Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2014] All ER (D) 76 (Jan)
Neutral Citation: [2014] EWCA Civ 20
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Arden, Kitchin LJJ and Lord Toulson

Representation Philip Marshall QC and Justin Higgo (instructed by Pinsent Masons LLP) for the claimant.
  Anthony Trace QC, Thomas Grant QC and Alexander Winter (instructed by Addleshaw Goddard LLP) for the first defendant.
  Philip Jones QC and Jennifer Haywood (instructed by Boodle Hatfield LLP) for the second defendant.
Judgment Dates: 16 January 2014

Catchwords

Conflict of laws - Foreign judgments - Enforcement - Defendants being found guilty of fraud in Russia and ordered to compensate claimant company - Compensation orders subsequently being increased - Claimant seeking to enforce Russian judgments in England - Judge summarily dismissing claim due to finality principle - Claimant appealing - Whether judge erring in summarily dismissing claim - Whether first judgment being final and binding - Whether English or Russian law governing question.

The Case

Conflict of laws Foreign judgments. A Russian court awarded the claimant company compensation and a second court increased that order. The claimant issued proceedings to enforce the two judgments in the United Kingdom. The judge summarily dismissed the claim on the ground that there had been a complete defence, namely, the finality principle. The claimant appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the appeal, held that the court had to resolve the question of the incidents under Russian law of the first judgment before it could consider whether to recognise or to refuse to recognise the judgments. It could only do that at trial.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.