Alexander Gorbachev v Andrey Grigoryevich Guriev

Alexander Gorbachev v Andrey Grigoryevich Guriev

An application for third party disclosure under s.34 SCA and CPR 31.17 constitutes a claim and proceedings for the purposes of Practice Direction 6B Gateway (20), and the enactment allows proceedings to be brought against persons outside England and Wales. The court has jurisdiction to permit service out of the jurisdiction, and in the circumstances, including the location of documents within England and the need for efficient resolution, discretion should be exercised to permit service out and alternative service.

Parties
Claimant: Alexander Gorbachev; Defendant: Andrey Grigoryevich Guriev; First Respondent: Forsters LLP; Second Respondent: T. U. Reflections Limited; Third Respondent: First Link Management Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Third Party Disclosure Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Order Permitting Service Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application to set aside order permitting service out of jurisdiction dismissed.
Legal Topics
Third Party Disclosure, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Practice Direction 6 B Gateway (20), Senior Courts Act 1981 Section 34, Civil Procedure Rules 31.17, Alternative Service
Civil Procedure International Civil Litigation Third Party Disclosure Service Out of Jurisdiction Practice Direction 6 B Gateway (20) Senior Courts Act 1981 Section 34 Civil Procedure Rules 31.17 Alternative Service

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Gorbachev

Claimant

Andrey Grigoryevich Guriev

Defendant

Forsters LLP

First Respondent

T. U. Reflections Limited

Second Respondent

First Link Management Services Limited

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Third Party Disclosure Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Order Permitting Service Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CPR 31.17 application under s.34 SCA falls within Practice Direction 6B Gateway (20)
  2. 2 Whether court has jurisdiction to permit service of third party disclosure application out of jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether court should exercise discretion to permit service out

Ratio Decidendi

An application for third party disclosure under s.34 SCA and CPR 31.17 constitutes a claim and proceedings for the purposes of Practice Direction 6B Gateway (20), and the enactment allows proceedings to be brought against persons outside England and Wales. The court has jurisdiction to permit service out of the jurisdiction, and in the circumstances, including the location of documents within England and the need for efficient resolution, discretion should be exercised to permit service out and alternative service.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside order permitting service out of jurisdiction dismissed.

Orders

  • Permission to serve application for third party disclosure out of jurisdiction upheld.
  • Order for alternative service upheld.