Court rejects Holy See’s allegations of dishonesty, fraud and conspiracy in Vatican “trial of the century” and grants Claimants declaratory relief

The Commercial Court (the Hon. Mr Justice Robin Knowles CBE) has handed down a final judgment in Athena Capital Fund SICAV-FIS SCA and others v the Secretary of State of the Holy See [2025] EWHC 355 (Comm), granting the Claimants the vast majority of the declaratory relief sought and rejecting the Defendant’s (the Vatican’s Secretariat of State) allegations of dishonesty, fraud and conspiracy. The effect of the Commercial Court’s judgment is to confirm the validity and lawfulness of a transaction in 2018 whereby the Secretariat of State acquired the entirety of the commercial interests in the landmark property at 60 Sloane Avenue in Chelsea, London – a former Harrods Depository Building. The decision, following a 17-day trial described in the press as “the trial of the century”, represents a substantial victory for the Claimants, Athena Capital Fund, WRM Capital Management and Raffaele Mincione, who were represented by Charles Samek KC leading Tetyana Nesterchuk of Fountain Court Chambers and Bláthnaid Breslin of Littleton Chambers, instructed by a team at Withers LLP led by Global Head of Litigation, Peter Wood. 

The Court substantially granted 29 of the 31 declarations sought by the WRM/Athena Claimants and Raffaele Mincione and as well held at para 242: “The Claimants… have the benefit of a number of findings in this judgment, not the subject of the declarations sought, which reject very serious allegations levelled against them. Here I have been able to, and have taken the opportunity to, deal with particular allegations, including particular allegations of dishonesty and particular allegations of conspiracy. The Claimants are entitled to those findings in relation to those allegations.”

Although the Court was not prepared to go so far as to hold that the Claimants acted in “good faith” (para. 239), this was on the basis that at a meeting on 20 November 2018, the reference to £275m as the value was not frank and was, at least without elaboration, misleading by reference to the sources then available to him, nevertheless the Court did find that £275m was in fact supportable as a market value of the property (para 223). It follows that there was no misrepresentation, let alone fraudulent misrepresentation, by Raffaele Mincione of the value of the Property, an allegation that lay at the heart of the Secretariat’s case.

The WRM/Athena Claimants and Raffaele Mincione had previously been successful in resisting the Secretariat’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the English Court (Athena Capital Fund Sicav-Fis SCA & Ors v Secretariat of State for the Holy See [2021] EWHC 3166 (Comm) (26 November 2021); [2022] 1 WLR 1389) and also, on appeal (Athena Capital Fund SICAV-FIS SCA & Ors v Secretariat of State for the Holy See [2022] EWCA Civ 1051 (26 July 2022);  [2022] 1 WLR 4570), in overturning a stay granted by the High Court which enabled this case to proceed to trial.

Charles Samek KC’s advocacy attracted the following comment from the Court (at para 15): “I pay particular tribute to the mastery of detail shown in the oral closing of Mr Charles Samek KC, leading Ms Tetyana Nesterchuk and Ms Bláthnaid Breslin, and instructed by Withers LLP for the Claimants.”

A copy of the judgment is available on our website.