Co-Owner of Gormash Global Accused of 45 Million Ruble Fraud Amid Claims of Corporate Raid

The Gormash Global Case: Allegations of Theft or a Hostile Takeover?

On 21 July, the Mytishchi City Court in the Moscow region extended house arrest for Dmitry Milash, a co-owner of OOO Gormash Global, and his wife Anastasia. The two stand accused of large-scale fraud and abuse of authority, following a criminal complaint filed by the company's general director, Sergey Novomlintsev. Investigators from the local economic crime unit allege that Milash systematically misappropriated company assets, including a BMW car, and arranged a fictitious employment for his spouse, causing total damages of about 45 million rubles.

According to case materials, Milash, who has held 45% of the charter capital since 2021, allegedly bought a BMW for the firm in 2021 for 10 million rubles, later artificially depressed its book value to 588,000 rubles, and then transferred it for personal use without ever reimbursing the company. He is also accused of having his wife formally employed as head of a separate division in Uchaly, where she received roughly 6 million rubles in salary and bonuses, while regularly spending corporate funds on private trips. The investigation claims that Novomlintsev was kept in a state of dependence and acted under deceit from Milash.

Milash's defense strongly rejects all charges. Attorney Marina Chizhova argues that her client was instrumental in growing the company's revenue to 20 billion rubles annually but later fell out with commercial director Alexey Kashirsky, who owns the other 45%. She says Kashirsky secretly amended the charter to eliminate Milash's veto right, then in March 2026 consolidated Novomlintsev's 10% stake to gain a 55% controlling interest, pushing Milash out and blocking his access to corporate records. The defense contends that the criminal case was launched to legitimize a hostile takeover of Milash's stake, worth an estimated 4.5 billion rubles, and points to procedural irregularities, including an early-morning search at the family home without prior court approval.

Cracks in the Partnership: How the Gormash Dispute Unfolded

A textbook partnership breakdown

The Gormash Global dispute follows a familiar pattern in closely held companies: three co-owners with initially aligned interests, then a rupture over control. Milash claims he was the commercial engine behind a meteoric rise to 20 billion rubles in revenue. The other partners appear to have restructured the legal framework to dilute his influence while he was still formally a shareholder. The timeline — a secret charter amendment removing veto rights, the consolidation of a minority stake, the appointment of a first deputy with immediate power of attorney, and then the criminal complaint — strongly suggests a premeditated move, though the court has so far found enough merit to keep Milash and his wife under house arrest.

The criminal law as a lever in corporate disputes

Russian legal practice has a long history of using criminal accusations in commercial conflicts. The 45 million ruble sum is large enough to trigger serious fraud charges but is small relative to the company's revenue and the disputed 4.5 billion ruble stake. The defense claim of a “fabricated” case is bolstered by the witness Pavlov, who allegedly stated he incriminated Milash under fear. The arrest of Minash’s wife — mother of two young children — on the basis of a fictitious job that allegedly generated 6 million rubles over several years, and the seizure of the Milash family’s 45% stake, suggest that the criminal proceedings have moved far beyond a simple embezzlement inquiry and are now tightly intertwined with the battle for corporate control.

Real-world consequences for the business

Even if the accusations are eventually dismissed, the disruption is already severe. The co-owner behind the company’s sales growth is under house arrest; his key asset — the 45% stake — is frozen; and the management team is led by figures he claims engineered his ouster. Gormash Global, which supplies machinery and equipment for mining and construction, depends on trust with suppliers and customers. A public, messy ownership fight could lead counterparties to seek alternative partners, turning a shareholder dispute into an operational crisis.

Business Owner Takeaways from the Gormash Global Conflict

• Lock in veto rights with ironclad documentation: Milash’s defense claims a secret charter amendment removed his veto. Any shareholder agreement should require supermajority approval for charter changes and include notarized protocols to make unilateral changes extremely difficult.
• Separate family assets from corporate roles: The charge of fictitious employment of a spouse is a common flashpoint. If a family member genuinely performs work, the arrangement must be documented with clear job descriptions, time records, and arm’s-length compensation, avoiding the appearance of personal benefit.
• Avoid using company assets for personal use without formal reimbursement: The BMW transfer, even if agreed verbally, left a paper trail that now serves as a basis for embezzlement charges. Any use of corporate property by owners should be recorded as a benefit-in-kind with a documented repayment plan, or avoided entirely.
• Resolve disputes through internal mechanisms before they escalate to law enforcement: The 2026 internal probe that allegedly “uncovered” systematic theft came after the charter amendment and share consolidation. Once criminal charges are filed, the control fight becomes existential; early, third-party mediation or binding arbitration may preserve value that criminal proceedings will destroy.