Evgeny Korchevtsev v Martin Severa & Ors.

Evgeny Korchevtsev v Martin Severa & Ors.

Permission is granted to continue the double derivative claim as the claimant has established a prima facie case of dishonest misappropriation by the first defendant, supported by accounting evidence, journal entries, and forensic IT analysis. The worldwide freezing injunction and proprietary freezing injunction are continued due to a real risk of dissipation, existence of assets, and inadequacy of damages. Orders for further disclosure are made to police the injunctions and enable tracing. The claimant is prospectively indemnified for own costs up to £100,000. The application to increase fortification is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Evgeny Korchevtsev; First Defendant: Martin Severa; Second Defendant: Fatfacades Limited; Third Defendant: F. A. T. Structures Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Double Derivative Claim / Interlocutory Judgment on Applications for Permission, Freezing Injunction, Proprietary Injunction, Disclosure, Indemnity, and Fortification
Outcome
Permission granted to continue double derivative claim; freezing and proprietary injunctions continued; disclosure orders made; indemnity for costs granted; fortification application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Double Derivative Claims, Directors' Duties, Freezing Injunctions, Proprietary Injunctions, Disclosure Orders, Indemnity for Costs, Fortification of Undertakings
Company Law Civil Procedure Equity Double Derivative Claims Directors' Duties Freezing Injunctions Proprietary Injunctions Disclosure Orders +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 9 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evgeny Korchevtsev

Claimant

Martin Severa

First Defendant

Fatfacades Limited

Second Defendant

F. A. T. Structures Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Double Derivative Claim / Interlocutory Judgment on Applications for Permission, Freezing Injunction, Proprietary Injunction, Disclosure, Indemnity, and Fortification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted to continue a double derivative claim
  2. 2 Whether the worldwide freezing injunction should be continued
  3. 3 Whether a proprietary freezing injunction should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

Permission is granted to continue the double derivative claim as the claimant has established a prima facie case of dishonest misappropriation by the first defendant, supported by accounting evidence, journal entries, and forensic IT analysis. The worldwide freezing injunction and proprietary freezing injunction are continued due to a real risk of dissipation, existence of assets, and inadequacy of damages. Orders for further disclosure are made to police the injunctions and enable tracing. The claimant is prospectively indemnified for own costs up to £100,000. The application to increase fortification is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Permission granted to continue double derivative claim; freezing and proprietary injunctions continued; disclosure orders made; indemnity for costs granted; fortification application dismissed.

Orders

  • Permission to continue double derivative claim
  • Prospective indemnity for claimant's own costs up to £100,000