Fishman v Mangazeev [2025] EWHC 1270 (Ch) (31 January 2025)

Fishman v Mangazeev [2025] EWHC 1270 (Ch) (31 January 2025)

The Fancourt order established a regime permitting the defendant to pay living expenses from frozen assets, with the quantum to be determined by the court if not agreed. The claimant's attempt to require further worldwide asset disclosure as a precondition is precluded by the Chanel principle, as it could have been raised at the original hearing. There has been no material change of circumstances to justify revisiting the regime. The court will determine the quantum of living expenses based on evidence of actual expenses, applying healthy scepticism, but will not require further asset disclosure as a precondition.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1270 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Grigori Fishman; Defendant: Viktor Mangazeev
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Application Within Civil Proceedings (freezing Order) / Post Interim Order, Determination of Living Expenses Exception
Outcome
Application granted in part; quantum of living expenses to be determined without requiring further worldwide asset disclosure as a precondition.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Living Expenses Exception, Asset Disclosure, Variation of Orders, Interlocutory Applications
Civil Procedure Injunctions Asset Freezing Freezing Orders Living Expenses Exception Asset Disclosure Variation of Orders Interlocutory Applications

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grigori Fishman

Claimant

Viktor Mangazeev

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application Within Civil Proceedings (freezing Order) / Post Interim Order, Determination of Living Expenses Exception

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is entitled to pay living expenses from frozen assets without further worldwide asset disclosure
  2. 2 Whether the quantum of living expenses should be determined solely by reference to evidence of actual expenses or also require disclosure of other assets
  3. 3 Whether the claimant can require further disclosure as a precondition to payment of living expenses from frozen assets

Ratio Decidendi

The Fancourt order established a regime permitting the defendant to pay living expenses from frozen assets, with the quantum to be determined by the court if not agreed. The claimant's attempt to require further worldwide asset disclosure as a precondition is precluded by the Chanel principle, as it could have been raised at the original hearing. There has been no material change of circumstances to justify revisiting the regime. The court will determine the quantum of living expenses based on evidence of actual expenses, applying healthy scepticism, but will not require further asset disclosure as a precondition.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; quantum of living expenses to be determined without requiring further worldwide asset disclosure as a precondition.

Orders

  • The defendant may pay living expenses from frozen assets, subject to court determination of quantum.
  • Payment of rent as a living expense is permitted only if the defendant provides an unredacted tenancy agreement to the claimant's legal team, with further disclosure to the claimant or his adviser only upon application.