Akers & Ors v Samba Financial Group

Akers & Ors v Samba Financial Group

The governing law of the alleged trusts and the proprietary interest in the disputed shares is Saudi Arabian law, as the shares are in Saudi companies, registered in Saudi Arabia, and the relevant transactions have their closest connection with Saudi Arabia. Saudi law does not recognise the type of trust alleged, so the claim under section 127 fails. Saudi Arabia is clearly and distinctly the more appropriate forum, and the proceedings should be stayed.

Parties
Claimant / Respondent: Stephen John Akers; Claimant / Respondent: Mark Byers; Claimant / Respondent: Hugh Dickson; Claimant / Respondent: Saad Investments Company Limited (in liquidation); Defendant / Applicant: Samba Financial Group
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Insolvency Proceedings (application for Stay) / Interlocutory Application (stay of Proceedings)
Outcome
Stay granted; proceedings stayed in favour of Saudi Arabian courts.
Legal Topics
Forum Non Conveniens, Recognition of Foreign Insolvency Proceedings, Governing Law of Trusts, Cross Border Insolvency, Section 127 Insolvency Act 1986
Insolvency Law Conflict of Laws Trusts Law Forum Non Conveniens Recognition of Foreign Insolvency Proceedings Governing Law of Trusts Cross Border Insolvency Section 127 Insolvency Act 1986

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen John Akers

Claimant / Respondent

Mark Byers

Claimant / Respondent

Hugh Dickson

Claimant / Respondent

Saad Investments Company Limited (in liquidation)

Claimant / Respondent

Samba Financial Group

Defendant / Applicant

Procedural Posture

Insolvency Proceedings (application for Stay) / Interlocutory Application (stay of Proceedings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court should stay insolvency proceedings in favour of Saudi Arabian courts as a more appropriate forum
  2. 2 What law governs the proprietary interest in shares held under alleged trusts
  3. 3 Whether section 127 of the Insolvency Act 1986 applies to the disposition of shares registered in Saudi Arabia

Ratio Decidendi

The governing law of the alleged trusts and the proprietary interest in the disputed shares is Saudi Arabian law, as the shares are in Saudi companies, registered in Saudi Arabia, and the relevant transactions have their closest connection with Saudi Arabia. Saudi law does not recognise the type of trust alleged, so the claim under section 127 fails. Saudi Arabia is clearly and distinctly the more appropriate forum, and the proceedings should be stayed.

Court Disposition

Stay granted; proceedings stayed in favour of Saudi Arabian courts.

Orders

  • Proceedings stayed on the ground that the courts of Saudi Arabia are clearly and distinctly a more appropriate forum.