ArmInfo. The Financial Times today published an article, stating that Rosneft Russian state corporation was cathced on manipulations in respect to YUKOS case during the trials in Armenia and Netherlands.
According the information published by these newspapers, Rosneft stands beyond the decision of the Supreme Court of Armenia, which has adjudicated in 2010, that the Russian company mentioned is the owner of the Armenian subsidiary of YUKOS. Being based on the that decision also, Dutch court took a similar decision in May 2011. It was stated first by a Dutch newspaper, which had under its disposa the correspondence and documents of Russian oil company.
As this media states, the manipulations of Rosneft were supported by American law firm of Baker Botts, Russian and Armenian officers, a famous Armenia lawyer and former officers of FSB. According to data, they gave a bribe to the court.
Following the article, the evidences of the Rosneft pressure on the court wre presentedby YUKOS lawyers yet in 2014, and a year later these evidences were considered by court. After that Rosneft withdraw its claim against the YUKOS, and YUKOS USD 337 mln assets were divided between Yukos former shareholders.
Rosneft stated to the NRC Handelsblad, that all the decisions of Armenian court were justified and were taken in conformance to regulations. The Baker Botts, in its turn, disproved the version that the company affected anyhow the Armenian justice, and refused from any additional comments.
Both newspapers remind that former shareholders of Yukos are in court trials with Russia, because they thing that the company has been expropriated illegally. In 20007 the bankruptcy procedure was raised in respect to YUKOS , the company was canceled, and the Rosneft became the owner of its main assets. In July 2014 the Hague court obliged Russia to pay USD 50 bln to the former co-owners of the YUKOS, adjudicating the fact of expropriation after nine yares of trials. In April 2016, the Hague District Court decided that the Arbitration Court of Hague was had no eligible competence in respect to YUKOS case, and cancelled that decision.