Trafigura Pte Ltd & Anor v Emirates General Petroleum Corporation [2010] EWHC 3007 (Comm) (4 November 2010)

Trafigura Pte Ltd & Anor v Emirates General Petroleum Corporation [2010] EWHC 3007 (Comm) (4 November 2010)

The defendant and Mr Al Midfa were properly served and knowingly breached the anti-suit injunction and worldwide freezing order. The breaches were deliberate and substantial, justifying orders for sequestration and committal. The court has discretion to grant sequestration even if assets are not currently within the jurisdiction, and committal is necessary to uphold the authority of the court.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 3007 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Trafigura Pte Ltd; Claimant/respondent: Trafigura Beheer Bv; Defendant/appellant: Emirates General Petroleum Corporation; General Manager of Defendant: Mr Al Midfa
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application in Commercial Proceedings / Judgment on Contempt Application
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Anti Suit Injunctions, Freezing Orders, Service of Process, Committal for Contempt, Sequestration
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Anti Suit Injunctions Freezing Orders Service of Process Committal for Contempt Sequestration

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

Parties

Trafigura Pte Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Trafigura Beheer Bv

Claimant/respondent

Emirates General Petroleum Corporation

Defendant/appellant

Mr Al Midfa

General Manager of Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application in Commercial Proceedings / Judgment on Contempt Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant and its general manager are in contempt of court for breaching anti-suit injunction and worldwide freezing order
  2. 2 Whether service of the application was sufficient
  3. 3 Whether sequestration and committal orders should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant and Mr Al Midfa were properly served and knowingly breached the anti-suit injunction and worldwide freezing order. The breaches were deliberate and substantial, justifying orders for sequestration and committal. The court has discretion to grant sequestration even if assets are not currently within the jurisdiction, and committal is necessary to uphold the authority of the court.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Leave to issue a writ of sequestration against the property of the defendant granted
  • Order for committal of Mr Al Midfa to prison for 12 months on each breach, sentences to run concurrently