RosCo lawyers helped the company restore access to account servicing through the court

ONSE LLC entered into a remote banking service agreement (hereinafter referred to as RBS) with Sberbank PJSC.

Sberbank notified ONSE LLC of the application of restrictive measures to the current account due to the discrepancy between the documents and the "actual activity". After that, the bank refused to carry out several payment transactions for "glass fabric" under the supply agreement with “Polotsk-Steklovolokno” CJSC.

An attempt to settle the dispute out of court was unsuccessful. The bank left the complaint unanswered, and the restrictive measures against the applicant were not lifted. After that, the company's representatives filed a claim with the Arbitration Court of Moscow against Sberbank to recognize the restriction of access to the RBS system in relation to the current account as illegal. The plaintiff demanded that the current account be restored taking into account the changes adopted by the court in accordance with Article 49 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the APC of the RF).

The plaintiff's representative, a lawyer for RosCo, supported the claims at the court hearing and asked the court to satisfy them. The defendant's representative spoke out against this.

According to the plaintiff's representative, ONSE LLC provided the bank with documents confirming the reality of the transaction: supply agreements, specifications, invoices, acts, etc. The reality of the business transactions was additionally confirmed by an explanatory letter from the company's counterparty, “Polotsk-Steklovolokno” CJSC.

The defendant insisted that he acted strictly in accordance with the requirements of anti-money laundering legislation (clause 2 of Article 7, paragraph 3, clause 2 of Article 7 of Federal Law No. 115-ФЗ dated from August 7, 2001).

According to the arbitration court, the defendant's arguments were not confirmed. The defendant did not provide evidence that the bank acted in accordance with the requirements of Federal Law N. 115-ФЗ of August 7, 2001. Namely, that the transactions carried out by ONSE LLC:

• were confusing in nature;

• had no economic sense;

• were carried out for illegal purposes (money laundering, terrorist financing, etc.).

The court emphasized that there were no grounds for suspending the company's access to the DBO system for the current account.

Verdict: the actions of Sberbank PJSC are recognized as illegal. Obligate the bank to restore the DBO of the current account and collect in favor of ONSE LLC the costs of paying the state fee is 12,000 rubles.