The claimant bank said that it had been induced to create very substantial lending facilities by fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendants. They now appealed against findings that England was not clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum for resolution of VTB’s tort claims, and nor that there was a proper basis for piercing the corporate veil. The parties were all based abroad, and only the initiation of the alleged fraud had occurred here.
Held: The appeal failed. The burden was on the claimant to persuade the court that England is clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum. The claimant would not be given leave to serve the documents outside the jurisdiction, and nor had it been shown to warranted to pierce the corporate veil.
Lloyd, Rimer, Aikens LJJ
 EWCA Civ 808,  WLR(D) 181,  2 Lloyd’s Rep 313,  2 CLC 431,  2 BCLC 437
Private International Law Act (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 11(2)(c)
England and Wales
Appeal from – VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others ChD 29-Nov-2011
The appellant bank had granted very substantial lending facilities to the defendant companies, and now alleged fraudulent misrepresentation. The defendants now sought to have the service set aside. The claimants also sought permission to amend the . .
Appeal from – VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others SC 6-Feb-2013
The claimant bank said that it had been induced to create very substantial lending facilities by fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendants. They now appealed against findings that England was not clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum for . .
Cited – Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others SC 12-Jun-2013
In the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce, questions arose regarding company assets owned by the husband. The court was asked as to the power of the court to order the transfer of assets owned entirely in the company’s names. The . .
Cited – Abela and Others v Baadarani SC 26-Jun-2013
The claimants sought damages alleging fraud in a company share purchase. They said that their lawyer had secretly been working for the sellers. The claim form had been issued, but the claimant had delayed in requesting permission for its service . .
Cited – Google Inc v Vidal-Hall and Others CA 27-Mar-2015
Damages for breach of Data Protection
The claimants sought damages alleging that Google had, without their consent, collected personal data about them, which was resold to advertisers. They used the Safari Internet browser on Apple products. The tracking and collation of the claimants’ . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 May 2021; Ref: scu.460544