Case Law Telenor East Inv. As. v. Altimo Hold. & Inv. Ltd.

Telenor East Inv. As. v. Altimo Hold. & Inv. Ltd.

Document Cited Authorities (42) Cited in (28) Related

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, by: Robert L. Sills, Esq., Jay K. Musoff, Esq., New York, NY, Peter O'Driscoll, Esq., United Kingdom, for Plaintiff Telenor East Invest AS.

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP, by: Ronald S. Rolfe, Esq., New York,' NY, for Defendants Altimo Holdings & Investments Limited, Crown Finance Foundation, and Rightmarch Limited.

Lovells LLP, by: Hillel I. Parness, Esq., Edward T. Schorr, Esq., Gonzalo S. Zeballos, Esq., New York, NY, for Defendants Eco Telecom Limited and CTF Holdings Limited.

OPINION

CHIN, District Judge.

In this securities case, plaintiff Telenor East Invest AS ("Telenor East") alleges that defendants committed insider trading, conducted an illegal tender offer, and filed misleading disclosure statements in connection with their purchase of shares in Open Joint Stock Company Vimpel-Communications ("VimpelCom"), a Russian telecommunications company traded on the New York Stock Exchange. The complaint charges five counts under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act").

Defendants move to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and 9(b) and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the "PSLRA"), 15 U.S.C. §§ 78u-4(b)(1)-(3). In the alternative, they move to stay this action and to compel arbitration. For the reasons set forth below, the motion to stay and compel arbitration is denied and the motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part.

BACKGROUND
A. The Facts

The following facts are drawn from the amended complaint and the documents in-corporated by reference. For purposes of the motion to dismiss, the facts alleged in the amended complaint are assumed to be true.

1. The Parties

Telenor East is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Telenor ASA, Norway's largest telecommunications provider and a corporation that invests in mobile telecommunication companies around the world. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 8-9).

Defendants are Altimo Holdings & Investments Limited ("Altimo"), Eco Telecom Limited ("Eco Telecom"), CTF Holdings Limited ("CTF"), Crown Finance Foundation ("Crown"), and Rightmarch Limited ("Rightmarch"). Together, they comprise the Alfa Group Consortium (the "Alfa Group"), one of Russia's largest privately owned financial-industrial groups.1 (Id. ¶ 10-15).

2. The Shareholders Agreement

Telenor East and Eco Telecom are VimpelCom shareholders. On May 30, 2001, they entered into an agreement (the "Shareholders Agreement") governing their nominating of candidates to VimpelCom's Board of Directors (the "Board"). (Id. ¶ 21). The Shareholders Agreement gave Telenor East and Eco Telecom each the right to nominate four candidates to the nine-member Board, provided that each named an independent as one of their nominees. (Id.; Sills Decl. Ex. C at § 4.01). The Shareholders Agreement specified, however, that if either party acquired between 44% and 50% of Vimpel-Com's voting capital stock, that party became a "Plurality Shareholder" and was not required to name an independent as one of its nominees. (Am. Compl. ¶ 21; Sills Decl. Ex. C at § 4.01). The Shareholders Agreement further provided that it would terminate if either party's ownership of voting capital stock rose above 50% or fell below 25%. (Sills Decl. Ex. C at Art. V(b)-(c)).

Section 6.13 of the Shareholders Agreement contained an arbitration clause, which provided:

Any and all disputes and controversies arising under, relating to or in connection with this Agreement shall be settled by arbitration by a panel of three (3) arbitrators under the United Nations Commission on International Trade law (UNCITRAL) Arbitration Rules then in force.

(Id. at § 6.13).

3. The Parties' Ownership of Vimpel-Com Stock

In December 1998, Telenor East acquired approximately 25.7% of the voting capital stock of VimpelCom. (Am. Compl. ¶ 20). As of the filing of the amended complaint, Telenor East owned approximately 29.9% of VimpelCom's capital stock. (Id). On or about November 5, 2001, Eco Telecom purchased approximately 5 million shares of VimpelCom stock. (Id. ¶ 22). Thereafter, Eco Telecom continued to increase its shares of VimpelCom stock so that as of August 29, 2006, it owned approximately 32.9% of VimpelCom's voting stock. (Id). As of the date of the amended complaint, Eco Telecom's beneficial ownership of VimpelCom voting stock had increased to approximately 44.00001%. (Id ¶ 12). Hence, from August 2006 to July 2007, Eco Telecom increased its ownership of VimpelCom's voting shares from 32.9% to 44.0001%.

4. Request for Approval to Acquire 60

On May 26, 2005, Eco Telecom, Altimo, CTF, and Crown Finance (the "Alfa Reporting Persons") filed an amendment to their Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") 13D filing2 that disclosed that Eco Telecom had requested approval from the Russian Federal Anti-Monopoly Service (the "FAS") to acquire 60% plus one share of VimpelCom. (Id. ¶ 39). The following month, they clarified that this request represented a defensive move and that they would only pursue majority control of VimpelCom if Telenor attempted to do so. (Id. II68).

5. The Rightmarch Transaction

On August 15, 2006, VimpelCom emailed its second quarter 2006 financial results to the Board's Finance Committee, of which Altimo Senior Vice President Oleg Malis was a member. (Id. ¶ 24). One week later, it emailed those results to the rest of the Board, whose members included Mikhail Fridman, Chairman of Altimo's Supervisory Group, and Alexey Reznikovich, Alitmo's CEO and a member of the Alfa Group's Supervisory Board. (Id.).

On September 1, 2006, VimpelCom released to the public its second quarter financial results, which showed substantial increases in subscribers, revenues, and net income. (Id. ¶ 34). Members of the VimpelCom Board who were controlled by defendants were in possession of this favorable, material information before it was made public. (Id.).

During the eight trading days between August 29, 2006 and September 8, 2006, VimpelCom ADSs traded very heavily, far above its average trading volume, and its closing price increased from $50.26 to $59.90. (Id. ¶ 25).

On September 6, the Alfa Reporting Persons filed a 13D/A that disclosed a transaction between Rightmarch and Jam Holding Asset Management Ltd. ("Jam"),3 memorialized in a "Master Confirmation" dated August 30, 2006 (the "Rightmarch Transaction"). (Id. ¶ 27). Neither Rightmarch nor Jam joined in the filing. (Id. ¶ 31). The September 6 13D/A indicated that Jam had previously agreed to sell VimpelCom American Depositary Shares ("ADSs") in its possession to Rightmarch on any date between October 26, 2006 and January 1, 2007. (Id. ¶ 30). It did not disclose the price or number of ADSs Rightmarch intended to purchase from Jams. (Id.).

6. 2006 Russian Anti-Monopoly Law

On October 26, 2006, a Russian anti-monopoly law came into effect that would allow the Alfa Group to acquire up to 50% of VimpelCom's voting shares without the approval of the FAS. (Id. ¶ 33). In advance of that date, the Alfa Reporting Persons filed an October 10 13D/A explaining that they had entered the Rightmarch Transaction "through a wholly owned affiliate to attempt to assure the availability of additional Common Shares in VimpelCom should the Reporting Person[s] seek to acquire such shares as a result of the effectiveness of the new Anti-monopoly law." (Id. ¶ 35). In a November 22 13D/A, they reported that Eco Telecom had received 6,597,900 VimpelCom ADSs purchased by Jam. (Id ¶ 37). They did not disclose the prices that either Eco Telecom or Jams had paid for those ADSs. (Id).

7. The Eco Telecom-Deutsche Bank Transactions

In March 2007, the Alfa Reporting Persons filed a series of 13D/As that disclosed that Eco Telecom had entered into purchase agreements with Deutsche Bank to purchase VimpelCom ADSs. (Id ¶¶ 41-47). Among them, a March 13 13D/A disclosed that Eco Telecom had issued $1.5 billion in bonds to Deutsche Bank, guaranteed by Altimo and secured by 9,349,999 shares of VimpelCom stock. (Id ¶ 47). The next day, Altimo issued a press release stating that it intended to use the proceeds of the Deutsche Bank loan "to develop its investment projects in emerging mobile communications markets in Eurasia," particularly "in South and South East Asia." (Id ¶ 51). A June 30, 2007 FOXNews.com article quoted a Deutsche Bank spokesperson as stating, however, that $350 million of the loan was to refinance Altimo's debt, with "the rest" going to buy more shares in VimpelCom. (Id ¶ 52).

On March 16, 2007, VimpelCom emailed its Board members, including Fridman, Reznikovich, and Malis, its proposals and financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2006. (Id). Five days later, before the information became public, the Alfa Reporting Persons filed a 13D/A indicating that Eco Telecom had acquired 4,915,200 VimpelCom ADSs through previously disclosed transactions with Deutsche Bank. (Id. ¶ 54). It also indicated that Eco Telecom had acquired additional shares through brokered transactions with other "significant shareholders" and open market purchases between March 15 and March 20, increasing its voting stock to 42.4%.4 (Id.).

On June 13, 2007, after this action was commenced, the Alfa Reporting Persons filed a 13D/A disclosing the prices they had paid for ADSs referenced in earlier amendments. (Id. ¶ 59). Two weeks later, they reported that Rightmarch had acquired additional ADSs on June 25 and transferred them to Eco Telecom, bringing Eco Telecom's holdings of voting shares to slightly over 44%. (Id ¶ 60).

B. Procedural History

Plaintiff filed a complaint in this Court on June 6, 2007, asserting...

5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York – 2018
Brown Media Corp. v. K & L Gates, LLP
"..."In short, a plaintiff must set forth the who, what, when, where and how of the alleged fraud." Telenor E. Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Invs. Ltd. , 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 441–42 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). "Fraud must be pleaded with particularity while ..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York – 2018
Spinnato v. Unity of Omaha Life Ins. Co.
"..."In short, a plaintiff must set forth the who, what, when, where and how of the alleged fraud." Telenor E. Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Invs. Ltd. , 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 441–42 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). "Fraud must be pleaded with particularity while ..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York – 2011
U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Verdiramo
"...Section 13(d) nor Section 16(a) “require[s] a showing of scienter to establish liability.” Telenor East Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Investments Ltd., 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 442 (S.D.N.Y.2008); see also SEC v. McNulty, No. 94 Civ. 7114, 1996 WL 422259, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 1996); Sierra B..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut – 2018
In re Tangoe, Inc.
"...Report accompanying proposed § 14(e), S. Rep. No. 510, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968) ); see also Telenor E. Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Investments Ltd. , 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) ("Largely modeled after section 10(b), it prohibits material misstatements, omissions, and fraud..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Delaware – 2015
Del. Trust Co. v. Energy Future Intermediate Holdings, LLC (In re Energy Future Holding Corp.), Bankruptcy Case No. 14–10979–CSS Jointly Administered
"...certain disclosure rules when offering securities publicly for sale or exchange. See, e.g., Telenor E. Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Investments Ltd., 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 442 (S.D.N.Y.2008). The fact that the SEC's oversight in chapter 11 cases is relatively limited does not suggest that it..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
1 books and journal articles
Document | Corporate Counsel Guides: Corporation Law – 2012
Federal And State Takeover Laws
"...Supp. 1248, 1251 (W.D. Okla. 1972) (i nding a tender offer to have occurred). See also, e.g. , Telenor East Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Invs. Ltd., 567 F. Supp. 2d 432, 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (noting the difference between those in need of protection of the Act and those who do not; specii ..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
1 books and journal articles
Document | Corporate Counsel Guides: Corporation Law – 2012
Federal And State Takeover Laws
"...Supp. 1248, 1251 (W.D. Okla. 1972) (i nding a tender offer to have occurred). See also, e.g. , Telenor East Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Invs. Ltd., 567 F. Supp. 2d 432, 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (noting the difference between those in need of protection of the Act and those who do not; specii ..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York – 2018
Brown Media Corp. v. K & L Gates, LLP
"..."In short, a plaintiff must set forth the who, what, when, where and how of the alleged fraud." Telenor E. Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Invs. Ltd. , 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 441–42 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). "Fraud must be pleaded with particularity while ..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York – 2018
Spinnato v. Unity of Omaha Life Ins. Co.
"..."In short, a plaintiff must set forth the who, what, when, where and how of the alleged fraud." Telenor E. Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Invs. Ltd. , 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 441–42 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). "Fraud must be pleaded with particularity while ..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York – 2011
U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Verdiramo
"...Section 13(d) nor Section 16(a) “require[s] a showing of scienter to establish liability.” Telenor East Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Investments Ltd., 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 442 (S.D.N.Y.2008); see also SEC v. McNulty, No. 94 Civ. 7114, 1996 WL 422259, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 1996); Sierra B..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut – 2018
In re Tangoe, Inc.
"...Report accompanying proposed § 14(e), S. Rep. No. 510, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968) ); see also Telenor E. Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Investments Ltd. , 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) ("Largely modeled after section 10(b), it prohibits material misstatements, omissions, and fraud..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Delaware – 2015
Del. Trust Co. v. Energy Future Intermediate Holdings, LLC (In re Energy Future Holding Corp.), Bankruptcy Case No. 14–10979–CSS Jointly Administered
"...certain disclosure rules when offering securities publicly for sale or exchange. See, e.g., Telenor E. Invest AS v. Altimo Holdings & Investments Ltd., 567 F.Supp.2d 432, 442 (S.D.N.Y.2008). The fact that the SEC's oversight in chapter 11 cases is relatively limited does not suggest that it..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex