JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank & Anor v Pugachev & Ors

JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank & Anor v Pugachev & Ors

The trial should proceed despite the jurisdictional challenge because adjourning would cause disproportionate waste of costs and court resources, and the application for adjournment will be reviewed promptly after parties have had time to consider it.

Parties
Claimant: JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenny Bank and another; Defendant: Sergei Viktorovich Pugachev; Defendant: 12th, 13th and 14th Defendants (infant children of Mr Pugachev, by Alexandra Tolstoy, litigation friend)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Enforcement Proceedings / Interlocutory Application for Adjournment During Trial
Outcome
Application for adjournment refused; trial to proceed.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Adjournment, Overriding Objective, Contempt of Court, Trusts as Shams
Civil Procedure Trusts and Equity Jurisdiction Service Out of Jurisdiction Adjournment Overriding Objective Contempt of Court Trusts as Shams

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenny Bank and another

Claimant

Sergei Viktorovich Pugachev

Defendant

12th, 13th and 14th Defendants (infant children of Mr Pugachev, by Alexandra Tolstoy, litigation friend)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Enforcement Proceedings / Interlocutory Application for Adjournment During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction over Mr Pugachev under the Judgment Regulation (Recast) 1215/2012
  2. 2 Whether the trial should be adjourned pending determination of jurisdictional challenge
  3. 3 Implications of proceeding in absence of a defendant allegedly not properly served

Ratio Decidendi

The trial should proceed despite the jurisdictional challenge because adjourning would cause disproportionate waste of costs and court resources, and the application for adjournment will be reviewed promptly after parties have had time to consider it.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment refused; trial to proceed.

Orders

  • The trial will continue as scheduled.
  • The application for adjournment will be reviewed with counsel at the start of proceedings on Wednesday morning.