Linda May Green v CT Group Holdings Ltd

Hearing date: 30 November 2023

This judgment was handed down by the Judge remotely by circulation to the parties' representatives by email and release to The National Archives. The date and time for hand-down is deemed to be 10:00 on Monday 11 th December 2023.

Charles Hollander KC sitting as a Judge of the High Court:

By a Part 8 claim issued on 13 October 2023 Linda Green, the Claimant, seeks Norwich Pharmacal relief against CT Group Holdings Ltd (“ CT Group”).

The claim arises against a backdrop of proceedings before the Royal Court of Jersey and Royal Court of Guernsey concerning the restructuring of certain family trusts. For convenience I refer to those proceedings as “the Channel Island Proceedings” unless there is a need to distinguish between them. Because those proceedings involve trusts and minors, there is a confidentiality regime in place and I was asked to make confidentiality orders in these proceedings, which I did. However, the hearing was in open court.

The MdR Documents

In the Channel Island Proceedings, the Claimant's stepchildren, referred to as “AA,” have alleged that the Claimant has failed to be open about her needs and resources and that this is relevant to the relief to be considered in those proceedings regarding the restructuring of certain family trusts. Mishcon de Reya (“MdR”) act for AA.

On around 14 April 2023, the private investigation company, CT Group, was engaged by MdR on behalf of AA to conduct investigations into the Claimant's financial affairs.

On 12 May 2023, CT Group provided MdR with a phase one report (“the 12 May Report”) stating that unidentified sources and confidential contacts had identified EUR 125 million controlled by the Claimant, largely being dividend payments from three Liechtenstein companies controlled by the Claimant: Galway Trading Ltd, Accord Investment Services Ltd, and Kael Services SA (“the Entities”) and sums from an account held by Monaco Asset Management (“MAM”), the Claimant's investment manager, at Julius Baer Bank (“Julius Baer”) in Monaco. The 12 May Report asserted that those sums had been received by the Claimant into bank accounts held at BNP Paribas in Luxembourg, Lombard Odier in Switzerland, EFG Bank in Switzerland, and Barclays Bank Monaco (“the Banks”).

On 26 May 2023, CT Group provided MdR with a series of documents evidencing the information set out in the 12 May Report (the “May Documents”). The May Documents comprise bank records and SWIFT confirmations showing substantial cash transfers being made to or from accounts in the Claimant's married name, as follows:

a. Funds being received into a personal bank account held at EFG Bank Ltd (Switzerland) (“EFG Bank”) by way of four payments between June 2021 and December 2022.

b. Funds being received into another personal bank account at EFG Bank by way of 22 payments between February 2021 and September 2022, all made by Kael Services SA from an account held at Bank Frick & Co, and a further 13 payments out of the EFG account between May 2021 and January 2023.

c. A payment being made from the second EFG account to an account with Barclays Bank plc (Monaco) (“Barclays Bank”).

d. Funds being received into a personal bank account at Banque Lombard Odier & Cie SA (Switzerland) (“Bank LOC”) between March 2021 and March 2023 by way of eight payments all made by Galway Trading Ltd and originating from an account held at Bank Frick & Co.

e. Funds being received into a personal bank account held at BGL BNP Paribas S.A. (Luxembourg) (“BNP Paribas”) between February 2021 and January 2023 by way of 40 payments all made by Accord Investment Services Ltd.

The May Documents were redacted to remove reference to the identity of the sources.

On or around 27 July 2023 CT Group provided a further set of documents to MdR from Julius Baer showing two payments being made in June 2021 and June 2022 to accounts at EFG Bank by MAM from an account at Julius Baer (the “July Documents”); The evidence of Mr Chik of MdR is that CT Group informed MdR that the source of the July Documents was different and independent to the source of the May Documents.

AA are seeking to introduce these documents into evidence in the Jersey Proceedings to contend that the Claimant has misled the trustees and the Courts as to her asset position, and in support of an application for further relief in light of the content of the documents. The Claimant says the documents are all forgeries, that she has no knowledge of, and has not received, the payments apparently shown in the documents. She says she does not have accounts with any of the banks said to have accounts in her name. She says she had no knowledge of, or interest in, Galway Trading Ltd, Accord Investment Services Ltd, or Kael Services SA. Each of EFG Bank, Banque LOC, BNP Paribas and Barclays Bank has confirmed, in response to enquiries by the Claimant, that they do not have and have never had any accounts linked to her. BNP Paribas has stated that the transactions in the SWIFT documents do not correspond to any transactions carried out with them, there are no corresponding BNP Paribas IBAN accounts to those mentioned in the SWIFT documents, that the SWIFT MT103 indicating a transfer from an Accord Investment Services Ltd account at Bank Frick in Liechtenstein did not take place; and that the SWIFT documents do not correspond to authentic SWIFT messages because they contain characters which they should not be included, and omit required characters. The ECB has stated that the SWIFT messages (i.e. the May Documents) have fake references to the ECB and the screenshots do not come from the ECB Systems.. The Liechtenstein Commercial Register (oera.li) has no records of companies or other legal entities with names corresponding to the names of the Entities. MAM has confirmed that none of the transfers, account numbers, customer ID or portfolio numbers purportedly shown in the July Documents are known to them. MAM does not (and does not have the power to) instruct transfers for any of its clients, including the members of the family; and MAM had confirmed with Julius Baer that neither of the payments nor the related account referred to in the July Documents were known to the bank. Julius Baer has confirmed that the customer number in the July Documents was not a customer number relating to the Claimant, and that the transactions identified in the July Documents were not related to any account that belonged to her.

The Claimant applied in the Channel Island Proceedings for orders seeking disclosure from AA of information regarding the provenance of those documents. The Jersey Court subsequently made orders requiring AA to provide certain information regarding their engagement of CT Group and the source of the MdR Documents. AA sought further information from CT Group for that purpose including the identity of its purported sources but CT Group has refused to provide the information sought. The Claimant obtained permission from both the Jersey Royal Court and the Guernsey Royal Court to use certain documents in the Channel Islands Proceedings for the purposes of this claim.

Evidence on behalf of CT Group for this application is given by Mr Eugene Curley CMG OBE, who is an Executive Director of CT Group. Mr Curley's evidence asserts:

a. The investigation into the Claimant's assets was at all times conducted in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and the other jurisdictions in which the investigations took place;

b. CT Group engaged a trusted individual referred to as Person A to obtain information; Person A is a former intelligence operative within the intelligence service of an eastern European country who is currently resident in the Russian Federation;

c. Person A did so by engaging with a source Person X who is unknown to Mr Curley or any other person employed by CT Group, who provided the information in the 12 May Report and the May Documents to Person A;

d. When the accuracy of the May Documents had been questioned, CT Group then engaged Person A to obtain further information; he is said to have engaged Person Y, another individual unknown to Mr Curley or anyone employed by CT Group, who provided Person A with the July Documents; Following the letter of claim, CT Group informed Person A that there had been allegations of forgery and asked that person to assist again;

e. CT Group has engaged with 12 other trusted sources, including from Israel, which suggest that the Claimant's former husband had an association with and was a shareholder of the Entities, and in particular Galway and Accord;

f. Mr Curley considers that the May Documents and July Documents reflect actual transactions and that it is possible that the the Claimant has no knowledge of the transactions and that a fraud may be being perpetrated on the Claimant; Mr Curley considers the May Documents and July Documents to be genuine and not forged; and

g. Person A is at risk to his personal safety if his association with CT Group should become publicly known.

CT Group have commenced proceedings in New York under USC s1782 for discovery of records from the Federal Reserve and CHIPS. The purpose of those proceedings is to access original documentation which CT Group say is likely to show whether the underlying transaction docuemnts are genuine. They say the...