Yossifoff v Donnerstein

Yossifoff v Donnerstein

The application for interim relief is dismissed because the applicant has not advanced a substantive monetary claim in the Israeli proceedings, and thus there is no basis for a freezing injunction. There is no credible evidence of a threat to dissipate assets or infringe proprietary rights, and the balance of convenience does not favour granting an injunction. Further, the Israeli court is the appropriate forum to consider any interim relief, and it would be inexpedient for the English court to intervene where the Israeli court has jurisdiction and would not grant such relief on the facts presented.

Parties
Applicant: Yoram Yossifoff; Respondent: Shmuel Donnerstein
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Injunction in Support of Foreign Proceedings / Ruling on Application for Interim Relief
Outcome
Application for interim relief dismissed
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Freezing Orders, Ancillary Relief in Support of Foreign Proceedings, Trusts—breach of Trust, Jurisdiction—section 25 Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982
Civil Procedure Trusts Law Private International Law Interim Injunctions Freezing Orders Ancillary Relief in Support of Foreign Proceedings Trusts—breach of Trust Jurisdiction—section 25 Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yoram Yossifoff

Applicant

Shmuel Donnerstein

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Injunction in Support of Foreign Proceedings / Ruling on Application for Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court should grant interim injunctions (including freezing orders) in support of Israeli proceedings under section 25 CJJA 1982
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a sufficient proprietary or monetary claim to justify interim relief
  3. 3 Whether it is expedient or inexpedient for the English court to grant such relief given the circumstances and the role of the Israeli court

Ratio Decidendi

The application for interim relief is dismissed because the applicant has not advanced a substantive monetary claim in the Israeli proceedings, and thus there is no basis for a freezing injunction. There is no credible evidence of a threat to dissipate assets or infringe proprietary rights, and the balance of convenience does not favour granting an injunction. Further, the Israeli court is the appropriate forum to consider any interim relief, and it would be inexpedient for the English court to intervene where the Israeli court has jurisdiction and would not grant such relief on the facts presented.

Court Disposition

Application for interim relief dismissed