Kanametova v OSG Records Management: High Court upholds arbitrator's finding of backdated agreement

In Zalina Kanametova v OSG Records Management (Europe) Limited [2026] EWHC 1196 (Comm), His Honour Judge Cadwallader dismissed a section 67 challenge brought by the former general director of OSG Russia against an LCIA arbitral award that had upheld a jurisdictional challenge to her claim for approximately USD 1.3 million under a Long Term Incentive agreement.

The claimant, Zalina Kanametova, contended that the LTI Agreement had been executed on 8 October 2015 by Krzysztof Bobrowski, then CEO of OSG Records Management (Europe) Limited, a Cyprus-incorporated holding company. OSG denied that Bobrowski had authority to execute the document at the relevant time, arguing instead that it had been signed sometime between February and May 2020 and backdated.

The tribunal, sole arbitrator Rosalind Phelps KC, found in OSG's favour on jurisdiction following a three-day hearing. Kanametova's section 67 challenge represented a full rehearing, with the court not bound by the award, though obliged to examine it with care where its reasoning was persuasive.

The funding question

A significant development arose from a pre-trial disclosure order obtained by OSG concerning the claimant's litigation funding. The material disclosed in December 2025 revealed that Bobrowski had paid all of Kanametova's legal fees since the commencement of the challenge, as well as three tranches of security for costs totalling in excess of USD 1 million. Both the claimant and Bobrowski had meanwhile continued to describe him as an independent witness.

HHJ Cadwallader found this conduct to be "not the behaviour of an independent witness," and held that it significantly undermined the credibility of both. The absence of any written funding agreement, and the failure to produce documentary evidence of the alleged cryptocurrency reimbursements despite request, compounded the difficulty.

The documentary record

The contemporaneous documentation proved fatal to the claimant's case. Internal Elbrus communications from late 2016 indicated that those closest to the matter did not believe an executed agreement existed. An email from Sergey Panarin in November 2016 stated as fact that "ZK's option agreement was never execute[d], though there were attempts in 2015 (we have draft forms)." A spreadsheet circulated in March 2017 described Bobrowski's agreement as "executed" and Kanametova's as "draft." Crucially, Bobrowski did not correct this characterisation at the time.

The court also drew adverse inferences from the claimant's failure to produce communications directed by the tribunal. Her explanation that she had lost email access, destroyed two mobile telephones and was unable to retrieve WhatsApp messages was described as "an implausible trail of mishaps."

The company seal

The presence of OSG's company seal on the agreement had formed a central plank of the claimant's case, on the basis that Bobrowski had returned the seal in April 2019 and therefore could not have applied it in 2020. HHJ Cadwallader rejected this argument. He found that Bobrowski had lied about the events of October 2015 in concert with the claimant, and that it was more likely than not he had also lied about returning the seal. The DHL waybill produced in evidence named neither sender nor recipient, and privileged correspondence, though demonstrating an intention to return the seal, did not confirm that this had occurred.

The court concluded that the LTI Agreement was not executed in October 2015, that no valid arbitration agreement existed between the parties, and that the arbitrator had been correct to find that she lacked jurisdiction. The claim was dismissed.