The Legal 500

Law Firm VARUL

KONSTITUCIJOS AVENUE 7, 09308 VILNIUS, LITHUANIA
Tel:
Work +370 5 248 7337
Fax:
Fax +370 5 248 7338
Email:
Web:
www.varul.com
Vilnius, Tartu, Tallinn, Riga

Lithuania

Recommendations


Lithuania

Within Banking and finance, Varul, Law Firm is a third tier firm,

Law Firm Varul is highly regarded for large-scale project financings, and regularly assists borrowers in obtaining financing and structuring complex transactions. It recently assisted Vilnius City municipality in concluding the largest PPP deal in Lithuanian history. It also advised Euro Providus on the implementation of a new consumer financing model. The team is ‘very thorough, attentive, fast and professional’. Liutauras Baikštys is the main contact.

[back to top]

Within Corporate and M&A, Varul, Law Firm is a second tier firm,

At Law Firm Varul, Marius Devyžis is an ‘exceptionally result-oriented dealmaker known for his thorough work and patience in negotiations’, and co-heads the team with Robert Juodka. ‘The proper functioning of the team and the commitment of the lawyers enable it to give professional advice on short notice even on very specific topics.’ Its recent work includes assisting with the negotiated takeover of a portfolio of assets, and advising a building materials provider on a €25m acquisition.

[back to top]

Within Dispute resolution, Varul, Law Firm is a third tier firm,

Law Firm Varul has ‘very good understanding of business ideas, and excellent understanding of clients’ needs and goals’. The team is best known for handling public procurement, construction and EU funding issues. Head of the practice Paulius Docka is ‘a result-oriented lawyer, and is capable of managing complicated situations’.

[back to top]

Within EU and competition, Varul, Law Firm is a third tier firm,

Giedrė Dailidėnaitė heads a ‘highly competent and mature’ team at Law Firm Varul which advises clients on state aid, competition clearance issues, antitrust regulation and cartel agreements. Robert Juodka has ‘strong and deep knowledge of national, regional and international law and judicial precedents’.

[back to top]

Within Intellectual property, Varul, Law Firm is a third tier firm,

Robert Juodka and Gediminas Pranevičius head the IP team at Law Firm Varul, which is acting for TNS in disputes with local companies, and is also assisting EKSPLA in concluding a multi-jurisdictional joint venture agreement with South Korea’s EO Technics, including advising on IP transfers and the protection of IP rights.

[back to top]

Within Real estate and construction, tier 4

Law Firm Varul advises clients on complex real estate, planning, zoning and construction matters as well as on PPP projects, and has ‘excellent knowledge’. Robert Juodka and Tomas Venckus assisted Invest Lithuania in conjunction with the Ministry of Environment and the Territory Planning Inspection in reforming the existing regulatory regime.

[back to top]

Within Shipping and transport, Varul, Law Firm is a second tier firm,

Law Firm Varul is advising Dobeles Dzirnavnieks in negotiations with Norfa and other major retail chains in relation to product delivery and logistics. Michelin is also a key client, the team assisting with transport and tyre safety regulation issues. Robert Juodka heads the team.

[back to top]

Within TMT, tier 4

Law Firm Varul is assisting Lingjob with complex IP, IT, finance and tax law matters relating to the setting up of its website. It also advises Infotrust on IT product licences and the development of client-tailored modules. Marius Devyžis heads the team.

[back to top]


Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • Update on EU Sanctions against Russia

    On 6 December 2014, Council Regulation (EU) No 1290/2014 entered into force. This regulation is the latest in a series of regulations regarding "sectoral sanctions" against Russia.
  • Slovakia: Checkmate? New law regulates protection of employees when blowing the whistle

    So far, in Slovakia there has not been in force any regulation specifically addressing whistleblowing situations in which employees report wrongdoings, such as the commission of a crime which they learnt about in connection with the performance of their employment, work or function. Certain partial aspects related to whistleblowing have been regulated by the country's data protection, criminal and labour laws. read more
  • Croatia: A look at the Strategic Investment Projects Act One Year after Implementation

    Croatia's sixth consecutive year of recession
  • AT: Transparency International – Release of 20th annual Corruption Perceptions Index

    On 3 December 2014, Transparency International, the leading civil society organisation fighting corruption worldwide, released its 20th annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). The index draws on surveys covering the views of business people, provides expert assessments, and ranks 175 countries by the perceived levels of corruption in their public sectors. The scale ranges from 0 (perceived to be highly corrupt) to 100 (perceived to be very clean). The CPI can be found under the following link .  read more...
  • Review of the Constitutional Court Decision on the Cancellation of Article 42/1 (C) of Law No. 556

    Introduction
  • Transfer and Granting of Rights under Turkish Petroleum Law: Freedom of Contract versus Regulatory R

    Especially after the drop in oil prices the companies that are in early stage of their investments have begun to get position aiming to turn into an advantageous investment and started to look to what extent the regulations allow them to transfer and grant their rights under Turkish Petroleum Law. This may be deemed also as an exit strategy for some from operational perspective as it parallels with the tendency around the world and has direct relation with oil prices. 
  • Contracting the Petroleum Operations under Turkish Petroleum Law: Scope and Limits of Liability on P

    As exception to liberty of contracting and unlike a number of other industries, Turkey's petroleum industry imposes certain obligations to petroleum right owners in contracting the conduct of the petroleum operations.  At the first glance this seems that it aims to strengthen the management of hazards by enhancing the safety however the liability imposed to petroleum right owners in case of contracting the operations still remains unclear in terms of limitation.
  • Liabilities of Primary Employer and Subcontractors in case of a Collusive Contract

    Growing economy and competitive environment in Turkey has been leading companies to seek more profitable ways to conduct their business. Therefore companies have chosen to engage in subcontracts for the purpose of reducing their costs. Yet, to serve such purpose, at some point companies have started utilizing subcontracts to limit employees' entitlements through collusive contracts. Labor Law numbered 4857 (the " Labor Law ") and Bylaw on Subcontractor dated September 27, 2008 (the " Bylaw ") regulate which services or works may be subcontracted and strictly prohibit collusive contracts. According to Article 2/7 of the Labor Law, a collusive subcontract is considered null and void. Such nullity of subcontract automatically results in primary employers being redefined as main and sole employers of employees assigned to subcontracted work. Consequently, primary employers are solely responsible for employees' rights arising from subcontracted works and technically, primary employers would not have the option to recourse to subcontractors in order to claim any compensation due to their sole responsibility.
  • Boundaries of the Turkish Competition Authority’s Investigative Powers

    Boundaries of the Turkish Competition Authority's Investigative Powers: Case Handlers vs. Personal Property
  • Potential Consequences of Acquisitions of Minority Shareholdings under Turkish Competition Law

    The acquisition of a minority shareholding may come under the Turkish Competition Authority's (" Authority ") scrutiny in two ways, mainly: 1) it may result in de facto or de jure sole or joint control, depending on the rights possessed by the minority shareholders and/or shareholding structures and past voting patterns; and 2) it may not result in control but in cross-shareholding structures amongst competitors in a concentrated market which may raise questions about coordinated effects. This article discusses the circumstances under which the abovementioned consequences may arise under Turkish competition law with references to the relevant legislation and the most noteworthy cases in this regard.