Commentary: Russian IPOs - hoping East keeps on meeting West
As a cautious breed, lawyers are often the last to get excited about what they read in the press. So when claims emerged last week that Russian aluminium giant RUSAL was planning to turn its back on London in favour of a float in Hong Kong, many senior capital markets lawyers were yet to press the panic button. But whether or not there are any legs to the story, one firm that should view such talk as a warning shot is Ashurst. The City firm is advising on the listing alongside Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, but would risk losing its role if the offer moves away from London, as it has no office in Hong Kong.The stakes are considerable - Ashurst has advised RUSAL, the world's largest aluminium producer, on most of its biggest corporate deals to date, a track record that has made the company one of its most lucrative clients. The firm is currently advising on its acquisition of a stake in Norilsk Nickel and took a lead role on its $30bn (£15.2bn) merger with Sual in 2006.
February 06, 2008 at 10:43 PM
4 minute read
As a cautious breed, lawyers are often the last to get excited about what they read in the press. So when claims emerged last week that Russian aluminium giant RUSAL was planning to turn its back on London in favour of a float in Hong Kong, many senior capital markets lawyers were yet to press the panic button.
But whether or not there are any legs to the story, one firm that should view such talk as a warning shot is Ashurst. The City firm is advising on the listing alongside Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, but would risk losing its role if the offer moves away from London, as it has no office in Hong Kong.
The stakes are considerable – Ashurst has advised RUSAL, the world's largest aluminium producer, on most of its biggest corporate deals to date, a track record that has made the company one of its most lucrative clients. The firm is currently advising on its acquisition of a stake in Norilsk Nickel and took a lead role on its $30bn (£15.2bn) merger with Sual in 2006.
This must have made it particularly irksome when Cleary, underlining the substantial inroads it has made with Russian clients in recent years, secured a major role on the float. Should the listing, which has been valued at around $9bn (£4.6bn), go to Asia, the US-based law firm's impeccable securities credentials would surely make it first in line for the mandate.
Nevertheless, RUSAL-watchers are yet to be convinced that the deal will migrate to Asia. For a start, a float is unlikely in the short term as the Norilsk takeover has yet to close and the Russian company has shown little appetite for testing the market in anything but very robust conditions. It was only last March that RUSAL announced it intended to list within three years, which gives it plenty of time for the allure of London to return.
Diplomatic tensions
Still, it will not only be Ashurst hoping that the company sticks with London, considering the number of international law firms currently targeting Russia. A key area of concern is one of the issues cited as a reason for RUSAL to avoid London: the souring of diplomatic relations between Russia and the UK in the wake of the 2006 assassination of Alexander Litvinenko in London.
Many major Russian companies have already floated: Rosneft, Lukoil, Gazprom, Severstal and VTB – last year's biggest. But speak to any capital markets partner in Moscow and they will tell you there are a host of smaller but sizeable listings to come, which could be turn away from London if the political situation were to escalate.
Another issue for UK lawyers is whether the growing competition from emerging market exchanges and rival centres in Europe will start to hit London's securities work. Investor interest in Hong Kong is one thing, but smaller companies will also be tempted by Frankfurt, which is actively courting Russian companies, and Singapore, which is setting up a rival to London's junior market. Meanwhile, Moscow is seeing increasing float sizes, and the Middle East also has a number of growing exchanges.
In this setting, even if RUSAL does end up floating in London, the recent turn of events has highlighted a wider issue for firms such as Ashurst, which know their relative lack of foreign capability puts them at a disadvantage compared with the international securities strength of firms such as Cleary and some of London's largest firms. Of course, it is early days and the Square Mile has seen off plenty of threats in its day but London lawyers, however cautious, will be watching this one very closely.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllIs KPMG’s Arizona ABS Strategy a Turning Point in U.S. Law? What London’s Experience Reveals
5 minute readKPMG Moves to Provide Legal Services in the US—Now All Eyes Are on Its Big Four Peers
International Arbitration: Key Developments of 2024 and Emerging Trends for 2025
4 minute readThe Quiet Revolution: Private Equity’s Calculated Push Into Law Firms
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'A More Nuanced Issue': NJ Supreme Court Considers Appellate Rules for Personal Injury Judgments
- 2Drake Sues UMG for Defamation Over Promotion of False Claims of Pedophilia
- 3Quinn Emanuel Files Countersuit Against DOJ in Row Over Premerger Reporting
- 4High Court Rejects 'Heightened' Standard for Employers Defending FLSA Cases
- 5Case With 'Serious Consequences for Corporate Law' Heads to Texas Supreme Court
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250