Forum non conveniens

Cherney v Deripaska [2008] EWHC 1530 (Comm) 3 July

The claimant applied for permission to serve the claim form on the defendant out of the jurisdiction. If there had been no question of the claimant not getting a fair trial in Russia, and no doubt that he would, if necessary, pursue his claim in the Russian courts, or could reasonably be expected to do so, the claimant would have failed to establish that England was the proper forum for the trial of the dispute. It was apparent, however, that if the claim was not allowed to proceed in England, it would not proceed in Russia. It was unrealistic to suppose that the claimant’s claim could be prosecuted with any hope of success without his giving oral evidence and he would not return to Russia because he feared for his life, feared that he might be arrested on trumped up charges and did not believe that he would get a fair trial. There was a significant risk of improper government interference if the claimant were to bring his claims in Russia, where they would be very high profile proceedings indeed, such that substantial justice might not be done to him if he was required to proceed there. Accordingly the claimant had shown that, although Russia was the natural forum for the litigation, the risks inherent in a trial in Russia were sufficient to make England the forum in which the case could most suitably be tried in the interests of both parties and the ends of justice and, accordingly, England was the proper place for the determination of the claim.