Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc & Ors v Zhunus & Ors

Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc & Ors v Zhunus & Ors

The injunction is set aside as regards the First Claimant and the Astana 1 claim due to lack of a good arguable case and material non-disclosure. The Second to Seventh Claimants have a good arguable case on the PEAK and Astana 2 frauds, and the defence of limitation under Kazakh law does not prevent the case from proceeding. The reflective loss principle bars the First Claimant's claims on the facts and law as currently advanced. Non-disclosure by the claimants on Astana 1 and reflective loss does not justify setting aside the injunction as it applies to the other claims. Minor non-disclosures regarding limitation are not sufficient to set aside the injunction given the complexity and...

Parties
Claimant: Kazakhstan Kagazy PLC; Claimant: Kazakhstan Kagazy JSC; Claimant: Prime Estate Activities Kazakhstan LLP; Claimant: Peak Akzhal LLP; Claimant: Peak Aksenger LLP; Claimant: Astana – Contract JSC; Claimant: Paragon Development LLP; Defendant: Baglan Abdullayevich Zhunus; Defendant: Maksat Askaruly Arip; Defendant: Shynar Dikhanbayeva
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Commercial Fraud / Freezing Injunction / Interlocutory Application to Discharge or Continue Freezing Injunction
Outcome
Injunction set aside as regards the First Claimant and Astana 1; otherwise continued for Second to Seventh Claimants on PEAK and Astana 2 claims.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Non Disclosure, Limitation Periods, Reflective Loss, Jurisdiction, Disclosure Obligations
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Fraud Freezing Injunctions Non Disclosure Limitation Periods Reflective Loss Jurisdiction +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 6 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kazakhstan Kagazy PLC

Claimant

Kazakhstan Kagazy JSC

Claimant

Prime Estate Activities Kazakhstan LLP

Claimant

Peak Akzhal LLP

Claimant

Peak Aksenger LLP

Claimant

Astana – Contract JSC

Claimant

Paragon Development LLP

Claimant

Baglan Abdullayevich Zhunus

Defendant

Maksat Askaruly Arip

Defendant

Shynar Dikhanbayeva

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Fraud / Freezing Injunction / Interlocutory Application to Discharge or Continue Freezing Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the freezing injunction should be discharged for material non-disclosure
  2. 2 Whether the claimants have a good arguable case on the alleged frauds (PEAK and Astana)
  3. 3 Whether the claims are time-barred under Kazakh law

Ratio Decidendi

The injunction is set aside as regards the First Claimant and the Astana 1 claim due to lack of a good arguable case and material non-disclosure. The Second to Seventh Claimants have a good arguable case on the PEAK and Astana 2 frauds, and the defence of limitation under Kazakh law does not prevent the case from proceeding. The reflective loss principle bars the First Claimant's claims on the facts and law as currently advanced. Non-disclosure by the claimants on Astana 1 and reflective loss does not justify setting aside the injunction as it applies to the other claims. Minor non-disclosures regarding limitation are not sufficient to set aside the injunction given the complexity and...

Court Disposition

Injunction set aside as regards the First Claimant and Astana 1; otherwise continued for Second to Seventh Claimants on PEAK and Astana 2 claims.

Orders

  • Freezing injunction discharged as to First Claimant and Astana 1 claim.
  • Freezing injunction continued for Second to Seventh Claimants on PEAK and Astana 2 claims.