LM-2023-000035 - [2025] EWHC 1989 (Comm)

It is appropriate, as a last word, to say a little more about some of the witnesses and their general approach to the case.

I was left with the clear impression that Dominik Leszczyński had come to court to argue his case rather than to tell the truth. In parts his evidence bordered on the outrageous. In particular (and simply to highlight some obvious examples) his evidence about DLIGDL (when its name was changed and its involvement in the Mandate), about Katarzyna Dorosz-Wosiek and Blazej Stodulkiewicz working for DLIGDL and about the “watershed” change in March 2022 when Mr Antolovich came onto the scene, had no basis in fact at all. Dominik Leszczyński was not an honest witness.

I have come to the conclusion that Wirginia Leszczyńska came to court to argue her brother’s case rather than give an honest account of events as she recalled them. I formed the view that she also was not an honest witness. In particular her evidence as to the 9 August 2021 meeting and what she did after she received the 9 July 2021 email was unimpressive and in my view designed solely to support her brother’s narrative.

It was plain to me that Wirginia Leszczyńska and Tomasz Brodzki (whose evidence was of very little relevance and which I have not mentioned) were keen to follow Dominik Leszczyński’s lead and support his views without any real regard for the facts. These observations (whilst they form no part of my reasoning) confirm my conclusion that Dominik Leszczyński had authority to bind the Defendant and was generally regarded as the person in charge.

CPR PD 57AC applies to witness statements for use at trials in the Business and Property Courts and requires the witness to “identify by list what documents, if any, the witness has referred to or been referred to for the purpose of providing the evidence set out in their trial witness statement” (see paragraph 3.2). The list (see 3.5 of the Appendix to PD 57AC) should “identify or describe the documents in such a way that they may be located easily at trial. Documents disclosed in the proceedings may be listed by disclosure reference.”

The list set out in the witness statements of Wirginia Leszczyńska, Dominik Leszczyński refers simply to “contemporaneous emails and messages.” This is plainly non-compliant with PD 57AC and was unhelpful. It was impossible to understand, to give 2 examples, which of the many disclosed documents each had considered when preparing their witness statements and whether they had considered documents that had not been disclosed.