High Court dismisses claims against Doha Bank in alleged conspiracy case

High Court dismisses claims against Doha Bank in alleged conspiracy case

The High Court has dismissed claims against Doha Bank in a complex case involving allegations of conspiracy linked to the State of Qatar. The case, which was heard before Mr Justice Soole, centred on claims brought by Syrian citizens who alleged they were forced to flee their homes due to the actions of the Al-Nusra Front, a terrorist group.

The claimants, identified as EE, FF, GG, and HH, collectively referred to as the 'Discontinuing Claimants', sought to displace the presumptive rule regarding costs upon discontinuance of an action. They argued that their discontinuance was due to a conspiracy involving agents of the Qatari State aimed at perverting the course of justice.

Mr Justice Soole noted that the claimants had failed to establish their case on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities. The evidence presented was deemed insufficient to support a finding of conspiracy involving the State of Qatar or its agents. The judge emphasised that the distinction between the Bank and the State was not a 'legal fiction', and no adverse inference could be drawn against the Bank for the actions of the State.

The claimants had alleged that agents of the State of Qatar engaged in a conspiracy to derail the proceedings, including attempts to bribe witnesses and interfere with the claimants' legal representation. However, the court found that the evidence did not substantiate these claims.

The judgment highlighted the complexity of the case, which involved multiple parties and alleged misconduct across international jurisdictions. Despite the serious nature of the allegations, the court concluded that the evidence was not sufficient to displace the standard rule on costs.

In his ruling, Mr Justice Soole stated that it would be inappropriate to reach any conclusion on the allegations against the Qatari State, given that it was not a party to the proceedings. The court also noted that the claimants had not demonstrated any causative conduct by Doha Bank that would justify a departure from the presumptive rule on costs.

The decision underscores the challenges faced by claimants in proving allegations of conspiracy involving state actors, particularly when those actors are not directly involved in the proceedings. The case serves as a reminder of the high evidential threshold required to displace the standard costs rule in litigation.

Learn More

For more information on complex litigation and cost rules, see BeCivil's guide to UK Employment Law.