LECAP team has exceptional experience and expertise to successfully resolve even the most complex disputes. We provide legal support to our clients at every stage of the judicial process, starting from case evaluation up to execution of judgment.

We represent clients in commercial (arbitrazh) courts and courts of general jurisdiction of all levels, including the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Our team has a proven record of performance, litigating matters in courts in most of the Russian regions.

Our lawyers handle a wide variety of disputes, including:

  • corporate disputes
  • real estate disputes
  • privatisation disputes
  • securities disputes
  • disputes in energy and utilities sector
  • antitrust/competition disputes
  • bankruptcy and insolvency
  • enforcement of obligations
  • insurance disputes
  • IP disputes
  • recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards
  • debt recovery disputes
  • other commercial disputes
Disputes in commercial (arbitrazh) courts

Drawing upon over 15 years of experience litigating matters in commercial (arbitrazh) courts, we are confident that our expertise in certain types of disputes is unrivalled. Clients benefit from our particular strengths in corporate disputes, securities disputes, and real estate disputes. We have extensive experience representing public authorities and investors alike in privatisation disputes, and we have participated in a number of landmark antitrust disputes. In addition to that, we are able to navigate every peculiarity of disputes in energy and utilities sector and disputes arising out of construction contracts.

Disputes in courts of general jurisdiction

District and regional courts today have become more actively involved in resolving commercial disputes. On the one hand, this derives from the fact that counterparties increasingly tend to include mechanisms for liability of actual business owners in contract documentation. On the other hand, disputes where business is opposed by a certain class of investors – depositors, bondholders, shared residential construction participants, etc. – are becoming more common.

We have substantial experience handling multimillion disputes in courts of general jurisdiction, including enforcement, obtaining evidence, and cross-examinations.


Our lawyers regularly represent clients in domestic arbitrations in Russia and coordinate arbitral proceedings in foreign jurisdictions.

We are well positioned to marshal evidence for the upcoming hearings, including participation in oral examinations before the arbitral tribunal.

Case evaluation

Evaluation of potential outcomes is on a checklist of mandatory pre-litigation steps in order for a client to make a well-considered decision as to the extent of anticipated involvement in a dispute. However, we do not give inflated promises and make sure to draw client’s attention to every relevant issue that may potentially arise.

Out-of-court settlement

Assessment of transactions in order to reveal potential litigation risks has recently become a growing trend. Backed by the firm’s lawyers in other practice areas, we are able to assess litigation risks arising out of a contract, bond documentation, or current project situation, therefore enabling a client to develop a strategy for dispute avoidance or early settlement. At the same time, we are well prepared to represent clients in settlement negotiations.


Our lawyers help clients to manage efficient and swift enforcement of court judgments, working closely with bailiff service at all stages of enforcement. Where necessary we are able to coordinate tracing and freezing of debtor’s property throughout Russia and abroad. We can also facilitate the enforcement of non-monetary judgments, including those relating to corporate disputes.



Representing Mechel group companies in disputes with creditor banks in relation to loan agreements with embedded derivatives



Representing Bashneft in a dispute between the Russian Federation and JSFC “Sistema” over title to Bashneft shares



Representing a grid company in a number of disputes related to title to electricity and heat networks in Novokuznetsk acquired in the process of privatisation, including review of cases on the grounds of newly discovered evidence in connection with judgment in a criminal case



Representing ThyssenKrupp in relation to enforcement of a Romanian court judgement



Representing M.video in a dispute with antimonopoly authority arising out of accusations of alleged participation in a cartel



Representing Slavyanka Confectionary Factory in a dispute in the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial (Arbitrazh) Court of the Russian Federation related to recovery of damages for the use of counterfeit mark on its products (case amicably settled in the court of first instance)



Representing Metinvest Holding (Ukraine) before the Supreme Commercial (Arbitrazh) Court of the Russian Federation (first instance) in a case related to challenging the regulation of the Government of the Russian Federation on taking anti-dumping measures against Ukrainian steel pipe producers



Representing Komsomolka sewing factory in a dispute with Khabarovsk Krai; case was finally disposed in favour of our client in the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial (Arbitrazh) Court of the Russian Federation – the Presidium issued a precedent setting judgment on a claim prepared by our lawyers



Representing shareholders of OJSC “Univermag Moskva” in a corporate dispute related to invalidation of additional issue of shares of OJSC “Univermag Moskva”; the dispute which involved several proceedings was finally disposed in favour of our client in the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial (Arbitrazh) Court of the Russian Federation



Representing Petrocommerce Bank before the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial (Arbitrazh) Court of the Russian Federation in a dispute related to recovery of debt in relation to bonds issued by Arkada Agro-Industrial Company; the judgment set a precedent for review of dozens of cases related to bonds issued by Arkada Agro-Industrial Company



Representing RATM-Holding group companies in a dispute related to unlawful debiting of stock of OJSC “Angarskcement”; our advice helped the client to recover controlling interest in OJSC “Angarskcement” by vindication of the key stake from several purchasers which took possession of the disputed stock as a result of numerous transactions