Jourdan Penrice

Insights and Analysis When sanctions collide with jurisdiction — A new era for service on individuals outside the UK The Court of Appeal decision in Fridman v Agrofirma and another (“Fridman”) sets a new approach by the English courts to service on individuals. For businesses, financial institutions and litigation teams, the judgment in Fridman requires reconsideration of long-standing assumptions on service and applicability of the CPR.

Background The Defendants, subsidiaries of Z Co (“the Yard”), agreed to build and sell ten container vessels. The ten shipbuilding contracts were novated to SPVs within C Inc (“the Buyers”). The contracts contained a term that the Yard was to provide Refund Guarantees to the Buyers. Under each contract, the Refund Guarantees were to be delivered “no later than 120 days” after novation. The Yard failed to provide the Refund Guarantees within the 120-day period.

In SLB & Ors v PAK & Ors [2026] EWHC 449 (Comm), Mr Justice Calver dismissed appeals against ten arbitral awards arising from shipbuilding contracts on the basis that a contractual term to provide refund guarantees within a specified time limit was in fact an innominate term and not a contractual condition.