Chambers UK 2021

The experienced commercial barristers at Serle Court are routinely instructed in high-profile fraud cases on both a domestic and international scale. Members offer significant expertise in claims involving allegations of bribery, as well as the tracing, freezing and recovery of assets across a wide range of jurisdictions. Several of the set's instructions involve offshore jurisdictions such as the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and the BVI, while the team is also regularly instructed in disputes arising in Russia and the Middle East. Recent work handled by the set includes acting for one of the defendants in The Public Institution for Social Security v Al-Rajaan, an USD800 million fraud claim brought by the Kuwaiti state involving allegations of bribery and collusion.

Client Service: "There is a real collaborative effort within the set and the clerks are very responsive, helpful and commercial." "The clerks are friendly, approachable and happy to accommodate requests." "Charlie Payne and Adam Bell are excellent - they're extremely efficient and turn around instructions very quickly."  

Silks

Elizabeth Jones QC: "She is impressive in court and very good at making submissions." "Her fraud brain is incredible - she is technically bright and astute and for complex issues she is a go-to person."

Dominic Dowley QC: "He is incredibly effective." "A reliable and bright barrister."

Philip Marshall QC: "One of the top barristers around - he has massive experience, is super quick and very academically clever." "He is ruthlessly efficient and gets the job done." "He is impressively quick on his feet."

Philip Jones QC:  "A fantastic barrister with a huge brain." "He is impressive and clear in his submissions."

Hugh Norbury QC: "An incredible barrister who is very engaging, deals with clients incredibly well and has a great command of the law." "He is highly competent and clever."

Jonathan Adkin QC:  "A brilliant advocate." "He is very calm, extremely thorough and very direct in his advocacy."

Justin Higgo QC: "He is enthusiastic, great on his feet and has a really nice attitude in court." "He is very robust and has great knowledge of civil fraud."

Juniors

Nicholas Harrison: "Very reliable and a good advocate."

David Drake: "He is great at analysing academically tricky areas." "A great advocate with a first-class brain who is also fantastic on paper." "He is a pleasure to work with and is a QC in all but name."

Simon Hattan: "A brilliant senior junior who is very strategic. He is great if you have a thorny issue that you want to navigate around." "He knows the law back to front and he pleads his cases thoroughly."

Matthew Morrison: "A clever barrister." "He is highly efficient, knows the law inside out and produces quality work."

Dan McCourt Fritz: "He is very hard-working." "He is user-friendly, sharp and bright." "A rising star and an absolute pleasure to work with."

Legal 500 2021

"The quality is excellent" at Serle Court which is "a go-to set for fraud claims generally". Clients rate the strength in depth, where "from the top to the bottom they're high-quality barristers and I've not come across one I wouldn't instruct".

Silks

Alan Boyle QC: "An absolute delight to work with - his levels of accessibility, kindness and general helpfulness are more associated with a very junior barrister looking to build their network and are a testament to him."

Elizabeth Jones QC: "A truly brilliant silk."

Dominic Dowley QC: "Happy to either provide high level legal guidance or roll his sleeves up to do more routine work, whatever helps the team."

Philip Marshall QC: "A brilliant tactician and a formidable advocate who leaves no stone unturned to win a case."

Philip Jones QC: "The kind of silk that can turn a case around and is never without a solution for the most difficult of problems."

Hugh Norbury QC: "An outstandingly capable silk - immensely engaging and always a pleasure to work with."

Jonathan Adkin QC: "A passionate and highly intelligent advocate - the clients love his approach in conference and in court."

Daniel Lightman QC: "Fantastically bright and has very good strategic sense. Daniel is a pleasure to work with and has a wonderful demeanour with clients."

Dakis Hagen QC: "Delightful and hugely capable young silk - brilliant with clients and very hard working."

Justin Higgo QC: "He's brilliant - really clever, sees the way through complex matters as if they're simple."

Juniors

Nicholas Harrison: "Creative, with an immense ability to resolve the most challenging of legal issues as if second nature."

David Drake: "One of the smartest lawyers one could possibly meet – never intimidated by any legal issue and an immense talent."

Simon Hattan: "Marvelous - thorough, intelligent, fights a client's case and can be relied upon completely."

Matthew Morrison: "A very hard working junior, provides excellent support, and is a good team player."

Dan McCourt Fritz: "He has a fierce intellect and is a brilliant advocate, and is also superb with clients and, which really marks him out."

Paul Adams: "He is astonishingly bright: he sees and understands issues and the interaction between them instantly; his knowledge of the law and his ability to recall authority relevant to any given situation is, in my experience, without equal."

Navigator Equities Limited and Vladimir Chernukhin v Oleg Deripaska:

The Court of Appeal has today handed down an important judgment on committal applications in Navigator Equities Limited and Vladimir Chernukhin v Oleg Deripaska [2021] EWCA Civ 1799. The court set aside the order of Andrew Baker J (striking out the committal application against Mr Deripaska as an abuse of process) and has remitted the matter back to the Commercial Court for trial.

The judgment is available below.

James Weale (led by Jonathan Crow QC) represented the successful appellants, instructed by Ted Greeno and Greg Pantlin of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan UK LLP.

Key Points

The claimants brought committal proceedings against Mr Deripaska in respect of alleged breaches of his undertakings to the court in June 2018 relating to a portion of shares in EN+ Plc (Jersey), of which Mr Deripaska was the ultimate beneficial owner. The alleged breaches consisted of Mr Deripaska procuring (or, alternatively, failing to block) a vote of EN+ Plc in December 2018 in favour of “redomiciliation” from Jersey to a special administrative region of Russia. The Claimants alleged that the effect of such redomiciliation was to destroy the true value of the undertakings by cancelling the shares which formed their subject matter and replacing them with shares in a company located in Russia (where enforcement was extremely difficult if not impossible).

At first instance, Andrew Baker J struck out the committal application as an abuse of process on the basis the Claimants had brought committal proceedings in order to vex and harass Mr Deripaska and that the Claimants were motivated by personal animus.

However, the Court of Appeal held that Andrew Baker J’s judgment depended upon “fundamental misapprehensions” as to the factual basis of the alleged breaches as well as errors of law relating to the duties owed by an applicant bringing contempt proceedings and the relevance of an applicant’s subjective motives. The key points arising out of the court’s judgment are as follows.

The court (Carr LJ giving the lead judgment) held that there was an important distinction between “civil contempt” (i.e. committal proceedings arising out of breaches of orders/undertakings) and “criminal” / “public law” contempt (i.e. committal proceedings arising out of matters other than such breaches) (see paras 81 and 120). In the context of civil contempt:

1. Provided that the objective purpose of the application is to bring to the court’s attention serious breaches, an applicant’s subjective motive (e.g. personal animosity) is irrelevant and cannot form the basis for a strike out application (paras 82(vii), 110, 114, 122 and 127).
    
2. Applicants are not required to act as disinterested quasi-prosecutors acting solely in the public interest. Rather, they are entitled to pursue applications in a partisan fashion in pursuit of their legitimate private interests (paras 134 and 138).

Business Energy Solutions v Scrivener & Ors:

Philip Marshall QC and Matthew Morrison continue to act for Business Energy Solutions (BES) in respect of proceedings arising from the obtaining and execution of search warrants, and an ongoing trading standards investigation into BES’s affairs. The claims, which seek damages for misfeasance in public office and just satisfaction under the Human Rights Act 1998, raise novel points of public and private law including immunity from suit. The 12-day trial commences in November 2021.

Vale v Steinmetz & Ors:

Philip Jones QC and Hugh Norbury QC are each instructed on behalf of separate Defendants in the major commercial fraud case of Vale v Steinmetz & Ors, arising out of a failed mining joint venture in Guinea. The claim is for nearly US$2 billion.

Kelly v Baker & Braid:

Lance Ashworth QC acts for the claimant in Kelly v Baker & Braid, a commercial court claim for damages for fraudulent misrepresentation and/or breach of fiduciary duty leading to the sale of a group of companies at an undervalue of over £110m.

Wellcourt Investment Corp v Propfurn Ltd:

Lance Ashworth QC and Matthew Morrison are acting for the claimants in Wellcourt Investment Corp v Propfurn Ltd, a claim in connection with a £100m property portfolio in London, owned by BVI and Liberian companies. They have so far successfully obtained recovery of all monies held by the former agents of the claimants.

Circumference v Martin:

John Machell QC acts for the claimants in Circumference v Martin in which the Claimants claim an entitlement to rescind a share purchase agreement for fraudulent misrepresentation.

China Metals v Chun:

Hugh Norbury QC has been involved in the English leg of China Metals v Chun, a large international fraud case relating to the alleged misappropriation of assets in China / Hong Kong. Hugh is acting for the daughters of the alleged fraudster in relation to a proprietary injunction over valuable assets that they hold in London.

Equity Real Estate (Bracknell) Ltd & Ors v Capstan Capital Partners LLP & Ors:

In Equity Real Estate (Bracknell) Ltd & Ors v Capstan Capital Partners LLP & Ors, Justin Higgo QC and Stephanie Thompson are representing five SPVs who are the apparent victims of a substantial property investment fraud. They have so far obtained extensive disclosure from third parties under the Bankers Trust, Norwich Pharmacal, and pre-action disclosure jurisdictions.

Ballacorey What v Brown and Ors:

Hugh Norbury QC is instructed on behalf of corporate and individual trustee and director defendants in Ballacorey What v Brown and Ors, a fraud claim issued in the Isle of Man arising out of a relationship between investment managers in the GEM financial management business.

Federal Republic of Nigeria v Tibit:

In Federal Republic of Nigeria v Tibit, Timothy Collingwood QC acts for the defendant company in an action in the BVI brought on behalf of the Government of Nigeria to recover funds which it is claimed were appropriated by corrupt former officials and used to purchase an executive jet.

HMRC v IGE USA Investments:

Philip Jones QC and Gareth Tilley are acting for HMRC in HMRC v IGE USA Investments Ltd, a claim arising from the Revenue’s contention that it has rescinded tax settlements with the UK Subgroup of the US conglomerate worth upwards of £650m. The trial is to take place in late 2021. An interlocutory decision of Zacaroli J reported at [2020] EWHC 2121 (Ch) permitting the Claimants to amend to allege fraud is currently on appeal to the Court of Appeal raising the question of what if any limitation period applies to equitable claims for rescission on the basis of fraudulent misrepresentation.

SPI North Ltd v Swiss Post International (UK) Ltd [2020] EWHC 3268 (Ch):

David Drake acted for the successful defendants in SPI North Ltd v Swiss Post International (UK) Ltd [2020] EWHC 3268 (Ch), where the court had to consider the practical limits to the permission, frequently given to respondents to an amendment application, to make “consequential” amendments to their own responsive statement of case.

Please click here to view the judgment.

Social Security of Kuwait v Al-Rajaan and Ors [2020] EWHC 2979 (Comm):

Jonathan Adkin QC and Charlotte Beynon act for the fourth defendant and Philip Marshall QC and Simon Hattan for the fifth defendant in Public Institution for Social Security of Kuwait v Al-Rajaan and Ors, one of the largest fraud claims ever heard in the Commercial Court. PIFSS alleges that the defendants are liable for over US$800m as a result of a large-scale fraud perpetrated by its former director general, Mr Al-Rajaan, in conjunction with the other defendants. The Serle Court contingent recently successfully challenged the jurisdiction of the English Court to hear the claims against their clients, with the Court directing that the claims should be heard in Switzerland, a decision which the Claimant has been given permission to appeal.

Please click here to view the judgment.

Renova Industries Ltd & ors v Emmerson International Corporation & ors:

Philip Marshall QC and Oliver Jones continue to represent Emmerson International Corporation and several other defendants and claimants by way of counterclaim and ancillary claim in proceedings in the BVI in a dispute worth circa US$1bn between two prominent Russian businessmen and associated parties concerning a joint venture in relation to power generation and distribution assets in Russia (Renova Industries Ltd & Ors v Emmerson International Corporation & Ors). The proceedings involve contractual claims and claims for breach of trust and dishonest assistance, deceit, conspiracy to injure and other economic torts. There were numerous interlocutory hearings and appeals in 2020, including a successful appeal by Emmerson against the lower court’s decision to set aside certain amendments to its claims (BVIHCMAP 2019/0017), applications made by Emmerson for anti-suit injunctions in relation to proceedings brought in Russia (currently subject to appeal) and Cyprus, and an application by the Renova parties for an order that Emmerson be required to share legal representation with certain other parties notwithstanding that there is a conflict of interests between them. Judgment of the ECCA is also pending on Emmerson’s appeal against the lower court’s decision to impose a confidentiality club in relation to disclosure ordered to be given ancillary to a freezing injunction obtained by Emmerson, which will be the first appellate decision on the subject in the BVI.

Please click here to view the latest judgment. 

Taylor v Rhino Overseas Inc. [2020] EWCA Civ 353:

Lance Ashworth QC and Dan McCourt Fritz represented the Respondents in an appeal from the decision of Julia Dias QC as a High Court Judge [2019] EWHC 1951 (Ch).  The Court of Appeal held that the Judge had been right to say that agency did not extend to allow the party to enter into the contract as agent for an undisclosed principal. Further, it upheld the Judge’s findings that the relevant agent was not, in any event, intended to be a party to the contract.  Appeal was dismissed.

Please click here to view the judgment.

Christoforou v Christoforou [2020] EWHC 1196 (Ch):

In Christoforou v Christoforou [2020] EWHC 1196 (Ch) the High Court struck out allegations of dishonesty, fraud, and illegality from an Amended Defence and excluded those allegations from consideration (and cross-examination) at trial.  Giving judgment HH Judge Stephen Eyre QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that the allegations amounted to similar fact of evidence but that they were of “peripheral” value to the Claimant’s claim that a London property is held on trust for him pursuant to a common intention constructive trust. Allowing the allegations to remain, he held, would have greatly increased the cost, and risked an adjournment, of the trial. Daniel Lightman QC and Stephanie Thompson represent the Claimant. The trial is due to take place in July 2020.

Please click here to view the judgment. 

Ward v Savill [2020] EWHC 1534 (Ch):

In Ward v Savill [2020] EWHC 1534 (Ch), James Mather acted for the successful defendant in the determination of a preliminary issue on whether declarations obtained in earlier proceedings to which the defendant was not a party that property was held on constructive trust for the claimants could be relied on in future proceedings for purposes of asserting a tracing or following claim against her. The case is due to be heard by the Court of Appeal in March 2021.

Please click here to view the judgment. 

Taylor v Van Dutch:

Lance Ashworth QC and Dan McCourt Fritz represented the Defendants in a 6-day Chancery Division trial, defeating claims for conspiracy to defraud in connection with the Van Dutch luxury yachts in Taylor v Van Dutch.

O’Brien v Moneycorp:

Lance Ashworth QC and Dan McCourt Fritz successfully represented the Claimant in O'Brien v Moneycorp in Commercial Court proceedings concerning the sale and purchase of the entire share capital of a foreign exchange trading business. 

Magdeev v Tsvetkov & Ors [2020] EWHC 887 (Comm):

Jonathan Adkin QC and Adil Mohamedbhai acted for the successful defendants in Magdeev v Tsvetkov & Ors, a high-profile piece of civil fraud and commercial litigation involving various Russian individuals who had invested in a jewellery business in the UAE and Cyprus. The trial lasted three weeks. Cockerill J’s judgment ([2020] EWHC 887 (Comm)) contains a detailed analysis of the law on foreign illegality.

Please click here to view the judgment.

Spokane v CMS:

Justin Higgo QC and Stephanie Thompson acted for a private equity fund in proceedings for breach of fiduciary duty against its former solicitor in Spokane v CMS, billed as one of the top 10 commercial court trials for 2019. 

Public Institution for Social Security of Kuwait v Man Group PLC plus 37 other defendants:

Public Institution for Social Security of Kuwait v Man Group PLC plus 37 other defendants, involving Jonathan Adkin QC and Charlotte Beynon for the fourth defendant and Philip Marshall QC and Simon Hattan for the fifth defendant, is one of the largest fraud disputes ever heard in the commercial court. in its High Court claim, the Public Institution for Social Security alleges it is owed $847.7 million as a result of a large-scale fraud by its former director-general, Fahad Maziad Rajaan Al-Rajaan. With allegations of bribery and corruption spanning three decades. This case featured in The Lawyer's Top 20 Cases of 2020.

Taylor v Van Dutch Marine Holding [2020] EWCA Civ 353:

Lance Ashworth QC and Dan McCourt Fritz acted for the successful Respondents in the Court of Appeal in Taylor v Van Dutch Marine Holding [2020] EWCA Civ 353, in a claim concerning agents for undisclosed principals. They are now instructed for the defendants in Taylor v Khodabaksh in which it is claimed that the original decision in Taylor v Van Dutch Marine Holding was obtained by fraud. That will come on for trial in 2022.

Please click here to view the most recent judgment.

Filatona Trading Ltd & Anor v Navigator Equities Ltd & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 109:

In Filatona Trading Ltd v Navigator Equities Ltd [2020] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 418, James Weale acted for the successful respondent before the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal gave guidance on the inter-relationship between principles of agency law and contractual construction in order to determine when a disclosed principal can intervene in, and assert rights under, a contract. James acts in related proceedings in Jersey which have been listed for trial in March 2021.

Please click here to view the judgment. 

Russell v Cartwright [2020] EWHC 41 (Ch):

In Russell v Cartwright [2020] EWHC 41 (Ch), Dan McCourt Fritz and Stephanie Thompson represented three defendants in the trial of a claim for fraudulent non-disclosure and unlawful means conspiracy brought by their former business partner. They were wholly successful at trial, with the Court finding that the parties did not owe fiduciary duties or duties of disclosure and that the defendants had been honest in their dealings with the claimant. The defendants were entitled to their costs on the indemnity basis.

Please click here to view the judgment. 

Motortrak Ltd v FCA Australia Pty Ltd [2018] EWHC 990 (Comm):

Hugh Norbury QC and Adil Mohamedbhai appeared in Motortrak Ltd v FCA Australia Pty Ltd [2018] EWHC 990 (Comm) a contractual and civil fraud dispute which was tried before Moulder J in the Commercial Court over three weeks. This is an important decision on the law of affirmation of contracts procured by bribes and on the construction of exclusion clauses. 

Please click here to view the judgment. 

Akhmedova v Akhmedov [2018] EWFC 23:

In Akhmedova v Akhmedov [2018] EWFC 23, Dakis Hagen QC represented the wife in a case in which Mr Justice Haddon-Cave, as part of satisfaction of England's largest divorce award, transferred to her ownership of a superyacht allegedly worth $487m, pierced the corporate veil of a Liechtenstein anstalt, set aside a number of dispositions under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and extended a worldwide freezing order.

Please click here to view the judgment.

St John’s Trust Company (Pvt) Ltd v Tamine [2018] EWHC 3629 (Ch):

Dakis Hagen QC and Emma Hargreaves are acting for the trustee of a Bermuda trust, with assets worth billions of dollars, in proceedings against its former director who refused to hand over trust property following his resignation. In the recent judgment, St John's Trust Company (Pvt) Ltd v Tamine [2018] EWHC 3629 (Ch) they successfully obtained interim relief (along with indemnity costs) against the former director under section 25 if the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 in support of the Bermuda proceedings. 

Please click here to view the judgment.

Glenn v Watson [2018] EWCH 2016 (Ch):

Elizabeth Jones QC, Justin Higgo, Gareth Tilley, Paul Adams, Zahler Bryan and Oliver Jones continue to act for Sir Owen Glenn and his company, Kea Investments Limited in their dispute with New Zealand businessman Eric Watson, following the judgment in Glenn v Watson [2018] EWCH 2016 (Ch) in which Kea suceeded in establishing its entitlement to set aside agreements relating to a joint venture etween Sir Owen and Eric Watson on the baiss of (i) fraudulent misrepresentations made on behalf of Mr Watson, (ii) breach of Mr Watson's fiduciary duty to Kea. The court gave an important decision on equitable interest, awarding interest of 6.5% compounded annually, at [2018] EWCH 2016 (Ch). Litigation continues as Kea seeks to enforce its judgment againts Mr Watson's assets in the UK and internationally. 

Please click here to view the judgment. 

Accident Exchange Ltd & Anor v McLean & Ors [2018] EWHC 1533 (Comm):

In Accident Exchange v McLean & Ors, Hugh Norbury QC, Dan McCourt Fritz, and Charlotte Beynon continue to act for Keoghs, one of three firms of solicitors joined to Accident Exchange's £130m conspiracy claim relating to Autofocus' "perjury on an industrial scale". Following successful applications by Keoghs and the other firms for security for costs, the claim settled shortly before trial. 

Please click here to view the judgment. 

Instant Access Properties v Rosser [2018] EWHC 756 (Ch):

Lance Ashworth QC and Matthew Morrison secured judgment secured judgment for the First Defendant , Mr Rosser in Instant Access Properties v Rosser successfully defeating a fraudulent trading and breach of fiduciary duty claim of £35 million.

Please click here to view the judgment. 

JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 1176:

Philip Jones QC acted for the Kazakh bank BTA in its claim to recover in excess of $4bn from which it has been defrauded by Mukhtar Ablyazov. He was involved in a trial that sought to recover assets from Mukhtar Ablyazov's son.

Please click here to view the judgment.

First Peninsula Trustees Limited v Picard & others:

Alan Boyle QC and Giles Richardson act in proceedings in the BVI and Bermuda for trustees holding the proceeds of commission payments made by Madoff feeder funds to their investments adviser in defending claims by the liquidators of the funds. 

Constantin Medien [2017] EWHC 131 (Comm):

Philip Marshall QC and James Mather acted for Constantin Medien in a claim against Bayerische Landesbank for US$130m arising out of the sale in 2006 of the bank's stake in Formula One under the influence of a bribe paid to its senior official. 

Please click here for the judgment.

Secretary of State for Health & Ors v Servier Laboratories Ltd:

Rejected the defendants' attempt to rely on a French criminal statue in order to resist providing further information and disclsoure.

SerleShare:

'No constructive trust for moneys paid under judgment alleged to have been obtained by Fraud' article by Lance Ashworth QC & Dan McCourt Fritz

'New year, new cases: Specific disclosure under the pilot scheme' article by Gareth Tilley

Legal Week:

'Big Data, Coronavirus and Cryptocurrencies: The Changing Face of Fraud' article by Sophia Hurst