JSC VTB Bank v Skurikhin & Ors

JSC VTB Bank v Skurikhin & Ors

It is an abuse of process for Berenger to rely on the exclusion of Mr Skurikhin as a beneficiary, a change brought about at his own instigation, to discharge the Receivership Order. The exclusion was not a genuine divestment but a device to frustrate enforcement, and Berenger was in breach of the WFO. The change was not material as Mr Skurikhin retained de facto control over Berenger's assets.

Parties
Claimant: JSC VTB Bank; Defendant: Pavel Valerjevich Skurikhin; Defendant: Pikeville Investments LLP; Defendant: Perchwell Holdings LLP; Respondent: Zeno Alois Meier; Respondent: Beat Lerch; Respondent: Crown Capital Holdings Limited; Respondent: The Berenger Foundation; Respondent: Accreda Trustees Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Freezing Injunctions, Receivership, Equitable Execution, Contempt of Court
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Trusts and Equity Abuse of Process Freezing Injunctions Receivership Equitable Execution Contempt of Court

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

Parties

JSC VTB Bank

Claimant

Pavel Valerjevich Skurikhin

Defendant

Pikeville Investments LLP

Defendant

Perchwell Holdings LLP

Defendant

Zeno Alois Meier

Respondent

Beat Lerch

Respondent

Crown Capital Holdings Limited

Respondent

The Berenger Foundation

Respondent

Accreda Trustees Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is an abuse of process for a party to apply to set aside an interlocutory order based on a material change of circumstances brought about by the party itself
  2. 2 Whether the exclusion of Mr Skurikhin as a beneficiary was a material change of circumstances justifying discharge of the Receivership Order
  3. 3 Whether Berenger breached the Worldwide Freezing Order (WFO) and Receivership Order by excluding Mr Skurikhin

Ratio Decidendi

It is an abuse of process for Berenger to rely on the exclusion of Mr Skurikhin as a beneficiary, a change brought about at his own instigation, to discharge the Receivership Order. The exclusion was not a genuine divestment but a device to frustrate enforcement, and Berenger was in breach of the WFO. The change was not material as Mr Skurikhin retained de facto control over Berenger's assets.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; Receivership Order remains in force.
  • VTB granted permission to advance argument that Berenger breached the WFO and Receivership Order.