National Bank Trust v Yurov & Ors [2021] EWHC 164 (Comm) (03 February 2021)

National Bank Trust v Yurov & Ors [2021] EWHC 164 (Comm) (03 February 2021)

Mr Belyaev failed to discharge the burden of persuasion that no other assets were available to fund his legal or living expenses, given evidence of undisclosed assets, third-party funding, and Mrs Belyaeva's means; the interests of justice and policy favouring enforcement precluded variation of the freezing order or a stay of execution.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 164 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: National Bank Trust; Defendant: Ilya Yurov; Defendant: Sergey Belyaev; Defendant: Nikolay Fetisov; Defendant: Nataliya Yurova; Defendant: Irina Belyaeva; Defendant: Elena Pischulina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Post Judgment Application / Application to Vary Post Judgment Worldwide Freezing Order and for Stay of Execution
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Enforcement of Judgments, Fraud, Asset Disclosure, Stay of Execution
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Freezing Orders Enforcement of Judgments Fraud Asset Disclosure Stay of Execution

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Bank Trust

Claimant

Ilya Yurov

Defendant

Sergey Belyaev

Defendant

Nikolay Fetisov

Defendant

Nataliya Yurova

Defendant

Irina Belyaeva

Defendant

Elena Pischulina

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Post Judgment Application / Application to Vary Post Judgment Worldwide Freezing Order and for Stay of Execution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Second Defendant should be permitted to vary the post-judgment worldwide freezing order to allow legal expenses and sale of frozen assets
  2. 2 Whether a stay of execution of the judgment should be granted
  3. 3 Whether the freezing order should be discharged in relation to Mrs Belyaeva's assets

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Belyaev failed to discharge the burden of persuasion that no other assets were available to fund his legal or living expenses, given evidence of undisclosed assets, third-party funding, and Mrs Belyaeva's means; the interests of justice and policy favouring enforcement precluded variation of the freezing order or a stay of execution.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to vary the worldwide freezing order refused
  • Application for stay of execution refused