The judgment of the Riga Regional Court announced on Wednesday, which satisfied the previously rejected claim of the same court SIA “Public Account Manager” Possessor “(” Possessor “, formerly – Privatization Agency) in connection with the state’s uneconomically sold shares of JSC” Grindeks “, is unfounded, absurd and unfair and will definitely be appealed, Kirov Lipmans, a shareholder of “Grindeks”, told LETA.
He stated that in 2019, the Riga Regional Court rejected an identical claim. “The fact that the same court gives two diametrically opposed judgments in the same case with the same evidence two years apart in itself raises reasonable and serious suspicions of possible influence on the composition of the court and judges and perhaps even corruption. motivation, “said Lipmans.
The businessman pointed out that the court, which had announced that it would hear the case in a written procedure on Wednesday, had literally been able to prepare a judgment on 20 pages in a few hours. According to Lipman, this fact reinforces the suspicion that the outcome was consistent and known in advance.
“Such an” express judgment “is an indication of a political or other order which the court may have carried out. Such at least strange judgments which in fact are against bona fide businessmen and which cover up the criminal negligence, omission or abuse of public authorities and officials, “It is no wonder that as a result, foreign entrepreneurs very often decide not to start a business in Latvia, but our country entrepreneurs register their companies abroad and also pay taxes in other countries’ budgets,” Lipmans said.
According to him, such an absurdity is possible only in Latvia, when first the person of the State Financial and Capital Market Commission (FCMC) announces in an official letter that Philip Lipman [Kirova Lipmana dēlu] is not considered to be a member of Kirov Lipman ‘s family, but then tries to punish him for behaving as allowed by the FCMC in an official letter.
“Only in Latvia there is an attempt to punish entrepreneurs who relied on what was written in an official letter of a state institution, instead of holding officials who sold state-owned” Grindeks “shares incredibly cheap, creating suspicions of giving an impressive” gift “to” their own “,” Lipmans emphasized. .
He also said that the government led by Krišjānis Kariņš (JV) was simply looking at what was going on or even supporting such unfair practices in an “uncompromising rule of law” and not caring about the development of business and tax-paying businesses, destroying the economy and borrowing more and more millions. will have to be returned to the people of Latvia.
“In such circumstances, an appeal against the verdict is the only possible solution. Hopefully, the Supreme Court (Senate) will not be so easily influenced,” Lipmans added.
It has already been reported that the Riga Regional Court on Wednesday satisfied “Possessor’s” claim against Kirov and Philip Lipman for recovery of losses and decided to recover more than 1.9 million euros from entrepreneurs.
The court decided to jointly and severally recover damages from Lipmanis in favor of the Latvian state in the amount of 1,903,294 euros, as well as court costs in the amount of 31,732 euros and expenses related to the conduct of the case in the amount of 7,133 euros, recovering a total of 1,942,160 euros.
The judgment may still be appealed in cassation to the Supreme Court within 30 days from the date of delivery of the judgment.
The case was considered after Possessor’s appeal against the judgment of the Riga City Vidzeme Suburb Court of October 22, 2018, by which the court rejected “Possessor’s” or then Privatization Agency’s claim against “Grindeks” shareholders Kirov and Filip Lipman for the state-owned The sale of “Grindeks” shares resulted in losses for the State, in the applicant’s view.
On April 3, 2019, the Riga Regional Court rejected the claim of the Privatization Agency against the shareholders of the pharmaceutical manufacturer “Grindeks” Lipmanis for recovery of losses in the amount of 1,903,294 euros. The Privatization Agency filed a cassation appeal against this court decision.
It is also reported that the FCMC performed an examination of the amount of participation of “Grindeks” shareholders, finding that since October 27, 2010 Kirov Lipmans has been acting in concert with Filip Lipman and together they have acquired a participation of “Grindeks” in the amount of 50.02%. Contrary to the Financial Instruments Market Law, Kirov Lipmans and Filips Lipmans have not made a mandatory offer to repurchase “Grindeks” shares.
By a judgment of 5 September 2016, the Department of Administrative Cases of the Supreme Court rejected the cassation appeals of Kirov Lipman and Philip Lipman, leaving the judgment of the Administrative Regional Court unchanged. Consequently, the decision has entered into force, according to which the FCMC has acknowledged that since October 27, 2010 Kirov Lipmans and Filips Lipmans have acted in a coordinated manner and have not made a mandatory share repurchase offer in accordance with Section 66, Paragraph one of the Financial Instruments Market Law. which Kirov Lipman and Philip Lipman were fined.
Pursuant to the decision adopted at the sitting of the Cabinet of Ministers on 21 February 2017, the Privatization Agency is authorized to bring an action against Kirov Lipman and Filip Lipman on behalf of the State of Latvia for damages to the state pension budget in connection with Kirov Lipmans and Filip Lipmans did not make a mandatory offer to repurchase “Grindeks” shares.
–
