Otkritie Capital International Ltd & Anor v threadneedle Asset Management Ltd & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 274 (12 April 2017)

Otkritie Capital International Ltd & Anor v threadneedle Asset Management Ltd & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 274 (12 April 2017)

Non-compliance with the Aldi guidelines is a serious procedural failure but does not automatically render subsequent proceedings an abuse of process. The court must undertake a broad merits-based assessment, considering all circumstances, including the seriousness of the breach and the hypothetical scenario of what would have happened if directions had been sought. In this case, the judge was entitled to find that Action 2 was not an abuse of process and to make a costs order reflecting Otkritie's conduct.

Citation
[2017] EWCA Civ 274
Parties
Respondent/appellant: OTKRITIE CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL LTD; Respondent/appellant: JSC OTKRITIE HOLDING; Appellant/respondent: THREADNEEDLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LIMITED; Appellant/respondent: THREADNEEDLE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Both appeals and the respondent's notice dismissed.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Case Management, Joinder of Parties, Costs Orders, Vicarious Liability
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Abuse of Process Case Management Joinder of Parties Costs Orders Vicarious Liability

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OTKRITIE CAPITAL INTERNATIONAL LTD

Respondent/appellant

JSC OTKRITIE HOLDING

Respondent/appellant

THREADNEEDLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LIMITED

Appellant/respondent

THREADNEEDLE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LIMITED

Appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to comply with the Aldi guidelines (seeking management directions on potential claims against non-joined parties) mandates striking out subsequent proceedings as an abuse of process.
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in considering the hypothetical scenario of what would have happened if directions had been sought.
  3. 3 Whether the costs order against Otkritie was appropriate given its non-compliance with the Aldi guidelines.

Ratio Decidendi

Non-compliance with the Aldi guidelines is a serious procedural failure but does not automatically render subsequent proceedings an abuse of process. The court must undertake a broad merits-based assessment, considering all circumstances, including the seriousness of the breach and the hypothetical scenario of what would have happened if directions had been sought. In this case, the judge was entitled to find that Action 2 was not an abuse of process and to make a costs order reflecting Otkritie's conduct.

Court Disposition

Both appeals and the respondent's notice dismissed.

Orders

  • Action 2 not struck out; proceedings to continue.
  • Otkritie to pay 75% of Threadneedle's costs of the application.