Court decision invalidating yukos capital casualdating Wiesbaden

Rated 3.87/5 based on 632 customer reviews

Two preliminary issues fell to be decided in those English enforcement proceedings: ).As set out in that blog post, the High Court resolved both issues in favour of Yukos Capital.

However, on Rosneft’s application the awards were then set aside by Russian courts.

It found that the Amsterdam Court of Appeal’s decision did give rise to an issue estoppel in England (such that Rosneft would not be able to deny that the annulment decisions were the result of a partial and dependent judicial process). “Act of State” doctrine The Court of Appeal considered the jurisprudence concerning the Act of State doctrine at some length, disagreeing with the formulation reached by the High Court.

It also found that Rosneft could not rely on the Act of State doctrine where the validity of the acts of the Russian government were not being called into question. The Court of Appeal was careful to explain that the Act of State doctrine did not have “exceptions”, but was rather subject to “limitations” which confined its scope.

The Court of Appeal found that the act of state doctrine did not bar any part of Yukos Capital’s case, providing helpful clarification on the doctrine’s limitations.

However, the Court of Appeal found that there was no issue estoppel.

Leave a Reply