Key Facts
- •Claimants sought recognition and enforcement of an Abu Dhabi Court of Cassation judgment (ADCC Judgment) and a freezing injunction.
- •The ADCC Judgment concerned a dispute over a USD 1 billion misappropriation from the estate of the late Sheikh Ahmed Bin Hamed Butti Al Hamed.
- •Defendants challenged jurisdiction and service permission, arguing the ADCC Judgment was not final and conclusive and England was not the proper forum.
- •The ADCC Judgment was in Arabic and its translation was disputed.
- •Defendants also challenged the fairness of the without-notice application.
- •Parallel proceedings were ongoing in California and the British Virgin Islands.
Legal Principles
Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments at common law requires the judgment to be final and conclusive, for a definite sum of money, and not contrary to public policy.
Dicey, Morris & Collins: The Conflict of Laws (16th ed. 2022) at 14-027, 14-026, 14-148 to 14-157
Permission to serve a claim out of the jurisdiction can be granted to enforce a judgment or arbitral award (CPR 6.37(3)).
CPR Part 6
For enforcing a foreign judgment, it's not necessary to show executable assets in the jurisdiction; a reasonable expectation or possibility of benefit suffices.
Tasarruf Mevduati Sigorta Fonu v. Demirel & another [2007] EWCA Civ 799
On a without-notice application, full and frank disclosure and fair presentation are crucial.
2024 White Book, Volume 1 at 6.37.4; Appendix 9 to the Commercial Court Guide
Outcomes
Jurisdiction challenge dismissed.
The court found a real prospect of success on the enforcement action, despite linguistic ambiguities in the ADCC Judgment. England was deemed the proper forum due to the potential for a legitimate benefit to the claimants, even without current executable assets. The court also rejected the claim of unfair presentation.