Fifth time lucky for Saudi royal
A member of the Saudi royal family was able to finally convince the courts that he was not resident in England & Wales within three years of the presentation of a bankruptcy petition against him, and that there was, therefore, no jurisdictional grounds for that petition.
The petitioner presented a bankruptcy petition against a Prince of the Saudi royal family for debts in excess of £705m arising out of an arbitration award from 2012. The matter had a long litigation history.
The Prince had unsuccessfully applied to set aside a statutory demand, unsuccessfully appealed that decision, unsuccessfully objected to an application for an order serving the petition on him out of the jurisdiction, and had unsuccessfully appealed that decision.
In all four of those court proceedings, the Prince failed to convince the court that he didn't have a place of residence in England & Wales.
The Prince then objected to the petition on the same ground and was fifth time lucky. One of the main reasons for this is that the Prince finally adduced full evidence setting out his residency going back to the 1980s.
The ICCJ found that the Prince was resident in London until 1990 when he was studying there and living in his mother’s house. During that time, the Prince’s name was registered for council tax and, unbeknownst to him, his name remained on the council tax register.
The Petitioner based their jurisdictional argument on this and other factors, but the ICCJ found that the council tax bills were mistakenly retained in the Prince’s name at his mother’s property and, based on the evidence, the Prince hadn't been in residence in England & Wales since 1990 and certainly not within three years of presentation of the petition.
The ICCJ, therefore, dismissed the petition, but this case demonstrates the need for detailed evidence if a debtor is going to rely on a lack of residence in respect of a bankruptcy petition.
Mobile Telecommunications Company KSCP v HRH Prince Hussam Bin Saud Bin and Abdulaziz Al Saud [2025] EWHC 85 (Ch)
Our content explained
Every piece of content we create is correct on the date it’s published but please don’t rely on it as legal advice. If you’d like to speak to us about your own legal requirements, please contact one of our expert lawyers.