On Sunday, November 3, the state news agency IRNA reported that the Court of Appeal in Britain issued a new ruling accepting Bank Mellat's request for access to documents from the British Treasury regarding sanctions, which will be referred back to the prosecutor's office. This news agency quoted Bank Mellat's lawyers in London as stating that this information and evidence regarding the sanctions against this Iranian bank is of 'high importance' and has so far been deemed 'against the public interest' of Britain. According to the report, the prosecutor's office in Britain issued a ruling on November 5, 2014, stating that 'sufficient information' regarding the allegations against Bank Mellat should be provided to the bank, but this ruling was overturned after an appeal by the British Treasury's defense lawyer on November 18 of the same year. According to the British government's argument, the documents based on which this Iranian bank was sanctioned are classified and governmental and are not accessible at all. IRNA, referencing a note provided to it on Saturday evening 'by Bank Mellat's lawyers in London', announced that the Court of Appeal last Friday rejected the British Treasury's complaint and referred the case back to the prosecutor's office for reconsideration 'regarding the disclosure of information and evidence.' At the beginning of its report, IRNA claimed that the Court of Appeal in Britain accepted that Bank Mellat could 'access these documents.' However, in the text of the news and the note from Bank Mellat's lawyers, only the referral of the case back to the prosecutor's office is mentioned. The British Treasury blacklisted Bank Mellat in 2009, accusing it of financing Iran's nuclear program. Bank Mellat has denied this accusation and filed a lawsuit in the High Court of Britain to lift the sanctions. In the spring of 2013, the British Treasury requested the High Court to hold a closed session to prove its claims against Bank Mellat, but the court rejected the Treasury's request, stating that 'there is no reason to hold a closed session of the High Court, as there is nothing that would negatively impact the court's ruling if discussed in an open session.' The High Court of Britain then ruled to lift the sanctions against Bank Mellat. According to IRNA, this court also announced in late May that Bank Mellat has the right to 'claim damages' against the British Treasury. The news agency quoted an 'informed source' as stating that the bank has filed a lawsuit in the High Court of Britain, seeking $3.98 billion in damages. According to this 'informed source', following this lawsuit, the British Treasury deemed the claims for damages to Bank Mellat and losses incurred by its subsidiaries, including the Persian International Bank, as 'unfounded.' This 'informed source' added: 'However, the High Court of England, rejecting the claims of the Treasury, stated that Bank Mellat's lawsuit and the matters it raised as damages could be legally examined.' Sarosh Zaiwala, Bank Mellat's lawyer, also stated in 2013 that the bank intends to claim at least £500 million, equivalent to $820 million, from the Commercial Court in Britain as compensation.
IRNA: New Court Ruling in Britain Following Request from Bank Mellat
The Court of Appeal in Britain has accepted Bank Mellat's request for access to documents related to its sanctions, which will be reviewed by the prosecutor's office. This case is significant as it involves allegations against the bank regarding financing Iran's nuclear program, which the bank denies. The outcome could impact the bank's ability to challenge the sanctions imposed on it.
👥 Key Players
⚡ Actions
📰 What Happened
UK Court rules for Bank Mellat to access Treasury documents related to sanctions.
- Court of Appeal in Britain announce Bank Mellat
- British Treasury sanction Bank Mellat
- Bank Mellat file lawsuit British Treasury
💡 Why It Matters
📚 Background
The ruling could set a precedent for other Iranian entities seeking to contest sanctions.
📝 Key Evidence
🏷️ Entities Mentioned
Translated from the original and edited for English readers. View original source →
Translation confidence: 85%