Professional practice

The “clever and commercial” James Collins QC is “a great advocate and a great tactician”. He is instructed by UK and international clients to handle a wide range of commercial disputes, with a particular emphasis on commercial contracts, financial services, fraud, insurance, international trade, joint-ventures and shareholder and share purchase disputes.  Most of these disputes are substantial and complex; many are multi-jurisdictional and involve foreign law.

James appears regularly as lead counsel in the High Court and appellate courts of England and Wales, and in the Commercial Court and Court of Appeal in the BVI. He also acts as lead counsel, co-counsel (with foreign lawyers) or arbitrator in arbitrations around the World, including in London, Paris, New York, Singapore and Dubai.

James advises and acts at all stages of the dispute resolution process, from strategy development, through pre-action and interlocutory applications (including Freezing Orders, anti-suit injunctions; protection of confidential information, restraint of conflicts and jurisdiction challenges), to trials and final hearings, appellate and review hearings, and enforcement of judgments and awards. Professional and lay clients have consistently praised James as being able to “map a course to the objective” and “excellent at anticipating how a case will unfold and positioning you for a great outcome”.

 

What others say

Since taking Silk in 2012 James has been described as follows:

“Has a great manner with the judge and is calm and very persuasive”; ” a very hands-on silk who takes the time to learn and understand the background and details of the case” (Chambers UK 2019, Commercial Dispute Resolution)

“Outstanding – a very strong practitioner in the field of international arbitration” (Legal 500 2019)

 

“Stands out for his presentation skills; he narrows down the issues and focuses on the key points”; “He’s affable, easy to work with, very bright and dependable” (Chambers UK 2019, Offshore).

“An excellent cross-examiner” (Chambers UK 2019, International Arbitration)

“A very confident advocate with a relaxed but precise style” (Chambers UK 2018, Commercial Dispute Resolution)

“Very good. Tactically Savvy” (Chambers UK 2018, International Arbitration)

“A very thoughtful, proactive and hands-on silk” (Legal 500 2018)

“Puts difficult points across simply and powerfully”; “He is easy to work with and he is client-friendly” (Chambers Global 2018)

 

“His advocacy is really exceptional. He makes difficult concepts sound easy” (Chambers UK, 2017)

A bright and resourceful arbitration silk” (Legal 500 2016);

A barrister who is “excellent at anticipating how a case will unfold and positioning you for a great outcome” (Legal 500 2016);

“An extremely impressive barrister with an extremely sharp mind” who is also “very easy to work with” (Chambers UK 2015);

A “very high-quality advocate” (Chambers UK 2014) with “great analytical skills and cross-examination technique” (Legal 500 2014);

“A great advocate and a great tactician” and an “excellent all-rounder for a variety of commercial matters” (Chambers Global 2013)

A barrister who is “able to see through the complexities of law and evidence, and map a course to the objective” (Legal 500 2013).

Examples of recent cases

Otello Corp ASA v. Moore Freres and Co LLC [2018] EWHC 2347 (Ch). James is lead counsel for a minority shareholder (Otello) in a claim against the majority shareholder (Moore Freres) arising from the blocked sale of the minority interest to a third party. Following a successful application for expedition in April 2018, there was a trial of liability issues and the claim for injunctive relief July 2018. Judgment for Otello, and an injunction, were granted in September 2018.

PJSC Tatneft v. Bogolyubov & Others [2018] EWHC 3249 (Comm) (and other refs). James acts for the second defendant in this substantial claim under Article 1064 of the Russian Civil Code. The claim arises from the alleged misappropriation of payments made by a Ukrainian refinery.

Willmont & Sayers v. Elm International & Others. James acts for the claimant trustees in bankruptcy of Mikhail Shlosberg. They are seeking to recover assets held in complex offshore structures. In 2018, the defences of 5 defendants were struck out and proprietary injunctions were obtained against a further 7 defendants.

A substantial arbitration involving cargoes of petroleum product from Iran sold into Pakistan. James acted for the claimant. The dispute involved consideration of U.N.S.C., U.S. and European sanctions as well as English law, and the law of Pakistan, in relation to fraud, forgery and illegality.

Hoteles Pinero Canarias SL v. Keefe C-419/17. James acted for the appellant in the Supreme Court and the CJEU. The dispute concerned the scope of Article 11.3 of the Judgments Regulation (44/2001). After the Supreme Court referred the matter to the CJEU, but prior to determination by the CJEU, the case settled.

A number of arbitrations involving construction defect claims under New York law insurance and reinsurance policies. James acts for homebuilders, developers and captive insurers in claims arising from major construction issues in the U.S.A..

Stockman Interhold SA v. Arricano Real Estate Plc [2017] EWHC 2909 (Comm) (and other refs). James was lead counsel for the claimant on a number of challenges to arbitral awards made under sections 67 and 68 of the Arbitration Act.

Millicom Tanzania NV v. Golden Globe International (2016) BVI Commercial Court and Court of Appeal. This dispute concerns an alleged conspiracy, and corruption of court officers, to misappropriate a Tanzanian mobile telephone company. The claimant obtained a US$100m Worldwide Freezing Order in the BVI. James acted for the first defendant on its successful application to discharge the WFO and stay the BVI proceedings, and on the appeal to the E.C. Court of Appeal.

Integral Petroleum SA v. SCU-Finanz AG [2015] EWCA Civ 144. James acted for the defendant in this oil product supply/financing dispute. The successful application to set aside Default Judgment, and the claimant’s unsuccessful appeal from that decision, determined significant conflict of law issues in relation to the powers of individuals to bind companies.

Ikon International v. Ikon Finance [2016] EWHC 318. This was a joint venture and shareholder dispute in relation to a substantial group of companies that provided online retail and institutional foreign exchange and financial derivatives trading services. It spawned multiple court and arbitral proceedings.

SFC Swiss Forfaiting Company Ltd v. Swiss Forfaiting Ltd; IAMC v. Swiss Forfaiting Ltd (2015-2016) BVI Commercial Court and Court of Appeal. James acted for the claimants in related disputes concerning the ownership of, and services provided to, a BVI fund. These disputes resulted in a number of hearings including a jurisdiction challenge and appeal and the trial of an unfair prejudice claim.

CSAV v. Hin-Pro International Logistics [2015] EWCA Civ 401. This case concerned allegedly fraudulent cargo claims in China. In breach of an English interim anti-suit injunction, Hin-Pro prosecuted a large number of such claims. Permission was given to issue writs of sequestration and Hin-Pro’s director was committed to prison for contempt. Following trial (which Hin-Pro was barred from attending) CSAV was granted a final anti-suit Injunction and damages. James acted for Hin-Pro on appeal. The Court of Appeal determined that (1) Hin-Pro was entitled to appeal notwithstanding that it had been barred from attending trial; and (2) Hin-Pro was entitled to be heard notwithstanding its serious and continuing contempt of court.

Arbitration & related court applications

Recognised as a “bright and resourceful arbitration silk” with “great analytical skills and cross-examination technique”, James has extensive knowledge and experience of arbitration law and practice.

He has represented clients in arbitrations in the U.K., Bermuda, Canada, France, Singapore and the U.S., under AAA, CEITAC, ICC, LCIA, LMAA and other procedural rules. These arbitrations have involved many different fields of work and have been subject to a number of different procedural and substantive laws (including the laws of Bermuda, England, France, Liechtenstein, New York and Singapore). Hearings have ranged from short interlocutory applications to trials lasting many weeks. At these hearings, James appears as lead counsel, sole counsel or cocounsel with overseas lawyers.

James has also acted as arbitrator in institutional and ad hoc arbitrations seated in England, Paris and Dubai.

Recent arbitrations include:

  • Oil Exploration and Production Sharing Dispute. UNCITRAL. James is a party-appointed arbitrator in this dispute between a state and an oil exploration and production company. The arbitration has its seat in Dubai.
  • Iran Sanctions Dispute. Ad Hoc. James acted as lead counsel for a claimant seeking payment for 2 cargoes from Iran. The Defendants alleged breach of US, EU and other sanctions regimes; illegality; forgery; and fraud. The Arbitration (and the related court challenges) were resolved in favour of the claimant.
  • Construction Defects Insurance. Bermuda Form Arbitration. James is currently acting as co-counsel for a major U.S. housebuilder seeking recovery under various insurance policies. The policies are governed by New York law.
  •  Pharmaceutical License Dispute. ICC Arbitration. James acted as sole counsel for a pharmaceutical company in a dispute with another company regarding royalties due under a license agreement.
  •  Financial Services Joint Venture. LCIA Arbitration. James acted as lead counsel in a joint venture dispute relating to a substantial group of companies that provided online retail and institutional foreign exchange and financial derivatives trading services.
  •  Shipping Joint Venture. LMAA Arbitration. James acted as lead counsel in a dispute that followed the breakdown of a substantial shipping joint venture.

James has also advised and acted in a wide range of arbitration-related court proceedings, including; applications for relief in support of arbitrations (such as anti-suit injunctions and worldwide freezing orders and witness summonses); challenges to awards (eg. under sections 67, 68 and 69); and proceedings to enforce both foreign and domestic awards.

Recent cases in include:

  • Stockman Interhold SA v. Arricano Real Estate Plc[2017] EWHC 2909 (Comm)and [2015] EWHC 2979 (Comm). James acted as lead counsel on a number of challenges under sections 67 and 68 of the 1996 Act.
  • Cruz City 1 Mauritius Holdings v. Unitech Ltd & Others [2014] EWHC 3704 (Comm). James acted as lead counsel for the 5th This case establishes important limitations on the ability of the English courts to grant post-award Freezing Orders in aid of enforcement. In particular (1) there is no jurisdiction to grant Chabra-type relief against foreign parties who were not party to the arbitration agreements or arbitrations; and (2) where Regulation 44/2001 applies, a claimant must show that the respondents have assets within the jurisdiction in order to establish a real connecting link between the subject matter of measures sought and the jurisdiction of the English court.

 

Banking & financial services

James has advised and acted for or against a number of banks and financial institutions (including Barclays, Goldman Sachs, HIG, Thames Capital and Yukos Capital) and HNWIs in a wide range of domestic and international banking and financial services disputes.

This has included claims by or against funds and corporations in relation to debt and equity investments (typically cross-border), including claims relating to the misappropriation of assets. Recent or notable cases include:

  • Cayman Fund. James is advising the independent directors of a limited partner in relation to a dispute between the ultimate investors in, and the general partner of, a Cayman fund.
  • SFC Swiss Forfaiting Company Ltd v. Swiss Forfaiting Ltd and IAMC v. Swiss Forfaiting Ltd (2015-2016, BVI Commercial Court and E.C. Court of Appeal). James acted for the investment manager and agent/custodian in related disputes concerning the control of and services provided to a BVI fund.
  • Eco Quest Plc v. GFI Consultants [2016] EWHC 57 (QB). James acted for the defendants in a case that involved an allegedly sham investment scheme.
  • JSC Ukrsibbank v. Polyakov [2014] EWHC 4292 (Comm). James acted for the defendant on his successful application to set aside a Freezing Order granted in support of Ukrainian proceedings to enforce a guarantee.
  • Yukos Capital. James acted for Yukos Capital in arbitrations that led to two US$ multi-billion awards.
Civil fraud & asset tracing

James has advised and acted in a wide range of cases involving allegations of commercial fraud.

Recent cases include:

  • PJSC Tatneft v. Bogolyubov & Others [2018] EWHC 3249 (Comm) (and other refs). James acts for the second defendant in this substantial claim under Article 1064 of the Russian Civil Code. The claim arises from the alleged misappropriation of payments made by a Ukrainian refinery.
  • Willmont & Sayers v. Elm International & Others. James acts for the claimant trustees in bankruptcy of Mikhail Shlosberg. They are seeking to recover assets concealed in complex offshore structures.
  • Iranian Petroleum Arbitration. James acted as lead counsel for a claimant seeking payment for 2 cargoes from Iran. The defences to this claim included fraudulent misrepresentation and forgery of shipping documents (as well as illegality and breach of sanctions). Whilst the fraud, forgery, (some) illegality and sanctionable conduct were all established, these did not defeat the claim.
  • Millicom Tanzania NV v. Golden Globe International (2016 and ongoing, BVI Commercial Court and E.C. Court of Appeal). In this case the claimant alleges that the first defendant (a BVI company) conspired with others and corrupted court officials in Tanzania in order to misappropriate shares in a mobile telephone company said to be worth US$192m. The claimant commenced proceedings in the BVI and obtained a US$100m Worldwide Freezing Order. James acted for the first defendant on its successful application to discharge the WFO and stay the BVI proceedings, and on appeal to the E.C. Court of Appeal. An appeal to the Privy Council is outstanding.
  •  Accent Delight v. Bouvier. In this case the claimants allege that Mr Bouvier fraudulently inflated the price of works by artists such as Leonardo da Vinci, Van Gough, Picasso, Modigliani, Rothko, Monet and Matisse by about US$1 billion. To date it has involved litigation in Singapore, Hong Kong, Monaco, France, New York and Switzerland, and threatened proceedings in England. James acts for and advises the defendant in relation to global strategy; and jurisdictional issues in in common law and convention territories.
  • Ikon International (HK) Holdings v. Ikon Finance Ltd (2015-2016, Commercial Court and Arbitration). This dispute concerned a joint venture to provide currency trading services. It was alleged that substantial funds had been stolen by one of the parties. Several distinct actions and arbitrations were commenced prior to a settlement being concluded in 2016.
  • Eco Quest Plc v. GFI Consultants [2016] EWHC 57 (QB). James acts for two defendants alleged to have set up a fraudulent eco-investment scheme.
  • CSAV v. Hin-Pro International Logistics [2015] EWCA Civ 401. This case concerned allegedly fraudulent cargo claims in China. In breach of an English interim anti-suit injunction, Hin-Pro prosecuted a large number of such claims. Permission was given to issue writs of sequestration and Hin-Pro’s director was committed to prison for contempt. Following trial (which Hin-Pro was barred from attending) CSAV was granted a final anti-suit Injunction and damages. James acted for Hin-Pro on appeal. The Court of Appeal determined that (1) Hin-Pro was entitled to appeal notwithstanding that it had been barred from attending trial; and (2) HinPro was entitled to be heard notwithstanding its serious and continuing contempt of court.

 

Commercial dispute resolution

James is recognised as an “excellent all-rounder for a variety of commercial matters”. These include:

  • International trade in goods and services. (See the separate section for this). Recent cases include an ongoing arbitration in which a claimant seeking payment for 2 cargoes from Iran and Vitol Bahrain v. Nasdec [2014] EWHC 984 (Comm).
  • Energy sector disputes, including rig sale and management, pipeline and supply disputes. (See the separate section for this).
  • Shareholder and share purchase disputes. (See the separate section for this). Recent cases include Otello v. MFC [2018] EWHC 2347 (Ch); Independent Asset Management Company v. Swiss Forfaiting Ltd (2016, BVI Commercial Court).
  • Healthcare and pharmaceutical sector disputes. Recent work includes: advising NHS Trusts in relation to PFI contracts; advising private hospital groups in relation to outsourcing contracts; and acting for pharmaceutical companies in licensing/royalty disputes. In 2013, James acted as lead counsel for the hospital in Mid Essex NHS Trust v. Compass [2013] EWCA Civ 200. This dispute concerned a long-term catering contract. Each side alleged that the other was in repudiatory breach and claimed damages. At first instance, Compass was substantially successful. This was reversed on appeal in what is now the leading modern Court of Appeal case on good faith in commercial contracts.
  • Joint-venture, partnership, quasi-partnership disputes. Recent cases include Ikon International (HK) Holdings v. Ikon Finance Ltd (2015-2016, Commercial Court and Arbitration).
  • Conflicts of interest, protection of confidential information and professional conduct. (See the separate section for this).

James advises clients involved in commercial disputes in many jurisdictions and represents clients involved in such disputes both in arbitration and in the courts of England and Wales and the BVI.

Conflict of laws & private international law

James has extensive experience of cases focused on issues of jurisdiction and applicable law.

Recent or interesting cases include:

  • Hoteles Pinero Canarias SL v. Keefe C-419/17. James acted for the appellant in the Supreme Court and the CJEU. The dispute concerned the scope of Article 11.3 of the Judgments Regulation (44/2001).
  • Millicom Tanzania NV v. Golden Globe International (2016, E.C. Court of Appeal). This case concerned stage 2 of the Spilida test and the application of the guidance in Altimo v. Kyrgyz Mobil in circumstances where the claimant alleged that the defendant had corrupted and would continue to corrupt the judiciary in Tanzania.
  • Integral Petroleum SA v. SCU-Finanz AG [2015] EWCA 144 (Court of Appeal). This appeal focused on identification of the conflicts rule that applies when seeking to establish the law that governs a dispute as to whether or not a foreign company is bound by the signature of one of its officers.
  • CSAV v. Hin-Pro International Logistics [2015] EWCA Civ 401 (Court of Appeal). One of the principal issues in this appeal was whether a standard form jurisdiction clause in a bill of lading provided for exclusive or non-exclusive jurisdiction.
  • SFC Swiss Forfaiting Company Ltd v. Swiss Forfaiting Ltd (2015-2016, BVI Court of Appeal). One of the principal issues in this case, and on appeal, was the test to be applied to the forum challenge.
  • Cruz City 1 Mauritius Holdings v. Unitech Ltd & Others [2014] EWHC 3704 (Commercial Court). This case established important limitations on the jurisdiction of the English courts to grant post-award Freezing Orders in aid of enforcement of arbitral awards. In particular, there is no jurisdiction to grant Chabra-type relief against foreign parties who were not party to the arbitration agreements or arbitrations as no service-out gateway is available.
  • Vitol Bahrain v. Nasdec [2013] EWHC 3359 and [2014] EWHC 984 (Commercial Court). The first of these cases involved an anti-suit injunction. The second involved a jurisdiction challenge.
  • Haji-Ioannou v. Frangos [2009] EWHC 2310 (QB). This case determined the law applicable to issues of succession.
  • OT Africa Line v. Magic Sportswear & Others [2005] EWCA Civ 710. The issue in this case, and on appeal, was whether an anti-suit injunction should be granted in circumstances where (1) the rival jurisdiction, Canada, had passed legislation that specifically conferred jurisdiction on the Canadian courts in the circumstances of this case; and (2) an application for a stay in Canada had been rejected. It is also notable because the anti-suit, which was granted to restrain breach of an exclusive jurisdiction clause, was granted against non-parties (as well as parties) to the relevant agreement.
Conflicts of interest & confidential information

James acted for the claimant in what became the leading House of Lords authority on the protection of confidential information: Prince Jefri Bolkiah v. KPMG (a firm) [1999] 2 WLR 215. Since then, he has advised and acted in numerous cases involving conflicts of interest, protection of confidential information and professional conduct rules.

 

Energy & natural resources

James has advised and acted in a large number of energy sector disputes (involving oil & gas, electricity, coal, uranium and wind farms) in cases involving the oil majors, Glencore, Kinder Morgan, National Grid, Odebrecht, Petrobras, Stena Drilling, Vitol and many others. This work has included:

  • As counsel, disputes (typically in arbitration) relating to rig quality, rig management, pipelines, offtake agreements, supply agreements and oil and gas trading and transport disputes
  • As arbitrator, disputes concerning exploration and production sharing agreements, and piping systems.

 

Insurance & reinsurance

“He is an extremely impressive barrister with an extremely sharp mind, who has extensive knowledge of the Bermuda Form” (Chambers UK).

James has advised and acted in wide range of insurance and reinsurance disputes. This work has included:

  • A substantial number of Bermuda form arbitrations and other arbitrations where the substantive law of the insurance contracts has been the law of New York. This has involved hearings in London, New York, Toronto and Montreal. Underlying subject matter has included the liability of drug manufacturers, chemical companies, hospitals, a restaurant chain and house-builders for a range of liabilities, including personal injury, property damage, discrimination and commercial disparagement.
  • Insurance and reinsurance arbitrations in England and abroad, including reinsurance claims arising from substantial audit and tax advice liabilities incurred by the Big 4 accounting firms.

 

 

International trade, transport & commodities

James has advised and acted in a large number of cases involving many different aspects of international trade. This has included:

  • An arbitration in which a claimant sought payment for 2 cargoes from Iran. The Defendants alleged breach of US, EU and other sanctions regimes; illegality; forgery and fraud.
  • Vitol Bahrain v. Nasdec [2014] EWHC 984 (Comm). This dispute concerned the purchase and storage of 2 cargoes of oil.
  • Disputes in relation to documentary credits.
  • International distribution, franchise and licensing agreements.
Media, art, entertainment

James has advised and acted in a number of cases involving art, antiques and antiquities, including:

  • Accent Delight v. Bouvier. In this case the claimants allege that Mr Bouvier fraudulently inflated the price of works by artists such as Leonardo da Vinci, Van Gough, Picasso, Modigliani, Rothko, Monet and Matisse by about US$1 billion. To date it has involved litigation in Singapore, Hong Kong, Monaco, France, New York and Switzerland, and threatened proceedings in England. James acts for and advises the defendant in relation to global strategy; and jurisdictional issues in in common law and convention territories.
  • Scheps v. Fine Art Logistics [2007] EWHC 541. This dispute resulted from the loss of a sculpture by Anish Kapoor. James acted for the defendants.
  • Advising leading auction houses in relation to their potential liabilities.
Offshore litigation

James frequently represents clients in offshore disputes, including in the B.V.I. Commercial Court and Court of Appeal and in the Cayman Islands. Recent cases have included:

 

  • Cayman Fund.James is advising the independent directors of a limited partner in relation to a dispute between the ultimate investors in, and the general partner of, a Cayman fund.
  • Millicom Tanzania NV v. Golden Globe International (2016 and ongoing, BVI Commercial Court and E.C. Court of Appeal). In this case the claimant alleges that the first defendant (a BVI company) conspired with others and corrupted court officials in Tanzania in order to misappropriate shares in a mobile telephone company said to be worth US$192m. The claimant commenced proceedings in the BVI and obtained a US$100m Worldwide Freezing Order. James acted for the first defendant on its successful application to discharge the WFO and stay the BVI proceedings, and on appeal.
  • Sonara Limited v. Akolyn & Others (2015-2016, BVI Commercial Court). In this case James acted for minority shareholders bringing a derivative action on behalf of a Russian company in relation to a series of related-party transactions that had resulted in the company loosing approximately US$200m. The defendants successfully applied to have the claim stayed on forum non conveniens.
  • SFC Swiss Forfaiting Company Ltd v. Swiss Forfaiting Ltd (2015-2016, BVI Commercial Court and Court of Appeal). This dispute concerned fees alleged due for forfaiting services provided by a Swiss company to a BVI fund. The Commercial Court stayed the BVI proceedings in favour of Switzerland. This decision was upheld on appeal.
  •  Independent Asset Management Company v. Swiss Forfaiting Ltd (2015-2016, BVI Commercial Court). In this action, the BVI fund’s investment manager brought an unfair prejudice claim in which it complained about the dilution of its shareholding. James acted for the claimant at the injunction return date and trial.
  •  Itum v. Kteili & Others (2014-2015, Commercial Court and Court of Appeal). This was an unfair prejudice claim. James acted for various defendants at a jurisdiction hearing (leading to a decision that established that there is no “necessary or proper” party jurisdiction where the claims against the anchor defendants have been stayed in favour of arbitration) and in the Court of Appeal.

 

Shareholder disputes

James frequently acts for shareholders or former shareholders in disputes with managers, other shareholders, buyers or sellers, and related parties. Recent work has included the following.

Unfair Prejudice Claims, including:

  • Otello Corp ASA v. Moore Freres and Co LLC [2018] EWHC 2347 (Ch). James is lead counsel for a minority shareholder (Otello) in a claim against the majority shareholder (Moore Freres) arising from the blocked sale of the minority interest to a third party. Following a successful application for expedition in April 2018, there was a trial of liability issues and the claim for injunctive relief July 2018. Judgment for Otello, and an injunction, were granted in September 2018.
  • Independent Asset Management Company v. Swiss Forfaiting Ltd (2016 trial, BVI Commercial Court). In this claim, an investment manager complained that its shareholding in a BVI fund had been unfair diluted.
  • David v. Infinite Renewables (2017). James was instructed on the appeal from the judgment in this case about the management of wind generation company.

Derivative claims. A recent example is Sonara Limited v. Akolyn & Others (2015-2016, BVI Commercial Court). James acted for minority shareholders making a claim on behalf of a Russian company in relation to a series of related-party transactions that had resulted in the company loosing approximately US$200m.

Claims on warranties in SPAs. Recent work has included, representing a defendant to a claim that certain warranties in the SPA were made fraudulently.

Other SPA disputes. For example, in Play LA v. Swiss Science & Others (2015, BVI Commercial Court) a seller asserted that buyers had repudiated a share purchase agreement.

Shipping & admiralty

James has advised and acted in large number of disputes before the English courts and arbitral tribunals involving shipping, shipbuilding, ship repair contracts and ship sale and purchase. This work has included:

  • Numerous charterparty, BL and COA disputes involving diverse subject matter including short delivery, cargo damage, hire, speed and consumption, safe port, drydocking, demurrage and bunkers.
  • Shipping partnership, agency, management and supply disputes.
  • Shipbuilding, ship repair and ship sale and purchase, including technical disputes (eg. in relation to tank coatings, paint, wiring, piping, cranes etc.).

 

Career

2012  Silk

1995  Call: Gray’s Inn

1994  Essex Court Chambers

Education

1994    BVC, Inns of Court School of Law

1993    BA, Downing College, Cambridge