Marc Glover and Hugh Rowan successfully defeat appeal against $1.2 Billion Bankruptcy Petition listed in the Court of Appeal with four days’ notice

February 17, 2025

On 22 January 2025, Judgment was handed down in the case of Mobile Telecommunications Company KSPC v HRH Prince Hussam bin Saud bin Abdulaziz al Saud [2025] EWHC 85 (Ch). Following a five-day trial in December 2024, ICC Judge Briggs had determined that the Court did not have jurisdiction as the Respondent, HRH Prince Hussam bin Saud bin Abdulaziz al Saud (“Prince Hussam”) did not have a place of residence in England and Wales in the three years prior to the presentation of the Petition. https://tanfieldchambers.co.uk/1-2-billion-bankruptcy-petition/

One point that had arisen shortly before trial related to the question of limitation and raises a number of novel issues on which there is scant authority. Prince Hussam argued that the principal arbitration sum arose more than six years ago, and the presentation of the petition in 2022 did not stop time running, so that the alleged debts were (as of shortly before the trial in November 2024) now statute-barred and cannot support the Petition. One counter argument raised by the Appellant (“MTC”), was that time did not start to run until a reasonable period of time had elapsed. On this alternative case, limitation expired in mid-February 2025 (the “Limitation Point”).

As a result of the Limitation Point, MTC applied for their appeal to be expedited. This request was granted by Snowden LJ late in the evening on Friday 7 February 2025. Snowden LJ directed that the appeal brought by MTC would be heard four clear days later, namely Friday 14 February 2024, as a rolled-up hearing for permission to appeal with the substantive appeal to follow. This truncated window placed considerable pressure on the team who nonetheless rose to the challenge.

MTC’s substantive appeal was broken down into five grounds. In summary, the first ground alleged that the Court had applied the wrong test when considering whether Prince Hussam had a place of residence. MTC argued for a much simpler (and more expansive) test, namely whether there was a place of residence available to Prince Hussam during the Relevant Period. The remaining four grounds were – Prince Hussam argued – simply challenges to the Judge’s findings of fact.

After a day of oral argument before Newey, Snowden, and Whipple LJJ, the Court gave an oral indication that it would refuse permission to appeal. Written reasons are set to follow.

A full recording of the morning session can be found here and the afternoon session can be found here.

Marc Glover has been instructed as Prince Hussam’s lead counsel in the dispute since 2023, having been instructed in place of a KC. For this Appeal, Hugh Rowan was also instructed, along with Peter Arden KC (Erskine Chambers) and Geraint Jones KC (3 Paper Buildings). Stephen Moverley-Smith KC (XXIV) and others acted on behalf of MTC.

This case drew media attention.