Professional practice
Ricky Diwan KC has a global practice in the fields of international commercial litigation, international commercial arbitration, international investment arbitration, and public international law. His practice frequently involves multi-jurisdictional disputes that give rise to both court and arbitration related claims as well as interlocutory applications under the Arbitration Act 1996 and the CPR that require overall strategic co-ordination. He also has extensive experience in the execution of awards and judgments including against states and state entities, raising issues of sovereign immunity and other public international law related issues as well as seeking relief under s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (transactions defrauding creditors).
He appears both before the English Courts, foreign Courts and in international arbitrations in London and abroad under a wide variety of rules (including HKIAC, ICC, ICSID, LCIA, SCC, SIAC, UNCITRAL and VIAC). In recent years, he has appeared in important cases both before the Court of Appeal (most recently in NIOC v Crescent [2023] EWCA Civ 826) and before the Supreme Court (Kabab-Ji v Kout Food Group [2021] UKSC 48).
His advocacy practice is complemented by his extensive experience sitting as an international arbitrator both in international commercial and investment arbitration. He is a member of the HKIAC and SIAC panel of arbitrators, a member of the UK ICC Arbitraiton Committee and sits on the advisory board of the Mauritian International Arbitration Centre. Prior to practicing at the English Bar, Ricky was admitted to the New York Bar and practiced in New York at the leading international law firm of Debevoise & Plimpton.
He has been variously described in the legal guides as “a very clear, analytical thinker who can transform that into persuasive advocacy”, “a very strong advocate”, “an advocate who “glues the attention of the court”, whose “understated but powerful performance at hearings is advocacy at its best”, “razer-sharp intellect”, “always thinking about the bigger picture”, “extremely bright”, “exceptionally sharp and extremely pleasant to work with”, “meticulous, extremely hard-working and always on top of all the detail” and “widely recognised and recommended figure in the market.” In 2020, he was one of three nominees for international arbitration silk of the year at the Chambers Bar Awards. Two of his more recent cases have also been shortlisted by international guides for awards for their legal significance (GAR Awards 2019 and 2020) and the breadth of his international practice is recognized in Chambers and Partners Global, where he is ranked as a Global Market Leader and in Lawdragon 500 where he is recognised as a leading global litigator.
The subject matter of his cases is diverse and includes energy (oil & gas) in which he has acted in some of the largest international arbitrations, civil fraud (including conspiracy) both in court and in arbitration, telecommunications in which he has again acted in some of the largest international arbitrations, investment projects (infrastructure, power, mining, natural resources) that have given rise to international commercial and investment claims, joint ventures, pharmaceuticals, franchise arrangements, shareholder disputes, international supply contracts and disputes of a more technical nature. Given the nature of his international practice, he has a great deal of experience in cross-examining and arguing cases under a wide variety of common law and civil law systems (including Angolan law, French law, Iranian law, Kuwait law, Libyan law, Polish law, Russian law, Sudanese law, Ukrainian law and Turkish law).
- Examples of cases (more information available on request)
International Commercial Litigation (including civil fraud)
- Crane Bank (and others) v DFCU Bank (and others). Representing two of the co-defendants in a civil fraud claim alleging unlawful means conspiracy concerning a Ugandan Bank that was placed into receivership by the Bank of Uganda and subsequently sold. The case is on-going and raises (inter alia) questions of Foreign Act of State (see Crane Bank v DFCU Bank [2023] EWCA Civ 886).
- A v B. Pending high court trial concerning the disposition of property giving rise to claims under s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and under the Charging Orders Act 1979.
- Ness Global Services v Perform Content Services Ltd. International dispute between two global companies concerning the supply of software development services. The case gave rise to a jurisdictional battle involving US and English proceedings raising issues under the Brussels Regulation Recast (Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012) that went to the Court of Appeal (in which Ricky acted as counsel): Perform v Ness [2021] EWCA Civ 981.
- Tatneft v Ukraine[2021] 1 WLR 1123. Commercial Court re-hearing trial of issues under Ukrainian law concerning validity of investment for the purposes of a BIT.
- Bouhadi v Breish[2016] EWHC 602; Libyan Investment Authority v Société Générale [2015] EWHC 1720 and [2015] EWHC 1925. International commercial litigation concerning control over the Libyan Investment Authority, the sovereign wealth fund of Libya, and the question of which entity was to be recognised as the government of Libya following the fall of the Gaddafi regime.
- Yegiazaryan v Smagin[2015] EWHC 1944. Commercial court re-hearing trial (of jurisdiction under) to determine whether signature on an agreement was a forgery.
- International Commercial Arbitration
- Energy: Oil & Gas
- Crescent v NIOC acting on behalf of Crescent with respect to an on-going multi-billion dollar dispute concerning a long-term gas supply contract entered into with the Iranian State owned company NIOC giving rise to London and Geneva seated arbitrations and numerous interrelated court applications (with details of the cases appearing in the public domain including on the italaw website) (arbitrations seated in London and Geneva, claims in the billions of dollars).
- Acted in a Gapzrom related arbitration dispute against a major oil and gas company (arbitration seated in Istanbul, Turkish law, ICC).
- Acted on behalf of leading oil and gas companies in the context of the decommissioning dispute.
- Acted on behalf of an African State in an oil and gas pipeline dispute with its joint venture partners (claims in excess of USD 1 billion).
- Franchise agreements
- Acted on behalf of Kout Food Group concerning a dispute arising out of a franchise development agreement between two Middle Eastern companies in the food and beverage industry (ICC Rules, Paris seat). The case gave rise to court related proceedings that went to the Supreme Court (in which Ricky acted): Kabab-Ji v Kout Food Group [2021] UKSC 48.
- Infrastructure, mining, power and other joint venture projects
- Acted for a Caribbean government in a joint venture dispute with a South American aluminium company relating to the engineering, design and construction of an aluminium smelter and downstream facilities pursuant to a long term joint venture agreement (ICC Rules, Miami seat and London seat (two related arbitrations), claims in excess of USD 100 million).
- Acted for a mining company against an African State relating to long term oil concession giving rise to taxation issues (UNCITRAL, claims in excess of USD 400 million).
- Acted for a power company (Dowans) against relating to an emergency power off-take agreement agreement with Tanesco (state entity), which came into the public domain through enforcement proceedings: Dowans v Tanzania Electric Supply Company [2011] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 475 and 2012 [EWHC] 350 (ICC Rules, Tanzian seat, claims in excess of USD 65 million).
- Acted for a mining company against an African State relating to long term diamond mining concession (London seat).
- International sale transactions & supply agreements
- Counsel for an Indian company in dispute with a German company relating to the supply of high-tech manufacturing equipment raising complex engineering issues (ICC Rules, Singapore seat).
- Counsel for a company being part of a Swiss insurance group, relating to its acquisition of a Russian insurance company, raising issues of Russian law, and warranty and indemnity claims (LCIA Rules, London seat).
- Telecommunications
- Acting on behalf of a Dubai incorporated company in relation to dispute arising out of a supply agreement with a French telecom company (ICC Rules, Paris seat, claims in excess of USD 150 million).
- Acted on behalf of a Malaysian company relating to the acquisition of an Indian mobile telecommunication operator (SIAC Rules, Singapore seat, claims in excess of USD 250 million).
- Acted for a mobile telecom operator relating to a loan agreement (LCIA Rules, London seat, New York law, claims in excess of USD 400 million).
- Acted for a French mobile operator against a German mobile operator raising contractual and tortious disputes (VIAC Rules, Polish law, claims in excess of EUR 2 billion).
- International Investment treaty arbitration
- Tatneft v Ukraine[2021] 1 WLR 1123 raising questions as to the validity of the investment under the Ukraine-Russia BIT.
- Republic of Korea v Dayyanis[2020] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 212 raising questions of treaty interpretation under the Iran-Republic of Korea BIT.
- Raymond Eyre & Montrose Development v Sri Lanka, ICSID Case No. ARB/16/25. Acted on behalf of Sri Lanka in investment treaty arbitration (UK-Sri Lanka BIT) concerning a hotel development project raising multiple jurisdictional questions. The Award (of 5 March 2020) gave raise to ICSID annulment proceedings and a Decision rejecting annulment (2 December 2020) in which Ricky also successfully acted.
- Griffin v Poland[2018] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 410 raising issues of treaty interpretation under the Treaty between Poland, Belgium and Luxembourg.
- A v B (UNCITRAL). International arbitration case raising issues concerning interpretation of a stabilisation clause in the context of increased taxation imposed by a State.
- Advised on jurisdictional issues arising out of Slovak Republic v Achema (C-248/16)
- Advised on investment treaty claims arising out of the annexation of Crimea.
- Arbitration & related court applications
New York Convention 1958 (ss.100-103 Arbitration Act 1996)
- Kabab-Ji v Kout Food Group[2021] UKSC 48 (and also Court of Appeal [2020] 1 CLC 90 and also first instance decision)
- Tatneft v Ukraine[2021] 1 WLR 1123
- Travis Coal v Essar [2014] EWHC 2510
- Dowans v Tanzania Electric Supply Co Ltd[2011] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 475 and 2012 [EWHC] 350
- IPCO v NNPC [2008] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 59
s.9 Arbitration Act 1996 (stay)
- Wilson v Assaubayevs [2015] CP Rep 10 (CA)
s.44 Arbitration Act 1996, injunctions, anti-arbitration injunctions
- Gerald v Timis Trust [2016] EWHC 2327
- Assaubayevs v Wilson [2012] EWHC 350
s.66 Arbitration Act 1996 (enforcement)
- Crescent v NIOC (see below)
- Hays v Bloomfield Investments (see below)
- Y v S [2015] 1 Lloyds’ Rep 703
s.67 Arbitration Act 1996 (jurisdiction)
- NIOC v Crescent [2023] EWCA Civ 2641 (and also [2022] EWHC 2641)
- Port De Djibouti SA v DP World Djibouti [2023] EWHC 1189
- Republic of Korea v Dayyanis[2020] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 212
- Griffin v Poland[2018] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 410
- Petrotrin v Samsung [2017] EWHC 3055
- Yegiazaryan v Smagin[2015] EWHC 1944, [2015] 2 All ER (Comm) 85
s.68 Arbitration Act 1996 (serious irregularity)
- Polski Koncern v Yukos International [2013] Folio 736 (Comm)
- Petrochemical Industries v Dow Chemical Company [2012] EWHC 2739
s.69 Arbitration Act 1996 (error of law)
- NIOC v Crescent [2022] EWHC 1645
s.72 Arbitration Act 1996 (jurisdiction)
- TNEB v ST-CMS [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 93
s.73 Arbitration Act 1996 (waiver)
- NIOC v Crescent [2023] EWCA Civ 2641 (and also [2022] EWHC 2641)
- Port De Djibouti SA v DP World Djibouti [2023] EWHC 1189
- Tatneft v Ukraine[2021] 1 WLR 1123
s.80 (Extension of time)
- Hays v Bloomfield Investments [2022] EWHC 1648
- What others say
Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2023, International Arbitration: General Commercial & Insurance:
“His mastery of material and law is phenomenal.” “Ricky has a razor-sharp intellect and is always thinking about the bigger picture. He is responsive, incredibly hard-working and a great team-player.” “He is a very clear, analytical thinker who can transform that into persuasive advocacy.”
Legal 500 UK Bar 2023, International Arbitration: Counsel:
“Ricky is a phenomenally effective advocate. He presents extremely complex issues in a clear and logical way without hyperbole. I would instruct Ricky again without hesitation.”
Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2022, International Arbitration: General Commercial & Insurance:
“Ricky is highly experienced in dealing with a tribunal and has a very nice manner with them. He performs extremely well.” “He gives strong, strategic advice.”
Legal 500 UK Bar 2022, International Arbitration: Counsel:
“He provides clear, concise analysis of difficult points. Thoughtful and considered. Excellent all-round knowledge. Very hands-on and responsive. An absolute pleasure to work with.”
Legal 500 UK Bar 2021, International Arbitration: Counsel:
“Extremely sharp and understated at the same time – advocacy at its best.”
Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2021, International Arbitration: General Commercial & Insurance:
“He’s a very strong advocate, extremely bright and completely straightforward.”
“He glues the attention of the court in a very understated and efficient manner.”
Chambers & Partners (2019) and Chambers Global (2020)
“Ricky’s understated but powerful performance at hearings is advocacy at its best. He has a real willingness to exchange ideas and does very careful and detailed analysis.”
Chambers & Partners (2018)
“Highly regarded for his international arbitration practice, which concentrates on commercial and investment issues.
Legal 500 (2019)
“Exceptionally sharp and extremely pleasant to work with.”
Legal 500 (2018)
“An excellent silk who lives and breathes arbitration.”
Who’s Who Legal UK Bar (2019)
“Widely recognised and recommended figure in the market.”
Who’s Who Legal UK Bar (2017)
“Draw[ing] praise for the rate at which he has developed a very strong practice in both international commercial and investment arbitration with one source claiming, “He is one of the best young silks around”.
Who’s Who Legal UK Bar (2016)
“Outstanding Ricky Diwan QC emerges as one of the leading lights in our research and specializes in international commercial arbitration both in London and abroad under a range of laws.” In Chambers and Partners (2017) he was ranked in the field of international arbitration and described as “meticulous, extremely hard-working and always on top of all the detail.”
- Career
- Called to the Bar of England & Wales: 1998
- Admitted as an Attorney and Counsellor at Law by the State of New York: 1996
- Education
Cambridge University, Trinity College (1991-1994) BA (Law), First Class Honours (Parts 1A, 1B & Part II) Trinity College Senior and Junior Scholarships
Van Heyden Prize for Academics
ECS Wade Prize for Administrative Law
Harvard Law School, Cambridge Massachusetts, USA (1994-1995)
LL.M. (1994)
Holland Fund Scholarship awarded by Trinity College, Cambridge University for study at Harvard Law School
Inns of Court School of Law, Lincoln’s Inn, London (1997-1998)
Lord Denning Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn
Lord Mansfield Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn
Bar Association Prize for Commerce, Finance & Industry CCH Editions Prize for Company Law
Finalist of the Robert Wright Mooting Competition
