“Serle Court is still second to none for civil fraud…”
Serle Court "is in so many ways the top chancery and commercial fraud chambers in the country"
"The quality is excellent' at Serle Court which is 'a go-to set for fraud claims generally'."
“The go-to set for emergency applications”
Serle Court has been in Band 1 for civil fraud in both Chambers & Partners and Legal 500 for more than 10 years. With 10 silks and 8 juniors rated as leading practitioners by the directories, teams from chambers have been involved for both claimants and defendants in many of the most complex and high-value civil fraud cases of the past decade, such as Glenn v Watson, Griffith v Gourgey, Fiona Trust, BTA Bank v Ablyazov, Aeroflot v Berezovsky, Sovcomflot v Privalov, Ras Al Khaimah v Bestfort, Constantin Medien v Ecclestone, Tatneft PJSC v Bogolyubov, Orb v Ruhan as well as more historic involvement in well-known cases such as Barings Bank and Barlow Clowes, the Gruppo Torras litigation, the Sumitomo Corporation trading fraud and the Madoff and Maxwell frauds. Often several teams from Serle Court are involved in the biggest cases so that Serle Court is experienced and adept at coping with the additional demands of confidentiality arising when members of chambers appear on different sides.
One of the things which differentiate Serle Court is that our technical knowledge and long experience in the field of civil fraud is combined with our expertise not only in banking/financial services and company/insolvency but also in the fields of private client and trusts. We can, therefore, provide teams which can tackle fraud cases across the full range of subject matter and legal categories, and across the world. As well as regular appearances in the courts in London, over the past few years, we have appeared or advised in the Bahamas, BVI, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, the Channel Islands, the CIS, France, Isle of Man, Hong Kong, Japan and the UAE.
In this as in all areas, the directories comment on the client focussed approach, the strategic judgment and the effectiveness in court of our barristers.
Please join our experts in conversation on LinkedIn by joining the Serle Court – Fraud and Asset Tracing Group here.
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 KC: "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 KC: "He is incredibly effective." "A reliable and bright barrister."
Philip Marshall KC: "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 KC: "A fantastic barrister with a huge brain." "He is impressive and clear in his submissions."
Hugh Norbury KC: "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 KC: "A brilliant advocate." "He is very calm, extremely thorough and very direct in his advocacy."
Justin Higgo KC: "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 2023
‘An excellent set with a roster of formidably intelligent, yet approachable and user-friendly barristers‘, Serle Court‘s members consistently appear in the Commercial Court and Chancery Division’s most substantial civil fraud actions. Head of chambers Elizabeth Jones KC has longstanding experience in handling litigation involving fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty and other wrongdoing. In Joannou Paraskavides Overseas Limited (in liquidation) v Joannou, Philip Marshall KC represents an international construction company’s claimant liquidators, which are bringing claims of over $1bn for fraudulent trading and conspiracy to defraud. Meanwhile, in a $3bn bribery action before the Commercial Court, Jonathan Adkin KC acts for the Republic of Mozambique against a number of banks and an Abu Dhabi-based shipbuilder, in relation to allegations that state guarantees were procured by massive bribes to bankers and state agents. Dan McCourt Fritz KC, who took silk in March 2023, routinely acts in a broad range of fraud litigation; while at a junior level, Gregor Hogan‘s civil fraud practice spans multiple jurisdictions, including England, the DIFC, BVI and the Isle of Man.
Silks
Elizabeth Jones KC: "Manages to direct the strategy while having total command of the detail. She is courageous, determined and formidable." - Ranked: Tier 1
Philip Marshall KC: Ranked: Tier 1
Philip Jones KC: Ranked: Tier 2
Lance Ashworth KC: "An amazingly eloquent advocate who is fearless against other eminent silks and works well in a team." - Ranked: Tier 4
Hugh Norbury KC: "Always on a list of first choices for any fraud case. He has a depth and breadth of knowledge and experience that very few can match, and he has great instincts." - Ranked: Tier 1
Jonathan Adkin KC: "He is thorough, thoughtful, and inspires confidence in his judgement, which is excellent. His advocacy style is clear, concise and relentless - a firm favourite" - Ranked: Tier 1
Daniel Lightman KC: "Daniel is a master of litigation strategy. His attention to detail and strategic nous are excellent, he is tenacious as an advocate, and judges instantly respect him for his obvious legal and analytical strength in depth." - Ranked: Tier 3
Dakis Hagen KC: "Dakis is the consummate advocate. He is excellent with clients and really puts them at ease." - Ranked: Tier 4
Justin Higgo KC: "Ruthless, convincing and persuasive. His advocacy is really excellent - he has an uncanny ability to predict what is needed and often what will happen." - Ranked: Tier 3
Dan McCourt Fritz KC: ‘Very bright and determined to win.’
Juniors
Nicholas Harrison: "A brilliant strategist with a great brain." - Ranked: Tier 1
David Drake: Ranked: Tier 2
Simon Hattan: "Absolutely top rate - very responsive, thorough and persuasive in and out of court. Goes the extra mile." - Ranked: Tier 1
Matthew Morrison: "Matthew is an excellent practitioner in the civil fraud field, who is well liked by clients and a great team player. His written advocacy is first class and he has a great grasp of the legal issues." - Ranked: Tier 2
James Mather: "A real star in civil fraud. Knows the area like few others and has an excellent intellect." - Ranked: Tier 3
James Weale: Ranked: Tier 4
Paul Adams: "A really penetrating intellect - sound strategic judgement and the sort of calm demeanour that really inspires confidence." - Ranked: Tier 2
Sophie Holcombe:"Sophie has a marvellous work ethic. She's absolutely meticulous in her approach, and she's ferociously clever and dedicated to her clients. Highly recommended for complex and high-value civil fraud litigation." - Ranked: Tier 4
Adil Mohamedbhai: "Adil has an extremely sharp mind and an encyclopaedic knowledge of civil fraud law. His attention to detail is phenomenal, and he is able to identify issues of fact and law that that may be imperceptible to others." - Ranked: Tier 3
Zahler Bryan: "Very enjoyable to work with and very practical." - Ranked: Tier 4
Oliver Jones: "On top of complex detail, with great command of the technical, legal, and factual aspects of disclosure." - Ranked: Tier 4
Charlotte Beynon: "Unfailingly impressive and performs beyond her years. Gets to grips with complex cases quickly and is strategically astute. Great with instructing solicitors and clients alike." - Ranked: Tier 4
Gregor Hogan: "Always presents compelling arguments, articulates complex legal concepts clearly and persuasively, and proficiently communicates clients' positions." - Ranked: Tier 4
Stephanie Thompson: "Incredibly hardworking, organised and bright. Totally dependable - she always delivers and her work is exceptionally good." - Ranked: Tier 4
İşbilen v Selman Turk & Ors [2024] EWHC 505 (Ch):
Dan McCourt Fritz KC and Andrew Gurr act in successful committal application
The High Court has handed down a sentence of 12 months against the Respondent to a committal application in the long-running fraud case İşbilen v Turk. Dan McCourt Fritz KC and Andrew Gurr, instructed by Peters & Peters, acted for the successful applicant, Mrs İşbilen.
The Court found that Mr Turk had committed serious and contumacious breaches of an asset tracing order in failing to disclose information relating to the whereabouts of millions of pounds worth of funds to which Mrs İşbilen makes proprietary claims. Mr Turk’s breaches of the order were aggravated by his having put forward false explanations for some of the transactions, and by defending the application on the false basis that he did not understand the order and was not properly advised on its meaning and effect.
The judgment of Sir Anthony Mann on liability ([2024] EWHC 505 (Ch)) is available here.
The liability judgment includes discussion on a number of points which will be of interest to practitioners, including:
The decision has also been reported in the national press, including in the Times and the Telegraph.
Ivanishvili v Credit Suisse Trust Limited [2023] SGCH(I) 9:
The Singapore International Commercial Court (International Judge Bergin) has today handed down judgment following the trial of the dispute between Bidzina Ivanishvili and other plaintiffs and Credit Suisse Trust Limited. The claim stemmed from the long-running fraud committed by Patrice Lescaudron, an employee of Credit Suisse Bank in Geneva.
In a detailed judgment spanning 257 pages, the Court upheld the Plaintiffs’ claim that the Defendant acted in breach of trust. Of particular interest:
The Court has determined the basis for the assessment of loss and ordered that the calculations of loss be updated following the judgment. The total loss is expected to be in excess of USD 900 million.
Sophie Holcombe and Jamie Randall acted for the successful Plaintiffs with Drew & Napier LLC.CIVI
To read the judgment, please click here.
Floreat Investment Management Limited v Churchill & Ors:
The Court of Appeal handed down judgment on Tuesday 25th April 2023 in Floreat Investment Management Limited v Churchill & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 440, in which it reversed a finding of dishonesty made at first instance and entered judgment in favour of the appellants. The decision also provides useful guidance as to the appropriate content and structure of trial closing submissions.
Thomas Elias and John Eldridge appeared for the successful appellants, instructed by Fergus Buckley of Gunnercooke LLP.
The judgment can be viewed here.
Hunt v Ubhi:
The Court of Appeal handed down judgment on Wednesday, 19th April 2023, in Hunt v Ubhi [2023] EWCA Civ 417 in which it reiterated that the default rule is that applicants for freezing orders, including office holders, must provide unlimited cross undertakings in damages and that a departure from the default rule must be justified.
John Machell KC and Dan McCourt Fritz KC, in his last appearance as a junior, acted for the successful appellant. The decision also flags, but does not resolve, some niche issues relating to the Insolvent Partnerships Order.
The judgment can be viewed here.
PJSC National Bank Trust v Mints:
Mrs Justice Cockerill has recently handed down judgment in PJSC National Bank Trust v Mints [2023] EWHC 118 (Comm) in which she considered the effect of the Russian sanctions on various litigation issues. In short, she held that sanctioned claimants can sue for damages and judgment can be entered in their favour without the regulations being contravened; and payment of costs to and by sanctioned persons (i.e. adverse and favourable) and security for costs to be provided by sanctioned persons are licensable activities.
John Machell KC acted for MFT (PTC) Limited (together with James Knott of 4 Stone Buildings) instructed by Jonathan Speed and Simona Peter of Bird & Bird.
The judgment can be viewed here.
Frain (aka Reeves) v Reeves:
In Frain (aka Reeves) v Reeves [2023] EWHC 73 (Ch), Elizabeth Jones KC and Paul Adams successfully opposed the grant of permission to bring committal proceedings in relation to alleged false statements made in pleadings and witness statements containing a statement of truth, and in disclosure statements. Significant aspects of the judgment include (a) confirmation at [26]-[32] that where it can be seen at the permission stage that more than one inference may reasonably be drawn in relation to evidence advanced in support of a committal application, the claimant will be unable to establish a strong prima facie case to the criminal standard at trial, so that permission should not be granted, (b) confirmation at [37]-[39] of the importance of the applicant’s case on a committal application being clearly and fully set out within the four corners of the application and (c) the Judge’s decision at [42] that a judgment made at the trial of underlying proceedings out of which a committal application arises is not admissible in the committal application against a person who was a witness in but not a party to the original proceedings.
The judgment can be found here.
The Public Institution for Social Security v Al Rajaan & others:
On 26 January, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in The Public Institution for Social Security v Al Rajaan & others [2022] EWCA Civ 29. The Court dismissed the Claimant’s appeal, which was heard over three days in December 2021, and confirmed that the English court has no jurisdiction to hear bribery and money-laundering claims against a number of Swiss-domiciled individuals and entities.
The case is one of the largest fraud disputes ever heard in the Commercial Court and featured in The Lawyer’s Top 20 cases of 2020. The Court of Appeal decided entirely novel points on establishing jurisdiction under Article 6 of the Lugano Convention where there are (i) overlapping claims against the same defendant, some of which must be considered in that defendant’s state of domicile pursuant to an exclusive jurisdiction clause falling within Article 23 of the Convention, and (ii) connected claims against another defendant.
Click here to read more.
Jonathan Adkin QC and Charlotte Beynon acted for the Fourth Defendant instructed by Peters & Peters.
Philip Marshall QC and Simon Hattan acted for the Fifth Defendant instructed by Eversheds.
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:
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:
Michael Edenborough KC and David Drake are two of the four counsel acting for the SoS in this claim to recovery the monopolistic profits made by Servier based upon its invalid patent for perindopril (an ACE inhibitor used to combat high blood pressure). Part of the claim involves an allegation that SErvier improperly obtained a European Patent by deceiving the EPO as to the allegedly novelty of the invention. There is satellite litigation before the CJEU on the competition aspects and various issues concerning the disclosure being purported prevented by the French criminal code.
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
Welcome to SerleShare
SerleShare is an up-to-date digital marketing initiative that came to life in July 2020 when our Business Development and... Read More
A stellar year for Serle Court in The Legal 500 UK Bar 2025 guide
We are thrilled to announce another outstanding year of rankings and testimonials in The Legal 500 UK Bar 2025. Serle Court... Read More
"impressive silks and juniors are praised for their strength in depth"
Welcome to SerleShare
SerleShare is an up-to-date digital marketing initiative that came to life in July 2020 when our Business Development and... Read More
A stellar year for Serle Court in The Legal 500 UK Bar 2025 guide
We are thrilled to announce another outstanding year of rankings and testimonials in The Legal 500 UK Bar 2025. Serle Court... Read More
