Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Those in Britain with an appetite for intricate court cases have already enjoyed a vintage year, with the lawsuit brought by the exiled Russian oligarch, Boris Berezovsky, against Roman Abramovich, owner of Chelsea Football Club (and much else). Even as the judgment in that case is awaited, though, we now have the metals billionaire, Michael Cherney, suing the aluminium magnate, Oleg Deripaska, in London's same brand-new commercial court. The case was opened and adjourned yesterday to allow the judge to review the documents; battle recommences in the autumn.
These labyrinthine cases have much in common. They both have their origins in the chaotic carve-up of Russia's natural resources in the "wild east" years after the Soviet Union's collapse. They concern complex business arrangements for which there is scant documentation. They pit the word of one oligarch who keeps (relatively) good relations with the Kremlin against that of another who definitely does not, and in both huge sums are at stake.
But they also pose questions. Wherever the disputed deals were hatched, they relate to businesses and resources based in Russia. They have helped push the proportion of Russian and East European business disputes heard at the High Court above 60 per cent, tying up London court space and legal teams and – perhaps – pushing up the cost of litigation for others. Doubt may also surround the court's capacity to enforce its judgment.
Obviously, it is preferable for oligarchs to seek redress through the courts than settle scores by extra-judicial means. And it should be a source of some satisfaction that the English courts are so much in demand by wealthy foreigners – though it is worth asking, too, how far this reflects their faith in the quality of English justice and how far the quest for publicity and cachet. A bigger question, though, is whether advances in the Russian court system may be retarded because the super-rich have a London option, even when their dispute has no clear link to this country. Their qualms about corrupt and politicised Russian justice are understandable. But if the richest can use their money to buy justice elsewhere, the pressure will be that much weaker for better courts in Russia.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments