The court upheld Deripaska’s claim against Romanova in the case of words about PMCs – Kommersant
[ad_1]
The Tagansky Court of Moscow upheld the claim of billionaire Oleg Deripaska against human rights activist and head of the Sitting Rus’ Foundation (declared a foreign agent) Olga Romanova (declared a foreign agent). The billionaire filed a lawsuit to protect his honor, dignity and business reputation after Olga Romanova stated in an interview that the businessman owns a number of private military companies (PMCs). The entrepreneur’s lawyer Alexey Melnikov told TASS and RTVI about this.
The plaintiff demanded that Olga Romanova refute the information about Oleg Deripaska on her personal Twitter page (now X). The decision will come into force in 30 days unless Olga Romanova appeals it. For each day of non-compliance with the court decision, a fine of 10 thousand rubles will be imposed.
In an interview with the founder of the online publication The Bell (declared a foreign agent), journalist Elizaveta Osetinskaya (declared a foreign agent), Olga Romanova stated that Oleg Deripaska owns two PMCs that operate in the south of Ukraine. She also called the businessman “the main military man” in Russia. In the lawsuit, the billionaire’s defense indicated that the information about his ownership of two PMCs “is not true and is slander.”
Initially, the billionaire filed a lawsuit against Elizaveta Osetinskaya, however recalled him after this fragment of the interview was removed from the YouTube channel. The claims against Olga Romanova were expanded, since the same statements were made in an interview with journalist Katerina Gordeeva.
The businessman’s lawyer, Alexei Melnikov, said that Twitter was chosen as a platform for refutation because the plaintiff did not want to “create difficulties” for Olga Romanova, who, according to him, is “an active user of this site.” Oleg Deripaska in his lawsuit refers to the experience of “Citizen P”, who, like him, “was credited with the creation of PMCs in Russia, but the court recognized this information as defamatory.”
[ad_2]
Source link
