Why Russian Oligarchs Choose London Courts for Billion-Dollar Disputes?

Why Russian oligarchs fight out their conflicts in London

While Moscow insists on loyalty and domestic dispute resolution, Russian oligarchs are increasingly choosing London courts to settle their multibillion-dollar disputes. The recent case of Oleg Deripaska against Roman Abramovich and Vladimir Potanin exposes not only personal rivalries but also the deeper tensions between Russia and the West over power, money, and legal certainty.

A legal duel between giants

A remarkable announcement appeared on a Russian Telegram channel this week: oligarchs prefer a court in London to one in Moscow to settle their disputes. The reason? Billionaire Oleg Deripaska has launched a new legal battle against his old rivals Vladimir Potanin and Roman Abramovich. Both cases were filed in London, far from the Kremlin’s influence.
The Russian presidential apparatus is far from pleased with this move. “If you want to settle matters, do it through Russian courts,” is the government’s official position. Moscow considers it a matter of sovereignty and national pride that such disputes be resolved domestically. Yet, London’s courts appear to retain an irresistible allure for the Russian elite.

The strategic importance of Norilsk Nickel

The case revolves around Norilsk Nickel, one of the world’s largest producers of nickel and palladium. These metals are crucial for batteries and electric vehicles, making the company not only an economic powerhouse but also geopolitically important.
In 2012, Abramovich played the role of peacemaker in a conflict between Deripaska and Potanin. He bought 6.5 percent of Norilsk shares to restore the balance of power. A corporate governance agreement was signed that prohibited the parties from selling or buying new shares. According to Deripaska, Abramovich violated this agreement by wanting to sell his stake to Potanin.
The stakes are high: whoever controls Norilsk Nickel wields influence over a strategic industry. This legal battle is therefore not just a matter of personal rivalry, but also of economic and political power.

Why London and not Moscow?

It’s no coincidence that oligarchs prefer London to Moscow. British courts have built a reputation for independence, predictability, and legal certainty – qualities that Russian courts can’t match. Rulings in Russia are often politically influenced, making large corporations wary of settling their disputes there.
London also offers practical advantages. The UK has long been a haven for Russian elites. Many oligarchs own real estate, businesses, or residences there. This presence provides courts with the necessary jurisdiction to hear cases . Moreover, English judgments are easily enforceable internationally, and arbitration offers a confidential setting where sensitive information remains protected.
Historical figures underscore the trend: in 2018, Russia and Kazakhstan were among the top three foreign litigants in London commercial cases, with 29 and 36 cases respectively. Legal experts now call it a “march of oligarchs” heading to the English courts.
Moscow logically rejects this move towards foreign jurisdictions, as sensitive information about strategic Russian companies could become public.

Sanctions and shifting power relations

The preference for London must also be understood in the context of the sanctions imposed since 2022. Before the war in Ukraine, Russian oligarchs held vast interests in Europe and the UK, with investments in real estate, sports clubs, and philanthropy often serving as instruments of influence. At the time, the British government warned of the growing grip of Kremlin-linked businessmen on London networks.
That reality has changed. Hundreds of oligarchs, including Abramovich and Deripaska, saw their assets frozen, together worth an estimated £15 billion. Yet London remains attractive. Sanctions may prevent transactions, but legal proceedings often fall outside the sanctions regulations. Law firms in London cleverly capitalize on this: they represent clients in civil and arbitration cases as long as this doesn’t result in the release of frozen assets.
Paradoxically, oligarchs remain intertwined with the British economy. For example, investment firm LetterOne, co-owned by Petr Aven and Mikhail Fridman, recently acquired a nearly 15 percent stake in Harbour Energy, the UK’s largest oil and gas producer. At the same time, the British government is trying to dismantle structures used by oligarchs to protect their wealth, such as the network surrounding Alisher Usmanov, which is involved in luxury properties like Beechwood House in London.

New safe havens

While London remains legally attractive, economic interests are shifting. Oligarchs are seeking new hubs in Dubai, Israel, and some European countries like Switzerland. Oligarch Gennady Timchenko reportedly owns several villas in Switzerland and previously owned properties in southern France. This geographic dispersal reflects a strategy to circumvent sanctions and secure assets in jurisdictions with less stringent oversight mechanisms.

What’s at stake?

The legal battle between Deripaska, Abramovich, and Potanin goes beyond personal wealth. It exposes a tension between Russian oligarchs seeking legal certainty in the West and enforceability in other countries, and a Kremlin that wants to centralize legal confrontations at home.
For the UK, this means that London courts will remain the arena for conflicts that – according to the Russian elite – cannot be settled neutrally in Moscow for the time being.