Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation & Ors v Yuri Privalov & Ors

Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation & Ors v Yuri Privalov & Ors

The court will direct an inquiry into damages under the cross-undertakings given for the freezing orders, as the claimants' serious and culpable breaches of duty in obtaining the orders outweigh the applicants' misconduct, and sufficient evidence of loss has been adduced to justify an inquiry.

Parties
Claimant: Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation & ors; Defendant: Yuri Privalov & ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Post Trial, Application for Inquiry Into Damages Under Cross Undertakings
Outcome
Directions for inquiry into damages under cross-undertakings granted.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Cross Undertakings, Damages Assessment, Misrepresentation, Non Disclosure, Equitable Discretion

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

Parties

Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation & ors

Claimant

Yuri Privalov & ors

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Post Trial, Application for Inquiry Into Damages Under Cross Undertakings

  1. 1 Should cross-undertakings given in support of freezing orders be enforced given the conduct of the applicants and claimants?
  2. 2 Is there sufficient evidence that the applicants suffered loss as a result of the freezing orders?

Ratio Decidendi

The court will direct an inquiry into damages under the cross-undertakings given for the freezing orders, as the claimants' serious and culpable breaches of duty in obtaining the orders outweigh the applicants' misconduct, and sufficient evidence of loss has been adduced to justify an inquiry.

Court Disposition

Directions for inquiry into damages under cross-undertakings granted.

Orders

  • Directions for inquiry as to damages suffered by applicants as a result of the 2005 and 2007 freezing orders to be made.
  • Parties invited to agree directions; court to resolve any remaining issues.