Key Facts
- •Joint application by claimant and defendant to take defendant's and his son's evidence on commission at the DIFC court in Dubai.
- •Defendant and his son are designated persons under the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, preventing them from entering the UK.
- •Defendant is a foreign national sued in England against his will.
- •The case concerns a disputed oral declaration of trust with limited contemporaneous documentation.
- •Witnesses are Russian and may require translation.
- •Claimant actively supports the application.
- •Defendant's solicitors will pay for the judge's travel and accommodation, with invoices publicly available.
Legal Principles
Jurisdiction of the English court to appoint a trial judge as a special examiner to take evidence overseas.
Various cases including Peer International Corporation v Termidor Music Publishers Limited [2005] EWHC 1048, Energy Venture Partners Limited v Malabu Oil & Gas Limited [2013] EWHC 2118, Attorney General of Zambia v Meer Care & Desai [2006] EWCA Civ 390, and SKAT Litigation [2024] EWHC 19 (Comm).
Public policy considerations in relation to sanctions regulations and access to justice.
Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, Polanski v Conde Nast Publications Limited [2005] UKHL 10, Mints and others v. PJSC National Bank Trust and another [2023] EWCA Civ 1132.
Court's inherent power to manage its own procedures and case management.
CPR r.34.8, CPR r.34.13, CPR 3.1(d) and (m), Ross v Woodward [1894) 1 Ch 38.
Outcomes
Application granted. Evidence to be taken on commission in Dubai by the judge sitting as a special examiner.
Exceptional circumstances justify the sub-optimal solution of taking evidence overseas due to the language barrier, the nature of the claim relying heavily on oral evidence, the defendant's status as a foreign national sued against his will, and the claimant's support for the application.