JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov [2012] EWCA Civ 639 (16 May 2012)

It would not be in the interests of justice or proportionate to require Mr. Ablyazov to surrender to custody, make interim payment, provide security for costs, or make further disclosure as conditions for pursuing his appeal against the committal order, as such conditions would disproportionately restrict his right to challenge an order affecting his liberty.

Citation: [2012] EWCA Civ 639
Parties: Claimant/respondent: JSC BTA Bank; Defendant/appellant: Mukhtar Ablyazov
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 16 May 2012
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Application in the Court of Appeal Regarding Conditions for Pursuing Appeal Against Committal Order
Outcome: Applications dismissed
Legal Topics: Committal for Contempt, Right to Appeal, Security for Costs, Interim Payment, Disclosure Orders, Proportionality Under Article 6 ECHR

Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Human Rights Committal for Contempt Right to Appeal Security for Costs Interim Payment Disclosure Orders +1 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

JSC BTA Bank

Claimant/respondent

Mukhtar Ablyazov

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application in the Court of Appeal Regarding Conditions for Pursuing Appeal Against Committal Order

Legal Issues

1 Whether the appellant should be required to surrender to custody, make interim payment, provide security for costs, or make further disclosure as conditions for pursuing his appeal against a committal order for contempt of court.

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed