For more information please call our Clerks on

+44 (0)20 7910 8300

Commercial Litigation


All members work day-to-day on the preparation and presentation of cases for litigation and arbitration. They recognise that what commercial clients usually want, however, is a cost effective resolution of their disputes.  At the outset of disputes, members will therefore advise as requested on the legal merits of a client’s position; will help to devise settlement strategies; will prepare position papers for mediations and, where appropriate, will represent their clients at mediations and in other ADR procedures.  Where no reasonable settlement is possible, they will prepare for and represent clients in court or in arbitration hearings – conducting cross-examinations and presenting written and oral arguments as required. Members of 7 KBW have long enjoyed an exceptional reputation for their conduct of hearings, and members are regularly instructed in the largest and most complex cases proceeding in the Commercial Court and in London arbitration.  By way of recent example:

 

  • BHL v Leumi ABL Limited [2017] EWHC 1871 (QB): Clive Freedman QC Claim of particular interest to the factoring and invoice discounting industry.
  • Jonathan Gaisman QC acted on behalf of Petrosaudi in Petrosaudi Oil Services (Venezuela) Ltd v Novo Banco SA & Ors. A case in which the Court of Appeal has reaffirmed the autonomy of a letter of credit, and its independence from the underlying transaction to which it stood as security.
  • Members have also been instructed on both sides in Orb and ors v Ruhan, a complex and high value multi-party commercial fraud dispute, presently scheduled for trial in November 2016.
  • Five members of 7KBW have been instructed, on both sides, in Suez Fortune Investments Ltd and anr v Talbot Underwriting and ors, the Brillante Virtuoso; a claim, exceeding US$80m, on a marine war risks insurance, following the loss of the vessel by fire.  The claimants assert that the fire followed an abortive hijacking of the vessel by pirates or terrorists in the Gulf of Aden.  The defendant underwriters contend that it was contrived by the vessel’s owners. 
  • A team from 7KBW represented the defendant in Republic of Djibouti v Boreh [2016] EWHC 405 (Comm), in which Djibouti asserted that one of its former public officials, Mr Abdourahman Boreh, took bribes and abused his public position to make secret profits.  Mr Boreh was completely exonerated at trial, with all of Djibouti’s allegations against him being abandoned or dismissed, and indemnity costs awarded.  At an earlier stage, the case also gave rise to a high-profile interlocutory judgment, when a freezing injunction obtained by Djibouti was discharged.  It was proved that the court had been deliberately misled by Djibouti and one of its solicitors when granting the injunction: see [2015] 3 All ER 577.
  • Five members of 7KBW were instructed at various times for the claimants in Cattles v PWC, a £1.6bn auditors’ negligence claim which followed the collapse of the Cattles Group (formerly one of the largest providers of consumer finance in the UK).  The case had significant implications for financial service regulation. 
  • In a well-publicised case, Ritz Hotel Casino Ltd v Safa Al Geabury [2015] EWHC 2294 (QB), Clive Freedman QC successfully represented the Ritz Casino seeking recovery of £2m of gambling debts incurred by Mr Al Geabury.  Mr Al Geabury claimed that he suffered from gambling addiction, but cross-examination of the factual and expert witnesses demonstrated that he had had no gambling addiction at any time.  Indemnity costs were awarded.
  • Three members of Chambers represented the claimant in Lakatamia v Nobu Su [2014] EWHC 3611 (Comm), a case involving oral agreements to sell and then re-purchase (at fixed price) positions on the forward market in freight rates in July 2008.  In breach of the agreement, the freight futures had not been re-purchased when the market crashed in late 2008.
  • Members were also instructed on both sides in Excalibur Ventures v Texas Keystone, in which Excalibur claimed to have been improperly deprived of participation in a bidding process for oil exploration concessions in Kurdistan.  Excalibur’s claim, valued by itself at US$1.6bn, was comprehensively rejected at trial [2013] EWHC 2767 (Comm); and indemnity costs were subsequently awarded against it and its funders.

 

Latest Commercial Litigation News

[2018] EWHC 1733 (Comm) The Commercial Court handed down judgment on 6 July 2018 in HSBC Bank Plc v Antaeus & ors., upholding HSBC’s c.US$2.5 million claim against defaulting ship-finance borrowers and their corporate and personal guarantors. The judgment of Deputy Judge Andrew Henshaw QC includes a 6-page consideration of Articles 862, 281 and 288 […]

July 9, 2018

[2018] EWHC 1083 (Comm) James Brocklebank QC acted with Henry Moore, and Peter MacDonald Eggers QC acted with Marcus Mander in this substantial trial of 10 preliminary issues, raising a number of interesting points of law in the insurance context and more generally, particularly relating to the notification of insurance claims and the operation of […]

May 9, 2018

[2018] EWHC 894 (Comm) David Allen QC leading John Bignall succeeded in the Commercial Court before Males J in their action for IMS S.A. and others claiming US$5,800,000 from Capital Oil and Gas Industries. Access bank alleged that cargoes of oil, loaded and discharged by the Claimants at the direction of Capital had been misdelivered […]

May 3, 2018

Menu