Home / People / Vsevolod Tyupa
Portrait of Vsevolod Tyupa

Vsevolod Tyupa

Head of Life Sciences & Healthcare

Naberezhnaya Tower, block C
Naberezhnaya Tower Block C - 10 Presnenskaya Naberezhnaya
123112 Moscow
Languages English, Russian

Vsevolod Tyupa is Counsel and Head of Life Sciences & Healthcare sector group. 

Vsevolod is a legal counsel of many international and Russian companies on the entry into and operating on the Russian pharmaceutical and medical device markets. Vsevolod advises on regulatory and commercial matters, contracts conclusion, compliance matters, anticorruption and competition issues, legal aspects of clinical trials, promotion of medical products and interactions with HCPs and HCOs, public procurement and personal data issues. Besides legal regulation of the Life Sciences sector, Vsevolod specialises in commercial law, regulatory requirements, compliance, legislation on personal data, public procurement.

Before joining the firm in 2011, Vsevolod worked for Roche as head of the legal department and compliance officer. 

more less

Practice head Vsevolod Tyupa is well-regarded for his expertise in the sector. "He has practical experience of working with many healthcare companies; he really understands how such companies work," a client reports.

Chambers Europe

Relevant experience

  • Gilead Sciences – leading external advisor on all key projects of the company starting from the entry into the Russian market in 2013. Provides legal support of the product localization projects, regulatory advice, routine day-to-day legal support. Represents the client in public authorities.
  • GE Healthcare – successfully defended the client’s interests in the court of appeal and further in the court of cassation against the Russian healthcare regulatory authority (Roszdravnadzor). Invalidated the regulator’s refusal from registering one of GE Healthcare products, a modern ultrasound diagnostic system, in Russia.
  • Johnson & Johnson – regular advice on compliance and regulatory matters, including product liability, licensing issues, labelling and packaging, interactions with HCPs and public authorities.
  • Zentiva – advising the global investment company Advent International and its group company Zentiva on the acquisition of the CEE business of Alvogen, a global manufacturer of generics and over-the-counter drugs.
  • Roche Diabetes Care Rus – legal support of the local manufacturing project in Russia; acting as the company’s external compliance manager.
  • Philips – legal support of localisation of medical equipment production in Russia; representing the client in a product liability case.
  • Straumann – legal and regulatory assistance on circulation of medical devices, contract drafting, interactions with public authorities, tax advice, etc.
  • Servier – legal support of clinical trials in Russia (advising, drafting standard agreements and other documents for clinical trials, etc.).
  • Dr. A. & L. Schmidgall GmbH & Co KG – advising on product localisation in Russia in partnership with a local Russian manufacturer Evalar.
  • Petrovax – assisting in its CDMO project with Pfizer. Advising on advertising and promotion matters.
more less

Awards & Rankings

  • Chambers Europe 2021, Life Sciences | Band 2
  • Pravo.ru-300 2022, Life Sciences | Band 1
  • Best Lawyers 2022, Life Sciences Practice, Regulatory, Retail
  • Kommersant 2022, Healthcare
  • Kommersant 2020, Healthcare, Compliance
  • "Vsevolod Tyupa acts for both local and international pharmaceutical companies on matters including localisation, regulatory, and product acquisitions. He is also experienced in distribution as well as compliance issues." // Chambers Europe 2020
  • Vsevolod Tyupa is appreciated for his experience in commercial matters in the life sciences sphere as well as his prowess in regulatory mandates. "He is extremely responsive and client-oriented," a client says,adding: "He is ready to fight the fire with me. He is not afraid to give me a different opinion." // Chambers Europe 2021
more less


  • CMS Expert Guide to digital health apps and telemedicine, Russia chapter
  • CMS Expert Guide to vaccine compensation regimes, Russia chapter
  • CMS Expert Guide to advertising of medicines and medical devices advertising, Russia chapter 
  • Healthcare M&A, Getting the Deal Through, 2019
more less


  • 2010, Russian State University for the Humanities, PhD in Civil Law
  • 2006, Russian State University for the Humanities, Degree in Law
more less


With­draw­al and de­struc­tion of im­prop­er med­ic­al devices: new rules
On 1 Septem­ber 2022, rules for the with­draw­al from cir­cu­la­tion and de­struc­tion of fals­i­fied, de­fect­ive and coun­ter­feit med­ic­al devices will come in­to force, as per Rus­si­an Gov­ern­ment De­cree No. 145 dated 10 Feb­ru­ary 2022*.Pre­vi­ously, the with­draw­al of such med­ic­al devices was out of the reg­u­lat­ory land­scape, and the de­struc­tion pro­ced­ure was only de­scribed in gen­er­al terms.The with­draw­al of fals­i­fied, de­fect­ive and coun­ter­feit med­ic­al devices from cir­cu­la­tion im­plies that their own­er en­sures that the devices are stored in such a way that they can­not be used, op­er­ated, sold, in­stalled, com­mis­sioned, main­tained or re­paired.Fals­i­fied and de­fect­ive med­ic­al devices can be with­drawn from cir­cu­la­tion and des­troyed by de­cision of:In the case of coun­ter­feit med­ic­al devices, this de­cision can only be taken by a court.The de­cision of Roszdravn­ad­zor to with­draw and des­troy med­ic­al devices can be chal­lenged either by fil­ing a claim with a court or as an ad­min­is­trat­ive re­course (i.e. by fil­ing a com­plaint to Roszdravn­ad­zor it­self). The lat­ter means of chal­len­ging the de­cision is avail­able to the own­er of med­ic­al devices and their man­u­fac­turer. If the own­er with­draws and de­structs the fals­i­fied or de­fect­ive med­ic­al devices at its own ini­ti­at­ive, the own­er must do the fol­low­ing:Form­ally, the de­cision of the med­ic­al devices’ own­er to with­draw and des­troy the med­ic­al devices can be ex­ecuted only after 60 busi­ness days from the date of no­ti­fic­a­tion of the man­u­fac­turer and Roszdravn­ad­zor (even if there are no ob­jec­tions from the man­u­fac­turer). However, in case of ob­vi­ous falsi­fic­a­tion or de­fect­ive­ness of the med­ic­al devices, Roszdravn­ad­zor may de­cide on with­draw­al and de­struc­tion with­in a short­er peri­od of time.Once the med­ic­al devices have been des­troyed, Roszdravn­ad­zor must be no­ti­fied with­in five busi­ness days.We re­com­mend that com­pan­ies in the med­ic­al device in­dustry bring their in­tern­al doc­u­ments (stand­ard op­er­at­ing pro­ced­ures, policies, etc.) gov­ern­ing the pro­cesses for re­spond­ing to the de­tec­tion and dis­pos­al of im­prop­er products in line with the new reg­u­la­tions.* In Rus­si­an
Rus­si­an Min­istry of In­dustry and Trade to have ac­cess to data of re­gis­tra­tion...
The Rus­si­an Pres­id­ent signed Fed­er­al Law No. 311* al­low­ing the Min­istry of Health to provide the Min­istry of In­dustry and Trade with sens­it­ive in­form­a­tion from re­gis­tra­tion dossiers of medi­cines even if the in­form­a­tion is pro­tec­ted as a trade secret. The rel­ev­ant amend­ments to the Fed­er­al Laws “On Com­mer­cial Secrets”* and “On Cir­cu­la­tion of Medi­cines”* will be of­fi­cially pub­lished this week.Pre­vi­ously, in­form­a­tion con­sti­tut­ing a trade secret held by the Min­istry of Health could only be trans­ferred at the re­quest of the courts or the bod­ies re­spons­ible for in­quir­ies and pre­lim­in­ary in­vest­ig­a­tions.This in­form­a­tion will now be trans­ferred to the Min­istry of In­dustry and Trade with­in the frame­work of in­ter­de­part­ment­al in­ter­ac­tion, and the com­pany will be no­ti­fied of the trans­fer. The Min­istry of Health and the Min­istry of In­dustry and Trade will jointly de­term­ine the de­tailed pro­ced­ure for such in­ter­ac­tion.Ac­cord­ing to the amend­ments, the in­form­a­tion can be trans­ferred to the Min­istry of In­dustry and Trade only for li­cens­ing pur­poses or to in­spect medi­cine pro­duc­tion fa­cil­it­ies. However, the new law neither es­tab­lishes con­trol mech­an­isms for such re­stric­tions nor provides any dir­ect sanc­tions for non-com­pli­ance.The above changes do not form­ally af­fect the pro­tec­tion of trade secrets and in­tel­lec­tu­al prop­erty in Rus­sia. However, in prac­tice, the in­crease in the num­ber of re­cip­i­ents of con­fid­en­tial in­form­a­tion about medi­cines and pro­duc­tion pro­cesses nat­ur­ally in­creases the risk of leak­age.* In Rus­si­anCo-au­thored by Ivan Za­raiskiy, As­so­ci­ate, and Maria Volkodaeva, Paralegal in Life Sci­ences & Health­care.
Pro­ced­ure in­tro­duced to trans­fer mar­ket­ing au­thor­isa­tion cer­ti­fic­ates for...
Dur­ing the events of Spring 2022, there were some sig­ni­fic­ant le­gis­lat­ive changes which have not been widely re­por­ted, but are of in­terest to busi­nesses act­ive in the EAEU.One of these changes is the in­tro­duc­tion of a pro­ced­ure for trans­fer­ring a mar­ket­ing au­thor­isa­tion cer­ti­fic­ate for a medi­cine (the “Mar­ket­ing Au­thor­isa­tion”) from one com­pany to an­oth­er. Rel­ev­ant changes were in­tro­duced by EEC Coun­cil De­cision No. 36* to the Rules for Re­gis­tra­tion and Ex­am­in­a­tion of Medi­cines for Med­ic­al Use ap­proved by EEC Coun­cil De­cision No. 78*.The lack of a reg­u­lated pro­ced­ure for trans­fer­ring Mar­ket­ing Au­thor­isa­tions had been a re­cur­ring is­sue of Euras­i­an and Rus­si­an reg­u­la­tion. This com­plic­ated a vari­ety of busi­ness pro­cesses: from in­tra­group re­or­gan­isa­tion to the sale of a product line.This gap in the law has now been filled. To trans­fer a Mar­ket­ing Au­thor­isa­tion, doc­u­ments have to be provided to the rel­ev­ant au­thor­ised bod­ies to jus­ti­fy the trans­fer of the Mar­ket­ing Au­thor­isa­tion and the new hold­er’s abil­ity to ful­fil the ac­quired reg­u­lat­ory re­spons­ib­il­it­ies. In ad­di­tion, some tech­nic­al in­form­a­tion must be provided, in­clud­ing a re­vised phar­ma­covi­gil­ance sys­tem spe­cific­a­tion, up­dated in­form­a­tion for some sec­tions of the dossier and a reg­u­lat­ory doc­u­ment per­tain­ing to qual­ity.At the same time, changes in con­nec­tion with the trans­fer of a Mar­ket­ing Au­thor­isa­tion can be made sim­ul­tan­eously with the pro­ced­ure of bring­ing the re­gis­tra­tion dossier in line with the re­quire­ments of the EAEU.The new Mar­ket­ing Au­thor­isa­tion trans­fer pro­ced­ure makes the Euras­i­an Eco­nom­ic Uni­on’s reg­u­lat­ory space more open for trans­ac­tions with phar­ma­ceut­ic­al as­sets. It also eases the re­or­gan­isa­tion of Euras­i­an busi­nesses, something which has re­cently be­come of in­terest to many for­eign com­pan­ies.* In Rus­si­anCo-au­thored by Ivan Za­raiskiy, As­so­ci­ate, and Maria Volkodaeva, Paralegal in Life Sci­ences & Health­care.
New grounds in­tro­duced for the im­port and sale of un­re­gistered medi­cines...
In the spring of 2022, the Rus­si­an gov­ern­ment ad­op­ted De­cree No. 593* aimed at en­sur­ing the sus­tain­ab­il­ity of drug sup­ply in the con­text of for­eign sanc­tions. One of the main meas­ures in­tro­duced is the pos­sib­il­ity to tem­por­ar­ily cir­cu­late batches or series of un­re­gistered medi­cines in Rus­sia on the basis of a spe­cial per­mit from the Min­istry of Health (“Per­mit”).The nov­elty primar­ily con­cerns medi­cines that are not re­gistered in Rus­sia, are au­thor­ised for use abroad and have ana­logues re­gistered in Rus­sia with the same in­ter­na­tion­al non-pro­pri­et­ary name.However, this meas­ure could not be ap­plied for a peri­od of time due to the fact a spe­cial inter-min­is­teri­al com­mis­sion (the “Com­mis­sion”), whose de­cision on the fol­low­ing is­sues must form the basis for is­su­ing the Per­mit, had not yet been set up:de­term­in­ing wheth­er there is a short­age of a medi­cine or the risk it may oc­cur;de­term­in­ing wheth­er a batch or series of un­re­gistered medi­cine can be cir­cu­lated tem­por­ar­ily.The Reg­u­la­tion on the func­tion­ing of the Com­mis­sion was ap­proved by Or­der No. 339n of the Rus­si­an Min­istry of Health* and came in­to force on 7 June 2022. The Com­mis­sion in­cludes rep­res­ent­at­ives of the Min­istry of Health, the Fed­er­al Ser­vice for Sur­veil­lance in Health­care, the Min­istry of In­dustry and Trade, the Min­istry of Fin­ance, the Fed­er­al Anti-Mono­poly Ser­vice and the Fed­er­al Cus­toms Ser­vice. At the ini­ti­at­ive of the Com­mis­sion, mar­ket­ing au­thor­isa­tion hold­ers and Per­mit ap­plic­ants may par­ti­cip­ate in its meet­ings without the right to vote.Ex­ec­ut­ive au­thor­it­ies and en­tit­ies in­volved in the cir­cu­la­tion of medi­cines (e.g. phar­ma­cies, dis­trib­ut­ors, man­u­fac­tur­ers) can be sources of in­form­a­tion on un­avail­ab­il­ity or risk of un­avail­ab­il­ity of a medi­cine.In mak­ing its de­cisions, the Com­mis­sion takes in­to ac­count factors such as the with­draw­al of mar­ket­ing au­thor­isa­tions, the risk that man­u­fac­tur­ers or sup­pli­ers of fin­ished medi­cines or raw ma­ter­i­als may dis­con­tin­ue busi­ness.The de­cision on the pos­sib­il­ity of tem­por­ary cir­cu­la­tion of a drug must be un­an­im­ous.Con­clu­sionThe Com­mis­sion is ex­pec­ted to start its activ­it­ies shortly. This will give for­eign com­pan­ies con­tinu­ing to op­er­ate on the Rus­si­an mar­ket ad­di­tion­al op­por­tun­it­ies to sup­ply medi­cines that are not re­gistered in Rus­sia to meet pa­tients’ needs.* In Rus­si­an
Latest le­gis­lat­ive ini­ti­at­ives in the Life Sci­ences sec­tor im­pact­ing for­eign...
There are plans to:pro­hib­it man­u­fac­tur­ers and dis­trib­ut­ors of med­ic­al devices from leav­ing the Rus­si­an mar­ket without at least six months pri­or no­tice; an­dper­mit the sale of for­eign medi­cines in their ori­gin­al pack­ages.Exit no­tice for man­u­fac­tur­ers and dis­trib­ut­ors of med­ic­al devicesThe Rus­si­an gov­ern­ment has de­veloped and in­tro­duced to the State Duma a bill* to amend the laws “On the ba­sics of pub­lic health pro­tec­tion in the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion”, “On the cir­cu­la­tion of medi­cines” and “On the con­tract sys­tem in the pro­cure­ment of goods, works, ser­vices for state and mu­ni­cip­al needs”. To re­duce the risk of un­avail­ab­il­ity of med­ic­al devices and the threat to the life and health of cit­izens (in­clud­ing due to un­timely pro­vi­sion of med­ic­al care), there are plans to pro­hib­it man­u­fac­tur­ers and dis­trib­ut­ors of med­ic­al devices from sus­pend­ing or ter­min­at­ing the pro­duc­tion of med­ic­al devices or their im­port in­to Rus­sia without giv­ing the Rus­si­an Min­istry of Health no less than six months’ no­tice.Sale of for­eign medi­cines in their ori­gin­al pack­agesIt is pro­posed to ac­cel­er­ate the pro­cess of put­ting newly-re­gistered medi­cines on the Rus­si­an mar­ket. In case of their short­age (or the risk of short­age) while sanc­tions are in place, it will be pos­sible to im­port medi­cines, put them on the mar­ket and use them in Rus­sia in the ori­gin­al (i.e. for­eign) pack­aging without a Rus­si­an trans­la­tion.The rel­ev­ant bill* has already passed first read­ing and, if ad­op­ted, will come in­to force on the date of its of­fi­cial pub­lic­a­tion. Giv­en the prompt­ness of the ad­op­tion of counter-sanc­tions in Rus­sia, the ad­op­tion of this law can be ex­pec­ted in the com­ing days.* In Rus­si­an
CMS Rus­sia earns a re­cord num­ber of re­cog­ni­tions by Best Law­yers 2022
Strong re­cog­ni­tion by the rank­ing 32 CMS Rus­sia ex­perts have been se­lec­ted for in­clu­sion in­to the 2022 edi­tion of the Best Law­yers rank­ing. In total, we have earned 74 re­cog­ni­tions by the rank­ing :Ant­on...
CMS Rus­sia ranked in Cham­bers Europe 2021
CMS Rus­sia has been ranked in the fol­low­ing cat­egor­ies: Bank­ing & Fin­ance­Com­pet­i­tion/An­ti­trust Cor­por­ate/M&A: High-End Cap­ab­il­it­ies Em­ploy­ment Life Sci­ences TMT In­di­vidu­al ac­know­ledg­ment re­ceivedElena...
CMS Rus­sia ex­perts re­cog­nised in the Pravo.ru-300 in­di­vidu­al rank­ing
The lead­ing na­tion­al leg­al dir­ect­ory Pravo.ru-300 has re­vealed the re­com­men­ded law­yers across 29 areas of law.This year sev­en CMS Rus­sia ex­perts have been ac­know­ledged by the rank­ing this year. Pravo.ru-300...
CMS suc­cess­fully de­fen­ded GE Health­care in a court of cas­sa­tion against...
CMS has suc­cess­fully de­fen­ded in­terests of GE Health­care in the court of ap­peal and fur­ther in the court of cas­sa­tion against the Rus­si­an health­care reg­u­lat­ory au­thor­ity (Roszdravn­ad­zor), in the case...
Do­ing busi­ness in Rus­sia 2020
Gen­er­al back­groundThe Rus­si­an leg­al sys­tem gen­er­ally be­longs to the con­tin­ent­al European leg­al fam­ily. The leg­al struc­ture de­veloped at a rap­id pace dur­ing the 1990s. Dur­ing this peri­od, sig­ni­fic­ant re­forms were en­acted in al­most every area of law as the coun­try moved away from its So­viet com­mand eco­nomy.The Con­sti­tu­tion, fed­er­al laws and re­gion­al laws form the found­a­tion of the Rus­si­an leg­al sys­tem. Pres­id­en­tial ex­ec­ut­ive or­ders, de­crees of the Rus­si­an Gov­ern­ment and the de­cisions of vari­ous min­is­tries are used to sup­port and de­vel­op the pro­vi­sions of primary le­gis­la­tion.The Con­sti­tu­tion states that gen­er­al prin­ciples of in­ter­na­tion­al law and in­ter­na­tion­al treat­ies are part of the Rus­si­an leg­al sys­tem. Con­sequently, if Rus­sia is a sig­nat­ory to an in­ter­na­tion­al treaty con­tain­ing pro­vi­sions con­trary to the pro­vi­sions of any do­mest­ic le­gis­la­tion, the pro­vi­sions of the in­ter­na­tion­al treaty will pre­vail. The Con­sti­tu­tion, how­ever, takes pre­ced­ence over any con­tra­dict­ing pro­vi­sion of an in­ter­na­tion­al treaty.The Rus­si­an Civil Code (the “Civil Code”) sets out the found­a­tion of civil law and is the key source of law for busi­ness. As part of the re­form, sig­ni­fic­ant amend­ments to the Civil Code con­cern­ing cor­por­ate law and the law of ob­lig­a­tions came in­to force in Septem­ber 2014 and June 2015. These amend­ments form the most sig­ni­fic­ant de­vel­op­ment since the shap­ing of mod­ern cor­por­ate and com­mer­cial law in Rus­sia. Today, a num­ber of con­cepts which have for a long time been com­mon to in­ter­na­tion­al prac­tice in cor­por­ate, debt and gen­er­al com­mer­cial areas, are also re­cog­nised and widely used in Rus­sia, in par­tic­u­lar:cor­por­ate agree­ments;the “four-eyes” prin­ciple;the con­di­tion­al per­form­ance of ob­lig­a­tions;the concept of rep­res­ent­a­tions (“zaveren­iya ob ob­stoy­a­tel­stvakh”) (an in­ten­ded equi­val­ent of “rep­res­ent­a­tions” and “war­ranties” as used in con­tracts un­der Eng­lish law);the concept of the re­im­burse­ment of losses arising from the oc­cur­rence of cer­tain events spe­cified in a con­tract (the in­ten­ded equi­val­ent of the Eng­lish law concept of an “in­dem­nity”);new types of civil law con­tracts, such as op­tions, frame­work agree­ments and sub­scrip­tion agree­ments;rules for the con­duct of ne­go­ti­ations to con­clude a con­tract; andnew mech­an­isms to se­cure the per­form­ance of con­trac­tu­al ob­lig­a­tions by the parties.These highly sig­ni­fic­ant changes to the Civil Code are in­ten­ded to ac­com­mod­ate the grow­ing trend of sub­mit­ting com­plic­ated trans­ac­tion doc­u­ments to Rus­si­an law and Rus­si­an courts in­stead of Eng­lish law and in­ter­na­tion­al ar­bit­ra­tion which were tra­di­tion­ally the “well-trod­den path” in Rus­sia. It is yet to be seen how the new con­cepts and pro­vi­sions will be en­forced by courts and ar­bit­ral tribunals. Nev­er­the­less, in prac­tice, com­pan­ies are act­ively us­ing the new con­cepts in their pro­jects.WTO­Fol­low­ing 18 years of ne­go­ti­ations, Rus­sia fi­nally joined the World Trade Or­gan­isa­tion in sum­mer 2012 (please see the Cus­toms reg­u­la­tions chapter).At the time, WTO ac­ces­sion sent a pos­it­ive sig­nal to for­eign in­vestors. However, not­able changes such as a ma­ter­i­al drop in tar­iffs on im­por­ted goods and changes to the quotas for for­eign par­ti­cip­a­tion in the in­sur­ance sec­tor have not yet come in­to ef­fect be­cause of the long grace peri­ods that are al­lowed. For ex­ample, un­der WTO rules, for­eign in­sur­ance com­pan­ies will be able to open branch of­fices in Rus­sia, but this is not re­quired to take ef­fect un­til nine years after ac­ces­sion. The rel­ev­ant bill to im­ple­ment this change is in pro­gress and has yet to be sub­mit­ted to the State Duma.For­eign in­vest­ment Leg­al reg­u­la­tionThe main le­gis­lat­ive act gov­ern­ing for­eign in­vest­ments is Fed­er­al Law No. 160-FZ “On For­eign In­vest­ment in the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion” dated 9 Ju­ly 1999. This law states that for­eign in­vestors and in­vest­ments will be treated no less fa­vour­ably than do­mest­ic in­vestors and in­vest­ments, sub­ject to cer­tain wide-ran­ging ex­cep­tions.Ex­cep­tions/re­stric­tions may be in­tro­duced, amongst oth­ers, to pro­tect the Rus­si­an con­sti­tu­tion­al sys­tem; the mor­al­ity, health and rights of third parties; or in or­der to en­sure state se­cur­ity and/or de­fence. Some of the sec­tors con­cerned are com­men­ted on sep­ar­ately be­low. By and large, for­eign in­vest­ment is per­mit­ted in most sec­tors of the Rus­si­an eco­nomy, in­clud­ing in­vest­ment in port­fo­li­os of gov­ern­ment se­cur­it­ies, stocks and bonds, dir­ect in­vest­ment in new busi­nesses, in the ac­quis­i­tion of ex­ist­ing Rus­si­an-owned com­pan­ies and in joint ven­tures.For­eign in­vestors are pro­tec­ted against na­tion­al­isa­tion or ex­pro­pri­ation, un­less this is provided for by fed­er­al law. In these cases, for­eign in­vestors are en­titled to re­ceive com­pens­a­tion for their in­vest­ment and oth­er losses.Ex­clu­sions/re­stric­tionsIn ad­di­tion to the so-called “Stra­tegic In­dus­tries Law” (please see the Com­mon forms of busi­ness struc­tures for for­eign in­vestors chapter), re­stric­tions on for­eign in­vest­ment ex­ist not­ably in the in­sur­ance and bank­ing sec­tors.Fed­er­al Law No. 4015-1 “On In­sur­ance” dated 27 Novem­ber 1992 cur­rently pro­hib­its for­eign in­vestors from own­ing more than 25% of the total mar­ket for do­mest­ic in­sur­ance. In­sur­ance com­pan­ies in which for­eign share­hold­ers own more than 49% of the charter cap­it­al may not en­gage in cer­tain types of in­sur­ance busi­ness, in­clud­ing, for ex­ample, life as­sur­ance. The ex­ist­ing lim­it­a­tions will be partly lif­ted by the le­gis­lat­ive amend­ments which will be con­sidered in con­nec­tion with WTO ac­ces­sion.In the bank­ing sec­tor, the Cent­ral Bank of Rus­sia has the right to use re­ci­pro­city as a cri­terion to spe­cify the types of busi­ness that sub­si­di­ar­ies or branches of for­eign banks may be li­censed to op­er­ate in Rus­sia. In prac­tice, how­ever, branches of for­eign banks are not able to carry out any bank­ing activ­it­ies on the Rus­si­an mar­ket. Ad­di­tion­ally, a ceil­ing on the total amount of for­eign bank cap­it­al, as a per­cent­age of the total bank cap­it­al in Rus­sia, can be im­posed by fed­er­al law; how­ever, no such lim­it ap­plies at the time of writ­ing. Un­der WTO rules, any such ceil­ing may not be less than 50%.Sanc­tionsIn 2014, the European Uni­on and the United States of Amer­ica (among oth­ers) im­posed in­di­vidu­al sanc­tions on cer­tain Rus­si­an and Ukrain­i­an na­tion­als and en­tit­ies that they be­lieve to be re­spons­ible for the ac­tions which led to the de­clar­a­tion of sov­er­eignty by Crimea, and sub­sequently, it be­com­ing part of the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion. Sanc­tions tar­get­ing cer­tain sec­tors of the Rus­si­an eco­nomy (or so-called “sec­tor­al sanc­tions”), as well as re­gion­al sanc­tions pro­hib­it­ing cer­tain eco­nom­ic activ­ity re­lated to Crimea and Sevastopol, have also been ad­op­ted.In re­tali­ation, Rus­sia ad­op­ted coun­tersanc­tions to pro­hib­it the im­port of cer­tain ag­ri­cul­tur­al products, raw ma­ter­i­als and food­stuffs from coun­tries that have im­posed sanc­tions on Rus­sia. In par­al­lel, it also launched an im­port sub­sti­tu­tion policy (please see the Im­port sub­sti­tu­tion and pro­duc­tion loc­al­isa­tion in Rus­sia chapter).2018 marked a turn­ing point in terms of sanc­tions for Rus­sia. In May, the US en­acted le­gis­la­tion that may res­ult in non-US per­sons be­ing held li­able for know­ingly fa­cil­it­at­ing “sig­ni­fic­ant trans­ac­tions” for or on be­half of per­sons sanc­tioned un­der Ukraine-/Rus­sia-re­lated sanc­tions im­posed by the US (so-called “sec­ond­ary sanc­tions”). In Oc­to­ber 2018, the EU ad­op­ted a new sanc­tions frame­work in con­nec­tion with the use and pro­lif­er­a­tion of chem­ic­al weapons which does not ex­pressly tar­get Rus­sia, but is ex­pec­ted to be used against Rus­sia in fu­ture.Again, Rus­sia re­acted to these de­vel­op­ments. Firstly, it ad­op­ted a frame­work law on meas­ures against un­friendly ac­tions of the US and oth­er for­eign states in June 2018 and im­posed the first sanc­tions un­der such law against Ukrain­i­an in­di­vidu­als and leg­al en­tit­ies in Novem­ber 2018. Secondly, it im­posed du­ties on a se­lec­tion of goods im­por­ted from the US from 6 Au­gust 2018. Thirdly, a ban on the im­port to Rus­sia of a num­ber of goods of Ukrain­i­an ori­gin or trans­it­ing through Ukraine was de­clared in Decem­ber 2018 and ex­pan­ded in scope in Decem­ber 2019.Sanc­tions against Rus­si­aEven though each na­tion­al sanc­tions re­gime will vary in scope, the re­stric­tions im­posed can be broadly char­ac­ter­ised as fol­lows.Un­der the in­di­vidu­al sanc­tions re­gime, travel re­stric­tions and as­set freezes have been im­posed on in­di­vidu­als and en­tit­ies lis­ted un­der the rel­ev­ant leg­al acts.Sec­tor­al sanc­tions have been im­posed on the fol­low­ing sec­tors of Rus­si­an eco­nomy:En­ergy sec­tor: the sale, sup­ply, trans­fer or ex­port of items for cer­tain types of oil ex­plor­a­tion and pro­duc­tion pro­jects in Rus­sia and the pro­vi­sion of as­so­ci­ated ser­vices are pro­hib­ited, or sub­ject to pri­or au­thor­isa­tion by the com­pet­ent au­thor­it­ies of the ex­port­ing coun­try. De­part­ing from pre­vi­ous widely worded pro­hib­i­tions, in Decem­ber 2019, the US ad­op­ted a tar­geted ap­proach in the en­ergy sec­tor by re­strict­ing activ­it­ies con­nec­ted with the con­struc­tion and op­er­a­tion of the Nord Stream 2 and Turk­Stream pipelines.Fin­an­cial sec­tor: ma­jor Rus­si­an fin­an­cial in­sti­tu­tions, as well as cer­tain de­fence and en­ergy com­pan­ies, have been pro­hib­ited from deal­ing with bonds, equity or sim­il­ar fin­an­cial in­stru­ments with a ma­tur­ity ex­ceed­ing 14, 30 or 90 days. It is also pro­hib­ited to make loans or cred­it avail­able to any of the en­tit­ies covered by the meas­ures.De­fence sec­tor: Rus­sia is sub­ject to a weapons em­bargo. In ad­di­tion, sup­ply­ing dual use goods and tech­no­logy to Rus­sia is sub­ject to in­di­vidu­al au­thor­isa­tion by the re­spect­ive au­thor­it­ies of the ex­port­ing coun­try. The au­thor­isa­tion will be denied if those items are in­ten­ded for mil­it­ary use or for a mil­it­ary end-user. This type of sanc­tion also af­fects the man­u­fac­ture of civil goods and equip­ment.The activ­it­ies pro­hib­ited un­der re­gion­al sanc­tions in­clude im­port­a­tions from and ex­port­a­tions to Crimea, as well as mak­ing new in­vest­ments (either in gen­er­al or in cer­tain sec­tors).As a res­ult of some re­cent meas­ures aimed at the Rus­si­an state, US banks can no longer par­ti­cip­ate in the primary mar­ket for non-rouble de­nom­in­ated bonds is­sued by the Rus­si­an sov­er­eign and lend non-rouble de­nom­in­ated funds to the Rus­si­an sov­er­eign.Sanc­tions im­posed on Rus­sia are not pro­hib­it­ing all com­mer­cial activ­ity. They are fo­cus­ing on very spe­cif­ic in­di­vidu­als, en­tit­ies, re­gions and eco­nom­ic sec­tors. Com­pan­ies wish­ing to con­tract with Rus­si­an en­tit­ies should carry out en­hanced due di­li­gence to en­sure that they do not be­come in­volved in activ­it­ies pro­hib­ited un­der the rel­ev­ant sanc­tions re­gime.Lob­by­ing­Giv­en how slowly the leg­al cul­ture has de­veloped in Rus­sia, busi­nesses tend not to ex­pend their lob­by­ing ef­forts on at­tempt­ing to in­flu­ence the draft­ing of new laws or the ac­tions of those draft­ing them. In­stead, busi­nesses tend to seek de facto spe­cial treat­ment, such as tax de­fer­ments, cus­toms be­ne­fits, op­er­a­tion li­cences and the right to en­gage in cer­tain kinds of activ­ity. In do­ing so, how­ever it may be that these com­pan­ies ex­pose them­selves un­duly to “polit­ic­al risk” upon any change of ad­min­is­tra­tion and com­pan­ies en­ter­ing the mar­ket need to con­sider how se­cure such con­ces­sions might be for their busi­ness in the long term.There are not many leg­ally re­cog­nised lob­by­ing as­so­ci­ations with a large mem­ber­ship base. Prom­in­ent ex­amples of as­so­ci­ations that do ex­ist are the As­so­ci­ation of Rus­si­an Banks, the Cham­ber of Com­merce and In­dustry of the Rus­si­an Fed­er­a­tion, the Fed­er­a­tion of In­de­pend­ent Trade Uni­ons of Rus­sia and the Uni­on of In­dus­tri­al­ists and En­tre­pren­eurs.Back to top ↑ “The Rus­si­an Civil Code sets out the found­a­tion of civil law and is the key source of law for busi­ness.”  me­di­um­me­di­um­me­di­um
CMS suc­cess­fully de­fen­ded GE Health­care in a court case against the Rus­si­an...
CMS has suc­cess­fully rep­res­en­ted in­terests of GE Health­care in sev­er­al court pro­ceed­ings against the Rus­si­an health­care reg­u­lat­ory au­thor­ity (Roszdravn­ad­zor). We could in­val­id­ate the reg­u­lat­or’s re­fus­al...
CMS Rus­sia earns 58 re­cog­ni­tions by Best Law­yers 2021
Strong re­cog­ni­tion by the rank­ing 26 CMS Rus­sia ex­perts have been se­lec­ted for in­clu­sion in­to the 2021 edi­tion of the Best Law­yers. In total, we have earned 58 re­cog­ni­tions by the rank­ing:Ant­on Bankovskiy...