In the field of scientific publishing, trust is particularly important. A researcher entrusts a company with money, documents and the results of their work, and sometimes effectively entrusts it with part of their professional reputation. That is why public accusations against a company, especially accusations of deceiving clients, failing to return money or deliberately misleading customers, cannot be left unaddressed.
In 2026, such statements became the subject of legal proceedings between Scientific Publications and Academy of Articles. We did not allow years of work to be written off on the basis of unsubstantiated accusations, so we turned to the court and obtained a legal assessment of the specific statements.
Scientific Publications defended its business reputation in court
The reason for applying to the court was the false public statements made by Vasyl Malets, Director of LLP Academy of Articles. At his webinar, he claimed that Scientific Publications "constantly deceives clients", "delays deadlines by 3-4 years" and "does not return money", and that the company's owner runs the business with the intention of deceiving clients.
We did not leave these accusations unanswered and applied to the court. As a result, the court found that the information disseminated by Vasyl Malets did not correspond to reality and damaged the company's business reputation.
For more than ten years, we have been building our reputation through real work, cooperation with researchers and the development of partnerships with scientific and educational organisations. And when a competitor attempts to call all of this into question through high-profile public statements, we are prepared to defend that reputation not with words in response, but by every means provided for by law.
What exactly did the court find to be untrue?
The court's decision lists five specific statements disseminated by Vasyl Malets. They include:
- "The limited liability company Scientific Publications constantly deceives clients."
- "The limited liability company Scientific Publications delays deadlines by 3-4 years."
- "The limited liability company Scientific Publications has received orders for 500 articles."
- "The limited liability company Scientific Publications does not return money."
- The statement that the owner of Scientific Publications runs the business with the intention of deceiving clients, and that this "culture of deception" extends across the whole company.
The court clearly established that these statements do not correspond to reality and cause damage to the company's reputation. This is a matter of principle for us. Scientific Publications has been operating on the market for more than ten years and values its name. Public accusations must be substantiated and supported by evidence. In this case, their truthfulness was not proved in court – and that is a fact.
What does the court's decision provide for?
The court did not limit itself to finding the information untrue. The decision establishes that Vasyl Malets, Director of Academy of Articles, is obliged to retract the statements in question by publishing a video statement on the YouTube platform. He was required to do so within three calendar days of the court's decision entering into legal force.
However, the retraction ordered by the court was never published within the prescribed period. Instead of fulfilling this obligation, the case moved on to the next stage – enforced execution of the decision. On 3 August 2026, a private bailiff of the city of Astana issued a resolution opening enforcement proceedings against Vasyl Malets. It states that Vasyl Malets was warned of administrative and criminal liability for non-compliance with the requirements.
The court also separately ordered LLP Academy of Articles to reimburse Scientific Publications for legal costs of 1,004,325 tenge. This obligation was to be fulfilled, yet the company is still ignoring it. It continues to be listed in the Unified Register of Debtors of Kazakhstan.
This raises an entirely logical question: how does a company that has unfulfilled financial obligations and restrictions on its funds continue to work fully with new clients, conclude agreements and accept payment for its services?
For a person who is planning to entrust a company with their money and their scientific work, such circumstances may quite reasonably become grounds for additional verification of its reliability.
The director of Academy of Articles is not responding
After enforcement proceedings were opened, another problem arose: it was not possible to establish contact with Vasyl Malets. To determine his whereabouts, a request was sent to the relevant state authorities of Kazakhstan.
In response to the request, information was received from the Unified Information System 'Berkut'. It showed that Vasyl Malets had crossed the state border of Kazakhstan and left for Poland.
In other words, the person who is supposed to comply with the court's decision is currently outside Kazakhstan, and it is not possible to contact him directly.
At the same time, Academy of Articles continues to claim to have offices in Astana and Lviv. According to the results of our verification, neither their actual existence nor the work of permanent local teams has been confirmed.
This makes for a rather strange situation: Malets has not fulfilled the obligation established by the court and is not responding, and information about his departure from Kazakhstan had to be established through state authorities. Meanwhile, in the public space, the company continues to attract a new audience and to present itself as an operating business.
We continue to seek enforcement of the decision
For Scientific Publications, this case did not end on the day the court's decision was issued. On the contrary, that was when the work on its actual enforcement began.
Our legal department is actively engaging with the competent authorities and law enforcement bodies of Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Poland in order to establish contact with Vasyl Malets, ensure that the court's obligations are fulfilled and see the case through to the end.
Official state mechanisms have already had to be used to establish his whereabouts and the circumstances relevant to the enforcement of the decision. We are not stopping there. If a person does not respond and does not fulfil the obligations established by the court, this does not mean that the matter can simply be left unattended. A court decision must be enforced, and all the mechanisms provided for by law will be used to achieve this.
We are working in several jurisdictions at once and will continue to engage with the relevant authorities until we obtain a tangible result. It is a matter of principle for Scientific Publications that this story does not remain merely on paper. The court's decision must be enforced, and Vasyl Malets must answer for his own public statements.
Always check whom you entrust with your scientific work
The story of this dispute is also an occasion to discuss how a researcher should choose a company to which they intend to entrust their money and the work on their publication.
On the market, one can come across attractive websites, persuasive advertising promises and expert webinars. However, a first impression on its own says little about how reliable a partner will be in long-term work.
Before paying for services, it is worth checking which legal entity you are actually concluding the contract with. Look at whether the company's name, details and the party to the contract match, and to whom exactly you are transferring the money. It is no less important to understand who is responsible for your project and whom you can approach if questions or a dispute arise.
Particular attention should be paid to the company's actual presence. If an organisation claims to have offices in certain cities, this information can be additionally verified. The same applies to employees and representatives, as it is advisable to understand who exactly works at the company and what function they perform.
You should be alerted by situations in which a company uses addresses that are difficult to verify, does not provide clear information about the legal entity or the responsible employees, offers to accept payment to personal bank cards or uses non-transparent payment schemes. Each of these circumstances taken separately does not necessarily indicate a problem, but together they are a reason to ask the partner additional questions before payment.
It is also worth paying attention not only to what a company says about itself, but also to its actual history. Does it fulfil its obligations? How does it behave in disputed situations? Are its representatives prepared to answer for their public statements and contractual promises?
In the case of Academy of Articles, these questions acquire particular significance against the background of a court decision that found specific public statements by its director to be untrue, established an obligation to retract them and determined the company's financial obligations.
Therefore, before entrusting someone with your scientific work, it is worth looking not only at promises. A company's reliability is shown in how it fulfils its own obligations and how it answers for its own words.
