This websites use cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. For more details about cookies and how to manage them, see our cookie policy.

Cases Richard Morgan

P (a co inc in country A) v D (a co inc in country B) & ors (2019)

Judgment Date: 16 May 2019

Arbitrators had breached their duty under the Arbitration Act 1996 s.33 to act fairly and impartially as between the parties by reaching a decision on a core issue without the losing party's main witness being cross-examined on that issue and by basing their decision on a case which had not been argued.

View case

Members
Richard Morgan QC

Practice areas
Arbitration & ADR

In the matter of Olympia Securities Commercial v (1) WDW 3 Investments Ltd (2) Arazim (Gibraltar) Ltd (2017)

Judgment Date: 23 Nov 2017

Where a party to a swap agreement had gone bankrupt and the bankruptcy was a default event but the other party had chosen not to serve an early termination notice, the agreement had continued in full force and effect. Consequently, when the other party later committed a default event, the bankrupt party was entitled to serve notice and the other party was liable to pay the early termination payment.

View case

(1) Koza Ltd (2) Hamdi Akin Ipek v Mustafa Akcil & 5 Ors (2017)

Judgment Date: 18 Oct 2017

The English courts had jurisdiction to hear a claim brought by an English company against its Turkish parent company. The proceedings were principally concerned with the validity of decisions of an organ of the English company, and therefore fell within Regulation 1215/2012 art.24(2).

View case

(1) Koza Ltd (2) Hamdi Akin Ipek v Mustafa Akcil & 5 ors (2016)

Judgment Date: 21 Dec 2016

The High Court determined that it had jurisdiction to hear a claim brought by an English company against its Turkish parent concerning the validity of amendments to its articles of association and of notices served by the parent under the Companies Act 2006 s.303 and s.305. The claim fell within Regulation 1215/2012 art.24 and, by serving a counterclaim that went beyond the claim, the parent had submitted to the jurisdiction of the English court.

View case

Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors (2016)

Judgment Date: 08 Nov 2016

The court granted two defendants summary judgment in a claim against them by a Russian oil company on the basis that the claim had no real prospect of success. It also set aside an order permitting service out of the jurisdiction on two other defendants, as there was no serious issue to be tried. The claimant had no standing to bring the proceedings and the claim was misconceived as a matter of Russian law.

View case

PJSC Tatneft v Gennadiy Bogolyubov & ors (2017)

Judgment Date: 08 Nov 2016

The court granted two defendants summary judgment in a claim against them by a Russian oil company on the basis that the claim had no real prospect of success. It also set aside an order permitting service out of the jurisdiction on two other defendants, as there was no serious issue to be tried. The claimant had no standing to bring the proceedings and the claim was misconceived as a matter of Russian law.

View case

Erste Group Bank AG (London) v JSC (VMZ Red October) [2015]

Judgment Date: 17 Apr 2015

Two Russian defendants to proceedings alleging unlawful means conspiracy established that a judge had been wrong to find that England was the appropriate forum for resolving the dispute. Although the proceedings concerned a loan governed by English law, the starting point for deciding forum was the place of commission of the tort. That was Russia. The judge had been wrong to determine the issue by examining technical factors urged on him by the claimant instead of standing back and identifying where the fundamental focus of the litigation was.

View case

Cifal Groupe SA & Ors v Meridian Securities (UK) Ltd & Ors (2013)

Judgment Date: 15 Nov 2013

An order for service of a claim out of the jurisdiction was set aside where the claimants failed to demonstrate that their claim for breach of an alleged oral contract had a real prospect of success. In cases concerning oral contracts the court expected the claimant to adduce evidence identifying the individuals who made the agreement, and to give some account of what happened at the meeting in question.

View case

Members
Richard Morgan QC

Practice areas
Commercial Disputes

Erste Group Bank AG (London) v JSC (VMZ Red October) & Ors (2013)

Judgment Date: 03 Oct 2013

It had been appropriate to permit service of proceedings alleging unlawful means conspiracy on defendants outside the jurisdiction in Russia as there was a serious issue to be tried, the relevant requirements of CPR PD 6B para.3.1 were met, and the claimant had demonstrated that England was the appropriate and proper forum for the dispute's determination.

View case

Niklas Zennstrom v Kevin Fagot (2013)

Judgment Date: 21 Feb 2013

The redevelopment of a property had not been carried out during the course of a business in connection with the provision of dwellings so as to make the vendors liable to the purchasers for breach of their duty under the Defective Premises Act 1972 s.1(1).

View case

Members
Richard Morgan QC

Practice areas
Real Estate

Alliance Bank JSC v Aquanta Corp & 14 Ors (2012)

Judgment Date: 12 Dec 2012

A Kazakhstan bank had not established that the English court was the most appropriate forum for resolution of disputes arising out of an alleged conspiracy to defraud it of £1.1 billion. Although two of the instruments used to further the fraud were expressly governed by English law, the essence of the dispute had very little connection with the domestic jurisdiction. The court also examined the availability of subrogated rights, causes of action in implied contract, and the jurisdictional gateway in CPR PD 6B.

View case

OJSC TNK-BP Holding v Beppler & Jacobson Ltd & 12 Ors (2012)

Judgment Date: 20 Nov 2012

The obvious natural forum for a claim by a Russian company against a connected company's former employee said to have been involved in bribery was Russia, with the result that it would be appropriate to set aside an order granting the claimant permission to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction

View case

Caldero Trading Ltd v Beppler & Jacobson Ltd & Ors (2012)

Judgment Date: 14 Jun 2012

Showing or supplying the witness statements and attached documents to a third party funder so that the funder could determine whether to continue to fund the proceedings and whether to give and whether to continue to give the cross-undertaking in damages was use "for the purpose of the proceedings" within CPR r.31.22.

View case

Al Sanea v Saad Investments Co Ltd (2012)

Judgment Date: 20 Mar 2012

On the correct interpretation of a put option agreement there was no basis upon which the respondent could be entitled to exercise a put option in respect of shares it did not own.

View case

Alliance Bank JSC v Aquanta Corp & 14 Ors (2011)

Judgment Date: 14 Dec 2011

(2011) Summary Despite the existence of English jurisdiction clauses in loan agreements with two of the defendants, the appropriate forum for a claim by a Kazakhstan bank against its former controlling shareholders and others was Kazakhstan rather than England.

View case

Saad Investments Co Ltd (In Liquidation) v Maan Abdulwahed Abdulmajeed Al-Sanea (2011)

Judgment Date: 14 Oct 2011

The court declined to set aside an order for service out of the jurisdiction of proceedings relating to a put option agreement and made a freezing order in support of the proceedings.

View case

Cadogan Petroleum Plc & 9 Ors v Mark Tolly & 10 Ors (2011)

Judgment Date: 07 Sep 2011

On the facts as pleaded and in light of the decision in Sinclair Investments (UK) Ltd v Versailles Trade Finance Ltd (In Administration) (2011) EWCA Civ 347, (2011) Bus LR 1126, proprietary claims based on an allegation that a company group's former chief operating officer had accepted bribes or secret commissions in the course of various company transactions had no prospect of success.

View case

Awal Bank BSC (In Administration) v Maan Abdulwahed Abdulmajeed Al-Sanea (2011)

Judgment Date: 27 May 2011

A notice purportedly exercising a put option was not a valid notice in terms of the put option agreement.

View case

Members
Richard Morgan QC

Practice areas
Commercial Disputes

In The Matter Of Overnight Ltd (2010)

Judgment Date: 25 Mar 2010

It was appropriate for the court to make a separate assessment of the contributions to be made by a company director and by a company secretary to the insolvent company's assets under the Insolvency Act 1986 s.213.

View case

Chantry Estates (South East) Ltd v Anderson (2010)

Judgment Date: 10 Mar 2010

It was not necessary to imply terms into an option-to-buy contract entered into by a property development company and the former owners of the freehold property to which the option related as the proposed terms were not necessary to make the agreement work.

View case

1 2 3

Results 1 - 20 of 56