Charlotte Eborall

Charlotte Eborall

Call: 2004

"She is exceptionally hard-working, provides thorough advice and is a delight to work with."

- Chambers & Partners UK Bar (2022)

"Charlotte is a top-drawer senior junior. She is meticulous, thorough and relentless in her approach."

- Chambers & Partners UK Bar (2022)

"A compelling and thorough advocate who is very technically adept."

- Chambers & Partners UK Bar (2022)

"A real star; her analysis is very considered and detailed, and she is very responsive."

- Legal 500 UK Bar (2022)

"Versatile and quick on her feet."

- Legal 500 UK Bar (2022)

Practice Overview

Charlotte is an experienced senior junior specialising in complex and high value commercial litigation in the fields of banking, financial services and regulation, civil fraud and general commercial disputes.

Charlotte has been consistently recognised in the legal directories for over a decade as a leading senior junior in Banking & Finance, Financial Services, and Consumer Law. In November 2021, Charlotte was named Banking Junior of the year at the Chambers & Partners UK Bar Awards.

Described in the directories as “a top-drawer senior junior” and “a real star” who is “always excellent” and “exceptionally hard-working, meticulous, thorough and relentless in her approach”. Charlotte is known for being “very approachable and a fine team player” and “extremely client-friendly”, “very responsive” with “a good eye for detail”.

Charlotte is regularly instructed as sole counsel and is “tenacious in fighting for her client”, “a compelling and thorough advocate” who “regularly outperforms silks”. She “gets to grips well with cases quickly and efficiently” and is “really impressive and noted for her rigorous analysis of cases” her advisory work being described as “clear, measured and methodical” and “her written work output is excellent.”

Charlotte specialises in banking and financial litigation and disputes and is regularly instructed by major banks and financial institutions, as well as other clients with a banking dispute. Charlotte’s practice spans disputes arising out of financial instruments (e.g. derivatives and related products), credit, mortgages, guarantees and other securities, allegations of fraud, undue influence, negligent advice, and equitable and restitutionary claims. Her strengths are described (in Chambers & Partners) as follows: “She is exceptionally hard-working, provides thorough advice and is a delight to work with.” “Charlotte is a top-drawer senior junior. She is meticulous, thorough and relentless in her approach. She is strong with both the written and spoken word and demonstrates empathy in her dealings with the lay client. She is very approachable and a fine team player. She regularly outperforms silks.”

Recent and former instructions include:

Lombard North Central plc v European SkyJets Limited [2022] EWHC 728 (QB), (also [2021] EWHC 3705 (QB), [2020] EWHC 679 (QB), [2019] EWHC 2335 (QB)) – acted successfully on behalf of Lombard North Central plc in this contractual and banking dispute in which the Part 20 Claimants claimed alleged losses of over £26 million in respect of a business jet financed by Lombard. Charlotte successfully resisted the initial application to set aside default judgment (later overturned on appeal) and appeared as advocate against a silk in numerous of the interim hearings. At trial, Charlotte was led by Nicholas Craig QC. Her cross-examination of the aviation expert was described by Foxton J in his judgment as “highly impressive”.

PCP Capital Partners LLP v Barclays Bank plc [2021] EWHC 307 (Comm); [2021] EWHC 1852 (Comm) – instructed as part of the counsel team, initially led by Ewan McQuater QC during case preparation, and latterly by David Quest QC at trial, in relation to issues of causation and quantum in respect of this £1.6 billion fraudulent misrepresentation claim made by PCP against Barclays Bank plc arising out of the capital raising conducted by the bank during the 2008 financial crisis. Charlotte was responsible for analysing the expert evidence (contained in nearly 20 expert reports) which addressed PCP’s ability to secure debt finance against the financial instruments issued by Barclays to fund the deal, the nature of PCP’s remuneration arrangements with its investors (including consideration of private equity transactions, market conventions, SPACs and PIPEs), and the counterfactual in which PCP made its £1.6 billion claim (which failed).

Ward v Clydesdale Bank plc [2021] EWHC 1942 (Comm) – representing (together with Ian Wilson QC) the bank in relation to alleged breaches of statutory, tortious and contractual duties, and an unfair relationship claim, concerning the claimant partnership’s (at one time) £50m property business and their entry into swaps and tailored business loan (TBL) products with the defendant bank. The claim is in excess of £23 million.

Citco Bank and Trust Co Ltd v Barclays Bank UK plc [2021] EWHC 2767 (Ch) – acting on behalf of a major bank in an inter-bank restitutionary unjust enrichment claim regarding a mistaken payment and defences of ministerial receipt and change of position.

Broomhead v National Westminster Bank plc and anor [2021] EWHC 105 (Ch); [2020] EWHC 1005 (Ch) – securing the summary disposal of a claim alleging that an earlier judgment was tainted by fraud, engaging principles drawn from the Supreme Court’s decision in Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd [2019] UKSC 13.

R v E (2019) – advising a financial institution on the validity of a debenture concerning the application of section 44 Companies Act 2006.

In the matter of (1) Santander UK PLC (2) Abbey National Treasury Services plc [2019] EWHC 111 (Ch) –solely instructed by Ernst & Young LLP on behalf of the Skilled Person, John Cole, to advise and appear as advocate in relation to Santander’s ring-fencing transfer scheme. Following the global financial crisis, the UK Government obliged UK banks holding more than £25bn of core deposits to have a fully-operational ring-fenced structure, to be effected, pursuant to the Financial Services (Banking Reform) Act 2013, by a ring-fencing transfer scheme. Santander, one of the Big Four retail banks, resolved to transfer its investment banking operations to its Spanish parent, leaving its retail banking business within the ring-fenced Santander UK plc. This transfer resulted in the combined transfer of over £40 billion of assets and liabilities to Banco Santander. Charlotte advised the Skilled Person on the form and content of his independent expert reports and appeared as sole advocate (Martin Moore QC acting on behalf of the bank and Rory Phillips QC acting on behalf of the Regulators) on behalf of the Skilled Person. During the two-day hearing, Charlotte’s oral submissions addressed: the consequences of transferring business to Spain and the potential impact of Brexit; financial strength and adverse effects by reference to the Skilled Person’s report such that Hildyard J was able to conclude that the scheme ought to be sanctioned.

N (2019) – advising a building society upon the transition from LIBOR to risk-free rates and the implications upon debt instruments and other financial products referencing that rate.

Broomhead v Royal Bank of Scotland [2018] EWHC 1574 (Ch) – instructed (initially, instructed alone, but instructed for the 10-day trial together with David Quest QC) to defend the bank in a £13m claim by a former business customer alleging breach of an oral collateral contract for automatic renewal of lending facilities. The claim also raised a section 140A CCA unfair relationship claim, limitation and insolvency set-off issues. Charlotte is now solely instructed in further litigation on the same matter concerning the recovery of the £1 million judgment debt owed to the bank.

Various derivative product mis-selling and related claims – instructed on behalf of a number of banks to defend claims or potential claims arising out of derivatives entered into before and during the global financial crisis. Such cases raise issues concerning the scope of the duty of care; non-reliance and limitation of liability clauses; whether advisory duties were owed; limitation issues; and review claims. Charlotte has been involved in IRHP claims since early 2012 when she was instructed, as part of a Counsel team, to advise one of the big four banks in relation to its agreement with the FCA to review sales of IRHPs. She was also instructed (until maternity leave) in Bailey v Barclays Bank Plc [2014] EWHC 2882 (QB), concerning striking out of causes of action in interest rate swaps mis- selling claim (Richard Hanke was instructed for the application).

Hacketts v HSBC Bank plc [2016] EWHC (Comm Ct) –instructed (led latterly by Daniel Toledano QC) in this circa £10m claim for consequential loss against the bank in respect of mis-sold interest rate derivatives. LIBOR misrepresentations were successfully excluded at the case management stage. Claim settled shortly before trial.

Mortgage Express v Countrywide Surveyors Ltd [2016] EWHC 1830 (Ch), [2016] PNLR 35; [2016] EWHC 224 (Ch) – acting on behalf of the mortgage lender in respect of losses it suffered when it advanced loans on the basis of fraudulently inflated valuation figures; led at trial by Paul Lowenstein QC; sole advocate on the consequential quantum trial concerning the award of compound interest as damages under the Sempra Metals principles .

RBS v McCarthy [2015] EWHC 3626 (QB) (Picken J) – solely instructed in the 5-day trial before Mr Justice Picken in a claim arising out of Halliwells LLP collapse. Bank sought recovery of monies lent under a professional practice loan (PPL) and the former partner counterclaimed inducing breach of contract, alleged collateral contract, implied terms and the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. Counterclaim dismissed and indemnity costs awarded in favour of the bank.

Holdstock v Endeavour Personal Finance Limited [2012] EWCA Civ – instructed at the first instance hearing and on appeal on behalf of the lender in relation to a payment protection insurance claim. The Court held that there was no unfair relationship despite the payment and non-disclosure of commission. The claim settled prior to the appeal in the Court of Appeal.

Enterprise Inns plc v Smith [2012] EWHC (London Mercantile Court) – instructed, together with Jonathan Mark Phillips, to seek mandatory injunctions, declarations and default judgment against an individual who made a fraudulent claim under the direct debit guarantee scheme (“DDGS”) that the bank would not refuse not to honour.

Payment protection insurance claims – instructed on behalf of the leading banks and financial institutions including HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds, Welcome Finance, Abbey/Santander and Lloyds/Black Horse to defend and advise on claims for repayment of payment protection insurance premiums and issues arising out of such claims, including representing the Defendants in Claims Group Direct Limited v Lloyds TSB Bank plc (t/a Welcome Financial Services) and another [2009] (unreported) (Judge Holman, County Court, Manchester) in which a series of PPI claims brought by a claims management company who was the assignee of many individuals’ PPI claims was struck out as being champertous assignments.

Anfield v Bank of Scotland [2010] EWHC 2374 (Ch); [2011] 1 WLR 2414; [2011] 1 All ER 708 – instructed, both at the first instance hearing and on appeal, heard before Proudman J, in the Part 8 claim seeking declarations that the bank was entitled to be subrogated to the prior mortgage in priority to other chargeholders.

Secret commission claims – instructed in cases concerning allegations of secret commissions under Hurstanger v Wilson [2007] 1 WLR 2351 (CA).

Bank Charges (2007-2008) – instructed on behalf of leading banks in bank charges and related litigation.

Bank freezing accounts/ Iraq (United Nations Sanctions) Order 2000 – instructed on behalf of a bank in a breach of contract and/or negligence claim after accounts frozen pursuant to legislation.

Halliday v HBOS plc (2007) – instructed to defend an application brought in the Interim Applications Court to re-open an appeal and for related relief, including committal for alleged contempt of court. (For related proceedings, see Halliday v HBOS plc [2007] EWHC 1780 (QB)).

BGL Realisations Limited (in administration) (2007) – instructed as junior counsel (led by Jonathan Mark Phillips) in multi-party litigation seeking injunctions and further relief against individuals and their banks to prevent fraudulent DDGS claims.

Charlotte is regularly instructed as sole advocate, and as a junior, to appear in the High Court and County Court in general commercial matters, including fraud claims.

Current and notable instructions include:

Lombard North Central plc v European SkyJets Limited [2022] EWHC 728 (QB), (also [2021] EWHC 3705 (QB), [2020] EWHC 679 (QB), [2019] EWHC 2335 (QB)) – acted successfully on behalf of Lombard North Central plc in this contractual and banking dispute in which the Part 20 Claimants claimed alleged losses of over £26 million in respect of a business jet financed by Lombard. Charlotte successfully resisted the initial application to set aside default judgment (later overturned on appeal) and appeared as advocate against a silk in numerous of the interim hearings. At trial, Charlotte was led by Nicholas Craig QC. Her cross-examination of the aviation expert was described by Foxton J in his judgment as “highly impressive”.

PCP Capital Partners LLP v Barclays Bank plc [2021] EWHC 307 (Comm); [2021] EWHC 1852 (Comm) – instructed as part of the counsel team, initially led by Ewan McQuater QC during case preparation, and latterly by David Quest QC at trial, in relation to issues of causation and quantum in respect of this £1.6 billion fraudulent misrepresentation claim made by PCP against Barclays Bank plc arising out of the capital raising conducted by the bank during the 2008 financial crisis. Charlotte was responsible for analysing the expert evidence (contained in nearly 20 expert reports) which addressed PCP’s ability to secure debt finance against the financial instruments issued by Barclays to fund the deal, the nature of PCP’s remuneration arrangements with its investors (including consideration of private equity transactions, market conventions, SPACs and PIPEs), and the counterfactual in which PCP made its £1.6 billion claim (which failed).

Ward v Clydesdale Bank plc [2021] EWHC 1942 (Comm) – representing (together with Ian Wilson QC) the bank in relation to alleged breaches of statutory, tortious and contractual duties, and an unfair relationship claim, concerning the claimant partnership’s (at one time) £50m property business and their entry into swaps and tailored business loan (TBL) products with the defendant bank. The claim is in excess of £23 million.

Broomhead v National Westminster Bank plc and anor [2021] EWHC 105 (Ch); [2020] EWHC 1005 (Ch) – securing the summary disposal of a claim alleging that an earlier judgment was tainted by fraud, engaging principles drawn from the Supreme Court’s decision in Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd [2019] UKSC 13.

Plutus Capital Limited v Siddiqi (2019-2020) – representing an investor and judgment debtholder in Part 71 proceedings to obtain information and subsequent committal proceedings for non-compliance concerning the enforcement of a £9.5 million judgment debt.

R v E (2019) – advising a financial institution on the validity of a debenture concerning the application of section 44 Companies Act 2006.

A v B (2019) – contractual dispute alleging procurement of a breach of contract by competing supplier business. Claim settled at mediation.

First National TrustCo (UK) Limited v Bahia Blanca and others [2018] EWHC 899 (Ch) – Charlotte was instructed, from 2017 until shortly before trial in early 2019, on behalf of an international professional trustee in the timeshare industry in relation to claims for recovery of trust property and associated relief; allegations of dishonest assistance and knowing receipt. In April 2018, Charlotte successfully opposed an application seeking relief from sanctions under rule 3.9 resulting in the defendants being unable to recover their costs of the proceedings. (For the main trial and subsequent appeal (not instructed), see [2019] EWHC 1187 (Ch) and [2020] EWCA Civ 107).

Mortgage Express v Hall & Co (and other) (the “NHL” litigation) (2009-2018) – Charlotte was instructed, predominantly solely instructed, in this £20m fraud claim against various solicitors and valuers in relation to the “North East Property Buyers” and “Newcastle Home Loans” fraud that took place in the early 2000s (see https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-34549500 for the convictions for conspiracy to defraud). After a series of interim applications and case management hearings in which Charlotte appeared as advocate, the final defendants settled in late 2018.

Lantern v RSM (2017) – instructed on behalf of a consumer credit debt collections business in a circa £2.8 million claim against their former professional advisers concerning the proper conduct of a FSMA s.166 investigation and review. Claim settled.

Hacketts v HSBC Bank plc [2016] EWHC (Comm Ct) – Charlotte was originally solely instructed (latterly led by Daniel Toledano QC) in this circa £10m alleged claim for consequential loss against the bank in respect of mis-sold interest rate derivatives. The claim raised LIBOR misrepresentations, which were successfully excluded from the issues in dispute at the case management stage. The claim settled shortly before trial.

Mortgage Express v Countrywide Surveyors Ltd [2016] EWHC 1830 (Ch), [2016] PNLR 35 – solely instructed for the quantum trial after the successful trial on liability (in which Charlotte was led by Paul Lowenstein QC) on behalf of the lender who sought to recover losses as a result of fraudulently inflated valuation rental figures for buy-to-let mortgages. The Court considered whether the lender was entitled to compound interest as damages, on the basis of its lost opportunity to make alternative loans and the authorities on that issue.

MPL v ASL (Ch D) (2016) – instructed in a commercial debt claim raising issues of insolvency set-off and anticipatory breach of contract. Claim settled at mediation.

Timeshare dispute (2015) – instructed, together with Andrew Sutcliffe QC, to advise a worldwide provider of timeshare resort services in relation to its contractual obligations owed pursuant to a series of agreements between trustee, site owner, owning companies and timeshare owners/members.

Withers LLP v Rybak [2012] 1 WLR 1748 (Court of Appeal) – instructed as junior counsel, led by Andrew Fletcher QC, on behalf of the appellant, Langbar. The Court of Appeal held, allowing an appeal from the judgment of Morgan J, that (1) no retaining lien arose in favour of solicitors Withers, in respect of monies held in its client account, pursuant to a quasi-freezing injunction, and (2) there was no equitable charge over these monies.

Timeshare agreements multi-party litigation (2010) (HHJ Chambers QC, London Mercantile Court) – instructed as junior counsel (led by Andrew Sutcliffe QC) in a group litigation claim brought against a financial institution in respect of alleged misrepresentations and breaches of contract of timeshare agreements funded by credit offered by the finance provider, under sections 56 and 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

SITA v Serruys (May 2009 – April 2010) (ChD) – instructed as part of a counsel team in respect of a £90m deceit and SPA warranty action arising out of the sale of the Easco national scrap metal business. Led by Adrian Beltrami QC and David Head and instructed by Mills & Reeve.

Misuse of confidential information claim (ChD) – instructed by a leading commercial waste disposal company in respect of claims against a former company director for conspiracy, breach of confidentiality, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract (including non-solicitation/non-compete clauses) in respect of the alleged sale of confidential information to a competitor company. Claim settled shortly before the 5-day trial listed in the Chancery Division.

Claims Group Direct Limited v Black Horse Limited and Lloyds TSB Bank plc (Lawtel 11 Nov 2009) – acted on behalf of the lenders in four test cases brought as a result of over 100 claims issued by the Claimant under what was ruled to be a champertous and unenforceable assignment of any rights of action in respect of mis-selling claims of payment protection insurance.

VTB Bank Europe plc -v- KPMG Bohlins Aktiebolag et alia (2009) (Swedish Court of Appeal) – Charlotte was led by Andrew Fletcher QC on behalf of the bank in a deposition hearing (ordered after a letter of request) pursuant to CPR Part 34 and the 1975 Act in relation to a claim for SEK 285m brought in the Swedish Court by the bank against auditors of a company to whom the bank lent monies.

Breach of warranty claim – advising on prospects of claim before issue. Led to a successful settlement.

SR Technics Acquisition II & Another v. Flsmith – led by Paul Lowenstein QC for the Claimant companies in their action for recovery of sums due under indemnity and other clauses in a business sale agreement.

Reid v Capita Group plc (2006-8) (ChD) contract – (led by Andrew Onslow QC) acted on behalf of the defendant FTSE 100 company in relation to alleged breach of a share sale purchase agreement in respect of the sale of a costs negotiating business.

IXIS v Corporate & Investment Bank v WestLB AG & ors (2007) (Comm Court) – instructed as part of a counsel team on behalf of Terra Firma, in relation to the high-profile commercial litigation concerning the securitization and subsequent collapse of the Box Clever group.

Charlotte is regularly instructed, both as sole Counsel and as part of a Counsel team in professional negligence claims, including fraud claims.

Current and recent instructions include:

Confidential (2022) – instructed on behalf of a barrister in a professional negligence action.

Confidential (2021-ongoing) – representing the FCA and PRA in their joint investigation into high-profile individuals of a systemically important financial institution and enforcement proceedings before the relevant regulatory committees (leading Emmanuel Sheppard, led by Paul Stanley QC).

G (2019) – representing (in writing) an individual who was making representations to the Enforcement Decision Making Committee (EDMC) of the PRA regarding his alleged shadow directorship, a proposed fine and a prohibition. Charlotte’s written representations persuaded the committee that the allegation of shadow directorship was not proven and the penalties were reduced accordingly.

A v Q (2019) – advised a leading investment manager in respect of an alleged unauthorised share disposal and possible breach of mandate claim (in addition to other possible contractual, tortious and fiduciary breaches).

Mortgage Express v Lopian Wagner (2019) – instructed for this 5-day trial of a professional negligence claim; claim settled shortly before trial.

Mortgage Express v Hall & Co (and other) (the “NHL” litigation) (2009-2018) – Charlotte was instructed, predominantly solely instructed, in this £20m fraud claim against various solicitors and valuers in relation to the “North East Property Buyers” and “Newcastle Home Loans” fraud that took place in the early 2000s (see https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-34549500 for the convictions for conspiracy to defraud). After a series of interim applications and case management hearings in which Charlotte appeared as advocate, the final defendants settled in late 2018.

Lantern v RSM (2017) – instructed on behalf of a consumer credit debt collections business in a circa £2.8 million claim against their former professional advisers concerning the proper conduct of a FSMA s.166 investigation and review. Claim settled.

Mortgage Express v Countrywide Surveyors Limited [2016] EWHC 224 (Ch) -instructed, together with Paul Lowenstein QC, on behalf of the lender in a claim in deceit in respect of fraudulent rental overvaluations given by a valuer for 64 properties located in a new development in the south-east of England. The judgment considered the mental element required for the tort of deceit and causation.

Mortgage Express v Countrywide Surveyors Ltd [2016] EWHC 1830 (Ch), [2016] PNLR 35 – solely instructed for the quantum trial after the successful trial on liability (in which Charlotte was led by Paul Lowenstein QC) on behalf of the lender who sought to recover losses as a result of fraudulently inflated valuation rental figures for buy-to-let mortgages. The Court considered whether the lender was entitled to compound interest as damages, on the basis of its lost opportunity to make alternative loans and the authorities on that issue.

Amber Homeloans v Countrywide (2015) – instructed to advise in relation to potential professional negligence claims against valuers.

Mortgage Express v SFM Legal Services Limited and others (2010) (HHJ Waksman QC) – instructed (together with Paul Lowenstein QC) on behalf of the lender in ex parte urgent search and freezing order applications resulting in the successful recovery of over 600 conveyancing files and thereafter in the ongoing litigation.

Negligent accountants’ share valuation (Jan 2010) – advising on prospects and quantum in relation to a negligent share sale valuation: issues relating to loss of a chance; maintainable earnings basis of valuation and margin of error to establish breach.

In tandem with her strong banking and finance practice, Charlotte Is regularly instructed in relation to consumer issues arising out of such disputes and in other consumer-related matters, including regulatory perimeter and compliance issues concerning the FCA’s CONC sourcebook and the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Recent and former instructions include:

A (2022) – representing an insurance brokerage in proceedings alleging payment of secret commission, following the decisions of the Court of Appeal in Pengelly and Wood.

T (2021) – advising an FCA-regulated mortgage lender in relation to alleged “mortgage prisoner” claims.

Motor finance claims (2020-ongoing) – representing and advising motor finance dealers and financiers in relation to alleged secret commission claims following the FCA’s publication of its Policy Statement PS20/8 which banned motor finance discretionary commission models.

Business energy commission claims (2020-ongoing) – advising clients in relation to possible claims concerning hidden commissions paid to energy brokers.

V (2019) – advising a consumer credit firm in relation to its charging structure and CONC compliance.

R v B (2019) – advising a leading credit card company in relation to CCA unfair relationship claims and the applicable legislation in respect of old credit card agreements; the question concerned the applicability of the exception to unfair relationship claims in respect of secured lending.

Aytons v [insurer] [2019] (HHJ Kramer, Newcastle BPC, 14 October 2019) – appeal in relation to a Hurstanger “secret commission” claim alleged against the insurer in relation to the sale of a PPI policy to consumers in 2005.

Carrington v GE Money (2018) (and others) – instructed on behalf of the lender in strike out applications in relation to secret commission claims brought out of time in reliance upon section 32 Limitation Act 1980 (deliberate concealment).

CCA claims – advising on the interaction between the regulated mortgage contract regime; the CCA and the CONC regime.

Secret commission claims – instructed on behalf of financial institutions in relation to Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Limited [2014] UKSC 61 and Hurstanger v Wilson [2007] EWCA Civ 299 claims for commission.

Townson v FCE Bank plc [2016] ECC 30 – instructed on appeal in relation to an unfair relationship claim made against a creditor whose alleged agent, the car dealership, had mis-sold a payment protection insurance policy.

Section 140A timeshares disputes (2015) – advising a bank in respect of consumer claims brought by individuals under the unfair relationship regime in respect of timeshares entered into financed by credit agreements with the bank.

Customer v Bank (2015) – claim brought against a bank in respect of breaches of Data Protection Act legislation.

Timeshare dispute (2015) – instructed, together with Andrew Sutcliffe QC, to advise a worldwide provider of timeshare resort services in relation to its contractual obligations owed pursuant to a series of agreements between trustee, site owner, owning companies and timeshare owners/members.

Timeshare agreements multi-party litigation (2010) (HHJ Chambers QC, London Mercantile Court) – Charlotte was instructed as junior counsel (led by Andrew Sutcliffe QC) in a group litigation claim brought against a financial institution in respect of alleged misrepresentations and breaches of contract of timeshare agreements funded by credit offered by the finance provider, under sections 56 and 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Claims Group Direct Limited v Black Horse Limited and Lloyds TSB Bank plc (Lawtel 11 Nov 2009) – acted on behalf of the lenders in four test cases brought as a result of over 100 claims issued by the Claimant under what was ruled to be a champertous and unenforceable assignment of any rights of action in respect of mis-selling claims of payment protection insurance.

Having completed two secondments in the insurance division of the former Financial Services Authority, Charlotte specialises in Part VII insurance business transfers and appears regularly on behalf of the regulator/s. Charlotte is also developing her practice and is now instructed on behalf of companies to make Part 8 claims for insurance business transfers.

Charlotte’s instructions in this area include:

LV= (2018-2021) – advising the FCA in relation to LV=’s conversion to a company limited by guarantee under the Friendly Societies Act 1992 and on issues concerning LV=’s proposed sale to private equity firm, Bain Capital, which collapsed in late 2021.

Interested party in Part VII transfer (2021) – instructed on behalf of a person alleging they would be adversely affected by a Part VII transfer to represent it at the final hearing (attendance ultimately not required as a result of settlement negotiations succeeding on the eve of hearing).

Prudential Assurance Co Ltd, Re Rothesay Life plc, [2021] 2 All ER (Comm) 1051 – instructed (with Barry Isaacs QC) in the landmark Court of Appeal decision which addressed for the first time the approach that the Court should adopt in relation to Part VII insurance business transfer schemes.

In the matter of Certain of the Member at Lloyd’s [2020] EWHC 3266 (Ch); [2020] EWHC 1388 (Ch); [2018] EWHC 3228 (Ch) – representing the FCA throughout this complex Brexit-related Part VII insurance business transfer, at the preliminary directions, directions, and final hearings which effected the transfer of EEA elements of Lloyd’s of London policies to a Belgian subsidiary of Lloyd’s (Martin Moore QC instructed on behalf of the applicants and Tom Weitzman QC instructed on behalf of the PRA).

In the matter of (1) Santander UK PLC (2) Abbey National Treasury Services plc [2019] EWHC 111 (Ch) – instructed by Ernst & Young LLP on behalf of the Skilled Person, John Cole, to advise and appear as advocate in relation to Santander’s ring-fencing transfer scheme. Following the global financial crisis, the UK Government obliged UK banks holding more than £25bn of core deposits to have a fully-operational ring-fenced structure, to be effected, pursuant to the Financial Services (Banking Reform) Act 2013, by a ring-fencing transfer scheme. Santander, one of the Big Four retail banks, resolved to transfer its investment banking operations to its Spanish parent, leaving its retail banking business within the ring-fenced Santander UK plc. This transfer resulted in the combined transfer of over £40 billion of assets and liabilities to Banco Santander. Charlotte advised the Skilled Person on the form and content of his independent expert reports and appeared as sole advocate (Martin Moore QC acting on behalf of the bank and Rory Phillips QC acting on behalf of the Regulators) on behalf of the Skilled Person. During the two-day hearing, Charlotte’s oral submissions addressed: the consequences of transferring business to Spain and the potential impact of Brexit; financial strength and adverse effects by reference to the Skilled Person’s report such that Hildyard J was able to conclude that the scheme ought to be sanctioned.

Reliance Mutual Insurance Society Limited [2018] EWHC 820 (Ch) (Fancourt J) – instructed on behalf of the FCA at the final hearing of a transfer scheme sanctioning a demutualisation of the society.

Reassure and HSBC Life (UK) Limited [2015] EWHC 2664 (Ch) (Snowden J) – instructed on behalf of the FCA at the final hearing (attended by policyholders) in respect of the FCA’s reasons for non- objection and views on the benefit security and reasonable expectations of policyholders. In this case the Judge referred to Charlotte’s “conspicuously concise and clear submissions” on behalf of the FCA.

Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance (Europe) [2013] EWHC (Ch) (David Richards J) – instructed on behalf of Mitsui (Pollyanna Deane of Simmons & Simmons instructing) to advise and attend directions and final hearing in respect of the Part VII transfer of Mitsui’s UK business to a newly incorporated German company, resulting in the reorganisation of Mitsui’s Continental European business.

Direct Line Insurance and Churchill Insurance Co Ltd [2011] EWHC 1667 (Ch) (Floyd J) – directions hearing at which waiver to notify all policyholders affected by a Part VII transfer was sought.

Sompo Japan Insurance Inc [2011] EWHC 260 (Ch) (Briggs J) – transfer of reinsurance business. Led (in second hearing only) by Jonathan Nash QC.

Cardrow and Tradex (July 2009) – interim hearing on the transfer of general insurance business between motor insurance businesses: issues relating to the proper definition of “policyholder” and the parties to be notified of the transfer to satisfy FSMA, the FSA and the Court.

Royal Sun Alliance v Europa [2008] EWHC 3436 (Ch) (David Richards J)- transfer of general insurance business to Ireland: issues relating to capital adequacy, Pillar I (MCR) and Pillar 2 (ICAS) cover and the imposition of a court undertaking in relation to maintenance of capital. This authority is now cited as one of the leading authorities setting out the principles to be considered in relation to capital requirements for general insurance business Part VII transfers.

Pharmacy Mutual Insurance Company Limited v NPA Limited (Dec 2008) – general insurance business transfer within the UK.

St Paul v UIC (Dec 2007) – general insurance business transfer. Swiss Re (Nov 2007) – general insurance and reinsurance business transfer.

New Hampshire v Landmark (Oct 2007) – general insurance business transfer: issues relating to certificates of consent from EEA State Regulators and interpretation of FSMA requirements.

City General v Generali (Oct 2007) – general insurance business transfer. Issues relating to certificates to be obtained by the FSA and interpretation of FSMA, First and Third Non-Life Directives and the Swiss Agreement.

Cavendish v Royal Sun Alliance Insurance plc (July 2007) – general insurance. Bupa v Quinn (July 2007) – transfer of general insurance business to Ireland.

At the start of her career, Charlotte was seconded twice to the Insurance and Prudential Policy department of the General Counsel Division at the then Financial Services Authority. Charlotte draws on this direct experience in her current practice and advises on a number of regulatory and financial services issues, as well as starting to develop a financial investigations practice.

Instructions include:

G (2019) – Charlotte was recently instructed through FSLA, pro bono, together with White & Case LLP to assist an individual in making representations to the Enforcement Decision Making Committee (EDMC) of the PRA

K (2019) – advising a UK entity on the regulatory perimeter in respect of its proposed currency exchange and digital wallet service to be provided to UK and foreign customers, involving the use of distributed ledger technology and transfer (in part) in cryptocurrency.

LV (2018-2019) – assisting the FCA in relation to a conversion of a friendly society under the Friendly Societies Act 1992 and related schemes of arrangement under Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006.

Insurance Distribution Directive (2018) – advising the FCA in relation to the implementation of the IDD into its rules and guidance and the impacts of that implementation upon firms.

FSCS – advising the FSCS in relation to payment of claims in respect of unauthorised collective investment schemes.

Russian/Cypriot bank – advising in relation to MCOB regulated activities and passporting issues.

Regulated activities in relation to insurance – advising various entities on perimeter issues concerning contracts of insurance, advising regulated activities, and financial promotions.

Regulated activities in relation to lending – advising whether informal lending arrangements amount to regulated activities or financial promotions.

RDC – assisting an individual in making representations to the former FSA’s Regulatory Decisions Committee (RDC) in respect of allegations as to whether he was a fit and proper person.

Passporting – advising on passporting into Spain and Portugal and notification and agency requirements.

Solvency II drafting (2011) – instructed to transpose parts of the Solvency II directive into FSA Rules.

FSA COBS Rules (2006) – instructed by the then FSA to draft “Conduct of Business” (COBS) rules (now incorporated into COBS14).

The Lawyer Awards 2022: Chambers of the Year