CL-2022-000558 - [2025] EWHC 1995 (Comm)

There are before me today two applications brought by the Claimant, IPJSC United Company Rusal (“Rusal”) on what is the first case management conference in this action (the “Proceedings”). The Proceedings involve allegations of breaches of a shareholders’ agreement dated 10 December 2012 (as varied by various deeds of substitution and side letters) (the “Framework Agreement”) in relation to the governance of PJSC MMC Norilsk Nickel (“NN”), the Claimants and the Defendants are all parties to the Framework Agreement.

The first application that is before me is an application for alternative service (the “Alternative Service Application”) upon the Fourth Defendant, Mr Roman Abramovich. The Claimants have taken steps to serve Mr Abramovich with the Proceedings but he has not engaged with the Proceedings. Pursuant to an order of Cockerill J dated 11 April 2024 (the “Cockerill Order”), the parties were excused from serving documents on Mr Abramovich, save where orders were sought against him, pending this first Case Management Conference (“CMC1”). The Cockerill Order is clear on its face that it expires at CMC1, so the question of service of documents upon Mr Abramovich (so that he is aware of the progress of the Proceedings and is in a position to take part as he sees fit), is a matter that needs to be considered afresh. The application is not opposed by the First to Third Defendants (Whiteleave Holdings Limited, Vladimir Potanin and Crispian Investments Limited, respectively).

In the second application Rusal seeks permission to re-amend its Re-Re-Amended Particulars of Claim (“2RAPOC”) (the “Amendment Application”). The amendments sought by Rusal in the Amendment Application are largely agreed to by the First to Third Defendants save that the First and Second Defendants object to a plea in one paragraph of the proposed draft amendment.

The applications have been addressed in the respective application notices, supporting evidence and correspondence, as well as in the parties’ submission. I decided at the outset of CMC1 that it was appropriate for me to rule upon each of these applications at this hearing, and in advance of case management matters on the CMC, so as to progress matters, as far as possible, at this hearing and in the furtherance of the overriding objective.