An Anti-suit injunction (ASI) is a judicial prohibition directed at a party, aimed at preventing the initiation or continuation of proceedings in a foreign jurisdiction. In other words, the court orders a litigant to refrain from pursuing litigation abroad if such proceedings conflict with a pre-existing agreement on jurisdiction or arbitration. The primary purpose of ASIs is to prevent forum shopping and to restrain so-called “torpedo proceedings” (for instance, the notorious “Italian torpedo,” whereby a party rushes to file a claim before an Italian or another jurisdiction known for slow-moving procedures, in order to obstruct effective arbitration). Thus, the anti-suit injunction serves as an instrument for upholding jurisdiction and arbitration agreements and for preventing potential unfairness arising from parallel proceedings in multiple countries.
General principles and legal basis in Cyprus
The Cypriot legal system belongs to the common law family. Following independence in 1960, Cyprus retained continuity with English common law and equity doctrines in the absence of specific legislation or Cypriot precedent. In particular, section 29(1)(c) of the Courts of Justice Law 1960 (Law 14/1960) requires Cypriot courts to apply common law and equity as developed in England, unless otherwise provided by Cypriot statute. Since there is no statutory regime expressly regulating ASIs in Cyprus, the courts resort to common law principles developed by English jurisprudence.
One of the Cypriot judgments addressing ASIs was Casto Shipping Co. v Mineag SQM (Africa) Ltd (1999), alongside the Admiralty Court decision in Gannet Shipping Ltd v NAAFI (1995). In both cases, the Cypriot courts adopted the English approach to anti-suit injunctions. English courts have long recognised jurisdiction to restrain foreign proceedings on the basis that such orders operate in personam – they are directed at the party subject to the jurisdiction of the court, not the foreign court itself. Although such injunctions do not formally interfere with foreign judicial activity, they do indirectly affect foreign proceedings and therefore are granted with caution. A fundamental requirement is that the respondent must be subject to Cypriot jurisdiction (e.g. residence, assets, or presence in Cyprus), failing which the order cannot be enforced.
The principle underlying the grant of ASIs is the prevention of injustice. Historically, it was stated that foreign proceedings may be restrained where they are “against equity and good conscience”. Typical grounds, adopted in both English and Cypriot case law, include:
- where foreign litigation is in breach of an exclusive jurisdiction or arbitration agreement;
- where it interferes with the proper administration of justice in Cyprus, e.g. undermining local insolvency or liquidation proceedings; or
- where the foreign proceedings are oppressive or vexatious, amounting to abuse of process.
It should be noted that the availability of ASIs does not depend on the existence of substantive proceedings in Cyprus. An application may be brought independently, although in practice, claimants sometimes file declaratory actions locally to strengthen their application.
Criteria and judicial caution
Like any other interim measure, an ASI must satisfy the general conditions under section 32 of the Courts of Justice Law 1960. The applicant must demonstrate:
- a serious question to be tried,
- prima facie right that is being infringed by the foreign proceedings, and
- that irreparable harm will ensue if the injunction is not granted, harm that cannot be remedied by damages.
Cypriot courts emphasise that ASIs are exceptional remedies. They restrain a party’s access to justice in another forum and may strain relations with foreign courts. Accordingly, judges exercise restraint, carefully balancing the need to protect contractual rights and local jurisdiction against the principle of comity - respect for foreign judicial systems.
Broadly speaking, Cypriot courts may grant ASIs in the following scenarios:
- To protect local proceedings, such as insolvency or liquidation, before Cypriot courts.
- To enforce exclusive jurisdiction or arbitration agreements, where litigation abroad constitutes breach of contract.
- To restrain oppressive or vexatious litigation abroad, amounting to bad faith or harassment.
- Provided the respondent is subject to Cypriot jurisdiction and the injunction is necessary to prevent injustice.
Limitations under EU law
Cyprus’s EU membership significantly restricts the use of ASIs. The European Court of Justice in Turner v Grovit (2004) and West Tankers (2009) held that courts of Member States may not issue ASIs restraining proceedings in other EU Member States, even where foreign litigation breaches an arbitration or jurisdiction clause. The rationale lies in the principle of mutual trust among EU judiciaries.
Consequently, Cypriot courts can only issue ASIs in relation to proceedings outside the EU. For example, ASIs may target litigation in the United States, Russia or other third countries, but not cases before courts in France, Germany or Greece.
The situation evolved with the recast Brussels I Regulation (2015), which excludes arbitration from its scope. Following Gazprom OAO v Lithuania (ECJ, 2015), anti-suit orders issued by arbitral tribunals may now be recognised within the EU. However, national courts, including those of Cyprus, remain barred from issuing ASIs against parallel proceedings in other EU states.
Anti-suit injunctions and arbitration clauses
ASIs are commonly sought to protect arbitration agreements. Commencing litigation in breach of an arbitration clause constitutes sufficient grounds for such relief. While arbitral tribunals themselves may issue interim anti-suit orders under modern arbitration rules, their effectiveness depends on subsequent judicial recognition and enforcement.
The Cyprus International Commercial Arbitration Law 1987 (Law 101/87), which implements the UNCITRAL Model Law, empowers courts to grant “protective measures” in support of arbitration (section 9). However, the Supreme Court of Cyprus held that this provision does not extend to ASIs. In that case, the lower court had issued an ASI restraining Cypriot defendants from litigating abroad contrary to an LCIA arbitration clause. The Supreme Court quashed the order, holding that the proper forum to grant such relief was the English court (the seat of arbitration).
Thus, Cypriot courts are reluctant to issue ASIs in support of foreign-seated arbitrations, leaving parties to rely primarily on arbitral tribunals themselves and on the courts of the seat of arbitration. Where Cyprus is the seat, however, the tribunal may issue the order and Cypriot courts can enforce it, attaching contempt sanctions for non-compliance.
In recent years, Cypriot courts have increasingly faced attempts to rely on the Russian sanctions law (Article 248.1 of the Russian Commercial Procedure Code) to shift disputes from Cyprus to Russia. In response, parties have sought anti-anti-suit injunctions, preventing Russian defendants from initiating or continuing such proceedings. In May 2024, a Cypriot court issued such an order for the first time, affirming the exclusive jurisdiction of Cypriot courts over corporate matters and their readiness to defend against “torpedo” actions. You can read more about this case and the Cypriot courts’ approach in our previous article.
Final Thoughts
Anti-suit injunctions are not remedies granted lightly. They represent an exceptional form of judicial intervention, reserved for circumstances where parallel or abusive proceedings abroad would undermine justice or violate contractual obligations. When successfully obtained, they provide a decisive safeguard, preserving the effectiveness of arbitration agreements and exclusive jurisdiction clauses, and ensuring that litigation remains within its proper forum.
At Fortior Law, we advise clients on all aspects of anti-suit injunctions - from assessing whether the criteria for such relief are met, to preparing applications and defending against parallel proceedings. Our team draws on deep expertise in both Cypriot and English law, ensuring that clients receive strategic, practical guidance in protecting their rights across multiple jurisdictions.
Fortior Law is a dynamic and growing international dispute resolution practice. Our Cyprus office assists clients in seeking anti-suit injunctions and other interim remedies before Cypriot courts. For more information, reach out to your usual Fortior contact or email us at [email protected].
We also advise and represent clients in anti-suit injunction proceedings before courts in England and in arbitration-related disputes worldwide.
