header-logo header-logo

23 June 2011 / Ekaterina Sjostrand
Issue: 7471 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

To sue or not to sue?

Ekaterina Sjostrand analyses the main principles of the jurisdiction of English courts in Russia/CIS related disputes

England having become a popular dispute resolution forum for Russia and Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) related cases in the past decade or so, the High Court in London has seen an influx of various matters connected, one way or another, to the former Soviet states. In many such cases, it is the origin of the actual parties which bears this connection, and/or the origin of the assets at the heart of the dispute, and/or the origin of the ultimate owners of the assets. In different “scenarios” different conflict of laws rules will apply as regards the courts’ jurisdiction.

The most significant cases giving rise to landmark decisions involved the famous “oligarchs”. In almost all of them challenges to jurisdiction of English Courts ended up in long fierce legal battles. They dealt with various difficult legal issues such as personal service, domicile, criteria for grant of permission to serve out of jurisdiction including “forum conveniens”.

Domicile

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll