Eastern European Engineering Ltd v Vijay Construction (Proprietary) Ltd [2018] EWHC 1539 (Comm) (20 June 2018)

Eastern European Engineering Ltd v Vijay Construction (Proprietary) Ltd [2018] EWHC 1539 (Comm) (20 June 2018)

The court has jurisdiction to grant a worldwide freezing order in support of enforcement of a foreign arbitral award, but in the circumstances of this case—where both parties are Seychellois, the assets are primarily in Seychelles, the Seychellois courts have already addressed injunctive relief, and the recent discharge of Seychellois injunctions—the case is not exceptional and comity dictates the English court should not intervene with a worldwide order. However, a domestic freezing order limited to assets within England and Wales is appropriate given evidence of risk of dissipation.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 1539 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Eastern European Engineering Ltd; Defendant: Vijay Construction (Proprietary) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim / Application for Worldwide Freezing Order After Arbitral Award Enforcement Proceedings
Outcome
Worldwide freezing order refused; domestic freezing order granted.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Jurisdiction, Comity, Interim Relief
Arbitration Civil Procedure Injunctions Freezing Orders Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Jurisdiction Comity Interim Relief

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eastern European Engineering Ltd

Claimant

Vijay Construction (Proprietary) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Claim / Application for Worldwide Freezing Order After Arbitral Award Enforcement Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction to grant a worldwide freezing order in support of enforcement of a foreign arbitral award where the seat of arbitration is not England and Wales
  2. 2 Whether the discretion to grant a worldwide or domestic freezing order should be exercised in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The court has jurisdiction to grant a worldwide freezing order in support of enforcement of a foreign arbitral award, but in the circumstances of this case—where both parties are Seychellois, the assets are primarily in Seychelles, the Seychellois courts have already addressed injunctive relief, and the recent discharge of Seychellois injunctions—the case is not exceptional and comity dictates the English court should not intervene with a worldwide order. However, a domestic freezing order limited to assets within England and Wales is appropriate given evidence of risk of dissipation.

Court Disposition

Worldwide freezing order refused; domestic freezing order granted.

Orders

  • Domestic freezing order made against Vijay Construction (Proprietary) Ltd limited to assets within England and Wales, with exceptions for payments in the ordinary course of business and legal expenses.
  • Order for provision of information about Vijay's assets within the jurisdiction.