Managing Partner, Moscow
"Andrey Goltsblat is a very widely respected specialist assisting clients with high-level transactional and corporate matters." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
- Prior to becoming a commercial lawyer in 1993 for three years Andrey Goltsblat was Chief of Staff for the Constitutional Commission of the Russian Parliament.
- 20+ years’ experience working primarily on: M&A, restructuring, JVs, commercial/industrial real estate, counselling directors and senior management of domestic and overseas companies in connection with investment projects and deal structuring in Russia/CIS.
- Representing clients in major complex litigation and acting on high profile cases, developing the case strategy and leading the team.
- Working with clients from: Russia/CIS, USA, Canada, UK, Japan, China, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Sweden and Turkey.
- Examples of work range from: continuous comprehensive support (20+ years) to a company with investment projects in different parts of Russia, including construction of seven plants in four Russian regions, major acquisitions (e.g., USD 23 bn. Wrigley acquisition, Royal Canin, Korkunov) and day-to-day legal issues; legal support for (600+) real estate and construction projects in different regions of Russia (over 5 years) for major multinational investors.
- Clients include: Mars Inc., GE, Philips, NALCO/An Ecolab Company, RusHydro, Sukhoi Company, The Russian Corporation of Nanotechnologies (RUSNANO), Sberbank of Russia, VEB (Vnesheconombank), Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), Danone, Kimberly-Clark, Kingfisher/Castorama, Guardian Industries, Kronospan, Saint-Gobain, Mitsubishi Motors Corporation, Nissan/Russia, Volkswagen Group, and Komatsu.
- Qualified with a PhD in Law in 1994.
- Awarded the medal of Federal Chamber of Attorneys of the Russian Federation "for services in support of human rights and liberties".
- Regularly featured in Legal 500 EMA, IFLR 1000, Best Lawyers and Who’s Who Legal.
- Professional Memberships include: IBA & ABA, Advisory Board of Best Lawyers.
Have you noticed any departure by foreign clients/investors from the Russian market or any drop in their business activity in Russia?Indeed, a number of foreign investors have withdrawn from the Russian market in the current economic situation. At the same time, those international companies that have long-term plans for developing their presence on the Russian market are creating a demand for comprehensive legal services on a broad range of matters, including litigation, revision of contractual terms with business partners (especially those with a foreign currency element), advice on issues relating to the sanctions, distressed assets, bankruptcy and so on.
How have the crisis and devaluation changed the situation? What practices and spheres are likely to develop in the future? Which projects might grow/shrink, etc.?In the given economic situation, the scope of work in some spheres has, indeed, shrunk. Even so, in some cases this is offset by a rise in the number of requests by our clients for new, crisis-related types of service. For example, there has been a reduction in work on major transactions and foreign trade operations but the demand has grown for services related to toxic assets, bankruptcy, litigation and sanctions.
What amendments do you think are needed to the bankruptcy legislation?The bankruptcy legislation has recently been the most frequently changing field of our law. Since it was adopted in 2002, the Federal Law on Bankruptcy has undergone over fifty amendments. In December 2014 alone, six laws were passed substantially changing how this sphere is regulated. In particular, adoption of the law on personal bankruptcy has the potential of creating a huge load on the judicial system and it is very important not just to grasp all the new developments before the law comes into effect but also to understand how they will fit into the overall system of Russian law. For example, it is not really clear how general jurisdiction courts will cope or whether the unified bankruptcy case approaches developed by the state arbitration court system will be retained. In this connection, it is better to concentrate all efforts right now on harmonising the bankruptcy legislation and consolidating uniform enforcement of it. I think, for the near future, it would be better at least to refrain from making material amendments to the bankruptcy legislation and to allow uniform and stable law enforcement practice to develop.