The privatization of the Ocean Plaza shopping and entertainment center confiscated from the Russians, planned for October 2024, is in doubt. And the fault for this is not the lawyers of the Russian oligarch Arkady Rotenberg, who previously legally owned the shopping center, but the domestic would-be businessmen from the Lanita Invest company.
The company has initiated a lawsuit that could drag on for years. And it will not allow the state, which now owns two-thirds of the shopping center, to write off debts to the structures of the billionaire from Putin’s entourage.
Unfinished nationalization
The situation looks like this. Back in March 2023, the High Anti-Corruption Court, at the request of the Ministry of Justice, seized in favor of the state 100% of the shares of Avangard-Vilarti LLC, which owns 66.65% of the authorized capital of IP Lybid LLC, which owns the Ocean Plaza shopping center.”
The remaining 33.35% of IS Lybid LLC belongs to the domestic company Lanita Invest LLC, which is actually trying to manage the center in its own interests.
But after the “nationalization” of the company itself, the owner of the shopping center, another important issue remained unresolved. This is the issue of a loan of about $200 million, which the Lybid company took out in 2009 for the construction of Ocean Plaza from the Itoder Investments Limited company, a structure of the oligarch Rotenberg close to Putin.
It is obvious that in Ukraine no one can owe anything to Putin or his henchmen. Therefore, after appropriate legal processing, the Ministry of Justice prepared and on June 11, 2024 filed a statement of claim with the High Anti-Corruption Court to recover the right of claim under this loan agreement from Rotenberg’s company for the benefit of the state.
HACS, of course, accepted the claim and ordered proceedings in the case, as discussed in the relevant ruling. The first hearing, scheduled for July 11, 2024, was postponed due to statements by the defendant. The next meeting was scheduled for July 19.
Friends with whom you don't need enemies
Now watch your hands.
In the interval between these two dates, Lanita Invest suddenly becomes active. And on July 16 he filed his own lawsuit against Itoder Investments Limited. The truth is not in VAKS, but only in the Economic Court of the city of Kyiv.
It looks like she wasn’t previously bothered by the loan (which was also hanging on her). But then the company suddenly decided: why are we worse than the state? We can also sue the Russian creditors.
In explanation of its step, Lanita Invest states that its lawsuit is much better than the state one. They say that instead of two pools (debt and asset), there is one, and in general such a claim brings the deadlines for privatization closer (and this despite the fact that they have already been established).
Probably, one could even trust a company that is ready to take on the litigation and its costs. If not for a few serious “buts”.
Firstly, Lanita Invest once already tried to “help” the state by changing the charter of IS Lybid LLC. In particular, in such a way that important decisions in the company should be made not by 2/3, but by 3/4 of the votes. This happened in February 2023, that is, shortly before the decision to seize Rotenberg’s assets in favor of the state.
Lanita Invest’s logic here was transparent - since the state should become the owner of 2/3 of the assets of the shopping center, and the company did not want to lose influence, it raised the decision-making threshold. Then a considerable scandal arose, and for the first time the company was asked the question: who does it work for?
And secondly, the current decision to file a lawsuit in parallel with the state is nothing more than a grandiose pig that Lanita Invest is laying on Ukraine.
Privatization in the fog
Why this is so was explained in detail in his post by businessman and social activist Andrei Zhurzhiy, who, by the way, is directly interested in the issue, because his foundation is preparing to take part in the privatization of Ocean Plaza.
“There is every chance, before October 1, 2024, to nationalize the specified assets from Rotenberg to the state through consideration of the case at the Higher Supreme Court, taking into account the shortened time frame for consideration of cases on the application of sanctions. According to Article 283-1 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings: the case of application of sanctions is resolved within 30 days, an appeal against the decision can be filed within 5 days, consideration of the appeal lasts 15 days,” notes Andrey Zhurzhiy.
Indeed, even the HACC decision to open proceedings in the case speaks about a shortened review and tight deadlines
“Since Part 4 of Art. 283-1 of the CAS of Ukraine for this case, it is provided for its consideration by a panel of three judges of the Supreme Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of the statement of claim in court, therefore, it refers to cases for which a quick resolution of the case is a priority. Therefore, according to Part 2 of Art. 12 of the CAS of Ukraine, it should be considered in simplified claim proceedings, taking into account the features provided for in Art. 283-1 CAS of Ukraine,” noted, in particular, in the ruling of the High Anti-Corruption Court.
What happened after the parallel lawsuit by Lanita Invest?
“July 18, 2024. The economic court opened proceedings in the case and scheduled a preparatory meeting for October 21, 2024. <...> Now there is a parallel case in the Economic Court - which will only begin its preparatory hearing in 3 months. And given that such cases do not have shortened consideration periods, this can last for years!” – writes Zhurzhiy.
He also noted that the lawyer from Lanita Invest (who, by the way, claims to represent the entire company IS Lybid) had already tried at the HACC meeting on July 19 to postpone the consideration of the claim filed by the state. Based on the fact that there is another claim, the same one in the Economic Court. But, to the credit of VAKS, they ignored her arguments.
So the question arises, in whose interests is Lanita Invest acting, provoking an outright delay in the nationalization of the debt, and therefore the beginning of the privatization process? Considering who this debt is to (which, let us remember, Ukrainians should not have a priori), the answer to this question looks rather unattractive.
Ukrainian businessman Vasily Khmelnitsky (UPD holding) was officially a co-owner of Ocean Plaza a year ago, after he bought the share from Rotenberg in 2020. The rest was bought by Swiss citizens Suzanne and Andrea Richaal Vallabh. Later, Khmelnytsky told Forbes.ua that he sold his share to another businessman, Andrey Ivanov.
Currently, according to the Opendatabot system, the beneficial owner of Lanita Invest with a share of 49.99% is Ukrainian citizen Konstantin Kostenko, who was added as an owner in October 2023 along with Andrey Ivanov. Also, according to this system, Andrey Ivanov was removed from the beneficial owners of the company approximately in the spring of 2024.
Konstantin Kostenko, according to the Clarity-project analytical system, was previously a co-founder and beneficiary in a number of companies where Vasily Khmelnitsky is still the owner. These are, for example, companies such as AMC UDP ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC, UNIT FINANCE LLC.
In addition, in addition to Lanita Invest, Kostenko is also the formal owner of the investment company INVEST-M, the consulting company RINN and the berry growing company BLUEBERRY INVEST.
However, Andrey Zhurzhiy, judging by his message, is convinced that Lanita Invest still belongs to Khmelnitsky-Ivanov.
As for Lanita Invest’s share in the company IS Lybid, the owner of Ocean Plaza, it received it in February 2023, that is, a month before the nationalization of the shopping center. Before this, legally, Ocean Plaza, we recall, was owned by Rotenberg’s structures. That is, in order to agree on the acquisition of a share, it was necessary to obtain a decision from the shareholders, and this means talking with a Russian businessman or his representatives. Who pulled it off and how is a question that still remains open.
