Update of 2 July 2025. Please read my latest update about a Latvian criminal case on death threats and how scandalously famous Juris Stukāns, the Latvian Prosecutor General, helps criminals - the Russian oligarchs.

 

__________________________________________________________

PETITION 

 

EPIGRAPH (PART 1)

Events of May - July 2023. Quotes from emails (now being investigated by UK and Latvian police) about

• THE ORDER OF RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS TO KILL ME BY POISONING IN CONNECTION WITH MY BRITISH LAWSUIT AGAINST THEM and
• their total corruption in the UK through the British lawyer Edward Crosse of Simmons & Simmons LLP in order to pervert the course of justice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The story connected with these emails and previous events is partially described in the article of The Mirror of 7 July, which quotes the comment of the London police - "Detective Inspector Michael O’Sullivan said: "We have had a report of malicious communications. We treat any such allegations seriously. We will not be commenting further at this stage"."

Despite the fact that these emails have become the subject of two criminal investigations in two countries (the UK and Latvia), and despite my request to the Court of Appeal to transfer the civil case as a whole to law enforcement agencies (including in order to find out whether perverting the course of justice takes place due to corruption), Lord Justice Bean, in a decision dated 11 August 2023, recognizes my arguments that I am a victim in these two criminal cases “totally without merits”. Lord Justice Bean did this without explaining in any way the reasons for such an extremely strange conclusion.

Detailed information about the decisions of Lord Justice Bean is contained in the update series, which started on 26 August and finished on 21 September. The update of 26 August contains my open letter to Lord Justice Bean, in which, having given specific and very eloquent arguments, I call his decisions knowingly illegal and that this is the result of CORRUPTION, which is repeatedly mentioned in the emails cited above (which became the subject of two criminal investigations). In subsequent updates, I have provided a detailed justification for my accusations against Lord Justice Bean.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EPIGRAPH (PART2)

Events of 2018-2021. Various death threats from the same Russian oligarchs against me and even my children with demands that my British lawsuit CL-2016-000831 in the High Court of Justice) against them be dropped.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A more complete, BUT NOT EXHAUSTIVE, list of 37 (!!!) such death threats, together with the decision of the Latvian Police to initiate criminal proceedings on the facts of death threats, is here.

 

                                    Important preamble

I am very grateful to the journalists who describe these monstrous events.

In particular, I thank the journalists of The Mirror, who on 7 July described the story about ordering my murder by poisoning, as well as the real attempts to kill me that were committed earlier in Russia in a generally dangerous way (by staging as accidents with my cars).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I thank the journalists of the Daily Mail, who on 26 February also described the attempts to kill me and the shocking death threats against me and my children with the demand to drop the English lawsuit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I thank the journalists of the DailyStar, who also in February described these shocking events. 

 

I thank the journalists of Orato World Media for their January publication about the same. The article is titled "Man battles Russian Oligarchs in court, survives assassination attempts”, which speaks for itself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The article describes (1) repeated attempts to kill me; (2) constant death threats against me and even my children with demands to drop the English lawsuit; (3) a crazy criminal case fabricated in Russia against me, with the help of which they tried to take me hostage and blackmailed me; (4) my flight to Europe, where I was granted asylum and international protection. And all this is a "reward" to me from Putin's oligarchs for the fact that I once saved them from prison and ruin.

 

Special thanks to the journalists of one of the American human rights channels who aired my detailed interview on 1 March. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The main topic of which is the export of corruption by Russian oligarchs to Western countries. Using specific examples, I have demonstrated how this happens in relation to my story described in the petition. We talked about how destructive the export of corruption is for Western countries and the need to stop it.

 

I thank those journalists who are now showing interest in this monstrous story. I think that I am still alive only thanks to the journalists and this petition (and your support, of course).

 

                                       PETITION

The purpose of this petition to the British and Latvian authorities - I demand to prosecute the super-rich Putin's oligarchs for crimes (extortion, corruption and others) committed in the UK and EU.

                                      Main theses:

• Putin's oligarchs, who are defendants in my lawsuit in the High Court (case CL-2016-000831), have repeatedly threatened me and even my children with murder, demanding that the lawsuit be dropped.
• Later, these oligarchs, also under threats of murder, demanded that I assign the plaintiff's rights to persons associated with them (that is, in their own words, they tried to capture the lawsuit). By doing this, they directly warned me that they would bribe my British lawyers and even judges.
• As a result, Putin's oligarchs have really bribed my British lawyers. On 12 January 2023 an investigation was initiated by the Legal Ombudsman (UK) in respect of one such case related to my former British lawyers (law firm Candey). The reason for investigation is as follows: on the eve of the deadline for submitting a response to the defendants' applications of more than 2,600 pages my lawyers began to aggressively insist that our response should be formulated on 3-5 pages, consist exclusively of headlines and hints and with no confirming evidence.
• The High Court of Justice of England and Wales (deputy judge Mr Beltrami KC) forbid me to continue the proceedings WITHOUT LAWYERS (WHO HAD BEEN BRIBED BY THE
  DEFENDANTS - OLIGARCHS), effectively depriving me of access to justice.
• This deputy judge (Mr Beltrami KC) turned out to be CLOSELY ASSOCIATED WITH THE LAWYERS OF THESE RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS AND, CONTRARY TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDE TO JUDICIAL CONDUCT, HAS NOT DISCLOSED THIS FACT, depriving me of the opportunity to apply for his recusal.
• After that the High Court with the reference to the decision of Mr Beltrami KC actually terminated the lawsuit without consideration on the merits and ordered me to pay several million pounds as compensation for the costs of the Russian oligarchs, WHO BRIBED MY LAWYERS AND DESPITE ALL THE ENORMITY OF THEIR BEHAVIOR.

_______________________________________________________________

Information about these Russian oligarchs, me and the background of the court case

The defendants in case CL-2016-000831 are the Russian oligarchs who own one of the largest Russian companies PhosAgro (listed on the London Stock Exchange) and one of which (Mr Guryev) is known as the owner of the most luxurious real estate in England (Witanhurst Palace worth 300 million pounds, second only to Buckingham Palace, and a four-story penthouse in London's tallest skyscraper, as discovered by investigative journalists).

Mr Guryev and his son, who headed PhosAgro, have been included in the sanctions lists of the US, UK, EU, Australia and other countries after the Putin regime started the crazy war in Ukraine. The US authorities, for example, justified these sanctions as follows:

• “A.G. Guryev is a known close associate of RF President Vladimir Putin and previously served in the Government of the RF; he was appointed to the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in 2001, where he served until 2013. A.G. Guryev owns the Witanhurst estate, which is the second-largest estate in London after Buckingham Palace”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOWEVER, EVEN THEIR INCLUSION IN THE SANCTIONS LISTS DOES NOT STOP THEM FROM CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES IN THE UK AND EU.

In England, these oligarchs actively lobby for their interests, using ties with the English elite. For example, PhosAgro's board of directors has been chaired in recent years by the former head of the London Stock Exchange, Mr Xavier Rolet, who stepped down only after he was criticized for working for the oligarchs close to Putin, who started the war in Ukraine.

The filing of the lawsuit was preceded by the criminal actions of these oligarchs (the criminality of their actions is confirmed by the opinions of several lawyers), as a result of which I essentially turned out to be a beggar. At the same time, I didn’t do anything bad to them, but on the contrary, I brought them a profit of about $ 1 billion. However, after I fulfilled my obligations, they changed their minds about fulfilling their obligations, and moreover, with the help of fraudulent actions, they created my artificial debt to them. That is, instead of receiving remuneration for my work, I myself became to be a debtor of these oligarchs under fraudulent loan agreements drawn up in secret from me and subject to English law. At the same time, these oligarchs:

• Repeatedly threatened me and my children with murder, demanding to drop the lawsuit, in connection with which a criminal case was recently opened in Europe.
• Fabricated a criminal case against me in Russia, with the help of which they demanded that I drop my claims. In Russia, I was arrested in absentia, but managed to leave Russia. Interpol, at my request, stopped my international search, and the European authorities (Latvia) granted me refugee status due to persecution by the Russian oligarchs close to Putin.

An eloquent description of the criminal case fabricated against me was given by my 70-year-old former lawyer Valery Stepanov, widely known in Russia, in his witness statement for the English court:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• “From my many years of experience I can declare that I have never met a stranger and more absurd criminal case and have never heard of anything like it. In terms of the number and quality of elementary violations, this criminal case has no analogues. I am convinced that this criminal case is completely fabricated and was initiated not with the aim of investigating something, but with the aim of being used as an instrument of the crime committed against Sychev, that is, to be an instrument of illegal pressure on Sychev in the conflict with PhosAgro”.

Shortly after submitting of this testimony to the defendants, Mr Stepanov died in Russia under very strange circumstances, about which the defendants did not hide their joy. Shortly before his death, Valery Stepanov told me that they tried to hack his WhatsApp account, which he connected with his participation as a witness in my case.

I will cite a few more eloquent quotations from this witness statement:

• “Sychev called me and asked me to come to his home to participate as his lawyer during the search. I arrived about two hours later, during which the search took place in the absence of a lawyer. About 10 people took part in the search, there was also a dog handler with a dog. As attesting witnesses, there were two people whom Sychev knew as members of the security service of PhosAgro. Investigator Gall A.E. at the same time assured us that this is an absolutely random coincidence, which, of course, is impossible to believe”.
• “Later it became known to me that just at that time, negotiations were taking place with Sychev, initiated by the mediator Kondratyev, who acted in his own words on behalf of Antoshin [the former CEO of PhosAfro and one of the defendants]. The demands on Sychev, voiced by Kondratyev, boiled down to the fact that the amount of obligations to him would decrease several times and that Sychev had to pay 4 million dollars. For this, Sychev was promised the termination of the criminal case against him, as well as non-presentation of demands for the return of $ 5 million transferred under loan agreements. Sychev recorded his conversations with Kondratyev on a dictaphone. I listened to them and can confirm that this is nothing more than extortion committed against Sychev in order to significantly reduce the amount of obligations to him, as well as extortion of a bribe in the amount of $ 4 million. In addition, threats of physical elimination were voiced against Sychev. It was against the background of these negotiations, which lasted several weeks, that the indictment of Sychev was repeatedly postponed”.
• “After that, lawyer Lashevich [PhosAgro's lawyer] contacted lawyer Dergachev [my second Russin lawyer] twice. He offered to end the criminal prosecution of Sychev on the condition that he renounce all demands against PhosAgro and Antoshin. At the same time, it was proposed to formalize the termination of criminal prosecution through the recognition of Sychev as insane. Both meetings are described by lawyer Dergachev in emails dated 08/20/16 and 02/03/21. A similar demand to Sychev was ‘sent’ through Kirill Trukhanov [another PhosAgro's lawyer]. In this case, this demand was voiced by him in England to the Sychev's lawyer Katerina Haslam-Jones. I know that at the same time, Mr. Trukhanov, commenting on Sychev's lawsuit in England, said that PhosAgro's financial capabilities are incomparable with Sychev's financial capabilities and that his claim will be "crushed" for this reason”.
• ”Sychev, in about 2018, introduced me to an audio recording of his telephone conversation with Mr. Lushkin [person affiliated with PhosAgro], during which the latter actually repeatedly threatened Sychev with murder in Latvia if Sychev did not drop his claim in England. I confirm that these are precisely murder threats and that the demand repeatedly voiced by Mr. Lushkin boils down to a demand to drop the claim in England”.

______________________________________________________________

                                       EXTORTION EPISODE 1

(The death threats of 2018 against me and even my children with demands to drop the court claim)

The lawsuit was filed back in 2016, but the defendants avoided receiving notifications of the lawsuit for several years. During this time period, I received regular death threats from them, accompanied by demands to drop the claim. These threats were addressed not only to me, but even to my minor children. Some quotes (from audio recordings):

• “I want your children to be alive and well”.
• “You don’t understand that you can be killed today or tomorrow, Igor?! Especially since everyone knows that you are in Riga, everyone knows!”
• “Stop the court claim, you will save your life, do you understand?!”
• “Drop the claim! You will lose your wife and children!”

The incomplete list of such threats includes 37 (!!!) positions. In addition to these direct threats, accompanied by the direct demands to drop the lawsuit, I receive veiled threats, such as emails from fake addresses offering to book my funeral in advance with the promise of a £500 discount.

In Latvia, where I have been living as a refugee since 2016, the criminal case was opened in October 2022 on these death threats.

However, the investigation is clearly being slowed down with full clarity of the picture and so far, no one has been brought to criminal responsibility. In addition, without explaining the reasons, my demands are ignored to reclassify part of the death threats from just death threats (this crime is insignificant) to extortion under death threats, criminal liability for which reaches 12 years of imprisonment with confiscation of property. Therefore, I had to send an application to the Prosecutor General of Latvia, Mr Juris Stukāns, and I am waiting for his decision.

The lower prosecutor motivated the refusal to reclassify death threats to extortion under death threats by the fact that the property claims and threats were allegedly not sufficiently insistent.

In paragraph 4 of my application to the Prosecutor General of Latvia in relation to one of several cases of explicit extortion, I gave the verbatim content of 8 (!!!) fragments during a 21-minute conversation with a representative of the oligarchs containing monstrous threats and at the same time demands to drop the lawsuit. This verbatim description is based on an audio recording available here.

In paragraph 5, I summed it up: “I am absolutely sure that when during a 21-minute conversation 8 (!!!) monstrous death threats are being made (not only against me, but even against my wife and children), accompanied by property demands, no one can have any doubts about whether these threats and demands can be considered insistent. They are extremely and excessively insistent!”

_____________________________________________________________                                        

                                        EXTORTION EPISODE 2

An attempt of 2021 to capture the lawsuit under death threats, ACCOMPANIED BY THE WORDS THAT THE OLIGARCHS WILL BRIBE MY BRITISH LAWYERS AND EVEN JUDGES

In 2021, I finally managed to notify the defendants of the lawsuit and the proceedings moved into the active stage. Against this background, the defendants sent some people to me who, threatening to kill, demanded that I assign the plaintiff's rights to these persons (that is, in their own words, they tried to capture the lawsuit).

• This story is described, for example, in my interview of August 2022.
• Making these demands, these people substantiated them by the promises that this would eliminate the threat of my contract killing by the defendants. These threats are described in lines 16-27 of the list of threats investigated by the Latvian police.
• In addition, these people directly warned me that THE DEFENDANTS WILL BRIBE MY BRITISH LAWYERS AND EVEN JUDGES. Verbatim transcripts of these fragments with links to the audio recordings are available here. That is how the words about the bribery of English judges sounded:

   

  “Bobylev: Look, Igor, I have such a question. Imagine that I am you. I am Igor Sychev, and you are the judge. And here sits our defendant [Mr Guryev]. Please tell me, now you are a judge and you are A BRIBED JUDGE. This is not possible in the English court, but we will imagine for a moment that you are THE BRIBED JUDGE. What would you cling to to make a decision not in my favor? Here you are the judge, you are THE BRIBED JUDGE, you need to cling to something. The judge is guided, except for his wig, by his conscience, he is not guided by anything else, this is in any legislation of the world. Now, what would you say? What would A RIBED JUDGE cling to?

  Me: I can't even imagine.

  Bobylev: Is everything going so fine for you? But in principle, we were told the same thing”.

The death threats of 2021 are also the subject of the investigation by the Latvian police, however, with all the clarity of the picture (it is known on the basis of the supporting audio recordings who exactly made the threats, when, under what circumstances), no one has been still brought to criminal responsibility for this series of episodes so far either.

Also, for this series of episodes, the Latvian police refuses to reclassify crimes from just death threats to extortion under death threats, motivating by the same thing – allegedly insufficient insistence of the demands and threats. On this occasion, in paragraph 14 of my application to the Prosecutor General of Latvia, I wrote the following: “Information about specific threats, indicating the date and who exactly made the threats and demands, and with an audio recording attached for each specific case, is contained in the following paragraphs of this detailed document: 41-42 (several threats at once), 79, 94, 98, 99, 117, 122, 138, 139, 141, 143, that is, in aggregate at least 11 times, and if we take into account that during a personal meeting in Riga on 21.06.21 (paragraphs 41-42) threats were voiced repeatedly in various forms (at least 5, directly indicated in paragraph 41), then we will get 15 (!!!) times in total. Isn't that insistent enough?!”

Summing up the events of 2018 and 2021, in paragraph 20 of the application to the Prosecutor General of Latvia, I wrote the following: “Thus, with regard to the events of 2018 and 2021, it is extremely obvious that death threats accompanied by property demands were more than insistent. IN TOTAL, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AT LEAST 25 SEPARATE FACTS OF DEATH THREATS ACCOMPANIED BY PROPERTY DEMANDS. If such a huge amount is not enough to consider these threats and demands insistent, then it is difficult for me to imagine what can then be considered insistence".

__________________________________________________________

        Bribery by the Russian oligarchs of my British lawyers

                            First case

The story of bribing my British lawyers (law firm Candey) is also described in my interview of August 2022. In order not to retell this story, I will quote my recent open letter addressed to these lawyers (the letter remained unanswered). In short, my lawyers began insistently and even aggressively demanding that my response to the 2,600 pages of documents of the Russian oligarchs be formulated only on 3-5 pages and consist only of headings and hints.

1. I refer to our previous correspondence on the issue that you, being the lawyers representing the claimants in the case CL-2016-000831 (that is, me) in August of last year, colluded with the defendants (were bribed by them). 

2. I have to contact you again because there will be two court hearings in the CL-2016-000831 case in the near future and the question of why the claimants are not represented by lawyers is always raised.

3. I explicitly state in court documents and during hearings that the defendants have colluded with my last solicitors (that is, you), which resulted in your acting not in the best interests of your clients, but in the interests of the opposite party. Namely, on the eve of the deadline, you began aggressively insisting that the claimants' response to the defendants' applications of more than 2,600 pages should be formulated on 3-5 pages and consist exclusively of headlines and hints (more about this is in the transcript of our last two conversations, which I reattach for convenience).

4. At the same time, it was intended that the following information should be provided on these 3-5 pages: (a) forging by the defendants of the main evidence used by them in these proceedings; (b) the knowingly false nature of five expert opinions that the defendants submitted; (c) the threats of the defendants to kill me, including the threats, accompanied by the demands to drop the lawsuit; (d) the fact that the defendants have fabricated the criminal case against me; (e) the other numerous facts of wrongdoing on the part of the defendants.

5. For any adequate person (not only for a lawyer), it is obvious that if such information is presented on 3-5 pages (and only in the form of headlines and hints) and does not include evidence confirming this information, it will be simply ridiculous, stupid and strange, and any everyman will raise questions about the adequacy of lawyers who give such advice. You have refused to answer my questions and comments on this matter, both during the time when our contract was still in effect and in subsequent correspondence.

6. At the same time, when I directly accused you of colluding with the defendants during the termination of our agreement on my initiative, you threatened me with criminal prosecution for spreading such information. Hoping that I would not double-check your threats, you have deceived me by claiming that there is criminal liability for libel in the UK.

7. In addition to (1) not answering my legitimate questions about the adequacy of your advice and (2) aggressively threatening me with various legal consequences if I spread information about your bribing by the defendants, you also began to demand payment of 165 thousand pounds from me, without even answering the most primitive questions about how this amount was calculated. In particular, I refer to your letter of 14 October 2021.

8. That information, for the distribution of which you diligently frightened me, has already become public in the UK, and the article about this was published in an authoritative legal newspaper more than a month ago.

9. Earlier (in August) this information has become public in Latvia.

10. I know for certain that neither the defendants nor you tried to take any measures to refute the information that has become public. At the same time, in Latvia, unlike the UK, there is criminal liability for defamation. It was in Latvia that such information was first published. 

11. I take your behavior as confirmation of the fact that it is already obvious to any sane person that you have colluded with the defendants (were bribed by them), which is a serious crime.

12. I demand to explain by the end of the day on 1 December why you did not implement your numerous threats and do not take any measures at all to refute the information about the defendants' bribery of you. I once again insist on my accusations and give you one last opportunity to present a reasonable alternative explanation for your extremely strange (for any layman) behavior (1) both in August 2021, when you aggressively were giving me extremely strange advice, (2) and now, when information about the bribery has become public, but you, despite all your previous threats, do not take any measures that you threatened if this information is distributed.

13. Until a reasonable explanation appears, I consider the fact that the defendants have bribed you proved (if we talk about the civil law standard of proof, then there is not the slightest doubt about this). The details of how the conspiracy and receipt of the bribe took place can and should be established by the investigating authorities.

14. This letter is open (public).

Of course, there is no response from Candey even to this open letter.

                           

                                 The second case

As for the story related to Signature Litigation, it is described in the update of 28 January.

________________________________________________________

Deputy Judge of the High Court of England and Wales, Mr Beltrami KC, HIDING FROM ME HIS CLOSE TIES WITH THE LAWYERS OF THE OLIGARCHS, after bribery by them of my lawyers, essentially deprived me of access to justice EXACTLY ON THAT BASIS THAT NOW I HAVE NO LAWYERS (!!!)

So, after the monstrous lawlessness described above only partially, I had the last hope to achieve justice in the English court, which is famous for its fairness, integrity, incorruptibility and impartiality, but my hopes have been ruined.

Blocking, in fact, access to justice for me, deputy judge Mr Beltrami KC wrote in his judgment literally the following:

• “Given the constraints of the application and the timing of the hearing I have not engaged in -- and I want to be absolutely clear about this -- the details or the merits of any of those allegations. It would be quite wrong for me do so, and I say nothing about them either way because I cannot do so. What I can say, and as is relevant to the application, is that the fact that such widespread allegations have been made is itself, in my judgment, a very strong factor against the application. Such allegations are easy to make but difficult to substantiate. <...> In summary, I see the fact of the allegations as a very strong contrary factor against the application”.

This judgment has not been published anywhere, and it was about my request that I personally, in the absence of lawyers, could represent the interests of the plaintiffs, since there is no one else can represent them, because (1) as a result of the fraudulent behavior of the defendants, I was left without money and cannot pay for the services of lawyers, and (2) those lawyers who agreed to work on the terms of “no win – no fee” were bribed by the Russian oligarchs in the most primitive way.

After the hearing conducted by Mr Beltrami KC, I found out from publicly available sources that he had been working for the lawyers of these Russian oligarchs for many years, and their relationship became so close that Mr Beltrami KC's son began working for Simmons & Simmons, representing these Russian oligarchs.

This information was not disclosed to me either before or during the court hearing, despite the fact that the Guide to Judicial Conduct states:

• “If there are circumstances which may give rise to a suggestion of bias, or appearance of bias, if possible, they should be disclosed to the parties well before the hearing. Disclosure, followed by recusal on the day of the hearing, will almost certainly involve additional costs for the parties and will frequently cause listing difficulties. However, listing arrangements in many courts may render notification in advance impossible. Disclosure should of course be to all parties and, save when the issue has been resolved by correspondence before the hearing, discussion between the officeholder and the parties as to what procedure to follow should normally be in open court”.

That is, due to non-disclosure of information, I was deprived of the opportunity to apply for recusal of Mr Beltrami KC, who turned out to be closely connected with the lawyers of the Russian oligarchs and who actually made a fateful decision in their favor, without considering at least one argument on the merits.

In the future, I tried to ensure that I could continue conducting the case in person without lawyers, but my attempts were stopped by the High Court with reference to the decision of Mr Beltrami KC, and on 9 December, Mr Justice Picken actually terminated the lawsuit without consideration on the merits and obliged me to compensate the defendants for the costs they incurred for conducting the case, which it cannot be continued actually due to the lack of lawyers.

At the last hearing before Mr Justice Picken, I tried at least to ensure that the costs of these Russian oligarchs were not shifted to me, who, as a result of the defendants' fraudulent actions, essentially became a beggar. In support of my request, I referred to the fact that, according to the several direct provisions of the law (Rules 44.2(4)-(5) and 44.4(3) and 44.11 of the Civil Procedure Rules), when considering issues of costs, the conduct of the parties both prior to and during the proceedings should be taken into account.

In particular, I referred to the enormity of the behavior of the Russian oligarchs who fraudulently deceived me; fabricated the criminal case with which they blackmailed me; repeatedly threatened me and my family members with murder, demanding to drop the claim - that is, to those facts that have irrefutable confirmation. But Mr Justice Picken considered that these irrefutably proven facts of the monstrous behavior of the Russian super-rich oligarchs should not be taken into account as their negative behavior and decided that I should compensate these oligarchs for costs in the full amount requested by them.

                                            CONCLUSION

                                              I DEMAND:

• That the corrupt activities of the Russian oligarchs and their British lawyer Edward Crosse of Simmons & Simmons be thoroughly investigated.

• That the Latvian and British authorities prosecute these Russian oligarchs for extortion under the death threats against me, my family member and even my children. This is a very serious crime both under the laws of Latvia and the UK (punishment up to 14 years in prison with the confiscation of property).

• That the British authorities Investigate bribery by the Russian oligarchs of my British lawyers, which is a very serious crime both for those who gave a bribe (the Russian oligarchs) and for those who took it.

• That the British authorities investigate why exactly Mr Beltrami KC has been appointed as the judge who made the fateful decision and why he did not recuse himself and did not even disclose to me information about his close ties with the lawyers of the Russian oligarchs.

• That the British authorities investigate whether the story with deputy judge Mr Beltrami KC (as well as with all subsequent judges who referred to the decision of Mr Beltrami KC) was THE RESULT OF CORRUPTION, which the Russian oligarchs warned me about, demanding under the death threats to assign the lawsuit to related persons. I believe that this is exactly the case!

• That my lawsuit against these Russian oligarchs be referred by the Court of Appeal and/or the High Court to the National Crime Agency. 
• That decision of Lord Justice Bean be investigated to find out whether they are the result of CORRUPTION aimed at perverting the course of justice.

I am sure that if the illegal activities of Putin's super-rich oligarchs in the UK and EU do not receive a proper legal assessment from the British and European authorities, it will provoke them to further illegal actions and undermine faith in British public institutions. This lawlessness must be stopped!