News
Print Article

A legal dispute between Abramovich and Jersey is a key factor in Ukraine war victims not receiving funds

18/11/2025

A legal row between Roman Abramovich and Jersey has held up the release of the £2.35bn Chelsea sale fund.

It had previously been thought that the 3½-year limbo was entirely owing to a refusal by Abramovich to sign off the fund being spent only in Ukraine.

But after Abramovich dropped a privacy order, it can be revealed that the legal dispute between the Russian and Jersey has been a key factor in the money not being given to war victims.

The funds from the sale of Chelsea have been in limbo since the club were sold to the Todd Boehly-led Clearlake consortium in 2022. That came after Abramovich was sanctioned because of his links to Vladimir Putin, with the Russian claiming the “net proceeds” from his sale of Chelsea would go to “all victims” of the war in Ukraine.

In April 2022, a month after the Chelsea fund pledge, the Royal Court of Jersey imposed a formal freezing order on $7bn (£5.3bn) worth of Abramovich-linked assets.

The attorney general of Jersey said at the time that Abramovich was a suspect in a criminal investigation but, months later, officers admitted that raids carried out at premises owned by Abramovich were unlawful, according to court documents seen by Telegraph Sport.

Abramovich complained that the local authorities deleted Jersey government data linked to the original investigation. The deletions became apparent after Abramovich succeeded in a legal attempt to force ministers and other senior figures to produce private messages, emails and other data related to him.

In a judgment last week, advocate David Michael Cadin, master of the Royal Court,

  • Sided with Abramovich. Cadin ordered the government of Jersey to pay the former Chelsea owner’s costs, describing its behaviour as “extreme”.
  • Cadin added that “GOJ defendants’ conduct was out of the ordinary for any litigant, let alone an ‘office holder’, and unreasonable”.

Sources close to the UK Government accept this ongoing case has been repeatedly raised when attempts were made to discuss the impasse over the Ukraine fund.

However, lawyers representing Abramovich repeatedly told the Government the issue must be resolved before the funding for war victims could be discussed, sources close to the talks say. It is understood that this is the key issue behind the delay in progress.

Abramovich’s side has now railed further against the Jersey government, with a spokesperson saying:

  • “The attorney general’s decision to investigate Mr Abramovich was illegitimate and politically motivated and linked to improving Jersey’s reputation as a financial centre in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict,
  • At a time when the Jersey government’s previous policy of encouraging Russian wealth to move to the island was now seen as politically inconvenient.”
  • “We are grateful that the Jersey court has 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.

The government of Jersey said in a statement:

  • “The government of Jersey is aware of recent media reports concerning ongoing legal proceedings involving Mr Roman Abramovich.
  • We respect the independence of the courts and the integrity of the legal process, and we will continue to defend our position vigorously.
  • “We categorically reject allegations of conspiracy, misfeasance in public office, or bad faith.
  • These claims are entirely without foundation and will be addressed through the appropriate legal channels.
  • “The government of Jersey has consistently supported the principle of open justice and opposed Mr Abramovich’s application to the Privy Council for the case to be heard in private.
  • However, as proceedings remain active, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.”

A UK Government source said “legal proceedings in Jersey are a matter for the government of Jersey”.

A statement added:

  • “The Government is determined to see the full proceeds from the sale of Chelsea Football Club reach humanitarian causes in Ukraine, following Russia’s illegal full-scale invasion.
  • We are deeply frustrated that it has not been possible to reach an agreement on this with Mr Abramovich so far.
  • “While the door for negotiations will remain open, we are prepared to pursue this through the courts if required, to ensure people suffering in Ukraine can benefit from these proceeds as soon as possible.”

Source

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/the-true-reason-roman-abramovich-s-2-35bn-has-not-been-released-to-war-victims/ar-AA1QC0Ar?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=691c47c84c5b4c5a857ef737d4f5ad5d&ei=50

The true reason Roman Abramovich’s £2.35bn has not been released to war victims

JERSEY LEGAL

The Team

Meet the team of industry experts behind Comsure

Find out more

Latest News

Keep up to date with the very latest news from Comsure

Find out more

Gallery

View our latest imagery from our news and work

Find out more

Contact

Think we can help you and your business? Chat to us today

Get In Touch

News Disclaimer

As well as owning and publishing Comsure's copyrighted works, Comsure wishes to use the copyright-protected works of others. To do so, Comsure is applying for exemptions in the UK copyright law. There are certain very specific situations where Comsure is permitted to do so without seeking permission from the owner. These exemptions are in the copyright sections of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended)[www.gov.UK/government/publications/copyright-acts-and-related-laws]. Many situations allow for Comsure to apply for exemptions. These include 1] Non-commercial research and private study, 2] Criticism, review and reporting of current events, 3] the copying of works in any medium as long as the use is to illustrate a point. 4] no posting is for commercial purposes [payment]. (for a full list of exemptions, please read here www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright]. Concerning the exceptions, Comsure will acknowledge the work of the source author by providing a link to the source material. Comsure claims no ownership of non-Comsure content. The non-Comsure articles posted on the Comsure website are deemed important, relevant, and newsworthy to a Comsure audience (e.g. regulated financial services and professional firms [DNFSBs]). Comsure does not wish to take any credit for the publication, and the publication can be read in full in its original form if you click the articles link that always accompanies the news item. Also, Comsure does not seek any payment for highlighting these important articles. If you want any article removed, Comsure will automatically do so on a reasonable request if you email info@comsuregroup.com.