Cherney v Deripaska

Cherney v Deripaska

Mr Deripaska was not resident at 5, Belgrave Square and thus not domiciled in England; service was not effected in accordance with CPR 6.4 or 6.5(6); dispensing with service under CPR 6.9 would circumvent jurisdictional rules.

Parties
Claimant: Michael Cherney; Defendant: Oleg Deripaska
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application Regarding Service and Domicile
Outcome
Claim Form not duly served; application to dispense with service refused; Mr Deripaska not domiciled in England.
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Domicile, Jurisdiction, Forum Non Conveniens
Civil Procedure Private International Law Service of Process Domicile Jurisdiction Forum Non Conveniens

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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Cherney

Claimant

Oleg Deripaska

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application Regarding Service and Domicile

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Deripaska was domiciled in England for purposes of the Jurisdiction Regulation
  2. 2 Whether the Claim Form was duly served on Mr Deripaska
  3. 3 Whether service should be dispensed with under CPR 6.9

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Deripaska was not resident at 5, Belgrave Square and thus not domiciled in England; service was not effected in accordance with CPR 6.4 or 6.5(6); dispensing with service under CPR 6.9 would circumvent jurisdictional rules.

Court Disposition

Claim Form not duly served; application to dispense with service refused; Mr Deripaska not domiciled in England.

Orders

  • Application to dispense with service refused.
  • Claim Form not duly served on Mr Deripaska.