VTB Commodities Trading DAC v JSC Antipinsky Refinery

VTB Commodities Trading DAC v JSC Antipinsky Refinery

Security for costs is not appropriate against VTB in respect of Petraco's enforcement of the undertaking in damages, as VTB is not in the position of a claimant for these purposes and the normal sanction for non-provision (staying or striking out the claim) is not available or appropriate. The Cargo Trial is adjourned due to VTB's inability to pay legal fees and comply with directions as a result of sanctions, and the General Licence does not enable VTB to pay the necessary legal fees for the trial. VTB is ordered to make a contingent application to OFSI for a licence in respect of any adverse costs liability.

Parties
Claimant/arbitration Claimant: VTB Commodities Trading DAC; Defendant/arbitration Respondent: JSC Antipinsky Refinery; Intervener: Petraco Oil Company SA
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Proceedings (arising From Arbitration and Injunctive Relief) / Interlocutory Applications (security for Costs, Case Management, Adjournment, Directions)
Outcome
Security for costs application dismissed; trial adjourned; directions given for further steps by VTB; contingent application to OFSI for costs licence ordered.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Sanctions and Licensing, Case Management, Injunctions, Undertaking in Damages
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Sanctions Law Security for Costs Sanctions and Licensing Case Management Injunctions Undertaking in Damages

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

VTB Commodities Trading DAC

Claimant/arbitration Claimant

JSC Antipinsky Refinery

Defendant/arbitration Respondent

Petraco Oil Company SA

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Proceedings (arising From Arbitration and Injunctive Relief) / Interlocutory Applications (security for Costs, Case Management, Adjournment, Directions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against VTB in favour of Petraco for the Cargo Trial
  2. 2 Whether the Cargo Trial should be adjourned due to VTB's inability to pay legal fees as a result of sanctions
  3. 3 Whether VTB can be represented by its CEO in the absence of legal representation

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs is not appropriate against VTB in respect of Petraco's enforcement of the undertaking in damages, as VTB is not in the position of a claimant for these purposes and the normal sanction for non-provision (staying or striking out the claim) is not available or appropriate. The Cargo Trial is adjourned due to VTB's inability to pay legal fees and comply with directions as a result of sanctions, and the General Licence does not enable VTB to pay the necessary legal fees for the trial. VTB is ordered to make a contingent application to OFSI for a licence in respect of any adverse costs liability.

Court Disposition

Security for costs application dismissed; trial adjourned; directions given for further steps by VTB; contingent application to OFSI for costs licence ordered.

Orders

  • Security for costs application by Petraco dismissed in respect of the Cargo Trial.
  • Cargo Trial adjourned and to be re-fixed for November 2023.