Boris Mints & Ors v PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor

Boris Mints & Ors v PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor

The Court held that the UK sanctions regime does not prohibit the entry of judgment in favour of a designated person, as there is no clear and unambiguous curtailment of the fundamental right of access to the court in SAMLA or the Regulations. The entry of judgment is not 'making available' funds or 'dealing' with economic resources within the meaning of the Regulations. The licensing regime permits OFSI to license payment of adverse and favourable costs and security for costs. The Court also held that 'control' under Regulation 7 is wide and includes control by whatever means, but the appeal was dismissed on the first two issues, making the control issue academic.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Boris Mints; Appellant/defendant: Dmitry Mints; Appellant/defendant: Alexander Mints; Appellant/defendant: Igor Mints; Respondent/claimant: PJSC National Bank Trust; Respondent/claimant: PJSC Bank Otkritie Financial Corporation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Effect of Sanctions on Civil Litigation, Interpretation of Sanctions Regulations, Right of Access to Courts, Licensing Under Sanctions Regime, Ownership and Control Under Sanctions
Sanctions Law Civil Procedure Banking Law International Law Effect of Sanctions on Civil Litigation Interpretation of Sanctions Regulations Right of Access to Courts Licensing Under Sanctions Regime +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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Boris Mints

Appellant/defendant

Dmitry Mints

Appellant/defendant

Alexander Mints

Appellant/defendant

Igor Mints

Appellant/defendant

PJSC National Bank Trust

Respondent/claimant

PJSC Bank Otkritie Financial Corporation

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether UK sanctions regime prohibits entry of judgment in favour of a designated person
  2. 2 Whether OFSI can license payment of adverse/favourable costs, security for costs, or damages under cross-undertakings
  3. 3 Whether control under Regulation 7 includes control via political office

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the UK sanctions regime does not prohibit the entry of judgment in favour of a designated person, as there is no clear and unambiguous curtailment of the fundamental right of access to the court in SAMLA or the Regulations. The entry of judgment is not 'making available' funds or 'dealing' with economic resources within the meaning of the Regulations. The licensing regime permits OFSI to license payment of adverse and favourable costs and security for costs. The Court also held that 'control' under Regulation 7 is wide and includes control by whatever means, but the appeal was dismissed on the first two issues, making the control issue academic.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Stay of proceedings refused
  • Discharge of undertakings refused