When the state Slovak Land Fund, after years of legal action, was on its way to winning the dispute over Slánské lesy for 100 million euros, he did not complete the last steps with the lawyer who had won his disputes until then. Instead, he hired a new law firm for the last two legal steps, to which he paid over 1.8 million euros. This follows from the police resolution, which POLICE she accused the former head of the fund and the current member of the party’s presidency CIS Gabriela Matečná from breach of duty in managing someone else’s property.
According to the police, the selection of the office was already accompanied by unclear conditions, and in addition, the contract stated that the office would collect a reward for one of the actions, even if it did not take place. This is all part of the indictment.
Through the presidency of the SNS, the foundation also asked Matečná herself to respond to the accusation. She did not respond to questions.
The dispute over the one-hundred-million Slánské lesy
The essence of one of the largest court cases in Slovakia for 100 million euros has its roots in 1998. That’s when it started dispute o Slánske lesy, in which the state forests represented the state, but the land fund also had to enter the dispute as the owner of the land. The entire case was represented on behalf of the state from the beginning by lawyer Irena Sopková, who was approached by the state forests for cooperation. The case appeared repeatedly in the courts, execution was dealt with, the lawyer went through archives in Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Romania because of the missing title deeds, and at one point she even had police protection when her son was beaten. Sopková had a contract with the state forests from the beginning, including remuneration for legal services. But the proper contract with the fund was not concluded for years. Well, she represented him at least on the basis of power of attorney.
Who is Irena Sopková?
Sopková is known for several large and publicized cases. In 2017, the Národná banka Slovenska chose her as a forced administrator in a publicized dispute with the insurance company Rapid Life. The insurance company eventually ended up in bankruptcy.
After the change of management in the Ulič State Forestry Property in 2020, she again helped to uncover over a million euros worth of damage to state property.
Currently in the case of the Ducky SPP promissory notes represents state gas companies in a dispute over millions of euros against a Cypriot company.
The change occurred in 2014. At that time, the Regional Court confirmed that Slánske lesy belongs to the state. At that time, the lawyer wrote to the then head of the fund, Matečná, to finally receive the reward, as the dispute was legally ended in favor of the fund.
But the fund decided otherwise. At the beginning of 2014, he closed the framework the contract for legal services with the Ecker – Kán & Partners office. On the basis of this contract, the fund later asked the office for representation in two matters in the case of Slánské les: in appeal proceedings at the Supreme Court and in proceedings before the Constitutional Court. Both were initiated by the opposing party to the dispute – the Slanske Lesy SSR. The task of the fund’s lawyers was to prepare statements for these submissions.
The fund still hasn’t paid Sopka’s reward.
The fund was then headed by Matečná as a party nominee Direction from 2012 until spring 2016, when she moved to the head of the Ministry of Agriculture already under the SNS. The impetus for the police investigation that led to her indictment was the criminal report of Zuzana Šubová, currently the leader of the non-parliamentary Pirates party.
Almost 2 million euros for two actions
The Supreme Court subsequently rejected the appeal in April 2016, and the constitutional complaint of the opposing party was also rejected as unfounded by the Constitutional Court in August 2016. According to the police, for the ordered legal services, “representation of the SPF in appeal proceedings conducted at the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic” and “in proceedings before the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic”, the lawyers were entitled to a fee, which was paid on the basis of the first invoice in the amount of almost 890,000 euros, and the next invoice exceeded 940,000.
The Ecker-Kán office stated regarding the amount of the reward before the police that, in addition to taking over and preparing the representation, it involved preparing and submitting a statement for the appeal, studying the submissions of the participants and recommending the next course of action to the client or consulting with the management of the fund and the Department of Agriculture.
The office added that this led to the definitive rescue of the state’s ownership of assets exceeding 100 million euros.
Office of Ecker – Kán & Partners
It is among the largest in Slovakia. At the time of the described actions for the land fund, it was placed on the first rungs in the rankings of law firms, also thanks to orders for public institutions. Vladimír Kán’s wife owns a property in Croatia next to a villa that belongs to the wife of Defense Minister Robert Kaliňák. At first, Kaliňák did not recognize the villa in his property declaration, for which he was fined at the initiative of the Foundation.
Representatives from the office Ecker – Kán & Partners are also mentioned in property disputes, in which Marián Kočner was also interested.
In the resolution, the police also mentions statements from the SAO inspection regarding the order of these legal services. The control group stated that the agreement of such a high contractual remuneration “can obviously be considered contrary to good morals”, when it grossly does not correspond to the contribution to the proceedings. The same legal arguments in favor of the fund were used in court by a previous lawyer.
The police also encountered a problem when they wanted to find a copy of the framework contract from 2014. To find out the responsible persons from the signatures and the date of conclusion of the contract. At Ecker – Kán, they stated that due to the time gap, the contract could not be found in their archives. Despite repeated requests, the Fund did not deliver a copy of the contract even with the signatures of the responsible representatives, so the contract without signatures was secured from the central register of contracts. The contract is published there, but without the mentioned signatures and the date is also missing.
At the end of March, the foundation also asked the office of Ecker-Kán & Partners for a response. Vladimír Kán responded to them by saying that, “the questions relate to closed proceedings, in which I consider it correct, in the interest of its legal course, to maintain restraint in publishing detailed information, especially in view of the fact that in the matter in question it has apparently not even been decided by the superior authority on the proper remedy of the accused. Our knowledge of this case is based only on non-public information, and our opinion is that it is legally and factually absolutely unfounded information”.
“The contract is publicly available in the central register”
Regarding the missing copy of the contract with the fund, Kán stated that the Foundation is asking about information that is apparently the content of the investigation file, to which only a narrow circle of subjects has access due to the non-public nature of the proceedings, which indicates a possible leakage of information from the file.
“Furthermore, I state that our law firm provides full cooperation to law enforcement authorities, and as regards the contract in question, its wording is publicly accessible to everyone in electronic form through the Central Register of Contracts. If you need information on this matter, I recommend that you consult the Central Register of Contracts.”
The foundation reached the police resolution through the official route, as described above. She also asked the fund about the problem with the undelivered copy as well as the accusation of the former shareholders. He did not respond to questions.
What the state auditors found out years ago in the fund
Earlier, the Supreme Audit Office drew attention to the special procedures of the state fund for legal services. In 2022, in its report they mentioned inefficient and possibly illegal procedures in contracting external lawyers in the fund. The findings also included contracts for representation around Slánské les.
At that time, the fund had its own 25 employees for the so-called dispute agenda. However, the fund director had the right to authorize an external lawyer for extraordinary cases. The fund also used this and, according to the auditors, often changed legal representatives in ongoing lawsuits, which “caused wasteful and inefficient spending of funds”.
The auditors also paid special attention to the example from 2014, when the fund chose an external law firm for representation in the Slánske lesy case. “He did so despite the fact that in the previous proceedings at the lower levels of the courts, the state was represented by another lawyer who knew the facts and was successful in the proceedings. The new lawyers prepared a 7-page opinion and received a reward of 1.8 million euros for it,” stated the controllers.
Both hourly, tariff and share remuneration
Based on the findings of the SAO, the police mentioned that the share remuneration for Ecker – Kán was “agreed against the decree on the attorney’s tariff”.
The essence of the share fee is that if the client is not even partially successful, the lawyer has the right to demand only reimbursement of the expenses already incurred. Simply put, the lawyer receives a share of the reward only when he succeeds. However, in the case of Slánský lesé, not only share, but also tariff and hourly remuneration was agreed upon, which is contrary to the decree of the time and the principle of share remuneration.
“In this case, AK did not expose itself to any risk,” stated the controllers.
The remuneration for lawyers was agreed as a combination of an hourly wage of 79 euros (without VAT), a tariff remuneration and a share remuneration.
(source: Police resolution)
However, the police point out that in the next framework contract between the fund and Ecker – Kán from 2018, there is no longer a provision for share remuneration.
The Foundation also asked the office about the method of determining the reward. Vladimír Kán stated that the contract as well as the structure of the remuneration specified in it is in accordance with the Public Procurement Act and the Attorneys’ Decree. “We have no information that the authority that has the authority to establish a violation of the law or decree has decided on such a violation. In our legal order, the decision belongs only to the Office for Public Procurement, or the court, not to the controllers from the SAO, who tended to approach this matter”.
Second reward even without filing a complaint
The state auditors also pointed out that the lawyer would be entitled to remuneration for the constitutional complaint even if the constitutional complaint had not been filed.
The police also see a problem in the very contracting of lawyers. The public procurement that preceded it was, according to the police, unpredictable and did not ensure impartiality checks.
For comparison, in 2018, the fund offered the original lawyer a combined remuneration for all actions since 2002 in the amount of 1.8 million euros (without VAT).
The external legal office collected the same amount for only 2 actions related to the Slánske lesy case.
The foundation also approached lawyer Sopková about the whole matter. She did not want to comment on the accusation of the former representatives of the fund. “The investigation is ongoing, and therefore I cannot comment on this issue in more detail, respecting the principle of the presumption of innocence of the accused persons.”
She won fund disputes for 20 years, they sued her
However, she described that in the court case against the Slánske lesy association on behalf of the Slovak Republic, she represented the Slovak Forests and the fund for approximately 20 years. In the dispute over forest real estate, other and agricultural land in the extent of 6,500 hectares and the value of the property over 60 million, as well as in the dispute over the 10 million in damages by Slánsky lesami s.r.o. to the Slovak Republic, the Slovak Republic was successful in its entirety during its representation.
State institutions representation before courts and in criminal proceedings, where the perpetrators were lawful convicted and an unconditional sentence was imposed on them.
In April 2020, the Minister of Agriculture personally thanked the lawyer for her work. 3 months later, the then management took several legal steps against her, among other things, they filed a criminal complaint and a civil lawsuit. They objected that she is entitled to a reward of 50,000 Slovak crowns for 20 years, which translates to roughly 1,600 euros.
According to Sopková, the current management of the fund has shown an effort to settle out of court.
