6), transfer of shares and related rights (Article 7), the prohibition on competition (Article 11). Despite the objections of the defendants' lack of jurisdiction on the case to the arbitral tribunal of first instance, there is no grounds for declaring the agreement null and void according to the norms Russian law, the validity of an arbitration clause on the choice of law in Sweden and that the agreement does not regulate the internal relations of OJSC "MegFon", the court granted the plaintiffs' claims and found void (void) because of violation of public policy of the Russian Federation, signed a shareholders agreement. The court held that the shareholders' agreement dated August 6, 2001 in the disputed part contrary to the provisions of Art. 164 Principles of Civil Law of the USSR, the RSFSR Civil Code Article 566 and paragraph 1 of Article 1206 Civil Code, providing that the occurrence and termination of property rights and other rights to property are determined by the law of the country where the property was a time when the action took place or other circumstance giving rise to the occurrence or the termination of property rights and other rights, except as otherwise provided by law. Resolution of the Federal District of Western Siberia on March 31, 2006 decision of the court of first instance upheld 2. The case of JSC "Russian Standard Insurance A40-62048/06-81-343 to recognize shareholders' agreements void JSC "Russian Standard Insurance" in 2006 filed a lawsuit to the Arbitration Court of Moscow 3.