The Czech Republic (claimant) v Diag Human SE and another (defendants)
Monday 3 – Friday 7 February 2025
Appeal 1 – By an Appellant’s Notice, filed on 2 May 2024, this is an appeal by the Czech Republic against the Order, dated 8 March 2024 of Foxton J sitting as a High Court Judge in the Commercial Court in which the Judge at paragraphs 145 to 147 decided that the tribunal would not have jurisdiction to determine if investments for a claim by the second Respondent for damages were a breach.
Appeal 2 – By an Appellant’s Notice, filed on 2 May 2024, this is an appeal by the defendants below against the Order, dated 8 March 2024 of Foxton J sitting as a High Court Judge in the Commercial Court in which the Judge dismissed the challenge brought pursuant to s.67 of the Arbitration Act 1996, deciding that it be determined at a second hearing (but only to the extent identified in paragraph 232 of the Judgement) and placing no conditions on the Respondents permission to appeal in respect of its first ground of appeal.
Appeal 3 – By an Appellant’s Notice, filed on 22 November 2024, this is a further appeal by the claimant against the Order, dated 25 October 2024 (Judgment 9 August 2024) of Mr Justice Foxton sitting as a High Court Judge in the Commercial Court in which the Judge dismissed the Claimant’s arbitration challenge.
The dispute relates to an investment in the blood plasma market in Czechoslovakia in the 1990s (later the Czech Republic from 1 January 1993). Operations in the Czech Republic were via a Czech company called Conneco (to which Diag Human SE, the First Respondent, is the successor company). Mr Stava the second Respondent is a Swiss national who held shares in Diag Human SE.
View hearing:
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
Day 5