Nomihold Securites Inc v Mobile Telesystems Finance SA [2011] EWHC 337 (Comm) (18 February 2011)

Nomihold Securites Inc v Mobile Telesystems Finance SA [2011] EWHC 337 (Comm) (18 February 2011)

The worldwide freezing order should continue pending the section 66 application as there is a real risk of asset dissipation and non-payment of the arbitration award, but the Consent Solicitation and Tender Offer transactions, if conducted without involvement or liability of the Defendant, do not breach the order. No material non-disclosure occurred in the ex parte application, and a cross-undertaking in damages should be offered but need not be fortified.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 337 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Nomihold Securities Inc; Defendant/respondent: Mobile Telesystems Finance SA
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application Post Arbitration Award / Hearing of Applications Regarding Worldwide Freezing Order and Enforcement of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Worldwide freezing order to continue pending section 66 application; Consent Solicitation and Tender Offer transactions permitted if Defendant incurs no liability; cross-undertaking in damages required but not fortified; disclosure order regarding indemnity granted.
Legal Topics
Worldwide Freezing Orders, Enforcement of Arbitration Awards, Non Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications, Cross Undertaking in Damages, Asset Dissipation, Section 66 Arbitration Act
Arbitration Commercial Law Injunctions Worldwide Freezing Orders Enforcement of Arbitration Awards Non Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications Cross Undertaking in Damages Asset Dissipation +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nomihold Securities Inc

Claimant/applicant

Mobile Telesystems Finance SA

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application Post Arbitration Award / Hearing of Applications Regarding Worldwide Freezing Order and Enforcement of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the worldwide freezing order should continue
  2. 2 Whether the Consent Solicitation and Tender Offer transactions breach the freezing order
  3. 3 Whether there was material non-disclosure in the ex parte application

Ratio Decidendi

The worldwide freezing order should continue pending the section 66 application as there is a real risk of asset dissipation and non-payment of the arbitration award, but the Consent Solicitation and Tender Offer transactions, if conducted without involvement or liability of the Defendant, do not breach the order. No material non-disclosure occurred in the ex parte application, and a cross-undertaking in damages should be offered but need not be fortified.

Court Disposition

Worldwide freezing order to continue pending section 66 application; Consent Solicitation and Tender Offer transactions permitted if Defendant incurs no liability; cross-undertaking in damages required but not fortified; disclosure order regarding indemnity granted.

Orders

  • Worldwide freezing order continued until section 66 hearing
  • Consent Solicitation and Tender Offer transactions permitted if Defendant incurs no liability or fees