The Public Institution for Social Security v Ely Michel Ruimy & Anor.

The Public Institution for Social Security v Ely Michel Ruimy & Anor.

AFL and Mr Ruimy failed to show that Switzerland is clearly or distinctly the more appropriate forum. The English proceedings are well advanced, the Aerium Scheme is already part of the English claim against the estate of the alleged recipient, and the main protagonists and evidence have strong connections to England. The risk of inconsistent judgments and fragmentation would be greater if the claims were stayed in favour of Switzerland. Article 34 of Brussels Recast does not apply as there were no relevant Swiss court proceedings pending before the English court was seised.

Parties
Claimant: The Public Institution for Social Security; Defendant: Mr Ely Michel Ruimy; Defendant: Aerium Finance Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial Claim / Jurisdictional Challenge and Application to Stay Proceedings
Outcome
Jurisdictional challenge and application to stay dismissed; English court is the appropriate forum.
Legal Topics
Forum Non Conveniens, Jurisdictional Challenge, Brussels Recast Regulation Article 34, Secret Commissions and Bribery, Limitation of Actions
Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws Commercial Law Forum Non Conveniens Jurisdictional Challenge Brussels Recast Regulation Article 34 Secret Commissions and Bribery Limitation of Actions

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

Parties

The Public Institution for Social Security

Claimant

Mr Ely Michel Ruimy

Defendant

Aerium Finance Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial Claim / Jurisdictional Challenge and Application to Stay Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court is the appropriate forum to hear the claims against AFL and Mr Ruimy in connection with the Aerium Scheme
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings should be stayed on forum non conveniens grounds
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings should be stayed pursuant to Article 34 of Brussels Recast Regulation

Ratio Decidendi

AFL and Mr Ruimy failed to show that Switzerland is clearly or distinctly the more appropriate forum. The English proceedings are well advanced, the Aerium Scheme is already part of the English claim against the estate of the alleged recipient, and the main protagonists and evidence have strong connections to England. The risk of inconsistent judgments and fragmentation would be greater if the claims were stayed in favour of Switzerland. Article 34 of Brussels Recast does not apply as there were no relevant Swiss court proceedings pending before the English court was seised.

Court Disposition

Jurisdictional challenge and application to stay dismissed; English court is the appropriate forum.

Orders

  • The English court will hear the claims against AFL and Mr Ruimy.
  • The 1st claim is not stayed on the basis of Article 34 of Brussels Recast.