The Supreme Arbitration Court of Russia has decided to deny the plaintiff — the representatives of UC, «Russian Aluminium» — in the review of the case to invalidate decisions taken at the annual meeting of shareholders, «Norilsk Nickel» in June 2010, when the question of the composition of the operational management of MMC. Recall that at the event the board of directors of «Norilsk nickel» were elected three of the promoted «RUSAL» candidates, while on the «Interros» to the board were four candidates, although both sides possessed the same weight stake.

Representatives OK «Russian Aluminium» questioned the legality of the meeting outcome, and appealed to the Arbitration Court of Krasnoyarsk Territory with the appropriate claim. The judges acknowledged the decision of the shareholders, «Norilsk Nickel» legitimate, but «RUSAL» did not leave attempts to «restore justice» and the company's lawyers have filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Arbitration Court of Russia, which — in March of this year — they refused to review the case. The press service of MMC noted that such actions YOU once again confirm the legitimacy of the company's management decisions and the validity of his actions for the benefit of shareholders.

The conflict between Vladimir Potanin and Oleg Deripaska (owners of the «Interros» and «RUSAL») lasted since 2008. But the above claim — not the first, and obviously not the last attempt OK «Russian Aluminium» official questioning management decisions, «Norilsk Nickel». According to analysts, the differences between these companies adversely affect the financial stability of the MMC and in the interests of all the «Norilsk Nickel» shareholders should be resolved as soon as possible.