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 overwhelming international condemnation and prior Russian proceedings meant that any vindication achievable in England would be minimal and disproportionate to the resources required. The English court was not the appropriate forum, and the claim was, in substance, a collateral attack on the Magnitsky list and international findings, not a legitimate attempt to protect reputation within the jurisdiction.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3071 (QB)
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 (pre Trial)
Outcome
Claim struck out as an abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction, Reputation, Limitation Period, Vindication, Forum Non Conveniens
Defamation Private International Law Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Jurisdiction Reputation Limitation Period Vindication +1 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 21 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 (pre Trial)

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 the English court 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 overwhelming international condemnation and prior Russian proceedings meant that any vindication achievable in England would be minimal and disproportionate to the resources required. The English court was not the appropriate forum, and the claim was, in substance, a collateral attack on the Magnitsky list and international findings, not a legitimate attempt to protect reputation within the jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as an abuse of process

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • No trial to proceed on merits