Day 2

Bank St Petersburg v Vitaly Arkhangelsky [Master]
Day 2

Contents

:1 Friday, 29 January 2016
2 (10.00 am)
3 Housekeeping
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, good morning.
5 MR STROILOV: May it please your Lordship, I appear with
6 your Lordship’s permission as McKenzie friend of
7 the defendants. As yesterday, Mr Arkhangelsky is there
8 by videolink, more as a courtesy than for practical
9 reasons, because it is anticipated that I will be making
10 the submissions.
11 He will also, in the very unfortunate event that we
12 have to continue further than the lunch break, have to
13 leave with apologies; he has another commitment.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. Can I just say this: good
15 morning, Mr Arkhangelsky. It is not intended to be —
16 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Good morning.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Good morning. It is not intended to
18 be a discourtesy, but I shan’t say good morning or good
19 afternoon to you every time, just as I would not were
20 you sitting in court. I don’t want you to think that
21 I don’t mark your presence; I do and I value it. But
22 nevertheless, the ordinary process is that the matter is
23 conducted by counsel or anyone authorised to represent
24 you. I don’t want you to feel I am ignoring you; simply
25 that I am carrying on as usual.

2 :1 MR ARKHANGELSKY: Thank you.
2 MR STROILOV: I am grateful, my Lord.
3 My Lord, I must mention that the Bank is represented
4 by my learned friends Mr Lord QC, Mr Birt QC and
5 Mr Eschwege.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, thank you.
7 MR STROILOV: My Lord, briefly, thinking back on what I said
8 yesterday, I think I must make one correction in
9 relation to my appearance as McKenzie friend in other
10 cases. You will recall that I referred to a divorce
11 case, to which the claimants referred.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
13 MR STROILOV: I said I only appeared in one hearing. That’s
14 not quite correct: it was one hearing at one time, and
15 then over a year later, and after the trial and the
16 judgment, I did appear again to help that gentleman with
17 another application, just for the sake of accuracy. It
18 was, really, in both cases it was one thing where, for
19 one reason or another, he couldn’t engage proper legal
20 representatives, but actually it happened more than
21 once. It was once in — I can’t remember which year,
22 and then on another occasion then it was, I think, two
23 or three hearings, because there was also permission to
24 appeal application also. I appeared, but it was in
25 relation to one fairly limited application. So just for

3 :1 the sake of accuracy on that.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. So far as I am concerned —
3 I don’t know whether Mr Lord wishes or feels it
4 necessary to comment — the real distinction is between
5 someone who has, on a couple of times, and in this case
6 is appearing on a regular basis, but who does not, as it
7 were, de facto pretend to be an advocate to the court of
8 first or last resort, because if you habitually did
9 this, then you would be habitually doing something which
10 the law requires you to be professionally equipped and
11 registered to do.
12 Obviously it may very well be that there may be
13 others in Mr Arkhangelsky’s position from time to time,
14 and there may have been people in his position in
15 the past. You must be aware that the court will be
16 vigilant to ensure that this doesn’t become a sort of
17 unregistered career, if I can put it that way, and I am
18 assisted by you, and I say no more in the context of
19 this case, save to repeat what I said yesterday: I will
20 always keep the matter in this regard, as in all
21 regards, under review. But I am grateful to you for
22 your clarification, but that is, as it seems to me, the
23 dividing line, and if I felt you had gone over the
24 dividing line, that would be a matter of concern because
25 I would be blessing, really, a departure from the

4 :1 professional rules.
2 MR STROILOV: Yes. Quite, my Lord. I just did it for the
3 sake of …
4 MR LORD: My Lord, there was one thing I meant to — just
5 Mr Stroilov’s very helpful correction. My Lord, there
6 is one further thing I think I needed to apprise
7 your Lordship of in the bundle. I am not making any
8 point on it, I just think the court should be aware of
9 it, if you don’t mind. It is in the first bundle. It
10 is the article from La Russophobe, I know your Lordship
11 has read that but I want to show your Lordship the
12 article. There is a comment at the end which I think
13 I do need to draw to your Lordship’s attention. It is
14 the first bundle, my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Of the supplemental bundle.
16 MR LORD: I will be clear, I am not going back on anything.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Show it to me.
18 MR LORD: It is behind divider 8.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I haven’t read this with any care.
20 I have really focused on the witness statements rather
21 than the exhibits.
22 MR LORD: I understand that, my Lord, but this was a piece
23 in La Russophobe, and that’s a frontispiece which hasn’t
24 come out in the photocopy very well. Your Lordship can
25 see what La Russophobe is about. Then there was

5 :1 a letter by Mr Stroilov to it complaining about what was
2 said to be a crude propaganda article in
3 The Independent, praising Mrs Matvienko. Your Lordship
4 can see there what Mr Stroilov wrote on that first page.
5 (Pause)
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
7 MR LORD: And obviously this, La Russophobe, has carried
8 this piece.
9 It runs on at length, and then there is a long list
10 of signatories, not to Mr Stroilov, but there is then,
11 on the second page, a «Dear Sir or Madam …»
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The second page of?
13 MR LORD: The second page of this. The first one is
14 a letter, a letter to Mr Stroilov, and then «Dear Sir or
15 Madam …» there looks to be a longer piece or letter,
16 if you like, I don’t need your Lordship to look at it
17 but it is about Mrs Matvienko.
18 Then on page 9, {N22/53.2/10}, there are then a long
19 list of signatories of people who sign up to this
20 letter, but just above the top hole punch, there is
21 something that says «Further Proceedings».
22 Then paragraph 78 says:
23 «The complainants authorised one of their number, Mr
24 Pavel Stroilov, to act on behalf of them all in the
25 future proceedings on this matter.»

6 :1 Again, one of the points I made yesterday was that
2 the court might have thought it right, for various
3 interests and aspects, to be explained. I do not press
4 that. I am not going back over old ground, but I did
5 mean yesterday to alert the court at the outset to this
6 particular article, and the fact that it looks as if
7 Mr Stroilov was carrying some ongoing brief in regard —
8 in relation to this matter concerning Ms Matvienko,
9 which, in my submission, is a relevant factor just to
10 apprise the court of and no more as far I am concerned
11 at this stage.
12 MR STROILOV: I am grateful for my learned friend, first of
13 all it is always nice to expand one’s readership when
14 one writes publicly. Of course, you may recall that
15 I discussed this controversy in my first witness
16 statement in some detail when I explained my interest in
17 this case and also, of course, the proceedings referred
18 to in this document concern a complaint before the Press
19 Complaints Commission, as it then was.
20 So it wasn’t — these were more or less quasi
21 judicial proceedings but they are not subject to
22 regulations. Anyone can — they are judicial
23 proceedings where only a professional advocate can
24 participate. So to that extent I don’t consider that
25 this is relevant, even though I have no objection to —

7 :1 I did bring this to the attention of the court in my
2 time in my first witness statement.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I think Mr Lord was right to
4 bring this to my attention. It doesn’t alter my
5 position but, as I said, I will keep it under review
6 and, if I may, a mild warning, which may become more
7 pungent as matters go on. These things can, as it were,
8 as waves of the sea, you can carry from one case to
9 the next, and until people who obviously would value
10 your support begin to treat you as available, and you
11 become held out, whether intentionally or not, as being
12 available, and you then step into the shoes of
13 an advocate without having the necessary professional
14 qualifications and responsibilities of one.
15 If the court were to determine that that was
16 happening, then whatever might be the prejudice to
17 the individual litigant concerned, it would have to stop
18 you in your tracks, and the reason for that is otherwise
19 it would undermine the greater public interest in there
20 being a regulated legal profession.
21 So I suppose my warning is this: be careful here,
22 you can, by a process almost seamless, begin to purport
23 to be an advocate, and that would be unacceptable and
24 that does not mean that I don’t value your contribution.
25 It does, I think, increase the onus on you to be

8 :1 entirely straightforward and candid, as, as far as I am
2 concerned, you have been in the past; and if you are in
3 doubt as to your position, you must share that doubt
4 with me rather than take a view, because you may not be
5 in the best position to take an objective view.
6 MR STROILOV: I am grateful, my Lord. I hear what you say
7 and I will do as you say if it comes to it.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
9 MR STROILOV: My Lord, should we finish off the issue of
10 pleadings —
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I think so.
12 MR STROILOV: — at the moment? I’m not quite sure how you
13 prefer to proceed. I personally find it easier when the
14 time is divided between the parties and then the parties
15 can divide its time between the issues and cover the
16 whole ground.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think, in this case, unless it very
18 much disturbs you, I would prefer to deal with each
19 point and then hear what Mr Lord says. That’s really
20 for my own benefit, because I think it is easier for me
21 to keep in mind the particular points in that way.
22 MR STROILOV: Yes, certainly, my Lord.
23 I think picking up from where we finished the issue
24 of pleadings yesterday, although I hadn’t thought about
25 it, I am concerned that perhaps we are talking about

9 :1 slightly different things. I wonder if it makes sense
2 to look at the — we have to follow three documents,
3 I am afraid, at the same time. So if I could open my
4 learned friend’s note for this hearing. I’m sorry, it
5 will take a little time because I have to —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, the three documents are Mr Lord’s
7 note, which identifies the points that he is really
8 bothered about; Mr McGregor’s witness statement, which
9 is an elaboration which contains points which are not so
10 seriously pursued; then there is the object of their
11 attention, which is the pleading.
12 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I want to take the benefit of
13 Magnum and bring them on the screen and really follow
14 all of them.
15 I think the note of my learned friends is at I21.
16 Let me start again {I21/27/31}. Then Mr McGregor’s
17 statement is at {G4/111/1}, and because there are only
18 two screens, I suppose we can use the paper bundle to
19 look at the pleadings.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, that’s a good idea. Yes.
21 MR STROILOV: And that’s the latest version of the draft, is
22 divider 9.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
24 MR STROILOV: So, my Lord, looking at the skeleton of
25 the note.

10 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And we left off at 154(i) to (k),
2 really.
3 MR STROILOV: I am sorry, I am not quite …
4 MR LORD: We had finished 3 and there was going to be
5 a pleaded case, I think, or some particulars, and we
6 hadn’t got to 4.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s correct. Item (k), you were
8 going to …
9 MR STROILOV: Most grateful. So that’s page 33,
10 paragraph 16, and then (4).
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. {I21/27/33}
12 MR STROILOV: I think it makes sense now simply to look at
13 the draft, so that starts at paragraph 177.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
15 MR STROILOV: My Lord, you will see the old pleadings and
16 the amendments made.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
18 MR STROILOV: The first one comes in subparagraph (a), and
19 I think there is no objection to reference to
20 Mrs Maylsheva, but there is an objection to the words
21 «but without limitation —«.
22 Then further, I think, in — I am just looking at my
23 learned friend’s notes to see what other objections …
24 — yes, I think further, the principal objection is
25 really that the amendment doesn’t go far enough in that.

11 :1 If you look at (d) of that paragraph, you will see that
2 it is pleaded that other senior employees of the Bank,
3 including Mrs Mironova and Mr Balandin, but then clearly
4 it is not pleaded this limitation. So we don’t give
5 complete list of people who we say are conspirators
6 within the Bank, we just mention the people who we are
7 sure about.
8 So I think, pausing on this point, what we say about
9 that, clearly this does not change the substance of
10 the pleadings as they were. They were pleaded without
11 limitation. They remain without limitation. It is
12 suggested that they must be amended so there is
13 limitation.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So that there is what?
15 MR STROILOV: So that there is an exhaustive list of people
16 against whom the allegation is made.
17 Now, what I accept is that we wouldn’t be entitled
18 to rely on subsequent identification of someone who may
19 have been a conspirator within the Bank to establish
20 either the existence of the conspiracy or the Bank’s
21 liability for the conspiracy. So that I accept.
22 What I think has been suggested is that we won’t be
23 able to make any allegations of dishonesty against
24 anyone who gives evidence, or any other employee of
25 the Bank unless we have pleaded it before, or as a last

12 :1 resort plead it now.
2 I don’t think that’s quite correct. I have had,
3 obviously, a very superficial look at the cases on that
4 overnight. There is a lot of authority to say that
5 allegations of fraud against the party must be
6 particularised and how they must be particularised.
7 I accept we must plead each particular transaction which
8 we say was fraudulent, but we don’t have, in relation to
9 each particular transaction, to say who of the bank’s
10 executives involved was acting dishonestly.
11 Firstly, simply because that is not strictly
12 relevant to determine liability. These transactions are
13 only pleaded as collateral facts to establish the
14 conspiracy case.
15 Secondly, because we simply cannot know, in many
16 cases — well, there are a lot of cases where conspiracy
17 is pleaded on the basis of overt acts of a corporation;
18 from that it can be inferred that transactions were
19 dishonest, but we don’t know any more — simply from the
20 nature of transactions you can infer dishonesty, but the
21 claimant, I think, is ordinarily not in a position to
22 know either the internal workings of the conspiracy or
23 the internal workings of a corporation to the extent of
24 being able to identify all executives who are said to
25 have acted dishonestly.

13 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think you have to identify, correct
2 me if I am wrong, the individuals who you say conceived
3 and/or implemented the plan, or conspiracy, and whose
4 activities in that regard are to be attributed to
5 the Bank to make it liable. You have to identify those
6 in common fairness. If you have identified those, then
7 to some extent accusing other people, who you haven’t
8 identified, of dishonesty or fraud is just gratuitously
9 insulting, if I can put it that way, and they may be
10 entitled to know, and for you to say, whether you say
11 they were involved or not.
12 If you say they were involved, you have to say in
13 what way they were involved so that they have a chance
14 to rebut, in detail, this slur on them. It’s fairness,
15 isn’t it, that —
16 MR STROILOV: I make several points in relation to this.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
18 MR STROILOV: Firstly, if we have pleaded that transaction
19 such and such — well, just to take an example, we have
20 been last on the sale of Mercury LLC to ROK N1 Prichaly
21 was fraudulent, and that was a part of a fraud and
22 conspiracy to fraud to which the Bank was a party.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The trouble is you bandy these words
24 around a bit. Conspiracy, which is notoriously often
25 relied on, but equally notoriously difficult to

14 :1 establish, means that they have had to gather round,
2 whatever that means, and decide on a wicked plot. They
3 have to have conspired, knowingly, to do damage, and
4 they have — it is not something which you simply say:
5 well, someone must have done it. You have to say who
6 did it and what their plan was.
7 MR STROILOV: My Lord, that —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s why conspiracy is a notoriously
9 difficult thing to establish.
10 MR STROILOV: Let me try again. There should be
11 a distinction. Firstly there is a pleading of
12 conspiracy, as such.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR STROILOV: That’s something we ask you to find in
15 the very end of the evidential analysis. That is to say
16 there was a conspiracy. The Bank, acting by X, Y and Z
17 was a party to it. They had this intent, it was
18 dishonest. That’s one thing.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, and you have to identify in that
20 context, which you agree, the people who you said
21 conspired.
22 MR STROILOV: Quite right, my Lord.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
24 MR STROILOV: Apart from that, next to that, and that is the
25 majority of those thing which will occupy the court, we

15 :1 say: well, transactions on such and such days between
2 such and such parties, plead them out properly, and we
3 say: well, out of those transactions, A, B, C and D were
4 fraudulent, and from that we ask the court to infer
5 conspiracy, if you follow that.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
7 MR STROILOV: These are collateral facts. This is different
8 from the overall pleading of conspiracy and fraud.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
10 MR STROILOV: And we say, further we plead the Bank was —
11 either we say the Bank was a party to these
12 transactions, or the Bank gave consent to these
13 transactions, or we say the Bank procures these
14 transactions. All of these are relevant, collateral
15 facts to what we have pleaded.
16 What I don’t accept is that we are required, in each
17 particular case, to identify each member of each
18 particular committee who was acting dishonestly who
19 behalf of the Bank, or simply not —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: As I tried to explain yesterday, it
21 isn’t like a game of Ludo where you have to throw a six
22 or fail. You don’t have to identify every member of
23 the conspiracy to succeed. You have to establish, you
24 have to plead and ultimately prove enough people to
25 visit liability on the Bank. It may be that there were

16 :1 others who you never say or establish were involved, and
2 who were involved. That wouldn’t matter. Mr Lord
3 wouldn’t go round trying to show that there was one
4 innocent in the Bank and therefore you have failed.
5 MR STROILOV: I accept that. But I think there is
6 a slightly different point.
7 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, I entirely agree with that, but,
8 of course, because of your Lordship’s, with respect,
9 correct observation about what the conspiracy is, which
10 is the concerted — the ring, the agreement. There is
11 an obvious difficulty for the claimant if they can’t
12 identify if it is a partial ring. That may bring its
13 own difficulty into play, and I accept your Lordship’s
14 point that they can establish that, they don’t have to
15 identify each and every member of the ring, but
16 obviously they have to identify the concerted action.
17 So there will obviously be some forensic issues there,
18 which I think it is fair that I point out. But I don’t
19 demur from your Lordship’s analysis.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think we have to distinguish
21 between, on one hand the conspiracy claim, and on the
22 other, as I understand it, and you must correct me if I
23 am wrong, is a more amorphous or innominate claim to
24 the extent that you say that the values achieved are
25 simply inconsistent with honesty.

17 :1 MR STROILOV: That’s not what I am talking about, no,
2 my Lord.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is it all conspiracy?
4 MR STROILOV: I am talking about collateral facts, from
5 which — and there are hundreds of facts from which,
6 ultimately, we ask to infer conspiracy.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think that is reverse engineering of
8 an impermissible kind. I think you have to identify at
9 least more than one person who got together and decided:
10 right, we’re going to sell these things at
11 an undervalue. We don’t care of the effect on the Bank
12 or anything else.
13 MR STROILOV: That’s right.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We are just going to do this.
15 MR STROILOV: That’s right, I accept that, that’s in
16 the pleadings now.
17 I think what Mr Lord has suggested is something
18 different; that is to say that where we say that sale
19 from Mercury to ROK N1 Prichaly was fraudulent, we must
20 identify precisely who of the Bank’s witnesses, and
21 I think who of the Bank’s executives as a whole, knew
22 about it being dishonest, and who didn’t.
23 So later, if we haven’t named witness X as being
24 dishonest now, and later we ask him about that
25 particular transaction, and we are not satisfied with

18 :1 the answer, we will be stopped from submitting to
2 your Lordship that the witness was dishonest and it was
3 a fraudulent transaction, and ultimately that makes the
4 conspiracy more likely. That, I understand, is what is
5 suggested, and I don’t find, from very limited research
6 I have been able to do, I don’t find that to be
7 supported in the authorities.
8 I quite accept, we have to identify each
9 transaction, and then as a matter of fairness, of course
10 people in the Bank would know who was involved in these
11 transactions and would call these people to give
12 evidence if, in the course of cross-examination, it
13 seems to us that we will have to submit that they were
14 personally dishonest.
15 I think all we have to do, we have to put that to
16 the witness before submitting it to you, but that’s as
17 far as the obligation goes. We don’t have to plead the
18 case against each individual witness or against each
19 individual conspirator.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I actually need some help on this, but
21 let’s take an example. You say there was a conspiracy
22 and you identify X, Y and Z, and you say that they were
23 in a position, the Bank, such that the Bank is liable by
24 reference to their misactivities; okay? Part of your
25 proof that there was a conspiracy, according to your

19 :1 case, is to say that only conspirators would have come
2 up with such a dodgy value as was achieved. You use
3 that as part of your proof; right?
4 MR STROILOV: Yes.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: A witness, unnamed, not X, Y and Z,
6 gets up in the box and is asked by Mr Lord or by you:
7 did that valuation strike you as inconsistent with
8 propriety? And they say no, it looked all right to me.
9 And Mr Lord uses that to show that at least as to that
10 part of your proof, that is to say that it goes without
11 saying that a price so achieved was fraudulent, it
12 didn’t appear so to someone who is not being accused of
13 any impropriety, and he would be entitled to do that.
14 MR STROILOV: No. Obviously we are going into the forensic
15 points which have not yet been made.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But the essence of your case is such
17 a broad one, and the way you seek to prove it is so
18 enormous, that you lay yourself open to the possibility
19 that unless you have identified the people you say were
20 in on the act, Mr Lord can show that, at least to that
21 person, who looks a pretty reasonable person, the price
22 didn’t put up a red flag. Isn’t it as simple as that?
23 I don’t know, Mr Lord.
24 MR LORD: It is, my Lord, and it is right to know that the
25 claim is for conspiracy. It is important to remember

20 :1 that the claim is of, what I am going to call, it’s
2 a grand conspiracy.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sorry, I had misunderstood
4 Mr Stroilov and I thought that there was an underground
5 claim which wasn’t quite conspiracy. But I have been
6 corrected by you both and I accept, and we record, that
7 the claim is only in conspiracy, and it is a bank-wide
8 conspiracy.
9 MR LORD: It is, my Lord, and the reason it is so important
10 is because this claim has been made for five years or
11 so, and the whole litigation has been approached on that
12 footing; in other words, I have your Lordship’s point in
13 mind, but let’s say, for argument’s sake, a more
14 granular complaint that one particular disposal didn’t
15 look quite right, that is a very, very different piece,
16 that would be a very, very different position and that’s
17 not the claim that we are facing, the claim that there
18 was a conspiracy to seize the assets right in 2008. It
19 is important, in fairness to the Bank, that’s the claim,
20 that’s the way this thing has been approached.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But the thing is, by so defining it,
22 I think the only way we can help Mr Stroilov and me is
23 to identify how these things work through.
24 MR LORD: Examples. Yes, I understand. I understand.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov is understandably saying:

21 :1 how can I, how can anyone know everyone who was in on
2 the act? And I’ve tried to say you don’t have to, you
3 just have to show enough people in a sufficient position
4 that — you show their conspiracy and you show the Bank
5 is liable for it, for want of a better phrase.
6 What I am warning him is, by reference to the way he
7 is going to prove this, or says he will, he is reliant
8 on it being plain as a pikestaff that the values
9 achieved were consistent only with impropriety, fraud.
10 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord, but the way the rules work — and it
11 is a fairness point — is that when you come to
12 the trial, any party has to be straight with the court,
13 and witnesses and other parties, as to what their case
14 is at that point. At that point in time, whatever was
15 known at pleading stages and earlier, you either have a
16 positive case of dishonesty to run against the person or
17 persons or events or valuations —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s true, but, Mr Lord, maybe it is
19 best to avoid the word «party», because Mr Stroilov has
20 done his research and he says that that rule only
21 applies to parties, as it were. I think you would say
22 anyone who is going to go in the box and have put to
23 them that they were dishonest, or party to a conspiracy,
24 must know of that ahead of time. Any person, it doesn’t
25 matter whether they are a party or not.

22 :1 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord, any — sorry, it is my fault. The
2 rules say that if you are going to allege fraud that
3 an allegation of fraud must be specifically pleaded,
4 because it is serious. So, just to help Mr Stroilov —
5 I don’t mean to be at all condescending, but
6 essentially, if it is a relevant piece of fraud that you
7 rely upon as part of your claim or counterclaim —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It must be pleaded and if it isn’t,
9 you shouldn’t make it.
10 MR LORD: Exactly. That is one box. If it is a credit
11 matter, to be fair to Mr Stroilov, to help him, if it is
12 a credit matter, so you don’t need it to prove your
13 claim on counterclaim, then you may not need to plead
14 it.
15 But before you put it to a witness, you must have
16 a basis for suggesting positively that they are
17 dishonest. That’s the first threshold.
18 Secondly, a credit answer will be binding; in other
19 words, a different set of considerations apply. You
20 can’t go round the houses endlessly.
21 What you can’t do is sort of fish around credit for
22 the witness and then suggest they are a dishonest person
23 and try and import that back into your claim. That
24 would be entirely impermissible, not fair to
25 the witnesses and just not acceptable, really.

23 :1 So I am sure he won’t go down that route but that is
2 really what lies behind. The main objections we have,
3 or the main objection to these amendments, is to stop
4 that sort of outcome, my Lord.
5 Your Lordship has our point.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, this is right at the cusp
7 of one of the reasons why the courts normally do
8 restrict representation. It is, as it were, black
9 letter law for advocates that they must not accuse non
10 parties of fraud, except in very exceptional
11 circumstances where it simply comes out of the box
12 rather unexpectedly, and if they are to allege fraud, or
13 conspiracy in this case, they must identify in advance
14 who they say was fraudulent. The court will be,
15 usually, fairly reluctant, unless that person is
16 a party, actually, because it looks an irrelevant thing
17 to say that someone was fraudulent if you don’t actually
18 rely on it to make your case. That’s why I think the
19 difficulty is, perhaps, arising.
20 MR STROILOV: I’m grateful, my Lord. Let me try to take it
21 in stages and in each case keep —
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: May I say this. He isn’t saying you
23 can’t — at the end of the day, you may say that the
24 witness was not a compelling witness. You may say that
25 their evidence was internally inconsistent. You may say

24 :1 that when the facts were put to them, they blinked and
2 looked inconsistent, scratched their nose and ears and
3 definitely looked dodgy. He is not saying you can’t say
4 that. But he is saying you can’t say they were one of
5 the actors, either passive or active, in the conspiracy.
6 MR LORD: My Lord, again, in fairness to Mr Stroilov, there
7 is a rule that you have to put to a witness those
8 points. They can’t come and go without first knowing it
9 is going to be said positively they are dishonest, and
10 secondly they can come and go in the witness box without
11 that being fairly put to them so that they have a chance
12 to put their side of things. Obviously if that process
13 has been followed, then in closing you can say whatever
14 you think proper. But that is the sequence of events to
15 ensure fairness.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That is a slightly more general point,
17 and it is a difficult one. I shall be flexible within
18 the limits of fairness, but on serious matters you can’t
19 really at the end of the day submit to me things which
20 you say the people who were guilty of them didn’t have
21 a chance to reply on them. They must have a chance to
22 put their version of the story. I may believe it, I may
23 not believe it, but they have a right to respond to that
24 sort of suggestion, because people may be compelling.
25 It may look very dark to you, but they may say something

25 :1 which, actually, triggers a different explanation. That
2 is essential in a trial, it really is.
3 MR STROILOV: I’m very grateful, my Lord. I think, really,
4 in my earlier submission, I acknowledged exactly that.
5 Let me try and take it in stages.
6 Question one, should our amendments be allowed?
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
8 MR STROILOV: I say that is simply not the basis for
9 objecting to them, because the old version, if you
10 refuse the application, you will still be left with the
11 pleadings which does not give exhaustive list of
12 employees of the Bank —
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We can’t have the words «without
14 limitation» because you seem to be reserving, in
15 the back pocket, the possibility of identifying other
16 actors who you say act behind the Bank, than Mr Savelyev
17 and Mrs Maylsheva.
18 MR STROILOV: Then if we — I think the question to: should
19 our pleadings as they are, or as they would be allowed
20 to stand, as such. That’s a pleading point. That’s
21 separate from the rules as to taking evidence, to which
22 I will come, and I’m very grateful —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, because pleadings confine the
24 evidence in the case. Pleadings aren’t just a sort of
25 extravagant exercise in slagging each other off. They

26 :1 are intended to define what you say and confine what you
2 say so that things aren’t — so that the case does not
3 become entirely uncontrolled.
4 MR STROILOV: I am very grateful, my Lord.
5 Now, on the pleading principles, what do we have to
6 plead to plead conspiracy?
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
8 MR STROILOV: And fraud. I think, perhaps, again,
9 I apologise, my research, I don’t think it was
10 satisfactory.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, no, I’m sure it was.
12 MR STROILOV: Or exhaustive because really, the time was
13 very limited. If I could hand up the case of Bank of
14 Moscow v Kekhman.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Have you told Mr Lord about this?
16 MR STROILOV: Yes, I did, just before the hearing.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What do you say this says?
18 MR STROILOV: I think it illustrates how much —
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s very helpful, could I have
20 a look at that, please? (Handed)
21 Thank you.
22 MR STROILOV: The passages I have in mind, in a way it is
23 rather to the point and illustrative, so perhaps the
24 best way might be for your Lordship to read it
25 throughout, in case you may spot something I haven’t

27 :1 spotted.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, which is the bit you have
3 spotted?
4 MR STROILOV: The bits I found is — that starts at
5 paragraph 43, I think that’s the most important thing.
6 I’m not sure if you need, really, to see all the
7 background, but that gives you an example of what —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Where are you?
9 MR STROILOV: At paragraph 43.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
11 MR STROILOV: So, my Lord, that gives you an example of what
12 may be sufficient for the pleadings of fraud and
13 conspiracy to go ahead.
14 Really, it is very little:
15 «The companies to which funds and business
16 opportunities were under the ultimate control of
17 Mr Kekhman —»
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mm.
19 MR STROILOV: «— since he was the person who benefited, it
20 is the proper inference that he directed the transfers
21 or that it is very easily carried out with his
22 knowledge. Certainly no proper commercial explanation
23 has been provided.»
24 That is a proper basis for a pleading of fraud
25 against a number of —

28 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: This was a very different case. The
2 person whose activities — reading it very quickly —
3 were impugned was a Mr Kekhman, and the question of
4 whether he was or he wasn’t involved in a dishonest act
5 or conspiracy was said not to have been properly
6 particularised, but this was not a question where there
7 was some mystery as to the identity of the actor. The
8 actor was firmly identified, and the question was
9 whether they had done enough to raise the wind, to raise
10 the inference it is fraud. The judge, after a vigorous
11 argument to the contrary, argued that there was. That
12 is it, isn’t it?
13 MR STROILOV: That is right. I accept it is not quite
14 a case to the point. I think it is a very helpful
15 summary of principles.
16 What I am concerned about, firstly, is that, in
17 a way, it is a criticism which can always be made of any
18 pleadings that we want more particulars.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I accept that, and it is exasperating
20 when one is trying to plead these things, but this is
21 a case which rather emphasises that it is necessary, but
22 not sufficient, to identify who you say was involved.
23 MR STROILOV: Yes.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: One is to say: who is it that’s
25 naughty?

29 :1 MR STROILOV: My Lord, and I submit that, and I haven’t seen
2 anything in the authorities to contradict that, that to
3 say that the Bank as a corporation was a conspirator is
4 enough to satisfy that requirement.
5 Then obviously if it is a conspiracy we have to
6 identify a number of other conspirators. As
7 your Lordship says, we need to identify significantly
8 more.
9 But what we are not required to identify is who
10 within the particular corporation was honest and who was
11 not.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t think that is right, because
13 the Bank can’t sit in a chair. It is someone who has to
14 be there, on behalf of the Bank.
15 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, but there may be a lot of
16 ways. It can plead that from other acts done by the
17 Bank, really by the Bank as a corporation, and we have
18 no idea what’s happening behind their closed doors, but
19 from the acts we can show they have done, you can infer
20 that transactions A, B and C were fraudulent. This is
21 satisfactory pleadings. We don’t have to identify that
22 directors one, two and three were fraudsters and
23 directors four and five were honest. We don’t have to
24 say that. There is no authority for that. We have to
25 identify —

30 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What were the Supreme Court banging on
2 about in the case you referred — what’s the purpose of
3 all the rules of attribution if they are unnecessary?
4 On your footing it doesn’t matter who did things on
5 behalf of the Bank; you just say it was the Bank. Then
6 what’s the purpose of trying to identify whose knowledge
7 or activities are binding on the Bank?
8 MR STROILOV: Well, my Lord, I think firstly this — from
9 memory, I think this case has nothing to do with
10 pleadings. It has to do with evidence and findings.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The Supreme Court case?
12 MR STROILOV: Yes.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, I think it was a case on
14 ex turpi causa. That’s to say, could the defendants get
15 off on the grounds that the fact that they were
16 dishonest meant that their dishonesty was attributed to
17 the Bank and it couldn’t succeed?
18 MR STROILOV: Yes. It is a long way from that discussion —
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is a long way —
20 MR STROILOV: — to saying that we can’t plead a fraud
21 against a corporation until we have identified to each
22 of the persons involved whether they were honest or
23 dishonest. That’s —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I don’t want to argue with you
25 too much longer, Mr Stroilov. But in the old days, as

31 :1 emerges from the case you referred me to, I can’t
2 remember its name, I read it quickly last night, a Bank
3 could never be held liable for a criminal act, no legal
4 construct, no figment of the legal imagination, like
5 a corporation, could be held liable for a criminal act
6 because it had no soul and it couldn’t sit in a chair.
7 Then the court developed means whereby criminal
8 liability, and, slightly earlier than that, civil
9 liability, could be brought home to this legal
10 construct, and it did so via the rules of attribution,
11 and the rules of attribution are notoriously complex,
12 because you get yourself into a fantastic muddle when
13 the people who acted for the entity were themselves
14 dishonest, and the question of whether the corporation
15 could then sue them becomes an awkward one, because of
16 the ex turpi causa: no man should rely on his own wrong
17 rule.
18 Those are complex areas, but the only reason they
19 are relevant is the rules of attribution. You can’t
20 just say: this thing was guilty. You have to say how
21 that thing, which doesn’t exist, except in the eyes of
22 the law, can’t sit in a chair or argue with you, how it
23 acted, and you have to identify the individuals, and
24 those individuals must be in a position such that their
25 activities are attributed to the Bank, or corporation,

32 :1 because of their status within it. The lavatory
2 cleaner’s naughty thoughts may not be attributed because
3 he simply has no means of influencing that thing.
4 MR STROILOV: My Lord, exactly. I have been trying to find
5 some authority for the proposition that we have to plead
6 the attribution and identify individuals. I have found
7 none. But we have to —
8 MR LORD: I’m sorry, my Lord, could I maybe help? If
9 your Lordship has the Chancery Guide, because —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sorry to take so long, I just want
11 Mr Stroilov to understand where the confines are, as
12 well as be told it.
13 MR LORD: My Lord, I understand. But there are two things:
14 one is the question of what sort of legal attribution,
15 what framework might ultimately drop down, but it
16 doesn’t matter whatever that framework may or may not
17 be.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What are you looking at?
19 MR LORD: It is page 141 of the second volume of The White
20 Book, from the Chancery Guide and it is about statements
21 of case. It is 2.8 and 2.9, and I do respectfully
22 submit that this is unarguable, and if — well … this
23 sets out what must be set out.
24 MR STROILOV: From memory, I don’t have it before me, all
25 the primary facts from which we infer fraud must be set

33 :1 out. That I accept.
2 MR LORD: There we are, it is 2.8 and 2.9, Mr Stroilov.
3 (Handed).
4 MR STROILOV: I am grateful.
5 MR LORD: Your Lordship will see that:
6 «Full particulars of any allegation of fraud,
7 dishonesty or illegality» —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It doesn’t quite address Mr Stroilov’s
9 point. Mr Stroilov says that all he has to do is say
10 that the Bank was dishonest, and say reasons why, but he
11 doesn’t have to say who within the Bank was responsible.
12 That’s his point that I’m trying to get at.
13 MR LORD: But obviously, my Lord — your Lordship is right,
14 and that may be a separate sort of debate, but when we
15 get into the trial, and as this pleading shows and all
16 the statements and submissions show, ultimately,
17 Mr Stroilov is going to be identifying, presumably,
18 people, a person or entities.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s what I’m trying to explain.
20 MR STROILOV: Let’s take it in stages. I have said that
21 I have to plead all primary facts from which I will be
22 asking you to infer fraud. I accept that in relation to
23 each transaction which I will say was fraudulent I have
24 to plead it was fraudulent. But I don’t accept that
25 I am required to identify each executive.

34 :1 I do accept that before I stop cross-examining, if
2 I intend to submit that Mr A, B or C was dishonest,
3 I have to put it to them, and if I am to submit they
4 were dishonest because of such and such reasons, I have
5 to give them the reasons. But that’s as far as it goes.
6 It’s not something we must particularise at the pleading
7 stage to that extent. We have to particularise such
8 things against a party. We don’t have to particularise
9 it against a witness.
10 My Lord, I think that is all have to say on that
11 point. That being a rather complex point, should I give
12 way to my learned friend or should I go on to other
13 pleading points?
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Anyway, you continue in wishing to
15 include the words «but without limitation» in 177(a),
16 and the words «all other conspirators acted on the
17 Bank’s instructions and/or with the Bank’s consent» in
18 (iii)?
19 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You press that?
21 MR STROILOV: I press that as proper pleadings. I don’t …
22 well, I am keen to avoid any confusion between pleading
23 points and then points of law about any defence that can
24 be advanced in law.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right. Thanks.

35 :1 MR LORD: My Lord, your Lordship made a ruling yesterday
2 about the need for the defendants to identify any other
3 persons who were going to be alleged to be in on it.
4 Your Lordship made that ruling. We appear to be, with
5 respect, going back over that ground.
6 We do strongly object to an attempt by the
7 defendants to reserve the ability to allege fraud and
8 dishonesty against currently unidentified persons and
9 without any particulars being set out as to why they are
10 said to have been dishonest. That’s just — it’s
11 axiomatic in a fraud case, that’s the starting point,
12 that’s the very first thing that a person alleging it
13 must do.
14 If one looks at what is now suggested, if one goes
15 to paragraph 177 of the proposed amended defence, it
16 starts:
17 «(a) The Bank acting primarily without
18 limitation …»
19 So that would be a concern.
20 Then if one reads on, 177(a) has «without
21 limitation», and then 178:
22 «His (inaudible) was formed mainly in or around …»
23 Then 179 (b):
24 «Mr Savelyev and other employees, including without
25 limitation Mrs Maylsheva …»

36 :1 Then it says at the end:
2 «Mr Savelyev, Ms Maylsheva and/or all other persons
3 acting on behalf of the Bank.»
4 So every single unidentified employee of
5 Bank of St Petersburg can just be said at any point by
6 Mr Stroilov to be a fraudster. That would be the most
7 — I don’t make a submission on that.
8 I do, respectfully, ask your Lordship to make some
9 rulings on this because it would be very unfair to
10 the Bank. It is obviously not an option for the
11 defendants to carry on like this and if, in fact, this
12 conspiracy case is actually based on this sort of
13 analysis, that does not need to be — some stock-taking
14 needs to be carried out, because we respectfully submit
15 that if one looks at this in a proper, responsible way,
16 some of these things just shouldn’t be said. Just
17 should not be said, and the rules are there to stop
18 things being said that shouldn’t be said and witnesses
19 being accused of things they shouldn’t be accused of.
20 That applies as much to Mr Stroilov as it does to a
21 person or a team of barristers.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You agree, do you not, Mr Lord, that,
23 take the case of a witness who is not a party and who is
24 not named individually in the pleadings. Mr Stroilov
25 would be permitted to say to them, for what it is

37 :1 worth — and it might not be worth very much — that
2 price for that asset is so far below the price that
3 might have been achieved for it that we would agree it
4 cannot have been an honest price, thinking about it now.
5 That would be permissible?
6 MR LORD: Yes.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It wouldn’t be a very useful question,
8 because unless that witness was a valuer —
9 MR LORD: I hesitate because query the relevance. If it is
10 his opinion, he can. If the implication is: you are
11 some way privy to that dishonest —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If he goes on to say: you knew that at
13 all times, didn’t you?
14 MR LORD: Yes.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That is more difficult.
16 MR LORD: It is impermissible, because it would be
17 an indirect way of saying that the person was dishonest
18 in and about —
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I don’t know. I think that is
20 more difficult, because I think — I would like to think
21 about that. It might be more difficult.
22 MR LORD: My Lord, it’s really a very simple point, really,
23 which is that by this stage, the defendant should set
24 out who the conspirators are that they are going to
25 allege, they are positively going to allege were

38 :1 conspirators.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Of course, I don’t disagree, but I’m
3 just trying to work out how, exactly, it would play out
4 in cross-examination, or in what has to be put, because
5 I think that is where the real fault line lies.
6 MR LORD: Right.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And the question is, would the
8 question — it looks a dodgy price, you knew it was
9 a dodgy price, didn’t you? I am not saying you were
10 part of the conspiracy, but just, you were following
11 orders, whatever it was, but you knew that.
12 MR LORD: That would have to be — because that is
13 essentially imputing dishonesty to that person, that
14 they went along with a dishonest scheme or process. You
15 can ask a question: what do you think about it? But you
16 can’t say to them or put to them that they are
17 dishonest. You can’t even impliedly accuse them of
18 fraud like that, you can’t tiptoe up to it.
19 You either have a basis to say you were involved in
20 this process, you can’t have thought it was an honest
21 process, and you were privy to it. That’s an allegation
22 of dishonesty, it must be pleaded and warned, or you
23 have a different approach. You might ask a question and
24 say: what do you think of it all? But you can’t snap,
25 without more, into saying: you are dishonest. I will

39 :1 object if ever that happens in this case, and fairness
2 will dictate that the ground rules, who is in and who is
3 out of the conspiracy tent, should by now have been
4 identified.
5 If the defendants can’t identify any people, that’s
6 important. That sets the fair goalposts.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You keep on swapping between — it is
8 perfectly possible for someone to have known in their
9 heart that a price was just not sustainable, but not to
10 have been party to a conspiracy, or not to have been in
11 a position, really, of any influence to counsel against
12 it.
13 MR LORD: Well, my Lord, that is possible, yes.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s what I want to think about.
15 MR LORD: Yes. But, my Lord, I’m trying to understand what
16 the case is — if one reads the pleading, the case is
17 that they —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I accept that it is a very broad plea
19 to say that and/or other employees acted on behalf of
20 the Bank.
21 MR LORD: My Lord, what that says, you can’t get away from
22 it. What it’s really saying, and I made the point
23 yesterday, is really anyone who appears to have featured
24 in this episode is dishonest. That’s essentially what’s
25 happening.

40 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m trying to figure out a way of
2 explaining, because I don’t just simply want to rule,
3 I want to explain it, and I am finding it difficult to
4 do so.
5 MR LORD: I understand.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, I am against you on your
7 case you can simply state that the Bank as a legal
8 entity was dishonesty without identifying the human
9 agencies by which it was so. You must identify who you
10 say was in a position of authority in the Bank and who
11 acted dishonestly, such as to make the Bank liable for
12 that dishonesty. And you must identify the persons who
13 you rely on in that regard. There may have been other
14 persons who, ex hypothesi, you don’t rely on, and by
15 saying you rely on X and Y does not mean to say that you
16 accept that everyone else was honest, but simply you are
17 not going to rely on their dishonesty for bringing home
18 liability. You must say who it was who you say are the
19 relevant people who must answer for this.
20 MR LORD: And, my Lord, just one thing, and obviously the
21 basis. Whatever the basis is alleged.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Of course, just one thing at a time.
23 So the first point I am against you on is that you
24 can’t simply pray in aid the fiction of the Bank: you
25 must say, and identify each and every person, who you

41 :1 say is the person whose bad activities you say should be
2 visited in their consequences on the Bank. That’s the
3 first point.
4 The second point is that it flows from that that you
5 can’t simply seek to get home on the basis of some
6 innominate accusation against all other employees of
7 the Bank. That is simply not good enough.
8 The third point is that once you have identified the
9 persons whose naughty activities you wish to attribute
10 to the Bank, you must say, with sufficient cogency and
11 particularity to enable Mr Lord and his clients, which
12 I shall expect to be acute rather than innocence in this
13 regard, the facts and matters you rely on, so that their
14 witnesses can answer them. They can say: no, that’s
15 just not right. That’s not true, and the reason it is
16 not true is such and such. That has to be done.
17 As to the fourth matter, which is the ambit of
18 cross-examination, you mustn’t put to any witness that
19 they were in the conspiracy if they are not pleaded to
20 have been in that conspiracy. Other ancillary questions
21 may be more difficult, and I shall think about them.
22 But those are the parameters in which you should
23 operate. Are you content with that?
24 MR LORD: I am, my Lord.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.

42 :1 Do you see?
2 MR STROILOV: I am not sure, my Lord. Are you inviting
3 submissions or was that a judgment given?
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, if you wish to say why that is
5 wrong for reasons which you have not previously given,
6 all right.
7 MR STROILOV: Simply because it is not in the rules, it’s
8 not in the law, it’s not in the —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You have already said that.
10 MR STROILOV: You must plead out a case against each
11 witness. There is a confusion between these things and
12 I don’t accept it.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Not each witness. I was careful to
14 say each person whose activities you rely on as giving
15 rise to the attribution of fraud. I’m not saying every
16 witness. I’m saying your case depends on identifying
17 individuals. Now, those individuals identified must
18 answer. Those individuals who are not identified,
19 I shall assume are not relied on as being persons whose
20 activities land the Bank in trouble. I am not sure
21 I can put it clearer than that.
22 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I think, again, there are two
23 separate points, and I have to address them separately,
24 I am afraid. I am not going to repeat what I have said
25 before.

43 :1 Well, as regards — let’s take a hypothetical and
2 simplistic case, somewhat, where we allege fraud against
3 the corporation on the grounds of the following facts:
4 (a) such and such assets were sold at an undervalue, (b)
5 the deal was collusive because it was a connected party,
6 and (c) the corporation has given no proper disclosure
7 in relation to a number of matters they were ordered to.
8 Full stop, this is a proper basis for the pleading of
9 fraud against a corporation where we don’t even know the
10 names of any of the directors. That would be a proper
11 basis on the established principles.
12 What we have to do, we have to identify — well,
13 I said that, primary facts, primary transactions, not
14 individuals.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are pleading conspiracy. You must
16 show the human actors, being more than one, whose
17 activities informing that conspiracy you say put the
18 Bank in trouble.
19 MR STROILOV: Quite. That I accept. That we have done —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s what you have to do.
21 MR STROILOV: That’s simply not the issue today or none of
22 the things we …
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, Mr Stroilov, we have spent
24 an hour on a single paragraph. I rule against you on
25 this. You may not make this amorphous amendment to

44 :1 include all persons unknown, whether by the formula of
2 «without limitation» or with the formula «other
3 employees». If you wish to identify people whose
4 activities you wish to visit the consequences on in
5 the Bank, you must name them and show good reason why
6 they have been named.
7 MR STROILOV: So the words «without limitation» can’t go in?
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They come out.
9 MR STROILOV: The words «other employees», are you looking
10 at subparagraph (d)? Is it (d)?
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The ones I am looking at are 177(a),
12 in the first line, where you say:
13 «Acting primarily [which are old words] but without
14 limitation …»
15 The «without limitation» are not appropriate.
16 MR STROILOV: And then?
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And then in (a) (iii):
18 «… all other conspirators acted on the Bank’s
19 instructions and/or with the Bank’s consent.»
20 I don’t understand that plea. It seems to me the
21 wrong way around. It seems to me you have to say who
22 the conspirators were whose instructions and/or whose
23 activities bind the Bank.
24 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I think that’s a slightly
25 different point, and I didn’t come to that paragraph

45 :1 because I wanted to —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, I will give you liberty to
3 say a little bit more on that.
4 MR STROILOV: Another complaint is made about the old text
5 in (d), «other senior employees of the Bank.»
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Sorry?
7 MR STROILOV: I think further on in (d), you will see the
8 old pleading about «other senior employees of the Bank».
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR STROILOV: Including Mrs Mironova and Mr Balandin.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, well, you are going to be limited
12 to the people you have named, including in that
13 particular phrase means «ie».
14 MR STROILOV: Right, my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That is to say —
16 MR STROILOV: I think in the light of your rulings then
17 I would want permission first of all to consider whether
18 I need to add names.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right. Well, if you do, you do.
20 You will have to recognise that time is ticking.
21 MR STROILOV: Well, it is, my Lord, but you have only just
22 given that ruling, and that’s rather unexpected and not
23 something … but if I am directed to a single authority
24 where that is said, I accept we should have done it
25 years ago, but this one is the first.

46 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think it is one of those things
2 which is — I don’t know how to put this politely. It
3 is so obvious that individuals should not be accused of
4 fraud without knowing that they are being so that
5 I don’t think anyone has bothered to say it. It is
6 extremely obvious, I am afraid, Mr Stroilov. You would
7 not wish to venture into a court expecting to answer one
8 point and then be forced to answer on points unknown to
9 you as to your own personal honesty. I do not think
10 that that would be — I think to be told suddenly that
11 you are one of the people fingered for conspiracy when
12 you have turned up to give evidence on something
13 completely different would shock you to your
14 foundations, and I don’t think the court likes it.
15 MR STROILOV: Obviously that’s not what is proposed. What
16 is proposed is that we have pleaded that a number of
17 transactions were fraudulent and they know they were
18 involved in them or not.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I know what you say, which is you say
20 that every witness who tramps through this court, who is
21 presented to me by the court, should know by now that
22 they are going to be accused of conspiracy.
23 MR STROILOV: That’s not what I’m saying. I say they will
24 know whether they have been involved in the selling of
25 Mercury to ROK N1 Prichaly or selling of —

47 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, it is not a confessional, we
2 have to have a reasonably proper process. I’m sure that
3 each of us will be surprised by what the other says, but
4 we can’t sort of rake over that. I just have to confine
5 this case to what you properly plead. I cannot have
6 a case which moves from allegation to allegation,
7 according to the exigencies of the times.
8 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I still want just to be clear on how
9 far it goes. It goes to the allegation of someone being
10 a conspirator. Does that ruling extend as far as,
11 really, allegation in relation of each particular
12 transaction which is pleaded to be fraudulent? So do
13 I have to identify in relation to each of them
14 attribution, really: well, we say it was fraudulent, we
15 say it was the Bank’s fraud?
16 So at this stage you have ruled we have to identify
17 all the executives in the relationship.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Your case is that Mr Savelyev and
19 Mrs Maylsheva got together and decided to rip you off,
20 and they were in a position not only to agree that, but
21 to implement their agreement because of the positions
22 they held in the Bank. You must show that they agreed
23 that, that’s the conception, that’s the necessity to
24 show how the plan was conceived, and you must then show
25 how they implemented that. That is the implementation

48 :1 of the dishonest scheme. You are entitled to say they
2 commanded people who didn’t think one way or the other
3 about it. That is perfectly possible. People tend to
4 do what their superiors tell them to do, because
5 otherwise they get the sack.
6 So, you know, that’s — you have to show — the fact
7 that it was done, if you are wondering about that, is
8 quite good evidence that it was commanded. Obviously
9 so. But you have to show who the commanders were.
10 MR STROILOV: Yes, that’s right. I’m more thinking about in
11 relation to each individual witness. I don’t think it
12 can be said that unless we have pleaded them as
13 conspirators or fraudsters —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You don’t have to show that they were
15 involved in the transaction, no.
16 MR STROILOV: — we have to accept they are honest. That
17 would be a very extraordinary limitation.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You may very well say at the end of
19 the day that they didn’t look very honest. I don’t
20 know.
21 MR STROILOV: I think one of the points, which I still don’t
22 quite follow, with respect, from your Lordship’s ruling,
23 is just by way of example, can you look at
24 paragraph 156?
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 156?

49 :1 MR STROILOV: Yes.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right. Did we look at that
3 previously?
4 MR STROILOV: We may have. I am not sure. I simply want to
5 show to your Lordship what I don’t understand.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
7 MR STROILOV: So we plead in relation to a particular sale
8 that it was a fraudulent transaction.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That it was?
10 MR STROILOV: That it was a fraudulent transaction.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
12 MR STROILOV: We say that should be ultimately imputed to
13 the Bank. We say ultimately we invite you to infer
14 conspiracy from that.
15 So is it suggested that in relation to each such
16 transactions, and I think we mention a dozen, or
17 thereabouts, we must say who of the Bank’s executives
18 was acting fraudulently. This is a difficulty.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Your case, as I understand it, as
20 I have said before, is of conspiracy?
21 MR STROILOV: Yes.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You say that all these things that
23 happened, which you say were fraudulent, were pursuant
24 to a plot hatched by individuals and implemented
25 thereafter. That’s as I understand your case; okay?

50 :1 It may be that you might have identified people who
2 weren’t in on the original conception or inception of
3 the plan, who joined it with full knowledge of it, but
4 you haven’t, so far, identified who.
5 For the moment you say it was Mr Savelyev and
6 Mrs Maylsheva who hatched this plot, and everything that
7 happened thereafter, according to your case, was
8 pursuant to that plot, which is why they achieved such
9 low values, because that was their intention.
10 You say I can infer, I can support my case by the
11 very fact that the values were so low, and that may be
12 so, but it does not excuse you from demonstrating what
13 the original plot was, what its ambit was, and who was
14 party to it: you have to say that. The rest is the
15 proof of it.
16 MR LORD: My Lord, can I just say, are the defendants at
17 this juncture going to allege, as part of the trial,
18 that any other person is guilty of fraud, dishonesty or
19 conspiracy in relation to the scheme than those they
20 have positively identified so far?
21 So, for example, Mr Belykh, who is at the back of
22 court, who has come from Russia, is it going to be said
23 to him on Monday that he is dishonestly party to
24 the scheme? And it must be a yes or no. If there are
25 other people that Mr Stroilov knows about, now he has

51 :1 conduct of the case, he should identify them now to
2 the court. Now, not wait over the weekend. He should
3 know by now. If so, who are they? That’s a basic
4 fairness. He has been cut a lot of slack and that is
5 a very basic quid pro quo here.
6 MR STROILOV: Not exactly. I’m sorry it is going on in
7 a slightly chaotic way because everyone interrupts
8 everyone else.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is Mr Belykh one of the ones who was
10 in on the original conspiracy or who joined it
11 thereafter?
12 MR STROILOV: My Lord, you can see the pleadings. What I am
13 trying to establish, and if I may, I am just trying to
14 establish the scope of the ruling you have just made,
15 and then I will make submissions in relation to any
16 other possible ruling. I am afraid we have to have some
17 order on this.
18 Now, my Lord, I take your point about the general
19 allegation of conspiracy.
20 Next, does the same go to every collateral fact
21 where fraud is alleged?
22 That is if we say such a sale — it’s one of
23 the collateral facts, such and such sale on such and
24 such date was fraudulent, the Bank was a party to it, do
25 we have in each case to plead every executive who we say

52 :1 whose knowledge of this being fraudulent is to be
2 imputed to the Bank?
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, you would have to show that the
4 people who you say conceived and implemented the
5 conspiracy directed that transaction.
6 MR STROILOV: Right. How far do I have to plead that? So
7 I will have to show — well, in relation to each
8 transaction, I will have to —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: These were high up people. It will be
10 an easy matter, presumably, to say that they directed
11 it. The conspiracy which is toothless isn’t really much
12 of a conspiracy.
13 MR STROILOV: What I am concerned about is at the end of the
14 day Mr Lord will — I have pleaded — well, such and
15 such transaction is one of the collateral facts from
16 which I want fraud to be inferred, that it is
17 fraudulent. We say we invite you to find fraud from the
18 undervalue and from the connections, and from a number
19 of facts which are pleaded out. They have said that,
20 but in the end Mr Lord stands up and said: but look,
21 this transaction was approved by a committee of eight
22 people, none of them is Mr Savelyev or Mrs Maylsheva, or
23 there are honest people against whom you haven’t pleaded
24 fraud, therefore clearly it couldn’t have been
25 a fraudulent transaction on the part of the Bank.

53 :1 In my submission, as a matter of law, that’s not how
2 it works. We have to plead the basis —
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If I get together with Mr Lord and
4 I decide that I am going to rip you off via BP, okay,
5 and I make a great big plot about it and we make
6 detailed plans that this is what we wish to do, having
7 no connection or ability within BP to direct any of its
8 activities, it’s a complete legal non-event, isn’t it?
9 You have to show that the conspiracy was implemented,
10 and the only way you can show that, not only conceived
11 as a plan, but implemented, and the only way you can
12 show that is to show that the transactions which you say
13 were made pursuant to that conspiracy were directed by
14 the conspirators.
15 Now, you don’t have to show that everyone who was
16 directed was involved in the conspiracy, because they
17 may have been pawns who had nothing to think about, to
18 implement. But you do have to show that the
19 conspirators procured that transaction. Otherwise they
20 are in the position of me and Mr Lord, just talking
21 about in the air.
22 MR STROILOV: My Lord, is it suggested that we have to plead
23 all the internal workings of the conspiracies, and how
24 Mr Savelyev communicated his will to Mr Belykh and why
25 Mr Belykh voted for it at the credit committee meeting?

54 :1 Is that suggested? Is that your ruling?
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It would be sufficient, for example,
3 for you to plead, then to prove, that nothing happened
4 in this Bank of any serious thing which wasn’t approved
5 by Mr Savelyev. That’s quite likely.
6 MR STROILOV: I’m not sure I do have as a basis for pleading
7 that. I have the basis for saying —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Then you have not the basis for — you
9 must show how their naughty plan was implemented. You
10 must show that.
11 MR STROILOV: No, but I simply — I’m sorry, normally on
12 this there would have been legal advisers who would have
13 researched this and advised on that. I simply don’t
14 follow. If we are saying this transaction was clearly
15 fraudulent for such and such and such reasons, then we
16 are saying — secondly, we say the Bank gave formal
17 consent to it. Thirdly, we can see from the claimants’
18 disclosure, this formal consent was given from
19 a committee comprising ten people, and we have to plead
20 who of the ten people was honest and who of them was
21 dishonest.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You have to show at least one of them
23 was acting either as part of, or on the directions of
24 someone who was part of, the conspiracy.
25 MR STROILOV: How can we possibly know who and how? It

55 :1 happens behind closed doors, it is an internal working
2 conspiracy.
3 MR LORD: If in fact it could be implemented with lots of
4 innocent puppets doing things, that’s one thing. But
5 the point he is grappling with, because he knows he has
6 to grapple with it very soon, is that there is a lot of
7 bureaucracy in this Bank and it goes in stages. And
8 what he is really talking about, if I can be so bold, is
9 the fact that at some stage there is going to be the
10 addressing of how one or two very important people who
11 are very, very conspiratorial, how they have managed to
12 get something through of such magnitude. That’s what he
13 is really grappling with. Of course, if he is going to
14 say that any other person is dishonestly privy to that
15 execution, then he has to identify it.
16 If he is standing and fighting on the two
17 protagonists, wherever they are, and everything else is
18 just going to happen, then that’s a different sort of
19 case.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I know that and you know that,
21 Mr Lord.
22 I think, Mr Stroilov, there are two ways in which
23 naughty acts get done: either by the actual actor who is
24 naughty, or by direction of someone else who was an
25 actor who was naughty and was in a position to give that

56 :1 direction. You don’t have to show that everyone in
2 the chain was dishonest, but you do have to show that
3 the direction was given by someone who was dishonest, or
4 who was procured directly by them. That’s what I think
5 Mr Lord is saying.
6 So if the converse applies, such that he shows that
7 the decision was uninfluenced by anyone against whom
8 an accusation of dishonesty was made, it is
9 an independent decision which is not part of
10 the conspiracy, ex hypothesi. Just as my conversations
11 with Mr Lord about our naughty activities in BP would
12 have no connection with whatever BP did.
13 MR LORD: They had not taken place, my Lord. These
14 conversations are hypothetical. I don’t want
15 Mr Arkhangelsky — I don’t want to be added to this
16 list, my Lord. I am slightly concerned.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Purely imaginary conversations.
18 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Just to bring home the point that
20 coincidence is not enough. Supposing on my example BP
21 tomorrow did something heinous which happened to
22 coincide with what Mr Lord and I were hypothetically
23 discussing. Supposing we said: what we really want to
24 do is sell oil at $10 a barrel in order to rip off X for
25 the time being. Then, by some mischance, BP on the next

57 :1 day sells oil at $10 a barrel. You would not be able to
2 say that thereby we were liable for BP’s misdeed,
3 because it is just coincidence. There has to be
4 direction.
5 MR STROILOV: My Lord, what I am trying to understand you
6 are saying, and I’m sorry it obviously shouldn’t be my
7 questions to you, how is — especially as we are talking
8 about pleading principles, so hypothetically, we are
9 talking about a plaintiff who only knows as much as
10 a plaintiff is supposed to know at this stage. He knows
11 he has been defrauded by one or another corporation for
12 such and such reasons. How can he — I appreciate there
13 are two ways — there may be a direction coming from the
14 top or there may be people, bureaucrats, who are acting
15 dishonestly themselves.
16 But how on earth the claimant may be supposed to
17 know the internal workings of the conspiracy, in
18 the sense who gave the direction and which particular
19 executive was dishonest?
20 Moreover, how can we, if that was the position,
21 my Lord, how can we rely on non disclosure? There are
22 transactions where we have literally one document, or we
23 have no documents and we have to rely on clues from
24 public sources, we put together a picture to invite
25 inferences of dishonesty on the part of the Bank, or on

58 :1 the part of Renord-Invest because it is —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But you have had disclosure of
3 the meetings at which the various transactions were
4 directed?
5 MR STROILOV: Well, we have some of them, but are still —
6 it doesn’t give us a complete picture as to who gave
7 what direction to whom, and who made submissions in due
8 course about it.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It depends what your perspective is.
10 You have to piece together a proper plea, and I take it,
11 since you have made the plea, that you had done so, of
12 responsibility for all the activity. If you are saying
13 it is not an easy case to prove, you are right about
14 that: it isn’t an easy case to prove.
15 MR STROILOV: But surely we cannot be required to plead out
16 matters which, by definition, we cannot know?
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, I accept that you are
18 anxious as to how difficult it is, and you are not
19 wrong, but take the example, another historical example,
20 when an English king, Henry II, said to Barons who were
21 eager to please him «Who will rid me of this troublesome
22 priest?» They took that, though he didn’t name the
23 priest and he certainly didn’t command the act, to be
24 encouragement to them to go and kill Thomas A Becket,
25 and they did so.

59 :1 Now, if you did that, even if you could not prove
2 that Henry II gave the direction, or nominated the
3 priest, you would almost certainly establish liability
4 of the equivalent of Henry II, because he was in
5 a position of such authority that people wished to abide
6 by his wish, as well as his command, and did so. You
7 may well have a case along those lines. I do not know.
8 I do not know the strength of control that Mr Savelyev
9 and Mrs Maylsheva exercised over the Bank. I just don’t
10 know. This is a matter to be unfolded to me.
11 MR LORD: My Lord — this is getting a bit — completely
12 understands that the starting point for the pleaded
13 claim that we have faced for how many years is the
14 forgery. My Lord, the claim that is put is not really
15 of one or two principal protagonists who then just
16 dictate on high and nobody else knows, the claim is that
17 the whole suite of documents were fabricated. I don’t
18 think it is suggested that those two principals did
19 this. So people have actually made up documents in
20 the Bank. So it is not really — the case isn’t that on
21 high the command came and everybody just did it. That
22 isn’t the case. The case is that everybody, everywhere,
23 really, who touched this case was dishonest. That’s why
24 we are entitled to say, and ask your Lordship to put to
25 Mr Stroilov, is there anybody else said to be in on the

60 :1 conspiracy, because that should be answered now, in
2 fairness. I note Mr Stroilov is refusing to tell the
3 court and the claimant.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, try and keep it reasonably cool,
5 but, Mr Stroilov, Mr Lord is right. As we have said
6 repeatedly, you must identify the people you said did
7 wrong, or knew that wrong was being done, if thereby you
8 wish to show that you have a good defence or a good
9 claim.
10 MR STROILOV: I am very grateful to Mr Lord for his
11 continued interventions.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are both sort of at each other.
13 What we want to do is try and — I am anxious, at any
14 rate, that you should understand what is necessary for
15 you to plead and what is irrelevant.
16 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I was hoping at some point to
17 make submissions on that rather than your Lordship and
18 Mr Lord between yourselves to —
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, I am going to rise for
20 a little bit. I do think after an hour and a half, as
21 the transcript will reveal, an earnest attempt to try
22 and understand what you say and whether it fits in,
23 I think that that complaint is rather exaggerated.
24 But there we are. We haven’t made as much progress
25 as, perhaps, I hoped. I think this is a good time,

61 :1 after an hour and a half, to break, and we will do so
2 for five minutes.
3 If at the end of this process you wish to reconsider
4 any of your pleas, then at this late stage I will
5 nevertheless allow you to do so. But before we start on
6 witnesses who are to be accused of any personal
7 impropriety, they must know of the accusation, you see.
8 They must know that. They must know whether they are
9 accused in such a way as to give you a good claim.
10 That’s just right.
11 MR STROILOV: That’s really what — the distinction I am
12 trying to understand, where you draw the line. Do
13 I need to plead any impropriety or do I need to plead —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You don’t have to plead in advance
15 that they are going to give dishonest evidence.
16 Obviously you don’t.
17 MR STROILOV: That’s one example. That’s helpful.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you are seeking to defend or to
19 claim on the basis of their participation or their
20 knowledge of impropriety, you must say so.
21 MR STROILOV: That’s right.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is unfair for them to carry that
23 burden without knowing you were going to say it.
24 MR STROILOV: But there is a difference between primary and
25 collateral facts on this.

62 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right. Five minutes.
2 (11.32 am)
3 (A short break)
4 (11.37 am)
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
6 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I think I have no choice but to
7 move along. I must say, I don’t quite understand all
8 the implications of your rulings, but perhaps it will be
9 easier to see what you mean when we get to the actual
10 cross-examination. I am not sure what order you propose
11 to make and whether we are going to be given some time
12 if that’s your ruling to substitute the pleadings that
13 have always been there that there are other employees to
14 the Bank, to add some names to that. Perhaps you will
15 decide to give us no time and not to let us add any new
16 names, but I would submit that if that extends as far as
17 not being able to allege dishonesty against any of
18 the witnesses in relation to any of the collateral
19 deals, that is unfair — I think it will be unfair to
20 any party, really, because this point is one relatively
21 recently taken against us, and especially given all the
22 difficulties I don’t need to list again.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, if there is anyone other
24 than the people who you have named who you say was
25 an active or knowing participant in the conspiracy which

63 :1 you allege, or in its implementation, you must specify
2 who they are. I have already said to you that I will,
3 even at this stage, allow you to consider whether you
4 wish to add to those names, but if you do so, I would
5 have to be persuaded that there was a reasonable basis
6 for doing so, and you must do so today because we start
7 with witnesses on Monday. I don’t think I can say
8 fairer than that.
9 MR STROILOV: My Lord, obviously what we have to do — the
10 concepts, such as implementation of the conspiracy,
11 well, in a way it’s perhaps rather vague.
12 I take it to mean that this means literally
13 everything that is pleaded. So I will have to go
14 through the pleadings and in relation to each averment
15 I will have to identify people involved.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You must have done this already. Take
17 the example of a committee. Obviously if that committee
18 was acting independently, it is not enough to show that
19 the figures were undervalues, because they just may be
20 a very stupid committee. You have to show that they
21 were acting dishonestly. You can show that in a number
22 of ways. You can show that one or more people on that
23 committee dishonestly did something. You can show that
24 one or more people on that committee were commanded by
25 someone not to think about it any more and just do it.

64 :1 That would be enough, or you may show that although they
2 weren’t active, that they jolly well knew that it was
3 a price which no honest person could agree to, but one
4 way or the other, they thought it was better to be on
5 the right side of Mr Savelyev or Mrs Maylsheva.
6 But in any of those cases, if they did other than —
7 if they moved beyond stupidity, in your view, you must
8 say the basis on which they acted. I don’t know how to
9 put it clearer than that.
10 MR STROILOV: I think that is clear enough but, with
11 respect, that is — well, I —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You agree to disagree?
13 MR STROILOV: Yes, putting that on one side, what you are
14 ordering is to do very substantial work. The
15 counterclaim includes pleadings of dozens of — at least
16 one or two dozen of transactions which are alleged to be
17 fraudulent, which have been there in some cases for
18 years — in most cases for years. It has never been
19 suggested that we cannot plead that because we haven’t
20 identified the executives, but we need time —
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It may be right and it may be wrong,
22 but I have adopted a fairly lenient approach to your
23 pleading, which the assurance on which I may have placed
24 excessive reliance, that at the time you had, for
25 example, Mr Milner of counsel who had looked through the

65 :1 pleadings, and whilst he was the first to say that were
2 he starting from a blank piece of paper he wouldn’t have
3 put it quite like that, nevertheless they would do for
4 your case. Rather than subject them to the scrutiny
5 that might have been more appropriate, I took you at
6 your word that you had looked at it carefully.
7 But now, when we are on the eve of trial, it is said
8 to me, I think with some force: look, the witnesses are
9 about to attend, they must know whether they are
10 implicated, there is nothing in the pleadings to suggest
11 that they are. You are saying: well, I must have a look
12 to see whether I want to implicate a bunch more by name
13 rather than by grouping, such as all the employees would
14 be a grouping. I am afraid the rules require me to
15 uphold that, that is a valid objection.
16 MR STROILOV: That’s right, we have to identify the names in
17 relation to each particular transaction.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you say that the transactions were
19 dishonest of themselves, or directed by dishonest
20 people, you must say who they were.
21 MR STROILOV: Yes. My Lord, as a matter of trial
22 management, what is your order, and how long —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I refuse your amendments, so far as we
24 have discussed them and they involve groupings or things
25 like «without limitation». That’s the order.

66 :1 MR STROILOV: Yes. Is that where we are left? There are
2 obviously no alternative matters —
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is not my function to plead your
4 case.
5 MR STROILOV: It isn’t. I’m just trying — so we simply
6 proceed on the basis of the pleadings as they are, and
7 you have just analysed them, and essentially this means
8 I cannot allege dishonesty against any of the executives
9 except for —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You can say the witness is not telling
11 the truth at the end of the day if you have some
12 inconsistency with the documents or internally within
13 their evidence. You can say that, yes.
14 What you cannot say is that they were dishonest in
15 a way which substantiates your case or your defence.
16 MR STROILOV: I hope I have understood that, my Lord.
17 Now, the reference — I think the issue has been
18 taken with reference to other conspirators in — I beg
19 your Lordship’s pardon. I am slightly lost.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 178 (g) to (i), have we dealt with
21 them? This is Mrs Matvienko and the police chap,
22 Mr Piotrovsky.
23 MR STROILOV: I beg your Lordship’s pardon. I think there
24 is another point taken in relation to a slightly earlier
25 one, which is 177(a)(iii). That is a point you have

67 :1 raised with me slightly earlier.
2 Obviously what we are talking about are all the
3 companies, most of them in the Renord group, which we
4 say we are co-conspirators. You will see that the old
5 version of the pleadings was that the Bank was
6 responsible for acquiring or coercing the other parties
7 for the purposes of using them for its serious fraud on
8 the counterclaimants. All we propose is slightly water
9 this down, simply because this part was inherited from
10 the BVI pleadings where we had to establish
11 jurisdiction, and then therefore it was important to
12 show that creation of some of these companies was part
13 of the conspiracy. At the moment we don’t need to prove
14 that, obviously.
15 So all we are saying is — well, I think what it
16 repeats, essentially it repeats that there was
17 a conspiracy. So this is simply meant to show to
18 the Bank that what we are going to rely on are the
19 consents they have given for various transactions.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t understand this pleading, I am
21 sorry. As explained, the Bank can only give
22 instructions or consent through human beings.
23 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord, yes.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Who are the human beings who gave the
25 instructions to any other conspirators?

68 :1 MR STROILOV: We are going to rely on the evidence of
2 Mrs Maylsheva doing that, that’s one.
3 Then, secondly, we will rely on documents where
4 there is a formal consent of the Bank to transactions A,
5 B and C.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And then the next question is, when
7 you say «other conspirators», which other conspirators?
8 MR STROILOV: That I think I can quickly clarify by
9 reference to —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: At the moment you are saying that the
11 directions were given by Mr Savelyev and Mrs Maylsheva,
12 and I am not sure you have named anybody else. Is there
13 anyone to whom they gave directions?
14 MR STROILOV: No, if you look below, that will be in
15 subparagraph (e), you have the list of original
16 purchasers in (f) —
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mironova and Balandin.
18 MR STROILOV: Subsequent purchasers, that is obviously in
19 the old version and then in (g) we go for dissipation of
20 assets, and then in (h) ultimate beneficial owners of
21 other co-conspirators with the Bank and/or Mr Savelyev
22 and/or other co-conspirators. These are the parties we
23 are talking about and then we go in the corrupt
24 officials and that’s a slightly different category.
25 So, my Lord, that is what we want to rely on: that

69 :1 quite apart from there being a conspiracy, as such, that
2 being the ultimate inference, that each stage of
3 the narrative set out above, and that’s — this is
4 obviously just a conclusion where we seek to draw all
5 the strands together — at all stages we say the Bank
6 was aware of what was being done, was giving consent to
7 that, and/or giving instructions to take those steps.
8 So obviously that’s — I think it is important to
9 understand in relation to those paragraphs, though, from
10 177 on, that they don’t stand in isolation, and that’s
11 made clear in the introduction, that really, well, this
12 is where we invite inferences from everything that is
13 pleaded above. This section starts at paragraph 174,
14 and that makes it clear that we simply — this is where
15 we invite inference as well, pleading primary facts.
16 So, in that sense, I don’t think there is any
17 proper — and then in paragraph 177, all we propose to
18 do, and all we profess to do, is to show how the roles
19 within the conspiracy were located as if this was the
20 pleading of conspiracy and there was nothing else on
21 that.
22 So we perhaps — I mean, I would be — I don’t
23 really see what the problem with this all other
24 conspirators. Simply we identify the primary mover.
25 Well, the list of conspirators is here, so there can be

70 :1 no doubt as to who the reference is to. So, my Lord,
2 I don’t really feel there can be — and obviously
3 compared to — we have simply watered down what has been
4 pleaded in the old paragraph (iii), simply because we
5 feel we don’t have to prove it, but we still have to
6 prove conspiracy and I think that’s as far as we go.
7 Now, my Lord, I think that objection is taken —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What do you say about (a) (iii),
9 Mr Lord?
10 MR LORD: My Lord, I think this was a point that we thought
11 we would go along with.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
13 MR LORD: We are trying to be helpful, my Lord. Our main
14 point is we should know if any of the Bank’s people are
15 witnesses said to be in on it.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think you should take it that who is
17 mentioned in this long list —
18 MR LORD: Yes. I am assuming all the ones that are actually
19 named are said to be in on this.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — were in on the conspiracy, or
21 became knowing participants in the conspiracy to rip off
22 Mr Arkhangelsky.
23 MR LORD: Yes. Your Lordship will have seen that obviously
24 the vast majority don’t work for the Bank. So there
25 will be issues at the end of the day as to exactly how

71 :1 that all works out. That’s for another day, but yes.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
3 MR LORD: I understand, my Lord.
4 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, so let’s go back to the old
5 mode, I think, and look at what points are taken by my
6 learned friend, simply to be sure we don’t spend time on
7 something unnecessary.
8 So 177, I think we have dealt with 177(a), so we
9 move on to 178(a).
10 MR LORD: We have done all these, my Lord. We have done
11 paragraph 4.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think we were now on 179(a), aren’t
13 we?
14 MR LORD: We are, we are on knowledge.
15 MR STROILOV: 179(a).
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 179(a)(i), the knowledge of
17 Mrs Maylsheva and the policeman, Mr Piotrovsky.
18 MR STROILOV: I think this is the same point, it is not in
19 isolation. Obviously there are elements in
20 the pleadings above, there are allegations made against
21 Mrs Matvienko and against General Piotrovsky. You have
22 been invited to strike them out. You have refused to do
23 so. All they are trying to do is particularise at what
24 time we will invite you to find they have joined the
25 conspiracy.

72 :1 So it is not any addition to the case. It is
2 simply, you know, what had been pleaded without
3 limitations that there had been conspiracy at some time,
4 to which various parties joined. Now we are trying,
5 really to confine this to a certain point in time.
6 I think one point that has been taken, and which
7 I would like to address, is that I have to admit it was,
8 obviously, the old pleading in terms of time of
9 conspiracy, was if you — I think we have to jump back
10 and forth a bit, I am afraid. I apologise for that.
11 But the old pleading, on paragraph 178, if you see the
12 sentence crossed out in the end:
13 «The counterclaimants cannot at present
14 particularise the precise date of the agreements or
15 combination between the parties and two disclosure —»
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not sure I have what 178
17 originally said. Have I got 178? 178 looks new,
18 doesn’t it?
19 MR STROILOV: 178. My Lord, I am asking you to look quickly 20 at 176.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see. 178 in its old form is now 22 179(a)?
23 MR STROILOV: I beg your pardon?
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 178 in the old pleading has been
25 deleted and began:

73 :1 «The actions of the Bank were a breach of
2 contract …»
3 All that is coming out.
4 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord, that’s simply
5 a numbering thing.
6 In substance, what it is meant to replace is one
7 sentence at the end of old paragraph 176, if you may
8 look at that.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Old 176?
10 MR STROILOV: 176, yes.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
12 MR STROILOV: So what we said previously was:
13 «The counterclaimants cannot at present
14 particularise the precise date of their agreement or
15 combination between the parties until this disclosure
16 hearing, but allege that it must have been before the
17 conclusion of the memorandum.»
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
19 MR STROILOV: So now we are trying to particularise the
20 time, and of course I do accept that one of the — well,
21 more than one — the principal case remains that it was
22 in December 2008.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think it’s the basis on which you
24 assert knowledge which is principally the problem.
25 MR STROILOV: That’s the basis on which we imbue the

74 :1 knowledge to Mr Savelyev, that’s right.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Wherever you assert knowledge, and
3 I think the ones particularly keen to — are two people
4 and a group, Mrs Matvienko, Mr Piotrovsky and the group
5 is the other corrupt officials.
6 You say they had knowledge of the conspiracy, and
7 you are being asked to state on what grounds.
8 MR STROILOV: Obviously on the grounds of what has been
9 pleaded above, that they have done fraudulent acts.
10 What we plead is that Mrs Matvienko interfered with
11 courts. I am not sure. I think it is pleaded that she
12 procured Russian Auction House to carry out the
13 fraudulent sale of assets.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Take that example. I mean, you may
15 demonstrate the Russian Auction House was an outfit.
16 I don’t know. But at the moment — I can’t remember
17 when it was established, about 2005 — it was ostensibly
18 the most — one of the largest auction houses in Russia.
19 MR STROILOV: Exactly, my Lord, and that’s why we have to
20 explain how it became a party to a fraud.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, I think that’s what you are being
22 asked to explain.
23 MR STROILOV: No, that has been done long ago. I think we
24 may have to look at historic judgments and transcripts,
25 just to see how this develops.

75 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Nothing has been shown in these
2 proceedings. It is all up for grabs, you have the
3 trial. There are no facts established in these
4 proceedings, except admitted facts.
5 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I am talking about procedural
6 history. Obviously these matters, the allegations
7 against Mrs Matvienko and General Piotrovsky have been
8 pleaded before.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You seem to have said that you would
10 supply them later. You are being asked to supply them
11 now that disclosure has taken place, and you are being
12 asked to say that Mrs Matvienko — she was the Governor,
13 wasn’t she, of St Petersburg?
14 MR STROILOV: Yes, that’s right.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What do you say is the basis for her
16 knowledge of the naughty scheme, the conspiracy?
17 MR STROILOV: We can look back at the pleadings.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, but —
19 MR STROILOV: What is actually pleaded against here.
20 I understand the question, my Lord, thank you.
21 From the acts which we have pleaded against her,
22 well, we suggest that the knowledge must be inferred.
23 Well, that is implicit when we say that someone has done
24 fraudulent act as part of the execution of
25 the conspiracy, it is implicit in that pleading that by

76 :1 that time that person knew about the conspiracy.
2 So all we add by this amendment is simply to set out
3 the relevant dates in one place where I am in a position 4 to —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So you say that her knowledge is to be
6 inferred from the fact of what she did?
7 MR STROILOV: Exactly. Yes, my Lord, because there would be
8 no need for someone to put pressure on the head of
9 a Russian Auction House to sell the assets if it was
10 a proper — if it was a proper sale.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Where is the pleading of pressure?
12 MR STROILOV: Let’s get back to this, my Lord. I do
13 apologise, it may take me a little time to find.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Do you know, Mr Lord?
15 MR LORD: I have the old — I am bobbing around a bit.
16 Persecution by Russian authorities, is that what we are
17 talking about?
18 MR STROILOV: No, I found it surprisingly quickly, so I can
19 direct you to that. It is 153.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you.
21 MR STROILOV: And then subparagraph 4 in the particulars
22 section:
23 «The director of Russian Auction House is Mr —»
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: This is Mr Stepanenko?
25 MR STROILOV: Yes, and then in the last sentence:

77 :1 «It is asserted that Mr Stepanenko was acting under
2 Mrs Matvienko’s orders as part of the conspiracy.»
3 I can perhaps show you the passage in
4 Mr Arkhangelsky’s 16th witness statement where the basis
5 of this is explained. This is hearsay evidence, but
6 essentially what is said is that Mr Stepanenko told that
7 to Mr Arkhangelsky.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So you say it is to be inferred that
9 she was privy, or at least knew of the conspiracy,
10 because she gave these directions?
11 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, because if it was all above
12 board, there is no need for the Governor to ask for the
13 auction house to sell the assets in such and such way,
14 or in whatever way. That’s their job. So really the
15 other —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Are there other bases on which you
17 assert she had knowledge?
18 MR STROILOV: I’m just trying to recall all the allegations
19 we make in relation to Mrs Matvienko.
20 I think, in terms of — if we focus simply on
21 knowledge, I think it is basically the general pleading
22 of her role vis-a-vis the Bank, is relevant. So in that
23 respect, I will ask you to look at paragraph 1.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Paragraph 1?
25 MR STROILOV: Yes. It is pleaded —

78 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: «Close friends «.
2 MR STROILOV: That’s the very beginning, behind divider 9.
3 I will, insofar as I have to take you through all
4 the pleadings in relation to Mrs Matvienko, I have to —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, that’s what you say. So
6 her knowledge is to be inferred from her participation
7 in the events of which you complain, and these matters
8 pleaded in paragraph 1?
9 MR STROILOV: Yes. Right, well I haven’t taken you through
10 everything, so in paragraph 1 we plead here a close
11 connection with the Bank and Mr Savelyev and the role we
12 say she plays generally.
13 Then the next bit I think I want to take you to
14 would be — I believe that is the section which Mr Lord
15 was pointing out, the one on persecution by Russian
16 authorities.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And you rely on the same basis for
18 knowledge also against Mr Piotrovsky?
19 MR STROILOV: Yes, Mr Piotrovsky, I would like to explain
20 that separately, in a way, because there is some pleaded
21 assertions that he — anyway that he was — well,
22 essentially after stopping being the chief of
23 the police, he moved on to get a job near the top of
24 Baltic Fuel Company, which was the company which
25 actually ran Western Terminal after it was taken over.

79 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mm hmm.
2 MR STROILOV: So we say from the fact that the very police
3 general who was supervising all the criminal cases
4 against Mr Arkhangelsky, and who forced him to flee out
5 of Russia, and thus clearly assisted in the takeover of
6 Western Terminal, and his subsequent getting a job near
7 the top of the company, from that we invite to make
8 inferences about his own participation in
9 the conspiracy.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
11 MR STROILOV: And, again, we plead knowledge by reference to
12 the first acts which were done by the police, we say
13 under his direction. So that was the approach we have
14 taken, rightly or wrongly.
15 I don’t propose — unless it is proposed we should
16 now go back and scrutinise the actual pleadings of
17 primary facts in relation to Mrs —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What about the other corrupt
19 officials?
20 MR STROILOV: Well, I suppose, in a way, given the ruling
21 your Lordship has made.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You are not going to press the
23 corrupt —
24 MR STROILOV: I’m not going to press other corrupt
25 officials.

80 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No. Okay.
2 MR STROILOV: Except those we have named, and I think we
3 only named Mr Kikot(?) and Mrs Livitskaya(?).
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You will have to limit those.
5 MR STROILOV: I will have to limit this to specific names
6 with —
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Lord, what do you say about this?
8 I am sorry to press on.
9 MR LORD: No, that’s okay, my Lord.
10 Can I just show your Lordship, the point about the
11 justicability, your Lordship dealt with it at a hearing
12 back in March 2014. Does your Lordship have the K
13 bundle in hard copy there? Probably not. With
14 judgments. It may be we should get that if
15 your Lordship hasn’t got a copy. We will get a copy of
16 that.
17 Could we get up {K1/8/1}? Your Lordship may
18 recollect this was a hearing back in March 2014, various
19 points were about the freezer and application to strike
20 out and so on were made by the Bank. Mr Stroilov
21 appears for the defendants.
22 If your Lordship would be kind enough to go, if we
23 can get up on Magnum {K/8/19}, your Lordship will see at
24 the foot of the page there is a heading, and there was
25 an issue about whether these were non-justiciable

81 :1 because they were acts of State personnel.
2 I think we can probably skip to {K1/8/24},
3 paragraph 74 your Lordship summarised what your Lordship
4 understood to be the gist of the claim against the Bank.
5 Then 75, your Lordship said this:
6 «Subject to paragraph 76 below, I am not persuaded,
7 at least at this stage and to the extent necessary to
8 warrant striking these allegations out, that the
9 doctrine applies …»
10 That was the non-justicability point.
11 Then paragraph 76:
12 «More troublesome, to my mind, are the allegations
13 in paragraphs 166 to 172 of the amended counterclaim.»
14 I am trying to take it as fast as I can, my Lord,
15 but the point is this shouldn’t become a sort of show
16 trial and your Lordship, with respect, rightly kept
17 alive the idea that some judicial control would be
18 exercised at the right point in this regard.
19 If one goes to paragraph 76, please. {K1/8/24}, and
20 the particulars given under it, and then over the page,
21 please {K1/8/26}, your Lordship made rulings about
22 further particularity that should be provided, if one
23 just skims down that page.
24 Then going, please, to the next page, {K1/8/27}, if
25 your Lordship could look at paragraph 92:

82 :1 «All these pleading matters are to be reviewed at
2 the [pre-trial review]: I would propose to order that
3 any not addressed to my satisfaction by then be struck
4 out.»
5 So a number of matters were bearing down on the
6 court at this pre-trial review, and in fact me, and I am
7 afraid I confess I overlooked that caveat that was built
8 into a ruling that was made by your Lordship back in
9 March 2014 that, if you like, complaints about Russian
10 officials and so on would not be struck out but they
11 would essentially be reviewed at the pre-trial review.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: As I read it, and I must confess,
13 I can’t remember anything about this judgment, as I read
14 it, really the principal issue was was there a sort of
15 Act of State clause.
16 MR LORD: That’s right, my Lord.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And I thought that more needed to be
18 done on the pleadings, but incentive being said they
19 should be done immediately, I said they should be done
20 over the course of time. The PTR then, I suspect, was
21 intended to take place some time in the middle of 2014.
22 MR LORD: What’s happened, my Lord, since then —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It’s slipped.
24 MR LORD: Again, I’m not taking a point, I don’t want this
25 to be ruled upon, I am not challenging Mr Stroilov, but

83 :1 in my submission the matter hasn’t been satisfactorily
2 particularised, but this submission has quite
3 a chequered history.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I should have recollected this, but in
5 any event, we have it for what it is, we are where we
6 are, but it does appear that at least some of the things
7 they had to plead was identified for them.
8 MR LORD: Exactly, my Lord, but the point really is this:
9 the key point is that, in my submission, any complaint
10 about the sort of Russian political establishment, or
11 officials, has to be shown to be relevant to this
12 alleged conspiracy. The point your Lordship made
13 yesterday.
14 So the key point, really, is not wider questions of
15 the Russian State or St Petersburg, but how it actually
16 bolts on, if at all, to the rather more mundane, we
17 would say, features of this Bank enforcement process.
18 So provided that your Lordship is happy that notice
19 has been given to us of knowledge of these various
20 people that are said to have done quite serious things,
21 we would live with that, subject to the marker that this
22 mustn’t become a sort of bridgehead or a Trojan horse
23 for a general sort of free-for-all based on
24 Ms Matvienko’s alleged notoriety.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What I have in mind to do, but the

84 :1 problem is we are right up against the time, was to try
2 and ask Mr Stroilov to gather together the salient
3 activities pleaded, which are said to give rise to
4 the inference of knowledge in order that we should have
5 a more secure basis. The problem is, if I asked him to
6 do that, we would probably have to defer some activities
7 next week.
8 MR LORD: And we would rather not do that, my Lord.
9 I think our position is, really, we are trying to be
10 constructive. We are really putting down a marker that,
11 ultimately, your Lordship knows our case. Our case is
12 that there is, ultimately, in effect — and I am going
13 to try and put this as gently as I can, that what one
14 sees coming out of this case is a conspiracy theory,
15 I am afraid, and that everything is seen through that
16 prism, and, really, now is the time, in our respectful
17 submission, to go through it from the way that the
18 English rules and procedure applies of primary facts and
19 inferences and so on, and you can’t start at the end
20 with the conspiracy established and then basically
21 presume back and infer everything back from that.
22 I’m not really — I’m genuinely not trying to make
23 a point. That is, in my respectful submission, what has
24 happened here, and the parties are so far apart in large
25 measure because of that, because everything that happens

85 :1 in this case Mr Stroilov sees as a conspiracy, and we
2 would approach it from a much more prosaic sort of Bank
3 enforcement position and that’s really this great big
4 gulf. As long as your Lordship is happy that this
5 aspect of Mr Stroilov’s client’s claim is adequately
6 particularised to be fair to this process, then we will
7 obviously abide by that.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think it is very marginal. I feel
9 at great unease about it, but, equally, I wouldn’t
10 strike it out from giving an opportunity to collate the
11 various references, and the collation would impact on
12 the timetable. So I am between the devil and a hard
13 place.
14 MR LORD: We would urge your Lordship to keep the timetable
15 and let something else go and we —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: In preparing his cross-examination
17 he’s almost certainly going to have to collate all of
18 these things, so it wouldn’t be a waste of time. But
19 I just don’t want to direct the way he deploys his time.
20 MR LORD: It is fair to note that Mr Stroilov has not been
21 alone throughout this case, there has been some
22 representations, this is a conspiracy case that has
23 largely been made since the BVI 2011.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, he has had —
25 MR LORD: So one would expect this sort of careful analysis,

86 :1 because BVI rules and English rules, there have been
2 lawyers on the record, so this sort of careful analysis
3 really should have been done and it appears that it
4 hasn’t been done. Again, I am not pressing the point
5 now, but it is becoming apparent that what should have
6 been done does not appear to have been done but that
7 will not excuse any failure to play by the rules from
8 now on in.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No.
10 MR STROILOV: I make a couple of points in relation to this.
11 I feel we are constantly straying into a more general
12 criticism of our pleadings, and I’m not sure that is
13 an economical thing to do. It may be a useful exercise.
14 It may be not.
15 I would submit that re-arguing this application made
16 to your Lordship back in 2014 unsuccessfully, if it is
17 permissible at all, now is not the time. Then I think
18 you do identify that any criticisms of particulars be
19 provided must be done in the PTR, and I think there are
20 very strong reasons to adhere to this direction now that
21 we are desperately overwhelmed by having lots of work to
22 do.
23 So I would suggest that as long as this new
24 amendment does not take us any further in substance than
25 what has been alleged, the matter may be allowed to

87 :1 rest. Obviously we have no intention of —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think with the warning, with the
3 caveat that he is anxious that your, as you see it, the
4 true ambit of the trial is to investigate the propriety
5 of the Government and the police, et cetera within
6 St Petersburg, as long as we got get to that stage, and
7 subject to my advice to you to collate, really, from
8 your pleadings, those things on which you rely to
9 demonstrate the knowledge inferred.
10 MR STROILOV: I don’t expect this to be particularly
11 prominent. I wouldn’t accept this is not relevant at
12 all, but —
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What isn’t relevant?
14 MR STROILOV: Well, all these allegations against the
15 Governor, against the police chief. They are relevant.
16 They have some place in the counterclaim. I accept it
17 is not the central place.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is going to be very difficult to
19 persuade me they have relevance unless you tie
20 particular people to particular acts. I mean, supposing
21 I accepted that the Government of St Petersburg and
22 those involved in it, including Mrs Matvienko,
23 Mr Piotrovsky, were scoundrels and ran a highly suspect
24 governmental organisation. I don’t say that, but
25 supposing I did say that. Unless you tie that in to

88 :1 this, they might have had bigger fish to fry, for all
2 I know.
3 MR STROILOV: Of course.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They might have been so involved in
5 a whole load of ghastliness, they just couldn’t be
6 bothered with you.
7 MR STROILOV: Of course, I accept, and that’s already …
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So you have to tie it in.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes. I’m not quite sure in terms of trial
10 management, again. Do you want to give us a particular
11 date? I would suggest, really —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m going to leave it this way:
13 Mr Lord does not press for the collation of the
14 individual parts of the pleading on which you rely.
15 That’s point one.
16 He objects to your plea insofar as it goes further
17 than named persons. So «corrupt officials» is a broad
18 category capable of many thousands, for all I know, and
19 that, I think you agree, must not be pursued.
20 Point three, I think that it may very well be of
21 advantage to you, though I don’t wish to dictate the
22 usage of your time, to scour your pleadings to see what
23 it is you are going to rely on as giving rise to
24 the inference of knowledge on the part of Mrs Matvienko
25 and Mr Piotrovsky and any other named persons. And you

89 :1 are going to focus, fifthly, on how it is that that
2 knowledge and their activities bear on this case; that
3 is to say what did they do in relation to this case
4 which you are entitled to complain of, given that the
5 fact that they may be — I am not saying they are, but
6 supposing I accepted they were corrupt — is a legally
7 irrelevant matter unless it bears on the case before me.
8 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. I think us being on the same
9 page on the principles, I don’t really need to go on
10 about it. The amendment goes in, subject to all the —
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but remember the warning, that at
12 the end of the day, if you have not shown any valid
13 grounds for knowledge, point one, or involvement, point
14 two, this is going to just be considered to be
15 a diversion.
16 MR STROILOV: Indeed, my Lord. I take the point.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, thanks.
18 MR STROILOV: We are quite satisfied that this is a proper
19 allegation to plead.
20 Now, I just wonder what remains. Let me look back
21 at my learned friend’s note. (Pause)
22 I am sorry, my Lord, I think I am slightly …
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t know where 179(a) — what’s
24 happened to 179(a)?
25 MR STROILOV: 179(a)?

90 :1 MR LORD: It is on 57.69 of this document.
2 MR STROILOV: 57.69.
3 MR LORD: The numbering has got divorced from the text.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see. So it is really, in any event:
5 «Prior to the fraudulent … aimed at dissipation,
6 there was agreement or agreements of Mr Savelyev and
7 Renord to facilitate the fraudulent transaction.»
8 MR STROILOV: What we are trying to do is actually to
9 save — basically it is right for the time to be
10 pleaded. At the same time, as I think your Lordship has
11 had occasion to observe at one of the recent hearings,
12 it is possible — it’s harder to prove, but it is
13 possible for the court simply to look at subsequently
14 and to infer that there must have been a conspiracy at
15 some earlier point.
16 So as a further alternative case to the allegations
17 that there was a conspiracy in December and that there
18 was a conspiracy in March, we want to preserve this more
19 general case that there was a conspiracy at some stage.
20 Obviously we accept it is, in a way, pleaded with less
21 particularity, and then will be, to that extent, harder
22 to prove.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t know how much Mr Lord will
24 press this. But if you assert an agreement, or you have
25 asserted an agreement and you wish to, normally you will

91 :1 have to say who the parties to the agreement were, when
2 it took place and ordinarily you have to say if it
3 wasn’t in writing, the gist of the words used whereby
4 they struck their accord. That would be usual. I don’t
5 know whether Mr Lord is going to press this.
6 MR LORD: I do press that, my Lord, because we have
7 a conspiracy in 178, we have an alternative in 179, and
8 then the «in any event» seems to be a very new sort of
9 micro thing that has never really — as a sort of
10 fallback, and that really has to be set out very clearly
11 and looked at.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: He does press it, and I can see why.
13 MR STROILOV: I don’t think it is —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You say this was an agreement which
15 took place before the fraudulent transactions took
16 place?
17 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I think it is open to us, I had
18 actually been looking at some of the textbooks on the
19 pleadings of conspiracy, and I may, perhaps, provide the
20 extracts of specific cases.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You say it is textbook that you can
22 infer an agreement between X and Y from the fact that
23 something happened?
24 MR STROILOV: Yes, over the facts of the conspiracy we can
25 invite an inference that there had been a conspiracy

92 :1 prior to that. We may or may not plead the time and the
2 place and these kind of particulars.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You say it has been inferred from the
4 subsequent acts that there had been an agreement; is
5 that what you are saying?
6 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. That is a further, alternative
7 basis of the case, and that is really the basis as far
8 as the pleading of conspiracy is concerned, that was the
9 basis that was in the old version of the pleadings,
10 saying: well, we can’t say when, but from all the events
11 above, it is clear there was a combination between
12 a number of parties, they are particularised and we
13 don’t know when it must have happened.
14 So that, in substance, is what is preserved by the
15 new paragraph — which one is it, I am afraid I don’t
16 know.
17 MR LORD: 179(a).
18 MR STROILOV: 179(a), I’m grateful. Yes, so that’s what is
19 in 179(a) now.
20 MR LORD: I suppose, my Lord, the very simply objection is,
21 178 and 179 seem to set out two runs of the conspiracy,
22 which I think we can deal with, but 179(a) seems to hold
23 over some different case on conspiracy. So if it is
24 only a reiteration of what’s in 178 and 179, those
25 combinations of agreements, that’s one thing.

93 :1 If there is a new and separate agreement or
2 combination or concert, then that should be identified.
3 It should be explained what it is. What is the new
4 feature, or else there is no need for 179(a).
5 MR STROILOV: I’m grateful, that identifies our
6 disagreement.
7 We say we should be entitled to preserve the further
8 alternative case to the two alternatives.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What is the third, alternative case?
10 You seem to have alleged in 178 the agreements which you
11 seem to assert in 179(a). What is it that is not
12 covered in 178 and 179 which you feel is covered in 13 179(a)?
14 MR STROILOV: I’m sorry to start by a little introduction.
15 I think it is typical for a fraud case, what we have is
16 a narrative of one transaction following another, the
17 whole story, and I think it is in the nature of fraud
18 that from the start, these transactions look all right,
19 and then the further we go, the more suspicious they
20 look, and then from the end result —
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t need to get into the entrails,
22 obviously, but you see what I am looking at in
23 the context of 179(a) which you wished to introduce, is
24 you say there was an agreement, is the crux of it,
25 between these people. But you have already said that in

94 :1 178(c), but actually with more particularity, because
2 you say the agency whereby Renord-Invest became bound.
3 You say that’s by Mr Smirnov. So the agreement goes
4 nowhere further than 178. Then you go on to say it was
5 a prior agreement, there was also a prior agreement
6 relating to the Sklyarevsky companies.
7 MR STROILOV: Let me explain, sorry, I didn’t understand the
8 question. The purpose of that is if your Lordship finds
9 in that that there was no conspiracy in December and
10 there was no conspiracy in March, it is very likely that
11 there was, on the balance of probabilities, you do find
12 that there was a conspiracy at some point in June, we
13 don’t want the claim to fail, necessarily. We don’t
14 want to be held to these two dates we have given.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You have already said, round the same
16 time and in any event prior to the transfer — I mean,
17 if you establish a conspiracy at some other time than
18 December 2008, I shouldn’t think that is going to save
19 Mr Lord, but …
20 MR STROILOV: We are asking you to permit us — in that
21 sense, and I think in that respect only, really we are
22 trying to really resile from the previous indication
23 that it must have been before December. We say it may
24 have been after the transfer of shares. It’s not our
25 primary —

95 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So it is in any event, even if not in
2 December 2008 or thereabouts, then at some time prior.
3 MR STROILOV: No, at some time later too as an alternative
4 case, that’s what we suggest.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see. 179(a) as you have put it —
6 MR STROILOV: Yes.
7 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, so I have understood the point.
8 It was December 2008, then it was now February 2009, and
9 now it is June. Fairness does say there are obviously
10 lots of issues about how things would look if this is
11 what’s really happened, but that’s a huge jump in
12 the story. It’s a huge jump from the corporate raid in
13 2008, and all the bullying over Christmas time, we have
14 come miles away from that. So what is this further
15 independent conspiracy? On this hypothesis there is no
16 December 2008 conspiracy, there is no corporate raid,
17 February and March come and go with default, all fine,
18 all in the regular way, and then apparently there is
19 still another conspiracy featuring all these people in
20 the middle of the summer of 2009 in that context. What
21 is that case? That is a fairness point. If there is
22 a freestanding conspiracy, that can spring to life.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: This is in summer 2009?
24 MR LORD: Yes, in June 2009, because I need to know what
25 that is, what is going to be said about it, what is the

96 :1 position?
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see. I have it wrong. This is not
3 the fraud in December 2008, but supposing all that
4 happened between December 2008 and December 2009 was not
5 the conspiracy, it is now suggested that there might
6 have been a later, different conspiracy which gave rise
7 to the transactions involving Renord-Invest and the
8 Sklyarevsky companies?
9 MR STROILOV: That is right, my Lord, I’m sorry if I didn’t
10 make it clear.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That is a separate agreement? Another
12 agreement?
13 MR STROILOV: No, that’s a further, alternative case.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They might also have agreed then. All
15 right.
16 Who do you say the parties to that agreement were
17 and on what basis?
18 MR STROILOV: The Bank, acting principally by Mrs Maylsheva
19 and/or by its management board and Mr Savelyev as its
20 chairman, and Renord-Invest.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Renord-Invest acting by?
22 MR STROILOV: Yes, I can insert there.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Acting by Mr Smirnov.
24 MR STROILOV: Acting by Mr Smirnov, I don’t think there is
25 much here:

97 :1 «… in respect of each transactions involving the
2 Sklyarevsky companies … between the Bank acting as
3 aforesaid and Mr Sklyarevsky».
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So one concatenation of events which
5 you are trying to apply for is that there was perfect
6 innocence until this time?
7 MR STROILOV: Yes.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And then fraud broke out?
9 MR STROILOV: That is the further alternative case.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s an alternative case. Now, that
11 suggests that none of the facts prior to the earlier
12 agreement give rise to the inference, because they
13 are —
14 MR STROILOV: That’s right.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: — ex hypothesi, consistent with
16 innocence.
17 MR STROILOV: That’s why we put that in, if you find, we
18 don’t say that, we advance our primary case.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I appreciate that, just test it.
20 MR STROILOV: If you find that everything that happened in
21 December was innocent, if everything that happened in
22 March was innocent, but then at the end of all the
23 transactions later, look at them, there must have been
24 a conspiracy at some point, well, we want that to be
25 saved.

98 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So you say, in this case your task is
2 more confined. You accept, for these purposes, that you
3 can’t rely on everything that happened before March 2009
4 to show the agreement; it’s only what happens in June,
5 which you say is consistent only with, and gives rise to
6 an inference of a dishonest conspiracy?
7 MR STROILOV: I’m not sure I follow. We have pleaded — our
8 primary case is that there was conspiracy in December.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but what —
10 MR STROILOV: Our alternative case is there was a conspiracy
11 in March. In case both fail, we will still rely on this
12 case, which does not specify the date, simply invites
13 an inference that there was a conspiracy —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Ex hypothesi, I am only really
15 interested in this paragraph if you fail to establish
16 impropriety such as to give rise to the inference and
17 agreement prior to June 2009. So I am working on the
18 basis that those facts are consistent with an innocent
19 explanation. That’s how we have got to this point being
20 relevant. If those facts are consistent with innocence,
21 they can’t give rise to the inference of impropriety.
22 You say there was an improper agreement. You can’t rely
23 on those facts on that hypothesis. What are the facts
24 you rely on to give rise to the inference of
25 an agreement?

99 :1 MR STROILOV: To various facts after March.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that correct, Mr Lord, in your —
3 MR LORD: Yes, it is.
4 MR STROILOV: All the pleaded facts which occurred after
5 March 2009. In principle that will be connections
6 between companies and undervalues, that we will be
7 saying principally —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So you say that what happened in June
9 is consistent only with a dishonest agreement between
10 the persons you have identified?
11 MR STROILOV: That’s right, from a sale, a collusive sale,
12 we say that from connection we infer collusive sale, but
13 collusive sale at gross undervalue hasn’t got an
14 explanation.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Lord, do you understand the pleas
16 sufficiently?
17 MR LORD: My Lord, there is a point here that obviously this
18 is quite a radical departure from the conspiracy case.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, you are entitled to keep that
20 amongst your armoury.
21 MR LORD: Obviously it is a forensic credibility point,
22 which I will reserve to myself, with your Lordship’s
23 permission.
24 There is a further point, really, which is this: on
25 this hypothesis this is actually a new claim,

100 :1 ex hypothesi.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is a new conspiracy.
3 MR LORD: It is a new conspiracy.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: On the alternative version of this
5 plea.
6 MR LORD: It is important because the rules are there, it is
7 a limitation point, my Lord. It is not just there for
8 silly reasons, it is to make sure that things come at
9 the right time and so on. We have had five or six years
10 of conspiracy, all set out from December, and raiding.
11 I am going to have to make this submission: it looks as
12 if at the death with a thinness appearing to the old
13 conspiracy, a new conspiracy is actually attempted to be
14 run right on the —
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not sure this was stated in your
16 notes, was it?
17 MR LORD: No, my Lord, but we didn’t know — we didn’t know
18 that, but I wasn’t sure — I am doing my best to take
19 only the points I need to take. There are more points
20 I could have taken. I am moving pretty fast, my Lord,
21 through the gears, trying to do a lot of things —
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But for the limitation point I was
23 going to rather encourage you to proceed on the footing
24 that it is not worth a pitched battle now, but the
25 limitation point I accept is a difficult point.

101 :1 MR LORD: Of course the problem would be the relation back
2 point, because some other claims have been allowed in,
3 sort of de bene esse, or rather other bits of this
4 claim —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, no, the Section 35 position, as
6 I understand it, is unless the limitation point is
7 unarguable, it should only proceed in a separate claim.
8 MR LORD: And your Lordship will recollect that in order to
9 accommodate, to try to address limitation arguments in
10 an efficient way, it was agreed, when certain amendments
11 were made at a previous hearing, that limitation
12 defences could be argued as if the new plea had come in
13 from the date it came in rather than related back.
14 So there are limitation points, they are in
15 the openings, and I don’t want to be difficult or slow
16 things up, but I do want it to be understood, as must be
17 the case on this hypothesis, this is a new conspiracy
18 claim, because by definition there is no conspiracy up
19 to June 2009, no conspiracy, so you have a new
20 conspiracy claim, presumably made under article 10(64)
21 under the Russian Civil Code.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Even by our rules it would be.
23 MR LORD: And so, provided that it is sufficiently clearly
24 set out so I know what the agreement is, and provided
25 that the limitation defence is preserved, then to that

102 :1 extent I suppose we can live with it. But those are two
2 probably rather important caveats. I don’t want to stir
3 things up, but I think that is a fair point.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think you are probably not going to
5 get much on the first point except to say it is the
6 necessary inference from the fact of the transactions
7 that there was a prior agreement, and I think all you
8 are going to get is that the agreement was between
9 Mrs Maylsheva and Mr Savelyev and Renord-Invest in
10 the one case, or with Mr Sklyarevsky in the other.
11 MR LORD: Yes, it seems to be Maylsheva, Savelyev, Smirnov
12 and Sklyarevsky. Those appear to be the four —
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I can’t have «and/or by its management
14 board» unless and until they are named.
15 MR LORD: No, and we are going to assume that until they are
16 named we are talking about four people here, and
17 your Lordship is going to hear from three of those
18 people.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, and Renord-Invest, it is agreed,
20 is Mr Smirnov. When they say Renord-Invest, they mean
21 Renord-Invest by Mr Smirnov?
22 MR LORD: They do. Your Lordship will see how much weight
23 is being borne by the valuation complaint, and obviously
24 that will be addressed in the trial. I wasn’t sure if
25 there were other points that were going to be adduced,

103 :1 other aspects of phone calls, or meetings, et whatever.
2 Is seems that that is not: it is simply that the
3 valuations are too low, there was a connection between
4 these persons and from that you can deduce a new
5 conspiracy in June 2009. I’m not going to make any
6 comments on the merits of that and whether it was
7 a proper basis, I don’t want to stir things up. I’m not
8 accepting that would be a basis, I’m not accepting that
9 if we were in ordinary conditions that would be allowed
10 through. It is too thin and too late. But, subject to
11 those reservations, and if I can put my limitation
12 marker down and plead it back, I think there is a way
13 through this without wasting too much more time.
14 MR STROILOV: I am afraid that is a new objection made and
15 I will have to reply to that in some way.
16 No, it is not a new claim, and that’s what I was
17 trying to start from, really, by way of introduction.
18 When you plead fraud you plead a narrative of
19 various events. There were such and such transactions,
20 there was a report in December/January, and then there
21 was a sale from original or subsequent purchasers in
22 March/April, there was replacement of management, then
23 there were various transfers between different Renord
24 companies, then there were various auction sales and so
25 on. We tell the story.

104 :1 But then we stop setting out primary facts, and we
2 start inviting inferences, and the inference was that
3 there must have been a conspiracy in the beginning.
4 Now, what I want to stress is that all we add in
5 this paragraph is, really, an additional inference.
6 Effectively we are asking simply not to be held to our
7 previous pleading, which was with a certain caveat that
8 it is subject to any future disclosure. We don’t want
9 to be held strictly to that in relation to the date.
10 That is to say, if you find that we have failed to prove
11 fraud in relation to the first half of the story, but we
12 have succeeded in proving fraud in relation to
13 the second half of the story, we shouldn’t fail just for
14 that reason.
15 Not a single new fact is going to be relied on in
16 terms of primary facts. It’s simply if you are not
17 satisfied that certain events — if you are satisfied,
18 really, that the second chronological — the second half
19 of the story does give rise to the Bank’s liability for
20 fraud under article 10(64), this claim must succeed, and
21 I submit that’s by no means a new claim simply because
22 not the smallest new event is pleaded. It would be
23 unfair to — really, that is just a question for
24 your Lordship. Supposing on that hypothesis, supposing
25 we failed —

105 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, are you saying that the
2 limitation point is unarguable and you want to
3 crystallise it and my decide it now? You see, Mr Lord
4 is saying you don’t have to. He is saying that,
5 although this is unusual, and actually I feel a bit, in
6 all ordinary circumstances, I am afraid I don’t think it
7 would be right, but it has been done before in this
8 case. I think actually the more you look at having to
9 do it, in fact mandatory. But there we are, by estoppel
10 or agreement, everyone is agreed in this particular case
11 never again we should do this, it will add to
12 the impropriety by doing this, there we are.
13 But he is rather saying: let’s not fight this battle
14 now. The only basis on which you can win this battle
15 now is if you show me that Mr Lord’s limitation point is
16 unarguable. Unarguable. Not a good battle which you
17 win. Just unarguable.
18 Now, I would counsel you against that. The question
19 of what is a cause of action is not an easy area.
20 I think it was explored by Lord Diplock in Letang v
21 Cooper, it is a set of factual averments giving rise to
22 a claim know to law. Here, the factual averment at the
23 heart of it, if your claim is based in conspiracy, is
24 that there was a conspiracy, if not in 2008, then in 25 June 2009.

106 :1 I would have thought it was arguable that that is
2 a new cause of action because it relies on a new set of
3 circumstances giving rise to a legal claim; that is to
4 say an agreement not previously pleaded.
5 I would have thought that was arguable and my own
6 view is you might be better advised to think further
7 about this before requiring me to rule now. I can’t be
8 fairer than that, I don’t think.
9 MR STROILOV: We can agree on that, subject to one
10 qualification. I don’t think, really, that my learned
11 friend’s reference to what was ordered in relation to
12 Onega claim, I may have misheard, but what is in
13 your Lordship’s order is that if it is a new claim, then
14 limitation defence would be available. But the question
15 of whether it is a new claim is left open for
16 an argument.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, it is left open whether it is
18 a new claim. If it is a new claim, my own feeling is
19 that’s the end of it, it’s a bad claim because it is
20 statute barred.
21 The reason I say that is because my recollection,
22 which is rusty, is that the Russian limitation period
23 was very, very short, so short that I overrode it but
24 only because it was offensive, really, to the way this
25 court would look at things. But this court would treat

107 :1 a wholly English action to be statute barred by now
2 unless you could show deliberate concealment.
3 MR LORD: And if your Lordship recollects the difference was
4 the original conspiracy was in play enough in another
5 jurisdiction for it to feed the unfairness —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. You are quite right, Mr Lord,
7 I had rather sort of misremembered.
8 MR LORD: It would be unfair not to relate it back, in
9 a way.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, but here this is new and late,
11 even by English standards of limitation.
12 MR STROILOV: My Lord, we will simply say for the
13 argument — I will also, simply for the record, this
14 being on that basis, I also reserve the right to address
15 your Lordship on the exercise of your discretion, if you
16 find there is limitation, I will possibly be asking you
17 to disapply it under section clause of Foreign
18 Limitation Periods Act. I don’t want to argue it now.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think you are right to reserve these
20 points, just for clarity, in this plea, which is
21 premised on establishing a subsequent conspiracy in the
22 summer of 2009, you are asserting that the new
23 conspiracy is between the Bank, acting by Mrs Maylsheva
24 and Mr Savelyev; unless and until you plead any other
25 individually named persons, it is only them.

108 :1 Secondly, the compact was with Renord-Invest acting
2 by Mr Smirnov. You rely in terms of giving rise to the
3 inference that there was such an agreement on the
4 subsequent transactions as being inconsistent with
5 anything other than an improper compact, and we reserve
6 any limitation point as to whether that is a new cause
7 of action and, if it is, whether it is time barred or
8 whether I should exercise any residual discretion to
9 allow it, nevertheless, to a future occasion.
10 MR LORD: And, my Lord, that’s exactly right —
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: By agreement, because I couldn’t do it
12 otherwise.
13 MR LORD: I think the only point to add is I think it is
14 fair to say that’s also Mr Sklyarevsky.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The same goes for the other —
16 MR LORD: The same goes for the other wing —
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Sklyarevsky.
18 MR LORD: Yes, and so it is two from the Bank and it is two
19 other persons.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: By way of friendly warning,
21 Mr Stroilov, in the only event this is likely to be of
22 real importance, which is that you fail to establish
23 anything prior to then, it will be difficult, if not
24 impossible, for you to rely on facts prior to June 2009
25 as giving rise to an inference of an agreement, because

109 :1 on that hypothesis, they would have been consistent with
2 innocence and not conspiracy.
3 MR STROILOV: Quite well, my Lord. I think I need to make
4 two reservations, just for, 1 June 2009 was named by way
5 of example. The way it is pleaded.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Summer 2009. Some time after the
7 innocent events and prior to the transactions you say
8 are consistent only with —
9 MR STROILOV: Quite. It may be — the way it is pleaded, it
10 may be any time, really, between any of the fraudulent
11 acts pleaded, before really by the latest of
12 the fraudulent transactions we plead. So that’s in —
13 I’m not saying I’m going to run this way because simply
14 we don’t specify the date.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I would say very little more,
16 Mr Stroilov, because the more vague, the less likely the
17 inference.
18 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I accept that, and that’s why I —
19 I think I started by accepting that, so I don’t —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, there we are.
21 MR STROILOV: Secondly, my Lord, I think I need to, again
22 from my brief look at the cases on that overnight,
23 I don’t think that’s quite the correct statement of
24 principles that the facts are consistent with innocence,
25 then no matter what the probabilities are, fraud may not

110 :1 be found. I think it is still the balance of
2 probabilities test, and in a way the evidential standard
3 should not be confused with the pleading rules.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You may be right on that. But I think
5 there is a case by Lord Millett, I think it is quoted in
6 the BCCI case, that the court is reluctant, to the point
7 of refusing, usually, to infer a fraudulent compact from
8 facts which are consistent with innocence.
9 MR STROILOV: My Lord, yes, there are a few. It is
10 a pleaded point.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am not quoting him, but that is my
12 recollection of broadly what he said. I think it was in
13 El Ajou or one of those cases, but it was also
14 summarised in the BCCI case, the Bank of England v BCCI.
15 MR STROILOV: My Lord, there is quite a lot of case law and
16 we will have to look at that.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let’s leave that, we can enjoy that
18 later.
19 MR STROILOV: Now, I don’t think anything is left in terms
20 of pleadings, save for, I think there are a couple of
21 points —
22 MR LORD: My Lord, there is one point. There is the loss of
23 a chance point, which is at 181(c). Maybe I could —
24 MR STROILOV: Yes, I do apologise.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: This is a new one, is it?

111 :1 MR LORD: My Lord, just very, very quickly. It is a new
2 point. All these amendments are sought on the basis of
3 no further evidence or other procedural steps required,
4 no more disclosure, no more witness evidence. There is
5 no support for this in any of the Russian law. If that
6 were not to be the premise of the application, we would
7 object to it on those grounds, and therefore one doesn’t
8 allow in a loss of a chance claim, borrowed from English
9 currency, into a Russian law case in those
10 circumstances, so this should not be applied.
11 MR STROILOV: My Lord, may I address you on that? I am
12 afraid I find it too difficult to follow the three
13 documents.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let’s put it another way, your claim
15 in this regard is based on a Russian statutory
16 provision.
17 MR STROILOV: Yes.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think that you must therefore follow
19 the logic of the Russian statutory provision.
20 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You must, therefore, confine yourself
22 to what, in Russian, would be a permissible basis or
23 head of claim. If, in Russian, you say that the loss of
24 a chance claim could be made good, the answer will be:
25 very interesting, but too late since it requires

112 :1 evidence.
2 Your answer is to say: well, in England you were
3 allowed loss of a chance, and the response will be: yes,
4 but in England we don’t base our claims on the Russian
5 statute. I think it is as simple as that.
6 MR STROILOV: I do understand the objection, let me try and
7 address you on that.
8 Really, it is not based on any new facts. The
9 matters which —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Russian law is fact.
11 MR STROILOV: Let me take it in stages, my Lord. In terms
12 of fact as fact, as opposed to —
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Russian law is fact.
14 MR STROILOV: I know that, my Lord, I am just trying to
15 explain where it comes from.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
17 MR STROILOV: So the matters which relate to this loss of
18 chance, loss of chance is essentially just a basis of
19 calculating damages. It’s not any new event, so I don’t
20 think it is suggested it is a new cause of action. It
21 is an issue which goes only to quantum. It has been
22 pleaded for some time, and further particulars were
23 provided by a letter pursuant to your Lordship’s order
24 that there was — that on the balance of probabilities,
25 the group would have obtained refinancing, would have

113 :1 overcome its difficulties and would have developed
2 significant value of its businesses.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So it is already in, is it?
4 MR STROILOV: That’s already in.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right, then, if it is already in, you
6 needn’t have it.
7 MR STROILOV: I beg your pardon?
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If it is already in, you needn’t have
9 it.
10 MR STROILOV: Well, but it is pleaded on the balance of
11 probabilities —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is it already pleaded or not?
13 MR STROILOV: It is.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If it is already pleaded, I don’t want
15 you to plead it again. If it is not already pleaded,
16 I don’t understand your point.
17 MR STROILOV: What is pleaded, my Lord, is that this would
18 have happened on the balance of probabilities, we invite
19 you to find that the companies would have developed such
20 and such value, and on that basis, we seek damages.
21 What we want — the particulars of that have been
22 pleaded, if you look at paragraph 181(a).
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: (a).
24 MR STROILOV: And then the further particulars which are
25 added now are, again, particulars which have been

114 :1 provided pursuant to one of the earlier amendments,
2 pursuant to your Lordship’s order, now we have copied
3 them into the pleadings but they have been there since
4 summer 2015, and I believe no objection is taken on
5 them. So all these points, I think until we actually
6 come to 181(c)(i), even though technically they are
7 amendments, they have been pleaded for some time.
8 So all we are heading for that is if your Lordship
9 ultimately feels that from all these facts you are not
10 able to make a finding on the balance of probabilities,
11 well, we propose an alternative basis for calculating
12 the figure of damages. In relation to — in my
13 submission that is something that very properly would
14 have come in that scenario under the heading «Further
15 and Other Relief». It’s not something new at all. It
16 is simply a basis of calculating quantum.
17 There is no Russian lawyer, admittedly. I think we
18 will come to that. I think it is very likely that
19 issues of quantum have to be split off anyway, so in
20 terms of issues such as this, it gives quite sufficient
21 time, and we will have seen that in practice it doesn’t
22 seem to be possible to explore quantum at this trial.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think we should split off those
24 things they can probably be split off. But your whole
25 case on fraud is dependent on showing such a variant

115 :1 between the true value and the recovered value as to
2 demonstrate fraud, so I can’t split it off, because your
3 whole case is that one follows the other.
4 I would very much like to try and compartmentalise
5 this case, and I can you I have been racking my mind to
6 try and find some way to do it. But on the general
7 point I don’t see how, because you are wanting to
8 reverse engineer from the values achieved in fact the
9 inference that they were fraudulent transactions and,
10 you know, there we are, I don’t know how I get round
11 that.
12 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I think that is the opposite of what
13 Mr Lord said and what you said at the previous two
14 hearings about this.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All I said was if I could find out
16 some way of chopping this case in two or in three or in
17 four which was fair, I wanted to retain the right to do
18 so. But the more you think about the case, the more the
19 quantum is the liability.
20 MR STROILOV: I accept there is a difficulty on that. But
21 then — and I’m sorry, really, to depart from the
22 orderly going through the points, but the question is:
23 what do we do about the expert?
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s another matter. I know that
25 Mr Steadman is unable — or not unable, I think his

116 :1 partnership is unwilling to release him for free and,
2 therefore, he cannot attend. That’s my understanding.
3 MR STROILOV: And we are left without the expert.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: In the letter there is no evidence of
5 such. This may become an important point, but at the
6 moment it is assertion. I don’t think I have heard from
7 Mr Steadman saying he refuses, nor from his partnership
8 saying they refuse to release him.
9 MR STROILOV: He needs that. I note I will arrange that.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
11 MR STROILOV: I appreciate it is all very funny, but,
12 my Lord, I think it has been just implicitly suggested
13 that I am making this assertion and I am lying.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, no, it’s just I can only proceed
15 on evidence. I note correspondence, but I can’t proceed
16 otherwise than on evidence. If it is to be asserted
17 that either that aspect of the matter must be deferred,
18 or that some wider portion of the trial should be
19 deferred, I need evidence, and I think that can only
20 come from Mr Steadman and/or from the partnership of
21 which he is a member and which refuses to release him.
22 I think that is my feeling.
23 MR STROILOV: Right, my Lord, I note that.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No one is saying the correspondence is
25 a lie; they are just saying it is not something we can

117 :1 rely on.
2 MR STROILOV: I am not saying that. I hope this issue, in
3 view of the indications you have repeatedly given and
4 Mr Lord has repeatedly given, that this wasn’t a very
5 contentious issue, the explanation of this part of
6 the issue but it is now —
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If Mr Lord accepted it, that would be
8 one thing. But I rather gather that Mr Lord does not
9 accept it. If he does accept it, well and good. I can
10 proceed, as part of the record, on things you agree.
11 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
12 Turning back to the pleadings.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR STROILOV: What we say on that is that this is not —
15 apart from being a new mode of calculation, there is
16 nothing new in that pleading. On that basis, we say
17 that, again, the test is, if, for whatever reason, at
18 the end of the day you find you cannot make findings on
19 the balance of probabilities, there is this alternative
20 way of calculating it and it would be unfair if you are
21 stopped from doing it simply on the basis it is not
22 pleaded.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I can only do it, unless you convince
24 me otherwise, on the footing that the Russian statute
25 enables me to do it. I have no evidence before me to

118 :1 that effect, therefore I would just be guessing as to
2 what the content of Russian law is, because otherwise
3 I have no idea whether under the Russian statute loss of
4 a chance is a permissible method of calculation. I just
5 don’t know.
6 MR STROILOV: My Lord, in the absence of evidence on that
7 point, the presumption applies that it is similar.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I don’t think that’s right,
9 because I don’t think I can sort of mix and match
10 English and Russian law. I can’t say that the remedy is
11 Russian but the quantification is English. I just —
12 I must follow the logic of the Russian statute under
13 which you base your claim.
14 MR STROILOV: And, my Lord, I submit that —
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you submit that’s wrong and you
16 wish to reserve it, that’s fine. We will park this
17 point. It is not going to be got to for some time. But
18 at the moment, Mr Stroilov, I must say, I would find it
19 awkward to say that you get English theories of damages
20 in respect of Russian statutory breaches. I just find
21 that awkward.
22 MR STROILOV: I think, again, I just want to make my point
23 clear, very clearly, evidentially the way it works is
24 before you are given any evidence that it is not so, you
25 simply assume the Russian law to permit this kind of

119 :1 calculation of damages.
2 So I invite you to do that.
3 If, in response to that, the claimants ask to be
4 permitted to adduce Russian law that this is not so,
5 then that’s their right.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I take your point, I will have to
7 think about that. I don’t know whether Mr Lord knows
8 the answer. I just don’t know. The general theory is
9 that in default of evidence you assume the two laws to
10 be the same.
11 MR LORD: Yes, you do, my Lord, but, of course, that’s the
12 starting position. That’s where you start off: you
13 plead and prove something, but if it is a foreign law,
14 it is accepted to be the same unless it is pleaded and
15 proved to be different. But we are in different
16 territory. The accepted Russian law applies. Russian
17 law experts look at the causation test and the
18 requirement, and it is causation. It doesn’t have this
19 unusual English creature of a loss of a chance in the
20 professional negligence world, it has bolted in and it
21 is really for the —
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think I have said enough to indicate
23 that I think that’s right, but if Mr Stroilov wishes to
24 advance a case that it is wrong, all I make clear at the
25 moment is that this plea is not presently approved, and

120 :1 if you seek to admit it, you must show me the basis on
2 which it can be justified without further evidence.
3 MR LORD: Yes.
4 MR STROILOV: Much obliged, my Lord.
5 So it is now —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I should say that I have a matter to
7 attend to, this being the last day of the tax year, at
8 1.10 pm, and therefore I feel that we will have to draw
9 stumps, we will have to stop for the moment.
10 How much longer do we have?
11 MR STROILOV: I think there are a few, literally a few
12 housekeeping points, or fairness points.
13 I think I can comfortably, really, address you on
14 all of them within half an hour.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Half an hour? Mr Lord?
16 MR LORD: I would have thought probably an hour, I would
17 hope an hour altogether to finish off, my Lord. Half
18 an hour, probably.
19 My Lord, there is timetabling, a little bit of extra
20 disclosure, or some things in documents, questions posed
21 about assets which will or won’t be ordered to be
22 answered ahead of time, and maybe something about the
23 bundles.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I mean, on the timetable, and without
25 indicating one way or the other, the real sort of bone

121 :1 of contention in the first two weeks is Mr Savelyev,
2 isn’t it?
3 MR STROILOV: And, my Lord, let me —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: There we are, that is the bone of
5 contention. I think you are probably going to say that
6 he should come after Paris and they are going to say he
7 should come before.
8 MR STROILOV: We can address you after lunch, my Lord.
9 MR LORD: Our position is that we do think this trial is
10 going to go more quickly, not in an unfair way. But we
11 genuinely think that when one looks at what can be
12 properly put to witnesses, not fettering Mr Stroilov,
13 but when one looks at what can be put and one starts to
14 think how the conspiracy case is advanced, we think time
15 is going to go more quickly.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think I have indicated earlier
17 I rather tend to agree with that.
18 Mr Savelyev is obviously a party and an important
19 witness and I should say, as I hope I made clear,
20 I think I may be cruising for a bruising if I do the
21 five days.
22 MR LORD: My Lord, our point is really that we should keep
23 this under review and see how things are going, but
24 there is no need to make any preemptive orders now, that
25 if by next Tuesday or Wednesday we are going at one

122 :1 pace —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s fine. I make the point now,
3 really for the convenience of your witnesses, if
4 Mr Savelyev doesn’t mind whether he is here for a week
5 or two, that’s fine.
6 MR LORD: I understand that.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 2.00 pm. 8 (1.05 pm)
9 (The Luncheon Adjournment) 10 (2.00 pm)
11 MR STROILOV: My Lord, you will see that Mr Arkhangelsky has
12 left, with apologies.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, you explained to me that he might
14 have to.
15 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I think just before we quite leave
16 the subject of pleadings, I have to make one further
17 reservation with regard to the reservation made in
18 Mr Lord’s skeleton, that’s to say that there is,
19 I think, an assumption — well, the way he puts it in
20 paragraph 18, where I think if you just read
21 paragraph 18 and then I have a brief comment on that, if
22 I may. (Pause)
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Oh yes. These are the …
24 MR STROILOV: I simply want to clarify the position that we
25 don’t consider that we are bound by assumptions. Our

123 :1 pleadings are what it is. In relation what is termed as
2 an agency case, I think if your Lordship has had the
3 patience to read far enough through my opening — and
4 I don’t blame you if you didn’t — I think I attempt
5 some analysis as to what our pleadings are on relations
6 between the bank and Renord. We plead control by the
7 Bank of the original purchasers. We plead that the
8 claimants were the real owners and controllers of
9 the shares through subsequent purchasers. We plead
10 conspiracy.
11 So as long as this is understood to be our pleadings
12 as to facts, we are happy to proceed on that. We are
13 not suggesting that there is any specific legal
14 construct under the Russian law where liability is going
15 to be imputed, except for liability under article 10(64)
16 bearing in mind these facts. So that’s all we say about
17 that.
18 Then in relation to the fraud exception point,
19 I think I have told your Lordship yesterday what we say
20 in relation to that. Principally we say that that’s not
21 their pleaded defence, and if they want to rely on fraud
22 by executives against the Bank, for instance by
23 Mrs Maylsheva or, for this matter, any other executive,
24 Mr Savelyev, have defrauded the Bank, that had to be
25 pleaded observing all the rules on the way fraud has to

124 :1 be pleaded. So that is not their defence.
2 Further, or alternatively, there is no Russian law
3 evidence of such an exception being applicable to cases
4 of this kind and, in my submission, on the presumption
5 that English law applies, that exception does not apply
6 to a claim by third parties.
7 So that is our position. We don’t have to resolve
8 this at the moment, but since they have made their
9 reservations, I felt I have to make my own.
10 My Lord, should I move on to the more prosaic
11 matters of housekeeping?
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I want to hear whether Mr Lord has
13 anything to say on what you have said?
14 MR LORD: My Lord, I think the first point, I think what
15 Mr Stroilov is very fairly saying is that they are
16 relying upon various acts or omissions by Renord and so
17 on, but as incidence of a primary liability of liability
18 and not a vicarious liability case, and I understand
19 that, so that’s all right.
20 The second area — sorry, the first point we dealt
21 with is really the second point in the paragraph, and
22 the second point is really the first point, which is
23 what happened is Mrs Maylsheva was conspiring with
24 someone to defraud the Bank. I don’t accept that’s for
25 me to sort of anticipate and defend, I am not sure

125 :1 whether or not a case is being run that that was the
2 case or, in the alternative, it was the case, and the
3 Bank is still liable even if it was the victim, for
4 these purposes, in addition to Mr Arkhangelsky, I’m not
5 entirely sure whether that alternative case is being
6 run.
7 So, really, it is just that clarification I would
8 ask for.
9 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
10 Should we move on?
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think you have been invited for
12 clarification.
13 MR STROILOV: I don’t think, obviously what he has pleaded
14 is pleaded, and in my submission any fraud by any of
15 the Bank’s executives against the Bank is neither here
16 nor there. Neither party has pleaded it. So, for the
17 purposes of these proceedings it doesn’t matter at all.
18 What happens is if alleged certain acts to be
19 fraudulent, we say these are acts by the Bank, the Bank
20 say: we have done these acts, they are not fraudulent.
21 That is the issue between the parties. We just don’t go
22 any further into whether the Bank was possibly some
23 secondary victim of that fraud, or perhaps is the
24 primary victim of that fraud and we are only secondary.
25 That’s not an issue as they arise on the proceedings.

126 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I will share with you my own muddle,
2 so you can help me. My appreciation of your case is
3 that you say that the various people conspired to rip
4 you off, and that’s your case; and that the Bank is
5 liable because the Bank did it through the agencies of
6 the various people you have identified.
7 Mr Lord says that the inevitable corollary, unless
8 you are right that it owned everything anyway, if you
9 see what I mean, is that the Bank was the victim since,
10 although it might have recourse against your client
11 under his personal guarantees, to the extent in
12 the reduction in the values achieved, its security was,
13 by the same amount, devalued. Thereby it was the
14 victim.
15 A question, I suppose, might arise, of law, whether,
16 given that inevitable corollary, the rules of
17 attribution do not enable the activities of its alleged
18 actors to be attributed to it for the purposes of
19 liability.
20 I do not know what the position in Russian law is,
21 and none, so far as I am aware, is pleaded. Therefore,
22 I am presently assuming that English law will govern.
23 What the answer in English law is, I do not presently
24 know. It is one of the most difficult areas of
25 corporate — in its interface with tort and contract

127 :1 liability, it’s a very difficult area.
2 I believe both of you are suggesting that each of
3 you will have a go at this but do not invite me to
4 decide anything now.
5 MR STROILOV: Well, I think that’s a fair summary, save as,
6 as I say, I don’t accept that this issue actually
7 arises. I don’t accept it is open to them to argue this
8 because English law only applies insofar as this is —
9 by force of the presumption that Russian law is the
10 same.
11 Russian law is the issue of fact. If they rely on
12 their being victims of fraud and whatever Russian law
13 that is, they have to plead this. They haven’t pleaded
14 that. It’s not a defence open to them.
15 In substance, this would have been a very different
16 case if, in response to all our allegations, they would
17 have said: yes, this is fraud, but we didn’t do that.
18 Mrs Maylsheva did it, we are victims of it.
19 So it would be able to allow them to run this
20 defence.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But in other contexts you have
22 accepted, I thought, and in fact you have urged this on
23 me this very morning, that in default of any other
24 evidence as to some difference in Russian law, Russian
25 law, though applicable, is to be assumed to be the same

128 :1 as English law.
2 MR STROILOV: It is assumed, but it doesn’t stop to be
3 an issue of fact by that. So it’s not that you simply
4 disapply Russian law and apply English law —
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t think that’s how it works.
6 I think if you are going to say there is a difference,
7 the factual basis on which it is different must be
8 pleaded. But if you say nothing, then English law is
9 English law and doesn’t have to be pleaded.
10 MR STROILOV: That’s right, yes, but what happens, my Lord,
11 is that before you can apply English law — well, you
12 have to be satisfied on the pleadings that this is
13 an issue which arises for the time you mention.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You say, as it were, ex turpi causa,
15 the basis for refusing attribution is not pleaded?
16 MR STROILOV: That’s right, my Lord. That’s, first, we say
17 this is not an issue, we take this pleading point, and
18 if that fails, in the alternative we say that as
19 a matter of English law, that exception still doesn’t
20 apply.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So you say there is no pleaded basis
22 against the ordinary application of the rules of
23 attribution?
24 MR STROILOV: I don’t think that’s what I’ve said. I say
25 that — well, we have pleaded our case, such as it is.

129 :1 Their defence to it was —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, their defence was to say: it’s not
3 our act.
4 MR STROILOV: — taking responsibility. It hasn’t been
5 their defence, that’s right. Their defence is it’s our
6 act, it is honest.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is not our act.
8 MR STROILOV: Yes. Well, they haven’t pleaded that it’s not
9 our act, they have only pleaded that.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay.
11 MR STROILOV: So, in my submission, it would be quite unfair
12 to let them now change their case so substantially.
13 It’s not that we are running any new case. We have
14 always relied on these events, we’ve always said these
15 were the Bank’s events, and we learn from their evidence
16 that Mrs Maylsheva was actually exercising these
17 functions on behalf of the Bank.
18 So in these circumstances, they cannot turn around
19 now and say: well, Mrs Maylsheva, actually she was doing
20 it on her own and we have nothing to do with it. That’s
21 not had a defence that can be properly run.
22 There is an important distinction to that extent:
23 they cannot — if it was an English situation, they
24 could have simply taken a legal point against us. But
25 because this is governed by Russian law and English law

130 :1 only applies by virtue of presumption as to facts, and
2 Russian law being a particular fact, that has to be
3 pleaded, even if ultimately we rely on English law, they
4 still have to plead that this is not attributable to
5 the Bank because it is Mrs Maylsheva, or any other
6 executive.
7 So that’s —
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not sure I follow all that. But
9 it may not be necessary to decide it now.
10 The fact is, is it not, that unless you establish
11 a main element of your claim, that the recipients,
12 though they appear to be different, was, in fact, the
13 Bank, or controlled by Bank so that ownership didn’t
14 make a scratch of difference, they could just call for
15 the assets or the money received, it necessarily follows
16 that the Bank was ripped off. If the Bank had an asset
17 worth 100, sold for 30, and it did not retain ownership
18 of the 100, or such control as it was content would
19 enable it to obtain possession of that 100, it naturally
20 follows that 70 have fallen out of the Bank’s bucket.
21 MR STROILOV: My Lord, it may be so but, as a fact, this is
22 in the same category as whatever may necessarily follow
23 about the corruption of the Governor of St Petersburg —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You may establish your main claim,
25 I am not saying otherwise. But if you don’t and the

131 :1 Bank has, in fact, been prejudiced and its sole recourse
2 is under the personal guarantee, what, then, do you say
3 that — is there not then an argument that the Bank is
4 insulated from the activities of its apparent actors?
5 MR STROILOV: I’m not sure I quite follow. So the scenario
6 is that we’ve lost on the counterclaim, they have
7 established liability on the personal guarantees, then
8 I think this issue doesn’t arise —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: As a defence.
10 MR STROILOV: Doesn’t arise as a defence. Yes. If we fail
11 on the counterclaim then we have failed, and then there
12 is a separate issue of forgeries, and subject to that,
13 they must succeed.
14 MR LORD: My Lord, can I just — the issue really arises, in
15 my submission, this way: the case, as we understood it,
16 up to now, and so it is only for however many years it
17 has been going on, the Bank of St Petersburg is the
18 prime conspirator here, it is the Bank acting through.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The persons nominated.
20 MR LORD: Correct, acting through certain agencies.
21 Principally it is said to be Mr Savelyev. Other people
22 have been identified, we have gone through them today,
23 who have played their own part.
24 Mrs Maylsheva is now playing a more prominent role
25 in the defendant’s conspiracy claim, and what we are

132 :1 trying to clarify is whether it will be said that if, in
2 fact, any conspiracy or illegality was through
3 Mrs Maylsheva and at the Bank’s expense, if you like
4 behind its back and not involving Mr Savelyev, and not
5 for BSP’s coffers or benefits, it may still be said in
6 that circumstance, it may be unlikely, but in that
7 eventuality the Bank is still liable, because on that
8 hypothesis, there will be issues about accountability of
9 an act of that sort.
10 Now, it doesn’t fit with the case narrative that
11 a conspiracy theory has developed, as with any of that,
12 but we were just trying to establish whether that will
13 be a sort of final burrow down which the defendants
14 might seek to go. It may be that we are querying
15 unnecessarily, because the case is that whatever
16 Mrs Maylsheva did or didn’t do dishonestly, so it was
17 said, was all for the Bank. So she wasn’t trying to
18 diddle the Bank, she was doing it for the Bank. That is
19 obviously the case that it in play; it is the other case
20 that we were just trying to flush out.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But the problem with the case is that
22 the Bank lost. But you will make that —
23 MR LORD: Yes, exactly. On this hypothesis it looks like it
24 is the family and friends point, as it were, which is
25 really behind Mr Savelyev’s back and the Bank’s back,

133 :1 that was the main difference — behind their back, on
2 this hypothesis, they feel like, if you like, a sort of
3 rogue employee.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But do you take or reserve the point
5 that if it is established that the sales were to
6 an extreme undervalue, but it is not established that
7 the Bank owned or controlled the recipients of
8 the deficit, that the Bank is precluded but the Bank is
9 insulated from liability?
10 MR LORD: We do, my Lord. We do reserve that point.
11 Yes, I am reminded. It depends, really, whether
12 that is put as part of the general conspiracy or whether
13 it is, as your Lordship postulates, really a sort of
14 isolated, more of a compartmentalised bit of
15 wrong-doing.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Maybe the same general wrong- doing,
17 but the only explanation for it might be that the Bank
18 was losing intentionally.
19 MR LORD: Yes.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t know.
21 MR LORD: Really, my Lord, there would always be a question.
22 If, in fact, what happened here, if what happened, if
23 there’s some — if the conspiracy was actually aimed at
24 the Bank and at Mr Savelyev effectively —
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Maybe that is a better way of looking

134 :1 at it.
2 MR LORD: If it was directed, is your Lordship’s point,
3 really, that the Bank has this collateral, on the face
4 of it it is not in the BSP or Mr Savelyev’s interest, to
5 lose money in the realisation process, unless they can
6 show that this benefit was recycled back to the Bank in
7 some way, which is not shown, then it looks like the
8 Bank would say they have lost out through this, and then
9 there would be an issue as to whether or not liability
10 still attaches to those —
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The further question which would then
12 arise would be supposing the Bank didn’t have the
13 wherewithal to get back the deficit, by ownership or by
14 control, supposing that’s not established, but the
15 deficit is established, might not the Bank be liable if
16 it were established that it, through its nominated
17 officers, decided that it would be better to accept the
18 deficit and cause the collapse of Mr Arkhangelsky’s
19 entire as its primary objective?
20 MR LORD: I am not sure how that would work. I don’t know,
21 my Lord.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Ie, it would take the strain and the
23 loss as a necessary instance of its greater aim.
24 MR LORD: I am not sure how it is put. I think temporarily
25 it is out of sync. I think — I am not sure it could

135 :1 really work on that because the alleged conspiracies and
2 about the realisation of assets which happens after the
3 default has been caused. So the default —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So by then it is done.
5 MR LORD: It is done. There isn’t a covenant breach or
6 a collateral shortfall.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Subject to March, July 2009
8 conspiracy.
9 MR LORD: The June point, because the default comes in March
10 and the realisations come well after, so my
11 understanding is what is attempted to be run in
12 the third case is really a collateral realisation
13 conspiracy when the other raiding and default — raiding
14 is December, default is March 2009, and now we have
15 another run to be dealt with, which is actually if all
16 of that fails, there was skullduggery in and about the
17 auctions and directly afterwards.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand that. These are deep
19 waters and we will have to wade in them later.
20 Just one point, just to make clear my ignorance.
21 Normally looking at it as an English law matter for the
22 moment, if a Bank or mortgagee realises its security for
23 so flagrant an undervalue as really to connote either
24 dishonesty or gross negligence, ordinarily the claim
25 would not be in conspiracy; it would just be a sort of

136 :1 cut me a brick type claim for negligence of a gross
2 kind, or worse, in the realisation of properties
3 entrusted to it by way of security, and for damage in
4 effect of the equity of redemption, if you like. Tell
5 me if I am speaking in tongues, Mr Stroilov, and you
6 don’t follow. But there is no such claim, is there,
7 there is no such cut me a brick type claim?
8 MR LORD: There isn’t such a claim made and it is clear why
9 is can’t be made because the Russian law — that if you
10 follow certain processes, it doesn’t matter what the
11 value is.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It’s only fraud which takes you out of
13 the presumption that an auction sale is binding on you.
14 MR LORD: Yes, because unlike the English example that
15 your Lordship posits —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
17 MR LORD: — the collateral holder, the pledgee, doesn’t
18 have the same degree of control over the realisation
19 process. It goes down via a public sale, by a court
20 ordered bailiff process, or a licensed auction house.
21 If there’s an agreement either —
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s very helpful, I have just been
23 wondering why there wasn’t a sort of aggravated cut me
24 a brick, but it is by force of the Russian realisation
25 processes and law.

137 :1 MR LORD: That’s potentially why the dishonesty and
2 conspiracy has to run through all of this, because
3 actually in the end, if it is not a very good value and
4 the auction house has done it and you have not
5 dishonestly interfered with it, that’s it.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is fraud or nowt, really.
7 Mr Stroilov, I’m sorry if I have been speaking
8 behind your back at times. Do you see what I mean,
9 ordinarily banks or receivers in certain circumstances,
10 there wouldn’t be conspiracy claims or anything complex;
11 there would just be the assertion that they had simply
12 been negligent — sometimes you have to prove to a very
13 considerable, or gross extent, in the discharge of their
14 duties as holders of the property which is subject to
15 the equity of redemption, that’s to say the right to get
16 it back once the charges are paid.
17 But it has been explained to me, and I think this
18 may very well explain why the case is as it is, that
19 just wouldn’t wash under Russian law, and there we are.
20 MR STROILOV: Let me put it like that. The issues of
21 Russian law on that are rather complex, so I wouldn’t
22 necessarily concede now that if conspiracy is not
23 established that is the end of the matter.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, that’s what I am rather getting
25 at.

138 :1 MR STROILOV: I don’t think — I would submit that’s
2 an unlikely factual finding. I think there are other
3 fine questions of Russian law.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sure there are, and I haven’t got
5 to grips with them.
6 But on the central issue, Mr Lord has said to me
7 that it is agreed that if the sale was pursuant to the
8 processes mandated by the Russian law, including a court
9 ordered sale with some form of auction, be it State
10 auction or otherwise, that that cuts off any claims
11 unless it is shown that they were pursuant to fraudulent
12 activities.
13 MR STROILOV: Well, that’s obviously where we do concentrate
14 our files, that’s where we were trying to prove that
15 they were following. But if you don’t accept that, and
16 I am partly thinking aloud because I haven’t really
17 analysed the Russian law reports as carefully as I would
18 like, but thinking aloud, I think there may be
19 an alternative basis —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, there may be, but what I am
21 trying to ascertain is whether there is, in the present
22 pleading, which has been on foot for some time.
23 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. You will have seen that the
24 pleadings, really they do focus on fraud very much.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. Anyway, I can proceed on the

139 :1 footing that there is no such claim, even if they are
2 wrong on the Russian law.
3 MR STROILOV: I am not quite sure of that. The way it is
4 pleaded, and, again, I am trying to draw a very general
5 scheme, among other things, which we may well fail,
6 among other things it is pleaded the sale was at gross
7 undervalue, that in the end we tie this up by saying and
8 thereby loss was caused and the claimants are liable
9 under article 10(64).
10 Then on the very high level view of the Russian law.
11 Now, this being so, there is, then, an additional issue
12 for us to prove. That is causation, and I think, in
13 a way, that is difficult, because we would have to show
14 that the Bank, by a meeting to do what they might have
15 done, by a meeting to object to these kind of sales, the
16 Bank acted fraudulently or, at least, negligently.
17 But subject to that, we’ve established loss, we’ve
18 established causation from the Bank’s acts or omissions,
19 and then the Bank has to prove — and I know this burden
20 point, it may be more or less a technical thing. They
21 have to prove one of the two things: firstly that they
22 have acted lawfully, and if they have acted lawfully,
23 they have; or that they acted innocently. So that is to
24 say honestly and without negligence.
25 So, I am just thinking where that quite leaves us.

140 :1 I accept if it is a difficult and possibly an impossible
2 case in the event you make these unlikely factual
3 findings, but it may or may not be the case that it
4 still leaves some room for an award of damages. I think
5 it is really a question to Russian law experts and, in
6 a way, it is better to ask these questions when the
7 facts are clearer from cross-examinations. I’m sorry
8 I cannot be more helpful, but I think that is the kind
9 of point where the fine issues of Russian law do come
10 into play.
11 MR LORD: My Lord, I don’t want Mr Stroilov to mislead the
12 court, and I’m sure he wouldn’t do it intentionally, but
13 if your Lordship has Mr Stroilov’s latest draft pleading
14 behind divider 9 and go to page — well, the top right
15 might be the easiest number to find — 263. One can see
16 by the lower hole punch «Claim for breach of the Bank’s
17 obligation as a secured creditor» which is the point
18 I think your Lordship put to me just now.
19 One can see a reference to the law on pledges in
20 the Russian Civil Code. But over the page, 184, it is
21 said this will be an actionable breach of Russian law,
22 so it is said:
23 «… if the Bank and/or the original purchasers
24 disposed or procured or permitted as part of the Western
25 Terminal and/or Scan Insurance and/or assets to closely

141 :1 connected entities at a gross and dishonest undervalue.»
2 So it’s not right, as Mr Stroilov just submitted,
3 that there can be some non-dishonest recoveries here.
4 He has pleaded a claim that even this head of liability
5 would require dishonesty on the part of these persons.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sorry to be so unclear, but you
7 have spotted what — I am simply trying to ascertain
8 whether there is a claim, even if dishonesty of some
9 kind is not established, and —
10 MR STROILOV: If your Lordship looks at subparagraph 2 of
11 the same paragraph, at the end of subparagraph 1 you say
12 «and/or», and then:
13 » … the Bank and/or original or subsequent
14 purchasers have failed to account to OMGP …»
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They haven’t failed to account because
16 there was no surplus.
17 MR STROILOV: But, my Lord, if there was no dishonesty, and
18 I think we are going into very —
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But we can’t suppose that which we
20 know didn’t happen. The fact is that there was no
21 surplus. That’s why you are cross.
22 MR STROILOV: I beg your pardon, my Lord, but I think your
23 question was, if there was gross undervalue —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
25 MR STROILOV: — then — yes, I see what you mean.

142 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
2 MR STROILOV: Yes.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think on this plea you have to get
4 into (i), if I can put it that way.
5 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I don’t — really I don’t
6 anticipate this being quite necessary, because
7 ultimately I think I have made it pretty plain in
8 the opening that both parties approach this as very much
9 a claim which depends on —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: A claim in conspiracy, dishonest
11 conspiracy.
12 MR STROILOV: Yes, I wouldn’t simply want to say anything
13 now to a suggestion that I am not pursuing any part of
14 the —
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, you see, the thing is the court
16 will make you decide, because the court can’t think of
17 every possibility that there ever was. It just
18 adjudicates between parties as they raise their case.
19 I have been trying to elicit from you whether though
20 I hadn’t understood you to be claiming this, you and
21 intended to claim it, and I am going to take it the
22 answer was no by reference to the plea.
23 MR STROILOV: I will have to look at it more carefully.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, one day or another —
25 when was this claim begun?

143 :1 MR STROILOV: Well, this was — obviously the events were
2 a number —
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We have had years and three
4 adjournments, whatever latitude I give, I cannot have
5 you on the day before witnesses start reserving some
6 claim not pleaded.
7 MR STROILOV: No, my Lord.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I can’t do it.
9 MR STROILOV: All I am saying — well, I’m not really in
10 a position to comment on these pleadings. Look at what
11 you read and decide.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Take it from me that at the moment
13 I consider your entire claim to be based on a dishonest
14 conspiracy.
15 MR STROILOV: All right, if you are satisfied of that.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, if you say other, then you must
17 point me to some bit in your pleading that says other.
18 I won’t put you to that now, but you must say, really,
19 immediately, by certainly the time that the witnesses
20 get into the witness box, whether there is anything that
21 you wish to rely on as extending your case in this
22 regard.
23 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
24 Well, what I am thinking about, and I am just
25 thinking aloud, but there was a case based on

144 :1 a disguised pledge argument. It was a contractual
2 claim. I would like to look at it and think.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right. Well, you have a bit of
4 time this afternoon, with any luck. You will have a bit
5 of time after we finish, because we thought we would
6 finish by 3.00 pm.
7 MR STROILOV: Indeed.
8 Right, then if I may move on now.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR STROILOV: And, my Lord, before I turn, I address
11 specific housekeeping issues.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
13 MR STROILOV: I think I want to briefly address a more
14 general point, simply because I don’t want to be
15 addressing it every day. I would welcome some guidance,
16 and if not, in any event I would invite your Lordship to
17 think about it. What are the proper parameters of the
18 continuous review of fairness of this trial?
19 The reason I am raising this is simply because we
20 don’t want to have an argument on fairness after any new
21 difficulty which arises. But this said, we see that
22 your Lordship and the Court of Appeal too, placed a lot
23 of faith on that review.
24 We submit that it is clearly — it has to be
25 considered as something distinct from the general trial

145 :1 management, which is going to be difficult in itself.
2 But, as you said yesterday in relation to translations,
3 I have to choose the least unfair things, and presumably
4 that is not the last time when you have to make
5 a decision on that basis.
6 We are not quite clear, and this is something at
7 least your Lordship will have to think about, at what
8 point the unfairness accumulates to the point when
9 the —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, you know very well that
11 I can’t possibly define that, otherwise there would be
12 no need for constant review.
13 Ultimately, and I believe that Lord Justice Elias
14 supported this, my responsibility and my commitment is
15 to keep under constant review whether I can discharge
16 the judicial function as it was identified in
17 Lord Justice Chadwick’s case, and if there comes a time
18 when I don’t feel I can, then despite the loss of court
19 time and the loss of considerable amounts of money, the
20 matter would have to be adjourned on the footing that no
21 fair trial is possible.
22 Given that what constitutes a fair trial is as much
23 as other things a subjective assessment, given that
24 there is certainly not, in the strictest sense, equality
25 of arms or anything like that, is really a subjective

146 :1 judgment to be looked at from day-to-day as the
2 circumstances develop. I don’t think I can give you
3 more than that.
4 Just to pick you up on one thing: when I said the
5 least unfair result, I think it is fair to Mr Lord and
6 to his clients to acknowledge that what I meant by that
7 was that by a strict interpretation of the rules and
8 ordinary practice, Mr Lord was probably entitled to more
9 than I was prepared to give him, but I was explaining to
10 him that the rigid adoption of the law and the rules
11 would just result in the round of unfairness, and
12 therefore I would persuade him, or encourage him to
13 adopt a less inflexible stance. But that was to his
14 disadvantage and your advantage, if I may say so.
15 MR STROILOV: I appreciate that, my Lord, very much.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
17 MR STROILOV: But still there is a difference between a fair
18 result and the least unfair one.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If I were you, and I mean this with
20 some emphasis, I would leave to me whether I think the
21 trial is fair and confine yourself not for looking for
22 unfairness, but for looking to do the best you can.
23 There is too much — there has been too much — much too
24 much looking around to see whether there are grounds for
25 destabilising the trial and not enough sheer

147 :1 preparation, and you have just got to shut your mind,
2 trust the judge. I can say to you, it is my commitment,
3 it is my oath, that if I do not think I can do justice,
4 I must not attempt to do so.
5 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I am grateful for that
6 indication.
7 I think, for our part, I simply want to make it
8 clear that we are proceeding — the basis on which we
9 are proceeding. Clearly the task is enormous. We
10 haven’t got anything resembling a realistic plan of how
11 we get through this trial. We haven’t got that.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: If you want guidance on that: yes,
13 I will take that into account, but the court cannot
14 ignore the time and the context in which this point is
15 put. The fact is that these defendants have had (a)
16 a long time, (b) the benefit of legal advice at certain
17 key moments, (c) the opportunity, even if they did not
18 think that their claim had been pleaded with all the
19 particularity and concision which was required to get to
20 grips with the claim as it was, and I simply cannot
21 erase the past and say: well, it is too difficult now,
22 therefore there can be no trial. That’s not right.
23 I have to look to see whether, in all the
24 circumstances, it is unfair to proceed — unfair to
25 proceed — but I do not mean that I think it is perfect.

148 :1 No, I do not. I have a great deal of anxiety, but a lot
2 of the anxiety, I am afraid to say, is the consequence
3 of too little done too late on the part of
4 the defendants, and I don’t see why I am required to
5 ignore that.
6 MR STROILOV: I am not asking you to ignore that.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, but just so you know where the
8 confines are.
9 MR STROILOV: If that is obviously your view that is one of
10 the matters you have to take into account. I am
11 simply — we have a few concerns I would like to
12 mention.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
14 MR STROILOV: And it goes partly to the practical points.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
16 MR STROILOV: I think the general concern is that in
17 a number of matters which have recently been identified
18 to us as safeguards of fair trial, well, we feel they
19 are vanishing one by one, such as extra reading, and now
20 we see that.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, we are on that now. We are just
22 about to turn to that. We are about to turn to
23 timetable.
24 MR STROILOV: Yes, and then I don’t know whether it was
25 Mr Lord or I who misunderstood what has been directed in

149 :1 terms of impartial opening, but we felt we had to make
2 a proper opening rather than, as anticipated.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am grateful to you for your
4 submissions. I will tell you exactly where I am.
5 I have read them both and I am now combing through with
6 a much more detailed eye. I wanted to see broadly what
7 the lie of the land is.
8 I think it fruitless for me to say of any particular
9 piece of the claimants’ skeleton: oh, well you have put
10 that rather aggressively, or whatever that is. The fact
11 is, what I want to know is where the salient points are,
12 and you just have to trust me to try and identify the
13 points rather than be impressed according to the vigour
14 with which they are put.
15 MR STROILOV: Quite. I just wanted to flag this concern, as
16 a number of matters —
17 MR LORD: I’m sorry, I am not going to let that go
18 unchallenged. That opening we were directed to
19 produce —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am not going to say anything about
21 it. Unwittingly or not, sometimes I could see that
22 Mr Stroilov would think: oh, that’s a bit aggressive, or
23 whatever it is. It is fruitless, Mr Lord. It was
24 a long opening and I found it of great assistance in
25 identifying the issues.

150 :1 MR LORD: And we were directed to identify fairly the
2 issues. We were not directed, and we couldn’t be
3 directed, with the greatest — this is an important
4 point, which I must make, I think, that fairness works
5 both ways, and we were not directed not to put in
6 relevant points that we wanted to put in. We were
7 directed to identify the issues, and we tried very hard
8 to put both sides of the case, even if we concluded with
9 our points on the case, which was not an unfair thing
10 for us to do.
11 And the fairness point that is continually wheeled
12 out, it mustn’t be allowed to intimidate the claimants
13 or the way this case will otherwise go. At every stage,
14 whenever we have challenged a point —
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I will wait and see the extent to
16 which I think you are intimidated, Mr Lord.
17 MR STROILOV: Yes, I think moving on, in terms of timetable,
18 I think broadly we are simply guided by
19 your Lordship’s —
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am worried about the timetable on
21 three grounds: one, I did have some nightmares about
22 this housekeeping hearing, but they have been well
23 exceeded, as an indication of how long everything is
24 going to take; two, although my eyesight is improving,
25 the volume of paper is immense, and I have to say,

151 :1 without sounding too ninny-pinny about it, I get tired
2 towards the end of the day, and the week, and my eyes
3 roll and I do not take on board as I have to in order to
4 do justice; three, largely because I have eaten up two
5 weeks, there has been a pressure to try and concertina
6 things into a short timetable. I am worried about
7 Mr Savelyev, because Mr Savelyev is a bit of a do or die
8 witness for you, Mr Stroilov.
9 MR LORD: Can we say, my Lord, that our suggestion is that
10 we see how we go. We think things will go faster.
11 Mr Savelyev will come back on the 15th, after the
12 weekend, if that is required.
13 So looking at this timetable, in order to build in
14 the four-day week, we can build in a rest day on the
15 second week, and if Mr Savelyev takes more than two
16 days, he will be available. But it is equally important
17 for your Lordship to hear Mr Savelyev. What is being
18 said, he wants to come to court.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I know that, but supposing it pans out
20 this way. Next week is quite a difficult week for
21 Mr Stroilov because there are such a variety of
22 witnesses, and we all know that, actually, unimportant
23 but long sequences of witnesses is quite exhausting even
24 if you are quite experienced, because you just try and
25 remember what you want from each of them and it is not

152 :1 an easy task. So he will have quite a hard first week.
2 I cannot remember the timing, I was looking at it
3 this morning.
4 MR LORD: It is behind the first divider in the bundle,
5 my Lord, at the end.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So he has two on the 1st, two on the
7 2nd, up to three on the 3rd, two on the 4th and then
8 overspill.
9 MR LORD: They are overlapping, my Lord. There are some
10 overlapping witnesses here. They are spillover
11 witnesses, so some of them are short witnesses. It is
12 not two on the 2nd, if Ms Mironova takes more than half
13 a day, which I don’t think she will, she can come back
14 on the 2nd. That is the way we have tried to do it. We
15 don’t think it will take —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: There is little breath-catching time,
17 isn’t there? You see, you are a professional, Mr Lord,
18 you are used to all this. But, you know, I would
19 appreciate that Mr Stroilov may just sort of get punch
20 drunk in the difference between Belykh and Blinova and
21 Guz and which one was I meant to ask and this and that,
22 I am slightly worried about this.
23 MR LORD: We suggest, my Lord — well, this was a timetable
24 that was endorsed by the court.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It was, but the more I have looked

153 :1 into this and the more I have heard you all and the more
2 I detect quite what the position is, I am troubled about
3 this.
4 MR LORD: My Lord, we strongly suggest that we see how this
5 goes, because if —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What I am really warning you is it is
7 not impossible, is it, that we simply don’t get to
8 Mr Savelyev, or we only get to him for a day and he has
9 to come back after Paris?
10 MR LORD: It is not impossible, my Lord, but he can be
11 flexible and I suggest that we leave the other witnesses
12 in the first two weeks as they are.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right.
14 MR LORD: And we see how we get on.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Tell me what you think about
16 Mr Savelyev after Paris. It is not orthodox, but what
17 do you think about it?
18 MR LORD: My Lord, he is the second claimant. We will have
19 to think about this because if your Lordship says now —
20 in my submission he should probably come before Paris.
21 But this trial, I want you to hear from Mr Savelyev
22 because it is — an awful lot hinges, really, an awful
23 lot has been directed his way and I think, in
24 fairness —
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: In the absence of Mr Maylsheva he, to

154 :1 a very large extent, is the man.
2 MR LORD: So all the more reason for your Lordship to hear
3 from the man, really.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I definitely want to hear from him,
5 but by parity of reasoning, it is necessary for me to
6 ensure that a fair crack is reserved.
7 MR LORD: My Lord, can we see how we go. Because there is
8 no prejudice if we see how we go. If things go quickly
9 as they well may, a lot of these witnesses are going to
10 be forgery witnesses, we will see how that goes.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, subject to anything that
12 Mr Stroilov now says to me, I have given my warning that
13 it is not impossible that we don’t get to Mr Savelyev.
14 I am very much hoping, as you are, that matters progress
15 both more evenly and easily and fairly than this taster
16 might suggest. But yes.
17 MR LORD: My Lord, your Lordship will obviously keep timing
18 under review. We accept that. We don’t expect
19 your Lordship to endlessly change the timetable. We
20 expect a degree of focus in the questioning, so we
21 haven’t tried to make an unfair timetable. We are
22 trying to think what questions —
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am not saying you have, but I think
24 you may find more pauses may be necessary.
25 Mr Stroilov, do you —

155 :1 MR LORD: I’m sorry, my Lord. Ms Patrakova, she is very
2 short.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: She is the one who apparently
4 witnessed the signature —
5 MR LORD: On the personal note.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: She is pregnant, isn’t she, and she is
7 coming over?
8 MR LORD: She is on maternity leave, she was wanted for
9 an hour. There was an objection to videolinking, so she
10 is flying over. Just so your Lordship knows the shape
11 of it, she saw the personal loan being signed, or not.
12 So if one wants to, not quite draw breath, but to take
13 some reassurance from this timetable, one can see her in
14 a particular way and then it perhaps will start to
15 shrink a bit.
16 I accept there are lots of names there, but they are
17 not necessarily —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Subject to anything Mr Stroilov says
19 and I am going to ask him, I see what you mean, but I am
20 anxious that a shortcut should not lead to a longer road
21 here.
22 MR LORD: I understand.
23 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I was actually about to say
24 that, as long as it is understood, I don’t accept the
25 submission that is being made that this is a timetable

156 :1 which was approved by the court and this suggests we
2 have quite a hurdle to overcome in persuading you to
3 change it. This was a question whether we need more
4 time, that was a question your Lordship expressly
5 reserved —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let’s not argue about this. This is
7 a provisional timetable. I approved it as such. If we
8 can keep to it with fairness, that would be the best
9 world. Where we see it being impossible, we must try
10 and identify that as quickly as possible, and where it
11 is going to impact on people whose travel arrangements
12 have to be very carefully orchestrated, the further we
13 can detect that in advance, the better.
14 I don’t think that it is wrong just to see how,
15 unless we have particular complaints about the first
16 week, which I haven’t detected in the correspondence,
17 let us see how the first week develops.
18 The second week involving Mr Savelyev over two to
19 three days is an important week, and I will listen and
20 learn as to whether that is fairly achievable.
21 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I just want to stress — well,
22 perhaps you haven’t detected that in correspondence. If
23 all this proceeded on the basis of what you said at the
24 PTR in December, that is exactly that all these
25 estimates are no more than guesses and we will just have

157 :1 to see how it begins in the first week, and it may be
2 that we really need five or six weeks, as we said, and
3 we will feel free to order this. We say, our feeling
4 is, for what it is worth, is that this is quite
5 unrealistic —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, I am sorry to interrupt
7 you. I have said that I will look at it as things go
8 on. You have not said that you think the first week is
9 unfair. I have indicated I will be very careful about
10 the second week. I think I might suggest to you, as
11 I have suggested to you before, that your complaints
12 that you need more time or that the process is
13 oppressive will carry more conviction if you haven’t
14 forecast that weeks ahead before you know how it is
15 going to pan out.
16 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord, I accept all that, and I am
17 quite prepared to leave it to the first week, but on the
18 understanding that it is left to the first week of
19 cross-examination and not that during the first week
20 I am going to be told: well, we have approved this
21 timetable —
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But I have said that. I have said
23 that. Without wishing to mimic the difficult judge,
24 ultimately the court will proceed as it thinks best. It
25 is not a matter of bargain, with you or with anybody

158 :1 else, it is just a matter of what I think best. I have
2 heard what you say and I wish to achieve the result we
3 all want, which is a fair trial.
4 MR STROILOV: I think something else I have to flag,
5 I sense, rightly or wrongly, from Mr Lord’s submissions
6 this morning that there will be quite a few legal points
7 taken about questions which he may expect, and obviously
8 we are all in the dark, about them being not
9 appropriate, and that’s, of course, in ordinary life,
10 very much his right. But if there are a lot of such
11 points taken that’s an additional burden for me. I may
12 well be asking for adjournments.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mr Stroilov, in this country, unlike
14 America in depositions, it is not the habit of counsel
15 to get up and object to every question unless it really
16 is an outrageous question.
17 At the end of the day how we do it in this country,
18 subject to that exception, is at the end of the
19 examination, if various questions have been asked which
20 are simply inappropriate or for which there was no
21 foundation, the judge will be asked to ignore the answer
22 and I will do so. It’s not like having a jury where
23 there will be prejudice immediately, or could be. We
24 are both trained and trusted to exclude that which is
25 not properly before us.

159 :1 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s the way it works. I can see
3 that there may be — if we get into people’s political
4 careers, or something like that, I can understand that
5 you may remain me that this is not in issue in
6 the proceedings, but by and large I would expect you to
7 listen and to not interrupt more than you possibly can
8 avoid doing. So that’s what I expect of you and that’s
9 what, it hadn’t occurred to me, would not be the
10 position.
11 MR LORD: I am grateful, my Lord. It hadn’t occurred to me
12 that I would behave other than in that course.
13 The markers are really about the fairness of the
14 witnesses and I am sure your Lordship will take them,
15 but it is really people being accused of fraud that have
16 never been — it’s that sort of big point.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Normally these things are simply when
18 counsel believes that his witness, that the judge may be
19 thinking about something else, or isn’t quite on the
20 ball, or may not have appreciated it is not pleading.
21 Normally an intervention takes about a minute and the
22 judge accepts it or not. It shouldn’t be a great issue.
23 MR LORD: And our position will obviously be that we will
24 trust your Lordship that there will be fair questioning,
25 however it comes. Your Lordship is in charge.

160 :1 MR STROILOV: I will obviously do my best to comply with the
2 rules, as I understand them, but there may be legal
3 points, I just want to —
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let’s see how it goes. It may take
5 longer, it may take shorter, we will just have to see.
6 MR STROILOV: Quite, and I think one more issue I have to
7 flag, and it may be a point for the first week, given
8 that it is now agreed that quite a number of important
9 witnesses go to March, in any event, until after Paris.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
11 MR STROILOV: Then really I feel we do, whichever way it
12 goes, do need quite a much longer break before their
13 experts, because having cross-examined Mr Smirnov and
14 Mr Sklyarevsky, and I think there are some other
15 important people there, and obviously the experts are
16 quite different issues. I’m not worrying about them for
17 the moment at all. We need to survive 13 witnesses of
18 fact. But I would need some time to prepare.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let us see how things go.
20 MR STROILOV: Yes.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: In the old days parties, especially in
22 big cases, were afforded as long as they wanted in order
23 to have their cases tried. Now that is not so. In
24 the ordinary case you would have been given a finish
25 date and the judge would simply have held you to that

161 :1 and if, by chance, you hadn’t finished a witness on
2 time, he would say: that’s your lot, just sit down, the
3 clock’s run out.
4 I am not going to do that, because the case is
5 an exceptional one, because you are in great
6 difficulties, or would be if that was the approach of
7 the court.
8 But that does not mean — and I indicated this in
9 correspondence, I hope — that every other litigant has
10 to step aside while you take as long as you want. Only
11 a proportionate time on a generous basis can be afforded
12 to this case, and if it causes a bit of stress and
13 strain in the end, I will have to measure that stress
14 and strain against my overall obligation, which is to
15 devote a fair but proportionate time to these
16 proceedings.
17 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord.
18 Now, I think one more point which I think will be —
19 I think we are agreed on the timetable in the sense that
20 we are just going to see how it goes, we were concerned
21 about Mr Savelyev being at the end of it, precisely
22 because on our estimate, right or wrong, this means he
23 is almost certain to be squeezed, so we want reassurance
24 that he will appear in March. I understand that has
25 been given.

162 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m sure they will wish to call
2 Mr Savelyev, Mr Savelyev is still employed by the Bank
3 and it would look very odd — or is he not? I mean,
4 I have not had so much of had a smidgen of an inkling
5 that he will not appear.
6 MR STROILOV: That’s right, we were concerned because I
7 believe there were some difficulties in the French
8 proceedings with him.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I don’t know about that.
10 MR STROILOV: That’s as long as we are given some confidence
11 that he will be there, we are fine, we don’t really
12 object much to it being at any time, provided we have
13 some more or less adequate time to prepare for that
14 because we accept that he is one of the most important
15 witnesses.
16 My Lord, one more point, and I think Mr Lord will
17 address you on that in more detail than I, and from
18 another, different angle. I would like to show to you
19 some letters we received from the claimants, if you look
20 at the — perhaps we can deal with the paper bundle.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: By all means, I don’t know where it is
22 going, but I am more interested in the Mr Steadman point
23 and the general position in that regard. What is this?
24 Is it whether they expressed things in a way which
25 irritated you or is it a proper point?

163 :1 MR STROILOV: Well, its a proper point. We have been
2 through this, I think it was Mr Lord’s suggestion
3 originally that if Mr Steadman is not prepared to come
4 pro bono then what has to be done is to split this off.
5 I think you have indicated this is the only part of
6 the case that can be realistically split off.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, you know, as I indicated I had
8 thought this is a really odd case where liability and
9 quantum are two sides of the very same coin. It is so
10 difficult. I am troubled by Mr Steadman’s absence.
11 MR LORD: But, my Lord, we suggested, or your Lordship
12 knows, there are some business valuation or business
13 forensic accountancy, essentially.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
15 MR LORD: And a part of this case is the OMG business, and
16 that is obviously going to be investigated by
17 your Lordship through a mixture of questioning of
18 witnesses and looking at documents and, as things stand,
19 some assistance from expert evidence, from Mr Popov of
20 Deloittes and, in theory, Mr Steadman of Alvarez &
21 Marsal. What we suggested was that’s kept under review
22 to see the extent to which the court has an ongoing duty
23 to control expert evidence, if memory serves me
24 correctly, to ensure that it is kept to the minimum
25 necessary — I cannot remember what the CPR says.

164 :1 Your Lordship would have to do that in any event in
2 an ordinary case and, subject to how this matter
3 develops, which it may decide in case management powers,
4 to make various rulings, but we would suggest not to do
5 it yet because there may be assistance to be derived
6 from those fields of expertise which have been ordered
7 and evidence adduced from them because and we are
8 concerned that an attempt to foreclose that aspect of
9 expert evidence at this point, and in terms of
10 Mr Steadman, my understanding is that he is a regular
11 expert witness, and we would suggest that if his firm
12 and he were — a request to them to allow some time for
13 Mr Steadman to attend in the exceptional case that we
14 have here, that that may well fall on more fertile
15 ground.
16 So rather than let Mr Stroilov control the process,
17 which would be the wrong way of doing it, in my
18 respectful submission, there is probably a way of
19 addressing this so that if your Lordship does feel that
20 it would be helpful for Mr Steadman to attend, then
21 an attempt is made to see if he can be asked to come.
22 There is obviously an extreme solution of witness
23 summonsing, but I wouldn’t think we would get to that.
24 This is a man who is a reputable expert witness. He
25 appears a lot before these courts and he has obviously

165 :1 acted and been paid so far in this case.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: We will leave it and park it. It is
3 a matter for a red asterisk to see how it is all going.
4 MR STROILOV: I see your point and I am concerned about
5 that. Well, in fact, if anyone is prejudiced by a split
6 trial then it’s me because we won’t be able to show the
7 potential of that business. If there is nothing in it,
8 there is nothing in it.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let’s just see how it goes.
10 Now, these letters you want to show me, why do you
11 want to show them to me?
12 MR STROILOV: I am afraid, we are obviously in a position
13 when we have to focus on preparing cross-examination.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
15 MR STROILOV: And not to worry about anything else. I’m
16 really concerned that a lot of inquiries have been made
17 to us which either should have been made a year ago or
18 now that where we are, they should be put to
19 Mr Arkhangelsky in cross-examination, but we shouldn’t
20 be getting —
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Give us three examples.
22 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. If you go to tab 16.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 16?
24 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: These are matters which you are unable

166 :1 to do consistently with your trial preparation; is that
2 right?
3 MR STROILOV: Quite.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes?
5 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. It takes a lot of time to
6 really go —
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, show me where they are.
8 MR STROILOV: Tab 16, just behind the divider, that was
9 the 5 January letter. If you just, I don’t know if
10 Mr Lord wants you to read through it in much detail, but
11 it is a five-page letter which amounts to quite
12 a substantial request for further information, and apart
13 from one point, in my submission it is totally
14 unnecessary for the trial to proceed to have the
15 answers. These are the questions which are properly put
16 to a witness in cross-examination.
17 We have dealt with, and then there are quite
18 a number of enclosures, your Lordship will see, until
19 page 57 of the same tab. So it’s quite a substantial
20 number of enclosures accompanying these questions.
21 At page 58 you then can see Mr Arkhangelsky’s
22 response.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 58?
24 MR STROILOV: Yes, and that’s obviously —
25 Yes, we acknowledge that there is —

167 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that … yes, I see.
2 MR STROILOV: The e-mail response of the same day.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Short answer?
4 MR STROILOV: Yes and what we are saying is that — well,
5 only — without being able, really, to study this whole
6 letter, these lots of enclosures in detail, you saw that
7 one legitimate concern which had to be cleared was
8 whether the right company was the part 2 claimants under
9 these proceedings. So that wasn’t necessary to explain.
10 Following that, there have been a number of chasers
11 on that, and I would like to ask your Lordship to look
12 towards the end of the same divider, you will see at
13 page 31, I am not sure the numbering is quite
14 consistent. That’s {I20/26/31}, the fourth letter of
15 22 January. Are you up to speed with that, my Lord?
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
17 MR STROILOV: So there are some inquiries, reiterations of
18 points made previously, and then there are some further
19 inquiries about City Centre, and then consolidated
20 accounts, loans from V-Bank to OMG companies, loans from
21 Vyborg Port to OMG companies and so on.
22 My Lord, I don’t see how on earth we are — I’m
23 sorry to say it is abusive to send these comprehensive
24 requests given all the difficulties at this time when
25 they could have been made well before that time or that

168 :1 in two weeks’ time they will have five days to ask these
2 sorts of questions.
3 My Lord, what I’m going to propose on that is
4 something you won’t find exciting. What I am going to
5 ask is that all correspondence from now on is to be
6 copied to the court, so that you can know all the facts
7 in your review of fairness, and it introduces some
8 discipline on the parties not to disturb each other with
9 unnecessary and abusive requests.
10 We, for our part, unless there is something we feel
11 is a genuine concern without which we simply can’t
12 progress with the trial, well, we reserve the right to
13 ignore letters of this kind. The time for these
14 inquiries has gone. They are to be made orally in
15 cross-examination now, but this kind of correspondence
16 is unacceptable. It is abusive.
17 So that’s our complaint on that.
18 MR LORD: May I respond, please, my Lord, on that?
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
20 MR LORD: This would have been my application so it appears
21 things have got inverted a bit, but your Lordship will
22 appreciate that there are various legitimate questions
23 and queries that arise in litigation, that one party is
24 entitled to put to the other, to establish a position,
25 and that typically happens as you bear down on a trial.

169 :1 The fact that there might be — Mr Stroilov is
2 involved in this case, doesn’t by itself mean that
3 ordinary service should be suspended entirely, is
4 the first point.
5 Secondly, your Lordship has granted the defendants
6 the right to have Mr Stroilov conduct this litigation.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, to represent him and to do those
8 things which he is authorised in accordance with the
9 protocol in writing to be approved by me.
10 MR LORD: And so there is, as one would expect, that there
11 is more ability on the part of Mr Arkhangelsky to deal
12 with various proper questions.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I doubt that. I think it is clear
14 that Mr Arkhangelsky corresponds through the writings of
15 Mr Stroilov, and that has been so for some time.
16 MR LORD: My Lord, can I just show your Lordship why —
17 well, your Lordship will appreciate that the claimants
18 have legitimate questions about Mr Arkhangelsky’s
19 business empire and how it was put together.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: But why can’t you ask him that?
21 MR LORD: We can, my Lord, but we are conscious of
22 the refrain of the need to make this litigation
23 efficient, and to ensure that time is effectively used
24 and to try to guard against the suggestion that
25 documents that are particularly — perhaps inarguably a

170 :1 rather financial inquiry, is something that the witness
2 needs time to acquaint themselves with, because what
3 would be unfortunate — yesterday, obviously, I’m sure
4 it was not Mr Arkhangelsky’s fault, we lost a lot of
5 time establishing the videolink yesterday, and it would
6 be unfortunate if, for example — and I have
7 a particular concern about that now, and I am more
8 concerned about it than I was before yesterday, because
9 yesterday Mr Stroilov said this. It’s a transcript,
10 actually, it is {Day 1/115:1} we will get a hard copy
11 bundle with tabs.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, you have very kindly provided me
13 one.
14 MR LORD: We will get a hard copy with tabs.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Page 115?
16 MR LORD: Mr Stroilov was making submissions in relation to
17 advance notice of questioning at the top of the page,
18 and he said, he referred to the suggestion that we might
19 provide a cross-examination bundle, and he said this, at
20 line 5:
21 «That is not what is normally done, that is not what
22 they were prepared to do. Incidentally we wouldn’t be
23 assisted by that because we wouldn’t have time to look
24 at it.»
25 So what appeared to be suggested there is before

171 :1 Mr Arkhangelsky goes into the witness box in so many
2 weeks away, he wouldn’t have time to look at any
3 documents that might have been readied for him. Now,
4 that struck us as a rather strange thing to say, because
5 you would expect that Mr Arkhangelsky would, even taking
6 account of other preparation, be familiarising himself
7 and would be helped by that sort of orientation, and it
8 would be wrong, in my submission, for questions to be
9 met with the answer: well, I haven’t looked at that
10 before. I haven’t had time to look at that. What do
11 you think I have been doing for the last two weeks if,
12 in fact, what we have sought to do is in respect is to
13 set things out.
14 I do need to show your Lordship why some of these
15 points are important. They are not just fiddly points,
16 they are really quite big points, so far as the
17 claimants are concerned, and therefore we are anxious
18 that whatever order your Lordship makes, and of course
19 we will abide by it and we are aware of the stress and
20 the strains, we are anxious that some of these important
21 points — they are not little points, they are big
22 points, these, that these are going to be dealt with
23 fairly on this exceptional occasion, and I do need to
24 show your Lordship what some of the points are, and if
25 I can take a couple of examples, if your Lordship has

172 :1 divider 16 of bundle 2.
2 We wrote a letter on 5 January identifying that
3 actually there appeared to be two OMG companies.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is this at page 536?
5 MR LORD: It is, my Lord, and it doesn’t go into detail, but
6 essentially when my learned juniors were going through
7 the papers and they were trying to piece things
8 together, there are two OMG companies, two OMGP
9 companies, and there’s another company of which there
10 are two of. But OMG and OMGP are obviously very
11 important companies and there are two of those companies
12 in different numbers, and it appears that those are
13 mirror companies, and it is suggested, I think, by
14 Mr Arkhangelsky, that he apparently wanted them to
15 preserve goodwill.
16 My Lord, there are legitimate questions as to why
17 there might be a mirror or, if you like, a dummy company
18 bearing the same name as a key company in this case.
19 That isn’t something that should be hard to explain.
20 Mr Arkhangelsky, whatever else he may need time for,
21 understanding his OMG business on which this huge
22 counterclaim is premised, must be something that he can
23 be expected to do, obviously within confines — we are
24 not talking about four days of cross-examination
25 questions, we are talking about some big points, the

173 :1 truthful answers to which are likely to simplify and
2 distil his litigation.
3 So that is one example. If I can show your Lordship
4 another, and Mr Arkhangelsky came back, as Mr Stroilov
5 rightly said, on page 590.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
7 MR LORD: He came back very quickly, he came back, I think,
8 the same day with an email and he helpfully clarified
9 the question of the mistake in the previous affidavit.
10 He had made a mistake, there had been a mistake,
11 I think, in the exhibits order, or something, and that’s
12 what he — but he didn’t answer the other questions,
13 which is: what are these mirror companies, and he said
14 very helpfully in that e-mail:
15 «I would like to be able to respond in more detail
16 before the trial if time permits but you appreciate the
17 time pressures.»
18 Obviously that was 5 January and there obviously are
19 time pressures, but we had thought he might be able to
20 help. So that was the answer on that.
21 Then, my Lord, there are some other questions about
22 the assets which are important. Your Lordship will
23 recollect that in the expert accountancy process, they
24 identified that the majority of Scandinavia Insurance’s
25 liquid assets appear to have been transferred to

174 :1 a company called City Centre in return for some
2 receivables or promissory notes of some sort, and they
3 identified that. There were questions asked, I think by
4 Mr Popov and Mr Steadman. They were trying to establish
5 what was that, because they were looking at Scandinavia
6 Insurance and its business prospects and so on with
7 a view to making a counterclaim based upon the loss of
8 the company. So that’s what they were asking.
9 Obviously they asked Mr Arkhangelsky, but
10 Mr Arkhangelsky’s answer, and it is important for
11 your Lordship to see, his answer to City Centre is in
12 his witness statement. He dealt with it in his witness
13 statement, and it is in bundle C, and it is behind
14 divider — it is the first divider and it is at page
15 {C1/1/58}, and it is paragraph 227, which your Lordship
16 can see. So 725 million Russian roubles, so that’s
17 roughly some, I don’t know, £15 million to £20 million
18 thereabouts, at an exchange rate of 40 roubles to £1,
19 are comprised within that transfer.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
21 MR LORD: «I have no recollection or knowledge of
22 City Centre and therefore cannot comment on whether
23 these debts would have been recoverable by Scan. I can
24 however confirm that City Centre was not part of the
25 Group or otherwise associated with me or Julia.»

175 :1 Your Lordship notes that we do not accept that is
2 a plausible answer but that is where the matter lay at
3 this point. Then in the course of preparing for the
4 trial we have come across two further City Centre
5 transactions, and hopefully on your Lordship’s bench
6 there are some accounts that have been translated.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
8 MR LORD: They are on Magnum, but there are two pages, and
9 if your Lordship goes to {D116/1726.3/3} this is
10 a translation of an extract from the LPK Scan accounts
11 as at March 2009. If your Lordship looks to the lower
12 holepunch, your Lordship will see City Centre. LPK
13 scan, as your Lordship knows from the company charts, is
14 one of the OMG companies. I think at one stage
15 Mr Arkhangelsky was the director general of this
16 company, although I think that role then passed to his
17 mother-in-law, Ms Tarasova, who has signed these
18 accounts, but I think has also become the owner of this,
19 but I stand to be corrected.
20 So LPK scan, an extract from those accounts this
21 document is, is fairly and squarely within
22 Mr Arkhangelsky’s ken.
23 If one scans down the page, one can see City Centre
24 LLC goods: 950 million roubles.
25 So, again, a £20 million or £25 million transaction

176 :1 with City Centre in May 2008.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Why do you say this is part of
3 the Scan group? They are described as counteragents or
4 creditors.
5 MR LORD: No, my Lord, this is an extract from Scandinavia,
6 LPK Scan. So if your Lordship has the company charts
7 for the openings — does your Lordship have the company
8 charts that we put in with our opening?
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
10 MR LORD: It looks a bit like that, my Lord. It has
11 the blue squares on.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I cannot remember which tab. I have
13 it, yes.
14 MR LORD: Your Lordship can see that LPK Scandinavia is one
15 of the OMG companies.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I accept that, but why do you say that
17 City Centre is other than a creditor?
18 MR LORD: No, it’s a receivable, my Lord. It is the other
19 way around. It’s like Scan: money has gone from LPK to
20 City Centre. It is clear from the Russian, we have
21 established that. It is clear from the Russian version
22 that is the case. Mr Stroilov, I am sure, can confirm
23 that.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So I should ignore the creditor
25 description?

177 :1 MR LORD: Yes. Well, I am not sure — so our understanding
2 of this is that, a bit like with Scan, 950 million
3 roubles worth have been paid across to City Centre.
4 But the point is this, my Lord: this, really, raises
5 a serious question about an answer that says, from
6 Mr Arkhangelsky: I have no recollection of City Centre,
7 because we can’t establish what City Centre was. We
8 can’t find it in public records, and this looks like
9 a transaction which, really, it suggests that really
10 somebody must know about it.
11 Then we found a third transaction to do with
12 City Centre, and it’s the second of the pages that we
13 handed up to your Lordship, to do with PetroLes.
14 Your Lordship knows that PetroLes is another company
15 within this overall case and, again, there was
16 a transaction, and it doesn’t really matter very much,
17 my Lord, it may not matter terribly much whether it is
18 to and fro, although we say we are right about the flow
19 of money. But as your Lordship can see, City Centre,
20 255 million roubles in April 2008.
21 So it looks as though there are not just the Scan
22 Insurance receivables that Mr Steadman and Mr Popov
23 identified, but LPK Scan and PetroLes have also had
24 dealings with City Centre.
25 There is a legitimate question to Mr Arkhangelsky,

178 :1 which is: what is City Centre? What’s going on here?
2 That’s not a difficult question to answer. Well, sorry,
3 it is not a difficult question to understand, and we
4 would say, my Lord, there is no unfairness in asking
5 Mr Arkhangelsky to answer these questions. He is going
6 to be asked about these questions, but there is no
7 reason why he shouldn’t answer them now because that is
8 likely to save time, make the cross-examination of him
9 more efficient, and to show us whether issues can be
10 narrowed, and there is no unfairness there. These are
11 not little footling points, these are pretty serious
12 points, and he may have a perfectly adequate answer.
13 But he has no recollection of this company and he and
14 his wife have no interest in it.
15 But if in fact another person has an interest that
16 is connected or if in fact he does know about this, then
17 he ought to be making that quite clear, and
18 your Lordship knows the case that we challenged, if you
19 like, the business claims of Mr Arkhangelsky, and if, in
20 fact, he has no proper explanation for some of these
21 matters, the sooner that that is appreciated, on the
22 face of the litigation, the better, then it is likely to
23 short-circuit things, so we are not suggesting in any
24 way that he should be brow-beaten or oppressed by it,
25 but these are questions which you would expect he would

179 :1 be able fairly readily to answer. He is a man who is
2 making a $700 million counterclaim, it is all about his
3 OMG business, he was the pivot for that and he ought to
4 know the answer to that. It certainly is right that he
5 should be in a position to answer these questions by the
6 time we start in Paris and we are not told: what’s this
7 document? I’ve not seen it. I just don’t know, because
8 that would be to frustrate the process in an unfair way.
9 So, my Lord, we do suggest that Mr Arkhangelsky
10 should be either directed or encouraged to answer these
11 questions, but we are in your Lordship’s hands as to how
12 that can fairly be done. If your Lordship thinks that
13 is too much, that is fine. But I do want to guard
14 against having a cross-examination process that is less
15 effective than it should be because these questions are
16 not confronted ahead of time.
17 MR STROILOV: I don’t think I have much to say on that.
18 I just emphasise, it is on top of preparing for
19 cross-examination of 13 witnesses.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not going to treat these as
21 interrogatories requiring questions. I am not going to
22 responses, but just as you suppose that revealing one or
23 two translations might betray the lines of
24 cross-examination you propose to adopt, surely your
25 client should welcome pre-warning of the sort of

180 :1 questions that he will inevitably be asked on various
2 elements of the case.
3 Now, if he has any sense at all, if I may say so, in
4 respect of his trial preparation, the first thing, like
5 exam spotting, spotting the questions in exams, that you
6 would pay attention to is if it is revealed to you what
7 questions are going to be asked.
8 Second of all, you may take the view, if you are
9 a prospective witness, that it would be nicer to put in
10 your own words after consideration what your response is
11 in order to both shorten your time in the box and to put
12 your best foot forward. So that also is
13 an encouragement to him to answer.
14 Third, he has the benefit of your assistance, and
15 I suspect very long hours, Mr Stroilov, and getting
16 longer as the weekend becomes closer, and he was, after
17 all, which you were not, right at the coalface in all of
18 these matters, and he is the best possible person to be
19 able to remember these things and I should have thought
20 that, of all people, he might, with profit, sit down and
21 try and work out answers.
22 Now, I am not going to direct him to supply them in
23 writing. If he really can’t do them in writing and
24 wants to answer them in the box, well, there we are.
25 But questions which have been forewarned have been

181 :1 forewarned, and therefore I shall be less than
2 enthusiastic about any reply that he hasn’t thought of
3 it and has no idea it would be raised.
4 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I think we can well leave it there.
5 We have to prioritise.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not going to draw inferences from
7 your not replying, but I will treat as a fact the fact
8 that you were alerted to these questions, and I do
9 encourage your client, via you, if perhaps it could be
10 relayed, since he is not there, that this is just the
11 sort of thing where his time can usefully be spent, and
12 however it may be not the fact, the truth is that the
13 court simply assumes that people who bring these
14 proceedings at huge expense to others and whopping
15 commitment of the court are prepared to spend their time
16 assisting the court and proceeding with their case,
17 however many other calls there may be on their time.
18 Obviously courts tend to think themselves as
19 important enough for that purposes, and are sometimes
20 disappointed, but nevertheless that is the basis on
21 which I proceed: he should make time to do this.
22 As to the suggestion that all correspondence be sent
23 via me, the answer is no. If there are points which
24 have to be raised with me, well and good, but it is not
25 part of my function, nor is it a necessary ancillary to

182 :1 a fair trial, that I should, effectively, become
2 a solicitor as well as a judge. I simply decline to do
3 that because I know that I will explode if I do and
4 other people who expect things from me will be so
5 disappointed, it will really be unfair on them.
6 MR LORD: My Lord, can I just deal with — there are one or
7 two disclosure points in our note. There is a matter —
8 it is not an application, if you like, for new points,
9 it is an attempt to tidy up things that have been
10 ordered.
11 If your Lordship has the first bundle for this
12 hearing, there is a copy of the relevant order behind
13 divider 2. This was a disclosure order made in relation
14 to, amongst other things, the defendant’s disclosure.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
16 MR LORD: And there was an order for the defendants to make
17 a reasonable search for documents in schedule A, which
18 is to be found on page {J1/20/9}, and your Lordship will
19 see under schedule A number of different categories.
20 Category 5 «Documents held by Mr Mikhail Nazarov».
21 Mr Nazarov is a Russian lawyer who has helped and
22 been instructed by Mr Arkhangelsky was accepted by
23 Mr Stroilov that various waivers of privilege had
24 happened, and that is what underpinned this order that
25 certain notes of this lawyer be disclosed.

183 :1 Now, they have so far not been disclosed, and he has
2 also a gentleman who is coming to give evidence on
3 behalf of Mr Arkhangelsky, and from whom a witness
4 statement has been served, and if your Lordship has the
5 second bundle, the second bundle for today, the
6 supplemental bundle, and the reference is
7 {I18&19/18/361.4}. It is tab 15, and actually the top
8 right-hand corner is easier to locate, it is 479 on the
9 internal numbering.
10 This is a letter from Mr Arkhangelsky on
11 11 November 2015, responding to —
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What date is this letter?
13 11 November.
14 MR LORD: Sorry, it is 476. It was an e-mail, really.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So he hoped that within 18 November he
16 would have the documents?
17 MR LORD: That’s right. So Mr Nazarov is sent this letter.
18 Then, yes, at 479, your Lordship has seen — that’s
19 right, 479 was a further passage about Mr Nazarov.
20 Mr Stroilov had also been involved.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. Well, there we are, it hasn’t
22 been done.
23 Are there any other matters?
24 MR LORD: Is there any chance that your Lordship might —
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I will ask Mr Stroilov why it hasn’t

184 :1 been done. It was ordered and anticipated that it would
2 be done.
3 MR LORD: My Lord, that’s one point. Then there is a point
4 about some metadata for an important document, but I can
5 take it quite swiftly. There were some issues about
6 an important document or two where the e-mails and
7 attachments appear to have been disclosed in a way that
8 wasn’t quite right, and we followed that up this month,
9 and then we had a response back on behalf of
10 Mr Arkhangelsky, and it is in bundle 2, behind tab 15,
11 and it is page 528, is the top right-hand number.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
13 MR LORD: Your Lordship will see that it is an e-mail from
14 Withers.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
16 MR LORD: Ms Meylanov, your Lordship will recollect, was the
17 associate who was instructed.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, was to be given a special start
19 date.
20 MR LORD: On the 18th of this month she assisted in sending
21 things through so it looks like a bit of help was
22 forthcoming, and there are still some queries about this
23 process and we asked them at page 533 in this bundle,
24 some more questions arose which we sent on 27 January,
25 but with your Lordship’s permission, rather than trouble

185 :1 Mr Arkhangelsky with this, as it is obviously a matter
2 that goes to the disclosure format process, and it might
3 be a little technical. If your Lordship would permit
4 us, and if Mr Stroilov doesn’t object, we would really
5 suggest writing to Withers’ Ms Meylanov this letter
6 prepared to answer these points, really. She obviously
7 is involved with this process. She was, I think,
8 supervising the disclosure where we are asking various
9 questions about various attachments and so on, and that
10 might be a way of cutting to the chase without troubling
11 Mr Stroilov or Mr Arkhangelsky. But we are conscious
12 that’s a process that needs your Lordship’s direction
13 and encouragement, and Mr Stroilov, I am sure, will
14 agree to that. So that would be a point.
15 Then there is a third point, which is that in the
16 order I took your Lordship to, there was an order that
17 exchanges between Withers and FTI be disclosed, and we
18 have had only redacted copies of those exchanges, and we
19 have asked for unredacted copies and they have not come.
20 So, again, we haven’t had any explanation for why there
21 has been redaction on material where it was accepted
22 that there was a waiver of privilege. So, again, those
23 are the three aspects of housekeeping that we would ask
24 your Lordship to assist us with. There has been
25 a rather perfunctory request for Clyde & Co documents

186 :1 made pursuant to your Lordship’s order. We are not
2 going to press that. It seems to us a matter that is in
3 Mr Arkhangelsky’s interest to get that material, and we
4 are not going to press that. He sent an e-mail to
5 the firm saying: you once acted for me, could I have the
6 documents? And there hasn’t been a reply. We will
7 leave those.
8 So there are these three points, really: there are
9 the FTI reductions, which are unredacted, Mr Nazarov
10 should supply these notes that have been ordered and we
11 would ask that this metadata query be addressed by
12 Withers. So they are not big points, but we would ask
13 them to be tidied away, with your Lordship’s permission.
14 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I make the obvious point: why now?
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Partly because you have had since
16 November to provide these and the trial is very
17 imminent. Do you think they should have insisted
18 before?
19 MR STROILOV: Obviously, now is a mad time, we are working 20 24/7.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think it would be a fair response to
22 say that having asked you once and then again, for you
23 to say it is late for them to make a further third
24 request is a bit off.
25 MR LORD: Sorry, my Lord, we have been asked — I didn’t

187 :1 show your Lordship all the letters, I have cut to
2 the final point.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You asked in November. In the case of
4 Mr Nazarov, on 11 November a request was made, after
5 an order had been made previously, you apologised for
6 the fact that he didn’t provide it, but said he had had
7 a very busy time, he was scooting this way and that, but
8 even so he would provide them by the weekend. I took
9 18th as being seven days from the 11th, of course it
10 would be earlier than that since — the weekend, and
11 they took you at your word.
12 Now for you to say: my goodness me, you haven’t
13 hounded us continually since the 18th, is a bit rich.
14 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I think, firstly, what we did,
15 rightly or wrongly, at some point you have to draw the
16 line behind complaints on disclosure and do what you
17 can —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Why has Mr Nazarov not provided the
19 documents I ordered him to provide?
20 MR STROILOV: I am afraid that is the kind of person he is.
21 I don’t want to criticise him too much. He is doing
22 work without payment, but you have to chase him
23 endlessly and —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And have you chased him endlessly?
25 MR STROILOV: I did, yes.

188 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Chase him again and tell me what the
2 result is.
3 MR STROILOV: Of course, my Lord, I can do that.
4 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And you had better let me in to the
5 basis on which you chase him. I think you would be
6 entitled to put to him that the court has been taken to
7 the correspondence and is concerned that an order now
8 outstanding for many months is still not complied with.
9 MR STROILOV: I will convey the message, my Lord.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And he will find his time more focused
11 and less anxious as a witness if he has done it well
12 before then.
13 MR STROILOV: Yes my Lord, I appreciate the point. The
14 question really for us is how much we can do. We could
15 have really —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It won’t take you long to draft
17 a quite snappy letter.
18 MR STROILOV: I beg your pardon?
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It won’t take you long to draft
20 a quite short letter.
21 MR STROILOV: Obviously, but we can send any number of
22 letters. I’m not sure where that leaves us in terms of
23 our disclosure obligations. I was supposed to say well,
24 the documents effectively is now not in our control
25 because we can’t get them from Mr —

189 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: My understanding was that those
2 documents are accepted to be within your possession,
3 custody or power and are not privileged, and he is
4 therefore bound and has been ordered to account for
5 them. If he wishes to dispute that they are your
6 documents, then he should say so. If there is no such
7 dispute, he should provide the documents.
8 MR STROILOV: Obviously, my Lord, in practical terms,
9 I don’t see what we can do but chase him, and I have
10 done that.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It may be, in which case he will be in
12 on this point for a rather hostile reception when he
13 turns up to give witness evidence. I think he would be
14 better off just taking some time out.
15 MR STROILOV: In terms of writing to Withers, well, it
16 is a free country, I cannot stop anyone writing to
17 Withers —
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I think that they would feel
19 constricted by professional obligations under which,
20 although you don’t have custody in the term of art
21 sense, the fact is that they wouldn’t ordinarily write
22 to people who appear to be acting for you without your
23 say-so. It may be that if you agree, and you may appear
24 to do so, that the thing to do is to send a copy of
25 the letter that was sent to Mr Arkhangelsky under cover

190 :1 of a brief note saying that with Dr Arkhangelsky’s
2 agreement, and in light of the pressures on him, which
3 they will well appreciate, the court has sanctioned you
4 being provided with a copy of this request in case you
5 can assist.
6 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. I don’t think we are in any way
7 in a position to oppose that.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Would you agree to that?
9 MR STROILOV: Obviously the only concern we have is that
10 Withers have been doing a lot of work for free after
11 running out of funds, and we have really — we feel
12 quite guilty when they are asked to do anything else.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: They may say they can’t, they can’t,
14 and they are at the end of the road with it. But it
15 appears from Ms Meylanov’s e-mail that they did, once
16 more, involve themselves.
17 MR STROILOV: They did.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And that was their choice, and I am
19 therefore —
20 MR STROILOV: Obviously it is an inquiry to them, so we did
21 ask them what it was about.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I’m not ordering them. I am simply
23 sanctioning a copy of the letter that was sent to Dr and
24 Mrs Arkhangelsky with your agreement to be sent to them
25 in case they may be able to assist, given the very

191 :1 considerable difficulties.
2 If the answer comes back saying: no, we’ve got no
3 time, we are not paying, we shall have to see some other
4 way of obtaining the answers.
5 MR STROILOV: In respect of FTI, my Lord, I am speaking from
6 memory. As I remember FTI have concerned about certain
7 people in Russia being exposed to risk if their names
8 are known.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right.
10 MR STROILOV: I am not really in a position to judge that
11 issue and what was said in the disclosure order and what
12 was said about that. I think that was the concern, and
13 again, I am afraid we are not in a position to deal with
14 it now. We have to focus on what is essential for the
15 trial to go ahead.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Did I make an order in respect of FTI?
17 MR STROILOV: You did for the documents to be disclosed.
18 I think, again, completely from memory, I think I recall
19 some authority, documents being redacted. Basically you
20 have to disclose them but you can redact things on the
21 grounds of proportionality for inspection.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
23 MR STROILOV: I would urge the court very much against
24 forcing us to research this properly and argue this
25 properly.

192 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, I ordered them, did I, because
2 I thought that they were documents also within your
3 custody, possession and power, and I must have been
4 persuaded — I can’t remember a thing about it at the
5 moment, but I must have been persuaded at that time that
6 was so. Having made the order, I am not going to
7 withdraw it, the order is there to be complied with. If
8 you don’t comply with it, then you have to explain to me
9 in due course why you have not complied with the court
10 order.
11 MR STROILOV: Quite, my Lord. I don’t accept we haven’t
12 complied, because it was ordered to disclose —
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: By non-compliance I mean that if the
14 assumption that they were within your custody,
15 possession or power was accepted by the court, then
16 there’s no reason why they haven’t —
17 MR STROILOV: We haven’t provided, it’s just that certain
18 names have been redacted.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, you must justify the redactions.
20 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord. Well, I am not quite sure what
21 that means in practical terms, and where do we have to
22 justify it.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: You will provide on inspection the
24 documents as redacted, and if the other side say that
25 things are being redacted for no good reason, as far as

193 :1 they can see, or such as only to demonstrate the cards
2 in their hands which suit them and not the cards which
3 don’t, then they will refer it to me and I shall rule.
4 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I think that’s what I’m trying
5 to do now, and I’m not quite sure whether any order is
6 being made.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I haven’t looked at the documents. Am
8 I meant to?
9 MR LORD: My Lord, no. We have written querying the
10 redaction. We will write again, we will hope that we
11 will get an answer to it and if we don’t, we will have
12 to raise it in the trial.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Ordinarily these matters are dealt
14 with — the court only has 24 hours in a day, such as
15 you do, and these matters are normally dealt with. See
16 if you can deal with them. If you really can’t deal
17 with them, then I will rule.
18 MR LORD: Yes, my Lord. Again, Ms Meylanov is coming as
19 a witness, she is coming to exhibit the FTI reports.
20 These are matters we would expect the court to be fully
21 and candidly apprised of.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That must be right, mustn’t it,
23 Mr Stroilov?
24 MR STROILOV: That is right, I don’t see why these questions
25 can’t be asked in cross-examination.

194 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, because I think that
2 cross-examination is, of course, useful, but to
3 the extent the questions can be cleared out of the way
4 beforehand without objection, that is obviously a more
5 sensible use of time. I appreciate that your time is so
6 limited you may say: even if it would be sensible we
7 simply can’t do it and that may be, but then the witness
8 will spend rather had a lot of time, and unnecessary
9 time, in the box, which I shall be sorry about.
10 MR STROILOV: Yes my Lord. I urge you to keep in mind the
11 picture of us — and I’m sure you have an idea of what
12 amount of work it is to prepare for cross-examination.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I am very sympathetic to your personal
14 position. I think you have a great deal of work to do
15 and I wish you well in it. I will be very flexible
16 where it appears to me you need a breather or more time,
17 just as I shall be internally flexible about the time
18 I need if I find I am not focusing.
19 But Mr Arkhangelsky, as it seems to me, may have
20 time to do more than is being done, and he should deploy
21 it. This is a very, very big matter for him, and if you
22 are doing all the prep on cross-examination and he is
23 looking at some documents, it may mean that this is
24 a very torrid couple of months for him, very torrid
25 indeed.

195 :1 MR STROILOV: Just, my Lord, to be quite clear so that you
2 have a clear picture in your mind as to what is
3 happening. It is not that the prep on cross-examination
4 is delegated to me.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, you are working together.
6 MR STROILOV: Obviously we have to keep in mind the
7 possibility that he would cross-examine. I am,
8 obviously, leading that effort, but a lot of effort is
9 also required from him on that. He has to understand
10 well the notes I make to be able to use them.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I understand that. It is
12 an irritating observation, but I daresay that in all
13 cases the terrible thing about litigation is that life
14 does not go on as usual. The rest of your life, even if
15 you are counsel and used to it, basically grinds to
16 a horrible halt and your entire life becomes resolved
17 around the case and all sorts of people complain about
18 it, your family and others, and that is the nature of
19 litigation. It is all-absorbing, it is a personal
20 disaster for everyone in a way, it is better for those
21 who are paid to do it.
22 MR STROILOV: I am afraid, with respect, I am astonished
23 that you thought you need to explain it to me.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I don’t need to explain it to you.
25 I do rather, I feel, possibly wrongly, you may need to

196 :1 explain it to Mr Arkhangelsky, who explained to me that
2 he had a lot of other things on, which I understand, but
3 so far as the court is concerned, a big claim like this
4 as far as the court is concerned number one, number two
5 and number three priority. That’s the truth of it.
6 MR STROILOV: My Lord, I do understand, but people have
7 things they can’t quite forget, or they can’t quite
8 abandon their children.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It is unbelievable what you can
10 prioritise if really you have no option. But I leave it
11 to that and will say no more about it.
12 MR STROILOV: Yes, well, I think we have prioritised it 24/7
13 for cross-examination —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, I have said what I have
15 said, if it is considered unfair, because he knows he
16 has done all that he could, my apologies to him. But
17 I encourage maximum diversion of all his spare time and
18 other time to this. It is essential.
19 MR LORD: I just have two very tiny points. There was one
20 issue about, I think, the hard copy bundles and the
21 Magnum. I’m sorry, it really is housekeeping, the back
22 of bundle two. I don’t want any loose ends. The back
23 of bundle 2.
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
25 MR LORD: The last letter {I21/27/22}, there was a letter

197 :1 sent to Dr and Mrs Arkhangelsky about hard copy bundles
2 which your Lordship has obviously ruled on and we have
3 not had a response. We have had a number of requests
4 for guidance as to where they would like this paper to
5 be sent. And over the page we were just making
6 an observation about the sort of computer they would
7 need, or laptop, to be able to use Magnum. {I21/27/23}
8 It may be the letter has been addressed, because
9 Dr Arkhangelsky seemed to be following events, maybe he
10 is set up okay, but we were anxious that he understood
11 how to use Magnum, realtime, that’s the first point.
12 The second point was where the hard copy bundles
13 should go. I’m not sure they are required any more, but
14 if they are, we would like to know where we should send
15 them to we send them to the right place and they are
16 signed for safely and there is not an issue about
17 non-delivery or the wrong address and so on.
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: There will be copies for the witness
19 in Paris in any event.
20 MR LORD: Yes.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: These are for his personal homework?
22 MR LORD: These are the copies for his homework, my Lord.
23 Maybe now he doesn’t want them, it is being done on
24 Magnum and that is perfectly legitimate.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What’s the answer to that,

198 :1 Mr Stroilov. What would he like?
2 MR STROILOV: I think we have indicated quite long ago that
3 we want hard copy bundles to be in court or in that
4 room. We don’t have space for them at home, but …
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Hard copies we are going to have are
6 these ones. We are not having hard copies.
7 MR LORD: My Lord, this is the set of hard copies, there is
8 no issue about the ruling —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Everyone will have the same.
10 MR LORD: It’s not the ambit, the questions is where these
11 hard copy bundles, 1,2,3,4,5 and now 6 — your Lordship
12 would have seen that what we have sought to do to help
13 the court and the parties is to create three little
14 contract bundles with the loans and the amendments so
15 they are there for everybody —
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Otherwise, beyond this, we will always
17 be on screen, and if I want or if anyone wants
18 a supplemental bundle of hard copies, we will have
19 a supplemental bundle of hard copies.
20 MR LORD: Precisely, but there will be hard copies available
21 for the witness, and there will be hard copies available
22 in Paris, I think.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: A full suite.
24 MR LORD: A full suite for the witness, so whenever someone
25 is being cross-examined here or in Paris they will have

199 :1 a hard copy from the D file —
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Will I have that?
3 MR LORD: There are lots of bundles. I am not sure, my Lord
4 no. I don’t think the plan was to have that. We would
5 anticipate, if your Lordship wants hard copies made,
6 we will have those made and my plan was to add to
7 the abridged bundle if your Lordship wanted a particular
8 document, or, alternatively, a core file for everybody,
9 and we could put key documents in so we can start that
10 going to try to —
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I shall try and work on the machine
12 and additional bundles to the six you have identified.
13 MR LORD: The question, really, is where we should send
14 those and when we should send them.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Can you discuss this. Where is it to
16 be sent?
17 MR STROILOV: Just to make sure they are in that room we see
18 on the screen by the time we start cross-examination, if
19 that’s possible.
20 MR LORD: By cross-examination?
21 MR STROILOV: Yes.
22 MR LORD: Yes.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Of Mr Arkhangelsky?
24 MR STROILOV: No, I mean by Monday, really.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: By Monday.

200 :1 MR STROILOV: Or whatever time next week.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So the six bundles are to be in that
3 room by Monday. He doesn’t want them at home?
4 MR STROILOV: No, not at home. He may take some of them
5 with him overnight, but for the moment —
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s helpful. Thank you.
7 MR LORD: My Lord, we have had an e-mail from Mr Stroilov
8 about the protocol, and we will think further about it.
9 It is a short e-mail, obviously none the worse for that.
10 The one issue that it doesn’t deal with is the question
11 of authority. The one thing is doesn’t contain is the
12 extent of the authority vested in Mr Stroilov to bind
13 the defendants to various positions in court and so on.
14 I don’t know whether your Lordship wants to follow
15 that up now, whether we just take it up with
16 Mr Stroilov. I don’t want to trouble him about
17 something where we could thrash it out now shortly,
18 really. But the question that we have is, for example,
19 if an answer is given or a position is taken on the case
20 by Mr Stroilov, we would expect that that would bind —
21 that we won’t be told later: well, that was Mr Stroilov
22 and he has now spoken to the client and actually it
23 turns out that that’s not quite right. So we are
24 assuming that that will fall into this: that when
25 Mr Stroilov takes a position, it will be on authority

201 :1 from his client.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, it is a difficult one to be
3 absolutely categoric about.
4 MR LORD: It is.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Generally speaking, Mr Stroilov, if
6 you say something without reserving your position as
7 regards it, then I will take it that you speak on behalf
8 of the client and the client will not say different. If
9 there is a point on which you are uncertain, you should
10 indicate that you are uncertain, and although I hesitate
11 to add to Mr Arkhangelsky’s woes, he is being provided,
12 as I am, with a daily transcript, and if there are
13 matters which either you or he wish to qualify, or
14 withdraw, then he must do so earlier rather than later;
15 and, in particular, it would be dangerous not to have
16 corrected something of importance which is then put to
17 a witness on one footing and it be then suggested that
18 that footing was not binding on your client. Does that
19 give you some guidance?
20 MR STROILOV: Of course, my Lord, and I do hope that in
21 these years you have had a chance to observe that we are
22 trying to comply with that kind of … So I don’t
23 anticipate there being any problem. If RPC can draft
24 something we can look at it, and I don’t anticipate
25 there being much difficulty over this.

202 :1 MR LORD: My Lord, the very final, final point is attire.
2 Court dress. I am conscious that we are in open court,
3 your Lordship may also wish, in the circumstances of
4 this case, to have us in suits with ties and that would
5 be absolutely fine by us. If your Lordship wants to
6 think about it, that’s fine.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I will think about it. There are
8 arguments either way. There are arguments that we
9 should demonstrate that, as counsel against a litigant
10 in person, there are equally arguments that — do you
11 have any strong view, Mr Stroilov, as to whether the
12 demarcation between you should be evident to all?
13 MR STROILOV: Well, my personal preference is obviously in
14 favour of the traditional way of doing this, as you will
15 have gathered from the frequency of my references to
16 Magna Carta, and this kind of thing.
17 So, generally speaking, I think it will be — and
18 I think the Russian witnesses will enjoy seeing you in
19 proper judicial dress. Apart from that I haven’t got
20 particularly strong views on that, except that I do have
21 my own aesthetic preference for this being done.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That’s very fair. You have
23 an aesthetic but no substantive view.
24 MR LORD: If we could be told before we have to get dressed
25 in the morning, my Lord, we obviously need to know what

203 :1 togs we are putting on.
2 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Assume that you have to tog up at
3 least for the first day, in order that you shouldn’t be
4 on tenterhooks as to that.
5 MR LORD: We will.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And we will then see how we go.
7 MR LORD: I understand.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: A couple of questions, and there may
9 be more as matters go on, because I haven’t had the
10 benefit of oral openings — for good reason; I am not
11 complaining about it.
12 Mr Stroilov, first, it is stated in Mr Lord’s
13 skeleton argument that OMGP, the party in its own right,
14 making this big counterclaim, has given no disclosure at
15 all. That point did strike me. You have that under
16 advisement, do you? That’s the case, is it?
17 MR STROILOV: No, it depends on, really, how you formulate
18 it. OMGP is, at the moment, for all practical purposes
19 a one-man company. Now, that man has his computers and
20 he has his home — I’m not sure he has ever any hard
21 copy papers there, actually, but all this was searched
22 and disclosure duly given.
23 But apart from that, there is nothing — no
24 depositories of documents or custodians of documents who
25 would be under country law.

204 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And that goes for any mirror company
2 as well?
3 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, I think obviously the other OMGP
4 is just a shelf.
5 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So I can take it, by whatever extra
6 numeral, OMG has given all it has to give?
7 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, that’s right.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Now, it is stated on page 184,
9 paragraph 572, of Mr Lord’s skeleton that you are
10 prepared to give credit for all monies —
11 MR LORD: My Lord, I must interrupt. Just so your Lordship
12 is not misled, could you get up {P1/10/20}. It is about
13 disclosure. I don’t want to leave a wrinkle, really,
14 because I don’t want Mr Stroilov — he obviously has a
15 lot to do and I don’t want him to say something that is
16 not right. This is the disclosure statement from
17 15 October last year, 2015. OMG Ports. Your Lordship
18 can see, I don’t think what Mr Stroilov said was quite
19 right, if one looks at the documents described there.
20 It looks like some documents may have been retained. It
21 doesn’t say that they have all been — it says what it
22 says, but I don’t want the court to be misled.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I see, there were some not seized by
24 the police. They are retained by Ms Lukina or
25 Mr Vasiliev.

205 :1 MR LORD: Mr Vasiliev is obviously Mr Stroilov’s lawyer, one
2 of his Russian lawyers.
3 MR STROILOV: That’s not right, I don’t think he is acting
4 as a lawyer for quite a long time and you may recall
5 there have been various mutual complaints been made
6 about his rather mysterious role, certainly in
7 connection with Vyborg Port, and basically he no longer
8 answers attempts to contact him. So it is quite
9 impossible. These people are not under our control in
10 any material sense.
11 MR LORD: My Lord, I am told that they have both given
12 witness statements in this litigation.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I was wondering about that.
14 MR STROILOV: I have to set it out in some detail and, you
15 know, I wish — if this has to be raised now, I wish
16 I would have some notice of that.
17 My Lord, the position is they did — they were —
18 Mr Vasiliev, up to a point, he was acting as a Russian
19 lawyer representing OMG Ports in Russian courts.
20 Mrs Lukina was, or possibly still is, for all we know,
21 the general director of two companies which comprises
22 the Vyborg Port and which were at the time the
23 subsidiaries of OMG Ports.
24 Then in 2014, I believe, at some point, we have
25 discovered that the shareholding of Vyborg Port

206 :1 companies was now registered in the name of some other
2 companies, by were not known to us, and around the same
3 time, as we have disclosed the fact to the claims as we
4 have had to under the freezing order, and we have tried
5 to chase Mr Vasiliev and Mrs Lukina for an explanation;
6 around that time they stopped answering inquiries.
7 Now, we don’t quite — well, we may or may not at
8 some point have to investigate these events closer, and
9 the role played by these people in these events. But
10 the position is, as it is at the moment, is that
11 effectively Mr Arkhangelsky, as director general of
12 OMG Ports, hasn’t got control over any custodians or
13 subsidiaries — who are no longer subsidiaries anyway —
14 except himself.
15 So that’s what I mean when I say that OMGP is
16 effectively a one-man company. I’m sorry if that wasn’t
17 what you were asked me for. I was trying to keep the
18 answer brief. Obviously there is a history behind this.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, prima facie at any rate,
20 documents which were not seized by the police but were
21 retained by either/or both Mr Vasiliev and Ms Lukina
22 would be documents which, in law, at any rate, leave
23 aside practice, in law would be documents to which your
24 client had the means of obtaining.
25 Now, if that is not the case, because your client is

207 :1 in Paris and any legal remedies are not really available
2 to him, he would, surely, have been better to have
3 explained what the position is, rather than simply allow
4 this to go either sort of unnoticed, or noticed and made
5 complaint of.
6 MR STROILOV: But, my Lord, he has explained, it is on the
7 screen before you, there were ten pages of answers as
8 an attachment to the disclosure statement. There were
9 ten pages of answering —
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Saying that he couldn’t get any.
11 MR STROILOV: — very detailed interrogatories just to clear
12 these questions and explain the position.
13 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: All right, I haven’t read those.
14 Where are those? Someone will send me a reference and
15 I will read those.
16 MR STROILOV: Yes, I think it is {P1/10/20} where does it
17 start, I don’t know.
18 MR LORD: It’s the one on screen.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that all we have?
20 MR STROILOV: That’s one of the pages. That cannot be
21 right.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That says nothing. You said — is
23 there more on subsequent pages? {P1/10/21}
24 MR STROILOV: Yes. Where does the document start, if that
25 could be identified? Because obviously there are lots

208 :1 of inquiries about the disclosure and explanations were
2 provided, quite detailed.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is there anything more than: and if
4 they had them they would probably have disclosed them in
5 the BVI proceedings; is that it?
6 MR STROILOV: There is about a ten-page appendix. I do
7 apologise, my Lord, I will have to find it in
8 the bundle.
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let me know. We can’t deal with that
10 now because we have to get pushing, but if someone could
11 send me a link, that would be good.
12 MR LORD: My Lord, it is this document, there is
13 an appendix, but I’m not sure that it actually gives any
14 further colour to this particular point.
15 MR STROILOV: I ask you to read the whole document, I think
16 it is —
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Let me take a note of that. I can’t
18 read it I am afraid; could you let me know what it is? 19 MR LORD: {P1/10/10}.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: And I just read that? It is about ten
21 pages, it has an appendix, and I can read it.
22 MR LORD: Yes.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Thank you very much. Okay, that’s
24 fine. Thank you.
25 Now, I was saying in paragraph 572, Mr Lord noted

209 :1 that in addition to the OMG loans in respect of which
2 the Bank makes claims, OMG owed the Bank a large number
3 of other sums under the OMG loans. Whilst they are not
4 part of the claim, you will nevertheless give credit for
5 them in your counterclaim. That’s correct, is it?
6 MR STROILOV: Let me look how it is put, I beg
7 your Lordship’s pardon. Incidentally it is {AA1/7/1},
8 that’s where I am. I beg your pardon, my Lord, which
9 paragraph are you looking at?
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It was 572.
11 MR LORD: Your Lordship will recollect at the interim
12 payment hearing there was an acceptance of the sums that
13 had to be given credit for as to what had to —
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Okay, then that’s the basis. All
15 right, I will draw it to your attention. If you
16 disagree with it —
17 MR STROILOV: I am terribly sorry, my Lord, I don’t think
18 I am quite up to speed. Which paragraph was it? 572.
19 And the footnote there.
20 MR LORD: Your Lordship has seen, it is footnote 1004,
21 I think.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 1104?
23 MR LORD: 1004. It is the re-amended —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: 1004.
25 MR STROILOV: I’m sorry, I just have to go through the —

210 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: The answer may be on your pleading.
2 Sorry about that, that’s fine. Thank you.
3 Mr Lord, I don’t fully understand what your case is
4 as regards the sort of legal relationship between the
5 Bank and the original and then the subsequent
6 purchasers. What you say is, I think — or what they
7 say, Mr Smirnov in particular and I think Mr Sklyarevsky
8 — is that they were held on behalf of the Bank.
9 MR LORD: We don’t say that there is any formal legal
10 relationship between them, that they were doing the Bank
11 a favour to hold.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: There must always be a legal
13 relationship, mustn’t there?
14 MR LORD: I’m not sure that’s right, my Lord.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: How were they accounted for? Do we
16 have the accounts of the Renord-Invest entities? Were
17 they treated as its assets or not?
18 MR LORD: I’m not sure, my Lord.
19 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: What about the Bank? Did it treat
20 them as its assets or not?
21 MR LORD: No, my Lord, because that was the point.
22 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It wanted them off balance.
23 MR LORD: They didn’t want to have to consolidate the debts
24 of these companies on its balance sheet at this
25 particular parlous time. It is an important point,

211 :1 because we have been asked about it before, and I want
2 to just show your Lordship the share purchase agreement.
3 (Pause).
4 Sorry, my Lord. Does your Lordship have the custom
5 bundle 7 on your Lordship’s … number 7, it is in
6 the lower — that’s it.
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
8 MR LORD: Behind divider 106, D/106, there are some of these
9 repo arrangements.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
11 MR STROILOV: I’m sorry, I don’t have that, sir.
12 MR LORD: {D106/1530/1}. Your Lordship will recollect that
13 the repo arrangement was entered into between the OMG
14 companies and the original purchasers.
15 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes.
16 MR LORD: So here you have OMGP acting for Mr Arkhangelsky
17 and Sevzapalians in relation to the Western Terminal
18 shares. This was, if you like, the first sale
19 agreement.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Mm hmm.
21 MR LORD: Then there were various agreements from the
22 parties as to what they would and wouldn’t do to
23 regulate their affairs legally, then there was
24 a provisional share purchase agreement, which is at
25 {D106/1530/7} which was a provisional contract, again

212 :1 entered into between OMGP and Sevzapalians that set out,
2 if you like, some further agreements as to how this
3 arrangement was going to be regulated, and the lower
4 hole punch:
5 «4. Rights and obligations of the parties.»
6 «5. Terms of intentions and implementations by the
7 parties.»
8 And importantly number 6:
9 «Parties undertake to act reasonably and in good
10 faith during performance of obligation under this
11 agreement.»
12 So it appears that there was an agreement between
13 the original purchaser and OMGP in and about how they
14 would regulate their relationship on this share purchase
15 and repurchase arrangement. We would say, my Lord, that
16 is an important feature of the case: there was this
17 binding arrangement between these parties and the Bank,
18 if you like, trusted — not in a technical term, but
19 a favour was done to the Bank, and it was trusting that
20 Sevzapalians would, if you like, do the right thing, and
21 they were in a better position in that regard than if
22 they had been facing OMGP. Your Lordship knows that the
23 key point is that the Western Terminal’s assets were
24 pledged to the bank at all times. So what the Bank was
25 really doing, the most the Bank was doing, it was facing

213 :1 a different holder of the keys, as it were, than it
2 would otherwise have been facing.
3 So in those terms it is not so surprising or
4 sinister that the arrangement was informal in the way
5 that we explained, and doesn’t have a sort of agency or
6 some or more conventional English law epithet to apply
7 to it. I’m sorry I can’t be more helpful than that and
8 more prescriptive. But we say that was the position: it
9 was a favour done in more difficult financial times to
10 make our enforcement changes better for security that
11 wasn’t affected, that was always pledged.
12 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, that may have to be explored.
13 Thank you. But anyway, there is no agreement and
14 there’s no legal depiction of the agreement as between
15 the Bank and the original or subsequent purchasers.
16 172 of Mr Lord’s skeleton quotes Ms Volodina as
17 having been involved in an internal investigation at the
18 Bank about what went wrong, in effect. Where is that?
19 Is that D129/2087? Is that the — where is the actual
20 internal investigation?
21 MR LORD: I think, my Lord, it should be, we’re checking.
22 Can you open up {D129/2087/1}?
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is that the same one, it is a report
24 for the Bank in late 2009, the same as the internal
25 investigation referred to in 172.

214 :1 MR LORD: I will just double-check, my Lord. We are just
2 double-checking. It is exhibited to her statement, so
3 if I get her statement. (Pause)
4 My Lord, yes, it is the same reference as in
5 paragraph 80 of her witness statement.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: So they are the same document?
7 MR LORD: It is, my Lord, yes, and you can click on to it
8 click on to the —
9 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It gives a description.
10 I will tread delicately here and won’t say more, but
11 Mrs Maylsheva left in 2014, if memory serves me right.
12 MR LORD: 2015, I think, my Lord. February last year,
13 I think.
14 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: February 2015, was it?
15 MR LORD: Yes.
16 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Right. And until then, at any rate,
17 had been a shareholder in the Bank?
18 MR LORD: I think that’s right, yes. She was a small —
19 yes, she was a shareholder but I think quite a small
20 shareholding, but yes, she was a shareholder.
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes. Without sort of asking
22 cross-examination before the witness is here, I think it
23 would be wise to know more about that shareholding.
24 MR LORD: I think it was 0.02 per cent.
25 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It went down a bit, I thought it was

215 :1 0.07, or something like that, I can’t remember.
2 MR LORD: We will check from the accounts.
3 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, and somebody will be able to tell
4 me the terms on which she disengaged from the Bank. Is
5 there any reference to that in the —
6 MR LORD: Mr Savelyev deals with it, paragraph 35.
7 {B2/1/8}. It is paragraph 35.
8 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, exactly. Is there any
9 documentary evidence of the terms on which —
10 MR LORD: I’m not sure, my Lord. We will check.
11 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: It should be disclosed if there is and
12 there will be questions to follow from that, obviously.
13 Okay, that’s the major points I had for the moment.
14 I shall leave you be to get on with your copious amount
15 of work.
16 MR STROILOV: My Lord, just one micropoint on housekeeping.
17 I think I will find it in two ways helpful if we could
18 have ten-minute breaks rather than five-minute breaks in
19 the middle of the morning and the middle of
20 the afternoon. I think the reason you will find
21 important is that I may need to take instructions from
22 Mr Arkhangelsky, equally by way of full and frank
23 disclosure, the reason I find them important is that
24 I may also want a cigarette. To me these are two
25 reasons, but instructions from Mr Arkhangelsky —

216 :1 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I shall be very flexible about — I’m
2 sure the transcript writers, who do a tremendous job,
3 and the translators, who must find it exhausting, will
4 welcome more than a five-minute break, and if it is 10
5 or 15, or whatever is required within reason, I shall be
6 very flexible, and if people want to start a little
7 earlier in order to give breaks along the way, I shall
8 be flexible about that.
9 Basically, unless and until one of us sort of cracks
10 up, the day will be sometimes between 10.00 am and
11 4.30 pm each day, and we will apportion it as best we
12 can. We will start at 10.30 am each day unless
13 specifically requested, but if people find an earlier
14 start gives more breathing spaces I shall be very
15 flexible about that.
16 MR LORD: Your Lordship wants to start at 10.30 this Monday,
17 I understand?
18 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, 10.30 this Monday if that suits
19 you.
20 MR STROILOV: Yes, my Lord, that’s fine, subject to
21 the general concern we would like to have more time, but
22 I don’t think it would be wise, really, to try and make 23 10.00 —
24 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: No, we won’t make it a general start,
25 but I am just indicating I shall be flexible if anyone

217 :1 requires it. I think you will find that an earlier
2 start than 10.00 am — and Mr Lord and I did a case some
3 time ago where we did begin to start earlier — is
4 actually too exhausting for everybody, and it is best,
5 really, and except in the most exceptional
6 circumstances, not to try and start before 10.00 am, nor
7 to go on, really, beyond 4.15 pm, 4.30 pm.
8 Is there anything else that we need address?
9 MR LORD: No, my Lord.
10 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I have had a query from the senior
11 case manager at Opus 2:
12 «Claimants have requested a copy of the native
13 language coming from the videolink and the witness box.
14 Please can you confirm if the judge is happy for us to
15 release this.»
16 I don’t fully understand what that is.
17 MR LORD: I think — we think it may be a request to release
18 the material to the press. Does Mr Stroilov know about
19 this, I’m not sure?
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Is says «the native language coming
21 from the videolink and the witness box». I assume that
22 is when the translators are doing their stuff and
23 translate the English into the Russian, has there been
24 a request for the Russian to be provided?
25 I’m not going to bore you with it. Mr Alex Smith

218 :1 has asked me, or has asked Richard this, I think if
2 I give you a copy of that, you can debate what it means
3 and you can explain what it means.
4 MR STROILOV: I need to take instructions on that. You will
5 recall there have been concerns about the translations,
6 as such, but …
7 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, it is a difficult one, this.
8 What must be recorded for the court is both the English
9 and the Russian versions, so that the Russian
10 translations, both out and in, if I can put it that way,
11 must be recorded, lest there be some issue at some later
12 stage, but I did make this point about three weeks ago,
13 I think, was it before Christmas, we were asked about
14 this, and I just hope that that is done.
15 MR STROILOV: I am not sure who they are asked to be
16 released to. We would obviously feel much more
17 confident if we know that both language versions are
18 recorded and that is preserved somewhere in case there
19 is any dispute.
20 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Well, it may have got lost in
21 translation. I think I will leave it to you to decide.
22 MR LORD: I think we should establish what the purpose is,
23 my Lord and whether it is for a purpose that
24 your Lordship is content with or whether it is for
25 another purpose.

219 :1 I think whoever is asking for it, whichever party
2 is, and I will check, and establish what the purpose is
3 and the court can fairly decide whether that is a proper
4 purpose or a collateral purpose that actually should be
5 discounted.
6 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Yes, there are two aspects. One is to
7 whom it is released, the other is the court should have
8 a record of everything that is said and done, and
9 because it is being done in two languages, a record of
10 both in an independently verifiable way must be
11 available lest anyone should question the proceedings
12 hereafter.
13 MR LORD: But, for example, it may not be an acceptable to
14 use this particular process to promulgate live almost
15 a recording of court proceedings on a radio station, for
16 example.
17 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: Absolutely. No, I don’t want any of
18 that. My sole interest for the moment is that this is
19 a court of record, therefore there must be a record.
20 MR LORD: I understand.
21 MR STROILOV: We are not sure who —
22 MR LORD: I am not sure, Mr Stroilov.
23 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: I have no idea, I just throw it back
24 at you and ask you for an explanation.
25 I won’t wish you a good weekend lest it be thought

220 :1 pious, but have a good weekend.
2 (4.23 pm)
3 (The court adjourned until 10.30 am
4 on Monday, 1 February 2016) 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

221 :1 INDEX
2 PAGE
3 Housekeeping 1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

0
222 :1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

$
$10 ( 2 ) 56:24 57:1
$700179:2

A

achieved ( 8 ) 16:24
19:2 19:11 21:9 37:3
50:8 115:8 126:12
acknowledge ( 2 )
146:6 166:25
acknowledged25:4 acquaint170:2 acquiring67:6

admittedly.114:17 adopt ( 2 ) 146:13
179:24
adopted64:22 adoption146:10 advance ( 6 ) 23:13
61:14 97:18 119:24
156:13 170:17

agree, ( 14 ) 14:20 16:7
36:22 37:3 47:20 64:3
64:12 88:19 106:9
117:10 121:17 185:14
189:23 190:8
agreed ( 8 ) 47:22 96:14
101:10 102:19 105:10
138:7 160:8 161:19

alternative ( 18 ) 66:2
90:16 91:7 92:6 93:8
93:9 95:3 96:13 97:9
97:10 98:10 100:4
114:11 117:19 125:2
125:5 128:18 138:19
alternatively, ( 2 ) 124:2
199:8

answers. ( 6 ) 166:15
173:1 180:21 191:4
205:8 207:7
anticipate ( 5 ) 124:25
142:6 199:5 201:23
201:24
anticipated ( 3 ) 1:9
149:2 184:1

across ( 2 ) 175:4 177:3
acted ( 14 ) 12:25 31:13

advanced ( 2 ) 34:24
121:14

agreement. ( 42 ) 16:10
47:21 73:14 90:6

alternatives.93:8
although ( 9 ) 8:24 64:1

anxiety, ( 2 ) 148:1
148:2

{AA1/7/1},209:7
abandon196:8 abide ( 3 ) 59:5 85:7
171:19
ability ( 3 ) 35:7 53:7
169:11
above ( 7 ) 5:20 69:3
69:13 71:20 74:9
77:11 92:11
abridged199:7 absence ( 3 ) 118:6
153:25 163:10
absolutely ( 3 ) 201:3
202:5 219:17
abusive ( 3 ) 167:23
168:9 168:16
accept ( 47 ) 11:17
11:21 12:7 15:16
16:5 16:13 17:15 18:8
20:6 28:13 28:19 33:1
33:22 33:24 34:1
39:18 40:16 42:12
43:19 45:24 48:16
58:17 73:20 87:11
87:16 88:7 90:20 98:2
100:25 109:18 115:20
117:9 117:9 124:24
127:6 127:7 134:17
138:15 140:1 154:18
155:16 155:24 157:16
162:14 175:1 176:16
192:11
acceptable, ( 2 ) 22:25
219:13
acceptance209:12 accepted ( 10 ) 87:21
89:6 117:7 119:14
119:16 127:22 182:22
185:21 189:2 192:15
accepting ( 3 ) 103:8
103:8 109:19
accepts159:22 accommodate,101:9 accompanying166:20 accord.91:4 accordance169:8 according ( 4 ) 18:25
47:7 50:7 149:13
account ( 6 ) 141:14
141:15 147:13 148:10
171:6 189:4
accountability132:8 accountancy, ( 2 )
163:13 173:23
accounted210:15 accounts, ( 7 ) 167:20
175:6 175:10 175:18
175:20 210:16 215:2
accumulates145:8 accuracy. ( 2 ) 2:17 3:1
accusation ( 3 ) 41:6
56:8 61:7
accuse ( 2 ) 23:9 38:17
accused ( 8 ) 19:12
36:19 36:19 46:3
46:22 61:6 61:9
159:15
accusing13:7 achievable.156:20 achieve158:2

31:23 34:16 39:19
40:11 44:18 64:8
139:16 139:22 139:22
139:23 165:1 186:5
acting ( 25 ) 12:10
14:16 15:18 35:17
36:3 44:13 49:18
54:23 57:14 63:18
63:21 77:1 96:18
96:21 96:23 96:24
97:2 107:23 108:1
131:18 131:20 189:22
205:3 205:18 211:16
action. ( 6 ) 16:16
105:19 106:2 107:1
108:7 112:20
actionable140:21 actions73:1
active, ( 3 ) 24:5 62:25
64:2
activities ( 19 ) 13:4
28:2 30:7 31:25 41:1
41:9 42:14 42:20
43:17 44:4 44:23 53:8
56:11 84:3 84:6 89:2
126:17 131:4 138:12
activity.58:12
actor. ( 4 ) 28:7 28:8
55:23 55:25
actors, ( 5 ) 24:5 25:16
43:16 126:18 131:4
acts ( 16 ) 12:17 29:16
29:19 55:23 74:9
75:21 79:12 81:1
87:20 92:4 109:11
124:16 125:18 125:19
125:20 139:18
actual ( 4 ) 55:23 62:9
79:16 213:19
acute41:12 added ( 2 ) 56:15
113:25
addition ( 3 ) 72:1 125:4
209:1
additional ( 4 ) 104:5
139:11 158:11 199:12
address ( 14 ) 33:8
42:23 72:7 101:9
107:14 111:11 112:7
120:13 121:8 144:10
144:13 162:17 197:17
217:8
addressed ( 4 ) 82:3
102:24 186:11 197:8
addressing ( 3 ) 55:10
144:15 164:19
adduce119:4 adduced, ( 2 ) 102:25
164:7
adequate ( 2 ) 162:13
178:12
adequately85:5 adhere86:20 adjourned ( 2 ) 145:20
220:3
Adjournment)122:9 adjournments, ( 2 )
143:4 158:12
adjudicates142:18 admit ( 2 ) 72:7 120:1
admitted75:4

advantage ( 2 ) 88:21
146:14
advice ( 2 ) 87:7 147:16
advised ( 2 ) 54:13
106:6
advisement,203:16 advisers54:12 advocate ( 4 ) 3:7 6:23
7:13 7:23
advocates23:9 aesthetic ( 2 ) 202:21
202:23
affairs211:23 affected,213:11 affidavit.173:9 afforded ( 2 ) 160:22
161:11
aforesaid97:3
afraid, ( 18 ) 9:3 42:24
46:6 51:16 65:14
72:10 82:7 84:15
92:15 103:14 105:6
111:12 148:2 165:12
187:20 191:13 195:22
208:18
after ( 24 ) 2:15 28:10
60:20 61:1 78:22
78:25 94:24 99:1 99:4
109:6 121:6 121:8
135:2 135:10 144:5
144:20 151:11 153:9
153:16 160:9 180:10
180:16 187:4 190:10
afternoon ( 3 ) 1:19
144:4 215:20
afterwards.135:17 again ( 30 ) 2:16 6:1
9:16 14:10 24:6 26:8
42:22 62:22 79:11
82:24 86:4 88:10
105:11 109:21 113:15
113:25 117:17 118:22
139:4 175:25 177:15
185:20 185:22 186:22
188:1 191:13 191:18
193:10 193:18 211:25
against ( 46 ) 11:16
11:23 12:5 18:18
18:18 21:16 27:25
30:21 34:8 34:9 35:8
39:11 40:6 40:23 41:6
42:10 43:2 43:9 43:24
52:23 56:7 62:17
62:21 66:8 71:20
71:21 75:7 75:19
75:21 78:18 79:4
81:4 84:1 87:14 87:15
105:18 123:22 125:15
126:10 128:22 129:24
161:14 169:24 179:14
191:23 202:9
agencies ( 3 ) 40:9
126:5 131:20
agency ( 3 ) 94:2 123:2
213:5
aggravated136:23 aggressive,149:22 aggressively,149:10 ago, ( 6 ) 45:25 74:23
165:17 198:2 217:3
218:12

90:24 90:25 91:1
91:14 91:22 92:4 93:1
93:24 94:3 94:5 94:5
96:11 96:12 96:16
97:12 98:4 98:17
98:22 98:25 99:9
101:24 102:7 102:8
105:10 106:4 108:3
108:11 108:25 136:21
190:2 190:24 211:2
211:19 211:24 212:11
212:12 213:13 213:14
agreements ( 6 ) 72:14
90:6 92:25 93:10
211:21 212:2
ahead ( 6 ) 21:24 27:13
120:22 157:14 179:16
191:15
aid40:24 aim.134:23
aimed ( 2 ) 90:5 133:23
air.53:21 Ajou110:13 alert6:5 alerted181:8 Alex217:25 alive81:17
all-absorbing,195:19 allegation ( 10 ) 11:16
22:3 33:6 38:21 47:6
47:6 47:9 47:11 51:19
89:19
allegations ( 10 ) 11:23
12:5 71:20 75:6 77:18
81:8 81:12 87:14
90:16 127:16
allege ( 11 ) 22:2 23:12
35:7 37:25 37:25 43:2
50:17 62:17 63:1 66:8
73:16
alleged ( 11 ) 35:3 40:21
51:21 64:16 83:12
83:24 86:25 93:10
125:18 126:17 135:1
alleging35:12 allow ( 7 ) 61:5 63:3
108:9 111:8 127:19
164:12 207:3
allowed? ( 7 ) 25:6
25:19 86:25 101:2
103:9 112:3 150:12
almost ( 5 ) 7:22 59:3
85:17 161:23 219:14
alone85:21
along ( 5 ) 38:14 59:7
62:7 70:11 216:7
aloud ( 3 ) 138:16
138:18 143:25
already ( 13 ) 42:9 63:2
63:16 88:7 93:25
94:15 113:3 113:4
113:5 113:8 113:12
113:14 113:15
also, ( 20 ) 1:11 2:23
2:24 6:17 78:18 94:5
96:14 107:13 107:14
108:14 110:13 175:18
177:23 180:12 183:2
183:20 192:2 195:9
202:3 215:24
alter7:4

105:5 126:10 150:24
175:16 177:18 189:20
201:10
altogether120:17 Alvarez163:20
always ( 10 ) 3:20 6:13
28:17 62:13 129:14
129:14 133:21 198:16
210:12 213:11
ambit ( 4 ) 41:17 50:13
87:4 198:10
amended ( 3 ) 11:12
35:15 81:13
amendment ( 5 ) 10:25
43:25 76:2 86:24
89:10
amendments ( 9 )
10:16 23:3 25:6 65:23
101:10 111:2 114:1
114:7 198:14
America158:14
among ( 2 ) 139:5 139:6
amongst ( 2 ) 99:20
182:14
amorphous ( 2 ) 16:23
43:25
amount, ( 3 ) 126:13
194:12 215:14
amounts ( 2 ) 145:19
166:11
analysed ( 2 ) 66:7
138:17
analysis. ( 6 ) 14:15
16:19 36:13 85:25
86:2 123:5
ancillary ( 2 ) 41:20
181:25
and/or ( 17 ) 13:3 34:17
36:2 39:19 44:19
44:22 68:21 68:22
69:7 96:19 102:13
116:20 140:23 140:25
140:25 141:12 141:13
angle.162:18
another ( 23 ) 1:13 2:17
2:19 2:22 45:4 57:11
58:19 66:24 71:1
93:16 95:19 96:11
107:4 111:14 115:24
135:15 142:24 162:18
172:9 173:4 177:14
178:15 218:25
answer, ( 39 ) 18:1
22:18 40:19 41:14
42:18 46:7 46:8
111:24 112:2 119:8
126:23 142:22 158:21
167:3 171:9 173:12
173:20 174:10 174:11
175:2 177:5 178:2
178:5 178:7 178:12
179:1 179:4 179:5
179:10 180:13 180:24
181:23 185:6 191:2
193:11 197:25 200:19
206:18 210:1
answered ( 2 ) 60:1
120:22
answering ( 2 ) 206:6
207:9

anxious ( 8 ) 58:18
60:13 87:3 155:20
171:17 171:20 188:11
197:10
anybody ( 3 ) 59:25
68:12 157:25
anyone ( 15 ) 1:23 6:22
11:24 21:1 21:22
39:23 46:5 56:7 62:23
68:13 165:5 189:16
198:17 216:25 219:11
anything. ( 21 ) 4:16
17:12 29:2 82:13
108:5 108:23 110:19
124:13 127:4 137:10
142:12 143:20 145:25
147:10 149:20 154:11
155:18 165:15 190:12
208:3 217:8
Anyway, ( 7 ) 34:14
78:21 114:19 126:8
138:25 206:13 213:13
Apart ( 7 ) 14:24 69:1
84:24 117:15 166:12
202:19 203:23
apologies; ( 3 ) 1:13
122:12 196:16
apologise, ( 5 ) 26:9
72:10 76:13 110:24
208:7
apologised187:5 apparent ( 2 ) 86:5
131:4
apparently ( 3 ) 95:18
155:3 172:14
appeal ( 2 ) 2:24 144:22
appear ( 14 ) 1:5 2:16
19:12 35:4 83:6 86:6
102:12 130:12 161:24
162:5 173:25 184:7
189:22 189:23
appearance2:9 appeared ( 4 ) 2:13 2:24
170:25 172:3
appearing ( 2 ) 3:6
100:12
appears ( 9 ) 39:23
80:21 86:3 164:25
168:20 172:12 190:15
194:16 212:12
appendix. ( 3 ) 208:6
208:13 208:21
applicable ( 2 ) 124:3
127:25
application, ( 10 ) 2:17
2:24 2:25 25:10 80:19
86:15 111:6 128:22
168:20 182:8
applied.111:10 applies ( 10 ) 21:21
36:20 56:6 81:9 84:18
118:7 119:16 124:5
127:8 130:1
apply. ( 7 ) 22:19 97:5
124:5 128:4 128:11
128:20 213:6
apportion216:11 appreciate ( 11 ) 57:12
97:19 116:11 146:15
152:19 168:22 169:17

173:16 188:13 190:3
194:5
appreciated ( 2 ) 159:20
178:21
appreciation126:2 apprise ( 2 ) 4:6 6:10 apprised193:21 approach. ( 6 ) 38:23
64:22 79:13 85:2
142:8 161:6
approached ( 2 ) 20:11
20:20
appropriate. ( 3 ) 44:15
65:5 158:9
approved ( 7 ) 52:21
54:4 119:25 156:1
156:7 157:20 169:9
April177:20
area. ( 3 ) 105:19 124:20
127:1
areas, ( 2 ) 31:18 126:24
aren’t ( 3 ) 25:24 26:2
71:12
arguable ( 2 ) 106:1
106:5
argue ( 6 ) 30:24 31:22
107:18 127:7 156:6
191:24
argued ( 2 ) 28:11
101:12
argument ( 7 ) 28:11
106:16 107:13 131:3
144:1 144:20 203:13
argument’s20:13 arguments ( 4 ) 101:9
202:8 202:8 202:10
arise ( 6 ) 125:25 126:15
131:8 131:10 134:12
168:23
arises. ( 4 ) 127:7
128:13 131:14 144:21
arising.23:19 Arkhangelsky ( 42 )
1:7 1:15 1:16 2:1
56:15 70:22 77:7 79:4
122:11 125:4 165:19
169:11 169:14 171:1
171:5 172:14 172:20
173:4 174:9 175:15
177:6 177:25 178:5
178:19 179:9 182:22
183:3 183:10 184:10
185:1 185:11 189:25
190:24 194:19 196:1
197:1 197:9 199:23
206:11 211:16 215:22
215:25
Arkhangelsky’s ( 11 )
3:13 77:4 134:18
166:21 169:18 170:4
174:10 175:22 186:3
190:1 201:11
armoury.99:20 arms145:25 arose184:24 around ( 11 ) 13:24
22:21 35:22 44:21
76:15 129:18 146:24
176:19 195:17 206:2
206:6
arrange116:9 arrangement ( 5 )
211:13 212:3 212:15
212:17 213:4
arrangements ( 2 )
156:11 211:9
art189:20
article ( 8 ) 4:10 4:12
5:2 6:6 101:20 104:20
123:15 139:9

ascertain ( 2 ) 138:21
141:7
aside ( 2 ) 161:10
206:23
ask ( 27 ) 14:14 15:4
17:6 17:24 36:8 38:15
38:23 59:24 77:12
77:23 84:2 119:3
125:8 140:6 152:21
155:19 167:11 168:1
168:5 169:20 183:25
185:23 186:11 186:12
190:21 208:15 219:24
asked ( 27 ) 19:6 74:7
74:22 75:10 75:12
84:5 158:19 158:21
164:21 174:3 174:9
178:6 180:1 180:7
184:23 185:19 186:22
186:25 187:3 190:12
193:25 206:17 211:1
218:1 218:1 218:13
218:15
asking ( 12 ) 33:22
72:19 94:20 104:6
107:16 148:6 158:12
174:8 178:4 185:8
214:21 219:1
aspect ( 3 ) 85:5 116:17
164:8
aspects, ( 4 ) 6:3 103:1
185:23 219:6
assert ( 5 ) 73:24 74:2
77:17 90:24 93:11
asserted ( 3 ) 77:1
90:25 116:16
asserting107:22 assertion. ( 3 ) 116:6
116:13 137:11
assertions78:21 assessment,145:23 asset ( 2 ) 37:2 130:16
assets ( 15 ) 20:18 43:4
68:20 74:13 76:9
77:13 120:21 130:15
135:2 140:25 173:22
173:25 210:17 210:20
212:23
assist ( 3 ) 185:24 190:5
190:25
assistance ( 4 ) 149:24
163:19 164:5 180:14
assisted ( 4 ) 3:18 79:5
170:23 184:20
assisting181:16 associate184:17 associated174:25 assume ( 6 ) 42:19
102:15 118:25 119:9
203:2 217:21
assumed ( 2 ) 127:25
128:2
assumes181:13 assuming ( 3 ) 70:18
126:22 200:24
assumption ( 2 ) 122:19
192:14
assumptions.122:25 assurance64:23 asterisk165:3 astonished195:22 attaches134:10 attachment207:8 attachments ( 2 ) 184:7
185:9
attempt ( 7 ) 35:6 60:21
123:4 147:4 164:8
164:21 182:9
attempted ( 2 ) 100:13
135:11
attempts205:8

attend, ( 5 ) 65:9 116:2
120:7 164:13 164:20
attention. ( 6 ) 4:13 7:1
7:4 9:11 180:6 209:15
attire.202:1 attributable130:4 attribute41:9 attributed ( 5 ) 13:4
30:16 31:25 32:2
126:18
attribution ( 11 ) 30:3
31:10 31:11 31:19
32:6 32:14 42:15
47:14 126:17 128:15
128:23
Auction ( 12 ) 74:12
74:15 74:18 76:9
76:23 77:13 103:24
136:13 136:20 137:4
138:9 138:10
auctions135:17 authorised ( 3 ) 1:23
5:23 169:8
authorities. ( 4 ) 18:7
29:2 76:16 78:16
authority ( 10 ) 12:4
29:24 32:5 40:10
45:23 59:5 191:19
200:11 200:12 200:25
available, ( 8 ) 7:10 7:12
106:14 151:16 198:20
198:21 207:1 219:11
averment ( 2 ) 63:14
105:22
averments105:21 avoid ( 3 ) 21:19 34:22
159:8
award140:4
aware ( 5 ) 3:15 4:8 69:6
126:21 171:19
away ( 4 ) 39:21 95:14
171:2 186:13
awful ( 2 ) 153:22
153:22
awkward ( 3 ) 31:15
118:19 118:21
axiomatic35:11

B
{B2/1/8}.215:7 back ( 43 ) 2:7 4:16
6:4 22:23 25:15 35:5
50:21 71:4 72:9 75:17
76:12 79:16 80:12
80:18 82:8 84:21
84:21 86:16 89:20
101:1 101:13 103:12
107:8 117:12 132:4
132:25 132:25 133:1
134:6 134:13 137:8
137:16 151:11 152:13
153:9 173:4 173:7
173:7 184:9 191:2
196:21 196:22 219:23
background,27:7 bad ( 2 ) 41:1 106:19
bailiff136:20 balance ( 9 ) 94:11
110:1 112:24 113:10
113:18 114:10 117:19
210:22 210:24
Balandin, ( 3 ) 11:3
45:10 68:17
ball,159:20 Baltic78:24 bandy13:23 banging30:1
Bank ( 147 ) 2:3 11:2
11:6 11:19 11:25 13:5

13:22 14:16 15:10
15:11 15:12 15:13
15:19 15:25 16:4
17:11 18:10 18:23
18:23 20:19 21:4
25:12 25:16 26:13
29:3 29:13 29:14
29:17 29:17 30:5
30:5 30:7 30:17 31:2
31:25 33:10 33:11
35:17 36:3 36:5 36:10
39:20 40:7 40:10
40:11 40:24 41:2 41:7
41:10 42:20 43:18
44:5 44:23 45:5 45:8
47:22 49:13 51:24
52:2 52:25 54:4 54:16
55:7 57:25 59:9 59:20
62:14 67:5 67:18
67:21 68:4 68:21
69:5 70:24 73:1 77:22
78:11 80:20 81:4
83:17 85:2 96:18 97:2
107:23 108:18 110:14
123:6 123:7 123:22
123:24 124:24 125:3
125:15 125:19 125:19
125:22 126:4 126:5
126:9 129:17 130:5
130:13 130:13 130:16
130:16 131:1 131:3
131:17 131:18 132:7
132:17 132:18 132:18
132:22 133:7 133:8
133:8 133:17 133:24
134:3 134:6 134:8
134:12 134:15 135:22
139:14 139:16 139:19
140:23 141:13 162:2
209:2 209:2 210:5
210:8 210:10 210:19
212:17 212:19 212:24
212:24 212:25 213:15
213:18 213:24 214:17
215:4
Bank’s ( 19 ) 11:20 12:9
17:20 17:21 34:17
34:17 44:18 44:19
47:15 49:17 70:14
104:19 125:15 129:15
130:20 132:3 132:25
139:18 140:16
bank-wide20:7 banks137:9 bargain,157:25 Barons58:20 barred. ( 3 ) 106:20
107:1 108:7
barrel ( 2 ) 56:24 57:1
barristers.36:21
base ( 2 ) 112:4 118:13
based ( 8 ) 36:12 83:23
105:23 111:15 112:8
143:13 143:25 174:7
bases77:16
basic ( 2 ) 51:3 51:5
basically ( 7 ) 77:21
84:20 90:9 191:19
195:15 205:7 216:9
basis, ( 54 ) 3:6 12:17
22:16 25:8 27:24
38:19 40:21 40:21
41:5 43:8 43:11 53:2
54:6 54:7 54:8 61:19
63:5 64:8 66:6 73:23
73:25 75:15 77:4
78:17 84:5 92:7 92:7
92:9 96:17 98:18
103:7 103:8 105:14
107:14 111:2 111:22
112:18 113:20 114:11

114:16 117:16 117:21
120:1 128:7 128:15
128:21 138:19 145:5
147:8 156:23 161:11
181:20 188:5 209:14
battle ( 4 ) 100:24
105:13 105:14 105:16
BCCI ( 3 ) 110:6 110:14
110:14
bear ( 2 ) 89:2 168:25
bearing ( 3 ) 82:5
123:16 172:18
bears89:7 became ( 3 ) 70:21
74:20 94:2
Becket,58:24 become ( 9 ) 3:16 7:6
7:11 26:3 81:15 83:22
116:5 175:18 182:1
becomes ( 3 ) 31:15
180:16 195:16
becoming86:5
before ( 45 ) 6:18 11:25
18:16 22:15 26:16
32:24 34:1 42:25
49:20 61:5 73:16 75:8
89:7 91:15 94:23 98:3
105:7 106:7 109:11
117:25 118:24 121:7
122:15 128:11 143:5
144:10 153:20 157:11
157:14 158:25 160:12
164:25 167:25 170:8
170:25 171:10 173:16
186:18 188:12 202:24
207:7 211:1 214:22
217:6 218:13
beforehand194:4 beg ( 8 ) 66:18 66:23
72:23 113:7 141:22
188:18 209:6 209:8
began:72:25
begin ( 3 ) 7:10 7:22
217:3
beginning, ( 2 ) 78:2
104:3
begins157:1 begun?142:25
behalf ( 11 ) 5:24 15:19
29:14 30:5 36:3 39:19
129:17 183:3 184:9
201:7 210:8
behave159:12
behind ( 19 ) 4:18 23:2
25:16 29:18 55:1 78:2
132:4 132:25 133:1
137:8 140:14 152:4
166:8 174:13 182:12
184:10 187:16 206:18
211:8
beings. ( 2 ) 67:22
67:24
believe ( 8 ) 24:22 24:23
78:14 114:4 127:2
145:13 162:7 205:24
believes159:18 below ( 3 ) 37:2 68:14
81:6
Belykh, ( 5 ) 50:21 51:9
53:24 53:25 152:20
bench175:5 bene101:3 beneficial68:20 benefit, ( 6 ) 8:20 9:12
134:6 147:16 180:14
203:10
benefited,27:19 benefits,132:5
best ( 13 ) 8:5 21:19
26:24 100:18 146:22
156:8 157:24 158:1

160:1 180:12 180:18
216:11 217:4
betray179:23
better ( 14 ) 21:5 64:4
106:6 133:25 134:17
140:6 156:13 178:22
188:4 189:14 195:20
207:2 212:21 213:10
between ( 41 ) 3:4 8:14
8:15 15:1 16:21 34:22
39:7 42:11 60:18
61:24 72:15 73:15
85:12 91:22 92:11
93:25 96:4 97:2 99:6
99:9 102:8 103:3
103:23 107:23 109:10
115:1 123:6 125:21
142:18 146:17 152:20
185:17 202:12 210:4
210:10 211:13 212:1
212:12 212:17 213:14
216:10
beyond ( 3 ) 64:7
198:16 217:7
big ( 11 ) 53:5 85:3
159:16 160:22 171:16
171:21 172:25 186:12
194:21 196:3 203:14
bigger88:1
bind ( 3 ) 44:23 200:12
200:20
binding; ( 5 ) 22:18 30:7
136:13 201:18 212:17
Birt2:4
bit. ( 25 ) 13:24 27:2
45:3 59:11 60:20
72:10 76:15 78:13
105:5 120:19 133:14
143:17 144:3 144:4
149:22 151:7 155:15
161:12 168:21 176:10
177:2 184:21 186:24
187:13 214:25
bits ( 2 ) 27:4 101:3
black23:8 blame123:4 blank65:2 blessing,3:25 blinked24:1 Blinova152:20 blue176:11
board, ( 4 ) 77:12 96:19
102:14 151:3
bobbing76:15 bold,55:8 bolted119:20 bolts83:16
bone ( 2 ) 120:25 121:4
bono163:4 Book,32:20 bore217:25 borne102:23 borrowed111:8 both ( 18 ) 2:18 20:6
60:12 98:11 127:2
142:8 149:5 150:5
150:8 154:15 158:24
180:11 205:11 206:21
218:8 218:10 218:17
219:10
bothered ( 3 ) 9:8 46:5
88:6
bound. ( 3 ) 94:2 122:25
189:4
box ( 12 ) 19:6 21:22
22:10 23:11 24:10
143:20 171:1 180:11
180:24 194:9 217:13
217:21
BP’s57:2

breach ( 4 ) 73:1 135:5
140:16 140:21
breaches.118:20 break, ( 5 ) 1:12 61:1
62:3 160:12 216:4
breaks ( 3 ) 215:18
215:18 216:7
breath,155:12
breath-catching152:16 breather194:16 breathing216:14
brick ( 3 ) 136:1 136:7
136:24
bridgehead83:22 brief ( 5 ) 6:7 109:22
122:21 190:1 206:18
briefly, ( 2 ) 2:7 144:13
bring ( 6 ) 7:1 7:4 9:13
16:12 56:19 181:13
bringing40:17
broad ( 3 ) 19:17 39:18
88:17
broadly ( 3 ) 110:12
149:6 150:18
broke97:8 brought31:9
brow-beaten178:24 bruising121:20 BSP134:4 BSP’s132:5
bucket.130:20

38:20 38:24 39:5
39:21 40:24 41:5
44:7 47:4 74:16 82:13
84:19 92:10 98:3
98:21 98:22 102:13
106:7 115:2 116:15
118:10 136:9 141:19
142:16 143:8 145:11
168:11 169:20 177:7
177:8 180:23 188:25
190:13 190:13 192:4
193:16 193:25 194:7
196:7 196:7 208:9
208:17 213:7 215:1
candid,8:1 candidly193:21
cannot ( 24 ) 12:15 37:4
47:5 58:15 58:16
64:19 66:8 66:14
72:13 73:13 116:2
117:18 129:18 129:23
140:8 143:4 147:13
147:20 152:2 163:25
174:22 176:12 189:16
207:20
capable88:18
cards ( 2 ) 193:1 193:2
care. ( 2 ) 4:19 17:11
career,3:17 careers,159:4
careful ( 5 ) 7:21 42:13

chairman,96:20 challenged ( 2 ) 150:14
178:18
challenging82:25 chance ( 15 ) 13:13
24:11 24:21 24:21
110:23 111:8 111:24
112:3 112:18 112:18
118:4 119:19 161:1
183:24 201:21
Chancery ( 2 ) 32:9
32:20
change ( 4 ) 11:9
129:12 154:19 156:3
changes213:10 chaotic51:7 chap,66:21 charge.159:25 charges137:16 charts, ( 3 ) 175:13
176:6 176:8
chase ( 6 ) 185:10
187:22 188:1 188:5
189:9 206:5
chased187:24 chasers167:10
check ( 3 ) 215:2 215:10
219:2
checking.213:21 chequered83:3
chief ( 2 ) 78:22 87:15

178:17 195:1 195:2
207:11
cleared ( 2 ) 167:7
194:3
clearer ( 3 ) 42:21 64:9
140:7
clearly ( 10 ) 11:3 11:9
52:24 54:14 79:5
91:10 101:23 118:23
144:24 147:9
click ( 2 ) 214:7 214:8
client ( 10 ) 126:10
179:25 181:9 200:22
201:1 201:8 201:8
201:18 206:24 206:25
client’s85:5
clients, ( 2 ) 41:11 146:6
clock’s161:3
«Close ( 2 ) 78:1 78:10
closed ( 2 ) 29:18 55:1
closely140:25 closer, ( 2 ) 180:16
206:8
closing24:13 clues57:23 Clyde185:25
co-conspirators. ( 3 )
67:4 68:21 68:22
coalface180:17 Code. ( 2 ) 101:21
140:20

comments103:6 commercial27:22 Commission,6:19 commitment. ( 4 ) 1:13
145:14 147:2 181:15
committee ( 9 ) 15:18
52:21 53:25 54:19
63:17 63:17 63:20
63:23 63:24
common13:6 communicated53:24 compact ( 3 ) 108:1
108:5 110:7
companies ( 25 ) 27:15
67:3 67:12 94:6 96:8
97:2 99:6 103:24
113:19 167:20 167:21
172:3 172:8 172:9
172:11 172:11 172:13
173:13 175:14 176:15
205:21 206:1 206:2
210:24 211:14
Company, ( 18 ) 78:24
78:24 79:7 167:8
172:9 172:17 172:18
174:1 174:8 175:13
175:16 176:6 176:7
177:14 178:13 203:19
204:1 206:16
compared70:3 compartmentalise115:4

170:8 171:17 188:7
191:6 196:3 196:4
concerning6:8 concerns ( 2 ) 148:11
218:5
concert,93:2 concerted ( 2 ) 16:10
16:16
concertina151:5 concision147:19 concluded150:8 conclusion ( 2 ) 69:4
73:17
condescending,22:5 conditions103:9 conduct ( 2 ) 51:1 169:6 conducted1:23 confess ( 2 ) 82:7 82:12 confessional,47:1 confidence162:10 confident218:17 confine ( 6 ) 25:23 26:1
47:4 72:5 111:21
146:21
confined.98:2 confines ( 3 ) 32:11
148:8 172:23
confirm ( 3 ) 174:24
176:22 217:14
confronted179:16 confused110:3

build ( 2 ) 151:13

85:25 86:2 157:9

children.196:8

coercing67:6

compartmentalised133:14confusion ( 2 ) 34:22

151:14
built82:7 bullying95:13 bunch65:12
bundle. ( 25 ) 4:7 4:9
4:14 4:15 9:18 80:13
152:4 162:20 170:11
170:19 172:1 174:13
182:11 183:5 183:5
183:6 184:10 184:23
196:22 196:23 198:18
198:19 199:7 208:8
211:5
bundles. ( 10 ) 120:23
196:20 197:1 197:12
198:3 198:11 198:14
199:3 199:12 200:2
burden ( 3 ) 61:23
139:19 158:11
bureaucracy55:7 bureaucrats,57:14 burrow132:13 business ( 10 ) 27:15
163:12 163:12 163:15
165:7 169:19 172:21
174:6 178:19 179:3
businesses.113:2 busy187:7
BVI ( 4 ) 67:10 85:23
86:1 208:5

C
{C1/1/58},174:15
calculating ( 4 ) 112:19
114:11 114:16 117:20
calculation, ( 3 ) 117:15
118:4 119:1
call ( 4 ) 18:11 20:1
130:14 162:1
called174:1
calls, ( 2 ) 103:1 181:17
can’t ( 61 ) 2:21 16:11
22:20 22:21 23:23
24:3 24:4 24:8 24:18
25:13 29:13 30:20
31:1 31:19 31:22
38:16 38:17 38:18

carefully. ( 4 ) 65:6
138:17 142:23 156:12
carried ( 3 ) 5:7 27:21
36:14
carry ( 5 ) 7:8 36:11
61:22 74:12 157:13
carrying ( 2 ) 1:25 6:7
Carta,202:16
cases. ( 16 ) 2:10 2:18
12:3 12:16 12:16
64:6 64:17 64:18 79:3
91:20 109:22 110:13
124:3 160:22 160:23
195:13
categoric201:3 categories.182:19 category. ( 4 ) 68:24
88:18 130:22 182:20
causa. ( 3 ) 30:14 31:16
128:14
causation ( 4 ) 119:17
119:18 139:12 139:18
cause ( 5 ) 105:19 106:2
108:6 112:20 134:18
caused. ( 2 ) 135:3
139:8
causes161:12 caveat ( 3 ) 82:7 87:3
104:7
caveats.102:2 cent.214:24
central ( 2 ) 87:17 138:6
Centre, ( 18 ) 167:19
174:1 174:11 174:22
174:24 175:4 175:12
175:23 176:1 176:17
176:20 177:3 177:6
177:7 177:12 177:19
177:24 178:1
certain ( 13 ) 72:5
101:10 104:7 104:17
125:18 131:20 136:10
137:9 147:16 161:23
182:25 191:6 192:17
cetera87:5 Chadwick’s145:17 chain56:2
chair. ( 3 ) 29:13 31:6
31:22

choice ( 2 ) 62:6 190:18 choose145:3 chopping115:16 Christmas ( 2 ) 95:13
218:13
chronological104:18 cigarette.215:24 circumstance,132:6 circumstances ( 10 )
23:11 105:6 106:3
111:10 129:18 137:9
146:2 147:24 202:3
217:6
City ( 18 ) 167:19 174:1
174:11 174:22 174:24
175:4 175:12 175:23
176:1 176:17 176:20
177:3 177:6 177:7
177:12 177:19 177:24
178:1
civil ( 3 ) 31:8 101:21
140:20
claimant, ( 5 ) 12:21
16:11 57:16 60:3
153:18
claimants ( 12 ) 2:11
54:17 119:3 123:8
139:8 149:9 150:12
162:19 167:8 169:17
171:17 217:12
claiming142:20
claims ( 7 ) 101:2 112:4
137:10 138:10 178:19
206:3 209:2
clarification, ( 3 ) 3:22
125:7 125:12
clarified173:8
clarify ( 3 ) 68:8 122:24
132:1
clarity,107:20 clause. ( 2 ) 82:15
107:17
cleaner’s32:2
clear, ( 21 ) 4:16 47:8
64:10 69:11 69:14
92:11 96:10 118:23
119:24 121:19 135:20
136:8 145:6 147:8
169:13 176:20 176:21

coffers132:5 cogency41:10 coin.163:9 coincide56:22 coincidence ( 2 ) 56:20
57:3
collapse134:18
collate ( 3 ) 85:10 85:17
87:7
collateral ( 14 ) 12:13
15:7 15:14 17:4 51:20
51:23 52:15 61:25
62:18 134:3 135:6
135:12 136:17 219:4
collation ( 2 ) 85:11
88:13
collusive ( 4 ) 43:5
99:11 99:12 99:13
colour208:14 combination ( 4 ) 72:15
73:15 92:11 93:2
combinations92:25 combing149:5
come ( 30 ) 4:24 19:1
21:11 24:8 24:10
25:22 44:8 44:25
50:22 95:14 95:17
100:8 101:12 114:6
114:14 114:18 116:20
121:6 121:7 135:10
140:9 151:11 151:18
152:13 153:9 153:20
163:3 164:21 175:4
185:19
comes ( 8 ) 8:7 10:18
23:11 112:15 135:9
145:17 159:25 191:2
comfortably,120:13 coming ( 9 ) 57:13 73:3
84:14 155:7 183:2
193:18 193:19 217:13
217:20
command ( 3 ) 58:23
59:6 59:21
commanded ( 3 ) 48:2
48:8 63:24
commanders48:9 comment ( 5 ) 3:4 4:12
122:21 143:10 174:22

compelling ( 2 ) 23:24
24:24
complain, ( 3 ) 78:7
89:4 195:17
complainants5:23 complaining ( 2 ) 5:1
203:11
complaint ( 8 ) 6:18
20:14 45:4 60:23 83:9
102:23 168:17 207:5
Complaints ( 6 ) 6:19
82:9 156:15 157:11
187:16 205:5
complete ( 3 ) 11:5 53:8
58:6
completely ( 3 ) 46:13
59:11 191:18
complex, ( 5 ) 31:11
31:18 34:11 137:10
137:21
complied ( 4 ) 188:8
192:7 192:9 192:12
comply ( 3 ) 160:1
192:8 201:22
comprehensive167:23 comprised174:19 comprises205:21 comprising54:19 computer197:6 computers203:19 concatenation97:4 concealment.107:2 concede137:22 conceived ( 4 ) 13:2
47:24 52:4 53:10
concentrate138:13 conception, ( 2 ) 47:23
50:2
concepts,63:10 concern ( 11 ) 3:24 6:18
35:19 148:16 149:15
167:7 168:11 170:7
190:9 191:12 216:21
concerned ( 20 ) 3:2
6:10 7:17 8:2 8:25
28:16 52:13 56:16
92:8 161:20 162:6
164:8 165:4 165:16

42:11
connected ( 3 ) 43:5
141:1 178:16
connection ( 6 ) 53:7
56:12 78:11 99:12
103:3 205:7
connections, ( 2 ) 52:18
99:5
connote135:23 conscious ( 3 ) 169:21
185:11 202:2
consent ( 8 ) 15:12
34:17 44:19 54:17
54:18 67:22 68:4 69:6
consents67:19 consequence148:2 consequences ( 2 )
41:2 44:4
consider ( 5 ) 6:24
45:17 63:3 122:25
143:13
considerable, ( 3 )
137:13 145:19 191:1
consideration180:10 considerations22:19 considered ( 3 ) 89:14
144:25 196:15
consistent ( 11 ) 21:9
97:15 98:5 98:18
98:20 99:9 109:1
109:8 109:24 110:8
167:14
consistently166:1 consolidate210:23 consolidated167:19 conspiracies, ( 2 )
53:23 135:1
conspiracy ( 146 )
11:20 11:21 12:14
12:16 12:22 13:3
13:22 13:24 14:8
14:12 14:16 15:5
15:8 15:23 16:9 16:21
17:3 17:6 18:4 18:21
18:25 19:25 20:2
20:5 20:7 20:8 20:18
21:4 21:23 23:13 24:5
26:6 27:13 28:5 29:5
36:12 38:10 39:3

39:10 41:19 41:20
43:15 43:17 46:11
46:22 49:14 49:20
50:19 51:10 51:19
52:5 52:11 52:12 53:9
53:13 53:16 54:24
55:2 56:10 57:17 60:1
62:25 63:10 67:13
67:17 69:1 69:19
69:20 70:6 70:20
70:21 71:25 72:3 72:9
74:6 75:16 75:25 76:1
77:2 77:9 79:9 83:12
84:14 84:20 85:1
85:22 90:14 90:17
90:18 90:19 91:7
91:19 91:24 91:25
92:8 92:21 92:23 94:9
94:10 94:12 94:17
95:15 95:16 95:19
95:22 96:5 96:6 97:24
98:6 98:8 98:10 98:13
99:18 100:2 100:3
100:10 100:13 100:13
101:17 101:18 101:19
101:20 103:5 104:3
105:23 105:24 107:4
107:21 107:23 109:2
121:14 123:10 131:25
132:2 132:11 133:12
133:23 135:8 135:13
135:25 137:2 137:10
137:22 142:10 142:11
143:14
conspirator ( 5 ) 11:19
18:19 29:3 47:10
131:18
conspiratorial,55:11 conspirators ( 17 ) 11:5
19:1 29:6 34:16 37:24
38:1 44:18 44:22
48:13 53:14 53:19
66:18 67:25 68:7 68:7
69:24 69:25
conspired, ( 3 ) 14:3
14:21 126:3
conspiring124:23 constant ( 2 ) 145:12
145:15
constantly86:11 constitutes145:22 constricted189:19 construct, ( 3 ) 31:4
31:10 123:14
constructive.84:10 contact205:8 contain200:11 contains9:9 content ( 4 ) 41:23
118:2 130:18 218:24
contention ( 2 ) 121:1
121:5
contentious117:5 context ( 5 ) 3:18 14:20
93:23 95:20 147:14
contexts127:21 continually ( 2 ) 150:11
187:13
continue ( 2 ) 1:12
34:14
continued60:11 continuous144:18 contract ( 4 ) 73:2
126:25 198:14 211:25
contractual144:1 contradict29:2 contrary,28:11 contribution.7:24 control ( 12 ) 27:16 59:8
81:17 123:6 130:18
134:14 136:18 163:23

164:16 188:24 205:9
206:12
controlled ( 2 ) 130:13
133:7
controllers123:8 controversy6:15 convenience122:3 conventional213:6 conversations ( 3 )
56:10 56:14 56:17
converse56:6 convey188:9 conviction157:13 convince117:23 cool,60:4 Cooper,105:21
copied ( 2 ) 114:2 168:6
copies ( 12 ) 185:18
185:19 197:18 197:22
198:5 198:6 198:7
198:18 198:19 198:20
198:21 199:5
copious215:14
copy ( 18 ) 80:13 80:15
80:15 170:10 170:14
182:12 189:24 190:4
190:23 196:20 197:1
197:12 198:3 198:11
199:1 203:21 217:12
218:2
core199:8 corner183:8 corollary, ( 2 ) 126:7
126:16
corporate ( 3 ) 95:12
95:16 126:25
corporation; ( 13 )
12:17 12:23 29:3
29:10 29:17 30:21
31:5 31:14 31:25 43:3
43:6 43:9 57:11
correct: ( 10 ) 2:14 10:7
12:2 13:1 16:9 16:22
99:2 109:23 131:20
209:5
corrected ( 3 ) 20:6
175:19 201:16
correction ( 2 ) 2:8 4:5 correctly,163:24 correspondence, ( 9 )
116:15 116:24 156:16
156:22 161:9 168:5
168:15 181:22 188:7
corresponds169:14 corrupt ( 7 ) 68:23 74:5
79:18 79:23 79:24
88:17 89:6
corruption130:23 couldn’t ( 8 ) 2:19 30:17
31:6 52:24 88:5
108:11 150:2 207:10
counsel ( 8 ) 1:23 39:11
64:25 105:18 158:14
159:18 195:15 202:9
counteragents176:3 counterclaim ( 12 ) 22:7
22:13 64:15 81:13
87:16 131:6 131:11
172:22 174:7 179:2
203:14 209:5
counterclaimants. ( 3 )
67:8 72:13 73:13
country, ( 4 ) 158:13
158:17 189:16 203:25
couple ( 6 ) 3:5 86:10
110:20 171:25 194:24
203:8
course, ( 24 ) 6:14 6:17
16:8 18:9 18:12 38:2
40:22 55:13 58:8
73:20 82:20 88:3 88:7

101:1 119:11 158:9
159:12 171:18 175:3
187:9 188:3 192:9
194:2 201:20
courtesy1:8
courts ( 5 ) 23:7 74:11
164:25 181:18 205:19
covenant135:5
cover ( 2 ) 8:15 189:25
covered ( 2 ) 93:12
93:12
CPR163:25
crack154:6 cracks216:9 create198:13 creation67:12 creature119:19 credibility99:21
credit ( 8 ) 22:10 22:12
22:18 22:21 53:25
204:10 209:4 209:13
creditor» ( 3 ) 140:17
176:17 176:24
creditors.176:4 criminal ( 4 ) 31:3 31:5
31:7 79:3
criticise187:21 criticism ( 2 ) 28:17
86:12
criticisms86:18 cross.141:21
cross-examination, ( 25 ) 18:12 38:4
41:18 62:10 85:16
157:19 165:13 165:19
166:16 168:15 170:19
172:24 178:8 179:14
179:19 179:24 193:25
194:2 194:12 194:22
195:3 196:13 199:18
199:20 214:22
cross-
examinations.140:7 cross-examine.195:7 cross-examined ( 2 )
160:13 198:25
cross-examining,34:1 crossed72:12 crude5:2 cruising121:20 crux93:24 crystallise105:3 currency,111:9 currently35:8 cusp23:6
custodians ( 2 ) 203:24
206:12
custody ( 4 ) 189:3
189:20 192:3 192:14
custom211:4
cut ( 5 ) 51:4 136:1
136:7 136:23 187:1
cuts138:10 cutting185:10

D
D/106,211:8
{D106/1530/1}.211:12
{D106/1530/7}211:25
{D116/1726.3/3}175:9 D129/2087?213:19
{D129/2087/1}?213:22
daily201:12 damage, ( 2 ) 14:3
136:3
damages. ( 6 ) 112:19
113:20 114:12 118:19
119:1 140:4
dangerous201:15

daresay195:12
dark ( 2 ) 24:25 158:8
date ( 11 ) 51:24 72:14
73:14 88:11 98:12
101:13 104:9 109:14
160:25 183:12 184:19
dates ( 2 ) 76:3 94:14
day, ( 27 ) 23:23 24:19
48:19 52:14 57:1
66:11 70:25 71:1
89:12 117:18 120:7
142:24 143:5 144:15
151:2 151:14 152:13
153:8 158:17 167:2
170:10 173:8 193:14
203:3 216:10 216:11
216:12
day-to-day146:1 days ( 9 ) 15:1 30:25
121:21 151:16 156:19
160:21 168:1 172:24
187:9
deal ( 13 ) 8:18 43:5
92:22 148:1 162:20
169:11 182:6 191:13
193:16 193:16 194:14
200:10 208:9
dealings177:24
deals, ( 2 ) 62:19 215:6
dealt ( 10 ) 66:20 71:8
80:11 124:20 135:15
166:17 171:22 174:12
193:13 193:15
«Dear ( 2 ) 5:11 5:14
death100:12 debate, ( 2 ) 33:14
218:2
debts ( 2 ) 174:23
210:23
December ( 16 ) 73:22
90:17 94:9 94:18
94:23 95:2 95:8 95:16
96:3 96:4 96:4 97:21
98:8 100:10 135:14
156:24
December/ January,103:20
decide ( 11 ) 14:2 53:4
62:15 105:3 127:4
130:9 142:16 143:11
164:3 218:21 219:3
decided: ( 3 ) 17:9
47:19 134:17
decision ( 3 ) 56:7 56:9
145:5
decline182:2 deduce103:4 deep135:18 default, ( 8 ) 95:17
119:9 127:23 135:3
135:3 135:9 135:13
135:14
defences101:12 defend ( 2 ) 61:18
124:25
defendant37:23 defendant’s ( 2 ) 131:25
182:14
defendants. ( 14 ) 1:7
30:14 35:2 35:7 36:11
39:5 50:16 80:21
132:13 147:15 148:4
169:5 182:16 200:13
defer84:6
deferred, ( 2 ) 116:17
116:19
deficit, ( 4 ) 133:8
134:13 134:15 134:18
define ( 2 ) 26:1 145:11
defining20:21

definitely ( 2 ) 24:3
154:4
definition, ( 2 ) 58:16
101:18
defraud124:24 defrauded ( 2 ) 57:11
123:24
degree ( 2 ) 136:18
154:20
delegated195:4 deleted72:25 deliberate107:2 delicately214:10 Deloittes163:20 demarcation202:12 demonstrate ( 5 ) 74:15
87:9 115:2 193:1
202:9
demonstrating50:12 demur16:19 depart115:21 departure ( 2 ) 3:25
99:18
dependent114:25 depends ( 5 ) 42:16
58:9 133:11 142:9
203:17
depiction213:14 deploy194:20 deploys85:19 depositions,158:14 depositories203:24 derived164:5 described ( 2 ) 176:3
204:19
description? ( 2 )
176:25 214:9
desperately86:21 despite145:18 destabilising146:25 detail ( 8 ) 6:16 13:14
162:17 166:10 167:6
172:5 173:15 205:14
detailed ( 4 ) 53:6 149:6
207:11 208:2
detect ( 2 ) 153:2
156:13
detected ( 2 ) 156:16
156:22
determine ( 2 ) 7:15
12:12
devalued.126:13 develop.146:2 developed ( 4 ) 31:7
113:1 113:19 132:11
develops. ( 3 ) 74:25
156:17 164:3
devil85:12 devote161:15
dictate ( 3 ) 39:2 59:16
88:21
diddle132:18 didn’t. ( 26 ) 17:22
19:12 19:22 20:14
24:20 37:13 38:9
44:25 48:2 48:19
58:22 58:23 94:7 96:9
100:17 100:17 123:4
127:17 130:13 132:16
134:12 141:20 173:12
186:25 187:6 210:23
die151:7
difference ( 8 ) 61:24
107:3 127:24 128:6
130:14 133:1 146:17
152:20
different ( 28 ) 9:1 15:7
16:6 17:18 20:15
20:16 22:19 25:1 28:1
38:23 44:25 46:13
55:18 68:24 92:23

96:6 103:23 119:15
119:15 127:15 128:7
130:12 160:16 162:18
172:12 182:19 201:8
213:1
difficult ( 28 ) 13:25
14:9 24:17 37:15
37:20 37:21 40:3
41:21 58:18 87:18
100:25 101:15 108:23
111:12 126:24 127:1
139:13 140:1 145:1
147:21 151:20 157:23
163:10 178:2 178:3
201:2 213:9 218:7
difficulties ( 6 ) 62:22
113:1 161:6 162:7
167:24 191:1
difficulty ( 7 ) 16:11
16:13 23:19 49:18
115:20 144:21 201:25
Diplock105:20
direct ( 4 ) 53:7 76:19
85:19 180:22
directed ( 18 ) 27:20
45:23 52:5 52:10
53:13 53:16 58:4
65:19 134:2 148:25
149:18 150:1 150:2
150:3 150:5 150:7
153:23 179:10
direction ( 11 ) 55:24
56:1 56:3 57:4 57:13
57:18 58:7 59:2 79:13
86:20 185:12
directions ( 4 ) 54:23
68:11 68:13 77:10
directly ( 2 ) 56:4
135:17
director ( 4 ) 76:23
175:15 205:21 206:11
directors ( 3 ) 29:22
29:23 43:10
disadvantage146:14 disagree, ( 3 ) 38:2
64:12 209:16
disagreement.93:6 disapply ( 2 ) 107:17
128:4
disappointed, ( 2 )
181:20 182:5
disaster195:20 discharge ( 2 ) 137:13
145:15
discipline168:8 disclose ( 2 ) 191:20
192:12
disclosed. ( 8 ) 182:25
183:1 184:7 185:17
191:17 206:3 208:4
215:11
disclosure ( 25 ) 43:6
54:18 57:21 58:2
72:15 73:15 75:11
104:8 111:4 120:20
182:7 182:13 182:14
185:2 185:8 187:16
188:23 191:11 203:14
203:22 204:13 204:16
207:8 208:1 215:23
discounted.219:5 discourtesy,1:18 discovered205:25 discretion, ( 2 ) 107:15
108:8
discuss199:15 discussed ( 2 ) 6:15
65:24
discussing.56:23 discussion30:18 disengaged215:4

disguised144:1 dishonest, ( 39 ) 12:19
14:18 17:22 17:24
18:2 18:14 21:23
22:17 22:22 24:9
28:4 30:16 30:23
31:14 33:10 34:2 34:4
35:10 37:11 37:17
38:14 38:17 38:25
39:24 48:1 54:21
56:2 56:3 57:19 59:23
61:15 65:19 65:19
66:14 98:6 99:9 141:1
142:10 143:13
dishonestly. ( 11 )
12:10 12:25 15:18
40:11 50:23 55:14
57:15 63:21 63:23
132:16 137:5
dishonesty ( 22 ) 11:23
12:20 13:8 21:16
30:16 33:7 35:8 38:13
38:22 40:8 40:12
40:17 50:18 56:8
57:25 62:17 66:8
135:24 137:1 141:5
141:8 141:17
disposal20:14 disposed140:24 dispute ( 3 ) 189:5
189:7 218:19
dissipation ( 2 ) 68:19
90:5
distil173:2 distinct144:25 distinction ( 4 ) 3:4
14:11 61:11 129:22
distinguish16:20 disturb168:8 disturbs8:18 diversion. ( 2 ) 89:15
196:17
divide8:15 divided8:14
divider ( 12 ) 4:18 9:22
78:2 140:14 152:4
166:8 167:12 172:1
174:14 174:14 182:13
211:8
dividing ( 2 ) 3:23 3:24 divorce2:10 divorced90:3 doctrine81:9 document ( 12 ) 6:18
57:22 90:1 175:21
179:7 184:4 184:6
199:8 207:24 208:12
208:15 214:6
documentary215:9 documents, ( 36 ) 9:2
9:6 57:23 59:17 59:19
66:12 68:3 111:13
120:20 163:18 169:25
171:3 182:17 182:20
183:16 185:25 186:6
187:19 188:24 189:2
189:6 189:7 191:17
191:19 192:2 192:24
193:7 194:23 199:9
203:24 203:24 204:19
204:20 206:20 206:22
206:23
dodgy ( 4 ) 19:2 24:3
38:8 38:9
does ( 34 ) 3:6 7:24 7:25
11:9 25:11 26:2 36:13
36:20 40:15 47:10
50:12 51:20 80:12
83:6 86:6 86:24 88:13
91:12 95:9 98:12
104:19 117:8 117:9

124:5 161:8 164:19
176:7 178:16 195:14
201:18 207:16 207:24
211:4 217:18
doesn’t ( 34 ) 3:16 7:4
10:25 21:24 30:4
31:21 32:16 33:8
33:11 58:6 72:18
111:7 114:21 119:18
122:4 125:17 128:2
128:9 128:19 131:8
131:10 132:10 136:10
136:17 169:2 172:5
177:16 185:4 197:23
200:3 200:10 200:11
204:21 213:5
doing ( 20 ) 3:9 55:4
63:6 68:2 100:18
105:12 117:21 129:19
132:18 159:8 164:17
171:11 187:21 190:10
194:22 202:14 210:10
212:25 212:25 217:22
don’t ( 188 ) 1:20 1:21
1:24 3:3 4:9 5:16 6:24
7:24 11:4 12:2 12:8
12:19 15:16 15:22
16:14 16:18 17:11
18:5 18:6 18:17 19:23
21:2 22:5 22:12 23:17
26:9 29:12 29:21
29:23 30:24 32:24
33:24 34:8 34:21 36:7
37:19 38:2 40:2 40:14
42:12 43:9 44:20 46:2
46:5 46:14 48:11
48:14 48:19 48:21
49:5 53:15 54:13
56:1 56:14 56:15 59:9
59:17 61:14 61:16
62:7 62:22 63:7 64:8
67:13 67:20 69:10
69:16 69:22 70:2
70:5 70:24 71:6 74:16
79:15 82:24 85:19
87:10 87:24 88:21
89:9 89:23 90:23 91:4
91:13 92:13 92:15
93:21 94:13 94:13
96:24 97:18 101:15
102:2 103:7 104:8
105:4 105:6 106:8
106:10 107:18 109:14
109:19 109:23 110:19
112:4 112:19 113:14
113:16 115:7 115:10
116:6 118:5 118:8
118:9 119:7 119:8
122:25 123:4 124:7
124:24 125:13 125:21
127:6 127:7 128:5
128:24 130:25 133:20
134:20 136:6 138:1
138:15 140:11 142:5
142:5 144:14 144:20
145:18 146:2 148:4
148:24 152:13 152:15
153:7 154:13 154:18
155:24 156:14 162:9
162:11 162:21 166:9
167:22 174:17 179:7
179:17 187:21 189:9
189:20 190:6 192:8
192:11 193:3 193:11
193:24 195:24 196:22
198:4 199:4 200:14
200:16 201:22 201:24
204:13 204:14 204:15
204:18 204:22 205:3
206:7 207:17 209:17

210:3 210:9 211:11
216:22 217:16 219:17
done ( 53 ) 14:5 21:20
28:9 29:16 29:19
41:16 43:19 45:24
48:7 55:23 58:11
60:7 63:16 69:6 71:10
71:10 74:9 74:23
75:23 79:12 82:18
82:19 82:19 83:20
86:3 86:4 86:6 86:6
86:19 105:7 125:20
135:4 135:5 137:4
139:15 148:3 163:4
170:21 179:12 183:22
184:1 184:2 188:11
189:10 194:20 196:16
197:23 202:21 212:19
213:9 218:14 219:8
219:9
doors, ( 2 ) 29:18 55:1
double-check,214:1 double-checking.214:2 doubt ( 4 ) 8:3 8:3 70:1
169:13
down ( 15 ) 23:1 32:15
67:9 70:3 81:23 82:5
84:10 103:12 132:13
136:19 161:2 168:25
175:23 180:20 214:25
dozen, ( 2 ) 49:16 64:16
dozens64:15
draft, ( 6 ) 9:21 10:13
140:13 188:16 188:19
201:23
draw ( 9 ) 4:13 61:12
69:4 120:8 139:4
155:12 181:6 187:15
209:15
dress. ( 2 ) 202:2
202:19
dressed202:24 drop32:15 drunk152:20
due ( 2 ) 58:7 192:9
duly203:22 dummy172:17 during ( 2 ) 157:19
212:10
duties137:14 duty163:22

E
e-mail ( 8 ) 167:2 173:14
183:14 184:13 186:4
190:15 200:7 200:9
e-mails184:6 eager58:21
earlier, ( 15 ) 21:15 25:4
31:8 66:24 67:1 90:15
97:11 114:1 121:16
187:10 201:14 216:7
216:13 217:1 217:3
earnest60:21 ears24:2
earth ( 2 ) 57:16 167:22
easier ( 4 ) 8:13 8:20
62:9 183:8
easiest140:15
easily ( 2 ) 27:21 154:15
easy ( 5 ) 52:10 58:13
58:14 105:19 152:1
eaten151:4 economical86:13 effect ( 5 ) 17:11 84:12
118:1 136:4 213:18
effective179:15

Effectively ( 7 ) 104:6
133:24 169:23 182:1
188:24 206:11 206:16
efficient ( 3 ) 101:10
169:23 178:9
effort, ( 2 ) 195:8 195:8
eight52:21
either ( 16 ) 11:20 12:22
15:11 21:15 24:5
38:19 54:23 55:23
116:17 135:23 136:21
165:17 179:10 201:13
202:8 207:4
either/or206:21 elaboration9:9 element130:11 elements ( 2 ) 71:19
180:2
Elias145:13 elicit142:19
else. ( 18 ) 17:12 40:16
51:8 55:17 55:24
59:16 59:25 68:12
69:20 85:15 93:4
158:1 158:4 159:19
165:15 172:20 190:12
217:8
email173:8 emerges31:1 emphasis,146:20 emphasise,179:18 emphasises28:21 empire169:19 employed162:2 employee ( 3 ) 11:24
36:4 133:3
employees ( 11 ) 11:2
25:12 35:24 39:19
41:6 44:3 44:9 45:5
45:8 62:13 65:13
enable ( 3 ) 41:11
126:17 130:19
enables117:25 enclosures, ( 3 ) 166:18
166:20 167:6
encourage ( 4 ) 100:23
146:12 181:9 196:17
encouraged179:10 encouragement ( 3 )
58:24 180:13 185:13
end ( 31 ) 4:12 14:15
23:23 24:19 36:1
48:18 52:13 52:20
61:3 66:11 70:25
72:12 73:7 84:19
89:12 93:20 97:22
106:19 117:18 137:3
137:23 139:7 141:11
151:2 152:5 158:17
158:18 161:13 161:21
167:12 190:14
endlessly. ( 4 ) 22:20
154:19 187:23 187:24
endorsed152:24 ends.196:22 enforcement ( 3 ) 83:17
85:3 213:10
engage2:19 engineer115:8 engineering17:7 England ( 3 ) 110:14
112:2 112:4
English ( 28 ) 58:20
84:18 86:1 107:1
107:11 111:8 118:10
118:11 118:19 119:19
124:5 126:22 126:23
127:8 128:1 128:4
128:8 128:9 128:11
128:19 129:23 129:25

130:3 135:21 136:14
213:6 217:23 218:8
enjoy ( 2 ) 110:17
202:18
enormous, ( 2 ) 19:18
147:9
enough ( 16 ) 10:25
15:24 21:3 28:9 29:4
41:7 56:20 63:18 64:1
64:10 80:22 107:4
119:22 123:3 146:25
181:19
ensure ( 5 ) 3:16 24:15
154:6 163:24 169:23
entered ( 2 ) 211:13
212:1
enthusiastic181:2 entire ( 3 ) 134:19
143:13 195:16
entirely ( 6 ) 8:1 16:7
22:24 26:3 125:5
169:3
entities. ( 3 ) 33:18
141:1 210:16
entitled ( 11 ) 11:17
13:10 19:13 48:1
59:24 89:4 93:7 99:19
146:8 168:24 188:6
entity ( 2 ) 31:13 40:8 entrails,93:21 entrusted136:3 episode39:24 epithet213:6 equality145:24 equally ( 5 ) 13:25 85:9
151:16 202:10 215:22
equipped3:10 equity ( 2 ) 136:4
137:15
equivalent59:4 erase147:21 Eschwege.2:5 especially ( 3 ) 57:7
62:21 160:21
esse,101:3 essence19:16 essential ( 3 ) 25:2
191:14 196:18
essentially, ( 11 ) 22:6
38:13 39:24 66:7
67:16 77:6 78:22
82:11 112:18 163:13
172:6
establish ( 22 ) 11:19
12:13 14:1 14:9 15:23
16:1 16:14 51:13
51:14 59:3 67:10
94:17 98:15 108:22
130:10 130:24 132:12
168:24 174:4 177:7
218:22 219:2
established ( 15 ) 43:11
74:17 75:3 84:20
131:7 133:5 133:6
134:14 134:15 134:16
137:23 139:17 139:18
141:9 176:21
establishing ( 2 )
107:21 170:5
establishment,83:10 estimate,161:22 estimates156:25 estoppel105:9 eve65:7
even ( 21 ) 6:25 38:17
43:9 59:1 63:3 95:1
101:22 107:11 114:6
125:3 130:3 139:1
141:4 141:8 147:17
150:8 151:23 171:5
187:8 194:6 195:14

evenly154:15
event ( 14 ) 1:11 83:5
90:4 91:8 94:16 95:1
104:22 108:21 112:19
140:2 144:16 160:9
164:1 197:19
events ( 14 ) 21:17
24:14 78:7 92:10 97:4
103:19 104:17 109:7
129:14 129:15 143:1
197:9 206:8 206:9
eventuality132:7 ever ( 3 ) 39:1 142:17
203:20
every ( 14 ) 1:19 15:22
16:15 36:4 40:25
42:15 46:20 51:20
51:25 142:17 144:15
150:13 158:15 161:9
everybody ( 5 ) 59:21
59:22 198:15 199:8
217:4
everyone ( 9 ) 21:1
40:16 51:7 51:8 53:15
56:1 105:10 195:20
198:9
everything ( 14 ) 50:6
55:17 63:13 69:12
78:10 84:15 84:21
84:25 97:20 97:21
98:3 126:8 150:23
219:8
everywhere,59:22 evidence, ( 34 ) 11:24
18:12 23:25 25:21
25:24 30:10 46:12
48:8 61:15 66:13
68:1 77:5 111:3 111:4
112:1 116:4 116:15
116:16 116:19 117:25
118:6 118:24 119:9
120:2 124:3 127:24
129:15 163:19 163:23
164:7 164:9 183:2
189:13 215:9
evident202:12 evidential ( 2 ) 14:15
110:2
evidentially118:23 Exactly. ( 14 ) 22:10
25:4 32:4 38:3 51:6
70:25 74:19 76:7 83:8
108:10 132:23 149:4
156:24 215:8
exaggerated.60:23 exam180:5 examination,158:19 example, ( 21 ) 13:19
18:21 27:7 27:11
48:23 50:21 54:2
56:20 58:19 58:19
61:17 63:17 64:25
74:14 109:5 136:14
170:6 173:3 200:18
219:13 219:16
Examples. ( 3 ) 20:24
165:21 171:25
exams,180:5 exasperating28:19 exceeded,150:23 except ( 10 ) 23:10
31:21 66:9 75:4 80:2
102:5 123:15 202:20
206:14 217:5
exception ( 5 ) 123:18
124:3 124:5 128:19
158:18
exceptional ( 5 ) 23:10
161:5 164:13 171:23
217:5
excessive64:24

exchange174:18 exchanges ( 2 ) 185:17
185:18
exciting.168:4 exclude158:24 excuse ( 2 ) 50:12 86:7
execution, ( 2 ) 55:15
75:24
executive. ( 5 ) 33:25
51:25 57:19 123:23
130:6
executives ( 9 ) 12:10
12:24 17:21 47:17
49:17 64:20 66:8
123:22 125:15
exercise ( 4 ) 25:25
86:13 107:15 108:8
exercised ( 2 ) 59:9
81:18
exercising129:16 exhausting ( 3 ) 151:23
216:3 217:4
exhaustive ( 3 ) 11:15
25:11 26:12
exhibit193:19 exhibited214:2 exhibits. ( 2 ) 4:21
173:11
exigencies47:7 exist,31:21 existence11:20 expand6:13 expect ( 14 ) 41:12
85:25 87:10 154:18
154:20 158:7 159:6
159:8 169:10 171:5
178:25 182:4 193:20
200:20
expected172:23 expecting46:7 expense, ( 2 ) 132:3
181:14
experienced,151:24 expert? ( 8 ) 115:23
116:3 163:19 163:23
164:9 164:11 164:24
173:23
expertise164:6 experts ( 4 ) 119:17
140:5 160:13 160:15
explain ( 17 ) 15:20
33:19 40:3 74:20
74:22 78:19 94:7
112:15 137:18 167:9
172:19 192:8 195:23
195:24 196:1 207:12
218:3
explained. ( 11 ) 6:3
6:16 67:21 77:5 93:3
122:13 137:17 196:1
207:3 207:6 213:5
explaining, ( 2 ) 40:2
146:9
explanation. ( 10 ) 25:1
27:22 98:19 99:14
117:5 133:17 178:20
185:20 206:5 219:24
explanations208:1 explode182:3 explore114:22 explored ( 2 ) 105:20
213:12
exposed191:7 expressed162:24 expressly156:4 extend47:10 extending143:21 extends62:16
extent ( 16 ) 6:24 12:23
13:7 16:24 34:7 81:7
90:21 102:1 126:11

129:22 137:13 150:15
154:1 163:22 194:3
200:12
extra ( 3 ) 120:19
148:19 204:5
extract ( 3 ) 175:10
175:20 176:5
extracts91:20 extraordinary48:17 extravagant25:25 extreme ( 2 ) 133:6
164:22
extremely46:6 eye.149:6
eyes ( 2 ) 31:21 151:2
eyesight150:24

F
fabricated.59:17
face ( 2 ) 134:3 178:22
faced59:13 facie206:19 facilitate90:7 facing, ( 4 ) 20:17
212:22 212:25 213:2
facto3:7 factor6:9
factual ( 5 ) 105:21
105:22 128:7 138:2
140:2
fail. ( 8 ) 15:22 94:13
98:11 98:15 104:13
108:22 131:10 139:5
failed. ( 6 ) 16:4 104:10
104:25 131:11 141:14
141:15
fails, ( 2 ) 128:18 135:16
failure86:7
fair ( 23 ) 16:18 22:11
22:24 39:6 85:6 85:20
102:3 108:14 115:17
127:5 145:21 145:22
146:5 146:17 146:21
148:18 154:6 158:3
159:24 161:15 182:1
186:21 202:22
fairer ( 2 ) 63:8 106:8
fairly ( 13 ) 2:25 23:15
24:11 64:22 124:15
150:1 154:15 156:20
171:23 175:21 179:1
179:12 219:3
fairness. ( 22 ) 13:6
13:14 18:9 20:19
21:11 24:6 24:15
24:18 39:1 51:4 60:2
95:9 95:21 120:12
144:18 144:20 150:4
150:11 153:24 156:8
159:13 168:7
faith ( 2 ) 144:23 212:10
fall ( 2 ) 164:14 200:24
fallback,91:10 fallen130:20 familiarising171:6 family ( 2 ) 132:24
195:18
fantastic31:12
far ( 25 ) 3:2 6:10 8:1
10:25 18:17 34:5 37:2
47:9 47:10 50:4 50:20
52:6 62:16 65:23
70:6 84:24 92:7 123:3
126:21 165:1 171:16
183:1 192:25 196:3
196:4
fast ( 2 ) 81:14 100:20
faster.151:10

fault. ( 3 ) 22:1 38:5
170:4
favour ( 4 ) 202:14
210:11 212:19 213:9
feature, ( 2 ) 93:4
212:16
featured39:23 features83:17 featuring95:19 February ( 5 ) 95:8
95:17 214:12 214:14
220:4
feed107:5
feel ( 19 ) 1:24 70:2
70:5 85:8 86:11 93:12
105:5 120:8 133:2
145:18 148:18 157:3
160:11 164:19 168:10
189:18 190:11 195:25
218:16
feeling ( 3 ) 106:18
116:22 157:3
feels ( 2 ) 3:3 114:9
felt ( 3 ) 3:23 124:9
149:1
fertile164:14 fettering121:12
few. ( 5 ) 110:9 120:11
120:11 148:11 158:6
fiction40:24 fiddly171:15 fields164:6 fifthly,89:1 fight105:13 fighting55:16 figment31:4
figure ( 2 ) 40:1 114:12
figures63:19
file ( 2 ) 199:1 199:8
files,138:14
final ( 4 ) 132:13 187:2
202:1 202:1
financial ( 2 ) 170:1
213:9
find ( 33 ) 8:13 14:14
18:5 18:6 32:4 52:17
71:24 76:13 94:11
97:17 97:20 104:10
107:16 111:12 113:19
115:6 115:15 117:18
118:18 118:20 140:15
154:24 168:4 177:8
188:10 194:18 208:7
215:17 215:20 215:23
216:3 216:13 217:1
finding ( 3 ) 40:3 114:10
138:2
findings. ( 3 ) 30:10
117:18 140:3
finds94:8
fine, ( 13 ) 95:17 118:16
122:2 122:5 138:3
140:9 162:11 179:13
202:5 202:6 208:24
210:2 216:20
fingered46:11
finish ( 5 ) 8:9 120:17
144:5 144:6 160:24
finished ( 3 ) 8:23 10:4
161:1
firm ( 2 ) 164:11 186:5
firmly28:8
first ( 45 ) 3:8 4:9 4:14
5:4 5:13 6:12 6:15
7:2 10:18 22:17 24:8
35:12 40:23 41:3
44:12 45:17 45:25
65:1 79:12 102:5
104:11 121:1 124:14
124:20 124:22 128:16
152:1 152:4 153:12

156:15 156:17 157:1
157:8 157:17 157:18
157:19 160:7 169:4
174:14 180:4 182:11
197:11 203:3 203:12
211:18
Firstly, ( 7 ) 12:11 13:18
14:11 28:16 30:8
139:21 187:14
fish ( 2 ) 22:21 88:1
fit132:10 fits60:22
five ( 8 ) 20:10 29:23
61:2 62:1 100:9
121:21 157:2 168:1
five-minute ( 2 ) 215:18
216:4
five-page166:11
flag. ( 4 ) 19:22 149:15
158:4 160:7
flagrant135:23 flee79:4
flexible ( 9 ) 24:17
153:11 194:15 194:17
216:1 216:6 216:8
216:15 216:25
flow177:18 flows41:4 flush132:20 flying155:10
focus ( 6 ) 77:20 89:1
138:24 154:20 165:13
191:14
focused ( 2 ) 4:20
188:10
focusing.194:18 follow ( 16 ) 9:2 9:13
15:5 48:22 54:14 98:7
111:12 111:18 118:12
130:8 130:22 131:5
136:6 136:10 200:14
215:12
followed, ( 2 ) 24:13
184:8
following ( 6 ) 38:10
43:3 93:16 138:15
167:10 197:9
follows ( 3 ) 115:3
130:15 130:20
foot ( 3 ) 80:24 138:22
180:12
footing; ( 8 ) 20:12 30:4
100:23 117:24 139:1
145:20 201:17 201:18
footling178:11 footnote ( 2 ) 209:19
209:20
force: ( 3 ) 65:8 127:9
136:24
forced ( 2 ) 46:8 79:4 forcing191:24 forecast157:14 foreclose164:8 Foreign ( 2 ) 107:17
119:13
forensic ( 4 ) 16:17
19:14 99:21 163:13
forewarned ( 2 ) 180:25
181:1
forgeries,131:12 forgery. ( 2 ) 59:14
154:10
forget,196:7
form ( 2 ) 72:21 138:9
formal ( 4 ) 54:16 54:18
68:4 210:9
format185:2 formed35:22
formula ( 2 ) 44:1 44:2 formulate203:17 forth72:10

forthcoming,184:22 forward.180:12 found ( 7 ) 27:4 32:6
76:18 110:1 149:24
177:11 182:18
foundation,158:21 foundations,46:14 four ( 5 ) 29:23 102:12
102:16 115:17 172:24
four-day151:14
fourth ( 2 ) 41:17 167:14
framework ( 2 ) 32:15
32:16
frank215:22
fraud ( 57 ) 12:5 13:8
13:21 13:22 15:8 21:9
22:2 22:3 22:6 23:10
23:12 26:8 27:12
27:24 28:10 30:20
32:25 33:6 33:22 35:7
35:11 38:18 42:15
43:2 43:9 46:4 47:15
50:18 51:21 52:16
52:17 52:24 67:7
74:20 93:15 93:17
96:3 97:8 103:18
104:11 104:12 104:20
109:25 114:25 115:2
123:18 123:21 123:25
125:14 125:23 125:24
127:12 127:17 136:12
137:6 138:24 159:15
fraudster.36:6 fraudsters ( 2 ) 29:22
48:13
fraudulent, ( 36 ) 12:8
13:21 15:4 17:19 18:3
19:11 23:14 23:17
29:20 33:23 33:24
46:17 47:12 47:14
49:8 49:10 49:23
51:24 52:1 52:17
52:25 54:15 64:17
74:9 74:13 75:24 90:5
90:7 91:15 109:10
109:12 110:7 115:9
125:19 125:20 138:11
fraudulently. ( 2 ) 49:18
139:16
free ( 4 ) 116:1 157:3
189:16 190:10
free-for-all83:23 freestanding95:22 freezer80:19 freezing206:4 French162:7 frequency202:15 Friday,1:1
friend’s ( 4 ) 9:4 10:23
89:21 106:11
friendly108:20 friends ( 4 ) 2:4 9:15
78:1 132:24 fro,177:18 frontispiece4:23 fruitless ( 2 ) 149:8
149:23
frustrate179:8 fry,88:1
FTI ( 6 ) 185:17 186:9
191:5 191:6 191:16
193:19
Fuel78:24
«Full ( 6 ) 33:6 43:8 50:3
198:23 198:24 215:22
fully ( 3 ) 193:20 210:3
217:16
function ( 3 ) 66:3
145:16 181:25
functions129:17
funds ( 2 ) 27:15 190:11

funny,116:11
further ( 38 ) 1:12 4:6
5:21 10:22 10:24
15:10 45:7 81:22
86:24 88:16 90:16
92:6 93:7 93:19 94:4
95:14 96:13 97:9
99:24 106:6 111:3
112:22 113:24 114:14
120:2 122:16 124:2
125:22 134:11 156:12
166:12 167:18 175:4
183:19 186:23 200:8
208:14 212:2
future ( 3 ) 5:25 104:8
108:9

G

{G4/111/1},9:17
game15:21
gather ( 3 ) 14:1 84:2
117:8
gathered202:15
gave ( 9 ) 15:12 54:16
57:18 58:6 59:2 67:24
68:13 77:10 96:6
gears,100:21 general ( 23 ) 24:16
51:18 71:21 75:7
77:21 79:3 83:23
86:11 90:19 115:6
119:8 133:12 133:16
139:4 144:14 144:25
148:16 162:23 175:15
205:21 206:11 216:21
216:24
generally. ( 3 ) 78:12
201:5 202:17
generous161:11 gentleman ( 2 ) 2:16
183:2
gently84:13 genuine168:11 genuinely ( 2 ) 84:22
121:11
get ( 49 ) 30:14 31:12
33:12 33:15 39:21
41:5 48:5 53:3 55:12
55:23 62:9 76:12
78:23 80:14 80:15
80:17 80:23 87:6
93:21 102:5 102:8
115:10 118:19 134:13
137:15 142:3 143:20
147:11 147:19 151:1
152:19 153:7 153:8
153:14 154:13 158:15
159:3 164:23 170:10
170:14 186:3 188:25
193:11 202:24 204:12
207:10 208:10 214:3
215:14
gets19:6
getting ( 5 ) 59:11 79:6
137:24 165:20 180:15
ghastliness,88:5 gist ( 2 ) 81:4 91:3
give ( 32 ) 11:4 18:11
25:11 34:5 34:11 45:2
46:12 55:25 58:6 61:9
61:15 62:15 67:21
84:3 88:10 97:12
98:16 98:21 98:24
104:19 143:4 146:2
146:9 165:21 183:2
189:13 201:19 204:6
204:10 209:4 216:7
218:2

given? ( 35 ) 42:3 42:5
43:6 45:22 54:18 56:3
62:11 62:21 67:19
68:11 79:20 81:20
83:19 89:4 94:14
117:3 117:4 118:24
126:16 145:22 145:23
154:12 160:7 160:24
161:25 162:10 167:24
184:18 190:25 200:19
203:14 203:22 204:6
205:11 209:13
gives ( 8 ) 11:24 27:7
27:11 98:5 114:20
208:13 214:9 216:14
giving ( 9 ) 42:14 69:6
69:7 85:10 88:23
105:21 106:3 108:2
108:25
goalposts.39:6
gone ( 4 ) 3:23 131:22
168:14 176:19
good ( 25 ) 1:4 1:14
1:16 1:17 1:18 1:18
9:20 41:7 44:5 48:8
60:8 60:8 60:25 61:9
105:16 111:24 117:9
137:3 181:24 192:25
203:10 208:11 212:9
219:25 220:1
goodness187:12 goods:175:24 goodwill.172:15 govern.126:22 governed129:25 Government ( 2 ) 87:5
87:21
governmental87:24 Governor, ( 4 ) 75:12
77:12 87:15 130:23
grabs,75:2 grand20:2 granted169:5 granular20:14 grapple55:6 grappling ( 2 ) 55:5
55:13
grateful, ( 16 ) 2:2 3:21
6:12 8:6 10:9 23:20
25:3 25:22 26:4 33:4
60:10 92:18 93:5
147:5 149:3 159:11
gratuitously13:8 great ( 8 ) 53:5 85:3
85:9 148:1 149:24
159:22 161:5 194:14
greater ( 2 ) 7:19 134:23 greatest150:3 grinds195:15
grips ( 2 ) 138:5 147:20
gross ( 7 ) 99:13 135:24
136:1 137:13 139:6
141:1 141:23
ground, ( 5 ) 6:4 8:16
35:5 39:2 164:15
grounds ( 9 ) 30:15 43:3
74:7 74:8 89:13 111:7
146:24 150:21 191:21
group, ( 6 ) 67:3 74:4
74:4 112:25 174:25
176:3
grouping, ( 2 ) 65:13
65:14
groupings65:24 guarantee,131:2 guarantees, ( 2 ) 126:11
131:7
guard ( 2 ) 169:24
179:13
guesses156:25 guessing118:1

guidance, ( 4 ) 144:15
147:12 197:4 201:19
Guide, ( 2 ) 32:9 32:20
guided150:18
guilty ( 4 ) 24:20 31:20
50:18 190:12
gulf.85:4 Guz152:21

H
habit158:14 habitually ( 2 ) 3:8 3:9
hadn’t ( 6 ) 8:24 10:6
142:20 159:9 159:11
161:1
half, ( 9 ) 60:20 61:1
104:11 104:13 104:18
120:14 120:15 120:17
152:12
halt195:16
hand ( 2 ) 16:21 26:13
(Handed) ( 3 ) 26:20
33:3 177:13
hands ( 2 ) 179:11
193:2
happened ( 21 ) 2:20
49:23 50:7 54:3 56:21
82:22 84:24 89:24
91:23 92:13 95:11
96:4 97:20 97:21 98:3
99:8 113:18 124:23
133:22 133:22 182:24
happening, ( 4 ) 7:16
29:18 39:25 195:3
happens ( 8 ) 39:1 55:1
84:25 98:4 125:18
128:10 135:2 168:25
happy ( 4 ) 83:18 85:4
123:12 217:14
hard ( 22 ) 80:13 85:12
150:7 152:1 170:10
170:14 172:19 196:20
197:1 197:12 198:3
198:5 198:6 198:7
198:11 198:18 198:19
198:20 198:21 199:1
199:5 203:20
harder ( 2 ) 90:12 90:21
hasn’t ( 11 ) 4:23 80:15
83:1 86:4 99:13 129:4
181:2 183:21 183:25
186:6 206:12
hatched ( 2 ) 49:24 50:6
haven’t ( 32 ) 4:19 13:7
17:23 26:25 29:1 50:4
52:23 60:24 64:19
78:9 127:13 129:8
138:4 138:16 141:15
147:10 147:11 154:21
156:16 156:22 157:13
171:9 171:10 185:20
187:12 192:11 192:16
192:17 193:7 202:19
203:9 207:13
he’s85:17
head ( 3 ) 76:8 111:23
141:4
heading, ( 3 ) 80:24
114:8 114:14
hear ( 8 ) 8:6 8:19
102:17 124:12 151:17
153:21 154:2 154:4
heard ( 3 ) 116:6 153:1
158:2
hearing. ( 11 ) 2:13 2:14
9:4 26:16 73:16 80:11
80:18 101:11 150:22
182:12 209:12

hearings, ( 3 ) 2:23
90:11 115:14
hearsay77:5
heart ( 2 ) 39:9 105:23
heinous56:21
held ( 10 ) 7:11 31:3
31:5 47:22 94:14
104:6 104:9 160:25
182:20 210:8
help ( 10 ) 2:16 18:20
20:22 22:4 22:11 32:8
126:2 173:20 184:21
198:12
helped ( 2 ) 171:7
182:21
helpful ( 11 ) 4:5 26:19
28:14 61:17 70:13
136:22 140:8 164:20
200:6 213:7 215:17
helpfully ( 2 ) 173:8
173:14
Henry ( 3 ) 58:20 59:2
59:4
here, ( 24 ) 7:21 51:5
69:25 75:19 78:10
84:24 96:25 99:17
102:16 105:22 107:10
122:4 125:15 131:18
133:22 141:3 152:10
155:21 164:14 178:1
198:25 211:16 214:10
214:22
hereafter.219:12 hesitate ( 2 ) 37:9
201:10
high ( 4 ) 52:9 59:16
59:21 139:10
highly87:23 HILDYARD: ( 531 ) 1:4
1:14 1:17 2:6 2:12
3:2 4:15 4:17 4:19
5:6 5:12 7:3 8:8 8:11
8:17 9:6 9:20 9:23
10:1 10:7 10:11 10:14
10:17 11:14 13:1
13:17 13:23 14:8
14:13 14:19 14:23
15:6 15:9 15:20 16:20
17:3 17:7 17:14 18:20
19:5 19:16 20:3 20:21
20:25 21:18 22:8 23:6
23:22 24:16 25:7
25:13 25:23 26:7
26:11 26:15 26:17
26:19 27:2 27:8 27:10
27:18 28:1 28:19
28:24 29:12 30:1
30:11 30:13 30:19
30:24 32:10 32:18
33:8 33:19 34:14
34:20 34:25 36:22
37:7 37:12 37:15
37:19 38:2 38:7 39:7
39:14 39:18 40:1 40:6
40:22 41:25 42:4 42:9
42:13 43:15 43:20
43:23 44:8 44:11
44:17 45:2 45:6 45:9
45:11 45:15 45:19
46:1 46:19 47:1 47:18
48:14 48:18 48:25
49:2 49:6 49:9 49:11
49:19 49:22 51:9 52:3
52:9 53:3 54:2 54:8
54:22 55:20 56:17
56:19 58:2 58:9 58:17
60:4 60:12 60:19
61:14 61:18 61:22
62:1 62:5 62:23 63:16
64:12 64:21 65:18
65:23 66:3 66:10

66:20 67:20 67:24
68:6 68:10 68:17 70:8
70:12 70:16 70:20
71:2 71:12 71:16
72:16 72:21 72:24
73:9 73:11 73:18
73:23 74:2 74:14
74:21 75:1 75:9 75:15
75:18 76:5 76:11
76:14 76:20 76:24
77:8 77:16 77:24 78:1
78:5 78:17 79:1 79:10
79:18 79:22 80:1
80:4 80:7 82:12 82:17
82:23 83:4 83:25 85:8
85:16 85:24 86:9 87:2
87:13 87:18 88:4 88:8
88:12 89:11 89:17
89:23 90:4 90:23
91:12 91:14 91:21
92:3 93:9 93:21 94:15
95:1 95:5 95:23 96:2
96:11 96:14 96:21
96:23 97:4 97:8 97:10
97:15 97:19 98:1 98:9
98:14 99:2 99:8 99:15
99:19 100:2 100:4
100:15 100:22 101:5
101:22 102:4 102:13
102:19 105:1 106:17
107:6 107:10 107:19
108:11 108:15 108:17
108:20 109:6 109:15
109:20 110:4 110:11
110:17 110:25 111:14
111:18 111:21 112:10
112:13 112:16 113:3
113:5 113:8 113:12
113:14 113:23 114:23
115:15 115:24 116:4
116:10 116:14 116:24
117:7 117:13 117:23
118:8 118:15 119:6
119:22 120:6 120:15
120:24 121:4 121:16
122:2 122:7 122:13
122:23 124:12 125:11
126:1 127:21 128:5
128:14 128:21 129:2
129:7 129:10 130:8
130:24 131:9 131:19
132:21 133:4 133:16
133:20 133:25 134:11
134:22 135:4 135:7
135:18 136:12 136:16
136:22 137:6 137:24
138:4 138:20 138:25
141:6 141:15 141:19
141:24 142:1 142:3
142:10 142:15 142:24
143:3 143:8 143:12
143:16 144:3 144:9
144:12 145:10 146:16
146:19 147:12 148:7
148:13 148:15 148:21
149:3 149:20 150:15
150:20 151:19 152:6
152:16 152:25 153:6
153:13 153:15 153:25
154:4 154:11 154:23
155:3 155:6 155:18
156:6 157:6 157:22
158:13 159:2 159:17
160:4 160:10 160:19
160:21 162:1 162:9
162:21 163:7 163:14
165:2 165:9 165:14
165:21 165:23 165:25
166:4 166:7 166:23
167:1 167:3 167:16
168:19 169:7 169:13

169:20 170:12 170:15
172:4 173:6 174:20
175:7 176:2 176:9
176:12 176:16 176:24
179:20 181:6 182:15
183:12 183:15 183:21
183:25 184:12 184:15
184:18 186:15 186:21
187:3 187:18 187:24
188:1 188:4 188:10
188:16 188:19 189:1
189:11 189:18 190:8
190:13 190:18 190:22
191:9 191:16 191:22
192:1 192:13 192:19
192:23 193:7 193:13
193:22 194:1 194:13
195:5 195:11 195:24
196:9 196:14 196:24
197:18 197:21 197:25
198:5 198:9 198:16
198:23 199:2 199:11
199:15 199:23 199:25
200:2 200:6 201:2
201:5 202:7 202:22
203:2 203:6 203:8
204:1 204:5 204:8
204:23 205:13 206:19
207:10 207:13 207:19
207:22 208:3 208:9
208:17 208:20 208:23
209:10 209:14 209:22
209:24 210:1 210:12
210:15 210:19 210:22
211:7 211:10 211:15
211:20 213:12 213:23
214:6 214:9 214:14
214:16 214:21 214:25
215:3 215:8 215:11
216:1 216:18 216:24
217:10 217:20 218:7
218:20 219:6 219:17
219:23
himself ( 2 ) 171:6
206:14
hinges,153:22 historic74:24 historical58:19 history. ( 3 ) 75:6 83:3
206:18
hmm. ( 2 ) 79:1 211:20
hold ( 2 ) 92:22 210:11
holder, ( 2 ) 136:17
213:1
holders137:14
hole ( 3 ) 5:20 140:16
212:4
holepunch,175:12 home ( 8 ) 31:9 40:17
41:5 56:19 198:4
200:3 200:4 203:20
homework? ( 2 ) 197:21
197:22
honest ( 12 ) 29:10
29:23 30:22 37:4
38:20 40:16 48:16
48:19 52:23 54:20
64:3 129:6
honestly139:24 honesty. ( 2 ) 16:25
46:9
hope ( 8 ) 66:16 117:2
120:17 121:19 161:9
193:10 201:20 218:14
hoped. ( 2 ) 60:25
183:15
hopefully175:5 hoping ( 2 ) 60:16
154:14
horrible195:16 horse83:22

hostile189:12 hounded187:13
hour ( 9 ) 43:24 60:20
61:1 120:14 120:15
120:16 120:17 120:18
155:9
hours, ( 2 ) 180:15
193:14
House ( 7 ) 74:12 74:15
76:9 76:23 77:13
136:20 137:4
Housekeeping ( 9 ) 1:3
120:12 124:11 144:11
150:22 185:23 196:21
215:16 221:3
houses ( 2 ) 22:20
74:18
however ( 5 ) 131:16
159:25 174:24 181:12
181:17
huge ( 4 ) 95:11 95:12
172:21 181:14
human ( 4 ) 40:8 43:16
67:22 67:24
hundreds17:5 hurdle156:2 hypothesi, ( 5 ) 40:14
56:10 97:15 98:14
100:1
hypothesis ( 9 ) 95:15
98:23 99:25 101:17
104:24 109:1 132:8
132:23 133:2
hypothetical ( 2 ) 43:1
56:14
hypothetically ( 2 )
56:22 57:8

I

I’m ( 84 ) 8:12 9:4 20:3
23:20 25:3 25:22
26:11 27:6 32:8 32:10
33:12 33:19 38:2
39:15 40:1 42:15
42:16 46:23 47:2
48:10 51:6 54:6
54:11 57:6 66:5 72:16
77:18 79:24 82:24
84:22 84:22 86:12
88:9 88:12 92:18
93:5 93:14 96:9 98:7
100:15 103:5 103:7
103:8 109:13 109:13
115:21 125:4 130:8
131:5 137:7 138:4
140:7 140:12 141:6
143:9 149:17 155:1
160:16 162:1 165:15
167:22 168:3 170:3
179:20 181:6 188:22
190:22 193:4 193:5
194:11 196:21 197:13
203:20 206:16 208:13
209:25 210:14 210:18
211:11 213:7 215:10
216:1 217:19 217:25
I’ve ( 3 ) 21:2 128:24
179:7
{I18&19/18/361.4}.183:7
{I20/26/31},167:14 I21.9:15
{I21/27/22},196:25
{I21/27/23}197:7
{I21/27/31}.9:16
{I21/27/33}10:11 idea. ( 7 ) 9:20 29:18
81:17 118:3 181:3
194:11 219:23
identification11:18

identified ( 25 ) 13:6
13:8 19:19 28:8 30:21
39:4 41:8 42:17 42:18
50:1 50:4 50:20 64:20
83:7 93:2 99:10 126:6
131:22 145:16 148:17
173:24 174:3 177:23
199:12 207:25
identifies ( 2 ) 9:7 93:5
identify ( 45 ) 12:24
13:1 13:5 14:19 15:17
15:22 16:12 16:15
16:16 17:8 17:20 18:8
18:22 20:23 23:13
28:22 29:6 29:7 29:9
29:21 29:25 30:6
31:23 32:6 33:25 35:2
39:5 40:9 40:12 40:25
43:12 44:3 47:13
47:16 51:1 55:15 60:6
63:15 65:16 69:24
86:18 149:12 150:1
150:7 156:10
identifying ( 6 ) 25:15
33:17 40:8 42:16
149:25 172:2
identity28:7 ignorance.135:20 ignore ( 6 ) 147:14
148:5 148:6 158:21
168:13 176:24
ignoring1:24
(iii)? ( 4 ) 34:18 44:17
70:4 70:8
illegality» ( 2 ) 33:7
132:2
illustrates26:18 illustrative,26:23 imaginary56:17 imagination,31:4 imbue73:25 immediately, ( 3 ) 82:19

impossible, ( 7 ) 108:24
140:1 153:7 153:10
154:13 156:9 205:9
impressed149:13 improper ( 2 ) 98:22
108:5
impropriety, ( 8 ) 19:13
21:9 61:7 61:13 61:20
98:16 98:21 105:12
improving,150:24 impugned28:3
imputed ( 3 ) 49:12 52:2
123:15
imputing38:13 inappropriate158:20 inarguably169:25 (inaudible)35:22 incentive82:18 inception50:2 incidence124:17 Incidentally ( 2 ) 170:22
209:7
include ( 2 ) 34:15 44:1 includes64:15 including ( 6 ) 11:3
35:24 45:10 45:12
87:22 138:8
inconsistency66:12 inconsistent ( 5 ) 16:25
19:7 23:25 24:2 108:4
increase7:25 Independent, ( 3 ) 5:3
56:9 95:15
independently, ( 2 )
63:18 219:10
INDEX221:1
indicate ( 2 ) 119:22
201:10
indicated ( 6 ) 121:16
157:9 161:8 163:5
163:7 198:2
indicating ( 2 ) 120:25

information,166:12 informing43:17 inherited67:9 inkling162:4 innocence ( 7 ) 41:12
97:6 97:16 98:20
109:2 109:24 110:8
innocent ( 6 ) 16:4 55:4
97:21 97:22 98:18
109:7
innocently.139:23 innominate ( 2 ) 16:23
41:6
inquiries ( 6 ) 165:16
167:17 167:19 168:14
206:6 208:1
inquiry, ( 2 ) 170:1
190:20
insert96:22 insisted186:17 insofar ( 3 ) 78:3 88:16
127:8
inspection. ( 2 ) 191:21
192:23
instance ( 2 ) 123:22
134:23
instructed ( 2 ) 182:22
184:17
instructions ( 9 ) 34:17
44:19 44:22 67:22
67:25 69:7 215:21
215:25 218:4
insulated ( 2 ) 131:4
133:9
insulting,13:9 Insurance ( 3 ) 140:25
174:6 177:22
Insurance’s173:24 intend34:2
intended ( 5 ) 1:15 1:17
26:1 82:21 142:21
intent,14:17

172:5 200:24 211:13
212:1 217:23
introduce,93:23 introduces168:7 introduction, ( 3 ) 69:11
93:14 103:17
inverted168:21 investigate ( 2 ) 87:4
206:8
investigated163:16 investigation ( 3 )
213:17 213:20 213:25
invite ( 12 ) 49:13 52:17
57:24 69:12 69:15
71:24 79:7 91:25
113:18 119:2 127:3
144:16
invited ( 2 ) 71:22
125:11
invites98:12
inviting ( 2 ) 42:2 104:2
involve ( 2 ) 65:24
190:16
involved ( 22 ) 12:10
13:11 13:12 13:13
16:1 16:2 18:10 28:4
28:22 30:22 38:19
46:18 46:24 48:15
53:16 63:15 87:22
88:4 169:2 183:20
185:7 213:17
involvement,89:13 involving ( 4 ) 96:7 97:1
132:4 156:18
irrelevant ( 3 ) 23:16
60:15 89:7
irritated162:25 irritating195:12
isn’t ( 20 ) 13:15 15:21
19:22 22:8 23:22
28:12 52:11 53:8
58:14 59:20 59:22

J
{J1/20/9},182:18
January ( 6 ) 1:1 166:9
167:15 172:2 173:18
184:24
job. ( 4 ) 77:14 78:23
79:6 216:2
joined ( 4 ) 50:3 51:10
71:24 72:4
jolly64:2
judge, ( 10 ) 28:10
147:2 157:23 158:21
159:18 159:22 160:25
182:2 191:10 217:14
judgment, ( 4 ) 2:16
42:3 82:13 146:1
judgments ( 2 ) 74:24
80:14
judicial ( 5 ) 6:21 6:22
81:17 145:16 202:19
Julia.»174:25 July135:7
jump ( 3 ) 72:9 95:11
95:12
juncture50:17
June, ( 12 ) 94:12 95:9
95:24 98:4 98:17 99:8
101:19 103:5 105:25
108:24 109:4 135:9
juniors172:6 jurisdiction, ( 2 ) 67:11
107:5
jury158:22 justicability,80:11 justified120:2 justify ( 2 ) 192:19
192:22

K

37:19 43:9 46:2 46:17
46:19 46:21 46:24
48:6 48:20 51:3 54:25
55:20 55:20 57:10
57:17 58:16 59:7 59:8
59:10 61:7 61:8 61:8
64:8 65:9 70:14 72:2
74:16 76:14 88:2
88:18 89:23 90:23
91:5 92:13 92:16
95:24 100:17 100:17
101:24 105:22 112:14
115:10 115:10 115:24
118:5 119:7 119:8
126:20 126:24 133:20
134:20 139:19 141:20
145:10 148:7 148:24
149:11 151:19 151:22
152:18 157:14 162:9
162:21 163:7 166:9
168:6 174:17 177:10
178:16 179:4 179:7
182:3 197:14 200:14
202:25 205:15 205:20
207:17 208:9 208:18
214:23 217:18 218:17
knowing ( 5 ) 24:8 46:4
61:23 62:25 70:21
knowingly,14:3 knowledge. ( 26 ) 27:22
30:6 50:3 52:1 61:20
71:14 71:16 73:24
74:1 74:2 74:6 75:16
75:22 76:5 77:17
77:21 78:6 78:18
79:11 83:19 84:4
87:9 88:24 89:2 89:13
174:21
known ( 4 ) 21:15 39:8
191:8 206:2
knows ( 14 ) 50:25 55:5
57:9 57:10 59:16

143:19 158:23
immense,150:25

216:25
indication ( 3 ) 94:22

intention. ( 2 ) 50:9 87:1
intentionally ( 3 ) 7:11

66:5 87:13 121:2
135:5 136:8 152:17

84:11 119:7 155:10
163:12 175:13 177:14

imminent.186:17 impact ( 2 ) 85:11
156:11
impartial149:1 impermissible ( 3 ) 17:8
22:24 37:16
implement ( 2 ) 47:21
53:18
implementation ( 3 )
47:25 63:1 63:10
implementations212:6 implemented ( 8 ) 13:3
47:25 49:24 52:4 53:9
53:11 54:9 55:3
implicate65:12 implicated,65:10 implication37:10 implications62:8 implicit ( 2 ) 75:23
75:25
implicitly116:12 impliedly38:17 import22:23 importance, ( 2 ) 108:22
201:16
important ( 31 ) 19:25
20:9 20:19 27:5 39:6
55:10 67:11 69:8
100:6 102:2 116:5
121:18 129:22 150:3
151:16 156:19 160:8
160:15 162:14 171:15
171:20 172:11 173:22

147:6 150:23
indications117:3 indirect37:17 individual ( 5 ) 7:17
18:18 18:19 48:11
88:14
individually ( 2 ) 36:24
107:25
individuals ( 10 ) 13:2
31:23 31:24 32:6
42:17 42:17 42:18
43:14 46:3 49:24
inevitable ( 2 ) 126:7
126:16
inevitably180:1
infer ( 13 ) 12:20 15:4
17:6 29:19 32:25
33:22 49:13 50:10
84:21 90:14 91:22
99:12 110:7
inference ( 20 ) 27:20
28:10 69:2 69:15 84:4
88:24 91:25 97:12
98:6 98:13 98:16
98:21 98:24 102:6
104:2 104:5 108:3
108:25 109:17 115:9
inferences ( 6 ) 57:25
69:12 79:8 84:19
104:2 181:6
inferred ( 8 ) 12:18
52:16 75:22 76:6 77:8
78:6 87:9 92:3

133:18 140:12
intentions212:6 interest ( 7 ) 6:16 7:19
134:4 178:14 178:15
186:3 219:18
interested ( 2 ) 98:15
162:22
interesting,111:25 interests6:3 interface126:25 interfered ( 2 ) 74:10
137:5
interim209:11 internal ( 9 ) 12:22
12:23 53:23 55:1
57:17 183:9 213:17
213:20 213:24
internally ( 3 ) 23:25
66:12 194:17
interpretation146:7 interrogatories ( 2 ) 179:21 207:11
interrupt ( 3 ) 157:6
159:7 204:11
interrupts51:7 intervention159:21 interventions.60:11 intimidate150:12 intimidated,150:16 into ( 29 ) 7:12 16:13
19:14 22:23 31:12
33:15 38:25 46:7 82:8
86:11 93:21 111:9

155:6 159:19 172:19
isolated,133:14 isolation, ( 2 ) 69:10
71:19
issues ( 16 ) 8:15 16:17
70:25 95:10 114:19
114:20 132:8 137:20
140:9 144:11 149:25
150:2 150:7 160:16
178:9 184:5
It’s ( 42 ) 13:14 20:1
34:6 35:10 37:22
39:22 42:7 42:8 51:22
53:8 63:11 73:23
82:23 90:12 94:24
95:12 98:4 104:16
106:19 112:19 114:15
116:14 127:1 127:14
128:3 129:2 129:5
129:8 129:13 136:12
141:2 158:22 159:16
165:6 166:19 170:9
176:18 176:19 177:12
192:17 198:10 207:18
Item10:7
its ( 29 ) 8:15 16:12 31:2
50:13 53:7 63:1 67:7
72:21 96:19 96:19
102:13 113:1 113:2
126:12 126:17 126:25
131:1 131:4 132:4
134:16 134:19 134:23
135:22 163:1 174:6

{K/8/19},80:23
{K1/8/1}?80:17
{K1/8/24}, ( 2 ) 81:2
81:19
{K1/8/26},81:21
{K1/8/27},81:24 keen ( 2 ) 34:22 74:3
keep ( 15 ) 3:20 7:5 8:21
23:21 39:7 60:4 85:14
99:19 121:22 145:15
154:17 156:8 194:10
195:6 206:17
Kekhman. ( 3 ) 26:14
27:17 28:3
ken.175:22
kept ( 3 ) 81:16 163:21
163:24
key ( 6 ) 83:9 83:14
147:17 172:18 199:9
212:23
keys,213:1 Kikot(?)80:3 kill58:24
kind. ( 14 ) 17:8 80:22
92:2 118:25 124:4
136:2 139:15 140:8
141:9 168:13 168:15
187:20 201:22 202:16
kindly170:12 king,58:20
knew ( 8 ) 17:21 37:12
38:8 38:11 60:7 64:2
76:1 77:9
know ( 94 ) 3:3 4:10
12:15 12:19 12:22
13:10 18:10 19:23
19:24 21:1 21:24

178:18 196:15 212:22

L

land ( 2 ) 42:20 149:7
language ( 3 ) 217:13
217:20 218:17
languages,219:9 laptop,197:7
large ( 4 ) 84:24 154:1
159:6 209:2
largely ( 2 ) 85:23 151:4
largest74:18
last ( 11 ) 3:8 11:25
13:20 31:2 76:25
120:7 145:4 171:11
196:25 204:17 214:12
late ( 7 ) 61:4 103:10
107:10 111:25 148:3
186:23 213:24
later, ( 12 ) 2:15 17:23
17:24 75:10 95:3 96:6
97:23 110:18 135:19
200:21 201:14 218:11
latest ( 3 ) 9:21 109:11
140:13
latitude143:4 lavatory32:1 lawfully, ( 2 ) 139:22
139:22
lawyer, ( 6 ) 114:17
182:21 182:25 205:1
205:4 205:19
lawyers ( 2 ) 86:2 205:2
lay ( 2 ) 19:18 175:2
lead155:20

leading195:8 learn ( 2 ) 129:15
156:20
least ( 14 ) 17:9 19:9
19:20 54:22 64:15
77:9 81:7 83:6 139:16
145:3 145:7 146:5
146:18 203:3
leave ( 16 ) 1:13 88:12
110:17 122:15 146:20
153:11 155:8 157:17
165:2 181:4 186:7
196:10 204:13 206:22
215:14 218:21
leaves ( 3 ) 139:25
140:4 188:22
left ( 10 ) 10:1 25:10
66:1 106:15 106:17
110:19 116:3 122:12
157:18 214:11
legal ( 20 ) 2:19 7:20
31:3 31:4 31:9 32:14
40:7 53:8 54:12 106:3
123:13 129:24 147:16
158:6 160:2 207:1
210:4 210:9 210:12
213:14
legally ( 2 ) 89:6 211:23
legitimate ( 6 ) 167:7
168:22 169:18 172:16
177:25 197:24
length,5:9 lenient64:22
less ( 9 ) 6:20 90:20
109:16 139:20 146:13
162:13 179:14 181:1
188:11
lest ( 3 ) 218:11 219:11
219:25
Let ( 22 ) 9:16 14:10
23:20 25:5 62:15
85:15 89:20 94:7
112:6 112:11 121:3
129:12 137:20 149:17
156:17 160:19 164:16
188:4 208:9 208:17
208:18 209:6
let’s ( 12 ) 18:21 20:13
33:20 43:1 71:4 76:12
105:13 110:17 111:14
156:6 160:4 165:9
Letang105:20 letter ( 24 ) 5:1 5:14
5:14 5:15 5:20 23:9
112:23 116:4 166:9
166:11 167:6 167:14
172:2 183:10 183:12
183:17 185:5 188:17
188:20 189:25 190:23
196:25 196:25 197:8
letters ( 5 ) 162:19
165:10 168:13 187:1
188:22
level139:10 liability ( 21 ) 11:21
12:12 15:25 31:8 31:9
40:18 59:3 104:19
115:19 123:14 123:15
124:17 124:17 124:18
126:19 127:1 131:7
133:9 134:9 141:4
163:8
liable. ( 12 ) 13:5 18:23
21:5 31:3 31:5 40:11
57:2 125:3 126:5
132:7 134:15 139:8
liberty45:2 licensed136:20
lie; ( 2 ) 116:25 149:7
lies ( 2 ) 23:2 38:5

life. ( 5 ) 95:22 158:9
195:13 195:14 195:16
light ( 2 ) 45:16 190:2
like, ( 48 ) 5:16 15:21
31:4 36:11 37:20
38:18 65:3 65:25
72:7 78:19 82:9 115:4
132:3 132:23 133:2
133:2 134:7 136:4
137:20 138:18 144:2
145:25 148:11 158:22
159:4 162:18 167:11
172:17 173:15 176:10
176:19 177:2 177:8
178:19 180:4 182:8
184:21 196:3 197:4
197:14 198:1 204:20
211:18 212:2 212:18
212:20 215:1 216:21
likely. ( 9 ) 18:4 54:5
94:10 108:21 109:16
114:18 173:1 178:8
178:22
likes46:14
limit ( 2 ) 80:4 80:5
limitation ( 33 ) 10:21
11:4 11:11 11:11
11:13 25:14 34:15
35:18 35:21 35:25
44:2 44:7 44:14 44:15
48:17 65:25 100:7
100:22 100:25 101:6
101:9 101:11 101:14
101:25 103:11 105:2
105:15 106:14 106:22
107:11 107:16 107:18
108:6
limitations72:3 limited ( 5 ) 2:25 18:5
26:13 45:11 194:6
limits24:18
line, ( 7 ) 3:23 3:24 38:5
44:12 61:12 170:20
187:16
lines. ( 2 ) 59:7 179:23
link,208:11 liquid173:25
list ( 10 ) 5:9 5:19 11:5
11:15 25:11 56:16
62:22 68:15 69:25
70:17
listen ( 2 ) 156:19 159:7
literally ( 3 ) 57:22
63:12 120:11
litigant ( 3 ) 7:17 161:9
202:9
litigation ( 9 ) 20:11
168:23 169:6 169:22
173:2 178:22 195:13
195:19 205:12
little ( 15 ) 9:5 27:14
45:3 60:20 76:13
93:14 109:15 120:19
148:3 152:16 171:21
178:11 185:3 198:13
216:6
live ( 3 ) 83:21 102:1
219:14
Livitskaya(?).80:3 LLC ( 2 ) 13:20 175:24
load88:5 loan155:11
loans ( 5 ) 167:20
167:20 198:14 209:1
209:3
locate,183:8 located69:19
logic ( 2 ) 111:19 118:12
long ( 25 ) 5:9 5:18
30:18 30:19 32:10
65:22 70:17 74:23

85:4 86:23 87:6
123:11 147:16 149:24
150:23 151:23 155:24
160:22 161:10 162:10
180:15 188:16 188:19
198:2 205:4
longer ( 9 ) 5:15 30:25
120:10 155:20 160:5
160:12 180:16 205:7
206:13
look ( 48 ) 5:16 9:2 9:19
10:12 11:1 12:3 20:15
24:25 26:20 48:19
48:23 49:2 52:20
65:8 65:11 68:14
71:5 72:19 73:8 74:24
75:17 77:23 81:25
89:20 90:13 93:18
93:20 95:10 97:23
105:8 106:25 109:22
110:16 113:22 119:17
142:23 143:10 144:2
147:23 157:7 162:3
162:19 167:11 170:23
171:2 171:10 201:24
209:6
looked ( 10 ) 19:8 24:2
24:3 64:25 65:6 91:11
146:1 152:25 171:9
193:7
looking ( 18 ) 9:24
10:22 32:18 44:9
44:11 91:18 93:22
133:25 135:21 146:21
146:22 146:24 151:13
152:2 163:18 174:5
194:23 209:9
looks ( 21 ) 5:15 6:6
19:21 23:16 35:14
36:15 38:8 72:17
100:11 121:11 121:13
132:23 134:7 141:10
175:11 176:10 177:8
177:21 184:21 204:19
204:20
loose196:22
Lord’s ( 8 ) 9:6 105:15
122:18 158:5 163:2
203:12 204:9 213:16
Lordship, ( 130 ) 1:5
4:7 4:10 4:11 4:24 5:3
5:16 18:2 23:5 26:24
29:7 32:9 33:5 33:13
35:1 35:4 36:8 49:5
59:24 60:17 70:23
79:21 80:10 80:11
80:12 80:15 80:17
80:22 80:23 81:3
81:3 81:5 81:16 81:21
81:25 82:8 83:12
83:18 84:11 85:4
85:14 86:16 90:10
94:8 101:8 102:17
102:22 104:24 107:3
107:15 114:8 123:2
123:19 133:13 136:15
140:13 140:18 141:10
144:16 144:22 145:7
151:17 153:19 154:2
154:17 154:19 155:10
156:4 159:14 159:24
159:25 163:11 163:17
164:1 164:19 166:18
167:11 168:21 169:5
169:16 169:17 171:14
171:18 171:24 171:25
173:3 173:22 174:11
174:15 175:1 175:9
175:11 175:12 175:13
176:6 176:7 176:14
177:13 177:14 177:19

178:18 179:12 182:11
182:18 183:4 183:18
183:24 184:13 184:16
185:3 185:16 185:24
187:1 197:2 198:11
199:5 199:7 200:14
202:3 202:5 204:11
204:17 209:11 209:20
211:2 211:4 211:12
212:22 216:16 218:24
Lordship’s ( 23 ) 1:6
4:13 16:8 16:13 16:19
20:12 48:22 66:19
66:23 99:22 106:13
112:23 114:2 134:2
150:19 175:5 179:11
184:25 185:12 186:1
186:13 209:7 211:5
lose134:5 losing133:18
loss ( 14 ) 110:22 111:8
111:23 112:3 112:17
112:18 118:3 119:19
134:23 139:8 139:17
145:18 145:19 174:7
lost. ( 6 ) 66:19 131:6
132:22 134:8 170:4
218:20
lot ( 23 ) 12:4 12:16
29:15 51:4 55:6
100:21 110:15 144:22
148:1 153:22 153:23
154:9 158:10 161:2
164:25 165:16 166:5
170:4 190:10 194:8
195:8 196:2 204:15
lots ( 7 ) 55:3 86:21
95:10 155:16 167:6
199:3 207:25
low ( 3 ) 50:9 50:11
103:3
lower ( 4 ) 140:16
175:11 211:6 212:3
LPK ( 7 ) 175:10 175:12
175:20 176:6 176:14
176:19 177:23
luck.144:4 Ludo15:21
Lukina ( 4 ) 204:24
205:20 206:5 206:21
lunch ( 2 ) 1:12 121:8
Luncheon122:9 lying.116:13

M
machine199:11 mad186:19
Madam ( 2 ) 5:11 5:15
Magna202:16 magnitude.55:12 Magnum ( 7 ) 9:13
80:23 175:8 196:21
197:7 197:11 197:24
main ( 6 ) 23:2 23:3
70:13 130:11 130:24
133:1
mainly35:22 major215:13 majority ( 3 ) 14:25
70:24 173:24
makes ( 6 ) 9:1 10:12
18:3 69:14 171:18
209:2
making ( 9 ) 1:9 4:7
116:13 170:16 174:7
178:17 179:2 197:5
203:14

man ( 6 ) 31:16 154:1
154:3 164:24 179:1
203:19
managed55:11 management, ( 7 )
65:22 88:10 96:19
102:13 103:22 145:1
164:3
manager217:11 mandated138:8 mandatory.105:9 many ( 7 ) 12:15 59:13
88:18 131:16 171:1
181:17 188:8
March ( 17 ) 80:12
80:18 82:9 90:18
94:10 95:17 97:22
98:3 98:11 99:1 99:5
135:7 135:9 135:14
160:9 161:24 175:11
March/April,103:22 marginal.85:8 mark1:21
marker ( 3 ) 83:21 84:10
103:12
markers159:13 Marsal.163:21 match118:9 material ( 4 ) 185:21
186:3 205:10 217:18
maternity155:8 matter ( 42 ) 1:22 3:20
3:24 5:25 6:8 16:2
18:9 21:25 22:11
22:12 30:4 32:16
41:17 52:10 53:1
59:10 65:21 83:1
86:25 89:7 109:25
115:24 116:17 120:6
123:23 125:17 128:19
135:21 136:10 137:23
145:20 157:25 158:1
164:2 165:3 175:2
177:16 177:17 182:7
185:1 186:2 194:21
matters ( 26 ) 7:7 24:18
41:13 43:7 58:16 66:2
75:6 78:7 82:1 82:5
112:9 112:17 124:11
148:10 148:17 149:16
154:14 165:25 178:21
180:18 183:23 193:13
193:15 193:20 201:13
203:9
Matvienko. ( 13 ) 5:3
5:17 6:8 66:21 71:21
74:4 74:10 75:7 75:12
77:19 78:4 87:22
88:24
Matvienko’s ( 2 ) 77:2
83:24
maximum196:17 maybe ( 8 ) 21:18 32:8
110:23 120:22 133:16
133:25 197:9 197:23
Maylsheva, ( 27 ) 10:20
25:17 35:25 36:2
47:19 50:6 52:22 59:9
64:5 68:2 68:11 71:17
96:18 102:9 102:11
107:23 123:23 124:23
127:18 129:16 129:19
130:5 131:24 132:3
132:16 153:25 214:11
McGregor’s ( 2 ) 9:8
9:16
McKenzie ( 2 ) 1:6 2:9
mean ( 25 ) 6:5 7:24
22:5 40:15 62:9 63:12
69:22 74:14 87:20
94:16 102:20 120:24

126:9 137:8 141:25
146:19 147:25 155:19
161:8 162:3 169:2
192:13 194:23 199:24
206:15
means ( 14 ) 14:1 14:2
31:7 32:3 45:13 63:12
66:7 104:21 161:22
162:21 192:21 206:24
218:2 218:3
meant ( 7 ) 4:4 30:16
67:17 73:6 146:6
152:21 193:8
measure ( 2 ) 84:25
161:13
meeting? ( 3 ) 53:25
139:14 139:15
meetings ( 2 ) 58:3
103:1
member ( 4 ) 15:17
15:22 16:15 116:21
memorandum.»73:17 memory, ( 6 ) 30:9
32:24 163:23 191:6
191:18 214:11
mention ( 5 ) 2:3 11:6
49:16 128:13 148:12
mentioned70:17 Mercury ( 3 ) 13:20
17:19 46:25
merits103:6 message,188:9 met171:9
metadata ( 2 ) 184:4
186:11
method118:4 Meylanov, ( 3 ) 184:16
185:5 193:18
Meylanov’s190:15 micro91:9 micropoint215:16 middle ( 4 ) 82:21 95:20
215:19 215:19
might ( 35 ) 6:2 7:16
26:24 32:15 37:1 37:3
37:21 38:23 50:1 65:5
88:1 88:4 96:5 96:14
106:6 122:13 126:10
126:15 132:14 133:17
134:15 139:14 140:15
154:16 157:10 169:1
170:18 171:3 172:17
173:19 179:23 180:20
183:24 185:2 185:10
Mikhail182:20 mild7:6 miles95:14 Millett,110:5 million ( 9 ) 174:16
174:17 174:17 175:24
175:25 175:25 177:2
177:20 179:2
Milner64:25 mimic157:23
mind. ( 13 ) 4:9 8:21
20:13 26:22 81:12
83:25 115:5 122:4
123:16 147:1 194:10
195:2 195:6
minimum163:24 minute159:21 minutes. ( 2 ) 61:2 62:1
Mironova ( 4 ) 11:3
45:10 68:17 152:12
mirror ( 4 ) 172:13
172:17 173:13 204:1
misactivities;18:24 mischance,56:25 misdeed,57:2 misheard,106:12 mislead140:11

misled, ( 2 ) 204:12
204:22
misremembered.107:7 mistake ( 3 ) 173:9
173:10 173:10
misunderstood ( 2 )
20:3 148:25
mix118:9 mixture163:17
mode, ( 2 ) 71:5 117:15
moment? ( 19 ) 8:12
50:5 67:13 68:10
74:16 116:6 118:18
119:25 120:9 124:8
135:22 143:12 160:17
192:5 200:5 203:18
206:10 215:13 219:18
moments,147:17 Monday ( 8 ) 50:23 63:7
199:24 199:25 200:3
216:16 216:18 220:4
money ( 5 ) 130:15
134:5 145:19 176:19
177:19
monies204:10 month, ( 2 ) 184:8
184:20
months ( 2 ) 188:8
194:24
Moreover,57:20 morning. ( 10 ) 1:4 1:15
1:16 1:17 1:18 127:23
152:3 158:6 202:25
215:19
mortgagee135:22 Moscow26:14 mother-in-law,175:17 move ( 5 ) 62:7 71:9
124:10 125:10 144:8
moved ( 2 ) 64:7 78:23
mover.69:24 moves47:6
moving ( 2 ) 100:20
150:17
muddle ( 2 ) 31:12
126:1
mundane,83:16
must ( 92 ) 2:3 2:8 3:15
8:3 11:12 12:5 12:6
12:7 14:5 16:22 17:19
21:24 22:3 22:8 22:15
23:9 23:13 24:21
31:24 32:23 32:25
34:6 35:13 38:22 40:9
40:12 40:18 40:19
40:25 41:10 42:10
42:17 43:15 44:5
47:22 47:24 49:17
50:24 54:9 54:10 60:6
61:7 61:8 61:8 61:20
62:7 63:1 63:6 63:16
64:7 65:9 65:11 65:20
73:16 75:22 82:12
86:19 88:19 90:14
92:13 94:23 97:23
101:16 104:3 104:20
111:18 111:21 116:17
118:12 118:18 120:1
128:7 131:13 143:16
143:18 147:4 150:4
156:9 172:22 177:10
192:3 192:5 192:19
193:22 201:14 204:11
210:12 216:3 218:8
218:11 219:10 219:19
mustn’t ( 5 ) 41:18
83:22 150:12 193:22
210:13
mutual205:5 myself,99:22 mysterious205:6

mystery28:7

N
{N22/53.2/10},5:18 name, ( 6 ) 31:2 44:5
58:22 65:12 172:18
206:1
named ( 15 ) 17:23
36:24 44:6 45:12
62:24 68:12 70:19
80:2 80:3 88:17 88:25
102:14 102:16 107:25
109:4
names ( 10 ) 43:10
45:18 62:14 62:16
63:4 65:16 80:5
155:16 191:7 192:18
narrative ( 4 ) 69:3
93:16 103:18 132:10
narrowed,178:10 native ( 2 ) 217:12
217:20
naturally130:19
nature ( 3 ) 12:20 93:17
195:18
naughty? ( 9 ) 28:25
32:2 41:9 54:9 55:23
55:24 55:25 56:11
75:16
Nazarov». ( 7 ) 182:20
182:21 183:17 183:19
186:9 187:4 187:18
near ( 2 ) 78:23 79:6
necessarily. ( 5 ) 94:13
130:15 130:22 137:22
155:17
necessary ( 14 ) 3:4
7:13 28:21 60:14 81:7
102:6 130:9 134:23
142:6 154:5 154:24
163:25 167:9 181:25
necessity47:23 need ( 47 ) 4:13 5:16
18:20 22:12 22:13
27:6 29:7 35:2 36:13
45:18 61:13 61:13
62:22 64:20 67:13
76:8 77:12 89:9 93:4
93:21 95:24 100:19
109:3 109:21 116:19
121:24 145:12 156:3
157:2 157:12 160:12
160:17 160:18 169:22
171:14 171:23 172:20
194:16 194:18 195:23
195:24 195:25 197:7
202:25 215:21 217:8
218:4
needed ( 2 ) 4:6 82:17
needn’t ( 2 ) 113:6
113:8
needs ( 4 ) 36:14 116:9
170:2 185:12
negligence ( 4 ) 119:20
135:24 136:1 139:24
negligent137:12 negligently.139:16 neither ( 2 ) 125:15
125:16
never ( 6 ) 16:1 31:3
64:18 91:9 105:11
159:16
nevertheless, ( 6 )
1:22 61:5 65:3 108:9
181:20 209:4
next, ( 11 ) 7:9 14:24
51:20 56:25 68:6
78:13 81:24 84:7
121:25 151:20 200:1

nice6:13 nicer180:9 night,31:2 nightmares150:21 ninny-pinny151:1 nobody59:16
nominated ( 3 ) 59:2
131:19 134:16
non ( 2 ) 23:9 57:21
non-compliance192:13 non-delivery197:17 non-dishonest141:3 non-event,53:8
non-justicability81:10 non-justiciable80:25 none. ( 6 ) 32:7 43:21
52:22 97:11 126:21
200:9
nor ( 4 ) 116:7 125:16
181:25 217:6
normally ( 8 ) 23:7
54:11 90:25 135:21
159:17 159:21 170:21
193:15
nose24:2
note ( 14 ) 9:4 9:7 9:15
9:25 60:2 85:20 89:21
116:9 116:15 116:23
155:5 182:7 190:1
208:17
noted208:25
notes ( 7 ) 10:23 100:16
174:2 175:1 182:25
186:10 195:10
nothing ( 13 ) 30:9
53:17 54:3 65:10
69:20 75:1 117:16
128:8 129:20 165:7
165:8 203:23 207:22
notice ( 3 ) 83:18
170:17 205:16
noticed207:4 notoriety.83:24 notoriously ( 4 ) 13:24
13:25 14:8 31:11
November ( 6 ) 183:11
183:13 183:15 186:16
187:3 187:4
nowhere94:4 nowt,137:6 number, ( 27 ) 5:23
27:25 29:6 43:7 46:16
52:18 63:21 82:5
92:12 140:15 143:2
148:17 149:16 160:8
166:18 166:20 167:10
182:19 184:11 188:21
196:4 196:4 196:5
197:3 209:2 211:5
212:8
numbering ( 4 ) 73:5
90:3 167:13 183:9
numbers,172:12 numeral,204:6

O
oath,147:3
object ( 8 ) 9:10 35:6
39:1 111:7 139:15
158:15 162:12 185:4
objecting25:9 objection ( 13 ) 6:25
10:19 10:20 10:24
23:3 65:15 70:7 92:20
103:14 112:6 114:4
155:9 194:4
objections ( 2 ) 10:23
23:2

objective ( 2 ) 8:5
134:19
objects88:16 obligation ( 4 ) 18:17
140:17 161:14 212:10
obligations. ( 3 ) 188:23
189:19 212:5
obliged,120:4 observation ( 3 ) 16:9
195:12 197:6
observe ( 2 ) 90:11
201:21
observing123:25 obtain130:19 obtained112:25 obtaining ( 2 ) 191:4
206:24
obvious ( 4 ) 16:11 46:3
46:6 186:14
Obviously ( 82 ) 3:12
5:7 7:9 12:3 16:16
16:17 19:14 24:12
29:5 33:13 36:10
40:20 46:15 48:8 57:6
61:16 63:9 63:17 66:2
67:2 67:14 68:18 69:4
69:8 70:2 70:23 71:19
72:8 74:8 75:6 85:7
87:1 90:20 93:22 95:9
99:17 99:21 102:23
121:18 125:13 132:19
138:13 143:1 148:9
154:17 158:7 159:23
160:1 160:15 163:16
164:22 164:25 165:12
166:24 170:3 172:10
172:23 173:18 173:18
174:9 181:18 185:1
185:6 186:19 188:21
189:8 190:9 190:20
194:4 195:6 195:8
197:2 200:9 202:13
202:25 204:3 204:14
205:1 206:18 207:25
215:12 218:16
occasion ( 4 ) 2:22
90:11 108:9 171:23
occupy14:25 occurred ( 3 ) 99:4
159:9 159:11
October204:17
odd ( 2 ) 162:3 163:8
offensive,106:24 officers,134:17 officials ( 7 ) 68:24 74:5
79:19 79:25 82:10
83:11 88:17
often13:24
oil ( 2 ) 56:24 57:1
okay? ( 13 ) 18:24 27:10
49:25 53:4 80:1 80:9
89:17 112:16 129:10
197:10 208:23 209:14
215:13
old ( 21 ) 6:4 10:15 25:9
30:25 44:13 45:4
45:8 67:4 68:19 70:4
71:4 72:8 72:11 72:21
72:24 73:7 73:9 76:15
92:9 100:12 160:21
OMG ( 19 ) 163:15
167:20 167:21 172:3
172:8 172:10 172:21
175:14 176:15 179:3
204:6 204:17 205:19
205:23 206:12 209:1
209:2 209:3 211:13
OMGP ( 11 ) 141:14
172:8 172:10 203:13
203:18 204:3 206:15

211:16 212:1 212:13
212:22
omissions ( 2 ) 124:16
139:18
once. ( 7 ) 2:21 2:21
41:8 137:16 186:5
186:22 190:15
one’s6:13
one-man ( 2 ) 203:19
206:16
Onega106:12
ones ( 5 ) 44:11 51:9
70:18 74:3 198:6
ongoing ( 2 ) 6:7 163:22
onus7:25
open ( 9 ) 9:3 19:18
91:17 106:15 106:17
127:7 127:14 202:2
213:22
opening ( 7 ) 123:3
142:8 149:1 149:2
149:18 149:24 176:8
openings, ( 3 ) 101:15
176:7 203:10
operate.41:23 opinion,37:10 opportunities27:16 opportunity ( 2 ) 85:10
147:17
oppose190:7 opposed112:12 opposite115:12 oppressed178:24 oppressive157:13 option ( 2 ) 36:10
196:10
Opus217:11 oral203:10 orally168:14 orchestrated,156:12 order ( 36 ) 51:17 56:24
62:10 65:22 65:25
82:2 84:4 101:8
106:13 112:23 114:2
151:3 151:13 157:3
160:22 171:18 173:11
180:11 182:12 182:13
182:16 182:24 185:16
185:16 186:1 187:5
188:7 191:11 191:16
192:6 192:7 192:10
193:5 203:3 206:4
216:7
ordered ( 13 ) 43:7
106:11 120:21 136:20
138:9 164:6 182:10
184:1 186:10 187:19
189:4 192:1 192:12
ordering ( 2 ) 64:14
190:22
orderly115:22
orders, ( 3 ) 38:11 77:2
121:24
ordinarily ( 6 ) 12:21
91:2 135:24 137:9
189:21 193:13
ordinary ( 9 ) 1:22 103:9
105:6 128:22 146:8
158:9 160:24 164:2
169:3
organisation.87:24 orientation,171:7 original ( 13 ) 50:2
50:13 51:10 68:15
103:21 107:4 123:7
140:23 141:13 210:5
211:14 212:13 213:15
originally ( 2 ) 72:17
163:3
orthodox,153:16 ostensibly74:17

others ( 4 ) 3:13 16:1
181:14 195:18
otherwise ( 14 ) 7:18
48:5 53:19 108:12
116:16 117:24 118:2
130:25 138:10 145:11
150:13 174:25 198:16
213:2
ought ( 2 ) 178:17 179:3
outcome,23:4 outfit.74:15 outrageous158:16 outset6:5 outstanding188:8
over ( 21 ) 2:15 3:23 6:4
35:5 47:4 51:2 59:9
78:25 81:20 82:20
91:24 92:23 95:13
136:18 140:20 155:7
155:10 156:18 197:5
201:25 206:12
overall ( 3 ) 15:8 161:14
177:15
overcome ( 2 ) 113:1
156:2
overlapping, ( 2 ) 152:9
152:10
overlooked82:7 overnight. ( 3 ) 12:4
109:22 200:5
overrode106:23 overspill.152:8 overt12:17 overwhelmed86:21 owed209:2
own ( 14 ) 8:20 16:13
31:16 46:9 79:8 106:5
106:18 124:9 126:1
129:20 131:23 180:10
202:21 203:13
owned ( 2 ) 126:8 133:7
owner175:18 owners ( 2 ) 68:20
123:8
ownership ( 3 ) 130:13
130:17 134:13

P

{P1/10/10}.208:19
{P1/10/20}. ( 2 ) 204:12
207:16
{P1/10/21}207:23
pace122:1 pages, ( 7 ) 175:8
177:12 207:7 207:9
207:20 207:23 208:21
paid. ( 4 ) 137:16 165:1
177:3 195:21
pan157:15 pans151:19
paper ( 5 ) 9:18 65:2
150:25 162:20 197:4
papers ( 2 ) 172:7
203:21
parameters ( 2 ) 41:22
144:17
pardon. ( 8 ) 66:19
66:23 72:23 113:7
141:22 188:18 209:7
209:8
Paris ( 10 ) 121:6 153:9
153:16 153:20 160:9
179:6 197:19 198:22
198:25 207:1
parity154:5
park ( 2 ) 118:16 165:2
parlous210:25
part ( 36 ) 13:21 18:24
19:3 19:10 22:7 38:10

50:17 52:25 54:23
54:24 56:9 57:25 58:1
67:9 67:12 75:24 77:2
88:24 117:5 117:10
131:23 133:12 140:24
141:5 142:13 147:7
148:3 163:5 163:15
167:8 168:10 169:11
174:24 176:2 181:25
209:4
partial16:12 participant62:25 participants70:21 participate.6:24 participation ( 3 ) 61:19
78:6 79:8
particular ( 29 ) 6:6 8:21
12:7 12:9 15:17 15:18
17:25 20:14 29:10
45:13 47:11 49:7
57:18 65:17 87:20
87:20 88:10 105:10
130:2 149:8 155:14
156:15 170:7 199:7
201:15 208:14 210:7
210:25 219:14
particularise ( 7 ) 34:6
34:7 34:8 71:23 72:14
73:14 73:19
particularised ( 6 ) 12:6
12:6 28:6 83:2 85:6
92:12
particularity ( 5 ) 41:11
81:22 90:21 94:1
147:19
particularly ( 4 ) 74:3
87:10 169:25 202:20
particulars, ( 12 ) 10:5
28:18 33:6 35:9 76:21
81:20 86:18 92:2
112:22 113:21 113:24
113:25
parties ( 27 ) 8:14 8:14
15:2 21:13 21:21
23:10 67:6 68:22 72:4
72:15 73:15 84:24
91:1 92:12 96:16
124:6 125:21 142:8
142:18 160:21 168:8
198:13 211:22 212:5
212:7 212:9 212:17
partly ( 3 ) 138:16
148:14 186:15
partnership ( 3 ) 116:1
116:7 116:20
parts88:14
party ( 23 ) 12:5 13:22
14:17 15:11 21:12
21:19 21:23 21:25
23:16 34:8 36:23
39:10 43:5 50:14
50:23 51:24 62:20
74:20 121:18 125:16
168:23 203:13 219:1
passage ( 2 ) 77:3
183:19
passages26:22 passed175:16 passive24:5
past. ( 3 ) 3:15 8:2
147:21
patience123:3 Patrakova,155:1 (Pause) ( 5 ) 5:5 89:21
122:22 211:3 214:3
pauses154:24 pausing11:8 Pavel5:24 pawns53:17 pay180:6 paying,191:3

payment, ( 2 ) 187:22
209:12
people ( 67 ) 3:14 5:19
7:9 11:5 11:6 11:15
13:7 14:20 15:24
18:10 18:11 19:19
21:3 24:20 24:24
31:13 33:18 39:5
40:19 44:3 45:12
46:11 48:2 48:3 50:1
50:25 52:4 52:9 52:22
52:23 54:19 54:20
55:10 57:14 59:5
59:19 60:6 62:24
63:15 63:22 63:24
65:20 70:14 74:3
83:20 87:20 93:25
95:19 102:16 102:18
126:3 126:6 131:21
156:11 159:15 160:15
180:20 181:13 182:4
189:22 191:7 195:17
196:6 205:9 206:9
216:6 216:13
people’s159:3 per214:24
perfect ( 2 ) 97:5 147:25
perfectly ( 4 ) 39:8 48:3
178:12 197:24
performance212:10 perfunctory185:25 perhaps ( 17 ) 8:25
23:19 26:8 26:23
60:25 62:8 62:14
63:11 69:22 77:3
91:19 125:23 155:14
156:22 162:20 169:25
181:9
period106:22 Periods107:18 permissible? ( 4 ) 37:5
86:17 111:22 118:4
permission ( 6 ) 1:6
2:23 45:17 99:23
184:25 186:13
permit ( 3 ) 94:20
118:25 185:3
permits173:16 permitted ( 3 ) 36:25
119:4 140:24
Persecution ( 2 ) 76:16
78:15
person ( 25 ) 17:9 19:21
19:21 21:16 21:24
22:22 23:15 27:19
28:2 33:18 35:12
36:21 37:17 38:13
40:25 41:1 42:14
50:18 55:14 64:3 76:1
178:15 180:18 187:20
202:10
personal ( 11 ) 46:9
61:6 126:11 131:2
131:7 155:5 155:11
194:13 195:19 197:21
202:13
personally ( 2 ) 8:13
18:14
personnel.81:1 persons ( 18 ) 21:17
30:22 35:3 35:8 36:2
40:12 40:14 41:9
42:19 44:1 88:17
88:25 99:10 103:4
107:25 108:19 131:19
141:5
perspective58:9 persuade ( 2 ) 87:19
146:12
persuaded ( 4 ) 63:5
81:6 192:4 192:5

persuading156:2 Petersburg ( 7 ) 36:5
75:13 83:15 87:6
87:21 130:23 131:17
PetroLes. ( 3 ) 177:13
177:14 177:23
phone103:1 photocopy4:24 phrase. ( 2 ) 21:5 45:13 pick146:4
picking8:23
picture ( 4 ) 57:24 58:6
194:11 195:2
piece ( 9 ) 4:22 5:8 5:15
20:15 22:6 58:10 65:2
149:9 172:7
pikestaff21:8 Piotrovsky. ( 9 ) 66:22
71:17 71:21 74:4 75:7
78:18 78:19 87:23
88:25
pious,220:1 pitched100:24 pivot179:3
place, ( 12 ) 56:13 75:11
76:3 82:21 85:13
87:16 87:17 91:2
91:15 91:16 92:2
197:15
placed ( 2 ) 64:23
144:22
plain ( 2 ) 21:8 142:7
plaintiff ( 2 ) 57:9 57:10
plan, ( 9 ) 13:3 14:6
47:24 50:3 53:11 54:9
147:10 199:4 199:6
plans53:6 plausible175:2 play, ( 6 ) 16:13 38:3
86:7 107:4 132:19
140:10
played ( 2 ) 131:23
206:9
playing131:24 plays78:12
plea ( 11 ) 39:18 44:20
58:10 58:11 88:16
100:5 101:12 107:20
119:25 142:3 142:22
plead ( 49 ) 12:1 12:7
15:2 15:10 15:24
18:17 22:13 26:6 26:6
28:20 29:16 30:20
32:5 33:21 33:24
42:10 47:5 49:7 51:25
52:6 53:2 53:22 54:3
54:19 58:15 60:15
61:13 61:13 61:14
64:19 66:3 74:10
78:10 79:11 83:7
89:19 92:1 103:12
103:18 103:18 107:24
109:12 113:15 119:13
123:6 123:7 123:9
127:13 130:4
pleaded ( 74 ) 10:5 11:2
11:4 11:10 11:25
12:13 12:17 13:18
15:15 22:3 22:8 38:22
41:19 46:16 47:12
48:12 52:14 52:19
52:23 59:12 63:13
69:13 70:4 72:2 74:9
74:11 75:8 75:19
75:21 77:25 78:8
78:20 84:3 90:10
90:20 98:7 99:4
104:22 106:4 109:5
109:9 109:11 110:10
112:22 113:10 113:12
113:14 113:15 113:17

113:22 114:7 117:22
119:14 123:21 123:25
124:1 125:13 125:14
125:16 126:21 127:13
128:8 128:9 128:15
128:21 128:25 129:8
129:9 130:3 139:4
139:6 141:4 143:6
147:18
pleading. ( 39 ) 9:11
14:11 15:8 21:15
25:20 26:5 27:24
33:15 34:6 34:13
34:22 39:16 43:8
43:15 45:8 54:6 57:8
64:23 67:20 69:15
69:20 72:8 72:11
72:24 75:25 76:11
77:21 82:1 88:14 92:8
104:7 110:3 117:16
128:17 138:22 140:13
143:17 159:20 210:1
pleadings ( 45 ) 8:10
8:24 9:19 10:15 11:10
17:16 25:11 25:19
25:23 25:24 27:12
28:18 29:21 30:10
34:21 36:24 51:12
62:12 63:14 64:15
65:1 65:10 66:6 67:5
67:10 71:20 75:17
78:4 79:16 82:18
86:12 87:8 88:22
91:19 92:9 110:20
114:3 117:12 122:16
123:1 123:5 123:11
128:12 138:24 143:10
pleas, ( 2 ) 61:4 99:15
pledge144:1 pledged ( 2 ) 212:24
213:11
pledgee,136:17 pledges140:19 plot. ( 6 ) 14:2 49:24
50:6 50:8 50:13 53:5
pocket,25:15 pointing78:15 points ( 53 ) 6:1 8:21
9:7 9:9 13:16 19:15
24:8 34:13 34:23
34:23 42:23 46:8
48:21 71:5 80:19
86:10 100:19 100:19
101:14 102:25 107:20
110:21 114:5 115:22
120:12 120:12 148:14
149:11 149:13 150:6
150:9 158:6 158:11
160:3 167:18 171:15
171:15 171:16 171:21
171:21 171:22 171:24
172:25 178:11 178:12
181:23 182:7 182:8
185:6 186:8 186:12
196:19 215:13
police ( 8 ) 66:21 78:23
79:2 79:12 87:5 87:15
204:24 206:20
policeman,71:17 politely.46:2 political ( 2 ) 83:10
159:3
Popov ( 3 ) 163:19
174:4 177:22
Port ( 4 ) 167:21 205:7
205:22 205:25
portion116:18 Ports. ( 4 ) 204:17
205:19 205:23 206:12
posed120:20

position ( 48 ) 3:13
3:14 7:5 8:3 8:5
12:21 18:23 20:16
21:3 31:24 39:11
40:10 47:20 53:20
55:25 57:20 59:5 76:3
84:9 85:3 96:1 101:5
119:12 121:9 122:24
124:7 126:20 143:10
153:2 159:10 159:23
162:23 165:12 168:24
179:5 190:7 191:10
191:13 194:14 200:19
200:25 201:6 205:17
206:10 207:3 207:12
212:21 213:8
positions ( 2 ) 47:21
200:13
positive21:16 positively ( 4 ) 22:16
24:9 37:25 50:20
posits136:15 possession ( 4 ) 130:19
189:2 192:3 192:15
possibility ( 4 ) 19:18
25:15 142:17 195:7
possible ( 11 ) 39:8
39:13 48:3 51:16
90:12 90:13 114:22
145:21 156:10 180:18
199:19
possibly ( 8 ) 54:25
107:16 125:22 140:1
145:11 159:7 195:25
205:20
postulates,133:13 potential165:7 potentially137:1 power ( 3 ) 189:3 192:3
192:15
powers,164:3 practical ( 5 ) 1:8
148:14 189:8 192:21
203:18
practice ( 3 ) 114:21
146:8 206:23
praising5:3 pray40:24
[pre-trial ( 3 ) 82:2 82:6
82:11
pre-warning179:25 precise ( 2 ) 72:14
73:14
precisely ( 3 ) 17:20
161:21 198:20
precluded133:8 preemptive121:24 prefer ( 2 ) 8:13 8:18
preference ( 2 ) 202:13
202:21
pregnant,155:6 prejudice ( 3 ) 7:16
154:8 158:23
prejudiced ( 2 ) 131:1
165:5
premise111:6 premised ( 2 ) 107:21
172:22
prep ( 2 ) 194:22 195:3
preparation, ( 4 ) 147:1
166:1 171:6 180:4
prepare. ( 3 ) 160:18
162:13 194:12
prepared ( 7 ) 146:9
157:17 163:3 170:22
181:15 185:6 204:10
preparing ( 4 ) 85:16
165:13 175:3 179:18
prescriptive.213:8 presence;1:21

present ( 3 ) 72:13
73:13 138:21
presented46:21 presently ( 3 ) 119:25
126:22 126:23
preserve ( 3 ) 90:18
93:7 172:15
preserved ( 3 ) 92:14
101:25 218:18
press ( 15 ) 6:3 6:18
34:20 34:21 79:22
79:24 80:8 88:13
90:24 91:5 91:6 91:12
186:2 186:4 217:18
pressing86:4 pressure ( 3 ) 76:8
76:11 151:5
pressures.» ( 3 ) 173:17
173:19 190:2
presumably, ( 4 ) 33:17
52:10 101:20 145:3
presume84:21 presumption ( 5 ) 118:7
124:4 127:9 130:1
136:13
pretend3:7
pretty ( 4 ) 19:21 100:20
142:7 178:11
previous ( 5 ) 94:22
101:11 104:7 115:13
173:9
previously ( 6 ) 42:5
49:3 73:12 106:4
167:18 187:5
price ( 9 ) 19:11 19:21
37:2 37:2 37:4 38:8
38:9 39:9 64:3
Prichaly ( 3 ) 13:20
17:19 46:25
priest?» ( 3 ) 58:22
58:23 59:3
prima206:19 primarily ( 2 ) 35:17
44:13
primary ( 17 ) 32:25
33:21 43:13 43:13
61:24 69:15 69:24
79:17 84:18 94:25
97:18 98:8 104:1
104:16 124:17 125:24
134:19
prime131:18 principal ( 4 ) 10:24
59:15 73:21 82:14
principally ( 5 ) 73:24
96:18 99:7 123:20
131:21
principals59:18 principle99:5 principles, ( 6 ) 26:5
28:15 43:11 57:8 89:9
109:24
«Prior ( 12 ) 90:5 92:1
94:5 94:5 94:16 95:2
97:11 98:17 102:7
108:23 108:24 109:7
prioritise. ( 2 ) 181:5
196:10
prioritised196:12 priority.196:5 prism,84:16 privilege ( 2 ) 182:23
185:22
privileged,189:3 privy ( 4 ) 37:11 38:21
55:14 77:9
pro ( 2 ) 51:5 163:4
probabilities, ( 8 ) 94:11
109:25 110:2 112:24
113:11 113:18 114:10
117:19

Probably ( 13 ) 80:13
81:2 84:6 102:2 102:4
114:24 120:16 120:18
121:5 146:8 153:20
164:18 208:4
problem ( 7 ) 69:23
73:24 84:1 84:5 101:1
132:21 201:23
procedural ( 2 ) 75:5
111:3
procedure84:18 proceed. ( 14 ) 8:13
66:6 100:23 101:7
116:14 116:15 117:10
123:12 138:25 147:24
147:25 157:24 166:14
181:21
proceeded156:23 proceeding ( 3 ) 147:8
147:9 181:16
Proceedings». ( 17 )
5:21 5:25 6:17 6:21
6:23 75:2 75:4 125:17
125:25 159:6 161:16
162:8 167:9 181:14
208:5 219:11 219:15
process ( 23 ) 1:22 7:22
24:12 38:14 38:20
38:21 47:2 61:3 83:17
85:6 134:5 136:19
136:20 157:12 164:16
173:23 179:8 179:14
184:23 185:2 185:7
185:12 219:14
processes, ( 3 ) 136:10
136:25 138:8
procured ( 4 ) 53:19
56:4 74:12 140:24
procures15:13 produce149:19 profess69:18 profession.7:20 professional ( 6 ) 4:1
6:23 7:13 119:20
152:17 189:19
professionally3:10 profit,180:20 progress ( 3 ) 60:24
154:14 168:12
prominent. ( 2 ) 87:11
131:24
promissory174:2 promulgate219:14 proof ( 4 ) 18:25 19:3
19:10 50:15
propaganda5:2
proper ( 25 ) 2:19 24:14
27:20 27:22 27:24
34:21 36:15 43:6
43:8 43:10 47:2 58:10
69:17 76:10 76:10
89:18 103:7 144:17
149:2 162:25 163:1
169:12 178:20 202:19
219:3
properly, ( 10 ) 15:2
28:5 47:5 114:13
121:12 129:21 158:25
166:15 191:24 191:25
properties136:2 property137:14 proportionality191:21 proportionate ( 2 )
161:11 161:15
propose ( 8 ) 62:10
67:8 69:17 79:15 82:2
114:11 168:3 179:24
proposed ( 4 ) 35:15
46:15 46:16 79:15
proposition32:5

propriety? ( 2 ) 19:8
87:4
prosaic ( 2 ) 85:2
124:10
prospective180:9 prospects174:6 protagonists, ( 2 )
55:17 59:15
protocol ( 2 ) 169:9
200:8
prove ( 20 ) 15:24 19:17
21:7 22:12 54:3 58:13
58:14 59:1 67:13
70:5 70:6 90:12 90:22
104:10 119:13 137:12
138:14 139:12 139:19
139:21
proved119:15 provide ( 8 ) 91:19
170:19 186:16 187:6
187:8 187:19 189:7
192:23
provided.» ( 16 ) 27:23
81:22 83:18 86:19
101:23 101:24 112:23
114:1 162:12 170:12
187:18 190:4 192:17
201:11 208:2 217:24
proving104:12 provision. ( 2 ) 111:16
111:19
provisional ( 3 ) 156:7
211:24 211:25
PTR ( 3 ) 82:20 86:19
156:24
public ( 4 ) 7:19 57:24
136:19 177:8
publicly.6:14
punch, ( 4 ) 5:20 140:16
152:19 212:4
pungent7:7 puppets55:4 purchase ( 3 ) 211:2
211:24 212:14
purchaser212:13 purchasers ( 10 ) 68:16
68:18 103:21 123:7
123:9 140:23 141:14
210:6 211:14 213:15
Purely56:17 purport7:22
purpose ( 9 ) 30:2 30:6
94:8 218:22 218:23
218:25 219:2 219:4
219:4
purposes ( 7 ) 67:7 98:2
125:4 125:17 126:18
181:19 203:18
pursuant ( 9 ) 49:23
50:8 53:13 112:23
114:1 114:2 138:7
138:11 186:1
pursued; ( 2 ) 9:10
88:19
pursuing142:13 pushing,208:10 puts122:19
putting ( 3 ) 64:13 84:10
203:1

Q
qualification.106:10 qualifications7:14 qualify,201:13 quantification118:11 quantum. ( 6 ) 112:21
114:16 114:19 114:22
115:19 163:9
quasi6:20

queries ( 2 ) 168:23
184:22
query ( 3 ) 37:9 186:11
217:10
querying ( 2 ) 132:14
193:9
Question ( 38 ) 25:6
25:18 28:3 28:6 28:8
31:14 32:14 37:7 38:7
38:8 38:15 38:23 68:6
75:20 94:8 104:23
105:18 106:14 115:22
126:15 133:21 134:11
140:5 141:23 156:3
156:4 158:15 158:16
173:9 177:5 177:25
178:2 178:3 188:14
199:13 200:10 200:18
219:11
questioning, ( 4 )
154:20 159:24 163:17
170:17
questions ( 41 ) 41:20
57:7 83:14 120:20
138:3 140:6 154:22
158:7 158:19 166:15
166:20 168:2 168:22
169:12 169:18 171:8
172:16 172:25 173:12
173:21 174:3 178:5
178:6 178:25 179:5
179:11 179:15 179:21
180:1 180:5 180:7
180:25 181:8 184:24
185:9 193:24 194:3
198:10 203:8 207:12
215:12
quickly ( 11 ) 28:2 31:2
68:8 72:19 76:18
111:1 121:10 121:15
154:8 156:10 173:7
quid51:5
quite ( 85 ) 2:14 4:2
8:12 10:3 12:2 14:22
18:8 20:5 20:15 28:13
29:15 33:8 43:19 48:8
48:22 54:5 62:7 65:3
69:1 77:11 83:2 83:20
88:9 89:8 89:18 99:18
107:6 109:3 109:9
109:23 110:15 114:20
122:15 129:11 131:5
139:3 139:25 142:6
145:6 149:15 151:20
151:23 151:24 152:1
153:2 155:12 156:2
157:4 157:16 157:17
158:6 159:19 160:6
160:8 160:12 160:16
161:17 166:3 166:5
166:11 166:17 166:19
167:13 171:16 178:17
184:5 184:8 188:17
188:20 190:12 192:11
192:20 193:5 195:1
196:7 196:7 198:2
200:23 204:18 205:4
205:8 206:7 208:2
209:18 214:19
quo51:5 quoted110:5 quotes213:16 quoting110:11

R
racking115:5 radical99:18 radio219:15
raid ( 2 ) 95:12 95:16

raiding. ( 3 ) 100:10
135:13 135:13
raise ( 4 ) 28:9 28:9
142:18 193:12
raised ( 4 ) 67:1 181:3
181:24 205:15
raises177:4 raising144:19 rake47:4
ran ( 2 ) 78:25 87:23
rate, ( 5 ) 60:14 174:18
206:19 206:22 214:16
rather ( 40 ) 4:20 8:4
23:12 26:23 28:21
34:11 41:12 45:22
60:17 60:23 63:11
65:4 65:13 83:16 84:8
100:23 101:3 101:13
102:2 105:13 107:7
117:8 121:17 137:21
137:24 149:2 149:10
149:13 164:16 170:1
171:4 184:25 185:25
189:12 194:8 195:25
201:14 205:6 207:3
215:18
re-amended209:23 re-arguing86:15 read ( 17 ) 4:11 4:19
26:24 31:2 82:12
82:13 122:20 123:3
143:11 149:5 166:10
207:13 207:15 208:15
208:18 208:20 208:21
readership6:13 readied171:3 readily179:1 reading ( 2 ) 28:2
148:19
reads ( 2 ) 35:20 39:16
real ( 5 ) 3:4 38:5 108:22
120:25 123:8
realisation ( 6 ) 134:5
135:2 135:12 136:2
136:18 136:24
realisations135:10 realises135:22 realistic147:10 realistically163:6 realtime,197:11 reason ( 18 ) 2:19 7:18
20:9 31:18 41:15 44:5
104:14 106:21 117:17
144:19 154:2 178:7
192:16 192:25 203:10
215:20 215:23 216:5
reasonable ( 3 ) 19:21
63:5 182:17
reasonably ( 3 ) 47:2
60:4 212:9
reasoning,154:5 reasons, ( 11 ) 1:9 23:7
33:10 34:4 34:5 42:5
54:15 57:12 86:20
100:8 215:25
reassurance ( 2 )
155:13 161:23
rebut,13:14
recall ( 6 ) 2:10 6:14
77:18 191:18 205:4
218:5
receivable,176:18 receivables ( 2 ) 174:2
177:22
received, ( 2 ) 130:15
162:19
receivers137:9 recent90:11 recently ( 2 ) 62:21
148:17
reception189:12

recipients, ( 2 ) 130:11
133:7
recognise45:20 recollect ( 6 ) 80:18
101:8 173:23 184:16
209:11 211:12
recollected83:4 recollection, ( 5 )
106:21 110:12 174:21
177:6 178:13
recollects107:3 reconsider61:3 record, ( 8 ) 20:6 86:2
107:13 117:10 219:8
219:9 219:19 219:19
recorded ( 3 ) 218:8
218:11 218:18
recording219:15 records,177:8 recourse ( 2 ) 126:10
131:1
recoverable174:23 recovered115:1 recoveries141:3 recycled134:6
red ( 2 ) 19:22 165:3
redact191:20 redacted ( 5 ) 185:18
191:19 192:18 192:24
192:25
redaction ( 2 ) 185:21
193:10
redactions.192:19 redemption, ( 2 ) 136:4
137:15
reduction126:12 reductions,186:9 refer193:3
reference ( 15 ) 10:19
18:24 21:6 66:17
66:18 68:9 70:1 79:11
106:11 140:19 142:22
183:6 207:14 214:4
215:5
references, ( 2 ) 85:11
202:15
referred ( 7 ) 2:10 2:11
6:17 30:2 31:1 170:18
213:25
refinancing,112:25 refrain169:22
refuse ( 3 ) 25:10 65:23
116:8
refused71:22 refuses, ( 2 ) 116:7
116:21
refusing ( 3 ) 60:2 110:7
128:15
regard, ( 11 ) 3:20 6:7
13:4 40:13 41:13
81:18 111:15 122:17
143:22 162:23 212:21
regards, ( 4 ) 3:21 43:1
201:7 210:4
registered ( 2 ) 3:11
206:1
regular ( 3 ) 3:6 95:18
164:10
regulate ( 2 ) 211:23
212:14
regulated ( 2 ) 7:20
212:3
regulations.6:22 reiteration92:24 reiterations167:17 relate ( 2 ) 107:8 112:17 related101:13 relating94:6
relation ( 38 ) 2:9 2:25
6:8 12:8 13:16 33:22
43:7 47:11 47:13

48:11 49:7 49:15
50:19 51:15 52:7
62:18 63:14 65:17
66:24 69:9 77:19
78:4 79:17 86:10 89:3
101:1 104:9 104:11
104:12 106:11 114:12
123:1 123:18 123:20
145:2 170:16 182:13
211:17
relations123:5 relationship. ( 5 ) 47:17
210:4 210:10 210:13
212:14
relatively62:20 relayed,181:10
release ( 5 ) 116:1 116:8
116:21 217:15 217:17
released ( 2 ) 218:16
219:7
relevance. ( 2 ) 37:9
87:19
relevant ( 16 ) 6:9 6:25
12:12 15:14 22:6
31:19 40:19 76:3
77:22 83:11 87:11
87:13 87:15 98:20
150:6 182:12
reliance,64:24 reliant21:7
relied ( 4 ) 13:25 42:19
104:15 129:14
Relief».114:15 relies106:2 reluctant, ( 2 ) 23:15
110:6
rely ( 31 ) 11:18 22:7
23:18 31:16 40:13
40:14 40:15 40:17
41:13 42:14 57:21
57:23 67:18 68:1
68:3 68:25 78:17 87:8
88:14 88:23 98:3
98:11 98:22 98:24
108:2 108:24 117:1
123:21 127:11 130:3
143:21
relying124:16
remain ( 2 ) 11:11 159:5
remains ( 2 ) 73:21
89:20
remedies207:1 remedy118:10 remember ( 14 ) 2:21
19:25 31:2 74:16
82:13 89:11 151:25
152:2 163:25 176:12
180:19 191:6 192:4
215:1
reminded.133:11 Renord ( 5 ) 67:3 90:7
103:23 123:6 124:16
Renord-Invest ( 11 )
58:1 94:2 96:7 96:20
96:21 102:9 102:19
102:20 102:21 108:1
210:16
repeat ( 2 ) 3:19 42:24
repeatedly, ( 3 ) 60:6
117:3 117:4
repeats, ( 2 ) 67:16
67:16
replace73:6 replacement103:22 reply ( 4 ) 24:21 103:15
181:2 186:6
replying,181:7
repo ( 2 ) 211:9 211:13
report ( 2 ) 103:20
213:23

reports ( 2 ) 138:17
193:19
represent ( 2 ) 1:23
169:7
representation.23:8 representations,85:22 representatives,2:20 represented2:3 representing205:19 repurchase212:15 reputable164:24 request ( 8 ) 164:12
166:12 185:25 186:24
187:4 190:4 217:17
217:24
requested, ( 2 ) 216:13
217:12
requests ( 3 ) 167:24
168:9 197:3
require ( 2 ) 65:14 141:5
required, ( 11 ) 15:16
29:9 33:25 58:15
111:3 147:19 148:4
151:12 195:9 197:13
216:5
requirement. ( 2 ) 29:4
119:18
requires ( 3 ) 3:10
111:25 217:1
requiring ( 2 ) 106:7
179:21
research ( 4 ) 18:5
21:20 26:9 191:24
researched54:13 resembling147:10 reservation ( 2 ) 122:17
122:17
reservations, ( 3 )
103:11 109:4 124:9
reserve ( 9 ) 35:7 99:22
107:14 107:19 108:5
118:16 133:4 133:10
168:12
reserved. ( 2 ) 154:6
156:5
reserving, ( 3 ) 25:14
143:5 201:6
residual108:8 resile94:22 resolve124:7 resolved195:16 resort, ( 2 ) 3:8 12:1
respect, ( 15 ) 16:8 35:5
48:22 64:11 77:23
81:16 94:21 97:1
118:20 171:12 180:4
191:5 191:16 195:22
209:1
respectful ( 3 ) 84:16
84:23 164:18
respectfully ( 3 ) 32:21
36:8 36:14
respond ( 3 ) 24:23
168:18 173:15
responding183:11 response ( 9 ) 112:3
119:3 127:16 166:22
167:2 180:10 184:9
186:21 197:3
responses,179:22 responsibilities7:14 responsibility ( 3 )
58:12 129:4 145:14
responsible. ( 3 ) 33:11
36:15 67:6
rest ( 4 ) 50:14 87:1
151:14 195:14
restrict23:8
result ( 6 ) 93:20 146:5
146:11 146:18 158:2
188:2

retain ( 2 ) 115:17
130:17
retained. ( 3 ) 204:20
204:24 206:21
return174:1 reveal,60:21 revealed180:6 revealing179:22 reverse ( 2 ) 17:7 115:8
review. ( 13 ) 3:21
7:5 82:2 82:6 82:11
121:23 144:18 144:23
145:12 145:15 154:18
163:21 168:7
reviewed ( 2 ) 82:1
82:11
rich.187:13 Richard218:1 rid58:21
right-hand ( 2 ) 183:8
184:11
rightly ( 5 ) 79:14 81:16
158:5 173:5 187:15
Rights212:5 rigid146:10
ring, ( 3 ) 16:10 16:12
16:15
rip ( 5 ) 47:19 53:4
56:24 70:21 126:3
ripped130:16
rise ( 15 ) 42:15 60:19
84:3 88:23 96:6 97:12
98:5 98:16 98:21
98:24 104:19 105:21
106:3 108:2 108:25
risk191:7
road ( 2 ) 155:20 190:14
rogue133:3
ROK ( 3 ) 13:20 17:19
46:25
role ( 6 ) 77:22 78:11
131:24 175:16 205:6
206:9
roles69:18 roll151:3
room ( 4 ) 140:4 198:4
199:17 200:3
roubles, ( 5 ) 174:16
174:18 175:24 177:3
177:20
roughly174:17 round, ( 6 ) 14:1 16:3
22:20 94:15 115:10
146:11
route23:1 RPC201:23
ruled ( 3 ) 47:16 82:25
197:2
rules. ( 25 ) 4:1 21:10
22:2 25:21 30:3 31:10
31:11 31:19 36:17
39:2 42:7 65:14 84:18
86:1 86:1 86:7 100:6
101:22 110:3 123:25
126:16 128:22 146:7
146:10 160:2
ruling ( 12 ) 35:1 35:4
45:22 47:10 48:22
51:14 51:16 54:1
62:12 79:20 82:8
198:8
rulings ( 5 ) 36:9 45:16
62:8 81:21 164:4
run ( 11 ) 21:16 100:14
109:13 125:1 125:6
127:19 129:21 135:11
135:15 137:2 161:3
running ( 2 ) 129:13
190:11
runs ( 2 ) 5:9 92:21

Russia, ( 4 ) 50:22
74:18 79:5 191:7
Russian ( 68 ) 74:12
74:15 76:9 76:16
76:23 78:15 82:9
83:10 83:15 101:21
106:22 111:5 111:9
111:15 111:19 111:22
111:23 112:4 112:10
112:13 114:17 117:24
118:2 118:3 118:10
118:11 118:12 118:20
118:25 119:4 119:16
119:16 123:14 124:2
126:20 127:9 127:11
127:12 127:24 127:24
128:4 129:25 130:2
136:9 136:24 137:19
137:21 138:3 138:8
138:17 139:2 139:10
140:5 140:9 140:20
140:21 174:16 176:20
176:21 182:21 202:18
205:2 205:18 205:19
217:23 217:24 218:9
218:9
Russophobe, ( 4 ) 4:10
4:23 4:25 5:7
rusty,106:22

S
sack.48:5 safeguards148:18 safely197:16
sake ( 4 ) 2:17 3:1 4:3
20:13
sale ( 18 ) 13:20 17:18
49:7 51:22 51:23
74:13 76:10 99:11
99:11 99:12 99:13
103:21 136:13 136:19
138:7 138:9 139:6
211:18
sales ( 3 ) 103:24 133:5
139:15
salient ( 2 ) 84:2 149:11
same ( 30 ) 9:3 51:20
71:18 78:17 89:8
90:10 94:15 108:15
108:16 119:10 119:14
126:13 127:10 127:25
130:22 133:16 136:18
141:11 163:9 166:19
167:2 167:12 172:18
173:8 198:9 206:2
213:23 213:24 214:4
214:6
sanctioned190:3 sanctioning190:23 satisfaction82:3 satisfactorily83:1 satisfactory. ( 2 ) 26:10
29:21
satisfied ( 6 ) 17:25
89:18 104:17 104:17
128:12 143:15
satisfy29:4
save ( 6 ) 3:19 90:9
94:18 110:20 127:5
178:8
saved.97:25 Savelyev ( 40 ) 25:16
35:24 36:2 47:18
50:5 52:22 53:24 54:5
59:8 64:5 68:11 68:21
74:1 78:11 90:6 96:19
102:9 102:11 107:24
121:1 121:18 122:4
123:24 131:21 132:4

133:24 151:7 151:7
151:11 151:15 151:17
153:8 153:16 153:21
154:13 156:18 161:21
162:2 162:2 215:6
Savelyev’s ( 2 ) 132:25
134:4
saw ( 2 ) 155:11 167:6
say-so.189:23 saying ( 48 ) 19:11
20:25 23:22 24:3
24:4 30:20 37:17 38:9
38:25 39:22 40:15
42:15 42:16 46:23
54:7 54:14 54:16
56:5 57:6 58:12 65:11
67:15 68:10 89:5 92:5
92:10 99:7 105:1
105:4 105:4 105:13
109:13 116:7 116:8
116:24 116:25 117:2
124:15 130:25 139:7
143:9 154:23 167:4
186:5 190:1 191:2
207:10 208:25
Scan ( 11 ) 140:25
174:23 175:10 175:13
175:20 176:3 176:6
176:19 177:2 177:21
177:23
Scandinavia ( 4 )
173:24 174:5 176:5
176:14
scans175:23 scenario ( 2 ) 114:14
131:5
schedule ( 2 ) 182:17
182:19
scheme ( 6 ) 38:14 48:1
50:19 50:24 75:16
139:5
scooting187:7 scope51:14 scoundrels87:23 scour88:22 scratch130:14 scratched24:2
screen ( 5 ) 9:13 198:17
199:18 207:7 207:18
screens,9:18 scrutinise79:16 scrutiny65:4 sea,7:8 seamless,7:22 search182:17 searched203:21 second ( 20 ) 5:11
5:12 5:13 32:19 41:4
104:13 104:18 104:18
124:20 124:21 124:22
151:15 153:18 156:18
157:10 177:12 180:8
183:5 183:5 197:12
secondary ( 2 ) 125:23
125:24
Secondly, ( 8 ) 12:15
22:18 24:10 54:16
68:3 108:1 109:21
169:5
section ( 5 ) 69:13
76:22 78:14 101:5
107:17
secure84:5 secured140:17 security ( 4 ) 126:12
135:22 136:3 213:10
see ( 91 ) 4:25 5:4
10:15 10:23 11:1
27:6 33:5 42:1 45:7
51:12 54:17 61:7 62:9
65:12 67:4 69:23

72:11 72:21 74:25
80:23 87:3 88:22 90:4
91:12 93:22 95:5 96:2
102:22 105:3 115:7
121:23 122:11 126:9
137:8 140:15 140:19
141:25 142:15 144:21
146:24 147:23 148:4
148:20 149:6 149:21
150:15 151:10 152:17
153:4 153:14 154:7
154:8 154:10 155:13
155:19 156:9 156:14
156:17 157:1 159:2
160:4 160:5 160:19
161:20 163:22 164:21
165:3 165:4 165:9
166:18 166:21 167:1
167:12 167:22 174:11
174:16 175:12 175:23
176:14 177:19 182:19
184:13 189:9 191:3
193:1 193:15 193:24
199:17 203:6 204:18
204:23
seeing202:18
seek ( 6 ) 19:17 41:5
69:4 113:20 120:1
132:14
seeking61:18
seem ( 6 ) 25:14 75:9
92:21 93:10 93:11
114:22
seemed197:9
seems ( 10 ) 3:22 18:13
44:20 44:21 91:8
92:22 102:11 103:2
186:2 194:19
seen ( 9 ) 29:1 70:23
84:15 114:21 138:23
179:7 183:18 198:12
209:20
sees ( 2 ) 84:14 85:1
seize20:18
seized ( 2 ) 204:23
206:20
sell ( 4 ) 17:10 56:24
76:9 77:13
selling ( 2 ) 46:24 46:25
sells57:1
send ( 9 ) 167:23 188:21
189:24 197:14 197:15
199:13 199:14 207:14
208:11
sending184:20 senior ( 4 ) 11:2 45:5
45:8 217:10
sense ( 11 ) 9:1 10:12
57:18 69:16 94:21
145:24 158:5 161:19
180:3 189:21 205:10
sensible ( 2 ) 194:5
194:6
sent ( 10 ) 181:22
183:17 184:24 186:4
189:25 190:23 190:24
197:1 197:5 199:16
sentence ( 3 ) 72:12
73:7 76:25
separate ( 7 ) 25:21
33:14 42:23 93:1
96:11 101:7 131:12
separately, ( 2 ) 42:23
78:20
sequence24:14 sequences151:23 serious. ( 7 ) 22:4 24:18
54:4 67:7 83:20 177:5
178:11
seriously9:10 served,183:4

serves ( 2 ) 163:23
214:11
service169:3
set ( 18 ) 22:19 32:23
32:25 35:9 37:23
69:3 76:2 91:10 92:21
100:10 101:24 105:21
106:2 171:13 197:10
198:7 205:14 212:1
sets ( 2 ) 32:23 39:6
setting104:1 seven187:9 several13:16 Sevzapalians ( 3 )
211:17 212:1 212:20
shall ( 16 ) 24:17 41:12
41:21 42:19 181:1
191:3 193:3 194:9
194:17 199:11 215:14
216:1 216:5 216:7
216:14 216:25
shan’t1:18 shape155:10
share ( 5 ) 8:3 126:1
211:2 211:24 212:14
shareholder ( 3 )
214:17 214:19 214:20
shareholding ( 3 )
205:25 214:20 214:23
shares. ( 3 ) 94:24
123:9 211:18
sheer146:25 sheet210:24 shelf.204:4 shock46:13 shoes7:12
short ( 9 ) 62:3 106:23
106:23 151:6 152:11
155:2 167:3 188:20
200:9
short-circuit178:23 shortcut155:20 shorten180:11 shorter,160:5 shortfall.135:6 shortly,200:17 should ( 82 ) 4:8 8:9
14:10 25:6 25:18
31:16 34:11 34:12
36:17 37:23 39:3
41:1 41:22 45:24 46:3
46:21 49:12 51:1 51:2
60:1 60:14 70:14
70:16 79:15 80:14
81:22 82:19 82:19
83:4 84:4 86:3 86:5
93:2 93:3 93:7 101:7
105:11 108:8 110:3
111:10 114:23 116:18
120:6 121:6 121:7
121:19 121:22 124:10
125:10 153:20 155:20
165:17 165:18 169:3
172:19 176:24 178:24
179:5 179:10 179:15
179:25 180:19 181:21
182:1 186:10 186:17
189:6 189:7 194:20
197:13 197:14 199:13
199:14 201:9 202:9
202:12 213:21 215:11
218:22 219:4 219:7
219:11
shouldn’t ( 12 ) 22:9
36:16 36:18 36:19
57:6 81:15 94:18
104:13 159:22 165:19
178:7 203:3
show ( 63 ) 4:11 4:17
16:3 19:9 19:20 21:3
21:4 21:4 29:19 33:16

43:16 44:5 47:22
47:24 47:24 48:6 48:9
48:14 49:5 52:3 52:7
53:9 53:10 53:12
53:12 53:15 53:18
54:9 54:10 54:22 56:1
56:2 60:8 63:18 63:20
63:21 63:22 63:23
64:1 67:12 67:17
69:18 77:3 80:10
81:15 98:4 105:15
107:2 120:1 134:6
139:13 162:18 165:6
165:10 165:11 166:7
169:16 171:14 171:24
173:3 178:9 187:1
211:2
showing114:25 shown ( 5 ) 75:1 83:11
89:12 134:7 138:11
shows ( 2 ) 33:15 56:6
shrink155:15 shut147:1
side ( 4 ) 24:12 64:5
64:13 192:24
sides ( 2 ) 150:8 163:9
sign5:19
signatories, ( 2 ) 5:10
5:19
signature155:4 signed, ( 3 ) 155:11
175:17 197:16
significant113:2 significantly29:7 silly100:8 similar.118:7
simple ( 3 ) 19:22 37:22
112:5
simplify173:1 simplistic43:2
since ( 12 ) 27:19 58:11
82:22 85:23 111:25
114:3 124:8 126:9
181:10 186:15 187:10
187:13
single ( 4 ) 36:4 43:24
45:23 104:15
sinister213:4
Sir ( 3 ) 5:11 5:14
211:11
sit ( 5 ) 29:13 31:6 31:22
161:2 180:20
sitting1:20 situation,129:23 six ( 5 ) 15:21 100:9
157:2 199:12 200:2
skeleton ( 6 ) 9:24
122:18 149:9 203:13
204:9 213:16
skims81:23 skip81:2
Sklyarevsky ( 10 ) 94:6
96:8 97:2 97:3 102:10
102:12 108:14 108:17
160:14 210:7
skullduggery135:16 slack51:4 slagging25:25 slightly ( 14 ) 9:1 16:6
24:16 31:8 44:24 51:7
56:16 66:19 66:24
67:1 67:8 68:24 89:22
152:22
slipped.82:23 slow101:15 slur13:14
small ( 2 ) 214:18
214:19
smallest104:22 smidgen162:4

Smirnov. ( 9 ) 94:3
96:23 96:24 102:11
102:20 102:21 108:2
160:13 210:7
Smith217:25 snap,38:24 snappy188:17
sold ( 2 ) 43:4 130:17
sole ( 2 ) 131:1 219:18
solicitor182:2 solution164:22 somebody ( 2 ) 177:10
215:3
someone ( 18 ) 3:5
11:18 14:5 19:12
23:17 29:13 39:8
47:9 54:24 55:24
56:3 63:25 75:23 76:8
124:24 198:24 207:14
208:10
something ( 38 ) 3:9
5:21 14:4 14:14 17:17
24:25 26:25 34:6
45:23 46:12 55:12
56:21 63:23 71:7
85:15 91:23 114:13
114:15 116:25 119:13
120:22 144:25 145:6
158:4 159:4 159:19
168:4 168:10 170:1
172:19 172:22 173:11
200:17 201:6 201:16
201:24 204:15 215:1
sometimes ( 4 ) 137:12
149:21 181:19 216:10
somewhat,43:2 somewhere218:18 soon,55:6 sooner178:21
sort ( 44 ) 3:16 22:21
23:4 24:24 25:24
32:14 33:14 36:12
47:4 55:18 60:12
81:15 82:14 83:10
83:22 83:23 85:2
85:25 86:2 91:8 91:9
101:3 107:7 118:9
120:25 124:25 132:9
132:13 133:2 133:13
135:25 136:23 152:19
159:16 171:7 174:2
179:25 181:11 197:6
207:4 210:4 213:5
214:21 216:9
sorts ( 2 ) 168:2 195:17
sought ( 3 ) 111:2
171:12 198:12
soul31:6 sounding151:1 sources,57:24 space198:4 spaces216:14 spare196:17 speak201:7 speaking ( 5 ) 136:5
137:7 191:5 201:5
202:17
special184:18
specific ( 4 ) 80:5 91:20
123:13 144:11
specifically ( 2 ) 22:3
216:13
specify ( 3 ) 63:1 98:12
109:14
speed ( 2 ) 167:15
209:18
spend ( 3 ) 71:6 181:15
194:8
spent ( 2 ) 43:23 181:11
spillover152:10

split ( 7 ) 114:19 114:23
114:24 115:2 163:4
163:6 165:5
spoken200:22 spot26:25
spotted. ( 3 ) 27:1 27:3
141:7
spotting, ( 2 ) 180:5
180:5
spring95:22 squarely175:21 squares176:11 squeezed,161:23 stage. ( 15 ) 6:11 34:7
37:23 47:16 55:9
57:10 61:4 63:3
69:2 81:7 87:6 90:19
150:13 175:14 218:12
stages ( 7 ) 21:15 23:21
25:5 33:20 55:7 69:5
112:11
stance.146:13
stand, ( 4 ) 25:20 69:10
163:18 175:19
standard110:2 standards107:11 standing55:16 stands52:20
start ( 25 ) 9:16 61:5
63:6 84:19 93:14
93:18 103:17 104:2
119:12 143:5 155:14
179:6 184:18 199:9
199:18 207:17 207:24
216:6 216:12 216:14
216:16 216:24 217:2
217:3 217:6
started109:19 starting ( 4 ) 35:11
59:12 65:2 119:12
starts ( 5 ) 10:13 27:4
35:16 69:13 121:13
stated ( 3 ) 100:15
203:12 204:8
statement ( 14 ) 6:16
7:2 9:8 9:17 77:4
109:23 174:12 174:13
183:4 204:16 207:8
214:2 214:3 214:5
statements ( 4 ) 4:20
32:20 33:16 205:12
station,219:15 status32:1
statute ( 6 ) 106:20
107:1 112:5 117:24
118:3 118:12
statutory ( 3 ) 111:15
111:19 118:20
Steadman ( 11 ) 115:25
116:7 116:20 162:22
163:3 163:20 164:10
164:13 164:20 174:4
177:22
Steadman’s163:10 step ( 2 ) 7:12 161:10
Stepanenko? ( 3 )
76:24 77:1 77:6
steps. ( 2 ) 69:7 111:3
still ( 20 ) 25:10 47:8
48:21 58:5 70:5 95:19
98:11 110:1 125:3
128:19 130:4 132:5
132:7 134:10 140:4
146:17 162:2 184:22
188:8 205:20
stir ( 2 ) 102:2 103:7
stock-taking36:13
stop ( 9 ) 7:17 23:3 34:1
36:17 43:8 104:1
120:9 128:2 189:16

stopped ( 3 ) 18:1
117:21 206:6
stopping78:22
story. ( 7 ) 24:22 93:17
95:12 103:25 104:11
104:13 104:19
straight21:12 straightforward8:1 strain ( 3 ) 134:22
161:13 161:14
strains,171:20 strands69:5 strange171:4 straying86:11 strength59:8 stress ( 5 ) 104:4
156:21 161:12 161:13
171:19
strict146:7 strictest145:24
strictly ( 2 ) 12:11 104:9
strike ( 5 ) 19:7 71:22
80:19 85:10 203:15
striking81:8 STROILOV: ( 460 )
1:5 2:2 2:7 2:13 4:2
5:1 5:4 5:10 5:14
5:24 6:7 6:12 8:6 8:9
8:12 8:22 9:12 9:21
9:24 10:3 10:9 10:12
10:15 10:18 11:15
13:16 13:18 14:7
14:10 14:14 14:22
14:24 15:7 15:10
16:5 17:1 17:4 17:13
17:15 19:4 19:14
20:4 20:22 20:25
21:19 22:4 22:11
23:6 23:20 24:6 25:3
25:8 25:18 26:4 26:8
26:12 26:16 26:18
26:22 27:4 27:9 27:11
27:19 28:13 28:23
29:1 29:15 30:8 30:12
30:18 30:20 30:25
32:4 32:11 32:24
33:2 33:4 33:9 33:17
33:20 34:19 34:21
36:6 36:20 36:24
40:6 42:2 42:7 42:10
42:22 43:19 43:21
43:23 44:7 44:9 44:16
44:24 45:4 45:7 45:10
45:14 45:16 45:21
46:6 46:15 46:23
47:8 48:10 48:16
48:21 49:1 49:4 49:7
49:10 49:12 49:21
50:25 51:6 51:12
52:6 52:13 53:22 54:6
54:11 54:25 55:22
56:18 57:5 58:5 58:15
58:17 59:25 60:2 60:5
60:10 60:16 60:19
61:11 61:17 61:21
61:24 62:6 62:23 63:9
64:10 64:13 65:16
65:21 66:1 66:5 66:16
66:23 67:23 68:1 68:8
68:14 68:18 71:4
71:15 71:18 72:19
72:23 73:4 73:10
73:12 73:19 73:25
74:8 74:19 74:23
75:5 75:14 75:17
75:19 76:7 76:12
76:18 76:21 76:25
77:11 77:18 77:25
78:2 78:9 78:19 79:2
79:11 79:20 79:24
80:2 80:5 80:20 82:25

84:2 85:1 85:20 86:10
87:10 87:14 88:3 88:7
88:9 89:8 89:16 89:18
89:25 90:2 90:8 91:13
91:17 91:24 92:6
92:18 93:5 93:14 94:7
94:20 95:3 95:6 96:9
96:13 96:18 96:22
96:24 97:7 97:9 97:14
97:17 97:20 98:7
98:10 99:1 99:4 99:11
103:14 105:1 106:9
107:12 108:21 109:3
109:9 109:16 109:18
109:21 110:9 110:15
110:19 110:24 111:11
111:17 111:20 112:6
112:11 112:14 112:17
113:4 113:7 113:10
113:13 113:17 113:24
115:12 115:20 116:3
116:9 116:11 116:23
117:2 117:11 117:14
118:6 118:14 118:18
118:22 119:23 120:4
120:11 121:3 121:8
121:12 122:11 122:15
122:24 124:15 125:9
125:13 127:5 128:2
128:10 128:16 128:24
129:4 129:8 129:11
130:21 131:5 131:10
136:5 137:7 137:20
138:1 138:13 138:23
139:3 140:11 141:2
141:10 141:17 141:22
141:25 142:2 142:5
142:12 142:23 142:24
143:1 143:7 143:9
143:15 143:23 144:7
144:10 144:13 145:10
146:15 146:17 147:5
148:6 148:9 148:14
148:16 148:24 149:15
149:22 150:17 151:8
151:21 152:19 154:12
154:25 155:18 155:23
156:21 157:6 157:16
158:4 158:13 159:1
160:1 160:6 160:11
160:20 161:17 162:6
162:10 163:1 164:16
165:4 165:12 165:15
165:22 165:24 166:3
166:5 166:8 166:24
167:2 167:4 167:17
169:1 169:6 169:15
170:9 170:16 173:4
176:22 179:17 180:15
181:4 182:23 183:20
183:25 185:4 185:11
185:13 186:14 186:19
187:14 187:20 187:25
188:3 188:9 188:13
188:18 188:21 189:8
189:15 190:6 190:9
190:17 190:20 191:5
191:10 191:17 191:23
192:11 192:17 192:20
193:4 193:23 193:24
194:10 195:1 195:6
195:22 196:6 196:12
198:1 198:2 199:17
199:21 199:24 200:1
200:4 200:7 200:12
200:16 200:20 200:21
200:25 201:5 201:20
202:11 202:13 203:12
203:17 204:3 204:7
204:14 204:18 205:3
205:14 207:6 207:11

207:16 207:20 207:24
208:6 208:15 209:6
209:17 209:25 211:11
215:16 216:20 217:18
218:4 218:15 219:21
219:22
Stroilov’s ( 5 ) 4:5 33:8
85:5 140:13 205:1
strong ( 3 ) 86:20
202:11 202:20
strongly ( 2 ) 35:6 153:4
struck ( 4 ) 82:3 82:10
91:4 171:4
study167:5 stuff217:22 stumps,120:9 stupid63:20 stupidity,64:7
subject ( 19 ) 6:21 65:4
81:6 83:21 87:7 89:10
103:10 104:8 106:9
122:16 131:12 135:7
137:14 139:17 154:11
155:18 158:18 164:2
216:20
subjective ( 2 ) 145:23
145:25
submit ( 14 ) 18:13
24:19 29:1 32:22
34:2 34:3 36:14 62:16
86:15 104:21 118:14
118:15 138:1 144:24
submitted,141:2 submitting ( 2 ) 18:1
18:16
subparagraph ( 6 )
10:18 44:10 68:15
76:21 141:10 141:11
subsequent ( 12 )
11:18 68:18 79:6 92:4
103:21 107:21 108:4
123:9 141:13 207:23
210:5 213:15
subsequently90:13 subsidiaries ( 3 )
205:23 206:13 206:13
substance ( 5 ) 11:9
73:6 86:24 92:14
127:15
substantial ( 3 ) 64:14
166:12 166:19
substantially.129:12 substantiates66:15 substantive202:23 substitute62:12 succeed. ( 4 ) 15:23
30:17 104:20 131:13
succeeded104:12 suddenly46:10 sue31:15 sufficient ( 6 ) 21:3
27:12 28:22 41:10
54:2 114:20
sufficiently? ( 2 ) 99:16
101:23
suggest ( 15 ) 22:22
65:10 75:22 86:23
88:11 95:4 152:23
153:4 153:11 154:16
157:10 164:4 164:11
179:9 185:5
suggested ( 19 ) 11:12
11:22 17:17 18:5
35:14 49:15 53:22
54:1 59:18 64:19 96:5
112:20 116:12 157:11
163:11 163:21 170:25
172:13 201:17
suggesting ( 4 ) 22:16
123:13 127:2 178:23

suggestion, ( 7 ) 24:24
142:13 151:9 163:2
169:24 170:18 181:22
suggests ( 3 ) 97:11
156:1 177:9
suit193:2
suite ( 3 ) 59:17 198:23
198:24
suits ( 2 ) 202:4 216:18
summarised ( 2 ) 81:3
110:14
summary ( 2 ) 28:15
127:5
summer ( 5 ) 95:20
95:23 107:22 109:6
114:4
summonsing,164:23 sums ( 2 ) 209:3 209:12
superficial12:3 superiors48:4 supervising ( 2 ) 79:3
185:8
supplemental ( 4 ) 4:15
183:6 198:18 198:19
supply ( 4 ) 75:10 75:10
180:22 186:10
support ( 3 ) 7:10 50:10
111:5
supported ( 2 ) 18:7
145:14
suppose ( 8 ) 7:21 9:18
79:20 92:20 102:1
126:15 141:19 179:22
supposed ( 3 ) 57:10
57:16 188:23
Supposing ( 11 ) 56:20
56:23 87:20 87:25
89:6 96:3 104:24
104:24 134:12 134:14
151:19
Supreme ( 2 ) 30:1
30:11
sure ( 56 ) 8:12 11:7
23:1 26:11 27:6 42:2
42:20 47:2 49:4 54:6
62:10 68:12 71:6
72:16 74:11 86:12
88:9 98:7 100:8
100:15 100:18 102:24
124:25 125:5 130:8
131:5 134:20 134:24
134:25 138:4 139:3
140:12 159:14 162:1
167:13 170:3 176:22
177:1 185:13 188:22
192:20 193:5 194:11
197:13 199:3 199:17
203:20 208:13 210:14
210:18 215:10 216:2
217:19 218:15 219:21
219:22
surely ( 3 ) 58:15
179:24 207:2
surplus. ( 2 ) 141:16
141:21
surprised47:3 surprising213:3 surprisingly76:18 survive160:17 suspect, ( 3 ) 82:20
87:23 180:15
suspended169:3 suspicious93:19 sustainable,39:9 swapping39:7 swiftly.184:5 sympathetic194:13 sync.134:25

T
tab ( 6 ) 165:22 166:8
166:19 176:12 183:7
184:10
tabs. ( 2 ) 170:11 170:14
taken ( 18 ) 56:13 62:21
66:18 66:24 70:7 71:5
72:6 75:11 78:9 78:25
79:14 100:20 114:4
129:24 158:7 158:11
188:6 200:19
takeover79:5 takes ( 6 ) 136:12
151:15 152:12 159:21
166:5 200:25
taking ( 5 ) 25:21 82:24
129:4 171:5 189:14
talking ( 14 ) 8:25 17:1
17:4 53:20 55:8 57:7
57:9 67:2 68:23 75:5
76:17 102:16 172:24
172:25
Tarasova,175:17 task ( 3 ) 98:1 147:9
152:1
taster154:15 tax120:7 team36:21
technical ( 3 ) 139:20
185:3 212:18
technically114:6 telling66:10 temporarily134:24 ten ( 5 ) 54:19 54:20
207:7 207:9 208:20
ten-minute215:18 ten-page208:6
tend ( 3 ) 48:3 121:17
181:18
tent,39:3 tenterhooks203:4
term ( 2 ) 189:20 212:18
termed123:1 Terminal ( 4 ) 78:25
79:6 140:25 211:17
Terminal’s212:23 terms ( 19 ) 72:8 77:20
88:9 104:16 108:2
110:19 112:11 114:20
149:1 150:17 164:9
188:22 189:8 189:15
192:21 212:6 213:3
215:4 215:9
terrible195:13 terribly ( 2 ) 177:17
209:17
territory.119:16
test ( 4 ) 97:19 110:2
117:17 119:17
text ( 2 ) 45:4 90:3
textbook91:21 textbooks91:18 Thanks. ( 2 ) 34:25
89:17
That’s ( 194 ) 2:13 4:23
8:19 9:20 9:21 10:7
10:9 12:2 14:8 14:14
14:18 17:1 17:13
17:15 17:15 18:16
20:16 20:19 20:20
21:18 22:17 23:18
25:20 25:20 26:19
27:5 28:24 30:14
30:23 33:12 33:19
34:5 35:10 35:11
35:12 38:21 39:5
39:14 39:24 41:2
41:14 41:15 43:20

43:21 44:24 45:22
46:15 46:23 47:23
47:23 48:6 48:10
49:25 51:3 53:1 54:5
55:4 55:12 55:18 56:4
59:23 61:10 61:11
61:17 61:17 61:21
62:12 65:16 65:25
67:23 68:2 68:24 69:3
69:8 69:10 70:6 71:1
73:4 73:4 73:25 74:1
74:19 74:21 75:14
77:14 78:2 78:5 80:9
82:16 85:3 88:7 88:15
92:18 92:25 94:3 95:4
95:11 96:13 97:10
97:14 97:17 98:19
99:11 103:16 104:21
106:19 108:10 108:14
109:12 109:18 109:23
113:4 115:24 116:2
118:8 118:15 118:16
119:5 119:11 119:12
119:23 122:2 122:5
122:18 123:16 123:20
124:19 124:24 125:25
126:4 127:5 128:5
128:10 128:16 128:16
128:24 129:5 129:20
130:7 134:14 136:22
137:1 137:5 137:15
137:24 138:1 138:13
138:14 141:21 147:22
149:22 158:9 158:11
159:2 159:8 159:8
161:2 162:6 162:10
163:21 166:24 167:14
168:17 173:11 174:8
174:16 178:2 183:17
183:18 184:3 185:12
193:4 196:5 197:11
199:19 200:6 200:23
202:6 202:22 203:16
204:7 205:3 206:15
207:20 208:23 209:5
209:8 209:14 210:2
210:14 211:6 214:18
215:13 216:20
themselves ( 6 ) 31:13
57:15 65:19 170:2
181:18 190:16
theories118:19
theory, ( 4 ) 84:14 119:8
132:11 163:20
there’s ( 5 ) 133:23
136:21 172:9 192:16
213:14
thereabouts, ( 3 ) 49:17
95:2 174:18
thereafter. ( 3 ) 49:25
50:7 51:11
thereby ( 4 ) 57:2 60:7
126:13 139:8
therefore ( 18 ) 16:4
52:24 67:11 111:7
111:18 111:21 116:2
118:1 120:8 126:21
146:12 147:22 171:17
174:22 181:1 189:4
190:19 219:19
thin103:10
thing ( 36 ) 2:18 4:4
4:6 14:9 14:18 14:25
20:20 20:21 23:16
27:5 31:20 31:21 32:3
35:12 40:20 40:22
54:4 55:4 73:5 86:13
91:9 92:25 117:8
139:20 142:15 146:4
150:9 171:4 180:4
181:11 189:24 192:4

195:13 200:11 202:16
212:20
thinking ( 9 ) 2:7 37:4
48:10 138:16 138:18
139:25 143:24 143:25
159:19
thinks ( 2 ) 157:24
179:12
thinness100:12 third ( 8 ) 41:8 93:9
124:6 135:12 177:11
180:14 185:15 186:23
Thirdly,54:17 Thomas58:24
though ( 9 ) 6:25 58:22
69:9 88:21 114:6
127:25 130:12 142:19
177:21
thought ( 20 ) 6:2 8:24
20:4 38:20 64:4 70:10
82:17 106:1 106:5
120:16 127:22 144:5
163:8 173:19 180:19
181:2 192:2 195:23
214:25 219:25
thoughts32:2 thousands,88:18 thrash200:17
three ( 19 ) 2:23 9:2 9:6
29:22 88:20 102:17
111:12 115:16 143:3
150:21 151:4 152:7
156:19 165:21 185:23
186:8 196:5 198:13
218:12
threshold.22:17 through. ( 33 ) 20:23
46:20 55:12 63:14
64:25 67:22 78:3 78:9
84:15 84:17 100:21
103:10 103:13 115:22
123:3 123:9 126:5
131:18 131:20 131:22
132:2 134:8 134:16
137:2 147:11 149:5
163:2 163:17 166:10
169:14 172:6 184:21
209:25
throughout, ( 2 ) 26:25
85:21
throw ( 2 ) 15:21 219:23
thus79:5 ticking.45:20 tidied186:13 tidy182:9
tie ( 4 ) 87:19 87:25 88:8
139:7
ties202:4
time, ( 124 ) 1:19 2:14
3:13 3:13 7:2 8:14
8:15 9:3 9:5 21:14
21:24 26:12 40:22
45:20 56:25 60:25
62:11 62:15 64:20
64:24 71:6 71:24 72:3
72:5 72:8 73:20 76:1
76:13 82:20 82:21
84:1 84:16 85:18
85:19 86:17 88:22
90:9 90:10 92:1 94:16
94:17 95:2 95:3 95:13
97:6 100:9 103:13
108:7 109:6 109:10
112:22 114:7 114:21
118:17 120:22 121:14
128:13 138:22 143:19
144:4 144:5 145:4
145:17 145:19 147:14
147:16 152:16 156:4
157:12 160:18 161:2
161:11 161:15 162:12

162:13 164:12 166:5
167:24 167:25 168:1
168:13 169:15 169:23
170:2 170:5 170:23
171:2 171:10 172:20
173:16 173:17 173:19
178:8 179:6 179:16
180:11 181:11 181:15
181:17 181:21 186:19
187:7 188:10 189:14
191:3 192:5 194:5
194:5 194:8 194:9
194:16 194:17 194:20
196:17 196:18 199:18
200:1 205:4 205:22
206:3 206:6 210:25
216:21 217:3
times, ( 6 ) 3:5 37:13
47:7 137:8 212:24
213:9
timetable. ( 16 ) 85:12
85:14 120:24 148:23
150:17 150:20 151:6
151:13 152:23 154:19
154:21 155:13 155:25
156:7 157:21 161:19
timetabling,120:19 timing, ( 2 ) 152:2
154:17
tiny196:19 tiptoe38:18 tired151:1
today ( 4 ) 43:21 63:6
131:22 183:5
tog203:2
together ( 10 ) 17:9
47:19 53:3 57:24
58:10 69:5 84:2
169:19 172:8 195:5
togs203:1
told ( 10 ) 26:15 32:12
46:10 77:6 123:19
157:20 179:6 200:21
202:24 205:11
tomorrow56:21 tongues,136:5
too ( 19 ) 30:25 95:3
103:3 103:10 103:10
103:13 111:12 111:25
144:22 146:23 146:23
146:23 147:21 148:3
148:3 151:1 179:13
187:21 217:4
took ( 8 ) 58:22 65:5
91:2 91:15 91:15
185:16 187:8 187:11
toothless52:11 torrid ( 2 ) 194:24
194:24
totally166:13 touched59:23 towards ( 2 ) 151:2
167:12
tracks,7:18 traditional202:14 trained158:24 tramps46:20 transaction ( 25 ) 12:7
12:9 13:18 17:25
18:3 18:9 33:23 47:12
48:15 49:8 49:10 52:5
52:8 52:15 52:21
52:25 53:19 54:14
65:17 90:7 93:16
175:25 177:9 177:11
177:16
transactions ( 32 )
12:12 12:18 12:20
15:1 15:3 15:12 15:13
15:14 18:11 29:20
43:13 46:17 49:16

53:12 57:22 58:3
64:16 65:18 67:19
68:4 91:15 93:18
96:7 97:1 97:23 102:6
103:19 108:4 109:7
109:12 115:9 175:5
transcript ( 4 ) 60:21
170:9 201:12 216:2
transcripts,74:24 transfer ( 3 ) 94:16
94:24 174:19
transferred173:25 transfers ( 2 ) 27:20
103:23
translate217:23 translated.175:6 translation ( 2 ) 175:10
218:21
translations, ( 4 ) 145:2
179:23 218:5 218:10
translators, ( 2 ) 216:3
217:22
travel156:11 tread214:10
treat ( 5 ) 7:10 106:25
179:20 181:7 210:19
treated210:17 tremendous216:2 trial ( 38 ) 2:15 21:12
25:2 33:15 50:17 65:7
65:21 75:3 81:16 87:4
88:9 102:24 114:22
116:18 121:9 144:18
144:25 145:21 145:22
146:21 146:25 147:11
147:22 148:18 153:21
158:3 165:6 166:1
166:14 168:12 168:25
173:16 175:4 180:4
182:1 186:16 191:15
193:12
tried ( 7 ) 15:20 21:2
150:7 152:14 154:21
160:23 206:4
triggers25:1 Trojan83:22
trouble ( 5 ) 13:23 42:20
43:18 184:25 200:16
troubled ( 2 ) 153:2
163:10
troublesome ( 2 ) 58:21
81:12
troubling185:10 true, ( 5 ) 21:18 41:15
41:16 87:4 115:1
trust ( 3 ) 147:2 149:12
159:24
trusted ( 2 ) 158:24
212:18
trusting212:19
truth ( 3 ) 66:11 181:12
196:5
truthful173:1
try ( 23 ) 14:10 22:23
23:20 25:5 60:4 60:13
60:21 84:1 84:13
101:9 112:6 115:4
115:6 149:12 151:5
151:24 156:9 169:24
180:21 199:10 199:11
216:22 217:6
trying ( 43 ) 16:3 28:20
30:6 32:4 33:12 33:19
38:3 39:15 40:1 51:13
51:13 57:5 61:12 66:5
70:13 71:23 72:4
73:19 77:18 81:14
84:9 84:22 90:8 94:22
97:5 100:21 103:17
112:14 132:1 132:12
132:17 132:20 138:14

138:21 139:4 141:7
142:19 154:22 172:7
174:4 193:4 201:22
206:17
Tuesday121:25
turn ( 4 ) 129:18 144:10
148:22 148:22
turned46:12 Turning117:12 turns ( 2 ) 189:13
200:23
turpi ( 3 ) 30:14 31:16
128:14
type ( 2 ) 136:1 136:7
typical93:15 typically168:25

U
ultimate ( 3 ) 27:16
68:20 69:2
ultimately ( 14 ) 15:24
17:6 18:3 32:15 33:16
49:12 49:13 84:11
84:12 114:9 130:3
142:7 145:13 157:24
unable ( 3 ) 115:25
115:25 165:25
unacceptable ( 2 ) 7:23
168:16
unarguable, ( 6 ) 32:22
101:7 105:2 105:16
105:16 105:17
unbelievable196:9 uncertain, ( 2 ) 201:9
201:10
unchallenged.149:18 unclear,141:6 uncontrolled.26:3 underground20:4 undermine7:19 underpinned182:24 understand ( 44 ) 4:22
16:22 18:4 20:24
20:24 32:11 32:13
39:15 40:5 44:20 49:5
49:19 49:25 57:5
60:14 60:22 61:12
62:7 67:20 69:9 71:3
75:20 94:7 99:15
101:6 112:6 113:16
122:6 124:18 135:18
155:22 159:4 160:2
161:24 178:3 195:9
195:11 196:2 196:6
203:7 210:3 216:17
217:16 219:20
understandably20:25 understanding. ( 7 )
116:2 135:11 157:18
164:10 172:21 177:1
189:1
understands59:12 understood ( 9 ) 66:16
81:4 95:7 101:16
123:11 131:15 142:20
155:24 197:10
undertake212:9 undervalue. ( 9 ) 17:11
43:4 52:18 99:13
133:6 135:23 139:7
141:1 141:23
undervalues, ( 2 ) 63:19
99:6
unease85:9

129:11 145:3 146:5
146:18 147:24 147:24
150:9 154:21 157:9
179:8 182:5 196:15
unfairness ( 6 ) 107:5
145:8 146:11 146:22
178:4 178:10
unfolded59:10 unfortunate ( 3 ) 1:11
170:3 170:6
unidentified ( 2 ) 35:8
36:4
unimportant151:22 uninfluenced56:7 unknown, ( 2 ) 44:1
46:8
unless ( 25 ) 8:17 11:25
19:19 23:15 37:8
48:12 79:15 87:19
87:25 89:7 101:6
102:14 107:2 107:24
117:23 119:14 126:7
130:10 134:5 138:11
156:15 158:15 168:10
216:9 216:12
unlike ( 2 ) 136:14
158:13
unlikely, ( 3 ) 132:6
138:2 140:2
unnamed,19:5 unnecessarily,132:15 unnecessary? ( 5 ) 30:3
71:7 166:14 168:9
194:8
unnoticed,207:4 unrealistic157:5 unredacted ( 2 ) 185:19
186:9
unregistered3:17 unsuccessfully,86:16 unusual, ( 2 ) 105:5
119:19
unwilling116:1 Unwittingly149:21 uphold65:15
urge ( 3 ) 85:14 191:23
194:10
urged127:22 usage88:22
used ( 4 ) 91:3 152:18
169:23 195:15
useful ( 3 ) 37:7 86:13
194:2
usefully181:11 uses19:9 using67:7
usual. ( 3 ) 1:25 91:4
195:14
usually, ( 2 ) 23:15
110:7

V
V-Bank167:20
vague. ( 2 ) 63:11
109:16
valid ( 2 ) 65:15 89:12
valuation ( 3 ) 19:7
102:23 163:12
valuations ( 2 ) 21:17
103:3
value ( 10 ) 1:21 7:9
7:24 19:2 113:2
113:20 115:1 115:1
136:11 137:3

variant114:25 variety151:21 various ( 25 ) 6:2 58:3
67:19 72:4 80:18
83:19 85:11 99:1
103:19 103:23 103:24
124:16 126:3 126:6
158:19 164:4 168:22
169:12 180:1 182:23
185:8 185:9 200:13
205:5 211:21
Vasiliev. ( 5 ) 204:25
205:1 205:18 206:5
206:21
vast70:24 venture46:7 verifiable219:10
version ( 8 ) 9:21 24:22
25:9 67:5 68:19 92:9
100:4 176:21
versions, ( 2 ) 218:9
218:17
vested200:12
via ( 5 ) 31:10 53:4
136:19 181:9 181:23
vicarious124:18 victim, ( 5 ) 125:3
125:23 125:24 126:9
126:14
victims ( 2 ) 127:12
127:18
videolink, ( 4 ) 1:8
170:5 217:13 217:21
videolinking,155:9 views202:20 vigilant3:16 vigorous28:10 vigour149:13 virtue130:1
vis-a-vis77:22
visit ( 2 ) 15:25 44:4
visited41:2 Volodina213:16 volume ( 2 ) 32:19
150:25
voted53:25 Vyborg ( 4 ) 167:21
205:7 205:22 205:25

W
wade135:19
wait ( 2 ) 51:2 150:15
waiver185:22 waivers182:23 wanting115:7 wants ( 9 ) 151:18
155:12 166:10 180:24
198:17 199:5 200:14
202:5 216:16
warned,38:22 warning, ( 8 ) 7:6 7:21
21:6 87:2 89:11
108:20 153:6 154:12
warrant81:8 wash137:19
wasn’t ( 15 ) 6:20 20:5
28:4 54:4 75:13 91:3
100:18 102:24 117:4
132:17 136:23 167:9
184:8 206:16 213:11
waste85:18 wasting103:13 water67:8 watered70:3

21:10 26:22 26:24
28:17 30:18 30:19
34:12 36:15 37:11
37:17 40:1 44:21
48:2 48:23 51:7 53:10
53:11 61:9 63:11 64:4
66:15 77:13 77:14
78:20 79:20 84:17
85:19 88:12 90:20
95:18 101:10 103:12
103:15 103:17 106:24
107:9 108:20 109:4
109:5 109:9 109:13
110:2 111:14 115:6
115:16 117:20 118:23
120:25 121:10 122:19
123:25 131:15 133:25
134:7 136:3 139:3
139:13 140:6 142:4
150:13 151:20 152:14
153:23 155:14 159:2
160:11 162:24 164:17
164:18 176:19 178:24
179:8 184:7 185:10
187:7 190:6 191:4
194:3 195:20 202:8
202:14 213:4 215:22
216:7 218:10 219:10
ways. ( 6 ) 29:16 55:22
57:13 63:22 150:5
215:17
we’re ( 2 ) 17:10 213:21
we’ve ( 5 ) 129:14 131:6
139:17 139:17 191:2
Wednesday121:25 week. ( 20 ) 84:7 122:4
151:2 151:14 151:15
151:20 151:20 152:1
156:16 156:17 156:18
156:19 157:1 157:8
157:10 157:17 157:18
157:19 160:7 200:1
weekend. ( 7 ) 51:2
151:12 180:16 187:8
187:10 219:25 220:1
weeks ( 9 ) 121:1 151:5
153:12 157:2 157:14
168:1 171:2 171:11
218:12
weight102:22 welcome ( 3 ) 144:15
179:25 216:4
weren’t ( 2 ) 50:2 64:2
Western ( 5 ) 78:25 79:6
140:24 211:17 212:23
what’s ( 11 ) 29:18 30:2
30:6 39:24 82:22
89:23 92:24 95:11
178:1 179:6 197:25
whatever ( 22 ) 7:16
14:2 21:14 24:13
32:16 38:11 40:21
56:12 77:14 103:1
117:17 127:12 130:22
132:15 143:4 149:10
149:23 171:18 172:20
200:1 204:5 216:5
wheeled150:11 whenever ( 2 ) 150:14
198:24
whereby ( 3 ) 31:7 91:3
94:2
wherever ( 2 ) 55:17
74:2
wherewithal134:13 whichever ( 2 ) 160:11

whole ( 10 ) 8:16 17:21
20:11 59:17 88:5
93:17 114:24 115:3
167:5 208:15
wholly107:1
whom ( 7 ) 11:16 52:23
56:7 58:7 68:13 183:3
219:7
whopping181:14 whose ( 13 ) 13:3 28:2
30:6 41:1 41:9 42:14
42:19 43:16 44:3
44:22 44:22 52:1
156:11
wicked14:2
wider ( 2 ) 83:14 116:18
wife178:14
win ( 2 ) 105:14 105:17
wind,28:9 wing108:16
wise ( 2 ) 214:23 216:22
wish ( 22 ) 41:9 42:4
44:3 44:4 46:7 53:6
59:6 60:8 61:3 63:4
88:21 90:25 118:16
143:21 158:2 162:1
194:15 201:13 202:3
205:15 205:15 219:25
wished ( 2 ) 59:5 93:23
wishes ( 3 ) 3:3 119:23
189:5
wishing ( 2 ) 34:14
157:23
withdraw ( 2 ) 192:7
201:14
Withers. ( 7 ) 184:14
185:5 185:17 186:12
189:15 189:17 190:10
witness ( 55 ) 4:20 6:15
7:2 9:8 17:23 18:2
18:16 18:18 19:5
22:15 22:22 23:24
23:24 24:7 24:10
34:9 36:23 37:8 41:18
42:11 42:13 42:16
46:20 48:11 66:10
77:4 111:4 121:19
143:20 151:8 159:18
161:1 164:11 164:22
164:24 166:16 170:1
171:1 174:12 174:12
180:9 183:3 188:11
189:13 193:19 194:7
197:18 198:21 198:24
201:17 205:12 214:5
214:22 217:13 217:21
witnessed155:4 witnesses, ( 29 ) 17:20
21:13 22:25 36:18
41:14 61:6 62:18 63:7
65:8 70:15 121:12
122:3 143:5 143:19
151:22 151:23 152:10
152:11 152:11 153:11
154:9 154:10 159:14
160:9 160:17 162:15
163:18 179:19 202:18
woes,201:11
won’t ( 12 ) 11:22 23:1
120:21 143:18 165:6
168:4 188:16 188:19
200:21 214:10 216:24
219:25
wonder ( 2 ) 9:1 89:20
wondering ( 3 ) 48:7
136:23 205:13

194:12 194:14 199:11
215:15
working ( 4 ) 55:1 98:17
186:19 195:5
workings ( 4 ) 12:22
12:23 53:23 57:17
works. ( 6 ) 53:2 71:1
118:23 128:5 150:4
159:2
world, ( 2 ) 119:20
156:9
worried ( 3 ) 150:20
151:6 152:22
worry165:15 worrying160:16
worse, ( 2 ) 136:2 200:9
worth ( 6 ) 37:1 37:1
100:24 130:17 157:4
177:3
wouldn’t ( 19 ) 11:17
16:2 16:3 37:7 65:2
85:9 85:18 87:11
137:10 137:19 137:21
140:12 142:12 164:23
170:22 170:23 171:2
189:21 211:22
wrinkle,204:13
write ( 2 ) 189:21 193:10
writers,216:2 writes6:14
writing, ( 7 ) 91:3 169:9
180:23 180:23 185:5
189:15 189:16
writings169:14 written193:9
wrong, ( 19 ) 13:2 16:23
31:16 42:5 44:21
58:19 60:7 60:7 64:21
96:2 118:15 119:24
139:2 156:14 161:22
164:17 171:8 197:17
213:18
wrong-doing. ( 2 )
133:15 133:16
wrongly. ( 4 ) 79:14
158:5 187:15 195:25
wrote ( 2 ) 5:4 172:2

Y

year ( 6 ) 2:15 2:21
120:7 165:17 204:17
214:12
years ( 9 ) 20:10 45:25
59:13 64:18 64:18
100:9 131:16 143:3
201:21
yesterday, ( 16 ) 1:7
2:8 3:19 6:1 6:5 8:24
15:20 35:1 39:23
83:13 123:19 145:2
170:3 170:5 170:8
170:9
yourself ( 4 ) 19:18
31:12 111:21 146:21
yourselves60:18

£

£15174:17
£20 ( 2 ) 174:17 175:25
£25175:25

0

unexpected45:22
unexpectedly,23:12

valuer37:8
values ( 6 ) 16:24 21:8

waters135:19
waves7:8

219:1
whilst ( 2 ) 65:1 209:3

work ( 15 ) 20:23 21:10
38:3 64:14 70:24

unfair ( 20 ) 36:9 61:22
62:19 62:19 104:23
107:8 117:20 121:10

50:9 50:11 115:8
126:12
vanishing148:19

way, ( 94 ) 3:17 8:21
13:9 13:13 19:17
20:20 20:22 21:6

White32:19 whoever219:1

86:21 134:20 135:1
180:21 187:22 190:10

0.02214:24
0.07,215:1

1
(1.05122:8
1.10120:8
1,2,3,4,5198:11
1/115:1}170:10 (10.00 ( 5 ) 1:2 216:10
216:23 217:2 217:6
10.30 ( 4 ) 216:12
216:16 216:18 220:3
10(64) ( 4 ) 101:20
104:20 123:15 139:9
100, ( 3 ) 130:17 130:18
130:19
1004, ( 3 ) 209:20
209:23 209:24
106,211:8
(11.3262:2
(11.3762:4
1104?209:22
115?170:15
11th,187:9
14132:19
153.76:19
154(i)10:1
156? ( 2 ) 48:24 48:25
15th,151:11
16681:13
16th77:4
172 ( 3 ) 81:13 213:16
213:25
174,69:13
176. ( 4 ) 72:20 73:7

108:24 109:4 109:6
135:7 135:14 175:11
213:24
2011.85:23
2014. ( 7 ) 80:12 80:18
82:9 82:21 86:16
205:24 214:11
2015, ( 5 ) 114:4 183:11
204:17 214:12 214:14
2016 ( 2 ) 1:1 220:4
227,174:15
24/7. ( 2 ) 186:20 196:12
255177:20
263.140:15
2nd, ( 3 ) 152:7 152:12
152:14

3

3.00144:6
3rd,152:7

4

4.15217:7
(4.23220:2
4.30 ( 2 ) 216:11 217:7
476.183:14
479 ( 3 ) 183:8 183:18
183:19
4th152:7

5

73:9 73:10
177. ( 5 ) 10:13 35:15

69:10 69:17 71:8
177(a), ( 4 ) 34:15 35:20
44:11 71:8
177(a)(iii).66:25
178: ( 15 ) 35:21 66:20
72:11 72:16 72:17
72:17 72:19 72:21
72:24 91:7 92:21
92:24 93:10 93:12

528,184:11
533184:23
536?172:4
57.69 ( 2 ) 90:1 90:2
572, ( 4 ) 204:9 208:25
209:10 209:18
590.173:5

7

94:4

178(a).71:9
178(c),94:1
179 ( 5 ) 35:23 91:7
92:21 92:24 93:12
179(a), ( 15 ) 71:12
71:15 72:22 89:23
89:24 89:25 92:17
92:18 92:19 92:22
93:4 93:11 93:13
93:23 95:5
179(a)(i),71:16
181(a).113:22
181(c).110:23
181(c)(i),114:6
184, ( 2 ) 140:20 204:8
18th ( 3 ) 184:20 187:9
187:13
1st,152:6

725174:16

9

950 ( 2 ) 175:24 177:2

2
2.00 ( 2 ) 122:7 122:10
2.8 ( 2 ) 32:21 33:2
2.9, ( 2 ) 32:21 33:2
200574:17
2008. ( 12 ) 20:18 73:22
94:18 95:2 95:8
95:13 95:16 96:3 96:4
105:24 176:1 177:20
2009, ( 19 ) 95:8 95:20
95:23 95:24 96:4 98:3
98:17 99:5 101:19
103:5 105:25 107:22