Navigator Equities Ltd & Anor v Deripaska [2021] EWCA Civ 1799 (30 November 2021)

Navigator Equities Ltd & Anor v Deripaska [2021] EWCA Civ 1799 (30 November 2021)

The contempt application was properly struck out as an abuse of process due to the Appellants' improper motive, partisan conduct, misleading evidence, and failure to act dispassionately as quasi-prosecutors. There was no breach of the Deripaska Undertakings as the redomiciliation did not extinguish the shares or render them unavailable for enforcement, and the undertakings did not require the shares to remain Jersey-registered. The judge's findings on motive, knowledge, and prosecutorial duties were correct and justified dismissal of the application.

Citation
[2021] EWCA Civ 1799
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Navigator Equities Limited; Claimant/appellant: Vladimir Anatolevich Chernukhin; Defendant/respondent: Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil Division) / Appeal From High Court Judgment Striking Out Contempt Application and Dismissing Contractual Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment upheld.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Contempt of Court, Contractual Undertakings, Freezing Orders, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Arbitration Abuse of Process Contempt of Court Contractual Undertakings Freezing Orders Enforcement of Arbitral Awards

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Navigator Equities Limited

Claimant/appellant

Vladimir Anatolevich Chernukhin

Claimant/appellant

Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil Division) / Appeal From High Court Judgment Striking Out Contempt Application and Dismissing Contractual Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contempt application was an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the Deripaska Undertakings were breached
  3. 3 Whether the undertakings had contractual effect

Ratio Decidendi

The contempt application was properly struck out as an abuse of process due to the Appellants' improper motive, partisan conduct, misleading evidence, and failure to act dispassionately as quasi-prosecutors. There was no breach of the Deripaska Undertakings as the redomiciliation did not extinguish the shares or render them unavailable for enforcement, and the undertakings did not require the shares to remain Jersey-registered. The judge's findings on motive, knowledge, and prosecutorial duties were correct and justified dismissal of the application.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment upheld.

Orders

  • Contempt application struck out as abuse of process
  • No finding of breach of Deripaska Undertakings