Day 14

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

Day 14 — Redacted

February 22, 2016

Opus 2 International — Official Court Reporters

Phone: +44 (0)20 3008 5900

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Monday, 22 February 2016 1 counsel would not allow to do that.
2 (10.30 am) 2 So there are, actually, two things here around. The
3 Housekeeping 3 first thing, definitely it’s not yet clear if I had any
4 MR LORD: May it please your Lordship. 4 chance for re-examination and how it would be organised
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Good morning. 5 by the court, that’s the second point. But the first
6 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Good morning. 6 point that I want to bring to the attention of
7 MR LORD: My Lord, there are some matters of housekeeping, 7 the court, which had to be done by my counsel if I am
8 but I would greatly prefer if we dealt with them at 8 represented, the nine points of the lie of Mr Lord at
9 4.30 today and we got on with the cross-examination, if 9 the hearing on Friday.
10 that is acceptable to your Lordship. There are one or 10 So I need five to ten minutes just to show that the
11 two issues about transcripts and the like and I would 11 points he given to the court have been deceived points.
12 rather do it at the end of the day, rather than lose 12 That relates to the authenticity of the documents and
13 time at the beginning of the day, but I am obviously in 13 the facts he was presenting to the court.
14 your Lordship’s hands. 14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, Mr Arkhangelsky, it may be
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think there is some merit in 15 a language problem, but all counsel does is put forth
16 continuing with the cross-examination. I have read 16 the documents and his questions. If you feel that he
17 an e-mail from Mr Stroilov very early this morning, and 17 has misrepresented them, you will have a chance in due
18 so he has obviously been working hard at the matter. 18 course to say so. I will deal with your re-examination
19 It may be that after the short adjournment we could 19 points in a moment, but I think it is inevitable that
20 take some time out. The only reason for accelerating it 20 counsel, and, to some extent, the court, will take
21 is this: that it has been some while since the 21 exception to suggestions that counsel is lying. It may
22 transcripts were recorded and it is appropriate, 22 be that the matters he put as factual premises are
23 therefore, that they should not be further held back. 23 disputed by you, but that does not mean that they are
24 Shall we try and get some time under our belts, 24 lies.
25 Mr Arkhangelsky, with your cross-examination; that’s to 25 MR ARKHANGELSKY: No, no, no, no, I’m just referring to
1 3
1 say proceed immediately with your cross-examination, and 1 the points where he lies, and I want to show you that.
2 it may be that I will direct that the matter be heard 2 So that’s for sure. Because I believe that
3 after lunch, rather than at 4.30, to enable those who 3 a continuation of the cross-examination, based on the
4 have responsibility for the matter to be able to ensure 4 fact that I am not represented and I don’t have
5 the publication of the transcript as soon as possible. 5 a counsel who can say so, so I think it’s my must to
6 I think we would all feel better if we had some progress 6 show to the court —
7 made in the meantime. 7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Give me your very best of your nine
8 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Absolutely, my Lord. 8 points, please.
9 Your Lordship, may I just ask you a few small 9 MR ARKHANGELSKY: The first, and probably —
10 questions, technical questions, while I am not 10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Not necessarily the first on your
11 represented and I haven’t had the time to — not time, 11 list; the one you feel most strongly about and which is
12 but I haven’t had the possibility to discuss it with 12 the clearest.
13 anybody? 13 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes. The first and the most important,
14 So just a few minor things. First of all, the 14 the application which Mr Lord said that was
15 people from Magnum got a stick with the videos and 15 an application done by Mr Yaroslav Vasiliev to
16 pictures, which we were discussing, so it’s on the 16 the court. He shown us on the screen both Russian and
17 computer, and I suggest that — I probably would suggest 17 English version, and he said that was the particular
18 that the cross-examination to start with these small 18 document lodged with the court, and based on which he
19 movies. 19 made at least three quite important statements and
20 The second thing, that after seriously considering 20 assumptions.
21 what’s happened on Thursday and Friday, actually I put 21 So I want to say that by giving at least five to six
22 it for myself in writing, that there are at least nine 22 reasons, that that document never, ever been lodged with
23 points where Mr Lord was lying in the court on Friday, 23 the court, and it means that any cross-examination on
24 and by doing this, he was misleading the court; and 24 that particular document could not be done, at least in
25 having a counsel at that particular hearing, I think the 25 that way and with that assumptions.
2 4
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 If your Lordship would allow to show these two 1 You remember, as far as I remember, Mr Stroilov
2 documents, I would give you five to six points why 2 pointed them at least three points where, for example,
3 I strongly believe that, having a counsel, he would not 3 they were referring to the judgment which had been, for
4 allow to do this examination on that particular 4 example, overturned in the Court of Appeal and so on.
5 document. 5 So my question: if they had to make these changes
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I am just wondering what the 6 and explain why and what for and based on which reasons
7 most effective and time-efficient way of dealing with 7 they tried to mislead the court. So that’s my question
8 this — 8 to you.
9 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I need just five to ten minutes on that, 9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You must leave these matters to me,
10 I mean on all the points. 10 though I shall be grateful of assistance on questions
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but you have nine points and this 11 which you have already made and questions which you
12 is your first and best of them and it sounds as if it 12 and/or Mr Stroilov are to make in the future, so that
13 needs — it’s not the sort of point which leaps off the 13 I know your position on them. But you must not,
14 page; it is a point which needs a considerable amount of 14 I think, without minimising the depth of your concern,
15 elaboration. 15 you must not, I think, confuse disagreement with
16 There is no prejudice to you, is there, in dealing 16 impropriety. These are different matters.
17 with these points and any further points as points that 17 It may be that you demonstrate that there are
18 you make after the conclusion of your cross-examination, 18 matters which are inaccurate in the submissions that
19 lest I attach an inadequate — well, an excessive weight 19 have been made to me by Mr Lord and his clients, and if
20 to matters which you dispute. Isn’t it better to deal 20 they are inaccurate and they are relevant, I will
21 with these at the end? There are going to be lots of 21 adjudicate on them. But all counsel does, and what his
22 them, probably; if there are nine after two days, 22 solicitors do, in good faith and professionally, as far
23 probably there will be 18 after five. 23 as I am concerned, is put the matters to the court. If
24 MR ARKHANGELSKY: You see, there are two points here. It 24 in due course the court does not accept them, that does
25 depends if we would return to that points during the 25 not mean that they are lying; it just means that I have
5 7

1 cross-examination. I mean if any points which have been

2 discussed on Thursday and Friday would be repeated.

3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, if he does, you can say: this is

4 one of my nine points and I wish to elaborate the

5 following.

6 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Okay, and the second question if I may ask

7 you, because depending on your reply on that question,

8 I may reply generally if I need time immediately or not.

9 It’s, again, the question to you as the judge, as long

10 as I am not represented, and I don’t have anybody who

11 can give me a proper reply. So just two minutes on

12 that.

13 You know that two months ago, two counsel

14 representing the Bank, they lodged with the court

15 opening submissions. In that opening submissions they

16 given quite a number of deceived statements which also

17 bring the court — mislead the court.

18 Some few points been shown by Mr Stroilov in my

19 opening submissions, and my question to your Lordship:

20 isn’t it a normal and necessary point that if two

21 counsel give such an important alleged submissions to

22 the court, shouldn’t they — knowing that they misled

23 the court, should they make changes, first; and, second,

24 if they should explain why they were misleading the

25 court.

1 reached a different adjudication on points of relevance.

2 Mr Lord is not on trial here; he is simply the

3 vehicle by which you are asked questions on matters

4 relating to the case. So I think that, of course,

5 I will keep an open mind as to all the points that you

6 make, and when it is necessary to adjudicate on them,

7 I shall, and if it is necessary to make any further

8 comments, I shall, but I do not want us to have

9 a running commentary on Mr Lord and his clients’

10 performance thus far. I would rather get on with the

11 questions and your answers.

12 So far as these points that you have, I will give

13 you an opportunity to make these points at the end of

14 your cross-examination, that’s the first point; and any

15 further points that you accumulate also.

16 If, during the course of your cross-examination, any

17 of these points arise, and you feel you are being

18 cross-examined in respect of documents or matters where

19 your nine points arise, or you have concerns as to

20 the authenticity or veracity of what is being put to

21 you, then I will intervene and ask you to explain it as

22 efficiently as you can.

23 So far as any other questions on re-examination at

24 the conclusion of your cross-examination, and subject to

25 anything that Mr Lord may put to me, I would propose to

6 8
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 rise for a little time to allow you to consider your 1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, read it out, and I am sure
2 position, possibly at the end of Wednesday, and possibly 2 they …
3 returning on the Thursday, in order that you should have 3 MR ARKHANGELSKY: (Interpreted) «Consent list. Declaration
4 an opportunity to think what in the transcript you wish 4 of intent has been consented, organisation, the Federal
5 to elaborate. 5 Agency for Marine and River Transport. We have federal
6 I will also try, though there is a limit to what 6 agencies, Rosmorjilev(?) with corporate seal with all
7 I can do, and raise matters with you where I feel I need 7 the details, and we have the signature and we have the
8 your further assistance, or where I feel you can 8 name of the representative, Mr D Mitrienko(?).»
9 elaborate that which remains obscure. 9 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I just want to stress your attention to
10 So I very much hope that in that way, you will be 10 the fact that this is a quite unusual document from the
11 given different, but coextensive, opportunities to 11 point of view of Russian bureaucrats. So they agreed
12 perfect what it is you wish to say. 12 something, which you call a declaration about
13 So please understand I have every wish and objective 13 intentions, but they don’t have any particular
14 to ensure that you are given proper opportunity to put 14 explanation, which, and in which volume, and how far and
15 your case. 15 so on. So these actually give full rights for
16 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Okay, very good. 16 everything for those who handle these documents. So
17 Can I just bring to your attention, I have given 17 just referring to Wednesday’s hearing.
18 a document which has been in disclosure for sure; I’ve 18 So this is the approval of the investment
19 given it to you and to the translators. 19 declaration of Western Terminal done by the person we
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes — 20 discussed on Wednesday. So giving the full, absolute
21 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Can you just hear for half a minute what 21 rights and permissions, which is done in a very unusual
22 the translator would read it for you? It’s referring 22 way.
23 to — 23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I am not going to pretend that
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Does Mr Lord have this? 24 I fully understand this point, and therefore I think you
25 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, yes, yes, they have. 25 will have to think how best to put it as clearly as you
9 11

1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.

2 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I just want you to hear the interpreter,

3 just to explain what it is about. I think it is quite

4 an important point for Wednesday’s hearing.

5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right. Do you want me to put my thing

6 on? I will be able to read it on the screen.

7 MR ARKHANGELSKY: We don’t have a translation, so I just got

8 it yesterday.

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, but they can tell me what it says

10 and I can read it on the screen.

11 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Okay, sorry.

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So you want them to translate this

13 document.

14 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes.

15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And tell me what it says?

16 Please may they do so. (Pause)

17 Do they have it?

18 MR BIRT: Yes, they are just wondering what to do.

19 THE INTERPRETER: My Lord, would your Lordship like to

20 put —

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would it be best for Dr Arkhangelsky

22 to read it out and for them to do it that way?

23 Would you like to read what it says in Russian and

24 they can then simultaneously translate it? Yes.

25 MR ARKHANGELSKY: He hasn’t done a translation?

1 can to me, now that it has been translated, and I will

2 give — I will add that to the list of matters which

3 I will let you expand on in re-examination, this being

4 another matter, and there may be other examples of this.

5 If I thought that you should be exposed to further

6 cross-examination, having given your explanation, I will

7 deal with that in due course; that is to say, if you put

8 forward new material in re-examination, it is only right

9 you should be cross-examined on it, with further right

10 of re-examination if it appears to me to be appropriate.

11 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Very good. And the final, final, final

12 thing.

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

14 MR ARKHANGELSKY: As I said, I’ve given the videos to Opus,

15 and I think it would be good to spend ten minutes on

16 videos and pictures, just, you know, because we’ve been

17 discussing quite a number of points, I think it is

18 better to see it once.

19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, it is certainly right that we

20 should see the video, but it’s not for you, or for me,

21 for that matter, to dictate to Mr Lord what sequence he

22 conducts his cross-examination in. I have made clear in

23 what I have said that I do want to see these videos and

24 I want you to have a chance to explain what they say,

25 but I am not going to dictate to Mr Lord when he does

10 12
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 it. If he wants to do it now, well and good; if he 1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Lord is addressing me at the
2 wants to do it later, well and good. One way or the 2 moment, Dr Arkhangelsky, but I will let you speak about
3 other, they must be done in some time. 3 these things.
4 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I just wanted to tell that they appeared 4 Yes?
5 and they have everything installed, so we checked that 5 MR LORD: My Lord, I am not sure whether there is a prior
6 right now. 6 page.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, that’s very good. Thank you. 7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
8 MR LORD: My Lord, just on that, I assume all these videos 8 MR LORD: And I want to reserve my clients’ rights entirely
9 have been disclosed? I am not sure if they have. 9 in relation to this document in all the circumstances,
10 That’s just the first point. 10 including as to the matters I have just adumbrated, and
11 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Absolutely disclosed. 11 any further questions, which I anticipate there will be,
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: When? 12 but only once I have established a number of relevant
13 MR ARKHANGELSKY: By Withers, so I provided all the 13 background matters and provenance and disclosure and
14 documents. I have not had the chance to speak to 14 the like and taken appropriate instruction. But I do
15 anybody, so all the documents I had been disclosed to 15 anticipate having to cross-examine on this document at
16 Withers, and Withers made a disclosure and have numbers. 16 some stage, but I will, of course, alert your Lordship
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Including the videos? 17 to that before I do so.
18 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Absolutely, so I haven’t had a chance to 18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think two points arise from this.
19 discuss it with anybody. 19 The first is that Mr Lord has spotted that in the top
20 I assume, and I think it for sure would be brought 20 right, there is a number 2, which he suggests suggests
21 by Ms Simonova that she definitely has had much more 21 that there was a first page and possibly a third and
22 pictures and documents, but again, I have not had the 22 subsequent pages.
23 chance, or I am not allowed to discuss anything with 23 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I think it is at least 1,000 pages in that
24 her; and I think if any further issues arise, and when 24 document.
25 my cross-examination finished, I think we can — I could 25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is 1,000 pages.
13 15
1 discuss it with Mr Stroilov and probably we would be 1 MR ARKHANGELSKY: So that is what I was able to identify on
2 able to bring more pictures, documents, whatever, 2 my computer and print, just to confirm what I just said
3 whatever necessary for the court. 3 on Wednesday, just to make a very brief evidence of
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So far as you are concerned, 4 confirmation. So all these hundreds of pages been
5 everything that I am to see in due course has been 5 disclosed properly.
6 provided on disclosure through Withers? 6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see.
7 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Absolutely. Absolutely. 7 MR LORD: All right.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see, all right. 8 MR STROILOV: Well, if they are page references within a big
9 MR LORD: My Lord, on this document this morning, again, 9 document disclosure exercise, that is one thing; but if
10 I am having it checked, but I am not sure whether it has 10 this is the second page of a discrete document,
11 been previously disclosed in the litigation. 11 a separate document, then I think that the other pages
12 MR ARKHANGELSKY: It has been, for sure. 12 should be identified at some point by referring —
13 MR LORD: Well, then we can be furnished with the disclosure 13 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Absolutely.
14 reference and we can find it. 14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — to them.
15 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Absolutely, but it’s — I would not tell 15 The other thing I think is that it might be as well,
16 it to you, so Mr Stroilov, you can write to him or to 16 please, if a translation could be obtained of this
17 Withers and discuss that. 17 document. I don’t mean to say that I didn’t appreciate
18 So it was a part of a huge set of documents, 18 the translation previously, but what I mean is in
19 including all the business plan in respect to that. 19 writing, so that I can simply see the document.
20 MR LORD: That’s the first point. 20 Very good. Shall we resume, then?
21 Secondly, it has a «2» in the top right-hand corner. 21 MR VITALY DMITRIEVICH ARKHANGELSKY (continued)
22 I don’t know if that denotes that there’s a prior page. 22 Cross-examination by MR LORD (continued)
23 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Sorry? 23 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, I wonder if we could go, please,
24 MR LORD: Sorry, Mr Arkhangelsky, I am addressing his 24 to paragraph 90 of your witness statement on {C1/1/23},
25 Lordship. 25 and you will recall on Friday I was asking you questions
14 16
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 about the BNP Paribas —

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. — financing that you were engaged upon.

4 A. Sorry, which paragraph you are referring now?

5 Q. Paragraph 90. {C1/1/23}, {C1/1/24}.

6 You can see what you say there. You see that you

7 say there, BNP Paribas wrote to you saying that they

8 were willing in principle to fund the project. I think

9 I asked you about that?

10 A. Yes, we discussed the letter on Friday, I think.

11 Q. Yes. Then you say:

12 «This would have been sufficient both to pay for the

13 redevelopment of Western Terminal and to restructure

14 around US $80 million of the Group’s debt.»

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. I wonder if you could be shown, please, {D52/889/11},

17 which is a page in the information memorandum which

18 I asked you about last week, which is behind divider 10

19 of the Western Terminal bundle for his Lordship’s, or

20 your ease, of reference.

21 Dr Arkhangelsky, this page of the information

22 memorandum has a heading, «Funding Requirement»; can you

23 see that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And what this document appeared to be telling the reader

1 it?

2 A. No, I think my understanding that it would — actually,

3 it’s not only my understanding, but it was the

4 requirements of the financing banks. It was the same

5 story with EBRD or BNP Paribas that they wanted not to

6 have any Russian banks involved, so it means that they

7 wanted to refinance all the outstanding local short term

8 debt.

9 Q. Can I ask you, please, to go to {D74/1102/1}, where you

10 will find a letter from BNP Paribas —

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. — to Oxus, in relation to this proposed fundraising for

13 the development of Western Terminal, and it is dated

14 25 September 2008; can you see that?

15 A. Yes, we discussed that on Friday, I think. It’s the

16 same letter, I believe.

17 Q. It’s not the same letter, Dr Arkhangelsky. They refer

18 to their earlier letter of interest of 12 September.

19 A. Okay.

20 Q. Which I took you to on Friday, and this is a subsequent

21 letter from them. All right?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. You can see in the second paragraph it says:

24 «As developed in our letter of interest

25 dated September 12 …»

17 19

1 was this:

2 «OMG are therefore seeking to raise up to

3 $300 million in long term debt to fund the upgrade of

4 the terminal and to repay $90 million of short term debt

5 used to acquire the terminal in 2007.»

6 Then a little further down you can see the following

7 bullet point:

8 «Gearing.

9 «The parent company has already put in

10 US $140 million of equity into the facility.»

11 Can you see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Now, it is right, isn’t it, that this information

14 memorandum was representing to any potential lender that

15 any borrowed money would be used either to upgrade

16 Western Terminal or to repay short term debt used to

17 acquire it?

18 A. Yes, and to — I think it might be not a full

19 explanation, but as far as I understand and remember,

20 €80 million, so which is, I think, $90 million, is,

21 I think by that time short term debt to Russian banks,

22 yes.

23 Q. And this information memorandum did not say, did it, did

24 not represent, that any of these borrowed monies would

25 be used to refinance the group’s debts generally, did

1 Can you see that?

2 A. Yes, yes.

3 Q. And they go on to say:

4 » … a number of structuring issues will need to

5 be —»

6 A. But I think it’s a letter not addressed to me; it’s

7 a letter addressed to Oxus.

8 Q. That’s right. That’s what I said, Dr Arkhangelsky.

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not sure you did say that,

10 actually. The letter of interest, from recollection,

11 was addressed to Dr Arkhangelsky, but this is addressed

12 to his other advisers.

13 A. Absolutely, first, and they are referring to the letter

14 sent by advisers to them.

15 MR LORD: I said «to Oxus». In [draft transcript] line 17,

16 I said it’s to Oxus.

17 A. Sorry?

18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Oh, did you? Well, don’t let’s argue,

19 I am wrong about it, but I must say, I hadn’t myself

20 picked up that it was to a different addressee.

21 A. I’m sorry, I completely missed …

22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Dr Arkhangelsky, it was my mistake.

23 I thought that the addressee had not been expressly

24 pointed out to you by Mr Lord; he has shown me in

25 the transcript that he did so. It just shows that you

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 and I didn’t pick it up. It is not an important matter. 1 A. Yes, absolutely, because that was our suggestion and the
2 This letter is addressed to Mr Macpherson of Neutralis 2 banks, big banks, they have their own regulation and
3 and to Mr Bromley-Martin of Oxus. The other letter was 3 their own underwriting guidelines, and that’s definitely
4 addressed to you. This is further to that other letter. 4 points for the commercial discussions, including
5 A. Sorry, the first letter dated 12 September, was it 5 pricing, timing, interest holidays and so on;
6 addressed to me; is that right or not? 6 absolutely.
7 MR LORD: Don’t worry about that. I want to ask about this 7 Q. So what they were saying, Dr Arkhangelsky, to you, was
8 letter and it is a letter that you exhibit in your 8 that the model which was underpinning this particular
9 witness statement. 9 business proposition was going to need to be
10 A. Maybe, yes. 10 substantially amended. That’s what they said to you,
11 Q. Paragraph 92 — 11 didn’t they?
12 A. Yes. 12 A. Yes.
13 Q. — on {C1/1/24}, you referred to this letter, 13 Q. And it follows from that, doesn’t it, that BNP Paribas
14 {D74/1102/1}. 14 were not, on the face of it, accepting any previous
15 A. Which paragraph? 15 modelling that had been submitted in support of this
16 Q. Paragraph 92. 16 proposal?
17 A. Yes. 17 A. Absolutely not, because it’s quite normal that we make
18 Q. So can we go back to the letter that you exhibited to 18 a suggestion based on the average in the market, and
19 your witness statement dated 25 September 2008, please, 19 normally all the banks, for example, would — you know,
20 Dr Arkhangelsky? 20 it’s a question of commercial discussion. The key
21 A. Yes, yes. 21 points there, interest, structuring, for how long loan
22 Q. I want to ask you a few questions about it and I want to 22 would be given, holidays for the repayment of the main
23 point out one or two points that BNP Paribas made in 23 debt and for the interest, so all these points, they are
24 this letter, please. 24 quite important to be put in the model, which was not
25 One of the points they made on {D74/1102/1} was 25 really difficult because everything was done in Excel
21 23

1 that:

2 «… significant preliminary works need to be

3 carried out at this stage in order to elaborate the most

4 appropriate financing structure for the Project.»

5 Can you see that?

6 A. Sorry, no … paragraph (i) or …?

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Paragraph three, the third paragraph.

8 A. «As developed…»; you mean this one?

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, it says, «We believe

10 therefore …».

11 A. Oh, okay, yes.

12 Yes.

13 MR LORD: And if you go over the page, you can see that

14 BNP Paribas set out a number of matters that they are

15 going to require to be addressed {D74/1102/2} as part of

16 this process.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. If you look in the second paragraph, you can see this.

19 In that paragraph they say this:

20 «On the basis of our preliminary review, the model

21 may need to be substantially —»

22 A. Sorry, not that fast. Yes. Yes.

23 Q. » … may need to be substantially amended and we would

24 like to discuss the most efficient process to do so with

25 you.»

1 and in the special, I think, software by BNP. So based

2 on all these figures and the results of the commercial

3 discussions, the model could be adjusted, and that’s

4 quite a normal part.

5 Q. And in the fifth —

6 A. And what is also important, that BNP Paribas was —

7 sorry. BNP Paribas was planned to be a lead placing

8 bank, and each and every bank in the programme would

9 have their partially different conditions, including the

10 timing and interest rate and so on.

11 So the model, final model, have to include all the

12 banks in the scheme.

13 Q. And if you look, Dr Arkhangelsky, please, at the fifth

14 paragraph on that page, you can see that BNP Paribas set

15 out some further matters that they are going to require

16 to be done, and the first of them was this:

17 «We also suggest that the due diligence related to

18 the market be undertaken as a matter of priority.»

19 Can you see that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. So BNP Paribas were suggesting, weren’t they, that some

22 further market due diligence had to be undertaken?

23 A. I’m sorry, if I can ask Oxus to show a file which called

24 «Market Due Diligence», which been disclosed in these

25 proceedings, and I want to show that 90-page document

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 done by the leading international marketing, shipping

2 and port marketing company, who has done this market

3 study.

4 Your Lordship, would you allow to show this?

5 Q. You are reading from some notes at the moment. What are

6 those notes? Do you mind my asking? You are reading

7 from notes?

8 A. No, no, I just want to tell the name on the —

9 Q. You are.

10 A. Sorry?

11 Q. You are reading from notes.

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You have some notes in front of you.

13 MR LORD: You have, and you have been reading from them.

14 A. Yes, yes, it was in respect to what I wanted to tell

15 you, so you can see it’s nine points here, in Russian

16 and English.

17 MR LORD: But you were just reading from some notes now.

18 A. No, no, no, I just wanted to tell the name of

19 the archive there.

20 Q. Have you talked to anybody, Dr Arkhangelsky —

21 A. No.

22 Q. — about your evidence, over the —

23 A. No, no.

24 Q. Nobody at all?

25 A. Nobody at all.

1 page 25, and you want to refer to another document.

2 Just describe the document to me that you wanted me to

3 see.

4 A. Yes, it’s the market due diligence done in respect to

5 north western Russian region ports, which has been done

6 by the leading international company, suggested to us by

7 EBRD. General work been done for Vyborg Port, but as

8 long as it’s the same part of the complex. So I given

9 to Oxus a 90-page document which is called «Market Due

10 Diligence», done by one of the best and leading

11 companies in the world in respect to this thing.

12 They also have a document called «Health and Safety

13 Due Diligence», which has been done by another company.

14 So what I say, that all these documents been prepared in

15 due course, and by that time.

16 I mean, Mr Lord is referring that preparation of

17 BNP Paribas would take enormous amount of time and so

18 on, but what I say, that all these things been done.

19 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, that wasn’t my question. My

20 question was that BNP Paribas are suggesting here that

21 they are going to require some further market due

22 diligence. That was my only question to you, and you

23 could have said yes or no to it.

24 A. Yes, but what I should say, that the major market due

25 diligence done by the leading international company has

25 27

1 Q. And have you made some notes about the BNP Paribas

2 matter —

3 A. No.

4 Q. — over the weekend?

5 A. I can see — no, there’s no BNP Paribas here, it’s just:

6 «Point 9. Stage of development of financing of

7 BNP Paribas.»

8 Q. So are you happy for his Lordship and us to see those

9 notes? I’m not saying you should show them.

10 A. Yes, absolutely, you can see that.

11 Q. Are you sure you want to show them?

12 A. Yes, sure, sure, it’s in Russian —

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, show them to me later.

14 MR LORD: I wonder if you could put them to one side,

15 Dr Arkhangelsky, while I ask you the questions, if you

16 don’t mind, please.

17 A. No problem. But would you like to see the document I am

18 referring to?

19 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, I would like to just ask you my

20 questions, please, if I may, and in re-examination you

21 can make all these points.

22 A. But, your Lordship, if I’m allowed to make points for

23 myself, I mean, to write points for my memory, at least

24 on another white side of the page?

25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Jot it down. It is transcript

1 been undertaken; it might be that some minor corrections

2 or additions could be done by BNP Paribas, but, again,

3 it would not be done — not by BNP Paribas but by,

4 I assume, the same company who has already undertaken

5 market due diligence on behalf of EBRD.

6 Q. And is the due diligence you are referring to the

7 document at {D68/1056/1}?

8 A. I should see that.

9 Q. Mr Keith Parker of OMG —

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. — attached the market —

12 A. Yes, that’s the document. It’s the market due diligence

13 for the ports in north western part of Russia generally

14 related to the port of Vyborg, but it is also comprised

15 in their data the study of Onega and Western Terminal.

16 Q. And are you saying that this due diligence report had

17 been submitted to BNP Paribas before 25 September 2008?

18 A. This market due diligence, I think Mr Parker referring

19 to one of the drafts, I’m not sure which particular

20 draft has been submitted, but I assume that at least one

21 of the drafts been submitted to BNP Paribas because that

22 was the key document. But I think which particular

23 document had been submitted to BNP Paribas, I think it

24 is better to ask Mr Robin Bromley-Martin. He’s been

25 submitting that.

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Q. I wonder if we could scroll down, please, to the next

2 page {D68/1056/2}. Can you see the date there,

3 Dr Arkhangelsky?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Is that the document you are talking about?

6 A. I think so yes.

7 Q. And do you agree that it looks as if BNP Paribas are

8 saying on 25 September 2008 that they are going to want

9 to have some further due diligence on the market?

10 A. No, I think that by that time, by that letter, they have

11 not seen this document yet.

12 Q. And could you please go back to the letter at

13 {D74/1102/2}, please. Sorry to take you back to it,

14 Dr Arkhangelsky. If you look, please, in the same

15 paragraph, the fifth paragraph, you can see that there

16 is a further matter which BNP Paribas raise, and they do

17 it in the following way:

18 «We would therefore need to be advised by

19 an independent technical consultant, which will in term

20 also opine of the technical aspects of the Project.»

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Can you see that?

23 A. Yes, and I think by that time —

24 Q. Sorry, can you see that, Dr Arkhangelsky? That was the

25 first point.

1 analysis and detailed risk analysis?

2 A. Absolutely, that’s a standard letter sent by any bank

3 and I cannot see what’s unusual there.

4 Q. And it is right, isn’t it, that what BNP Paribas were

5 not saying to you at this time was that they were going

6 to go ahead on the basis of the project analysis already

7 submitted to them on your behalf?

8 A. What they normally say, that if the project is brought

9 to that particular part and they are understanding the

10 value of their time and the project itself, so they

11 normally don’t go forward unless they believe in

12 the project and want to structure it in the way which is

13 accepted for both parties, bank and the client.

14 Q. And it is right, isn’t it, that in the event, none of

15 these further steps were carried out, were they?

16 A. Sorry?

17 Q. It’s right, isn’t it, that as things turned out, none of

18 these matters, none of these steps that BNP Paribas

19 identified in this letter, were in fact carried out?

20 A. No, it’s not correct. I should say that, and what

21 I just described you, most of the steps been done.

22 Q. Sorry, so after 25 September 2008 —

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. — is it right that there was substantial — that the

25 model was substantially amended as part of this —

29

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. So it is right, isn’t it, that whatever BNP Paribas had

3 or hadn’t received on behalf of OMG by this point — and

4 I will take that up with Mr Bromley-Martin — whatever

5 they had or hadn’t received by this point, BNP Paribas

6 were stipulating that there would need to be advice from

7 an independent technical consultant?

8 A. Absolutely, and by referring to this, we — or

9 Mr Bromley-Martin approached two leading, I think

10 English or American companies, technical consultants,

11 who had given a quote and started working on that.

12 Q. The fourth factor I would like you to look at, please,

13 is in the sixth paragraph on that same page, where

14 BNP Paribas say this:

15 «The above activities will culminate in the fatal

16 flaw analysis and a detailed risk analysis of

17 the Project and related mitigation strategy as may be

18 deemed necessary in the context of raising a long term

19 project financing.»

20 Can you see that?

21 A. Yes, absolutely.

22 Q. So it is self-explanatory, isn’t it, but BNP Paribas

23 were saying, weren’t they, that after the above work had

24 been carried out, investigative work into the project,

25 that would culminate in something called fatal flaw

31

1 A. I’m not sure about model, I have not been involved. So

2 you’d better ask Mr Bromley-Martin.

3 Q. What about —

4 A. But —

5 Q. Sorry, what about further due diligence on the market;

6 was that undertaken after 25 September —

7 A. Most of things been done, yes.

8 Q. No, no, after 25 September —

9 A. Yes, yes.

10 Q. — 2008?

11 A. Yes, yes.

12 Q. Was due diligence carried out in relation to the market

13 as part of this BNP Paribas —

14 A. Absolutely, yes. I met — so EC Harris, the document

15 just been shown —

16 Q. No, sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, on Western Terminal. Not on

17 Vyborg Port; on Western Terminal?

18 A. Yes, yes, yes. We got a preliminary agreement by that

19 time that BNP Paribas would accept EC Harris as a market

20 due diligence company, and thereon as health and safety.

21 So I had quite a number of meetings with EC Harris,

22 so you can check, if it is necessary, with EC Harris.

23 The person who have been doing the report on Vyborg, so

24 they have been visiting us. I had meetings even in

25 London and in St Petersburg and in Moscow with the

30 32
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 person who made the report on Vyborg, so they made quite

2 a substantial work on that.

3 And I think the last time I met EC Harris in London

4 was, I think, in January 2009.

5 Q. So can I be quite clear: you are saying that in terms of

6 the market due diligence that BNP Paribas are referring

7 to in this letter —

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. — your evidence is that there was some further due

10 diligence carried out?

11 A. Absolutely. Absolutely. And we enclosed health and

12 safety due diligence. In respect to Western Terminal it

13 was in our disclosure. It’s something like a 90-pages

14 document in English language, and market due diligence

15 also.

16 Q. And who carried out that further due diligence work,

17 Dr Arkhangelsky?

18 A. Ah —

19 Q. Was it Oxus?

20 A. No, no, no. The company — one of the leading companies

21 in this market, it’s company EC Harris which done the

22 market due diligence for Vyborg Port. And the market

23 due diligence, as you probably understand, it doesn’t

24 matter if the port’s in, let’s say, 100 kilometres’

25 distance, so it’s more or less the same market and

1 can you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Now, you just said, I think, a minute ago — and it is

4 right, isn’t it, that OMG never agreed to pay this fee,

5 did they?

6 A. Not in — not at that stage. So the structure or way it

7 worked was that first we had to collect most important

8 basic information based on this and the previous letter.

9 So —

10 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, I don’t want to — I’m going to

11 run out of time, I’m sorry. I just asked about the fee,

12 if I may. Just the fee. Whether OMG ever agreed to pay

13 the fee?

14 A. I had a discussion and I had a meeting with BNP Paribas

15 myself in Paris in January, and by that time we were

16 preparing — we were nearly prepared to sign that.

17 Q. So the answer is that OMG never agreed at any stage to

18 pay that fee?

19 A. No. The answer is that by beginning — or end

20 of September, we had not had a full set of documents

21 based on which BNP Paribas could start working, so we

22 got a guidelines what to be undertaken, and, yes, maybe

23 we’ve been a bit slow in this process, but we came to

24 the point in the beginning of January that we are now

25 prepared to do this, and they were prepared to finance

33

1 the same due diligence.

2 So, it has been agreed that EC Harris — and I don’t

3 remember the family name and name, but I assume that the

4 person who signed the Vyborg report, it’s the same

5 person with whom we had all discussions. So it’s one

6 English person who has been quite a big specialist on

7 projects in Russia.

8 Q. You see, Dr Arkhangelsky, I suggest to you that what

9 BNP Paribas are telling the reader in this letter is

10 that there is going to have to be due diligence and

11 further modelling and so on done separately,

12 independently, of the OMG presentation so far; in other

13 words, they want some independent verification of the —

14 A. Absolutely. Such companies, for example, like Environ

15 or EC Harris, they are independent companies, so banks

16 are approving the names of these companies, and then we

17 supply them our information and they do their

18 independent report, and normally it would be

19 an international bank who would be paying them, and we

20 would be just compensating to the Bank expenses they

21 spent on this type of consultants.

22 Q. And if we go, please, to the third page of this letter,

23 the next page down, {D74/1102/3}, please, you can see

24 that BNP Paribas set out a compensation structure which

25 included payment of a monthly retainer fee of €25,000;

35

1 by the end of June, or something like that, 2009, but

2 all the events which happened afterwards, you know, made

3 it impossible.

4 Q. I wonder if you could be shown, please, {D75/1116/2}.

5 Actually, let’s start at {D75/1116/1}. Sorry.

6 This looks like it is a draft mandate letter,

7 disclosed by the defendants, and it looks like it is

8 a draft mandate letter mandating BNP Paribas by OMG in

9 relation to this proposed financing project; do you

10 agree?

11 A. Yes. It’s their standard draft, I believe.

12 Q. Which it looks as if they have sent out in draft to OMG,

13 doesn’t it?

14 A. Or at least to Robin Bromley-Martin, yes.

15 Q. At least to Robin Bromley-Martin.

16 If you could go to the second page, please,

17 {D75/1116/2} you can see what it says in paragraph 1.4:

18 «BNP Paribas also wishes to consider arranging the

19 financing based on a term sheet to be developed as part

20 of the services.

21 «For the avoidance of doubt, by accepting the

22 Sponsor’s appointment hereunder and in performing the

23 Services, BNP Paribas in no way explicitly or implicitly

24 makes (or otherwise represents that it will make) any

25 commitment or offer (or otherwise agrees) to invest in

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 or to provide financial resources to, the Project, the

2 Sponsor or any other party.»

3 A. Yes, it’s standard wording prepared by quality lawyers,

4 for sure, yes. I think it’s a part of any of such

5 letters.

6 Q. And so —

7 A. Just to eliminate any risk for BNP.

8 Q. When you say in your witness statement at paragraph 94

9 on {C1/1/24}, as follows —

10 A. Number which?

11 Q. Paragraph 94.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. «In October 2008 Oxus and BNP continued to negotiate the

14 detailed terms of the mandate letter. The terms were

15 essentially agreed, but BNP required the Group to pay

16 a monthly … fee of €25,000 for their services in

17 addition to all the other fees and expenses related to

18 other professional advisers and consultants.

19 October 2008 was a time of enormous uncertainty in

20 the markets and I did not think that the Group could

21 commit to this expenditure at that time. I expected

22 that the cash flow … would improve over the coming

23 months and intended to take the project forward as soon

24 as we were able to do so.» {C1/1/25}

25 A. Yes.

1 means?

2 A. Yes, yes, yes. And all other banks would be normally

3 following, with some minor changes, BNP Paribas’

4 structuring and conditions.

5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.

6 A. But definitely were, as far as I understood,

7 Bromley-Martin and myself afterwards, we discussed with

8 the Bank general terms, let’s say, because there is

9 a risk on Russia, there’s a risk on rates and so on.

10 So generally we had these discussions and generally

11 we — I’ve been understanding how it would work, but to

12 come to the final stage, to put all these things on the

13 paper and to be signed, of course it would take some

14 time and it has to be approved, at least on three or

15 four different levels in the same bank.

16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And your discussions that you say took

17 place at the latest in January 2009, were they with the

18 people who signed that letter or — can we have a look

19 at that?

20 A. Yes. The name of the person, it’s, I think, a person

21 with an Armenian name.

22 Can you show us the final page, for example, of

23 the previous letter? Or can you name the — Yerkan, or

24 something like that, Yerikan. The letter from the 25th,

25 for example. {D74/1102/3}

37 39

1 Q. It is wrong, isn’t it, Dr Arkhangelsky, for you to say

2 in paragraph 94 {C1/1/24} that:

3 «The terms were essentially agreed …»

4 BNP Paribas were just really proposing to start the

5 process, really, weren’t they?

6 A. No, the term has been agreed so the letter, just you see

7 that letter, so term has been agreed. I cannot see that

8 it’s anything wrong there. It’s their standard

9 arrangement letter and standard terms. Definitely

10 the bank wanted to exclude any risks of the operations,

11 which is quite standard and normal, and we are a small

12 player and they are huge international bank, probably

13 the best in infrastructure finance by that time.

14 Q. I wonder, could you be shown D98 —

15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Sorry, just a moment, I just need to

16 clarify.

17 Where you say «the terms were essentially agreed»,

18 do you mean the terms on which BNP would act as

19 advisers, or the terms on which they might extend or

20 procure loans to be extended?

21 A. No, the first one, so the terms have been agreed on

22 structuring. Once again, BNP Paribas was planned to be

23 the lead bank. So they were planning to be about 15 to

24 20 banks altogether. So —

25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: In terms of their involvement, it

1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The letter of 25 September, it was

2 signed by two people.

3 A. Yes.

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I just wanted to make my note as to

5 who.

6 A. Yerikian —

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It was by Vahram Yerikian —

8 A. Yerikian, yes. So I met him in Paris in January 2009.

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And Mr Vuillard?

10 A. I don’t remember, definitely there were several people.

11 I think at each meeting with the Bank, you have two

12 people at least, but I … that person I remember

13 because he had been calling me several times afterwards

14 and so on and so …

15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.

16 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, it is right, isn’t it, that

17 BNP Paribas were offering to act as a structurer in

18 relation to this financing, weren’t they?

19 A. They were offering to be a leading bank in financing,

20 including some structuring of subfinancing.

21 Q. And I showed you clause 1.4 in their draft mandate

22 letter, {D75/1116/2} where they made it clear that they

23 were not at this stage undertaking any commitment

24 themselves to provide any funds; that’s right, isn’t it?

25 A. What I should say, that it’s not correct, because they

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 haven’t had any big team in this bank for infrastructure

2 in Russia. So considering the fact that they started to

3 work on this project and they’ve been knowing

4 Mr Bromley-Martin from the previous transactions, they

5 were believing in this and it was just a question of

6 structuring and proper due diligence.

7 Q. Could we go to {D98/1259/1}, please.

8 Mr Bromley-Martin — it looks from this page as if

9 Mr Bromley-Martin sent you an e-mail on

10 27 November 2008.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. We can see what he says:

13 «Vitaly,

14 «As requested by Keith, we have been talking to

15 the banks that have expressed an interest in funding

16 Western, and, in particular, BNP Paribas. While the

17 common theme from all them is one of continued interest

18 in providing funding, they all say that they are unable

19 to put anything in writing at this stage and strongly

20 recommend that you appoint the PSC contractor. Once we

21 are able to provide a costed and defined project then

22 they would be able to move internally towards an offer

23 of funding.

24 «Given this, our advice is promulgated by:

25 «1. The fact that, if OMG were to borrow

1 fundraising in the [third quarter of 2009] at the

2 earliest. But clearly any delay in appointing the PSC

3 contractor will delay that closing — with each day

4 costing $50,000.»

5 Do you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Then he said this:

8 «So what is the downside risk to you?»

9 Can you see that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Just pausing there, Dr Arkhangelsky, you were being told

12 by Oxus in November 2008 —

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. — that this proposed financing would, if it went

15 through, save you US $50,000 per day; that’s right,

16 isn’t it?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And BNP Paribas wanted a monthly retainer to advance

19 this project of €25,000 per month, didn’t they?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And Oxus asked you what the downside risk was to you in

22 going forward, didn’t they?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Now, can you tell his Lordship why OMG didn’t go forward

25 with this proposal at this time, please?

41 43
1 $300 million, using western finance would save OMG 1 A. Yes. Because first of all what you are referring to,
2 roughly $50,000 per day in interest charges loan, and 2 that’s an internal discussion and we were trying to
3 «2. Your stated desire NOT to pay BNP a retainer. 3 understand all the possible options. One of
4 BNP are not prepared to proceed without a retainer.» 4 the possible options by that time was that we also were
5 A. Yes, that’s what we have been discussing. 5 using some Russian banks, like Vneshsconombank, which
6 Q. Just stopping there, so is it right that this 6 was considered to be a Russian development bank and so
7 prospective financing might have saved the OMG group 7 on.
8 some $50,000 per day? 8 So I have not been, really, at that stage,
9 A. Yes, I think so. 9 understanding how it would work, so I used Keith Parker
10 Q. That works out, I think, if my maths is wrong — and it 10 and Robin Bromley-Martin and his colleagues, just to
11 may be — at about $17 million per year; is that right? 11 understand the situation and make a decision. So
12 A. May I just try to multiply. 12 that’s — it was a decision-making process, absolutely.
13 Q. Yes, well I’ve tried. That would be a very significant 13 Q. But why — Dr Arkhangelsky, it is right, isn’t it, that
14 saving for OMG, wouldn’t it? 14 as at November 2008, you did not go ahead with this
15 A. Absolutely. And that’s — you know, we were not only 15 BNP Paribas proposal, did you?
16 interested in western finance because of the saving of 16 A. As I said, by that time, and at that time, we were doing
17 interest, but we were interested in western finance 17 all the homework, discussing and making a tender with
18 because it was a long term financing, stable financing, 18 PSC contractor, doing due diligences and so on. So
19 international level financing and stable financing. 19 I cannot say that we have not been going through, so we
20 Q. And if you go over the page, please, to the second page 20 were in the discussions and actually one of the options
21 of this e-mail {D98/1259/2}, Mr Bromley-Martin said 21 which has been also discussed, that BNP Paribas may
22 this: having set out a number of options which he was 22 waive this figure because they were — waive this
23 suggesting to take the matter forward, he said this in 23 payment because they were really very much interested in
24 the third paragraph: 24 this project. And by the way I was feeling that time
25 «Either route we are looking at completing this 25 that we were too much interested. So that’s made me
42 44
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 a bit afraid of jumping inside.

2 So we had a long discussion, yes, maybe a bit longer

3 than it should be, but in discussion with specialists,

4 I had to make a decision, and that’s a normal part of

5 the decision-making process.

6 Q. If we go to your witness statement, please, at

7 paragraph 94, on {C1/1/24}, I had understood this

8 paragraph to be saying that you were not prepared to

9 commit to paying €25,000 per month by way of a retainer

10 because of the cash flow position of the OMG group at

11 that time?

12 A. Yes, at that time we had a rather difficult —

13 Q. Is that a correct reading of that?

14 A. That’s also, yes, because I tried to save all the costs

15 and I was at that time more concentrated on

16 restructuring of the whole debt of the group,

17 considering that we were approaching the end of the year

18 when we had to do all this restructuring.

19 Q. So his Lordship can take it, can he, that the financial

20 position of the OMG group as at November 2008 was such

21 that you did not feel able to pay €25,000 per month to

22 take the BNP Paribas project finance forward?

23 A. No, we had a quite a number of different projects,

24 including, for example, Vyborg Petroleum Company and so

25 on, so we have to decide what and how to do, and have

1 would not be accepted.

2 Q. And you didn’t think it was worth spending €25,000 per

3 month, even though it could save you $50,000 per day in

4 interest, because you didn’t really think this project

5 was actually going to be passed by the lenders, did you?

6 A. No, because at that time I had to make quite a number of

7 strategic decisions on different points. We were still

8 in discussion by that time with KIT Finance, even if

9 they been under the bankruptcy processes, but the team

10 was still operating, so I still had a discussion, and

11 they were trying to keep it warm. And I also, in

12 the parallel, I had a discussion with EBRD. If you

13 remember, EBRD sent in January 2009 a letter.

14 So what was my position, that any one of three

15 options would survive and any one of three options would

16 be able to refinance all the debt and finance, at least

17 some of the project.

18 So for me it was not that important, if I start, for

19 example, reconstruction or redevelopment of Western

20 Terminal, let’s say exactly the middle of 2009, I could

21 make it, let’s say, two, three, four, five months

22 afterwards. So for me it was important that at least

23 one of the projects would be — I mean financing project

24 would be running, and by that stage, the major and the

25 good, most developed by that time financing project was

45 47

1 a safe — safety … safety funds for going out of — at

2 the end of the year. So that was the key issue by that

3 time.

4 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, was it not the case that you

5 appreciated by November 2008 that BNP Paribas were going

6 to carry out their own independent assessment of this

7 project, and would not be relying on the materials that

8 OMG had supplied them?

9 A. Sorry, it’s — can you repeat the question, please?

10 Q. Well, I am suggesting to you that you appreciated

11 by November 2008 that BNP Paribas were going to require

12 their own independent assessment to be carried out of

13 the project.

14 A. They were in this process, so I don’t understand what

15 you are asking about.

16 Q. And that you would have appreciated that if this was not

17 a viable project, that would have been uncovered in

18 the course of that independent due diligence and

19 modelling —

20 A. No, no, independent due diligence by the bank of this

21 size means that employment of independent

22 subcontractors, and the list of this subcontracts been

23 preliminarily agreed. So, as I said, independent

24 subcontractors like EC Harris and Environ have been

25 working on this project already. So I cannot see why it

1 done by EBRD. So if you remember a letter sent by EBRD

2 to V-Bank, telling that the financing would be approved

3 by March, and actually the board of directors of

4 the bank approved that by March 2009.

5 Q. So from that last answer, it sounds as if your main

6 objective around the end of 2008 was to be able to

7 refinance the OMG group debt generally; would that be

8 fair?

9 A. Sorry?

10 Q. It sounds from your last answer as if your main

11 objective was to secure refinancing for the OMG group

12 debt generally?

13 A. Yes, and that was the key issue of any international

14 bank. So any international bank wanted to finance,

15 including EBRD, BNP Paribas, or any LPN, they wanted to

16 finance only subject to the condition that all local

17 Russian debt is refinanced. So that was their key

18 structuring suggestion.

19 Q. And that was a more — in relation to the Western

20 Terminal project, it’s fair, isn’t it, to say,

21 Dr Arkhangelsky, that the refinancing of your group debt

22 through that project was the real aim, rather than the

23 development of the Western Terminal —

24 A. No, absolutely not. Both. We had both aims. And,

25 actually, that was the bank BNP Paribas’ aim to

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 refinance, in case they start financing.

2 Q. And I wonder, can we go, please, to paragraph 97 of your

3 witness statement on {C1/1/25}, where you say:

4 «If it had been necessary to borrow the money to pay

5 BNP’s retainer and other fees then that is what I would

6 have done. Between about October 2008 and April 2009

7 I met with a very large number of banks all of whom were

8 interested in doing business with the Group …»

9 And then you list them; can you see that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And you end up referring to Vozrozhdenie, which is

12 the —

13 A. Yes, Vozrozhdenie Bank was one of the most flexible, and

14 Mr Novikov, who was the head of the north western

15 department of the bank, he had his own limits so he

16 could finance any project just while using his limits,

17 and that’s actually what he was doing.

18 Q. Let’s take the period October 2008 up to, let’s say, the

19 end of February 2009.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Can we just take that period?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Did OMG have the finance to pay the 25,000 —

24 A. Sorry, if?

25 Q. Looking at the period October 2008 —

1 way how to do that.

2 Q. But the implication from paragraph 97 of your witness

3 statement —

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. — is that you were short of money at that time, and you

6 might have to borrow the BNP retainer and fees?

7 A. It could be. We had about 620 employees. We had

8 50 companies, quite a number of companies been in

9 a difficult situation due to the most difficult timing

10 of the world financial crisis. So my target was really

11 the target of a crisis manager, just to understand the

12 priorities and — you know, each rouble, or each dollar,

13 whatever you want, we’ve been considering very

14 seriously. So that was really a very difficult time.

15 So after 19 September, after Lehman Brothers, all

16 the banks stopped at least for several months doing

17 anything, and it was a time when nobody could understand

18 what would be the next step and if it would be even

19 worser or it would be more relaxed, or if the crisis

20 would continue for two, three, four years, so on.

21 So actually the same — more or less the same

22 situation was in BNP Paribas, so some delay was also

23 connected to their understanding because they had to go

24 through all the board meetings and so on, because

25 nobody — you know, Mr Lord is referring to the letter

49 51

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. — to February 2009.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Inclusive.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Did OMG have the finances to pay BNP Paribas €25,000 —

7 A. Yes, yes. By that time —

8 Q. Sorry, may I finish the question for the transcript —

9 to pay €25,000 per month?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. So can you explain why it wasn’t paid?

12 A. Because by that time all the structuring and all the

13 commercial conditions of that loan had not been agreed

14 on first — from one side. On another side, as you’re

15 referring to November letter, we were still discussing

16 and understanding our strategy, so we’ve been in

17 negotiations, and the fact that I met with BNP Paribas

18 personally in January 2009 supports that position.

19 And I just want to tell that it’s — it was one of

20 the key issues for BNP Paribas before entering in any

21 contracts, they wanted to meet me, and for me the first

22 opportunity was in the beginning of January.

23 So they normally don’t sign any letters or any

24 intentions or any firm suggestions unless they seen the

25 owner of the business and discussed in the formal bank

1 dated 25 September 2008, and 25 September, nobody really

2 was understanding that it would not be only, let’s say,

3 Lehman Brothers, but it would be quite a number of other

4 ongoing events, and all the banks, all the financial

5 teams, they have to have — they had to have a global

6 understanding where they would go.

7 So that was a time consuming thing and it’s, you

8 know, it’s been quite an important strategic decision

9 for me, where and how to go, and in which direction —

10 to which direction give a priority, considering the fact

11 that I was the key person who had to have meetings with

12 all these banks, and make a key negotiation.

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think the question put to you,

14 really, was rather different than that. It was simply

15 to find out from you whether your evidence is that you

16 did have the money to pay the fee, or whether you would

17 have been reliant, as paragraph 98 rather suggests, on

18 raising money whereby to pay the fee in the difficult

19 circumstances which there were at that time. Do you

20 want to have a look at 98 of your witness statement?

21 I think it was a simpler question: did you have the

22 money, or did you need to borrow it, to pay the fee of

23 BNP, or, for that matter, EBRD or any other bank?

24 {C1/1/25}

25 A. I think by that time we were paying to EBRD, because

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 EBRD have had absolutely the same requirements, so we’ve

2 been paying them a retainer on a monthly basis, plus all

3 consultants.

4 But for BNP Paribas, I think in case I really needed

5 that, and I really wanted that, I always could go to

6 V-Bank, where I had a very good relations with

7 Mr Novikov. So €25,000, it was not, you know, a big

8 amount, considering just one example with Vyborg

9 Petroleum Company where he just given some, whatever,

10 $10 million or $15 million loan, just kind of overnight

11 loan; so I said I need that, and I got that.

12 MR LORD: Can I ask you, Dr Arkhangelsky, I think you just

13 said, a little earlier today, that BNP Paribas would

14 want to meet you.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And that was an important part of their —

17 A. Absolutely.

18 Q. And was your evidence that the first time they met you,

19 that was in 2009?

20 A. I think in January 2009, as far as I remember.

21 Q. Well, could I show you Mr Bromley-Martin’s witness

22 statement, please, at {C1/3/9}, paragraph 46, where you

23 will see that Mr Bromley-Martin talks about this

24 BNP Paribas project, and he says this, the second

25 sentence:

1 Mr Bromley-Martin’s witness statement, again. You can

2 see what he says in paragraphs 54 to 57. In 54 he

3 refers to the BNP proposed mandate. Can you see what he

4 says in 55:

5 «We discussed these terms with Vitaly and Keith, but

6 they were reluctant to pay the retainer and pushed back

7 on that element of the offer, which surprised me.»

8 A. Yes, because I was absolutely sure that when I was

9 speaking to other banks or other investment banks, for

10 example like KIT Finance, they were not offering us to

11 pay any retainer, so I thought that if arguing with BNP,

12 I would just eliminate this.

13 Q. So you thought, as a businessman, running OMG, seeking

14 the refinancing of its debt, you thought it was a good

15 idea to argue with BNP Paribas about a €25,000 monthly

16 retainer, when their financing would save your group

17 US $50,000 per day in interest; is that right?

18 A. Maybe I was — maybe I was too greedy at that time, yes.

19 Q. Do you agree, with hindsight, that wasn’t a very good

20 piece of business sense?

21 A. Maybe. Maybe. Everybody makes mistakes, or maybe

22 I should better hear my consultants.

23 By that time I was not calculating it like saving of

24 €50,000 a day or whatever. So maybe.

25 Q. So what was the real reason that you didn’t go ahead

53 55

1 «We were dealing with the Director of Project

2 Finance Infrastructure and another associate at BNP more

3 or less on a daily basis, and in the week commencing

4 1 September 2008, Nigel went to Paris to meet them with

5 Vitaly at BNP’s offices.»

6 A. Maybe, I don’t remember that —

7 Q. Can I finish, for the transcript, please,

8 Dr Arkhangelsky?

9 A. Yes. Yes.

10 Q. «They also met with other senior individuals, including

11 the Global Head of Project Finance Infrastructure at BNP

12 HQ in Paris. In addition, local BNP staff at their

13 St Petersburg office became involved also.»

14 Can you see that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. So if Mr Bromley-Martin’s evidence is right, it looks,

17 doesn’t it, as if you did meet BNP Paribas

18 in September 2008?

19 A. Yes, I don’t remember that exactly, but that was a kind

20 of pre-preliminary meeting, before they started to

21 really analyse all the documents and going through the

22 due diligence.

23 So the meeting in January was much more important,

24 and I think they were quite more senior people involved.

25 Q. And could you go, please, to {C1/3/11}, which is

1 with the BNP Paribas financing initiative?

2 A. I was too greedy.

3 Q. And that was nothing to do with Bank of St Petersburg,

4 was it?

5 A. Sorry?

6 Q. That had nothing to do — that decision of yours had

7 nothing to do with Bank of St Petersburg, did it?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Do you agree with that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Thank you, Dr Arkhangelsky.

12 I wonder, could you please go to C1 —

13 A. I’m sorry, can we make a five minutes break, please?

14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Does that suit you?

15 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord.

16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Five or ten minutes.

17 (11.50 am)

18 (A short break)

19 (12.00 pm)

20 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, I suggest that there was never

21 any real prospect of the $300 million Western Terminal

22 financing project coming to fruition.

23 A. It’s a wrong suggestion.

24 Q. And that you appreciated that from the autumn of 2008.

25 A. Absolutely not.

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Q. I’m going to ask you, please, some more questions about

2 the OMG group’s financial position at the end of 2008,

3 please. I would just like to go to paragraph 122 of

4 your witness statement, please, at {C1/1/31}, where you

5 say this in the first line:

6 «Until November 2008, the Group continued to be in

7 a sound financial position and was able to service its

8 loan obligations in a timely manner.»

9 Can you see that?

10 A. Yes. Yes, absolutely.

11 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, in October 2008, OMG had to have

12 recourse to the Tekno loan in order to be able to meet

13 the end of October interest payments; is —

14 A. I was not a party to that agreement.

15 Q. I will ask the question again, or put it another way:

16 you don’t challenge the proposition that the OMG group

17 needed the Tekno loan in order to be able to pay debts

18 at the end of October 2008?

19 A. I don’t think so.

20 Q. Do you have any reason — do you have any basis to

21 challenge the proposition that I put to you?

22 A. Yes, of course, because I had not been informed by

23 that — at that time about this loan, so I thought —

24 I think that it was not important, so it might be some,

25 let’s say, few days’ liquidity, or cash flow

1 Q. And I think I showed you the accounts last week?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Maybe I ought to go back to them.

4 I will. Can we have {D33/523/5}, please. I think

5 I put this point to you, but just to make sure I have,

6 we had some questions last week about this page; do you

7 remember, Dr Arkhangelsky?

8 A. Yes. Yes, I remember a lot of insinuations you made

9 without any knowledge of IFRS accounting.

10 Q. And the 2007 accounts show a profit/loss of

11 US $3.799 million, don’t they?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And then, when you add in various adjustments,

14 including, for example, negative goodwill, you get to

15 a profit —

16 A. No, you are not allowed to make any adjustments as long

17 as you are not a specialist. So I would not accept any

18 suggestions or adjustments while not operating the

19 proper understanding of IFRS accounts.

20 Q. Sorry. These accounts add on to the profit of

21 3.799 million certain net figures so as to get to a net

22 profit of US $45.767 million for 2007, don’t they?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And when we go back to your witness statement, if you

25 could have that page open, and you have your witness

57 59

1 difficulties, but it’s not a question of financial

2 instability.

3 Q. So you accept that it is likely that this loan was taken

4 out by OMG in order to be able to meet —

5 A. No, I don’t accept that. I simply don’t know the real

6 story there.

7 Q. So are you suggesting that people within OMG could be

8 borrowing loans when there was no need to borrow money?

9 A. Yes, as far as I understand from these proceedings,

10 Mr Berezin already by that time been closely cooperating

11 with the Bank, the Bank of St Petersburg, and was

12 following to some his own purposes, as well as playing

13 some games with the Bank of St Petersburg by that time.

14 Q. Well, I suggest, Dr Arkhangelsky, that by the end

15 of October 2008, the OMG group could not pay its debts

16 as they fell due?

17 A. No, it’s not like this.

18 Q. And was, on that measure, insolvent at that time.

19 A. No, absolutely not.

20 Q. Could you look at paragraph 120 of your witness

21 statement, please, on {C1/1/31}. Can I please show you,

22 you have said there in that paragraph 120, you have

23 referred to the pre-tax profits of OMG; can you see, in

24 2007?

25 A. Yes.

1 statement at paragraph 120, {C1/1/31} where you said

2 there were pre-tax profits of US $33 million for 2007 —

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. — can you explain to his Lordship the basis for the

5 figure of US $33 million, please?

6 A. I think — I don’t remember exactly, but I think we are

7 referring to the Russian accounting results, most

8 probably, here, because, your Lordship, it is very much

9 different, Russian accounting and IFRS accounting.

10 Q. I’m not sure that’s right, Dr —

11 A. I don’t remember how we were calculating that.

12 Q. If we go, please, to {M1/20/7} —

13 A. And by the way, it is also quite important that, as

14 I said on Friday, these IFRS accounts comprise only,

15 whatever, six or seven companies, and in the group

16 altogether we had about 50 companies.

17 Q. If you go to {M1/20/7}, please, this is your first

18 affidavit in the BVI proceedings?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And in paragraph 18 you can see that you have given the

21 same figure —

22 A. Maybe.

23 Q. — for 2007; can you see?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. A profit of US $33 million; can you see that?

58 60
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And if you go over the page to {M1/20/8}, paragraph …

3 sorry. Yes, it is paragraph 26 on {M1/20/11}. You can

4 see at paragraphs 26 to 28, you exhibit the combined

5 accounts for the OMG group; can you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And those are the combined accounts that I have just

8 taken you to.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. So it does look as if those are the accounts that you

11 are looking at when you are giving your evidence in

12 the BVI, or is that wrong?

13 A. I don’t remember.

14 Q. Can you identify today any account entry that would show

15 a net profit figure of US $33 million for 2007 —

16 A. No, I’m not that good to know these figures, so I don’t

17 remember. As I said, we were writing it together —

18 I mean, 16th witness statement we were writing with

19 Mr Milner, so I don’t remember which figures we were

20 referring to, so I’m not that good in all these figures.

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Are the accounts at 184 to, what, 236,

22 VA1, the accounts you have just been showing me?

23 MR LORD: Yes, they are.

24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They are.

25 A. I assume that when we done this 120 paragraph, so

1 exposed some banks in the Russian financial market

2 generally.

3 So it has been quite a number of different events,

4 and nobody in the market was understanding what is going

5 on.

6 Q. And you have said in paragraph 124 on that page,

7 {C1/1/31}, you said:

8 «By late November 2008, with the credit crisis

9 worsening, I anticipated that short term liquidity

10 difficulties at the Group would in all likelihood result

11 in the Group companies being unable to make interest

12 payments due to the Bank in accordance with the loan

13 agreements for the month ending 31 December 2008 and

14 subsequent months.»

15 Do you see that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. So it is right, isn’t it, that OMG was not going to be

18 able to pay its debts as they fell due by the end of

19 2008, as things stood at that time?

20 A. No, we could theoretically do that, but that was

21 important that we pay in each in particular date, and as

22 long as we didn’t want to create any troubles in respect

23 to reserving for the Bank of St Petersburg and other

24 banks, and to make easier crisis development for the

25 group, I had a strategy to make a restructuring of

61

1 I think we made some checkings with Mr Milner, so he is

2 very accurate in this, but I simply don’t remember how

3 we calculated that.

4 MR LORD: If you go, please, to paragraph 123 of your

5 witness statement at {C1/1/31}, you say this:

6 «During the last three months of 2008 I, like

7 many —»

8 A. Sorry, which paragraph?

9 Q. 123.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. You say:

12 «During the last three months of 2008 I, like many

13 businessmen, was under great pressure.»

14 Do you see that?

15 A. Absolutely, yes, that’s true.

16 Q. And that’s because the OMG business was in serious

17 difficulty; that’s right, isn’t it?

18 A. No, it was because of the general financial crisis and

19 that all around the market were not understanding what

20 was going on and what would be the prospects of this

21 crisis, how long it would last, who would be exposed and

22 so on. So it was a general uncertainty, and I think —

23 I’m not sure exactly, but in Russia at that time, I’m

24 not sure, it was August 2008, it was a big political

25 difficulties with war connected with Georgia, which also

63

1 the loans, which was easily accepted by V-Bank and other

2 players in the market, and only created, as we can see

3 now, troubles with the Bank of St Petersburg.

4 Q. And I suggest, Dr Arkhangelsky, that the troubles were

5 not short term, but they were —

6 A. That’s not right.

7 Q. But that they were systemic problems —

8 A. No, absolutely not.

9 Q. — because OMG was not a viable business?

10 A. No, no, no, absolutely not, and we discussed it several

11 times on Friday and Thursday and I’m absolutely against

12 any such assumptions.

13 Q. Could you look, please, at paragraph 126 of your witness

14 statement, {C1/1/32}, and you have set out some evidence

15 there about the group debts at about this time, that’s

16 the end of 2008, and you said the group owed BSP about

17 RUB 3.7 billion, and around RUB 2 million was owed to

18 V-Bank; can you see that?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Is it right that the group debts to V-Bank were only

21 RUB 2 billion, or might they have been bigger than that?

22 A. I don’t remember. So I think while putting it here,

23 I think we had some basis for that.

24 Q. I wonder, could you be shown {D145/2424.1/1}, please.

25 This is Mr Ameli’s note —

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. — of a meeting he had with a Mr Novikov of V-Bank; do

3 you see that?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Sorry, just forgive me while I turn up my copy.

6 {D145/2424.1/3}

7 The meeting, I think, Dr Arkhangelsky, according to

8 Mr Ameli, was in about March or April 2011?

9 A. Yes, something like that, yes.

10 Q. And Mr Novikov, he was your contact, wasn’t he, your

11 best contact at V-Bank?

12 A. He was the major person responsible for all north

13 western Russian business.

14 Q. And if you look at the second page of this note

15 {D145/2424.1/2}.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. It records that the total amount owed to V-Bank at this

18 time — so that’s early 2011 —

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. — is RUB 3.9 billion?

21 A. It might be like this, yes, because they were continuing

22 financing, even while I was in emigration, they still

23 were continuing financing projects which left and which

24 were under the control of V-Bank. I don’t know where

25 and how they got this figure, but I assume it might be

1 Q. You have given no disclosure, have you, Dr Arkhangelsky,

2 of any documents that evidence this alleged arrangement

3 with V-Bank?

4 A. No, I don’t think so, because I haven’t had any

5 documents. I haven’t taken any documents with me in my

6 emigration, so …

7 Q. Can you see this, two paragraphs on:

8 «The additional guarantees did not offer sufficient

9 coverage in any case. The bank requested a personal

10 guarantee from Mr Arkhangelsky and it obtained it.»

11 Can you see that?

12 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I don’t know where he got it, so. I don’t

13 remember I signed any guarantees. So my practice, my

14 general practice, was that I never, ever given any

15 personal guarantees.

16 Q. But it looks from this note, doesn’t it, if it’s

17 an accurate note, that if you did give a personal

18 guarantee —

19 A. I don’t know, because Mr Novikov, he was a head of

20 a very big banking institution and I’m not sure that he

21 was really deep in all the details of each and every

22 transaction.

23 Q. Might you be mistaken in your evidence that you never

24 gave a personal guarantee?

25 A. No, I don’t think so.

65 67

1 correct.

2 Q. If we look at this note, back at page 1, please,

3 {D145/2424.1/1} it seems to record V-Bank telling

4 Mr Ameli that from November 2008, your «business affairs

5 encountered problems»?

6 A. Sorry, which paragraph are you referring to?

7 Q. Sorry, it’s the first paragraph.

8 A. Maybe. I don’t know what he got from Mr Novikov.

9 Q. Mm. And it appears from Mr Novikov’s view that your

10 capabilities were not sufficient to repay your debts as

11 at that time; do you agree?

12 A. No, I think it’s because we started discussions of

13 restructuring and thought that we need restructuring

14 with all the banks and with all the debts to be on the

15 safe side in the most difficult period of the crisis.

16 Q. If you look about halfway down the page, there’s

17 a paragraph that says:

18 «At that time, the Bank began to negotiate with

19 Mr Arkhangelsky [I think that’s V-Bank]. He was given

20 six months to give us guarantees (additional mortgages)

21 for the developments that were not completed. He

22 provided the guarantees. The first period was extended

23 until June 2009.»

24 Do you see that?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. I wonder, could you look at the second-to-last paragraph

2 on that page, where the note records this:

3 «In June 2009, he was still unable to repay.»

4 Can you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. So is it right that by June 2009, OMG was still unable

7 to meet its loan obligations owed to V-Bank?

8 A. No, because 3rd of — or something like that,

9 3 June 2006, I’ve been pressed to leave the country and

10 since then, all the collapse started.

11 Q. So your evidence is that this note is inaccurate, is it,

12 at that time?

13 A. No, I cannot say that. But everybody had their own

14 understanding, so I assumed that, considering if I could

15 stay in Russia, continue my operations, not been forced

16 or thrown away out of the country, I assume it would be

17 absolutely different development of my business.

18 Q. But as things turned out in June 2009, you couldn’t pay

19 back V-Bank; is that right?

20 A. All these discussions with V-Bank at the June 2009

21 happened after my emigration and it has been decided,

22 let’s say, one month after my emigration, and it has

23 been decided by them that they wait and see and don’t

24 make any decisions and nobody was understanding what is

25 going on, because I left first days of June. It was

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 a lot of criminal cases which started by me against the 1 transactions what you want to bring here, I think.
2 Bank of St Petersburg for raider attack. It was ongoing 2 Q. Yes.
3 arbitration cases against the Bank in respect to 3 A. So it’s absolutely not like this.
4 returning of the shares in these companies. 20 June, 4 Q. Because when it says:
5 Bank of St Petersburg undertaken a raid on — to take 5 «We agree that the mortgages given to the bank would
6 over Western Terminal with the police and so on — 6 be managed by the bank for a certain time until he took
7 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky — 7 them back on.»
8 A. So it was absolutely a time not understandable by 8 It rather looks as though there is a transfer and
9 anybody, neither by anybody nor by me. 9 retransfer arrangement —
10 So it was not absolutely the time for any 10 A. No, absolutely not. Absolutely not. I was thinking
11 structuring or restructuring of any financing. 11 that after — so, for example, business centre or flats
12 Q. This paragraph of the note says this: 12 in Solnechnoye for example, we were planning that we
13 «In June 2009, he was still unable to repay. We 13 will sell them and see what would be the profitability.
14 agreed that the mortgages given to the bank would be 14 So it is absolutely a different type of arrangement and
15 managed by the bank for a certain time until he took 15 absolutely not any repo arrangements.
16 them back on. The bank agreed in exchange to finance 16 Q. And who were your contacts at V-Bank for entering into
17 developments. In the future, probably, to sell the 17 these transactions?
18 assets together.» 18 A. I had two major contacts: previous general director, or
19 Can you see that? 19 owner of the Bank, who died a couple of years ago, and
20 A. Yes. Yes. 20 Mr Novikov.
21 Q. So it looks from that as if you did reach some sort of 21 Q. Who is the first person you mentioned?
22 arrangement with V-Bank, notwithstanding your 22 A. Ex-owner, I’ll just give you — Dmitry Lyvovich, so
23 emigration, or the matter you just referred to, doesn’t 23 I was calling him on his, let’s say, full Russian name.
24 it? 24 Dmitry Lyvovich, he was ex-president of V-Bank before he
25 A. Yes, of course, yes, because they were understanding 25 died, I think, last year or year before.
69 71
1 that the mess was going around and we wanted to keep 1 Q. And V-Bank would have a record, would they, of these
2 good business relations and they believed in my 2 transactions you are talking about?
3 business, so we reached an agreement, absolutely, yes. 3 A. Absolutely. Absolutely.
4 Q. And when it says that: 4 Q. Thank you.
5 «… the mortgages given to the bank would be 5 Could you please be shown {N11/19/85}, please.
6 managed by the bank for a certain time —» 6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is there any date attributed to this
7 A. Yes. 7 note, please?
8 Q. «— until he took them back on —» 8 MR LORD: Only in Mr Ameli’s witness statement.
9 A. We agreed that some of the assets have been sold to 9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right, okay, I will have a look at
10 the Bank, like Novy Gorod, and I think Rusiv and a few 10 that.
11 other companies, so we decided to sell and it was 11 MR LORD: It’s about April —
12 an absolutely market transaction, so we sold them 12 A. I think it would be better to ask Mr Ameli. He will be
13 several real estate projects which reduced the amount of 13 here, I mean in London, I think next week or something
14 loan and then agreed that they would make me as 14 like that.
15 a director of that companies, that even in emigration 15 Q. The reference, my Lord, is {C1/4/2}, paragraph 7, and
16 I would continue their development. 16 then the note which I have taken Dr Arkhangelsky to,
17 Q. So effectively V-Bank acquired the shares of some of 17 I think, is the one at —
18 your businesses; is that right? 18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Does he give a date?
19 A. No, no, actually, V-Bank bought, I think, two or three 19 MR LORD: Paragraph 7 — not when the note was done, but:
20 companies, or two or three assets, like real estate 20 «I met Mr Novikov in St Petersburg at some point
21 assets, because I was understanding while in emigration 21 between 31 March and 4 April 2011 (probably on 1 April
22 I would not be able to run them. 22 but I am not able to verify the exact date now).»
23 So in the bank, together with me, we were continuing 23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 2000-and …?
24 a development of several projects, so it was not — 24 MR LORD: 2011.
25 absolutely not any similar thing to any repo 25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
70 72
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 A. So that meeting was — it was a special trip organised

2 by Bristows and Mr Ameli in preparation of our Cyprus

3 and BVI proceedings. So I think three persons from

4 Bristows and Mr Ameli came to St Petersburg and tried to

5 speak to my ex-employees, just to establish the case and

6 just to collect whatever documents available and get

7 their own feeling of what was going on by that time.

8 Q. Could you be shown, sorry, {N11/19/85} —

9 A. The key issue there was that V-Bank was financing work

10 of Bristows and Mr Ameli while preparing this, so it was

11 V-Bank, actually, who helped me to start BVI proceedings

12 and Cyprus proceedings. That’s why they were quite

13 interested to see the lawyers, how they are looking, and

14 what are they thinking about, so that was a quite

15 important big meeting there.

16 Q. At {N11/19/85}, you can see, Dr Arkhangelsky — can you

17 see an e-mail?

18 A. Yes, can I see it in Russian, please.

19 Q. {N11/19/87}, I think. I think these are documents that

20 Mr Ameli has exhibited. You can see, again, it is

21 translated, it has a certified translation on from

22 Ms Bidault, and it is an e-mail — can you see — from

23 Ms Shaldova to you; can you see that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. She says — this is 19 October 2012:

1 the Port has repeatedly proposed the Bank to restructure

2 the existing loan relationship in order to ensure the

3 Company’s activity allowing … to provide for the

4 payment of debts to the Bank.»

5 A. Yes, absolutely.

6 Q. «Regretfully, our initiative did not meet the support of

7 the other party.»

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And that’s referring to V-Bank, isn’t it?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And then it goes on to say:

12 «The Bank’s non constructive position …»

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And then you can see what is said?

15 A. Yes, and the fact is that at the end of December 2011,

16 after we won in the Court of Appeal in BVI, then

17 Bank of St Petersburg pressed, with KGB officers,

18 V-Bank, and since that time they stopped any financing

19 and started behaving strangely. So I’ve been told by

20 Mr Novikov that they were under the big pressure from

21 the Russian authorities, and I thought and they thought

22 that the activity of the Bank of St Petersburg and their

23 real owner, like Matvienko(?) would create more serious

24 troubles for V-Bank.

25 So since that time, V-Bank stopped any negotiations

73 75

1 «Good afternoon Vitaly …

2 «At the request of Olga Yurievna please find

3 enclosed a note about the financial situation of

4 the port and its connections with the bank.»

5 Can you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And then if you look further down there is a reference

8 to the seaport of Vyborg; can you see?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Then at the foot of the page, it says as of 30 September

11 the port’s debt to V-Bank amount to RUB 4.196 billion.

12 Can you see that?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. At the foot of the page it says this:

15 «Based on the above information, the following

16 conclusions may be done …»

17 Then if you go to the second page, please

18 {N11/19/86}.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. You can see that a number of observations or

21 propositions are set out; can you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And then in the third paragraph the writer of the note

24 says this:

25 «Taking into consideration the existing situation,

1 and stopped any business activity with Vyborg Port as

2 far as I understand.

3 Q. So I think, Dr Arkhangelsky, that last answer, you are

4 alleging that V-Bank took part in the conspiracy you

5 allege by BSP against your businesses?

6 A. No, what I say, that the Bank of St Petersburg, when

7 they decided to squeeze me completely, so they put

8 enormous pressure, official KGB and so on pressure, on

9 V-Bank. So V-Bank, to survive in the Russian

10 environment, they had to stop any financing and any

11 continuation of supporting me in the struggle with the

12 Bank and Matvienko(?) family.

13 Q. So if you look at this note, the sort of things that —

14 it rather looks as if the author of this note was

15 complaining about V-Bank doing the same sort of things

16 that you complain BSP did?

17 A. No, they simply stopped financing and stopped

18 negotiations. So they are not complaining about any

19 raider attack or anything like this.

20 Q. You see, at the foot of the page, the author says this:

21 «In connection with the above, the Bank’s acts

22 entailed:

23 «Damages to the business reputation,

24 «Destabilisation of commercial and investment

25 attractiveness of the seaport,

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 «Creation of favourable conditions for the

2 spoilation of the company by raiders.

3 «Decrease of the value of the asset.»

4 A. Absolutely, yes. Any scandals would decrease the value

5 of the assets.

6 Q. Are you saying on oath, Dr Arkhangelsky, that you are

7 claiming that V-Bank deliberately set about damaging

8 your business in this way, or not?

9 A. No, first of all it’s not me who is telling this. This

10 is one of the low level employees of the Vyborg Port who

11 made this note. So it’s her private opinion, not having

12 any in common with what I’m thinking or been thinking or

13 would be thinking. So it’s her private opinion, so —

14 and I don’t — in these proceedings I don’t think that

15 it’s a subject for any things with V-Bank, but you know

16 that we reserved our rights when we get more information

17 if and how Bank of St Petersburg involved in the raider

18 attack of Vyborg Port, we would bring these proceedings.

19 Q. Because isn’t it really the position, Dr Arkhangelsky,

20 that V-Bank had also lost patience with OMG —

21 A. No, absolutely not.

22 Q. — and that that’s what lies behind the —

23 A. No, no, absolutely not. It was Bank of St Petersburg

24 and their police officers and KGB officers who put the

25 pressure on V-Bank and V-Bank decided to choose survival

1 the turnover, and I cannot see anything strange in this.

2 Q. Could you be shown, please, {C1/1/54}, paragraph 215 of

3 your witness statement.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. You say this:

6 «If the Bank had complied with our December 2008

7 agreement in good faith, I believe the Group would have

8 raised sufficient finance within the first six months of

9 2009 to repay the Bank’s loans.»

10 Can you see that?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Then can you please have on the same page, please —

13 sorry, on the parallel page, {C1/1/55}, so the next

14 page, and paragraph 218. If we could have both pages up

15 if that’s possible. Thank you.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. In paragraph 218 you say this:

18 «I am not suggesting that the Bank’s debts would

19 have been repaid by the end of June 2009 …»

20 Can you see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. That sentence contradicts what you said in

23 paragraph 215, doesn’t it?

24 A. No, I don’t think so.

25 Q. Because isn’t 218 an acceptance by you that even by the

77 79

1 in the Russian market and survival as a bank, and while

2 choosing this they had to stop financing me and support

3 my projects, because it was against the political

4 interests of the Russian Federation.

5 Q. Could you be shown, please, {C1/1/32}, paragraph 127 of

6 your statement, where you say this in the last sentence:

7 «On the basis of the Group’s cash flow forecast,

8 I did not —»

9 A. Which?

10 Q. Paragraph 127.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. «On the basis of the Group’s cash flow forecasts I did

13 not anticipate that the Group would be in a position to

14 resume servicing the loans until the spring of 2009 at

15 the earliest.»

16 Can you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. So even on your case the OMG group could not service

19 loans until spring 2009?

20 A. Yes, that’s why we easily agreed with V-Bank

21 restructuring, because they understood that there were

22 several issues: first of all it’s a global financial

23 crisis; the second, that in shipping and ports business,

24 January and December and February are the most difficult

25 months, so it’s always you have a seasonal reduction in

1 end of June 2009 it was unlikely that BSP’s debts would

2 have been repaid by OMG?

3 A. Not sure, no. I don’t think so. If everything — as

4 you say it looks logic on face — logical on face.

5 Q. Can we go to paragraph 220, please, of your statement,

6 on {C1/1/56}, where you say this:

7 «I therefore cannot imagine that the Bank [that’s

8 BSP], acting commercially and reasonably, would not have

9 been content to wait beyond June 2009 for the full

10 repayment of its loans.»

11 Can you see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Can I suggest to you, Dr Arkhangelsky, that if OMG was

14 unable to repay its loans by the end of June 2009, it

15 would have been perfectly reasonable and commercial for

16 a bank to insist upon repayment of them?

17 A. No, I don’t think so.

18 Q. Can I please ask about EBRD. If you could be shown,

19 please, {C1/1/27} {C1/1/28}, paragraph 108, you give

20 some evidence about discussions you had with EBRD, which

21 is the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development,

22 in relation to the development of Vyborg Port; can you

23 see that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And you say:

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

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 «In April 2008 the EBRD indicated that it was

2 willing in principle to make a loan of €115 million to

3 enable the development to be carried out.»

4 Do you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. I wonder, could you be shown, please, {D39/674/1}. it

7 looks like a letter, 10 April 2008.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. From EBRD to you, Dr Arkhangelsky.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And it looks as though it is setting out a proposed

12 mandate, or a draft mandate; would that be right?

13 A. Yes, yes.

14 Q. Is that fair?

15 A. Maybe, yes. I think this is a draft, as far as

16 I understood.

17 Q. Yes.

18 A. Some mandate been signed with EBRD bank, yes.

19 Q. And you can see what — and you can see who it is from.

20 If you go, please, to page 4 {D39/674/4}. It looks as

21 if it has been signed by Sue Barrett, Director,

22 Transport Team.

23 A. Yes, I met him personally. Yes, he’s a very nice person

24 and one of the major managers, or directors, of EBRD.

25 Q. Is Sue Barrett a man?

1 Q. » … (subject to satisfactory results of evaluation and

2 negotiations) …»

3 A. Absolutely, yes.

4 Q. «… through the provision of long-term financing.»

5 Can you see that?

6 A. Absolutely, yes.

7 Q. So again, this was only really a letter of interest from

8 EBRD, wasn’t it?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And their participation was:

11 «… (subject to satisfactory results of evaluation

12 and negotiations)…»

13 Of —

14 A. Yes, and they were satisfied, and in March 2009 the

15 board of directors, I think, approved the loan of

16 the bank.

17 Q. And if you go, please, to the second page, to clause 5,

18 you can see that EBRD are suggesting certain fees to be

19 paid to them? {D39/674/2}

20 A. Yes, they’ve been paid, yes.

21 Q. So your evidence is they have been paid?

22 A. Yes, absolutely, yes. So we signed — I’m not sure if

23 it is a final version, but it was a very big ceremony,

24 so we’ve taken a charter flight with Mr Novikov and

25 ex-Minister of Finance, Mr Rukshov(?), so we chartered

81 83

1 A. Yes, sure. So he is one of the top executives of EBRD.

2 So it’s a very nice — I’m not sure if he’s British, but

3 I think he’s American. So he’s really a very, very,

4 very special person — personality, a very good

5 personality.

6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Sue is usually a woman’s name.

7 A. No, I —

8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Not in this case: it is a boy called

9 Sue?

10 A. I think, yes, he is a very big man, yes. As far as

11 I remember. I may be mistaken, but I …

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.

13 A. But head of transport team, I think, is him. It’s him.

14 MR LORD: All right, if you go back to {D39/674/1},

15 Dr Arkhangelsky, back to the first page.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. You can see in the first paragraph, EBRD outline what

18 they understand the project or the financing proposal

19 entails; can you see that?

20 A. Maybe, yes.

21 Q. And then in paragraph 2 they say this:

22 «This will confirm the interest of the European Bank

23 for Reconstruction and Development … in considering

24 participating in the Project…»

25 A. Yes.

1 a flight and we came to Helsinki and we had a meeting

2 with EBRD people in Helsinki and signed this contract.

3 I’m not sure exactly this, but we signed a contract.

4 Q. Could we go, please, to your witness statement at

5 {C1/1/34}, paragraph 133. You say there in the middle

6 of the page:

7 «… the prospect that the EBRD would shortly decide

8 to fund the development of Vyborg Port.»

9 Can you see that?

10 A. 133?

11 Q. Yes.

12 A. Absolutely, yes.

13 Q. EBRD never actually decided to fund you, did they? In

14 the event, EBRD never actually decided: yes —

15 A. No, I think they decided. So you may find at least two

16 confirmation of this case. First of all it’s the letter

17 from EBRD to Mr Novikov dated January 2009. It’s in

18 disclosure and it’s on the stick I’ve given to Opus so

19 we can show it right now —

20 Q. Can we have that up? D110 —

21 A. And in March 2009, EBRD published their decision on

22 their website. March 2009, EBRD published that

23 decision.

24 Q. Could we have {D110/1570/1}, please?

25 A. Yes.

82 84
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Q. Is this the letter you are talking about,

2 Dr Arkhangelsky?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. To Mr Novikov?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Why were they writing to Mr Novikov at this time?

7 A. Because it was me and Mr Novikov and Mr Rukshov who met

8 them, because Mr Novikov was considered to be one of

9 the most reliable Russian bankers, and V-Bank, as long

10 as it’s the key financing bank of Vyborg Port, was

11 considered to be kind of a project manager on the

12 banking side of running this investment project.

13 Q. This letter doesn’t say that EBRD has decided to finance

14 this project —

15 A. EBRD is a public organisation and in March 2009, the

16 board of directors of EBRD approved financing, and you

17 may find this information on the official website of

18 EBRD.

19 Q. Could you be shown your witness statement, please, at

20 paragraph 110 at {C1/1/28}. You referred to a report

21 there. Can you see —

22 A. To which number?

23 Q. Paragraph 110.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. You say:

1 it is from your, defendants’, disclosure; do you see

2 that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. «Basic Terms for the Proposed EBRD Loan»?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. So it looks as if there were some heads of terms or

7 draft heads of terms; would that be a fair description

8 of this, Dr Arkhangelsky?

9 A. It was, I think, initial draft of any suggestions.

10 Q. Right, and you can see the borrower is said to be Vyborg

11 Port, isn’t it?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Do you see the security? Look at the security, halfway

14 down the page. Can you see it includes, at the third

15 bullet point:

16 «Pledge of all assets of the Borrower.»

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. The borrower was Vyborg Port, wasn’t it?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. All of Vyborg Port’s assets had been pledged already,

21 hadn’t they, to V-Bank?

22 A. Yes, and the condition was that — and, actually, that’s

23 why V-Bank was involved in discussions. So the plan was

24 that EBRD was paying some money to V-Bank to waive the

25 mortgages and to make a controlling — controlled

85 87

1 «Following this positive report, the EBRD process

2 entered its final review stage. A conclusive decision

3 of the EBRD’s credit committee was expected

4 in March 2009.»

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Is that piece of evidence in your witness statement

7 accurate, Dr Arkhangelsky?

8 A. I think so, yes.

9 Q. So the EBRD had not finally decided to support this

10 project, certainly until March 2009; is that right?

11 A. So it was the board of directors of EBRD in March 2009,

12 they decided to finance this project, and they put all

13 the information officially on the website of EBRD.

14 Q. That wasn’t the question, Dr Arkhangelsky. Is it right,

15 which appears to be the case if your evidence is right

16 at paragraph 110, that EBRD had not finally decided to

17 lend you money, or lend OMG money, before March 2009?

18 A. Yes, because before finally deciding, they had to make

19 all the due diligence, and you know that normally with

20 EBRD, it takes from one to two years. In our case, all

21 the due diligence taking much shorter, so it has taken

22 only nine months, which is quite unusual for EBRD. So

23 EBRD was really eager and happy to finance this project.

24 Q. Could you be shown {D39/668/1}, please, which appears to

25 be a draft of some terms involving an EBRD loan. Again,

1 process of transferring mortgages to EBRD.

2 But, in fact, this is a very initial and basic

3 suggestion, so then after initial due diligence,

4 somewhere around the middle of summer 2008, EBRD

5 suggested absolutely different structure. That’s why

6 I approached Clyde & Co in London, lawyers, to make

7 a necessary structuring, because EBRD wanted, by

8 something like August, something, 2008, that the

9 structuring is done by the companies in Cyprus. That’s

10 why all these rather complicated structures in respect

11 to the ownership of the port, OMG Ports and so on, been

12 created.

13 So it has been under the requirements of EBRD to

14 create such kind of structure, including the family

15 trust and all these things. So everything been done by

16 Clyde & Co in direct cooperation with EBRD at that time.

17 Q. It’s right, isn’t it, Dr Arkhangelsky, that if EBRD did

18 want as security all of the Vyborg assets pledged, that

19 would not be possible because they had already been

20 pledged in favour of another bank, ie V-Bank; that’s

21 right, isn’t it?

22 A. No, it’s not, because that’s why we had a three-party

23 discussions between V-Bank, me and EBRD, and they were

24 discussing directly what and how they would do. But

25 what I am telling, that this is a preliminary,

86 88
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 preliminary draft, so the more or less final conditions

2 been agreed by the middle of summer, end of summer, and

3 then this Cyprus and BVI company has been established

4 for the purpose of financing by EBRD.

5 Q. Could you be shown {D68/1056/1}, please. That’s from

6 the defendants’ disclosure, Dr Arkhangelsky, and it’s

7 an e-mail on 6 September 2008, from Keith Parker to

8 you —

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. — and Mr Bromley-Martin and others. Subject:

11 «EBRD Market Due Diligence Draft Report (version 2)

12 attached…»

13 Can you see that?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And it says:

16 «I attach the Market DD report from EC Harris.»

17 Do you see that?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And it says:

20 «This is still being reviewed by EBRD …»

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Then at the foot of the page it says:

23 «This is a ‘confidential report’ so please do not

24 circulate. But there is a lot of useful information in

25 this report on our competitor ports that we can copy

1 I think, anyway, there have been quite a number of

2 changes in the final version for sure.

3 Q. Do you have any reason, Dr Arkhangelsky, to disagree

4 with that risk analysis?

5 A. As I told you, I don’t think it’s a final version, so

6 probably there were some discussions going on and

7 I don’t remember what’s been included in the final

8 version.

9 Q. Don’t worry about whether it is the final version or

10 not; just look at it as a piece of free-standing risk

11 analysis, please, of the north west Russian port sector.

12 And drawing upon your alleged expertise in that area,

13 could you tell his Lordship whether you have any reason

14 to disagree with any of this risk analysis here?

15 A. To be honest I have not really been reading this report

16 because it was 90 pages and for me at that time, it was

17 important that people like Keith Parker and

18 Robin Bromley-Martin and EBRD are happy with that.

19 And, by the way, finally, with the final version of

20 the report, EBRD been very much happy.

21 Q. And, in particular, if you look at each risk, the first

22 one was «Global economic growth declines»; can you see

23 that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And it was a low/medium probability, impact on Port

89

1 from (eg BNP Paribas question yesterday on competition

2 and KIT will need some info as well), as well as general

3 market info.»

4 Can you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Then if you scroll down, if you go to the next page

7 {D68/1056/2}, you can see the report; do you see that?

8 A. Yes, absolutely.

9 Q. Then I would like, please, to go to {D68/1056/33}.

10 A. I’m not sure if, in fact, it was the final version of

11 the report. So I think the final version of the report

12 been done by — together with — between EC Harris and

13 EBRD I think by the end of the year, so I think it’s

14 a preliminary draft or something like that.

15 Q. Well, Dr Arkhangelsky, can you see on that page I’ve

16 just shown you, that this report, draft or otherwise,

17 sets out some risk analysis for the north west Russian

18 port sector?

19 A. Maybe, yes.

20 Q. I wonder, could you just read through that to yourself,

21 please?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. You see the various risks are identified; can you see

24 that?

25 A. They are quite low everywhere. (Pause)

91

1 Vyborg: high. Can you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. You have no reason to disagree that that was a risk,

4 have you?

5 A. I don’t remember. I have not been in discussion with

6 that — or about these points.

7 Q. And the same for number 2? Is there anything you want

8 to say on number 2?

9 A. For all the points, I have not been discussing with

10 anybody.

11 Q. No, but I want to give you a chance, Dr Arkhangelsky,

12 because of your alleged expertise here. If there is

13 anything wrong with these risks, I am giving you the

14 chance to point out to his Lordship why you disagree

15 with the risk assessment?

16 A. It is an international independent company which has its

17 own understanding and I would not intervene in their

18 assessment.

19 My personal understanding, as long as I’ve been very

20 patriotic and I had much beliefs in development of

21 Russian economy and democracy and so on, so I definitely

22 had my own opinion, but always people from EBRD or any

23 English or American specialists are considered to be

24 much more conservative on any Russian businesses or

25 Russian risks compared to the locals, which is quite

90 92
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 normal.

2 Q. Could you be shown {D99/1322/1}, please.

3 A. May I have the Russian version, please.

4 Q. And the Russian version is at {D99/1322/3}.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. This is a letter by you, Dr Arkhangelsky —

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. — to the Vice-Governor for the Leningrad region.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And it’s the first of a number of letters,

11 Dr Arkhangelsky, I’m going to be showing you today,

12 tomorrow, and possibly on Wednesday, where you write to

13 various senior officials within the Russian Federation.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Why did you write to the Vice-Governor for the Leningrad

16 region?

17 A. Yes, I can explain you, and I think it’s been covered in

18 my witness statement, that — I think it’s happened

19 in October 2008. It was a very classical thing, then

20 Mr Putin said publicly that it could be a crisis all

21 around the world, but there are not any financial or

22 banking or any crisis in Russia.

23 So he said that the Russian Development Bank,

24 Vneshsconombank, Central Bank and other institutions, in

25 case that any companies may have problems, would be

1 Q. Yes, but if you look at the first line, you say:

2 «Thank you for attention to the Group’s projects in

3 the Leningrad Region.»

4 Then you say:

5 «You are kindly requested to solicit the Management

6 of the Federal Marine and River Transport Agency for the

7 necessity of speedy entering into agreements on the

8 lease of terminals in the Vyborg Port, and also it

9 should be pointed out that Vyborgsky and Vysotsky

10 branches of Rosmorport demonstrate inaction and prevent

11 from entering into this agreement. Inability to enter

12 into this agreement complicates and slows down the

13 funding of the Vyborg Port reconstruction project

14 (including inability to continue this project by the

15 European Bank of Reconstruction and Development). You

16 are kindly requested to set up a working group and hold

17 a meeting aimed to enter into such agreement as soon as

18 possible and to eliminate causes of funding constraints

19 which becomes particularly important against the

20 backdrop of economic crisis in the Russian Federation.»

21 Can you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. So is it right that official inaction at that time, as

24 you describe here, was actually creating a problem with

25 the EBRD’s —

93

1 financed and supported by the Russian State.

2 So that’s why all the bureaucrats all around the

3 country, they were creating lists of what they called at

4 that time strategic companies to be supported and

5 developed, and so I had a desire to include my projects

6 into this list of the strategic companies to be financed

7 by the State. And financing by the State meant cheap

8 and long term financing, which probably could be even

9 more interesting than any foreign financing.

10 So Putin given quite a number of promises to large

11 businesses and specially Vyborg Port and Western

12 Terminal were considered to be like these biggest — big

13 companies, so we thought that we can get fast and easy

14 financing from the Russian State.

15 Q. So you were asking for some assistance in relation to

16 these business plans of yours, basically?

17 A. What I was asking, that in each member of the Russian

18 Federation, it was created special big commissions from

19 10 to 20 people, bureaucrats on different levels, who

20 were part of these commissions, so I was writing mostly

21 to all these members of these commissions, just because

22 it was a kind of collegial decision, so I was writing to

23 all of them just to inform them about my projects, about

24 prospects of development, asking to support the projects

25 in case they would be sitting in these commissions.

95

1 A. Not really, because one of the conditions with EBRD was

2 to sign a special agreement for the berths, and as long

3 as in Vyborg Port the berths belongs to the State, so

4 EBRD wanted to have a contract or agreement accepted by

5 their lawyers. So that’s why we needed to implement

6 changes, and that’s why — and just while attracting

7 attention of the vice-governor who was responsible for

8 the transport development in the area, I just wanted to

9 speed up this process and he made it and we made all the

10 necessary — we signed all the necessary contracts.

11 Q. So is it right that you needed the federal agency’s

12 support really to be able to advance this Vyborg

13 project?

14 A. We also had this federal agency’s support, and what

15 I said on Wednesday, we had the full federal agency’s

16 support.

17 Q. Could you be shown, please, {D147/2499/2}.

18 {D147/2449/2}. This is a witness statement from

19 somebody called Natalya Saltykova; can you see that?

20 A. Can I have the Russian version, please?

21 Q. Yes, certainly. That’s on {D147/2449/5}; do you have

22 that, Dr Arkhangelsky?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. It looks as if Natalya Saltykova was the chief

25 accountant for OMG Group Limited; is that right?

94 96
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 A. Yes, she’s been running several companies in the group,

2 yes.

3 Q. And she gave a witness statement in support of

4 litigation of yours, didn’t she?

5 A. Yes, I think it was in extradition proceedings, as far

6 as I remember. But after that she’s been under — so

7 Colonel Levitskaya, she’s taken her kid and so on, so

8 she had enormous personal pressure on Saltykova and so

9 she is not speaking to me any more because they promised

10 to put her in the prison if she continue any contacts

11 with me.

12 Q. You can see what she says in the witness statement,

13 starting on the first page. {D147/2449/1}

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. She describes working for the group in early 2002; the

16 funding for the OMG group being provided mainly by two

17 banks, Vozrozhdenie —

18 A. Can I see the second page on the Russian version,

19 please. {D147/2449/6}. Thanks.

20 Yes.

21 Q. And she says this: {D147/2449/1}

22 «Looking at the example of the Vyborg port project

23 worth over 233 million euros, it should be noted that

24 the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

25 (EBRD) was going to fund it through the provision of

1 statement about the EBRD loan; that’s all. So you can

2 see she describes that EBRD was going to fund that loan,

3 and then over the page, on the second page

4 {D147/2449/2}, in the second paragraph, Ms Saltykova

5 says this:

6 «The global financial crisis affected OMG in

7 the second half of 2008 …»

8 A. Which paragraph?

9 Q. The second paragraph on the second page.

10 A. Okay.

11 Q. «The global financial crisis affected OMG in the second

12 half of 2008. For well-known reasons, the EBRD first

13 reduced the amount of its assistance to €40 million, and

14 then completely suspended the planned funding.»

15 Can you see that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And you can see that this was a statement signed — if

18 you go to the third page, Ms Saltykova seems to have

19 signed — {D147/2449/3}

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. — and verified this statement —

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. — on 23 May 2011; can you see that?

24 A. Yes, yes, yes.

25 Q. If you go back to page 2, please, {D147/2449/2},

97 99

1 a loan of 115 million —»

2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Where are you reading? So sorry.

3 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, my fault. It’s at the bottom of

4 the {D147/2449/1} page. It’s the first English page.

5 I think the Russian and English might be out of sync.

6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Oh, sorry.

7 MR LORD: So we might have to have different pages. Sorry,

8 my Lord, it is my fault. It is the paragraph at the

9 foot of the first page.

10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, got it.

11 MR LORD: Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky; do you have that text in

12 Russian?

13 A. Yes, I have. Just which paragraphs are you referring

14 to?

15 Q. The one that says:

16 «Looking at the example of the Vyborg port

17 project …»

18 I think it’s the last one on the first page — you

19 asked to go to the second —

20 A. No, no, I thought that you were reading the second page,

21 yes.

22 Q. Can you see that?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Because I want to track through what the chief

25 accountant of OMG Group Limited said in this witness

1 according to the chief accountant of OMG, the EBRD

2 completely suspended —

3 A. No, just one small comment. So she was a chief

4 accountant of several companies and one of the company

5 called Oslo Marine Group indeed, but she was not

6 personally, and never, ever been personally, involved in

7 the financing of Vyborg Port, because Vyborg Port had

8 absolutely different accountant and so on.

9 So I don’t think that she was and is in position to

10 discuss financing, and I suggest to address you to

11 the official website of EBRD in March 2009; there they

12 published the final and correct figures of their

13 possible financing.

14 So I am not sure that she is not mistaken here, and

15 she was not definitely involved in any EBRD discussions.

16 Q. If she is right, it looks as if —

17 A. I’m not sure that she’s right, because she definitely

18 could have her private opinion and she was writing this,

19 I think, in 2012, let’s say three, four years after

20 that, and as long as she was not involved in any

21 financing, I’m not sure that she’s not mistaking

22 anything here, any figures.

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Did you say this was evidence in

24 the extradition proceedings?

25 A. In the extradition proceedings. So that’s just for —

98 100
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 you know, to save my life. I think she’d been under

2 huge, enormous pressure by Colonel Levitskaya, and

3 nobody really been caring what — to make any factual

4 changes, or whatever, so … it was important to get

5 some witnesses from Russia confirming what’s happened,

6 actually.

7 MR LORD: And if you go back to page — but if this evidence

8 is right, it looks as if —

9 A. No, I don’t think it’s right in respect to EBRD

10 financing —

11 Q. No, sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky —

12 A. — because she was not involved in that. I confirm you

13 that she is not right in respect to EBRD financing.

14 Q. So this evidence was wrong, was it?

15 A. No, no, the evidence is right, but she is mistaken in

16 respect to her knowledge of EBRD financing.

17 Q. If you go back to —

18 A. But any her statements in respect of the raid attack by

19 the Bank of St Petersburg and Savelyev on me and my

20 group is absolutely, surely, is correctly stated here.

21 Q. If we go back to the second page, please, the third

22 paragraph, the chief accountant, Ms Saltykova, said

23 this: {D147/2449/2}

24 «Beginning in November 2008, the Group’s financial

25 capabilities no longer allowed it to repay the loans

1 in November 2008, the OMG group’s financial capabilities

2 no longer allowed it to repay the loans which it had?

3 A. Yes, I think she was not aware of all financial

4 situations, yes.

5 Q. What’s your basis for saying that that statement by her

6 was wrong?

7 A. Because she was on vacation, giving birth to the kid.

8 Q. No, no, that’s not a substantive basis —

9 A. No, no, if you are sitting in the office and you see

10 daily payments, that’s one situation. If you are

11 sitting at home, feeding your kids, breastfeeding, so

12 it’s an absolutely different story.

13 Q. That’s the reason you say she got this statement wrong:

14 because she was at home —

15 A. Maybe, maybe. I assume. I assume so.

16 Q. Could you look at the bottom of page 2, beginning:

17 «The first deferment was granted for six months…»

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Can you see the second sentence:

20 «As a result of the 2008 crisis, the prices for real

21 estate, which was the main security for the debt,

22 dropped by almost half.»

23 Can you see that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Again, do you have any reason to take issue with her

101 103

1 which had been received.»

2 Can you see that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Do you have any reason to think that this evidence which

5 was filed on your behalf was inaccurate?

6 A. No, I think that, as far as I remember, in

7 November 2008, Madame Saltykova, she just got a baby,

8 and she was sitting at home with her kids and she was

9 not — as far as I remember, she was not running daily

10 business. So I think that’s what she’s saying, that

11 it’s probably here saying.

12 Q. But she was the chief accountant, wasn’t she, of the OMG

13 Group Limited?

14 A. It’s not for the group, but particularly, limited

15 liability company, I think. But I think she was on what

16 we in Russia call «dekret», the kind of vacation when

17 you give birth to the kid. I think that she in October,

18 November, December, she was not sitting in the office

19 and she was not involved in any daily operations,

20 I assume.

21 Q. So are you saying that she was wrong in the evidence she

22 was giving? It was wrong?

23 A. No, no, it’s her evidence, but I assume that she could

24 be making some — her mistakes, yes.

25 Q. So you think she was wrong to say that beginning

1 evidence that the prices of real estate dropped by

2 almost half as a result of the 2008 crisis?

3 A. I think it’s her private opinion, but there is market

4 statistics.

5 Q. Now, if you go, please, to the third page, the third

6 paragraph, {D147/2449/3}, sorry, the second paragraph:

7 «After the first extension until June 2009, the

8 additional guarantees provided by VD Arkhangelsky were

9 deemed insufficient, but the bank has never questioned

10 the integrity of VD Arkhangelsky who made every …

11 effort to comply with the Bank’s demands.»

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. So it looks as if Ms Saltykova, the chief accountant —

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. — in this witness statement, she was giving evidence,

16 I think, to the effect that you had provided guarantees

17 to support some of these corporate debts?

18 A. No, absolutely not. I think you are manipulating with

19 the language. Guarantees in the Russian language means

20 any type of security. So in case it’s a — in case —

21 you understand like this: it had to be written «personal

22 guarantees», and in the Russian language, «guarantees»

23 means any mortgages, any — any other securities, any

24 equities and so on. So nothing common with what you

25 tried to establish. It’s absolutely nothing told here,

102 104
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 at least in the Russian version, in respect to any

2 personal guarantees.

3 Q. But the next paragraph suggests that that’s not right,

4 Dr Arkhangelsky, because the next paragraph says:

5 «Personal guarantees by business leaders were not

6 very common in Russia even before the crisis…»

7 So it does look as if —

8 A. No, in the Russian language she confirms that it was not

9 usual, and that’s why I would not be doing this.

10 Q. I see. If you read on in that paragraph —

11 A. She just confirmed that I would not sign any personal

12 guarantees, because it is unusual and would not work.

13 Q. But if you read on in that paragraph, please, you see

14 she says this:

15 «As a rule, this type of security is extremely

16 inefficient, because arbitration practice on it is

17 unfavourable.»

18 A. Sorry, it’s the same paragraph, or?

19 Q. Yes, it’s the one that begins with:

20 «Personal guarantees by business leaders …»

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Would you just read that to yourself and I am going to

23 ask —

24 A. Do you want me to read the second sentence, or which

25 one?

1 Q. Actually agreed. They never agreed to —

2 A. No, they agreed. I’m referring you to the March board

3 meeting of EBRD and the public information on their

4 website. March 2009.

5 Q. So in paragraph 110 of your witness statement at

6 {C1/2/29} —

7 A. Sorry, which paragraph?

8 Q. 110, {C1/2/28}:

9 «A conclusive decision of the EBRD’s credit

10 committee was expected in March 2009.»

11 A. Yes, and they done that. So I suggest you — I think

12 I’ve seen these documents, it would have been printed

13 from EBRD website.

14 Q. And EBRD never actually advanced any money to your

15 company?

16 A. No, never, because in March, or actually April 2009, all

17 this raider attack occurred by the Bank of St Petersburg

18 and Savelyev.

19 Q. Do you have any documents that show EBRD saying to

20 OMG —

21 A. Well, it’s not saying to OMG. EBRD is saying to

22 international community on their website. So I suggest

23 you — and I think — I am not able to give you a number

24 now, but on the website of EBRD for 2009, March

25 or April, there is this information.

105 107

1 Q. If you could read all five lines, please, if that’s all

2 right.

3 A. Okay. (Pause)

4 Q. Have you read them?

5 A. Just a moment. (Pause)

6 Yes. So she is telling it I would never, ever give

7 any personal guarantees as long as it’s enough to have

8 a security as a mortgage. So that’s what she is

9 telling.

10 Q. In the last sentence, she said:

11 «Naturally, as a guarantee they exercised

12 intensified control over the management of the real

13 estate mortgaged to the Bank.»

14 Do you know what that means?

15 A. I think, again, it is a problem with translation.

16 I can — maybe I will read that in Russian and

17 interpreters would maybe better translate it into the

18 English language.

19 A. (Interpreted) «Naturally as a guarantee an intensified

20 control over the management of the real estate under

21 mortgage agreement to the Bank was exercised.»

22 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, just a final question before I finish

23 this section: the EBRD never agreed to finance any of

24 your companies, did they?

25 A. I am referring you —

1 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, I see the time. I think I have

2 finished on that document. That would be a convenient

3 point to stop.

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Perhaps that document can be searched

5 for, the March or April 2009 public statement by EBRD —

6 A. That was on their website.

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — on its website.

8 MR LORD: I’m not sure it is there.

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, if it’s not there, it’s not

10 there, but …

11 MR LORD: We will look for it.

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 2.10 pm.

13 (1.11 pm)

14 (The Luncheon Adjournment)

15 (2.10 pm)

16 Housekeeping

17 MR LORD: May it please your Lordship. I think

18 your Lordship was minded to deal with the question of

19 the in private transcripts from last week.

20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. I am really in everyone’s hands.

21 Whichever will best suit the efficient furthering of

22 this. I mean, is this a good time, Mr Lord, or would

23 you prefer to keep cracking, or what would you prefer to

24 do? Is there going to be a debate of some length on

25 this?

106 108
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 MR LORD: No, there isn’t going to be a debate of some 1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
2 length. 2 MR LORD: And one couldn’t pre-judge the outcome of that
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right. 3 debate and therefore know in advance, in other words at
4 MR LORD: It is a matter for your Lordship whether you want 4 the moment that debate started, where it would tend; and
5 to do it now or at 4.30. 5 even if it became clear during the course of that
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Which suits you better? Are you in 6 episode that certain positions were going to be taken
7 mid-flow such as you want to keep going? 7 such that publication, or, rather, maintenance of
8 MR LORD: No, we can deal with it now if your Lordship would 8 the confidentiality was not sought by certain parties,
9 rather deal with it now. 9 that wouldn’t necessarily automatically kick away the
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let’s deal with it then. 10 in-private status of that passage of the hearing, would
11 MR LORD: Your Lordship has seen the submissions from the 11 be my respectful submission as to what happened then.
12 defendants. They want all the matters in private to be 12 So, really, it is a question of looking back over
13 declared to be in public. My clients’ position is that 13 all the in-private debates, including the passage that
14 whilst, obviously, having an in-private environment may 14 your Lordship just identified, and the court deciding
15 lead people to express themselves in a way that they 15 whether they are going to declare now that those
16 might otherwise not in that particular set-up, we are 16 transcripts should become public.
17 entirely neutral about whether the transcript should be 17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The only effect is that the
18 made public, and it is a matter for your Lordship. 18 transcripts would be available and publicised, whereas
19 Subject to just one point: should private hearings 19 otherwise those parts would only be available to
20 from last week be declared now to be public, that 20 the parties, and otherwise available only with my
21 shouldn’t set a precedent for other hearings in 21 permission.
22 the future that may be held in private on different 22 MR LORD: Yes.
23 bases where the same revisiting should not necessarily 23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And I have to say, I haven’t looked at
24 be thought to be automatically applicable. 24 all the other private things. I do — the reason I am
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I mean, it seems to me there are two 25 shilly-shallying is I do very much take your point
109 111
1 rather different questions. The first is whether 1 that — well, there are two points. One is, they were,
2 I should open up the matters which were heard in 2 subject to the issue as to 18 February, they were said
3 private, and the second is whether the proceedings in 3 to be in private, and that was that. The public would
4 the afternoon of February 18th, right at the beginning, 4 have been excluded, looking at it as it happened. I can
5 were intended to be in private or not, as to which, when 5 open those up, of course I can, but the second point is
6 I re-read the transcript, I was in some doubt about, 6 that part of the point of being in private is so that
7 partly because they referred to the notes which you 7 people, without worrying that they are saying things
8 exchanged and which you all agreed not to be in private, 8 which shouldn’t be in public, can be a bit more open,
9 do you see what I mean? 9 which is a good thing.
10 So I was rather minded to think that, contrary to my 10 MR LORD: Exactly, which is why I prefaced my submission
11 recollection, but I would be grateful for your views on 11 this afternoon by just that point: that we had
12 this, that which I was asked about while I was 12 an in-private forum and all persons on the transcript
13 travelling back and did not have the transcript 13 expressed themselves in the way that they did in that
14 available to me at the time, that is to say pages 112, 14 environment, but, as I said, as far as my clients are
15 line 2, to 121, line 11 of Day 12, which was 15 concerned — my clients — they are entirely neutral
16 February 18th, whether they were intended to be in 16 about what happens to those passages.
17 private or not — it is rather embarrassing not to know 17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
18 what was done. I didn’t say they were in private. It 18 Dr Arkhangelsky, Mr Stroilov is very keen that
19 may have been implicit, but when I looked at them 19 absolutely everything should be in public. The reasons
20 I thought perhaps they weren’t really meant to be in 20 he gave were, in effect, I think threefold from memory.
21 private because we were dealing, in effect, with the 21 One was that it was important that all proceedings
22 notes which were agreed to be public. 22 should be seen to be in public; the second was that you
23 MR LORD: My Lord, I think we would say that implicitly it 23 had to give context to the whole circumstances in which
24 was in private, because it was the continuation or the 24 the debate arose, and the third, that he felt it was
25 contumation of a debate that had been held in private. 25 only fair to Mr Lord.
110 112
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Now, the latter is not one which I can attach any 1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Oh, thank you. Perhaps — yes, thank
2 importance to, since Mr Lord does not. So it is only 2 you very much indeed. (Handed)
3 the first two. 3 MR ARKHANGELSKY: One small question, enquiry to you, while
4 As to the first, well, I decided that it would be in 4 I am giving this cross-examination.
5 private, so that’s not particularly a good point. It 5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
6 may have been right, it may have been wrong, but that’s 6 MR ARKHANGELSKY: And I am — you know, I’m really very much
7 what we did. 7 afraid of any insinuations of RPC or Mr Lord about any
8 But the second one, which is your anxiety that all 8 discussions about that. So in the midnight on the
9 matters should be in the public forum and available 9 weekend, I got an e-mail with enquiry to discuss several
10 generally, that I can understand. Do you want to say 10 issues with my wife. So I suggested while I am on
11 anything more? 11 cross-examination, so that they write her in Russian
12 MR ARKHANGELSKY: No, I just want to confirm Mr Stroilov’s 12 directly, just to avoid any possibility of any possible
13 position. I haven’t had a chance to discuss it with 13 troubles.
14 him, but I agree, and I think everything he is telling 14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You got an enquiry from your wife?
15 is quite smart. So I want to ask you to support his 15 MR ARKHANGELSKY: No, no, I got a — in the middle of
16 submission. 16 the night on the weekend, we got a long e-mail from RPC,
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I’m sorry about this; I cannot, 17 with the questions to be discussed with my wife. So
18 I think, open the whole lot up without going through all 18 I don’t want to do that, so what I understood from that
19 of them, and I shall have to do that and take time out 19 e-mail, I brought the documents, because they were just
20 to do that, and I am sorry about the delay. My feeling 20 in the copy machine which — they have not been copied
21 was that it really was immaterial, if I can put it that 21 for technical reasons, but if they need anything from
22 way, in terms of any prejudice to any parties, whether 22 her before I finish, so I suggest that they do it
23 I opened up the parts I was asked about. It seems to me 23 directly with her. In the language she understands.
24 that those are parts which I would be inclined to open 24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see. So the e-mail was in English,
25 up, but whether, in order to be fair, I have to open up 25 it was sent to your wife, it was copied to you; you felt
113 115
1 all the rest, I am afraid I haven’t reached a view. 1 a difficulty —
2 I suspect this is more a storm in a teacup than it 2 MR ARKHANGELSKY: No, no, it was sent to me with the enquiry
3 is a really important point, because the really 3 that I discuss it with her.
4 important point is that everyone, all the parties, 4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see.
5 should see what has happened. And I think, thinking 5 MR BIRT: I was just trying to see if the letter is on the
6 about it, Mr Stroilov had a fourth point, which is if 6 Magnum; I don’t know if it is or not. I have seen the
7 there were extradition proceedings, he would like to be 7 letter. I think it was probably sent to
8 able to — or Mr Ameli would, or whoever it was, might 8 Mr Arkhangelsky — it is addressed to Mr and
9 like to see the whole context. That can easily be done 9 Mrs Arkhangelsky, from recollection. It was sent to
10 by asking my permission and reminding me of 10 Mr Arkhangelsky’s e-mail address because it’s part of
11 the circumstances. 11 one of your Lordship’s case management orders that we
12 So I suspect this may be a point which is more 12 send correspondence to Mr Arkhangelsky’s e-mail address.
13 apparent in its importance than real in importance. But 13 It was also sent to Mr Stroilov because that’s part
14 let us come back to it. I think I can’t open up the 14 of the same order.
15 things without re-reading them. 15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
16 If someone, perhaps Mr Eschwege, could identify the 16 MR BIRT: My recollection is that the terms of the letter
17 bits of the transcripts, I can look at them. 17 said: we note that there are some pages missing from the
18 So let us continue with cross-examination. 18 bank account statements you have produced —
19 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Your Lordship, just a small question. 19 MR ARKHANGELSKY: It’s two long pages.
20 I brought some additional documents for your order on 20 MR BIRT: If I could just finish, please.
21 disclosure, so who should I give it to? 21 We identified what we think are a small number of
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m so sorry, what are these? 22 pages missing and it said at the end: if there is
23 MR ARKHANGELSKY: These are the some few — three pages 23 an opportunity for Mrs Arkhangelskaya to obtain them and
24 missing on disclosure, based on your order on our 24 e-mail them through before Mr Arkhangelsky finishes
25 private accounts. 25 evidence, we would be grateful, but we did not want to
114 116
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 disturb Mr Arkhangelsky during the course of his giving

2 evidence. I think that is the gist of it, but —

3 MR ARKHANGELSKY: No, but I don’t want to be involved in any

4 insinuations on this, so that’s why I suggest that they

5 do it directly with my wife if they need it. If they

6 really need it.

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Perhaps the simple thing, if there is

8 any real doubt, is to ask Mr Stroilov to relay the

9 matter to Mrs Arkhangelskaya.

10 MR BIRT: It may be easier. I’m sure that learned

11 instructing solicitors wanted to comply —

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, absolutely, yes.

13 MR BIRT: — with the order that correspondence go to both

14 e-mail addresses and it may be if there are further

15 enquiries we can simply say: Mr Stroilov, can you

16 communicate with Mrs Arkhangelskaya in particular on

17 this.

18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you very much.

19 MR BIRT: It was certainly expressed — it wasn’t for

20 Mr Arkhangelsky.

21 MR ARKHANGELSKY: I’m really very much afraid of being

22 against any rules, so that’s my major concern.

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.

24 MR BIRT: Should we take the copies and return them?

25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s very helpful.

1 A. Are you for some special reason discussing the draft and

2 not the final version? What’s the reason for discussing

3 the draft?

4 Q. I don’t know if it is the draft or the final.

5 A. It’s written on the first page that it’s a draft.

6 Q. It’s the final version, I think.

7 A. No, it’s the draft, written on the first page.

8 Q. I am just checking, Dr Arkhangelsky, because I just want

9 to check …

10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Does it say «Draft»? Sorry.

11 A. It’s written «Draft» on the first page, do you see

12 «Draft», big letters?

13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Ah, yes, I see. Sorry, it hasn’t come

14 out on my photocopy.

15 MR LORD: I think this may be the only version of this that

16 you have disclosed, or that has been disclosed by the

17 defendants, Dr Arkhangelsky. I think.

18 A. I’m not sure. It had to be a final version because we

19 were absolutely in preparation for roadshow and it had

20 to be some final version.

21 Q. If you go, please, to {D71/1066/6}. Well, actually, if

22 you go to {D71/1066/4}, first, you can see the executive

23 summary. For his Lordship’s note, there is an executive

24 summary of what’s been paid.

25 A. I just want to explain to your Lordship that the KIT —

117 119
1 Yes. 1 most of the team from KIT Finance, they went to work for
2 Cross-examination by MR LORD (continued) 2 the Bank of St Petersburg, I think, just after the —
3 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, I’m going to ask you, if I may, 3 soon after the collapse of this bank. So the Bank
4 please, about KIT Finance. 4 should have all the documents and originals because
5 A. Yes, please. 5 I know that the Bank obtained all this information from
6 Q. And you give some evidence about the KIT Finance 6 that team.
7 fundraising initiative in 2008 in your witness statement 7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They will search whether they have
8 at {C1/1/28} at paragraph 111. Do you see that you 8 an original, and for the moment we will take it that —
9 there describe that: 9 A. Yes.
10 «In parallel with the EBRD process, the Group was 10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — this is the document you are being
11 also in discussions with the Russian bank KIT Finance 11 cross-examined on.
12 about a bond issue under which the Group would issue 12 A. Okay.
13 loan participation notes to the value of 13 MR LORD: If we go, please, to {D71/1066/5} you can see
14 US $150 million.» 14 «Transaction summary», the next page. So this was what
15 Can you see that? 15 KIT Finance were working on, issuing of notes, loan
16 A. Yes. 16 notes, in the amount of US $150 million; do you see
17 Q. Could you please be shown {D71/1066/1}, please. Do you 17 that?
18 see that? 18 A. Yes.
19 A. Yes. 19 Q. And it looks from this summary and preliminary terms
20 Q. I think that’s the information memorandum, or certainly 20 page —
21 a draft of it, that KIT Finance were working on for the 21 A. Yes.
22 OMG Ports, weren’t they? 22 Q. — as if one of the — when you look at the security,
23 A. Yes, I think so. 23 can you see halfway down:
24 Q. You can see the colour pictures on the front. 24 «Pledge of shares: Pledge of [100 per cent] of
25 If we could go, please, to {D71/1066/6}. 25 shares of Bissonia Holdings.»
118 120
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 A. Which line:

2 «Pledge of [100 per cent] of shares of Bissonia

3 Holdings.»

4 Yes.

5 Q. I will come back to Bissonia Holdings, but can you tell

6 his Lordship what that refers to? Why would

7 Bissonia Holdings be pledging the shares here?

8 A. But you have just shown us, I think next page or

9 previous page, then they were offering some structuring.

10 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, why would it be suggested that

11 Bissonia Holdings would be pledging the shares —

12 A. I don’t know, it’s some their logic behind — it’s some

13 standard rules because LPN, letter participation notes,

14 it’s a quite difficult and complex structured financial

15 product. I’m not exactly sure how it works and what’s

16 the difference from other financial sources. So it’s

17 a kind of substitution to Eurobonds or something like

18 that.

19 So KIT Finance have been specialists and they were

20 suggesting something. I’m not exactly sure that it’s —

21 this document offered the final way it had to be done.

22 Q. And can you see, also under «Security», it says

23 «Personal guarantee»:

24 «Personal guarantee by Mr … Arkhangelsky attached

25 to the sum of Principal Amount and accrued Interests.»

1 repayment of short-term borrowings.»

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. So is it right that only 10 per cent of this potential

4 fundraising was going to be available for refinancing?

5 A. No, as far as I understood, from what we discussed last

6 week, 15 million is what relates to Vyborg Petroleum

7 Company. That’s what I understand from here. But

8 I don’t remember what and how it’s been done.

9 Q. Could you be shown {D67/1042.2/1}, please. If we could

10 please scroll down to page 4 of that and then we are

11 going to work backwards, if that’s possible

12 {D67/1042.2/4}.

13 This is an e-mail chain involving KIT Finance and

14 Mr Parker and others in relation to —

15 A. I think I have not been a party to this correspondence

16 and this discussion.

17 Q. If you see the e-mail at the foot, you can see that

18 Igor Kozak from KIT Finance was asking Keith Parker:

19 » … please send us key terms and memorandums both

20 for Western Terminal and Vyborg Port financing

21 programmes (of course if it is acceptable).»

22 Do you see that?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. So it looks as if KIT Finance, who are working on these

25 notes, it looks as if they were asking for information

121 123

1 Do you see that?

2 A. Yes, maybe. I see that but I don’t remember it.

3 Q. It looks from that, doesn’t it, as if it was envisaged,

4 certainly at one stage in this KIT Finance initiative,

5 that you would give a personal guarantee to secure this

6 loan, doesn’t it?

7 A. Yes, that was one of the discussions, for sure, yes, but

8 as I said, I considered it’s a draft and I’m not sure if

9 it would be realised at the final stage.

10 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, I think I must show you your witness

11 statement at paragraph 111 {C1/1/28}.

12 Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, I will come back to that

13 point.

14 Can we go back to the information memorandum. Could

15 you go, please, to {D71/1066/6}. Can you see at the

16 foot of the page it has «Use of proceeds»?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And it says:

19 «50 per cent … of the issue will be used for

20 current maintenance and modernisation of Vyborg Port

21 facilities.»

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. «35 per cent … will be used for acquisition of new

24 equipment.

25 «10 per cent … of the issue will be used for

1 about your other two fundraising projects at that time,

2 namely the Western Terminal and the Vyborg Port/EBRD.

3 A. Yes, maybe.

4 Q. And you had three different programmes on the go, didn’t

5 you then, potentially?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. You had Western Terminal with Oxus; you had Vyborg Port

8 with EBRD, and you had Vyborg Port with KIT Finance?

9 A. In respect to international financing. In respect to

10 local Russian financing, we had much more.

11 Q. Yes. Then if we go, please, to {D67/1042.2/3}, you can

12 see that Mr Parker writes back to KIT Finance on

13 27 August 2008, and looks as if you are copied in on the

14 e-mail, Dr Arkhangelsky.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. You can see what’s said there. He tells KIT Finance:

17 «At this moment both of the Vyborg Port and OMG

18 Western projects are live…»

19 Then he gives a bit of explanation about the Vyborg

20 Port/EBRD project.

21 If you look at the paragraph in the middle of

22 the page, Mr Parker says this, three lines up from the

23 bottom:

24 «I have not spoken to EBRD yet as I do not think

25 they would react positively to us proposing to issue

122 124
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 an LPN in this way, especially as we are in the middle

2 of a DD process (Similarly for OMG Western financing).

3 This is something for Vitaly to decide.»

4 Do you recollect there being a concern at that time

5 as to the effect upon the EBRD potential fundraising of

6 EBRD learning that you were doing other fundraising in

7 parallel?

8 A. As far as I remember, KIT Finance had a meeting with

9 EBRD even, so they discussed that. So I think it was

10 a joint — at least one joint meeting of EBRD and

11 KIT Finance, because KIT Finance at that time was one of

12 the leading Russian structured, or corporate finance

13 organisation, and a question of reputation and conflict

14 of interest was of key importance. So I think, as far

15 as I remember, we had joint meetings and discussions and

16 we were planning how to do that.

17 Q. And what did you decide?

18 A. I don’t remember how it’s — or what’s happened.

19 Because I think I was not a party of that meeting. It

20 was a meeting of KIT Finance directly with EBRD.

21 Q. You can see in relation to OMG Western Terminal,

22 Mr Parker attached a copy of the information memorandum;

23 do you see that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And he said:

1 Bank of St Petersburg, Dmitry — I don’t remember his

2 family name.

3 So I’ve been discussing all these things with the

4 head of — maybe … no, he is not here, not in

5 the correspondence. I discussed everything with the

6 head of KIT Finance, corporate finance department. It

7 might be some lack of information between them.

8 Q. And if you see —

9 A. But as far as I understood, actually, it’s the

10 difference, just one or two days, what’s the difference

11 in the correspondence.

12 Q. And if you look at the top of that page, Mr Parker says

13 to Mr Kozak:

14 «Do you have any comments on this?

15 «If we are going to proceed with LPN, then we will

16 need to inform EBRD (and potential OMG Western

17 investors).»

18 Do you see that?

19 A. Yes, and what I said, KIT Finance had a meeting with

20 EBRD and had all these discussions.

21 Q. So it became clear, didn’t it, Dr Arkhangelsky, that

22 each of these potential set of lenders was going to have

23 to be told about the other potential lenders; that’s

24 right, isn’t it?

25 A. In respect to LPN for sure, yes, because actually the

125 127

1 «This has recently been issued to banks in London

2 that have signed Confidentiality Agreement.»

3 Do you see that?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Then he said at the foot of the page:

6 «Once you have considered the information in this

7 e-mail then I suggest we arrange another conference call

8 to discuss how we move forward with this, as clearly

9 these transactions are all interlinked.»

10 Do you see that?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Then if we move up to {D67/1042.2/2}, taking these

13 e-mails in the chain in their order, getting later as we

14 go on, you can see that Mr Kozak wrote back to Mr Parker

15 saying:

16 «Thank you for your e-mail.

17 «It is new and very useful information for us.»

18 Can you see?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. It looks, doesn’t it, as if KIT Finance hadn’t been told

21 about these other two OMG financing initiatives before

22 this point?

23 A. No, I think maybe Mr Kozak was not, but my key person

24 was Dmitry … Dmitry— the person who was running the

25 afterwards corporate finance at the

1 idea was to separate all three projects, and I cannot

2 see that there were any limitations, so all necessary

3 and compulsory disclosure had been done in that process.

4 Q. Was there a problem with disclosing to one lender what

5 you were doing with another lender?

6 A. Not really, no. We were absolutely open to all the

7 foreign lenders, all the lenders in Russia. I have been

8 more or less on a daily basis informing

9 Bank of St Petersburg and V-Bank about all these

10 developments.

11 Q. If we go, please, to the first page of that chain,

12 {D67/1042.2/1}, you can see that somebody, I think from

13 KIT Finance, Natalya Tsalobanova, e-mails on

14 1 September 2008 to Mr Parker. I think you are copied

15 in, along with Mr Bromley-Martin. She said this — and

16 the subject is «LPN structure», so that’s the

17 KIT Finance proposed structure, and «EBRD/Vyborg & OMG

18 Western»:

19 «Keith,

20 «This is very important issue and to develop

21 an acceptable solution we scheduled a meeting with

22 Vitaly for tomorrow. After the meeting we will revert

23 on this question.»

24 Can you see that?

25 A. Yes.

126 128
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Q. If there was the need for a solution, that rather

2 implies that there was a potential problem here, doesn’t

3 it?

4 A. No, it’s not a problem, but the question that when we

5 were starting discussions with any of the lenders or any

6 of the consultants, we had a lot of confidentiality

7 agreements and so to avoid — that was the problem, so

8 just to inform each and every about each and every

9 project, so there were not any problems.

10 Q. Can we go to {D67/1042.1/1}, please, and Mr Parker had

11 sent this e-mail to you, Dr Arkhangelsky, on

12 27 August 2008, copied to Mr Bromley-Martin.

13 A. So it’s a few days before the letters we just discussed.

14 Q. That’s right.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. But around the same time. He said this:

17 «Vitaly,

18 «I attach a note from Oxus regarding the KIT/LPN.

19 I have discussed this with Oxus and agree with their

20 comments.

21 «In essence, the LPN would cross over both the

22 EBRD/Vyborg and Oxus/OMG Western projects.»

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. «If we proceed with the LPN in September, then both the

25 EBRD & Oxus projects would most probably fail.»

1 So knowing the potential placement or lending for

2 the company, such players, like KIT Finance, for

3 example, they could issue the bridge for half a year

4 prior we would enter into the more large and long term

5 financial arrangements.

6 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, bridge financing is, as you rightly

7 say, normally a temporary form of financing?

8 A. All financing is a temporary form of financing.

9 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, I think you know what I mean by

10 that. Bridge financing, as the name suggests, is

11 usually a temporary financing solution as a bridge

12 between two other positions; that’s what it means, isn’t

13 it? It’s a bridge, a sort of stopgap, normally, isn’t

14 it?

15 A. Normally a bridge financing is a financing up to half

16 a year, which is done by the investment bank prior the

17 placement of any equity or loans is done.

18 Q. But, Dr Arkhangelsky, bridge financing is normally more

19 expensive, isn’t it, than longer term financing?

20 A. Different types of financing having different pricing;

21 depends on the security and the validity of

22 the contract.

23 Q. And why would OMG need bridge financing in the autumn of

24 2008?

25 A. Because we had — we were entering into the new

129 131

1 Can you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Does this trigger any recollection, Dr Arkhangelsky, in

4 the sorts of problems that were emerging at this time in

5 this regard?

6 A. No, the difference between LPN and a lot of financing is

7 that LPN is considered to be short term lending compared

8 to any EBRD or BNP Paribas issues. So in case we

9 managed to get short term financing by LPN, we —

10 actually LPN is more expensive in any respect than other

11 instruments, so we were prepared to start with fast, or

12 what you call in the financial world, bridge financing,

13 so we could consider LPN as a bridge financing, prior we

14 are entering into any other financial arrangements with

15 the bigger players.

16 Q. So were you proposing at this stage to enter into bridge

17 financing? Is that right?

18 A. I’m telling that LPN is considered to be a kind of

19 bridge financing, or comparatively short term financing

20 compared to other loans with EBRD or BNP Paribas. And

21 by the way, by that time KIT Finance was offering bridge

22 itself, prior to the issuing of LPN note. So it means

23 that they were also offering one more solution which —

24 normally bridge financing is giving up to six months,

25 but it’s given on a more or less immediate basis.

1 acquisitions, like Vyborg Petroleum Company, BSMZ and

2 others. In fact, LPN project with KIT Finance was

3 generally — as you’ve shown us on Friday, was generally

4 oriented on acquisition of new parts of the port, as

5 well as Vyborg Petroleum Company.

6 Q. Could we see, please, {D71/1066/5}. I think we had this

7 on the screen a moment ago. This was the transaction

8 summary.

9 A. This was a draft of the transaction summary, yes.

10 Q. And you can see that the issue date was October 2008 and

11 maturity date was October 2011.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. So this looks like it was three years, not six months or

14 a year, doesn’t it?

15 A. Again, you are insinuating. What I am saying —

16 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky — no, sorry.

17 A. What I am saying — I just want to confirm what I am

18 saying, that any LPN or any project or products done by

19 investment bank assume that inside the whole project,

20 initial funding could be done in the form of bridge

21 financing, replaced later on by the funds coming from

22 the banks.

23 So maturity date is three years, but it does mean

24 that it’s up — it’s compulsory to keep these three

25 years. So we could stop, and — you are absolutely

130 132
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 right, telling that the shorter and less security, the

2 more expensive.

3 So entering into the agreement, for example, in

4 the middle of 2009, with EBRD, we could easily refinance

5 LPN or buy them back on our own account and make, even,

6 financial profit out of that.

7 Q. Could you be shown, please, {D67/1042/1}, please,

8 Dr Arkhangelsky. This, I think, is a copy of the note

9 which Oxus prepared which has just been referred to and

10 sent to you by Mr Parker. We know that because,

11 I think, on the second page you have Mr Bromley-Martin’s

12 initials and «27.8.08» at the foot {D67/1042/2}.

13 Do you have that, Dr Arkhangelsky?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. If we go back to the first page, you can see it says:

16 «Oslo Marine Group.

17 «LPNs and the issues raised by them.»

18 Then about a third of the way down, having referred

19 to the KIT Finance proposal to issue LPNs,

20 Mr Bromley-Martin says this:

21 «The three major issues here are:

22 «1. Parallel funding for Vyborg with EBRD.

23 «2. Extent of the security being sought.

24 «3. Use of Cypriot company.»

25 Can you see that?

1 by EBRD. And we never actually been telling or

2 suggesting that all three financing, three modes of

3 financing, would be running at the same time. We

4 assumed that, in case we are more successful with one of

5 them, some changes could be implemented in others. So

6 everything could be flexible.

7 Q. If we go, please, to the second page, {D47/1042/2} we

8 see at the top of the page Mr Bromley-Martin saying this

9 in relation to his second point. His second point was

10 about the extent of the securing being sought. He says:

11 «In the current market, the level of security is

12 bound to be higher than hitherto, and we have concerns

13 as to whether the security for the proposed $300 million

14 funding, provided by the Western Terminal itself, will

15 be sufficient for lenders. While we are making every

16 effort to avoid this, other Group assets may have to be

17 pledged to meet a potential lender’s requirement.»

18 Can you see that?

19 A. Yes, this letter just confirmed that we had a lot of

20 different discussions trying to choose the most optimal

21 solution which would accommodate three different options

22 of international financing, and that’s one of the advice

23 I got from Robin Bromley-Martin.

24 Q. But, Dr Arkhangelsky, doesn’t it show that OMG had

25 over-borrowed, had overstretched itself, and was,

133 135

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Then he sets out Oxus’ view of the situation and he says

3 this under number 1:

4 «EBRD, as with any commercial bank, will be very

5 surprised to hear that $75 million is being raised to

6 fund Vyborg, as the two ‘fundings’ will be running in

7 parallel as to timing of the Due Diligence,

8 documentation and closing.»

9 Can you see that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Did you understand, or did you appreciate why

12 a commercial bank would be surprised to hear —

13 A. No, it’s —

14 Q. — about these parallel funding initiatives of your

15 companies?

16 A. I think this is a kind of private opinion of, let’s say,

17 one of my consultants, which I had to consider.

18 What I should say, which is a bit funny for me

19 reading here — actually I don’t remember this letter,

20 but, you know, the use of Cyprus companies for all this

21 funding been offered to us, or it was a compulsory

22 requirement by EBRD. So, you know, each and every bank

23 definitely having their own requirements, but, for

24 example, for this particular concern about Cypriot

25 companies, it was a must, or compulsory condition, done

1 therefore, running out of, or had run out of, valuable

2 collateral to be able to use the security for further

3 loans?

4 A. Not absolutely, because this particular financing of LPN

5 was reentered on new acquisitions, which had very high

6 value and high potentials.

7 Q. Can you look at the third concern of Mr Bromley-Martin,

8 «Use of Cypriot company»?

9 A. Yes, what I just explained, that use of Cypriot

10 companies —

11 Q. I haven’t — I am going to ask you a question —

12 A. — was a compulsory requirement by EBRD.

13 Q. And why was a Cypriot company being used by you at that

14 stage?

15 A. What I said, that it was a compulsory requirement of

16 EBRD of structuring this.

17 Q. What, that you had to use a Cypriot company?

18 A. We — around that time —

19 Q. Sorry, are you saying that EBRD stipulated that you must

20 use a Cyprus company?

21 A. Yes. Actually the structure we had, what we disclosed

22 in our disclosure statement, on the freezing order,

23 including the family trust in BVI and Cyprus companies,

24 that was — as I said already today, that was

25 a requirement by EBRD, and I think it was done in —

134 136
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 I think in September/October 2008, so let’s say one or

2 two months after that letter. Then Clyde & Co created

3 that corporate structure, which could be, and which was

4 planned to be, used specially for the purpose of EBRD

5 financing.

6 Q. But why Cyprus in particular, Dr Arkhangelsky?

7 A. Because that was the condition and requirements of EBRD.

8 So for us it was not — you know, we could go anywhere

9 in the world if EBRD says: this would be the standard,

10 our underwriting guidelines.

11 So they suggested us this scheme, then we had a lot

12 of discussions with Clyde & Co, Clyde & Co being

13 reliable English lawyers, and we decided to accept that.

14 I couldn’t see any difficulty in case the finance would

15 be structured through Cyprus and BVI.

16 Q. And you see, Dr Arkhangelsky, what Mr Bromley-Martin

17 says in the penultimate paragraph; he makes some further

18 recommendations.

19 A. Sorry, which paragraph?

20 Q. Can you see «Further recommendation», just over halfway

21 down?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. He says:

24 «It would be seen as a well prepared company by

25 potential lenders if OMG were to develop a framework for

1 Q. Did you actually ask Clyde & Co to draft

2 an intercreditor deed?

3 A. No, because after discussions with KIT Finance and other

4 consultants, I decided that, at least at that stage, it

5 was not necessary.

6 Q. Was that because you were never going to draft

7 a document whereby one lender would be told borrowings

8 of other lenders? In other words, you were keen to keep

9 each lender to OMG isolated and compartmentalised; is

10 that fair?

11 A. No, what I said, that each and every project had to be

12 financed on the project basis and no recourse to any

13 other lender, and that could be easily structured, so

14 I can see — it’s quite a standard approach for big

15 holdings when each and every bank, or each and every

16 investment bank, financed different parts of different

17 projects.

18 Q. Could you be shown, please, {D67/1053.2/1}. If we could

19 scroll down to the second page, please — actually, if

20 we have the first page up, we can show the e-mail chain.

21 The first page is an e-mail of 4 September 2008 from

22 Ms Tsalobanova to Mr Parker, copied to you. It says:

23 «Keith,

24 «Thanks for your responses — they are very helpful.

25 «We revert on this tomorrow.»

137

1 all the debts, and the security provided to lenders now

2 and in the future.

3 «Where a company uses a significant amount of debt,

4 it is custom and practice to have an agreement, often

5 referred to as an ‘Intercreditor Deed’, detailing out

6 the priority of any potential claims that lenders may

7 have over a business, in the event of such a claim or

8 claims. It is a very complex document, by its very

9 nature, and can take weeks to put together.»

10 And he recommends that you retain Clyde & Co to

11 start work on drafting such a document, doesn’t he?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. An intercreditor deed would show, wouldn’t it,

14 Dr Arkhangelsky, one lender the extent of the borrowing

15 by relevant borrowers from other lenders, wouldn’t it?

16 A. I don’t know. I never seen such a deed.

17 Q. So you don’t know that that’s what it would do?

18 A. No, but the general idea was that each and every of

19 three projects would be financed separately on

20 a no-recourse basis, let’s say. That was a general

21 condition of EBRD and BNP Paribas, so that if they

22 finance one project, so then there are not any recourse

23 to any other Russian banks on any other projects. So

24 that could be easily structured by the lawyers of

25 the Bank.

139

1 If you scroll down to the second page,

2 {D67/1053.2/2}, you will see that Mr Parker had on the

3 same day e-mailed answers to her and to the same group

4 of people.

5 Can you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And he said this:

8 «I have not discussed this with EBRD, but I think

9 that the following would be their position:

10 «1. Internally we have two questions in connection

11 with EBRD loan:

12 «— pledge of receivables from Vyborg — where they

13 can be used during the first three years?

14 «I’m not sure I fully understand the question, but

15 I will explain the position. EBRD require the bank

16 accounts for all Vyborg Port income to be pledged to

17 EBRD.»

18 Can you see that?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And then he goes on to say the reason for that, and then

21 he said:

22 «When the Term Sheet was produced some months ago,

23 the OMG structure was not made clear to EBRD. The

24 intention of EBRD is that the borrower is the owner of

25 Vyborg Port land and Vyborg Port equipment.»

138 140
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Can you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And he says:

4 «If the size of the loan is to be $250 million, then

5 this will obviously increase the gearing ratio of OMG

6 group of companies and the existing gearing concerns of

7 EBRD (and other banks) will be increased as well.

8 We have not agreed the [covenant] on this aspect.»

9 Then he refers to a potential intercreditor

10 agreement.

11 Do you see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, doesn’t this show that at this time,

14 the banks were concerned; banks that came across OMG

15 were concerned at the gearing, in other words the

16 borrowing, of the OMG group?

17 A. No, not really. We had a lot of internal discussions

18 which have been shown by you now and we think that the

19 KIT Finance was quite a good consultant, and by the end

20 of that month, most of the questions have been — we

21 found a reply to most of the questions, and which were

22 comfortable to everybody involved.

23 Q. And in the event you did not go through with the — the

24 LPNs never came off, did they?

25 A. After the Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy in the — around

1 So theoretically speaking, we could return — in

2 normal circumstances we could return to that option any

3 time in spring, summer, whatever, 2009, for example.

4 Q. Could you go, please, to your witness statement at

5 {C1/1/56} —

6 A. And I’ve been keeping contact — now I remember the

7 name — with Dmitry Volkhov, head of the team of

8 KIT Finance, so they were quite active in the market and

9 they were trying to find the proper vehicle to continue

10 their business.

11 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, we have checked on Sue Barrett at the

12 EBRD; do you remember I asked you about Sue Barrett?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And you had quite a clear recollection of quite a big

15 man?

16 A. Yes, as far as I remember, yes.

17 Q. Yes. We’ve checked on the internet and there’s

18 an interview with her talking about the — is there

19 a new railroad, a diameter road in St Petersburg?

20 A. Sorry.

21 Q. Ring road; was there a new ring road in St Petersburg?

22 I think called the diameter —

23 A. Yes, two, at least; two roads, yes, in St Petersburg,

24 yes.

25 Q. And there is an interview with her on YouTube and we see

141 143

1 19 September 2008, it immediately created trouble for

2 the KIT Finance, and I think KIT Finance stopped their

3 operations, at least for some while.

4 Q. But you never went back and managed successfully to

5 raise money through this particular route, did you?

6 A. KIT Finance stopped operations by the end of September,

7 but the team of — but the bank was shortly bought by,

8 I think, Russian railroads, or something like that, and

9 we were still going through negotiations with their

10 ex-director, and they were thinking that at some stage

11 we can come back to that issue.

12 The fact that this team of people been employed by

13 the Bank of St Petersburg, it’s also quite

14 an interesting fact. So Bank of St Petersburg collected

15 the best corporate finance team and employed it for that

16 Bank.

17 Q. So it’s right, isn’t it, though, that the KIT Finance

18 fundraising initiative, that also did not result in any

19 raising of funds for the OMG group?

20 A. Not result —

21 Q. It’s a yes or no.

22 A. — it’s not resulted at that time, but we kept this

23 option because one of the major advantages of LPN

24 projects, or products, is that that money could be given

25 more or less overnight.

1 what she looks like. I am afraid it is only on my

2 learned friend Mr Birt’s computer, but I wonder if you

3 could hold it up. Could you play that, please? You

4 will see Sue Barrett on this. This is 2013.

5 A. Maybe, maybe, I don’t remember.

6 Q. Wait a minute. It is more dramatic than that.

7 A. Okay, maybe, I don’t remember, but I remember —

8 (Video played)

9 Q. Sorry, just wait a minute. That’s Sue Barrett.

10 A. I don’t remember. If it’s written there … I remember

11 that I —

12 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, I asked you earlier —

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. His Lordship explained to you that «Sue» was normally

15 a female name.

16 A. Maybe, I don’t know, yes.

17 Q. And you seemed quite sure in your evidence that it

18 wasn’t a woman; it was a fairly big man.

19 A. I remember that I was presented to a rather big man, who

20 had been — I don’t remember his position, but he was

21 considered one of the top executives of the Bank and he

22 had, from my recollection, more or less the same name,

23 so …

24 Q. He was called Sue Barrett as well, was he?

25 A. No, no, no, no. I don’t remember, but it is

142 144
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 theoretically possible to check this name.

2 But I’ve been presented to him and he was considered

3 to be one of the top executives of EBRD bank.

4 Q. And, for the transcript, you will agree that the

5 Sue Barrett we have seen on that video is obviously

6 a woman?

7 A. I haven’t seen this movie, but if you say that — it’s

8 written that she’s there, so I accept that.

9 Q. Could you go, please, to paragraph 221 of your witness

10 statement, it is on the screen {C1/1/56}. And you talk

11 about financing from V-Bank.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And you make some claims about financing that might well

14 have come from Vozrozhdenie Bank.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And you say in paragraph 222 as follows:

17 «I believe it is therefore virtually certain that

18 Vozrozhdenie would have provided funds to pay off the

19 Bank’s loans in mid-2009 pending the completion of

20 the refinancing.»

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Do you see that?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Can we have {Day13/102:1}, please. This is the

25 transcript from last Friday of your evidence,

1 A. Which amounts we are speaking about?

2 Q. You are trying to raise money?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Why were you unable to borrow money from V-Bank?

5 A. Because we have quite big limits with them already, and

6 there were not a question at that time of substitution

7 of Bank of St Petersburg loans by the loans from V-Bank.

8 So we were speaking about comparatively big amounts, and

9 in the situation of crisis, as I already just a few

10 minutes ago told you, that none of the privately owned

11 banks in the middle of the crisis didn’t want to

12 increase their exposure and the new loans — new, big

13 loans.

14 Q. You see, you have given evidence that V-Bank withdrew

15 their support for OMG because of pressure by BSP,

16 haven’t you?

17 A. Absolutely, yes.

18 Q. But you have identified — well, V-Bank were still

19 supporting you as late as 2011, weren’t they?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. So any alleged pressure from BSP would not explain why

22 V-Bank would not lend you money before that date, would

23 it?

24 A. V-Bank was lending money to my companies by the end of

25 2011, so you may notice that from 2009 to 2011, V-Bank

145 147

1 Dr Arkhangelsky. Can you see, I was asking you about

2 the financing, do you remember, of the balance of your

3 Vyborg Fuel Company?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And I just wondered, what did you mean — in

6 {Day13/102:2-3} you said this about Svyaz-Bank:

7 «Answer: … They had personal relations with

8 V-Bank, and V-Bank as a private bank, they couldn’t have

9 funds at that time…»

10 So, I took from that answer that you were suggesting

11 that V-Bank didn’t have funds available to help you at

12 that time; is that what you meant by that answer or not?

13 A. No.

14 Q. What did you mean by it, then?

15 A. That V-Bank was a privately owned bank and I think

16 Svyaz-Bank was by that time owned by the government, so

17 any financing or any funds coming from Svyaz-Bank would

18 be, first of all, cheaper, longer, and definitely V-Bank

19 was limiting their new fundings because of the crisis,

20 as all other banks; as, for example,

21 Bank of St Petersburg also did.

22 Q. You have said in your witness statement, paragraphs 221

23 and 222, that you were very confident that V-Bank could

24 give you the funds {C1/1/56}. Why didn’t you get any

25 money from V-Bank, let’s say in 2009?

1 increased their loans two times, so from roughly

2 2 million — RUB 2 billion to RUB 4 billion, which at

3 that time was something like $100 million, I think.

4 So V-Bank was quite eager and active in financing

5 the group, until the moment Bank of St Petersburg

6 created the pressure after the freezing order in BVI.

7 Q. But, Dr Arkhangelsky, going back to your witness

8 statement at paragraphs 221 and 222? {C1/1/56}

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. You are suggesting that financing to pay off the

11 Bank of St Petersburg might well have come from V-Bank

12 in the middle of 2009 to pay off the BSP loans, and we

13 know that V-Bank continued to support you into 2011. So

14 can you explain why you didn’t get some help from V-Bank

15 to pay off the Bank of St Petersburg in 2009, to get —

16 A. Very easy and very understandable, that already

17 in March 2009, Bank of St Petersburg created all these

18 raider attacks and created all these things which are

19 the subject of this counterclaim. So having all this,

20 how could you finance projects if they are in the middle

21 of criminal and mafia games?

22 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, I suggest that there is no basis for

23 you to claim that Bank of St Petersburg got V-Bank to

24 start to withdraw support for you.

25 A. No, no, no, that’s the case, which I’ve been told by

146 148
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Mr Novikov, so I believe strongly —

2 Q. Is Mr Novikov one of your — wasn’t he, or was he some

3 sort of business partner or associate of you or your

4 family?

5 A. I’m referring to cross-examination under the freezing

6 order two years ago, and I told you that we had

7 a company, and I think we still have shares in

8 an agricultural company, Molidjorzny(?), where my wife

9 keeps some shares, and I cannot say that he is any

10 business partner, but I am saying that we kept shares in

11 the same company.

12 Q. And that’s the limit of your business associations with

13 Mr Novikov, is it?

14 A. Absolutely. Absolutely.

15 Q. No other ventures or interests that you might have

16 together, either directly or indirectly?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Ever?

19 A. Ever.

20 Q. Can you look, please, at paragraph 223 of your witness

21 statement at {C1/1/56}. You refer to some meetings with

22 other banks in 2008 into 2009.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And over the page {C1/1/57}, Dr Arkhangelsky, you can

25 see that you refer to meeting Mr Gref, the Chairman of

1 Q. Sorry, what’s the answer to my question?

2 A. No, Guriev has a well known reputation in the market,

3 yes.

4 Q. So do you think that Professor Guriev would be a board

5 member of Sberbank between 2008 and 2014 if there was

6 any basis for him to think that Sberbank was a dishonest

7 or corrupt —

8 A. No.

9 Q. And Mr Gref is the head of the Russian savings bank?

10 A. Yes, absolutely, and I can tell you how it was

11 organised. So referring to the transaction on Friday —

12 Q. I don’t want you to give a speech; I will come to it.

13 A. No, I just want to —

14 Q. No, I’m sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, you have to answer the

15 question. You can do this at the end in re-examination.

16 A. No, but that’s an important issue, that this meeting was

17 organised by Ilya Traber because he wanted me to recover

18 my business while financed by EBRD and to finalise the

19 transaction of Vyborg Petroleum Company. So he called

20 to Mr Gref, organised my meeting in Moscow, and then he

21 also organised my meeting in Singapore with him, so

22 I flew to Singapore to meet Mr Gref.

23 Q. Could you be shown {D126/2005/1}, please. Now,

24 Mr Arkhangelsky, I’m sure you remember this e-mail,

25 because it is one from you to members of your OMG staff,

149 151

1 Sberbank in July 2009?

2 A. In July and in September?

3 Q. And in September, that’s right.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And Sberbank is the Russian State savings bank, is it?

6 A. Yes, it’s the biggest in Europe, in eastern Europe,

7 bank.

8 Q. Presumably that would be a very important bank, wouldn’t

9 it, to look after the savings of lots of Russian people?

10 A. Absolutely.

11 Q. And you would expect it to be run in a very careful and

12 responsible way, wouldn’t you, Dr Arkhangelsky?

13 A. Depends. Depends. I cannot say so, because there is

14 a special reputation behind that and behind that

15 particular person. Do you want me to explain more?

16 Q. No, I am going to ask you questions, if that’s all

17 right?

18 A. Yes, please.

19 Q. Professor Guriev was a board member of Sberbank between

20 2008 and 2014, wasn’t he?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And presumably you have no reason to think that

23 Professor Guriev would be a board member of a bank that

24 he thought was capable of dishonesty and corruption?

25 A. Yes, he’s —

1 I think, on 21 July 2009.

2 A. Yes, can I see it in Russian, please.

3 Q. {D126/2005/3}. Do you just want to read that to

4 yourself to remind yourself of it, so we don’t take too

5 long with your acquainting yourself with the contents.

6 Thank you.

7 Please let me know when you have finished reading

8 it, Dr Arkhangelsky. (Pause)

9 A. Yes, absolutely, everything is correct and like it was.

10 Q. So by this stage you had left Russia, hadn’t you?

11 A. Yes. I came exactly for one day because Mr Traber, who

12 was a long lasting partner of Gref — because Mr Gref

13 was for some while head of the property committee of

14 St Petersburg Government, while working with Putin. So

15 Mr Traber had a lot of deals with Mr Gref that time, and

16 he has organised me this meeting, and I risk myself.

17 I went for one day to Moscow to meet Mr Gref because

18 I thought that, having the influence of Traber, or

19 Antiquar, as he is told in the criminal world, on

20 Mr Gref, I thought that it may solve all my questions,

21 all my troubles with Bank of St Petersburg, because

22 definitely Traber and Gref, who had been minister,

23 I think, of finance, or Vice Prime Minister of

24 the Russian Federation, he had been a well established

25 person.

150 152
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Q. In the e-mail, you recount that you had a productive

2 meeting with the management of V-Bank and with

3 Mr Novikov?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And you talk about the proposed development of Vyborg

6 Port via government funding?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And then further on you say: {D126/2005/1}

9 «… for now VTK and the Khlebokombinat were not

10 discussed.»

11 What did you mean by that phrase? What were you

12 talking about then? Is that the Vyborg Fuel Company,

13 «VTK»?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Why were you telling your staff that that was not being

16 discussed?

17 A. It was not discussed in Vozrozhdenie Bank because it had

18 to be discussed in Sberbank because that was the key

19 point for my visit, because Mr Traber, who was the owner

20 of Vyborg Petroleum Company, wanted to introduce me to

21 Sberbank to finalise transactions with him on Vyborg

22 Petroleum Company. So that was his personal interest.

23 Q. What’s the reference to Khlebokombinat? What is that

24 about?

25 A. It’s the neighbouring — I think you have it in

1 I think you just said —

2 A. No, I’m saying that I have not discussed that.

3 Q. Yes, I know that here, I hear. But the reference —

4 A. Yes, because everybody remember — no, no.

5 Q. — is to a potential —

6 A. No, because everybody remember that we went to some

7 transactions, including Vyborg Petroleum Company and

8 this bread production factory, which is, in fact,

9 a small piece of land next to Vyborg Port, neighbouring

10 with the Vyborg Port, and everybody in my office thought

11 that in case we can finalise that transaction —

12 Q. Yes?

13 A. — it would create additional security and additional

14 business for Vyborg Port, first of all.

15 Q. Yes, if you were to be able to buy the bread factory?

16 A. No, to finalise, because we signed contracts, we made

17 even prepayments, some, but it have not been realised.

18 Q. But the counterparty, the seller, was

19 Bank of St Petersburg, was it?

20 A. No, no, no, seller was Bank Viking, as far as

21 I remember. Viking.

22 Q. I thought you said a moment ago that

23 Bank of St Petersburg — oh, sorry, in St Petersburg,

24 sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, it is my fault.

25 Can you see —

153

1 investment memorandum of KIT Finance. It’s — Vyborg —

2 there is a name there.

3 Q. I am waiting for your answer, keep going. Try and think

4 back, because I am not sure what it means.

5 A. It’s —

6 Q. Is it an asset or a project or …?

7 A. It’s — the name is mentioned in one of the acquisitions

8 of KIT Finance, and the name there is — reference there

9 is VHKP. Vyborg bread production factory, or something

10 like that.

11 Q. Where was that?

12 A. It’s just next to Vyborg Port.

13 Q. And which company owned that?

14 A. It’s owned by the Bank in St Petersburg.

15 Q. Was it owned by an OMG company?

16 A. No, it was a plan to purchase that, and it was in

17 the plan of LPN, what you were showing me on Friday.

18 Q. And that was still being discussed as at July 2009?

19 A. Yes, because that was not — the owners had some

20 problems with documents, so it was a long lasting

21 transaction.

22 Q. So in July 2009, you were discussing potentially buying

23 a factory from the Bank of St Petersburg?

24 A. No, I was — sorry.

25 Q. Sorry, sorry. You obviously didn’t refer to the —

155

1 A. I’m sorry, can we have a short break, please?

2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

3 A. I am waking up today at 4.00, so I am a bit tired.

4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, we will have a ten-minute break,

5 then.

6 (3.15 pm)

7 (A short break)

8 (3.27 pm)

9 MR LORD: Dr Arkhangelsky, I was asking you about that

10 e-mail, do you remember, the e-mail of 21 July 2009?

11 {D126/2005/1}

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And if you look at the middle of the page, you say this

14 to your staff?

15 A. Can you show me? Yes.

16 Q. «The question of a discussion with state bodies was

17 posed (by Litvina and I) —»

18 A. Sorry?

19 Q. It’s halfway down the e-mail.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. «… about the possibility of working up OMG projects

22 with possible compensatory percentage stakes on credit

23 (or the infrastructure of the project). There was

24 a meeting with Gref. In the course of the meeting

25 discussion of continuing financing by Sberbank of the

154 156
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 development and financing of the OMG Group port project

2 took place. Sberbank’s participation in the financing

3 of OMG was also discussed, as part of a programme of

4 state support, depending on discussion with the

5 President — Gref promised to air this question with him

6 personally. It is important the tomorrow meeting

7 (Wednesday) Putin will be at Sberbank. In this

8 connection [it is notable] that Gref had all of his

9 other meetings cancelled, but met with me.»

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. «Very upset was the Governor of the Krasnoyarsk

12 Territory, Tkachev — he was forced to wait while Gref

13 negotiated with me! Our project will be discussed with

14 Putin — as a large-scale infrastructural regional

15 project.»

16 A. Yes, that’s what Gref promised to me.

17 Q. Can I just finish reading:

18 «Negotiations in the Ministry of Transport were

19 successful, these were about their reply, I believe to

20 the President …»

21 Can you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. «A Good Day to All and a Constructive Mood.»

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, you have alleged that you have been

1 A. No, I flew on first days of June 2009.

2 Q. But the reason you give for fleeing is that you were

3 fearful for your safety; that’s right, isn’t it?

4 A. Yes, safety, especially in St Petersburg, because Russia

5 at that time, and right now, it’s a feudal state, and in

6 each and every city or region, you have absolutely own

7 government and own policy and everything own in each and

8 every region.

9 So I thought in July that even if it’s dangerous

10 generally to come to Russia, but in Moscow it was not

11 that dangerous by that time, because not any new or

12 dangerous criminal cases been started. And I was

13 probably too naive, and I thought that coming under the

14 reference of one big name to another big name, that they

15 can solve all my problems.

16 Q. But, Dr Arkhangelsky, if we look at this e-mail that you

17 sent on 21 July 2009. {D126/2005/1}

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. It looks, doesn’t it, as if your business projects were

20 going to be discussed with the President of Russia?

21 A. That’s what I’ve been told by Mr Gref.

22 Q. And —

23 A. I think that Mr Gref is very much dependent from

24 Ilya Traber, and for Gref enquiry to meet me and try to

25 solve the question was quite important. So that’s why

157 159
1 a victim of state-sponsored persecution, haven’t you? 1 he promised maybe too much, which was not realistic,
2 A. Yes. 2 I think.
3 Q. Persecution by or on behalf of the Russian state or 3 Q. And there was a discussion with state bodies?
4 Russian state bodies? 4 A. Yes, we sent a lot of letters to different — all the
5 A. Yes. 5 possible different state organisations to support the
6 Q. And that that began as part of the Bank of St Petersburg 6 project — my projects.
7 conspiracy; is that right? 7 Q. So do you agree that your claim that you were the victim
8 A. Yes. 8 of Russian State persecution sits uneasily with the
9 Q. From, what, the end of 2008, or the beginning of 2009? 9 contents of this e-mail, which suggest that your affairs
10 A. Russian State heavily been involved in that 10 were going to be positively discussed by the President
11 since August 2009. Then your clients started criminal 11 of the Russian Federation?
12 investigations against me, based on the enquiry of 12 A. No, I don’t think it’s ever been discussed, so it’s
13 Sevzapalians. 13 probably my naive dreams by that time.
14 Q. Now, if you go to your witness statement, 14 Q. So you don’t believe that Mr Gref, who was head of
15 Dr Arkhangelsky — 15 Sberbank, you don’t believe he was genuine when he said
16 A. Yes. 16 he would raise your —
17 Q. — {C1/1/51}. 17 A. Yes, absolutely. He had —
18 A. Which paragraph? 18 Q. Sorry, what’s «absolutely»? Do you agree? Are you
19 Q. Actually go to {C1/1/48}, please, paragraph 187, there 19 doubting what Mr Gref had led you to believe he would
20 is a heading, «My departure from Russia». 20 raise with the President?
21 A. Yes. 21 A. Yes. I think so, yes.
22 Q. And you claim that you fled Russia in fear in 22 Q. You doubt Mr —
23 around June or July 2009, don’t you? 23 A. Yes.
24 A. Yes. 24 Q. So you think he was misleading you, do you?
25 Q. So presumably — 25 A. Absolutely, yes, because I think he also was unfair of
158 160
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Mr Traber, a well known criminal, so I think he had to

2 meet me just to make a favour for Mr Traber, but he was

3 not planning to do anything for me.

4 Q. So you don’t see anything — you don’t see anything

5 inconsistent between —

6 A. No.

7 Q. — the contents of this e-mail and the reference to

8 state bodies and the President of the Soviet Union —

9 sorry, the President of Russia —

10 A. No.

11 Q. — looking into your affairs —

12 A. No.

13 Q. — and possibly helping you on the one hand —

14 A. No, no, no.

15 Q. — and your allegation that you are a victim —

16 A. Yes, I’m a victim, yes.

17 Q. — of Russian State —

18 A. Absolutely, yes.

19 Q. Can I finish?

20 Could you go, please, to — could you please go to

21 your witness statement at {C1/1/57}, and paragraph 224,

22 please, Dr Arkhangelsky, where you have given some

23 evidence about the possibility of selling off various

24 assets if you had had to raise money through that route;

25 can you see that?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. — to Mr Savelyev on 18 March 2009; is that right,

3 Dr Arkhangelsky?

4 A. Can I see the Russian, please?

5 Q. Certainly. Yes, that’s come up on screen now. Do you

6 remember writing this letter?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. You say — you are writing to him. You say to

9 Mr Savelyev:

10 «We have conducted an analysis on the status of

11 certain non-profile assets owned by Oslo Marine Group,

12 in particular …»

13 And then you list four, don’t you?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. So you were suggesting to Mr Savelyev, weren’t you, in

16 this letter, that certain assets of OMG could be sold in

17 order to generate some funds?

18 A. Yes, and actually by that time I think Savelyev and

19 the Bank already taking care of — taken over

20 Sestroretsk project, which was a part of Insurance

21 Company Scandinavia assets.

22 Q. These were not very valuable assets you were offering,

23 were they, Dr Arkhangelsky?

24 A. They were very valuable assets. They were located in

25 the best regions of the City of St Petersburg, and —

161 163

1 A. Yes, absolutely.

2 Q. You couldn’t have sold any of these assets by June 2009,

3 could you, on any view?

4 A. Why?

5 Q. Because it wouldn’t have — it would have taken about

6 a year to sell them, wouldn’t it?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Do you want to go to paragraph 225? Do you want to read

9 on down? Do you want to reconsider that last answer?

10 Or not?

11 A. I had a number of options and, actually, what I’ve been

12 offering to the Bank of St Petersburg, including

13 Mironova and Savelyev, I thought, and I was suggesting

14 them, that they would buy this to close the loans — the

15 loan agreements we had. So my major target was to sell

16 it to the Bank of St Petersburg, and by doing this to

17 close relations with that bank.

18 Q. Could you go, please, to {D115/1671/1}.

19 A. And, by the way, to support my position, this project

20 been sold to V-Bank in five or six months. So they’ve

21 been sold to V-Bank by August/September 2009. So, in

22 fact, I sold them to V-Bank in four to five months, in

23 fact.

24 Q. {D115/1671/1} and {D115/1671/3} in the Russian, you will

25 see a letter from you —

1 Q. Sorry, my question wasn’t — their value as collateral

2 was little, wasn’t it, because they’d either been

3 pledged or they were of low value?

4 A. No, I don’t think you are right. No, you are not right.

5 Q. Shall we look at them? The first one you offered up,

6 the multi-storey mixed use development, that’s a hotel,

7 isn’t it? That was a hotel, wasn’t it, a hotel project?

8 A. No, that’s a piece of land on the circle road which has

9 not been mortgaged. So it was a really good asset which

10 been bought with great pleasure by V-Bank in 2010 or

11 2011.

12 Q. There is a table of OMG assets at {D110/1573/1},

13 Dr Arkhangelsky.

14 A. Can I have a Russian version of that, please?

15 Q. Yes. Yes, the Russian version starts at {D110/1573/11},

16 I think. Has that come up on screen?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. You see, if you look at the first of the assets you were

19 offering in this letter to Mr Savelyev, it looks like it

20 was a 50,580 square metre plot, doesn’t it?

21 A. Yes, 5 hectares, yes.

22 Q. And if you go to {D110/1573/9}, you see under item 11.1,

23 something that looks as if it meets the description of

24 that site?

25 A. Can I have a Russian version, please?

162 164
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 Q. Yes. It’s on {D110/1573/15}.

2 A. Sorry, it’s … Yes, it is.

3 Q. And in the right-hand column, the right-hand column of

4 this table —

5 A. So it’s 11.1?

6 Q. Yes, and in the right-hand column of this table it

7 suggests that the asset has been — it is encumbered, so

8 it has been pledged; is that right?

9 A. I don’t think so.

10 Q. You are not sure?

11 A. I’m nearly sure that it was not pledged, because as far

12 as I remember, this asset has been bought by V-Bank for

13 something like RUB 900 million in the process of

14 restructuring of Vyborg loans in 2010 or 2011.

15 Q. Right, and if we go to the second of the assets you

16 offered, which was the Sestroretsk project.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. You can see, if you go to item 14, please, which is on

19 {D110/1573/9} in the English, and {D110/1573/15} in

20 the Russian, it looks like it was a land plot of some

21 600 square metres; is that right?

22 A. No.

23 Q. How big was it?

24 A. It was 2-something hectares.

25 Q. And how much was that worth, do you think?

1 That’s towards the foot of the page; can you see that?

2 A. I think what is meant here, that especially Solnechnoye,

3 Gatchina and Novosaratovka, which is the first one,

4 I think references that, for example, in Solnechnoye

5 we were planning to build a finalised construction of

6 the flats.

7 So I think here is the reference that in Solnechnoye

8 we would need from 12 to 14 months to finalise

9 construction there and sell each and every flat

10 independently.

11 Q. But you say here:

12 «… the realisation of the given assets will take

13 from 12 to 14 months.»

14 Don’t you? Was that true, Dr Arkhangelsky?

15 A. It’s a question for the translation. So «realisation»

16 also means realisation of the project; so I don’t know

17 what’s been meant here, but I’m nearly sure, for

18 example, that for Solnechnoye, the plan was to sell each

19 and every flat separately, and it would mean that

20 we would sell it to the private owners and then get the

21 necessary funding.

22 Q. But if we go back to your witness statement at

23 paragraph 225 at {C1/1/57}, you refer to this letter and

24 you exhibit it.

25 A. Which paragraph?

165 167
1 A. I suggest you to refer to Madame Simonova’s valuation, 1 Q. 225.
2 and it been, whatever, €100 million, or dollars, or 2 A. Yes.
3 whatever, so it’s a rather big amount. 3 Q. And you seem to be endorsing the contents of what you
4 Q. And the next one, the Tankistov Street, the third one in 4 told Mr Savelyev in that letter of March 2009.
5 the letter, that seems to be number 6.1 in the schedule, 5 A. Yes.
6 so that is {D110/1573/7} in the English, and 6 Q. So you seem to be telling Mr Savelyev in March 2009,
7 {D110/1573/13} in the Russian, and it looks as if this 7 according to your evidence, that you expected the sales
8 was also — 8 to be completed within 12 to 14 months, and you asked
9 A. Which number? 9 him to agree to extend the group’s loans to enable them
10 Q. 6.1. It looks as if this was pledged, doesn’t it? 10 to take place.
11 A. In Solnechnoye — 11 A. I think what I’ve been saying here that there were
12 Q. Yes. 12 several options: that the Bank was buying it for
13 A. — we had at least three or four pieces of land, so I’m 13 themselves, or they wait while I sell it — finalise
14 not sure — first of all, I don’t remember if anything 14 their projects, for example Solnechnoye was most
15 had been pledged, but at least some other assets are not 15 promising from these projects where I was planning to
16 mentioned here. So it’s just one. So we had a — 16 build individual houses and flats, and by realisation of
17 I don’t remember, three or something, pieces of land in 17 this, I meant to sell these flats and houses and get
18 the same area, and here is only one mentioned. 18 money out of that. So that was the business plan.
19 Q. But isn’t it land plot 2? Doesn’t it match up with 6.1? 19 Q. It was going to take about a year, and you wanted
20 A. No, 6.1 in Solnechnoye Village, you are referring here 20 Bank of St Petersburg — you were using or, rather, you
21 to just one piece of land, but we had at least two, or 21 were asking them to extend things for a year.
22 even three, pieces of land there. 22 A. I was suggesting them different options. If you
23 Q. If you go back to the letter, at {D115/1671/1}, please, 23 noticed, I disclosed in the disclosure process quite
24 you said in this letter that the realisation of these 24 a number of different presentation of each and every
25 assets would take from 12 to 14 months, didn’t you? 25 individual project and was suggesting to the Bank just
166 168
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 to reduce their exposure, to take — to buy from me some

2 of the projects, just to reduce their volume of loans.

3 Q. If you look at paragraph 224 of your witness statement,

4 please, {C1/1/57}, you say, in the last sentence:

5 «As a last resort I would even have been prepared to

6 sell Vyborg Port.»

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. But it is right, isn’t it, that Vyborg Port had been

9 fully pledged to V-Bank at that time?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. So what would the value be, the residual value for —

12 A. Official value, which been done by Lair by that time, or

13 some other independent valuers, was RUB 15 billion. So

14 RUB 15 billion, and it was mortgaged in the volume of

15 2 billion, as far as I remember.

16 Q. So on your evidence, in March 2009, OMG was in financial

17 difficulties, wasn’t it, in March 2009?

18 A. In March 2009 we’ve been already under the raiders

19 attack and we lost our assets, and directors — by the

20 end of the month, directors of the company has been

21 already replaced.

22 Q. Yes, but Dr Arkhangelsky, your last answer really is

23 that you had Vyborg Port that was worth RUB 15 billion,

24 as valued by Lair.

25 A. Yes. Not only Lair —

1 even to do — to sell that — even Vyborg Port to

2 the Bank of St Petersburg. But to avoid all the

3 troubles they created. But they were not interested in

4 doing that because they were in the middle of

5 the raiders attack.

6 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, this last answer about the residual

7 value in Vyborg Port surprises me, because when you

8 filed your first affidavit —

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. — in these proceedings, you set out what you said was

11 the value of your assets.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. I wonder if you could be shown {G1/6/1}, please?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. You made this affidavit in response to the freezing

16 order of the English court.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. So can his Lordship take it that you would have been

19 setting out the assets to the best of your knowledge and

20 belief in this affidavit?

21 A. Yes, of course.

22 Q. And you deal with Vyborg Port.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. At {G1/6/5}, can you see you said this, at

25 paragraph 13.1:

169 171
1 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky — 1 «Shareholding in Oslo Marine Group Ports LLC,
2 A. — but by at least three different valuation companies. 2 a company registered in the Russian Federation under
3 Q. And you had, it was mortgaged or pledged to V-Bank to 3 company number … based on Russian law, my wife and
4 secure an amount of RUB 2 billion. 4 myself are the beneficial owners of 50 per cent of
5 A. Yes. 5 the company’s shares each. This company is the owner of
6 Q. So that asset had spare collateral value, on your 6 the Vyborg Port. The company does not do any
7 evidence — 7 business — it just holds the asset — Vyborg Port. On
8 A. Yes. 8 14 April 2009, GVA Sawyer provided us with a gross
9 Q. — of RUB 13 billion. 9 valuation of the Port of Vyborg taking into account
10 A. Yes. 10 assets and goodwill of the company for an amount of
11 Q. Can you tell us his Lordship if that’s right? 11 US $443 —»
12 A. Yes, that’s right. 12 I think that is thousand, isn’t it, or is it
13 Q. Can you tell his Lordship, if you are right about that, 13 million?
14 why you didn’t go on to use that spare value in 14 A. Millions.
15 Vyborg Port to raise money at that time in order to pay 15 Q. «— US $443 million.»
16 off Bank of St Petersburg? 16 A. So what is not correct there?
17 A. I used that, I been in the middle of discussions with 17 Q. «This company has a €120 million loan from [V-Bank].
18 EBRD, so that was another option. So that was actually 18 The assets of the company are fully mortgaged to
19 the primary target, but in case Bank of St Petersburg 19 the benefit of [V-Bank].»
20 would be prepared to take that asset and close down the 20 A. Yes, everything is correct.
21 loans, I would be prepared to do that also. 21 Q. But did you — that suggests, doesn’t it, that there’s
22 So I would be prepared by that time to skip the EBRD 22 no spare value in Vyborg Port that’s not been pledged to
23 project, even if I spent also so many time on preparing 23 V-Bank?
24 that. So I was prepared to sell it to — what I am 24 A. No, I cannot understand your question. First of all, if
25 writing in my witness statement; that I was prepared 25 you were referring to spring 2009, March, so that time
170 172
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 the volume of our loans were 2 billion, which is

2 something like 40, whatever, million dollars or

3 roubles — dollars or euros, or something like that. So

4 the value was absolutely like stated in GVA Sawyer, so

5 433 million —

6 Q. $433 million?

7 A. So this is exactly 15, or something, billion roubles,

8 what I told you a few minutes ago, and by that time it

9 had loans of $40 million. So it means that it was

10 a spare of $400 million.

11 Q. Can you go back to the letter, please, at {D115/1671/1}.

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Are you putting to him that some part

13 of that is incorrect?

14 MR LORD: No, I am not.

15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: In which case I think you need to put

16 it more plainly.

17 MR LORD: No, I am not.

18 {D115/1671/1}, your letter to Mr Savelyev. You are

19 offering up additional collateral, or security, aren’t

20 you, to BSP here?

21 A. No, I think it’s not collateral. That’s — I was

22 suggesting to sell it to the Bank to reduce my loans.

23 Q. It was put to some of the Bank witnesses that there was

24 some suggestion in 2008 that the Western Terminal plot

25 that had been pledged in favour of Bank of St Petersburg

1 you in this letter, is there, that actually there is

2 some additional collateral value within Western

3 Terminal?

4 A. Yes, because at that time the Bank was a full owner of

5 that through their vehicle. So you remember that

6 in December, January 2009, they got all the shares and

7 all the assets, and by the time of this letter they

8 already replaced directors.

9 Q. Could you be shown {D118/1804.1/1}, please. This is

10 a document from the defendants’ disclosure. It says

11 «Profile of leading Sea Port Group of companies in

12 Russia», OMG, and then KGT, can you see, April 2009?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And if you go to the second page, {D118/1804.1/2}.

15 A. I think it’s a draft, you are referring to some draft,

16 yes. As far as I understood, this was just a draft and

17 this never been finalised and never been presented to

18 any financing parties.

19 Q. But it looks from {D118/1804.1/2} that OMG was at least

20 considering selling, or taking in, a potential strategic

21 investor; can you see?

22 A. I was thinking about any possible options and I had

23 a lot of meetings and discussions, and this company,

24 KGT Capital, I think they got our name from ex-employees

25 of KIT Finance, and I think some of them came from

173 175

1 might be split up, because of its value, so as to free

2 some extra collateral for OMG to use in other respects.

3 A. What I think, I said on the first day of

4 the cross-examination, that it was in August

5 or July 2008, it was initial agreement with the

6 Bank of St Petersburg that the mortgage value of

7 Western Terminal would be RUB 4 billion. But they said

8 that instead of advancing all 4 billion, so they’ve

9 given us 1 billion — I think we are speaking about the

10 fourth Vyborg Shipping loan — while keeping the rest of

11 the value for other projects; and I’m referring here to

12 two letters signed by Mr Guz in the English language,

13 addressed to the shipbuilders, that they were able and

14 they would be providing export credit guarantees for

15 something like €100 million. So I’m referring to

16 the letters signed by Mr Guz, dated beginning

17 of August 2008.

18 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, is it your evidence that there was —

19 that the Western Terminal, the pledged Western Terminal

20 assets had sufficient value in March 2009 that there was

21 additional security, or additional collateral value

22 beyond that which Bank of St Petersburg —

23 A. Absolutely. Absolutely, yes. And the valuation report

24 at that time done by GVA Sawyer strongly confirmed that.

25 Q. There’s no mention in this letter, or no suggestion by

1 KIT Finance, and they were suggesting to re-do

2 investment memorandum done by KIT Finance or by Oxus,

3 and they were thinking that they may be able to offer

4 any interesting solutions. So I’ve been offered — I’ve

5 been opened for any possible options.

6 Q. In the event no equity, no investor came in, did they?

7 A. Sorry?

8 Q. No investor invested in OMG?

9 A. They have not — as far as I understood, they have not

10 approached or finalised anything, because already in end

11 of March, beginning of April, it started a big scandal

12 in the Russian press about conflict with the

13 Bank of St Petersburg. And money loves silence, and you

14 cannot really attract any new funding or any new

15 investors when you have a huge scandal ongoing with the

16 criminal cases and raiders attacks and police and so on.

17 Q. Now, is it your evidence that, let’s say,

18 in November 2009, by which time I think you have moved

19 to France, haven’t you, by November?

20 A. I moved to France in the beginning of September, first

21 days of September 2009.

22 Q. And according to you, you were fleeing from

23 state-sponsored persecution; is that right?

24 A. I was afraid, yes.

25 Q. Of the Russian State?

174 176
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 A. Yes, absolutely.

2 Q. In November 2009 you seem to take part in an exhibition

3 in the USA.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Put on by the Chicago — in Chicago, put on by the

6 Russian Federation.

7 A. No, it was Russian days in Chicago, so it was a Russian

8 National Exhibition in Chicago, and I came there and it

9 was a kind of Russian national presentation. It was

10 a minister of industries of the Russian Federation, and

11 it was a big presentation of Russian businesses, yes.

12 Q. You disclosed — at {D134/2199/1} you disclosed what

13 looks to be a presentation —

14 A. Yes, I made a presentation, yes.

15 Q. A slide presentation.

16 A. And I also made a similar presentation in Singapore on

17 the visit of Russian delegation in September, and

18 I think in October I went to Beijing while it was

19 a Putin visit there and I wanted also to make

20 a presentation. So I made a presentation there also,

21 yes.

22 So it was at least three big major international

23 Russian events in Chicago, Beijing and Singapore, where

24 I came from Nice that time.

25 Q. Can we have, please, on the screen, {D196/2924/1}.

1 partly by the American side. It was a huge exhibition

2 centre in Chicago and I’ve been, actually, coordinating

3 all my efforts with the Americans.

4 Q. Do you think, normally — would you say that normally

5 somebody who was the target of Russian State-sponsored

6 persecution would be welcome at a trade exhibition put

7 on by the Russian Federation?

8 A. Why not? It was a lot of emigrants there, and Chicago

9 is well known for especially Jewish(?) emigration and so

10 on, so it was quite a number of Americans and Russians

11 who have been living there was interested to hear what

12 is really going on in Russia.

13 Q. And can you see, obviously that page I showed you has

14 a greeting from the Mayor of Chicago, at the bottom.

15 A. Yes, he is a very nice man. I met him personally, and

16 it was really a very interesting discussion with him.

17 Q. And at the bottom there, there is a greeting from the

18 Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian

19 Federation.

20 A. No, this person was not participating there, because

21 I think by that time he was replaced. It was

22 Mr Manturov, and I’ve been sitting with — on

23 the same — I’ve been in among the speakers and I’ve

24 been sitting [next] to him at the Chicago exhibition,

25 yes.

177

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Sorry, {D196/2941/1}. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky.

3 A. You don’t have it on the computer?

4 Q. If I could hand you up a hard copy. There it is. If

5 I could hand this up to his Lordship. (Handed)

6 Dr Arkhangelsky, would you like a hard copy or would

7 you rather work from Magnum?

8 A. No, the screen is very good for me. Yes.

9 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, this seems to be some sort of

10 invitation, or announcement, of this exhibition

11 in November 2009 in Chicago?

12 A. It’s called Russian National Exhibition, for sure, yes.

13 Q. If you look at the top of page, and just confirm this is

14 the exhibition that you attended in November 2009, isn’t

15 it?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. At the top it says «Russian National Exhibition,

18 18-21 November 2009, Chicago, [Illinois]».

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. «Organised by the Ministry of Industry and Trade of

21 the Russian Federation.»

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. So this was an exhibition organised, at least in part,

24 by the Russian State; is that right?

25 A. Partly by the State, by the Ministry of Industries, and

179

1 Q. It looks like it is a sort of event where certain people

2 are invited to appear on panels; would that be right?

3 A. You just tell that you want to make a presentation and

4 send the presentation and they choose, yes.

5 Q. And presumably you would have to send your CV in,

6 wouldn’t you, or you would have to explain who you were?

7 A. No, not really, I just explained my project and what —

8 they’d been accepted. And we had — Vyborg Port had

9 a very big partner in Chicago called rail — I don’t

10 remember the exact name, but it’s a big rail investor in

11 Chicago who is investing in railroads in Eastern Europe.

12 So, by the way, I came to know about this exhibition and

13 this event from our American colleagues.

14 Q. And if you go to page 4 of this, so {D196/2941/4}, you

15 can see that the session on 18 November 2009 —

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. — between 11.30 am and 1.30 pm:

18 «Logic of Investments in Russia and USA:

19 infrastructure, industry, agriculture.

20 «The Moderator is Victor Grishin, Rector, Russian

21 Economy Academy in the Name of … Plekhanov.»

22 A. Yes, I’ve been sitting next to him, I had a coffee with

23 him and even a glass of champagne, and discussed what’s

24 happened to me. And I’ve also been speaking to

25 the first person, Ivan Materov, I changed — I missed

178 180
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 the name, the deputy minister of industry, and I even

2 exchanged letters with them. My idea was to meet some,

3 let’s say, decision-makers, and tell my story that these

4 feudal people in St Petersburg just taking over very

5 good and successful businesses. So my idea was I was

6 stupidly naive just to tell them that it was a mistake

7 and I have to — they have to rethink about that, so

8 I done that.

9 And, as I said, I went to Singapore in April —

10 Q. No, I don’t want to ask about that, Dr Arkhangelsky.

11 I want to ask, as you know, I want to ask about this.

12 I want to ask about you appearing on a panel —

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. — at an exhibition —

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. — arranged by the Russian Federation.

17 A. By both Russian Federation and American — local

18 American Chamber of Commerce, I think.

19 Q. At a time when you claim — when you claim — to have

20 fled from Russia —

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. — in fear of Russian-sponsored persecution.

23 A. Absolutely, yes. My idea was to, as I said, meet

24 Russian decision-makers from the top of the government

25 to tell that it was an enormous raiders attack and local

1 ministers of your claims, of your claims to being

2 persecuted; is that right?

3 A. Not various. The only person there was Mr Materov, who

4 was a vice minister. That’s right, I talked to him,

5 yes.

6 Q. And what did he say to you?

7 A. He said what I just explained you, that he never heard

8 this story, so he would think, and write me a letter, so

9 I wrote him a letter and I never got any reply.

10 Because Matvienka considered to be one of the top

11 state executives, most closest to Putin, so now

12 I understand that nobody from the government would

13 intervene in her private business, like the

14 Bank of St Petersburg and her private assets.

15 Q. I must suggest, Dr Arkhangelsky, that it is difficult to

16 reconcile your claim to be persecuted by the Russian

17 State on the one hand, with your being, in effect,

18 invited to share a platform with Russian ministers on

19 the other. It is difficult to reconcile, isn’t it?

20 A. No, it’s not like this. It’s not me who invited.

21 I paid the participation fees, and it was a normal

22 commercial exhibition, so I paid the participation fee,

23 which was quite big, I think something like €1,000 or

24 something like that, and, you know, I tried to use any

25 opportunity to solve this absolutely unfair situation.

181 183
1 mafia in St Petersburg who was violating national rules 1 So I had a belief that there is a rule of law in
2 and national legislation. 2 Russia and so — and if you remember, by that time I was
3 Q. Dr Arkhangelsky, you were listed formally as 3 winning in courts, before Matvienko made an intervention
4 a participant in this panel, weren’t you? 4 in the third level of the court. By that time I was
5 A. I think so. I can’t see my name here, but … 5 winning the Russian courts, which is quite surprising
6 Q. Sorry, if you go on the next page, you can see that 6 for me now, but I thought that if I win the courts and
7 there are a list of people who look as if they are going 7 prove to the government representatives that it was
8 to present this session. 8 a mafia attack, a raid, then it can change the
9 A. Yes. Yes. 9 situation.
10 Q. And the last name is you, isn’t it? 10 Q. So you were winning in the Russian courts at this stage,
11 A. Yes, yes, absolutely, yes. What I have just told you. 11 were you?
12 Q. Can you reconcile your claim that you were fearful of 12 A. Yes, I got on — I think on Western Terminal I got first
13 Russian State persecution in November 2009 on the one 13 and second level of the court, made a judgment that
14 hand, with flying to America to take part in this sort 14 shares to be returned to me and the transactions were
15 of official Russian event on the other? Can you 15 illegal.
16 reconcile those two positions? 16 Q. Yes, and how do you reconcile your winning in
17 A. Yes, absolutely, because I want to bring my message to 17 the Russian courts at this stage with your being
18 the people who are decision-makers, so deputy minister 18 a victim of state-sponsored persecution, because I think
19 of industries, he could be theoretically the key person 19 you say that all the Russian courts —
20 who can take a consideration of my case. I even sent 20 A. The major, major state-owned persecution, by the way,
21 a letter to him after returning back to France, but to 21 started by the beginning or middle of December 2009,
22 which I never got a reply. But he said, yes, he has not 22 then they started this criminal search for me.
23 heard about the situation and he would rethink about 23 So until, whatever, 13 December 2009, I was
24 that, and so on. 24 formally — I was not in any search, so they started to
25 Q. So your evidence is that you told various Russian State 25 search me. It means that they started what they call
182 184
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 a federal search, so it means that if I cross the

2 Russian Federation border then I would be immediately

3 arrested.

4 Then, half a year after, in 20th, or something like

5 that, May 2010, they decided to make an arrest on me and

6 put me in Interpol. So …

7 So the major efforts of Russian State to take me

8 back to the country started from the decision of

9 the criminal court of Kalininsky region of St Petersburg

10 in end of May 2010.

11 Q. So the real effects of what you allege to be the State’s

12 persecution, they didn’t really start until May 2010; is

13 that your evidence?

14 A. No, no, no, no, no. In December 2009, something like

15 10 December, Levitskaya, Colonel Levitskaya, who was the

16 in-house policeman of the Bank, she started — she

17 included me in the federal search database, and it means

18 that from something like 10 December 2009, if I crossed

19 the Russian border I would be immediately arrested.

20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I need to get this straight, I think.

21 Are you saying that until December 2010 —

22 A. 2009.

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Until 2009, your concern was about

24 what you have called — and I make no comment

25 otherwise — the St Petersburg mafia were after you, but

1 belief that there are good people in the Federal

2 Government and just gangsters on the level of

3 St Petersburg, corrupted gangsters on the level of

4 St Petersburg.

5 But now, what I see now and all the developments

6 during all these years, I see that I was absolutely

7 naive. Absolutely naive.

8 I can just give you one very small but funny

9 example. It was, I think, two years ago, here in

10 France, in Sorbonne University. It was a lecture of

11 Mr Bastrykin, who is the kind of head of Russian FBI.

12 There is a video on that on YouTube done by some local

13 people.

14 On the video I told him my story; I told him

15 about — and he is considered to be one of the persons

16 who have to struggle with corruption. I told him this

17 story and his reply was that: I may come deep in your

18 subject if you help me with extraditing Ablyazov to

19 Russia.

20 So, you know, it’s kind of a strange game. But if

21 you are interested somehow, there is a good video on

22 YouTube where I told him this story. He was not

23 surprised on this story, but he said that he would be

24 able to help me only in case I help him — I don’t know

25 how — to extradite Ablyazov from France to Russia.

185 187
1 thereafter — I will start again. 1 MR LORD: So your evidence is that there was a change —
2 Until then, the St Petersburg mafia, you for some 2 your concern was initially about St Petersburg and then,
3 time thought that maybe the Federal Government would 3 more broadly, the Russian Federation generally. Is that
4 intervene, but there came a time, and I want you to 4 right?
5 refresh me when that time was, that you considered that 5 I want to be quite clear, Dr Arkhangelsky. This is
6 the Federal Government was going to be after you as 6 a very serious thing to allege. I want to be quite
7 well? 7 clear that you have alleged that Bank of St Petersburg
8 A. Yes. 8 is behind all this?
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that right? 9 A. Absolutely.
10 A. Yes, absolutely. So — 10 Q. So to be quite clear, what you are saying —
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And when was that time? 11 A. Yes, and I can explain you why: I sent many, many
12 A. Absolutely. You see, let’s put it this way: in autumn, 12 letters to the general prosecutor of Russian Federation.
13 in winter/autumn 2008 — sorry, 2009, let’s say 13 I’m speaking about July, August, September, October,
14 from September to December. I had not had, by the way, 14 November, December 2009. So the first time in
15 any information, so it’s now when we — 15 emigration I thought that there were good people in
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: September to December 2009? 16 the Russian Government who can help me, and I sent many,
17 A. So in December 2009, around 10 December 2009, I have 17 many letters to the Minister of Police, to President
18 been included in the federal search list. 18 Putin — or whoever it was, Medvedev — to the Prime
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right. 19 Minister, it was Medvedev; to the general prosecutor,
20 A. So since that time, I’ve been completely under the full 20 and it’s not only me. Some of my employees, like
21 operation of the State machine. 21 Mr Vinarsky, for example, he was also writing these
22 But definitely I came to know that a bit later. 22 letters.
23 It’s definitely all these steps been undertaken 23 So normally it should be the Russian Government,
24 secretly, but I was, you know, I was 34 years old, so 24 having all the facts and documents, they had to make
25 I was stupid and young and naive, and I had a strong 25 an investigation. But what they have done, all these
186 188
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 documents been sent to Colonel Levitskaya and she was

2 becoming even more angry and telling to Mr Nazarov about

3 that I would be killed and so on, so quite a number of

4 funny things.

5 Q. Can we go in your defence, please — sorry, not in your

6 defence but in your pleading, {A1/2/48} to what you say

7 about persecution by the Russian authorities. I may

8 have to come back to this, Dr Arkhangelsky, but just in

9 the light of those answers you gave to his Lordship’s

10 question, I just want to draw your attention to the way

11 in which you have alleged this persecution in your

12 statement of case.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Can you see in paragraph 165, it is under the heading,

15 «Persecution by Russian authorities».

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And you have said:

18 «The takeover of the Companies was accompanied by

19 a campaign of unlawful persecution of the Defendants by

20 Russian authorities.»

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. «It is averred that the persecution was coordinated

23 between the Claimants and corrupt Russian officials,

24 known and unknown, who thus were a party to

25 the conspiracy.»

1 «Since early 2009, the Defendants were subjected to

2 systematic harassment by the police and Interior

3 Ministry officials.»

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. When you talk about the interior ministry, are you

6 talking about the general interior ministry, or are you

7 just talking about St Petersburg?

8 A. St Petersburg, of course.

9 Q. So should you have made that qualification in this bit

10 of your pleading, or not, because the implication there

11 is —

12 A. Does it make any difference? I don’t think so.

13 Q. If you go over the page to 167, you say: {A1/2/52}

14 «The harassment became particularly intense

15 since June 2009 …»

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. «… when the First Defendant publicly appealed to

18 the then President of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev …»

19 A. Yes, because I written in — your Lordship —

20 Q. Sorry, Dr Arkhangelsky, it’s a timing point, because you

21 have now put the Russian Federation persecution I think

22 in December 2009, and I am just wanting you to compare

23 the dates here to see whether or not that is

24 inconsistent with your evidence; do you see?

25 A. No, it’s not inconsistent.

189

1 Do you see that?

2 A. Yes, and Mr Piotrovsky, whom I am referring to, been

3 unemployed from the police, but he is working now in

4 the interests of the Bank.

5 Q. So your pleading is that this persecution accompanied

6 the takeover of the company; so that would be back in

7 the spring of 2009, wouldn’t it?

8 A. Spring, and mainly in 20 June 2009, then the police

9 taking over Western Terminal. I don’t know if

10 your Lordship seen disclosed video of how riot police

11 are taking over Western Terminal, but I also given —

12 just in case, I also given this video. So it was one of

13 my employees; he was making video from the telephone, so

14 nobody was really aware of what was going on, and there

15 is an evidence that takeover —

16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Was that disclosed to the …?

17 A. Yes, absolutely, absolutely, absolutely. What we found

18 out, that there were not any video files or audio files

19 loaded into the Magnum system; that’s why I just brought

20 it, you know, in case you want to make better look into

21 that.

22 But there is factual video evidence how the police

23 taken over control of Western Terminal, 20 June 2009.

24 MR LORD: If you go, please, to {A1/2/51}, you say this at

25 paragraph 166:

191

1 Your Lordship, in end of June 2009, I written

2 message in Dmitry Medvedev — I don’t remember he’s

3 President or Prime Minister at that time. So I written

4 a message in his private blog, so he was running his

5 private blog. Normally, you know, it’s a very serious

6 moderation before, you know, any private person would

7 publish anything in his blog. So — but I don’t know

8 how, but my message about these gangsters from

9 St Petersburg appeared in his blog. So it been

10 moderated and it was included in his blog.

11 So it was a big scandal in the press. Quite

12 a number of major Russian newspapers, they just cited it

13 and so on.

14 So, just after that, and I was writing that:

15 Mr President, or whatever, Mr Prime Minister, there is

16 a local mafia who is just taking over, together with

17 police, best local private business.

18 So the newspaper has taken it over; I given quite

19 a number of interviews and so on, on the telephone, of

20 course, and just after that it started the mess, so it

21 was Colonel Levitskaya with a huge team of people, she

22 was — it was harassment.

23 So she was calling me even on my mobile, asking that

24 I should finish — what she called — I should finish my

25 vacation from imprisonment and come back to the place

190 192
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 I have to stay, and so on. And she was explaining me

2 very carefully that unless I would come back to Russia

3 and go to the prison, otherwise I would be simply killed

4 by the Bank. So that was her precise message.

5 So she was calling on my mobile on weekends, she’s,

6 you know, she always been quite drunk and so on. So

7 it’s a very special group of people devoting their life

8 to this prosecution, illegal prosecution, of normal

9 people.

10 Q. And that seems to be from the middle of 2009, does it;

11 that’s when it intensified, is that right, this

12 persecution?

13 A. As I said, it started immediately after I published

14 a message in the Medvedev blog.

15 Q. So, according to your — well, when was that?

16 A. I think it was something like last days of June 2009, or

17 first days of July.

18 Q. Right, so it is likely, isn’t it, by that stage, you

19 would have come to the attention of the Russian

20 Federation? You were trying to get yourself known,

21 weren’t you, at a higher level, really?

22 A. Not necessarily. It’s middle of summer, vacation

23 period, so I don’t think so …

24 Q. Can you go back. Can you explain why, if you are right

25 about the persecution, why you thought that it would be

1 don’t have anything to do, you understand that you have

2 been a rich person, now you are not able to buy, you

3 know, even good food by that time.

4 So I tried to use any opportunity to find a solution

5 from that situation. So I couldn’t think that I am

6 struggling like Don Quixote with the windmills, what

7 everybody tells me now, so nobody believes that I would

8 have any outcome of big struggle.

9 Q. And you went back to Moscow on 21 July 2009, didn’t you?

10 A. Yes, because I’d been told by Mr Traber that it’s a real

11 opportunity; I have been prepared to risk my life;

12 I have not been properly warned that I should not do

13 this, and if you remember the part of the story that my

14 wife came to St Petersburg, 1 September 2009, to give

15 evidences in the court of St Petersburg, and you

16 remember that she had to take a taxi to go to Finland.

17 So, you know, she still, on a rather regular basis,

18 reminds me that it was me and Mr Vasiliev who could

19 create real trouble for our family and nobody could even

20 imagine what could happen. So we are lucky that she

21 managed to take a taxi and escape from Russia that time.

22 So since that time we understood that we are not

23 able to come back any more.

24 Q. Can you look at {C1/1/30}, please. I want to pick up

25 some points from your witness statement. At

193 195
1 all right for you to go to the November 2009 Chicago 1 paragraph 118 you deal with your knowledge of the Bank’s
2 exhibition? Can you not see that there’s something 2 refinancing plans, and you suggest that you had regular
3 a bit odd — 3 meetings with the Bank’s management to keep them
4 A. No, no, no. 4 informed?
5 Q. — about somebody on the one hand who is scared of 5 Can you see that?
6 the Russian State — 6 A. Yes, absolutely.
7 A. Yes. 7 Q. Can I suggest that you didn’t admit to the Bank of
8 Q. — on the other going and mixing with lots of — 8 St Petersburg just how bad things were with the OMG
9 A. You think it is dangerous to go to Chicago for a regular 9 finances?
10 person? 10 A. No, no, it was very good finances, and Mr Belykh, he
11 Q. Did you not think — did you think that you would be 11 considered to be a specialist in valuation and business
12 welcome in the — 12 planning and so on, so he was — I should say he was
13 A. I’ve been welcomed, so people — Americans, you know, 13 heavily supporting my projects and he was really helpful
14 I got a very good impression of Americans who wanted to 14 that time. The same actually relates to Mr Guz.
15 develop any type of business with Russians, so I got 15 Q. And you have said in paragraph 119 that the Bank was
16 very positive impression, and such type of conference 16 apprised of your development plans. I’m just going to
17 allow to have, let’s say, non-official discussions with 17 suggest to you that none of those plans ever
18 the officials. 18 materialised, did they?
19 So my position was to use any opportunity to try to 19 A. They couldn’t be realised finally because I left the
20 recover myself, to bring my family back to Russia, 20 country, and the company — or I lost the control, or
21 maybe, that time. So I thought that the situation still 21 even — not only legal control, but I lost practical
22 could be changed, because you should understand that 22 control of the companies, how could it be realised.
23 I’ve been 34 years old, I had a family, I had to work, 23 Q. And as a result, your various financing initiatives, we
24 I had to feed the family, I had to, you know — can you 24 have the Oxus one, we have the EBRD one, we have the
25 imagine just overnight you sit down in the flat, you 25 KIT Finance, you were trying at least three different
194 196
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 ways to raise a lot of money in the autumn of 2008, 1 {Day11/114:4}, and {Day11/182:21} onwards.
2 weren’t you? 2 My Lord, there is a change of subject matter at
3 A. Yes. 3 {Day11/207:10}. I think at that stage we moved off the
4 Q. And none of them came to fruition, did they? Don’t say 4 particular topic to some other item of housekeeping,
5 why, but none of them came off, did they? 5 probably some less interesting technical detail that
6 A. Finally not. 6 I was dealing with, but we were still under the auspices
7 Q. And that left OMG having to try to pay its debts out of 7 of in private. But it was private from {Day11/182:21}
8 its own business income, didn’t it? 8 to the end of the day.
9 A. No, not, because by March, by end of March, I lost 9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Which was?
10 complete control of my businesses because of the illegal 10 MR BIRT: But there was that change of subject.
11 acquisition of the businesses by the 11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What was that page at the end of the
12 Bank of St Petersburg. 12 day?
13 Q. And by the end of October 2008, in those circumstances, 13 MR BIRT: The end of Day 11, it would have been
14 OMG was having to borrow money from Tekno in order to be 14 {Day11/213:25}.
15 able to pay the monthly bills? 15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
16 A. I’m not sure if it’s true because I have not personally 16 MR BIRT: Then Day 12, which was 18 February, it was
17 been involved in any discussions with Tekno, and I have 17 {Day12/1:3} to {Day12/8:13}. Then there is the passage
18 not even been told about the necessity of doing this. 18 that your Lordship was considering over the weekend, at
19 MR LORD: My Lord, I am going to move on to another topic. 19 {Day12/112:2} to {Day12/121:11}.
20 I see the time. I lost a bit of time this morning, 20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And the position is, as regards all
21 I didn’t start my cross-examination in fact until 10.55 21 those passages, that you are neutral as to whether or
22 in the event, but I am conscious that it is 4.30. It 22 not they are made public?
23 has been quite a long day for everybody. I don’t know 23 MR LORD: That’s my clients’ position.
24 whether your Lordship might sit a bit earlier tomorrow 24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
25 to try to recover that or whether you would rather keep 25 MR LORD: My Lord, there may be an issue. There may be
197 199

1 going?

2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, Mr Arkhangelsky was up early

3 this morning, 4.00, I understand, so I want to call

4 a halt now.

5 MR LORD: Yes.

6 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, I am really tired, yes.

7 MR LORD: I am sure that’s right.

8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How does 10.00 am suit you?

9 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Very good. Very good.

10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that what you are asking for,

11 Mr Lord?

12 MR LORD: It is, my Lord.

13 MR ARKHANGELSKY: You mean 10.00 tomorrow morning?

14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 10.00 tomorrow morning.

15 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Very good.

16 Housekeeping

17 MR LORD: My Lord, there are one or two housekeeping matters

18 I think I must address today, just very briefly.

19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, and are going to give me some

20 page references for the transcript.

21 MR LORD: May I let Mr Birt do that, and then I will deal

22 with one matter at the end?

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Of course, yes.

24 MR BIRT: We think the references that were referred to as

25 in private were 17 February, {Day11/94:10} to

1 an issue. I mean, your Lordship is right to note that,

2 as I said earlier, people may express themselves in that

3 environment in a freer way, or a different way, than may

4 otherwise have been done, but I don’t think that that is

5 a reason for any objection to be made, and as far as my

6 clients are concerned, they are content for that

7 material to be made public.

8 Your Lordship will see the contents of the exchanges

9 and the comments that have been made. That is obviously

10 a matter for the court as to how that matter — how that

11 should be addressed in those circumstances.

12 MR BIRT: My Lord, I was just going to mention one of

13 the points that was raised at the end of last week, if

14 it is a convenient point to do so, to do with the audio

15 recordings.

16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Oh yes.

17 MR BIRT: I know this was a point we were asked to look into

18 and I said we would come back as soon as we could.

19 There is a slightly involved history, which I shall

20 just run through, because it just sets the context. The

21 proceedings have been recorded, by which I mean both the

22 proceedings in London and the proceedings here, and we

23 have the audio of the English and the audio of

24 the Russian. If I can just quickly take each of those

25 in turn.

198 200
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 In relation to the London recordings in English,

2 those have been recorded. They can be synced to

3 the transcript and listened to on Magnum; in other words

4 you can go to the transcript setting on Magnum and you

5 can find a sort of play button and you can read through

6 the transcript and listen to the audio at the same time.

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think this was mentioned to me

8 before and I gave permission for them to be accessed,

9 providing that they weren’t generally dispersed.

10 MR BIRT: My Lord, exactly right. We discussed this at one

11 of the housekeeping hearings towards the start of

12 the trial, and your Lordship did give that permission,

13 I think perhaps because we all dealt with it on the

14 basis that your Lordship had given permission in court.

15 It doesn’t seem to have been implemented yet by Opus 2,

16 but that has been discussed with them over the weekend

17 and we have received confirmation that that function

18 ought to be operating during the course of today. So

19 that should now be up and running.

20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.

21 MR BIRT: Insofar as the Russian audio of the London parts

22 of the hearing, that is also being recorded, by the

23 contractor who is providing the interpretive technology,

24 and it is not possible, we understand, to host the

25 Russian audio in precisely the same way as the English

1 file on Magnum, and we would suggest it’s provided on

2 the same basis as your Lordship noted in relation to

3 the English audio, namely to be listened to but not to

4 be disseminated further. But Opus 2 would again

5 require, I am told, your Lordship’s written permission

6 to upload that onto the Magnum trial bundle. But they

7 have agreed, subject to that, that that can be done.

8 There will just need to be a logistical arrangement

9 between the people who record it in London and giving it

10 to Magnum and so on.

11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I mean, the copyright in that and the

12 possession of it not being a court record is a matter

13 for you and Magnum. All I am concerned is that I shall

14 take as the only record of the proceedings, so far as

15 the court is concerned, the English translation, which

16 has been made available by official interpreters. The

17 reason I raise this is because in another context, with

18 Mr Pugachev, there was an issue as to checking the

19 Russian translation after the events, and months after

20 the events, against the English translation. So it is

21 something I am slightly wary of, I think. Just for

22 certainty, I think the record has to be the record which

23 is in the English version.

24 MR BIRT: My Lord, yes, and we respectfully agree with that,

25 and that should be clearly understood by all concerned,

201 203

1 audio, by which I mean as a synchronised playback with

2 the transcript on real time. The transcript, of course,

3 is only in English and not in Russian. But there is

4 a work-around, I understand, which is that the Russian

5 audio can be uploaded into a new volume of the trial

6 bundle in Magnum so it can still be accessed; it’s just

7 you won’t be able to have it running from the transcript

8 in English, alongside the Russian audio. You can get

9 them both up and read along with them if you want, and

10 you can read one and listen to the other, but there will

11 be a separate audio file you can access on Magnum —

12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But what is the status of that? That

13 is not the record of the court.

14 MR BIRT: I think that must be right. The record of

15 the court is in English, although to the extent that the

16 witness is speaking Russian and so something has been

17 said in the court, there may be a question as to whether

18 that is then part of the court —

19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think then the transcript, the

20 English translation, is the record of the court.

21 MR BIRT: Yes. On reflection, my Lord must be right about

22 that. My Lord must be right about that because the

23 court is only going to take into account the English

24 translation of it.

25 But the Russian can be provided in a separate audio

1 my Lord, yes.

2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

3 MR ARKHANGELSKY: My Lord, we had only a question if we are

4 allowed to hear — it was a question if we have a chance

5 to hear this audio, because for us, for me and for my

6 wife, definitely it is faster if we hear the Russian

7 translation.

8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand that, and I am disposed

9 to give the permission, though they require it in

10 writing, if all other persons interested in

11 the translation are agreeable, but I warn you that

12 whilst, of course, if there were some mistake which was

13 identified early on — early on — we could ask the

14 interpreters, whose view on this would be definitive, to

15 have another look at it. The only reason for my

16 permitting this would be to inform you and your wife,

17 not to make it available generally, nor to open the gate

18 to subsequent dispute as to the record of the court. Do

19 you see what I mean?

20 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, yes, sure.

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Otherwise, months hence someone would

22 say: they didn’t use that word, and there is then

23 a difficulty.

24 MR BIRT: My Lord, in relation to the recordings that are

25 being taken of these hearings here in Paris, there is

202 204
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 a similar pattern. The English audio, Opus 2 has a copy

2 of that, so, again, that can be uploaded for the same

3 sort of synchronised feedback facility as Opus 2 will do

4 for the London recordings, subject to dealing with any

5 parts of the transcript that remain in private, so

6 subject to your Lordship resolving that issue. And

7 I understand that that won’t create any problem; it will

8 just need to be resolved. There is some sort of dubbing

9 or blanking mechanism which can be put over the relevant

10 part of the audio recording, if that is consistent with

11 your Lordship’s direction, whatever that ends up being,

12 as to the transcript.

13 So it is not a problem; it just means they won’t be

14 able to do it until we have the other issue sorted out.

15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Now, as to that, the official record

16 when sitting in England in the Rolls Building is the

17 DARTS system; that is the record of the court. And

18 I assume that when we are sitting in England, everything

19 is rolling away on the DARTS system. To what extent can

20 these proceedings, since DARTS is not operating, be

21 loaded up on to whatever the court says is the DARTS

22 system, or some court acceptable substitute for it?

23 MR BIRT: From a technological point of view, I’m afraid

24 I can’t answer that on my feet. But I imagine

25 there wouldn’t be an objection to the English version of

1 caused a bit of stirring in the courts.

2 MR BIRT: I imagine the answer, subject to checking the

3 technology side of it, and that everyone who has a stake

4 in it is content with it, will be that the record can be

5 preserved in whichever form is most appropriate and

6 fulfils all the requirements, my Lord.

7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you very much.

8 MR BIRT: In terms of Magnum, the question is whether, if

9 there are any parts remaining in private, one has those

10 scrubbed from the Magnum audio or not. But,

11 technologically, it can be done either way. One may

12 return to it after we know the answer on the

13 transcripts, my Lord.

14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right.

15 MR BIRT: Anyway, those will be dealt with after the

16 transcripts point is sorted out.

17 The Russian, in relation to the Paris recordings, is

18 similar in the sense that it is being done.

19 I understand similar written permission is required, and

20 then that can be uploaded and then a similar

21 consideration to be given as to what, if anything, is to

22 be scrubbed for the in-private bits.

23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So I will be provided with some

24 written form, acceptable to all, as to be the form of my

25 written permission?

205 207

1 these proceedings being uploaded onto that system so

2 that one has the record in that form, subject to

3 checking with the usual stakeholders, copyright holders

4 and so on —

5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I will give a bit of — I am so

6 sorry.

7 MR BIRT: I was simply going to add that if the system on

8 Magnum is going to have those parts in private which are

9 audibly redacted, one may still need that audio

10 available, somewhere and somehow; I understand that.

11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, the history to this is when the

12 arrangements were being made, quite novel in some ways,

13 as to the record, I required there to be assured, and

14 I think I was assured, that the transcript in England

15 would be on the court record, it being a court of

16 record. All I have to do, assuming that I was correctly

17 informed as to the position in England, is to ensure

18 that the position in France is ultimately assimilated to

19 it.

20 Of course, everything that happens, be it in private

21 or not, unless I have struck it from the record, must be

22 on the record, even if the DARTS system and any other

23 system should identify where the issues were that were

24 discussed in private.

25 Sorry to be pedantic about it, but that, too, has

1 MR BIRT: My Lord, yes; somebody will sort that out for you.

2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Very good.

3 MR BIRT: And in relation to — no, I don’t think I need to

4 tackle the fifth point yet. It arises only on

5 a contingency, so I will ask for your patience to deal

6 with that if we need to deal with it, my Lord. I think

7 those are the only points I need to ask you to take note

8 of now.

9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But I am right in thinking, am I, that

10 there is no Russian written record of what goes on?

11 MR BIRT: My Lord, you are right about that, because the

12 transcribers are English transcribers who are taking the

13 shorthand note in English, my Lord.

14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you very much indeed.

15 MR ARKHANGELSKY: My Lordship, sir —

16 MR LORD: My Lord, there is one final serious point that

17 I do need to raise today.

18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Does your point relate to

19 the transcripts?

20 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Yes, I just wanted to tell you that we

21 are — I don’t know if it’s personal. We are really

22 surprised by the quality of the translators, so we’ve

23 been facing these problems in other —

24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Surprised in that — gratified,

25 pleased?

206 208
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 MR ARKHANGELSKY: It’s quite unusual. It’s quite unusual on

2 both —

3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think it is an absolutely amazing

4 job, as far as I can tell.

5 MR ARKHANGELSKY: It’s not only question of Russian

6 language, but it is also the question of professional

7 translation, so what we just discussed with them in

8 Russian and in English, they were asking some terms and

9 some words —

10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, and they did it well.

11 MR ARKHANGELSKY: — which is really unusual, and I’m really

12 grateful, because that was one of our major concerns,

13 especially in respect of my wife.

14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That is reassuring.

15 Yes, Mr Lord, I’m sorry.

16 MR LORD: No, my Lord, not at all.

17 I have a confidential matter that I need to raise.

18 I would invite the court to sit in private, due to

19 the strict confidential nature of what I would like to

20 apprise your Lordship of.

21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, can it be marked that we are,

22 from hereon, until I say otherwise, sitting in private.

23 (Hearing in private)

24 [REDACTED]

25

209
1 [REDACTED]
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

1 [REDACTED]
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25 (4.48 pm)
211

1 (The court adjourned until 10.00 am on

2 Tuesday, 23 February 2016)

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

25

210 212
Opus 2 International transcripts@opus2.com
Official Court Reporters +44 (0)20 3008 5900

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

1 INDEX
2 PAGE
3 Housekeeping ………………………………….. 1
4 MR VITALY DMITRIEVICH ARKHANGELSKY ……………… 16
5 (continued) …..
Cross-examination by MR LORD (continued) 16
6 Housekeeping ………………………………… 108
7 Cross-examination by MR LORD (continued) …. 118
8 Housekeeping ………………………………… 198
9 (Hearing in private) …………………………. 209
10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

213

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

214

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

A

A1/2/48 (1) 189:6 A1/2/51 (1) 190:24 A1/2/52 (1) 191:13 able (30) 2:4 10:6 14:2 16:1 37:24 41:21,22 45:21

47:16 48:6 57:7,12 57:17 58:4 63:18 70:22 72:22 96:12 107:23 114:8 136:2 155:15 174:13 176:3 187:24 195:2 195:23 197:15 202:7 205:14

Ablyazov (2) 187:18 187:25

absolute (1) 11:20 absolutely (96) 2:8

13:11,18 14:7,7,15 16:13 20:13 23:1,6 23:17 26:10 30:8 30:21 31:2 32:14 33:11,11 34:14 42:15 44:12 48:24 53:1,17 55:8 56:25 57:10 58:19 62:15 64:8,10,11 68:17 69:8,10 70:3,12,25 71:3,10,10,14,15 72:3,3 75:5 77:4,21 77:23 83:3,6,22 84:12 88:5 90:8 100:8 101:20 103:12 104:18,25 112:19 117:12 119:19 128:6 132:25 136:4 147:17 149:14,14 150:10 151:10 152:9 159:6 160:17 160:18,25 161:18 162:1 173:4 174:23 174:23 177:1 181:23 182:11,17 183:25 186:10,12 187:6,7 188:9 190:17,17,17 196:6 209:3

Academy (1) 180:21 accelerating (1) 1:20 accept (7) 7:24 32:19

58:3,5 59:17 137:13 145:8 acceptable (5) 1:10 123:21 128:21 205:22 207:24 acceptance (1) 79:25 accepted (5) 31:13 47:1 64:1 96:4

180:8 accepting (2) 23:14

36:21

access (1) 202:11 accessed (2) 201:8

202:6 accommodate (1)

135:21 accompanied (2)
189:18 190:5 account (5) 61:14

116:18 133:5 172:9 202:23

accountant (8) 96:25 98:25 100:1,4,8 101:22 102:12 104:13

accounting (4) 59:9

60:7,9,9 147:10 149:6 answer (17) 35:17,19 29:3,14,24 32:16 87:16,20 88:18
accounts (12) 59:1,10 155:22 173:8 187:9 48:5,10 76:3 146:7 33:17 34:8 35:10 135:16 161:24
59:19,20 60:14 agree (13) 29:7 36:10 146:10,12 151:1,14 38:1 40:16 43:11 162:2 163:11,16,21
61:5,7,10,21,22 55:19 56:9 66:11 154:3 162:9 169:22 44:13 46:4 48:21 163:22,24 164:12
114:25 140:16 71:5 113:14 129:19 171:6 205:24 207:2 53:12 54:8 56:11 164:18 165:15
accrued (1) 121:25 145:4 160:7,18 207:12 56:20 57:11 58:14 166:15,25 167:12
accumulate (1) 8:15 168:9 203:24 answers (3) 8:11 59:7 64:4 65:7 169:19 171:11,19
accurate (3) 62:2 agreeable (1) 204:11 140:3 189:9 66:19 67:1,10,12 172:10,18 174:20
67:17 86:7 agreed (27) 11:11 anticipate (3) 15:11 69:7 72:16 73:16 175:7 183:14
acquainting (1) 152:5 34:2 35:4,12,17 15:15 78:13 76:3 77:6,19 80:13 assimilated (1) 206:18
acquire (2) 18:5,17 37:15 38:3,6,7,17 anticipated (1) 63:9 81:9 82:15 85:2 assistance (4) 7:10 9:8
acquired (1) 70:17 38:21 46:23 50:13 Antiquar (1) 152:19 86:7,14 87:8 88:17 94:15 99:13
acquisition (3) 122:23 69:14,16 70:9,14 anxiety (1) 113:8 89:6 90:15 91:3 associate (2) 54:2
132:4 197:11 78:20 89:2 106:23 anybody (8) 2:13 6:10 92:11 93:6,11 149:3
acquisitions (3) 132:1 107:1,1,2 110:8,22 13:15,19 25:20 96:22 98:11 101:11 associations (1)
136:5 154:7 141:8 203:7 69:9,9 92:10 104:8,10 105:4 149:12
act (2) 38:18 40:17 agreement (15) 32:18 anyway (2) 91:1 106:22 112:18 assume (14) 13:8,20
acting (1) 80:8 57:14 70:3 79:7 207:15 113:12 114:19,23 28:4,20 34:3 61:25
active (2) 143:8 148:4 95:11,12,17 96:2,4 apparent (1) 114:13 115:3,6,15 116:2,8 65:25 68:16 102:20
activities (1) 30:15 106:21 126:2 133:3 Appeal (2) 7:4 75:16 116:9,19,24 117:1 102:23 103:15,15
activity (3) 75:3,22 138:4 141:10 174:5 appealed (1) 191:17 117:3,20,21 118:3 132:19 205:18
76:1 agreements (4) 63:13 appear (1) 180:2 119:8,17 121:10,24 assumed (2) 68:14
acts (1) 76:21 95:7 129:7 162:15 appeared (3) 13:4 122:10,12 124:14 135:4
add (4) 12:2 59:13,20 agrees (1) 36:25 17:25 192:9 127:21 129:11 assuming (1) 206:16
206:7 agricultural (1) 149:8 appearing (1) 181:12 130:3 131:6,9,18 assumptions (3) 4:20
addition (2) 37:17 agriculture (1) 180:19 appears (4) 12:10 132:16 133:8,13 4:25 64:12
54:12 Ah (2) 33:18 119:13 66:9 86:15,24 135:24 137:6,16 assured (2) 206:13,14
additional (10) 66:20 ahead (3) 31:6 44:14 applicable (1) 109:24 138:14 141:13 attach (4) 5:19 89:16
67:8 104:8 114:20 55:25 application (2) 4:14 143:11 144:12 113:1 129:18
155:13,13 173:19 aim (2) 48:22,25 4:15 146:1 148:7,22 attached (4) 28:11
174:21,21 175:2 aimed (1) 95:17 appoint (1) 41:20 149:24 150:12 89:12 121:24
additions (1) 28:2 aims (1) 48:24 appointing (1) 43:2 151:14,24 152:8 125:22
address (4) 100:10 air (1) 157:5 appointment (1) 155:24 156:9 attack (9) 69:2 76:19
116:10,12 198:18 alert (1) 15:16 36:22 157:25 158:15 77:18 101:18
addressed (11) 20:6,7 allegation (1) 161:15 appreciate (2) 16:17 159:16 161:22 107:17 169:19
20:11,11 21:2,4,6 allege (3) 76:5 185:11 134:11 163:3,23 164:13 171:5 181:25 184:8
22:15 116:8 174:13 188:6 appreciated (4) 46:5 167:14 169:22 attacks (2) 148:18
200:11 alleged (8) 6:21 67:2 46:10,16 56:24 170:1 171:6 174:18 176:16
addressee (2) 20:20 91:12 92:12 147:21 apprise (1) 209:20 178:2,6,9 181:10 attended (1) 178:14
20:23 157:25 188:7 apprised (1) 196:16 182:3 183:15 188:5 attention (7) 3:6 9:17
addresses (1) 117:14 189:11 approach (1) 139:14 189:8 191:20 198:2 11:9 95:2 96:7
addressing (2) 14:24 alleging (1) 76:4 approached (3) 30:9 198:6,9,13,15 189:10 193:19
15:1 allow (6) 3:1 5:1,4 9:1 88:6 176:10 204:3,20 208:15,20 attract (1) 176:14
adjourned (1) 212:1 25:4 194:17 approaching (1) 45:17 209:1,5,11 213:4 attracting (1) 96:6
adjournment (2) 1:19 allowed (6) 13:23 appropriate (5) 1:22 Arkhangelsky’s (2) attractiveness (1)
108:14 26:22 59:16 101:25 12:10 15:14 22:4 116:10,12 76:25
adjudicate (2) 7:21 103:2 204:4 207:5 Armenian (1) 39:21 attributed (1) 72:6
8:6 allowing (1) 75:3 approval (1) 11:18 arose (1) 112:24 audibly (1) 206:9
adjudication (1) 8:1 alongside (1) 202:8 approved (5) 39:14 arrange (1) 126:7 audio (18) 190:18
adjusted (1) 24:3 altogether (2) 38:24 48:2,4 83:15 85:16 arranged (1) 181:16 200:14,23,23 201:6
adjustments (3) 59:13 60:16 approving (1) 34:16 arrangement (6) 38:9 201:21,25 202:1,5
59:16,18 amazing (1) 209:3 April (14) 49:6 65:8 67:2 69:22 71:9,14 202:8,11,25 203:3
admit (1) 196:7 Ameli (8) 65:8 66:4 72:11,21,21 81:1,7 203:8 204:5 205:1,10
adumbrated (1) 15:10 72:12 73:2,4,10,20 107:16,25 108:5 arrangements (4) 206:9 207:10
advance (3) 43:18 114:8 172:8 175:12 71:15 130:14 131:5 August (8) 62:24 88:8
96:12 111:3 Ameli’s (2) 64:25 72:8 176:11 181:9 206:12 124:13 129:12
advanced (1) 107:14 amended (3) 22:23 arbitration (2) 69:3 arranging (1) 36:18 158:11 174:4,17
advancing (1) 174:8 23:10 31:25 105:16 arrest (1) 185:5 188:13
advantages (1) 142:23 America (1) 182:14 archive (1) 25:19 arrested (2) 185:3,19 August/September …
advice (3) 30:6 41:24 American (7) 30:10 area (3) 91:12 96:8 asked (12) 8:3 17:9,18 162:21
135:22 82:3 92:23 179:1 166:18 35:11 43:21 98:19 auspices (1) 199:6
advised (1) 29:18 180:13 181:17,18 argue (2) 20:18 55:15 110:12 113:23 authenticity (2) 3:12
advisers (4) 20:12,14 Americans (4) 179:3 arguing (1) 55:11 143:12 144:12 8:20
37:18 38:19 179:10 194:13,14 arises (1) 208:4 168:8 200:17 author (2) 76:14,20
affairs (3) 66:4 160:9 amount (13) 5:14 Arkhangelskaya (3) asking (15) 16:25 25:6 authorities (4) 75:21
161:11 27:17 53:8 65:17 116:23 117:9,16 46:15 94:15,17,24 189:7,15,20
affidavit (4) 60:18 70:13 74:11 99:13 Arkhangelsky (187) 114:10 123:18,25 automatically (2)
171:8,15,20 120:16 121:25 1:6,25 2:8 3:14,25 146:1 156:9 168:21 109:24 111:9
afraid (7) 45:1 114:1 138:3 166:3 170:4 4:9,13 5:9,24 6:6 192:23 198:10 autumn (4) 56:24
115:7 117:21 144:1 172:10 9:16,21,25 10:2,7 209:8 131:23 186:12
176:24 205:23 amounts (2) 147:1,8 10:11,14,21,25 aspect (1) 141:8 197:1
afternoon (3) 74:1 analyse (1) 54:21 11:3,9 12:11,14 aspects (1) 29:20 available (11) 73:6
110:4 112:11 analysis (10) 30:16,16 13:4,11,13,18 14:7 assessment (4) 46:6 110:14 111:18,19
agencies (1) 11:6 31:1,1,6 90:17 91:4 14:12,15,23,24 46:12 92:15,18 111:20 113:9 123:4
Agency (2) 11:5 95:6 91:11,14 163:10 15:2,23 16:1,13,21 asset (8) 77:3 154:6 146:11 203:16
agency’s (3) 96:11,14 and/or (1) 7:12 16:23 17:21 19:17 164:9 165:7,12 204:17 206:10
96:15 angry (1) 189:2 20:8,11,22 21:20 170:6,20 172:7 average (1) 23:18
ago (10) 6:13 35:3 announcement (1) 23:7 24:13 25:20 assets (30) 69:18 70:9 averred (1) 189:22
71:19 132:7 140:22 178:10 26:15,19 27:19 70:20,21 77:5 avoid (4) 115:12

129:7 135:16 171:2 avoidance (1) 36:21 aware (2) 103:3

190:14

B

baby (1) 102:7

back (46) 1:23 21:18 29:12,13 55:6 59:3 59:24 66:2 68:19 69:16 70:8 71:7 82:14,15 99:25 101:7,17,21 110:13 111:12 114:14 121:5 122:12,14 124:12 126:14 133:5,15 142:4,11 148:7 154:4 166:23 167:22 173:11 182:21 185:8 189:8 190:6 192:25 193:2 193:24 194:20 195:9,23 200:18

backdrop (1) 95:20 background (1) 15:13 backwards (1) 123:11 bad (1) 196:8 balance (1) 146:2 bank (147) 6:14 24:8

24:8 31:2,13 34:19 34:20 38:10,12,23 39:8,15 40:11,19 41:1 44:6 46:20 48:4,14,14,25 49:13,15 50:25 52:23 56:3,7 58:11 58:11,13 63:12,23 64:3 66:18 67:9 69:2,3,5,14,15,16 70:5,6,10,23 71:5,6 71:19 74:4 75:1,4 75:17,22 76:6,12 77:17,23 78:1 79:6 80:7,16,21 81:18 82:22 83:16 85:10 88:20 93:23,24 95:15 97:24 101:19 104:9 106:13,21 107:17 116:18 118:11 120:2,3,3,5 127:1 128:9 131:16 132:19 134:4,12,22 138:25 139:15,16 140:15 142:7,13,14 142:16 144:21 145:3,14 146:8,15 146:21 147:7 148:5 148:11,15,17,23 150:5,7,8,23 151:9 152:21 153:17 154:14,23 155:19 155:20,23 158:6 162:12,16,17 163:19 168:12,20 168:25 170:16,19 171:2 173:22,23,25 174:6,22 175:4 176:13 183:14 185:16 188:7 190:4 193:4 196:7,15 197:12

Bank’s (8) 75:12 76:21 79:9,18 104:11 145:19 196:1,3

bankers (1) 85:9 banking (3) 67:20 85:12 93:22 bankruptcy (2) 47:9

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

215

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

141:25 139:14 143:14 138:14 141:16
banks (31) 18:21 19:4 144:18,19 147:5,8 borrowings (2) 123:1
19:6 23:2,2,19 147:12 159:14,14 139:7
24:12 34:15 38:24 165:23 166:3 bottom (5) 98:3
39:2 41:15 44:5 176:11 177:11,22 103:16 124:23
49:7 51:16 52:4,12 180:9,10 183:23 179:14,17
55:9,9 63:1,24 192:11 195:8 bought (4) 70:19
66:14 97:17 126:1 bigger (2) 64:21 142:7 164:10
132:22 138:23 130:15 165:12
141:7,14,14 146:20 biggest (2) 94:12 bound (1) 135:12
147:11 149:22 150:6 boy (1) 82:8
Barrett (8) 81:21,25 billion (17) 64:17,21 branches (1) 95:10
143:11,12 144:4,9 65:20 74:11 148:2 bread (3) 154:9 155:8
144:24 145:5 148:2 169:13,14,15 155:15
based (12) 4:3,18 7:6 169:23 170:4,9 break (5) 56:13,18
23:18 24:1 35:8,21 173:1,7 174:7,8,9 156:1,4,7
36:19 74:15 114:24 bills (1) 197:15 breastfeeding (1)
158:12 172:3 Birt (29) 10:18 116:5 103:11
bases (1) 109:23 116:16,20 117:10 bridge (15) 130:12,13
basic (3) 35:8 87:4 117:13,19,24 130:16,19,21,24
88:2 198:21,24 199:10 131:3,6,10,11,13
basically (1) 94:16 199:13,16 200:12 131:15,18,23
basis (20) 22:20 31:6 200:17 201:10,21 132:20
53:2 54:3 57:20 202:14,21 203:24 brief (1) 16:3
60:4 64:23 78:7,12 204:24 205:23 briefly (1) 198:18
103:5,8 128:8 206:7 207:2,8,15 bring (8) 3:6 6:17 9:17
130:25 138:20 208:1,3,11 14:2 71:1 77:18
139:12 148:22 Birt’s (1) 144:2 182:17 194:20
151:6 195:17 birth (2) 102:17 103:7 Bristows (3) 73:2,4,10
201:14 203:2 Bissonia (5) 120:25 British (1) 82:2
Bastrykin (1) 187:11 121:2,5,7,11 broadly (1) 188:3
becoming (1) 189:2 bit (14) 35:23 45:1,2 Bromley-Martin (23)
began (2) 66:18 158:6 112:8 124:19 21:3 28:24 30:4,9
beginning (13) 1:13 134:18 156:3 32:2 36:14,15 39:7
35:19,24 50:22 186:22 191:9 194:3 41:4,8,9 42:21
101:24 102:25 197:20,24 206:5 44:10 53:23 89:10
103:16 110:4 158:9 207:1 91:18 128:15
174:16 176:11,20 bits (2) 114:17 207:22 129:12 133:20
184:21 blanking (1) 205:9 135:8,23 136:7
begins (1) 105:19 blog (6) 192:4,5,7,9 137:16
behalf (5) 28:5 30:3 192:10 193:14 Bromley-Martin’s (4)
31:7 102:5 158:3 BNP (80) 17:1,7 19:5 53:21 54:16 55:1
behaving (1) 75:19 19:10 21:23 22:14 133:11
Beijing (2) 177:18,23 23:13 24:1,6,7,14 Brothers (2) 51:15
belief (3) 171:20 24:21 26:1,5,7 52:3
184:1 187:1 27:17,20 28:2,3,17 Brothers’ (1) 141:25
beliefs (1) 92:20 28:21,23 29:7,16 brought (5) 13:20
believe (13) 4:2 5:3 30:2,5,14,22 31:4 31:8 114:20 115:19
19:16 22:9 31:11 31:18 32:13,19 190:19
36:11 79:7 145:17 33:6 34:9,24 35:14 BSMZ (1) 132:1
149:1 157:19 35:21 36:8,18,23 BSP (8) 64:16 76:5,16
160:14,15,19 37:7,13,15 38:4,18 80:8 147:15,21
believed (1) 70:2 38:22 39:3 40:17 148:12 173:20
believes (1) 195:7 41:16 42:3,4 43:18 BSP’s (1) 80:1
believing (1) 41:5 44:15,21 45:22 build (2) 167:5 168:16
belongs (1) 96:3 46:5,11 48:15,25 Building (1) 205:16
belts (1) 1:24 50:6,17,20 51:6,22 bullet (2) 18:7 87:15
Belykh (1) 196:10 52:23 53:4,13,24 bundle (3) 17:19
beneficial (1) 172:4 54:2,11,12,17 55:3 202:6 203:6
benefit (1) 172:19 55:11,15 56:1 90:1 bureaucrats (3) 11:11
Berezin (1) 58:10 130:8,20 138:21 94:2,19
berths (2) 96:2,3 BNP’s (2) 49:5 54:5 business (36) 14:19
best (12) 4:7 5:12 board (9) 48:3 51:24 23:9 49:8 50:25
10:21 11:25 27:10 83:15 85:16 86:11 55:20 62:16 64:9
38:13 65:11 108:21 107:2 150:19,23 65:13 66:4 68:17
142:15 163:25 151:4 70:2,3 71:11 76:1
171:19 192:17 bodies (4) 156:16 76:23 77:8 78:23
better (10) 2:6 5:20 158:4 160:3 161:8 94:16 102:10 105:5
12:18 28:24 32:2 bond (1) 118:12 105:20 138:7
55:22 72:12 106:17 border (2) 185:2,19 143:10 149:3,10,12
109:6 190:20 borrow (7) 41:25 49:4 151:18 155:14
beyond (2) 80:9 51:6 52:22 58:8 159:19 168:18
174:22 147:4 197:14 172:7 183:13
Bidault (1) 73:22 borrowed (2) 18:15 192:17 194:15
big (33) 16:8 23:2 18:24 196:11 197:8
34:6 41:1 53:7 borrower (4) 87:10,16 businesses (8) 70:18
62:24 67:20 73:15 87:18 140:24 76:5 92:24 94:11
75:20 82:10 83:23 borrowers (1) 138:15 177:11 181:5
94:12,18 119:12 borrowing (3) 58:8 197:10,11

businessman (1)

55:13 businessmen (1)

62:13 button (1) 201:5

buy (5) 133:5 155:15 162:14 169:1 195:2

buying (2) 154:22 168:12

BVI (9) 60:18 61:12 73:3,11 75:16 89:3 136:23 137:15 148:6

C

C1 (1) 56:12 C1/1/23 (2) 16:24
17:5

C1/1/24 (5) 17:5 21:13 37:9 38:2 45:7

C1/1/25 (3) 37:24 49:3 52:24

C1/1/27 (1) 80:19 C1/1/28 (4) 80:19

85:20 118:8 122:11

C1/1/30 (1) 195:24 C1/1/31 (5) 57:4

58:21 60:1 62:5 63:7

C1/1/32 (2) 64:14 78:5

C1/1/34 (1) 84:5 C1/1/48 (1) 158:19 C1/1/51 (1) 158:17 C1/1/54 (1) 79:2 C1/1/55 (1) 79:13 C1/1/56 (6) 80:6

143:5 145:10 146:24 148:8 149:21

C1/1/57 (4) 149:24 161:21 167:23 169:4

C1/2/28 (1) 107:8 C1/2/29 (1) 107:6 C1/3/11 (1) 54:25 C1/3/9 (1) 53:22 C1/4/2 (1) 72:15 calculated (1) 62:3 calculating (2) 55:23

60:11

call (6) 11:12 102:16 126:7 130:12 184:25 198:3

called (15) 24:23 27:9 27:12 30:25 82:8 94:3 96:19 100:5 143:22 144:24 151:19 178:12 180:9 185:24 192:24

calling (4) 40:13 71:23 192:23 193:5

campaign (1) 189:19 cancelled (1) 157:9 capabilities (3) 66:10 101:25 103:1 capable (1) 150:24

Capital (1) 175:24 care (1) 163:19 careful (1) 150:11 carefully (1) 193:2 caring (1) 101:3 carried (9) 22:3 30:24

31:15,19 32:12 33:10,16 46:12 81:3

carry (1) 46:6 114:11 143:2 23:20 24:2 50:13
case (29) 8:4 9:15 197:13 200:11 76:24 80:15 134:4
46:4 49:1 53:4 67:9 cited (1) 192:12 134:12 183:22
73:5 78:18 82:8 city (2) 159:6 163:25 commercially (1) 80:8
84:16 86:15,20 claim (8) 138:7 148:23 commissions (4)
93:25 94:25 104:20 158:22 160:7 94:18,20,21,25
104:20 116:11 181:19,19 182:12 commit (2) 37:21 45:9
130:8 135:4 137:14 183:16 commitment (2)
148:25 155:11 Claimants (1) 189:23 36:25 40:23
170:19 173:15 claiming (1) 77:7 committee (3) 86:3
182:20 187:24 claims (5) 138:6,8 107:10 152:13
189:12 190:12,20 145:13 183:1,1 common (4) 41:17
cases (4) 69:1,3 clarify (1) 38:16 77:12 104:24 105:6
159:12 176:16 classical (1) 93:19 communicate (1)
cash (5) 37:22 45:10 clause (2) 40:21 83:17 117:16
57:25 78:7,12 clear (11) 3:3 12:22 community (1) 107:22
caused (1) 207:1 33:5 40:22 111:5 companies (34) 27:11
causes (1) 95:18 127:21 140:23 30:10 33:20 34:14
cent (7) 120:24 121:2 143:14 188:5,7,10 34:15,16 51:8,8
122:19,23,25 123:3 clearest (1) 4:12 60:15,16 63:11
172:4 clearly (4) 11:25 43:2 69:4 70:11,15,20
Central (1) 93:24 126:8 203:25 88:9 93:25 94:4,6
centre (2) 71:11 179:2 client (1) 31:13 94:13 97:1 100:4
ceremony (1) 83:23 clients (5) 7:19 112:14 106:24 134:15,20
certain (11) 59:21 112:15 158:11 134:25 136:10,23
69:15 70:6 71:6 200:6 141:6 147:24 170:2
83:18 111:6,8 clients’ (4) 8:9 15:8 175:11 189:18
145:17 163:11,16 109:13 199:23 196:22
180:1 close (3) 162:14,17 company (51) 18:9
certainly (7) 12:19 170:20 25:2 27:6,13,25
86:10 96:21 117:19 closely (1) 58:10 28:4 32:20 33:20
118:20 122:4 163:5 closest (1) 183:11 33:21 45:24 53:9
certainty (1) 203:22 closing (2) 43:3 134:8 77:2 89:3 92:16
certified (1) 73:21 Clyde (7) 88:6,16 100:4 102:15
chain (4) 123:13 137:2,12,12 138:10 107:15 123:7 131:2
126:13 128:11 139:1 132:1,5 133:24
139:20 coextensive (1) 9:11 136:8,13,17,20
Chairman (1) 149:25 coffee (1) 180:22 137:24 138:3 146:3
challenge (2) 57:16,21 collapse (2) 68:10 149:7,8,11 151:19
Chamber (1) 181:18 120:3 153:12,20,22
champagne (1) collateral (8) 136:2 154:13,15 155:7
180:23 164:1 170:6 173:19 163:21 169:20
chance (10) 3:4,17 173:21 174:2,21 172:2,3,5,6,10,17
12:24 13:14,18,23 175:2 172:18 175:23
92:11,14 113:13 colleagues (2) 44:10 190:6 196:20
204:4 180:13 company’s (2) 75:3
change (4) 184:8 collect (2) 35:7 73:6 172:5
188:1 199:2,10 collected (1) 142:14 comparatively (2)
changed (2) 180:25 collegial (1) 94:22 130:19 147:8
194:22 Colonel (5) 97:7 101:2 compare (1) 191:22
changes (7) 6:23 7:5 185:15 189:1 compared (3) 92:25
39:3 91:2 96:6 192:21 130:7,20
101:4 135:5 colour (1) 118:24 compartmentalised …
charges (1) 42:2 column (3) 165:3,3,6 139:9
charter (1) 83:24 combined (2) 61:4,7 compensating (1)
chartered (1) 83:25 come (19) 39:12 34:20
cheap (1) 94:7 114:14 119:13 compensation (1)
cheaper (1) 146:18 121:5 122:12 34:24
check (3) 32:22 119:9 142:11 145:14 compensatory (1)
145:1 148:11 151:12 156:22
checked (4) 13:5 159:10 163:5 competition (1) 90:1
14:10 143:11,17 164:16 187:17 competitor (1) 89:25
checking (4) 119:8 189:8 192:25 193:2 complain (1) 76:16
203:18 206:3 207:2 193:19 195:23 complaining (2) 76:15
checkings (1) 62:1 200:18 76:18
Chicago (15) 177:5,5,7 comfortable (1) complete (1) 197:10
177:8,23 178:11,18 141:22 completed (2) 66:21
179:2,8,14,24 coming (5) 37:22 168:8
180:9,11 194:1,9 56:22 132:21 completely (5) 20:21
chief (7) 96:24 98:24 146:17 159:13 76:7 99:14 100:2
100:1,3 101:22 commencing (1) 54:3 186:20
102:12 104:13 comment (2) 100:3 completing (1) 42:25
choose (3) 77:25 185:24 completion (1) 145:19
135:20 180:4 commentary (1) 8:9 complex (3) 27:8
choosing (1) 78:2 comments (4) 8:8 121:14 138:8
circle (1) 164:8 127:14 129:20 complicated (1) 88:10
circulate (1) 89:24 200:9 complicates (1) 95:12
circumstances (7) Commerce (1) 181:18 complied (1) 79:6
15:9 52:19 112:23 commercial (9) 23:4 comply (2) 104:11

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

216

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

117:11 consistent (1) 205:10 40:25 45:13 66:1
comprise (1) 60:14 conspiracy (3) 76:4 100:12 152:9
comprised (1) 28:14 158:7 189:25 172:16,20
compulsory (6) 128:3 constraints (1) 95:18 corrections (1) 28:1
132:24 134:21,25 construction (2) 167:5 correctly (2) 101:20
136:12,15 167:9 206:16
computer (4) 2:17 constructive (2) 75:12 correspondence (5)
16:2 144:2 178:3 157:23 116:12 117:13
concentrated (1) consultant (3) 29:19 123:15 127:5,11
45:15 30:7 141:19 corrupt (2) 151:7
concern (7) 7:14 consultants (8) 30:10 189:23
117:22 125:4 34:21 37:18 53:3 corrupted (1) 187:3
134:24 136:7 55:22 129:6 134:17 corruption (2) 150:24
185:23 188:2 139:4 187:16
concerned (9) 7:23 consuming (1) 52:7 costed (1) 41:21
14:4 112:15 141:14 contact (3) 65:10,11 costing (1) 43:4
141:15 200:6 143:6 costs (1) 45:14
203:13,15,25 contacts (3) 71:16,18 counsel (11) 2:25 3:1
concerns (4) 8:19 97:10 3:7,15,20,21 4:5
135:12 141:6 content (3) 80:9 200:6 5:3 6:13,21 7:21
209:12 207:4 counterclaim (1)
conclusion (2) 5:18 contents (5) 152:5 148:19
8:24 160:9 161:7 168:3 counterparty (1)
conclusions (1) 74:16 200:8 155:18
conclusive (2) 86:2 context (5) 30:18 country (5) 68:9,16
107:9 112:23 114:9 94:3 185:8 196:20
condition (5) 48:16 200:20 203:17 couple (1) 71:19
87:22 134:25 137:7 contingency (1) 208:5 course (25) 3:18 7:24
138:21 continuation (3) 4:3 8:4,16 12:7 14:5
conditions (6) 24:9 76:11 110:24 15:16 27:15 39:13
39:4 50:13 77:1 continue (7) 51:20 46:18 57:22 69:25
89:1 96:1 68:15 70:16 95:14 111:5 112:5 117:1
conducted (1) 163:10 97:10 114:18 143:9 123:21 156:24
conducts (1) 12:22 continued (10) 16:21 171:21 191:8
conference (2) 126:7 16:22 37:13 41:17 192:20 198:23
194:16 57:6 118:2 148:13 201:18 202:2
confident (1) 146:23 213:4,5,7 204:12 206:20
confidential (3) 89:23 continuing (5) 1:16 court (47) 2:23,24 3:5
209:17,19 65:21,23 70:23 3:7,11,13,20 4:6,16
confidentiality (3) 156:25 4:18,23 6:14,17,17
111:8 126:2 129:6 contract (4) 84:2,3 6:22,23,25 7:4,7,23
confirm (6) 16:2 82:22 96:4 131:22 7:24 14:3 75:16
101:12 113:12 contractor (4) 41:20 111:14 171:16
132:17 178:13 43:3 44:18 201:23 184:4,13 185:9
confirmation (3) 16:4 contracts (3) 50:21 195:15 200:10
84:16 201:17 96:10 155:16 201:14 202:13,15
confirmed (3) 105:11 contradicts (1) 79:22 202:17,18,20,23
135:19 174:24 contrary (1) 110:10 203:12,15 204:18
confirming (1) 101:5 control (8) 65:24 205:17,21,22
confirms (1) 105:8 106:12,20 190:23 206:15,15 209:18
conflict (2) 125:13 196:20,21,22 212:1
176:12 197:10 courts (7) 184:3,5,6
confuse (1) 7:15 controlled (1) 87:25 184:10,17,19 207:1
connected (2) 51:23 controlling (1) 87:25 covenant (1) 141:8
62:25 contumation (1) coverage (1) 67:9
connection (3) 76:21 110:25 covered (1) 93:17
140:10 157:8 convenient (2) 108:2 cracking (1) 108:23
connections (1) 74:4 200:14 create (6) 63:22 75:23
conscious (1) 197:22 cooperating (1) 58:10 88:14 155:13
Consent (1) 11:3 cooperation (1) 88:16 195:19 205:7
consented (1) 11:4 coordinated (1) created (9) 64:2 88:12
conservative (1) 92:24 189:22 94:18 137:2 142:1
consider (4) 9:1 36:18 coordinating (1) 179:2 148:6,17,18 171:3
130:13 134:17 copied (6) 115:20,25 creating (2) 94:3
considerable (1) 5:14 124:13 128:14 95:24
consideration (3) 129:12 139:22 Creation (1) 77:1
74:25 182:20 copies (1) 117:24 credit (5) 63:8 86:3
207:21 copy (8) 65:5 89:25 107:9 156:22
considered (15) 44:6 115:20 125:22 174:14
85:8,11 92:23 133:8 178:4,6 criminal (9) 69:1
94:12 122:8 126:6 205:1 148:21 152:19
130:7,18 144:21 copyright (2) 203:11 158:11 159:12
145:2 183:10 186:5 206:3 161:1 176:16
187:15 196:11 corner (1) 14:21 184:22 185:9
considering (10) 2:20 corporate (7) 11:6 crisis (20) 51:10,11,19
41:2 45:17 51:13 104:17 125:12 62:18,21 63:8,24
52:10 53:8 68:14 126:25 127:6 137:3 66:15 78:23 93:20
82:23 175:20 142:15 93:22 95:20 99:6
199:18 correct (8) 31:20 99:11 103:20 104:2

105:6 146:19 147:9 147:11

cross (2) 129:21 185:1

cross-examination (…

1:9,16,25 2:1,18 4:3,23 5:18 6:1 8:14,16,24 12:6,22 13:25 16:22 114:18 115:4,11 118:2 149:5 174:4 197:21 213:5,7

cross-examine (1)

15:15 cross-examined (3)

8:18 12:9 120:11 crossed (1) 185:18 culminate (2) 30:15

30:25

current (2) 122:20 135:11

custom (1) 138:4 CV (1) 180:5 Cypriot (6) 133:24

134:24 136:8,9,13 136:17

Cyprus (9) 73:2,12 88:9 89:3 134:20 136:20,23 137:6,15

D

D (1) 11:8 D110 (1) 84:20
D110/1570/1 (1)

84:24

D110/1573/1 (1)

164:12

D110/1573/11 (1)

164:15

D110/1573/13 (1)

166:7

D110/1573/15 (2)

165:1,19

D110/1573/7 (1)

166:6

D110/1573/9 (2)

164:22 165:19

D115/1671/1 (5)

162:18,24 166:23 173:11,18

D115/1671/3 (1)

162:24

D118/1804.1/1 (1)

175:9

D118/1804.1/2 (2)

175:14,19

D126/2005/1 (4)

151:23 153:8 156:11 159:17

D126/2005/3 (1)

152:3

D134/2199/1 (1)

177:12

D145/2424.1/1 (2)

64:24 66:3

D145/2424.1/2 (1)

65:15

D145/2424.1/3 (1)

65:6

D147/2449/1 (3)

97:13,21 98:4

D147/2449/2 (4)

96:18 99:4,25 101:23
D147/2449/3 (2)

99:19 104:6

D147/2449/5 (1)

96:21

D147/2449/6 (1)

97:19 day (20) 1:12,13 42:2 84:21,23 86:2
D147/2499/2 (1) 42:8 43:3,15 47:3 94:22 107:9 185:8
96:17 55:17,24 110:15 decision-makers (3)
D196/2924/1 (1) 140:3 152:11,17 181:3,24 182:18
177:25 157:23 174:3 decision-making (2)
D196/2941/1 (1) 197:23 199:8,12,13 44:12 45:5
178:2 199:16 decisions (2) 47:7
D196/2941/4 (1) Day11/114:4 (1) 68:24
180:14 199:1 declaration (3) 11:3
D33/523/5 (1) 59:4 Day11/182:21 (2) 11:12,19
D39/668/1 (1) 86:24 199:1,7 declare (1) 111:15
D39/674/1 (2) 81:6 Day11/207:10 (1) declared (2) 109:13
82:14 199:3 109:20
D39/674/2 (1) 83:19 Day11/213:25 (1) declines (1) 91:22
D39/674/4 (1) 81:20 199:14 decrease (2) 77:3,4
D47/1042/2 (1) 135:7 Day11/94:10 (1) deed (3) 138:13,16
D52/889/11 (1) 17:16 198:25 139:2
D67/1042.1/1 (1) Day12/1:3 (1) 199:17 Deed’ (1) 138:5
129:10 Day12/112:2 (1) deemed (2) 30:18
D67/1042.2/1 (2) 199:19 104:9
123:9 128:12 Day12/121:11 (1) deep (2) 67:21 187:17
D67/1042.2/2 (1) 199:19 defence (2) 189:5,6
126:12 Day12/8:13 (1) Defendant (1) 191:17
D67/1042.2/3 (1) 199:17 defendants (5) 36:7
124:11 Day13/102:1 (1) 109:12 119:17
D67/1042.2/4 (1) 145:24 189:19 191:1
123:12 Day13/102:2-3 (1) defendants’ (3) 87:1
D67/1042/1 (1) 133:7 146:6 89:6 175:10
D67/1042/2 (1) days (9) 5:22 68:25 deferment (1) 103:17
133:12 127:10 129:13 defined (1) 41:21
D67/1053.2/1 (1) 159:1 176:21 177:7 definitely (15) 3:3
139:18 193:16,17 13:21 23:3 38:9
D67/1053.2/2 (1) days’ (1) 57:25 39:6 40:10 92:21
140:2 DD (2) 89:16 125:2 100:15,17 134:23
D68/1056/1 (2) 28:7 deal (12) 3:18 5:20 146:18 152:22
89:5 12:7 108:18 109:8 186:22,23 204:6
D68/1056/2 (2) 29:2 109:9,10 171:22 definitive (1) 204:14
90:7 196:1 198:21 208:5 dekret (1) 102:16
D68/1056/33 (1) 90:9 208:6 delay (4) 43:2,3 51:22
D71/1066/1 (1) dealing (6) 5:7,16 113:20
118:17 54:1 110:21 199:6 delegation (1) 177:17
D71/1066/4 (1) 205:4 deliberately (1) 77:7
119:22 deals (1) 152:15 demands (1) 104:11
D71/1066/5 (2) dealt (3) 1:8 201:13 democracy (1) 92:21
120:13 132:6 207:15 demonstrate (2) 7:17
D71/1066/6 (3) debate (6) 108:24 95:10
118:25 119:21 109:1 110:25 111:3 denotes (1) 14:22
122:15 111:4 112:24 department (2) 49:15
D74/1102/1 (3) 19:9 debates (1) 111:13 127:6
21:14,25 debt (17) 17:14 18:3,4 departure (1) 158:20
D74/1102/2 (2) 22:15 18:16,21 19:8 dependent (1) 159:23
29:13 23:23 45:16 47:16 depending (2) 6:7
D74/1102/3 (2) 34:23 48:7,12,17,21 157:4
39:25 55:14 74:11 103:21 depends (4) 5:25
D75/1116/1 (1) 36:5 138:3 131:21 150:13,13
D75/1116/2 (3) 36:4 debts (14) 18:25 depth (1) 7:14
36:17 40:22 57:17 58:15 63:18 deputy (2) 181:1
D98 (1) 38:14 64:15,20 66:10,14 182:18
D98/1259/1 (1) 41:7 75:4 79:18 80:1 describe (3) 27:2
D98/1259/2 (1) 42:21 104:17 138:1 197:7 95:24 118:9
D99/1322/1 (1) 93:2 deceived (2) 3:11 6:16 described (1) 31:21
D99/1322/3 (1) 93:4 December (18) 63:13 describes (2) 97:15
daily (5) 54:3 102:9,19 75:15 78:24 79:6 99:2
103:10 128:8 102:18 175:6 description (2) 87:7
Damages (1) 76:23 184:21,23 185:14 164:23
damaging (1) 77:7 185:15,18,21 desire (2) 42:3 94:5
dangerous (4) 159:9 186:14,16,17,17 Destabilisation (1)
159:11,12 194:9 188:14 191:22 76:24
DARTS (5) 205:17,19 decide (4) 45:25 84:7 detail (1) 199:5
205:20,21 206:22 125:3,17 detailed (3) 30:16
data (1) 28:15 decided (16) 68:21,23 31:1 37:14
database (1) 185:17 70:11 76:7 77:25 detailing (1) 138:5
date (9) 29:2 63:21 84:13,14,15 85:13 details (2) 11:7 67:21
72:6,18,22 132:10 86:9,12,16 113:4 develop (3) 128:20
132:11,23 147:22 137:13 139:4 185:5 137:25 194:15
dated (7) 19:13,25 deciding (2) 86:18 developed (5) 19:24
21:5,19 52:1 84:17 111:14 22:8 36:19 47:25
174:16 decision (10) 44:11 94:5
dates (1) 191:23 45:4 52:8 56:6 development (23)

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

217

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

19:13 26:6 44:6 168:23 175:10 114:20 115:19
48:23 63:24 68:17 discrete (1) 16:10 120:4 154:20
70:16,24 80:21,22 discuss (11) 2:12 188:24 189:1
81:3 82:23 84:8 13:19,23 14:1,17 doing (14) 2:24 32:23
92:20 93:23 94:24 22:24 100:10 44:16,18 49:8,17
95:15 96:8 97:24 113:13 115:9 116:3 51:16 76:15 105:9
153:5 157:1 164:6 126:8 125:6 128:5 162:16
196:16 discussed (32) 6:2 171:4 197:18
developments (4) 11:20 17:10 19:15 dollar (1) 51:12
66:21 69:17 128:10 39:7 44:21 50:25 dollars (3) 166:2
187:5 55:5 64:10 115:17 173:2,3
devoting (1) 193:7 123:5 125:9 127:5 Don (1) 195:6
diameter (2) 143:19 129:13,19 140:8 doubt (4) 36:21 110:6
143:22 153:10,16,17,18 117:8 160:22
dictate (2) 12:21,25 154:18 155:2 157:3 doubting (1) 160:19
died (2) 71:19,25 157:13 159:20 downside (2) 43:8,21
difference (5) 121:16 160:10,12 180:23 Dr (118) 10:21 15:2
127:10,10 130:6 201:10,16 206:24 16:23 17:21 19:17
191:12 209:7 20:8,11,22 21:20
different (34) 7:16 8:1 discussing (11) 2:16 23:7 24:13 25:20
9:11 20:20 24:9 12:17 42:5 44:17 26:15,19 27:19
39:15 45:23 47:7 50:15 88:24 92:9 29:3,14,24 32:16
52:14 60:9 63:3 119:1,2 127:3 33:17 34:8 35:10
68:17 71:14 88:5 154:22 38:1 40:16 43:11
94:19 98:7 100:8 discussion (15) 23:20 44:13 46:4 48:21
103:12 109:22 35:14 44:2 45:2,3 53:12 54:8 56:11
110:1 124:4 131:20 47:8,10,12 92:5 56:20 57:11 58:14
131:20 135:20,21 123:16 156:16,25 59:7 60:10 64:4
139:16,16 160:4,5 157:4 160:3 179:16 65:7 67:1 69:7
168:22,24 170:2 discussions (27) 23:4 72:16 73:16 76:3
196:25 200:3 24:3 34:5 39:10,16 77:6,19 80:13 81:9
difficult (11) 23:25 44:20 66:12 68:20 82:15 85:2 86:7,14
45:12 51:9,9,14 80:20 87:23 88:23 87:8 88:17 89:6
52:18 66:15 78:24 91:6 100:15 115:8 90:15 91:3 92:11
121:14 183:15,19 118:11 122:7 93:6,11 96:22
difficulties (4) 58:1 125:15 127:20 98:11 101:11 105:4
62:25 63:10 169:17 129:5 135:20 106:22 112:18
difficulty (4) 62:17 137:12 139:3 118:3 119:8,17
116:1 137:14 141:17 170:17 121:10 122:10,12
204:23 175:23 194:17 124:14 127:21
diligence (35) 24:17 197:17 129:11 130:3 131:6
24:22,24 27:4,10 dishonest (1) 151:6 131:9,18 132:16
27:13,22,25 28:5,6 dishonesty (1) 150:24 133:8,13 135:24
28:12,16,18 29:9 dispersed (1) 201:9 137:6,16 138:14
32:5,12,20 33:6,10 disposed (1) 204:8 141:13 143:11
33:12,14,16,22,23 dispute (2) 5:20 144:12 146:1 148:7
34:1,10 41:6 46:18 204:18 148:22 149:24
46:20 54:22 86:19 disputed (1) 3:23 150:12 151:14
86:21 88:3 89:11 disseminated (1) 152:8 155:24 156:9
134:7 203:4 157:25 158:15
diligences (1) 44:18 distance (1) 33:25 159:16 161:22
direct (2) 2:2 88:16 disturb (1) 117:1 163:3,23 164:13
direction (3) 52:9,10 divider (1) 17:18 167:14 169:22
205:11 DMITRIEVICH (2) 170:1 171:6 174:18
directly (6) 88:24 16:21 213:4 178:2,6,9 181:10
115:12,23 117:5 Dmitry (7) 71:22,24 182:3 183:15 188:5
125:20 149:16 126:24 127:1 143:7 189:8 191:20
director (4) 54:1 191:18 192:2 draft (32) 20:15 28:20
70:15 71:18 81:21 Dmitry— (1) 126:24 36:6,8,11,12 40:21
directors (8) 48:3 document (39) 4:18 81:12,15 86:25
81:24 83:15 85:16 4:22,24 5:5 9:18 87:7,9 89:1,11
86:11 169:19,20 10:13 11:10 14:9 90:14,16 118:21
175:8 15:9,15,24 16:9,10 119:1,3,4,5,7,10,11
disagree (4) 91:3,14 16:11,17,19 17:25 119:12 122:8 132:9
92:3,14 24:25 26:17 27:1,2 139:1,6 175:15,15
disagreement (1) 7:15 27:9,12 28:7,12,22 175:16
disclosed (15) 13:9,11 28:23 29:5,11 drafting (1) 138:11
13:15 14:11 16:5 32:14 33:14 108:2 drafts (2) 28:19,21
24:24 36:7 119:16 108:4 120:10 dramatic (1) 144:6
119:16 136:21 121:21 138:8,11 draw (1) 189:10
168:23 177:12,12 139:7 175:10 drawing (1) 91:12
190:10,16 documentation (1) dreams (1) 160:13
disclosing (1) 128:4 134:8 dropped (2) 103:22
disclosure (17) 9:18 documents (26) 3:12 104:1
13:16 14:6,13 3:16 5:2 8:18 11:16 drunk (1) 193:6
15:13 16:9 33:13 13:14,15,22 14:2 dubbing (1) 205:8
67:1 84:18 87:1 14:18 27:14 35:20 due (46) 3:17 7:24
89:6 114:21,24 54:21 67:2,5,5 73:6 12:7 14:5 24:17,22
128:3 136:22 73:19 107:12,19 24:24 27:4,9,13,15

27:21,24 28:5,6,12 28:16,18 29:9 32:5 32:12,20 33:6,9,12 33:14,16,22,23 34:1,10 41:6 44:18 46:18,20 51:9 54:22 58:16 63:12 63:18 86:19,21 88:3 89:11 134:7 209:18

E

e-mail (30) 1:17 41:9 42:21 73:17,22 89:7 115:9,16,19 115:24 116:10,12 116:24 117:14 123:13,17 124:14 126:7,16 129:11 139:20,21 151:24 153:1 156:10,10,19 159:16 160:9 161:7

e-mailed (1) 140:3 e-mails (2) 126:13

128:13

eager (2) 86:23 148:4 earlier (5) 19:18 53:13 144:12 197:24

200:2

earliest (2) 43:2 78:15 early (7) 1:17 65:18

97:15 191:1 198:2 204:13,13

ease (1) 17:20 easier (2) 63:24

117:10

easily (6) 64:1 78:20 114:9 133:4 138:24 139:13

eastern (2) 150:6 180:11

easy (2) 94:13 148:16

EBRD (116) 19:5 27:7 28:5 47:12,13 48:1 48:1,15 52:23,25 53:1 80:18,20 81:1 81:9,18,24 82:1,17 83:8,18 84:2,7,13 84:14,17,21,22 85:13,15,16,18 86:1,9,11,13,16,20 86:22,23,25 87:4 87:24 88:1,4,7,13 88:16,17,23 89:4 89:11,20 90:13 91:18,20 92:22 96:1,4 97:25 99:1,2 99:12 100:1,11,15 101:9,13,16 106:23 107:3,13,14,19,21 107:24 108:5 118:10 124:8,24 125:5,6,9,10,20 127:16,20 129:25 130:8,20 133:4,22 134:4,22 135:1 136:12,16,19,25 137:4,7,9 138:21 140:8,11,15,17,23 140:24 141:7 143:12 145:3 151:18 170:18,22 196:24

EBRD’s (3) 86:3 95:25 107:9

EBRD/Vyborg (2)

128:17 129:22

EC (11) 32:14,19,21,22

33:3,21 34:2,15 130:16 131:4 exactly (11) 47:20
46:24 89:16 90:12 entered (1) 86:2 54:19 60:6 62:23
economic (2) 91:22 entering (7) 50:20 84:3 112:10 121:15
95:20 71:16 95:7,11 121:20 152:11
economy (2) 92:21 130:14 131:25 173:7 201:10
180:21 133:3 examination (1) 5:4
effect (6) 104:16 entirely (3) 15:8 example (25) 7:2,4
110:21 111:17 109:17 112:15 23:19 34:14 39:22
112:20 125:5 entry (1) 61:14 39:25 45:24 47:19
183:17 Environ (2) 34:14 53:8 55:10 59:14
effective (1) 5:7 46:24 71:11,12 97:22
effectively (1) 70:17 environment (4) 98:16 131:3 133:3
effects (1) 185:11 76:10 109:14 134:24 143:3
efficient (2) 22:24 112:14 200:3 146:20 167:4,18
108:21 envisaged (1) 122:3 168:14 187:9
efficiently (1) 8:22 episode (1) 111:6 188:21
effort (2) 104:11 equipment (2) 122:24 examples (1) 12:4
135:16 140:25 Excel (1) 23:25
efforts (2) 179:3 equities (1) 104:24 exception (1) 3:21
185:7 equity (3) 18:10 excessive (1) 5:19
either (5) 18:15 42:25 131:17 176:6 exchange (1) 69:16
149:16 164:2 escape (1) 195:21 exchanged (2) 110:8
207:11 Eschwege (1) 114:16 181:2
elaborate (4) 6:4 9:5,9 especially (5) 125:1 exchanges (1) 200:8
22:3 159:4 167:2 179:9 exclude (1) 38:10
elaboration (1) 5:15 209:13 excluded (1) 112:4
element (1) 55:7 essence (1) 129:21 executive (2) 119:22
eliminate (3) 37:7 essentially (3) 37:15 119:23
55:12 95:18 38:3,17 executives (4) 82:1
embarrassing (1) establish (2) 73:5 144:21 145:3
110:17 104:25 183:11
emerging (1) 130:4 established (3) 15:12 exercise (1) 16:9
emigrants (1) 179:8 89:3 152:24 exercised (2) 106:11
emigration (9) 65:22 estate (6) 70:13,20 106:21
67:6 68:21,22 103:21 104:1 exhibit (3) 21:8 61:4
69:23 70:15,21 106:13,20 167:24
179:9 188:15 Eurobonds (1) 121:17 exhibited (2) 21:18
employed (2) 142:12 Europe (3) 150:6,6 73:20
142:15 180:11 exhibition (14) 177:2
employees (4) 51:7 European (4) 80:21 177:8 178:10,12,14
77:10 188:20 82:22 95:15 97:24 178:17,23 179:1,6
190:13 euros (2) 97:23 173:3 179:24 180:12
employment (1) evaluation (2) 83:1,11 181:14 183:22
46:21 event (9) 31:14 84:14 194:2
enable (3) 2:3 81:3 138:7 141:23 176:6 existing (3) 74:25 75:2
168:9 180:1,13 182:15 141:6
enclosed (2) 33:11 197:22 expand (1) 12:3
74:3 events (6) 36:2 52:4 expect (1) 150:11
encountered (1) 66:5 63:3 177:23 203:19 expected (4) 37:21
encumbered (1) 165:7 203:20 86:3 107:10 168:7
endorsing (1) 168:3 everybody (8) 55:21 expenditure (1) 37:21
ends (1) 205:11 68:13 141:22 155:4 expenses (2) 34:20
engaged (1) 17:3 155:6,10 195:7 37:17
England (4) 205:16,18 197:23 expensive (3) 130:10
206:14,17 everyone’s (1) 108:20 131:19 133:2
English (32) 4:17 evidence (42) 16:3 expertise (2) 91:12
25:16 30:10 33:14 25:22 33:9 52:15 92:12
34:6 92:23 98:4,5 53:18 54:16 61:11 explain (16) 6:24 7:6
106:18 115:24 64:14 67:2,23 8:21 10:3 12:24
137:13 165:19 68:11 80:20 83:21 50:11 60:4 93:17
166:6 171:16 86:6,15 100:23 119:25 140:15
174:12 200:23 101:7,14,15 102:4 147:21 148:14
201:1,25 202:3,8 102:21,23 104:1,15 150:15 180:6
202:15,20,23 203:3 116:25 117:2 118:6 188:11 193:24
203:15,20,23 205:1 144:17 145:25 explained (4) 136:9
205:25 208:12,13 147:14 161:23 144:14 180:7 183:7
209:8 168:7 169:16 170:7 explaining (1) 193:1
enormous (6) 27:17 174:18 176:17 explanation (4) 11:14
37:19 76:8 97:8 182:25 185:13 12:6 18:19 124:19
101:2 181:25 188:1 190:15,22 explicitly (1) 36:23
enquiries (1) 117:15 191:24 export (1) 174:14
enquiry (6) 115:3,9,14 evidences (1) 195:15 exposed (3) 12:5
116:2 158:12 ex-director (1) 142:10 62:21 63:1
159:24 ex-employees (2) exposure (2) 147:12
ensure (4) 2:4 9:14 73:5 175:24 169:1
75:2 206:17 ex-Minister (1) 83:25 express (2) 109:15
entailed (1) 76:22 Ex-owner (1) 71:22 200:2
entails (1) 82:19 ex-president (1) 71:24 expressed (3) 41:15
enter (4) 95:11,17 exact (2) 72:22 180:10 112:13 117:19

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

218

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

extend (3) 38:19

168:9,21 extended (2) 38:20

66:22 extension (1) 104:7

extent (6) 3:20 133:23 135:10 138:14 202:15 205:19

extra (1) 174:2 extradite (1) 187:25 extraditing (1) 187:18 extradition (4) 97:5

100:24,25 114:7 extremely (1) 105:15

F

face (3) 23:14 80:4,4 facilities (1) 122:21 facility (2) 18:10 205:3 facing (1) 208:23

fact (17) 4:4 11:10 31:19 41:2,25 50:17 52:10 75:15 88:2 90:10 132:2 142:12,14 155:8 162:22,23 197:21

factor (1) 30:12 factory (4) 154:9,23

155:8,15

facts (2) 3:13 188:24 factual (3) 3:22 101:3

190:22 fail (1) 129:25

fair (7) 48:8,20 81:14 87:7 112:25 113:25 139:10

fairly (1) 144:18 faith (2) 7:22 79:7 family (10) 34:3 76:12

88:14 127:2 136:23 149:4 194:20,23,24 195:19

far (32) 7:1,22 8:10,12 8:23 11:14 14:4 18:19 34:12 39:6 53:20 58:9 76:2 81:15 82:10 97:5 102:6,9 112:14 123:5 125:8,14 127:9 143:16 155:20 165:11 169:15 175:16 176:9 200:5 203:14 209:4

fast (3) 22:22 94:13 130:11

faster (1) 204:6 fatal (2) 30:15,25

fault (3) 98:3,8 155:24 favour (3) 88:20 161:2

173:25 favourable (1) 77:1 FBI (1) 187:11

fear (2) 158:22 181:22 fearful (2) 159:3

182:12

February (10) 1:1 49:19 50:2 78:24 110:4,16 112:2 198:25 199:16 212:2

federal (12) 11:4,5 95:6 96:11,14,15 185:1,17 186:3,6 186:18 187:1

Federation (19) 78:4 93:13 94:18 95:20 152:24 160:11

172:2 177:6,10 63:1 74:3 78:22 fled (2) 158:22 181:20
178:21 179:7,19 93:21 99:6,11 fleeing (2) 159:2
181:16,17 185:2 101:24 103:1,3 176:22
188:3,12 191:21 121:14,16 130:12 flew (2) 151:22 159:1
193:20 130:14 131:5 133:6 flexible (2) 49:13
fee (11) 34:25 35:4,11 169:16 135:6
35:12,13,18 37:16 financing (88) 17:3 flight (2) 83:24 84:1
52:16,18,22 183:22 19:4 22:4 26:6 flow (5) 37:22 45:10
feed (1) 194:24 30:19 36:9,19 57:25 78:7,12
feedback (1) 205:3 40:18,19 42:7,18 flying (1) 182:14
feeding (1) 103:11 42:18,19,19 43:14 following (8) 6:5 18:6
feel (7) 2:6 3:16 4:11 47:23,25 48:2 49:1 29:17 39:3 58:12
8:17 9:7,8 45:21 55:16 56:1,22 74:15 86:1 140:9
feeling (3) 44:24 73:7 65:22,23 69:11 follows (3) 23:13 37:9
113:20 73:9 75:18 76:10 145:16
fees (5) 37:17 49:5 76:17 78:2 82:18 food (1) 195:3
51:6 83:18 183:21 83:4 85:10,16 89:4 foot (10) 74:10,14
feet (1) 205:24 94:7,8,9,14 100:7 76:20 89:22 98:9
fell (2) 58:16 63:18 100:10,13,21 122:16 123:17
felt (2) 112:24 115:25 101:10,13,16 126:5 133:12 167:1
female (1) 144:15 123:20 124:9,10 forced (2) 68:15
feudal (2) 159:5 181:4 125:2 126:21 130:6 157:12
fifth (4) 24:5,13 29:15 130:9,12,13,17,19 forecast (1) 78:7
208:4 130:19,24 131:6,7 forecasts (1) 78:12
figure (5) 44:22 60:5 131:8,8,10,11,15 foreign (2) 94:9 128:7
60:21 61:15 65:25 131:15,18,19,20,23 forgive (1) 65:5
figures (7) 24:2 59:21 132:21 135:2,3,22 form (7) 131:7,8
61:16,19,20 100:12 136:4 137:5 145:11 132:20 206:2 207:5
100:22 145:13 146:2,17 207:24,24
file (3) 24:23 202:11 148:4,10 156:25 formal (1) 50:25
203:1 157:1,2 175:18 formally (2) 182:3
filed (2) 102:5 171:8 196:23 184:24
files (2) 190:18,18 find (9) 14:14 19:10 forth (1) 3:15
final (26) 12:11,11,11 52:15 74:2 84:15 forum (2) 112:12
24:11 39:12,22 85:17 143:9 195:4 113:9
83:23 86:2 89:1 201:5 forward (8) 12:8
90:10,11 91:2,5,7,9 finish (9) 50:8 54:7 31:11 37:23 42:23
91:19 100:12 106:22 115:22 43:22,24 45:22
106:22 119:2,4,6 116:20 157:17 126:8
119:18,20 121:21 161:19 192:24,24 found (2) 141:21
122:9 208:16 finished (3) 13:25 190:17
finalise (6) 151:18 108:2 152:7 four (7) 39:15 47:21
153:21 155:11,16 finishes (1) 116:24 51:20 100:19
167:8 168:13 Finland (1) 195:16 162:22 163:13
finalised (3) 167:5 firm (1) 50:24 166:13
175:17 176:10 first (73) 2:14 3:3,5 fourth (3) 30:12 114:6
finally (6) 86:9,16,18 4:9,10,13 5:12 6:23 174:10
91:19 196:19 197:6 8:14 13:10 14:20 framework (1) 137:25
finance (70) 35:25 15:19,21 20:13 France (6) 176:19,20
38:13 42:1,16,17 21:5 24:16 29:25 182:21 187:10,25
45:22 47:8,16 35:7 38:21 44:1 206:18
48:14,16 49:16,23 50:14,21 53:18 free (1) 174:1
54:2,11 55:10 57:5 60:17 66:7,22 free-standing (1)
69:16 79:8 83:25 68:25 71:21 77:9 91:10
85:13 86:12,23 78:22 79:8 82:15 freer (1) 200:3
106:23 118:4,6,11 82:17 84:16 91:21 freezing (4) 136:22
118:21 120:1,15 93:10 95:1 97:13 148:6 149:5 171:15
121:19 122:4 98:4,9,18 99:12 Friday (14) 2:21,23
123:13,18,24 124:8 103:17 104:7 110:1 3:9 6:2 16:25 17:10
124:12,16 125:8,11 113:3,4 119:5,7,11 19:15,20 60:14
125:11,12,20 119:22 128:11 64:11 132:3 145:25
126:20,25 127:6,6 133:15 139:20,21 151:11 154:17
127:19 128:13,17 140:13 146:18 friend (1) 144:2
130:21 131:2 132:2 155:14 159:1 164:5 front (2) 25:12 118:24
133:19 137:14 164:18 166:14 fruition (2) 56:22
138:22 139:3 167:3 171:8 172:24 197:4
141:19 142:2,2,6 174:3 176:20 Fuel (2) 146:3 153:12
142:15,17 143:8 180:25 184:12 fulfils (1) 207:6
148:20 152:23 188:14 191:17 full (9) 11:15,20 18:18
154:1,8 175:25 193:17 35:20 71:23 80:9
176:1,2 196:25 five (11) 3:10 4:21 5:2 96:15 175:4 186:20
financed (6) 94:1,6 5:9,23 47:21 56:13 fully (4) 11:24 140:14
138:19 139:12,16 56:16 106:1 162:20 169:9 172:18
151:18 162:22 function (1) 201:17
finances (3) 50:6 flat (3) 167:9,19 fund (7) 17:8 18:3
196:9,10 194:25 84:8,13 97:25 99:2
financial (24) 37:1 flats (4) 71:11 167:6 134:6
45:19 51:10 52:4 168:16,17 funding (16) 17:22
57:2,7 58:1 62:18 flaw (2) 30:16,25 41:15,18,23 95:13

95:18 97:16 99:14 132:20 133:22 134:14,21 135:14 153:6 167:21 176:14
fundings (1) 146:19 fundings’ (1) 134:6 fundraising (8) 19:12 43:1 118:7 123:4 124:1 125:5,6

142:18

funds (10) 40:24 46:1 132:21 142:19 145:18 146:9,11,17 146:24 163:17

funny (3) 134:18 187:8 189:4

furnished (1) 14:13 further (28) 1:23 5:17

8:7,15 9:8 12:5,9 13:24 15:11 18:6 21:4 24:15,22 27:21 29:9,16 31:15 32:5 33:9,16 34:11 74:7 117:14 136:2 137:17,20 153:8 203:4

furthering (1) 108:21 future (4) 7:12 69:17 109:22 138:2

G

G1/6/1 (1) 171:13 G1/6/5 (1) 171:24 game (1) 187:20 games (2) 58:13

148:21

gangsters (3) 187:2,3 192:8

Gatchina (1) 167:3 gate (1) 204:17 gearing (4) 18:8 141:5

141:6,15

general (12) 27:7 39:8 62:18,22 67:14 71:18 90:2 138:18 138:20 188:12,19 191:6

generally (15) 6:8 18:25 28:13 39:10 39:10 48:7,12 63:2 113:10 132:3,3 159:10 188:3 201:9 204:17

generate (1) 163:17 genuine (1) 160:15 Georgia (1) 62:25 getting (1) 126:13 gist (1) 117:2

give (30) 4:7 5:2 6:11 6:21 8:12 11:15 12:2 52:10 66:20 67:17 71:22 72:18 80:19 92:11 102:17 106:6 107:23 112:23 114:21 118:6 122:5 146:24 151:12 159:2 187:8 195:14 198:19 201:12 204:9 206:5

given (33) 3:11 6:16 9:11,14,17,19 12:6 12:14 23:22 27:8 30:11 41:24 53:9 60:20 66:19 67:1 67:14 69:14 70:5 71:5 84:18 94:10 130:25 142:24

147:14 161:22 167:12 174:9 190:11,12 192:18 201:14 207:21

gives (1) 124:19 giving (11) 4:21 11:20

61:11 92:13 102:22 103:7 104:15 115:4 117:1 130:24 203:9

glass (1) 180:23 global (6) 52:5 54:11

78:22 91:22 99:6 99:11

go (88) 16:23 19:9 20:3 21:18 22:13 29:12 31:6,11 34:22 36:16 41:7 42:20 43:24 44:14 45:6 49:2 51:23 52:6,9 53:5 54:25 55:25 56:12 57:3 59:3,24 60:12,17 61:2 62:4 74:17 80:5 81:20 82:14 83:17 84:4 90:6,9 98:19 99:18,25 101:7,17,21 104:5 117:13 118:25 119:21,22 120:13 122:14,15 124:4,11 126:14 128:11 129:10 133:15 135:7 137:8 141:23 143:4 145:9 158:14 158:19 161:20,20 162:8,18 164:22 165:15,18 166:23 167:22 170:14 173:11 175:14 180:14 182:6 189:5 190:24 191:13 193:3,24 194:1,9 195:16 201:4

goes (3) 75:11 140:20 208:10

going (63) 5:21 11:23 12:25 22:15 23:9 24:15 27:21 29:8 31:5 34:10 35:10 43:22 44:19 46:1,5 46:11 47:5 54:21 57:1 62:20 63:4,17 68:25 70:1 73:7 91:6 93:11 97:25 99:2 105:22 108:24 109:1,7 111:6,15 113:18 118:3 123:4 123:11 127:15,22 136:11 139:6 142:9 148:7 150:16 154:3 159:20 160:10 168:19 179:12 182:7 186:6 190:14 194:8 196:16 197:19 198:1,19 200:12 202:23 206:7,8

good (38) 1:5,6 7:22 9:16 12:11,15 13:1 13:2,7 16:20 47:25 53:6 55:14,19 61:16,20 70:2 74:1 79:7 82:4 108:22 112:9 113:5 141:19 157:23 164:9 178:8 181:5 187:1,21 188:15 194:14 195:3 196:10 198:9 198:9,15 208:2

goodwill (2) 59:14

172:10

Gorod (1) 70:10 government (12)

146:16 152:14 153:6 159:7 181:24 183:12 184:7 186:3 186:6 187:2 188:16 188:23

Governor (1) 157:11 granted (1) 103:17 grateful (4) 7:10

110:11 116:25 209:12

gratified (1) 208:24 great (2) 62:13 164:10 greatly (1) 1:8

greedy (2) 55:18 56:2 greeting (2) 179:14,17 Gref (20) 149:25

151:9,20,22 152:12 152:12,15,17,20,22 156:24 157:5,8,12 157:16 159:21,23 159:24 160:14,19

Grishin (1) 180:20 gross (1) 172:8 group (49) 37:15,20

42:7 45:10,16,20 48:7,11,21 49:8 55:16 57:6,16 58:15 60:15 61:5 63:10,11,25 64:15 64:16,20 78:13,18 79:7 95:16 96:25 97:1,15,16 98:25 100:5 101:20 102:13,14 118:10 118:12 133:16 135:16 140:3 141:6 141:16 142:19 148:5 157:1 163:11 172:1 175:11 193:7

group’s (9) 17:14 18:25 57:2 78:7,12 95:2 101:24 103:1 168:9

growth (1) 91:22 guarantee (8) 67:10

67:18,24 106:11,19 121:23,24 122:5

guarantees (16) 66:20 66:22 67:8,13,15 104:8,16,19,22,22 105:2,5,12,20 106:7 174:14

guidelines (3) 23:3

35:22 137:10

Guriev (4) 150:19,23

151:2,4

Guz (3) 174:12,16 196:14

GVA (3) 172:8 173:4 174:24

H

half (8) 9:21 99:7,12 103:22 104:2 131:3 131:15 185:4

halfway (5) 66:16 87:13 120:23 137:20 156:19

halt (1) 198:4

hand (6) 161:13 178:4 178:5 182:14 183:17 194:5

Handed (2) 115:2

178:5

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

219

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

handle (1) 11:16 hands (2) 1:14 108:20 happen (1) 195:20 happened (10) 2:21

36:2 68:21 93:18 101:5 111:11 112:4 114:5 125:18 180:24

happens (2) 112:16 206:20

happy (4) 26:8 86:23 91:18,20

harassment (3) 191:2 191:14 192:22

hard (3) 1:18 178:4,6

Harris (11) 32:14,19 32:21,22 33:3,21 34:2,15 46:24 89:16 90:12

head (11) 49:14 54:11 67:19 82:13 127:4 127:6 143:7 151:9 152:13 160:14 187:11

heading (3) 17:22 158:20 189:14

heads (2) 87:6,7 health (3) 27:12 32:20

33:11

hear (10) 9:21 10:2 55:22 134:5,12 155:3 179:11 204:4 204:5,6

heard (4) 2:2 110:2 182:23 183:7 hearing (8) 2:25 3:9

10:4 11:17 111:10 201:22 209:23 213:9

hearings (4) 109:19 109:21 201:11 204:25

heavily (2) 158:10 196:13

hectares (2) 164:21 165:24

held (3) 1:23 109:22 110:25

help (6) 146:11 148:14 187:18,24 187:24 188:16

helped (1) 73:11 helpful (3) 117:25

139:24 196:13 helping (1) 161:13 Helsinki (2) 84:1,2 hereon (1) 209:22 hereunder (1) 36:22 high (3) 92:1 136:5,6 higher (2) 135:12

193:21

HILDYARD (142) 1:5 1:15 3:14 4:7,10 5:6,11 6:3 7:9 9:20 9:24 10:1,5,9,12,15 10:21 11:1,23 12:13,19 13:7,12 13:17 14:4,8 15:1,7 15:18,25 16:6,14 20:9,18,22 22:7,9 25:12 26:13,25 38:15,25 39:5,16 40:1,4,7,9,15 52:13 56:14,16 61:21,24 72:6,9,18,23,25 82:6,8,12 98:2,6,10 100:23 108:4,7,9 108:12,20 109:3,6 109:10,25 111:1,17

111:23 112:17 113:17 114:22 115:1,5,14,24 116:4,15 117:7,12 117:18,23,25 119:10,13 120:7,10 156:2,4 173:12,15 185:20,23 186:9,11 186:16,19 190:16 198:2,8,10,14,19 198:23 199:9,11,15 199:20,24 200:16 201:7,20 202:12,19 203:11 204:2,8,21 205:15 206:5,11 207:7,14,23 208:2 208:9,14,18,24 209:3,10,14,21

hindsight (1) 55:19 history (2) 200:19

206:11 hitherto (1) 135:12 hold (2) 95:16 144:3 holders (1) 206:3 holdings (6) 120:25

121:3,5,7,11

139:15 holds (1) 172:7

holidays (2) 23:5,22 home (3) 102:8

103:11,14 homework (1) 44:17 honest (1) 91:15 hope (1) 9:10

host (1) 201:24 hotel (3) 164:6,7,7 housekeeping (10)

1:3,7 108:16 198:16,17 199:4 201:11 213:3,6,8

houses (2) 168:16,17 HQ (1) 54:12

huge (6) 14:18 38:12 101:2 176:15 179:1 192:21

hundreds (1) 16:4

I

idea (6) 55:15 128:1 138:18 181:2,5,23
identified (7) 16:12 31:19 90:23 111:14 116:21 147:18 204:13

identify (4) 16:1 61:14 114:16 206:23

IFRS (4) 59:9,19 60:9 60:14

Igor (1) 123:18 illegal (3) 184:15

193:8 197:10

Illinois (1) 178:18

Ilya (2) 151:17 159:24 imagine (5) 80:7

194:25 195:20 205:24 207:2 immaterial (1) 113:21 immediate (1) 130:25 immediately (6) 2:1

6:8 142:1 185:2,19 193:13

impact (1) 91:25 implement (1) 96:5 implemented (2)

135:5 201:15

implication (2) 51:2

191:10

implicit (1) 110:19

implicitly (2) 36:23 204:16 25:1 27:6,25 34:19 35:15,24 39:17 key (15) 23:20 28:22
110:23 information (22) 38:12 42:19 48:13 40:8 47:13 50:18 46:2 48:13,17
implies (1) 129:2 17:17,21 18:13,23 48:14 92:16 107:22 50:22 53:20 54:23 50:20 52:11,12
importance (4) 113:2 34:17 35:8 74:15 124:9 135:22 78:24 84:17 175:6 73:9 85:10 123:19
114:13,13 125:14 77:16 85:17 86:13 177:22 Jewish (1) 179:9 125:14 126:23
important (28) 4:13 89:24 107:3,25 internet (1) 143:17 job (1) 209:4 153:18 182:19
4:19 6:21 10:4 21:1 118:20 120:5 Interpol (1) 185:6 joint (3) 125:10,10,15 KGB (3) 75:17 76:8
23:24 24:6 35:7 122:14 123:25 Interpreted (2) 11:3 Jot (1) 26:25 77:24
47:18,22 52:8 125:22 126:6,17 106:19 judge (1) 6:9 KGT (2) 175:12,24
53:16 54:23 57:24 127:7 186:15 interpreter (2) 10:2 judgment (2) 7:3 Khlebokombinat (2)
60:13 63:21 73:15 informed (3) 57:22 10:19 184:13 153:9,23
91:17 95:19 101:4 196:4 206:17 interpreters (3) July (13) 150:1,2 kick (1) 111:9
112:21 114:3,4 informing (1) 128:8 106:17 203:16 152:1 154:18,22 kid (3) 97:7 102:17
128:20 150:8 infrastructural (1) 204:14 156:10 158:23 103:7
151:16 157:6 157:14 interpretive (1) 159:9,17 174:5 kids (2) 102:8 103:11
159:25 infrastructure (6) 201:23 188:13 193:17 killed (2) 189:3 193:3
impossible (1) 36:3 38:13 41:1 54:2,11 intervene (4) 8:21 195:9 kilometres’ (1) 33:24
impression (2) 194:14 156:23 180:19 92:17 183:13 186:4 jumping (1) 45:1 kind (12) 53:10 54:19
194:16 initial (5) 87:9 88:2,3 intervention (1) 184:3 June (23) 36:1 66:23 85:11 88:14 94:22
imprisonment (1) 132:20 174:5 interview (2) 143:18 68:3,6,9,18,20,25 102:16 121:17
192:25 initially (1) 188:2 143:25 69:4,13 79:19 80:1 130:18 134:16
impropriety (1) 7:16 initials (1) 133:12 interviews (1) 192:19 80:9,14 104:7 177:9 187:11,20
improve (1) 37:22 initiative (5) 56:1 75:6 introduce (1) 153:20 158:23 159:1 162:2 kindly (2) 95:5,16
in-house (1) 185:16 118:7 122:4 142:18 invest (1) 36:25 190:8,23 191:15 KIT (44) 47:8 55:10
in-private (5) 109:14 initiatives (3) 126:21 invested (1) 176:8 192:1 193:16 90:2 118:4,6,11,21
111:10,13 112:12 134:14 196:23 investigation (1) JUSTICE (142) 1:5,15 119:25 120:1,15
207:22 inside (2) 45:1 132:19 188:25 3:14 4:7,10 5:6,11 121:19 122:4
inability (2) 95:11,14 insinuating (1) 132:15 investigations (1) 6:3 7:9 9:20,24 123:13,18,24 124:8
inaccurate (4) 7:18,20 insinuations (3) 59:8 158:12 10:1,5,9,12,15,21 124:12,16 125:8,11
68:11 102:5 115:7 117:4 investigative (1) 30:24 11:1,23 12:13,19 125:11,20 126:20
inaction (2) 95:10,23 insist (1) 80:16 investing (1) 180:11 13:7,12,17 14:4,8 127:6,19 128:13,17
inadequate (1) 5:19 Insofar (1) 201:21 investment (9) 11:18 15:1,7,18,25 16:6 130:21 131:2 132:2
inclined (1) 113:24 insolvent (1) 58:18 55:9 76:24 85:12 16:14 20:9,18,22 133:19 139:3
include (2) 24:11 94:5 instability (1) 58:2 131:16 132:19 22:7,9 25:12 26:13 141:19 142:2,2,6
included (5) 34:25 installed (1) 13:5 139:16 154:1 176:2 26:25 38:15,25 142:17 143:8 154:1
91:7 185:17 186:18 institution (1) 67:20 Investments (1) 39:5,16 40:1,4,7,9 154:8 175:25 176:1
192:10 institutions (1) 93:24 180:18 40:15 52:13 56:14 176:2 196:25
includes (1) 87:14 instructing (1) 117:11 investor (4) 175:21 56:16 61:21,24 KIT/LPN (1) 129:18
including (16) 13:17 instruction (1) 15:14 176:6,8 180:10 72:6,9,18,23,25 know (61) 6:13 7:13
14:19 15:10 23:4 instruments (1) investors (2) 127:17 82:6,8,12 98:2,6,10 12:16 14:22 23:19
24:9 40:20 45:24 130:11 176:15 100:23 108:4,7,9 36:2 42:15 51:12
48:15 54:10 59:14 insufficient (1) 104:9 invitation (1) 178:10 108:12,20 109:3,6 51:25 52:8 53:7
88:14 95:14 111:13 Insurance (1) 163:20 invite (1) 209:18 109:10,25 111:1,17 58:5 61:16 65:24
136:23 155:7 integrity (1) 104:10 invited (3) 180:2 111:23 112:17 66:8 67:12,19
162:12 intended (3) 37:23 183:18,20 113:17 114:22 77:15 86:19 101:1
Inclusive (1) 50:4 110:5,16 involved (16) 19:6 115:1,5,14,24 106:14 110:17
income (2) 140:16 intense (1) 191:14 32:1 54:13,24 116:4,15 117:7,12 111:3 115:6 116:6
197:8 intensified (3) 106:12 77:17 87:23 100:6 117:18,23,25 119:4 120:5 121:12
inconsistent (3) 161:5 106:19 193:11 100:15,20 101:12 119:10,13 120:7,10 131:9 133:10
191:24,25 intent (1) 11:4 102:19 117:3 156:2,4 173:12,15 134:20,22 137:8
incorrect (1) 173:13 intention (1) 140:24 141:22 158:10 185:20,23 186:9,11 138:16,17 144:16
increase (2) 141:5 intentions (2) 11:13 197:17 200:19 186:16,19 190:16 148:13 152:7 155:3
147:12 50:24 involvement (1) 38:25 198:2,8,10,14,19 167:16 180:12
increased (2) 141:7 intercreditor (4) 138:5 involving (2) 86:25 198:23 199:9,11,15 181:11 183:24
148:1 138:13 139:2 141:9 123:13 199:20,24 200:16 186:22,24 187:20
independent (13) interest (19) 19:18,24 isolated (1) 139:9 201:7,20 202:12,19 187:24 190:9,20
29:19 30:7 34:13 20:10 23:5,21,23 issue (21) 46:2 48:13 203:11 204:2,8,21 192:5,6,7 193:6
34:15,18 46:6,12 24:10 41:15,17 73:9 103:25 112:2 205:15 206:5,11 194:13,24 195:3,17
46:18,20,21,23 42:2,17 47:4 55:17 118:12,12 122:19 207:7,14,23 208:2 197:23 200:17
92:16 169:13 57:13 63:11 82:22 122:25 124:25 208:9,14,18,24 207:12 208:21
independently (2) 83:7 125:14 153:22 128:20 131:3 209:3,10,14,21 knowing (3) 6:22 41:3
34:12 167:10 interested (10) 42:16 132:10 133:19 131:1
INDEX (1) 213:1 42:17 44:23,25 142:11 151:16 K knowledge (4) 59:9
indicated (1) 81:1 49:8 73:13 171:3 199:25 200:1 Kalininsky (1) 185:9 101:16 171:19
indirectly (1) 149:16 179:11 187:21 203:18 205:6,14 196:1
keen (2) 112:18 139:8
individual (2) 168:16 204:10 issued (1) 126:1 known (5) 151:2
keep (10) 8:5 47:11
168:25 interesting (5) 94:9 issues (10) 1:11 13:24 161:1 179:9 189:24
70:1 108:23 109:7
individuals (1) 54:10 142:14 176:4 20:4 50:20 78:22 193:20
132:24 139:8 154:3
industries (3) 177:10 179:16 199:5 115:10 130:8 Kozak (4) 123:18
196:3 197:25
178:25 182:19 interests (4) 78:4 133:17,21 206:23 126:14,23 127:13
keeping (2) 143:6
industry (4) 178:20 121:25 149:15 issuing (2) 120:15 Krasnoyarsk (1)
174:10
179:18 180:19 190:4 130:22 157:11
keeps (1) 149:9
181:1 interior (3) 191:2,5,6 item (3) 164:22
Keith (9) 28:9 41:14
inefficient (1) 105:16 interlinked (1) 126:9 165:18 199:4 L
44:9 55:5 89:7
inevitable (1) 3:19 internal (2) 44:2 Ivan (1) 180:25 lack (1) 127:7
91:17 123:18
influence (1) 152:18 141:17
128:19 139:23 Lair (3) 169:12,24,25
info (2) 90:2,3 internally (2) 41:22 J
kept (2) 142:22 land (9) 140:25 155:9
inform (4) 94:23 140:10 January (13) 33:4
149:10 164:8 165:20
127:16 129:8 international (13)

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

220
February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

166:13,17,19,21,22 121:13 134:19 168:9 169:2 170:21 61:23 62:4 72:8,11 machine (2) 115:20 Materov (2) 180:25 123:19

language (10) 3:15 135:19 137:2 173:1,9,22 72:15,19,24 82:14 186:21 183:3 memory (2) 26:23
33:14 104:19,19,22 162:25 163:6,16 local (9) 19:7 48:16 98:3,3,7,8,11 101:7 Macpherson (1) 21:2 maths (1) 42:10 112:20
105:8 106:18 164:19 166:5,23,24 54:12 124:10 108:1,1,8,11,17,22 Madame (2) 102:7 matter (22) 1:18 2:2,4 mention (2) 174:25
115:23 174:12 167:23 168:4 181:17,25 187:12 109:1,4,8,11 166:1 12:4,21 21:1 24:18 200:12
209:6 173:11,18 174:25 192:16,17 110:23,23 111:2,22 mafia (6) 148:21 26:2 29:16 33:24 mentioned (5) 71:21
large (3) 49:7 94:10 175:1,7 182:21 locals (1) 92:25 112:10,25 113:2 182:1 184:8 185:25 42:23 52:23 69:23 154:7 166:16,18
131:4 183:8,9 located (1) 163:24 115:7 118:2,3 186:2 192:16 109:4,18 117:9 201:7
large-scale (1) 157:14 letters (12) 37:5 50:23 lodged (3) 4:18,22 119:15 120:13 Magnum (15) 2:15 198:22 199:2 merit (1) 1:15
lasting (2) 152:12 93:10 119:12 6:14 156:9 173:14,17 116:6 178:7 190:19 200:10,10 203:12 mess (2) 70:1 192:20
154:20 129:13 160:4 logic (3) 80:4 121:12 188:1 190:24 201:3,4 202:6,11 209:17 message (6) 182:17
late (2) 63:8 147:19 174:12,16 181:2 180:18 197:19,19 198:5,7 203:1,6,10,13 matters (20) 1:7 3:22 192:2,4,8 193:4,14
latest (1) 39:17 188:12,17,22 logical (1) 80:4 198:11,12,12,17,17 206:8 207:8,10 5:20 7:9,16,18,23 met (12) 32:14 33:3
law (2) 172:3 184:1 level (8) 42:19 77:10 logistical (1) 203:8 198:21 199:2,23,25 main (4) 23:22 48:5 8:3,18 9:7 12:2 40:8 49:7 50:17
lawyers (6) 37:3 73:13 135:11 184:4,13 London (10) 32:25 199:25 200:12 48:10 103:21 15:10,13 22:14 53:18 54:10 72:20
88:6 96:5 137:13 187:2,3 193:21 33:3 72:13 88:6 201:10 202:21,22 maintenance (2) 24:15 31:18 109:12 81:23 85:7 157:9
138:24 levels (2) 39:15 94:19 126:1 200:22 201:1 203:24 204:1,3,24 111:7 122:20 110:2 113:9 198:17 179:15
lead (3) 24:7 38:23 Levitskaya (6) 97:7 201:21 203:9 205:4 207:6,13 208:1,6 major (15) 27:24 maturity (2) 132:11 metre (1) 164:20
109:15 101:2 185:15,15 long (23) 6:9 18:3 208:11,13,16,16 47:24 65:12 71:18 132:23 metres (1) 165:21
leaders (2) 105:5,20 189:1 192:21 23:21 27:8 30:18 209:15,16,16 213:5 81:24 117:22 Matvienka (1) 183:10 mid-2009 (1) 145:19
leading (9) 25:1 27:6 liability (1) 102:15 42:18 45:2 59:16 213:7 133:21 142:23 Matvienko (3) 75:23 mid-flow (1) 109:7
27:10,25 30:9 lie (1) 3:8 62:21 63:22 85:9 Lordship (45) 1:4,10 162:15 177:22 76:12 184:3 middle (17) 47:20
33:20 40:19 125:12 lies (3) 3:24 4:1 77:22 92:19 94:8 96:2 2:9 5:1 6:19 10:19 184:20,20 185:7 Mayor (1) 179:14 84:5 88:4 89:2
175:11 life (3) 101:1 193:7 100:20 106:7 14:25 15:16 25:4 192:12 209:12 mean (28) 3:23 5:10 115:15 124:21
leaps (1) 5:13 195:11 115:16 116:19 26:8,22 43:24 making (4) 44:17 6:1 7:25 16:17,18 125:1 133:4 147:11
learned (2) 117:10 light (1) 189:9 131:4 152:5,12 45:19 60:4,8 91:13 102:24 135:15 22:8 26:23 27:16 148:12,20 156:13
144:2 likelihood (1) 63:10 154:20 197:23 92:14 108:17,18 190:13 38:18 47:23 61:18 170:17 171:4
learning (1) 125:6 limit (2) 9:6 149:12 long-term (1) 83:4 109:4,8,11,18 man (6) 81:25 82:10 72:13 108:22 184:21 193:10,22
lease (1) 95:8 limitations (1) 128:2 longer (5) 45:2 101:25 111:14 114:19 143:15 144:18,19 109:25 110:9 131:9 midnight (1) 115:8
leave (2) 7:9 68:9 limited (4) 96:25 103:2 131:19 119:25 121:6 179:15 132:23 146:5,14 million (42) 17:14
lecture (1) 187:10 98:25 102:13,14 146:18 144:14 170:11,13 managed (6) 69:15 153:11 167:19 18:3,4,10,20,20
led (1) 160:19 limiting (1) 146:19 look (41) 22:18 24:13 171:18 178:5 70:6 71:6 130:9 198:13 200:1,21 42:1,11 53:10,10
left (5) 65:23 68:25 limits (3) 49:15,16 29:14 30:12 39:18 190:10 191:19 142:4 195:21 202:1 203:11 56:21 59:11,21,22
152:10 196:19 147:5 52:20 58:20 61:10 192:1 197:24 management (6) 95:5 204:19 60:2,5,25 61:15
197:7 line (6) 20:15 57:5 64:13 65:14 66:2 199:18 200:1,8 106:12,20 116:11 means (17) 4:23 7:25 64:17 81:2 97:23
legal (1) 196:21 95:1 110:15,15 66:16 68:1 72:9 201:12,14 203:2 153:2 196:3 19:6 39:1 46:21 98:1 99:13 118:14
legislation (1) 182:2 121:1 74:7 76:13 87:13 205:6 208:15 manager (2) 51:11 104:19,23 106:14 120:16 123:6 134:5
Lehman (3) 51:15 lines (2) 106:1 124:22 91:10,21 95:1 209:20 85:11 130:22 131:12 135:13 141:4 148:2
52:3 141:25 liquidity (2) 57:25 103:16 105:7 Lordship’s (7) 1:14 managers (1) 81:24 154:4 167:16 173:9 148:3 165:13 166:2
lend (3) 86:17,17 63:9 108:11 114:17 17:19 116:11 mandate (8) 36:6,8 184:25 185:1,17 172:13,15,17 173:2
147:22 list (9) 4:11 11:3 12:2 120:22 124:21 119:23 189:9 203:5 37:14 40:21 55:3 205:13 173:5,6,9,10
lender (7) 18:14 128:4 46:22 49:9 94:6 127:12 136:7 205:11 81:12,12,18 meant (6) 94:7 110:20 174:15
128:5 138:14 139:7 163:13 182:7 149:20 150:9 lose (1) 1:12 mandating (1) 36:8 146:12 167:2,17 Millions (1) 172:14
139:9,13 186:18 156:13 159:16 lost (6) 77:20 169:19 manipulating (1) 168:17 Milner (2) 61:19 62:1
lender’s (1) 135:17 listed (1) 182:3 164:5,18 169:3 196:20,21 197:9,20 104:18 measure (1) 58:18 mind (3) 8:5 25:6
lenders (12) 47:5 listen (2) 201:6 178:13 182:7 lot (14) 59:8 69:1 manner (1) 57:8 mechanism (1) 205:9 26:16
127:22,23 128:7,7 202:10 190:20 195:24 89:24 113:18 129:6 Manturov (1) 179:22 Medvedev (5) 188:18 minded (2) 108:18
129:5 135:15 listened (2) 201:3 200:17 204:15 130:6 135:19 March (31) 48:3,4 188:19 191:18 110:10
137:25 138:1,6,15 203:3 looked (2) 110:19 137:11 141:17 65:8 72:21 83:14 192:2 193:14 minimising (1) 7:14
139:8 lists (1) 94:3 111:23 152:15 160:4 84:21,22 85:15 meet (15) 50:21 53:14 minister (10) 152:22
lending (3) 130:7 litigation (2) 14:11 looking (9) 42:25 175:23 179:8 197:1 86:4,10,11,17 54:4,17 57:12 58:4 152:23 177:10
131:1 147:24 97:4 49:25 61:11 73:13 lots (3) 5:21 150:9 100:11 107:2,4,10 68:7 75:6 135:17 181:1 182:18 183:4
length (2) 108:24 little (4) 9:1 18:6 97:22 98:16 111:12 194:8 107:16,24 108:5 151:22 152:17 188:17,19 192:3,15
109:2 53:13 164:2 112:4 161:11 loves (1) 176:13 148:17 163:2 168:4 159:24 161:2 181:2 ministers (2) 183:1,18
Leningrad (3) 93:8,15 Litvina (1) 156:17 looks (36) 29:7 36:6,7 low (3) 77:10 90:25 168:6 169:16,17,18 181:23 ministry (7) 157:18
95:3 live (1) 124:18 36:12 41:8 54:16 164:3 172:25 174:20 meeting (27) 35:14 178:20,25 179:18
lest (1) 5:19 living (1) 179:11 67:16 69:21 71:8 low/medium (1) 176:11 197:9,9 40:11 54:20,23 191:3,5,6
let’s (23) 20:18 33:24 LLC (1) 172:1 76:14 80:4 81:7,11 91:25 Marine (6) 11:5 95:6 65:2,7 73:1,15 84:1 minor (3) 2:14 28:1
36:5 39:8 47:20,21 loaded (2) 190:19 81:20 87:6 96:24 LPN (21) 48:15 121:13 100:5 133:16 95:17 107:3 125:8 39:3
49:18,18 52:2 205:21 100:16 101:8 125:1 127:15,25 163:11 172:1 125:10,19,20 minute (4) 9:21 35:3
57:25 68:22 71:23 loan (29) 23:21 42:2 104:13 120:19 128:16 129:21,24 marked (1) 209:21 127:19 128:21,22 144:6,9
100:19 109:10 50:13 53:10,11 122:3 123:24,25 130:6,7,9,10,13,18 market (36) 23:18 149:25 151:16,20 minutes (8) 3:10 5:9
134:16 137:1 57:8,12,17,23 58:3 124:13 126:20 130:22 132:2,18 24:18,22,24 25:2 151:21 152:16 6:11 12:15 56:13
138:20 146:25 63:12 68:7 70:14 132:13 144:1 133:5 136:4 142:23 27:4,9,21,24 28:5 153:2 156:24,24 56:16 147:10 173:8
176:17 181:3 75:2 81:2 83:15 159:19 164:19,23 154:17 28:11,12,18 29:9 157:6 Mironova (1) 162:13
186:12,13 194:17 86:25 87:4 98:1 165:20 166:7,10 LPNs (3) 133:17,19 32:5,12,19 33:6,14 meetings (9) 32:21,24 mislead (2) 6:17 7:7
letter (73) 17:10 99:1,2 118:13 175:19 177:13 141:24 33:21,22,22,25 51:24 52:11 125:15 misleading (3) 2:24
19:10,16,17,18,21 120:15 122:6 180:1 lucky (1) 195:20 62:19 63:1,4 64:2 149:21 157:9 6:24 160:24
19:24 20:6,7,10,13 140:11 141:4 Lord (121) 1:4,7,7 2:8 lunch (1) 2:3 70:12 78:1 89:11 175:23 196:3 misled (1) 6:22
21:2,3,4,5,8,8,13 162:15 172:17 2:23 3:8 4:14 7:19 Luncheon (1) 108:14 89:16 90:3 104:3 meets (1) 164:23 misrepresented (1)
21:18,24 29:10,12 174:10 8:2,9,25 9:24 10:19 lying (3) 2:23 3:21 135:11 143:8 151:2 member (4) 94:17 3:17
31:2,19 33:7 34:9 loans (28) 38:20 58:8 12:21,25 13:8,8 7:25 marketing (2) 25:1,2 150:19,23 151:5 missed (2) 20:21
34:22 35:8 36:6,8 64:1 78:14,19 79:9 14:9,9,13,20,24 Lyvovich (2) 71:22,24 markets (1) 37:20 members (2) 94:21 180:25
37:14 38:6,7,9 80:10,14 101:25 15:1,5,5,8,19 16:7 match (1) 166:19 151:25 missing (3) 114:24
39:18,23,24 40:1 103:2 130:20 16:22,23 20:15,24 M material (2) 12:8 memorandum (9) 116:17,22
40:22 47:13 48:1 131:17 136:3 21:7 22:13 25:13 M1/20/11 (1) 61:3 200:7 17:17,22 18:14,23 mistake (3) 20:22
50:15 51:25 81:7 145:19 147:7,7,12 25:17 26:14 27:16 materialised (1) 118:20 122:14 181:6 204:12
M1/20/7 (2) 60:12,17
83:7 84:16 85:1,13 147:13 148:1,12 27:19 40:16 51:25 196:18 125:22 154:1 176:2 mistaken (4) 67:23
M1/20/8 (1) 61:2
93:6 116:5,7,16 162:14 165:14 53:12 56:15,15,20 materials (1) 46:7 memorandums (1) 82:11 100:14

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

221

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

101:15

mistakes (2) 55:21 102:24

mistaking (1) 100:21 mitigation (1) 30:17 Mitrienko (1) 11:8 mixed (1) 164:6 mixing (1) 194:8 Mm (1) 66:9 mobile (2) 192:23

193:5

model (8) 22:20 23:8 23:24 24:3,11,11 31:25 32:1

modelling (3) 23:15 34:11 46:19

moderated (1) 192:10 moderation (1) 192:6 Moderator (1) 180:20 modernisation (1)

122:20 modes (1) 135:2

Molidjorzny (1) 149:8 moment (11) 3:19

15:2 25:5 38:15 106:5 111:4 120:8 124:17 132:7 148:5 155:22

Monday (1) 1:1 money (24) 18:15

49:4 51:5 52:16,18 52:22 58:8 86:17 86:17 87:24 107:14 142:5,24 146:25 147:2,4,22,24 161:24 168:18 170:15 176:13 197:1,14

monies (1) 18:24 month (9) 43:19 45:9

45:21 47:3 50:9 63:13 68:22 141:20 169:20

monthly (6) 34:25 37:16 43:18 53:2 55:15 197:15

months (24) 6:13 37:23 47:21 51:16 62:6,12 63:14 66:20 78:25 79:8 86:22 103:17 130:24 132:13 137:2 140:22 162:20,22 166:25 167:8,13 168:8 203:19 204:21

Mood (1) 157:23 morning (8) 1:5,6,17

14:9 197:20 198:3 198:13,14

mortgage (3) 106:8,21 174:6

mortgaged (5) 106:13 164:9 169:14 170:3 172:18

mortgages (7) 66:20 69:14 70:5 71:5 87:25 88:1 104:23

Moscow (5) 32:25 151:20 152:17 159:10 195:9

move (4) 41:22 126:8 126:12 197:19 moved (3) 176:18,20

199:3 movie (1) 145:7 movies (1) 2:19

multi-storey (1) 164:6 multiply (1) 42:12

N

N11/19/85 (3) 72:5 73:8,16
N11/19/86 (1) 74:18 N11/19/87 (1) 73:19 naive (6) 159:13

160:13 181:6 186:25 187:7,7 name (27) 11:8 25:8

25:18 34:3,3 39:20 39:21,23 71:23 82:6 127:2 131:10 143:7 144:15,22 145:1 154:2,7,8 159:14,14 175:24 180:10,21 181:1 182:5,10

names (1) 34:16 Natalya (3) 96:19,24

128:13

national (6) 177:8,9 178:12,17 182:1,2

Naturally (2) 106:11

106:19

nature (2) 138:9 209:19

Nazarov (1) 189:2 nearly (3) 35:16

165:11 167:17 necessarily (4) 4:10 109:23 111:9

193:22 necessary (13) 6:20

8:6,7 14:3 30:18 32:22 49:4 88:7 96:10,10 128:2 139:5 167:21

necessity (2) 95:7 197:18

need (34) 3:10 5:9 6:8 9:7 20:4 22:2,21,23 23:9 29:18 30:6 38:15 52:22 53:11 58:8 66:13 90:2 115:21 117:5,6 127:16 129:1 131:23 167:8 173:15 185:20 203:8 205:8 206:9 208:3,6,7,17 209:17

needed (4) 53:4 57:17 96:5,11

needs (2) 5:13,14 negative (1) 59:14 negotiate (2) 37:13

66:18

negotiated (1) 157:13 negotiation (1) 52:12 negotiations (7) 50:17 75:25 76:18 83:2

83:12 142:9 157:18 neighbouring (2)

153:25 155:9 neither (1) 69:9

net (3) 59:21,21 61:15 neutral (3) 109:17

112:15 199:21

Neutralis (1) 21:2 never (25) 4:22 35:4

35:17 56:20 67:14 67:23 84:13,14 100:6 104:9 106:6 106:23 107:1,14,16 135:1 138:16 139:6 141:24 142:4 175:17,17 182:22 183:7,9

new (15) 12:8 122:23 126:17 131:25 132:4 136:5 143:19 143:21 146:19 147:12,12 159:11 176:14,14 202:5

newspaper (1) 192:18 newspapers (1)

192:12

nice (4) 81:23 82:2 177:24 179:15

Nigel (1) 54:4 night (1) 115:16 nine (9) 2:22 3:8 4:7

5:11,22 6:4 8:19 25:15 86:22

no-recourse (1)

138:20 non (1) 75:12

non-official (1) 194:17 non-profile (1) 163:11 normal (9) 6:20 23:17 24:4 38:11 45:4

93:1 143:2 183:21 193:8

normally (17) 23:19 31:8,11 34:18 39:2 50:23 86:19 130:24 131:7,13,15,18 144:14 179:4,4 188:23 192:5

north (6) 27:5 28:13 49:14 65:12 90:17 91:11

notable (1) 157:8 note (25) 40:4 64:25

65:14 66:2 67:16 67:17 68:2,11 69:12 72:7,16,19 74:3,23 76:13,14 77:11 116:17 119:23 129:18 130:22 133:8 200:1 208:7,13

noted (2) 97:23 203:2 notes (15) 25:5,6,7,11 25:12,17 26:1,9 110:7,22 118:13 120:15,16 121:13

123:25 notice (1) 147:25

noticed (1) 168:23 notwithstanding (1)

69:22

novel (1) 206:12 November (24) 41:10

43:12 44:14 45:20 46:5,11 50:15 57:6 63:8 66:4 101:24 102:7,18 103:1 176:18,19 177:2 178:11,14,18 180:15 182:13 188:14 194:1

Novikov (19) 49:14 53:7 65:2,10 66:8 67:19 71:20 72:20 75:20 83:24 84:17 85:4,6,7,8 149:1,2 149:13 153:3

Novikov’s (1) 66:9

Novosaratovka (1)

167:3

Novy (1) 70:10 number (34) 6:16

12:17 15:12,20 20:4 22:14 32:21 37:10 42:22 45:23 47:6 49:7 51:8 52:3

63:3 74:20 85:22 91:1 92:7,8 93:10 94:10 107:23 116:21 134:3 162:11 166:5,9 168:24 172:3 179:10 189:3 192:12,19

numbers (1) 13:16

O

oath (1) 77:6 objection (2) 200:5
205:25 objective (3) 9:13

48:6,11 obligations (2) 57:8

68:7 obscure (1) 9:9 observations (1)

74:20

obtain (1) 116:23 obtained (3) 16:16 67:10 120:5

obviously (8) 1:13,18 109:14 141:5 145:5 154:25 179:13 200:9

occurred (1) 107:17 October (17) 37:13,19

49:6,18,25 57:11 57:13,18 58:15 73:25 93:19 102:17 132:10,11 177:18 188:13 197:13

odd (1) 194:3

offer (5) 36:25 41:22 55:7 67:8 176:3

offered (5) 121:21 134:21 164:5 165:16 176:4

offering (10) 40:17,19 55:10 121:9 130:21 130:23 162:12 163:22 164:19 173:19

office (4) 54:13 102:18 103:9 155:10

officers (3) 75:17 77:24,24

offices (1) 54:5 official (8) 76:8 85:17

95:23 100:11 169:12 182:15 203:16 205:15 officially (1) 86:13 officials (4) 93:13 189:23 191:3

194:18

oh (6) 20:18 22:11 98:6 115:1 155:23 200:16

okay (11) 6:6 9:16 10:11 19:19 22:11 72:9 99:10 106:3 120:12 144:7 199:15

old (2) 186:24 194:23

Olga (1) 74:2

OMG (82) 18:2 28:9 30:3 34:12 35:4,12 35:17 36:8,12 41:25 42:1,7,14 43:24 45:10,20 46:8 48:7,11 49:23 50:6 55:13 57:2,11 57:16 58:4,7,15,23

61:5 62:16 63:17 64:9 68:6 77:20 78:18 80:2,13 86:17 88:11 96:25 97:16 98:25 99:6 99:11 100:1 102:12 103:1 107:20,21 118:22 124:17 125:2,21 126:21 127:16 128:17 131:23 135:24 137:25 139:9 140:23 141:5,14,16 142:19 147:15 151:25 154:15 156:21 157:1,3 163:16 164:12 169:16 174:2 175:12,19 176:8 196:8 197:7,14

once (5) 12:18 15:12 38:22 41:20 126:6

Onega (1) 28:15 ongoing (3) 52:4 69:2

176:15 onwards (1) 199:1 open (11) 8:5 59:25

110:2 112:5,8 113:18,24,25 114:14 128:6 204:17

opened (2) 113:23 176:5

opening (3) 6:15,15 6:19

operating (4) 47:10 59:18 201:18 205:20

operation (1) 186:21 operations (5) 38:10

68:15 102:19 142:3 142:6

opine (1) 29:20 opinion (6) 77:11,13

92:22 100:18 104:3 134:16

opportunities (1) 9:11 opportunity (9) 8:13

9:4,14 50:22 116:23 183:25 194:19 195:4,11

optimal (1) 135:20 option (3) 142:23 143:2 170:18 options (12) 42:22

44:3,4,20 47:15,15 135:21 162:11 168:12,22 175:22 176:5

Opus (6) 12:14 84:18 201:15 203:4 205:1 205:3

order (19) 9:3 22:3 57:12,17 58:4 75:2 113:25 114:20,24 116:14 117:13 126:13 136:22 148:6 149:6 163:17 170:15 171:16 197:14

orders (1) 116:11 organisation (3) 11:4

85:15 125:13

organisations (1)

160:5

organised (9) 3:4 73:1 151:11,17,20,21 152:16 178:20,23

oriented (1) 132:4

original (1) 120:8 originals (1) 120:4
Oslo (4) 100:5 133:16

163:11 172:1

ought (2) 59:3 201:18 outcome (2) 111:2

195:8 outline (1) 82:17

outstanding (1) 19:7 over-borrowed (1)

135:25

overnight (3) 53:10 142:25 194:25 overstretched (1)

135:25 overturned (1) 7:4 owed (4) 64:16,17

65:17 68:7 owned (7) 146:15,16

147:10 154:13,14 154:15 163:11

owner (7) 50:25 71:19 75:23 140:24 153:19 172:5 175:4

owners (3) 154:19 167:20 172:4 ownership (1) 88:11

Oxus (18) 19:12 20:7 20:15,16 21:3 24:23 27:9 33:19 37:13 43:12,21 124:7 129:18,19,25 133:9 176:2 196:24

Oxus’ (1) 134:2

Oxus/OMG (1) 129:22

P

page (93) 5:14 14:22 15:6,21 16:8,10 17:17,21 22:13 24:14 26:24 27:1 29:2 30:13 34:22 34:23 36:16 39:22 41:8 42:20,20 59:6 59:25 61:2 63:6 65:14 66:2,16 68:2 74:10,14,17 76:20 79:12,13,14 81:20 82:15 83:17 84:6 87:14 89:22 90:6 90:15 97:13,18 98:4,4,9,18,20 99:3 99:3,9,18,25 101:7 101:21 103:16 104:5 119:5,7,11 120:14,20 121:8,9 122:16 123:10 124:22 126:5 127:12 128:11 133:11,15 135:7,8 139:19,20,21 140:1 149:24 156:13 167:1 175:14 178:13 179:13 180:14 182:6 191:13 198:20 199:11 213:2

pages (13) 15:22,23 15:25 16:4,11 79:14 91:16 98:7 110:14 114:23 116:17,19,22

paid (7) 50:11 83:19 83:20,21 119:24 183:21,22

panel (2) 181:12

182:4

panels (1) 180:2

paper (1) 39:13 paragraph (95) 16:24
17:4,5 19:23 21:11 21:15,16 22:6,7,7 22:18,19 24:14 29:15,15 30:13 36:17 37:8,11 38:2 42:24 45:7,8 49:2 51:2 52:17 53:22 57:3 58:20,22 60:1 60:20 61:2,3,25 62:4,8 63:6 64:13 66:6,7,17 68:1 69:12 72:15,19 74:23 78:5,10 79:2 79:14,17,23 80:5 80:19 82:17,21 84:5 85:20,23 86:16 98:8 99:4,8,9 101:22 104:6,6 105:3,4,10,13,18 107:5,7 118:8 122:11 124:21 137:17,19 145:9,16 149:20 158:18,19 161:21 162:8 167:23,25 169:3 171:25 189:14 190:25 196:1,15

paragraphs (6) 55:2 61:4 67:7 98:13 146:22 148:8

parallel (7) 47:12 79:13 118:10 125:7 133:22 134:7,14

parent (1) 18:9 Paribas (64) 17:1,7

19:5,10 21:23 22:14 23:13 24:6,7 24:14,21 26:1,5,7 27:17,20 28:2,3,17 28:21,23 29:7,16 30:2,5,14,22 31:4 31:18 32:13,19 33:6 34:9,24 35:14 35:21 36:8,18,23 38:4,22 40:17 41:16 43:18 44:15 44:21 45:22 46:5 46:11 48:15 50:6 50:17,20 51:22 53:4,13,24 54:17 55:15 56:1 90:1 130:8,20 138:21

Paribas’ (2) 39:3 48:25

Paris (6) 35:15 40:8 54:4,12 204:25 207:17

Parker (17) 28:9,18 44:9 89:7 91:17 123:14,18 124:12 124:22 125:22 126:14 127:12 128:14 129:10 133:10 139:22 140:2

part (27) 14:18 22:15 24:4 27:8 28:13 31:9,25 32:13 36:19 37:4 45:4 53:16 76:4 94:20 112:6 116:10,13 157:3 158:6 163:20 173:12 177:2 178:23 182:14 195:13 202:18 205:10

partially (1) 24:9 participant (1) 182:4

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

222
February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

participating (2) 82:24 114:10 201:8,12,14 166:22 140:16 164:3 165:8 140:9,15 144:20 192:11 35:23 38:5 44:12

179:20 203:5 204:9 207:19 Piotrovsky (1) 190:2 165:11 166:10,15 162:19 194:19 pressed (2) 68:9 45:5 46:14 86:1
participation (6) 83:10 207:25 place (4) 39:17 157:2 169:9 170:3 172:22 199:20,23 206:17 75:17 88:1 96:9 118:10
118:13 121:13 permissions (1) 11:21 168:10 192:25 173:25 174:19 206:18 pressure (10) 62:13 125:2 128:3 165:13
157:2 183:21,22 permitting (1) 204:16 placement (2) 131:1 pledging (2) 121:7,11 positions (3) 111:6 75:20 76:8,8 77:25 168:23
particular (21) 2:25 persecuted (2) 183:2 131:17 Plekhanov (1) 180:21 131:12 182:16 97:8 101:2 147:15 processes (1) 47:9
4:17,24 5:4 11:13 183:16 placing (1) 24:7 plot (4) 164:20 165:20 positive (2) 86:1 147:21 148:6 procure (1) 38:20
23:8 28:19,22 31:9 persecution (19) plainly (1) 173:16 166:19 173:24 194:16 presumably (4) 150:8 produced (2) 116:18
41:16 63:21 91:21 158:1,3 160:8 plan (6) 14:19 87:23 plus (1) 53:2 positively (2) 124:25 150:22 158:25 140:22
109:16 117:16 176:23 179:6 154:16,17 167:18 pm (8) 56:19 108:12 160:10 180:5 product (1) 121:15
134:24 136:4 137:6 181:22 182:13 168:18 108:13,15 156:6,8 possession (1) 203:12 pretend (1) 11:23 production (2) 154:9
142:5 150:15 184:18,20 185:12 planned (4) 24:7 180:17 211:25 possibility (4) 2:12 prevent (1) 95:10 155:8
163:12 199:4 189:7,11,15,19,22 38:22 99:14 137:4 point (47) 3:5,6 5:13 115:12 156:21 previous (6) 23:14 productive (1) 153:1
particularly (4) 95:19 190:5 191:21 planning (7) 38:23 5:14 6:20 8:14 10:4 161:23 35:8 39:23 41:4 products (2) 132:18
102:14 113:5 193:12,25 71:12 125:16 161:3 11:11,24 13:10 possible (15) 2:5 44:3 71:18 121:9 142:24
191:14 person (25) 11:19 167:5 168:15 14:20 16:12 18:7 44:4 79:15 88:19 previously (2) 14:11 professional (2) 37:18
parties (6) 31:13 32:23 33:1 34:4,5,6 196:12 21:23 26:6 29:25 95:18 100:13 16:18 209:6
111:8,20 113:22 39:20,20 40:12 plans (4) 94:16 196:2 30:3,5 35:24 59:5 115:12 123:11 prices (2) 103:20 professionally (1)
114:4 175:18 52:11 65:12 71:21 196:16,17 72:20 87:15 92:14 145:1 156:22 160:5 104:1 7:22
partly (3) 110:7 81:23 82:4 126:23 platform (1) 183:18 108:3 109:19 175:22 176:5 pricing (2) 23:5 Professor (3) 150:19
178:25 179:1 126:24 150:15 play (2) 144:3 201:5 111:25 112:5,6,11 201:24 131:20 150:23 151:4
partner (4) 149:3,10 152:25 179:20 playback (1) 202:1 113:5 114:3,4,6,12 possibly (5) 9:2,2 primary (1) 170:19 Profile (1) 175:11
152:12 180:9 180:25 182:19 played (1) 144:8 122:13 126:22 15:21 93:12 161:13 Prime (4) 152:23 profit (6) 59:15,20,22
parts (9) 111:19 183:3 192:6 194:10 player (1) 38:12 135:9,9 153:19 potential (14) 18:14 188:18 192:3,15 60:25 61:15 133:6
113:23,24 132:4 195:2 players (3) 64:2 191:20 200:14,17 123:3 125:5 127:16 Principal (1) 121:25 profit/loss (1) 59:10
139:16 201:21 personal (18) 67:9,15 130:15 131:2 205:23 207:16 127:22,23 129:2 principle (2) 17:8 81:2 profitability (1) 71:13
205:5 206:8 207:9 67:17,24 92:19 playing (1) 58:12 208:4,16,18 131:1 135:17 print (1) 16:2 profits (2) 58:23 60:2
party (6) 37:2 57:14 97:8 104:21 105:2 pleading (3) 189:6 pointed (3) 7:2 20:24 137:25 138:6 141:9 printed (1) 107:12 programme (2) 24:8
75:7 123:15 125:19 105:5,11,20 106:7 190:5 191:10 95:9 155:5 175:20 prior (6) 14:22 15:5 157:3
189:24 121:23,24 122:5 please (131) 1:4 4:8 points (44) 2:23 3:8 potentially (2) 124:5 130:13,22 131:4,16 programmes (2)
passage (3) 111:10,13 146:7 153:22 9:13 10:16 16:16 3:11,11,19 4:1,8 154:22 priorities (1) 51:12 123:21 124:4
199:17 208:21 16:23 17:16 19:9 5:2,10,11,17,17,17 potentials (1) 136:6 priority (3) 24:18 progress (1) 2:6
passages (2) 112:16 personality (2) 82:4,5 21:19,24 24:13 5:24,25 6:1,4,18 practical (1) 196:21 52:10 138:6 project (68) 17:8 22:4
199:21 personally (7) 50:18 26:16,20 29:1,12 7:2 8:1,5,12,13,15 practice (4) 67:13,14 prison (2) 97:10 193:3 29:20 30:17,19,24
passed (1) 47:5 81:23 100:6,6 29:13,14 30:12 8:17,19 12:17 105:16 138:4 private (42) 77:11,13 31:6,8,10,12 36:9
patience (2) 77:20 157:6 179:15 34:22,23 36:4,16 15:18 21:23,25 pre-judge (1) 111:2 100:18 104:3 37:1,23 41:3,21
208:5 197:16 41:7 42:20 43:25 23:4,21,23 25:15 pre-preliminary (1) 108:19 109:12,19 43:19 44:24 45:22
patriotic (1) 92:20 persons (4) 73:3 45:6 46:9 49:2 26:21,22,23 47:7 54:20 109:22 110:3,5,8 46:7,13,17,25 47:4
pattern (1) 205:1 112:12 187:15 53:22 54:7,25 92:6,9 112:1 pre-tax (2) 58:23 60:2 110:17,18,21,24,25 47:17,23,25 48:20
Pause (5) 10:16 90:25 204:10 56:12,13 57:1,3,4 195:25 200:13 precedent (1) 109:21 111:24 112:3,6 48:22 49:16 53:24
106:3,5 152:8 Petersburg (71) 32:25 58:21,21 59:4 60:5 208:7 precise (1) 193:4 113:5 114:25 54:1,11 56:22
pausing (1) 43:11 54:13 56:3,7 58:11 60:12,17 62:4 police (10) 69:6 77:24 precisely (1) 201:25 134:16 146:8 82:18,24 85:11,12
pay (28) 17:12 35:4 58:13 63:23 64:3 64:13,24 66:2 72:5 176:16 188:17 prefaced (1) 112:10 167:20 183:13,14 85:14 86:10,12,23
35:12,18 37:15 69:2,5 72:20 73:4 72:5,7 73:18 74:2 190:3,8,10,22 prefer (3) 1:8 108:23 192:4,5,6,17 95:13,14 96:13
42:3 45:21 49:4,23 75:17,22 76:6 74:17 78:5 79:2,12 191:2 192:17 108:23 198:25 199:7,7 97:22 98:17 124:20
50:6,9 52:16,18,22 77:17,23 101:19 79:12 80:5,18,19 policeman (1) 185:16 prejudice (2) 5:16 205:5 206:8,20,24 129:9 132:2,18,19
55:6,11 57:17 107:17 120:2 127:1 81:6,20 83:17 84:4 policy (1) 159:7 113:22 207:9 209:18,22,23 138:22 139:11,12
58:15 63:18,21 128:9 142:13,14 84:24 85:19 86:24 political (2) 62:24 preliminarily (1) 46:23 213:9 154:6 156:23 157:1
68:18 145:18 143:19,21,23 89:5,23 90:9,21 78:3 preliminary (7) 22:2 privately (2) 146:15 157:13,15 160:6
148:10,12,15 146:21 147:7 148:5 91:11 93:2,3 96:17 port (55) 25:2 27:7 22:20 32:18 88:25 147:10 162:19 163:20
170:15 197:7,15 148:11,15,17,23 96:20 97:19 99:25 28:14 32:17 33:22 89:1 90:14 120:19 probability (1) 91:25 164:7 165:16
paying (5) 34:19 45:9 152:14,21 154:14 101:21 104:5 74:4 75:1 76:1 premises (1) 3:22 probably (18) 2:17 4:9 167:16 168:25
52:25 53:2 87:24 154:23 155:19,23 105:13 106:1 77:10,18 80:22 preparation (3) 27:16 5:22,23 14:1 33:23 170:23 180:7
payment (3) 34:25 155:23 158:6 159:4 108:17 116:20 84:8 85:10 87:11 73:2 119:19 38:12 60:8 69:17 projects (29) 34:7
44:23 75:4 162:12,16 163:25 118:4,5,17,17,25 87:18 88:11 90:18 prepared (17) 27:14 72:21 91:6 94:8 45:23 47:23 65:23
payments (3) 57:13 168:20 170:16,19 119:21 120:13 91:11,25 94:11 35:16,25,25 37:3 102:11 116:7 70:13,24 78:3 94:5
63:12 103:10 171:2 173:25 174:6 122:15 123:9,10,19 95:8,13 96:3 97:22 42:4 45:8 130:11 129:25 159:13 94:23,24 95:2
pedantic (1) 206:25 174:22 176:13 124:11 128:11 98:16 100:7,7 133:9 137:24 169:5 160:13 199:5 124:1,18 128:1
pending (1) 145:19 181:4 182:1 183:14 129:10 132:6 133:7 122:20 123:20 170:20,21,22,24,25 problem (10) 3:15 129:22,25 138:19
penultimate (1) 185:9,25 186:2 133:7 135:7 139:18 124:7,8,17 132:4 195:11 26:17 95:24 106:15 138:23 139:17
137:17 187:3,4 188:2,7 139:19 143:4 144:3 140:16,25,25 153:6 preparing (3) 35:16 128:4 129:2,4,7 142:24 148:20
people (29) 2:15 191:7,8 192:9 145:9,24 149:20 154:12 155:9,10,14 73:10 170:23 205:7,13 156:21 159:19
39:18 40:2,10,12 195:14,15 196:8 150:18 151:23 157:1 169:6,8,23 prepayments (1) problems (8) 64:7 160:6 168:14,15
54:24 58:7 84:2 197:12 152:2,7 156:1 170:15 171:1,7,22 155:17 66:5 93:25 129:9 169:2 174:11
91:17 92:22 94:19 Petroleum (9) 45:24 158:19 161:20,20 172:6,7,9,22 present (1) 182:8 130:4 154:20 196:13
109:15 112:7 140:4 53:9 123:6 132:1,5 161:22 162:18 175:11 180:8 presentation (12) 159:15 208:23 promised (4) 97:9
142:12 150:9 180:1 151:19 153:20,22 163:4 164:14,25 port’s (3) 33:24 74:11 34:12 168:24 177:9 proceed (4) 2:1 42:4 157:5,16 160:1
181:4 182:7,18 155:7 165:18 166:23 87:20 177:11,13,14,15,16 127:15 129:24 promises (1) 94:10
187:1,13 188:15 photocopy (1) 119:14 169:4 171:13 Port/EBRD (2) 124:2 177:20,20 180:3,4 proceedings (21) promising (1) 168:15
192:21 193:7,9 phrase (1) 153:11 173:11 175:9 124:20 presented (3) 144:19 24:25 58:9 60:18 promulgated (1)
194:13 200:2 203:9 pick (2) 21:1 195:24 177:25 189:5 ports (7) 27:5 28:13 145:2 175:17 73:3,11,12 77:14 41:24
percentage (1) 156:22 picked (1) 20:20 190:24 195:24 78:23 88:11 89:25 presenting (1) 3:13 77:18 97:5 100:24 proper (5) 6:11 9:14
perfect (1) 9:12 pictures (5) 2:16 pleased (1) 208:25 118:22 172:1 preserved (1) 207:5 100:25 110:3 41:6 59:19 143:9
perfectly (1) 80:15 12:16 13:22 14:2 pleasure (1) 164:10 posed (1) 156:17 President (11) 157:5 112:21 114:7 properly (2) 16:5
performance (1) 8:10 118:24 pledge (5) 87:16 position (23) 7:13 9:2 157:20 159:20 171:10 200:21,22 195:12
performing (1) 36:22 piece (6) 55:20 86:6 120:24,24 121:2 45:10,20 47:14 160:10,20 161:8,9 200:22 203:14 property (1) 152:13
period (6) 49:18,21,25 91:10 155:9 164:8 140:12 50:18 57:2,7 75:12 188:17 191:18 205:20 206:1 proposal (5) 23:16
66:15,22 193:23 166:21 pledged (15) 87:20 77:19 78:13 100:9 192:3,15 proceeds (1) 122:16 43:25 44:15 82:18
permission (9) 111:21 pieces (3) 166:13,17 88:18,20 135:17 109:13 113:13 press (2) 176:12 process (15) 22:16,24 133:19

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

223

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

propose (1) 8:25 proposed (10) 19:12
36:9 43:14 55:3 75:1 81:11 87:4 128:17 135:13 153:5

proposing (3) 38:4

124:25 130:16 proposition (3) 23:9

57:16,21 propositions (1) 74:21 prosecution (2) 193:8

193:8

prosecutor (2) 188:12 188:19

prospect (2) 56:21 84:7

prospective (1) 42:7 prospects (2) 62:20

94:24 prove (1) 184:7

provenance (1) 15:13 provide (4) 37:1 40:24

41:21 75:3 provided (13) 13:13

14:6 66:22 97:16 104:8,16 135:14 138:1 145:18 172:8 202:25 203:1 207:23

providing (4) 41:18

174:14 201:9,23 provision (2) 83:4
97:25

PSC (3) 41:20 43:2 44:18

public (15) 85:15 107:3 108:5 109:13 109:18,20 110:22 111:16 112:3,8,19 112:22 113:9 199:22 200:7

publication (2) 2:5 111:7

publicised (1) 111:18 publicly (2) 93:20

191:17 publish (1) 192:7

published (4) 84:21 84:22 100:12 193:13

Pugachev (1) 203:18 purchase (1) 154:16 purpose (2) 89:4

137:4 purposes (1) 58:12 pushed (1) 55:6

put (35) 2:21 3:15,22 7:23 8:20,25 9:14 10:5,20 11:25 12:7 18:9 23:24 26:14 39:12 41:19 52:13 57:15,21 59:5 76:7 77:24 86:12 97:10 113:21 138:9 173:15,23 177:5,5 179:6 185:6 186:12 191:21 205:9

Putin (8) 93:20 94:10 152:14 157:7,14 177:19 183:11 188:18

putting (2) 64:22

173:12

Q

qualification (1) 191:9 quality (2) 37:3

208:22 quarter (1) 43:1

question (45) 6:6,7,9 6:19 7:5,7 23:20 27:19,20,22 41:5 46:9 50:8 52:13,21 57:15 58:1 86:14 90:1 106:22 108:18 111:12 114:19 115:3 125:13 128:23 129:4 136:11 140:14 147:6 151:1,15 156:16 157:5 159:25 164:1 167:15 172:24 189:10 202:17 204:3,4 207:8 209:5,6

questioned (1) 104:9 questions (22) 2:10 2:10 3:16 7:10,11 8:3,11,23 15:11

16:25 21:22 26:15 26:20 57:1 59:6 110:1 115:17 140:10 141:20,21 150:16 152:20

quickly (1) 200:24 quite (55) 4:19 6:16

10:3 11:10 12:17 23:17,24 24:4 32:21 33:1,5 34:6 38:11 45:23 47:6 51:8 52:3,8 54:24 60:13 63:3 73:12 73:14 86:22 90:25 91:1 92:25 94:10 113:15 121:14 139:14 141:19 142:13 143:8,14,14 144:17 147:5 148:4 159:25 168:23 179:10 183:23 184:5 188:5,6,10 189:3 192:11,18 193:6 197:23 206:12 209:1,1

Quixote (1) 195:6 quote (1) 30:11

R

raid (3) 69:5 101:18 184:8
raider (5) 69:2 76:19 77:17 107:17 148:18

raiders (5) 77:2 169:18 171:5 176:16 181:25

rail (2) 180:9,10 railroad (1) 143:19 railroads (2) 142:8

180:11

raise (13) 9:7 18:2 29:16 142:5 147:2 160:16,20 161:24 170:15 197:1 203:17 208:17 209:17

raised (4) 79:8 133:17 134:5 200:13

raising (3) 30:18 52:18 142:19

rate (1) 24:10 rates (1) 39:9 ratio (1) 141:5 re-do (1) 176:1

re-examination (8) 138:10 185:9 32:23 33:1 34:4,18 182:23
3:4,18 8:23 12:3,8 reconcile (5) 182:12 regional (1) 157:14 85:20 86:1 89:11 retransfer (1) 71:9
12:10 26:20 151:15 182:16 183:16,19 regions (1) 163:25 89:16,25 90:7,11 return (5) 5:25 117:24
re-read (1) 110:6 184:16 registered (1) 172:2 90:11,16 91:15,20 143:1,2 207:12
re-reading (1) 114:15 reconsider (1) 162:9 Regretfully (1) 75:6 174:23 returned (1) 184:14
reach (1) 69:21 reconstruction (6) regular (3) 194:9 report’ (1) 89:23 returning (3) 9:3 69:4
reached (3) 8:1 70:3 47:19 80:21 82:23 195:17 196:2 represent (1) 18:24 182:21
114:1 95:13,15 97:24 regulation (1) 23:2 representative (1) revert (2) 128:22
react (1) 124:25 record (21) 66:3 72:1 relate (1) 208:18 11:8 139:25
read (20) 1:16 9:22 202:13,14,20 203:9 related (4) 24:17 representatives (1) review (2) 22:20 86:2
10:6,10,22,23 11:1 203:12,14,22,22 28:14 30:17 37:17 184:7 reviewed (1) 89:20
90:20 105:10,13,22 204:18 205:15,17 relates (3) 3:12 123:6 represented (4) 2:11 revisiting (1) 109:23
105:24 106:1,4,16 206:2,13,15,16,21 196:14 3:8 4:4 6:10 rich (1) 195:2
152:3 162:8 201:5 206:22 207:4 relating (1) 8:4 representing (2) 6:14 right (104) 10:1,5 12:8
202:9,10 208:10 relation (16) 15:9 18:14 12:9,19 13:6 14:8
reader (2) 17:25 34:9 recorded (4) 1:22 19:12 32:12 36:9 represents (1) 36:24 15:20 16:7 18:13
reading (12) 25:5,6,11 200:21 201:2,22 40:18 48:19 80:22 reputation (4) 76:23 19:21 20:8 21:6
25:13,17 45:13 recording (1) 205:10 94:15 123:14 125:13 150:14 30:2 31:4,14,17,24
91:15 98:2,20 recordings (5) 200:15 125:21 135:9 201:1 151:2 35:4 40:16,24 42:6
134:19 152:7 201:1 204:24 205:4 203:2 204:24 request (1) 74:2 42:11 43:15 44:13
157:17 207:17 207:17 208:3 requested (4) 41:14 54:16 55:17 60:10
real (17) 48:22 55:25 records (2) 65:17 68:2 relations (4) 53:6 70:2 67:9 95:5,16 62:17 63:17 64:6
56:21 58:5 70:13 recount (1) 153:1 146:7 162:17 require (7) 22:15 64:20 68:6,19
70:20 75:23 103:20 recourse (3) 57:12 relationship (1) 75:2 24:15 27:21 46:11 70:18 72:9 81:12
104:1 106:12,20 138:22 139:12 relaxed (1) 51:19 140:15 203:5 204:9 82:12,14 84:19
114:13 117:8 recover (3) 151:17 relay (1) 117:8 required (3) 37:15 86:10,14,15 87:10
185:11 195:10,19 194:20 197:25 relevance (1) 8:1 206:13 207:19 88:17,21 95:23
202:2 Rector (1) 180:20 relevant (4) 7:20 requirement (6) 17:22 96:11,25 100:16,17
realisation (5) 166:24 redacted (4) 206:9 15:12 138:15 205:9 134:22 135:17 101:8,9,13,15
167:12,15,16 209:24 210:1 211:1 reliable (2) 85:9 136:12,15,25 105:3 106:2 109:3
168:16 redevelopment (2) 137:13 requirements (6) 19:4 110:4 112:17 113:6
realised (4) 122:9 17:13 47:19 reliant (1) 52:17 53:1 88:13 134:23 123:3 127:24
155:17 196:19,22 reduce (3) 169:1,2 reluctant (1) 55:6 137:7 207:6 129:14 130:17
realistic (1) 160:1 173:22 relying (1) 46:7 reserve (1) 15:8 133:1 142:17 150:3
really (47) 23:25 38:4 reduced (2) 70:13 remain (1) 205:5 reserved (1) 77:16 150:17 158:7 159:3
38:5 44:8,23 47:4 99:13 remaining (1) 207:9 reserving (1) 63:23 159:5 163:2 164:4
51:10,14 52:1,14 reduction (1) 78:25 remains (1) 9:9 residual (2) 169:11 164:4 165:8,15,21
53:4,5 54:21 67:21 reentered (1) 136:5 remember (62) 7:1,1 171:6 169:8 170:11,12,13
77:19 82:3 83:7 refer (7) 19:17 27:1 18:19 34:3 40:10 resolved (1) 205:8 176:23 178:24
86:23 91:15 96:1 149:21,25 154:25 40:12 47:13 48:1 resolving (1) 205:6 180:2 183:2,4
96:12 101:3 108:20 166:1 167:23 53:20 54:6,19 59:7 resort (1) 169:5 186:9,19 188:4
110:20 111:12 reference (10) 14:14 59:8 60:6,11 61:13 resources (1) 37:1 193:11,18,24 194:1
113:21 114:3,3 17:20 72:15 74:7 61:17,19 62:2 respect (19) 8:18 198:7 200:1 201:10
115:6 117:6,21 153:23 154:8 155:3 64:22 67:13 82:11 14:19 25:14 27:4 201:20 202:14,21
128:6 141:17 164:9 159:14 161:7 167:7 91:7 92:5 97:6 27:11 33:12 63:22 202:22 207:14
169:22 176:14 references (4) 16:8 102:6,9 122:2 69:3 88:10 101:9 208:9,11
179:12,16 180:7 167:4 198:20,24 123:8 125:8,15,18 101:13,16,18 105:1 right-hand (4) 14:21
185:12 190:14 referred (9) 21:13 127:1 134:19 143:6 124:9,9 127:25 165:3,3,6
193:21 196:13 58:23 69:23 85:20 143:12,16 144:5,7 130:10 209:13 rightly (1) 131:6
198:6 208:21 110:7 133:9,18 144:7,10,10,19,20 respectful (1) 111:11 rights (4) 11:15,21
209:11,11 138:5 198:24 144:25 146:2 respectfully (1) 15:8 77:16
reason (18) 1:20 referring (32) 3:25 7:3 151:24 155:4,6,21 203:24 ring (2) 143:21,21
55:25 57:20 91:3 9:22 11:17 16:12 156:10 163:6 respects (1) 174:2 riot (1) 190:10
91:13 92:3 102:4 17:4 20:13 26:18 165:12 166:14,17 response (1) 171:15 rise (1) 9:1
103:13,25 111:24 27:16 28:6,18 30:8 169:15 175:5 responses (1) 139:24 risk (16) 30:16 31:1
119:1,2 140:20 33:6 44:1 49:11 180:10 184:2 192:2 responsibility (1) 2:4 37:7 39:9,9 43:8,21
150:22 159:2 200:5 50:15 51:25 60:7 195:13,16 responsible (3) 65:12 90:17 91:4,10,14
203:17 204:15 61:20 66:6 75:9 remind (1) 152:4 96:7 150:12 91:21 92:3,15
reasonable (1) 80:15 98:13 106:25 107:2 reminding (1) 114:10 rest (2) 114:1 174:10 152:16 195:11
reasonably (1) 80:8 149:5 151:11 reminds (1) 195:18 restructure (2) 17:13 risks (4) 38:10 90:23
reasons (5) 4:22 7:6 166:20 172:25 repaid (2) 79:19 80:2 75:1 92:13,25
99:12 112:19 174:11,15 175:15 repay (9) 18:4,16 restructuring (8) River (2) 11:5 95:6
115:21 190:2 66:10 68:3 69:13 45:16,18 63:25 road (4) 143:19,21,21
reassuring (1) 209:14 refers (3) 55:3 121:6 79:9 80:14 101:25 66:13,13 69:11 164:8
recall (1) 16:25 141:9 103:2 78:21 165:14 roads (1) 143:23
receivables (1) 140:12 refinance (6) 18:25 repayment (4) 23:22 result (6) 63:10 roadshow (1) 119:19
received (4) 30:3,5 19:7 47:16 48:7 80:10,16 123:1 103:20 104:2 Robin (6) 28:24 36:14
102:1 201:17 49:1 133:4 repeat (1) 46:9 142:18,20 196:23 36:15 44:10 91:18
recollect (1) 125:4 refinanced (1) 48:17 repeated (1) 6:2 resulted (1) 142:22 135:23
recollection (7) 20:10 refinancing (6) 48:11 repeatedly (1) 75:1 results (4) 24:2 60:7 rolling (1) 205:19
110:11 116:9,16 48:21 55:14 123:4 replaced (4) 132:21 83:1,11 Rolls (1) 205:16
130:3 143:14 145:20 196:2 169:21 175:8 resume (2) 16:20 Rosmorjilev (1) 11:6
144:22 reflection (1) 202:21 179:21 78:14 Rosmorport (1) 95:10
recommend (1) 41:20 refresh (1) 186:5 reply (8) 6:7,8,11 retain (1) 138:10 rouble (1) 51:12
recommendation (1) regard (1) 130:5 141:21 157:19 retainer (11) 34:25 roubles (2) 173:3,7
137:20 regarding (1) 129:18 182:22 183:9 42:3,4 43:18 45:9 roughly (2) 42:2 148:1
recommendations (1) regards (1) 199:20 187:17 49:5 51:6 53:2 55:6 route (3) 42:25 142:5
137:18 region (7) 27:5 93:8 repo (2) 70:25 71:15 55:11,16 161:24
recommends (1) 93:16 95:3 159:6,8 report (17) 28:16 rethink (2) 181:7 RPC (2) 115:7,16

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

224
February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

RUB (14) 64:17,17,21 safety (7) 27:12 32:20 search (7) 120:7 126:18 127:8,18 services (3) 36:20,23 84:2,3 96:10 99:17 14:24 17:4 20:17

65:20 74:11 148:2 33:12 46:1,1 159:3 184:22,24,25 185:1 128:2,12,24 130:1 37:16 99:19 126:2 155:16 20:21 21:5 22:6,22
148:2 165:13 159:4 185:17 186:18 132:6,10 133:15,25 servicing (1) 78:14 174:12,16 24:7,23 25:10
169:13,14,23 170:4 sales (1) 168:7 searched (1) 108:4 134:9 135:8,18 session (2) 180:15 significant (3) 22:2 29:13,24 31:16,22
170:9 174:7 Saltykova (8) 96:19,24 seasonal (1) 78:25 137:14,16,20 182:8 42:13 138:3 32:5,16 35:10,11
Rukshov (2) 83:25 97:8 99:4,18 second (40) 2:20 3:5 139:14 140:2,5,18 Sestroretsk (2) 163:20 silence (1) 176:13 36:5 38:15 46:9
85:7 101:22 102:7 6:6,23 16:10 19:23 141:1,11 143:25 165:16 similar (6) 70:25 48:9 49:24 50:8
rule (2) 105:15 184:1 104:13 22:18 36:16 42:20 144:4 145:22 146:1 set (13) 14:18 22:14 177:16 205:1 56:5,13 59:20 61:3
rules (3) 117:22 satisfactory (2) 83:1 53:24 65:14 74:17 147:14 149:25 24:14 34:24 35:20 207:18,19,20 62:8 65:5 66:6,7
121:13 182:1 83:11 78:23 83:17 97:18 152:2 155:25 42:22 64:14 74:21 Similarly (1) 125:2 69:7 73:8 79:13
run (5) 35:11 70:22 satisfied (1) 83:14 98:19,20 99:3,4,7,9 157:21 161:4,4,25 77:7 95:16 109:21 Simonova (1) 13:21 98:2,3,6,7,11
136:1 150:11 save (6) 42:1 43:15 99:9,11 101:21 162:25 163:4 127:22 171:10 Simonova’s (1) 166:1 101:11 104:6
200:20 45:14 47:3 55:16 103:19 104:6 164:18,22 165:18 set-up (1) 109:16 simple (1) 117:7 105:18 107:7 108:1
running (13) 8:9 47:24 101:1 105:24 110:3 112:5 167:1 171:24 sets (3) 90:17 134:2 simpler (1) 52:21 113:17,20 114:22
55:13 85:12 97:1 saved (1) 42:7 112:22 113:8 175:12,21 179:13 200:20 simply (9) 8:2 16:19 119:10,13 121:10
102:9 126:24 134:6 Savelyev (11) 101:19 133:11 135:7,9,9 180:15 182:5,6 setting (3) 81:11 52:14 58:5 62:2 122:12 131:9
135:3 136:1 192:4 107:18 162:13 139:19 140:1 186:12 187:5,6 171:19 201:4 76:17 117:15 193:3 132:16,16 136:19
201:19 202:7 163:2,9,15,18 165:15 175:14 189:14 190:1 seven (1) 60:15 206:7 137:19 143:20
Rusiv (1) 70:10 164:19 168:4,6 184:13 191:23,24 194:2 Sevzapalians (1) simultaneously (1) 144:9,12 151:1,14
Russia (29) 28:13 34:7 173:18 second-to-last (1) 196:5 197:20 200:8 158:13 10:24 154:24,25,25
39:9 41:2 62:23 saving (3) 42:14,16 68:1 204:19 Shaldova (1) 73:23 Singapore (5) 151:21 155:23,24 156:1,18
68:15 93:22 101:5 55:23 Secondly (1) 14:21 seeking (2) 18:2 55:13 share (1) 183:18 151:22 177:16,23 160:18 161:9 164:1
102:16 105:6 128:7 savings (3) 150:5,9 secretly (1) 186:24 seen (11) 29:11 50:24 Shareholding (1) 181:9 165:2 170:1 176:7
152:10 158:20,22 151:9 section (1) 106:23 107:12 109:11 172:1 sir (1) 208:15 178:2,2 182:6
159:4,10,20 161:9 Sawyer (3) 172:8 sector (2) 90:18 91:11 112:22 116:6 shares (13) 69:4 70:17 sit (3) 194:25 197:24 186:13 189:5
175:12 179:12 173:4 174:24 secure (3) 48:11 122:5 137:24 138:16 120:24,25 121:2,7 209:18 191:20 206:6,25
180:18 181:20 saying (29) 17:7 23:7 170:4 145:5,7 190:10 121:11 149:7,9,10 site (1) 164:24 209:15
184:2 187:19,25 26:9 28:16 29:8 securing (1) 135:10 self-explanatory (1) 172:5 175:6 184:14 sits (1) 160:8 sort (13) 5:13 69:21
191:18 193:2 30:23 31:5 33:5 securities (1) 104:23 30:22 she’d (1) 101:1 sitting (11) 94:25 76:13,15 131:13
194:20 195:21 45:8 77:6 102:10 security (19) 87:13,13 sell (14) 69:17 70:11 sheet (2) 36:19 102:8,18 103:9,11 149:3 178:9 180:1
Russian (130) 4:16 102:11,21 103:5 88:18 103:21 71:13 162:6,15 140:22 179:22,24 180:22 182:14 201:5 205:3
10:23 11:11 18:21 107:19,21,21 112:7 104:20 105:15 167:9,18,20 168:13 shilly-shallying (1) 205:16,18 209:22 205:8 208:1
19:6 25:15 26:12 126:15 132:15,17 106:8 120:22 168:17 169:6 111:25 situation (13) 44:11 sorted (2) 205:14
27:5 44:5,6 48:17 132:18 135:8 121:22 131:21 170:24 171:1 shipbuilders (1) 51:9,22 74:3,25 207:16
60:7,9 63:1 65:13 136:19 149:10 133:1,23 135:11,13 173:22 174:13 103:10 134:2 147:9 sorts (1) 130:4
71:23 73:18 75:21 155:2 168:11 136:2 138:1 155:13 seller (2) 155:18,20 shipping (3) 25:1 182:23 183:25 sought (3) 111:8
76:9 78:1,4 85:9 185:21 188:10 173:19 174:21 selling (2) 161:23 78:23 174:10 184:9 194:21 195:5 133:23 135:10
90:17 91:11 92:21 says (44) 10:9,15,23 see (217) 5:24 12:18 175:20 short (14) 1:19 18:4 situations (1) 103:4 sound (1) 57:7
92:24,25 93:3,4,13 19:23 22:9 36:17 12:20,23 14:5,8 send (4) 116:12 18:16,21 19:7 51:5 six (9) 4:21 5:2 60:15 sounds (3) 5:12 48:5
93:23 94:1,14,17 41:12 53:24 55:2,4 16:6,19 17:6,6,23 123:19 180:4,5 56:18 63:9 64:5 66:20 79:8 103:17 48:10
95:20 96:20 97:18 66:17 69:12 70:4 18:6,11 19:14,23 senior (3) 54:10,24 130:7,9,19 156:1,7 130:24 132:13 sources (1) 121:16
98:5,12 104:19,22 71:4 73:25 74:10 20:1 22:5,13,18 93:13 short-term (1) 123:1 162:20 Soviet (1) 161:8
105:1,8 106:16 74:14,24 76:20 24:14,19 25:15 sense (2) 55:20 shorter (2) 86:21 sixth (1) 30:13 spare (4) 170:6,14
115:11 118:11 89:15,19,22 97:12 26:5,8,10,17 27:3 207:18 133:1 size (2) 46:21 141:4 172:22 173:10
124:10 125:12 97:21 98:15 99:5 28:8 29:2,15,22,24 sent (19) 20:14 31:2 shorthand (1) 208:13 skip (1) 170:22 speak (3) 13:14 15:2
138:23 142:8 150:5 105:4,14 121:22 30:20 31:3 34:8,23 36:12 41:9 47:13 shortly (2) 84:7 142:7 slide (1) 177:15 73:5
150:9 151:9 152:2 122:18 124:22 35:1 36:17 38:6,7 48:1 115:25 116:2 show (23) 3:10 4:1,6 slightly (2) 200:19 speakers (1) 179:23
152:24 158:3,4,10 127:12 133:15,20 41:12 43:5,9 46:25 116:7,9,13 129:11 5:1 24:23,25 25:4 203:21 speaking (9) 55:9 97:9
160:8,11 161:17 134:2 135:10 137:9 49:9 53:23 54:14 133:10 159:17 26:9,11,13 39:22 slow (1) 35:23 143:1 147:1,8
162:24 163:4 137:17,23 139:22 55:2,3 57:9 58:23 160:4 182:20 53:21 58:21 59:10 slows (1) 95:12 174:9 180:24
164:14,15,25 141:3 175:10 60:20,23,25 61:4,5 188:11,16 189:1 61:14 84:19 107:19 small (9) 2:9,18 38:11 188:13 202:16
165:20 166:7 172:2 178:17 205:21 62:14 63:15 64:2 sentence (7) 53:25 122:10 135:24 100:3 114:19 115:3 special (8) 24:1 73:1
172:3 176:12,25 Sberbank (10) 150:1,5 64:18 65:3 66:24 78:6 79:22 103:19 138:13 139:20 116:21 155:9 187:8 82:4 94:18 96:2
177:6,7,7,9,10,11 150:19 151:5,6 67:7,11 68:4,23 105:24 106:10 141:13 156:15 smart (1) 113:15 119:1 150:14 193:7
177:17,23 178:12 153:18,21 156:25 69:19 71:13 73:13 169:4 showed (3) 40:21 software (1) 24:1 specialist (3) 34:6
178:17,21,24 179:5 157:7 160:15 73:16,17,18,20,22 separate (4) 16:11 59:1 179:13 sold (7) 70:9,12 162:2 59:17 196:11
179:7,18 180:20 Sberbank’s (1) 157:2 73:23 74:5,8,12,20 128:1 202:11,25 showing (3) 61:22 162:20,21,22 specialists (3) 45:3
181:16,17,24 scandal (3) 176:11,15 74:21 75:14 76:20 separately (3) 34:11 93:11 154:17 163:16 92:23 121:19
182:13,15,25 192:11 78:16 79:1,10,20 138:19 167:19 shown (30) 4:16 6:18 solicit (1) 95:5 specially (2) 94:11
183:16,18 184:5,10 scandals (1) 77:4 80:11,23 81:4,19 September (33) 19:14 17:16 20:24 32:15 solicitors (2) 7:22 137:4
184:17,19 185:2,7 Scandinavia (1) 81:19 82:17,19 19:18,25 21:5,19 36:4 38:14 64:24 117:11 speech (1) 151:12
185:19 187:11 163:21 83:5,18 84:9 85:21 28:17 29:8 31:22 72:5 73:8 78:5 79:2 Solnechnoye (8) speed (1) 96:9
188:3,12,16,23 scared (1) 194:5 87:1,10,13,14 32:6,8 35:20 40:1 80:18 81:6 85:19 71:12 166:11,20 speedy (1) 95:7
189:7,15,20,23 schedule (1) 166:5 89:13,17 90:4,7,7 51:15 52:1,1 54:4 86:24 89:5 90:16 167:2,4,7,18 spend (1) 12:15
191:21 192:12 scheduled (1) 128:21 90:15,23,23 91:22 54:18 74:10 89:7 93:2 96:17 118:17 168:14 spending (1) 47:2
193:19 194:6 scheme (2) 24:12 92:1 95:21 96:19 128:14 129:24 121:8 123:9 132:3 solution (6) 128:21 spent (2) 34:21
200:24 201:21,25 137:11 97:12,18 98:22 139:21 142:1,6 133:7 139:18 129:1 130:23 170:23
202:3,4,8,16,25 screen (9) 4:16 10:6 99:2,15,17,23 150:2,3 176:20,21 141:18 151:23 131:11 135:21 split (1) 174:1
203:19 204:6 10:10 132:7 145:10 102:2 103:9,19,23 177:17 186:14,16 171:13 175:9 195:4 spoilation (1) 77:2
207:17 208:10 163:5 164:16 105:10,13 108:1 188:13 195:14 shows (1) 20:25 solutions (1) 176:4 spoken (1) 124:24
209:5,8 177:25 178:8 110:9 114:5,9 September/October… side (8) 26:14,24 solve (4) 152:20 Sponsor (1) 37:2
Russian-sponsored (1) scroll (5) 29:1 90:6 115:24 116:4,5 137:1 50:14,14 66:15 159:15,25 183:25 Sponsor’s (1) 36:22
181:22 123:10 139:19 118:8,15,18,24 sequence (1) 12:21 85:12 179:1 207:3 somebody (5) 96:19 spotted (1) 15:19
Russians (2) 179:10 140:1 119:11,13,22 serious (5) 62:16 sign (4) 35:16 50:23 128:12 179:5 194:5 spring (6) 78:14,19
194:15 scrubbed (2) 207:10 120:13,16,23 75:23 188:6 192:5 96:2 105:11 208:1 143:3 172:25 190:7
207:22 121:22 122:1,2,15 208:16 signature (1) 11:7 soon (5) 2:5 37:23 190:8
S Sea (1) 175:11 123:17,17,22 seriously (2) 2:20 signed (17) 34:4 39:13 95:17 120:3 200:18 square (2) 164:20
safe (2) 46:1 66:15 seal (1) 11:6 124:12,16 125:21 51:14 39:18 40:2 67:13 Sorbonne (1) 187:10 165:21
seaport (2) 74:8 76:25 125:23 126:3,10,14 service (2) 57:7 78:18 81:18,21 83:22 sorry (86) 10:11 14:23 squeeze (1) 76:7

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

225
February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

St (71) 32:25 54:13 53:22 55:1 57:4 struggling (1) 195:6 119:24 120:14,19 111:6 162:5 163:19 113:22 116:16 154:3 155:1 159:23

56:3,7 58:11,13 58:21 59:24 60:1 study (2) 25:3 28:15 132:8,9 190:23 192:18 120:19 123:19 160:2,12,21,24,25
63:23 64:3 69:2,5 61:18 62:5 64:14 stupid (1) 186:25 summer (5) 88:4 89:2 204:25 207:8 209:8 161:1 163:18 164:4
72:20 73:4 75:17 72:8 78:6 79:3 80:5 stupidly (1) 181:6 89:2 143:3 193:22 takeover (3) 189:18 Territory (1) 157:12 164:16 165:9,25
75:22 76:6 77:17 84:4 85:19 86:6 subcontractors (2) supplied (1) 46:8 190:6,15 text (1) 98:11 167:2,4,7 168:11
77:23 101:19 93:18 96:18 97:3 46:22,24 supply (1) 34:17 takes (1) 86:20 thank (16) 13:7 39:5 172:12 173:15,21
107:17 120:2 127:1 97:12 99:1,17,21 subcontracts (1) support (17) 23:15 talk (3) 145:10 153:5 40:15 56:11 72:4 174:3,9 175:15,24
128:9 142:13,14 103:5,13 104:15 46:22 75:6 78:2 86:9 191:5 72:25 79:15 95:2 175:25 176:18
143:19,21,23 107:5 108:5 118:7 subfinancing (1) 40:20 94:24 96:12,14,16 talked (2) 25:20 183:4 115:1,1 117:18,23 177:18 179:4,21
146:21 147:7 148:5 122:11 136:22 subject (18) 8:24 97:3 104:17 113:15 talking (8) 29:5 41:14 126:16 152:6 207:7 181:18 182:5 183:8
148:11,15,17,23 143:4 145:10 48:16 77:15 83:1 147:15 148:13,24 72:2 85:1 143:18 208:14 183:23 184:12,18
152:14,21 154:14 146:22 148:8 83:11 89:10 109:19 157:4 160:5 162:19 153:12 191:6,7 Thanks (2) 97:19 185:20 187:9
154:23 155:19,23 149:21 158:14 112:2 128:16 supported (2) 94:1,4 talks (1) 53:23 139:24 191:12,21 193:16
155:23 158:6 159:4 161:21 167:22 148:19 187:18 supporting (3) 76:11 Tankistov (1) 166:4 theme (1) 41:17 193:23 194:9,11,11
162:12,16 163:25 169:3 170:25 199:2,10 203:7 147:19 196:13 target (5) 51:10,11 theoretically (4) 63:20 195:5 198:18,24
168:20 170:16,19 189:12 195:25 205:4,6 206:2 supports (1) 50:18 162:15 170:19 143:1 145:1 182:19 199:3 200:4 201:7
171:2 173:25 174:6 statements (4) 4:19 207:2 sure (51) 4:2 9:18 179:5 thereon (1) 32:20 201:13 202:14,19
174:22 176:13 6:16 101:18 116:18 subjected (1) 191:1 11:1 13:9,20 14:10 taxi (2) 195:16,21 they’d (2) 164:2 180:8 203:21,22 206:14
181:4 182:1 183:14 statistics (1) 104:4 submission (3) 111:11 14:12 15:5 20:9 teacup (1) 114:2 thing (13) 2:20 3:3 208:3,6 209:3
185:9,25 186:2 status (3) 111:10 112:10 113:16 26:11,12,12 28:19 team (11) 41:1 47:9 10:5 12:12 16:9,15 thinking (10) 71:10
187:3,4 188:2,7 163:10 202:12 submissions (6) 6:15 32:1 37:4 55:8 59:5 81:22 82:13 120:1 27:11 52:7 70:25 73:14 77:12,12,13
191:7,8 192:9 stay (2) 68:15 193:1 6:15,19,21 7:18 60:10 62:23,24 120:6 142:7,12,15 93:19 112:9 117:7 114:5 142:10
195:14,15 196:8 step (1) 51:18 109:11 67:20 80:3 82:1,2 143:7 192:21 188:6 175:22 176:3 208:9
197:12 steps (4) 31:15,18,21 submitted (6) 23:15 83:22 84:3 90:10 teams (1) 52:5 things (21) 2:14 3:2 third (16) 15:21 22:7
stable (2) 42:18,19 186:23 28:17,20,21,23 91:2 100:14,17,21 technical (7) 2:10 15:3 27:18 31:17 34:22 42:24 43:1
staff (4) 54:12 151:25 stick (2) 2:15 84:18 31:7 108:8 117:10 29:19,20 30:7,10 32:7 39:12 63:19 74:23 87:14 99:18
153:15 156:14 stipulated (1) 136:19 submitting (1) 28:25 119:18 121:15,20 115:21 199:5 68:18 76:13,15 101:21 104:5,5
stage (22) 15:16 22:3 stipulating (1) 30:6 subsequent (4) 15:22 122:7,8 127:25 technological (1) 77:15 88:15 111:24 112:24 133:18
26:6 35:6,17 39:12 stirring (1) 207:1 19:20 63:14 204:18 140:14 144:17 205:23 112:7 114:15 127:3 136:7 166:4 184:4
40:23 41:19 44:8 stood (1) 63:19 substantial (2) 31:24 151:24 154:4 technologically (1) 148:18 168:21 thought (26) 12:5
47:24 86:2 122:4,9 stop (4) 76:10 78:2 33:2 165:10,11 166:14 207:11 189:4 196:8 20:23 55:11,13,14
130:16 136:14 108:3 132:25 substantially (4) 22:21 167:17 178:12 technology (2) 201:23 think (230) 1:15 2:6 57:23 66:13 75:21
139:4 142:10 stopgap (1) 131:13 22:23 23:10 31:25 197:16 198:7 207:3 2:25 3:19 4:5 7:14 75:21 94:13 98:20
152:10 184:10,17 stopped (8) 51:16 substantive (1) 103:8 204:20 Tekno (4) 57:12,17 7:15 8:4 9:4 10:3 109:24 110:20
193:18 199:3 75:18,25 76:1,17 substitute (1) 205:22 surely (1) 101:20 197:14,17 11:24,25 12:15,17 150:24 152:18,20
stake (1) 207:3 76:17 142:2,6 substitution (2) surprised (6) 55:7 telephone (2) 190:13 13:20,24,25 15:18 155:10,22 159:9,13
stakeholders (1) stopping (1) 42:6 121:17 147:6 134:5,12 187:23 192:19 15:23 16:11,15 162:13 184:6 186:3
206:3 storm (1) 114:2 successful (3) 135:4 208:22,24 tell (20) 10:9,15 13:4 17:8,10 18:18,20 188:15 193:25
stakes (1) 156:22 story (10) 19:5 58:6 157:19 181:5 surprises (1) 171:7 14:15 25:8,14,18 18:21 19:2,15 20:6 194:21
standard (9) 31:2 103:12 181:3 183:8 successfully (1) 142:4 surprising (1) 184:5 43:24 50:19 91:13 24:1 28:18,22,23 thousand (1) 172:12
36:11 37:3 38:8,9 187:14,17,22,23 Sue (11) 81:21,25 survival (2) 77:25 78:1 121:5 151:10 29:6,10,23 30:9 three (33) 4:19 7:2
38:11 121:13 137:9 195:13 82:6,9 143:11,12 survive (2) 47:15 76:9 170:11,13 180:3 33:3,4 35:3 37:4,20 22:7 39:14 47:14
139:14 straight (1) 185:20 144:4,9,14,24 suspect (2) 114:2,12 181:3,6,25 208:20 39:20 40:11 42:9 47:15,21 51:20
start (14) 2:18 35:21 strange (2) 79:1 145:5 suspended (2) 99:14 209:4 42:10 47:2,4 52:13 62:6,12 70:19,20
36:5 38:4 47:18 187:20 sufficient (6) 17:12 100:2 telling (15) 17:25 34:9 52:21,25 53:4,12 73:3 100:19 114:23
49:1 73:11 130:11 strangely (1) 75:19 66:10 67:8 79:8 Svyaz-Bank (3) 146:6 48:2 66:3 77:9 53:20 54:24 57:19 124:4,22 128:1
138:11 148:24 strategic (5) 47:7 52:8 135:15 174:20 146:16,17 88:25 106:6,9 57:24 59:1,4 60:6,6 132:13,23,24
185:12 186:1 94:4,6 175:20 suggest (22) 2:17,17 sync (1) 98:5 113:14 130:18 62:1,22 64:22,23 133:21 135:2,2,21
197:21 201:11 strategy (3) 30:17 24:17 34:8 56:20 synced (1) 201:2 133:1 135:1 153:15 65:7 66:12,19 67:4 138:19 140:13
started (19) 30:11 50:16 63:25 58:14 64:4 80:13 synchronised (2) 168:6 189:2 67:25 70:10,19 166:13,17,22 170:2
41:2 54:20 66:12 Street (1) 166:4 100:10 107:11,22 202:1 205:3 tells (2) 124:16 195:7 71:1,25 72:12,13 177:22 196:25
68:10 69:1 75:19 stress (1) 11:9 115:22 117:4 126:7 system (8) 190:19 temporary (3) 131:7,8 72:17 73:3,19,19 three-party (1) 88:22
111:4 158:11 strict (1) 209:19 148:22 160:9 166:1 205:17,19,22 206:1 131:11 76:3 77:14 79:24 threefold (1) 112:20
159:12 176:11 Stroilov (12) 1:17 6:18 183:15 196:2,7,17 206:7,22,23 ten (4) 3:10 5:9 12:15 80:3,17 81:15 82:3 thrown (1) 68:16
184:21,22,24,25 7:1,12 14:1,16 16:8 203:1 systematic (1) 191:2 56:16 82:10,13 83:15 Thursday (4) 2:21 6:2
185:8,16 192:20 112:18 114:6 suggested (5) 27:6 systemic (1) 64:7 ten-minute (1) 156:4 84:15 86:8 87:9 9:3 64:11
193:13 116:13 117:8,15 88:5 115:10 121:10 tend (1) 111:4 90:11,13,13 91:1,5 time (127) 1:13,20,24
starting (2) 97:13 Stroilov’s (1) 113:12 137:11 T tender (1) 44:17 93:17,18 97:5 98:5 2:11,11 6:8 9:1
129:5 strong (1) 186:25 suggesting (17) 24:21 table (3) 164:12 165:4 term (20) 18:3,4,16,21 98:18 100:9,19 13:3 18:21 27:15
starts (1) 164:15 strongly (5) 4:11 5:3 27:20 42:23 46:10 19:7 29:19 30:18 101:1,9 102:4,6,10 27:17 29:10,23
165:6
state (27) 94:1,7,7,14 41:19 149:1 174:24 58:7 79:18 83:18 36:19 38:6,7 42:18 102:15,15,17,25 31:5,10 32:19 33:3
tackle (1) 208:4
96:3 150:5 156:16 struck (1) 206:21 121:20 135:2 63:9 64:5 94:8 103:3 104:3,16,18 35:11,15 37:19,21
take (37) 1:20 3:20
157:4 158:3,4,10 structure (11) 22:4 146:10 148:10 130:7,9,19 131:4 106:15 107:11,23 38:13 39:14 43:25
27:17 29:13 30:4
159:5 160:3,5,8 31:12 34:24 35:6 162:13 163:15 131:19 140:22 108:1,17 110:10,23 44:4,16,16,24
37:23 39:13 42:23
161:8,17 176:25 88:5,14 128:16,17 168:22,25 173:22 terminal (31) 11:19 112:20 113:14,18 45:11,12,15 46:3
45:19,22 49:18,21
178:24,25 182:13 136:21 137:3 176:1 17:13,19 18:4,5,16 114:5,14 116:7,21 47:6,8,25 50:7,12
69:5 103:25 111:25
182:25 183:11,17 140:23 suggestion (7) 23:1,18 19:13 28:15 32:16 117:2 118:20,23 51:5,14,17 52:7,19
113:19 117:24
185:7 186:21 194:6 structured (5) 121:14 48:18 56:23 88:3 32:17 33:12 47:20 119:6,15,17 120:2 52:25 53:18 55:18
120:8 138:9 152:4
State’s (1) 185:11 125:12 137:15 173:24 174:25 48:20,23 56:21 121:8 122:10 55:23 57:23 58:10
166:25 167:12
state-owned (1) 138:24 139:13 suggestions (4) 3:21 69:6 94:12 123:20 123:15 124:24 58:13,18 62:23
168:10,19 169:1
184:20 structurer (1) 40:17 50:24 59:18 87:9 124:2,7 125:21 125:9,14,19 126:23 63:19 64:15 65:18
170:20 171:18
state-sponsored (4) structures (1) 88:10 suggests (7) 15:20,20 135:14 173:24 128:12,14 131:9 66:11,18 68:12
177:2 182:14,20
158:1 176:23 179:5 structuring (13) 20:4 52:17 105:3 131:10 174:7,19,19 175:3 132:6 133:8,11 69:8,10,15 70:6
185:7 195:16,21
184:18 23:21 38:22 39:4 165:7 172:21 184:12 190:9,11,23 134:16 136:25 71:6 73:7 75:18,25
200:24 202:23
stated (3) 42:3 101:20 40:20 41:6 48:18 suit (3) 56:14 108:21 terminals (1) 95:8 137:1 140:8 141:18 85:6 88:16 91:16
203:14 208:7
173:4 50:12 69:11 88:7,9 198:8 terms (22) 33:5 37:14 142:2,8 143:22 94:4 95:23 108:1
taken (14) 15:14 58:3
statement (51) 16:24 121:9 136:16 suits (1) 109:6 37:14 38:3,9,17,18 146:15 148:3 149:7 108:22 110:14
61:8 67:5 72:16
21:9,19 37:8 45:6 struggle (3) 76:11 sum (1) 121:25 38:19,21,25 39:8 150:22 151:4,6 113:19 124:1 125:4
83:24 86:21 97:7
49:3 51:3 52:20 187:16 195:8 summary (6) 119:23 55:5 86:25 87:4,6,7 152:1,23 153:25 125:11 129:16

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

226

February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

130:4,21 135:3 208:19 underpinning (1) 23:8 85:9 87:21,23,24
136:18 141:13 transfer (1) 71:8 understand (28) 9:13 88:20,23 128:9
142:22 143:3 146:9 transferring (1) 88:1 11:24 18:19 33:23 145:11 146:8,8,11
146:12,16 147:6 translate (3) 10:12,24 44:3,11 46:14 146:15,18,23,25
148:3 152:15 159:5 106:17 51:11,17 58:9 76:2 147:4,7,14,18,22
159:11 160:13 translated (2) 12:1 82:18 104:21 147:24,25 148:4,11
163:18 169:9,12 73:21 113:10 123:7 148:13,14,23 153:2
170:15,22,23 translation (15) 10:7 134:11 140:14 162:20,21,22
172:25 173:8 10:25 16:16,18 172:24 183:12 164:10 165:12
174:24 175:4,7 73:21 106:15 194:22 195:1 198:3 169:9 170:3 172:17
176:18 177:24 167:15 202:20,24 201:24 202:4 204:8 172:19,23
179:21 181:19 203:15,19,20 204:7 205:7 206:10 VA1 (1) 61:22
184:2,4 186:3,4,5 204:11 209:7 207:19 vacation (4) 102:16
186:11,20 188:14 translator (1) 9:22 understandable (2) 103:7 192:25
192:3 194:21 195:3 translators (2) 9:19 69:8 148:16 193:22
195:21,22 196:14 208:22 understanding (18) Vahram (1) 40:7
197:20,20 201:6 transport (6) 11:5 19:2,3 31:9 39:11 validity (1) 131:21
202:2 81:22 82:13 95:6 44:9 50:16 51:23 valuable (3) 136:1
time-efficient (1) 5:7 96:8 157:18 52:2,6 59:19 62:19 163:22,24
timely (1) 57:8 travelling (1) 110:13 63:4 68:14,24 valuation (5) 166:1
times (3) 40:13 64:11 trial (4) 8:2 201:12 69:25 70:21 92:17 170:2 172:9 174:23
148:1 202:5 203:6 92:19 196:11
timing (5) 23:5 24:10 tried (7) 7:7 42:13 understands (1) value (22) 31:10 77:3
51:9 134:7 191:20 45:14 73:4 104:25 115:23 77:4 118:13 136:6
tired (2) 156:3 198:6 183:24 195:4 understood (11) 39:6 164:1,3 169:11,11
Tkachev (1) 157:12 trigger (1) 130:3 45:7 78:21 81:16 169:12 170:6,14
today (9) 1:9 53:13 trip (1) 73:1 115:18 123:5 127:9 171:7,11 172:22
61:14 93:11 136:24 trouble (2) 142:1 175:16 176:9 173:4 174:1,6,11
156:3 198:18 195:19 195:22 203:25 174:20,21 175:2
201:18 208:17 troubles (7) 63:22 undertaken (8) 24:18 valued (1) 169:24
told (23) 43:11 75:19 64:3,4 75:24 24:22 28:1,4 32:6 valuers (1) 169:13
91:5 104:25 126:20 115:13 152:21 35:22 69:5 186:23 various (7) 59:13
127:23 139:7 171:3 undertaking (1) 40:23 90:23 93:13 161:23
147:10 148:25 true (3) 62:15 167:14 underwriting (2) 23:3 182:25 183:3
149:6 152:19 197:16 137:10 196:23
159:21 168:4 173:8 trust (2) 88:15 136:23 uneasily (1) 160:8 Vasiliev (2) 4:15
182:11,25 187:14 try (8) 1:24 9:6 42:12 unemployed (1) 190:3 195:18
187:14,16,22 154:3 159:24 unfair (2) 160:25 VD (2) 104:8,10
195:10 197:18 194:19 197:7,25 183:25 vehicle (3) 8:3 143:9
203:5 trying (8) 44:2 47:11 unfavourable (1) 175:5
tomorrow (7) 93:12 116:5 135:20 143:9 105:17 ventures (1) 149:15
128:22 139:25 147:2 193:20 Union (1) 161:8 veracity (1) 8:20
157:6 197:24 196:25 University (1) 187:10 verification (1) 34:13
198:13,14 Tsalobanova (2) unknown (1) 189:24 verified (1) 99:21
top (11) 14:21 15:19 128:13 139:22 unlawful (1) 189:19 verify (1) 72:22
82:1 127:12 135:8 Tuesday (1) 212:2 unusual (8) 11:10,21 version (25) 4:17
144:21 145:3 turn (2) 65:5 200:25 31:3 86:22 105:12 83:23 89:11 90:10
178:13,17 181:24 turned (2) 31:17 209:1,1,11 90:11 91:2,5,8,9,19
183:10 68:18 upgrade (2) 18:3,15 93:3,4 96:20 97:18
topic (2) 197:19 199:4 turnover (1) 79:1 upload (1) 203:6 105:1 119:2,6,15
total (1) 65:17 two (43) 1:11 3:2 5:1 uploaded (4) 202:5 119:18,20 164:14
Traber (10) 151:17 5:22,24 6:11,13,13 205:2 206:1 207:20 164:15,25 203:23
152:11,15,18,22 6:20 15:18 21:23 upset (1) 157:11 205:25
153:19 159:24 30:9 40:2,11 47:21 USA (2) 177:3 180:18 VHKP (1) 154:9
161:1,2 195:10 51:20 67:7 70:19 use (15) 122:16 viable (2) 46:17 64:9
track (1) 98:24 70:20 71:18 84:15 133:24 134:20 vice (2) 152:23 183:4
trade (3) 178:20 179:6 86:20 97:16 109:25 136:2,8,9,17,20 vice-governor (3) 93:8
179:18 112:1 113:3 116:19 164:6 170:14 174:2 93:15 96:7
transaction (9) 67:22 124:1 126:21 183:24 194:19 victim (5) 158:1 160:7
70:12 120:14 132:7 127:10 131:12 195:4 204:22 161:15,16 184:18
132:9 151:11,19 134:6 137:2 140:10 useful (2) 89:24 Victor (1) 180:20
154:21 155:11 143:23,23 148:1 126:17 video (11) 12:20
transactions (8) 41:4 149:6 166:21 uses (1) 138:3 144:8 145:5 187:12
71:1,17 72:2 126:9 174:12 182:16 usual (2) 105:9 206:3 187:14,21 190:10
153:21 155:7 187:9 198:17 usually (2) 82:6 190:12,13,18,22
184:14 type (6) 34:21 71:14 131:11 videos (6) 2:15 12:14
transcribers (2) 104:20 105:15 12:16,23 13:8,17
208:12,12 194:15,16 V view (7) 11:11 66:9
transcript (24) 2:5 9:4 types (1) 131:20 V-Bank (76) 48:2 53:6 114:1 134:2 162:3
20:15,25 26:25 204:14 205:23
64:1,18,20 65:2,11
50:8 54:7 109:17 U views (1) 110:11
65:17,24 66:3,19
110:6,13 112:12 ultimately (1) 206:18 Viking (2) 155:20,21
67:3 68:7,19,20
145:4,25 198:20 Village (1) 166:20
unable (7) 41:18 69:22 70:17,19
201:3,4,6 202:2,2,7 Vinarsky (1) 188:21
63:11 68:3,6 69:13 71:16,24 72:1 73:9
202:19 205:5,12 violating (1) 182:1
80:14 147:4 73:11 74:11 75:9
206:14 virtually (1) 145:17
uncertainty (2) 37:19 75:18,24,25 76:4,9
transcripts (9) 1:11,22 visit (3) 153:19 177:17
62:22 76:9,15 77:7,15,20
108:19 111:16,18 177:19
uncovered (1) 46:17 77:25,25 78:20
114:17 207:13,16 visiting (1) 32:24

Vitaly (9) 16:21 41:13 54:5 55:5 74:1 125:3 128:22 129:17 213:4

Vneshsconombank (2)

44:5 93:24

Volkhov (1) 143:7 volume (5) 11:14 169:2,14 173:1

202:5

Vozrozhdenie (6)

49:11,13 97:17 145:14,18 153:17

VTK (2) 153:9,13

Vuillard (1) 40:9

Vyborg (73) 27:7 28:14 32:17,23 33:1,22 34:4 45:24 53:8 74:8 76:1 77:10,18 80:22 84:8 85:10 87:10 87:18,20 88:18 92:1 94:11 95:8,13 96:3,12 97:22 98:16 100:7,7 122:20 123:6,20 124:2,7,8,17,19 132:1,5 133:22 134:6 140:12,16,25 140:25 146:3 151:19 153:5,12,20 153:21 154:1,9,12 155:7,9,10,14 165:14 169:6,8,23 170:15 171:1,7,22 172:6,7,9,22 174:10 180:8

Vyborgsky (1) 95:9

Vysotsky (1) 95:9

W

wait (6) 68:23 80:9 144:6,9 157:12 168:13

waiting (1) 154:3 waive (3) 44:22,22

87:24

waking (1) 156:3 want (67) 3:6 4:1,21

8:8 10:2,5,12 11:9 12:23,24 15:8 21:7 21:22,22 24:25 25:8 26:11 27:1 29:8 31:12 34:13 35:10 50:19 51:13 52:20 53:14 63:22 71:1 88:18 92:7,11 98:24 105:24 109:4 109:7,12 113:10,12 113:15 115:18 116:25 117:3 119:8 119:25 132:17 147:11 150:15 151:12,13 152:3 162:8,8,9 180:3 181:10,11,11,12 182:17 186:4 188:5 188:6 189:10 190:20 195:24 198:3 202:9

wanted (24) 13:4 19:5 19:7 25:14,18 27:2 38:10 40:4 43:18 48:14,15 50:21 53:5 70:1 88:7 96:4 96:8 117:11 151:17 153:20 168:19 177:19 194:14

208:20 wanting (1) 191:22 wants (2) 13:1,2 war (1) 62:25 warm (1) 47:11 warn (1) 204:11 warned (1) 195:12 wary (1) 203:21 wasn’t (16) 27:19

50:11 55:19 65:10 83:8 86:14 87:18 102:12 117:19 144:18 149:2 150:20 164:1,2,7 169:17

way (35) 4:25 5:7 9:10 10:22 11:22 13:2 29:17 31:12 35:6 36:23 44:24 45:9 51:1 57:15 60:13 77:8 91:19 109:15 112:13 113:22 121:21 125:1 130:21 133:18 150:12 162:19 180:12 184:20 186:12,14 189:10 200:3,3 201:25 207:11

ways (2) 197:1 206:12 we’ve (9) 12:16 35:23 50:16 51:13 53:1

83:24 143:17 169:18 208:22 website (10) 84:22

85:17 86:13 100:11 107:4,13,22,24 108:6,7

Wednesday (6) 9:2 11:20 16:3 93:12 96:15 157:7

Wednesday’s (2) 10:4

11:17

week (9) 17:18 54:3 59:1,6 72:13 108:19 109:20 123:6 200:13

weekend (5) 26:4 115:9,16 199:18 201:16

weekends (1) 193:5 weeks (1) 138:9 weight (1) 5:19 welcome (2) 179:6

194:12 welcomed (1) 194:13 well-known (1) 99:12 went (9) 43:14 54:4

120:1 142:4 152:17 155:6 177:18 181:9 195:9

weren’t (12) 24:21 30:23 38:5 40:18 110:20 118:22 147:19 163:15 182:4 193:21 197:2 201:9

west (2) 90:17 91:11 western (42) 11:19 17:13,19 18:16 19:13 27:5 28:13 28:15 32:16,17 33:12 41:16 42:1 42:16,17 47:19 48:19,23 49:14 56:21 65:13 69:6

94:11 123:20 124:2 124:7,18 125:2,21 127:16 128:18

129:22 135:14 173:24 174:7,19,19 175:2 184:12 190:9 190:11,23

whichever (2) 108:21 207:5

whilst (2) 109:14

204:12 white (1) 26:24

wife (11) 115:10,14 115:17,25 117:5 149:8 172:3 195:14 204:6,16 209:13

willing (2) 17:8 81:2 win (1) 184:6 windmills (1) 195:6 winning (4) 184:3,5

184:10,16

winter/autumn (1)

186:13

wish (4) 6:4 9:4,12,13 wishes (1) 36:18 withdraw (1) 148:24 withdrew (1) 147:14 Withers (5) 13:13,16

13:16 14:6,17 witness (43) 16:24

21:9,19 37:8 45:6 49:3 51:2 52:20 53:21 55:1 57:4 58:20 59:24,25 61:18 62:5 64:13 72:8 79:3 84:4 85:19 86:6 93:18 96:18 97:3,12 98:25 104:15 107:5 118:7 122:10 143:4 145:9 146:22 148:7 149:20 158:14 161:21 167:22 169:3 170:25 195:25 202:16

witnesses (2) 101:5

173:23

woman (2) 144:18 145:6

woman’s (1) 82:6 won (1) 75:16 wonder (14) 16:23

17:16 26:14 29:1 36:4 38:14 49:2 56:12 64:24 68:1 81:6 90:20 144:2 171:13

wondered (1) 146:5 wondering (2) 5:6

10:18

word (1) 204:22 wording (1) 37:3 words (6) 34:13 111:3

139:8 141:15 201:3 209:9

work (15) 27:7 30:23 30:24 33:2,16 39:11 41:3 44:9 73:9 105:12 120:1 123:11 138:11 178:7 194:23

work-around (1)

202:4 worked (1) 35:7 working (12) 1:18

30:11 35:21 46:25 95:16 97:15 118:21 120:15 123:24 152:14 156:21 190:3

works (3) 22:2 42:10 121:15

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

227
February 22, 2016 Day 14 — Redacted

world (6) 27:11 51:10 93:21 130:12 137:9 152:19

worry (2) 21:7 91:9 worrying (1) 112:7 worsening (1) 63:9 worser (1) 51:19 worth (4) 47:2 97:23

165:25 169:23 wouldn’t (11) 42:14 111:9 138:13,15

150:8,12 162:5,6 180:6 190:7 205:25

write (6) 14:16 26:23 93:12,15 115:11 183:8

writer (1) 74:23 writes (1) 124:12 writing (15) 2:22

16:19 41:19 61:17 61:18 85:6 94:20 94:22 100:18 163:6 163:8 170:25 188:21 192:14 204:10

written (14) 104:21 119:5,7,11 144:10 145:8 191:19 192:1 192:3 203:5 207:19 207:24,25 208:10

wrong (14) 20:19 38:1 38:8 42:10 56:23 61:12 92:13 101:14 102:21,22,25 103:6 103:13 113:6

wrote (3) 17:7 126:14 183:9

X

Y

Yaroslav (1) 4:15 year (13) 42:11 45:17
46:2 71:25,25 90:13 131:3,16 132:14 162:6 168:19,21 185:4 years (13) 51:20 71:19

86:20 100:19 132:13,23,25 140:13 149:6 186:24 187:6,9 194:23

Yerikan (1) 39:24 Yerikian (3) 40:6,7,8 Yerkan (1) 39:23 yesterday (2) 10:8

90:1

young (1) 186:25 YouTube (3) 143:25

187:12,22

Yurievna (1) 74:2

Z

0

1

1 (11) 41:25 54:4 66:2 72:21 128:14 133:22 134:3 140:10 174:9 195:14 213:3

1,000 (3) 15:23,25 183:23

1.11 (1) 108:13

1.30 (1) 180:17

1.4 (2) 36:17 40:21 2.10 (2) 108:12,15
10 (9) 17:18 53:10 20 (5) 38:24 69:4
81:7 94:19 122:25 94:19 190:8,23
123:3 185:15,18 2000-and (1) 72:23
186:17 2002 (1) 97:15
10.00 (4) 198:8,13,14 2006 (1) 68:9
212:1 2007 (7) 18:5 58:24
10.30 (1) 1:2 59:10,22 60:2,23
10.55 (1) 197:21 61:15
100 (6) 33:24 120:24 2008 (68) 19:14 21:19
121:2 148:3 166:2 28:17 29:8 31:22
174:15 32:10 37:13,19
108 (2) 80:19 213:6 41:10 43:12 44:14
11 (2) 110:15 199:13 45:20 46:5,11 48:6
11.1 (2) 164:22 165:5 49:6,18,25 52:1
11.30 (1) 180:17 54:4,18 56:24 57:2
11.50 (1) 56:17 57:6,11,18 58:15
110 (5) 85:20,23 62:6,12,24 63:8,13
86:16 107:5,8 63:19 64:16 66:4
111 (2) 118:8 122:11 79:6 81:1,7 88:4,8
112 (1) 110:14 89:7 93:19 99:7,12
115 (2) 81:2 98:1 101:24 102:7 103:1
118 (2) 196:1 213:7 103:20 104:2 118:7
119 (1) 196:15 124:13 128:14
12 (9) 19:18,25 21:5 129:12 131:24
110:15 166:25 132:10 137:1
167:8,13 168:8 139:21 142:1
199:16 149:22 150:20
12.00 (1) 56:19 151:5 158:9 173:24
120 (5) 58:20,22 60:1 174:5,17 186:13
61:25 172:17 197:1,13
121 (1) 110:15 2009 (105) 33:4 36:1
122 (1) 57:3 39:17 40:8 43:1
123 (2) 62:4,9 47:13,20 48:4 49:6
124 (1) 63:6 49:19 50:2,18
126 (1) 64:13 53:19,20 66:23
127 (2) 78:5,10 68:3,6,18,20 69:13
13 (2) 170:9 184:23 78:14,19 79:9,19
13.1 (1) 171:25 80:1,9,14 83:14
133 (2) 84:5,10 84:17,21,22 85:15
14 (6) 165:18 166:25 86:4,10,11,17
167:8,13 168:8 100:11 104:7 107:4
172:8 107:10,16,24 108:5
140 (1) 18:10 133:4 143:3 146:25
15 (7) 38:23 53:10 147:25 148:12,15
123:6 169:13,14,23 148:17 149:22
173:7 150:1 152:1 154:18
150 (2) 118:14 120:16 154:22 156:10
16 (2) 213:4,5 158:9,11,23 159:1
165 (1) 189:14 159:17 162:2,21
166 (1) 190:25 163:2 168:4,6
167 (1) 191:13 169:16,17,18 172:8
16th (1) 61:18 172:25 174:20
17 (3) 20:15 42:11 175:6,12 176:18,21
198:25 177:2 178:11,14,18
18 (6) 5:23 60:20 180:15 182:13
112:2 163:2 180:15 184:21,23 185:14
199:16 185:18,22,23
18-21 (1) 178:18 186:13,16,17,17
184 (1) 61:21 188:14 190:7,8,23
187 (1) 158:19 191:1,15,22 192:1
18th (2) 110:4,16 193:10,16 194:1
19 (3) 51:15 73:25 195:9,14
142:1 2010 (6) 164:10
198 (1) 213:8 165:14 185:5,10,12
185:21
2 2011 (13) 65:8,18
2 (23) 14:21 15:20 72:21,24 75:15
99:23 132:11
42:3 64:17,21
147:19,25,25
82:21 89:11 92:7,8
148:13 164:11
99:25 103:16
165:14
110:15 133:23
2012 (2) 73:25 100:19
148:2,2 166:19
2013 (1) 144:4
169:15 170:4 173:1
2014 (2) 150:20 151:5
201:15 203:4 205:1
2016 (2) 1:1 212:2
205:3
209 (1) 213:9
2-something (1)
20th (1) 185:4
165:24
21 (4) 152:1 156:10

159:17 195:9
215 (2) 79:2,23
218 (3) 79:14,17,25
22 (1) 1:1
220 (1) 80:5
221 (3) 145:9 146:22
148:8
222 (3) 145:16 146:23
148:8
223 (1) 149:20
224 (2) 161:21 169:3
225 (3) 162:8 167:23
168:1
23 (2) 99:23 212:2
233 (1) 97:23
236 (1) 61:21
25 (11) 19:14 21:19
27:1 28:17 29:8
31:22 32:6,8 40:1
52:1,1

25,000 (11) 34:25

37:16 43:19 45:9 45:21 47:2 49:23 50:6,9 53:7 55:15

250 (1) 141:4 25th (1) 39:24
26 (2) 61:3,4
27 (3) 41:10 124:13
129:12
27.8.08 (1) 133:12
28 (1) 61:4

3

3 (2) 68:9 133:24
3.15 (1) 156:6
3.27 (1) 156:8
3.7 (1) 64:17
3.799 (2) 59:11,21
3.9 (1) 65:20
30 (1) 74:10
300 (4) 18:3 42:1
56:21 135:13
31 (2) 63:13 72:21
33 (4) 60:2,5,25 61:15
34 (2) 186:24 194:23
35 (1) 122:23
3rd (1) 68:8

4

4 (8) 72:21 81:20 123:10 139:21 148:2 174:7,8 180:14

4.00 (2) 156:3 198:3

4.196 (1) 74:11

4.30 (4) 1:9 2:3 109:5 197:22

4.48 (1) 211:25

40 (3) 99:13 173:2,9

400 (1) 173:10

433 (2) 173:5,6

443 (2) 172:11,15

45.767 (1) 59:22

46 (1) 53:22

5

5 (2) 83:17 164:21

50 (4) 51:8 60:16 122:19 172:4

50,000 (7) 42:2,8 43:4 43:15 47:3 55:17 55:24

50,580 (1) 164:20

54 (2) 55:2,2

55 (1) 55:4

57 (1) 55:2

6

6 (1) 89:7
6.1 (4) 166:5,10,19,20
600 (1) 165:21
620 (1) 51:7

7
7 (2) 72:15,19
75 (1) 134:5

8
80 (2) 17:14 18:20

9
9 (1) 26:6
90 (5) 16:24 17:5 18:4
18:20 91:16
90-page (2) 24:25
27:9

90-pages (1) 33:13

900 (1) 165:13
92 (2) 21:11,16
94 (4) 37:8,11 38:2
45:7
97 (2) 49:2 51:2
98 (2) 52:17,20

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