Otkritie Capital International Ltd & Anor v Threadneedle Asset Management Ltd & Anor

Otkritie Capital International Ltd & Anor v Threadneedle Asset Management Ltd & Anor

Although the claimants breached the Aldi requirement by not referring the potential claim against Threadneedle to the court during the earlier litigation, this breach alone does not amount to abuse of process. On a broad merits-based assessment, the circumstances do not justify striking out the claim, as there were legitimate reasons for the claimants' conduct and no unjust harassment or oppression of Threadneedle.

Parties
Claimant: Otkritie Capital International Ltd; Claimant: JSC Otkritie Holding; Defendant: Threadneedle Asset Management Limited; Defendant: Threadneedle Management Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Application to Strike Out Claim as Abuse of Process
Outcome
Application to strike out the claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Case Management, Vicarious Liability, Finality in Litigation
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Abuse of Process Case Management Vicarious Liability Finality in Litigation

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

Otkritie Capital International Ltd

Claimant

JSC Otkritie Holding

Claimant

Threadneedle Asset Management Limited

Defendant

Threadneedle Management Services Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Application to Strike Out Claim as Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim against Threadneedle is an abuse of process for not being joined in earlier litigation
  2. 2 Whether breach of the 'Aldi requirement' (to refer potential claims to the court for case management) mandates striking out the claim

Ratio Decidendi

Although the claimants breached the Aldi requirement by not referring the potential claim against Threadneedle to the court during the earlier litigation, this breach alone does not amount to abuse of process. On a broad merits-based assessment, the circumstances do not justify striking out the claim, as there were legitimate reasons for the claimants' conduct and no unjust harassment or oppression of Threadneedle.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out the claim dismissed