Defending a complex cross-border bond dispute

Approach

The claim centred on the events at a noteholder meeting where a resolution to enforce bond terms did not pass the necessary threshold. The claimant alleged fraud and unlawful means conspiracy between various parties, relying on novel interpretations of standard bond documentation. We advised the defendants to file a strike out/reverse summary judgment application, which was successful bringing an end to the claim and an award of indemnity costs in favour of our clients. The claimant's attempt to reformulate its case prior to the strike out application was rejected by the Court.  

Outcome

The strike out of the claim against the UK based clients meant that there was no prospect of the claimant being given permission by the Court to serve the claim on other defendants outside the jurisdiction.  Our strategic response of focusing on the construction of the documents, moving early to judgment, and seeking to cause a knock-out blow on behalf of the UK defendants which would block the claim against other defendants, led to an early vindication for our clients.

Impact

This case tested the legal boundaries of standard bond documentation and may have had wider market implications if the claimant’s novel arguments were accepted. Our early, decisive action helped shape the proceedings and protect our clients’ interests by forcing a degree of procedural and legal clarity from the claimant which could be the subject of a strike out application.