ATTEMPTS by Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich to challenge Jersey court rulings have been thrown out — and the former Chelsea football club owner and his daughter have been ordered to foot the bill for Island’s legal costs in the proceedings.
In a statement issued yesterday, the Law Officers’ Department confirmed that the Privy Council had rejected applications by Mr Abramovich and his daughter Anna for permission to appeal against judgments of Jersey’s Royal Court and Court of Appeal.
The father-and-daughter duo were also ordered to pay the Attorney General’s legal costs.
The statement said: “The Attorney General is pleased that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has refused applications by Roman Abramovich and Anna Abramovich for permission to appeal against judgments of the Court of Appeal and the Royal Court in judicial review proceedings and ordered them to pay the Attorney General’s costs.”
The Law Officers’ Department also confirmed that a wider criminal investigation linked to the case remains ongoing.
“The investigation by the Economic Crime and Confiscation Unit in the Law Officers’ Department in relation to Mr Abramovich and others remains live,” the statement added.
The JEP looks back on Mr Abramovich and the Government of Jersey’s relationship to date:
2016–2017: Jersey residence and business permissions
Mr Abramovich was granted high-net-worth residency rights by the Government of Jersey.
As a result, a business licence was issued to A Limited, a company then ultimately owned by Mr Abramovich.
Substantial assets from trusts of which Mr Abramovich was the discretionary beneficiary were also moved into Jersey during this period.
Jersey officials considered an application related to A Limited, and compiled a report using open-source information about Mr Abramovich’s background and associations.
The former Attorney General received the report and entered discussions with UK contacts about individuals connected with Mr Abramovich.
The report highlighted reputation risks and potential money laundering risks due to Mr Abramovich’s association with President Putin – though it stated that it relied on uncorroborated open-source information
2022: Ukraine invasion and start of Jersey investigations
Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, sanctions action intensified across allied jurisdictions.
On 1 March 2022, the Government of Jersey publicly announced that it was examining Russian-linked assets held in the Island.
By 10 March, Mr Abramovich himself had become subject to Jersey sanctions, at a time when he had already been designated under UK and EU regimes.
Later that month, on 31 March, the External Relations Minister issued a formal notice to A Limited requiring information about assets connected to Mr Abramovich under the Sanctions and Asset Freezing (Jersey) Law 2019.
12–13 April 2022: Asset freeze and search warrants
On 12 April 2022, the Attorney General successfully applied to freeze assets worth more than $7 billion which were suspected to be connected to Mr Abramovich.
This was sought to support two live investigations: possible breaches of Jersey’s sanctions laws, and a wider money-laundering inquiry based on the belief that the assets derived substantially from the sale of Russian oil company Sibneft.
On the same day, the States of Jersey Police obtained and executed search warrants at premises in St Helier allegedly linked to Mr Abramovich, seizing documents and devices.
The following day, 13 April, the Attorney General issued a short public statement confirming that assets had been imposed and that searches had taken place.
The statement was removed from the government website in October that year.
Late 2022: Challenge to the search warrants
In November 2022, the lawfulness of the search warrants was challenged and the States of Jersey Police admitted that the warrants had been obtained unlawfully.
The force agreed to pay damages and apologise.
A further Royal Court judgment, delivered on 23 January 2023, set out the circumstances behind the unlawful warrants and reaffirmed that the broader criminal investigation remained focused on suspected money-laundering activity and potential sanctions breaches involving assets linked to Mr Abramovich.
2023: Steps by Mr Abramovich and the police
On 22 March 2023, Mr Abramovich’s lawyers issued a pre-action letter to the Attorney General seeking an end to the money-laundering investigation.
Less than a month later, Mr Abramovich made a series of Subject Access Requests to Jersey authorities and the States police in an attempt to identify what information had been held when his residency approvals were granted.
By mid-2023, the States police had applied for production orders against the entities linked to Mr Abramovich. The two entities resisted the applications, arguing that the investigation was inherently unlawful because the Attorney General had long possessed the key information he now claimed justified reopening scrutiny.
Because production order hearings must be held in private, the court directed that the proceedings be kept confidential, including the identities of the two entities.
On 13 October 2023, Mr Abramovich escalated matters by issuing an application for judicial review of the Attorney General’s decision to pursue the investigation and simultaneously seeking to have the asset freeze discharged.
His daughter, Anna Abramovich, was added to the proceedings after it emerged that the beneficial interest in the frozen assets had been transferred to his children before sanctions were imposed.
A directions hearing on 17 November 2023 ordered that all linked matters — the judicial review bid, the application to unfreeze assets, and overlapping issues from the production-order case — be dealt with together in a rolled-up hearing, which would take place in private.
2024: Hearings and judgments
The combined hearing was held in private between 28 February and 1 March 2024, with the court reserving judgment.
On 18 June 2024, the Royal Court delivered two major rulings. First, in its substantive judgment, it refused leave for judicial review and declined to discharge the asset freeze, finding that the Attorney General had reasonable grounds for suspicion and was entitled to continue the investigation.
Second, in its production-order judgment, the court rejected arguments that mirrored the judicial review challenge and allowed the production-order application to continue on its remaining issues. The court also sought submissions on whether the judgments should be published and how anonymisation should be approached.
A further ruling on 27 June 2024 refused Mr Abramovich’s attempt to keep his Subject Access Request proceedings private – an issue which became the subject of a separate appeal.
On 1 July 2024, the Royal Court ordered him to pay two-thirds of the Attorney General’s costs, taking into account a partial reduction due to the Attorney General’s failure to fully meet the public-law duty of candour.
On 5 September 2024, the court held that the June judgments should be published, with no anonymisation for Mr Abramovich or his daughter, though the names of the two related entities and other connected third parties were to remain redacted. However, publication was delayed pending an appeal to the Court of Appeal.
2025: Court of Appeal proceedings
On 28 April 2025, the Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Abramovich’s appeal against the refusal of judicial review and the asset freeze.
Issues relating to publication and anonymisation were then addressed at a consequential hearing on 30 May 2025, the Court of Appeal published its final judgments on 5 June 2025.
It dismissed the appeal on the merits, upholding the lawfulness of the investigation and the asset freeze, and separately dismissed the appeal on publication.
The court confirmed that the Royal Court’s judgments should be released with the specified anonymisation, but granted a further stay to allow Mr Abramovich to seek permission to appeal to the Privy Council.
The judgments were not published at the time to allow Mr Abramovich to seek permission to appeal to the Privy Council.
But this week, the Privy Council refused the applications to appeal and the judgments were yesterday published.
It comes just days after a spokesperson for Mr Abramovich told national newspapers that he is making “claims of conspiracy” against the Government of Jersey.
The spokesperson said: “We are grateful that Jersey courts have taken these matters seriously, as demonstrated by the fact that Mr Abramovich was allowed earlier this year to introduce claims of conspiracy against the government of Jersey.
“It should be noted that no charges have been brought against Mr Abramovich in the 3.5 years since the investigation was commenced, and, to our knowledge, in fact no progress has been made on this case.
“This is not surprising, as this case is entirely baseless – and Mr Abramovich will continue to challenge these claims as well as ensure that the obvious violations of rights are recognised for what they are: an unlawful overreach that must be corrected.”
Most read this week...