Overview

International law firm McDermott Will & Schulte act for Tecnimont S.p.A. and MT Russia LLC (together, the “Claimants”), subsidiaries of MAIRE S.p.A. (“MAIRE”), in ongoing ICC arbitration proceedings seated in London (the “Arbitration”) against LLC EuroChem North-West-2 (“EuroChem LLC”) and EuroChem Group AG (“EuroChem AG” and, together with EuroChem LLC, “EuroChem”).

Having participated in the Arbitration for more than three years and having therefore indisputably submitted to the exclusive jurisdiction of the ICC arbitral tribunal (the “Tribunal”), EuroChem LLC has recently commenced various actions before the Russian courts concerning the same matters being determined in the Arbitration (the “Unlawful Russian Actions”) and in clear breach of the parties’ agreement to arbitrate. The Claimants obtained orders from the Tribunal restraining the Unlawful Russian Actions, which orders were also breached by EuroChem LLC. The Claimants then sought relief from the English High Court to enforce the Tribunal’s orders and obtained an order (endorsed with a penal notice) from Mr Justice Butcher on 21 November 2025 which required EuroChem LLC to comply with the Tribunal’s directions and to withdraw the Unlawful Russian Actions and discharge certain interim relief already obtained thereunder (the “Butcher Order”). EuroChem LLC has failed to comply with its terms, including by not withdrawing the Unlawful Russian Actions.

Access the judgment underpinning the Butcher Order.

Further detail

In 2020, the Claimants and EuroChem LLC entered into various agreements concerning the construction of a major fertiliser plant in Kingisepp, Russia, for EuroChem (the “Agreements”). As a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the imposition of increased financial and trade sanctions (including the designation of EuroChem’s owner, Mr Andrey Igorevich Melnichenko), the Claimants lawfully suspended their services under the Agreements in May-July 2022. Subsequently, EuroChem LLC unlawfully terminated the Agreements, alleging that the Claimants had failed to properly perform their services and denying that it was owned and controlled by Mr Melnichenko.

As explained in this press release, McDermott then also represented Tecnimont S.p.A. as a non-cause of action defendant, and Part 20 defendant, in parallel proceedings before the English courts concerning the attempted enforcement by EuroChem of certain performance bonds totalling €212 million issued by Société Générale and ING Bank (the “Banks”) to secure the obligations of the Claimants under the Agreements. The Banks refused to make payment to EuroChem under the bonds on the basis that, amongst other things, to do so would breach EU sanctions as EuroChem is owned and controlled by Mr Melnichenko, who remains designated as an individual “responsible for actions which undermine or threaten the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.” On 31 July 2025, Mr Justice Bright in the English Commercial Court found in favour of the Banks and Tecnimont S.p.A. and dismissed EuroChem’s claims (the “Bright Judgement”). Access a copy of the judgment.

As a result of the adverse findings in the Bright Judgment, which support the Claimants’ decision to suspend their services under the Agreements and, therefore, their position in the Arbitration, EuroChem LLC performed the ultimate volte-face by seeking to move the dispute to its home courts in Russia by commencing the Unlawful Russian Actions. On 2 September 2025, EuroChem LLC issued an action before the Moscow Arbitrazh Court seeking the same relief as its counterclaims in the Arbitration (the “Moscow Action”). In the Moscow Action, EuroChem LLC also obtained an interim order against the Claimants freezing the Claimant’s movable and immovable property up to an amount of approximately EUR 100 million. In addition, on 2 October 2025, EuroChem LLC issued two separate anti-arbitration applications before the St. Petersburg Arbitrazh Court against the Claimants, seeking an order restraining the Claimants from continuing with the Arbitration (the “St. Petersburg Actions”).

Both sets of Unlawful Russian Actions rely on the so-called Lugovoy Law (Article 248 of the Russian Arbitrazh Code), which effectively enables Russian Courts to ignore the impact (whether as a matter of fact or law) of EU sanctions.

In response to the Unlawful Russian Actions, the Claimants obtained several orders from the Tribunal, unanimously deprecating the actions of EuroChem LLC and requiring it to withdraw and/or discharge the actions before the Russian courts. Having repeatedly breached the Tribunal’s orders, the Tribunal issued peremptory orders within the meaning of Section 41(5) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (the “Peremptory Orders”).

EuroChem LLC failed to comply with the Peremptory Orders and so the Claimants issued proceedings before the English Commercial Court on 17 October 2025 under Section 42 of the Arbitration Act 1996, with an expedited timetable. On 21 November 2025, Mr Justice Butcher made the Burcher Order, granting an injunction under penal notice requiring EuroChem LLC to comply with the Peremptory Orders and withdraw each of the Moscow and the St. Petersburg Actions. Mr Justice Butcher was wholly unpersuaded on every argument raised by EuroChem LLC, in particular holding that the Tribunal did have the power to issue interim anti-suit relief by way of the Peremptory Orders and that the director of EuroChem LLC did not face a real risk of prosecution in Russia if he was to cause EuroChem LLC to withdraw the Unlawful Russian Actions. Mr Justice Butcher also denied a subsequent application from EuroChem LLC seeking a stay of execution in respect of his order.

EuroChem LLC has permission to appeal Mr Justice Butcher’s judgment on the alleged ground that Parliament intended for orders under Sections 41 and s.42 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to be concerned with a party’s conduct of the arbitral reference, and this does not include orders restraining the pursuit of different proceedings in a different forum. The Claimants contend that this single ground of appeal is at odds with the natural meaning of words used in section 41(5) of the Arbitration Act 1996, which refer to “any orders or directions of the tribunal” (emphasis added) such that the provisions cannot be read in the narrow manner contended for by EuroChem LLC.

Despite the Butcher Order, EuroChem LLC did not withdraw the Unlawful Russian Actions and on 27 November 2025, only two months after the claim was issued, the hearing of the Moscow Action went ahead on the merits, without the benefit of any documentary or expert evidence, with the Moscow Arbitrazh Court awarding EuroChem LLC approximately EUR 1.9 billion. The Claimants consider such decision to be plainly wrong, in breach of the Tribunal’s Peremptory Orders and the Butcher Order, and indicative of a complete absence of due process in the Russian Courts.

MAIRE, the Claimants’ parent company, issued a press release on the 28th of November, 2025, stating amongst other things: “MAIRE Group will vigorously challenge the unlawful actions of [EuroChem LLC] and [EuroChem AG], and any other person doing anything to infringe the rights of MAIRE and its affiliates violating multiple orders and directions issued by an international arbitral tribunal and the English court”.

The Maire entities in the Arbitration and parallel English court litigation are represented by the disputes team of McDermott Will & Schulte, led by partners Milo Molfa, Alfonso Annibale De Marco, Jack Thorne and David Kiefer, supported by associates William Merry, James McGlaughlin, Jonathan Robb and William Evans in London, Mariafiore Miniussi in Milan, Maxime Delabarre in Paris, and Maria Cristina Rosales del Prado and Ignacio Zabala Alonso in Washington DC. Alan Maclean KC and Tom Leary, both of Blackstone Chambers in London, acted as counsel for Tecnimont in the English Court litigation.

Leading organizations turn to global law firm McDermott Will & Schulte for a better way to address legal challenges, connect with those at the forefront, and drive stronger outcomes. Working across more than 20 offices globally, our 1,750+ lawyers act on data-driven insights, deep relationships, and unmatched industry experience to deliver on our commitment of Always Better.