Alexander Gorbachev v Andrey Grigoryevich Guriev
[2024] EWHC 247 (Comm)
Sheikh Mohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber v Sheikh Walkid Bin Ibrahim Al Ibrahim & Anor.
24 March 2023
[2023] EWHC 719 (Comm)
High Court
Two people in Saudi Arabia couldn't travel to a UK court case because they said they were banned from leaving the country. The judge let them give evidence by video call, even though he was unsure if they were actually banned, because it was more fair than not letting them testify at all.
Key Facts
- •Defendants applied for permission to give evidence remotely via video link from Saudi Arabia due to alleged travel bans imposed by Saudi Arabian authorities.
- •Claimants argued that the evidence supporting the travel bans was insufficient and that the evidence regarding Saudi Arabian law on remote testimony was unsatisfactory.
- •Defendants presented evidence from a senior Saudi Arabian lawyer stating that Saudi law doesn't prohibit giving evidence via video link to foreign courts.
- •Defendants' evidence of travel bans lacked documentary support, despite alleged past applications and instances of international travel.
- •The case involved allegations of dishonesty, making cross-examination crucial.
Legal Principles
The court should consider whether the use of remote evidence is likely to be beneficial to the efficient, fair, and economic disposal of the proceedings.
Deutsche Bank AG v Sebastian Holdings [2022] EWHC 1555 (Comm)
Outcomes
The court granted the defendants' application for permission to give evidence remotely via video link.
The court balanced the importance of in-person cross-examination against the potential for unfairness if the defendants were unable to testify at all. The court considered remote cross-examination to be nearly as effective as in-person cross-examination, especially given the high value of the claim and the gravity of the allegations. The lack of compelling evidence supporting the travel bans, while noted, did not outweigh the potential for a miscarriage of justice if the defendants were unable to testify.
Similar Cases
Junior Sobowale v Lendinvest Capital SARL
[2024] EWHC 1829 (Ch)
Mobile Telecommunications Co KSCP v HRH Prince Hussam Bin Saud Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud
[2023] EWHC 312 (Ch)
Sheikh Mohammed Omar Kassem Alesayi v Bank Audi SAL
[2024] EWHC 1975 (KB)
SPM (R on the application of) v Secretary Of State For The Home Department
[2023] EWCA Civ 764