Cyprus Popular Bank Co Ltd v Vgenopoulos & Ors [2016] EWHC 1695 (QB) (22 June 2016)

Cyprus Popular Bank Co Ltd v Vgenopoulos & Ors [2016] EWHC 1695 (QB) (22 June 2016)

The English court retains discretion to grant or refuse a domestic freezing order under Articles 47.2 and 47.3 of the Judgments Regulation; the claimant is not entitled to such relief as of right. Despite considerable and largely unexplained delay, there is sufficient evidence of a real risk of dissipation to justify the grant of a freezing order in this case.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 1695
Parties
Claimant: Cyprus Popular Bank Co. Limited; Defendants: Andreas Vgenopoulos & Ors.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Domestic Freezing Order (protective Measures) Under Judgments Regulation / Post Judgment, Application for Interim Relief Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for domestic freezing order granted (interim, pending appeal)
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Protective Measures, Judgments Regulation (brussels I), Discretion of Domestic Courts, Delay in Seeking Relief
Civil Procedure Private International Law Enforcement of Judgments Freezing Orders Protective Measures Judgments Regulation (brussels I) Discretion of Domestic Courts Delay in Seeking Relief

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cyprus Popular Bank Co. Limited

Claimant

Andreas Vgenopoulos & Ors.

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Application for Domestic Freezing Order (protective Measures) Under Judgments Regulation / Post Judgment, Application for Interim Relief Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled as of right to a domestic freezing order under Articles 47.2 and 47.3 of the Judgments Regulation or whether the English court retains discretion to grant such relief
  2. 2 Whether the delay in seeking the freezing order and the evidence of risk of dissipation justify or preclude the grant of relief

Ratio Decidendi

The English court retains discretion to grant or refuse a domestic freezing order under Articles 47.2 and 47.3 of the Judgments Regulation; the claimant is not entitled to such relief as of right. Despite considerable and largely unexplained delay, there is sufficient evidence of a real risk of dissipation to justify the grant of a freezing order in this case.

Court Disposition

Application for domestic freezing order granted (interim, pending appeal)

Orders

  • Freezing order to be made against the defendants, operative until determination of the pending appeal at the end of next month.