175:10

8.47 (1) 24:10

85 (1) 149:21

9
9.00 (1) 24:16
9.45 (4) 197:1,4,6,15
9000 (1) 82:15

Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900