Cadogan Petroleum Plc & Ors v Tolley & Ors [2011] EWHC 2286 (Ch) (07 September 2011)

Cadogan Petroleum Plc & Ors v Tolley & Ors [2011] EWHC 2286 (Ch) (07 September 2011)

Following Sinclair v Versailles, the Claimants have no real prospect of succeeding on proprietary claims to bribes or secret commissions unless the asset or money was beneficially their property or derived from an opportunity properly theirs. As the Claimants had not rescinded the relevant contracts and the payments were made out-and-out, no proprietary interest arises. Privilege in interview notes was waived by the Claimants' deployment of the substance of those interviews in support of freezing injunctions, requiring disclosure for fairness.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 2286 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Cadogan Petroleum plc; Claimant: Cadogan Petroleum Holdings Limited; Claimant: LLC Astroinvest-Ukraine; Claimant: US Enco Ukraine; Claimant: LLC Cadogan Ukraine; Claimant: Colby Petroleum Limited; Claimant: LLC Gazvydobuvannia; Claimant: LLC Astroinvest-Energy; Claimant: JV Kolomiyska Nafto Gazova Kompaniya Delta; Claimant: OJSC Agronaftogastechservice; Defendant: Mark Tolley; Defendant: Marksman International Limited; Defendant: Natural Resource Limited; Defendant: Vasyl Vivcharyk; Defendant: VPV Oil Investments LLC; Defendant: Smith Eurasia Limited; Defendant: Vladimir Shlimak; Defendant: Sonicgauge Inc; Defendant: Global Process Systems LLC; Defendant: Global Process Systems Inc; Defendant: Clint Elgar; Defendant: Anthony Wright; Defendant: Wayne Goranson; Defendant: AOE Energy Inc; Defendant: Philip March; Defendant: Olga Konoshchuk; Defendant: Ribelant Limited; Defendant: Vitaliy Podolyaka; Defendant: Bohai Energy Services Limited; Defendant: SC Invest Point Consulting Grup SRL
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application (summary Judgment, Variation of Freezing Injunction, Disclosure)
Outcome
Summary judgment for the Vivcharyk Defendants on proprietary claims; variation of freezing injunction; order for disclosure.
Legal Topics
Constructive Trusts, Bribes and Secret Commissions, Freezing Injunctions, Litigation Privilege, Waiver of Privilege, Disclosure of Documents
Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Company Law Constructive Trusts Bribes and Secret Commissions Freezing Injunctions Litigation Privilege Waiver of Privilege +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 3 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cadogan Petroleum plc

Claimant

Cadogan Petroleum Holdings Limited

Claimant

LLC Astroinvest-Ukraine

Claimant

US Enco Ukraine

Claimant

LLC Cadogan Ukraine

Claimant

Colby Petroleum Limited

Claimant

LLC Gazvydobuvannia

Claimant

LLC Astroinvest-Energy

Claimant

JV Kolomiyska Nafto Gazova Kompaniya Delta

Claimant

OJSC Agronaftogastechservice

Claimant

Mark Tolley

Defendant

Marksman International Limited

Defendant

Natural Resource Limited

Defendant

Vasyl Vivcharyk

Defendant

VPV Oil Investments LLC

Defendant

Smith Eurasia Limited

Defendant

Vladimir Shlimak

Defendant

Sonicgauge Inc

Defendant

Global Process Systems LLC

Defendant

Global Process Systems Inc

Defendant

Clint Elgar

Defendant

Anthony Wright

Defendant

Wayne Goranson

Defendant

AOE Energy Inc

Defendant

Philip March

Defendant

Olga Konoshchuk

Defendant

Ribelant Limited

Defendant

Vitaliy Podolyaka

Defendant

Bohai Energy Services Limited

Defendant

SC Invest Point Consulting Grup SRL

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application (summary Judgment, Variation of Freezing Injunction, Disclosure)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proprietary claims in respect of alleged bribes and secret commissions can be maintained under English law after Sinclair v Versailles
  2. 2 Whether the proprietary elements of freezing injunctions should be deleted
  3. 3 Whether the maximum sum in the freezing injunctions should be altered

Ratio Decidendi

Following Sinclair v Versailles, the Claimants have no real prospect of succeeding on proprietary claims to bribes or secret commissions unless the asset or money was beneficially their property or derived from an opportunity properly theirs. As the Claimants had not rescinded the relevant contracts and the payments were made out-and-out, no proprietary interest arises. Privilege in interview notes was waived by the Claimants' deployment of the substance of those interviews in support of freezing injunctions, requiring disclosure for fairness.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for the Vivcharyk Defendants on proprietary claims; variation of freezing injunction; order for disclosure.

Orders

  • Summary judgment dismissing proprietary claims relating to the Smith, GPS and Ribelant Claims.
  • Deletion of proprietary elements from the freezing injunctions.