For years, a European manufacturer had been working with a Russian distributor under deferred payment terms (90 days). Volumes grew, the relationship was stable — until war, sanctions, and Russia’s disconnection from SWIFT made traditional payments impossible.

The distributor invoked force majeure and claimed inability to pay. The debt remained — and continued to grow.

At first glance, the situation looked predictable: the client had every chance of winning arbitration. Contractual obligations were clear, and the legal position well-documented.

But soon it became clear: a legal victory doesn’t guarantee enforcement — especially if the enforcement system itself is blocked.

The counterparty was located in Russia, where international rulings were not enforceable. On top of that, sanctions and currency controls created a situation where even if the debtor agreed to pay, transferring the funds to Europe became legally and technically impossible.

In this reality, traditional enforcement became irrelevant: courts had no reach, and transfers had no routes.

We developed a strategy that didn’t fight the system — it bypassed it.

Anahata Solutions conducted a comprehensive analysis — legal, financial, regulatory, and operational — and identified leverage points that allowed enforcement through alternative channels:

—  We identified the counterparty’s assets outside Russia, including stock inventory, contracts, and accounts;

—  We assessed solvency not only formally, but through indirect indicators such as contract flows, transaction volumes, and control structures;

—  We prepared an Expert Opinion answering key questions — from jurisdictional strategy to confirmation of real asset control.

A key turning point was deep analytics that allowed us not just to “search for assets,” but to reconstruct the debtor’s full operational behavior.

We mapped the corporate structure, uncovered open and hidden links between companies, and tracked the movement of goods and funds.
Special attention was given to payment logic: who paid whom, how, whether suppliers were duplicated, and how financial flows were distributed.

Through this, we:

—  Identified an affiliated company that handled part of the international transactions;

—  Located assets in neutral jurisdictions that could be used as compensation resources;

—  Modeled the debtor’s likely responses to financial and business pressure based on their market dynamics.

This intelligence became the foundation for building an influence strategy — including choosing a jurisdiction where enforcement could be executed without obstacles.

nstead of engaging with the Russian court system, the client was able to recover funds through the swift enforcement of assets in a jurisdiction not affected by sanctions.

This approach avoided lengthy arbitration in Russia, minimized the risk of asset “evaporation,” and significantly reduced the legal and financial costs associated with enforcement.