JSC COMMERCIAL BANK PRIVATBANK v IGOR VALERYEVICH KOLOMOISKY & Ors

JSC COMMERCIAL BANK PRIVATBANK v IGOR VALERYEVICH KOLOMOISKY & Ors

The first defendant and Fieldfisher adopted an unduly narrow approach to relevance in redacting WhatsApp messages, failing to assess them against all issues in the proceedings as required by CPR PD 51U para 16.1. Relief is warranted under para 17 due to inadequate compliance with extended disclosure orders.

Parties
Claimant: JSC Commercial Bank PrivatBank; First Defendant: Igor Valeryevich Kolomoisky; Second Defendant: Gennadiy Borisovich Bogolyubov; Third Defendant: Teamtrend Limited; Fourth Defendant: Trade Point Agro Limited; Fifth Defendant: Collyer Limited; Sixth Defendant: Rossyn Investing Corp; Seventh Defendant: Milbert Ventures Inc; Eighth Defendant: ZAO Ukrtransitservice Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Further Disclosure Orders
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Extended Disclosure, Redaction, Relevance, Confidentiality, Control of Entities
Civil Procedure Disclosure Extended Disclosure Redaction Relevance Confidentiality Control of Entities

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JSC Commercial Bank PrivatBank

Claimant

Igor Valeryevich Kolomoisky

First Defendant

Gennadiy Borisovich Bogolyubov

Second Defendant

Teamtrend Limited

Third Defendant

Trade Point Agro Limited

Fourth Defendant

Collyer Limited

Fifth Defendant

Rossyn Investing Corp

Sixth Defendant

Milbert Ventures Inc

Seventh Defendant

ZAO Ukrtransitservice Ltd

Eighth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Further Disclosure Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the redactions applied to WhatsApp messages disclosed by the first defendant were justified under CPR PD 51U para 16.1(1)
  2. 2 Whether the first defendant complied with extended disclosure orders
  3. 3 Appropriate relief for inadequate compliance with disclosure orders

Ratio Decidendi

The first defendant and Fieldfisher adopted an unduly narrow approach to relevance in redacting WhatsApp messages, failing to assess them against all issues in the proceedings as required by CPR PD 51U para 16.1. Relief is warranted under para 17 due to inadequate compliance with extended disclosure orders.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • First defendant to instruct Fieldfisher to conduct a further review of all WhatsApp message redactions, assessing relevance against all issues in the proceedings, not just Issues for Disclosure.
  • Fieldfisher to prepare a schedule for each redacted message, identifying recipient, date, time, and generic subject matter, verified by witness statement.