Report: Gazprom yet to receive redemption from Naftogaz Ukrainy

MOSCOW, Dec 25 (PRIME) -- Russian gas giant Gazprom has not yet received a U.S. $2.019 billion redemption that the Stockholm Arbitration Court ordered Ukraine’s Naftogaz Ukrainy to pay, Gazprom Deputy CEO Alexander Medvedev said in an interview to Rossiya 24 television channel broadcast on Monday.

On December 22, Gazprom said that the court also lowered the annual contracted amount of gas to be bought by the Ukrainian company to 5 billion cubic meters, leaving the take-or-pay condition in force for 80% of the amount.

“So far, we have not yet received no money or fines for overdue payment. The delay continues, and it amounts to $1.8 million for the three past days,” Medvedev said, adding that a fine for the arrears stands at $600,000 per day.

He also said that Gazprom is satisfied with the decision of the court. “We think that the major point of Gazprom’s suit has been completely satisfied, and we think that the way the Ukrainian side sees it can be called ‘you spit in his eye and he will reply it’s just dew from the sky’,” he said.

Complete satisfaction of all claims under the take-or-pay condition would bankrupt not only Naftogaz Ukrainy, but the entire country of Ukraine as well, he said.

Gazprom is ready to sell the 5 billion cubic meters of gas to Ukraine, and is waiting for a relevant request, but will satisfy it only on condition of prepayment, he said.

On December 22, Naftogaz Ukrainy CEO Andrei Kobolev said that the company disagreed that outstanding liabilities to Gazprom amount to $2 billion. He said that there is a positive difference in favor of Gazprom, but it was too early to mention the exact amount. According to Naftogaz Ukrainy’s earlier statement, the court completely voided Gazprom’s take-or-pay condition.

Medvedev said that Naftogaz Ukrainy had provided wrong information to Ukraine’s President Pyotr Poroshenko on the suit.

“President Poroshenko announced a complete and flawless victory, which is very odd and makes us wonder whether he had been informed about the real results of the arbitration case, because the court had acknowledged all major conditions of the contract as viable,” he said.

End