PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor v Mints & Ors

PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor v Mints & Ors

England is the proper forum for the claims against the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Defendants due to the risk of multiplicity of proceedings and inconsistent judgments, and the Claimants' rational choice to sue in England for enforceability reasons. The failure to give full and frank disclosure was inadvertent and does not warrant setting aside the order, but costs sanctions are appropriate.

Parties
Claimant: PJSC National Bank Trust; Claimant: PJSC Otkritie Financial Corporation; Defendant: Boris Mints; Defendant: Dmitry Mints; Defendant: Alexander Mints; Defendant: Igor Mints; Defendant: Vadim Belyaev; Defendant: Evgeny Dankevich; Defendant: Mikail Shishkhanov
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Application to Set Aside Permission for Service Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Applications to set aside permission for service out of jurisdiction dismissed.
Legal Topics
Forum Conveniens, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Full and Frank Disclosure, Multiplicities of Proceedings, Enforcement of Judgments
Civil Procedure Private International Law Forum Conveniens Service Out of Jurisdiction Full and Frank Disclosure Multiplicities of Proceedings Enforcement of Judgments

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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PJSC National Bank Trust

Claimant

PJSC 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

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Application to Set Aside Permission for Service Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether England is the proper forum for claims against Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Defendants
  2. 2 Whether permission for service out of jurisdiction should be set aside due to failure of full and frank disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

England is the proper forum for the claims against the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Defendants due to the risk of multiplicity of proceedings and inconsistent judgments, and the Claimants' rational choice to sue in England for enforceability reasons. The failure to give full and frank disclosure was inadvertent and does not warrant setting aside the order, but costs sanctions are appropriate.

Court Disposition

Applications to set aside permission for service out of jurisdiction dismissed.

Orders

  • Claimants to pay their own costs of these applications.
  • Claimants to pay one quarter of the costs of the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Defendants.