header-logo header-logo

‘Immovables rule’ continues to rule

27 November 2024
Issue: 8096 / Categories: Legal News , Property , Insolvency , International
printer mail-detail
Property and other immovables in England and Wales are protected from the reach of foreign judicial decisions, the Supreme Court has confirmed.

Dismissing the appeal in Kireeva v Bedzhamov [2024] UKSC 39, the court rejected the argument that common law allows a foreign authority to claim local immovables.

The respondent, Georgy Ivanovich Bedzhamov, owns property in Belgravia, London. A bankruptcy order was made against him by a Moscow court. The appellant, Lyubov Kireeva, was appointed trustee of Bedzhamov’s bankruptcy estate. Under Russian law, the London property forms part of the bankruptcy estate. The Supreme Court held, however, that the immovables rule prevents the trustee from claiming the London house and from obtaining assistance from the English court to do so.

Delivering their judgment last week, Lords Lloyd-Jones and Richards commented that the immovables rule ‘produces a surprising result in leaving the bankrupt’s immovable property in this country to be enjoyed by the bankrupt or to be taken in execution by individual creditors on a first come, first served basis, when in a bankruptcy under the laws of both this country and the foreign state (in this case, Russia), immovable property would form part of the bankrupt's estate.

‘That, however, is a policy reason to be considered in the context of any proposal for legislative change.’

Kathleen Garrett, partner at Reed Smith, said: ‘A foreign court has no jurisdiction to make orders on real property/immovables in England when it comes to foreign insolvency procedures.

‘The ruling appears to reflect a move to territorialism by the Supreme Court following its judgments in Rubin v Eurofinance SA and New Cap Reinsurance Corp (in liquidation) v Grant [2012] UKSC 46. This ruling will help to provide legal certainty in respect of rights over English real property/immovables at common law.

‘This will be a particularly significant, and potentially concerning, judgment for common law countries that have not adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-border Insolvency and have been relying on recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings under common law. However, where it is difficult to conduct a parallel procedure for creditors, any issues that do materialise will not be easily resolved.’

Issue: 8096 / Categories: Legal News , Property , Insolvency , International
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll