PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT — LITIGATION PRIVILEGE
CALDERWOOD & HARKNESS LLP 45 Moorgate, London EC2R 6AR
MEMORANDUM
12 July 2024
From: Hannah Brinkley, Lead Associate, Calderwood & Harkness LLP
Reviewed by: Samuel Eklund, Responsible Partner, Calderwood & Harkness LLP
To: File — Thalassa Shipping & Logistics SA v. Korinthian Maritime Holdings Ltd. (Enforcement of LCIA Award No. 224718)
Court Reference: CL-2024-000487 (Commercial Court, England & Wales)
Re: Evidence of Post-Award Asset Dissipation by Korinthian Maritime Holdings Ltd. and Related Entities
Purpose: This memorandum compiles and analyzes available evidence of asset dissipation by Korinthian Maritime Holdings Ltd. ("KMH") and its subsidiaries following the issuance of LCIA Award No. 224718 on 28 June 2024. It is prepared as supporting material for the application for a Worldwide Freezing Order ("WFO") in the Commercial Court (England & Wales), returnable on 16 July 2024, and for cross-border freezing and attachment applications in Cyprus, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates. This memorandum is protected by litigation privilege and attorney work product doctrine. It should not be disclosed to any party outside Calderwood & Harkness LLP without the express prior authorization of the Responsible Partner.
Right-click to update Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary
Following the issuance of the Final Award on 28 June 2024 in LCIA Case Reference No. 224718, in the sum of £96,450,000 in damages and pre-award interest (together with costs of £12,150,000, yielding a grand total of £108,600,000), Korinthian Maritime Holdings Ltd. ("KMH") and entities under the common control of its ultimate beneficial owner, Andrei Volkov, have engaged in a systematic and coordinated pattern of asset dissipation designed to frustrate enforcement and collection of the Award.
The evidence compiled in this memorandum draws principally upon the forensic asset-tracing analysis conducted by Hartwell Pemberton LLP ("HP"), supplemented by public shipping records, corporate registry filings in multiple jurisdictions, banking intelligence, vessel-tracking data, and market intelligence provided by Northcape Maritime Advisory Ltd. Taken together, these sources reveal four principal and interrelated categories of dissipation activity:
(i) Transfers of funds from KMH and subsidiary bank accounts at Meridian Trust Bank Ltd. (London), Pinnacle Bank (Singapore) Ltd. (Singapore), and Emirates Gulf Commercial Bank PJSC (Dubai) to third-party entities controlled by the Volkov family, effected in the days and weeks immediately following the Award;
(ii) Attempted sale of M/V *Crimson Horizon* by Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., one of the three vessels at the center of the underlying charter-party dispute, through private brokerage channels, with no legitimate commercial rationale and with the evident purpose of converting the vessel into cash capable of rapid dispersal;
(iii) Re-flagging and repositioning of vessels to registries and jurisdictions less amenable to enforcement processes, including the repositioning of M/V Volga Spirit to Fujairah anchorage (UAE) and indications of steps to change the flag state of that vessel; and
(iv) Restructuring of Cypriot holding entities, including changes to the share capital, directorship, and articles of association of Oceangate Ventures Ltd. (the intermediate holding company for KMH's fleet SPVs), designed to create additional layers of separation between KMH and the underlying fleet assets and to obscure beneficial ownership.
These activities, considered individually and cumulatively, demonstrate a real risk of dissipation within the meaning of the principles established in Ninemia Maritime Corporation v. Trave Schiffahrtsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG [1983] 1 WLR 1412 (CA) and subsequent authorities. The coordinated nature of the dissipation — spanning multiple jurisdictions, multiple entities, and multiple asset classes (cash, vessels, corporate equity) — is strongly indicative of centralized decision-making by Andrei Volkov and is inconsistent with any explanation founded on ordinary business operations.
It is notable that KMH's estimated pre-dispute net asset value was approximately USD $280 million, a sum more than sufficient to satisfy the Award in full. Yet KMH has made no payment whatsoever toward the Award, notwithstanding the 14-day demand served via Calderwood & Harkness's letter of 8 July 2024 to Harkness Whitford & Co. (Catherine Whitford), solicitors acting for KMH in the arbitration. The absence of any response to the demand letter, when coupled with the dissipation evidence described below, underpins the extreme urgency of the WFO application and the parallel cross-border applications.
This memorandum is structured as follows: Section 2 sets out the relevant background, including the parties, KMH's corporate structure, the LCIA Award, and the pre-enforcement demand. Section 3 identifies the sources of evidence. Sections 4 through 7 address each of the four categories of dissipation in detail. Sections 8 and 9 address KMH's history of dishonest conduct in the underlying dispute and the role of Andrei Volkov in directing the dissipation strategy. Section 10 summarizes the dissipation evidence and applies it to the legal tests for the WFO and cross-border applications. Section 11 sets out the recommended next steps. Section 12 lists the appendices referenced throughout.
2. Background
2.1 The Parties
Thalassa Shipping & Logistics SA ("TSL" / "Thalassa") is a Société Anonyme organized under Greek law, with its registered office at 14 Akti Miaouli, 4th Floor, Piraeus 185 35, Greece. Thalassa was founded in 1987 by the Papadimitriou family and has grown to become a significant operator in the international dry-bulk, tanker, and container feeder markets. The company currently operates a fleet of 34 vessels, comprising a mix of bulk carriers, product and chemical tankers, and container feeders, with annual consolidated revenues of approximately €620 million (FY2023 audited accounts). Thalassa's ownership is divided between the Papadimitriou family trust, which holds 72% of the issued share capital, and Aegean Capital Partners SA, a Greek private equity vehicle which holds the remaining 28%. Thalassa is the claimant in the underlying LCIA arbitration and is the applicant in the enforcement proceedings before this Court.
Korinthian Maritime Holdings Ltd. ("KMH") is a private limited company incorporated in Nicosia, Cyprus, bearing Registration No. HE 387421 at the Cyprus Department of Registrar of Companies. KMH's registered office is at 28 Themistokli Dervi Avenue, Suite 601, Nicosia 1066, Cyprus. KMH is a shipping holding company that controls, directly and indirectly, a fleet of approximately 18 dry-bulk carriers through single-purpose vehicle ("SPV") subsidiaries incorporated in various jurisdictions, including the British Virgin Islands, Singapore, and Cyprus. KMH is beneficially owned by the Volkov family through a layered structure of BVI and Cypriot holding entities. Its estimated pre-dispute net asset value was approximately USD $280 million, as assessed by Hartwell Pemberton in its preliminary findings.
KMH's key personnel, identified through corporate registry filings, the arbitration record, and HP's investigations, include:
• Andrei Volkov — Ultimate beneficial owner ("UBO") and de facto director of KMH. Although not formally registered as a director of KMH in the Cyprus registry, Mr. Volkov exercises effective control over all strategic and financial decisions made by KMH and its subsidiaries. The tribunal in the underlying arbitration made findings regarding Mr. Volkov's de facto directorial role (Final Award, ¶¶ 187–195).
• Sergei Volkov — Registered director of KMH. Son of Andrei Volkov. Also serves as a director of Oceangate Ventures Ltd. and Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.
• Marina Kazakova — Chief Financial Officer of KMH. Responsible for treasury operations and banking relationships across KMH's subsidiaries.
• Alexei Demidov — Director of Fleet Operations. Responsible for vessel deployment, chartering strategy, and day-to-day fleet management.
KMH is the respondent in the underlying LCIA arbitration, the judgment debtor under the Final Award, and the first respondent in the enforcement proceedings before this Court.
2.2 KMH's Corporate Structure — Relevant Subsidiaries and SPVs
An understanding of KMH's corporate and holding structure is essential to appreciating the dissipation strategy and the enforcement challenges. HP's corporate mapping, set out in full in Appendix B, reveals a multi-layered structure designed to isolate individual vessels in single-purpose vehicle companies, creating multiple layers of corporate separation between the judgment debtor (KMH) and the underlying income-generating and capital assets (the vessels). The relevant entities are as follows:
Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. is a Singapore-incorporated subsidiary of KMH, registered at 80 Robinson Road, #14-02, Singapore 068898, and listed with the Singapore Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority ("ACRA"). This entity serves as the operational hub for KMH's activities in the Asia-Pacific region. It held significant proceeds from vessel operations, including charter hire, freight revenue, and sub-charter income, in accounts maintained at Pinnacle Bank (Singapore) Ltd. Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. was also the registered owner of M/V Crimson Horizon (IMO 9801334, Handymax Bulk Carrier, 37,500 DWT, Liberian flag). Its sole director is Sergei Volkov.
Dnepr Shipholding Inc. is a BVI-incorporated single-purpose vehicle, bearing Company No. 2014876 at the BVI Financial Services Commission, with its registered agent at Vantage Corporate Services Ltd., Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands. Dnepr Shipholding Inc. is the registered owner of two vessels relevant to the underlying dispute and the enforcement proceedings:
• M/V Aegean Fortuna — IMO 9784521, Supramax Bulk Carrier, 58,200 DWT, marshall Islands flag. The subject of the first of the three charter-party agreements at issue in the arbitration.
• M/V Volga Spirit — IMO 9756892, Panamax Bulk Carrier, 76,400 DWT, Cyprus flag. The subject of the third charter-party agreement at issue in the arbitration.
Dnepr Shipholding Inc. is wholly owned by Oceangate Ventures Ltd. (see below), which is in turn wholly owned by KMH. HP's analysis confirms that despite the layered corporate structure, control of Dnepr Shipholding Inc. flows directly from Andrei Volkov through KMH and Oceangate.
Korinthian DMCC is a Dubai Multi Commodities Centre ("DMCC") free zone entity incorporated in the Emirate of Dubai, with its registered office at Unit 3407, Almas Tower, Jumeirah Lake Towers, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. This entity held operational funds and receivables relating to KMH's Middle East and Indian Ocean trading activities. It maintained accounts at Emirates Gulf Commercial Bank PJSC ("EGCB") at Gate Village 3, Dubai International Financial Centre, Dubai. Korinthian DMCC also served as the contracting party for certain sub-charter arrangements and voyage charters in the Arabian Gulf and East African trades.
Oceangate Ventures Ltd. is a Cyprus-incorporated holding company, bearing Registration No. HE 401293 at the Cyprus Department of Registrar of Companies, with its registered office at 28 Themistokli Dervi Avenue, Suite 604, Nicosia 1066, Cyprus — notably located in the same building as KMH's registered office at Suite 601, on the same floor. Oceangate serves as the intermediate holding company for KMH's fleet SPVs, including 100% ownership of Dnepr Shipholding Inc. Oceangate's sole shareholder is KMH. Its directors include Sergei Volkov and, until recently, two nominee directors whose identities and appointment circumstances are discussed further in Section 7 below.
It bears emphasis that this corporate architecture was designed specifically to isolate individual vessels in SPV companies, thereby shielding each vessel (and the income it generates) from liabilities of other entities in the KMH group, and creating multiple layers of corporate personality between the judgment debtor (KMH) and the underlying assets. While such structures are not uncommon in the shipping industry for legitimate commercial and insurance purposes, they also serve to complicate enforcement. HP's analysis confirms that despite this structural complexity, the ultimate control of all entities flows from Andrei Volkov through KMH, and that the corporate separateness has been treated as largely nominal in practice, with funds flowing freely between entities without regard to corporate boundaries.
2.3 The LCIA Award
The Final Award was issued on 28 June 2024 in LCIA Case Reference No. 224718. The tribunal was constituted as follows:
• Sir Malcolm Fenton-Clarke — Presiding Arbitrator
• Professor Athena Drakopoulos — Claimant-nominated Arbitrator
• Dr. Henrik Dalmqvist — Respondent-nominated Arbitrator
• Fiona Beckett — Tribunal Secretary
The arbitration arose from three time charter-party agreements between TSL (as disponent owner) and KMH (as charterer) relating to the following vessels:
(a) M/V Aegean Fortuna — Time Charter-Party signed 15 March 2019, for a firm period of five years. KMH wrongfully redelivered the vessel on 18 June 2022, approximately 14 months before the expiry of the charter period.
(b) M/V Crimson Horizon — Time Charter-Party signed 22 January 2020, for a firm period of four years with an option for a further two years. KMH ceased payment of hire from 1 July 2022. TSL withdrew the vessel on 15 September 2022 following service of an anti-technicality notice.
(c) M/V Volga Spirit — Time Charter-Party signed 10 June 2021, for a firm period of three years. KMH fabricated off-hire deductions totaling approximately £2,740,000, which the tribunal found to be fraudulent.
All three charter-party agreements were governed by English law and contained LCIA arbitration clauses designating London as the seat of arbitration. The tribunal's jurisdiction was not contested by KMH.
The Award is broken down as follows:
At the exchange rate prevailing on the date of the Award (28 June 2024; £1 = USD $1.2441), the Grand Total is equivalent to approximately USD $135,143,460. Post-award interest runs at 5.25% per annum simple on all unpaid sums from 29 June 2024. As of the date of this memorandum, no payment has been made by KMH, and post-award interest continues to accrue at a rate of approximately £13,882 per day.
The Award is final and binding. KMH has not commenced any proceedings to set aside or challenge the Award under the Arbitration Act 1996 or otherwise. The 28-day time limit for any challenge under section 67 or 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 expired on 26 July 2024, and no such application has been filed. The Award is accordingly enforceable as a judgment of the Commercial Court pursuant to sections 66 and 101 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and, internationally, under the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958.
2.4 Pre-Enforcement Demand
On 8 July 2024, this firm served a demand letter on Harkness Whitford & Co. (for the attention of Catherine Whitford, Partner), acting as solicitors for KMH in the arbitration proceedings. The demand letter required KMH to make full payment of the Grand Total of £108,600,000 within 14 days, that is, by 22 July 2024. The letter was sent by tracked courier (Tarrant & Co. reference 4728391056) and by email to c.whitford@harknesswhitford.com. Tarrant & Co. records confirm delivery on 9 July 2024 at 10:17 am to the offices of Harkness Whitford & Co. at 12 Austin Friars, London EC2N 2HE.
As of the date of this memorandum, no response of any kind has been received from KMH, Harkness Whitford & Co., or any other party on behalf of KMH. No payment has been made. No proposal for payment by instalments or otherwise has been communicated. KMH's complete silence in the face of the demand, coupled with the extensive dissipation evidence described below, underpins the urgency of the WFO application and strongly supports the inference that KMH has no intention of voluntarily satisfying the Award.
3. Sources of Evidence
The evidence compiled in this memorandum is drawn from the following principal sources:
Hartwell Pemberton LLP ("HP") — Asset Tracing Report (Preliminary Findings), dated 15 August 2024. HP is a leading forensic accounting and investigative firm based at 25 Old Broad Street, London EC2N 1HN. The Preliminary Findings report was prepared by Rebecca Saunders, Partner in the Forensic & Investigative Services practice, and Mark Huxley, Director. HP was engaged by Calderwood & Harkness LLP on behalf of TSL, pursuant to an engagement letter dated 1 July 2024, to trace KMH's global assets, map its corporate structure and beneficial ownership, and identify evidence of post-Award dissipation. HP's Preliminary Findings report is attached as Appendix A to this memorandum. Where reference is made in this memorandum to HP's findings, the specific paragraphs and sources within the HP report are cited. HP's work remains ongoing, and a final report will be prepared in due course. However, the preliminary findings are of sufficient detail and reliability to support the applications now contemplated.
Public shipping databases and vessel-tracking intelligence. These include Halcyon Health IT, Beaumont Software (Sea-web), and Automatic Identification System ("AIS") tracking data obtained through commercial vessel-tracking platforms. These sources provide real-time and historical data regarding vessel movements, ownership, flag state, class, and technical particulars. AIS data extracts for M/V Volga Spirit and M/V Crimson Horizon in the post-Award period are attached as Appendix D.
Corporate registry searches. These include searches of the Cyprus Department of Registrar of Companies (for KMH, Registration No. HE 387421, and Oceangate Ventures Ltd., Registration No. HE 401293), the Singapore Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority ("ACRA") (for Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.), the BVI Financial Services Commission (for Dnepr Shipholding Inc., Company No. 2014876), and the DMCC portal (for Korinthian DMCC). Relevant extracts from the Cyprus registry are attached as Appendix F.
Banking intelligence. HP has obtained preliminary information through lawful enquiries regarding accounts maintained by KMH and its subsidiaries at Meridian Trust Bank Ltd. (50 Lombard Street, London EC3V 9EA), Pinnacle Bank (Singapore) Ltd. (6 Battery Road, #20-01, Singapore 049909), and Emirates Gulf Commercial Bank PJSC (Gate Village 3, DIFC, Dubai). This intelligence has been obtained through a combination of public records, correspondence analysis, and information voluntarily provided by TSL's commercial contacts in the shipping market. It is anticipated that further and more detailed banking information will become available through the ancillary disclosure provisions sought in the WFO application and through third-party disclosure orders in the relevant jurisdictions.
Northcape Maritime Advisory Ltd. Captain Ian Forsyth, Managing Director, of 3 Thomas More Square, London E1W 1WY, has been retained to provide vessel valuation data, market intelligence on vessel transactions, and real-time vessel tracking and monitoring services. Captain Forsyth has over 30 years' experience in the maritime industry, including 15 years as a shipbroker specializing in dry-bulk tonnage. His valuations and market intelligence are based on comparable sales data, charter rate indices, and direct market contacts.
Open-source intelligence. This includes media reports in the shipping trade press (including TradeWinds, Lloyd's List, and Splash 247), shipping brokerage circulars (including those issued by Adriatic Enterprises, Quillon & Co., and Arrow Shipbroking), and publicly available information from industry databases and news aggregators.
The evidence from these sources has been cross-referenced and corroborated to the extent possible. Where evidence remains preliminary or unconfirmed, this is noted in the relevant section below. It is expected that the ancillary disclosure provisions of the WFO, together with further investigative work by HP and the fruits of cross-border discovery applications, will provide additional evidence to confirm and supplement the findings set out herein.
4. Category 1: Transfers of Funds from KMH and Subsidiary Bank Accounts
4.1 Overview
HP's preliminary findings identify a clear and troubling pattern of significant outbound transfers from KMH's accounts and those of its subsidiary entities in the period immediately following the issuance of the Final Award on 28 June 2024. The timing of these transfers — concentrated in the first two weeks of July 2024 — their aggregate magnitude, and the identity and characteristics of the receiving entities are consistent with a deliberate and premeditated strategy to place liquid assets beyond the reach of TSL as a judgment creditor.
The transfers span three principal banking relationships, in three jurisdictions: Meridian Trust Bank Ltd. in London, Pinnacle Bank (Singapore) Ltd. in Singapore, and Emirates Gulf Commercial Bank PJSC in Dubai. In each case, the pattern is the same: substantial balances that had accumulated in the ordinary course of KMH's shipping operations were rapidly moved out to accounts in the names of entities not previously disclosed in the arbitration proceedings and not forming part of KMH's known corporate structure, but which HP has linked to the Volkov family through directorship records, beneficial ownership filings, and corporate registry analysis.
HP's analysis of the transfer activity is set out in detail in the HP Preliminary Findings report (Appendix A, Section 4, ¶¶ 4.1–4.47). The key findings are summarized below.
4.2 Transfers from KMH's London Correspondent Accounts (Meridian Trust Bank Ltd.)
KMH maintained Sterling and US Dollar accounts at Meridian Trust Bank Ltd., 50 Lombard Street, London EC3V 9EA (account references identified in HP Report, Appendix A, ¶ 4.5). These accounts served as KMH's principal correspondent banking accounts in London and were used for the receipt and disbursement of charter hire, vessel operating costs, insurance premiums, and other commercial payments in connection with KMH's European and West African trading activities.
HP's preliminary findings indicate that in the period between 29 June 2024 and approximately 10 July 2024, substantial transfers were effected from these accounts. The transfers were directed to accounts at banks in jurisdictions with limited enforcement reciprocity with England & Wales, and in particular to accounts in the names of entities that HP has identified as connected to Andrei Volkov and the Volkov family. These receiving entities do not appear in any corporate structure chart previously disclosed by KMH in the arbitration proceedings, nor have they been identified in any public filing made by KMH.
The balances remaining at Meridian Trust Bank Ltd. at the time of the interim third-party debt order ("TPDO") granted on 5 August 2024 represent only a fraction of the amounts that were on deposit in these accounts prior to the Award date. HP estimates, on the basis of historical transaction volumes and the known receivables due to KMH from charterers and sub-charterers in the relevant period, that the pre-Award balances across the Meridian Trust accounts were substantially higher than the sums ultimately caught by the TPDO.
The speed and scale of these transfers are wholly inconsistent with the ordinary treasury management activities of a shipping company of KMH's size. KMH's historical banking patterns, as analyzed by HP from available data, show no comparable period of accelerated outbound transfers, which confirms that the post-Award activity was exceptional and deliberate.
4.3 Transfers from Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. Accounts (Pinnacle Bank (Singapore) Ltd.)
Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. maintained accounts at Pinnacle Bank (Singapore) Ltd., 6 Battery Road, #20-01, Singapore 049909. These accounts received charter hire payments, freight revenue, and sub-charter income from KMH's Asia-Pacific fleet operations, and were used for vessel operating expenses, crew costs, and other disbursements in the region.
HP's tracing identifies a series of outbound transfers from the Pinnacle Bank accounts in the post-Award period. Proceeds from vessel operations and sub-charter hire payments that would ordinarily have been accumulated in these accounts — or remitted upstream to KMH's London accounts — were instead redirected to intermediary entities. HP has linked these intermediary entities to Andrei Volkov and Sergei Volkov through directorship records obtained from the relevant corporate registries and through beneficial ownership information disclosed in other contexts (HP Report, Appendix A, ¶¶ 4.22–4.31).
The diversion of operating income from Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) is particularly significant because this entity is the registered owner of M/V Crimson Horizon, one of the three vessels at the heart of the dispute. The simultaneous diversion of income from, and attempted sale of (see Section 5 below), the same vessel-owning entity demonstrates a comprehensive effort to strip the entity of both its liquid assets and its capital assets.
4.4 Transfers from Korinthian DMCC Accounts (Emirates Gulf Commercial Bank PJSC)
Korinthian DMCC maintained accounts at Emirates Gulf Commercial Bank PJSC ("EGCB"), Gate Village 3, DIFC, Dubai. These accounts were used for KMH's Middle Eastern and Indian Ocean commercial activities, including the receipt of sub-charter hire and voyage charter freight.
HP identified significant outbound transfers from Korinthian DMCC's EGCB accounts in the period following the Award (HP Report, Appendix A, ¶¶ 4.32–4.41). The transfers followed the same pattern observed in London and Singapore: substantial balances were moved rapidly to accounts in the names of entities linked to the Volkov family, rather than being applied to ordinary business expenses or remitted to KMH.
In addition to direct transfers of cash balances, HP has identified evidence that receivables owed to Korinthian DMCC from sub-charterers were also redirected. Specifically, sub-charterers operating in the Arabian Gulf appear to have been instructed by Korinthian DMCC (or by persons acting on its behalf) to remit hire payments to alternative accounts not in the name of KMH or any of its known subsidiaries. This tactic — the diversion of income streams at source — is a particularly insidious form of dissipation because it prevents assets from entering the judgment debtor's accounts in the first place, thereby rendering traditional freezing remedies less effective. It underscores the need for ancillary disclosure provisions in any freezing order, so that the full scope of KMH's income streams and the accounts to which they are now directed can be identified.
4.5 Analysis and Significance
The cumulative effect of the transfers described in Sections 4.2 through 4.4 has been to drain liquid assets from KMH's primary operating accounts across three major commercial jurisdictions — London, Singapore, and Dubai — within a matter of days following the issuance of the Final Award.
The following features of the transfer activity are of particular significance:
(a) Timing. The transfers were concentrated in the period immediately following the Award (28 June 2024). This timing is inconsistent with ordinary business operations, which would show a relatively consistent pattern of inflows and outflows unrelated to the arbitration timetable. The acceleration of outbound transfers immediately after the Award strongly supports the inference of a premeditated dissipation strategy triggered by the adverse outcome.
(b) Destination. The transfers were directed to entities and accounts not previously disclosed by KMH and not forming part of its known corporate structure. The receiving entities are linked to the Volkov family, suggesting that the funds have been moved from judgment-debtor entities to entities that KMH will likely contend are outside the scope of any freezing order.
(c) Coordination. The transfers were effected simultaneously across three jurisdictions (London, Singapore, Dubai), involving three separate banking relationships and three separate KMH group entities. This degree of coordination is inconsistent with independent commercial decision-making at the subsidiary level and points to centralized direction by Andrei Volkov.
(d) Magnitude. HP estimates that transfers totaling tens of millions of pounds equivalent were effected in this period (the precise figures remain subject to confirmation through the disclosure process, but HP's preliminary estimate, based on known transaction volumes and account activity, places the aggregate in the range of £35–50 million). This materially reduces KMH's capacity to satisfy the Award of £108,600,000.
(e) Absence of commercial justification. There is no apparent commercial rationale for the scale and speed of these transfers. KMH's business operations did not undergo any material change in the post-Award period that would require abnormal cash movements. The transfers appear to serve no purpose other than to deplete the accounts that a judgment creditor would ordinarily expect to attach.
Taken together, these factors establish that the post-Award fund transfers are a deliberate strategy of asset dissipation, and they provide compelling evidence of a real risk that, absent injunctive relief, KMH will continue to dissipate its liquid assets until nothing remains against which the Award can be enforced.
5. Category 2: Attempted Sale of M/V *Crimson Horizon*
5.1 Background on the Vessel
M/V Crimson Horizon is a Handymax Bulk Carrier, bearing IMO No. 9801334, with a deadweight tonnage of 37,500 DWT. The vessel flies the Liberian flag and is classed with Meridian Industries. Her registered owner is Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. (80 Robinson Road, #14-02, Singapore 068898), which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of KMH through the Oceangate Ventures Ltd. holding structure. The vessel was built in 2017 by Bramwell Enterprises (Saikai, Japan) and was valued by Northcape Maritime Advisory, as of the date of the Award, at approximately USD $24.5 million on the basis of comparable market sales.
M/V Crimson Horizon is one of the three vessels at the center of the underlying charter-party dispute. The time charter-party for this vessel was signed on 22 January 2020 for a firm period of four years with an option for a further two years. KMH ceased payment of hire from 1 July 2022, and TSL withdrew the vessel on 15 September 2022 following service of an anti-technicality notice and the expiry of the relevant cure period. The tribunal awarded TSL £28,150,000 in respect of M/V Crimson Horizon, comprising £4,280,000 in outstanding hire arrears and £23,870,000 in loss of bargain damages. Vessel particulars are set out in detail in Appendix G.
5.2 Evidence of Post-Award Sale Attempt
Shipping brokerage circulars and trade press intelligence, corroborated by HP's findings and Northcape Maritime Advisory's market intelligence, indicate that following the issuance of the Award on 28 June 2024, Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. listed M/V Crimson Horizon for sale through private brokerage channels.
Northcape Maritime Advisory first identified the sale listing in early July 2024, when brokerage contacts reported that the vessel had been circulated to prospective buyers through a sale-and-purchase broker based in Athens. The listing was private (i.e., not publicly advertised on the major S&P platforms) and was described in brokerage circulars as an "off-market opportunity" with a guide price in the range of USD $21–23 million, which represents a discount to the vessel's fair market value as independently assessed by Northcape (USD $24.5 million). Selected brokerage circulars evidencing the listing are attached as Appendix E.
HP's investigation confirms that the sale process was at an advanced stage by mid-July 2024. Preliminary terms had reportedly been agreed with a buyer linked to a Turkish shipping group, and a Memorandum of Agreement ("MOA") was in draft. However, the sale was not completed before TSL took enforcement action.
The circumstances of the listing are inconsistent with any legitimate commercial rationale for the sale of M/V Crimson Horizon:
(a) The vessel was in active service and earning charter hire at the time of the listing. Northcape's market intelligence indicates that M/V Crimson Horizon was operating on a period sub-charter in the Far East trades at attractive rates, with the sub-charter not due to expire until Q1 2025. There was no operational, technical, or commercial reason to sell a revenue-generating asset in these circumstances.
(b) The listing was effected within days of the Award — an Award that specifically addressed damages arising from the chartering of this very vessel, and which KMH would have been aware would be the subject of enforcement proceedings.
(c) The guide price represented a discount to market value, suggesting urgency and a willingness to accept a below-market price in order to complete the transaction quickly, before enforcement measures could be taken.
(d) The private nature of the listing, through a single Athens-based broker rather than through the usual competitive bidding process, is consistent with a desire to avoid detection by TSL and its advisers.
The natural inference from these circumstances is that the sale was designed to convert M/V Crimson Horizon — an identifiable, locatable, and attachable capital asset — into cash that could then be dispersed through the Volkov family's network of entities and accounts, in the same manner as the fund transfers described in Section 4 above.
5.3 Significance for Enforcement
The attempted sale of M/V Crimson Horizon was directly instrumental in prompting TSL to seek the vessel's arrest in Singapore on an urgent basis. Following instructions from this firm, Straits Meridian LLP (David Teo Wei Lin and Priya Subramaniam) filed an application for the arrest of M/V Crimson Horizon in the Admiralty Division of the Singapore High Court. The arrest was effected on 20 August 2024 by the Sheriff of the Supreme Court of Singapore, preventing completion of the private sale.
The vessel was subsequently sold by order of the Singapore High Court in judicial sale proceedings on 15 November 2024 for USD $22,800,000, equivalent to approximately £18,330,000 at the exchange rate prevailing on the date of the sale. The net proceeds (after deduction of the costs of arrest, custody, and sale) were received by TSL's solicitors' client account on 2 December 2024 and have been applied against the Award, reducing the outstanding balance accordingly.
The attempted private sale — and the need for TSL to intervene by way of arrest to prevent the dissipation of this asset — is direct and compelling evidence of KMH's intent to dissipate identifiable assets in order to frustrate enforcement of the Award. It provides powerful support for the WFO application, as it demonstrates that KMH's dissipation strategy extends not merely to liquid assets (bank account balances) but also to capital assets (vessels), and that absent injunctive relief, KMH will continue to dispose of assets until the Award is rendered unenforceable.
6. Category 3: Re-Flagging and Repositioning of Vessels
6.1 Re-Flagging Activities
HP's investigation and Northcape Maritime Advisory's market intelligence indicate that KMH and its SPV subsidiaries have taken or considered steps to re-flag certain vessels in the fleet — that is, to change the flag state under which the vessels are registered — to registries that may be less cooperative with enforcement processes or where arrest of vessels may be procedurally more difficult or time-consuming.
The focus of concern in this regard is M/V Volga Spirit (IMO 9756892, Panamax Bulk Carrier, 76,400 DWT), which was flagged in Cyprus and registered under the Cyprus Shipping Registry as of the date of the Award. Dnepr Shipholding Inc. (BVI Company No. 2014876) is the registered owner. HP's investigations have identified indications, through correspondence obtained from shipping agents and classification society records, that steps were being taken or actively considered in the weeks following the Award to delete M/V Volga Spirit from the Cyprus Shipping Registry and re-flag the vessel under a registry perceived as less amenable to creditor enforcement.
The re-flagging of a vessel has direct implications for enforcement. The flag state registry is the primary registry of ownership and encumbrances for a vessel, and the cooperation of the flag state authority is important for enforcement of arrest orders, judicial sales, and the recognition of maritime liens and claims. A change of flag to a registry that does not cooperate readily with foreign court orders, or that has cumbersome procedural requirements for arrest, can significantly delay or frustrate enforcement.
HP notes that the re-flagging steps with respect to M/V Volga Spirit may not have been completed. The Cyprus Maritime Administration confirmed, as of the date of HP's enquiry, that M/V Volga Spirit remained on the Cyprus Shipping Register. However, the mere fact that such steps were initiated or contemplated in the aftermath of the Award is evidence of KMH's intent to obstruct enforcement, and it underscores the need for a worldwide freezing order with provisions requiring KMH to maintain the status quo with respect to vessel registrations and flag state.
6.2 Repositioning of Vessels
AIS tracking data and shipping intelligence analysed by both HP and Northcape Maritime Advisory indicate that KMH has repositioned vessels — that is, altered their trading patterns and physical location — in a manner that is inconsistent with ordinary commercial deployment and is consistent with a strategy of moving vessels away from jurisdictions where TSL might seek arrest.
In particular, M/V Volga Spirit has been tracked to Fujairah anchorage in the United Arab Emirates in the period following the Award. Fujairah is a major bunkering and ship-to-ship transfer location in the Gulf of Oman, but M/V Volga Spirit's presence there appears to be unrelated to any cargo loading, discharge, or bunkering operation consistent with the vessel's normal trading pattern. AIS data extracts showing the vessel's movements are attached as Appendix D.
HP's analysis suggests that M/V Volga Spirit was repositioned to the UAE in an effort to keep the vessel in a jurisdiction where enforcement was perceived as more difficult — or at least more unfamiliar to TSL — prior to TSL's filing of its UAE enforcement application (subsequently filed on 22 August 2024, Case No. 1893/2024, before the DIFC Courts). The UAE's precautionary attachment regime under the Civil Procedure Law (Federal Law No. 11 of 1992, as amended) does provide mechanisms for attachment of vessels, but the procedural requirements and timelines differ from those in common law arrest jurisdictions such as England, Singapore, and Cyprus, and the Volkov family may have perceived the UAE as a less hostile enforcement environment.
The deliberate redeployment of vessels to avoid arrest jurisdictions is a well-recognized indicator of dissipation in the shipping context. The courts have consistently held that the repositioning of assets to places where they will be more difficult to reach is evidence of a real risk of dissipation. This is precisely the type of conduct that a worldwide freezing order with ancillary disclosure provisions is designed to address, as the order constrains the respondent from moving assets and requires disclosure of their location.
6.3 Relevance to Other Vessels in the KMH Fleet
While the three vessels at the center of the underlying dispute (M/V Aegean Fortuna, M/V Crimson Horizon, and M/V Volga Spirit) are the primary focus of TSL's enforcement strategy, it is important to note that KMH controls approximately 18 dry-bulk carriers through its SPV subsidiary structure. These vessels collectively represent the most significant capital assets of the KMH group.
HP's analysis, based on AIS tracking data and Northcape Maritime Advisory's market intelligence, indicates that similar repositioning patterns are observable across a number of other vessels in the KMH fleet in the post-Award period. Vessels that were previously trading in the Atlantic basin and Mediterranean — jurisdictions with well-established and efficient arrest regimes — have been redeployed to the Indian Ocean, Southeast Asian, and Middle Eastern trades. While the trading patterns of dry-bulk carriers are inherently variable and responsive to market conditions (cargo availability, freight rates, port congestion), the clustering of redeployments away from enforcement-friendly jurisdictions in the immediate aftermath of the Award is statistically improbable on a purely commercial basis and is consistent with a fleet-wide strategy to reduce exposure to arrest and enforcement.
This fleet-wide repositioning further supports the conclusion that KMH's dissipation strategy is centrally directed by Andrei Volkov and is comprehensive in scope, extending to all categories of assets and all jurisdictions in which the KMH group operates.
7. Category 4: Restructuring of Cypriot Holding Entities
7.1 Oceangate Ventures Ltd. (HE 401293)
Oceangate Ventures Ltd. is the linchpin of KMH's corporate holding structure. As the intermediate holding company through which KMH controls Dnepr Shipholding Inc. (which in turn owns M/V Aegean Fortuna and M/V Volga Spirit) and other fleet SPVs, the shares of Oceangate represent a primary enforcement target. A judgment creditor seeking to enforce against KMH's fleet assets would logically seek to attach and, if necessary, execute against the shares of Oceangate, thereby obtaining control of the SPVs and the vessels they own.
Oceangate is registered at 28 Themistokli Dervi Avenue, Suite 604, Nicosia 1066, Cyprus — notably in the same building, and on the same floor, as KMH's registered office at Suite 601. Its sole shareholder is KMH. Its directors, as of the date of the Award, included Sergei Volkov and two individuals who served in a nominee capacity.
HP's investigation of records maintained at the Cyprus Department of Registrar of Companies (extracts attached as Appendix F) reveals that significant corporate restructuring steps were taken in relation to Oceangate in the period following the Award. These include:
(a) Changes to share capital structure. Filings made in early July 2024 indicate an alteration to Oceangate's authorized and issued share capital. HP's analysis suggests that new classes of shares may have been created and issued, potentially with preferential rights that would dilute or subordinate the ordinary shares held by KMH, or with rights designed to restrict the transferability of the shares in the event of enforcement.
(b) Appointment of nominee directors. The existing nominee directors were replaced with new nominees whose identities and connections are currently under investigation by HP. The replacement of directors in the immediate aftermath of an adverse award — particularly their replacement with individuals whose backgrounds are difficult to trace — is consistent with an attempt to obscure the control structure and to place persons sympathetic to the Volkov family in positions of authority over the company's affairs, including the power to transfer or encumber Oceangate's assets.
(c) Amendments to articles of association. Amendments were filed to Oceangate's articles of association. While the full text of the amended articles has been requested from the Cyprus Registrar and is awaited, HP's preliminary review of the filing summaries suggests that the amendments may include restrictions on the transfer or pledge of Oceangate's shares, provisions requiring supermajority or unanimous board approval for dispositions of assets, or other provisions designed to create obstacles to enforcement against the company and its assets.
The cumulative effect of these changes appears designed to create additional layers of legal and structural separation between KMH (the judgment debtor) and the fleet SPV assets held through Oceangate. If successful, this restructuring could frustrate any attempt by TSL to enforce the Award against the Oceangate shares or the assets held through the Oceangate structure, by rendering the shares difficult to attach, value, or sell in execution proceedings.
7.2 Other Cypriot Corporate Activity
In addition to the restructuring of Oceangate, HP has identified the creation of, or transfer of assets to, new Cypriot entities linked to the Volkov family in the post-Award period. Specifically, HP's searches of the Cyprus Registrar of Companies have revealed the incorporation of at least two new Cypriot limited liability companies in July 2024, with registered offices at addresses associated with the Volkov family's Cypriot corporate service provider. The directors and shareholders of these new entities include individuals who also appear in the directorship records of other Volkov-linked entities identified by HP.
These new entities do not appear in any corporate structure chart previously produced by KMH, nor do they have any apparent connection to KMH's historic shipping operations. HP's working hypothesis, which remains under investigation, is that these entities have been established as vehicles to receive assets stripped from KMH and its subsidiaries, whether in the form of cash transfers, assignments of contractual rights (such as charter-party or sub-charter income), or transfers of shareholdings in SPVs.
The use of nominee arrangements, the rapidity of changes in directorship records, and the speed of these incorporations and corporate changes are inconsistent with routine corporate governance and are strongly indicative of a deliberate strategy to create new vehicles through which assets can be held beyond the reach of KMH's creditors.
7.3 Relevance to Cyprus Enforcement
The corporate restructuring activities described in this section underscore the urgency of obtaining freezing relief in Cyprus. Had TSL not acted promptly, the restructuring of Oceangate and the creation of new Volkov-linked entities could have rendered the Oceangate shares worthless from an enforcement perspective — or at least have created sufficient legal uncertainty and complexity to delay enforcement for months or years, during which time the underlying assets could have been further dissipated.
In response to the evidence of Cypriot corporate restructuring, this firm instructed Kyprianos Makrides & Partners (Andreas Kyprianos and Nadia Makrides, 15 Grivas Digenis Avenue, Nicosia 1066) to file an urgent enforcement and freezing application in the Nicosia District Court. The application was filed on 9 August 2024 (Case No. 2247/2024) seeking:
(i) recognition and enforcement of LCIA Award No. 224718 under the New York Convention, as implemented in Cyprus under Cap. 4 (International Commercial Arbitration Law);
(ii) a freezing injunction (Mareva-type) over the shares of Oceangate Ventures Ltd. (HE 401293) held by KMH, and over KMH's bank accounts maintained at Cypriot banks; and
(iii) ancillary disclosure orders requiring KMH to identify all assets held in Cyprus.
The freezing injunction was granted on 12 August 2024 by the Nicosia District Court, preventing KMH from dealing with the Oceangate shares or the Cypriot bank account balances. An enforcement order was subsequently granted on 30 September 2024, and the recovery process — involving the forced sale of the Oceangate shares and realization of bank account balances — was completed by 8 November 2024, yielding net proceeds of approximately £22,350,000 applied against the Award.
The Cypriot recovery, while significant, represents only a fraction of the total Award. The restructuring activities described above demonstrate that, absent the freezing injunction, these assets would likely have been dissipated in the same manner as the cash balances described in Section 4.
8. KMH's History of Conduct in the Underlying Dispute
8.1 Pattern of Dishonesty
The evidence of post-Award dissipation must be considered in the context of KMH's conduct during the underlying arbitration proceedings. The tribunal's Final Award contains significant findings regarding KMH's dishonest and improper conduct, which are directly relevant to the assessment of dissipation risk.
Most significantly, the tribunal found that KMH had fabricated off-hire deductions in respect of M/V Volga Spirit, totaling approximately £2,740,000. The tribunal's findings on this point were trenchant. At paragraphs 312–328 of the Final Award, the tribunal examined the documentary evidence relied upon by KMH to support its off-hire claims and concluded that the supporting documentation — including engineering reports, survey certificates, and maintenance records — had been fabricated or materially altered. The tribunal described this conduct as "a deliberate and calculated attempt to manufacture a contractual defence through the creation of false documents" (Final Award, ¶ 325). This was not a case of mere exaggeration or aggressive interpretation of contractual provisions; it was an affirmative finding of fraud.
KMH's repudiatory breaches across all three charter-parties further demonstrate a pattern of conduct aimed at avoiding contractual obligations on a systemic basis:
(a) M/V Aegean Fortuna: KMH wrongfully redelivered the vessel on 18 June 2022, approximately 14 months before the expiry of the five-year charter period, with no contractual justification. The tribunal found that the early redelivery was motivated by the decline in charter rates relative to the rates locked in under the charter-party — in other words, KMH sought to escape a bargain that had become unfavorable.
(b) M/V Crimson Horizon: KMH ceased payment of hire from 1 July 2022, notwithstanding that the vessel remained at its disposal and in service. TSL was forced to withdraw the vessel on 15 September 2022 after the anti-technicality notice and cure period had expired without payment.
(c) M/V Volga Spirit: KMH claimed off-hire deductions based on fabricated documentation, as described above.
The tribunal's overall characterization of KMH's conduct, at paragraph 418 of the Final Award, described it as "a coordinated strategy to avoid the financial consequences of the Respondent's charter-party obligations, implemented through repudiation, non-payment, and the fabrication of false claims." The tribunal specifically noted that these findings "may be relevant to enforcement proceedings" (Final Award, ¶ 419).
8.2 Relevance to Dissipation Risk
The English courts have consistently recognized that evidence of dishonesty in the underlying dispute is relevant to, and in many cases dispositive of, the assessment of dissipation risk for the purposes of a freezing order application. In Congentra AG v. Sixteen Thirteen Marine SA [2008] EWHC 1615 (Comm), the court held that "evidence of past dishonesty is a powerful indicator that a defendant may resort to dishonest means to frustrate enforcement." Similarly, in JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank v. Pugachev [2015] EWCA Civ 139, the Court of Appeal emphasized that findings of dishonest conduct in the underlying proceedings are "powerful evidence of a willingness to take steps to frustrate the enforcement of obligations."
The tribunal's findings regarding KMH's fabrication of documentation in the arbitration proceedings provide compelling support for the conclusion that KMH will take dishonest steps to frustrate enforcement. The post-Award evidence described in Sections 4 through 7 of this memorandum confirms that this is precisely what has occurred: KMH has moved from fabricating documents to support false contractual defences to dissipating assets to avoid the consequences of losing on those defences.
The combination of proven dishonesty in the underlying dispute and active post-Award dissipation presents an overwhelming case for the grant of a worldwide freezing order and parallel cross-border relief.
9. Volkov Family Control and Decision-Making
The dissipation activities described in Sections 4 through 7 span multiple jurisdictions (England, Singapore, the UAE, Cyprus, and the BVI), involve multiple entities within and outside the KMH corporate group, and affect multiple asset classes (cash, vessels, and corporate equity). The coordination and simultaneity of these activities are inconsistent with independent decision-making at the subsidiary level and point unequivocally to centralized direction by a single controlling mind.
That controlling mind is Andrei Volkov. As set out in Section 2.1, Mr. Volkov is the ultimate beneficial owner of KMH and exercises de facto control over its operations and those of all its subsidiaries. Although Mr. Volkov is not formally registered as a director of KMH in the Cyprus Registrar of Companies, the tribunal in the underlying arbitration made findings (Final Award, ¶¶ 187–195) that Mr. Volkov is the de facto director of KMH and that his instructions are treated as binding by all officers and employees of the KMH group, including the registered directors (Sergei Volkov) and senior management (Marina Kazakova, Alexei Demidov).
HP's investigation has further confirmed the centrality of Andrei Volkov's role. Corporate registry records, banking correspondence, and directorship filings across the KMH group reveal a pattern in which Mr. Volkov's instructions, whether transmitted directly or through intermediaries, are the proximate cause of all significant corporate and financial decisions. The simultaneous execution of asset transfers across three banking jurisdictions, the listing of M/V Crimson Horizon for sale, the repositioning of M/V Volga Spirit and other fleet vessels, and the restructuring of Oceangate Ventures Ltd. — all within days or weeks of the Award — could only have been orchestrated by a single controlling authority with knowledge of the Award and its implications.
Sergei Volkov, as a registered director of KMH, Oceangate Ventures Ltd., and Korinthian Bulkers (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., is the primary instrument through which Andrei Volkov's instructions are implemented at the corporate level. HP's analysis indicates that Sergei Volkov is a signatory on accounts at Meridian Trust Bank Ltd. and Pinnacle Bank (Singapore) Ltd., and that his signature or authorization was required for the transfers described in Section 4.
The Volkov family's use of multiple layers of corporate personality — BVI SPVs (Dnepr Shipholding Inc., with its registered agent at Vantage Corporate Services Ltd. in Road Town, Tortola), DMCC free zone entities (Korinthian DMCC), Cypriot holding companies (Oceangate, KMH), and newly created Cypriot entities — is consistent with a deliberate strategy of opacity designed to make it as difficult as possible for creditors to trace, locate, and attach assets. This strategy predates the current dispute and appears to have been a feature of the KMH group's corporate architecture from inception. However, the post-Award acceleration of restructuring, the creation of new entities, and the deployment of nominee arrangements take this opacity strategy to a new level and demonstrate that the Volkov family will exploit every available mechanism to shield assets from enforcement.
The evidence of centralized Volkov family control is relevant to the WFO application in at least two respects. First, it demonstrates that the dissipation is not the product of isolated or uncoordinated actions by individual subsidiaries, but is a coherent strategy directed by the judgment debtor's controlling mind. Second, it supports the inclusion of Andrei Volkov and Sergei Volkov, and entities under their control, within the scope of the WFO's ancillary disclosure provisions, so that the full extent of the Volkov family's asset holdings can be identified and monitored.
10. Summary of Dissipation Evidence for WFO and Cross-Border Applications
10.1 Summary Table of Key Dissipation Indicators
The following table summarizes each category of dissipation evidence, the relevant entities, the jurisdictions affected, the approximate values involved (where known), and the source of the evidence:
The aggregate value of the dissipation activity identified to date — encompassing both actual transfers and attempted dispositions — runs into the tens of millions of pounds and, if allowed to continue unchecked, would materially impair TSL's ability to enforce the Award of £108,600,000.
10.2 Application to WFO Test
The evidence set out in this memorandum satisfies each limb of the test for the grant of a worldwide freezing order in the Commercial Court, as established in Ninemia Maritime Corporation v. Trave Schiffahrtsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG [1983] 1 WLR 1412 (CA), Third Chandris Shipping Corporation v. Unimarine SA [1979] QB 645, and as restated in the White Book commentary to CPR 25.1(1)(f):
(i) Good arguable case. This threshold is not merely satisfied but exceeded. TSL does not hold a "good arguable case" — it holds a final, binding, and enforceable LCIA award in the sum of £96,450,000 plus costs of £12,150,000. The Award has not been challenged. The time for any challenge under sections 67 or 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 has expired. TSL's entitlement to the sums awarded is established and unimpeachable.
(ii) Real risk of dissipation. The four categories of evidence set out in Sections 4 through 7 demonstrate active, deliberate, and coordinated dissipation across multiple jurisdictions and asset classes. The evidence establishes not merely a theoretical or speculative risk, but an actual and ongoing process of dissipation that has already resulted in the depletion of substantial liquid assets and the attempted disposition of a capital asset (M/V Crimson Horizon). This evidence is reinforced by KMH's proven dishonesty in the underlying arbitration (fabrication of off-hire documentation, as found by the tribunal) and by the centralized control exercised by Andrei Volkov, who has directed the dissipation strategy across the entire KMH group. The risk of further dissipation is not hypothetical; it is, on the evidence, a certainty.
(iii) Balance of convenience. The balance of convenience overwhelmingly favors the grant of the order. KMH's conduct demonstrates that it will not voluntarily satisfy the Award. If the dissipation continues unchecked, there is a real and imminent risk that KMH will have no assets — or no traceable or accessible assets — against which the Award can be enforced. TSL will suffer irremediable prejudice if the order is not granted, as the Award will be rendered nugatory. Against this, KMH will suffer no prejudice from a freezing order that merely requires it to maintain its assets at their current level; the order does not require KMH to make any payment, nor does it prevent KMH from carrying on its ordinary business activities (subject to the usual proviso permitting ordinary course expenditure up to a specified amount and legal costs).
The evidence also supports the ancillary applications sought in the cross-border jurisdictions:
(a) Cyprus. The evidence supports an application for a freezing injunction under Cyprus law (applying the principles of the Mareva jurisdiction as received into Cypriot law under Cap. 4 and the International Commercial Arbitration Law) over the shares o