JSC Commercial Bank Privatbank v Kolomoisky & Ors [2022] EWHC 868 (Ch) (11 April 2022)

JSC Commercial Bank Privatbank v Kolomoisky & Ors [2022] EWHC 868 (Ch) (11 April 2022)

The first defendant and Fieldfisher adopted an unduly narrow approach to relevance in redacting WhatsApp messages, failing to consider relevance to any issue in the proceedings rather than just the Issues for Disclosure. There has been or may have been a failure to comply with the extended disclosure order, justifying further review and a schedule of redactions under CPR PD 51U para 17.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 868 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: JSC Commercial Bank PrivatBank; First Defendant: Igor Valeryevich Kolomoisky; Second Defendant: Gennadiy Borisovich Bogolyubov; Third Defendant: Teamtrend Limited; Fourth Defendant: Trade Point Agro Limited; Fifth Defendant: Collyer Limited; Sixth Defendant: Rossyn Investing Corp; Seventh Defendant: Milbert Ventures Inc; Eighth Defendant: ZAO Ukrtransitservice Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Civil Litigation / Interlocutory Application Regarding Disclosure (redaction of Whats App Messages)
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Redaction, Relevance of Evidence, Extended Disclosure Under CPR PD 51 U
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Disclosure Redaction Relevance of Evidence Extended Disclosure Under CPR PD 51 U

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JSC Commercial Bank PrivatBank

Claimant

Igor Valeryevich Kolomoisky

First Defendant

Gennadiy Borisovich Bogolyubov

Second Defendant

Teamtrend Limited

Third Defendant

Trade Point Agro Limited

Fourth Defendant

Collyer Limited

Fifth Defendant

Rossyn Investing Corp

Sixth Defendant

Milbert Ventures Inc

Seventh Defendant

ZAO Ukrtransitservice Ltd

Eighth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Civil Litigation / Interlocutory Application Regarding Disclosure (redaction of Whats App Messages)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the redactions applied to WhatsApp messages disclosed by the first defendant were justified under CPR PD 51U para 16.1(1)
  2. 2 Whether the approach to relevance adopted by the first defendant and Fieldfisher was too narrow
  3. 3 What relief is appropriate under CPR PD 51U para 17 in light of possible non-compliance with disclosure orders

Ratio Decidendi

The first defendant and Fieldfisher adopted an unduly narrow approach to relevance in redacting WhatsApp messages, failing to consider relevance to any issue in the proceedings rather than just the Issues for Disclosure. There has been or may have been a failure to comply with the extended disclosure order, justifying further review and a schedule of redactions under CPR PD 51U para 17.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • First defendant to conduct a further review of all WhatsApp message redactions, assessing relevance to any issue in the proceedings, not just Issues for Disclosure.
  • First defendant to instruct Fieldfisher to prepare a schedule for each redacted message, identifying recipient, date, time, and a generic subject description, verified by witness statement.