JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov [2017] EWHC 2906 (Comm) (17 November 2017)

JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov [2017] EWHC 2906 (Comm) (17 November 2017)

The Bank failed to discharge the burden of proving that Mr Ablyazov is the beneficial owner of Bensbourogh and Alberts Court. The evidence, including new documentation and explanations from Mr Shalabayev, supports that he acquired the property with his own funds from the sale of Bektas and is the true beneficial owner. Prior findings against Mr Ablyazov do not bind Mr Shalabayev in these circumstances. The final charging order over Alberts Court is therefore discharged.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2906 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant / Applicant: JSC BTA Bank; 1st Defendant: Mukhtar Ablyazov; 1st Respondent: Salim Shalabayev; 2nd Respondent: Bensbourogh Trading Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Proceedings (charging Order/intervention) / Trial Following Court of Appeal Remittal to Determine Beneficial Ownership of Property
Outcome
Final charging order over Alberts Court discharged; Bank's application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Beneficial Ownership, Charging Orders, Asset Tracing, Nominee Arrangements, Contempt of Court, Admissibility of Prior Findings
Civil Procedure Property Law Trusts and Equity Banking Law Beneficial Ownership Charging Orders Asset Tracing Nominee Arrangements +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JSC BTA Bank

Claimant / Applicant

Mukhtar Ablyazov

1st Defendant

Salim Shalabayev

1st Respondent

Bensbourogh Trading Inc

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Proceedings (charging Order/intervention) / Trial Following Court of Appeal Remittal to Determine Beneficial Ownership of Property

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who is the beneficial owner of 17 Alberts Court and Bensbourogh Trading Inc?
  2. 2 Is the Bank entitled to a final charging order over Alberts Court to enforce its judgment against Mr Ablyazov?
  3. 3 Are findings from previous proceedings admissible in this trial?

Ratio Decidendi

The Bank failed to discharge the burden of proving that Mr Ablyazov is the beneficial owner of Bensbourogh and Alberts Court. The evidence, including new documentation and explanations from Mr Shalabayev, supports that he acquired the property with his own funds from the sale of Bektas and is the true beneficial owner. Prior findings against Mr Ablyazov do not bind Mr Shalabayev in these circumstances. The final charging order over Alberts Court is therefore discharged.

Court Disposition

Final charging order over Alberts Court discharged; Bank's application dismissed.

Orders

  • The final charging order over 17 Alberts Court is set aside.
  • No order as to costs.