Lawyer, Ph.D, partner and co-founder of the Firm. Mr. Ischuk’s speciality is antitrust law and dispute resolution in state courts He is well known in the market thanks to his work in precedent setting cases representing the interests of companies - leaders in their segments.
Since 2007, he has been defending clients from such industries as trade, construction, and industrial production in antitrust proceedings. He is known as a specialist in the field of antimonopoly regulation of trade activities, particular, for his work on the development of approaches to the regulation of procurement unions as part of the working group of the FAS in Russia. For more than 10 years, he has been advising clients of the Firm on conducting an antimonopoly audit of the company's activities and implementing antimonopoly compliance systems. Since 2013, he has been a member of the Association of Antimonopoly Experts. He is also known in the market due to the successful representation of clients in insurance, construction, rental disputes and disputes in the field of electric power.
He is the lecturer at the Competition Law Department of the Moscow State Law University named after O.E. Kutafin
In 2018-2019 he was awarded two honorary thanks at once - from the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) (2018) and the Association of Antitrust Experts (AAE) (2018 - 2019).
Personally ranked lawyer in Chambers Europe 2021, Legal 500 EMEA 2021, Best Lawyers 2022 (Competition/ Antitrust Law, Litigation, ‘Lawyer of the Year’ in the area of Government Practice), Pravo-300 (Competition) and Kommersant (Antitrust and Competition, Commercial law, Energy and natural resources) ratings. Also personally ranked by Pravo-300 in 2023 (Band 2: Antitrust law (including disputes).
- Representing a retail network (a subsidiary of one of the world’s biggest retailers):
- in a dispute against the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation concerning a possible cartel agreement in the field of socially-important foods;
- in Moscow and regional arbitrazh courts - in disputes against the Federal Antimonopoly Service concerning the alleged imposition of discrimination conditions against the food suppliers, including disputes concerning convictions of the commission of other breaches of Russian competition law;
- in Moscow and regional arbitrazh courts - in disputes against the Federal Antimonopoly Service concerning breaches of the Federal trade and competition laws, including cases concerning the alleged failure to provide relevant information about goods;
- in numerous disputes against food suppliers for compensation of damages suffered in connection with alleged breaches of the Federal competition law.
- Representing the interests of a Russian representative of a major international hypermarket chain in terms of the probe by the FAS of Russia Directorate (FASD) for Moscow Oblast into the allegations of client's anti-competitive practices in trade banned by the commerce law.
- Development of a corporate antitrust compliance policy for a telecommunications equipment retail chain.
- Representation of a trade association of major online retailers' interests in the FAS of Russia task force for the regulation of aggregators.
- Defending one of the leading private operators of airport infrastructure against the convictions of breach of Art. 15 and 16 of the Federal law on protection of competition, which were brought against the Client and the Governor, the Government and specialized ministries of one of the subjects of the Russian Federation.
- Support for a foreign automaker as part of measures undertaken by FAS of Russia to check whether the market players comply with the Distributor and Automaker Guidelines released in the autumn of 2012, in particular, advising, drafting of responses to enquiries, etc.
- Advice to a brewery on the likely risks involved in the bans put in place by the competition and advertising laws in effect on the promotion of beer and derivatives. Acting on the legal advice received, the company made major changes to the marketing and promotional events on the drawing board to safeguard against potential major regulatory and financial lawsuits [risks].
- Representing a major player on distance selling market in a case concerning an alleged violation of advertising and antimonopoly laws, brought by the Central Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia.
- Representing one of the largest vertically-integrated oil companies in a dispute with the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia during the so-called «first and second» waves of oil antimonopoly cases (within the “oil four cases”), including during the trial stages, administrative proceedings, and a judicial appeal against acts made by FAS at the court of the first instance and during the appellate stages.
- Representing largest Russian power supply company in a judicial challenge of acts issued by the Moscow Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service, claiming that our client was abusing its leading position in the electric power supply market.
- Representing one of Gazprom’s subsidiaries in antimonopoly proceedings in the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia regarding allegedly high prices being set on sulphur. After the case investigation was completed, proceedings in respect of our client were terminated as there was no breach of applicable law.
- Representing of OAO OGK-2 (Russia's No 1 provider of cogeneration, Gazprom's energy asset) in litigation with the E4 company owned by Mr Abyzov, Russian cabinet minister, to recover an advance of 3.5 bln rbl (about 100 mln US dollars in 2014). Dispute over the termination of contract to supply a powerplant acquired for the Serov State District Power Station construction project. OGK-2's claim was granted: the supply contract was terminated and the advance refunded.
- Representing the MTS retail chain in a precedent-making dispute against one of the world-wide leading manufacturers of telecom equipment. Among the legal issues in the case was the right to equality in access to justice. This issue drew the attention of the worldwide legal community, since the issue of equality in access to the judicial system has never been examined from this angle before. The position of the Firm has been supported by the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court and has had a serious impact on the practice in other courts. Likewise, this has had an impact on the contractual clause which sets forth the terms of international arbitration, especially with foreign companies as participants in agreements with arbitration clauses.
- Representing insurance company Allianz in a dispute with a foreign reinsurer on a reinsurance recovery in the total amount of more than USD 35 million arising out of the accident at the Sayano-Shushenskaya hydropower plant (total damage over USD 200 million). The result – the client’s claim was satisfied in full, afterwards the decision was enforced in the territory of Switzerland.
- Representing Capital Insurance Company (part of ROSGOSSTRAH) in insurance dispute worth 32 mln US Dollars. The dispute arose in connection with the refusal by thirty foreign reinsurers, some of them members of Lloyd's, to pay out a reinsurance claim from the Russian insurance company Capital Insurance for the loss of the aircraft, the total amount of which originally was over 32 mln US dollars. 8th Arbitrazh Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the Arbitrazh Court of Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug – Yugra, which fully granted the claim lodged by KIAP's Client, the Capital Insurance Russian insurance company, for the recovery of reinsurance proceeds for the loss of aircraft.
- Representing Olma-Finance and a pool of unit investment fund members in a number of disputes concerning the defense of real property, which was part of the fund’s assets, against illegal infringements of other persons. KIAP lawyers helped protect the members’ interests and their joint ownership in respect of a commercial property in a prestigious Moscow district.
- Representation of a major regional pension fund in many years of litigation against a high-profile Moscow-based management company at the court of cassation. The case is precedent setting since, given the vague statutory regulation in this field, it highlights once again the need for full compliance with the principle of preservation of pension reserves made available for discretionary management.
- Representing Quelle in a dispute with the Russian Federal Customs Service regarding the procedure for determining the customs value of goods bearing trademarks subject to license payments. As the result, the decisions of customs authorities were proved illegal. These claims have set a positive precedent at the federal level (North-Western and Central Districts).
- Advising the largest Russian company of electric energy on matters related to the structuring of relations with one of the largest Russian contractors involved in the construction of power sector facilities in connection with its bankruptcy. The amount of the debt was about 36 billion rubles.
- Representation of a debtor's former director in an action for vicarious liability damages of 250 mln roubles. The court of first instance and the court of appeal upheld the firm's position that the director's actions were legally valid.
- Striking down 63 administrative fines from FAS of Russia totalling 126 mln rbl. for one of the biggest retailers in connection with accusations of discrimination against suppliers of fish and fish products.
Energy and Utilities
- Representing a regional integrated company against power supplies and related integrated companies in up to 20 disputes that dealt with discrepancies concerning the total volume of the power supplied, the gaps in statutory regulations, as well as defects inagreements between the participants of the dispute.
- Consulting a regional power supplier on tariff setting.
- Consulting one of the three leading Russian vertically-integrated oil companies on a financial settlement between a subsidiary and one of the trans-regional distribution companies.
- Representing Samaraenergo in the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation in a precedent setting litigation in 2009 in the energy sector. As the result of the case, trials for most litigation matters in the electric energy industry previously adjudicated in PETEC Fund Arbitration Tribunal (legal successor of Arbitration Tribunal under EES RSC) now must be adjudicated in the arbitration courts system of Russia.
- Representing Mosenergosbyt successfully to resolve the largest conflict in the Moscow energy market in 2009 with COP-Energo concerning the authorization for receiving electric energy payments from consumers in Moscow and in the Moscow Region.