Egīls Radziņš
Sworn advocate, leading partner


A member of The Latvian Collegium of Sworn Advocates since 1990.

Graduated from The Law Faculty of the University of Latvia in 1987.

The Arbitrator of Riga International Arbitration Court, Riga Arbitration Court and Kurzeme Regional Arbitration Court.

Since 1990, he has represented the interests of his clients at all levels of courts of general jurisdiction, as well as the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights.   

A Board Member of The Latvian Collegium of Sworn Advocates since 2008.

Since the 2010 he has participated in the working group of The Ministry of Justice developing Civil Procedure amendments.

Languages: Latvian, English, Russian.

A member of The Latvian Collegium of Sworn Advocates since 1998.

Graduated the Law Faculty of the University of Latvia in 1987.

Graduated the Institute of International Affairs of the University of Latvia post-graduate studies in International Law and Economic Relations in 1994.

Since 1994 acting in major law offices she has represented the interests of her clients at all levels of courts of general jurisdiction and has obtained experience representing clients in transactions. She specializes in family law, obligation law, residential tenancy law and property rights. She has obtained certificates of professional qualification improvement program in the field of protection of children's rights.

Certified mediatore since 2014.

Languages: Latvian, English, Russian.

Dace Jenava

Sworn advocate


Laura Legzdiņa        
Assistant to sworn advocate             

A member of The Latvian Collegium of Sworn Advocates since 2018. Graduated from The Law Faculty of the University of Latvia in 2017, earning a Master's Degree in Law.

Languages: Latvian, English, Russian.

Una Skopiņa
Legal Assistant


Graduated from Riga Stradins University in 2020, earning a Bachelor’s Degree in Law.

Languages: Latvian, English, Russian

Ieva Kalniņa
Office Administrator


Languages: Latvian, English, Russian.


The Law Office of Sworn Advocate Egils Radzins was founded in 1992.

Since the founding of the Office a number of well-known lawyers have launched their legal practice within it: Dace Jenava, Anna Kovaļevska, Santa Liepiņa, Sandis Petrovičs, Kristīne Zīle, Agnese Osīte, Armands Rasa, Justīne Haka and Gundega Kārkliņa.


Since its founding, the Office has provided legal assistance to clients in the areas of civil, commercial and administrative law. At the beginning of its practice, and in collaboration with colleagues from the USA, the Office helped clients in trials regarding land reform, denationalization of real estate and enterprise privatisation, gradually becoming one of the most knowledgeable experts on property rights issues. The Firm has significant litigation experience in civil and administrative cases, starting from process initiation up to representation of clients’ interests in the Constitutional Court.


The Office has successfully represented the interests of its clients in the European Court of Human Rights, achieving a significant recovery of compensation in cases Vistiņš un Perepjolkins vs. Latvia and Dzirnis vs. Latvia. The Office provides representation of its clients’ interests both in court as well as aiming for out-of-court dispute resolutions. We are proud if the judgment of the court in cases involving our Office lawyers serves as an example for the subsequent interpretation of the law and is useful for future applications.

We are pleased if we manage to help our clients in the preparation of transactions, avoiding disputes in the future and protecting our clients from an unnecessary waste of time and resources. By participating in the negotiations of transactions, we consistently protect the interests of our clients, being ready to compromise so that a formal legal dispute does not become an obstacle to achieving significant results.



Apr 22, 2019


On 17 April 2019, the Senate of the Republic of Latvia rendered a judgment in case No. SKC - 107/2019 in connection with a cassation complaint of a client represented by the Office in a dispute concerning exercising the right of redemption of the building owner, which he was refused because at the moment of entering into the agricultural land purchase agreement he did not meet the conditions for the acquisition of title to the agricultural land included in Paragraph 1 of Part One of Section 281 of the Law On the Land Privatisation in Rural Areas. The Senate confirmed the opinion contained in the cassation complaint that the purchaser must meet the criteria set forth in the above legal provision, not at the moment of entering into the purchase agreement, but at the moment of making the decision on exercising the preemption right, or in the case of the violation of such right - at the moment of exercising the redemption right.

Apr 14, 2019

Judgment favourable to clients has entered into force

The judgment of Riga City Latgale Suburb Court has entered into force on 3 April 2019, whereby the claim of the producer of dog food DOGO, JSC Tukuma straume, against the veterinarians claiming the collection of almost half a million euros in compensation for the alleged defamation, has been rejected. This is definitely a rare occasion when judicial proceedings in a dispute that has caused vast public resonance is not continued in the appeal instance. The reason for such result may be found in a high-quality argumentation of the judgment by the court.

Dec 19, 2018

Important Supreme Court judgment regarding the right of access to information of company shareholders.

On 15 November 2018, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Latvia rendered a judgment regarding the availability of information that is favourable to the interests of minority shareholders of capital companies. However, the same can not be said about the interests of a company shareholder that owns a majority of the shares and who, most likely, therefore manages and controls the management of the company.

The aforementioned judgment provides an explanation of the right to information of a capital company shareholder provided by the Commercial Law. The Supreme Court has acknowledged that such right provides the shareholder with the opportunity to not only get acquainted with general information about the principal operational indicators of the company, but also with all company transactions, correspondence, accounting, record keeping and other documents. This right may only be restricted in each particular case by a decision of the shareholders' meeting, if other participants are able to justify, with specific facts, that there is a suspicion that the shareholder could use the information obtained contrary to the objectives of the company.

It is important to note that the shareholder has such a right to receive information irrespective of what number of shares the shareholder owns. Consequently, this judgment of the Supreme Court opens broad rights for minority shareholders to access information, which makes it possible to ascertain the effective management of the company and, if necessary, to challenge the validity of actions by the Board by, for example, bringing action for indemnification for damages. However, from the perspective of the majority shareholder, the transfer of complete information about the commercial activities of the company to any shareholder of the company poses a risk of leaking information containing commercial secrets. Therefore, the arguments and reasoning for the refusal to provide information should be carefully considered, so that, in the event of a dispute and disagreement between the shareholders, the information related to the commercial activities of the company would not be used contrary to the objectives of the company.

Dec 16, 2018

Lawyer process is being introduced as of January 1st

On 1 January 2019, article 82¹. of the Civil Procedure Law will enter into force, which, as an exception in separate case categories, will introduce a lawyer process in the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal as well; that is, it will give rights to people to participate in courts on their own or through a lawyer, prohibiting representatives and persons who are not in an employment relationship with the legal person from doing the same. Currently, the above will only apply to disputes that arise from contract law, if the amount of the claim exceeds EUR 150,000; and to disputes about the revocation of the decisions made by capital company members and shareholders. Hopefully, when the normal legislative work will have started in the Saeima, the number of case categories will be extended, ensuring the exclusive co-participation of lawyers in the civil procedure as a self-evident part of the judicial procedure.

1 / 4

Please reload



Krišjāņa Valdemāra iela 33-1, Riga, LV-1010
Phone: 67284280
Account number LV64 UNLA 0002 2007 0063 6,
SEB bank, VAT number: LV90000378107