English Court Clarifies Anti-Suit Injunctions in Sanctions Cases
Two recent Court of Appeal decisions chart the boundaries for granting anti-suit injunctions against foreign proceedings, offering key lessons on drafting and dispute strategy for Russia-related matters.
In two recent decisions, the UK Court of Appeal clarified the dividing line for granting anti-suit injunctions (ASIs) to block Russian legal proceedings arising from sanctions. The court refused an ASI in FH Holding v UniCredit, where a foreclosure action was brought in Moscow under a specific Russian-law mortgage agreement, finding this did not breach a Vienna arbitration clause in a related facility agreement. Conversely, in JP Morgan v VTB, it granted an ASI to stop Russian tort claims, deeming them a vexatious attempt to circumvent London arbitration agreements and UK sanctions using purpose-built Russian laws.
These rulings are important for any party with Russia-related contracts governed by English law. The court will protect the integrity of London arbitration and UK sanctions policy but is reluctant to interfere with foreign proceedings grounded in legitimate, pre-existing contractual arrangements and local law. The outcome can turn on whether the foreign lawsuit is seen as genuine enforcement or an illegitimate circumvention. Counsel should now carefully structure dispute resolution clauses across all related transaction documents and consider the choice of arbitral seat, which can affect an English court's jurisdiction to intervene.