Natalia Demina has helped the Trust bank win a dispute with the holders of credit notes

The St Petersburg City Court granted an appeal by the Trust bank against the decision of the Kuybyshevsky Regional Court of St Petersburg regarding a significant case concerning credit notes. Previously the Court of First Instance had approved a claim from a former holder of credit notes, Mark Vybornov. The Court held that documents used in the procedure of confirming qualified investor status were invalid and pointed to the requirements of consumer protection laws. At appeal this decision was overturned and the claimant’s demands dismissed.

Previously, the St Petersburg City Court held in favour of the rights of the holders of credit notes and the applicability of the consumer protection law, demanding that the bank return the funds – the case followed the rationale set out by Alexander Sergeev (one of the leading lawyers in Russia) who, according to his representative in Court, did not see a difference between a transaction involving securities and one involving bank deposits. This rationale was used in Court by Mark Vybornov, who is highly-qualified and experienced in the relevant field. In the past, Mark Vybornov held the post of First Vice-President of the Leningrad Regional Chamber of Commerce and Industry, was a member of the government of the Leningrad region as Deputy Governor and Chairman of the Committee for Foreign Economic Relations and Foreign Investment and currently holds the position of CEO in a company called OOO Titan-Severo-Zapad.

The issue about the legal relationship between the holders of credit notes and credit institutions is particularly relevant in light of recent matters, including that of the Trust bank. After the introduction of sanctions, the bank wrote-off debts held under subordinated loans, which resulted in the annulment of credit notes. These steps were taken in accordance with legislation and the terms and conditions of the credit notes. Nevertheless in the spring of 2015, the former holders of the credit notes started to submit claims against the bank. The claimants stated that they did not see a difference between credit notes and deposits and requested the return of their funds on the basis of consumer protection laws. The Bank of Russia set out its position in Court that credit notes are not covered by consumer protection laws. A unified precedent for such matters had not yet been established.

The Courts increasingly take the side of the bank in such disputes; until recently St Petersburg had been different to other regions in Russia – here the case law was more often not in favour of the banks; however, the most recent decision proves that such a divergence has ended.