Greenmail in Russian
The company Gazprom Komplektatsiya (GPK) filed a claim for 3.387 billion rubles in the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region against the company Nartex, from which it leases premises in the Fort Tower business center at 139 Moskovsky Prospekt. The company is part of the Fort Group, where 20 September Fontanka clarified its position regarding this dispute.
As the media noticed the day before, the claim appeared in the electronic file of arbitration cases on September 13. At the same time, two more claims were registered by Gazprom Komplektatsiya for the same amount and to the same defendant, probably due to a technical failure. They were returned by the court at the request of the plaintiff.
The remaining statement concerns the fulfillment of obligations under lease agreements for buildings and structures. It has not yet been accepted for production, and a meeting on it has not been scheduled.
Commenting on the situation at Fontanka, Fort Group managing partner Maxim Levchenko used the concept of greenmail. This is what corporate blackmail is called in international practice. If you look at it more broadly – when one side wants to achieve from the other certain actions it needs.
“This is such greenmail from the Civil Procedure Code. Their lease is ending. They want to renew at a discount. They ask her in this manner. This deal was agreed upon with PJSC (Gazprom. – Ed.). Preparation costs have also been accepted and agreed upon with PJSC Gazprom,” explained Levchenko.
He noted that Gazprom Komplektatsiya moved from Moscow to Fort Tower in St. Petersburg in 2019 and is still there. “Apparently they want to prolong the pleasure,” the businessman added. He could not explain what explains such a large amount of claims.
Fontanka also sent a request to the press service of Gazprom Komplektatsiya, but has not yet received a response.
This is not the first legal dispute between a tenant and a landlord, but it is the first time that the amount of claims has gone from millions to billions. In June 2022, Gazprom Investgazification LLC filed a lawsuit against Nartex. This company is the single technical customer for the relocation of Gazprom structures Gazprom UGS, Gazprom Komplektatsiya and Gazprom Fleet in St. Petersburg. It also carries out technical supervision, controls costs during construction and determines the maximum cost of purchasing goods, works, and contractor services.
The organization demanded 42.1 million rubles from the owner of Fort Tower. In February 2023, the parties entered into a settlement agreement, according to which Narthex agreed to pay 39.1 million rubles of debt under the 2018 agreements.
In November 2022, Narthex itself demanded a fine of 16.9 million rubles from the State Prosecutor’s Office for triple violation of the terms of the 2017 agreement. The court soon returned the claim at the request of the plaintiff.
The billion dollar amount had previously appeared in only one case. In January 2023, Nartex again filed a lawsuit against Gazprom Komplektatsiya. The management company managed to collect a fine of 3 million rubles from the tenant for the sublease of premises to GSP-Komplektatsiya, Gazstroyprom and Gazprom Diagnostics without its consent.
As follows from the court decision, in 2018, instead of Gazprom, Gazprom Komplektatsiya began renting premises in the business center on Moskovsky directly. We were talking about 13.8 thousand square meters. m and terraces with a total area of 535.3 square meters. At the same time, the lessor had to prepare the offices for “permitted use” and carry out certain work, the cost of which was agreed upon by Gazprom InvestmentGazification at the level of 2.3 billion rubles. This formed an increased part of the rent totaling approximately 2.8 billion rubles. It began to be additionally accrued from March 2021. Then the work was completed, and the acts are considered signed.
According to the Civil Procedure Code, this billion dollar amount should not have been taken into account when calculating the fine for unauthorized subletting. The court decided otherwise, since the work was eventually accepted by the customer, and the premises were occupied and in use. Thus, the court confirmed the correctness of Nartex’s calculations, which demanded a fine of 5.6 million rubles. However, in the end, the amount of the penalty was recognized as disproportionate to the consequences of the violation and was reduced to 3 million. Gazprom Komplektatsiya filed an appeal, but lost it on September 8, 2023.