PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor v Boris Mints & Ors

PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor v Boris Mints & Ors

The application by Igor Mints to be released from the undertakings is dismissed. The Chanel v Woolworth principle applies; there was no significant change of circumstances or good cause shown. There remains a good arguable case against Igor Mints, a real risk of dissipation, and no material non-disclosure justifying release from the undertakings.

Parties
Claimant: PJSC National Bank Trust; Claimant: PJSC Bank Otkritie Financial Corporation; Defendant: Boris Mints; Defendant: Dmitry Mints; Defendant: Alexander Mints; Defendant: Igor Mints
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Fraud / Freezing Order Application / Application by Fourth Defendant to Be Released From Undertakings Replacing a Worldwide Freezing Order
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Abuse of Process, Full and Frank Disclosure, Conspiracy, Fraud, Dissipation of Assets
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Banking Law Freezing Injunctions Abuse of Process Full and Frank Disclosure Conspiracy Fraud +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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
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

Procedural Posture

Commercial Fraud / Freezing Order Application / Application by Fourth Defendant to Be Released From Undertakings Replacing a Worldwide Freezing Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Fourth Defendant (Igor Mints) should be released from undertakings given in substitution for a worldwide freezing order
  2. 2 Whether the application is an abuse of process under the Chanel v Woolworth principle
  3. 3 Whether there is a good arguable case against Igor Mints

Ratio Decidendi

The application by Igor Mints to be released from the undertakings is dismissed. The Chanel v Woolworth principle applies; there was no significant change of circumstances or good cause shown. There remains a good arguable case against Igor Mints, a real risk of dissipation, and no material non-disclosure justifying release from the undertakings.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Igor Mints' application to be released from the undertakings is dismissed.
  • The undertakings given by Igor Mints remain in force.