Anahata Solutions

An international team of experts specializing in complex commercial disputes: including commercial arbitration, regulatory conflicts, loss recovery, infrastructure tenders, and more. We help clients achieve transparency in complex environments, ensure alignment of actions, and maintain control over critical data.

An international team
of experts specializing
in complex commercial disputes: including commercial arbitration, regulatory conflicts, loss recovery, infrastructure tenders, and more.
We help clients achieve transparency in complex environments, ensure alignment of actions,
and maintain control
over critical data.

Since 2015

We combine legal, managerial, and financial analysis to define both the strategic position and the way to reach it.

An external strategic partner who transforms fragmented information into a comprehensive picture of assets, connections, and risks, increasing clarity in the project while reducing hidden risks and unnecessary costs.

Anahata Solutions

What holds back progress in resolving a cross-border commercial dispute?

001.

Lack of access to critical information

In cross-border disputes, essential data on assets, beneficiaries, transactions, or corporate structure is often deliberately concealed or protected by local disclosure restrictions. This complicates strategic positioning, weakens decision-making, and limits project control.

002.

Fragmented and unusable information

In international disputes, large volumes of data accumulate from multiple jurisdictions, business entities, and events. Without structure, it’s impossible to identify what matters most, establish cause-and-effect links, and build a coherent case study. In a highly dynamic environment, this prevents decision-making, weakens positioning, and delays team engagement in execution.

003.

Uncertainty in choosing the right course of action

In international disputes, there is no single scenario. The choice of arbitration, jurisdiction, or action plan leads to different outcomes. Without access to relevant information and a framework for comparison, the team operates on assumptions, making alignment difficult, weakening arguments, and increasing the risk of strategic mistakes.

004.

Loss of direction due to unstructured actions

Responding to the other party’s moves, addressing regulatory inquiries, clarifying procedural documents, and handling other forced actions gradually erode control over the conflict and weaken strategic planning. The team shifts into a reactive mode, focusing on activities rather than project management.

005.

Lack of execution infrastructure

Legal expertise in the project may be well-structured. However, once a decision is obtained, there is often no team or tools in place to carry it out. This includes asset tracing, valuation, enforcement, freezing, and recovery of hidden assets.

001.

Lack of access to critical information 

In cross-border disputes, essential data on assets, beneficiaries, transactions, or corporate structure
is often deliberately concealed or protected by local disclosure restrictions. This complicates strategic positioning, weakens decision-making, and limits project control.

002.

Fragmented and unusable information 

In international disputes, large volumes
of data accumulate from multiple jurisdictions, business entities, and events. Without structure, it’s impossible to identify what matters most, establish cause-and-effect links, and build a coherent case study. In a highly dynamic environment, this prevents decision-making, weakens positioning, and delays team engagement in execution. 

003.

Uncertainty in choosing the right course

In international disputes, there is no single scenario — the choice of arbitration, jurisdiction, or action plan
leads to different outcomes. Without access to relevant information and a framework for comparison, the team operates on assumptions, making alignment difficult, weakening arguments, and increasing the risk
of strategic mistakes.

004.

Loss of direction from unstructured actions

Responding to the other party’s moves,
addressing regulatory inquiries, clarifying
procedural documents, and handling other forced actions gradually erode control over the conflict
and weaken strategic planning. The team shifts
into a reactive mode, focusing on execution rather
than project management.

005.

Lack of execution infrastructure

Legal expertise in the project may be well-structured, but once a decision is obtained, there’s no team
or tools in place to carry it out — from asset tracing and valuation to enforcement, freezing, and recovery of hidden assets. 

Create more impact in less time

Productivity

Efficiency

Strategy

Focus

Results

Challenges that require solutions

Expert Opinion

Justifying a position in an international dispute requires an independent opinion on the substance of local law.

A controversial issue arises due to ambiguous case law, unclear legislative interpretation, or specific factual circumstances, requiring expert resolution.

The project involves too many high-risk and hard-to-predict factors in a cross-border conflict.

The project's progress calls for an independent expert assessment requested by compliance, the board of directors, or other stakeholders.

The project data is unstructured: multiple jurisdictions, complex asset structure, and a large volume of chaotic information.

Challenges that require solutions

Data Research

When verified data is missing, the team is unable to make strategic decisions or assess risks.

There is no complete picture of the debtor’s assets, structure, and affiliated entities.

Information is fragmented or outdated, so most efforts are spent on filtering and searching.

The relevant jurisdiction remains unclear due to insufficient analysis and legal guidance.

Actions are initiated without assessing feasibility, which creates a gap between strategy and execution.

Challenges that require solutions

Project Transformation

The strategy is no longer relevant because roles, KPIs, and execution focus have not been updated.

There is no functional focus as roles overlap or critical expertise is missing.

Costs exceed the budget, and resource decisions are made reactively.

Implementation slows down due to shifting context, ad hoc actions, and active resistance from debtors.

The project is blocked by sanctions, asset freezes, or account suspensions, and there’s no adaptation plan.

Challenges that require solutions

Resolution Mode

It’s difficult to launch the project due to the lack of a roadmap toward the outcome.

The project involves significant expenses, but there’s no transparent resolution scenarios, so the financial.

Uncontrolled risks are identified at the outset, and they cannot be assessed without modeling.

There is no methodology for evaluating risks and scenarios — the financial consequences of decisions remain unclear.

There’s no control over processes or risk forecasting within the project.

Challenges that require solutions

Execution

The project has entered the active phase, but key roles and responsibilities remain undefined.

Multiple teams are involved, yet there’s no unified operational plan or coordination framework.

Tasks are being completed, but there’s no system to track progress against strategic objectives.

Budget and resources are being consumed rapidly without transparent performance metrics.

Emerging issues are addressed reactively, with no mechanism for anticipating or containing them.