Claim form – Service. The claimant bank had been given permission to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction in relation to claims for breach of contract and unlawful conspiracy. The third and fifth defendants unsuccessfully challenged the jurisdiction of the English courts. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the appeal and held that the judge had erred in granting permission when the gateway requirements in para 3.1(3), (9) and (20) of Practice Direction 6B had not been met. Further, the case was more closely connected with Russia, so the judge had erred in finding England to be the appropriate forum. Finally, he had erred in the exercise of his general discretion.