Offshore Litigation

Blog

Offshore Litigation

Contributors

Jonathan Addo
Jonathan Addo
  • Jonathan Addo

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jeremy Child
Jeremy Child
  • Jeremy Child

  • Partner
  • London
Julie Engwirda
Julie Engwirda
  • Julie Engwirda

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Peter Ferrer
Peter Ferrer
  • Peter Ferrer

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Claire Goldstein
Claire Goldstein
  • Claire Goldstein

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Hazel-Ann Hannaway
Hazel-Ann Hannaway
  • Hazel-Ann Hannaway

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Nick Hoffman
Nick Hoffman
  • Nick Hoffman

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Andrew Johnstone
Andrew Johnstone
  • Andrew Johnstone

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Paula Kay
Paula Kay
  • Paula Kay

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Phillip Kite
Phillip Kite
  • Phillip Kite

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Vicky Lord
Vicky Lord
  • Vicky Lord

  • Partner
  • Shanghai
Paul Madden
Paul Madden
  • Paul Madden

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Henry Mander
Henry Mander
  • Henry Mander

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Ian Mann
Ian Mann
  • Ian Mann

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
William Peake
William Peake
  • William Peake

  • Partner
  • London
Lorinda Peasland
Lorinda Peasland
  • Lorinda Peasland

  • Consultant
  • Hong Kong
Chai Ridgers
Chai Ridgers
  • Chai Ridgers

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Nicola Roberts
Nicola Roberts
  • Nicola Roberts

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
  • Singapore
Paul Smith
Paul Smith
  • Paul Smith

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Andrew Thorp
Andrew Thorp
  • Andrew Thorp

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jessica Williams
Jessica Williams
  • Jessica Williams

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Jayson Wood
Jayson Wood
  • Jayson Wood

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands

The Receivers are coming

In its recent decision in JSC VTB Bank v Pavel Skurikhin & Ors the English Court of Appeal dismissed as an abuse of process a challenge to a receivership order where the receivers sought to enforce a judgment of the Court. 

Mr Skurikhin was subject to two judgments in the sum of £13.5 million and a worldwide freezing order over his assets, up to £25million. VTB sought to enforce the judgments against a number of properties in Italy owned by a limited partnership, whose shares in turn were held by third parties for the benefit of a Liechtenstein Foundation of which Mr Skurikhin was a beneficiary. In connection with this VTB obtained the appointment of a receiver over the partnership’s shares and ultimately acquired possession of the properties which were put up for sale.

The Foundation subsequently passed a resolution excluding Mr Skurikhin from the class of beneficiaries and sought to discharge the receivership order on the basis that Mr Skurikhin’ s removal was a material change of circumstances and thus the receivership order should be discharged. The discharge application was dismissed in the High Court, which found that the Foundation’s resolution was likely brought about at the instigation of Mr Skurikhin to place obstacles in the way of enforcement of the judgments against him. The Court held that it was an abuse of process for the Foundation to seek to reopen an interlocutory order on the basis of a development that was wholly within its control. The Foundation appealed.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The Court held that the application was a clear case of abuse of process in circumstances where the Foundation accepted Mr Skurikhin’s instructions to exclude him as a named beneficiary so that it might contend he had no interest in the assets against which VTB sought to enforce.  The Court also found that the removal of Mr Skurikhin from the class of beneficiaries was a breach of the freezing order and the change of circumstances brought about by the revocations was not material to the appointment of the receivers.

Parties often go to great lengths to evade the consequences of a judgment or order including pursuing robust legal challenges in court. This judgment amply demonstrates that the Court is well aware of the possibility that parties may misuse its procedures in such a way so as to avoid the consequences of a judgment or order. It also illustrates that even if complicated structures have been set up in order to distance an individual from his assets, courts will be willing to see through these structures and will focus on the reality of the situation so as to enable enforcement to take place.

The Receivers are coming