Qatar Investment and Projects Development Holding Co & Anor v Phoenix Ancient Art SA & Ors [2024] EWHC 1331 (KB) (04 June 2024)

Qatar Investment and Projects Development Holding Co & Anor v Phoenix Ancient Art SA & Ors [2024] EWHC 1331 (KB) (04 June 2024)

The claim is not so obviously unfounded or inadequately pleaded as to justify strike out or summary judgment; it is not clearly time barred as the application of s.32 Limitation Act 1980 is at least arguable on the facts; and the New Action is not an abuse of process as the first action was struck out on procedural grounds without consideration of the merits and the present claims are not identical or wholly overlapping.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 1331 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Qatar Investment and Projects Development Holding Co.; Claimant: His Highness Sheikh Hamad Bin Abdullah Al Thani; Defendant: Phoenix Ancient Art S.A.; Defendant: Ali Aboutaam; Defendant: Hicham Aboutaam; Defendant: Roland Ansermet
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial) / Interlocutory Applications (strike Out/summary Judgment, Anti Suit Injunction, Relief From Sanctions)
Outcome
Defendants' application to strike out or for summary judgment dismissed.
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Fraud, Misrepresentation, Abuse of Process, Summary Judgment, Anti Suit Injunctions, Disclosure, Forgery
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Art Law Limitation of Actions Fraud Misrepresentation Abuse of Process Summary Judgment +3 more

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Qatar Investment and Projects Development Holding Co.

Claimant

His Highness Sheikh Hamad Bin Abdullah Al Thani

Claimant

Phoenix Ancient Art S.A.

Defendant

Ali Aboutaam

Defendant

Hicham Aboutaam

Defendant

Roland Ansermet

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial) / Interlocutory Applications (strike Out/summary Judgment, Anti Suit Injunction, Relief From Sanctions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the New Action should be struck out or summary judgment entered for the Defendants on grounds of (a) inadequate pleading/no reasonable cause of action, (b) limitation/time bar, (c) abuse of process as re-litigation of the First Alexander Action

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is not so obviously unfounded or inadequately pleaded as to justify strike out or summary judgment; it is not clearly time barred as the application of s.32 Limitation Act 1980 is at least arguable on the facts; and the New Action is not an abuse of process as the first action was struck out on procedural grounds without consideration of the merits and the present claims are not identical or wholly overlapping.

Court Disposition

Defendants' application to strike out or for summary judgment dismissed.

Orders

  • The New Action is not struck out and will proceed to trial.
  • No summary judgment granted for the Defendants.