WWRT v Tyshchenko & Anor (Rev1) [2023] EWHC 79 (Ch) (25 January 2023)

All four applications are dismissed as abusive and wholly unmeritorious; the assignment, banking records, fraud, and DGF claims arguments either constitute abuse of process or cannot be determined summarily due to disputed expert evidence; no grounds for strike out or stay exist.

Citation: [2023] EWHC 79 (Ch)
Parties: Claimant: WWRT; Defendant: Serhiy Tyshchenko; Defendant: Olena Tyshchenko
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 25 January 2023
Procedural Posture: Civil Fraud Claim / Interlocutory Applications for Strike Out, Stay, and Revocation of Freezing Order
Outcome: Applications dismissed
Legal Topics: Abuse of Process, Assignment of Claims, Freezing Orders, Foreign Law, Jurisdiction, Banking Records, Civil Liability for Fraud

Civil Procedure Fraud International Law Abuse of Process Assignment of Claims Freezing Orders Foreign Law Jurisdiction +2 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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2

Parties

WWRT

Claimant

Serhiy Tyshchenko

Defendant

Olena Tyshchenko

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Fraud Claim / Interlocutory Applications for Strike Out, Stay, and Revocation of Freezing Order

Legal Issues

1 Whether the claim should be struck out or stayed based on assignment, banking records, fraud, and DGF claims
2 Whether the applications constitute abuse of process
3 Whether the worldwide freezing order should be revoked

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed

Orders

All four applications for strike out, stay, and revocation of freezing order are dismissed
Bench warrant for Mr Tyshchenko's arrest remains