Joint Stock Company "Aeroflot Russian Airlines" v Berezovsky & Ors

Joint Stock Company "Aeroflot Russian Airlines" v Berezovsky & Ors

The court is obliged to decline jurisdiction over Services due to the enforceable Swiss law jurisdiction clause in the Advisory Mandate. The arbitration clause in the Second Credit Agreement cannot be relied upon by Cyprus due to abuse of right under Swiss law, as enforcing it would fragment the dispute. Claims against Holding, Cyprus, and Finance remain closely connected to those against Berezovsky and Glushkov and should proceed in England.

Parties
Claimant: JOINT STOCK COMPANY “AEROFLOT RUSSIAN AIRLINES”; Defendant: BORIS BEREZOVSKY; Defendant: NIKOLAY GLUSHKOV; Defendant: FORUS HOLDING S. A.; Defendant: FORUS (CYPRUS) LIMITED; Defendant: EM FINANCE S. A.; Defendant: FORUS LEASING S. A.; Defendant: FORUS FINANCE LTD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application—jurisdiction and Stay Pending Arbitration
Outcome
Jurisdiction declined in respect of Services; applications of Holding, Cyprus, and Finance dismissed.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Arbitration Agreements, Stay of Proceedings, Forum Selection Clauses, Abuse of Right, Double Representation, Connected Claims Under Judgments Regulation
Civil Procedure International Commercial Law Arbitration Jurisdiction Arbitration Agreements Stay of Proceedings Forum Selection Clauses Abuse of Right +2 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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JOINT STOCK COMPANY “AEROFLOT RUSSIAN AIRLINES”

Claimant

BORIS BEREZOVSKY

Defendant

NIKOLAY GLUSHKOV

Defendant

FORUS HOLDING S. A.

Defendant

FORUS (CYPRUS) LIMITED

Defendant

EM FINANCE S. A.

Defendant

FORUS LEASING S. A.

Defendant

FORUS FINANCE LTD

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application—jurisdiction and Stay Pending Arbitration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction over foreign defendants under the Judgments Regulation and Lugano Convention
  2. 2 Whether Swiss law jurisdiction and arbitration clauses are valid and enforceable
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration agreement is void under Swiss law (double representation, abuse of right)

Ratio Decidendi

The court is obliged to decline jurisdiction over Services due to the enforceable Swiss law jurisdiction clause in the Advisory Mandate. The arbitration clause in the Second Credit Agreement cannot be relied upon by Cyprus due to abuse of right under Swiss law, as enforcing it would fragment the dispute. Claims against Holding, Cyprus, and Finance remain closely connected to those against Berezovsky and Glushkov and should proceed in England.

Court Disposition

Jurisdiction declined in respect of Services; applications of Holding, Cyprus, and Finance dismissed.

Orders

  • The court declares it does not have jurisdiction over the claim against Services.
  • Applications of Holding, Cyprus, and Finance to dismiss or stay proceedings are dismissed.