Svetlana Bunina v Orkhan Nasibov

Svetlana Bunina v Orkhan Nasibov

The claimant has a good arguable case for breach of the personal guarantee agreement, there is a real risk of dissipation of assets by the defendant, service was validly effected via Telegram and other addresses, and it is just and convenient to continue the domestic freezing injunction until trial or further order.

Parties
Claimant: Svetlana Bunina; Defendant: Orkhan Nasibov
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil / Return Date Hearing for Continuation of Domestic Freezing Injunction
Outcome
Continuation of domestic freezing injunction granted until trial or further order.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunction, Personal Guarantee, Jurisdiction, Service of Process, Asset Dissipation
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Freezing Injunction Personal Guarantee Jurisdiction Service of Process Asset Dissipation

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

Parties

Svetlana Bunina

Claimant

Orkhan Nasibov

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Return Date Hearing for Continuation of Domestic Freezing Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant has a good arguable case for breach of personal guarantee agreement
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets by the defendant
  3. 3 Whether service of the injunction and related documents was valid

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant has a good arguable case for breach of the personal guarantee agreement, there is a real risk of dissipation of assets by the defendant, service was validly effected via Telegram and other addresses, and it is just and convenient to continue the domestic freezing injunction until trial or further order.

Court Disposition

Continuation of domestic freezing injunction granted until trial or further order.

Orders

  • Freezing injunction against the defendant continued until trial or further order.
  • Claimant's cross undertaking fortified by £25,000 remains in place.