A misconceived approach to a dispute or potential dispute can often make things worse.  A strategic grasp is required of what can be achieved, and this grasp must be properly informed by a thorough understanding of all the relevant commercial, technological, industry-specific, and legal factors.

Our team has experience in disputes covering a wide range of industries. We can bring or defend claims for contractual damages, bring or defend tortious claims, advance or resist claims for breach of directors’ duties, protect your copyright, and help to resolve complex outsourcing disputes. Whatever the nature of your actual or potential dispute, we will be able to protect and promote your interests.

Our team has a particular expertise in cross-border disputes including jurisdiction challenges, the enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards, and using the English Courts to assist foreign Courts and arbitral tribunals.

A particular focus has been on cryptocurrency disputes, where we have acted for a large cryptocurrency brokerage and acted on a number of fraud cases.

In procedural terms, our team has a range of experience which includes acting in cases before the Court of Appeal, the High Court, County Courts, Magistrates’ Courts, and even a Coroner’s Court, as well as arbitration and mediation. Our team has a particular experience dealing with LCIA and ICC arbitration as well as niche arbitration institutions such as LME.

Our clients include cabinet ministers, airlines, large corporations and leading telecom providers as well as start-ups and smaller businesses.

Moreover, our team has been ranked by Legal 500 for Commercial Litigation.

  • The firm has a variety of very interesting disputes. They are often able to get results without having to resort to bringing claims.’ (Legal 500 – 2023)
  • ‘The firm has the personal touch and achieves excellent results for clients.’ (Legal 500-2023)

Reported cases include:

EasyGroup Ltd v EasyFly SA and others [2020] EWHC 40 (Ch): Claim against South American budget airline alleging IP infringement. Successful in jurisdiction challenge setting aside service of proceedings in Colombia.

GFH Capital Limited v Haigh and others [2020] EWHC 1269 (Comm): First enforcement of DIFC Judgment in England – against fraudster and tracing into assets held by third parties.

GFH Capital Limited v Haigh and Others [2020] EWHC 2223 (Comm): Illustration of approach taken by Courts when party seeks an adjournment on medical evidence.

Kazakhstan Kagazy v Zhunus and others [2020] EWHC 2431 (Comm): Defending third parties alleged to be holding assets which were part of the proceeds of a substantial fraud against a Kazakh paper company.

Varma v Atkinson & Mummery [2020] EWCA Civ 1602; Atkinson & Ors v Varma & Ors [2021] EWHC 592 (Ch) Defending director in “clawback” claim brought by liquidators and contempt of court proceedings.

Dynasty Company for Oil and Gas Trading Ltd v Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq & Anor [2021] EWHC 952 (Comm): Claim brought by Kurdish oil company against Kurdistan Oil Minister involving a jurisdiction challenge and arguments regarding sovereign immunity.

Northern Powerhouse Developments Ltd & Ors v Woodhouse [2023] EWHC 1331 (Ch); Northern Powerhouse Developments Ltd & Ors v Woodhouse [2023] EWHC 3124 (Ch): Defending company director in claims brought by administration following collapse of £70 million hospitality/leisure company. Involved successfully resisting Claimants’ application for an “unless order” and representing him at trial.

Other unreported matters include:

Acting for a Ukrainian-based fund in relation to claims against an agricultural and food and beverage business. Involved obtaining freezing orders against 29 defendants, obtaining orders to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction, and obtaining disclosure orders against 24 defendants. The case settled.

Acting for a victim of a multi-million pound cryptocurrency fraud. Work involved obtaining a confidentiality order against 13 respondents, then obtaining an order to serve proceedings for Norwich Pharmacal/Bankers’ Trust orders out of the jurisdiction against 8 respondents. Norwich Pharmacal disclosure against 8 respondents to obtain information, then obtaining freezing injunctions and orders to serve proceedings out if the jurisdiction against 54 respondents, and defending these on the return date.

Acting for a successful Claimant in an ICC Arbitration arising out of telecoms charges and obtaining an order enforcing that award in the High Court.

Acting for a successful Claimant in an LMAA arbitration involving the sale of metals from Ukraine to Saudi Arabia.

Please contact us if you have any questions about an actual or potential dispute.

Robert Dougans

Partner, Head of Disputes

Other key contacts:

Dispute Resolution Team