Ivanishvili v Credit Suisse: Breach of Trust, Quantification of Losses & Costs

In Suit No 4 of 2021, the Singapore International Commercial Court addressed the finalization of orders following a judgment in favor of Bidzina Ivanishvili, Ekaterine Khvedelidze, Tsotne Ivanishvili, Gvantsa Ivanishvili, and Bera Ivanishvili against Credit Suisse Trust Limited. The court, presided over by Patricia Bergin IJ, dealt with three main issues: the quantification of the amount payable by the defendant for breach of trust, the costs of the proceedings, and whether a declaration should be made regarding the validity of a Deed of Amendment and Restatement. The court ordered Credit Suisse to pay US$742.73m in compensation and addressed the allocation of costs.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Singapore International Commercial Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiffs

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore court orders Credit Suisse to pay US$742.73m for breach of trust. The court also addressed the quantification of losses and costs.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Credit Suisse Trust LimitedDefendantCorporationJudgment against DefendantLost
Bidzina IvanishviliPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffWon
Ekaterine KhvedelidzePlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffWon
Tsotne IvanishviliPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffWon
Gvantsa IvanishviliPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffWon
Bera IvanishviliPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Patricia BerginInternational JudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Lee Eng BengRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Mak Sushan MelissaAllen & Gledhill LLP
Wong Pei TingAllen & Gledhill LLP
Disa SimRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Torsten CheongRajah & Tann Singapore LLP
Kenneth Lim Tao ChungAllen & Gledhill LLP
Afzal AliAllen & Gledhill LLP
Gan Yun Han RebeccaAllen & Gledhill LLP
Justin William JeremiahAllen & Gledhill LLP
Yeow Yuet CheongAllen & Gledhill LLP
Cavinder BullDrew & Napier LLC
Woo Shu YanDrew & Napier LLC
Tan Yuan KhengDrew & Napier LLC
Kelly Tseng Ai LinDrew & Napier LLC
Gerald Paul Seah Yong SingDrew & Napier LLC
Liang Fang Ling ElisabethDrew & Napier LLC
Fiona Chew Yan BeiDrew & Napier LLC

4. Facts

  1. The plaintiffs claimed the defendant was in breach of its duty from 2007.
  2. The court found the defendant was in breach as of 30 March 2008.
  3. The court used Model 1B to calculate the plaintiffs' losses.
  4. The Settlement amount of US$79,430,773 was made up of three components.
  5. Only one component of the settlement related to Meadowsweet in the amount of US$30,011,498.
  6. The parties agreed that costs for work done prior to the proceedings being transferred to the SICC should be awarded to the plaintiffs.
  7. The parties agreed that the plaintiffs should be awarded costs and disbursements for interlocutory applications.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ivanishvili, Bidzina and others v Credit Suisse Trust Ltd, Suit No 4 of 2021, [2023] SGHC(I) 14
  2. Ivanishvili, Bidzina and others v Credit Suisse Trust, , [2023] SGHC(I) 9
  3. Senda International Capital Ltd v Kiri Industries Ltd, , [2023] 1 SLR 96
  4. Lao Holdings NV v Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic and another matter, , [2022] SGHC(I) 6
  5. Ivanishvili, Bidzina and others v Credit Suisse Trust Ltd, , [2020] 2 SLR 638
  6. Kiri Industries Ltd v Senda International Capital Ltd and another, , [2022] 3 SLR 174

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Defendant's breach of duty to the plaintiffs
Deed of Amendment and Restatement dated
Work done from this date prior to proceedings being transferred to SICC
Defendant filed List of Documents
Court of Appeal proceedings in Ivanishvili, Bidzina and others v Credit Suisse Trust Ltd
Proceedings transferred to the SICC
Pre-trial conference
Case Management Conference
Parties issued respective requests for specific discovery
CMC vacated
CMC vacated
Plaintiffs granted extension of time to comply with Court's order to furnish further and better particulars
Case Management Conference
Parties exchanged substantive responses for specific discovery requests
Case Management Conference
Reply (Amendment No.1) dated
Defendant disclosed restated financial statements
CMC
Case Management Conference
Plaintiffs responded to requests
Affidavit of Mr Patrick Guldimann
Application heard
Judgment delivered
Supplemental expert report of Mr Davies
Order made that costs of SUM 49 were to be costs in the cause
Trial began
Trial ended
Plaintiffs suggested amendments to defendant's document
Plaintiffs’ closing submissions dated
Settlement dated
Reply Submissions dated
Oral closing hearing
Oral closing hearing
Judgment delivered in SIC/S 4/2021
Plaintiffs’ solicitors sent a costs proposal to the defendant’s solicitors
Defendant’s solicitors provided the plaintiffs’ solicitors with a costs counter-proposal
Plaintiffs’ solicitors responded to the 4 July Schedule
Parties filed written submissions
Parties filed written submissions
Defendant filed supplementary written submissions
Experts provided their respective reports
Plaintiffs filed reply submissions
Judgment reserved
Judgment issued
Hearing of the defendant’s application for a stay in SIC/SUM 33/2023

7. Legal Issues

  1. Breach of Trust
    • Outcome: The court declared that the defendant breached its duty to the plaintiffs to safeguard the Trust assets as at 30 March 2008.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to safeguard trust assets
  2. Quantification of Losses
    • Outcome: The court determined that Model 1B was the appropriate model for quantifying losses and calculated the losses from 30 March 2008 to 26 May 2023.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Costs
    • Outcome: The court addressed the costs of the proceedings, awarding costs to the plaintiffs and determining the date from which interest should accrue on those costs.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Compensation for losses
  2. Costs

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Trust

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Ivanishvili, Bidzina and others v Credit Suisse TrustSingapore High Court (International)Yes[2023] SGHC(I) 9SingaporeCited as the main judgment upon which the current orders are based.
Senda International Capital Ltd v Kiri Industries LtdCourt of AppealYes[2023] 1 SLR 96SingaporeCited for the approach to be adopted in the determination of costs.
Lao Holdings NV v Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic and another matterSingapore International Commercial CourtYes[2022] SGHC(I) 6SingaporeCited for the approach to be adopted in the determination of costs.
Ivanishvili, Bidzina and others v Credit Suisse Trust LtdCourt of AppealYes[2020] 2 SLR 638SingaporeCited to provide background on the proceedings.
Kiri Industries Ltd v Senda International Capital Ltd and anotherSingapore International Commercial CourtYes[2022] 3 SLR 174SingaporeCited regarding interest on costs.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
O 110 r 46 of the Rules of Court 2014
Order 59 rule 37 of the Rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Rules of Court 2014Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Trust assets
  • Model 1B
  • Settlement amount
  • Post-Transfer Costs
  • Quantum Experts’ Fees
  • Deed of Amendment and Restatement

15.2 Keywords

  • breach of trust
  • quantification of losses
  • costs
  • Singapore International Commercial Court
  • trust assets

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Costs95
Judgments and Orders80
Civil Procedure75
Quantification of Damages60
Breach of Trust40
Fiduciary Duty30
Trust Assets25
Estoppel20
Contract Law10
Company Law5
Trust Law5
Arbitration5

16. Subjects

  • Trust Law
  • Civil Procedure
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Costs