{"id":561523,"date":"2026-04-14T22:13:39","date_gmt":"2026-04-14T20:13:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/"},"modified":"2026-04-14T22:13:39","modified_gmt":"2026-04-14T20:13:39","slug":"east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/","title":{"rendered":"East-West United Bank SA v Vladimir Gusinski &amp; Ors"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"kji-decision\">\n<div class=\"kji-full-text\">\n<p>1. MR JUSTICE RAJAH: The existing pleading is adequately summarised in paragraph\u00a07.1 to 7.4 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton. The proposed amendment is adequately summarised in paragraph\u00a09 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton, and the law is as set out in paragraphs\u00a010 and 11 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton. 2. Mr George objects to the amendment on the basis that it discloses no real prospect of success because no concerted action is pleaded. I\u00a0do not accept that submission. Ms\u00a0Stanley has made clear, that is not what the pleading at paragraph\u00a098.(0A) is intending to do. It is not attempting to plead concerted action. It is attempting to plead sufficient knowledge to justify an inference of joinder to the conspiracy on a\u00a0particular date earlier than that which had previously been mentioned. I\u00a0accept Ms\u00a0Stanley&#039;s submissions that it is at least arguable that it is not necessary to prove concerted action by D2 and D3 for them to have participated in or to have joined a\u00a0conspiracy, and for the tort to be made out. 3. So far as limitation is concerned: this is linked to the pleading point as to timing. The original paragraph 98 said that Mr\u00a0Samuels and GSC had joined the conspiracy on a\u00a0date unknown, but by June\u00a02018 at the latest. The proposed amendment says that they had joined the conspiracy on a\u00a0date unknown, but by January\u00a02018 or, alternatively, some later date. It is self-evident from reading those two pleas that what is being pleaded by way of amendment is within what was already there. 4. The particulars which were originally given of paragraph\u00a098 particularised events which happened from June\u00a02018 onwards, and the proposed amendment now seeks to rely, in particular, on the alleged diversion of funds from January\u00a02018. That is the diversion of funds from NTV, which is already pleaded at paragraph 97 as part of the unlawful means conspiracy by Mr\u00a0Gusinski to which D2 and D3 is said in paragraph 98 to have joined. 5. What is now pleaded in 98.(0A) are particulars of the joinder to the conspiracy pleaded in 98. They are not a\u00a0new cause of action as such. The consequence of pleading that the relevant date of joinder to the conspiracy is January\u00a02018\u00a0&#8212; which was, as I\u00a0say, already within and available to the claimant on the original pleading\u00a0&#8212; is that if they can establish joinder to the alleged conspiracy in January\u00a02018, it means that loss which has been caused by the conspiracy since January\u00a02018, which will then be recoverable from D2 and D3 as well . But that, it seems to me, is not the addition of a\u00a0new course of action; it is simply a\u00a0consequence of the claimant being in a\u00a0position, it says, to prove something by evidence, which was already in its pleaded case. As a matter of pleading, these particulars are not strictly necessary, but where there is a\u00a0serious allegation such as conspiracy, it is right that as a matter of fairness they should be pleaded so that the Defendants know the case they have to meet. 6. So far as delay in making this application is concerned, I have seen the explanations in the witness statements. The Claimant has had the documents since February\u00a02025. They were reviewed from\u00a0August\u00a02025. I\u00a0accept Mr\u00a0George&#039;s submissions that the amendments should have been put forward earlier, and have not been. It was, however, raised more than two\u00a0months before trial. As I\u00a0say, it is not a\u00a0pleading which needed to have been made, save as a\u00a0matter of fairness to the defendant, and they will have had two months notice of this by the time of the trial. 7. So far as prejudice is concerned, I\u00a0am not satisfied that it is going to require any further disclosure, because the issues raised by the amendment were clearly part of the disclosure exercise, which the parties were directed to carry out. A\u00a0further witness statement may be necessary by the defendant&#039;s witnesses, and in particular Mr\u00a0Samuels and Ms\u00a0Dohmann, but that is not significant prejudice. 8. So far as expert evidence on Swiss and Cayman law, it seems to me that if Ms Stanley take out the references in subparagraph\u00a03 and subparagraph\u00a04 of 98 to the advice which it is said that Mr\u00a0Samuels did not give or did not say, then Mr\u00a0George does not need to get advice on Swiss or Cayman or indeed Russian law, but that is a\u00a0matter for him. 9. So far as forensic evidence on the purported division, I\u00a0anticipate that that is something which would be taken up in an inquiry after these proceedings, if the outcome of these proceedings is that the tort is established. 10. So far as an adjournment being required, I\u00a0am not satisfied that an adjournment is necessary, and the trial can go ahead if the pleading is amended in the way which I\u00a0have discussed with Ms\u00a0Stanley. 11. So, I\u00a0am going to allow the amendment, but subject to those comments as to how it is to be curtailed. 12. Epiq Europe Ltd hereby certify that the above is an accurate and complete record of the proceedings or part thereof. Lower Ground, 18-22 Furnival Street, London EC4A 1JS Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Email: civil@epiqglobal.co.uk<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<hr class=\"kji-sep\" \/>\n<p class=\"kji-source-links\"><strong>Sources officielles :<\/strong> <a class=\"kji-source-link\" href=\"https:\/\/caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/ewhc\/ch\/2026\/798\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">consulter la page source<\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"kji-license-note\"><em>Open Justice Licence (The National Archives).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>1. MR JUSTICE RAJAH: The existing pleading is adequately summarised in paragraph 7.1 to 7.4 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton. The proposed amendment is adequately summarised in paragraph 9 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton, and the law is as set out in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton. 2. Mr George objects to the amendment on the basis that it&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_crdt_document":""},"kji_country":[7608],"kji_court":[7642],"kji_chamber":[],"kji_year":[7610],"kji_subject":[7612],"kji_keyword":[8027,8025,7975,8028,8026],"kji_language":[7611],"class_list":["post-561523","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-royaume-uni","kji_court-high-court-business-list","kji_year-7610","kji_subject-fiscal","kji_keyword-amendment","kji_keyword-conspiracy","kji_keyword-paragraph","kji_keyword-pleaded","kji_keyword-pleading","kji_language-anglais"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.5 (Yoast SEO v27.5) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>East-West United Bank SA v Vladimir Gusinski &amp; Ors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"zh_CN\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"East-West United Bank SA v Vladimir Gusinski &amp; Ors\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"1. MR JUSTICE RAJAH: The existing pleading is adequately summarised in paragraph 7.1 to 7.4 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton. The proposed amendment is adequately summarised in paragraph 9 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton, and the law is as set out in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton. 2. Mr George objects to the amendment on the basis that it...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u9884\u8ba1\u9605\u8bfb\u65f6\u95f4\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"4 \u5206\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\\\/\",\"name\":\"East-West United Bank SA v Vladimir Gusinski &amp; Ors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-14T20:13:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"zh-Hans\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"East-West United Bank SA v Vladimir Gusinski &amp; Ors\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"zh-Hans\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"zh-Hans\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"East-West United Bank SA v Vladimir Gusinski &amp; Ors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/","og_locale":"zh_CN","og_type":"article","og_title":"East-West United Bank SA v Vladimir Gusinski &amp; Ors","og_description":"1. MR JUSTICE RAJAH: The existing pleading is adequately summarised in paragraph 7.1 to 7.4 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton. The proposed amendment is adequately summarised in paragraph 9 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton, and the law is as set out in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the defendants\u2019 skeleton. 2. Mr George objects to the amendment on the basis that it...","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u9884\u8ba1\u9605\u8bfb\u65f6\u95f4":"4 \u5206"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/","name":"East-West United Bank SA v Vladimir Gusinski &amp; Ors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-14T20:13:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"zh-Hans","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/east-west-united-bank-sa-v-vladimir-gusinski-ors\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"East-West United Bank SA v Vladimir Gusinski &amp; Ors"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"zh-Hans"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"zh-Hans","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/561523","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=561523"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=561523"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=561523"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=561523"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=561523"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=561523"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=561523"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=561523"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}