More than three years after the initiation of civil proceedings, the appellate court’s judgement, favorable to the client, has come into force.
More than three years after the initiation of civil proceedings, the appellate court’s judgement, favorable to the client, has come into force.
Read more
International Investment Dispute: Skrastins & Dzenis Partners Represent AS PNB Banka in a Case Against Latvia at ICSID
In June and July this year, Skrastins & Dzenis Law Office partners Vigo Krastiņš and Verners Skrastiņš together with HANEFELD colleagues – Partner, Attorney-at-Law Prof.
Read more
Successfully defended a client in an AML case regarding money laundering and confiscation of funds in the amount of 1 million euros
We are thrilled to announce that Skrastiņš & Dzenis Law Firm has successfully defended a client in a recent AML case where the Financial Intelligence Unit of Latvia initiated proceedings regarding money laundering and confiscation of funds in the amount of approximately 1 million euros.
Read more
Successfully represented insolvent PNB Banka in five multimillion arbitration proceedings at LCIA
Our office’s partner Verners Skrastiņš has successfully represented the insolvent PNB Banka in 5 arbitration proceedings at the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA).
Read more
Significant judgement opens a turning point in the Latvian case law regarding termination of statute of limitations
The case in question opens a new turning point in case law in regard to the termination of the statute of limitations.
Read more
We successfully represented a client in civil case regarding exercise of rights of first refusal and pre-emption
The case in question opens a new turning point in case law when the integrity and genuine will of a person entitled to rights of first refusal is being assessed.
Read more
Significant judgment of the appellate court in the claim of AS “Parex banka” against its former board members
Skrastiņš & Dzenis successfully represented the former board members of AS "Parex banka" in a civil case, in which the Court of Appeal (Riga Regional Court) repeatedly rejected the claim of AS “Parex banka” (later AS “Reverta”, but now SIA “REAP”) against the defendants, former board members Mr.
Read more
The DLV dispute has come to an end
We are proud to say that after rather protracted court trials, the long-standing dispute between the shareholders of DLV has finally been solved by reaching a settlement.
Read more
Representing a client in the LCIA
Skrastiņš & Dzenis partner Verners Skrastiņš together with our Lithuanian colleagues from Motieka & Audzevicius and Stephenson Harwood partner, Queen’s Counsel Louis Flannery has represented a client, as a claimant, in a 5-day long arbitration hearing in the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA).
Read more
Representing a client in a case over reimbursment of real estate investments
Skrastiņš & Dzenis team has successfully represented client’s interests in a litigation process.
Read more
Resolving a dispute between an alliance of architects and the contractor
Skrastiņš & Dzenis team has provided assistance to a creative alliance of architects U-R-A Studio (http://www.u-r-a.com) in resolution of complicated dispute with contractor regarding the four U-R-A Studio's prepared designs for a real estate in Jurmala and subsequent unauthorised use of ideas or copyrights of design authors.
Read more
Founders of DLV regain full control over their company
The team of Skrastiņš&Dzenis has successfully represented its client’s DLV interests and provided legal assistance in a dispute between shareholders of the firm, helping the founders of DLV regain full control over the company.
Read more
Skrastiņš & Dzenis has successfully represented SIA Ceļu, tiltu būvnieks in damages case against Saldus district municipality
Skrastiņš & Dzenis has successfully represented SIA Ceļu, tiltu būvnieks, a road building company, in damages case.
Read more
Skrastiņš & Dzenis has successfully represented a client in administrative court in a dispute over a permit for B category’s polluting activities
Skrastiņš & Dzenis client, a coal briquette manufacturer which products are highly recognized and demanded in Great Britain, had to postpone the construction of a new manufacturing site due to being involved in a dispute over a permit for B category’s polluting activities.
Read more
Skrastiņš & Dzenis represented the client in a damages case arising from breach of Latvian Competition law
Skrastiņš & Dzenis represented the client in a damages case regarding breach of competition law unauthorised acquisition and use of our client's business secret.
Read more
Successfully represented former owners of Parex Banka
Skrastiņš & Dzenis team (Andrejs Guļajevs and Verners Skrastiņš) together with other attorneys-at-law has successfully provided legal assistance and defended former owners of Parex banka before the court of first instance.
Read more
Skrastiņš & Dzenis has successfully represented a client in a dispute against AS “Rīgas Siltums”
Skrastiņš & Dzenis team has successfully represented a client which designs and manufactures heating, water metering and data management devices, in a dispute against AS “Rīgas Siltums”.
Read more
Skrastiņš & Dzenis has successfully represented its client – former member of the board
Skrastiņš & Dzenis has successfully represented its client in legal proceedings before the Riga District court in damages case.
Read more
Skrastiņš & Dzenis has represented AS Latvijas gāze in a damages case against Financial Capital and Market Commission
Skrastiņš & Dzenis team has represented AS Latvijas gāze in a damages case against Financial Capital and Market Commission where our client has taken an action to claim from the FCMC interest from the deposit – the part of damages suffered as a result of insufficient supervision over AS Latvijas Krājbanka.
Read more
Skrastiņš & Dzenis has successfully represented Latvian company in a shareholders’ dispute
Skrastiņš & Dzenis attorneys-at-law have provided legal assistance and represented the client – a limited liability company, in a shareholders’ dispute regarding the legality of a shareholders’ meeting’s decision.
Read more
