Registration confirms that a company exists, but does not explain who controls it or how it operates

Company Check is a check of a single company in one primary country: first-line owners, management, registration history, litigation and sanctions indicators. Corporate Due Diligence reveals multiple levels of ownership: beneficial owners, related companies, financial indicators, chronology and ownership structure. If the structure is multi-tiered or international, Company Check will show only the first line - a full format is needed for a material decision.

In many cases - yes, but the depth depends on the jurisdictions in the chain. Where registries disclose participants, the beneficial owner is established documentarily; where a link is closed, we work through a set of indicators - directors, addresses, representatives, financing - and clearly distinguish statuses: confirmed beneficial owner and presumed. An unverifiable link is recorded as a limitation.

Yes, this is a core part of the work. Each jurisdiction uses its own set of sources, and the report indicates what is available in a given country. The number of countries in the ownership chain is the main factor for timeframe and cost.

A nominee owner is an indication to continue the check, not a dead end. We look for indicators of de facto control: who appoints managers, who provides financing, whose representatives recur in the structures, who receives the benefits. The combination of such indicators often points to the actual controlling person, even when formal ownership is registered to others.

Yes: addresses and infrastructure, personnel in open sources, licenses, financial statements, traces of supplies and projects, and the correspondence between declared and observed capacity. A discrepancy between declared and actual activity is one of the most common findings of a check.

A closed link is recorded in the report as a limit of what can be concluded, with the reason stated. Beyond that, lawful avenues are used: requesting documents from the other party, admissible local sources, and the aggregate of control indicators. A closed jurisdiction may make it impossible to identify the ultimate person - in that case the status remains a hypothesis and is not presented as established.

Yes. Litigation, insolvency proceedings and regulatory measures are checked against court and insolvency registers; sanctions exposure is checked against lists concerning the company, its owners and its officers, including indirect connections to sanctioned entities. Closed proceedings are not accessible by lawful means and are recorded as a limitation.

Within the scope of available sources: financial statements, where published, debts, enforcement proceedings, pledges, and indicators of financial strain. This is an analytical assessment of indicators, not an audit - accounting audit remains the task of specialized providers.

Yes: authority, appointment history, involvement in other companies, disqualifications, and litigation or reputational matters. Officers often link the company to other structures within a group and point toward actual control.

Company Due Diligence answers the question of what the company is: structure, beneficial owners, activity, risks. Transaction Due Diligence is built around a specific deal: the parties, authority, subject matter, obligations and enforceability. Ahead of a major transaction the two formats are often carried out together - the company check provides the foundation, and the transaction check closes the contractual scope.

Company Check - usually 5-8 business days, Corporate Due Diligence - 10-20. Complex Ownership Investigation is estimated after a briefing. The timeframe increases with the number of jurisdictions, ownership levels, and closed links requiring documents.

Yes. The company, owners, beneficial owners and officers are checked against applicable sanctions sources and for PEP status. Every material match is resolved by identifiers: a name match alone is not a confirmed risk, and PEP status does not indicate unlawful conduct and requires additional measures.

Yes. Scope is agreed separately for each jurisdiction: in some, the list of participants and beneficial owners is available; in others, only the fact of registration. These differences are recorded in the report as limits of what can be concluded, not replaced by assumption.

The report reflects the state of the company as of the date of the check: each entry carries a source and a date. A change of participants or officers, or the emergence of new obligations, changes the picture, so key sections are updated ahead of a significant event. For transactions with a long preparation period, we recommend a final verification of material entries before signing.

No. The report provides a verifiable picture of the company - structure, beneficial owners, activity and risk factors - but does not guarantee the safety of a transaction and does not replace a bank's decision or a legal assessment. It reduces uncertainty and provides grounds for contractual terms; legal qualification is given by a qualified specialist.