Yukos Finance BV & Ors v Lynch & Ors

Yukos Finance BV & Ors v Lynch & Ors

There was no material delay or serious non-disclosure to justify setting aside the extension order; good reason existed for retrospective permission for alternative service in Lebanon due to Mr. Lynch's avoidance of service and the need for fair proceedings; Mr. Lynch was sufficiently apprised of the nature of the documents served.

Parties
Claimant: Yukos Finance B. V.; Claimant: Yukos International UK B. V.; Claimant: Stitching Administratiekantoor Yukos International; Claimant: David Godfrey; Claimant: Yukos Capital SARL; Claimant: Financial Performance Holdings B. V.; Claimant: Yukos Hydrocarbons Investments Limited; Defendant: Stephen Lynch; Defendant: Stephen Jennings; Defendant: Robert Reid; Defendant: Richard Andrew Deitz; Defendant: Robert Mark Foresman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Service Orders and Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Service Out of Jurisdiction, Extension of Time for Service, Alternative Service, Jurisdictional Challenge
Civil Procedure Service Out of Jurisdiction Extension of Time for Service Alternative Service Jurisdictional Challenge

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yukos Finance B. V.

Claimant

Yukos International UK B. V.

Claimant

Stitching Administratiekantoor Yukos International

Claimant

David Godfrey

Claimant

Yukos Capital SARL

Claimant

Financial Performance Holdings B. V.

Claimant

Yukos Hydrocarbons Investments Limited

Claimant

Stephen Lynch

Defendant

Stephen Jennings

Defendant

Robert Reid

Defendant

Richard Andrew Deitz

Defendant

Robert Mark Foresman

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Service Orders and Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether delay in service justified setting aside extension order
  2. 2 Whether non-disclosure of failed subpoena service in Florida justified setting aside extension order
  3. 3 Whether retrospective permission for alternative service in Lebanon was valid

Ratio Decidendi

There was no material delay or serious non-disclosure to justify setting aside the extension order; good reason existed for retrospective permission for alternative service in Lebanon due to Mr. Lynch's avoidance of service and the need for fair proceedings; Mr. Lynch was sufficiently apprised of the nature of the documents served.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Orders of Phillips J. dated 24 May 2016 and Andrew Baker J. dated 24 March 2017 upheld
  • Application for declaration of no jurisdiction dismissed