Intermet FZCO & Ors v Ansol Ltd & Ors [2007] EWHC 226 (Comm) (09 February 2007)

Intermet FZCO & Ors v Ansol Ltd & Ors [2007] EWHC 226 (Comm) (09 February 2007)

The application for an injunction was refused because Ansol delayed unreasonably in seeking relief, the arbitration and court proceedings addressed different issues (contractual vs. fraud), the claimants undertook not to pursue fraud-based claims in arbitration, and continuation of arbitration was not oppressive or unconscionable. The sanctity of the arbitration agreement was upheld, and the balance of justice did not require an injunction.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 226 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Intermet FZCO; Claimant: Intermet LLC; Claimant: Vneshexpertservice Consulting Company Limited (Ves); Defendant: Ansol Limited; Defendant: Ashton Investments Limited; Defendant: Enothera Limited; Defendant: Gradex Limited (Gibraltar); Defendant: Prixford Limited; Defendant: Gradex Limited (UK); Defendant: Mr Nazarov; Defendant: Mr Shushko; Defendant: Mr Rastegaev
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application for Interim Injunction / Ruling on Application for Interim Injunction to Restrain Arbitration
Outcome
Application for interim injunction refused; application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Anti Suit Injunctions, Arbitration Agreements, Jurisdiction, Contractual Disputes, Fraud Allegations
Civil Procedure Arbitration Commercial Law Anti Suit Injunctions Arbitration Agreements Jurisdiction Contractual Disputes Fraud Allegations

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 2 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Intermet FZCO

Claimant

Intermet LLC

Claimant

Vneshexpertservice Consulting Company Limited (Ves)

Claimant

Ansol Limited

Defendant

Ashton Investments Limited

Defendant

Enothera Limited

Defendant

Gradex Limited (Gibraltar)

Defendant

Prixford Limited

Defendant

Gradex Limited (UK)

Defendant

Mr Nazarov

Defendant

Mr Shushko

Defendant

Mr Rastegaev

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application for Interim Injunction / Ruling on Application for Interim Injunction to Restrain Arbitration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant an interim injunction restraining claimants from proceeding with arbitration pending court proceedings
  2. 2 Whether continuation of arbitration would be oppressive, vexatious, or prejudicial to the defendant
  3. 3 Whether delay in seeking injunction is a bar to relief

Ratio Decidendi

The application for an injunction was refused because Ansol delayed unreasonably in seeking relief, the arbitration and court proceedings addressed different issues (contractual vs. fraud), the claimants undertook not to pursue fraud-based claims in arbitration, and continuation of arbitration was not oppressive or unconscionable. The sanctity of the arbitration agreement was upheld, and the balance of justice did not require an injunction.

Court Disposition

Application for interim injunction refused; application dismissed.

Orders

  • No injunction granted restraining claimants from proceeding with arbitration.
  • Claimants to abide by undertakings not to pursue fraud-based claims in arbitration.