Roman Arkadyevich Abramovich (Appellant) v His Majesty's Attorney General and another (Respondents) (Jersey)

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2025/0075

Jurisdiction

Jersey

Parties

Appellant(s)

Roman Arkadyevich Abramovich

Respondent(s)

Attorney General of Jersey

Anna Abramovich

Issue

In the Substantive Appeal (JCPC/2025/0075): Is the judicial review duty of candour displaced or modified in the context of criminal investigations where no prosecution is pending or imminent? In the Substantive Appeal and the WZ Appeal (JCPC/2025/0079): Is the duty of full and frank disclosure in an application for a saisie judiciare displaced or modified by the duty of candour when there is a concurrent judicial review? In the Publication and Privacy Appeals (JCPC/2025/0076 and 0077 respectively): Can information, originally published in apparent breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights operate to reduce a person’s legitimate expectation of privacy?

Facts

There are four appeals before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (the “JCPC”). These appeals arise from challenges by Roman Abramovich and Anna Abramovich to investigations commenced and sanctions imposed by the Government of Jersey and from procedural orders related to these challenges. On 10th March 2022, Roman Abramovich, a Russian national, was made subject to sanctions by the Government of Jersey following the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. In April 2022, HM Attorney General of Jersey (the “AG”) commenced an investigation into potential breaches of these sanctions by Mr Abramovich. At the same time, the AG also began a money laundering investigation to determine whether certain assets, alleged to be connected to Mr Abramovich, were the proceeds of crime. On 12th April 2022, the AG applied to the Bailiff for a saisie judiciaire (the “Saisie”) against certain assets allegedly linked to Mr Abramovich. A saisie judiciaire is an order which vests property in the assets subject to the order in the executive officer of the Jersey Courts pending the conclusion of the investigation and any subsequent criminal proceedings. This Saisie was sought in support of the AG’s investigations into Mr Abramovich. The Bailiff granted the AG’s application for the Saisie. On 13th October 2023, Mr Abramovich applied for judicial review to challenge the AG’s decision to commence and continue the money laundering investigation. At the same time, Mr Abramovich applied for the discharge of the Saisie. Anna Abramovich, his wife, was subsequently added to the application for the discharge of the saisie as she also had a link to the assets subject to the order. The Royal Court of Jersey (the “RC”) and the Court of Appeal of Jersey (the “CA”) rejected both applications. The order of the CA on these two applications is the subject of the Substantive appeal. The WZ Appeal is against the CA’s order on the application to discharge the Saisie. When the RC handed down its decision, Mr Abramovich requested that the judgment not be published, on the basis that his high public profile meant that it would be impossible to publish the judgment in a meaningful form (for example, an anonymised form) without identifying him. The RC and the CA rejected the request and held that the judgment should be published. The order of the CA on this point is the subject of the Publication Appeal. On 11th April 2023, Mr Abramovich submitted data subject access requests (“DSARs”) to the Respondents to the Privacy Appeal (the “Privacy Respondents”) as part of his challenge to the investigation and the Saisie. The Privacy Respondents did not comply with these DSARs. On 1st February 2024, Mr Abramovich commenced proceedings against the Privacy Respondents. He also applied to the RC for an order that the proceedings be heard in private. The RC and the CA rejected this application. The order of the CA on this application is the subject of the Privacy Appeal.

Date of issue

1 August 2025

Case origin

PTA

Linked cases

Permission to Appeal

Justices

Lord Hodge

Lord Leggatt

Lady Simler

Permission to Appeal decision date

12 November 2025

Permission to Appeal decision

Refused

The application does not raise an arguable point of law or a point of law of general public importance. As the appeal is not proceeding, there is no need for an anonymity order before the Board.

Back to top