Navigator Equities Limited & Anor. v Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska

Navigator Equities Limited & Anor. v Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska

The High Court erred in striking out the contempt application as an abuse of process based on a misunderstanding of the effect of the redomiciliation and the parties' positions, and in treating subjective motive and quasi-prosecutorial duties as grounds for abuse. The contempt application was properly arguable and should not have been struck out. The matter is remitted for a hearing on the merits.

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
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Striking Out Contempt Application and Dismissing Contractual Claim
Outcome
Appeal allowed; matter remitted to Commercial Court for hearing of the contempt application on the merits.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Contempt of Court, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Freezing Orders, Contractual Undertakings
Civil Procedure Arbitration Commercial Law Abuse of Process Contempt of Court Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Freezing Orders Contractual Undertakings

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 18 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

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Striking Out Contempt Application and Dismissing Contractual Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in striking out the contempt application as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in finding no breach of the Deripaska Undertakings
  3. 3 Whether subjective motive and quasi-prosecutorial duties are relevant to civil contempt applications

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in striking out the contempt application as an abuse of process based on a misunderstanding of the effect of the redomiciliation and the parties' positions, and in treating subjective motive and quasi-prosecutorial duties as grounds for abuse. The contempt application was properly arguable and should not have been struck out. The matter is remitted for a hearing on the merits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; matter remitted to Commercial Court for hearing of the contempt application on the merits.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The contempt application is restored for hearing by the Commercial Court.