DTEK Trading S.A. v Morozov & Anor
Section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 does not confer jurisdiction on the court to make orders against non-parties to the arbitration agreement, and CPR 62.5(1)(b) does not permit service out of the jurisdiction on such non-parties. The application must therefore be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
- Parties
- Claimant: DTEK Trading S.A.; Defendant: Mr Sergey Morozov; Defendant: Incolab Services Ukraine LLC
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 27 January 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Arbitration Claim / Application / Application for Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction
- Outcome
- Application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Section 44 Arbitration Act 1996, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction Over Non Parties, Preservation of Evidence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
DTEK Trading S.A.
Claimant
Mr Sergey Morozov
Defendant
Incolab Services Ukraine LLC
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim / Application / Application for Permission to Serve Out of Jurisdiction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to make orders against non-parties to the arbitration agreement and to permit service out of the jurisdiction on such non-parties.
Ratio Decidendi
Section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 does not confer jurisdiction on the court to make orders against non-parties to the arbitration agreement, and CPR 62.5(1)(b) does not permit service out of the jurisdiction on such non-parties. The application must therefore be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment