JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank & Anor v Pugachev & Ors

JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank & Anor v Pugachev & Ors

The court has jurisdiction to order disclosure relating to the trusts for the purpose of ascertaining the true position as to the extent, if any, of the defendant's control of assets held within the trust structures. The trustees' application to discharge or vary the trust disclosure order fails, except that disclosure of assets located in Russia is restricted to persons subject to the jurisdiction of the English court.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank; Claimant/respondent: State Corporation “Deposit Insurance Agency”; Defendant: Sergei Viktorovich Pugachev; Applicant/defendant: Kea Trust Company Limited & Others (trustees of five discretionary trusts)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Discharge or Vary Trust Disclosure Order Ancillary to Worldwide Freezing Order
Outcome
application dismissed (save for restriction on disclosure of Russian assets)
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Asset Disclosure, Trust Beneficiary Rights, Confidentiality Regimes, Undertakings in Damages
Civil Procedure Trusts and Equity Cross Border Insolvency Freezing Injunctions Asset Disclosure Trust Beneficiary Rights Confidentiality Regimes Undertakings in Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank

Claimant/respondent

State Corporation “Deposit Insurance Agency”

Claimant/respondent

Sergei Viktorovich Pugachev

Defendant

Kea Trust Company Limited & Others (trustees of five discretionary trusts)

Applicant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Discharge or Vary Trust Disclosure Order Ancillary to Worldwide Freezing Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to order disclosure of trust assets where the defendant is a discretionary beneficiary
  2. 2 Whether the trust disclosure order should be discharged or varied on grounds of confidentiality, lack of cross-undertaking in damages, or risk of injustice to trustees

Ratio Decidendi

The court has jurisdiction to order disclosure relating to the trusts for the purpose of ascertaining the true position as to the extent, if any, of the defendant's control of assets held within the trust structures. The trustees' application to discharge or vary the trust disclosure order fails, except that disclosure of assets located in Russia is restricted to persons subject to the jurisdiction of the English court.

Court Disposition

application dismissed (save for restriction on disclosure of Russian assets)

Orders

  • Trustees' application to discharge or vary the trust disclosure order is dismissed.
  • Disclosure of assets located in Russia is restricted to persons subject to the jurisdiction of the English court, with liberty to apply for wider disclosure.