Eskwai logo
Verify now as a student, judge or newly called lawyer for access to discounted plans.

ICICI Bank UK Plc v Diminco NV (Rev 1)

2014

COMMERCIAL COURT

United Kingdom

CORAM

  • THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE POPPLEWELL

Areas of Law

  • Civil Procedure
  • Conflict of Laws
  • Banking and Finance Law
  • Commercial Law

AI Generated Summary

ICICI Bank Limited’s English subsidiary, operating through its Antwerp branch in Belgium, sought freezing and disclosure relief in England under section 25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 to support Belgian proceedings against Diminco NV, a diamond distributor controlled by Digico Holdings and directed by Mr Chetan Choksi. After defaults under US$25 million facilities and minimal recoverable assets in Belgium (about €2,600 after attachments on ten banks), Eder J had granted an inter partes worldwide freezing order without disclosure, and Andrew Smith J ordered Diminco to file evidence; Diminco refused, sending a letter asserting no dissipation risk and that relief was inexpedient. Mr Justice Popplewell found clear dissipation risk, distilled s.25 principles from Rosseel, Cuoghi, Motorola, and Banque Nationale, and granted domestic freezing relief with ancillary disclosure (including historic assets) limited to England & Wales, while refusing worldwide disclosure for lack of connecting link, in personam jurisdiction, and enforceability under comity.