20 May 2013
Home Page About Us Services Publications Links Forum
VIEWS
TACY'S MEMO
Opinion
Analysis
NEWS
Mining & Exploration
Rough Trade
Polished Wholesale & Manufacturing
Retail
Governmental
Labs & Trade and Industry Bodies
Branding & Marketing
Legal
Financial
Diamond Pipeline
Statistics
ARCHIVE NEWS - PRE 2008
People
Regional Issues
Created Diamonds
Civil Society
Ethics
Development Issues
Conflict Diamonds
Auctions
Kimberley Process
DIAMOND INTELLIGENCE BRIEFS
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2013
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2012
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2011
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2010
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2009
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2008
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2007
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2006
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2005
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2004
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2003
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2002
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2001
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2000
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1999
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1998
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1990
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1989
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1988
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1987
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1986
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1985
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1984
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1994
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1995
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1996
TACY RESEARCH
Tacy's Reports
Tacy's Research
Tacy's Presentations
RESOURCE LIBRARY
Company Reports
Kimberley Process
NGO Reports
Government Reports
Conflict Diamonds
Producer Marketing Documentation
Trade Organization Guidance
Supplier of Choice
LEGAL
Laws and Regulations
Court Documents
Anti-Money Laundering
Best Practice Principles
Compliance
Competition
Banking
FINANCE
Basel II
Compliance
Decisions
PICTURES
Botswana
De Beers Archive Pictures
Conference Photos
India
Zimbabwe
SITE MAP
MY ARTICLES
created by CyberServe
 Email this      Printer-Friendly Format       Respond to this Article
LONDON COURT DISMISSES GAYDAMAK'S CLAIM AGAINST LEVIEV - UPDATE
03 July 2012

Russian-Israeli business tycoon Arkady Gaydamak lost a London court battle last Friday against Israeli diamantaire Lev Leviev after the judge ruled that Gaydamak was not, as he alleged, owed hundreds of millions of dollars from the pair's disputed Angolan diamond business.

Moreover, on Monday, the English High Court ordered Gaydamak to pay Leviev the equivalent of about US$1 million in legal costs, and Judge Geoffrey Vos denied the request of Gaydamak to appeal against the dismissal of the case, reports Israel's Globes Online.

The case against Leviev focuses on Gaydamak's claims of unpaid commissions and dividends - worth anywhere from hundreds of millions dollars to at least US$1 billion - from the Angolan diamond venture in which the two magnates supposedly shared a stake, according to media reports.

The Claims

Gaydamak's suit claims that after becoming involved in Angola in the 1990s, he suggested to the Angolan government that it obtain control of the country's diamond industry at the height of the civil war so as to stem the rebels' flow of cash from so-called conflict diamonds. Gaydamak also says he was instrumental in setting up Ascorp, the Angolan Diamond Selling Corporation, which had sole purchasing rights to Angolan rough diamonds. According to Gaydamak, he invited Leviev to join the venture, as the front man for his activities, and in 2000, they had agreed to divide ownership of Ascorp and to share the profits from its diamond exports. 

Speaking by video link from Israel because of an outstanding French tax charge, Gaydamak told the High Court on the first day of the trial that he believed he was entitled to about half Leviev's diamond assets in Angola, reports Reuters. His argument was based on his claim that there was a written agreement to this effect between the two multi-millionaires that was dated December 2001.

Counter-Argument

Leviev, however, denied signing the agreement, which was reportedly entrusted to the Chief Rabbi of Russia, Rabbi Berel Lazar, who consequently lost the document.

Gaydamak also reportedly argues in his claim that Leviev agreed to hold their joint assets, in particular their share in Ascorp, which closed in 2003, and any income from those assets, on trust in equal shares.

Leviev's lawyers counter-argued that those claims were compromised by a settlement agreement between the two men in August 2011 in which Gaydamak signed away his rights to the assets. Gaydamak said he was induced to sign the latter agreement.

The Judgment

According to Reuters, High Court judge Geoffrey Vos said in his 70-page ruling on Friday: "I find that the 2001 agreement was indeed signed by Mr Gaydamak and Mr Leviev, and was a valid and enforceable agreement. But the parties entered a valid and binding settlement agreement which took effect on August 6 2011, whereby each party released all claims against the other. Accordingly the claim will be dismissed."

 

   Back»