An exiled Russian litigant who brought committal applications against lawyers instructed against him - and accused a succession of judges of corruption - is a 'wholly unsuitable' person to bring a case without representation in court, a judge has ruled.
In Verlox International & Anor v Igor Antoshin & Ors, Mr Justice Foxton found that Igor Sychev 'has proved himself wholly incapable of conducting litigation in an appropriate, proportionate and, from his own perspective, effective way'. He dismissed applications brought by Sychev for contempt against two British lawyers and one Russian lawyer who acted in, or were appearing as a witness in, London hearings.
The satellite action is the latest twist in a dispute over a 2011 agreement allegedly made in Moscow over the ownership of fertiliser giant PhosAgro. Sychev has assigned his claim to a shareholding to Verlox, a Belize shell company that he controls. He sought to commit the three lawyers after the High Court heard applications over jurisdiction and security for costs in the case.
The three lawyers are Edward Crosse, a partner in City firm Simmons & Simmons, Vladimir Yarkov, a Russian lawyer retained as an expert witness and Anthony Riem, a partner in City firm PCB Byrne, which acted for PhosAgro.
Giving judgment, Foxton observed that the committal applications 'are being brought in proceedings which it has been held ought never to have been commenced in this jurisdiction'.
While he accepted that Verlox has standing to bring applications arising from the proceedings he noted it had no legal represention. Application to act through a director or an employer was rejected last year when Adrian Beltrami KC ruled that Verlox had not produced clear evidence that it could not be legally represented and that Sychev did not have the ability to pursue the litigation.
These findings 'apply with even greater force to criminal allegations of contempt,' Foxton ruled. He found that Sychev's conduct since the order, which included allegations of bribery and/or actual bias against eight judges and two firms of solicitors, has 'amply confirmed the wisdom of Mr Beltrami KC’s order'.
He concluded: 'It follows that Verlox is unable to pursue the committal applications for so long as it remains unrepresented by authorised legal advisers who are able, in compliance with their professional duties, to pursue the applications.'
Among other points, the judge noted that Sychev had filed 'oppressively prolix documentation', including 3,255 pages of exhibits. He had also abused the opportunity to provide typographical corrections to a judgment, instead submitting a version of the judgment 'which effectively sought to re-argue the case'.
'In short, he has proved himself wholly incapable of conducting litigation,' the judge found. He refused Sychev's request to refer the case to law enforcement agencies, concluding 'It is open to Mr Sychev to do so, if he sees fit.'
