Arbitral Digest

Matter

CIBC Mellon Trust Cie, Daimler Chrysler and Royal Trust of Canada v Mr X (French Court of Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 30 June 2004)

  1. 25 February 1998United Kingdom

    25 February 1998United Kingdom

    Judgment of the High Court of London dated 25 February 1998

    High Court of London

    Decision summary
    The High Court of London ordered Mr X to pay CIBC Mellon Trust Cie, Daimler Chrysler and Royal Trust of Canada.

    Supporting details

    4 participants
    CIBC Mellon Trust Cie
    Daimler Chrysler
    Royal Trust of Canada
    Mr X
    High Court of London

    1 month and 30 days later · 58 days

  2. 24 April 1998United Kingdom

    24 April 1998United Kingdom

    Judgment of the High Court of London dated 24 April 1998

    High Court of London

    Decision summary
    The High Court of London ordered Mr X to pay CIBC Mellon Trust Cie, Daimler Chrysler and Royal Trust of Canada.

    Supporting details

    4 participants
    CIBC Mellon Trust Cie
    Daimler Chrysler
    Royal Trust of Canada
    Mr X
    High Court of London
  3. 24 April 1998United Kingdom

    24 April 1998United Kingdom

    Mareva injunction of the High Court of London dated 24 April 1998

    High Court of London

    Decision summary
    The High Court of London ordered Mr X not to deal with his assets within the limits fixed by the court, as a provisional and protective measure.

    Supporting details

    4 participants
    CIBC Mellon Trust Cie
    Daimler Chrysler
    Royal Trust of Canada
    Mr X
    High Court of London

    2 years, 5 months and 11 days later · 895 days

  4. 5 October 2000France

    5 October 2000France

    Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal dated 5 October 2000

    Paris Court of Appeal

    Decision summary
    The Paris Court of Appeal declared the 24 April 1998 Mareva injunction enforceable in France under the Brussels Convention.

    Supporting details

    4 participants
    CIBC Mellon Trust Cie
    Daimler Chrysler
    Royal Trust of Canada
    Mr X
    Paris Court of Appeal

    8 months and 19 days later · 262 days

  5. 24 June 2001France

    24 June 2001France

    Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal dated 24 June 2001

    Paris Court of Appeal

    Decision summary
    The Paris Court of Appeal held that recognition in France of the 25 February and 24 April 1998 judgments was not contrary to international public policy because the decisions were not reasoned.

    Supporting details

    4 participants
    CIBC Mellon Trust Cie
    Daimler Chrysler
    Royal Trust of Canada
    Mr X
    Paris Court of Appeal

    3 years and 6 days later · 1102 days

  6. 30 June 2004France

    30 June 2004France

    Judgment of the French Court of Cassation, First Civil Chamber, dated 30 June 2004

    French Court of Cassation, First Civil Chamber

    Case no.
    B 01-03.248 and S 01-15.452
    Decision summary
    The French Court of Cassation joined the two connected appeals and dismissed them. It held that the English judgments and Mareva injunction could be recognized and enforced in France under the Brussels Convention, that the service and fair-trial objections did not bar recognition, and that the absence of written reasons did not violate international public policy. Mr X was ordered to pay the costs and 4,000 euros under Article 700 of the French New Code of Civil Procedure.

    Supporting details

    4 authorities · 24 participants
    CIBC Mellon Trust Cie
    Daimler Chrysler
    Royal Trust of Canada
    Mr X
    French Court of Cassation, First Civil Chamber
    Judge
    M. Tay
    Advocate General
    Mme Sainte-Rose
    Other
    Court Reporter
    Mme Collet

    Authorities cited

    4
    • Brussels Convention dated 27 September 1968, as amended
      treaty
    • Hague Convention dated 15 November 1965
      treaty
    • European Convention on Human Rights
      treaty
    • French New Code of Civil Procedure
      code

Matter record

Report a correction

CIBC Mellon Trust Cie, Daimler Chrysler and Royal Trust of Canada v Mr X (French Court of Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 30 June 2004) · Matter