Boris Abramovich Berezovsky v Roman Arkadievich Abromovich v Hine and Ors (2012)
It was needed to be established whether Mr Berezovsky held an interest in 2 companies which amounted to a value of in excess of $5.6 billion before he fled fromRussiatoFrancein 2000.
This case, despite its enormous value and complexity, was handled on a no-win-no-fee agreement, as per the Access to Justice Act 1999. This Act followed the abolition of Legal Aid in personal injury and other similar cases, meaning that working and middle class citizens could still get legal help even if they could not afford it. This provided a sense of security to those who were afraid to bring legal action before due to the risk (and cost) of the case being unsuccessful. Fortunately, solicitors such as ourselves have no fear of acting under a conditional fee arrangement such as this, even with the risks involved.
In his summing up, the Judge pointed to various factors which had allowed the smooth running of the trial including the fact that the extensive documentation was in a highly organised and easily accessible electronic format- allowing for an efficient almost “paperless” trial meaning that time was saved and the case ran to schedule.
Members of Hafezis recently attended a conference on running our cases in this format, where all parties to the case would have their own screen that displayed the relevant documentation to watch as the case goes on. We believe this is the future of trials in theUK.
At Hafezis we believe in providing exception access to justice for all to guarantee a hassle-free fair trial. In this case the Judge praised the skill, efficiency, understanding and co-operation of the translators who enabled evidence given in Russian to be delivered seamlessly. AsBritainis now fast becoming one of the most multicultural countries in the world we as solicitors act for clients of all different nationalities, and often have to use translators both in trials and in client consultations. We believe that the use of interpreters is essential when a client is unable to understand the full scope of the English language, in particular the consequences of certain legal terms.