Farhaz Khan KC

Farhaz is ranked by all the directories as a leading Silk in Banking and Finance. He has particular experience of mis-selling, FX and LIBOR claims, having been instructed in Graiseley, the first LIBOR test case, and cases concerning complex derivatives and the meaning and effect of complex securitization, loan, security and ISDA documentation. Farhaz’s banking cases often arise in the context of complex fraud claims with a jurisdictional element to the dispute.

Farhaz is particularly experienced at dealing with commercial court and arbitration cases with a regulatory element and is a genuine specialist in both commercial court proceedings and regulatory cross-over claims (as to which see the recent cases under Financial Services and Commercial Dispute Resolution).

“Farhaz provides advice that is commercial and understandable to the client, which is very important on a complex matter.” (C&P 2024, Banking & Finance)

“He is indefatigable, thorough and friendly.” (C&P 2024, Banking & Finance)

“He brings a practical analysis to complex disputes, breaking things down into user-friendly work product, which is great for client management. He has an excellent sense of judgment and how a court would weigh the arguments.” (Legal 500 2024, Banking and Finance)

“He is a smart operator.” “He knows the financial services space and banking world very thoroughly.” “A real superstar in the banking litigation world.” (C&P 2022, Banking & Finance)

“Extremely thorough and responsive, he conveys his views with conviction and polish.” (Legal 500 2022, Banking & Finance)

“An extremely bright and analytical barrister who demonstrates judgement well beyond his years.” (C&P 2017, Banking & Finance)

“Very useful on his feet for commercial and banking matters.” (Legal 500 2016, Banking and Finance)

“A “brilliant tactician”. He continues to develop his standing in the banking sector following recent instructions involving securitization, market manipulation and documentation issues” (C&P 2016, Banking & Finance)

“…thoroughly recommended” by peers and is considered an “exceptionally smart lawyer.” He is “focused” and “employs a forensic approach.” (Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2016, Banking)

“He’s got an excellent grasp of the subject matter.” (C&P 2016, Banking & Finance)

“…a real star in banking disputes” who has “really shone as a junior in high profile cases” including “major banking disputes.” (C&P 2015, Banking & Finance)

Some recent cases:

• AXA v Revolut Bank Acting for Axa in a claim against Revolut bank for failure to prevent fraudulent payments.
• Re European Development Fund Advising an EU fund which had invested in regeneration projects in Scotland in relation to a dispute about the meaning and effect of a material adverse change clause in a mezzanine investment agreement.
• Ward & Ors v Clydesdale Bank plc Acting for claimants suing the bank for charging swap break costs for early termination of a loan.
• IS Prime v Think Markets [2022] EWHC 605 (Comm) Acting for Think Markets in a claim for breach of contract and deceit arising from the sale of a forex broker business involving alleged breach of an exclusive liquidity agreement between the purchaser (ISP) and the seller (Think).
• Aggreko v Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp & Ors (Commercial Court, 2020, unreported, but see press here) – acting for claimant in $37 million claim against a Yemeni electricity company taken over by Houthi rebels. Rare injunctive relief obtained preventing payment out under fraudulent call on performance bonds in support of DIFC-LCIA arbitral proceedings.
• Stifel Nicolaus Europe Ltd v Continental Capital Markets Ltd Acting for international bond broker (ContiCap) in defending a claim for breach of contract where ContiCap was unable to settle the proposed bond trade due to Russian sanctions imposed upon the proposed buyer of the bonds (ContiCap’s client).
• Rollino v Albermarle Asset Management Acting for a HNW Italian art dealer in a £m claim for fraudulent investment advice relating to the purchase of bonds and equity in worthless Italian fashion companies.
• Shurbanova v FX Capital Markets LLC [2017] EWHC 2133 (QB) (HHJ Waksman QC) Acted for defendant forex firm in a breach of contract claim. The claim failed.
• CBRE Loan Servicing Ltd v Gemini (Eclipse 2006-3) Plc [2015] EWHC 2769 (Ch) Acted for the Junior Noteholders in a Part 8 claim relating to the construction of a failed $1bn CMBS (meaning of “interest” and “principal” amounts).
• Graiseley Properties Ltd v Barclays Bank Plc; Deutsche Bank AG v Unitech Global Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1372 (CA) The first LIBOR test claim. One of The Lawyers ‘Top 20 cases’ of 2013. See also Graiseley Properties Ltd v Barclays Bank Plc (LIBOR amendments) [2012] EWHC 3093 (Comm); and Graiseley Properties Ltd v present and former directors and employees of Barclays Bank plc (open justice) [2013] EWHC 67 (Comm).
• X v FXCM Acting for FXCM in a claim for breach of contract and breach of s27 FSMA.
• Lehman Bros Holdings v X Acting for the claimant bank in a contractual dispute with a payable under the 1992 ISDA Master Agreement and Schedule.
• Yazdi v United Arab Bank Acting for the defendant bank in a claim for a declaration that a $125m personal guarantee is invalid.
• Papadopolous v Standard Chartered Bank [CFI/004/2017] (DIFC courts) (David Steel DCJ) Acted for defendant bank in very high profile $1.6m contractual bonus claim brought by former CEO of the Bank in the DIFC. The claim was struck out.
• Vitalo v Atlas Mara Bank Acting for the defendant bank and counterclaimant in a multimillion $ contract claim brought by the former CEO of the bank in the MENA.
• MHL v BOS (Financial List) Acting for a Scottish hotel group in a £130m breach of JV shareholder agreement (good faith) claim against BOS.
• Hockin v RBS (Financial List) Swaps mis-selling, LIBOR, conspiracy and deceit claim. Settled at trial. One of the first Financial List claims to go to trial. See also Hockin v RBS [2016] EWHC 925 (FL) (amendment / strike out applications).
• Regione Lazio v Dexia Crediop SpA Instructed by the defendant bank Dexia to provide an English law expert opinion for the Italian Federal Court on the construction of an exclusive jurisdiction clause contained within the 1992 ISDA (Multi-currency cross border) Master Agreement. The ISDA Master governed two interest rate swaps with an aggregate notional value of $400m.
• Merrill Lynch International v Amorim Partners Limited [2014] EWHC 74 (Comm) Acted for the defendant investment firm in a contract claim for payment in respect of shares acquired during a secondary offering.
• Ark Capital v Z Acted for the claimant investment firm in a FOREX manipulation claim under a prime brokerage arrangement arising out of a secondary offering of shares by a dealer-broker.

Farhaz is ranked as a leading Silk in Financial Services by Chambers and Partners and Legal 500. He is widely regarded as one of the foremost financial services barristers at the Bar with deep experience of regulatory investigations and enforcement actions, having been involved in some of the most significant regulatory interventions since the financial crisis (LIBOR, FOREX, JP Morgan ‘Whale Trades’, Keydata, Carillion, LME Nickel). Farhaz regularly acts for Lloyd’s of London in regulatory and enforcement matters including ground-breaking non-financial misconduct cases (Atrium) and continues to act for regulators (such as the Bank of England, the FCA and the DFSA) and firms and individuals in enforcement cases.

Farhaz is particularly experienced at dealing with commercial court and arbitration cases with a regulatory element and is a genuine specialist in both commercial court proceedings and regulatory cross-over claims (as to which see the recent cases under Banking and Finance and Commercial Dispute Resolution).

Farhaz also has a wide-ranging advisory practice working with firms on FCA, PRA and FOS related interventions including systemic FOS complaints (and Judicial Review of the FOS), SIPP / personal pensions related issues, investment funds, and contract terms. Recently he has advised on the impact of the Consumer Duty on a firm’s obligations.

“Farhaz is absolutely fantastic. He is very client-focused and a delight to work with.” “He provides a meticulous, thoughtful and strategic approach to investigations, interviews and tribunal hearings.” “He is a very good financial services specialist.” (C&P 2024, Financial Services)

“An absolute class act, with a deep knowledge of financial services matters. Charismatic and user-friendly.” (Legal 500 2024, Financial Services)

“He is exceptional – genuinely one of the best barristers I have worked with. He is a real expert in his field – very bright, very quick on his feet and responsive.” “No one is more knowledgeable than him. He’s very ambitious and a strong operator.” (C&P 2022, Financial Services)

“One of the most creative and ingenious thinkers in this area of law. He is a delight to work with, very hard-working and driven.” “An obvious choice for FCA regulatory matters and disputes involving complex financial products. He knows the issues back to front.” (C&P 2021, Financial Services)

“Rapidly becoming one of the very best known and well regarded juniors at the Bar, he has a clear passion and aptitude for contentious regulatory work, and is likely to become a doyen of the market in years to come.” (Legal 500 2021, Financial Services)

“Very commercial.” (C&P 2018, Financial Services)

“He is proactive, helpful, very pragmatic and has the client’s best interests at heart.” (C&P 2017, Financial Services)

“He is definitely very, very experienced now in terms of looking at the regulator and regulatory vulnerabilities.” (C&P 2016, Financial Services)

“…an enviable financial services regulatory practice.” (C&P 2016, Banking & Finance)

“…expertise not only in complex regulatory matters, but also in commercial, civil and criminal law” and “very impressive.” (C&P 2015, Financial Services)

“A barrister with a fast-growing reputation in both contentious and non-contentious financial services work.” (C&P 2015, Financial Services)

“…He is one of the best juniors for regulatory matters.” (C&P 2015, Chancery Commercial)

Some recent cases:

• Lloyd’s of London v Atrium Underwriting Limited Lead Counsel for Lloyd’s in very high profile regulatory proceedings against Atrium for serious failures in the way it handled non-financial misconduct at the firm including serious bullying, harassment and discrimination. https://www.lloyds.com/about-lloyds/media-centre/press-releases/responding-to-misconduct-in-the-lloyds-market
• Forsyth v FCA, Bank of England [2021] UKUT 0162 (TCC) Acting for the regulators in the first ever conjoined reference to the Upper Tribunal alleging lack of integrity against the former CEO of a mutual insurer.
• FCA v Carillion, The Official Receiver [2021] EWHC 2871 (Ch) Acted for the Official Receiver and SoS for Business on behalf of Carillion plc in liquidation in relation to the FCA’s power to file and serve statutory notices on Carillion.
• DFSA v Sheikh [FMT 19006] Successfully acted for the DFSA in the first ever lack of integrity case based on dishonesty and deceptive conduct (as opposed to mere recklessness) referred to the FMT.
• DFSA v Abraaj Capital. Advised the Abraaj compliance director in relation to regulatory and civil proceedings arising from the collapse of Abraaj.
• Re SIPP Operator Advising a SIPP operator in connection with a series of FOS determinations and potential JR of FOS decisions.
• Re Building Society Advising a UK building society in relation to its regulatory obligations under FSMA when providing customers with ancillary services.
• Re SIPP Operator Advising a SIPP operator in connection with a series of FOS determinations and potential JR of FOS decisions.
• Re LME Nickel Advising a party to regulatory investigations into LME Nickel.
• Re crypto-assets / NFTs Advising a crypto-asset / NFT provider in relation to a dispute under a high-profile sports licensing agreement and the meaning and effect of an exceptional circumstances clause in the event of a change in law and regulation.
• JP Morgan ‘Whale trader’ global investigation Acted for a former synthetic credit derivatives and indices trader within the Chief Investment Office of JPM accused of mismarking the trading book. The CIO sustained c.$9bn trading losses in 2012 leading to regulatory and criminal investigations in the US and the UK. The UK proceedings have led to a JR of the FCA and s393 FSMA ‘third party’ proceedings in the Upper Tribunal. See Grout v Financial Conduct Authority [2018] EWCA Civ 71 One of the leading appellate authorities on third party rights; R (on the application of Grout) v Financial Conduct Authority [2015] EWHC 596 (Admin) (Judicial Review); and Grout v Financial Conduct Authority [FS/2015/007] Upper Tribunal (Tax & Chancery) (s393 proceedings).
• Re MS Amlin Conducted investigation and settled charges on behalf of Lloyd’s of London against Amlin Underwriting Limited (AUL), part of the Amlin group, for breaches of the Lloyd’s Premium Trust Deed (PTD). AUL made payments of c.$88 million out of the PTD which were unconnected with the underwriting of the Syndicate 2001, in breach of the terms of the PTD. AUL failed to maintain adequate systems and controls around the use of the PTD assets, and also failed to investigate the matter in a timely way. Farhaz has since advised Lloyd’s on a number of PTD breach matters.
• LIBOR global investigation Acting for a senior CHF LIBOR derivatives trader under investigation by the DoJ, SEC, CFTC and the FCA. Farhaz successfully persuaded the Regulatory Decisions Committee of the FCA to take the extraordinary step (following a 2 year investigation) of discontinuing proceedings at the Warning Notice stage.
• FOREX global investigation Acting for a very senior FOREX and precious metals trader under investigation by regulators and prosecutors in numerous jurisdictions including FINMA and the AG (in Switzerland), the Singapore Monetary Authority and CADE (the securities competition regulator in Brazil), as well as in the UK (SFO, FCA & the Bank of England). Farhaz represented the trader at numerous criminal and regulatory interviews in various jurisdictions including London, Zurich and Washington DC. Led by Richard Lissack QC and with Simon Oakes (2010). Instructed by Arnold & Porter.
• Re X Advising a major UK insurer on its exposure under the Bribery Act 2010.
• Re Y Advising a well-known global firm in respect of a global investigation concerning alleged systemic over charging of customers. FCA, SFO investigations.
• Re Z Advising an insurer as to the scope and extent of indemnity insurance cover provided to a financial services firm and its directors in connection with an FCA / SFO investigation.
• Ford, Owen & Johnson v Financial Conduct Authority [2016] UKUT 0041 (TCC) Acted for the former compliance officer of Keydata before the Upper Tribunal. Successfully opposed a stay application by the FCA.
• Re Equity Syndicate Management Limited, Syndicate 218 & former directors. Acted for Lloyd’s in its biggest regulatory investigation in the Lloyd’s market since the 1990s (a Lloyd’s / FRC / FCA joint investigation) and subsequently represented Lloyd’s Enforcement before the Lloyd’s Disciplinary Tribunal. The defendant firm and directors admitted liability for breach of duty. The investigation arose out of the dramatic £311m deterioration in syndicate reserves.
• Re K Acted for an energy company seeking consent from the National Crime Agency under s335 POCA to proceed with a corporate transaction involving gas, oil and mining interests in West Africa. Bribery aspects.
• Gladstone Pacific Nickel v London Stock Exchange & AIM Regulation Represented a former AIM listed company in disciplinary/ regulatory matter including a claim for Judicial Review of the LSE on a jurisdictional issue.

Farhaz is ranked as a leading Silk by Chambers and Partners, Who’s Who Legal and Chambers Global for commercial dispute resolution and commercial chancery matters and receives instructions in a wide range of complex and high-profile commercial court litigation, international arbitration and regulatory proceedings, with a focus on civil fraud, banking, financial services, and pensions.

He is widely recognised as one of the leading Silks at the Bar with genuine cross-over expertise in commercial court litigation and financial services regulation, and his cases often have both elements.

Farhaz’s cases take him into different areas of law, and he has broad experience in cases involving insurance law, company law, corporate insolvency, partnership, shareholder disputes, sanctions, lobal investigations and ‘white collar’ crime, trusts law, employment law, Judicial Review / public law, funds and private equity, energy and commodities, media and technology, and sports law.

“He was clearly very experienced in the field and was very good at bringing someone with little knowledge up to speed. I found him very responsive and very personable to work with.” “He’s very hard-working.” (C&P 2024, Chancery Commercial)

“Farhaz is astute, gives great commercial and straight-talking advice, and wins the confidence of his clients.” (Legal 500 2023, Middle East: The English Bar – Commercial)

“He is excellent in all he does, incredibly bright and very client-friendly.” (C&P 2022, Commercial Dispute Resolution)

“Very, very knowledgeable. He is a very sound lawyer and a real expert in financial work.” (C&P 2022, Chancery Commercial)

“He gets to the heart of the matter quickly.” “You want him in your corner when fighting a complicated claim.” (C&P 2021, Commercial Dispute Resolution)

“Really developing a practice as a technically thorough lawyer. He’s incredibly hard-working, thoughtful and determined to make a success of his career” (C&P 2018, Chancery Commercial)

“A fantastic team player, who gives you nothing but a straightforward, easy ride when you instruct him.” (C&P 2018, Commercial Dispute Resolution)

“Attracts a great deal of praise relating to his handling of complex banking and finance work. He is also involved in pension matters.” (C&P 2016, Chancery Commercial)

“A junior with great commercial acumen.” “A junior with a strong emerging chancery practice. He is regularly instructed on commercial litigation in the pensions and banking and finance sectors…He is an excellent lawyer with a rare mix of practicality and intellect….” (C&P 2015, Chancery Commercial)

Some recent cases:

See the cases listed as recent examples of commercial dispute in which Farhaz has acted:

• 1Malaysia Development Berhad v International Petroleum Investment Company (LCIA) Farhaz represented Abu Dhabi state owned investment funds IPIC and Aabar in defence of multi-billion Dollar claims arising from the Malaysian 1MDB scandal in the Commercial Court (Arbitration Act 1996 claim) and arbitration under LCIA rules.
• Recovery Partners v Rukhadze & Ors [2022] EWHC 690 (Comm) Acting for Defendants in proceedings between Recovery Partners GP Limited, Revoker LLP (Claimants) and Mr Irakli Rukhadze and other individual and corporate defendants. The case concerns the recovery of the assets owned by the late billionaire Georgian oligarch Mr Badri Patarkatsishvili.
• AXA v Revolut Bank Acting for Axa in a claim against Revolut bank for failure to prevent fraudulent payments.
• Aggreko v Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp & Ors (Commercial Court, 2020, unreported, but see press here) – acting for claimant in $37 million claim against a Yemeni electricity company taken over by Houthi rebels. Rare injunctive relief obtained preventing payment out under fraudulent call on performance bonds in support of DIFC-LCIA arbitral proceedings.
• Stifel Nicolaus Europe Ltd v Continental Capital Markets Ltd Acting for international bond broker (ContiCap) in defending a claim for breach of contract where ContiCap was unable to settle the proposed bond trade due to Russian sanctions imposed upon the proposed buyer of the bonds (ContiCap’s client).
• Re LDI strategy claim Advising a scheme on possible claims against investment adviser and fund managers in connection with the impact of dislocations in the Gilts market following the September 2022 mini-budget on the scheme’s LDI strategy.
• Red Squirrel Consulting v Wireless Logic Ltd [2020] EWHC 2407 (Comm) Commission agreement dispute by claimant against the defendant, provider of machine to machine (M2M) and Internet of Things (IoT) connectivity platforms, including SIM cards. The claimant brought the proceedings to recover unpaid commission said to be due under a 2011 agency agreement.
• Re crypto-assets / NFTs Advising a crypto-asset / NFT provider in relation to a dispute under a high-profile sports licensing agreement and the meaning and effect of an exceptional circumstances clause in the event of a change in law and regulation.
• Re US Media Conglomerate Advising a US media house on common law termination of a long standing and very high value UK media broker / commission agreement and claims for breach of contract and possible deceit.
• Re Afkar Capital Limited [2017] ADGMCFI1 (interim declaration), [2018] ADGMCFI2 (costs) Acted for a director of an ADGM financial services firm in a shareholder dispute concerning the appointment of a new CEO and director by board resolution. The first case to be heard in the ADGM Court. The claim was discontinued after the defendant successfully resisted an interim declaration.
• Re MF Global UK Ltd (In Special Administration) [2015] EWHC 883 (Ch) (Companies Court) Acted for the Special Administrators. IA86 application concerning the implied contractual liability of an operating company (inter dealer broker) to indemnify the group service company for costs of a section 75 pension debt.
• Philips Electronics UK Ltd & the Trustees of the Philips Pensions Fund v Aon Hewitt & AllianceBernstein Acted for the trustees and Philips. Breach of contract and negligence claim against the pension scheme investment adviser and fund manager relating to CDS / CDO investments made in 2007.
• Teragon Capital Limited v Goodale Claim by the managing partner of a hedge fund against a former agent / partner for breach of contract, breach of trust and breach of partnership duty of good faith.
• Saxo Bank v LBIE Acting for a European investment bank in connection with its $30m claim against the Lehman estate for the recovery of client money held under statutory trust.
• Hermes Ors v Banco Espirito Santo (In Admin.) Acted for a large group of institutional and HNW individual investors in a civil fraud claim against the failed Portugese bank and its former directors.
• Re Bank of Moscow Tort of intimidation claim in the Commercial Court and a related LCIA arbitration.
• Re Mihaj Investments Advising a Dubai based group of companies in relation to a family dispute over UK assets and investments.

Farhaz is regularly instructed in international commercial arbitrations including, most recently, matters governed by the rules of the LCIA, SIAC, ICC and AAA. The subject matter of the disputes vary widely and include telecommunications, IT, construction and banking and finance. Recent examples include:

• Re ICC Paris arbitration Advising funders in connection with the merits of a £Multi-Billion arbitration.
• Re LCIA arbitration Acting for the claimant bank in an African banking dispute arising from an SPA.
• 1Malaysia Development Berhad v International Petroleum Investment Company (LCIA) Farhaz represented Abu Dhabi state owned investment funds IPIC and Aabar in defence of multi-billion Dollar claims arising from the Malaysian 1MDB scandal in the Commercial Court (Arbitration Act 1996 claim) and arbitration under LCIA rules.
• Aggreko v Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp & Ors (Commercial Court, 2020, unreported, but see press here) – acting for claimant in $37 million claim against a Yemeni electricity company. Injunctive relief obtained preventing payment out under fraudulent call on performance bonds in support of DIFC-LCIA arbitral proceedings.
• Re B v I (SIAC) Farhaz acted as Lead Counsel leading an international team of lawyers in a multi-million contractual dispute between commercial entities controlled by South Asian states under SIAC rules.
• Think Markets v IS Prime (AAA) Farhaz was instructed to advise and appear in AAA proceedings in Florida in connection with a complex contractual dispute involving English law issues. Farhaz appeared both as Co-Counsel with US attorneys and conducted the deposition of of witnesses.
• Re C (LCIA) Farhaz was instructed by the claimant in a IT / technology dispute relating to the meaning and effect of indemnity provisions in an SPA.
• Re CD (DIAC) Farhaz advised on quantum issues arising from a DIAC construction dispute.
• Re IKC adjudication (ad hoc) Farhaz was jointly instructed as an Independent KC by parties under a funding agreement to resolve a dispute arising from one party having invoked the termination provisions in the agreement.

Farhaz is an established member of the specialist pensions bar (commencing his career at Outer Temple Chambers, the leading pensions set) having been involved in many of the major pensions cases over the last decade (Foster Wheeler, IMG, Desmonds, Lehman, BT, G4S, Sea Containers) and has been ranked by Chambers and Partners since he was 4 years call. He is also ranked by Legal 500 and Who’s Who Legal.

This specialist pensions expertise is often called upon in wider commercial and financial services regulatory disputes where there is a pensions aspect. Recently, Farhaz has advised a SIPP operator on possible Judicial Review of the FOS and a major former government scheme on the legality of a contractual indemnity owed by a scheme employer.

Farhaz has particular expertise in professional negligence claims and claims with an investment aspect. For example, he has been advising schemes on the prospects of suing investment advisers and fund managers in relation to LDI strategies.

“Farhaz Khan can straddle the commerciality with the technical aspects.” “He is a tenacious litigator with a commercial edge.” (C&P 2024, Pensions)

“Rising star on contentious pensions disputes, very commercial and popular with clients.” (Legal 500 2024, Pensions)

“Confident, analytical, and an excellent tactician.” (Legal 500 2023, Pensions)

“He impresses with his combination of intellectual and commercial sense.” “He is brilliant.” (C&P 2021, Pensions)

“Highly flexible and punching well above his weight.” (Legal 500 2021, Pensions)

“He has a strong intellect, a sharp mind and commercial nous.” (C&P, 2018)

“A well-respected junior with pensions and professional negligence expertise, who is a particular expert in the financial services sector. Strengths: “I can’t fault his judgement calls and I think he’s a great addition to any team.” “He is an up-and-coming star who is very bright and extremely personable.” (C&P 2016, Pensions)

“He is noted for his intelligence and his involvement in a number of the most important pension cases. Expertise: “He’s very bright”, “up and coming” and “a personable and approachable barrister.” (C&P 2015, Pensions)

“…a broad practice that combines his extensive pensions knowledge with expertise in banking and finance matters…an amazing ability to pick up anything and dissect it…” (C&P 2015, Pensions)

Some recent cases:

• Re LDI strategy claim Advising a scheme on possible claims against investment adviserd and fund managers in connection with the impact of dislocations in the Gilts market following the September 2022 mini-budget on the scheme’s LDI strategy.
• PSGS Trust Corporation Ltd v Aon UK & Ors [2022] EWHC 2058 (Ch) (29 July 2022) Acting for Aon defending a professional negligence claim in the administration of a pension scheme. Successfully struck out trustee’s claim for a continuing duty of care.
• Capita Pension Trustees Ltd & Anor v Sedgwick Financial Services Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 314 (Ch) (20 February 2019) (Re Sea Containers 1990 Pension Scheme) Defending Denton Hall (a firm) in a c.£5m solicitors professional negligence claim (P20) arising out of the failed equalization of the Sea Containers 1990 Scheme.
• Re SIPP Operator Advising a SIPP operator in connection with a series of FOS determinations and potential JR of FOS decisions.
• Re BT Pension Plan [2018] EWHC 69 (Ch) Leading indexation case (construction of trust power, implied exercise of power, s51 Pensions Act 1995). Currently on appeal to the CA listed for 3 days in October 2018.
• G4S plc v G4S Trustees Limited [2018] EWHC 1749 (ch) Acted for the successful company in Part 8 proceedings concerning the meaning of “pensionable service” as s124 of the Pensions Act 1995, and whether a scheme that is closed to future accrual, but where the members’ benefits continue to be linked to their final salary, is to be regarded as a “frozen” scheme for the purposes of regulations known as the Occupational Pension Schemes (Employer Debt) Regulations 2005.
• Re Desmond & Sons Limited 1975 Pension & Life Assurance Scheme (Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery)) Acting for the corporate trustee of the scheme alongside the Pension Regulator in seeking a £22m contribution notice from the former directors of the company, under the NI equivalent of s38 Pensions Act 2004. The first case brought by the Pension Regulator concerning ‘contribution notices’. Settled at trial. See also Garvin Trustees Ltd &The Pensions Regulator v Desmond Ors (privilege) [2015] Pens. L.R. 1; Garvin Trustees Ltd &The Pensions Regulator v Desmond [2013] NICA 62 (Northern Ireland CA, regulator’s jurisdiction); Desmond Ors v The Pension Regulator [2013] NIQB 58 (Judicial Review); and Desmond Ors v Garvin Trustees Ltd &The Pensions Regulator Ors (regulator’s jurisdiction) FS/2010/10 (May 2011).
• Re X Instructed by the Pension Regulator in proceedings brought against the professional trustee of a pension scheme for making scheme investments in breach of the Pensions Act 2004 and FSMA. Advised the Determinations Panel and drafted its decision.
• Re Rockwool Pension Scheme Acted for the members of the scheme in Part 8 proceedings concerning the Re Courage fetter.
• Re Pensions Ombudsman Advising the PO on series of determinations concerning the scope of the Finance Act 2006 viz., taxable items.
• Re CNH / Fiat Advising major corporate on multi-employer pension consequences of a group corporate relocation.
• Re IMG Pension Plan [2010] EWCA Civ 1349; [2011] I.C.R. 329; [2011] Pens. L.R. 11 One of the leading modern authorities on the construction of commercial trusts in a pension scheme context. Led by Richard Hitckcock. Instructed by Baker & McKenzie. See also Re IMG Pension Plan (Part 8) [2009] EWHC 2785 (Ch); [2010] Pens. L.R. 23; and Re IMG Pension Plan (protective costs) [2010] EWHC 321 (Ch); [2010] 3 Costs L.R. 443; [2010] Pens. L.R. 131.
• Re Lehman / Storm Funding Pension regulatory proceedings relating to the Lehman Bros. Pension Scheme. Acted for the corporate trustee of the scheme alongside the Pension Regulator which was seeking financial support directions with an aggregate value of £300m from 38 Lehman corporate entities, under the Pensions Act 2004.
• Re Kodak Eastman Advising the administrators of a corporate group in Chapter 11 bankruptcy in respect of UK pension liabilities including the risk of a financial support direction or a contribution notice being imposed under the Pensions Act 2004.
• Thompson v Fresenius Kabi Ltd [2013] Pens. L.R. 157 (Ch) Acted for the company and sponsoring employer of the Fresenius Pension Scheme in Part 8 proceedings. See also Fresenius Kabi Ltd & the Trustees of the Fresenius Pension Fund v Addelshaw Goddard & Xafinity Consulting (follow on professional negligence claim against solicitors and scheme actuary and consultant).
• Farhaz has been instructed by claimants and defendants in a number of high value professional negligence claims brought by trustees and corporates against professional advisers including solicitors, actuaries, benefit consultants and others, for example: X Scheme v Y benefit consultants & Z solicitors (acting for the defendant benefit consultants); X Scheme & the PPF v Y solicitors (acting for the defendant solicitors); and Charles Taylor Pension Scheme v Bluefin Consultants, Miller Insurance, Reed Smith & Verulum Consulting (acting for the claimant trustee and company).

Farhaz is ranked by Legal 500 as a leading barrister for professional negligence for his work acting for claimants and defendants in cases concerning negligence alleged against a wide range of professionals including solicitors, accountants, actuaries and investment advisers.

“Farhaz has maintained a substantial pensions related prof neg practice. He is an extraordinarily talented barrister, able to pick up complex ideas and make them appear straightforward. Extremely diligent, he will thrive in silk.” (Legal 500 2023, Professional Negligence)

“Farhaz has genuinely excellent client skills, by which I mean explanation in lay terms of case and strategic issues and a keen interest in understanding the client’s own aspirations and priorities. This is backed by rigorous analytical skills. He has good strategic judgment and very strong advocacy skills.” (Legal 500 2023, Professional Negligence)

“He is extraordinarily bright and superbly commercial. He is assertive and bold and easy to work with. Clients love him.” (Legal 500 2021, Professional Negligence)

Recent cases include:

• Re LDI strategy claim Advising a scheme on possible claims against investment adviser and fund managers in connection with the impact of dislocations in the Gilts market following the September 2022 mini-budget on the scheme’s LDI strategy.
• PSGS Trust Corporation Ltd v Aon UK & Ors [2022] EWHC 2058 (Ch) (29 July 2022) Acting for Aon defending a professional negligence claim in the administration of a pension scheme. Successfully struck out trustee’s claim for a continuing duty of care.
• Capita Pension Trustees Ltd & Anor v Sedgwick Financial Services Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 314 (Ch) (20 February 2019) (Re Sea Containers 1990 Pension Scheme) Defending Denton Hall (a firm) in a c.£5m solicitors professional negligence claim (P20) arising out of the failed equalization of the Sea Containers 1990 Scheme.
• Re Sea Containers 1990 Pension Scheme (CMS) Defending solicitors Denton Hall in a c.£5m professional negligence claim (P20) arising out of the failed equalization of the Sea Containers 1990 Scheme.
• Philips Electronics UK Ltd & the Trustees of the Philips Pensions Fund v Aon Hewitt & AllianceBernstein Acted for the trustees and Philips. Breach of contract and negligence claim against the pension scheme investment adviser and fund manager relating to CDS / CDO investments made in 2007.
• Hockin v RBS (Financial List) Swaps mis-selling, LIBOR, conspiracy and deceit claim. Settled at trial. One of the first Financial List claims to go to trial. See also Hockin v RBS [2016] EWHC 925 (FL) (amendment / strike out applications).
• Thompson v Fresenius Kabi Ltd [2013] Pens. L.R. 157 (Ch) Acted for the company and sponsoring employer of the Fresenius Pension Scheme in Part 8 proceedings. See also Fresenius Kabi Ltd & the Trustees of the Fresenius Pension Fund v Addelshaw Goddard & Xafinity Consulting (follow on professional negligence claim against solicitors and scheme actuary and consultant).

Farhaz’s commercial cases typically involve civil fraud and chancery issues and underlying regulatory aspects. He has deep experience of claims alleging conspiracy, deceit and other intentional torts.

Recent cases include:

• Recovery Partners v Rukhadze & Ors [2022] EWHC 690 (Comm) Acting for Defendants in proceedings between Recovery Partners GP Limited, Revoker LLP (Claimants) and Mr Irakli Rukhadze and other individual and corporate defendants. The case concerns the recovery of the assets owned by the late billionaire Georgian oligarch Mr Badri Patarkatsishvili.
• 1Malaysia Development Berhad v International Petroleum Investment Company (LCIA) Farhaz represented Abu Dhabi state owned investment funds IPIC and Aabar in defence of multi-billion Dollar claims arising from the Malaysian 1MDB scandal in the Commercial Court (Arbitration Act 1996 claim) and arbitration under LCIA rules.
• AXA v Revolut Bank Acting for Axa in a claim against Revolut bank for failure to prevent fraudulent payments.
• Dalriada v 11 defendants Acting for a Swiss investment manager and defendant in breach of trust, knowing assistance and knowing receipt claim brought by Dalriada Trustees, the statutory trustee appointed by the Pension Regulator, in connection with alleged ‘pension liberation’ schemes concerning pension transfers out of occupation DB schemes into insurance wrapper investments. Leading Ian Higgins (3 Verulam Buildings).
• Shurbanova v FX Capital Markets LLC [2017] EWHC 2133 (QB) (HHJ Waksman QC) Acted for defendant forex firm in a breach of contract claim. The Court accepted FXCM’s defence that the claimant’s profitable trades were the result of market abuse and ‘front running’ and, following Farhaz’s cross examination of the claimant witnesses, the Court found that the claim was premised upon a fraud.
• Hermes Ors v Banco Espirito Santo (In Admin.) Acted for a large group of institutional and HNW individual investors in a civil fraud claim against the failed Portugese bank and its former directors.
• Re Bank of Moscow Tort of intimidation claim in the Commercial Court and a related LCIA arbitration.
• Yazdi v United Arab Bank Acting for the defendant bank in a claim for a declaration that a $125m personal guarantee is invalid on the grounds of fraud.
• JP Morgan ‘Whale trader’ global investigation Acted for a former synthetic credit derivatives and indices trader within the Chief Investment Office of JPM accused of mismarking the trading book leading to his indictment in the US for deceit. The CIO sustained c.$9bn trading losses in 2012 leading to regulatory and criminal investigations in the US and the UK. All charges against the trader were dropped or settled in 2018.
• Graiseley Properties Ltd v Barclays Bank Plc; Deutsche Bank AG v Unitech Global Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1372 (CA) The first LIBOR test claim involving allegations of deceit. One of The Lawyers ‘Top 20 cases’ of 2013. See also Graiseley Properties Ltd v Barclays Bank Plc (LIBOR amendments) [2012] EWHC 3093 (Comm); and Graiseley Properties Ltd v present and former directors and employees of Barclays Bank plc (open justice) [2013] EWHC 67 (Comm).
• MHL v BOS (Financial List) Acting for a Scottish hotel group in a £130m breach of JV shareholder agreement (good faith) claim against BOS.
• Hockin v RBS (Financial List) Swaps mis-selling, LIBOR, conspiracy and deceit claim. Settled at trial. One of the first Financial List claims to go to trial. See also Hockin v RBS [2016] EWHC 925 (FL) (amendment / strike out applications).
• Merrill Lynch International v Amorim Partners Limited [2014] EWHC 74 (Comm) Acted for the defendant investment firm in a contract claim for payment in respect of shares acquired during a secondary offering. The investment firm alleged that the claimant was aware of underlying regulatory issues concerning the entity on whose behalf the offering was being made.
• Ark Capital v Z Acted for the claimant investment firm in a FOREX manipulation claim (deceit, front running) under a prime brokerage arrangement arising out of a secondary offering of shares by a dealer-broker.
• FOREX global investigation Acting for a very senior FOREX and precious metals trader under investigation by regulators and prosecutors in numerous jurisdictions including FINMA and the AG (in Switzerland), the Singapore Monetary Authority and CADE (the securities competition regulator in Brazil), as well as in the UK (SFO, FCA & the Bank of England). Farhaz represented the trader at numerous criminal and regulatory interviews in various jurisdictions including London, Zurich and Washington DC.
• Re X Advising a major UK insurer on its exposure under the Bribery Act 2010.
• Re Y Advising a well-known global firm in respect of a global investigation concerning alleged systemic over charging of customers. FCA, SFO investigations.

Farhaz’s broad commercial and regulatory practice includes a growing media and sports element. He has acted in commercial and regulatory matters arising in the context of Premier League football and the Formula One World Championship and related media and entertainment disputes. Farhaz’s commercial, regulatory and investigations experience make him well placed to advise on a range of sensitive and high profile sports and media related issues.

Some recent cases:

• Re crypto-assets / NFTs Advising a crypto-asset / NFT provider in relation to a dispute under a high-profile sports licensing agreement and the meaning and effect of an exceptional circumstances clause in the event of a change in law and regulation.
• Re F1 Team Advising a Formula One team in relation to a contracts dispute with a major sponsor arising out of Covid-19.
• Re US Media Conglomerate Advising a US media house on common law termination of a long standing and very high value UK media broker / commission agreement and claims for breach of contract and possible deceit.