the Logo of “Rosneft”
the Court sought to RBC 390 thousand. for the article about the preparation to privatization of “Rosneft”. The court also decided to delete the article
the Arbitration court of Moscow partially satisfied the claim of “Rosneft” to the edition and journalists of RBC. According to the court, RBC (OOO “BusinessPress”), as well as journalists Timofey Dzyadko, Maxim Tovkailo, Lyudmila Podobedova and presenter of the TV channel Konstantin Bochkarev has to pay in favor of the oil company “Rosneft” 390 thousand rubles. The court also decided to remove the article “Sechin asked the government to protect Rosneft from BP”, which became the subject of the claim, and give a rebuttal. Additionally, the court decided to collect with each journalist on 4,5 thousand RUB.
According to lawyer Alexey Melnikov representing interests of Timofey Dzyadko, the court’s decision will be appealed.
In court the claimant asked to collect from the defendants of almost 8 thousand times more — 3,179 billion rubles a sensational amount of lawyers “Rosneft” explained that the damage was calculated based on the value of the company’s reputation. The cost of the assets to Rosneft, according to lawyers, more than 600 billion rubles.
Price reputation
‘); setTimeout(arguments.callee, 50); return; } if (!window.jwplayer) { s = document.createElement(‘script’); s.src = “//content.rbc.medialand.ru/templates_r/jwplayer/jwplayer.js”; s.type = ‘text/javascript’; parEl.parentNode.insertBefore(s, parEl); setTimeout(arguments.callee, 50); return; } window.jwplayer.key = ‘t3/gzoTw74tQdZgYlxSwzsrmSt96w0Y8EcIvqw==’; var styleStr = “”; styleStr += “width : auto;”; //2006 try { if (true === parent.rosbusinessconsulting.config.get(‘articleColumn’)) { styleStr += ” margin-right : 0;”; } } catch (e) {} try { if (!parent.deviceType) { if (parent.projectVersion == ‘rbc7′ || parent.bannersVersion == ‘v7′) { styleStr += ” margin : 0px -110px 0px 0px;”; } else { styleStr += ” margin : 0px -216px 0px 0px;”; } } } catch (e) {} try { if (parent.projectVersion == ‘rbc7′ || parent.bannersVersion == ‘v7′) { styleStr += ‘ max-width: 770px;’; } } catch (e) {} parEl.style.display=’block’; parEl.style.cssText += styleStr; parEl.innerHTML = “; s = document.createElement(‘script’); s.src = “//static.videonow.ru/vn_init.js”; s.setAttribute(“data-profile”, “1351319″); s.type = ‘text/javascript’; s.defer = true; parEl.parentNode.insertBefore(s, parEl); window.addEventListener(“orientationchange”, function() { setTimeout(function () { window.scrollBy(0,1);} ,200); }) } run(); })(random); } else { (function(d, url) { setTimeout(function() { if (window.dfp_sync_var) return; var s = document.createElement(‘script’); s.type = ‘text/javascript’; s.src = url; d.parentNode.insertBefore(s, d); }, 200); })(d, ‘http://engine.rbc.medialand.ru/code?pid=2006&gid=2&oin=1&rid=’ + random + extra +’&dreferer=’+escape(drefe rrer));} }//–>
the Reason for the trial was the article published on the website on 11 April 2016 under the heading “Sechin asked to protect Rosneft from BP”, and telecast on the channel of RBC, based on the publication. The article discussed the preparations for the privatization of 19.5% of Rosneft’s shares and that the company BP can collect blocking stake in the companies during the privatization.
At the end of last week, the deal on the privatization was actually carried out and highly appreciated by the head of state. The buyers were two companies — a consortium of Glencore and the Qatari sovereign Fund.
After this publication, the company filed a lawsuit to the court of arbitration for authors and edition. For a few months that lasted the hearing, lawyers of “Rosneft” presented to the court the expert opinion and studies that, in their opinion, confirmed the amount of the damage alleged in 3,179 billion.
At the court hearing, they insisted that journalists have spread defamatory and untrue information. The plaintiffs noted that RBC has a huge audience, and television broadcasts across the country and in the CIS countries and has offices in other cities.
the Lawyers insisted that the amount of compensation 3,179 billion rubles is quite reasonable and proportionate in relation to the value of the business reputation of the company. The lawyers referred to the value of the assets of the company, which, in their opinion, exceed 600 billion rubles. “We ask to recover only 0,49% of the value of reputation,” say the lawyers.
unwarranted harm
In turn, the company’s lawyers and journalists were asked to refuse satisfaction of the claim. “I don’t know what are the charges? What was the false data?” — rose lawyer Eugene Reznik. He noted that the article said about the deal on the privatization of shares of the company and it went exactly in that order, as the journalists wrote.
According to Reznik, even in the conclusions which were submitted by the plaintiff, discrediting the experts considered only the comments of the leading Bochkarev, not the publication itself. “But opinions can not be judged,” — said the lawyer. Resnick insisted that he property damage to the same caused was not.
“the plaintiff intended to cause property damage defendants”, said Reznik. “To ruin several journalists — was confirmed by his colleagues. — And also to show everyone, what about “Rosneft” it is impossible to write — how about the dead either good or nothing”.
representatives of the journalists pointed out that defendants, such as Maxim tovkaylo to compensate the damage, the declared oil company, will need at least 2.5 thousand years.
“the Claimed harm is unreasonable and unfair,” — summed up the lawyer.
non-absolute freedom
after Hearing the representatives of the defendant, the word again asked the lawyers of “Rosneft”. Leaning on the podium, the lawyer, the oil company announced that they have another written explanation of their positions. Passing papers to the court, he said that the successful privatisation deal was the result of their “hard work to overcome the negative background information” which created the defendants.
“the Defendants acting in bad faith, actively illuminate the process on their media outlets, which claimed that [our] demands unfounded,” insisted the representative.
“Freedom of speech is not absolute”, — supported him by another representative of “Rosneft”. He insisted that the company after the April publication had to explain with BP.
In turn, journalists and their lawyer stated that prior to publication have made every effort to verify the information. In particular, Podobedova called the press Secretary of “Rosneft” Mikhail Leontiev, but he wouldn’t talk to her. In confirmation of this the defendants put the phone records of a journalist.
the Case was considered by the judge Ubusa of Boldenow. He has had to consider cases against the media.
In 2014, he considered the lawsuit JSC “Russian holding company” (RHC) against the publication “Tape.Ru”. The company insisted that the erroneous posting pictures of the ex-head of “Sibneft”, the Chairman of the Board of Directors Alexander Ryazanov RHC in the article about the arrest of the former head of the Tyumen branch “Sibneft” Fyodor Khoroshilova on suspicion of bad loans by $ 776 million harmed the reputation RHC. The company insisted that “the Tape.ru” have to refute the defamatory information and pay in compensation for reputational harm 551,6 million rubles, the Judge found the plaintiff’s arguments were untenable and dismissed the claim.
In 2015, Boltunov judge considered the claim of the cafe Royal Burger in the city of Vladivostok against the TV channel “Friday” and the program “Revizorro”. This was considered that the release of the program in which he was shown, tarnished their reputation. The judge determined that the information provided in the program is “defamatory, as is the allegation by the plaintiff of applicable law, committing a dishonest act, wrong, unethical behavior in public life”, and decided to remove the plot from the website of the TV channel and issue a denial. The TV channel “Friday” has challenged the judge’s decision.
In 2016, Boltunov judge ruled on the claim of the Gosfilmofond of Russia to the “Soyuzmultfilm”, forbidding studios to use and to license cartoons on the Internet.
No comments:
Post a Comment