Gist of the case
The opponent was the general director and a 50% shareholder through a controlled company. The joint company owned a land plot in the Central Administrative District, which was to be transferred to a professional developer for the construction of a premium-class apartment complex.
A conflict arose between the shareholders, as a result of which the partner blocked the trustee's access to documents and began to systematically make deals to the detriment of the interests of the company: paying inflated salaries to himself and relatives, buying a premium car at the company's expense, issuing dubious loans, etc. In addition, being a director of the company, the opponent was a director of the company. Additionally, as the director of the company the opponent was also out of touch, preventing meetings to make crucial management decisions in every way possible.
The Law Office Actions
To resolve the conflict, we implemented an “active defense” strategy:
Opponent Actions
In addition, the office had to counter the director's attempts to delay the process. The opponent for his part:
