N G Casey

N G Casey

Call: 2005

"He is terrific, really superb."

Chambers Global 2021

Practice Profile


Noel Casey is an advocate and a qualified Chartered Accountant.

He acts in disputes arising out of a wide range of contracts, from share purchase agreements to reinsurance treaties, from charterparties to derivative instruments.  He also has extensive experience of contempt motions, enforcement proceedings, and applications for injunctive relief (including freezing injunctions, search orders and electronic disclosure orders).

He has appeared as an advocate in the Court of Appeal, the Commercial Court and in arbitration (both in the UK and Hong Kong). Chambers and Partners describes him as “a great barrister able to assist with complicated matters”. Legal 500 describes him as “an absolute star – combines brilliant technical expertise with user-friendliness”.  Before coming to the Bar, Noel spent six years working at PricewaterhouseCoopers in its financial services division. As a consequence, he has an understanding of the mechanics of business and the commercial dimensions of legal disputes.

Selected cases:

  • Lakatamia v Morimoto: Noel acted for Lakatamia in its successful claim against Toshiko Morimoto, also known as Madam Su, the mother of the shipping magnate Nobu Su.  Lakatamia claimed that Madam Su had conspired with Mr Su to defeat the efforts of Lakatamia to enforce an earlier judgment in its favour.  Its case was vindicated, and the Judge confirmed the existence of a new tort: viz the Marex tort (procuring a failure to honour a judgment debt).
  • Lakatamia v Nobu Su: Noel has also acted for Lakatamia in the related proceedings against Mr Su. These proceedings have involved (in the words of Sir Michael Burton GBE) “perhaps … the most serious campaign of contempt in the English courts”. Mr Su has been committed to prison on three occasions. Lakatamia has also obtained a wide variety of relief including search orders (both physical and electronic) and orders directing the transfer of assets.
  • Lakatamia v Nobu Su [2021] 1 W.L.R. 1097:  Noel acted unled on this successful application for retrospective permission to make collateral use of documents obtained pursuant to a search order against Mr Su in the proceedings against his mother.
  • Trinity v Goonewardena: Noel represented the Chairman of a clothing importer against a claim that he had participated in a fraudulent conspiracy to obtain the release of consignments of clothing without the presentation of valid bills of lading. After a two-week Commercial Court trial, that claim was dismissed.
  • Noel has acted in a number of LCIA arbitrations involving the sale of substantial businesses and industrial concerns in the former Soviet Union.

Selected cases:

  • France v Discovery Yachts [2019] EWHC 3553 (Comm)Noel acted for Andrew France in his successful claim against Discovery Yachts for defects in a new-build sailing yacht.  The claim was reported in the national press under the sobriquet “HMS Disappointment”. In circumstances where Mr France’s contractual counterparty was insolvent, Noel successfully argued that the parent company of the Discovery Yachts group had assumed responsibility for the repair of defects.
  • Noel has represented the purchaser of a luxury yacht in an arbitration arising out of the applicable yacht construction agreement. The dispute covered a number of technical yacht-building issues, many of which Noel has dealt with unled.
  • Noel acted on behalf of the charterers of three vessels in a reference to arbitration which resolved various disputes about the calculation of hire and the responsibility for various costs that owners were seeking to allocate to charterers.
  • Xstrata Coal Queensland & Others v Benxi [2016] EWHC 2022 (Comm). Noel (led by David Lewis Q.C. of 20 Essex Street) successfully represented the applicants on an application for an extension of the time allowed to apply to an arbitral tribunal for correction of an award.
  • Noel (led by David Allen Q.C.) acted for the purchaser of a luxury yacht in an arbitration dealing with the yacht’s technical performance.
  • Noel acted for charterers in a reference arising out of the supply of contaminated bunkers.
  • Noel represented the owners of a luxury yacht in a substantial arbitration spanning several weeks. The reference raised both intellectual property and practical shipbuilding issues. Noel was led by David Allen Q.C. at the main hearing, but dealt with all interlocutory matters himself.
  • Noel represented the owners of a vessel in a Hong Kong arbitration arising out of a charterparty. The key question was the identity of the owners’ contractual counterparty.
  • Noel represented the claimant owner in an arbitration arising out of an incident of crane damage. The case necessitated extensive cross-examination of experts on engineering and metallurgy.
  • The Falkonera [2013] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 582. Noel (led by David Allen Q.C.) acted for the successful defendants. The defendants were the charterers of a Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC). They asked the owners to approve a ship-to-ship transfer with another VLCC. The owners refused. The central question at trial was whether or not that refusal was reasonable.
  • The Kyla [2013] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 565. This case raised the question of whether or not a charterparty was frustrated when the subject vessel was damaged in the course of service. In the original arbitration, it was held that the charterparty was frustrated. On appeal to the Commercial Court, Flaux J. held that it was not. Noel (led by Dominic Kendrick Q.C.) acted for the successful charterers.
  • Azimut-Benetti v Healey [2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 473. Noel acted for the defendant on an application for summary judgment. The application centred on the question of whether or not a liquidated damages clause in a yacht construction contract was enforceable.
  • Berezovsky v Edmiston & Company [2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 419.  Noel acted for Edmiston & Co.    Edmiston & Co had been instructed by Mr Berezovsky to act as brokers on the sale of a luxury yacht, the Darius.  In the event, the yacht was sold for €240,000,000. The question before the Court was whether or not Edmiston & Co were entitled to commission on the sale. Mr Justice Field held that they were. Noel was led by Stephen Hofmeyr Q.C., but dealt with interlocutory matters on his own (successfully resisting a joinder application and an adjournment application).
  • Noel was instructed as junior counsel in an arbitration under a charterparty on an amended BHPTIME form. This reference involved issues of construction and estoppel by convention.
  • Noel acted as junior counsel for the claimants in a shipbuilding arbitration. The question before the arbitrators was whether or not the buyers of a new-build vessel were entitled to cancel the shipbuilding contract for delay.
  • Noel acted for the claimant in an arbitration under the rules of the Mediterranean Yacht Brokers’ Association. The reference centred on allegations of misrepresentation.
  • The Eternity [2009] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 107. Noel was instructed as junior to Gavin Kealey QC in this case which involved a consideration of: the effect of the incorporation of the Hague-Visby Rules into a charterparty on the BP Voy form; and the operation of the demurrage provisions in that form.
  • Noel was instructed as junior counsel in a two and a half week LMAA arbitration between a P&I Club and one of its members.

Selected cases:

  • Noel has recently advised an insurer on issues arising out of the fire at the Grenfell Tower.
  • Noel (led by Richard Southern Q.C.) acted for insurance brokers in a claim for alleged negligence in the broking of a business interruption and property insurance policy.
  • Noel (led by Alistair Schaff Q.C.) acted for London Market insurers on a claim against reinsurers for cover of a book of employers’ liability business.
  • Horwood v Land of Leather [2010] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 453. Noel acted for the Claimants in an insurance coverage dispute arising out of the “Toxic Sofa” litigation. He was led by Stephen Hofmeyr Q.C. The issues before the Court included: the proper construction of a settlement agreement; whether or not that settlement agreement was supported by good consideration; and the extent of an insured’s duty to protect his insurer’s rights of subrogation. Noel was instructed in a substantial London Market insurance arbitration about the proper calculation of an insured’s loss under an all risks property and business interruption policy.

Selected cases:

  • Noel has acted for the buyer of a business in a breach of warranty claim.  His background as a Chartered Accountant allowed him to act as a conduit between the legal team and the experts on valuation issues.
  • Noel acted for the buyer of a derivative product that gave a synthetic leveraged exposure to two portfolios of hedge funds.

Selected cases:

  • Noel has extensive experience of claims against professionals, including insurance brokers and accountants.
  • He has recently acted on two substantial matters: a claim against insurance brokers arising out of the renewal of a combined commercial insurance policy; and a claim against auditors for an alleged failure to identify material misstatements in the accounts of a publicly listed company.
  • Noel has acted for and against solicitors in claims brought by former clients.

Private International Law

Selected cases:

  • J v K [2019] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 323: Noel acted for the purchaser of a luxury yacht on an application by the builder of that yacht challenging the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal. The builder contended that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to overturn the decision of an independent expert who had been appointed pursuant to a yacht construction agreement to resolve a dispute between the parties. Noel successfully argued that the tribunal did have jurisdiction.
  • Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company SAL [2011] E.W.H.C 1780 (Comm). Noel was instructed to appear (as junior counsel) at a jurisdiction hearing in the long-running Masri litigation.
  • He was also instructed to assist in the preparation for the appeal to the House of Lords in Fiona Trust v Privalov [2007] U.K.H.L. 40, a case which involved consideration of the proper construction of arbitration and jurisdiction clauses and the principle of the separability of arbitration clauses.

Recent comments include:

  • “He is a great barrister able to assist with complicated matters. He is good on his feet and is flexible.” Chambers & Partners 2022
  • ‘An absolute star – combines brilliant technical expertise with user-friendliness.’ Legal 500 2022
  • “He is sensible, insightful, persuasive and has an easy advocacy style.” “An excellent barrister who punches above his weight.” Chambers & Partners 2021
  • “He is very genial and charming but can have a hard edge in cross-examination; he knows when to push points and hammer them home and when to go more softly.” “He is extremely good.” “He is terrific, really superb.” Chambers Global 2021
  • “Extremely bright and user-friendly – a rare combination.” “He is very knowledgeable.” Legal 500 2021
  • “A class act.” Legal 500 2021
  • An experienced junior with strength in a range of litigation and arbitration cases. Chambers & Partners 2020
  • “His background in accounting makes him an excellent fit for a wide range of forensic and quantum issues.” Legal 500 2020
  • “Very knowledgeable.” Legal 500 2020
  • “He is an excellent advocate and his approach with clients is second-to-none.” Legal 500 2020
  • “Very bright, very good with detail and very easy to work with.” “An excellent technical lawyer and advocate.” Chambers & Partners 2019
  • “He is fantastic with clients and gives clear and commercial advice in simple terms.” “Did a terrific job, he has an excellent sense of how to win the tribunal’s affection.” “He is particularly experienced in cases involving lawyers’ and brokers’ negligence.” Legal 500 2018
  • “[He] has ‘a keen grasp of the law in a commercial and practical setting’ and ‘makes a big impression with judges’ …He is ‘very well spoken in court’, a ‘great cross-examiner’ and is ‘excellent for quantum and number-driven issues’.” Who’s Who Legal 2019
  • “[He] is ‘calm under pressure, good with clients and an excellent lawyer’… One client effuses: ‘He has the ability to really get on top of the details and outshine his opponents as a result’.” Who’s Who Legal 2019