Deutsche Bank AG v Sebastian Holdings Inc

Deutsche Bank AG v Sebastian Holdings Inc

A party alleging breach of an order under CPR 71.2 may proceed with a committal application under CPR 81, not only CPR 71.8. However, the court has no jurisdiction under PD6B 3.1(10) to grant permission to serve the committal application out of the jurisdiction because an order under CPR 71.2 is not a 'judgment' within the meaning of that provision.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Deutsche Bank AG; Defendant: Sebastian Holdings Inc; Defendant for Costs Purposes Only/respondent: Alexander Vik
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Commercial Enforcement/contempt Application / Ruling on Application for Permission to Serve Committal Application Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application for permission to serve committal application out of jurisdiction dismissed.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Interpretation of Civil Procedure Rules, Enforcement of Judgments
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Contempt of Court Committal for Contempt Service Out of Jurisdiction Interpretation of Civil Procedure Rules Enforcement of Judgments

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

Parties

Deutsche Bank AG

Claimant/applicant

Sebastian Holdings Inc

Defendant

Alexander Vik

Defendant for Costs Purposes Only/respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Enforcement/contempt Application / Ruling on Application for Permission to Serve Committal Application Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a committal application for breach of an order under CPR 71 must be brought under CPR 71.8 or may be brought under CPR 81
  2. 2 Whether CPR 71.8 has extra-territorial effect
  3. 3 Whether there is a jurisdictional gateway under PD6B 3.1(10) for service out of a committal application

Ratio Decidendi

A party alleging breach of an order under CPR 71.2 may proceed with a committal application under CPR 81, not only CPR 71.8. However, the court has no jurisdiction under PD6B 3.1(10) to grant permission to serve the committal application out of the jurisdiction because an order under CPR 71.2 is not a 'judgment' within the meaning of that provision.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to serve committal application out of jurisdiction dismissed.

Orders

  • Application for permission to serve committal application out of jurisdiction under PD6B 3.1(10) dismissed.
  • Application to dispense with personal service also dismissed.