1. General provisions This personal data processing policy is drawn up in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Law of July 27, 2006. No. 152-FZ “On Personal Data” and determines the procedure for processing personal data and measures to ensure the security of personal data of NO "SOYUZCEMENT" (hereinafter referred to as the Operator).

1. The operator sets as its most important goal and condition for carrying out its activities the observance of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen when processing his personal data, including the protection of the rights to privacy, personal and family secrets.
2. This Operator’s policy regarding the processing of personal data (hereinafter referred to as the Policy) applies to all information that the Operator can obtain about visitors to the website http://soyuzcem.ru.

2. Basic concepts used in the Policy

1. Automated processing of personal data – processing of personal data using computer technology;
2. Blocking of personal data – temporary cessation of processing of personal data (except for cases where processing is necessary to clarify personal data);
3. Website – a collection of graphic and information materials, as well as computer programs and databases that ensure their availability on the Internet at the network address http://soyuzcem.ru;
4. Information system of personal data - a set of personal data contained in databases, and information technologies and technical means that ensure their processing;
5. Depersonalization of personal data - actions as a result of which it is impossible to determine without the use of additional information the ownership of personal data to a specific User or other subject of personal data;
6. Processing of personal data – any action (operation) or set of actions (operations) performed using automation tools or without the use of such means with personal data, including collection, recording, systematization, accumulation, storage, clarification (updating, changing), extraction, use, transfer (distribution, provision, access), depersonalization, blocking, deletion, destruction of personal data;
7. Operator - a state body, municipal body, legal or natural person, independently or jointly with other persons organizing and (or) carrying out the processing of personal data, as well as determining the purposes of processing personal data, the composition of personal data to be processed, actions (operations) performed with personal data;
8. Personal data – any information relating directly or indirectly to a specific or identified User of the website http://soyuzcem.ru;
9. User – any visitor to the website http://soyuzcem.ru;
10. Providing personal data – actions aimed at disclosing personal data to a certain person or a certain circle of persons;
11. Dissemination of personal data - any actions aimed at disclosing personal data to an indefinite number of persons (transfer of personal data) or familiarizing with personal data to an unlimited number of persons, including the publication of personal data in the media, posting in information and telecommunication networks or providing access to personal data in any other way;
12. Cross-border transfer of personal data – transfer of personal data to the territory of a foreign state to an authority of a foreign state, a foreign individual or a foreign legal entity;
13. Destruction of personal data – any actions as a result of which personal data are destroyed irrevocably with the impossibility of further restoration of the content of personal data in the personal data information system and (or) as a result of which the material media of personal data are destroyed.

3. The Operator may process the following personal data of the User

1. Full Name;
2. Email address;
3. The site also collects and processes anonymized data about visitors (including cookies) using Internet statistics services (Yandex Metrica and Google Analytics and others).
4. The above data below in the text of the Policy are united by the general concept of Personal Data.

4. Purposes of processing personal data

1. The purpose of processing the User's personal data is to provide the User with access to services, information and/or materials contained on the website.
2. The Operator also has the right to send notifications to the User about new products and services, special offers and various events. The User can always refuse to receive information messages by sending an email to the Operator [email protected] marked “Opt-out of notifications of new products and services and special offers.”
3. Anonymized data of Users, collected using Internet statistics services, serves to collect information about the actions of Users on the site, improve the quality of the site and its content.

5. Legal grounds for processing personal data

1. The Operator processes the User’s personal data only if it is filled out and/or sent by the User independently through special forms located on the website http://soyuzcem.ru. By filling out the appropriate forms and/or sending his personal data to the Operator, the User expresses his consent to this Policy.
2. The Operator processes anonymized data about the User if this is allowed in the User's browser settings (saving cookies and using JavaScript technology are enabled).

6. The procedure for collecting, storing, transferring and other types of processing of personal data The security of personal data processed by the Operator is ensured by implementing legal, organizational and technical measures necessary to fully comply with the requirements of current legislation in the field of personal data protection.

1. The operator ensures the safety of personal data and takes all possible measures to prevent access to personal data by unauthorized persons.
2. The User's personal data will never, under any circumstances, be transferred to third parties, except in cases related to the implementation of current legislation.
3. If inaccuracies in personal data are identified, the User can update them independently by sending a notification to the Operator to the Operator's email address [email protected] marked “Updating personal data”.
4. The period for processing personal data is unlimited. The User may at any time withdraw his consent to the processing of personal data by sending a notification to the Operator via email to the Operator's email address [email protected] marked “Withdrawal of consent to the processing of personal data.”

7. Cross-border transfer of personal data

1. Before the start of cross-border transfer of personal data, the operator is obliged to ensure that the foreign state into whose territory it is intended to transfer personal data provides reliable protection of the rights of personal data subjects.
2. Cross-border transfer of personal data to the territory of foreign states that do not meet the above requirements can only be carried out if there is written consent of the subject of personal data to the cross-border transfer of his personal data and/or execution of an agreement to which the subject of personal data is a party.

8. Final provisions

1. The User can receive any clarification on issues of interest regarding the processing of his personal data by contacting the Operator via email [email protected].
2. This document will reflect any changes to the Operator’s personal data processing policy. The policy is valid indefinitely until it is replaced by a new version.
3. The current version of the Policy is freely available on the Internet at http://soyuzcem.ru/policy/.

In the name of the Russian Federation

Moscow Case No. A40-102011/11

Arbitration Court of Moscow

composed of judge N.N. Tarasov

single-handedly

when keeping the minutes of the court session by secretary Burlyaeva E.A.

having considered the case in open court

OJSC "Holding Company "Siberian Cement"

to 1) the Editorial Board of the all-Russian socio-political electronic newspaper The Moscow Post, 2) the regional public organization “Promotion of Environmental Educational Programs”, 3) Alexey Lvovich Kozlov, registered at the address: Khimki, Moscow Region, st. Friedrich Engels, apt. 101.

starring:

from the plaintiff – Popova E.V. by power of attorney dated August 25, 2011.

from the defendants: from the 1st defendant - failure to appear, from the 2nd defendant - failure to appear, from the 3rd - Gadzhiev A.M. by power of attorney dated March 25, 2009.

INSTALLED:

that OJSC “Holding Company “Siberian Cement” appealed to the arbitration court (taking into account the partial abandonment of the claim against the Editorial Board of the all-Russian socio-political electronic newspaper The Moscow Post) with a claim against 1) the regional public organization “Promotion of Environmental Educational Programs”, 2 ) Kozlov Alexey Lvovich about, in which he asked:

1. The following statements are recognized as untrue and discrediting the plaintiff:

“...And he bluffs, bluffs, bluffs...

Behind the broad back of the upcoming state corporation, it will be easy to hide many of the unsightly affairs and facts of Sibcement, as well as debts (which, according to analysts, today exceed 18 billion rubles) and even... ordinary looting.

Over the three years that followed this raider takeover, Sibcement actually appropriated all the assets of the ACGC, using, so to speak, the classic techniques of a “hostile takeover.”

Yes, yes, the judge’s decision was forged by Sibcement - and there is nothing surprising here: this seems to be exactly one of the main methods of the newly minted “initiators of the state corporation.”

2. To collect jointly and severally from the defendants in favor of the plaintiff 3,000,000 (three million) rubles in compensation for moral (reputational) damage, 135,000 rubles. expenses for a representative.

The plaintiff appeared at the court hearing and asked for the demands to be satisfied based on the reasons set out in the statement of claim and additionally provided written explanations.

The first and second defendants, duly notified of the time and place of the trial, did not appear at the court hearing and did not challenge the claim on its merits.

The case is in accordance with Art. Art. 123, 156 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is considered in their absence.

The third defendant appeared at the court hearing and asked that the claim be dismissed for the reasons set out in the response submitted to the court.

Having examined the case materials, assessed the evidence presented in the case, and carefully listened to the representatives of the persons who appeared at the court hearing, the court finds the claim subject to partial satisfaction on the following grounds.

In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a citizen has the right to demand in court a refutation of information discrediting his honor, dignity or information, unless the person who disseminated such information proves that it is true. By virtue of paragraph 7 of this article, the rules on the protection of a citizen’s business reputation are correspondingly applied to the protection of business reputation. From the meaning of this article it follows that the obligation to prove the accuracy of the disseminated information lies with the defendant, and the plaintiff is obliged to prove the fact that the information was disseminated by the person against whom the claim was brought, as well as the defamatory nature of this information.

As follows from the explanations given in paragraph 7 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated February 24, 2005 No. 3 “On judicial practice in cases of protecting the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities,” in cases of this category it is necessary to have bearing in mind that the circumstances that, by virtue of Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, are significant for the case, which must be determined by the judge when accepting the statement of claim and preparing the case for trial, as well as during the trial, are: the fact that the defendant disseminated information about the plaintiff , discrediting the nature of this information and the discrepancy between its reality. In the absence of at least one of these circumstances, the claim cannot be satisfied by the court.

The dissemination of information discrediting the honor and dignity of citizens or the business reputation of citizens and legal entities should be understood as publication of such information in the press, broadcast on radio and television, demonstration in newsreels and other media, distribution on the Internet, as well as using other means of telecommunications, presentation in official characteristics, public speeches, statements addressed to officials, or communication in one form or another, including oral, to at least one person. The communication of such information to the person to whom it concerns cannot be recognized as its dissemination if the person who provided this information took sufficient confidentiality measures so that it does not become known to third parties.

Untrue information is statements about facts or events that did not take place in reality at the time to which the disputed information relates. Information contained in court decisions and sentences, decisions of preliminary investigation bodies and other procedural or other official documents, for appealing and challenging which another judicial procedure established by law, cannot be considered as untrue.

Defamatory, in particular, is information containing allegations of a citizen or legal entity violating the current legislation, committing a dishonest act, incorrect, unethical behavior in personal, public or political life, dishonesty in the implementation of production, economic and entrepreneurial activities, violation of business ethics or customs business transactions that detract from the honor and dignity of a citizen or the business reputation of a citizen or.

In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. The responsibility to prove the accuracy of the disseminated information lies with the defendant. The plaintiff is obliged to prove the fact of dissemination of information by the person against whom the claim is brought, as well as the defamatory nature of this information.

The arbitration court established the fact of publication of the article “Very dangerous!!!” or scammers are getting involved in the modernization,” containing the information that the plaintiff wants, on the Internet at http://www/moscow-post.ru/economics/001273851303535/, which is confirmed by the Protocol for the inspection of evidence drawn up by the notary N.M. Romanovskaya. 08.11.2010 and is not disputed by the parties to the case.

According to the certificate of JSC RSITs No. 1754 dated November 18, 2011, the owner (administrator) of the domain name moscow-post.ru is Alexey Lvovich Kozlov.

Having assessed the content of the above-mentioned article as a whole, and the directly disputed verbal and semantic constructions, the arbitration court comes to the conclusion that the following information about the plaintiff, stated in an affirmative form, discredits the business reputation of the plaintiff, indicates the plaintiff’s bad faith in carrying out production, economic and entrepreneurial activities. activities, violation of business ethics or business customs:

As you can see, with the help of sentences in the form of questions, the author of the article makes a statement about the facts that he knows.

The defamatory nature of the information presented is obvious and does not require confirmation by the conclusion of a linguistic-stylistic examination.

Evidence of the compliance of the information stated above regarding the plaintiff with reality in accordance with Art. not presented to the court.

The court finds that the publication of the information provided in the article may raise doubts about the integrity of the plaintiff in carrying out production, economic and entrepreneurial activities, indicates his unlawful behavior, thereby discrediting the plaintiff’s business reputation.

Due to the fact that untrue information discrediting the business reputation of the plaintiff was disseminated, that no evidence to the contrary was presented to the court, compensation for non-material damage is subject to recovery from the defendants, determined by the court in the amount of 15,000 rubles from each of the defendants

The claim for recovery by way of joint and several liability cannot be satisfied.

According to Art. 322 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a joint obligation (liability) or a joint claim arises if the solidarity of the duty or claim is provided for by an agreement or established by law, in particular when the subject of the obligation is indivisible.

According to Art. 323 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in case of joint and several obligations of debtors, the creditor has the right to demand performance both from all debtors jointly and from any of them separately, both in full and in part of the debt.

The plaintiff did not provide the court with evidence of the existence of joint and several liability in relation to the subject of the claim and its wording.

The norm of federal law establishing joint and several liability for an obligation arising from a tortious legal relationship is not indicated to the court.

At the same time, the court does not find legal grounds for satisfying the substantive requirements stated in relation to the first defendant, because contrary to the provisions of the current legislation, the plaintiff did not provide the court with evidence of the fact that the first defendant is an independent legal entity, which, obviously, requires the termination of the proceedings against the improper defendant.

By virtue of Art. 41 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, persons participating in the case must conscientiously use all procedural rights belonging to them, and failure to fulfill procedural duties has negative consequences.

Taking into account the foregoing, the court independently determined the degree of guilt of each of the defendants, distributing the legal costs attributable to them in proportion to the volume of the amount subject to forced collection.

In addition, the court was asked to recover legal expenses for the services of a representative in the amount of 130,000 rubles.

In accordance with Art. 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, legal expenses incurred by persons participating in the case, in whose favor a judicial act was adopted, are recovered by the arbitration court from the outside.

Article 101 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation determines that legal costs consist of state fees and legal costs associated with the consideration of the case by the arbitration court.

In accordance with Art. 106 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, legal costs associated with the consideration of a case in an arbitration court include amounts of money payable to experts, witnesses, translators, costs associated with conducting an on-site inspection of evidence, costs of paying for the services of lawyers and other persons providing legal assistance ( representatives), and other expenses incurred by persons participating in the case in connection with the consideration of the case in the arbitration court.

If the claim is partially satisfied, legal costs are borne by the persons participating in the case in proportion to the amount of the satisfied claims. The costs of paying for the services of a representative, incurred by the person in whose favor the judicial act was adopted, are recovered by the arbitration court from another person participating in the case, within reasonable limits.

The reasonableness of the costs of paying for the services of a representative must be justified by the party demanding reimbursement of these costs (Article 65 of the Arbitration Procedural Code of the Russian Federation).

In accordance with the explanations of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, contained in Resolution No. 12088/05 of 02/07/06. - according to the established practice of the arbitration courts of the Russian Federation, when determining reasonable limits for the costs of paying for the services of a representative, the following are taken into account: the relevance of the costs to the case; volume and complexity of the work performed; norms of expenses for business trips established by legal acts; cost of economical transport services; the time that a qualified specialist could spend on preparing materials; the prevailing prices for similar services in a given region, taking into account the qualifications of the persons providing the services; available information from statistical authorities on prices on the legal services market; duration of consideration of the case; other circumstances indicating the reasonableness of these expenses.

Taking into account the above circumstances, taking into account the category of complexity of the dispute, the number of court hearings, partial satisfaction of the stated claims, and, consequently, the need to distribute legal costs in proportion to the volume of satisfied claims, the plaintiff’s demand for the recovery of legal costs in the form of payment for the services of a representative, motivated by the conclusion of an agreement, payment order dated 07/01/2011, the court finds it possible to partially satisfy, to assign to the defendant the amount of legal costs to pay for the services of a representative only within 4,000 rubles, i.e. 2,000 rubles each. from each of the co-defendants.

Legal costs are distributed in accordance with Art. 110 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in proportion to the volume of satisfied requirements.

Due to the above arguments, guided by Art. Art. 152, Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Art. 4, 44, 63, 110, 123, 156, 167-170, 176 Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, court

Proceedings in the case against the Editorial Board of the all-Russian socio-political electronic newspaper The Moscow Post are terminated.

Recognize that it does not correspond to reality and discredits business
reputation of the open joint-stock company "HOLDING COMPANY "SIBERIAN CEMENT" (Kemerovo, OGRN 1044205040175, INN 4205070630) the following statements posted on the Internet page with the address http://www.moscow-post.ru/economics/0001273851303535 in article “Very dangerous!!!” or scammers are getting involved in the modernization"

1. And bluffs, bluffs, bluffs...

2. Behind the broad back of the upcoming state corporation, it will be easy to hide many of the unsightly affairs and facts of Sibcement. as well as debts (which, according to analysts, today exceed 18 billion rubles) and even... ordinary looting.

3. In the three years that followed this raider takeover, Sibcement actually appropriated all the assets of ACGC, using, so to speak, the classic techniques of a “hostile takeover.”

4. Yes, yes, the judge’s decision was forged by Sibcement - and there is nothing surprising here: this seems to be one of the main methods of the newly minted “initiators of the state corporation.”

To recover from the Regional Public Organization “Promotion of Environmental Educational Programs” (Moscow, OGRN 1067799028450, INN 7719286778) in favor of the open joint-stock company “SIBERIAN CEMENT HOLDING COMPANY” (Kemerovo, OGRN 1044205040175, INN N 4205070630) 19,000 rub. 00 kop., including: 15,000 rub. 00 kop. compensation for moral damage, 2,000 rubles. 00 kop. legal expenses for payment of state duty, 2,000 rubles. 00 kop. legal expenses for the services of a representative.

To recover from Alexey Lvovich Kozlov (born July 23, 1968, a native of Moscow, registered at the address: Moscow region, Khimki, Moscow region, Engels str., building 24, apt. 101) in favor of the open joint-stock company "HOLDING COMPANY" SIBERIAN CEMENT" (Kemerovo, OGRN 1044205040175, INN 4205070630) RUB 19,000. 00 kop., including: 15,000 rub. 00 kop. compensation for moral damage, 2,000 rubles. 00 kop. legal expenses for payment of state duty, 2,000 rubles. 00 kop. legal expenses for the services of a representative.

The rest of the claims made in the lawsuit, including the demand for joint and several recovery of compensation for moral (reputational damage) from the defendants, must be rejected.

To recover 2,000 rubles from the Regional Public Organization “Promotion of Environmental Educational Programs” (Moscow, OGRN 1067799028450, INN 7719286778) in favor of the federal budget. 00 kop. part of the state duty unpaid on the claim.

To collect from Alexey Lvovich Kozlov (born July 23, 1968, a native of Moscow, registered at the address: Moscow region, Khimki, Moscow region, Engels str., building 24, apt. 101) in favor of the federal budget of 2,000 rubles. 00 kop. part of the state duty unpaid on the claim.

The decision can be appealed in the manner and within the time limits provided for by the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation to the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal.

Judge N.N. Tarasov

The company became interested in the cement market in Moscow and Central Russia. According to information available to RBC daily, Sibirsky Cement is planning to enter the Moscow construction market.

The company became interested in the cement market in Moscow and Central Russia. According to information available to RBC daily, Sibirsky Cement is planning to enter the Moscow construction market. At least the Niccolo M company is conducting market research on his order. The company itself neither confirms nor denies the information. Meanwhile, experts believe that the Siberian manufacturer’s entry into the Moscow market will be difficult due to the plant’s great distance from the sales market and high transportation costs. Therefore, experts believe, Sibirsky Cement will have to purchase some cement plant in the European part of Russia.

OJSC Holding Company Siberian Cement (Kemerovo) was created in August 2004 on the basis of the cement assets of the financial and industrial union Sibconcord: LLC Topkinsky Cement, LLC Volna Plant (Krasnoyarsk Territory) and LLC Krasnoyarsk cement. The company also owns 45% of the shares of OJSC Angarskcement. In April 2005, the holding acquired 80% of the property and 65% of the accounts payable of the Buryat OJSC Kamensky Cement Plant. However, the holding fully controls only Topkinsky Cement; the remaining assets are problematic to one degree or another. In particular, Sibirsky Cement is engaged in a legal battle regarding the legality of the acquisition of the Krasnoyarsk Cement Plant within the framework of bankruptcy proceedings. The total production volume of Sibirsky Cement is 3 million tons of cement per year, and the holding’s president Andrey Muravyov estimates the total production capacity at 6 million tons. At the beginning of summer, the company placed the first bond issue in the amount of 800 million rubles.

Currently, the consulting company Niccolo M is conducting a study commissioned by Sibirsky Cement, designed to reveal, apparently, the degree of popularity of the company in the Moscow market, as well as the prospects for its entry into the capital market. Niccolo M, however, did not officially confirm information about the upcoming entry of Sibirsky Cement into the Moscow market. “Yes, we are conducting research, but this is not marketing research,” they said. Sibirsky Cement itself also neither confirmed nor denied information about a possible entry into other markets. Experts and market participants doubt that this venture has any prospects. Thus, the Eurocement company, which is currently the largest participant in the cement market, reported to RBC daily that the appearance of Siberian Cement on the Moscow market is unlikely. “Transportation of cement from Siberia to the European part is too expensive, in addition, Siberia has its own developed cement market,” they said.

Experts, in turn, believe that this is possible in principle, even despite the high transport costs. “Eurocement now sells its products in Moscow at a price of about 1,900 rubles. per ton, and representatives of Siberian Cement say that by the end of the year the selling price of the enterprises included in this holding should average 1,350 rubles. per ton. True, Topkinsky Cement is already selling products to consumers in the Siberian region at Moscow prices. Theoretically, even taking into account transportation costs (about 650 rubles per ton when delivered from Topki (Kemerovo region) to Moscow), Siberian Cement will be able to sell its products on the capital market at a competitive price - the margin of cement producers is now quite high, said RBC daily leading analyst of the Region group of companies Valery Weisberg. “This opportunity arose due to the increase in the cost of cement in 2005. But still, three thousand kilometers is too far, and the quality of the product must be very high.” According to Mr. Weisberg, there is an opportunity for new players to enter the European cement market. “Due to rising prices for cement, the share of Eurocement factories in all-Russian production at the end of five months of this year decreased to 42% compared to 45% in 2004,” he says. “Thus, there is room for other manufacturers to expand their share.”

At the same time, Valery Weisberg believes that the Siberian cement manufacturer will still not be able to occupy a significant market share in the capital region. “I think this is more of a publicity stunt,” he says. - Moreover, Sibirsky Cement cannot completely divert resources from the Siberian market: here it has a serious competitor - IskitimCement. In addition, significant supplies of cement from Belarus to the Moscow region have been contracted. In fact, it would be more logical for the company to intensify its work on the Kazakhstan market: it is located closer, and prices are higher there.” However, experts believe that Sibirsky Cement has the opportunity not only to enter the cement market of the European part of Russia, but also to take a significant share in it. But to do this, he needs to acquire production facilities in the European part of Russia, thus reducing transport costs. “Perhaps we are talking about the acquisition of additional capacity by Sibirsky Cement,” says Mr. Weisberg. – There is one large plant in the European part of Russia, which theoretically could be put up for sale. This is Gornozavodskcement, located in the Perm region. This plant was one of the first assets of Alfa-Cement; now, according to some sources, it is controlled by management and operates at a fairly low load. By purchasing this plant, Sibirsky Cement will reduce the distance to Moscow to just over a thousand kilometers. From such a bridgehead it is already possible to enter the capital market.”

OJSC "Holding Company "Siberian Cement"- management company of a group of enterprises united under a single name "Siberian Cement", engaged in the production and sale of cement in the Siberian Federal District. The product range is represented by various brands of cement intended for special and general construction purposes, and construction materials produced at enterprises belonging to the holding.

The company was founded in 2002. In the period from 2002 to 2005, the assets of the largest cement plants in the region were consolidated.

The holding includes the following cement plants in the Kemerovo, Irkutsk regions, Krasnoyarsk Territory, and the Republic of Buryatia:

1. Topkinsky cement plant. Capacity is 3 million tons per year;
2. Angarsk cement-mining plant. Capacity is 930,000 tons per year;
3. Timlyuy cement plant. Capacity - 660,000 tons per year;
4. Volna plant, focused on the production of fiber-cement products;
5. Krasnoyarsk cement plant. Capacity is 1.2 million tons per year.

Each of these plants is a complex with a full technological cycle, having permanent sales channels and its own raw material base.

The company's investment strategy is also designed to develop concrete production at its own facilities.

As a result of the merger "Siberian Cement" gained control of 64% of the region's cement market. Already in 2004, the volume of cement produced amounted to 6 percent of the all-Russian output (2.6 million tons). In 2006, the holding's share was 8%.

is a large Russian holding manufacturer and supplier of high-quality cement and building materials. Produces concrete, cement and chrysotile cement products.

Source: http://www.sibcem.ru/

Structure of the Siberian Cement holding

Management Company

Open Joint Stock Company "Siberian Cement" (Kemerovo).

Enterprises producing cement and cement raw materials

LLC "Topkinsky Cement" (Topki, Kemerovo region)

LLC "Krasnoyarsk Cement" (Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk Territory);

TimlyuyCement LLC (Kamensk village, Republic of Buryatia);

Mining Company LLC (Tatarsky Klyuch village, Republic of Buryatia).

Enterprises producing cement-based building materials:

LLC "Combine "Volna" (Krasnoyarsk), producing chrysotile cement roofing and flat sheets and pipes;

Siberian Concrete LLC (plants in Kemerovo, Novosibirsk, Krasnoyarsk), specializing in the production of ready-mixed concrete and mortars.

Service companies

LLC "ZapSibCement" (Kemerovo) - sale of cement;

KuzbassTransCement LLC (Novosibirsk) – operator of a fleet of specialized railway rolling stock;

LLC "Trading House "Sibirsky Cement" (Kemerovo) - purchase of raw materials, materials and equipment for cement assets;

Sibcemservice LLC (Kemerovo) is a company for the repair and maintenance of equipment, buildings and structures.

A group of persons of OJSC Holding Company Sibcem is the owner of 26% in the authorized capital of LLC RCC (Moscow), 46.79% of shares of OJSC Angarskcement (Angarsk, Irkutsk region) and 24.98% of shares of OJSC "(Iskitim, Novosibirsk region).

Contacts of OJSC "Siberian Cement"

Website: http://www.sibcem.ru/

Address: Russian Federation, 650000, Kemerovo region, Kemerovo, st. Karbolitovskaya, building 1/4

Phone: +7 3842 496 310

Fax: +7 3842 496 330

Email mail: [email protected]