Aerotron Limited v Hermes Aviation Limited

Facts

Aerotron Limited applied to resist the recognition and enforcement in England of two Maltese judgments obtained by Hermes Aviation Limited. Hermes had served an Article 53 certificate, demanded payment and threatened a winding up petition. By the substantive judgment, Aerotron Limited v Hermes Aviation Limited [2026] EWHC 1879 (KB) of 23 July 2026, Master Fontaine dismissed Aerotron's application for refusal of recognition and enforcement, and in doing so recorded that Hermes is a dormant company which apparently ceased operations in 2015 and has not filed accounts with the MBR since its incorporation in 2011, concluding that there was a strong likelihood that Hermes may be insolvent. On 30 July 2026 Aerotron lodged an appeal against the substantive judgment and applied for a stay of enforcement and execution pending its determination, relying on Article 51 and/or Article 44(1)(c) of the Brussels Recast Regulation 1215/2012 and/or CPR r.74.7C(1) and/or CPR r.74.7B and/or CPR r.52.16 and/or CPR r.3.1(2)(g) and/or the court's inherent jurisdiction. Aerotron filed the third witness statement of Ben Ashworth dated 22 July 2026 in support; Hermes filed the statement of Simon Cohen of the same date, opposing a stay and disputing that the court had jurisdiction to grant one before enforcement proceedings had been commenced.