PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors

PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors

The application was refused because the breach was serious and significant, there was no good reason for the delay, and admitting the evidence would be unfair and contrary to the interests of justice. The evidence was likely tailored in response to the trial, prejudicing the defendants and undermining efficient litigation and compliance with rules. Admission as hearsay was also refused due to unreliability and inability to test the evidence properly.

Parties
Claimant: PJSC Tatneft; First Defendant: Gennadiy Bogolyubov; Second Defendant: Igor Kolomoisky; Third Defendant: Alexander Yaroslavsky; Fourth Defendant: Pavel Ovcharenko
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Litigation / Interlocutory Application During Trial
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Late Witness Statement, Admission of Evidence, Trial Management
Civil Procedure Relief From Sanctions Late Witness Statement Admission of Evidence Trial Management

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PJSC Tatneft

Claimant

Gennadiy Bogolyubov

First Defendant

Igor Kolomoisky

Second Defendant

Alexander Yaroslavsky

Third Defendant

Pavel Ovcharenko

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Litigation / Interlocutory Application During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant relief from sanctions to admit a late witness statement and oral evidence during trial
  2. 2 Whether to admit the witness statement as hearsay evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused because the breach was serious and significant, there was no good reason for the delay, and admitting the evidence would be unfair and contrary to the interests of justice. The evidence was likely tailored in response to the trial, prejudicing the defendants and undermining efficient litigation and compliance with rules. Admission as hearsay was also refused due to unreliability and inability to test the evidence properly.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Claimant's application to admit Ms Savelova's witness statement and oral evidence is refused.
  • Claimant's alternative application to admit the witness statement as hearsay evidence is refused.