Navigator Equities Ltd & Anor v Deripaska

Navigator Equities Ltd & Anor v Deripaska

The contempt application was an abuse of process, motivated by personal animosity and prosecuted in a partisan manner, not in the public interest. Mr Deripaska did not breach his undertaking, as the redomiciliation of En+ did not prevent, impede, or obstruct the fulfilment of the undertakings, nor render the shares unavailable for direct enforcement. The undertaking did not constitute a contract enforceable by the claimants, and no damages are recoverable.

Parties
Claimant: Navigator Equities Limited; Claimant: Vladimir Anatolevich Chernukhin; Defendant: Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Judgment on Contempt Application and Damages Claim
Outcome
Contempt application dismissed as abuse of process; damages claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Breach of Undertaking, Abuse of Process, Damages for Breach of Contract, Enforcement of Arbitration Awards
Civil Procedure Contract Law Arbitration Contempt of Court Breach of Undertaking Abuse of Process Damages for Breach of Contract Enforcement of Arbitration Awards

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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Navigator Equities Limited

Claimant

Vladimir Anatolevich Chernukhin

Claimant

Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Judgment on Contempt Application and Damages Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contempt application was an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether Mr Deripaska breached his undertaking to the court
  3. 3 Whether the undertaking constituted a contract enforceable by the claimants

Ratio Decidendi

The contempt application was an abuse of process, motivated by personal animosity and prosecuted in a partisan manner, not in the public interest. Mr Deripaska did not breach his undertaking, as the redomiciliation of En+ did not prevent, impede, or obstruct the fulfilment of the undertakings, nor render the shares unavailable for direct enforcement. The undertaking did not constitute a contract enforceable by the claimants, and no damages are recoverable.

Court Disposition

Contempt application dismissed as abuse of process; damages claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Contempt application struck out; damages claim dismissed; costs to be determined as per subsequent order.