Leaked Files Suggest Abramovich Aide Falsified Evidence in 2008 UK Oil Dispute

Key points

• Leaked documents suggest Eugene Tenenbaum misled the UK High Court in 2008 by denying knowledge of the Sibneft-Yugra joint venture, despite authorizing related transactions in 2003.
• The 2008 case involved a dispute between Abramovich’s Sibneft and Chalva Tchigirinsky’s Sibir Energy over the dilution of Sibir’s stake in Siberian oil fields.
• The leaked files, part of the Cyprus Confidential investigation, reveal a systematic practice of backdating over 1,000 documents between 1999 and 2013 to hide assets and evade taxes.
• Deloitte Cyprus and its spin-off Meritservus are implicated in falsifying financial records, including erasing a $2bn tax liability and concealing luxury assets like the Fyning Hill estate.
• Abramovich and Tenenbaum deny wrongdoing, stating they relied on professional advice, while Deloitte claims compliance with laws but cannot access the old files.

Background

This story builds on earlier coverage from our archive regarding the Cyprus Confidential leak, which detailed a decade-long scheme to hide Abramovich’s wealth via backdated documents. Previous reports highlighted the involvement of Deloitte and Meritservus in falsifying over 1,000 documents to conceal assets and evade taxes. The current development adds a new dimension by linking these falsified records to a specific legal proceeding in the UK, suggesting that the integrity of the 2008 court judgment may have been compromised.

How outlets are covering it

The BBC and The Guardian present a consistent narrative that the leaked documents expose a coordinated effort to mislead the UK court and evade taxes. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) focuses on the specific act of presenting sham documents to the London high court. All sources agree that Abramovich and Tenenbaum deny the allegations, with their lawyers emphasizing reliance on professional advice. Deloitte’s response is uniform across sources, stating compliance with laws but inability to access the old files. Experts cited by the BBC and The Guardian, such as Andrew Mitchell KC, describe the actions as potential perjury and tax evasion, while forensic accountants note that the backdating appears fraudulent rather than legitimate.

Why it matters

This case raises serious questions about the integrity of the UK legal system and the role of major professional firms like Deloitte in facilitating financial misconduct. It highlights how offshore structures and backdated documents can be used to obscure the true ownership and value of assets, potentially undermining the fairness of legal proceedings. The implications extend beyond Abramovich, touching on broader issues of tax evasion, asset concealment, and the accountability of professional advisers in the financial sector.

What to watch

There may be further legal or regulatory scrutiny of the individuals and firms involved, particularly Deloitte and Meritservus, given the allegations of falsifying documents and evading taxes. The UK authorities may investigate the 2008 court case to determine if the evidence was indeed misleading. Additionally, the findings could lead to increased scrutiny of offshore financial practices and the role of professional advisers in facilitating such schemes.