Group Seven Ltd and Another v Ali Nasir and Others

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeMr Justice Morgan
Judgment Date06 October 2017
Neutral Citation[2017] EWHC 2466 (Ch)
Docket NumberCase Nos: HC-2014-000906 and HC-2014-001003
CourtChancery Division
Date06 October 2017

[2017] EWHC 2466 (Ch)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

CHANCERY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice

Rolls Building, Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL

Before:

Mr Justice Morgan

Case Nos: HC-2014-000906 and HC-2014-001003

Between:
(1) Group Seven Limited
(2) Rheingold Management Inc
Claimants
and
(1) Ali Nasir
(2) Jong-kang Yi
(3) Notable Services Llp
(4) Martin Landman
(5) Francesco Meduri
(6) Llb Verwaltung (Switzerland) Ag (Formerly Known as Liechtenstein Landesbank (Switzerland) Limited)
(7) Othman Louanjli
(8) Sebastien Elbied
(9) Renaissance Limited (a Company Incorporated Under the Laws of the United Arab Emirates)
(10) Bridge Limited (a company Incorporated under the laws of the United Arab Emirates)
Defendants
Between:
(1) Equity Trading Systems Limited
Claimants
and
(1) Notable Services Llp
(2) Martin Landman
(3) Francesco Meduri
(4) Llb Verwaltung (Switzerland) Ag (Formerly Known as Liechtenstein Landesbank (Switzerland) Limited)
(5) Othman Louanjli
(6) Sebastien Elbied
(7) Renaissance Limited (a Company Incorporated Under The Laws of the United Arab Emirates)
(8) Bridge Limited (a Company Incorporated Under The Laws of the United Arab Emirates)
Defendants

Jeffrey Chapman QC, Simon AtrillandSimon Paul (instructed by Mishcon de Reya LLP) for the Claimants in both actions

William Flenley QC and Francis Bacon (instructed by Caytons Law) for Notable Services LLP, Mr Landman and Mr Meduri

Clive Freedman QC and Michael Ryan (instructed by Pinsent Masons LLP) for LLB Verwaltung (Switzerland) AG

Richard Jones QC and Olivia Chaffin-Laird (instructed by FPG, Solicitors) for Mr Louanjli

Hearing dates: 15–17, 20–24, 27–28 February 2017, 1–3, 6–10, 13–17, 20, 22–24, 27–29 March 2017, 4–7 and 25 April 2017 and written submissions thereafter

Approved Judgment

I direct that pursuant to CPR PD 39A para 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this Judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic.

Mr Justice Morgan Mr Justice Morgan

Heading

Paragraph number

Part 1: General Matters

1

The case in outline

1

Who everyone is

4

The earlier proceedings

23

The current proceedings

25

The Group Seven claims

26

The Larn claims

34

The witnesses apart from Mr Landman, Mr Meduri and Mr Louanjli

35

Mr Landman, Mr Meduri and Mr Louanjli: general remarks

48

Mr Landman

60

Mr Meduri

71

Mr Louanjli

72

The expert evidence

73

Part 2: the claims against Mr Nasir and Mr Yi

74

The relevant facts for the purposes of these claims

74

The liability of Mr Yi

88

Part 3: the claims against Notable, Mr Landman and Mr Meduri: the facts

89

The relevant facts for the purposes of these claims: before 2 November 2011

89

2 November 2011

145

3 November 2011

150

The first meeting

153

The second meeting

161

The third meeting

167

The fourth meeting

178

The fifth meeting

186

4 November 2011

188

5 November 2011

200

7 November 2011

201

8 November 2011

205

9 November 2011

207

10 November 2011

212

11 November 2011

221

14 November 2011

227

The telephone calls from Notable to Mr Louanjli

243

15 November 2011

256

My findings about the payments

266

Events after 15 November 2011

344

Part 4: the claims against Mr Louanjli, LLB, Mr Elbied, Renaissance and Bridge: the facts

350

Part 5: Group Seven's claims against Notable, Mr Landman and Mr Meduri: discussion and conclusions

405

The claims

405

The trust

408

The breach of trust

409

The assistance

410

Dishonesty

411

Did Notable dishonestly assist a breach of trust?

441

Did Mr Meduri dishonestly assist a breach of trust?

442

Did Mr Landman dishonestly assist a breach of trust?

454

Unconscionable receipt

473

The money claimed from Mr Landman

479

The money claimed from Notable

488

Part 6: Group Seven's claims against Mr Louanjli and Bridge: discussion and conclusions

494

The claims

494

Dishonest assistance

495

The assistance

496

Dishonesty

499

Deceit

516

Conspiracy

522

Unconscionable receipt

525

Part 7: Group Seven's claims against LLB: discussion and conclusions

531

Part 8: Group Seven's claims against Mr Elbied and Renaissance: discussion and conclusions

556

Part 9: the claims by Larn: discussion and conclusions

560

Part 10: the contribution claims

570

PART 1: GENERAL MATTERS

The case in outline

1

These proceedings arise out of a substantial fraud whereby Allseas Group SA ("Allseas") was defrauded out of a large sum of money, €100 million. The fraud was followed by an attempt to launder the proceeds of the fraud using the client account of a firm of solicitors in London, Notable Services LLP ("Notable"). The attempt at money laundering was partly successful. Some €15 million were paid away by Notable. Some of these monies were recovered but, in the end, only €88 million was returned to Allseas which therefore lost about €12 million.

2

The way that the fraud worked was as follows. Allseas had €100 million which it wished to invest. A group of fraudsters persuaded Allseas that they could facilitate an extremely profitable investment of that sum by Allseas. Allseas formed a subsidiary company, Allseas Group Ltd (now known as Group Seven Ltd and referred to in this judgment as "Group Seven"), in order for it to make the relevant investment. Allseas transferred €100 million to Group Seven which transferred it to Allied Investment Corporation Ltd ("AIC").

3

AIC then set about removing the funds from the control of Allseas/Group Seven and laundering those funds. AIC transferred the funds to Notable's client account. Notable held that money in its client account for the benefit of Larn Ltd ("Larn"). Larn was controlled by a Mr Nobre who gave instructions (on behalf of Larn) to Notable to make a large number of payments out of its client account. Acting on these instructions, Notable paid away some €15 million. The Notable client account was with Barclays Bank. It seems that Barclays Bank reported these activities in relation to the Notable client account and the Metropolitan Police became involved. As a result of the police intervention the remaining monies were frozen and eventually, after some of the €15 million was returned to Notable, around €88 million were returned to Allseas.

Who everyone is

4

Allseas is a company registered in Switzerland, where it has its headquarters. It and its subsidiaries employ over 2,000 people in 9 countries. It specialises in pipe laying for the oil and gas industry.

5

Group Seven (under the name Allseas Group Ltd) was incorporated in Malta on 20 April 2011 for the purpose of making what it thought was an investment but which led to it being the victim of the fraud described above. Allseas was and is the principal shareholder in Group Seven.

6

Rheingold Management Inc ("Rheingold") is incorporated in Panama. By a Deed of Assignment of Rights and Causes of Action dated 16 November 2012, Group Seven assigned to Rheingold the causes of action which are the subject of these proceedings.

7

AIC was incorporated in Malta on 4 October 2011 for the purpose of participating in the fraud. Mr Rejniak was registered as a director, and sole shareholder, of AIC. In the course of the fraud, on 15 October 2011, Group Seven entered into a purported loan agreement, relating to the €100 million, under which AIC was the purported borrower. In earlier proceedings, to which I refer below, Peter Smith J set aside this loan agreement.

8

Mr Rejniak is a Polish national. In addition to being a director and shareholder of AIC, he was a director of Group Seven between 18 July and 23 November 2011. In the earlier proceedings, Group Seven/Rheingold obtained judgment for damages for fraud against Mr Rejniak.

9

Mr Sultana was held liable, in the earlier proceedings, for damages for fraud.

10

Mr Nasir and Mr Yi have been sued in the present proceedings. The case put forward by Group Seven/Rheingold is that Mr Nasir and Mr Yi were parties to the fraud and were fellow conspirators of Mr Rejniak and Mr Sultana.

11

Larn was formed on 26 September 2006. A single subscriber share was issued to Mr Nobre. Mr Nobre's full name is Luis (or Louis) Augusto Ramos Nobre so that the name of the company is Mr Nobre's initials. After incorporation, further shares were issued to Mr Nobre and he remained the sole shareholder of Larn. At all times, Mr Nobre was the sole director of Larn. On 15 October 2011, in order to assist with money laundering, AIC and Larn entered into a loan agreement, or purported loan agreement, whereby €100 million was loaned by AIC to Larn. In the earlier proceedings, to which I refer below, Peter Smith J set aside this loan agreement. Larn did not trade and did not have any business premises. Larn went into administration on 31 May 2012 and then into creditors' voluntary liquidation on 24 May 2013. Larn has since changed its name to Equity Trading Systems Ltd but I will continue to refer to it as Larn, its name at the time of the relevant events.

12

Mr Nobre is Portuguese. In February 2016, after a trial lasting some 80 days, he was convicted at Southwark Crown Court on 6 counts of money laundering and 3 counts in connection with the possession of fraudulent banking documents contrary to the Fraud Act 2006. The first 2 counts of money laundering related to the €100 million which are the subject of the present proceedings. He was sentenced to imprisonment for 12 years in relation to the money laundering offences and 2 years in relation to the fraudulent documents, to run consecutively.

13

In relation to most of the matters which are the subject of this judgment, it is not necessary...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • [1] Nissan Motor Company, Ltd [2] Nissan Middle East Fze v [1] Carlos Ghosn [2] Carole Nahas Ghosn [3] Beauty Yachts Pty Ltd
    • British Virgin Islands
    • High Court (British Virgin Islands)
    • 16 Mayo 2022
    ...assumed for the purposes of this Application: AXAHCVAP2020/0005 Hope-Ross v Dinning et al., at [21(iii)]. 104 [1988] 1 WLR 1256. 105 [2017] EWHC 2466 (Ch); [2018] PNLR 106 Reversed in part by the Court of Appeal, but not on this point: [2019] EWCA Civ 614; [2020] Ch 129. 107 Citing Ether......
  • Nissan Motor Company, Ltd v Carlos Ghosn
    • British Virgin Islands
    • High Court (British Virgin Islands)
    • 16 Mayo 2022
    ...assumed for the purposes of this Application: AXAHCVAP2020/0005 Hope-Ross v Dinning et al., at [21(iii)]. 104 [1988] 1 WLR 1256. 105 [2017] EWHC 2466 (Ch); [2018] PNLR 106 Reversed in part by the Court of Appeal, but not on this point: [2019] EWCA Civ 614; [2020] Ch 129. 107 Citing Ethe......
  • Group Seven Ltd (a company incorporated under the laws of Malta) v Notable Services LLP
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 11 Abril 2019
    ...DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS & PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES BUSINESS LIST (ChD) MORGAN J [2017] EWHC 2466 (Ch) Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Jeffrey Chapman QC, Simon Atrill and Simon Paul (instructed by Mishcon de Reya LLP) for Grou......
  • Mr Nopporn Suppipat v Mr Nop Narongdej
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • 31 Julio 2023
    ...is not a legal requirement, the less likely the motive, the less likely the intention to conspire unlawfully: Group Seven Ltd v Nasir [2017] EWHC 2466 (Ch) at [440] per Morgan J. d. Assessing a party's motive to participate in a fraud also requires taking into account the disincentives to ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT