ICSID vs Lithuania

I need to find 2 million euros to win a 32 million case against Lithuania in ICSID

  • Stacks Image 159
  • Stacks Image 161
  • Stacks Image 163
  • Stacks Image 165
  • Stacks Image 167

Government of Lithuania has stolen money from my companies

In 2006, Lithuania arrested over € 15 million at the bank accounts of my companies (they are listed below). The initial reason of the arrest was a warning by the Russian Central Bank concerning too high amounts of transfers from the Diskont Bank that lost its license. In 2011, the Lithuanian prosecution terminated all its criminal investigations and acquitted all the people anyhow related to my companies from all possible suspicions. However, the prosecution declared that I was not the owner of my companies, that my companies had no owner. This assessment was based merely on the fact that my companies were incorporated in the BVI and Nevis. There is absolutely nothing else. On this ground, the prosecutor declared my € 15 million property of the Lithuanian Government. The battle before the Lithuanian tribunals gave no results. Therefore, I started an arbitration case before an ICSID Arbitration Tribunal


The only efficient way to get my money back is to continue the arbitration proceedings before the Arbitration Tribunal of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). I am а Latvian national, and therefore, my investment is protected under the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) concluded between Lithuania and Latvia. Lithuania tries to object applicability of the BIT, but this kind of argument has already been dismissed by over 20 Awards of Arbitration Tribunals, and even Mr. Volterra representing Lithuania himself dismissed his own argument as dead-born when he was a member of the Arbitration Tribunal on 2 (two) occasions in cases Eastern Sugar v Czech Republic and RREEF v Spain. The arbitration fee is $42'000 to lodge the claim against Lithuania, and then it is $150'000 for each year of consideration. The total costs of arbitration will be about € 2'000'000.

yea or nay


The Lithuanian Government claims that I am not an investor, because I became the owner of my companies few days before the non-final decision to expropriate the money. Well, yes, I became the owner few days before the non-final decision on expropriation, but still before that decision. In any event, the decision to expropriate became final after the exhaustion of the appeal remedies that took 2 years more. The arbitration case law is on my side on this point.


  • I have no criminal convictions. Never during my entire life. None of the persons involved in my case have any criminal past.
  • The handling of my case by Lithuanian authorities is a good example of their corruption and absence of professionalism.
  • Money at a bank account is an investment, and it is property of the owner of the account, i.e., me.
  • If an account has at least 100 “dirty” dollars, this account will be immediately blocked and closed. But all my bank accounts perfectly functioned until 2019, and I was never even suspected of money laundering. The only thing thrown against me by the Lithuanian Government is the fact that my companies were incorporated in the BVI and Nevis.
  • Yes, my money was transferred to Lithuanian bank accounts from the Diskont Bank that lost its license in Russia, but there were transfers from that bank to Latvia and Austria. None has lost their money in Latvia and Austria. I have nothing to do with the loss of that bank license.

expropriated money 02–AUG–2012

MITA GROUP – USD 3'860'000
Logotreck products – USD 3'700'245.53
MACHINERY TRADE – USD 1'988149.25; EUR 765'101.68; CHF 25'160.25


USD – 14'498'668.80
EUR – 765'101,68
CHF – 25'160.25

Current amount of the expropriated money under the compound interest of 6 % provided by Lithuanian and Latvian legislation: 32 million

Lithuania shall pay to Oleg Roshchin $ 28'563'319.76, EUR 1'504'677.51 and CHF 49'481.09
My representative Professor Stanislovas Tomas at JULY 2018

Plase download and check out the latest Memorandum by Professor Stanislovas Tomas regarding my case

Professor Stanislovas Tomas

Prof. Mult. Phc. Dr. Stanislovas TOMAS, PhD (Sorbonne), attorney-at-law at the Russian Foreign Lawyers Registry practicing in Sark represents me in the € 32 million case against Lithuania.

Stanislovas Tomas was born in 1983. At the age of 21 he became a representative of the impeached President Rolandas Paksas of Lithuania before the European Court of Human Rights. At that time the impeached President had 4 lawyers, but the Strasbourg Court rejected all the arguments of other lawyers and accepted as valid only the part written by Stanislovas. After studies in Berlin, London, New York, Brussels, Venice, Madrid, Oslo, San Marino, he defends PhD in law at La Sorbonne (Paris). In 2014, he was awarded the title of full professor of arbitration by the Russian New University (Moscow), Eurasian Academy of Law (Almaty) and Narxoz University (Almaty). He was admitted to practice law in Transnistria, Andorra, Ukraine and Moscow. Currently, he occupies second place in the World according to the number of won cases before the United Nations judicial institutions.

Prof. Dr. Stanislovas Tomas speaks 15 languages: English, French, Russian, Polish, Catalan, Spanish, Portuguese, Lithuanian, Latvian, Belarusian, Dutch, German, Chinese, Bulgarian and Ukrainian.

Contacts of Stanislovas Tomas


my offer:

1. I would like to invite investors working with arbitration funding. I look for an investment of € 2'000'000, and let's divide the success in the amount $32'000'000! Important: my representative remains Prof. Dr. S.Tomas.


2. I can also sell you my claim against Lithuania

Please download some copies of case' documents

ICSID claim

Lithuania responded

ICSID order of discontinuance

Siauliu Bank' report

Prosecutor's decision LT and UK

EU Commission

Stacks Image 220

Oleg Roshchin

Stacks Image 235

Stanislovas Tomas

Stacks Image 233