Fundo Soberano De Angola & Ors v dos Santos & Ors [2018] EWHC 2199 (Comm) (16 August 2018)

Fundo Soberano De Angola & Ors v dos Santos & Ors [2018] EWHC 2199 (Comm) (16 August 2018)

The freezing order was discharged due to material non-disclosure by the Claimants on the without notice application, specifically failing to inform the court that the majority of the relevant funds were already secured and not at risk of dissipation. The court also found that England was not the appropriate forum...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 2199 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Fundo Soberano de Angola; Claimant: FSDEA Hotel Investment Limited; Claimant: FSDEA Africa Agriculture (LP) Limited; Claimant: FSDEA Africa Investment (LP) Limited; Claimant: FSDEA Africa Healthcare (LP) Limited; Claimant: FSDEA Africa Mezzanine (LP) Limited; Claimant: FSDEA African Mining (LP) Limited; Claimant: FSDEA Africa Timber (LP) Limited; Defendant: José Filomeno dos Santos; Defendant: Jean-Claude Bastos de Morais; Defendant: Quantum Global Investment Management AG; Defendant: QG Investments Africa Management Limited; Defendant: QG Investments Limited; Defendant: Quantum Global Alternative Investments AG; Defendant: Infrastructure Africa (GP) Ltd; Defendant: Hotel Africa (GP) Ltd; Defendant: Agriculture Africa (GP) Ltd; Defendant: Healthcare Africa (GP) Ltd; Defendant: Mezzanine Africa (GP) Ltd; Defendant: Mining Africa (GP) Ltd; Defendant: Timber Africa (GP) Ltd; Defendant: QG African Infrastructure 1 LP; Defendant: QG Africa Hotel LP; Defendant: QG Africa Agriculture LP; Defendant: QG Africa Healthcare LP; Defendant: QG Africa Mezzanine LP; Defendant: QG Africa Mining LP; Defendant: QG Africa Timber LP; Defendant: The Northern Trust Company
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Proceedings (freezing Order Application) / Judgment on Return Date of Worldwide Freezing Order, Including Jurisdiction and Non Disclosure Issues
Outcome
Worldwide freezing order discharged; no fresh order granted.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Jurisdiction, Arbitration Agreements, Constructive Trusts, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Conspiracy, Knowing Receipt, Non Disclosure in Ex Parte Applications
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Equity and Trusts Conflict of Laws Arbitration Freezing Injunctions Jurisdiction Arbitration Agreements +5 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Fundo Soberano de Angola

Claimant

FSDEA Hotel Investment Limited

Claimant

FSDEA Africa Agriculture (LP) Limited

Claimant

FSDEA Africa Investment (LP) Limited

Claimant

FSDEA Africa Healthcare (LP) Limited

Claimant

FSDEA Africa Mezzanine (LP) Limited

Claimant

FSDEA African Mining (LP) Limited

Claimant

FSDEA Africa Timber (LP) Limited

Claimant

José Filomeno dos Santos

Defendant

Jean-Claude Bastos de Morais

Defendant

Quantum Global Investment Management AG

Defendant

QG Investments Africa Management Limited

Defendant

QG Investments Limited

Defendant

Quantum Global Alternative Investments AG

Defendant

Infrastructure Africa (GP) Ltd

Defendant

Hotel Africa (GP) Ltd

Defendant

Agriculture Africa (GP) Ltd

Defendant

Healthcare Africa (GP) Ltd

Defendant

Mezzanine Africa (GP) Ltd

Defendant

Mining Africa (GP) Ltd

Defendant

Timber Africa (GP) Ltd

Defendant

QG African Infrastructure 1 LP

Defendant

QG Africa Hotel LP

Defendant

QG Africa Agriculture LP

Defendant

QG Africa Healthcare LP

Defendant

QG Africa Mezzanine LP

Defendant

QG Africa Mining LP

Defendant

QG Africa Timber LP

Defendant

The Northern Trust Company

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Proceedings (freezing Order Application) / Judgment on Return Date of Worldwide Freezing Order, Including Jurisdiction and Non Disclosure Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction over the claims and defendants
  2. 2 Whether the worldwide freezing order should be continued or discharged
  3. 3 Whether there was material non-disclosure justifying discharge of the freezing order

Ratio Decidendi

The freezing order was discharged due to material non-disclosure by the Claimants on the without notice application, specifically failing to inform the court that the majority of the relevant funds were already secured and not at risk of dissipation. The court also found that England was not the appropriate forum for the claims, most of which were subject to arbitration or more closely connected to Angola, Mauritius, or Switzerland. Only a small subset of claims arguably fell within English jurisdiction, and even those were subject to potential case management stay. The duty of full and frank disclosure was not met, and the freezing order could not be continued.

Court Disposition

Worldwide freezing order discharged; no fresh order granted.

Orders

  • Discharge of the worldwide freezing order against the Defendants.
  • No continuation of the freezing order pending trial.