Al Saud v & Anor v Eden & Anor [2025] EWHC 3421 (Ch) (04 December 2025)

Al Saud v & Anor v Eden & Anor [2025] EWHC 3421 (Ch) (04 December 2025)

The application for interim relief is refused because there is no evidence of a real risk of breach of duty or damage by the receivers, and any potential harm can be remedied by damages; privacy concerns do not justify injunctive relief in the context of lawful enforcement of security.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 3421 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: HRH Prince Fahad Bin Sultan Al Saud; Claimant: Premium Big Continental Inc.; Defendant: David Eden; Defendant: Geoffrey Wayne Bouchier
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Interim Application in Receivership Proceedings / Application for Urgent Interim Relief
Outcome
Application for interim relief refused
Legal Topics
Receivership, Interim Injunctions, Adequacy of Damages, Enforcement of Security, Privacy Rights
Civil Procedure Property Law Insolvency Receivership Interim Injunctions Adequacy of Damages Enforcement of Security Privacy Rights

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HRH Prince Fahad Bin Sultan Al Saud

Claimant

Premium Big Continental Inc.

Claimant

David Eden

Defendant

Geoffrey Wayne Bouchier

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Application in Receivership Proceedings / Application for Urgent Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim relief should be granted to restrain receivers from entering and taking possession of property
  2. 2 Whether damages are an adequate remedy for the claimants' concerns
  3. 3 Whether privacy concerns justify injunctive relief against receivers

Ratio Decidendi

The application for interim relief is refused because there is no evidence of a real risk of breach of duty or damage by the receivers, and any potential harm can be remedied by damages; privacy concerns do not justify injunctive relief in the context of lawful enforcement of security.

Court Disposition

Application for interim relief refused

Orders

  • Application for urgent interim relief is dismissed