Durnont Enterprises Ltd v Fazita Investment Ltd & Ors [2026] EWHC 405 (Ch) (25 February 2026)

Durnont Enterprises Ltd v Fazita Investment Ltd & Ors [2026] EWHC 405 (Ch) (25 February 2026)

There is a serious issue to be tried on all pleaded claims (fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, restitution) against the First to Fifth Defendants. The claims fall within the relevant jurisdictional gateways. England & Wales is the most appropriate forum for the trial. The claims are not time-barred on the present evidence and are not an abuse of process because the proceedings directly seek to set aside the prior default judgment for fraud. Applications to strike out, for summary judgment, or to set aside permission to continue the derivative claim are dismissed.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 405 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Durnont Enterprises Limited; First Defendant: Fazita Investment Limited; Second Defendant: Władysław Jaroszewicz; Third Defendant: Michael Carl Jaroszewicz; Fourth Defendant: M-JWK-Management Spółka z Ograniczona Odpowiedzialnościa; Fifth Defendant: Anna Bandurska; Sixth Defendant: Jan Czeremcha; Seventh Defendant: Maciej de Makay; Eighth Defendant: BNP Paribas Bank Polska S.A.; Ninth Defendant: Polish Real Estate Investment Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Derivative Claim (company Law, Fraud, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Restitution) / Interlocutory Judgment on Strike Out, Summary Judgment, Jurisdiction and Permission to Continue Derivative Claim
Outcome
Applications to strike out, for summary judgment, and to set aside permission to continue the derivative claim are dismissed. Permission to continue the derivative claim and to serve out of the jurisdiction is confirmed.
Legal Topics
Derivative Actions, Fraud, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Jurisdiction and Forum, Restitution, Abuse of Process, Limitation, Setting Aside Judgments for Fraud
Company Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Private International Law Derivative Actions Fraud Breach of Fiduciary Duty Jurisdiction and Forum +4 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 5 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Durnont Enterprises Limited

Claimant

Fazita Investment Limited

First Defendant

Władysław Jaroszewicz

Second Defendant

Michael Carl Jaroszewicz

Third Defendant

M-JWK-Management Spółka z Ograniczona Odpowiedzialnościa

Fourth Defendant

Anna Bandurska

Fifth Defendant

Jan Czeremcha

Sixth Defendant

Maciej de Makay

Seventh Defendant

BNP Paribas Bank Polska S.A.

Eighth Defendant

Polish Real Estate Investment Limited

Ninth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Derivative Claim (company Law, Fraud, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Restitution) / Interlocutory Judgment on Strike Out, Summary Judgment, Jurisdiction and Permission to Continue Derivative Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a serious issue to be tried on the claims (fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, restitution) against each defendant
  2. 2 Whether the claims fall within the jurisdictional gateways under CPR PD6B para 3.1
  3. 3 Whether England & Wales is the most appropriate forum

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious issue to be tried on all pleaded claims (fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, restitution) against the First to Fifth Defendants. The claims fall within the relevant jurisdictional gateways. England & Wales is the most appropriate forum for the trial. The claims are not time-barred on the present evidence and are not an abuse of process because the proceedings directly seek to set aside the prior default judgment for fraud. Applications to strike out, for summary judgment, or to set aside permission to continue the derivative claim are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Applications to strike out, for summary judgment, and to set aside permission to continue the derivative claim are dismissed. Permission to continue the derivative claim and to serve out of the jurisdiction is confirmed.

Orders

  • Permission to continue derivative claim confirmed
  • Permission to serve out of jurisdiction confirmed