On July 27, CEE Legal Matters reported that Integrites had helped Metro Cash & Carry Ukraine on a dispute involving a change of its energy supplier. CEEIHM spoke with Natalia Vasina, Legal Counsel at Metro Cash & Carry to learn more about the dispute.
CEEIHM: Can you give our readers a bit of context for the case? What was it that brought about this claim?
Natalia: Sure. The reason for filing a claim was the transition of Metro to a new electricity supplier on more favorable terms. In accordance with the terms of the concluded agreement, Metro notified the former electricity supplier of its intention to switch to a new one 21 calendar days before the transition, however, the former supplier considered such actions by Metro a violation of the terms of the agreement and filed a lawsuit against Metro.
CEEIHM: What was the main claim against Metro Cash & Carry Ukraine?
Natalia: The essence of the main claim against Metro was the recovery from Metro of a fine for early termination of the contract, as well as the recovery of losses (i.e., lost profits).
CEEIHM: What was the ultimate outcome of the dispute? Is the matter now fully resolved?
Natalia: The courts of first and second instances completely rejected the claim of our former electricity supplier indicating that Metro did not violate the agreement. To date, the cassation proceedings have been opened, but we hope that the Court of Cassation will make a decision in favor of Metro.
CEEIHM: What would you say was the most complicated aspect of this matter from a legal perspective?
Natalia: Legislation in this area is quite complex and ambiguous, as the rules governing these issues have their own specifics and must be taken into account. At the same time, the terms of the agreement and their correct interpretation became decisive in our case.
CEEIHM: How was the legal work split between your in-house legal team and Integrites and why did you pick this firm, in particular, to represent you in this case?
Natalia: Integrites provided procedural support in this case and provided legal advice. As for the choice of this firm, we have repeatedly cooperated in other matters and are satisfied with the services provided.
