What is an attorney (advokat), and how do they differ from a lawyer?

An attorney is a lawyer who has passed the bar examination and holds a special status with special rights and duties: attorney–client privilege, the warrant of attorney, formal attorney enquiries — and the exclusive right to act as defence counsel in criminal cases. Everyone at this bar association is an attorney; their status can be verified in the Moscow register of attorneys, and for the Mariupol office in the register of attorneys of the Donetsk People’s Republic.

How is the agreement concluded and the fee paid?

The legal-assistance agreement is concluded directly between you and the attorney. The fee is paid into the bar association’s cash office or bank account (art. 25(1), (6) of Federal Law No. 63-FZ). Terms are discussed at the consultation — we do not quote figures sight unseen.

What is attorney–client privilege?

Any information you give your attorney in connection with legal assistance is protected by law (art. 8 of Federal Law No. 63-FZ): an attorney cannot be questioned about it, and demands to disclose it are unlawful. It is a legal regime, not a promise.

Do you work only in Moscow?

The bar association works in Moscow and, since 2026, has an official representative office in the DPR — in Mariupol. Attorneys also handle cases in other regions: our practice includes proceedings in commercial (arbitrazh) courts — Russia’s state courts for business disputes — outside Moscow.

Can you help with tax, valuation or ongoing business support that does not need attorney status?

Such work — tax disputes, insolvency support, corporate law, valuation and audit — is handled by the lawyers of Kovalev & Partners LLC, a law firm with which the bar association has a cooperation agreement: kovalev.moscow. The bar association remains an independent organisation responsible for the attorney side of the work.

Do you advise in English?

Yes — written advice and court documents are prepared in Russian (the language of proceedings), and we correspond and explain the case to you in English. This page is a courtesy translation: where the two versions differ, the Russian version prevails.

The Tushite Svet case: defence against an extortion charge

The Tushite Svet case: defending the former Tatler editor-in-chief and a journalist charged with extorting the head of Rostec

Attorneys Dmitry Malyutov and Kristina Tsypkalo defended Arian Romanovsky and Tamerlan Bigaev in the case of extorting RUB 11 million from Rostec CEO Sergey Chemezov. The Moscow City Court cut two years off each sentence, a cassation appeal has been filed, Romanovsky was released in May 2026.

Attorneys Dmitry Malyutov and Kristina Tsypkalo, the case team was led by V. V. Kovalev, founder and managing partner of Kovalev & Partners LLC

Attorneys Kristina Tsypkalo and Dmitry Malyutov in the Tverskoy District Court of Moscow at a hearing in the Tushite Svet case, 22 December 2022 — The defence in the Tverskoy District Court of Moscow: attorney Kristina Tsypkalo on the left, attorney Dmitry Malyutov in the centre. Photo: Sofya Sandurskaya / Moscow City News Agency, Tverskoy District Court of Moscow, 22 December 2022

The task

In October 2022 a criminal case was opened for extortion on an especially large scale, article 163(3)(b) of the Criminal Code. According to the investigation, the former editor-in-chief of Tatler Arian Romanovsky (Kuzmin), journalist Tamerlan Bigaev and Ksenia Sobchak’s commercial director Kirill Sukhanov demanded RUB 11 million from Rostec CEO Sergey Chemezov for removing posts from the Telegram channel Tushite Svet and refraining from new ones. The article carries up to 15 years in prison. All three were remanded in custody.

Attorney Dmitry Malyutov took on the defence of Arian Romanovsky; attorney Kristina Tsypkalo joined the case as counsel for Tamerlan Bigaev. Neither client admitted guilt. The case was high-profile from the first day: a closed trial, federal media, public figures among the participants. The defence’s task was to prove the civil-law nature of the journalists’ relationship with the party commissioning the content and to secure the mildest possible outcome on a charge where the investigation insisted on the maximum qualification from the outset.

What we did

As early as November 2022 the defence produced documents on the civil-law contracts between the commissioner of the content and the journalists: under them the authors of Tushite Svet prepared publications on assignment and were liable for disclosing the terms. This line became the backbone of the position through all three instances.
At every extension of detention, including the Tverskoy District Court hearing on 22 December 2022, the defence applied for house arrest instead of custody and contested the investigation’s arguments about flight risk and witness tampering.
In the Khamovnichesky District Court, where the trial was held in camera at the victim’s request, the defence consistently contested the qualification under article 163 and maintained that the subject of the negotiations was commercial content moderation, not a threat.
After the verdict, appeals were filed with the Moscow City Court and, after the appeal, a cassation appeal with the Second Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction.
Throughout, the defence stayed in contact with the press so that the clients’ position was not distorted: Dmitry Malyutov’s statements were quoted by Kommersant, RBC, Vedomosti and RIA Novosti.

Attorney Dmitry Malyutov, counsel for Arian Romanovsky, at a hearing of the Tverskoy District Court of Moscow — Attorney Dmitry Malyutov, counsel for Arian Romanovsky.

Attorney Kristina Tsypkalo, counsel for Tamerlan Bigaev, at a hearing of the Tverskoy District Court of Moscow — Attorney Kristina Tsypkalo, counsel for Tamerlan Bigaev.

Outcome

On 12 February 2024 the Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow delivered its verdict: 7 years each for Romanovsky and Bigaev, 7.5 years for Sukhanov in a strict-regime colony. On 2 September 2024 the judicial panel of the Moscow City Court, having considered the defence’s appeals, reduced each sentence by two years: to 5 years for Romanovsky and Bigaev and 5.5 years for Sukhanov. The victim also asked for leniency. In February 2025 a cassation appeal was filed. On 19 May 2026 Arian Romanovsky was released before the end of his term.

Courtroom of the Tverskoy District Court of Moscow during a hearing in the Tushite Svet case, 22 December 2022 — The Tverskoy District Court courtroom, 22 December 2022: attorney Dmitry Malyutov at the defence table, Vladimir Kovalev, head of the case team, founder and managing partner of Kovalev & Partners LLC, in the gallery. Photo: Sofya Sandurskaya / Moscow City News Agency, Tverskoy District Court of Moscow, 22 December 2022

Timeline

24 October 2022 — case opened, Sukhanov and Romanovsky detained; Bigaev detained in November.
22 December 2022 — Tverskoy District Court extends custody for all three.
12 February 2024 — Khamovnichesky District Court verdict: 7.5 / 7 / 7 years.
2 September 2024 — Moscow City Court reduces the terms to 5.5 / 5 / 5 years.
February 2025 — cassation appeal filed.
19 May 2026 — Arian Romanovsky released.

Art. 163(3)(b) of the Criminal CodeKhamovnichesky District Court, Moscow City CourtTogether with the lawyers of Kovalev & Partners LLC

Sources

This description is based on open sources and the parties’ public statements; information protected by attorney–client privilege is not disclosed. The result in one case does not guarantee or imply a similar result in another.