Akhmedova v Akhmendov & Ors (Injunctive Relief)

Akhmedova v Akhmendov & Ors (Injunctive Relief)

It is just and convenient to grant further injunctive relief against Straight Establishment to prevent removal or dissipation of the Vessel, given the real risk of frustration of enforcement and the Respondents' history of non-compliance. The steps taken to serve the application by email constituted good service, and the de facto directors of Straight should be named in the penal notice as there is a good arguable case they control Straight.

Parties
Applicant: Tatiana Akhmedova; First Respondent: Farkhad Teimur Ogly Akhmedov; Second Respondent: Woodblade Limited; Third Respondent: Cotor Investment SA; Fourth Respondent: Qubo 1 Establishment; Fifth Respondent: Qubo 2 Establishment; Sixth Respondent: Straight Establishment; Seventh Respondent: Avenger Assets Corporation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Matrimonial/family (financial Remedies) / Application for Further Injunctive Relief Within Enforcement Proceedings
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Injunctive Relief, Freezing Orders, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Committal for Contempt, Enforcement of Financial Orders
Family Law Civil Procedure International Enforcement Injunctive Relief Freezing Orders Service Out of Jurisdiction Piercing the Corporate Veil Committal for Contempt +1 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tatiana Akhmedova

Applicant

Farkhad Teimur Ogly Akhmedov

First Respondent

Woodblade Limited

Second Respondent

Cotor Investment SA

Third Respondent

Qubo 1 Establishment

Fourth Respondent

Qubo 2 Establishment

Fifth Respondent

Straight Establishment

Sixth Respondent

Avenger Assets Corporation

Seventh Respondent

Procedural Posture

Matrimonial/family (financial Remedies) / Application for Further Injunctive Relief Within Enforcement Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether further injunctive relief should be granted against Straight Establishment to prevent removal or dissipation of the Vessel (Luna)
  2. 2 Whether service by email and abridgement of time for service constituted good service on foreign respondents
  3. 3 Whether de facto directors of Straight Establishment should be named in the penal notice for committal purposes

Ratio Decidendi

It is just and convenient to grant further injunctive relief against Straight Establishment to prevent removal or dissipation of the Vessel, given the real risk of frustration of enforcement and the Respondents' history of non-compliance. The steps taken to serve the application by email constituted good service, and the de facto directors of Straight should be named in the penal notice as there is a good arguable case they control Straight.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Further injunctive relief granted against Straight Establishment restraining removal or dealing with the Vessel (Luna)
  • Mandatory injunctions requiring notification and compliance by relevant third parties