Karpov v Browder & Ors [2013] EWHC 3071 (QB) (14 October 2013)

Karpov v Browder & Ors [2013] EWHC 3071 (QB) (14 October 2013)

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because the claimant, a Russian citizen with no significant connection or reputation in England, could not establish a real and substantial tort within the jurisdiction. The court found that vindication was not realistically achievable given the torrent of international condemnation and prior publication outside the jurisdiction and limitation period. England was not the appropriate forum, and the claim was being used for collateral purposes related to the Magnitsky list. The proportionality test weighed against allowing the claim to proceed.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3071
Parties
Claimant: Pavel Karpov; Defendant: William Felix Browder; Defendant: Hermitage Capital Management Limited; Defendant: Hermitage Capital Management (UK) Limited; Defendant: Jamison Reed Firestone
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) / Application to Strike Out/stay Claim as Abuse of Process
Outcome
Claim struck out as abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction, Reputation, Vindication, Limitation Period, Forum Non Conveniens, Causation of Damage, Collateral Purpose
Defamation Private International Law Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Jurisdiction Reputation Vindication Limitation Period +3 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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pavel Karpov

Claimant

William Felix Browder

Defendant

Hermitage Capital Management Limited

Defendant

Hermitage Capital Management (UK) Limited

Defendant

Jamison Reed Firestone

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) / Application to Strike Out/stay Claim as Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant has a real and substantial tort within the jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the claim serves a legitimate purpose of vindicating reputation given international context
  3. 3 Whether England is the appropriate forum given prior Russian proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because the claimant, a Russian citizen with no significant connection or reputation in England, could not establish a real and substantial tort within the jurisdiction. The court found that vindication was not realistically achievable given the torrent of international condemnation and prior publication outside the jurisdiction and limitation period. England was not the appropriate forum, and the claim was being used for collateral purposes related to the Magnitsky list. The proportionality test weighed against allowing the claim to proceed.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as abuse of process

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • No trial on merits