Russian Commercial Bank (Cyprus) Ltd v Khoroshilov

Russian Commercial Bank (Cyprus) Ltd v Khoroshilov

The injunctions should not be renewed due to material non-disclosure regarding the Protocol of 3 August 2010 and the presentation of the Pancia issue, and because the balance of convenience favours the bank as judgment creditor. The applicants' underlying claim is not strong, and the bank would suffer prejudice if the injunctions continued. However, time to challenge the arbitration award is extended to avoid injustice, as the issues overlap with the claim to set aside the consent judgments.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Russian Commercial Bank (Cyprus) Limited; Defendant/applicant: Fedor Khoroshilov; Defendant/applicant: Talon Enterprises Limited; Claimant/applicant: OOO Obneftegas
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Commercial Injunction Application (return Date) / Interlocutory Application for Continuation of Injunctions and Extension of Time to Challenge Arbitration Award
Outcome
Injunctions discharged; time to challenge arbitration award extended
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Consent Judgments, Arbitration Awards, Non Disclosure, Balance of Convenience
Commercial Law Banking Law Arbitration Injunctions Fraudulent Misrepresentation Consent Judgments Arbitration Awards Non Disclosure +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Russian Commercial Bank (Cyprus) Limited

Claimant/respondent

Fedor Khoroshilov

Defendant/applicant

Talon Enterprises Limited

Defendant/applicant

OOO Obneftegas

Claimant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Injunction Application (return Date) / Interlocutory Application for Continuation of Injunctions and Extension of Time to Challenge Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the injunctions restraining enforcement of consent judgments and arbitration award should be continued
  2. 2 Whether there was material non-disclosure or misrepresentation justifying discharge of the injunctions
  3. 3 Whether there is a serious issue to be tried on the claim to set aside the judgments/award for fraud

Ratio Decidendi

The injunctions should not be renewed due to material non-disclosure regarding the Protocol of 3 August 2010 and the presentation of the Pancia issue, and because the balance of convenience favours the bank as judgment creditor. The applicants' underlying claim is not strong, and the bank would suffer prejudice if the injunctions continued. However, time to challenge the arbitration award is extended to avoid injustice, as the issues overlap with the claim to set aside the consent judgments.

Court Disposition

Injunctions discharged; time to challenge arbitration award extended

Orders

  • The injunctions restraining enforcement of the consent judgments and arbitration award are not renewed and are discharged.
  • Time to bring the application to set aside the arbitration award is extended.