The London High Court set to hear continued arguments in the Mintz family case, with a final hearing slated for April 2025
The British court recently rejected the Mintz family’s move to terminate the case within the Trust matter, according to a press release from the bank overseeing non-core assets. The forthcoming final hearing will take place at London’s High Court in April 2025, continuing a dispute that has drawn attention to asset freezes and cross-border enforcement.
The Court of Appeal aligned with the trial judge’s assessment that the sanctions in place do not strip away the fundamental right of access to justice. It also underscored that the Trust, alongside other Russian parties subject to sanctions, retains the right to have its claims evaluated within the United Kingdom. This stance reinforces the reach of UK judicial processes even in complex international financial matters and confirms that sanctions do not automatically bar litigation or relief when legitimate interests are at stake (Citation: High Court of England and Wales, Court of Appeal ruling on access to justice and sanctions).
The decision from the British Court of Appeal is presented as a reaffirmation of commitment to the rule of law and to the principles of international law. The Trust’s foundation expressed confidence that the case will yield a positive outcome, drawing comparisons to a prior LCIA proceeding in which Mintz family members faced allegations of fraud. The bank’s press service indicated that the foundation will persist in pursuing compensation for damages and in seeking restoration of justice in relation to actions attributed to the Mintz family and their associates (Citation: Court documents and official statements from the Trust’s press service).
In addition, the court declined to overturn the freezing order on the Mintz family’s assets, with the value placed at approximately $300 million to $400 million. The frozen holdings include hotels located in the United Kingdom, multiple residences in both the UK and France, a yacht, and various pieces of art and jewelry. This asset freeze is part of the broader enforcement posture that accompanies sanctions, especially in cases involving cross-border financial activity and alleged fraudulent conduct in related institutions (Citation: UK court order and official case materials).
Finally, the judge ordered the Mintz family to bear the bank’s legal costs associated with the objection. The ruling touches on a spectrum of relief requests tied to losses claimed from transactions involving Otkritie Bank and Rost Bank in August 2017. The outcome of these proceedings could influence both the strategic approach of the parties and the calibration of future sanctions-related litigation in similar multi-jurisdictional contexts (Citation: Court records describing costs and related transactions).