Emily Wood KC

Professional practice

Emily is a leading barrister practising in Commercial Dispute Resolution, International Commercial Arbitration, Banking & Finance, Civil Fraud and Art & Cultural Property. She is recognised as such by the legal directories in each of those practice areas. She was awarded “International Arbitration Junior of the Year” in 2017, nominated for “Banking and Finance Junior of the Year” in 2021, named a “Future Leader in Arbitration” by Who’s Who Legal in successive years and identified as one of the Hot 100 by The Lawyer in 2017, which reported “If Emily Wood isn’t at the top of everyone’s list for major litigation and arbitration cases, she should be.”

Emily also frequently sits as arbitrator.

The recent legal directories record that those who have worked with her describe her as follows:

“She is extremely smart, very intelligent. Judges and clients love her and she’s extremely composed – cool as a cucumber and always in control.” (Chambers High Net Worth 2022)
“She is a voracious consumer of complex information with a huge intellect.” (Chambers and Partners 2022)
“a sensational barrister. She is incredibly easy to work with, always available to discuss strategy and procedure, and she is excellent with clients.” (Legal 500 2021)
“Emily is a superstar. She has an excellent reputation.” (Chambers UK 2022)
“Fantastic as she’s incredibly communicative and easy to work with. She is client-friendly, has both a flawless drafting style and a brilliant legal mind, and is incredibly clever.” (Chambers UK 2022)
“Emily is technically superb, her written submissions and advice are second to none and she is a spectacular oral advocate.” (Legal 500 2022)
“Confident and punchy advice. Not afraid to make a difficult judgment call and to defend it. A pleasure to work with.” (Legal 500 2022)
“One of the most impressive all-round barristers.” (Legal 500 2022)
“Very clever, very sharp and very good with clients. Gets on top of the papers and the issues quickly and efficiently and provides succinct and clear advice.” (Legal 500 2022)
“Emily Wood QC is lauded as a ‘really skilful practitioner’ who is ‘very professional and unflappable’”. (Who’s Who Legal 2022)
“Super impressive. Strategically incredible, navigates novel jurisdictional issues, gives clear and concise guidance and is incredibly easy to work with.” “A superstar.” (Chambers & Partners 2021)
“She has keen litigation sense and gives clear advice about what the options are and which is best to choose and why – her writing is crystal clear and persuasive, and she can crank out a written submission faster than I have ever seen.” (Legal 500 2021)
“She is excellent and understands the issues well.” “She responds in a commercial and
client-friendly way.” (Chambers & Partners 2021)
“An excellent barrister.” (Chambers & Partners 2021)
“She has a very good work ethic and is good on analysis.” “She is a voracious consumer of complex information with a huge intellect.”
“Emily is a superstar.” “She has an excellent reputation.”

What others say

Chambers & Partners 2024

“She is the superstar of the future. She is really on the ball and very clever.”
“She is extremely calm under pressure, holding her own and demonstrating an almost psychic ability to read the tribunal.”
“She’s an absolute star.”
“Emily Wood is user-friendly, engaging, and her legal work is exceptional.”
“Emily Wood is very good in this area. She is a great barrister commercially.”
“Emily has excellent client care and a real understanding of the underlying art market issues.”

Chambers & Partners 2022

“She has a very good work ethic and is good on analysis.” “She is a voracious consumer of complex information with a huge intellect.”
“Emily is a superstar.” “She has an excellent reputation.”
“Hard-working, conscientious and thoughtful.”
“Fantastic as she’s incredibly communicative and easy to work with. She is client-friendly, has both a flawless drafting style and a brilliant legal mind, and is incredibly clever.”

Legal 500 2022

“Very clever, very sharp and very good with clients. Gets on top of the papers and the issues quickly and efficiently and provides succinct and clear advice.”
“One of the most impressive all-round barristers. She is technically superb, her written submissions and advice are second-to-none and she is a spectacular oral advocate.”
“Emily is a sensational barrister. She is incredibly easy to work with, always available to discuss strategy and procedure, and she is excellent with clients.”
“Emily is technically superb, her written submissions and advice are second to none and she is a spectacular oral advocate.”

Legal 500 2021

“Emily is a sensational barrister. She is incredibly easy to work with, always available to discuss strategy and procedure, and she is excellent with clients.”
“She has keen litigation sense and gives clear advice about what the options are and which is best to choose and why – her writing is crystal clear and persuasive, and she can crank out a written submission faster than I have ever seen.”

Chambers & Partners 2021

“An excellent barrister.”
“She is excellent and understands the issues well.” “She responds in a commercial and client-friendly way.”
“Super impressive. Strategically incredible, navigates novel jurisdictional issues, gives clear and concise guidance and is incredibly easy to work with.” “A superstar.”

Testimonials 2020

“Ebullient, friendly and funny,” she is “great with clients incredibly responsive, and fully prepared to shoulder more than her fair share of work on a case.”
“Really easy to work with and always happy to talk through issues. She has a great personality and always makes the life of the instructing solicitor that much better. You can trust her as she always gives thoughtful and clear advice. Her drafting and skeleton arguments are first-class.”
“She is really easy to work with and drafts incredibly clearly and quickly.”
“Has excellent judgement across the whole spectrum of skill sets.”
“Exceptionally bright, strategic and commercial in approach.”
“She is very smart and offers excellent strategic advice.”

Testimonials 2019

A highly talented junior with a burgeoning reputation in the field. She regularly undertakes major commercial litigation and arbitration on behalf of major financial institutions and private equity firms. She has experience in swaps misselling, LIBOR rigging and improper practice cases. “Phenomenally smart, very easy to work with and very hard-working.” “Emily is a strong junior. She drafts well and provides helpful strategic input.”
“The complete package: she’s very bright and approachable, she’s very responsive, she produces very good written work, and she’s a good team player.”
Concentrates her practice on high-value, complex international commercial arbitration and has particular expertise in handling challenges to arbitral awards. She has substantial experience of arbitrations conducted under ICC, LCIA and UNCITRAL rules. In addition to her work as counsel she also takes sole arbitrator appointments. “Really bright and a very good advocate. She works really well in a team.”
“Incredibly commercial.”
“A superstar of the future – down to earth, clear and supremely smart.”
“Incredibly diligent and a real delight to work with.”
“She ably handles both commercial disputes at litigation and arbitration.”

Testimonials 2018

“One of the best juniors I have worked with. She is incredibly hard-working, a very clear, structured thinker and good strategically.”
“Always happy to be available at short notice, and gives calm, commercial advice, even when the temperature in a case starts to rise.”
“Emily combines superb technical ability with tremendous client-facing skills.”
“Excellent. Very bright.”

Testimonials 2017

“She’s very impressive. She strikes me as having a real maturity beyond her years.”
“Very clever, sharp and knowledgeable about the law. Her written advocacy is beautiful and her oral advocacy is pretty spectacular. She’s really going from strength to strength.”
“A diligent and impressive barrister”
‘A first-rate junior, who is highly responsive.’

Testimonials 2016

“An outstanding junior – she is unbelievable.”
“Her written advocacy is beautiful and her oral advocacy is pretty spectacular. She’s really going from strength to strength.”
“Just incredibly eloquent and utterly had her head around an incredibly complex matter”
“…brilliant and incredibly personable”
“Very clever, sharp and knowledgeable about the law”

Testimonials 2015

“Her capacity to digest and assimilate information is really incredible, and her level of engagement has been really astonishing.”
“Experienced beyond her year of call”

Testimonials 2014

“Received significant market support for her international arbitration expertise. She is regularly instructed by magic circle firm on complex commercial disputes.”
“She is someone you would always want to put on your team. Her drafting is tremendous, as it is so precise and clear.”
“Continues to be recognised as one of the rising stars of the Junior Commercial Bar.”
“She is extremely bright and very committed in terms of her capacity for work. She has a tremendous grasp of jurisdictional issues and is really, really on top of the detail.”

Testimonials 2013

“In Emily Wood [Essex Court] has a young junior who is making waves. ‘Positive and user friendly’ she displays a ‘huge appetite for work’ and is ‘absolutely fantastic technically.’”
“Impresses with her ‘quality drafting and analysis of complex issues’. On top of this, she demonstrates a tremendous ability to work seamlessly as part of a team.”

Examples of recent cases

Examples of recent matters, which are typical of Emily’s practice, include:

Gol Linhas Aereas SA (formerly VRG Linhas Aereas SA) (Respondent) v MatlinPatterson Global Opportunities Partners (Cayman) II LP and others (Appellants) (Cayman Islands) [2022] UKPC 21. Acting for private equity firm MatlinPatterson (instructed by Simpson Thacher & Bartlett) before the Privy Council on the interpretation of Article V of the New York Convention.
Acting for a major UK utilities supplier (instructed by Addleshaw Goddard) in an LCIA Arbitration against its wholesaler, concerning the proper interpretation of complex market codes and allegations of bad faith.
Tugushev v Orlov & Ors Acting for Magnus Roth (instructed by Covington & Burling) in civil fraud trial listed for 17 weeks in the Commercial Court. Claims of unlawful conspiracy and misappropriation in a dispute concerning an international fishing business operated by two Russian business magnates.
Virgin Enterprises v Brightline Holdings. Acting for Fortress, the leading global investment manager, defending a $250m claim brought against it by Virgin (instructed by Sidley Austin).
DAZN v Vodafone Italia. Acting for Vodafone (instructed by Dentons) in respect of a claim against DAZN, the streaming sports media company, concerning Serie A broadcasting rights.
Active Media Services Inc v Brumester, Duncker & Joly GmbH [2021] EWHC (Comm). Acting for Active International (instructed by Mishcon de Reya) in a trial in the Commercial Court in which the Court found that it was entitled to draw adverse inferences from the deliberate deletion of emails by the claimant’s witnesses on the eve of trial.
Acting for Sotheby’s (instructed by Freshfields) in the Court of Appeal and at first instance in Sotheby’s v Mark Weiss Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 1570; [2019] EWHC 3416 (Comm). This action also raised a significant question of privilege: [2018] EWHC 3179 (Comm);
Acting for Raiffeisen Bank (instructed by Stephenson Harwood) in the Court of Appeal in Raiffeisen Bank International AG v Asia Coal Energy Ventures & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 11; Acting for PAO Tatneft (instructed by Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton) in the Court of Appeal and at first instance in connection with Ukraine’s succession of attempts to resist enforcement of a $112 million award made under the Russia-Ukraine BIT: PAO Tatneft v Ukraine [2020] EWHC 3161 (Sir Andrew Smith); [2019] EWHC 3740 (Cockerill J); [2019] EWHC 1543 (Jacobs J); [2018] EWHC 1797 (Butcher J). These included resisting Ukraine’s challenge to enforcement on the basis that it was entitled to immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978;
Acting for Carphone Warehouse (instructed by Addleshaw Goddard) in its dispute against Telefonica in respect of their long term trading agreement.
Acting for two (unrelated) art dealers (instructed by Charles Russell Speechlys) in respect of claims brought against them by Sheikh Hamad of Qatar alleging items sold by them to be forgeries;
Instructed (by BCLP) in a series of related LCIA arbitrations in a dispute concerning the ownership and control of one of Russia’s largest banks;
Instructed (by Addleshaw Goddard) in a CIArb arbitration for one of the UK’s largest investment banks against another bank in connection with a syndicate agreement;
Acting for Soc Gen (by Dentons) in connection with a claim against it in unjust enrichment, establishing that payments held in a suspense account were properly regarded as “received” for limitation purposes when paid into that account, notwithstanding they were then subject to the Iranian sanctions regime: Sixteenth Ocean GmbH v Societe Generale [2018] EWHC 1731 (Comm).

Arbitration & related court applications

Gol Linhas Aereas SA (formerly VRG Linhas Aereas SA) (Respondent) v MatlinPatterson Global Opportunities Partners (Cayman) II LP and others (Appellants) (Cayman Islands) [2022] UKPC 21. Acting for private equity firm MatlinPatterson (instructed by Simpson Thacher & Bartlett) before the Privy Council on the interpretation of Article V of the New York Convention.
Acting for a major UK utilities supplier (instructed by Addleshaw Goddard) in an LCIA Arbitration against its wholesaler, concerning the proper interpretation of complex market codes and allegations of bad faith.
Acting for PAO Tatneft (instructed by Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton) in the Court of Appeal and at first instance in connection with Ukraine’s succession of attempts to resist enforcement of a $112 million award made under the Russia-Ukraine BIT: PAO Tatneft v Ukraine [2020] EWHC 3161 (Sir Andrew Smith); [2019] EWHC 3740 (Cockerill J); [2019] EWHC 1543 (Jacobs J); [2018] EWHC 1797 (Butcher J). These included resisting Ukraine’s challenge to enforcement on the basis that it was entitled to immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978;
Acting for the private equity house MatlinPatterson (instructed by Simpson Thacher & Bartlett) resisting enforcement of a R93 million Brazilian ICC award against it in respect of the sale and purchase of a Brazilian airline. An appeal to the Privy Council is pending; Instructed (by BCLP) in a series of related LCIA arbitrations in a dispute concerning the ownership and control of one of Russia’s largest banks;
Instructed (by Addleshaw Goddard) in a CIArb arbitration for one of the UK’s largest investment banks against another bank in connection with a syndicate agreement; Instructed by Gibson Dunn (as junior to David Foxton QC) in a JAMS arbitration. Instructed by Gibson Dunn (as junior to Toby Landau QC) to act for the respondent in an application under sections 67 and 68 of the Arbitration Act challenging an ICC Award. Orascom TMT Investments SARL v VEON Ltd [2018] EWHC 985 (Comm). Instructed by Cleary Gottlieb (as junior to David Foxton QC) to act for the applicant in an application under section 68(2)(d) of the Arbitration Act 1996, challenging and LCIA award.
Instructed by a state in respect of investor-state proceedings brought under a Bilateral Investment Treaty in an arbitration seated in Singapore.
A v B [2017] EWHC 3417 (Comm). Instructed by Taylor Wessing (as junior to David Foxton QC) to act for the applicant in an application under section 67 in respect of two LCIA arbitrations.
Instructed by Slaughter and May (as sole counsel) to act for a major household-name distributor in an ICC dispute against a joint venture partner in the Far East.
Instructed by Addleshaw Goddard (as sole counsel) to represent a major FTSE 100 company in an ICC dispute against Canadian joint venture partners.
National Iranian Oil Company v Crescent Petroleum Company [2016] EWHC 1900; [2016] EWHC 510. Instructed by Hogan Lovells (as junior to Gordon Pollock QC) to act for the respondent in applications under sections 67 and 68 challenging an ICC Award. The proceedings involved an application for a preliminary issue before Teare J, determination of the preliminary issues before Burton J and a subsequent failed attempt to discontinue the challenge by the applicant also heard by Burton J.
Secretary of State of the Home Department v Raytheon Systems Ltd [2015] EWHC 311 and [2014] EWHC 4375. Instructed by Clifford Chance (as junior to Joe Smouha QC) to act for the respondent to an application under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 challenging an LCIA award concerning a £480 million claim for breach of contract.
Instructed by Slaughter and May (as junior to David Streatfeild James QC) in an ICC arbitration involving a claim against a German conglomerate in the industrial sector. Instructed by Hogan Lovells LLP to act for the respondent to applications under section 67 and 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 challenging an award concerning a very substantial commodities dispute.
Instructed by Ashurst LLP (as junior to Stewart Boyd QC) in a US$400 million arbitration under the LCIA rules involving complex questions of the correct measure of loss in contractual damages under English law.
Instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP (as junior to Salim Moollan) to represent one of the world’s leading technology companies in an ICC Arbitration in a dispute concerning activities in South America.
Instructed by Addleshaw Goddard LLP (as junior to Vernon Flynn QC and Paul Stanley QC) for a Diageo plc subsidiary against SABMiller plc subsidiaries in a large scale ICC arbitration. This expedited arbitration was triggered by SABMiller having obtained an interim injunction in the Commercial Court restraining the Diageo company from taking certain steps alleged to constitute breaches of an agreement concerning the distribution of beer in Tanzania. The dispute involved intricate questions of law, in particular concerning agreements in restraint of trade.
Instructed by Addleshaw Goddard LLP (as junior to Vernon Flynn QC) in a substantial expedited ICC arbitration involving a claim for breach of contract culminating, part way through the hearing, in a $225 million settlement deal.
Instructed by Herbert Smith LLP (as junior to Paul Stanley QC) to represent the respondent in an ad hoc arbitration concerning two limited liability partnership disputes.
Instructed by Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP LLP (as junior to Joe Smouha QC) for a Cayman hedge fund in its efforts to enforce an arbitration award for in excess of £50 million against an Indian entity.

Banking & financial services

Acting for Raiffeisen Bank (instructed by Stephenson Harwood) in the Court of Appeal in Raiffeisen Bank International AG v Asia Coal Energy Ventures & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 11; Instructed (by BCLP) in a series of related LCIA arbitrations in a dispute concerning the ownership and control of one of Russia’s largest banks;
Instructed (by Addleshaw Goddard) in a CIArb arbitration for one of the UK’s largest investment banks against another bank in connection with a syndicate agreement;
Acting for Soc Gen (by Dentons) in connection with a claim against it in unjust enrichment, establishing that payments held in a suspense account were properly regarded as “received” for limitation purposes when paid into that account, notwithstanding they were then subject to the Iranian sanctions regime: Sixteenth Ocean GmbH v Societe Generale [2018] EWHC 1731 (Comm);
Acting (instructed by Clifford Chance) for one of the world’s largest banks in connection with claims against it under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000;
Hockin v Royal Bank of Scotland. Instructed by Dentons to act (as junior to Joe Smouha QC) on behalf of RBS in this LIBOR rigging and swaps misselling litigation.
Barclays Bank PLC v UniCredit SpA Instructed by Addleshaw Goddard LLP to act (as junior to Joe Smouha QC) on behalf of Barclays in its £300 million dispute with UniCredit in the Commercial Court.
Certain Limited Partners in Henderson PFI Secondary Fund II LP (A Firm) v (1) Henderson PFI Secondary Fund II; (2) Henderson Equity Partners Limited; (3) Henderson Equity Partners (GP) Ltd [2013] QB 934 Instructed by Ashurst LLP (as junior to Iain Milligan QC) to act on behalf of 24 large institutional investors in their claims in the Commercial Court against the manager and general partner of the fund in which they invested (both entities in the Henderson Global Investors Group) for the misapplication of their funds by the acquisition of a plc.
Mauritius Commercial Bank v Hestia Holdings [2013] EWHC 1328 Instructed by Bird and Bird LLP as sole counsel for the Claimant in this €15 million Commercial Court dispute in which the Defendant challenged jurisdiction on the basis (inter alia) that jurisdiction agreements operating in favour of one party only are enforceable.
Lehman Commercial Mortgage Conduit Limited v Northern Rock (Asset Management) PLC Instructed by Ashurst LLP (as junior to David Foxton QC) to act on behalf of a Northern Rock entity in its defence of claims against it by a Lehman Brothers entity arising out of the sale by Northern Rock to Lehman brothers of a large portfolio of secured loans.
FKI Engineering Ltd v Stribog Ltd [2011] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 387, [2011] EWCA Civ 622, [2011] 1 CLC 1005. Instructed (as junior to Mark Templeman QC) on behalf of the Respondent in this appeal in front of Mummery, Rix and Wilson LJJ concerning the proper interpretation of Article 28 (related actions pending the in the courts of different member states) of the Judgments Regulation (Council Regulation 44/2001).
Instructed (as junior to Richard Millett QC) by Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP to advise in connection with guarantees in respect of the Canary Wharf property occupied by Lehman Brothers entities prior to the collapse of the group.
Deutsche Bank AG and Ors v Asia Pacific Broadband Wireless Communications Inc (as junior to Christopher Butcher QC and Jawdat Khurshid): instructed on behalf of Asia Pacific Telecom in a Commercial Court claim (trial set for ten weeks) worth over US$200 million raising intricate questions of authority, restitution and the conflict of laws.
FKI Engineering Ltd v Stribog Ltd [2010] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. Plus 86, [2010] EWHC 1160, [2010] 1 CLC 752. Acting (as junior to Mark Templeman QC) on behalf of FKI resisting Stribog’s application for a stay of proceedings under Article 28 of the Judgments Regulation on the basis that related proceedings had been brought between the same parties in Germany. Instructed (as junior to Iain Milligan QC) to advise in connection with matters arising out of the collapse of the Lehman Brothers group.
White v (1) HSBC Private Bank UK Ltd; (2) HSBC Bank PLC Instructed as sole counsel for the claimant investor in a £1million Commercial Court claim against two HSBC entities for breach of the FSA rules in connection with the sale of structured products.
Fruition PO Ltd v Gaskains Ltd Instructed as sole counsel for a major fruit producers’ organisation in connection with an agency agreement dispute in a trial set down for seven days in the Chancery Division (which settled part heard).
Advised (as junior to Iain Milligan QC) on potential claim against big five accountancy firm in respect of breach of SUP 3.10.4.
Represented the FSA in its successful action against a mutual society for failure to comply with its statutory obligations and also in its successful application for the costs of intervening in Financial Services Compensation Scheme Limited v Abbey National Treasury Services Plc [2008] EWHC 1897 (Ch).
Advised an authorised individual against whom the Dubai Financial Services Authority sought a prohibition order.

Commercial dispute resolution

Tugushev v Orlov & Ors Acting for Magnus Roth (instructed by Covington & Burling) in civil fraud trial listed for 17 weeks in the Commercial Court. Claims of unlawful conspiracy and misappropriation in a dispute concerning an international fishing business operated by two Russian business magnates.
Virgin Enterprises v Brightline Holdings. Acting for Fortress, the leading global investment manager, defending a $250m claim brought against it by Virgin (instructed by Sidley Austin).
DAZN v Vodafone Italia. Acting for Vodafone (instructed by Dentons) in respect of a claim against DAZN, the streaming sports media company, concerning Serie A broadcasting rights.
Active Media Services Inc v Brumester, Duncker & Joly GmbH [2021] EWHC (Comm). Acting for Active International (instructed by Mishcon de Reya) in a trial in the Commercial Court in which the Court found that it was entitled to draw adverse inferences from the deliberate deletion of emails by the claimant’s witnesses on the eve of trial.
Acting for Sotheby’s (instructed by Freshfields) in the Court of Appeal and at first instance in Sotheby’s v Mark Weiss Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 1570; [2019] EWHC 3416 (Comm). This action also raised a significant question of privilege: [2018] EWHC 3179 (Comm);
Acting for Raiffeisen Bank (instructed by Stephenson Harwood) in the Court of Appeal in Raiffeisen Bank International AG v Asia Coal Energy Ventures & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 11; Acting for Carphone Warehouse (instructed by Addleshaw Goddard) in its dispute against Telefonica in respect of their long term trading agreement. Trial listed October 2021;
Acting for Seacon (instructed by Hogan Lovells), a vehicle of Mr Gary Klesch, in its claim against International Yacht Collection (Monaco) in respect of an alleged secret commission in relation to a $129 million superyacht;
Sixteenth Ocean GmbH v Societe Generale [2018] EWHC 1731 (Comm). Instructed by Dentons on behalf of Soc Gen in striking out the claim against it on the basis that payments held in a suspense account were properly regarded as “received” when paid into that account, notwithstanding they were then subject to the Iranian sanctions regime;
Sotheby’s v Weiss [2018] EWHC 3179. Instructed by Freshfields on behalf of Sotheby’s in this Commercial Court trial in which Sotheby’s alleges that a painting purportedly by the Old Master Frans Hals is a counterfeit. The Defendants (the sellers of the work) allege that Sotheby’s owed them and breached fiduciary duties/ common law duties of care in respect of Sotheby’s decision to return the purchase price for the work to the purchaser;
Hockin v Royal Bank of Scotland. Instructed by Dentons to act (as junior to Joe Smouha QC) on behalf of RBS in this LIBOR rigging and swaps misselling litigation;
Barclays Bank PLC v UniCredit SpA Instructed by Addleshaw Goddard LLP to act (as junior to Joe Smouha QC) on behalf of Barclays in its £300 million dispute with UniCredit in the Commercial Court;
Dunn Motor Traction v National Express [2017] EWHC 228 (Comm). Instructed by Hogan Lovells to act (as junior to Nathan Pillow QC) on behalf of National Express in this case in which the Claimant alleges National Express wrongly terminated a long term agreement. Three week Commercial Court trial set for 2019. Decision of Teare J on whether a shareholder undertaking constitutes good security;
Instructed by Gibson Dunn in connection with the litigation in Gray v Boreh [2017] EWCA Civ 56;
Certain Limited Partners in Henderson PFI Secondary Fund II LP (A Firm) v (1) Henderson PFI Secondary Fund II; (2) Henderson Equity Partners Limited; (3) Henderson Equity Partners (GP) Ltd [2013] QB 934 Instructed by Ashurst LLP (as junior to Iain Milligan QC) to act on behalf of 24 large institutional investors in their claims in the Commercial Court against the manager and general partner of the fund in which they invested (both entities in the Henderson Global Investors Group) for the misapplication of their funds by the acquisition of a plc;
Mauritius Commercial Bank v Hestia Holdings [2013] EWHC 1328 Instructed by Bird and Bird LLP as sole counsel for the Claimant in this €15 million Commercial Court dispute in which the Defendant challenged jurisdiction on the basis (inter alia) that jurisdiction agreements operating in favour of one party only are enforceable;
Lehman Commercial Mortgage Conduit Limited v Northern Rock (Asset Management) PLC Instructed by Ashurst LLP (as junior to David Foxton QC) to act on behalf of a Northern Rock entity in its defence of claims against it by a Lehman Brothers entity arising out of the sale by Northern Rock to Lehman brothers of a large portfolio of secured loans;
Kuwait Airways Company v Iraqi Airways Corporation Instructed by Fasken Martineau LLP to act for Kuwait Airways in its various an on-going efforts to enforce the US$1.2 billion judgment debt owed to it by Iraqi Airways, including in particular obtaining permission to serve out against the state of Iraq, as well as cross examination of the Director General of IAC as to its assets, obtaining third party debt orders and emergency freezing relief. This is the final chapter of this long-running litigation, which was commenced in the Commercial Court some two decades ago;
Dena (Technology) Thailand Ltd v ALSD Limited & Ors Instructed by Addleshaw Goddaard LLP to act, as sole counsel, for the Claimant in this £15 million claim in the Commercial Court for (inter alia) fraudulent misrepresentation, inducing the Claimant to enter into a joint venture;
Page 11
FKI Engineering Ltd v Stribog Ltd [2011] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 387, [2011] EWCA Civ 622, [2011] 1 CLC 1005. Instructed (as junior to Mark Templeman QC) on behalf of the Respondent in this appeal in front of Mummery, Rix and Wilson LJJ concerning the proper interpretation of Article 28 (related actions pending the in the courts of different member states) of the Judgments Regulation (Council Regulation 44/2001);
Instructed (as junior to Richard Millett QC) by Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP to advise in connection with guarantees in respect of the Canary Wharf property occupied by Lehman Brothers entities prior to the collapse of the group;
Yukos CIS Investment Limited v Yukos Hydrocarbons Investments Limited & Ors (Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal and Commercial Court of the British Virgin Islands) Acted (led by Steven Berry QC) for the respondents in successfully resisting applications by Yukos CIS including to appoint a receiver over the respondent companies and for freezing injunctions against them. This litigation formed part of the on-going, multi-jurisdictional battle by which OJSC Rosneft attempts to gain (ultimate) control over the subsidiaries of OAO Yukos Oil Company which it contends it has purchased. The former management of Yukos Oil resists those attempts, contending that the purchase is an unlawful appropriation;
Deutsche Bank AG and Ors v Asia Pacific Broadband Wireless Communications Inc (as junior to Christopher Butcher QC and Jawdat Khurshid): instructed on behalf of Asia Pacific; Telecom in a Commercial Court claim (trial set for ten weeks) worth over US$200 million raising intricate questions of authority, restitution and the conflict of laws;
FKI Engineering Ltd v Stribog Ltd [2010] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. Plus 86, [2010] EWHC 1160, [2010] 1 CLC 752. Acting (as junior to Mark Templeman QC) on behalf of FKI resisting Stribog’s application for a stay of proceedings under Article 28 of the Judgments Regulation on the basis that related proceedings had been brought between the same parties in Germany. Instructed (as junior to Iain Milligan QC) to advise in connection with matters arising out of the collapse of the Lehman Brothers group;
White v (1) HSBC Private Bank UK Ltd; (2) HSBC Bank PLC Instructed as sole counsel for the claimant investor in a £1million Commercial Court claim against two HSBC entities for breach of the FSA rules in connection with the sale of structured products;
Fruition PO Ltd v Gaskains Ltd Instructed as sole counsel for a major fruit producers’ organisation in connection with an agency agreement dispute in a trial set down for seven days in the Chancery Division (which settled part heard);
Datasat Communications Ltd v Swindon Town Football Company Ltd [2009] EWHC 589 (Comm) (led by Huw Davies QC): instructed by Davis & Co on behalf of the Claimants in their action in the Commercial Court for recovery of payments made in anticipation of an investment agreement which failed to materialise;
Satyam Computer Services Ltd v Upaid Systems Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 487, [2008] 2 All ER (Comm) 465 (as junior to David Foxton QC): instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP to act on behalf of the respondent in the Court of Appeal in an action concerning the
Page 12
proper constructions of three commercial agreements and in particular whether the parties to a settlement agreement were to be taken to have excluded fraud claims;
Advised (as junior to Iain Milligan QC) on potential claim against big five accountancy firm in respect of breach of SUP 3.10.4;
Represented the FSA in its successful action against a mutual society for failure to comply with its statutory obligations and also in its successful application for the costs of intervening in Financial Services Compensation Scheme Limited v Abbey National Treasury Services Plc [2008] EWHC 1897 (Ch);
Advised an authorised individual against whom the Dubai Financial Services Authority sought a prohibition order;
Bookmakers’ Afternoon Greyhound Services Limited v Amalgamated Racing Limited [2008] EWHC 1978 (Ch) (with Nicholas Green QC and Mark Hoskins): instructed by SJ Berwin to appear in this eight week trial concerning the validity of media rights agreements in the horseracing sector;
Ithmar Capital Ltd v 8 Investment Inc CA 1/2008: instructed for the appellant on an appeal from a freezing injunction; the first proceedings to come before the Court of Appeal of the Judicial Authority of the Dubai International Financial Centre.

Media, art, entertainment

Active Media Services Inc v Brumester, Duncker & Joly GmbH [2021] EWHC (Comm). Acting for Active International (instructed by Mishcon de Reya) in a trial in the Commercial Court in which the Court found that it was entitled to draw adverse inferences from the deliberate deletion of emails by the claimant’s witnesses on the eve of trial.
DAZN v Vodafone Italia. Acting for Vodafone (instructed by Dentons) in respect of a claim against DAZN, the streaming sports media company, concerning Serie A broadcasting rights.
Acting for Sotheby’s (instructed by Freshfields) in the Court of Appeal and at first instance in Sotheby’s v Mark Weiss Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 1570; [2019] EWHC 3416 (Comm) in this matter concerning an allegedly forged Frans Hals painting. This action also raised a significant question of privilege: [2018] EWHC 3179 (Comm);
Acting for two (unrelated) art dealers (instructed by Charles Russell Speechlys) in respect of claims brought against them by Sheikh Hamad of Qatar alleging items sold by them to be forgeries;
Acted (instructed by Freshfields) for Sotheby’s in respect of numerous confidential disputes; Acted (instructed by Olswang) for a London art gallery in respect of liability for a commissioned work;
Acted (as junior to Stewart Boyd QC) in a large scale arbitration under the LCIA rules concerning media rights;
Bookmakers’ Afternoon Greyhound Services Limited v Amalgamated Racing Limited [2008] EWHC 1978 (Ch) (as junior to Nicholas Green QC and Mark Hoskins): instructed by SJ Berwin to appear in this eight week trial concerning the validity of media rights agreements in the horseracing sector;
Instructed to act for one of the largest entities in the world creating and producing entertainment brands in a dispute concerning a professional sports body.