PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor v Boris Mints & Ors

PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor v Boris Mints & Ors

The UK sanctions regime does not prohibit the entry of judgment in favour of a sanctioned claimant; there is no clear or necessary implication in the 2018 Act or Regulations to derogate from the fundamental right of access to the courts. OFSI can license the payment of adverse costs, security for costs, and damages on a cross-undertaking by sanctioned claimants. The court is not a 'person' for the purposes of the Regulations. NBT is not 'owned or controlled' by a designated person within the meaning of the Regulations.

Parties
Claimant: PJSC National Bank Trust; Claimant: PJSC Bank Otkritie Financial Corporation; Defendant: Boris Mints; Defendant: Dmitry Mints; Defendant: Alexander Mints; Defendant: Igor Mints; Defendant: Vadim Belyaev; Defendant: Evgeny Dankevich; Defendant: Mikail Shishkhanov; Defendant: MaplesFS Limited (former trustee of the MF Trust); Defendant: MFT (PTC) Limited (trustee of the MF Trust)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Civil Litigation / Interlocutory Application Ruling
Outcome
Defendants' applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Effect of Sanctions on Litigation, Asset Freezing Orders, Access to Courts Under Sanctions, Ownership and Control Under Sanctions Regime, Licensing Powers of OFSI, Costs Orders and Security for Costs Under Sanctions
Sanctions Law Civil Procedure Banking Law Effect of Sanctions on Litigation Asset Freezing Orders Access to Courts Under Sanctions Ownership and Control Under Sanctions Regime Licensing Powers of OFSI +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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PJSC National Bank Trust

Claimant

PJSC Bank Otkritie Financial Corporation

Claimant

Boris Mints

Defendant

Dmitry Mints

Defendant

Alexander Mints

Defendant

Igor Mints

Defendant

Vadim Belyaev

Defendant

Evgeny Dankevich

Defendant

Mikail Shishkhanov

Defendant

MaplesFS Limited (former trustee of the MF Trust)

Defendant

MFT (PTC) Limited (trustee of the MF Trust)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Civil Litigation / Interlocutory Application Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether UK sanctions regime prohibits entry of judgment in favour of a sanctioned claimant
  2. 2 Whether OFSI can license payment of adverse costs, security for costs, and damages on cross-undertaking by sanctioned claimants
  3. 3 Whether the court is a 'person' under the Regulations for purposes of sanctions prohibitions

Ratio Decidendi

The UK sanctions regime does not prohibit the entry of judgment in favour of a sanctioned claimant; there is no clear or necessary implication in the 2018 Act or Regulations to derogate from the fundamental right of access to the courts. OFSI can license the payment of adverse costs, security for costs, and damages on a cross-undertaking by sanctioned claimants. The court is not a 'person' for the purposes of the Regulations. NBT is not 'owned or controlled' by a designated person within the meaning of the Regulations.

Court Disposition

Defendants' applications dismissed

Orders

  • Proceedings not stayed; litigation to continue
  • OFSI can license payment of adverse costs, security for costs, and damages on cross-undertaking by sanctioned claimants