Professional practice
Louise’s practice covers commercial and commercial/chancery litigation and arbitration, including banking and finance litigation, fraud, insolvency/restructuring and company law.
She is recommended in Chambers and Partners for Chancery: Commercial, for Fraud: Civil, for Banking & Finance and for Restructuring & Insolvency. She is described as “exceptional”, “absolutely outstanding”, an “extremely effective advocate”, “user-friendly and responsive” and “a joy to work with”. She is recommended for Banking & Finance and for Insolvency in the Legal 500, where she is described as “Calm and clear under pressure. Totally unflappable but responsive and direct when necessary. Thinks very creatively and has a track record of coming up with the winning point.”
Louise’s recent work has included:
Stanford International Bank Limited (in liquidation) v HSBC Bank plc, acting for HSBC defending claims for breach of the Quincecare duty and in dishonest assistance, arising from the Ponzi scheme of Allen Stanford. The trial was due to be one of the Lawyer’s Top Trials of 2021. HSBC successfully applied to strike out the vast majority of the claims: Court of Appeal decision at [2021] EWCA Civ 535, and Supreme Court at [2022] UKSC 34.
Ivanishvili v Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Limited: acting for the Plaintiffs in the dispute between Bidzina Ivanishvili (the former Prime Minister of Georgia) and other plaintiffs and Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Limited (“CS Life”), arising out of a long-running fraud committed by an employee of Credit Suisse. The Plaintiffs’ claims succeeded following trial in Bermuda from October to December 2021 and judgment in the sum of over USD600m was upheld after an appeal heard over 5 days in December 2022.
Avonwick Holdings Ltd v Azitio Holdings Ltd: one of The Lawyer’s Top 20 Trials of 2019, an 8 week Commercial Court trial involving allegations of misrepresentation, deceit and conspiracy in claims made by three prominent Ukrainian businessmen.
Louise acted for LBHI2 (one of the two shareholders of Lehman Brothers International (Europe)) throughout the Lehman “Waterfall I” litigation, which included the issue of currency conversion claims (on which LBHI2 succeeded in the Supreme Court [2017] UKSC 38) as well as issues of the construction of subordinated debt agreements, statutory interest entitlement, the extent of the s.74 liability of members, and the application of insolvency set-off. She also acted for LBHI2 in the Waterfall III application and LBIE scheme of arrangement.
Louise has been called to the Bar of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (BVI).
- What Others Say
Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2024, Chancery: Commercial
“She has an enormously good brain and is a powerhouse of intellectual activity.”
“Really measured, she gave a very considered opinion in the case and was both user-friendly and responsive.”
“Judges like her, and she’s a joy to work with.”Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2024, Fraud: Civil
“Louise is exceptional. She produces excellent paperwork and is an extremely effective advocate who is able to deal with complex points on her feet in a cool and collected manner.”
“She produces absolutely first-rate legal arguments.”
“Louise can be relied on to distil complex issues into clear advice.”Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2024, Banking & Finance
“Absolutely outstanding. Louise Hutton has such a great manner and judges like her.”
“Very good, very hard-working and very personable.”Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2024, Restructuring & Insolvency
“Louise is approachable, incredibly bright and will always give her best.”
“Louise is one of the top insolvency silks.”Legal 500 Bar 2024, Banking and Finance:
‘Calm and clear under pressure. Totally unflappable but responsive and direct when necessary. Thinks very creatively and has a track record of coming up with the winning point others have missed.’Legal 500 Bar 2024, Insolvency:
‘Diligent and details orientated but with complete clarity of the bigger picture. Cuts through and delivers the winning point that she has identified.’Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2023, Chancery: Commercial
“Superb at the paperwork and very economical as an advocate.”
“Someone with her name on a lot of big cases, she has an incredible appetite for work.”Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2023, Fraud: Civil
“Louise is unflappable. You can present her with any set of issues and she will work through them calmly.”
“She is extremely clever with a nice advocacy style.”
“Louise is incisive and methodical in cross-examination and able to deal with points well on her feet.”
Legal 500 Bar 2023, Banking and Finance:
“A very polished and a strong performer, who has worked with the best and been involved in some of the most interesting work around. She clearly has the critical blend of strong team skills and a fiercely analytical mind. She is also an accomplished advocate.”Legal 500 Bar 2022, Fraud: Civil
“Excellent, particularly for cases with an insolvency dimension.”Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2022, Fraud: Civil
“She’s hard-working, on top of the details and very thorough in her interventions. A very safe pair of hands.”Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2022, Chancery: Commercial
“Very impressive at getting to the nub of the issue.” “She is excellent”Legal 500 Bar 2022, Banking and Finance:
“Excellent, particularly for cases which include an insolvency dimension.”Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2022, Restructuring/Insolvency:
“Louise is supremely clever”.Legal 500 UK Bar 2021, Banking and Finance:
“Her combination of expertise in insolvency, banking litigation and fraud is invaluable.”Legal 500 UK Bar 2021, Fraud: Civil:
“Has a great instinct for what will and won’t matter when the chips are down.”Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2021, Chancery: Commercial:
“Louise is very responsive, hard-working and attentive.”“She is very conscientious and dedicated to her work.”
Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2021, Fraud: Civil:
“She is impressive in court – unflappable, persuasive in her advocacy and can carry the judges to a conclusion that she wants them to reach.”“She has very good knowledge of the law and good commercial judgement.”
Legal 500 UK Bar 2020, Fraud: Civil:
“Very, very bright, ferociously efficient and utterly charming”Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2020, Fraud: Civil:
“An incredibly clear thinker”Legal 500 UK Bar 2020, Banking and Finance:
“She has a tremendous grasp of the relevant caselaw and great technical knowhow”Chambers & Partners Global 2019, Dispute Resolution:
“Very impressive in court” - Banking & financial services
Madison Pacific Trust Ltd v Shakoor Capital Ltd [2020] EWHC 610: application by bond trustee for directions in relation to arbitration award. Also acted in the underlying LCIA arbitration. Instructed by Dechert.
Re Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (“Waterfall I”) [2017] UKSC 38, [2015] EWCA (Civ) 485 and [2014] EWHC 704: application for directions by the administrators of three companies in the Lehman Brothers group seeking the determination of various issues arising from the fact that LBIE has a substantial surplus after the payment of all its unsubordinated proved debts. Issues include construction of subordinated debt agreements. Instructed by Dentons.
Lehman Brothers Luxembourg Investments SARL v Lehman Brothers UK Holdings Limited (in administration): claim for declaratory relief in relation to subordinated debt agreements. Instructed by Dentons.
Pine River Asia Master Fund Ltd v Castex Technologies Ltd & Ors: claims relating to alleged share price manipulation in relation to convertible bonds, and consequences for a number of Asset Swapped Convertible Option Transactions (ASCOTs). Instructed by Baker & McKenzie.
Sukhoruchkin v Van Bekestein [2014] EWCA Civ 399 and [2013] EWHC 1993 (Ch): acting for claimants in claims arising out of the management of an offshore investment fund. Instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills.
RBS v Highland [2012] EWHC 1278 (Comm); [2013] EWCA Civ 328: applications for anti-suit injunctions to restrain proceedings in Texas and whether a previous judgment (on sums due following termination of a collateralised debt obligation) should be set aside as having been obtained by fraud. Instructed by Linklaters.
EIIB v AHAB [2011] EWHC 2444 (Comm): acting for a syndicate of banks, headed by EIIB, in their claim to recover sums due under an Islamic financing facility from the Algosaibi partnership, defended on grounds of alleged fraud on the part of Maan Al-Sanea. Instructed by Dentons.
Interactive Investor v City Index [2011] EWCA Civ 837: acting for City Index at first instance and on appeal to the Court of Appeal, defending claims by Interactive Investor for injunctions in relation to the conduct of the “Wind Down Periods” of the white label trading arrangements between Interactive and City Index. Instructed by Macfarlanes.
JPMorgan Chase v Wockhardt: Advising and acting for an investment bank in a claim for sums due in respect of range accrual transactions under an ISDA Master Agreement; issues included non reliance clauses. Commercial Court. Claim settled shortly before trial. Instructed by Allen & Overy.
HSBC v 5th Avenue and Brown: [2007] EWHC 2342 (QB) and [2007] EWHC 2819 (Comm) and [2009] EWCA Civ 296: acting for HSBC, both on appeal to the Court of Appeal (March 2009) and for the eight week Commercial Court trial (at the time, subject to reporting restrictions). HSBC successfully defended claims arising from the bank fraud perpetrated by Michael Brown, the Liberal Democrat donor convicted for that fraud. The trial was one of The Lawyer’s “Top Trials of 2007”. Instructed by Allen & Overy.
Acting for an investment bank in obtaining without notice injunctive relief to restrain misuse of commercially sensitive confidential information. Chancery Division proceedings settled. Instructed by Allen & Overy.
Shalson v Russo [2005] Ch 281: Chancery Division trial involving asset tracing and other issues arising from fraud using sham bank accounts. Instructed by Allen & Overy.
- Civil fraud & asset recovery
Experience includes acting and advising in relation to substantial fraud and asset tracing proceedings, involving claims of constructive trust, dishonest assistance, knowing receipt, deceit/misrepresentation and restitution.
Cases include:
Avonwick Holdings Ltd v Azitio Holdings Ltd [2020] EWHC 1844 (Comm): 8 week Commercial Court trial involving allegations of misrepresentation, deceit and conspiracy in claims made by three prominent Ukrainian businessmen. Instructed by Hogan Lovells.
Latin American Investments Ltd v Maroil Trading Inc [2017] EWHC 1254 (Comm): freezing injunctions; joint venture companies; reflective loss; shareholders’ agreements. Instructed by Quinn Emanuel.
Yeung v Zhang: proceedings brought by executors of deceased’s estate to recover assets in the possession of the defendant alleged to be held by her on trust for the deceased; alternatively, to have been transferred pursuant to transactions procured by undue influence; freezing and proprietary injunctions. Instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills.
Sukhoruchkin v Van Bekestein [2014] EWCA Civ 399 and [2013] EWHC 1993 (Ch): acting for claimants in claims for dishonest assistance, knowing receipt, unlawful means conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the management of an offshore investment fund. Reflective loss issues in context of freezing and proprietary injunctions. Instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills.
EIIB v AHAB: claims under an Islamic finance facility, defended on grounds of alleged fraud on AHAB (see above). Instructed by Dentons.
HSBC v 5th Avenue and Brown: [2007] EWHC 2342 (QB) and [2007] EWHC 2819 (Comm) and [2009] EWCA Civ 296: successfully acting for HSBC defending various claims arising from bank fraud (see above). Instructed by Allen & Overy.
Shalson v Russo [2005] Ch 281: civil fraud, asset tracing and contempt of court. Chancery Division. Instructed by Allen & Overy.
R v Kelly, McGovern and Munday: during 2002 Louise was instructed by the Crown as part of the team prosecuting an eight month investment fraud trial.
- Company Law
Most of Louise’s cases involve a company law aspect. Experience includes advising and acting in relation to shareholders’ disputes, claims against directors for breach of fiduciary duty, and proceedings for the disqualification of directors.
Instructed in relation to a complex arbitration under UNCITRAL rules relating to a shareholders’ dispute involving British, US and Liberian interests.
Instructed to act in an LCIA arbitration concerning a joint venture agreement concerning a real estate development.
- Insolvency/Restructuring
Re Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in administration) [2020] EWHC 1932 (Ch): application for directions by the administrators of LBIE concerning the distribution of surplus funds to LBIE’s sole shareholder. Instructed by Dentons.
Re Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in administration) (“Waterfall I”) [2017] UKSC 38, [2015] EWCA (Civ) 485 and [2014] EWHC 704: application for directions by the administrators of three companies in the Lehman Brothers group seeking the determination of various issues arising from the fact that LBIE is likely to have a substantial surplus after the payment of all its unsubordinated proved debts. Issues include (i) construction of subordinated debt agreements, (ii) currency conversion claims, (iii) statutory interest entitlement, (iv) extent of s.74 liability of members, (v) provability of s.74 liability while company is in administration, (vi) application of insolvency set-off and (vii) application of the Contributory Rule. Instructed by Dentons.
Lehman Brothers Luxembourg Investments SARL v Lehman Brothers UK Holdings Limited (in administration): claim for declaratory relief in relation to subordinated debt agreements. Instructed by Dentons.
BLV Realty Ltd v Batten [2009] EWHC 2994: application to remove administrators on ground of breach of duty to perform their function in interests of company’s creditors as a whole and causing unfair harm to interests of applicant creditor. Instructed by Pinsent Masons.
Mills v Fielding & Others: acted (for claimant trustee in bankruptcy of Michael Fielding, the Lawrence Graham partner convicted of stealing from the firm’s client account) in successfully opposing challenge to English court’s jurisdiction over claim for repayment of loan made by bankrupt. Proceedings subsequently settled shortly before trial. Instructed by Halliwells.
Air and General Finance Ltd v RYB Marine Ltd & Others: instructed by the administrative receivers of companies operating a marina to defend proprietary claims brought by finance company to the proceeds of sale of certain yachts (Chancery Division and Admiralty Court claims listed to be heard together; proceedings subsequently settled). Instructed by Osborne Clarke.
Law Society v Balendran [2004] BPIR 859: attempt to relitigate issues decided in bankruptcy proceedings by way of annulment application an abuse of process. Instructed for the Law Society by Wright Son & Pepper.
Re BRAC Rent-A-Car International Inc [2003] 1 WLR 1421: administration order, EC Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings 2000, company incorporated in USA. Instructed by SJ Berwin.
- Trusts and Estates Litigation
Experience includes (in addition to general advice and advocacy in relation to the administration of estates and execution of trusts) advising in relation to substantial offshore trusts, applications for accounts and inquiries, applications for the removal of executors and administrators, advising and acting for the litigation friends of minor beneficiaries, Court of Protection proceedings and Inheritance Act claims.
Cases include:
Griffin v Merrill Lynch Trust Services SA & Ors: acting for minor beneficiary in claim for appointment of judicial trustees; application for without notice injunctive relief. Instructed by Harcus Sinclair.
In the matter of several trusts: advising and acting for the beneficiaries of substantial trusts in relation to issues arising from the failed retirement and appointment of replacement trustees; applications for Beddoes and other relief. Instructed by DWF.
Birley and Anor v Birley and Others: acting for the litigation friend of the late Mark Birley’s grandson in proceedings relating to the validity of his will. Instructed by Boodle Hatfield.
In the matter of a trust: contested confidential application for directions by trustees of a very substantial trust. Instructed by Allen & Overy.
Shalson v Russo [2005] Ch 281: sham trusts. Instructed by Allen & Overy.
Also substantial experience (as detailed under other headings above) of litigation involving the application of trusts law in the commercial context, in particular in the context of fraud or insolvency proceedings.
- Memberships
Chancery Bar Association, COMBAR, ILA (Insolvency Lawyers Association), ACTAPS (Association of Contentious Trust and Probate Specialists) and the Commercial Fraud Lawyers Association
- Education
BA (Oxon)
