header-logo header-logo

Record numbers of Russian litigants in commercial courts

10 May 2023
Issue: 8024 / Categories: Legal News , Commercial , Sanctions , Climate change litigation
printer mail-detail
A record number of Russian litigants appeared in the London Commercial Courts last year, despite the war in Ukraine and sanctions.

Russians were the most common foreign nationality out of 78 different nationalities represented in the courts. According to the Commercial Courts Report 2023, published last week by Portland Communications, the increase was driven largely by Russian business executives and some sanctioned entities such as PJSC Bank Otkritie Financial Corporation.

Conversely, the number of Ukrainian litigants dropped to zero, compared to 25 appearances between April 2020 and March 2021, when Ukraine vs Russia was the second most common nationality pairing in judgments.

The US, India and Singapore fielded the next highest number of litigants. In a foreword to the report, former president of the Supreme Court Lord Neuberger wrote that he was ‘surprised by the increase in Singaporean and Indian litigants: it appears to be a particular compliment to London, given the keenness of the Singaporean courts and arbitration institutions to attract southern Asian international dispute resolution to Singapore.’

Only 40% of the 1,120 litigants appearing were from the UK—less than in previous years.

Portland’s polling for the report also found high levels of support for climate change litigation in the UK, with nearly 90% agreeing that parent companies should be held accountable for damage caused by a subsidiary. Some 81% of respondents agreed the UK courts should be prepared to intervene to force private companies to meet more ambitious climate change targets.

Philip Hall, managing director at Portland, said: ‘Litigation, commercial strategy and reputation can no longer be separated.

‘Today, every entity involved in litigation must consider how the audiences that matter to them will react. The recent world-wide wave of climate change litigation is popular among the British public. Portland’s in-house polling shows overwhelming support for climate change and greenwashing lawsuits, with far-reaching implications for companies and organisations’ reputation.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll