You're reading: Lawyers doubt Ukraine’s success with counterclaim against decision of High Court in London on $3 bln bond debt

It is unlikely that a counterclaim of Ukraine against the decision of the High Court of Justice in London on Russia’s claims to the $3 billion bond debt would be success, according to lawyers polled by Interfax-Ukraine.

“There are few prospects for the favorable outcome of hearing the counterclaim for Ukraine. The credit was taken by lawful Ukrainian authorities, and the debt was taken as a government secured sovereign debt,” advisor and head of bank and financial law practice at Suprema Lex law firm Roman Oksanich said.

The lawyer expects that the basis for Ukraine’s counterclaim would be economic and military aggression of Russia.

“I do not see other grounds for real revision of the decision,” he said.

Lawyer of Spenser & Kaufmann law firm Yuriy Rybak also has doubts about success of the counterclaim.

“Using the same arguments heard in the High Court of Justice it would be hard for Ukraine to prove that the decision of the lower instance court is a mistake or Ukraine’s rights were violated,” he said.

The lawyer believes that interpreting the case as a usual debt transaction is incorrect, as the conditions for signing the deal were not typical, while the court allowed the parties to present more details on their positions.

Rybak said that the court took into account, but maybe unlawfully rejected Ukraine’s arguments regarding the pressure on the defender, such as military occupation, destruction of property, the unlawful expropriation of assets.

The lawyers believe that Ukraine should use out of court tools to settle the dispute, in particular, restructuring of the debt.