Matthew Watson

Matthew’s core practice is in commercial disputes. He has acted and advised on sale of goods and commodities claims, complex joint ventures, energy projects and banking and financial services disputes. He has experience of cross-border litigation, dealing with the conflict of laws, interim relief and jurisdiction battles.

A selection of his cases before the English courts include:

• Cedar Mundi (Holding) SAL v Attieh [2025] EWHC 1930 (Comm) and [2026] EWHC 1820 (Comm): acted (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) for the defendants during a five week trial about the validity of the sale of a private equity portfolio against the backdrop of the Lebanese financial crisis.
• Athos Partners SAM v Sherpa Capital [2025]: acted in a successful Part 8 claim to compel a private equity fund to supply information under an engagement agreement with its former placement.
• Tottenham Hotspur Football Club v INEOS Automotive [2025]: acted (led by Ali Malek KC) for the well-known Premier League club in its well-publicised sponsorship dispute with INEOS before the Commercial Court. Proceedings were compromised before trial.
• Crabb v TUI [2024]: acted in the early stages of this litigation representing the airline in claims brought by eight pilots arising out of variations to their employment contracts – see [2024] EWHC 2589 (KB) and [2026] EWCA Civ 988 for the rest of the litigation.
• Union of India v Nirav Modi [2024]: acted for the US joint liquidators in relation to India’s claim to recover the proceeds of fraud.
• Northcott Global Solutions v Covac Global Holdings Inc [2023] EWHC 355 (Comm): successfully resisted summary judgment in a substantial claim to fees arising from an emergency COVID-19 evacuation venture.
• Horlick v Cavaco [2022] EWHC 1888 (QB); [2022] EWHC 1167(QB); [2022] EWHC 2935 (KB) and [2022] EWHC 3906 (KB): successfully defeated at a substantial trial (leading Chinmayi Sharma) claims in hard fought litigation relating to a Mozambique mining venture.
• Addax Energy SA v Petro Trade Inc [2022] EWHC 237 (Comm): acted as sole counsel in an important jurisdiction challenge relating to a dispute about the supply of petroleum in Liberia.
• UK Global Healthcare v IGC International [2021]: acted as sole counsel in a US$305 million sale of goods claim in relation to PPE bought at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.
• NAC Aviation 25 v Georgian Airways [2021]: acted against the Georgian national flag carrier on a claim to recover sums due under aircraft leases.
• Bank of Beirut (UK) v Moukarzel [2021] EWHC 3777 (Comm): acted as sole counsel for the bank and successfully obtained a multi-million dollar judgment on a restructuring loan.
• The University of Surrey v OSI Systems Inc [2021]: acted on a claim by the university for sums due under a share purchase agreement in relation to the exploitation of scanning technology developed by academics.
• Bank of Beirut v Sbayti [2020] EWHC 557 (Comm): acted for the successful claimant bank in its application for summary judgment under guarantees given to secure lending to a Nigerian company.
• First Tower Trustees v CDS (Superstores International) [2017] EWHC 891 (Ch) and [2018] EWCA Civ 1396: acted in a misrepresentation claim (led by Alan Steinfeld KC) arising out of the lease of substantial commercial warehousing. The Court of Appeal’s judgment is the leading decision on contractual estoppel.
• Macquarie Capital v Nordsee Offshore MEG I [2019] EWHC 1655 (Comm): acted for the defendants (led by Andrew Spink KC) in a multi-million euro claim by the Australian bank for commission relating to the project finance raised for an offshore German windfarm.
• CCUK Finance v Barclays Bank Plc [2018] EWHC 304 (Comm): acted for the claimants (led by Stephen Cogley KC) in a billion dollar claim relating to the sale of a portfolio of sub-prime credit card debt.
• Sheikh Mohammed Al Jaber v Sheikh Walid Al Ibrahim [2016] EWHC 1989 (Comm) and [2019] EWHC 1136 (Comm): acted for the first defendant (led by Steven Thompson KC) in a multi-million US dollar commercial dispute. The case involved a complex four-day jurisdiction challenge involving issues of Saudi law.
• Peter Black Footwear v Fawaz Abulaziz Alhokair & Co [2018] EWHC 93 (Comm): acted for a Saudi company (led by Rupert Reed KC) defending a multi-million international sale of goods claim.
• Investec Trust (Guernsey) v Glenalla Properties (2014) 18 ITELR 1; (2018) 18 ITELR 30 and GCA 7 and [2018] UKPC 7: acted in the Guernsey Court of Appeal and before the Privy Council (led by Ewan McQuater KC) in this landmark appeal relating to the status of foreign statutory limitations of liability in contractual claims as a matter of private international law and restitution.

Matthew has an established banking and financial services practice. He is a contributor to Paget on Banking (2023), the forthcoming edition of Jack on Documentary Credits and his own new practitioner text: The Law of Interest (anticipated 2027). He has been instructed on customer-bank and bank-bank disputes in England and overseas.

He has particular experience in syndicated and other complex lending arrangements, where he has acted for several syndicates on the recovery of debts and the enforcement of security.

Matthew has experience on claims involving complex financial products, including various types of swaps and derivatives. In 2014, the Financial Conduct Authority instructed him to draft part of the new MCOB rules to give effect to the new Mortgage Credit Directive (2014/17/EU).

A selection of Matthew’s cases include:

• Cedar Mundi (Holding) SAL v Attieh [2025] EWHC 1930 (Comm) and [2026] EWHC 1820 (Comm): acted (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) for the defendants during a five week trial about the validity of the sale of a private equity portfolio involving a consortium of Lebanese banks against the backdrop of the Lebanese financial crisis.
• Rijckaert v El-Khouri [2023] EWHC 409 (KB): successfully defeated a US$3m claim under an allegedly forged promissory note by resisting a last minute attempt to amend six days before trial.
• Bank of Beirut (UK) v Moukarzel [2021] EWHC 3777 (Comm): acted as sole counsel for the bank and successfully obtained a multi-million dollar judgment on a restructuring loan.
• Bank of Beirut v Sbayti [2020] EWHC 557 (Comm): acted for the successful claimant bank in its application for summary judgment under guarantees given to secure lending to a Nigerian company.
• Kazzaz v Standard Chartered Bank [2019] SGHC(I) 15: acted for the claimant in this regulatory claim in the Singapore Commercial Court relating to the mis-selling of a complex package of financial products.
• Macquarie Capital v Nordsee Offshore MEG I [2019] EWHC 1655 (Comm): acted for the defendants (led by Andrew Spink KC) in a multi-million euro claim by the Australian bank for commission relating to the project finance raised for an offshore German windfarm.
• CCUK Finance v Barclays Bank Plc [2018] EWHC 304 (Comm): acted for the claimants (led by Stephen Cogley KC) in a billion dollar claim relating to the sale of a portfolio of sub-prime credit card debt.
• Re the Arasbridge Trust [2017] GRC 002: acted for the trustee of an open-ended, unit investment trust being wound up by the Guernsey courts.

Matthew has considerable experience in banking and finance disputes before courts in the Middle East, in particular the DIFC Court. He is well versed in dealing with Islamic lending arrangements and lending practices in the Middle East more widely. A selection of his cases include:

• Citibank v Shetty [2022] DIFC CFI 079: acted (with Tom Montagu-Smith KC and Calum Mulderrig) for the agent bank of a syndicate that successfully enforced a loan agreement and security.
• Khoury v Mashreq Bank [2021] DIFC CFI 046 and [2022] DIFC CA 007: successfully defeated (sole counsel at first instance and led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC on appeal) a claim for damages for alleged negligent investment advice against the bank on service and jurisdictional grounds.
• Emirates NBD Bank v Advanced Facilities Management [2020] DIFC CFI 065: obtained a US$540m summary judgment (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) for a syndicate of banks that had lent to a UAE corporate group.
• DIFC Investments v Dubai Islamic Bank [2022] DIFC CFI 024: acted on a successful claim (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) challenging the validity of an assignment of receivables.
• Hamad Al Khaili v BNP Paribas Wealth Management [2021] DIFC CFI 031: acted for the successful bank defending a claim that it made an unauthorised investment on the claimant’s behalf.
• Emirates NBD Bank v KBBO CPG Investment [2020] DIFC CFI 045: acted on behalf of the successful claimant banks (led Tom Montagu-Smith KC and John Taylor KC) in proceedings relating to a US$300 million syndicated loan.
• DIFC Investments v Dubai Islamic Bank [2020] DIFC CFI 016: acted on a successful claim (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) to enforce a performance guarantee given by a bank, notwithstanding an injunction in the court where the bank was located restraining payment.
• IDBI Bank v Amira C Foods International DMCC [2019] DIFC CA 014: acted on an appeal (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) concerned with the measure of damages for breach of a documentary credit and the bank’s liability for damage to its customer’s reputation.

Matthew has considerable experience acting in arbitrations on a wide range of commercial disputes. He has appeared in LCIA, ICC and other institutional arbitrations. Matthew also has experience acting in court to obtain relief in support of arbitral proceedings. Matthew also accepts appointments as an arbitrator.

Much of Matthew’s caseload is confidential, however examples of recent cases include:

• Re a DIAC Arbitration [2026]: Matthew sits as part of a three-person tribunal on a dispute relating to alleged misrepresentation and negligence in the context of an investment.
• Re an LCIA Arbitration [2025]: acted (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) in arbitral proceedings to recover sums loaned by a banking syndicate to finance a construction project.
• Re an LCIA Arbitration [2025]: acted on a dispute relating to a padel competition. The dispute related to a joint venture to invest and host tournaments.
• Re an ICC Arbitration [2025]: acted (with Tom Montagu-Smith KC and Ravi Jackson) on a dispute between the owner and operator of a luxury hotel. The dispute arose following the owner’s termination on the ground that the operator, a well-known western brand underperformed.
• Muzama v Mihanti [2022] DIFC ARB 004: acted (led by Christopher Harris KC) on a successful application to resist the annulment of a US$87m ICC award in the DIFC.
• X v Y [2022] DIFC ARB 011: acted (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) in a claim for the recognition and enforcement of a $180m ICC award and successfully obtained a world-wide freezing order in support of enforcement. The dispute involved a politically prominent family in the Middle East.
• Qatar Pharma v the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia [2022]: acted for the Kingdom (led by Christopher Harris KC) on an investment treaty claim arising out of measures enacted against Qatar in 2017.
• Re an LCIA Arbitration [2022]: acted for an Omani importer in an arbitration relating to the supply of hot briquetted iron.
• Re an ICC Arbitration [2021]: acted as sole counsel for the defendant in a US$10 million claim arising from the termination of an oil rig contract.
• Re a DIFC-LCIA Arbitration [2020]: acted for a major hotel chain (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) in an arbitration relating to the termination of a hotel management agreement relating to a Middle Eastern hotel. The proceedings began following DIFC Court proceedings for interim injunctive relief pending formation of the tribunal.
• Re a DIFC-LCIA Arbitration [2019]: acted in a claim to recover sums due under an aircraft management agreement between Middle Eastern operators.
• Re a DIFC-LCIA Arbitration [2019]: acted for the successful claimant (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) obtaining a multi-million dollar award in proceedings concerning the termination of a commercial satellite telecommunications contract.
• Re a DIFC-LCIA Arbitration [2016-2018]: acted in a substantial arbitration (led by Rupert Reed KC) involving a claim to enforce a written parent company guarantee following the collapse of a Spanish clothing franchise.
• Re an ICSID Arbitration [2017]: acted for a government in proceedings to resist enforcement of an award made after an ICSID arbitration.
• Hayri International v Hazim Telecom Private [2016] DIFC ARB 010: acted for the successful applicant (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) for an urgent anti-suit injunction to restrain a foreign court from itself restraining arbitration proceedings.

As a result of his practice at a Chancery set, Matthew is experienced in all forms of commercial chancery litigation including company and insolvency disputes, trust disputes and equitable relief.

Matthew was until recently the junior barrister representative on the Bankruptcy and Companies Court Users’ Committee. He was also one of the draftsmen, alongside a team of senior judges and lawyers, of the Insolvency Practice Direction 2016. He was a contributor to Atkin’s Court Forms: Companies – General (2018).

His cases include:

• Gibson Consultants v The Emirates Capital [2024] DIFC CFI 033: acted for the successful petitioner in one of the DIFC Court’s few reported winding up petitions.
• Union of India v Nirav Modi [2024]: acted for the US joint liquidators in relation to India’s claim to recover the proceeds of fraud.
• Representation of B and C [2022] JRC 086: acted for the protector in this contentious dispute about the administration of a trust and corporate structure holding c.$1 billion in assets.
• Martinez v AAL Group [2022]: acted for a creditor resisting recognition of a Colombian insolvency on public policy grounds.
• Pilatus (PTC) v RBC Trustees (Guernsey) [2021] GRC 012: acted for the defendant in substantial Guernsey litigation relating to a corporate structure holding an African oil business. The claim is the leading decision on the application of the reflective loss rule in the Channel Islands.
• Re Shif [2020]: acted for a guarantor on his application to set aside a statutory demand in relation to substantial lending to a property development company.
• Hannon v Thresh & Mangajo [2019]: acted in a High Court claim for unfair prejudice relief in relation to a privately owned company.
• Hare v Doherty [2019]: acted for the defendant in this dispute relating to an offshore corporate structure holding a South African game farm. The dispute settled shortly before its two week High Court trial.
• Investec Trust (Guernsey) v Glenalla Properties (2014) 18 ITELR 1; (2018) 18 ITELR 30 and GCA 7 and [2018] UKPC 7: acted in the Guernsey Court of Appeal and before the Privy Council (led by Ewan McQuater KC) in this landmark appeal relating to the status of foreign statutory limitations of liability in contractual claims as a matter of private international law and restitution.
• Bank of Ireland v Lord Magan [2017]: acted for the successful respondent, a Conservative peer, to a bankruptcy petition in the High Court. The proceedings were widely reported in the national press.
• EME Capital v Bryant [2017]: acted for the successful petitioning creditor on a contested bankruptcy petition in relation to loans made to a broker by his former firm.
• Re Elgin Legal [2016] EWHC 2523 (Ch): acted for a former administrator in his claim to resolve problems with his appointment. The case established a former administrator’s standing as creditor to apply for a fresh administration order and considered the case law on retrospective appointments under paragraph 13(2) of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986.
• Zaleksi v GM Trustees [2015] GRC 042 and [2016] GCA 009: acted for the defendant at a two week trial before the Guernsey Royal Court and subsequently in the Court of Appeal. The defendant successfully resisted complex claims relating to the sale of a concession granted over a mineral port in the Gabon.
• Jefcoate v Spread Trustee [2014] GRC 42: acted for the successful defendant at the three week trial of this multi-million commercial trust dispute, defeating claims of conspiracy and breach of trust, arising from the alleged deliberate sale of former National Coal Board land at an undervalue.
• Barnett v Creggy [2014] EWHC 3080 (Ch); [2015] EWHC 1316 (Ch) and [2016] EWCA Civ 1004: acted for the claimants (led by Steven Thompson KC) at first instance and before the Court of Appeal in a claim for the repayment of substantial sums paid to a solicitor over several decades and held in an offshore structure. The Court of Appeal’s judgment is the leading decision on the application of the Limitation Act to equitable claims.

Many of Matthew’s cases involve allegations of fraud. He has experience pleading and pursuing such claims for claimants and resisting fraud claims for defendants. He is familiar with the common ancillary applications including freezing orders and Norwich Pharmacal orders.

Some cases that give a flavour of Matthew’s work in this area include:

• Cedar Mundi (Holding) SAL v Attieh [2025] EWHC 1930 (Comm) and [2026] EWHC 1820 (Comm): acted (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) for the defendants during a five week trial about the alleged fraudulent divestment of an investment portfolio.
• Abramenko v Chuprin [2024] DIFC CFI 095: acted (leading Rumen Cholakov) for the claimants in a dispute as to the ownership of a tech business. Each side accused the other of fraudulently claiming to be the true owner.
• Union of India v Nirav Modi [2024]: acted for the US joint liquidators in relation to India’s claim to recover the proceeds of fraud.
• SKAT v FFA Private Bank (Dubai) [2024] DIFC CFI 004: acted on a landmark application for Norwich Pharmacal relief, establishing the ambit of the DIFC Court’s jurisdiction to make orders in support of foreign proceedings.
• Rijckaert v El-Khouri [2023] EWHC 409 (KB): successfully defeated a US$3m claim under an allegedly forged promissory note by resisting a last minute attempt to amend six days before trial.
• Uphold v Ismail [2022]: acted for a cryptocurrency wallet provider and obtained judgment on its deceit claim against its former chief compliance officer arising out of the fraudulent appropriation of cryptoassets. Matthew also obtained a suspended committal order in 2023 for failure to comply with disclosure obligations.
• Jungquist v Corbin Crossroads Consulting [2021] DIFC CFI 025: acted for a US defence contractor in its successful defence of unlawful means conspiracy claims relating to the payment of commission for a US-UAE defence contract.
• SKAT v Elysium Global (Dubai) [2018] DIFC CFI 048: acted for the Danish government (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) in proceedings to recover £2 billion alleged to have been paid out to hundreds of parties pursuant to a fraudulent dividend withholding tax conspiracy. He managed the proceedings arising from one of the largest search orders ever executed.
• Tavira Securities v Re Point Ventures FZCO [2017] DIFC CFI 026: acted for the claimants (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) in a claim for damages for deceit and conspiracy arising from a share brokerage transaction.
• Peak Construction (London) v Michael Savva [2016] EWHC 1295 (Ch): successfully obtained an urgent freezing order in support of the claimant’s bribery claim arising in relation to a construction project and unless orders to enforce the order.
• Jefcoate v Spread Trustee [2014] GRC 42: acted for the successful defendant at the three week trial of this multi-million commercial trust dispute, defeating claims of conspiracy and breach of trust, arising from the alleged deliberate sale of former National Coal Board land at an undervalue.

Matthew’s practice also involves acting on negligence claims against professionals connected to his core practice areas. He has experience of claims against solicitors, accountants, trustees and investment professionals.

His cases include:

• Re a loan transaction: acted for the claimant banks in a c.$300 million negligence claim against former solicitors for negligent advice in relation to a substantial loan transaction.
• Abraaj Investment Management v KPMG Lower Gulf [2021] DIFC CFI 041: acted (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) for the former auditors of the Abraaj Capital Group in relation to a substantial negligence claim.
• Equity Real Estate (South West) v Harrison Clark Rickerbys: acted for the claimant against former solicitors for negligence in relation to a share purchase agreement.
• Kleinwort Benson (Guernsey) v Aras Investment Management [2017] GRC 30: acted for the trustee of an open-ended, unit investment trust bringing proceedings in negligence against the former management and administrator of the unit trust.

Matthew has experience litigating a range of insurance disputes for insurer and insured.

Recent cases include:

• Dhawan v Zurich International Life [2025] DIFC CFI 019: acted for the successful insurer against the insured in a dispute about a life insurance policy.
• Al Futtaim v Willis Towers Watson [2024]: acted (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) in relation to a dispute as to the apportionment of commissions arising from treaty reinsurance broking business in the UAE. The claim settled shortly before trial.
• Westford Trading v Dubai Insurance Co [2023]: acted for the insurer in a dispute about whether the insured was entitled to cover under trade credit insurance where it was alleged the relevant trades were fictitious.
• Re a Dental Partnership: advised in a dispute about whether the remaining partners were entitled to cover under a life insurance policy taken out in respect of a deceased former partner.
• A Bank v An Insurer & A Reinsurer: acted for the insured in an arbitral dispute with the insurer and a reinsurer under trade credit insurance.

Matthew is one of the most experienced junior barristers in litigation before Middle Eastern courts and tribunals. Matthew has been described by the directories as the “best junior barrister” in the market for litigation before courts and tribunals in the Middle East. He is particularly singled out for his “experience and knowledge of DIFC law and practice.” He has wide experience of a variety of claims and is often instructed to deal with cases involving complex jurisdictional disputes or injunctive relief.

He is a contributor to DIFC Courts Practice (1st and 2nd edn), wrote volumes for Halsbury’s Laws of the DIFC and has worked with the DIFC Court to revise various parts of the Rules of the DIFC Court. He was also part of the drafting team for the court rules in NEOM, a new Saudi Arabian free zone.

A selection of his cases include:

• SKAT v FFA Private Bank (Dubai) [2024] DIFC CFI 004: acted on a landmark application for Norwich Pharmacal relief, establishing the ambit of the DIFC Court’s jurisdiction to make orders in support of foreign proceedings.
• Dhawan v Zurich International Life [2025] DIFC CFI 019: acted for the successful insurer against the insured in a dispute about a life insurance policy.
• Ivankovich v KJM Marine [2024] DIFC CFI 068: Matthew successfully obtained anti-suit relief to restrain parallel proceedings in the onshore Dubai Courts.
• Abramenko v Chuprin [2024] DIFC CFI 095: acted (leading Rumen Cholakov) for the claimants in a dispute as to the ownership of a tech business. Each side accused the other of fraudulently claiming to be the true owner.
• Gibson Consultants v The Emirates Capital [2024] DIFC CFI 033: acted for the successful petitioner in one of the DIFC Court’s few reported winding up petitions.
• Zeniq Technologies v Ramziq Technologies [2023] DIFC CFI 017: successfully obtained security for the costs of an application for an injunction in a cryptocurrency joint venture dispute.
• Citibank v Shetty [2022] DIFC CFI 079: acted (with Tom Montagu-Smith KC and Calum Mulderrig) for the agent bank of a syndicate that successfully enforced a loan agreement and security.
• Jungquist v Corbin Crossroads Consulting [2021] DIFC CFI 025: acted for a US defence contractor in its successful defence of claims relating to the payment of commission for a US-UAE defence contract.
• Emirates NBD Bank v Advanced Facilities Management [2020] DIFC CFI 065 and [2022] DIFC CA 012: obtained a US$540m summary judgment (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) for a syndicate of banks that had lent to a UAE corporate group and retained that judgment on appeal.
• Muzama v Mihanti [2022] DIFC ARB 004: acted (led by Christopher Harris KC) on a successful application to resist the annulment of a US$87m ICC award in the DIFC.
• Khoury v Mashreq Bank [2021] DIFC CFI 046 and [2022] DIFC CA 007: successfully defeated (sole counsel at first instance and led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC on appeal) a claim for damages for alleged negligent investment advice against the bank on service and jurisdictional grounds.
• X v Y [2022] DIFC ARB 011: acted (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) in a claim for the recognition and enforcement of a $180m ICC award and successfully obtained a world-wide freezing order in support of enforcement. The dispute involved a politically prominent family in the Middle East.
• Sadiyyah v Khatib & Alami [2021] DIFC CFI 099: acted for the successful defendant (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC), challenging jurisdiction in favour of the Lebanese courts.
• Abraaj Investment Management v KPMG Lower Gulf [2021] DIFC CFI 041: acted (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) for the former auditors of the Abraaj Capital Group in relation to a substantial negligence claim.
• Hamad Al Khaili v BNP Paribas Wealth Management [2021] DIFC CFI 031: acted for the successful bank defending a claim that it made an unauthorised investment on the claimant’s behalf.
• Sunset Hospitality Holdings v Al Herz [2020] DIFC CFI 024: Matthew successfully obtained an order for committal for contempt against the defendant for failing to transfer assets post judgment.
• DIFC Investments v Dubai Islamic Bank [2020] DIFC CFI 016: acted on a successful claim (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) to enforce a performance guarantee given by a bank, notwithstanding an injunction in the court where the bank was located restraining payment.
• Emirates NBD Bank v KBBO CPG Investment [2020] DIFC CFI 045: acted on behalf of the successful claimant banks (led Tom Montagu-Smith KC and John Taylor KC) in proceedings relating to a US$300 million syndicated loan.
• IDBI Bank v Amira C Foods International DMCC [2019] DIFC CA 014: acted on an appeal (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) concerned with the measure of damages for breach of a documentary credit and the bank’s liability for damage to its customer’s reputation.
• Arabian Construction Company v WLL v Credit Suisse Bank [2019] DIFC CA 008: acted on the first appeal in the DIFC Courts (led by Michael Black KC) in relation to the enforcement of foreign judgments under the GCC and Riyadh Convention.
• Health Bay Investment v Dr Akkach [2019] DIFC CFI 087: acted for the defendant on a claim for breach of restrictive covenants and for alleged misuse of confidential information.
• SKAT v Elysium Global (Dubai) [2018] DIFC CFI 048: acted for the Danish government (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) in proceedings to recover £2 billion alleged to have been paid out to hundreds of parties pursuant to a fraudulent dividend withholding tax conspiracy. He managed the proceedings arising from one of the largest search orders ever executed.
• Monks v Meadows & Sweeney [2018] DIFC CFI 060: acted for the successful claimant on his claim to enforce a judgment of the English Commercial Court in the DIFC. The underlying claim related to a loan facility and the enforceability of interest provisions in the UAE.
• McConnell Dowell South East Asia v Essar Projects [2018] DIFC CFI 082: acted for the claimant on its claim to enforce a judgment of the Singapore Commercial Court in the DIFC. The underlying dispute related to the financing of a port in Singapore.
• Tavira Securities v Re Point Ventures FZCO [2017] DIFC CFI 026: acted for the claimants (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) in a claim for damages for deceit and conspiracy arising from a share brokerage transaction.
• Hayri International v Hazim Telecom Private [2016] DIFC ARB 010: acted for the successful applicant (led by Tom Montagu-Smith KC) for an urgent anti-suit injunction to restrain a foreign court from itself restraining arbitration proceedings.
• Silva v United Investment Bank [2014] DIFC CA 004: acted with Tom Montagu-Smith KC in the successful appeal by a banker accused of breach of fiduciary duty.