Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC v Shetty & Ors [2020] EWHC 3423 (Comm) (02 December 2020)

Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC v Shetty & Ors [2020] EWHC 3423 (Comm) (02 December 2020)

The Bank established a good arguable case in fraud and conspiracy against all defendants, supported by credible evidence of large-scale misrepresentation and asset dissipation. The risk of dissipation justified urgent worldwide freezing and disclosure orders. The English court had jurisdiction over all defendants, including foreign parties, under s.1140 Companies Act 2006 and tort gateways, and England was the proper forum given the centrality of NMC plc's UK listing, the making of representations in England, and the administration of NMC plc in England.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 3423 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC; Defendant/respondent: Bavaguthu Raghuram Shetty; Defendant/respondent: Khaleefa Butti Omair Yousif Almuhairi; Defendant/respondent: Saeed Mohamed Butti Mohamed Alqebaisi; Defendant/respondent: Prasanth Manghat; Defendant/respondent: Suresh Kumar Vadakke Kootala; Defendant/respondent: Prashanth Shenoy
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (urgent, Without Notice) / Interim Application for Worldwide Freezing Order and Disclosure Order
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Jurisdiction, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Conflict of Laws, Disclosure Orders
Commercial Law Banking Law Fraud Private International Law Freezing Injunctions Jurisdiction Fraudulent Misrepresentation Unlawful Means Conspiracy +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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC

Claimant/applicant

Bavaguthu Raghuram Shetty

Defendant/respondent

Khaleefa Butti Omair Yousif Almuhairi

Defendant/respondent

Saeed Mohamed Butti Mohamed Alqebaisi

Defendant/respondent

Prasanth Manghat

Defendant/respondent

Suresh Kumar Vadakke Kootala

Defendant/respondent

Prashanth Shenoy

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (urgent, Without Notice) / Interim Application for Worldwide Freezing Order and Disclosure Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant has a good arguable case in fraud and conspiracy against the defendants
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets justifying a worldwide freezing order
  3. 3 Whether the English court has jurisdiction over the defendants, including foreign defendants, under the relevant gateways

Ratio Decidendi

The Bank established a good arguable case in fraud and conspiracy against all defendants, supported by credible evidence of large-scale misrepresentation and asset dissipation. The risk of dissipation justified urgent worldwide freezing and disclosure orders. The English court had jurisdiction over all defendants, including foreign parties, under s.1140 Companies Act 2006 and tort gateways, and England was the proper forum given the centrality of NMC plc's UK listing, the making of representations in England, and the administration of NMC plc in England.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Worldwide freezing order granted against all defendants
  • Disclosure order granted against all defendants