Wilberforce Chambers

Excellent to see so many familiar faces and make new connections at our Civil Fraud Conference this afternoon! ⚖️ #fraud #civilfraud #litigation

⚖ On 4 November 2024, the High Court dismissed the claim made in Blower v GH Canfields LLP [2024] EWHC 2763 (Ch), a professional negligence claim also involving trusts and insolvency issues.   Jonathan Seitler KC and Lemuel Lucan-Wilson (instructed by Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP) acted for the successful defendant, which was alleged to have been negligent in their conduct of a mediation of claims brought by a trustee in bankruptcy against family members of the bankrupt. The defendant had acted for the family members, and was said to have “over-settled” the claims on the basis that those claims would have been unsuccessful and/or the claimant could have set-off against them. To read more, including the full judgment: https://lnkd.in/egHGCHDh #professionalliability #professionalnegligence #litigation

📢 Please join us for the LIIARC - London International Investigations and Asset Recovery Conference Professional Pathways Workshop, taking place on Monday 18 November from 3pm, at Gatehouse Chambers. Our panel welcomes you to explore the possibilities of your professional journey with a host of industry leading practitioners who will be sharing their own experiences. The speakers are: - Charlotte Pender, Charles Russell Speechlys - Marcia Shekerdemian KC, Wilberforce Chambers - Sophie Lamont, Grant Thornton UK LLP - Judith Hughes, Ogier - Aileen McErlean - Gatehouse Chambers To sign up, please follow this link: https://lnkd.in/eYiRajd9 #AssetRecovery #Insolvency #Investigation

✍Ram Lakshman has written an article for pensionsbarrister.com in which he considers whether the Chancellor’s proposals to encourage (or mandate) British pension schemes to invest in British businesses are consistent with the traditional fiduciary duties of pension trustees. Read more: https://lnkd.in/epqxWV6j Paul Newman KC | #pensions #pensionsschemes

⚖The Commercial Court has rejected an application by the Claimants in the Magomedov litigation – a $14 billion claim concerning alleged unlawful means conspiracies and bribery – for a Norwich Pharmacal order against three financial services companies, following the hearing of jurisdiction challenges and of the Claimants’ substantive application for Norwich Pharmacal relief, at a two-day hearing before Jacobs J. Bobby Friedman and Rachael Earle acted for the successful First Respondent, instructed by Sue Thackeray, Laurence Clarke and Phoebe Alexander of Kingsley Napley. To read more, including the full judgment: https://lnkd.in/e9V6Xnsh #commerciallaw #litigation #commerciallitigation

📢 Join us on the evening of Tuesday 19 November 2024 for 'Investigating and Uncovering Fraud Using The English Insolvency Regime', a LIIARC - London International Investigations and Asset Recovery Conference joint seminar with Charles Russell Speechlys, Wilberforce Chambers & Evelyn Partners. Hear from our expert-led panel as they debate the relative virtues and drawbacks of the English insolvency regime in the fight against fraud. James Bailey KC and Jia Wei Lee are speaking on the panel, moderated by Caroline Greenwell (CRS), and alongside Jamie Tilling (CRS) and Brendan Weekes (Evelyn Partners). To grab your tickets, please click here: https://lnkd.in/dtrpT_5e #AssetRecovery #Insolvency #Investigation

⚖ On 22 October 2024 the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in an important case concerning the jurisdiction to award costs in proceedings in the First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (‘F-tT’) and the Upper Tribunal. Under Rule 13 of the relevant Tribunal Rules, costs can, essentially, only be awarded against another party where that party has ‘acted unreasonably in bringing, defending or conducting proceedings’. There is an equivalent rule for the Upper Tribunal, which is identically worded. The case of Lea and Others v GP Ilfracombe Management Co Ltd now becomes the definitive ruling as to what ‘unreasonably’ means in this context. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal from the Upper Tribunal (‘UT’). The UT had itself dismissed an appeal against the ruling of the F-tT - which had refused to order costs to the successful appellant tenants, following the total failure of the respondent landlord’s service charge application. That substantive application related to service charge demands which the respondent had served on the appellants, totalling around £2.4M. In dismissing the proceedings entirely, the F-tT had found that the demands had been served without any genuine belief that the sums were correct. Yet the F-tT had refused to award costs in the tenants’ favour, despite this finding. The UT upheld their decision, agreeing that the ‘unreasonableness’ threshold had not been crossed. The Court of Appeal, in allowing the appeal, made clear that ‘unreasonably’ in Rule 13 was not to be equated only with ‘vexatious’ or ‘harassing’ behaviour. Such an interpretation was much too restrictive. UT and F-tT decisions, suggesting that this was the threshold test, were wrong. Unreasonable behaviour includes vexatious, abusive and harassing behaviour but is not limited only to such behaviour. The Court of Appeal further clarified that the UT had not intended, in the Willow Court case (which, until now, has been the leading case on Rule 13 costs) to state a threshold test which confined the rule only to abusive/harassing behaviour. Affirming Willow Court, the Court of Appeal stated that: ‘a good practical rule is for the tribunal to ask: would a reasonable person acting reasonably have acted in this way? Is there a reasonable explanation for the conduct in issue?’. The Court also made clear that further guidance on the threshold test, or its application, would not be helpful. Martin Hutchings KC acted for the successful appellants – instructed by Michael Green and Harriet Muffett of Trowers & Hamlins. To read more, including the full judgment: https://lnkd.in/eKMuaTiv #Property #Litigation

Lexa Hilliard KC and Marcia Shekerdemian KC are speaking at the Insolvency Practitioners Association (IPA)'s 2024 Roadshow event at Marsh, London on Tuesday 12 November. Lexa and Marcia's session is entitled, “Caselaw Canapés: Recent Decisions for Essential Snacking” More information: https://lnkd.in/eNSiFG2B #Restructuring #Turnaround #Insolvency #WomenInLaw

“𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒆𝒕 𝒂𝒔 𝒂 𝒘𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒆 𝒊𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒑𝒊𝒏𝒏𝒂𝒄𝒍𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑳𝒐𝒏𝒅𝒐𝒏 𝑩𝒂𝒓” We are delighted to announce our continued success in the latest edition of Chambers and Partners, highlighting collective strength across our core practice areas and the expertise and experience of members of Chambers and staff. ⚖️ We are ranked as a Leading Set in 12 practice areas, 5 of which we are Top Ranked in. We have achieved a record 170 barrister rankings, which includes 23 new and improved individual rankings. Thank you to all our clients for your ongoing support and feedback! Thank you to James Cowdell and his team for their considerable work throughout the research process. #ChambersUKBar2025 #LegalRankings #Litigation

⚖ On 14 October 2024 the Commercial Court handed down judgment in Filatona Trading Limited and Oleg Deripaska v Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan UK LLP [2024] EWHC 2573 (Comm). Mr Justice Calver acceded to the Claimants’ application for a Norwich Pharmacal order where the defendant law firm had obtained from an unnamed business consultancy a report which was subsequently deployed in s.68 proceedings against the Claimants with a view to setting aside an arbitration award. The report was subsequently revealed to be a forgery. The judgment contains a very interesting analysis of the circumstances in which a law firm might become amenable to a Norwich Pharmacal order and the extent to which privilege might bar such relief. Thomas Grant KC led James Sheehan KC of Essex Court Chambers, who were instructed by Mark Hastings, Abigail Healey and Emma Kingstone of Quillon Law. To read more, including the full judgment, click here: https://lnkd.in/ed2VMMuA #CommercialLitigation #CommercialLaw #Litigation