Rupert Reed KC

Rupert appears in Chambers UK Bar in Band 2 for Chancery Commercial. Client comment includes that “Rupert is very smooth and very good at persuading judges. He is really smart and charming.” “Rupert gets into the weeds of a case. He is brilliant and good on his feet with the judges.”

Rupert is listed in Chambers UK Bar in Band 4 for Commercial Dispute Resolution. Clients describe his strengths in the following terms: “Rupert has a deep knowledge of commercial disputes, particularly those relating to the Middle East. He has got real experience and gravitas, but wears it lightly.” “He works extremely well with the client and solicitor team.” “Rupert Reed is really the father figure of the DIFC bar. He is an excellent and smooth advocate.”

Rupert is listed in Legal 500 2026 in Tier 3 of the London Bar for Banking and Finance: ‘Rupert is an exceptionally persuasive and incisive advocate with a commanding presence in both a court room and an arbitral setting. His advocacy is marked by surgical precision, strategic foresight, and an ability to distill complex financial and legal concepts into compelling arguments that resonate with tribunals and judges alike.’

Legal 500 further noted client comment with respect to his Banking and Finance practice that Rupert Reed KC is ‘a persuasive advocate on his feet, and a trusted voice by the courts on the most complex of matters‘. He is also listed in Legal 500 2026 for Commercial Litigation in London: ‘Rupert’s advocacy skills are excellent.’

Rupert is listed in Legal 500 2026 in Tier 1 of UK Commercial silks working in the Middle East: ‘One of his strongest qualities lies in producing clear, strategic advice and presenting arguments in a calm but persuasive way. In arbitration, he is particularly effective at simplifying technical points for the tribunal, and in court proceedings his written advocacy is consistently of a high standard. His written work is always outstanding – succinct, well-structured, and tailored to the client’s needs.‘ He was short-listed for the Legal 500 Award of Commercial Silk of the Year in the Middle East in 2026.

Rupert was listed in Legal 500 2025 in Tier 1 of UK Commercial silks working in the Middle East: ‘An excellent assured advocate with superb judgment. He is client friendly and works extremely well with the solicitor team‘; ‘Rupert is extremely knowledgeable on issues that concern the conflict of jurisdiction between the DIFC Courts and other courts of the UAE. Rupert is extremely user friendly and provides prompt turnaround.’

He is also listed in Legal 500 for his work as a Leading Silk in Commercial Litigation at the London Bar. The 2024 and 2025 editions have noted client comment that: ‘Rupert is an extremely measured and forensic advocate who commands utter respect from judges as well as his opponents. A powerhouse in the field and at the Bar.‘

Rupert is also listed in Legal 500 2025 in Tier 3 for Banking and Finance: ‘Rupert is highly intelligent, hard working and a pleasure to work with. Despite his seniority and experience he still gets involved with the detail of a case, getting his hands dirty in the documents and the fact. He also has a very fine legal mind.‘

Chambers UK Bar 2025 lists Rupert for Commercial Chancery (Band 2) and Commercial Dispute Resolution (Band 4).

It reports the following market comment on his Commercial Chancery practice: ‘Rupert is an extremely polished and persuasive advocate, who is measured and effective. He is an extremely charming personality, who knows the law and procedure really well‘; “Rupert is very smooth. He has an encyclopaedic knowledge of cases and always has something interesting to say“; “Rupert is a cerebral barrister, who is incredibly impressive“.

Respondents to Chambers UK Bar 2025 said of his work in Commercial Dispute Resolution: “All over the details and very knowledgeable, he’s well regarded by judges“; “He is a very effective cross-examiner“; “If you have a difficult case that raises novel issues or difficult questions, he is the barrister for you“.

As for his DIFC Court practice, Chambers UK Bar notes client comment that: “Rupert is an expert in DIFC litigation. He understands procedures and understands the law, and how it interplays with local law in the Middle East“; and “Rupert is an expert on DIFC laws and has a really good knowledge of UAE customs and laws“.

Rupert was listed by Chambers UK 2024 for Commercial Chancery – UK (Band 2) and Commercial Dispute Resolution (Band 5). His strengths were identified by clients in the following terms: ‘He is very willing to roll up his sleeves and good at distilling complex issues into simple concepts‘; ‘Rupert Reed is amazing. He’s super smart, has very high emotional intelligence and is an excellent oral advocate‘.

Rupert was listed in Legal 500 2024 in Tier 1 of the UK Commercial silks working in the Middle East: ‘Rupert is an astute, articulate and above all personable barrister, who combines a profound technical knowledge of commercial issues with an advocacy style that is both understated and brilliant.’

Legal 500 UK Bar 2024 further noted comment on his Commercial litigation practice: ‘Rupert is extremely bright, hardworking and a team player. A true specialist in the Middle East, and a …speaker of Arabic. There are few like him.‘

Rupert appeared in Chambers Global 2023 as a leading silk in Dispute Resolution: English Bar in the UAE (Band 1), Dispute Resolution: Commercial Chancery – UK (Band 2) and Dispute Resolution: Commercial – UK (Band 5). It explained that he ‘acts on a variety of commercial disputes in the DIFC Courts and remains very active as arbitrator in various arbitration centres. His varied client base includes major energy companies, hospitality brands and well-known financial institutions‘. It cited client comment from Chambers UK Bar 2023 (as below) and further comment: ‘Rupert was impressive, had great attention to detail, and a great knowledge of case law‘; ‘Rupert is excellent on his feet and makes a real difference to the case‘; ‘He is very intellectual and highly strategic in his approach‘.

Chambers UK Bar 2023 listed Rupert as a leading silk in both Chancery Commercial (Band 2) and Commercial Dispute Resolution. Rupert’s strengths as follows: ‘Extremely considered in his approach and excellent on his feet’; ‘Strategic in his thinking and someone with a pleasant manner, he is responsive and has a good eye for presenting complex matters in an appealing way‘; ‘Rupert is very good with clients. He’s a smooth operator but can roll his sleeves up and fight the good fight when needed‘.

Rupert appeared in Legal 500 2023 as a leading silk in Commercial Litigation: ‘Enormously impressive grasp of Middle Eastern politics and business, his ability to manage complex issues and produce detailed submissions has been remarkable. As an Arabic speaker, he is somewhat unique.‘

Rupert appeared in Chambers Global 2022 as a leading silk in Dispute Resolution: English Bar in the UAE (Band 1), Dispute Resolution: Commercial – UK (Band 5) and Dispute Resolution: Commercial Chancery – UK (Band 4).

Clients reported that “Rupert is a phenomenally good DIFC advocate. He understands the brief, he is measured in his delivery and he knows which points to pursue“; “He is very methodical and meticulous, but also so approachable and just a delight to deal with“.

He is similarly identified in Legal 500 2022 as a leading silk both in Commercial Litigation and in Banking and Finance and in Chambers UK Bar 2022 as a leader at the Bar in Chancery Commercial litigation.

Legal 500 2021 and 2022 ranked him in Tier 1 of the Leading Silks working in the Middle East: “Arabic- speaking Rupert Reed QC is held in high esteem in the DIFC“, and reported client comment that: “Rupert is extremely calm under pressure, personable and has strong analytical and drafting skills. His oral advocacy skills are also strong and he is able to think on his feet and he has in-depth knowledge of English and DIFC law and DIFC Court procedural issues“.

Legal 500 2022 further identified him as a Leading Silk in Commercial Litigation: “Rupert is a commercially focused and astute barrister, with a profound understanding of the Middle East, particularly the DIFC“.
Chambers UK Bar 2022 noted of his Commercial practice that he is “one of the most pre-eminent barristers appearing before the DIFC. His experience in that regard is almost unmatched, and he always garners respect from the bench“.

Of his Chancery Commercial practice, Chambers UK Bar 2022 noted comments by clients: “Someone who is really carving out a practice in Middle East disputes, he spends a lot of time in the DIFC and has a real reputation for doing the commercial chancery side of those disputes. He is very user-friendly and very slick in his presentation of cases“.

He was described in Legal 500 2021 as: “a go to QC for international complex fraud and dispute resolution – he brings long-standing experience and a diligent approach to his cases, giving considered and practical advice to achieve the very best outcome for his clients“.

Chambers Global and UK Bar 2021 observed his strengths as a Chancery Commercial silk: “He has a brilliant bedside manner with clients and is very sympathetic and patient. He’s a really good advocate and his written work is excellent. A class act.” “He is an absolute mine of information and is technically and intellectually strong.”

Chambers Global 2021 further includes Rupert in its ‘Spotlight Table’ for UK barristers active in the UAE and notes that he “acts on a variety of commercial disputes in the DIFC Courts… His varied client base includes major energy companies, hospitality brands and well-known financial institutions.” Sources comment: “He is highly regarded for DIFC Court litigation and knowledgeable about the legal systems in the Middle East.”

Chambers UK Bar and Chambers Global 2020 put him in Band 3 for Chancery Commercial Litigation, and identified him as: “A noted leader in both commercial and pure chancery matters. His highly respected practice is focused on commercial agreements. He is a particularly fine choice of counsel for Middle Eastern work”

Sources said that: “He’s a good guy who has a terrific grasp on tactics. He remains a good team-player and collaborates well with his juniors and the solicitor’s team.“

Chambers Global 2020 also listed him among the six Leading Silks in Dispute Resolution, UAE (Expertise Based Abroad): “Based in London, respected barrister Rupert Reed QC is noted as very active in the region, and is commended not least for his knowledge of Arabic. He advocates on a broad range of commercial disputes in the DIFC Courts and also acts in arbitration, representing clients from sectors such as banking and real estate“.

Chambers Global and UK Bar 2019 said of him as follows: “A respected silk who is described by sources as pleasant, polished and smooth. His commercial chancery practice has an international thread running through it, and he has particular specialism in work with a Middle Eastern aspect to it.” “His knowledge of DIFC court law is excellent“.

Chambers Global and UK Bar 2018 noted the following views of him: “Very user-friendly and gets down to the detail of a case. He knows what the clients want and is a team player. He is commercial and offers good options based on sound legal principles.” “Thorough, well reasoned, approachable, young and dynamic.”

Legal 500 EMEA 2019 lists him as a leading Commercial silk in its UAE directory: “He stands out because of his unique ability to cross-linguistic and cultural gaps in cases connected to the region.”

In early Commercial practice, he was involved in long-running Commercial Court proceedings including the Equitable Life and Patarkatsishvili / Berezovsky litigation. Much of his commercial practice is now focused on contracts relating to property development, investment, and finance.

Most of his work has an international dimension, for example in relation to international commercial arbitration and in dealing with disputes relating to investments from the Middle East in property and related funds in Europe and the UK. His work commonly involves allegations of fraud, corruption, breach of AML regulations, conspiracy, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence. He is often instructed on the interim applications, including for urgent freezing injunctions and anti-suit relief, that arise in such litigation.

He has significant experience in disputes within companies, partnerships, and other joint ventures, often concerned with property development projects. His years of prosecuting company directors’ disqualification cases while on the Treasury panel gave him related expertise in directors’ duties, and he has acted in many shareholder disputes.

Rupert does a significant amount of Banking and Finance work, extending to trade finance and Islamic finance written in London and the Gulf region. Much of this work requires detailed knowledge of the relevant financial services and regulatory regimes.

He regularly acts on commercial claims in the Dubai International Finance Centre (DIFC) Courts. He has edited four editions of a Commentary on the Rules of the DIFC Court that is widely used in the Dubai legal community and has become commonly referred to in DIFC Court litigation as the ‘Blue Book’.

Recent Cases

• [2025] DIFC CFI 090 – Acting with Hadef & Partners on an application for an interim injunction to prevent disposal by a group holding company of shares in a subsidiary in a global waste management group in breach of fiduciary duty and at significant undervalue for the collateral benefit to the majority shareholders, pending the conclusion of an inquiry into the value of the shares pursuant to the Court’s appointment of a valuer.
• [2025] DIFC ENF 053 (30 April 2025) – Acting with Al Tamimi & Company and Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer for the judgment creditor in first case in which an English judgment was recognized and enforced by the DIFC Courts pursuant to an application made directly under RDC Part 45 and without the issue of a claim form (typically the first requirement in commencing any claim in the DIFC Courts), pursuant to an earlier decision of the Chief Justice in which it had been suggested there may be two parallel enforcement procedures.
• [2024] DIFC ENF 027 (15 May 2025) – Acting with Al Tamimi & Company and Freshfields for a global automobile manufacturer in having dismissed a challenge to the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts and application to have set aside an Order for the recognition and enforcement of a partial award in an LCIA arbitration seated in London on the basis that the granting of anti-suit injunctive relief in the form of a peremptory order already made by the Tribunal did not constitute an award for the purposes of Articles 42 and 43 of the Arbitration Law.
• [2025] DIFC ARB 012 (27 March 2025) – Acting with NHB Legal on an urgent application by a leading Dubai hotel chain, pending the Claimant’s submission to DIAC of a related request for arbitration, for an interim injunction against further breaches of certain commercial terms in the relevant SPA that had been included to protect the Claimant’s brand reputation, where the Respondent had failed to offer any undertaking or indeed respond at all to the Claimant’s notice of breach.
• AES Middle East Insurance Broker LLC & Ors v GSB Capital Ltd [2023] DIFC CFI 060 – Acting with Reed Smith for the Claimant financial advisory business at the trial of claims in the DIFC Court of procurement of breaches of confidentiality and duty, conspiracy to do the same, and breach of confidence arising out of the ‘team move’ of all of the senior members of the Claimant’s ‘wealth advisory division’ to the Defendant competing business and related claims of data theft.
• Nael v Niamh Bank [2024] DIFC CA 115 (9 January 2025) – Acting with Primecase and BLK Partners before the DIFC Court of Appeal in successfully upholding the judgment below of Justice Shamlan al Sawalehi against the appeal of a leading UAE bank, which had failed to pay the Claimant some AED 160 million on guarantees provided under substantial construction contracts. The bank appealed the Judge’s order for the recognition and enforcement of a relevant arbitral award on the basis of an alleged public policy of avoiding any inconsistency between relevant DIFC and Dubai judgments.
• Acting with Hadef in seeking to set aside Part 50 Orders for the examination of alleged officers of a judgment debtor pursuant to an order for the recognition and enforcement of a DIFC-LCIA arbitration award on the basis that the relevant individuals, past shareholders and directors, did not satisfy the relevant test established by the Court of Appeal in China State (below): [2023] DIFC ENF 269 (31 January 2025); acting on the appeal against the Judge’s refusal to set aside the relevant Part 50 Orders or to stay those orders.
• China State Engineering Corporation (Middle East) LLC v Zaya Living Real Estate Development LLC [2024] DIFC CA 009 (30 October 2024) – Acting with Eversheds Sutherland for the successful Appellants in having set aside certain examination orders made by the DIFC Courts under RDC Part 50 (the equivalent of CPR Part 71). In his leading judgment, Chief Justice Martin held that the term “officer” in Part 50, which provides for officers of a corporate judgment debtor to be required to attend court for examination, should be given a functional rather than a technical meaning. Further acting for the judgment creditor at the examination of the relevant officers of the Judgment Debtor.
• Acting with Norton Rose Fulbright on an expert determination of financial disputes that had arisen on the operation by a major UAE conglomerate of substantial government-owned Saudi infrastructure under a 30-year contract. The disputes raised issues of Saudi civil and administrative law, in particular as to whether certain fees payable by the operator had been reasonably adjusted to give the operator a reasonable share of revenues from the infrastructure. The operator was successful in establishing that the share was not discretionary but had to be determined by reference to a financial model.
• Skatteforvaltningen v Shah & Ors [2023] DIFC ENF 285 – Acting with DWF for certain judgment debtors in seeking to set aside orders made by the DIFC Courts for the recognition and enforcement of a judgment of the Dubai Court of Cassation and the examination of those debtors as to their assets. The case raises issues as to the statutory provisions for the enforcement by the DIFC Courts of the onshore Dubai Courts.
• [2024] DIFC ARB 010 (25 June 2024) – Acting with Charles Russell Speechlys for the trustees of two Guernsey trusts in obtaining litigation funding and then obtaining an injunction in the DIFC Courts to prevent the Defendant that owed USD 97 million of deferred consideration to the trustees from paying further dividends to its shareholders.
• Asturion Fondation v Princess Al Jawharah al Ibrahim [2019] EWHC 274 (Ch); Alibrahim v Asturion Fondation [2020] EWCA Civ 32 and Asturion Foundation v Alibrahim [2023] EWHC 3305 (Ch); [2024] 1 WLR 2947 and [2024] EWHC 757 (Ch) – Acting with Simmons & Simmons and Lalive in one of the Lawyer’s ‘Top 20’ Cases of 2023 for a wife of the late King Fahd of Saudi Arabia on the striking out and successful defence at trial in the Chancery division of restitutionary and other claims made in the English Courts by a Liechtenstein foundation to London assets on grounds that the transfer of those assets was invalid as a matter of Liechtenstein, Saudi and Shari’a law.
• [2024] DIFC ARB 016 – Acting with Eversheds Sutherland for an award creditor in opposing an application in the DIFC Courts for the setting aside of the award rendered in an LCIA arbitration in circumstances where the arbitration agreement had provided for DIFC-LCIA arbitration prior to the abolition of the DIFC-LCIA arbitration centre in 2021 and the LCIA and DIAC had agreed that the arbitration should continue to be administered by the LCIA.
• Acting with the Sanad Law Group in Jordan in association with Eversheds Sutherland in advising the Kuwaiti seller of shares in a regional telecoms group as to whether it could treat the relevant SPA as having been frustrated by reason of the supervening illegality of the relevant share transfer, which rights would survive that discharge of the SPA, and whether the seller could be required to continue negotiations for a new SPA.
• Union Insurance Company PJSC v International Precious Metals Refiners LLC [2022] DIFC CFI 064 (16 January 2024) – Acting with DWF for a major French-owned precious metals refiner in a dispute as to whether the DIFC Courts have jurisdiction to determine whether significant losses from an industrial accident were covered by a refinery insurance policy fronted by a Dubai insurer and reinsured in London: Union Insurance Company PJSC v International Precious Metal Refiners LLC [2022] DIFC CFI 064 (15 September 2023); further acting with DWF on an appeal from the Court’s decision in denying a challenge to the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts, including in seeking an extension of time for the filing of the Appellant’s Skeleton Argument in its application for permission to appeal the finding of DIFC Court jurisdiction.
• Kahlon v (1) Liberty Steel Group Ltd (2) Lliberty FE Trade DMCC [2022] DIFC CFI 070 – Acting with KBH in pursuing claims for USD 33 million by a former senior executive in the Liberty Steel Group for unpaid bonus payments and payments under the Long-Term Incentive Plan arrangements in various complex letter agreements made in persuading him to move from his previous position as regional CEO in the Arcelor Mittal steel group.
• [2023] DIFC ARB 002 (26 June 2023) – Acting with Akin Gump in successfully resisting an application for an interim injunction preventing the enforcement in the US District Court of Southern New York of Kuwaiti judgments on certain lender claims against a Middle East government for USD 490 million sought in aid of ICC arbitral proceedings seated in the DIFC in which the relevant government was seeking a permanent injunction.
• Acting with DAC Beachcroft for a BVI investment entity in pursuing in LCIA arbitral proceedings substantial loss of profit claims arising out of the exclusion of a foreign investor from a joint venture with a GCC sovereign entity that was primarily engaged in the installation of intelligence equipment in civil and military aircraft.
• Lateef v Laamih [2021] DIFC Arb 021 (29 July 2021); (24 March 2022) – Acting with DWF and Burford Capital in obtaining a worldwide freezing order in the DIFC Court against the directors and shareholders of a UAE conglomerate in support of New York proceedings against them as the “alter egos” of the UAE holding company, alternatively in setting aside a fraudulent transfer to them and others of company assets intended to frustrate enforcement of the award of an ICC arbitration seated in New York; further obtaining a committal for contempt in what is now the leading DIFC Court judgment on the contempt jurisdiction of that court.
• (1) Cesfin Ventures LLC (2) Cessna Finance Corp v Ghaith al Ghaith [2020] EWHC 3337 (Ch); [2020] EWHC 3683 (Ch). – Acting with DWF and Burford Capital in obtaining a worldwide freezing order in the Chancery Division against a director and shareholder of a UAE conglomerate in support of the same New York proceedings.
• Lateef v Liela [2020] DIFC Arb 017 (22 July 2020); (13 December 2021); (24 March 2022) – Acting with DWF and Burford Capital in obtaining an order for the recognition of a foreign arbitration award for USD 43 million and a related worldwide freezing order against the holding company of a major UAE conglomerate on the basis of evidence of its gifting substantial real estate to its shareholders and other dissipation of assets.
• [2020] DIFC ARB 014 (17 June 2020) – Acting with Kennedys in obtaining an order for the recognition of a London arbitration award, a worldwide freezing order and the first notification order made by the DIFC Court against a UAE resident entrepreneur on the basis of his attempts to use an opaque corporate structure to frustrate enforcement of the award and dishonest statements made in the course of foreign enforcement proceedings.
• Credit Europe Bank (Dubai) Ltd v (1) NMC Trading LLC (2) NMC Healthcare LLC (3) Bavaguthu Raghuram Shetty [2020] DIFC CFI 031 (14 April 2020); (8 July 2020) – Acting with Clyde & Co for a major Dutch bank in obtaining the first worldwide freezing order against various entities in the troubled NMC Group and their personal guarantor, notwithstanding the absence of any assets in the DIFC.
• Acting with Trowers & Hamlins in advising a major UAE conglomerate that was subject to a worldwide freezing order obtained by lenders in the wake of the financial difficulties of a related group of companies.
• Acting with Watson Farley & Williams in advising a leading Saudi chemical manufacturing group on a challenge to an expert share valuation arising out of various joint venture agreements made with a European chemical group.
• KBC Aldini Capital Ltd v (1) David Baazov (2) Canaccord Genuity Corp [2017] DIFC CFI 002 (14 October 2018) (12 February 2020) (23 February 2020) – Acting with Norton Rose Fulbright for a Canadian ‘unicorn’ in defending and having struck out claims for USD 90 million based on fraud allegations made in DIFC proceedings relating to equity commitment letters filed in support of a ‘go private’ bid to acquire a global internet gaming company, Amaya Inc.
• IMMS Ltd v BankMed SAL [2019] DIFC CA 013 (16 December 2019) – Acting with Herbert Smith Freehills LLP on the appeal by an oil trading company of the decision of Justice Field in refusing to grant a freezing order to prevent disposal of assets to the value of USD 755 million on the basis of conduct by the Respondent bank showing an ‘unacceptably low standard of commercial reality’ in terminating a facility while retaining a related deposit of USD 1 billion.
• First Abu Dhabi Bank PJSC & Anor v Larmag Holdings NV [2019] DIFC CFI (25 September 2019); [2019] DIFC CA 010 (23 March 2020) – Acting with Al Tamimi on a jurisdiction challenge and the subsequent appeal of the decision of Justice Field that the DIFC Courts had jurisdiction over the Appellant by reason of its having been recognised by the DFSA.
• Grand Valley General Trading LLC v GGICO Sunteck Ltd [2018] DIFC CFI 044 (12 September 2019) – Acting with Clyde & Co in successfully challenging jurisdiction of DIFC Courts by reason of an agreement for LCIA arbitration in Singapore and further resisting the joinder of the parent company of the Second Defendant.
• Larmag Holdings BV v First Islamic Bank PJSC & Anor [2019] DIFC CFI 030 (19 July 2019) (4 August 2019) – Acting with Al Tamimi in challenging the jurisdiction of the DIFC Court said to arise because the Defendant, an Abu Dhabi bank, had been ‘recognised’ by the DFSA for the purpose of its trading on NASDAQ Dubai.
• YYY Ltd v ZZZ Ltd [2017] DIFC ARB 005 (17 November 2019) – Acting with Norton Rose Fulbright in the long-running dispute as to the management of a leading hotel in Dubai in persuading Justice Field that the DIFC Court did not need to recognise as res judicata a decision of the Dubai Court of Cassation that conflicted with an order of the DIFC Court and was in breach of the New York Convention.
• [2019] DIFC CFI 042 (6 October 2020) (28 October 2020) – Acting with Al Tamimi in defending claims made by a Sri Lankan conglomerate against the DIFC subsidiary in an Indian financial advisory group in respect of its alleged breaches of fiduciary duty or negligence in failing to prevent a cyberattack against the joint venture company incorporated in Sierra Leone.
• Grand Valley General Trading LLC v GGICO Sunteck Ltd [2018] DIFC CFI 044 (27 December 2018) (19 May 2019) – Acting with Clyde & Co in obtaining the setting aside of default judgment for the winding-up of a JAFZA-registered joint venture company incorporated for a substantial commercial property development in onshore Dubai.
• SBM (Mauritius) Ltd v Renish Petrochem FZE & Ors [2018] DIFC CFI 054 (27 September 2020) (21 October 2020); JJC, Cassation No. 5/2018 – Acting with Dentons for the State Bank of Mauritius in obtaining a worldwide freezing order to freeze funds in the account of various corporate entities used in a trade finance fraud and subsequently in securing a decision of the JJC that the DIFC Court had jurisdiction over the matter in seeking disclosure from a Kuwaiti bank in onshore Dubai.
• Globemed Gulf Healthcare Solutions LLC v Oman Insurance Company PSC [2017] DIFC CFI 051; [2020] DIFC CFI 011 (21 September 2020) – Acting with Al Tamimi in defending claims to USD 36 million of lost revenue to a Dubai company owned by a Lebanese healthcare group alleged to have been caused by breaches by an Omani insurer of a third party administration agreement under which the insurer’s UAE book was to be administered.
• Federal Express International Inc v Abdul Latif Jameel Transportation Co Ltd [2018] DIFC CFI 038 (15 July 2018) – Acting with Freshfields for a major Saudi conglomerate in successfully resisting FedEx’s application for an Anti- Suit Injunction to prevent the Saudi conglomerate from pursuing §1782 proceedings in the US for document disclosure and witness deposition.
• (1) Peter Black Footwear and Accessories Ltd (2) Visage v Fawaz Abdullah Alhokair & Co SJSC [2018] – Acting with Dentons for a Saudi retail group in the Commercial Court in challenging the validity of service of English proceedings in Saudi Arabia, in resisting an order for substituted service, and in defending claims for USD 5 million made on the basis that, by entering certain invoicing arrangements to make use of an existing credit line, the Saudi parent had become the purchaser of goods supplied to various of its subsidiaries.
• (1) Vinod Sharma (2) Avalon Global Education Services Ltd (3) Avalon Heights World Private School LLC v Sheikh Khaled Saeed Humaid al Nuaimi [2018] DIFC CFI 022 (24 April and 7 June 2018) – Acting with Al Tamimi for an Indian educational entrepreneur and the holding company of a school in Ajman in obtaining and defending urgent injunctive relief against actions taken by the shareholder who was the local partner in that company.
• Hussein v Her Highness Princess Nouf Bint Khalid bin Abdullah al Saud [2018] – Acting with Cooke Young & Keidan for the former head of the family office of the late Prince Fahd bin Salman of Saudi Arabia in proceedings in the Chancery Division in which the Claimant claimed over £6 million in unpaid remuneration, expenses and commission owed on various Knightsbridge property developments pursued for the benefit of the family.
• Aurora Developments Ltd & Ors v Delta Holdings Limited & Ors [2018] EWHC 1047 (Ch) – Acting with Sherrards for the two principal groups of European investors in the North Kensington Gate property development project in successfully obtaining summary judgment after a three-day hearing in the High Court on fraud claims brought against the former promoters of the project.
• (1) Orion Holdings Overseas Ltd (2) Orion Global Financial Services LLC (3) Orion Capital Ltd v (1) Mohammed Abdel Khaleq Mohammad (2) Nidal Abdel Khaleq Mohammad (3) Privatbank Ihag Zurich AG [2015] DIFC CFI 033 (8 February 2018) – Acting with KBH Kaanuun for the liquidators of various DIFC and US companies in successfully resisting a jurisdiction challenge brought by a Swiss bank in resisting claims by the liquidators to have certain pledges made by fraudulent directors declared invalid.
• Acting with Brown Rudnick for a major Saudi bank against a European bank on claims for breach of an agreement under which certain technical and advisory services were provided to the Saudi bank [2018].
• Wallis Trading Inc v (1) Air Tanzania Company Ltd (2) The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania [2018] – Acting for Air Tanzania and the Government of Tanzania in the Commercial Court in successfully obtaining relief from sanction to permit the defence of claims for USD 30 million under the lease of an Airbus A320 and a guarantee on the grounds that they were executed without authority and in breach of Tanzanian procurement law.
• Capreon (UK) Ltd v Winnersh Holdings LP [2018] – Acting with Shakespeare Martineau for an asset management company in the Noé Group in pursuing Commercial Court claims for £12 million from the vendor of the Winnersh Triangle business park for breaches of its obligations of good faith, of reasonable endeavours in assisting the Claimant’s due diligence, and of exclusivity relating to the Claimant’s intended acquisition of the business park.
• Acting for a major Middle East retail group in DIFC-LCIA arbitral proceedings at the trial of claims brought under an alleged parent company guarantee of purchases made by its Spanish and UAE subsidiaries [2018].
• Sunteck Lifestyles Ltd v (1) Al Tamimi and Company Ltd and (2) Grand Valley General Trading LLC [2017] DIFC CFI 048 (15 November 2017) – Acting with Clyde & Co for a joint venture party in obtaining and defending in the DIFC Court an injunction restraining an escrow agent from releasing Shares worth USD 85m under the terms of an escrow agreement; and successfully resisting a challenge by the other joint venture party to the jurisdiction of the DIFC Courts.
• (1) BHSC Global LLC and (2) BHSC Global Holdings LLC v (1) Griffith (2) McKechnie [2017] EWHC 2035 – Acting with DWF for an angel investor in successfully resisting a freezing injunction and summary judgment of claims of his vicarious liability for the alleged fraud of another shareholder in the sale of a sports advertising company to US investors.
• Advising a major Dubai reinsurer as to the grounds on which it could decline policy cover to an Omani insurer for non- disclosure under a quota share treaty relating to the reinsured’s MENA energy portfolio by reference to the claims history on certain underlying policies within that portfolio [2017].
• Acting with Pepper Hamilton in successfully obtaining a worldwide freezing order in the DIFC Courts to freeze assets up to USD 80 million in value to secure an Indian arbitral award that was to be enforced in the DIFC and Dubai Courts [2016] DIFC CFI 034 (6 October 2016).
• British Overseas Bank Nominees Ltd v Analytical Properties Ltd [2014] EWHC 802; [2015] EWCA Civ 43; [2015] PLSCS 38 – Acting with CMS Cameron McKenna on a damages claim arising out of delayed performance of a contract for the sale of a shopping centre in circumstances where the claimant had relied on a condition precedent in declining to complete the sale.
• Advising reinsurers in the London market on the construction under English and Qatari law of an exclusion, LEG 2/96, in a common Construction All Risks policy, and as to claims arising from the defective waterproofing of underground car parks around a Doha marina [2015].
• Acting for a UK asset manager against a US investment firm in denying alleged breaches of their asset management and joint venture agreements and in defending claims that the asset manager had forfeited its entitlement to a £15 million profit share [2016].
• Acting for the same UK asset manager against the same US investment firm in claiming that its best internal estimate’ of the value of the relevant assets for the purpose of calculating the asset manager’s profit share undervalued them by £90 million by wrongfully excluding information of an open market offer made for those assets by a third party [2016].
• Rees v Walter Saunders [2016] – Acting with Field Fisher for the victim of an identity fraud in suing the fraudster’s representatives for breach of their express and implied warranties of authority and for breach of trust in transferring the purchase monies to the bank account of the fraudster.
• Sledkova & Ors v Sidworth Street Ltd [2016] – Acting with Field Fisher for the purchasers of a development property in London Fields in obtaining an order freezing the vendor’s assets up to £2 million to secure their claims against the seller for fraudulent misrepresentations after evidence had emerged of assets being transferred to an entity in Cyprus.
• Bocimar International NV v Emirates Trading Agency LLC [2015] DIFC CFI 008 (31 January 2016) – Acting with King & Wood Mallesons and Gately for a Belgian dry bulk ship owner in obtaining before Justice Sir John Chadwick a worldwide freezing order against the assets of a Dubai charterer in seeking to enforce arbitral awards totalling USD 110 million and orders of both the London Commercial Court and the DIFC Court recognising those awards.
• WCT Berhad (Dubai Branch) v Meydan Group LLP [2015] DIFC ARB 003 [2016] – Acting with King & Wood Mallesons for the Meydan Group in resisting the enforcement in the DIFC Court of an arbitral award for AED 1.1 billion by arguing that the Court should not accept jurisdiction in view of significant defects in the award on issues of UAE law that went to the underlying jurisdiction of the tribunal.
• Platinum Services Company EJSC v DP World Ltd [2015] DWT 005 – Acting with DLA Piper for an Egyptian labour supply company at the trial in the Dubai World Tribunal of claims for USD 50m on claims that DP World had incited the Claimant’s workers in Sokhna Port to cease working for it, causing strikes and ultimately the transfer of the Claimant’s workers to a government-owned entity.
• Vannin Capital PCC plc v Khorafi & Ors [2015] DIFC CFI 036 (11 February 2015 and 18 February 2015) – Acting for a global litigation funder in obtaining and defending a preservation order that over US$10 million of its Kuwaiti client’s interim recovery on mis-selling claims against Bank Sarasin be paid into court pending an arbitral determination of the funder’s entitlement.
• Damac Park Towers Company Ltd v Ward [2015] DIFC CA 006 (14 December 2015) – Acting for the DAMAC Group in the DIFC Court of Appeal on a successful appeal in which the Chief Justice confirmed the contractual validity of property reservation agreements and a commercial approach to the construction of the related credit agreements.
• First Rand Property Holding (Middle East) Ltd v Damac Park Towers [2014] DIFC CFI 030 (2 April 2015) – Acting for DAMAC in the DIFC Court in having struck out various agency, negligence and misrepresentation claims relating to the purchase of various units in a development.
• Damac Park Towers Company Ltd v Dattani [2014] DIFC CA 007 (10 November 2015) – Acting for DAMAC in the DIFC Court of Appeal in appealing findings that various units of a development had not been ready for occupation within the terms of the relevant SPAs.
• El Tarabey v Kade [2014] – Acting in resisting the enforcement by the English Courts of an order of the Druze Courts of Lebanon on grounds that it had not been ratified by the Civil Courts in Lebanon and was therefore not enforceable there.
• Advising a major litigation funder on arbitral claims for US$118m arising from a conspiracy by a Central Asian crude oil supplier and a Middle Eastern refinery to exclude from the supply chain under their joint venture a Cayman trading company [2014].
• Aquarelle Etoile II SA v Etoile Développement I SA [2014] – Acting with Eversheds in obtaining a judgment in the Commercial Court on claims for the repayment of Euros 148 million of Islamic finance provided by a Qatari bank to fund a property development in Luxembourg.
• Corinth Pipeworks v Barclays [2014] DIFC CFI 024 – Acting with Clyde & Co in obtaining the settlement before trial in the DIFC Court of fraud claims for US$24m against Barclays relating to its involvement in providing finance for the supply of pipes by a Greek manufacturer to an Omani oil company.
• Acting with CMS Cameron Mckenna in obtaining arbitral declarations as to the contractual operation of a change model used to allocate risk and impose charges relating to cash flows arising under the historic sale and leaseback by a telecoms operator of its national property portfolio [2013].
• Abbar v SEDCO [2013] EWHC 2132 (Ch) 2013 – Acting with DAC Beachcroft for various Saudi, Anguillan and English entities involved in the development of the Pinnacle tower in the City in defeating claims in fraud, conspiracy and breach of an investment agreement.
• LCMC v Northern Rock (Asset Management) Plc [2013] – Acting with Linklaters for the administrators of a Lehman subsidiary against Northern Rock on warranty claims for £8.5m arising from the sale for securitisation of a mortgage portfolio.
• Mana v Clariden Leu Asset Management (Dubai) Ltd [2013] DIFC CFI 030 – Acting with KBH Kaanuun on misselling claims in the DIFC Court against a Credit Suisse subsidiary in respect of its advice to transfer assets into a high-risk account from an ABN Amro account.