- Freezing orders (full and frank disclosure) and declining jurisdiction against foreign nationals (PJSC Commercial Bank PrivatBank v Kolomoisky)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Freezing orders
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: The court in considering freezing orders and the issues of jurisdiction decided (i) to set aside the ex parte worldwide freezing orders due to serious breaches of the duty of full and frank disclosure, (ii) that the English court does not have jurisdiction against the first and second defendants, Ukrainian businessmen domiciled in Switzerland under Article 6(1) of the Lugano Convention, (iii) to stay the claim against the English-domiciled defendants under Article 34 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), and (iv) to decline jurisdiction against the British Virgin Islands domiciled defendants on forum non conveniens grounds. Written by Kristina Lukacova, barrister at New Square Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial