Moscow, Russian Federation — April 28, 2006 — Mobile TeleSystems OJSC (“MTS” — NYSE: MBT), the largest mobile phone operator in Russia and the CIS, announces that the latest ruling on the receiver by the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal was won by MTS.
In its efforts to defend its rights on Bitel in courts, the Company would like to provide the following information:
The Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal ruled on April 24, 2006 that the receiver appointed by a court in the British Virgin Islands (BVI) over Fellowes International Holdings Limited (Fellowes) was validly appointed1.
The Court of Appeal’s recent ruling demonstrates that at all times since September 2005 the receiver was acting, and had all necessary and sufficient legal powers and authority to act, as the exclusive legal representative of Fellowes for the purposes of all litigation in the courts of Kyrgyzstan in relation to Bitel. Because Fellowes does not have any rights to Bitel and because the receiver appointed by the BVI court is the only legal representative of Fellowes with respect to the BVI rulings relating to the Bitel litigation, the decisions of the BVI courts, culminating in the Court of Appeal’s decision this week completely undermine the positions persons purporting to act for Fellowes have asserted before the courts of Kyrgyzstan.
The Fellowes receiver is expected to apprise the Kyrgyz courts of the East Caribbean Court of Appeal’s decision this week and to continue to pursue his official mandate to reverse the Kyrgyz court decisions made on the basis of the baseless legal positions previously asserted by Fellowes.
MTS will continue to vigilantly protect its rights in Bitel.
| 1
|
The receiver had been installed in September 2005 by a court in the BVI to ensure that Fellowes fully complies with court orders relating to Bitel LLC that, among other things, prohibit Fellowes and its agents from attempting to litigate outside of applicable arbitration procedures and require Fellowes to “stop any procedures” for re-registering Bitel shares in Kyrgyzstan. The court has also previously ordered in July 2005, with Fellowes’ consent, that Fellowes was not a party to an agreement to transfer Bitel shares and that it was not entitled to exercise any rights that are purportedly held by IPOC International Growth Fund Limited. |
| 
.jpg){kind=small}
