Deutsche Bank AG v Vik [2026] EWCA Civ 581 (12 May 2026)

Deutsche Bank AG v Vik [2026] EWCA Civ 581 (12 May 2026)

The Court of Appeal held that the court retains inherent jurisdiction to make further orders requiring an officer of a corporate judgment debtor to attend for examination and provide information under CPR r.71.2(1)(b), even if the officer is no longer within the jurisdiction or an officer, provided the original order was properly served and the process is not exhausted by non-compliance. The power to enforce compliance is a necessary incident of the original order, and the process continues until the information is provided. The court's inherent jurisdiction is not limited to committal for contempt but includes making further orders to achieve compliance.

Citation
[2026] EWCA Civ 581
Parties
Claimant / Applicant and Appellant: Deutsche Bank AG; Defendant for Costs Purposes Only / Respondent: Mr Alexander Vik
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (commercial Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Inherent Jurisdiction, CPR Part 71, Enforcement Against Corporate Judgment Debtors, Contempt of Court, Ancillary Orders, Jurisdiction Over Officers of Judgment Debtors
Civil Procedure Enforcement of Judgments Commercial Law Inherent Jurisdiction CPR Part 71 Enforcement Against Corporate Judgment Debtors Contempt of Court Ancillary Orders +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 3 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deutsche Bank AG

Claimant / Applicant and Appellant

Mr Alexander Vik

Defendant for Costs Purposes Only / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (commercial Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has inherent power to order further examination of a corporate officer under CPR r.71.2(1)(b) after non-compliance with an original order, even if the officer is no longer within jurisdiction or an officer of the company.
  2. 2 Whether the process under CPR Part 71 is exhausted after the initial examination date or continues until compliance is achieved.
  3. 3 Whether a further order for examination is ancillary or incidental to the original order and within the court's powers.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the court retains inherent jurisdiction to make further orders requiring an officer of a corporate judgment debtor to attend for examination and provide information under CPR r.71.2(1)(b), even if the officer is no longer within the jurisdiction or an officer, provided the original order was properly served and the process is not exhausted by non-compliance. The power to enforce compliance is a necessary incident of the original order, and the process continues until the information is provided. The court's inherent jurisdiction is not limited to committal for contempt but includes making further orders to achieve compliance.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order for further examination of Mr Vik under CPR r.71.2(1)(b) granted
  • Matter remitted to the Commercial Court for directions as to the conduct of the further examination