On November 2, the Kyiv city Court of Appeal held a proceeding on the identical motions of two investors of Joint-Stock Company Motor Sich to remove the arrests from the shares of the enterprise. Due to the quarantine measures, the journalists were not allowed into the courtroom, but television operators were allowed to install the video cameras there.
Then all the media representatives watched the process through a video monitor placed in the hall. Unfortunately, it was tough to hear what was being said as the sound from the monitor was barely audible in the lobby.
However, the journalists did not have to listen for a long time as the meeting lasted only about 10 minutes. Frustrated lawyers for the two investors explained to reporters what had happened.
‘The presiding judge made an unexpected decision. He did not accept the motion from the investor I represent, arguing that it was submitted... too early,’ said Aleksei Zadoenko, a lawyer. ‘In other words, the judge believes we have not yet received the right to appeal against the decision of the district court on the arrest of Motor Sich shares. The judge considers we should get a copy of the judgment first. But we have already studied the case materials. And this gave us reason to go to the court of appeal. The judge definitely understands this. Therefore, his refusal to accept the application seems strange. Tomorrow we will receive a copy of the decision on this. We will study it, and then we decide whether to file a cassation or act in another manner prescribed by law.’
Aleksei Zadoenko, ‘The refusal of the presiding judge to accept the motion seems strange’
The presiding judge postponed the consideration of the merits of the motion of the other owner of shares of Motor Sich for almost a month and a half – to December 14. What was a reason for it?
‘The prosecutor did not come to the hearing. Moreover, he did not inform the court,’ said Aleksandr Maksimenko, a lawyer. ‘According to the law, if a representative of one of the parties received an invitation to participate in the hearing, but did not appear without a good reason, the court has the right to consider the case on the merits without their presence. However, the judges did not use this right and postponed the consideration of the case to December 14. Now, three investors have applied to the courts of various instances to remove the arrests from Motor Sich shares. The failure to appear by the representatives of the prosecution, which has recently become systematic, is becoming a reason for the postponement of the consideration of cases, which means their delay.’
Aleksandr Maksimenko (on the right), ‘The failure to appear by the representatives of the prosecution, which has recently become systematic, is becoming a reason for the postponement of the consideration of cases, which means their delay.’
Let us recall that the criminal case where four (!) arrests were imposed at different times on the same Motor Sich shares, was initiated back in 2017. During this time, no one has been charged. At the same time, investors who had bought shares legally and invested large funds in the development of Motor Sich are not able to exercise their rights of owners, i.e. to convene a meeting of shareholders, appoint new managers, and determine the company’s development strategy. This story drags on, more and more undermining the authority of Ukraine in the eyes of foreign investors. At the same time, the economic situation of Motor Sich, with the former managers still at the helm, is deteriorating every day.
‘We submitted a motion to the SSU investigator to close the criminal case on Motor Sich because it has no prospects. And to the prosecutor’s office as well so that it ensures the consideration of our motion to the investigator within a reasonable time,’ said Taras Kisly, a lawyer.
