Bank of New York Fails to Appear in Russian Court
Legal World
The Moscow Arbitration Court heard opening arguments today regarding the Russian Federation's $22.5 billion claim against The Bank of New York, Inc., now the Bank of New York Mellon Corporation , for money laundering activities the Bank had previously admitted.
"We believe it is offensive and an arrogant slap in the face to the judge, the court and The Russian Federation that the Bank of New York would fail to show to a hearing they were well aware of," said Maxim Smal, a Moscow-based attorney representing Russia's Federal Customs Service.
"We feel confident in the validity and strength of Russia's claim as well as our prospective to prevail in court with or without the defendant," he said. The next hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, July 10 at noon in Moscow.
"The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled last week, consistent with prior precedent, that the Russian judicial system is legitimate and honest such that any award in Russia should be fully collectible in the U.S. where the Bank of New York does business. Therefore, the Federation remains confident not only as to receiving a successful outcome, but also with obtaining complete satisfaction of the damages sought, especially now that the merger has created a company capable of satisfying any judgment awarded," said Smal.
On May 17, the Federal Customs Service for the Russian Federation filed a lawsuit with the Moscow Arbitration Court against the Bank of New York, the world's second-largest custodian of investor assets.
The lawsuit stems from a 2005 U.S. Department of Justice investigation that ended with a non-prosecution agreement forcing the Bank to pay $38 million to the U.S. government to settle two criminal probes and admitting it failed to report $7.5 billion in illegal Russian transactions.
Federal investigators determined several accounts that existed at the Bank were part of an illegal network that allowed Russian businesses to defraud their government of customs duties and tax revenues by transferring funds in and out of Russia in violation of currency controls.
Although the suit is being heard in a Russian court, it will be tried in accordance with U.S. law. Under accepted and clear legal principles, the Bank of New York has already made signed admissions to its criminal responsibility and its officers have been criminally convicted.
Related listings
-
US, Russia pledge to work for nuclear-arms control
Legal World 07/04/2007[##_1L|1224242898.jpg|width="100" height="112" alt=""|_##]The United States and Russia will press ahead with talks on possible new cuts in their nuclear arsenals as the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) heads for expiration in 2009, both govern...
-
Three admit online terror charges at London court
Legal World 07/04/2007Three men have admitted using the internet to urge Muslims to wage holy war on non-believers, police said, in what is believed to the first prosecution of its kind in Britain.Tariq Al-Daour, Younes Tsouli and Waseem Mughal had close links with Al-Qae...
-
China, North Korea discuss nuclear issue
Legal World 07/03/2007Chinese Foreign Minister, Yang Jiechi, today met with North Korean leader, Kim Jong Il, paving way for the resumption of six-party talks on peacefully dismantling Pyongyang's nuclear weapons programmes. Apart from Kim, the Chinese Foreign Minister al...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.