PJSC NATIONAL BANK TRUST & Anor v BORIS MINTS & Ors

PJSC NATIONAL BANK TRUST & Anor v BORIS MINTS & Ors

The court held that the Respondents were not privies of the LCIA Claimants and could not be bound by issue estoppel arising from the LCIA arbitration award. The Banks' application for permission to amend to plead issue estoppel and abuse of process was refused, as the threshold for binding non-parties to an arbitration award was not met and there was no realistic prospect of establishing privity or abuse of process. Summary judgment or summary determination was not available on the preclusion arguments.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: PJSC National Bank Trust; Claimant/applicant: PJSC Bank Otkritie Financial Corporation; Defendant/respondent: Boris Mints; Defendant/respondent: Dmitry Mints; Defendant/respondent: Alexander Mints; Defendant: Igor Mints; Defendant: Vadim Belyaev; Defendant: Evgeny Dankevich; Defendant: Mikhail Shishkhanov; Defendant: MaplesFS Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application (interim) / Ruling on Application for Permission to Amend, Summary Judgment, and Preclusion Arguments
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Issue Estoppel, Abuse of Process, Privity, Arbitration Award Enforcement, Summary Judgment, Amendment of Pleadings
Civil Procedure Arbitration Commercial Law Issue Estoppel Abuse of Process Privity Arbitration Award Enforcement Summary Judgment +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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PJSC National Bank Trust

Claimant/applicant

PJSC Bank Otkritie Financial Corporation

Claimant/applicant

Boris Mints

Defendant/respondent

Dmitry Mints

Defendant/respondent

Alexander Mints

Defendant/respondent

Igor Mints

Defendant

Vadim Belyaev

Defendant

Evgeny Dankevich

Defendant

Mikhail Shishkhanov

Defendant

MaplesFS Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application (interim) / Ruling on Application for Permission to Amend, Summary Judgment, and Preclusion Arguments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-parties to an arbitration award can be bound by issue estoppel in subsequent court proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the claimants can amend pleadings to allege preclusion of certain defences by defendants based on prior arbitral findings
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment or summary determination is available on preclusion arguments

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Respondents were not privies of the LCIA Claimants and could not be bound by issue estoppel arising from the LCIA arbitration award. The Banks' application for permission to amend to plead issue estoppel and abuse of process was refused, as the threshold for binding non-parties to an arbitration award was not met and there was no realistic prospect of establishing privity or abuse of process. Summary judgment or summary determination was not available on the preclusion arguments.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Permission to amend to plead issue estoppel and abuse of process refused
  • Summary judgment or summary determination on preclusion arguments refused