Grigori Fishman v Viktor Mangazeev

Grigori Fishman v Viktor Mangazeev

The Fancourt order established a regime permitting payment of living expenses from frozen assets, with quantum to be determined by the court or agreement. There is no requirement for further worldwide asset disclosure or historical funding evidence before such payments. The claimant's attempt to impose such requirements constitutes an attempt to reopen matters already decided, contrary to the Chanel principle. The court's task is to determine the quantum based on evidence provided, applying healthy scepticism but not requiring additional disclosure.

Parties
Claimant: Grigori Fishman; Defendant: Viktor Mangazeev
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Freezing Order, Determination of Living Expenses Exception
Outcome
Application granted in part; quantum of living expenses determined subject to provision of relevant information and confirmations.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Exceptions to Injunctions, Disclosure of Assets, Living Expenses, Quantification of Exceptions
Civil Procedure Injunctions Asset Freezing Freezing Orders Exceptions to Injunctions Disclosure of Assets Living Expenses Quantification of Exceptions

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

Parties

Grigori Fishman

Claimant

Viktor Mangazeev

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Freezing 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 Determination of quantum for living expenses exception under a freezing order

Ratio Decidendi

The Fancourt order established a regime permitting payment of living expenses from frozen assets, with quantum to be determined by the court or agreement. There is no requirement for further worldwide asset disclosure or historical funding evidence before such payments. The claimant's attempt to impose such requirements constitutes an attempt to reopen matters already decided, contrary to the Chanel principle. The court's task is to determine the quantum based on evidence provided, applying healthy scepticism but not requiring additional disclosure.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; quantum of living expenses determined subject to provision of relevant information and confirmations.

Orders

  • Defendant may pay rent, school fees, and household expenses from frozen assets, subject to providing unredacted tenancy agreement to claimant's legal team and confirmation regarding school invoices.
  • No order as to costs.