PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors

PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors

Disclosure is ordered only on issues sufficiently linked to the alleged fraud and relevant to the narrative, not on peripheral or background matters; issues for disclosure should be set out in a separate list rather than amending the general list of issues.

Parties
Claimant: PJSC Tatneft; Respondent: Gennadiy Bogolyubov; Respondent: Igor Kolomoisky; Respondent: Alexander Yaroslavsky; Respondent: Pavel Ovcharenko
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Interlocutory Application for Disclosure
Outcome
application granted in part
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Fraud, Assignment of Claims, Similar Fact Evidence
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Disclosure Fraud Assignment of Claims Similar Fact Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PJSC Tatneft

Claimant

Gennadiy Bogolyubov

Respondent

Igor Kolomoisky

Respondent

Alexander Yaroslavsky

Respondent

Pavel Ovcharenko

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Interlocutory Application for Disclosure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether disclosure should be ordered on specific issues related to alleged fraud and ousting scheme
  2. 2 whether issues for disclosure should be set out by amendment to the list of issues or in a separate list

Ratio Decidendi

Disclosure is ordered only on issues sufficiently linked to the alleged fraud and relevant to the narrative, not on peripheral or background matters; issues for disclosure should be set out in a separate list rather than amending the general list of issues.

Court Disposition

application granted in part

Orders

  • Disclosure ordered on issues 11E1, 11E2, 11F, and 11G.
  • Application for disclosure on issues 11B and 11C rejected.