header-logo header-logo

05 October 2022
Issue: 7997 / Categories: Legal News , Disclosure , Procedure & practice , International
printer mail-detail

Territoriality row over Russian company

An order for disclosure of documents can be made against a third party outside the jurisdiction, the Court of Appeal has held.

n Gorbachev v Guriev [2022] EWCA Civ 1270, the court upheld an earlier ruling by Mr Justice Jacobs. The case stemmed from a £1bn dispute between two Russian former friends over their interests in a Russia-based fertiliser company, PJSC PhosAgro. That dispute is listed for a six-week trial in 2023, with one of the issues concerning how Alexander Gorbachev was financially supported for eight years through two Cyprus trusts created for his benefit and alleged to have been operated by a close associate of Andrey Guriev.

The claimant, Gorbachev, sought third-party disclosure of documents held electronically by law firm Forsters. Forsters countered that they held the documents on behalf of the appellants, the trustees TU Reflections and First Link Management Services, both Cypriot companies, out of the jurisdiction, and that any order for disclosure should be made against them.

Counsel for the trustees argued the principle of territoriality meant the court had no jurisdiction to order disclosure against a third party outside England and Wales under the Senior Courts Act 1981, s 34.

Giving the lead judgment, Lord Justice Males dismissed the appeal, holding the court ‘has and should exercise jurisdiction in this case’. He said the ‘critical fact’ was that the documents sought were located in England, since they ‘were sent to Forsters in England, albeit by electronic means, so that Forsters could give advice… It is, as Mr Justice Jacobs put it, not the result of chance that they are held within the jurisdiction’.

Males LJ declined to clarify the law on whether a judge might have discretion, in exceptional cases, to order disclosure where both third party and documents were outside the jurisdiction. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

back-to-top-scroll