PJSC Commercial Bank Privatbank v Kolomoisky & Ors [2018] EWHC 3835 (Ch) (23 November 2018)

PJSC Commercial Bank Privatbank v Kolomoisky & Ors [2018] EWHC 3835 (Ch) (23 November 2018)

Permission to appeal is granted only on jurisdiction and stay issues due to arguable points of law; refused on quantum, non-disclosure, and adequacy of reasons as no realistic prospect of success. Costs are awarded to the defendants on an indemnity basis due to the claimant's abuse of process and material...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 3835 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: PJSC Commercial Bank PrivatBank; First Defendant: Igor Valeryevich Kolomoisky; Second Defendant: Gennadiy Borisovich Bogolyubov; Third Defendant: Teamtrend Limited; Fourth Defendant: Trade Point Agro Limited; Fifth Defendant: Collyer Limited; Sixth Defendant: Rossyn Investing Corp; Seventh Defendant: Milbert Ventures Inc.; Eighth Defendant: ZAO Ukrtransitservice Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial/chancery Interim Applications / Permission to Appeal, Costs, and Interim Relief Post Judgment
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted on jurisdiction and stay issues; refused on quantum, non-disclosure, and adequacy of reasons. Costs awarded to defendants on indemnity basis. Interim payments ordered. Short-term stay of discharge of injunction granted pending application to Court of Appeal.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Freezing Injunctions, Costs, Non Disclosure, Lugano Convention, Article 6 ECHR
Civil Procedure Private International Law Banking Law Jurisdiction Freezing Injunctions Costs Non Disclosure Lugano Convention +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PJSC Commercial Bank PrivatBank

Claimant

Igor Valeryevich Kolomoisky

First Defendant

Gennadiy Borisovich Bogolyubov

Second Defendant

Teamtrend Limited

Third Defendant

Trade Point Agro Limited

Fourth Defendant

Collyer Limited

Fifth Defendant

Rossyn Investing Corp

Sixth Defendant

Milbert Ventures Inc.

Seventh Defendant

ZAO Ukrtransitservice Limited

Eighth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial/chancery Interim Applications / Permission to Appeal, Costs, and Interim Relief Post Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be granted on jurisdiction and stay issues
  2. 2 Whether permission to appeal should be granted on quantum, non-disclosure, and adequacy of reasons
  3. 3 Whether a stay or continuation of the freezing injunction should be granted pending appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted only on jurisdiction and stay issues due to arguable points of law; refused on quantum, non-disclosure, and adequacy of reasons as no realistic prospect of success. Costs are awarded to the defendants on an indemnity basis due to the claimant's abuse of process and material non-disclosure. Interim payments on account of costs are ordered. A short-term stay of the discharge of the injunction is granted pending any application to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted on jurisdiction and stay issues; refused on quantum, non-disclosure, and adequacy of reasons. Costs awarded to defendants on indemnity basis. Interim payments ordered. Short-term stay of discharge of injunction granted pending application to Court of Appeal.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted on jurisdiction and stay issues only
  • Permission to appeal refused on quantum, non-disclosure, and adequacy of reasons