Chrysanthos Christoforou was born in Limassol, Cyprus.
He graduated in law from the University of East Anglia in 2002. He obtained an LL.M in International Commercial & Business Law in 2003 and in 2006 he obtained his second LL.M in International Trade Law from the University of Northumbria. He was admitted to the Cyprus Bar in 2004.
His main areas of practice are contract law, international trade law, competition law and general commercial litigation.
Co-author of the Cyprus chapter in the "International Execution against Judgement Debtors" published by Oceana Publications Inc. (2005) and a contributor to the Cyprus Chapter in "Doing Business in Europe" published by Sweet and Maxwell, 2006.
The Supreme Court recently issued its decision in a case concerning the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission's imposition of a €100,000 fine on Marfin for buying shares in Marfin Popular Bank Plc on the Athens Stock Exchange during a closed period, which had contravened the Insider Dealing and Market Manipulation (Market Abuse) Law 2005 and the Code of Conduct for Advisers and Related Persons issued thereunder.
In many cases, employees – particularly those in key roles in investment firms and corporate and fiduciary service providers – possess confidential information that can be exploited to generate income for a new employer. In a recent decision regarding an application for injunctive relief prohibiting the unauthorised use of confidential information by the applicant's former employee, the Limassol District Court reaffirmed the Cyprus courts' general approach to this matter.
The rapid development and expansion of electronic commerce has forced the European Union to ensure that electronic signatures receive the necessary legal recognition. The legal framework in Cyprus is fully in line with EU standards since the EU Electronic Signatures Directive was transposed almost verbatim into domestic law by the Electronic Signatures and Related Matters Law 2004.
A recent judgment of the Nicosia District Court reaffirmed the approach of the Cyprus courts regarding applications to appoint a receiver over the assets of a Cypriot company – namely, that such an intrusive remedy will be ordered only where the court is persuaded that it is absolutely necessary in order to protect those assets and an injunction prohibiting the alienation of the assets would be insufficient.
EU Council Regulation 1206/2001 regulates cooperation between the courts of EU member states in relation to taking evidence in civil and commercial matters. In a decision based on the regulation, Cyprus courts have ruled that evidence may be taken via teleconferencing. This confirms the Cyprus courts' long-established readiness to do whatever is necessary within their powers to ensure the right of all litigants to a fair trial.
A receiver may be appointed by a court order to receive and, if authorised by the court, to manage specified assets and to deal with them as authorised under the order. The power of the civil courts to appoint a receiver under Section 32(1) of the Courts of Justice Law is well established, having been affirmed by both the district courts and the Supreme Court.
The critical role that letters of credit have played in the growth of international trade is widely acknowledged and there is extensive case law on the subject. In one such case, the Cyprus courts recently refused to issue an injunction forbidding a bank to make payment under a letter of credit. The decision reaffirms the courts' reluctance to interfere with the performance by a bank of a letter of credit unless fraud is involved.
The Nicosia District Court recently ruled in a case involving fraud and money laundering, in which the deceived entity requested a freezing injunction against a bank account and various Norwich Pharmacal orders. The decision confirms the readiness of the Cyprus judicial system to provide effective and efficient assistance in combating fraudulent conduct and money laundering activities.
Limitation periods in Cyprus are set out in the Limitation of Actions Law. The law was suspended in 1964 following inter-communal disturbances and has effectively remained suspended ever since. The Suspension of Limitation Period (Provisional Provisions) Law provided that it would re-enter into force with effect from June 1 2005; however, this has been postponed by a succession of laws passed in the interim.