Executive Summary
This case involves a complex shareholder dispute between J.P. Morgan International Finance Limited (JPM) and WEREALIZE.COM Limited (WRL), shareholders in Greek fintech Viva Wallet Holdings Software Development S.A. (Viva). The dispute centers on alleged breaches of a shareholders’ agreement (SHA), valuation and call option rights, and parallel litigation in English and Greek courts. WRL and Viva’s directors seek anti-suit injunctions to restrain JPM’s claims against the directors in Greece, arguing those claims breach contractual terms or are vexatious. The English court must consider jurisdiction, contractual interpretation, and Greek tort law provisions on intentional damage contrary to good morals.
Sanctions Highlights
- The case references sanctions-related terms, indicating potential implications for parties operating across jurisdictions with sanctions regimes.
- JPM and WRL’s cross-border dispute involves entities and individuals potentially subject to sanctions compliance scrutiny, given the involvement of jurisdictions including the UK, US, Russia, China, Canada, Bahrain, and Venezuela.
- The SHA’s “whole agreement” clause and dispute resolution provisions may limit claims that could implicate sanctions violations or enforcement actions.
- Greek criminal complaints alleging fraud and extortion against JPM executives were dismissed, reducing immediate sanctions risk but highlighting reputational and regulatory vigilance needs.
Emerging Risks
- Continued acrimony between JPM and WRL risks protracted multi-jurisdictional litigation, increasing legal costs and operational uncertainty for Viva.
- The unresolved interpretation of call option exercise rights creates valuation and control risks for shareholders.
- Greek tort claims under Article 919 GCC introduce a novel liability risk for directors based on “good morals” standards, potentially expanding director exposure beyond contractual breaches.
- The absence of a joint expert memorandum on Greek law complicates predictability and increases litigation risk.
- Potential for further regulatory or criminal complaints, despite dismissals, could affect reputations and cross-border business relations.
Geopolitical Impact
- The dispute involves entities and individuals connected to multiple jurisdictions: UK (English law and courts), Greece (Greek law and courts), US (JPM’s home jurisdiction), and others including Bahrain, Canada, China, Russia, UK, United Kingdom, and Venezuela.
- The case underscores challenges in enforcing shareholder agreements and dispute resolution across jurisdictions with differing legal systems and political contexts.
- The involvement of Greek courts and law highlights the interplay between EU and non-EU legal frameworks amid ongoing geopolitical tensions.
- Sanctions regimes and international compliance frameworks may influence shareholder behavior and dispute outcomes, especially given JPM’s global financial footprint.
Economic Intelligence
- Viva’s valuation dispute centers on a EUR 5 billion threshold affecting call option exercise rights, with JPM’s initial EUR 809 million investment and EUR 100 million capital injection at stake.
- The outcome affects control and potential exit strategies for major shareholders, impacting Viva’s strategic direction and market valuation.
- Protracted litigation may delay corporate governance decisions and strategic investments, affecting Viva’s growth trajectory in the competitive fintech sector.
- The case illustrates risks for international investors in fintech companies subject to complex shareholder agreements and multi-jurisdictional governance.
Strategic Recommendations
- Parties should seek expedited resolution of valuation and call option disputes to reduce operational uncertainty.
- Consider mediation or arbitration under the SHA’s dispute resolution clause to avoid costly multi-jurisdictional litigation.
- Directors and shareholders must enhance compliance frameworks addressing cross-border legal risks, including sanctions and tort liability under Greek law.
- Monitor developments in Greek tort law and enforcement trends to anticipate director liability exposure.
- JPM and WRL should clarify governance protocols to prevent further breaches or allegations of bad faith conduct.
- Legal teams should coordinate cross-jurisdictional strategy to manage sanctions risks and reputational impact.
---
**Source Notes:**
Sanctions Intelligence Digest | [https://empyreanprotocol.com/litigation/view/www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2025/1842.html](https://empyreanprotocol.com/litigation