Yermek Alimov v Abdumalik Mirakhmedov & Ors

Yermek Alimov v Abdumalik Mirakhmedov & Ors

Kazakhstan is clearly and distinctly the most appropriate forum for the dispute, given the governing law, factual connections, parties' links, and centrality of Kazakh legal issues. D1 was properly served within the jurisdiction but proceedings against him are stayed. Permission to serve D2, D3, and D4 out of jurisdiction is set aside due to lack of proper forum, no serious issue to be tried against D4, and material non-disclosure. Alternative service is not justified. Full and frank disclosure failures would independently warrant setting aside the order.

Parties
Claimant: Yermek Alimov; First Defendant: Abdumalik Mirakhmedov; Second Defendant: Rashit Makhat; Third Defendant: Andrey Kim; Fourth Defendant: Genesis Digital Assets Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim / Interlocutory Jurisdictional Challenge and Stay Application
Outcome
Claim stayed against D1; permission to serve out of jurisdiction set aside for D2, D3, D4; alternative service order set aside.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Forum Non Conveniens, Service of Process, Foreign Law, Partnership, Unjust Enrichment
Civil Procedure Private International Law Contract Law Jurisdiction Forum Non Conveniens Service of Process Foreign Law Partnership +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 8 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yermek Alimov

Claimant

Abdumalik Mirakhmedov

First Defendant

Rashit Makhat

Second Defendant

Andrey Kim

Third Defendant

Genesis Digital Assets Limited

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim / Interlocutory Jurisdictional Challenge and Stay Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether England is the appropriate forum for the dispute
  2. 2 Whether service within/outside jurisdiction was valid
  3. 3 Whether there is a serious issue to be tried

Ratio Decidendi

Kazakhstan is clearly and distinctly the most appropriate forum for the dispute, given the governing law, factual connections, parties' links, and centrality of Kazakh legal issues. D1 was properly served within the jurisdiction but proceedings against him are stayed. Permission to serve D2, D3, and D4 out of jurisdiction is set aside due to lack of proper forum, no serious issue to be tried against D4, and material non-disclosure. Alternative service is not justified. Full and frank disclosure failures would independently warrant setting aside the order.

Court Disposition

Claim stayed against D1; permission to serve out of jurisdiction set aside for D2, D3, D4; alternative service order set aside.

Orders

  • Proceedings against D1 stayed on grounds of forum non conveniens in favour of Kazakhstan.
  • Dias J Order for service out of jurisdiction against D2, D3, D4 set aside.