header-logo header-logo

16 March 2018 / Ben Amunwa
Issue: 7785 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Unfinished business?

nlj_7785_amunwa

Ben Amunwa covers an international commercial dispute over unconscious bias

Almazeedi v Penner and another (Cayman Islands) [2018] UKPC 3 concerned a distinguished former High Court judge, Mr Justice Cresswell, of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands. He was also a part-time judge in the Civil and Commercial Court of the Qatar Financial Centre but did not appear to have conducted any work for them nor drawn a salary from this appointment.

The dispute originates from a ten-year-long legal battle between various owners of a predominately Qatari owned business (BTU Power Company) in which several influential Qatari individuals were involved.

The Cayman Islands litigation

The Qatari shareholders had brought a winding-up petition in the Cayman Islands’ Grand Court with the purpose of relieving Mr Almazeedi of his role in managing the company.

During the proceedings, the parties traded various accusations of misconduct and Mr Almazeedi specifically alleged that he had been threatened with retaliation by shareholders, ‘for daring to stand up against the state of Qatar’.

The case came before Cresswell J who made the winding up

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