Golubovich v Golubovich [2022] EWHC 1605 (Ch) (22 June 2022)

Golubovich v Golubovich [2022] EWHC 1605 (Ch) (22 June 2022)

The court found no error in the Deputy Master's evaluation that England was clearly or distinctly the most appropriate forum for the Additional Claim, and no abuse of process in permitting Alexey to argue forum conveniens after the anti-suit injunction decision. The summary assessment of costs was not unjust despite procedural irregularity, as Olga had opportunity to make submissions and the Deputy Master exercised proper discretion.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1605 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Nataliya Golubovich; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Alexey Golubovich; Part 20 Defendant/appellant: Olga Mirimskaya
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Against Jurisdiction and Costs Orders
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction Challenge, Forum Conveniens, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Abuse of Process, Costs Assessment
Civil Procedure Private International Law Family Law Jurisdiction Challenge Forum Conveniens Service Out of Jurisdiction Abuse of Process Costs Assessment

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nataliya Golubovich

Claimant

Alexey Golubovich

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Olga Mirimskaya

Part 20 Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Against Jurisdiction and Costs Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether England is clearly or distinctly the most appropriate forum for the trial of the Additional Claim
  2. 2 Whether it was an abuse of process to re-argue forum conveniens after an earlier anti-suit injunction decision
  3. 3 Whether the summary assessment of costs was unjust due to procedural irregularity

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no error in the Deputy Master's evaluation that England was clearly or distinctly the most appropriate forum for the Additional Claim, and no abuse of process in permitting Alexey to argue forum conveniens after the anti-suit injunction decision. The summary assessment of costs was not unjust despite procedural irregularity, as Olga had opportunity to make submissions and the Deputy Master exercised proper discretion.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Deputy Master's order dismissing jurisdiction challenge upheld
  • Deputy Master's summary assessment of costs upheld