Charles Hollander QC's Full CV

Charles Hollander has been practising as an advocate for thirty years. The breadth of his practice is unusual. Whilst the core of his practice has always been in commercial litigation, whether in the commercial court, chancery division or in arbitrations, he has extensive expertise in sports law, and other media-related work. He is increasingly used as an advocate in major EU matters, particularly in the High Court, in competition and freedom of establishment cases and also has expertise in professional negligence. As a result of his well-known books Documentary Evidence and Conflicts of Interest he has a specialised practice in those areas: he has argued many of the leading cases in relation to disclosure and legal professional privilege, and has a substantial practice advising law firms on conflicts of interest. He also sits as arbitrator, often in sporting matters, or expert.

Qualifications

  • Deputy High Court Judge (Queen's Bench Division)
  • Deputy High Court Judge (Chancery Division)
  • Crown and civil court Recorder
  • Called to the Bar in the Eastern Caribbean
  • Called to the Bar in Gibraltar
  • Called to the Bar in Brunei
  • Board Member, Bar Standards Board 2006 to date
  • Chair, Standards Committee of Bar Standards Board 2006 to date
  • James Mould Scholar of Gray's Inn
  • Bacon Holt and Uthwatt prizewinner
  • King's College Cambridge 1974-77 (first class honours in Classics)
  • University College School, Hampstead (Scholar)

Commercial Litigation

Recommended by Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500 for commercial litigation.

Major commercial litigation:

Charles has been involved in many of the major commercial disputes of the day. He was involved in the huge Accident Group litigation and its successor Composite, leading a team of leading and junior counsel. The actions involved suit against 634 and 85 firms of solicitors respectively. Most recently he is involved in the Masri litigation. Recent trials include Calyon v PZL, a three week trial before David Steel J involving derivative transactions, ISDA and Polish law (which settled after the trial before judgment), Erlson v Hampson Industries, another commercial court trial before Field J involving fraudulent misrepresentation on the sale of a company and attribution of knowledge issues, and D v R (deliberately anonymised) where two s44 applications were made to the commercial court prior to the commencement of a LCIA energy arbitration concerning supply of gas in the middle east.

Major commercial litigation in which Charles has been involved has included: 

  • Masri v CCC
  • Kaupthing
  • Buncefield
  • TAG/Composite
  • Three Rivers
  • Sumitomo copper
  • Railtrack
  • Barings
  • NRG
  • Maxwell
  • Ferranti
  • British & Commonwealth/Quadrex
  • Polly Peck
  • Local authority swaps
  • Eagle Trust

"Oligarchs" disputes

Oligarch litigation is increasingly significant. Charles has acted in oligarch disputes both in the BVI and this jurisdiction. 

  • Wincanton v Yukos (Rosneft-BVI)
  • Kolomoisky v Lanebrook (Ugok-LCIA arbitration)
  • Petroval v Stainby (BVI and Singapore, Yukos subsidiary)
  • Rosenberg v Nazarov (Chancery Division)
  • Base Metals Trading v Rual Trading (BVI)
  • Base Metal Trading v Shamurin (Commercial Court and Court of Appeal) 

Jurisdiction and conflict of laws

All of Charles' BVI cases involve jurisdiction and conflict issues. He has recently been involved in a number of commercial court cases which also raise these issues.

  • Calyon v PZL (Polish law in banking dispute)
  • Hathurani v Jassat (illegality/South African law)
  • Sothebys v Republic of Italy (conversion of manuscripts/ Italian law)
  • Skype v Joltid (antisuit injunction-exclusive jurisdiction)
  • Petroval v Stainby (Yukos money laundering fraud in BVI-Swiss/Singapore/BVI law)
  • Base Metals Trading v Shamurin (proper law of causes of action-English or Russian) Tomlinson J and CA
  • Sarrio v Kuwait Investment Office (Brussels Convention- Mance J, CA and HL)
  • Standard Bank v Apostolakis (Brussels Convention- Steel J)
  • Macsteel v Thermasteel (Ch D and CA) (forum conveniens)
  • Major Shipping v Cosco (antisuit injunction, exclusive jurisdiction and arbitration clauses –Comm Ct and CA)
  • Phillips v Enron (antisuit injunction- CATS/J Block litigation, Comm. Ct)
  • American International Speciality Lines v Abbott Laboratories (Anti-suit injunction, Comm. Ct)
  • Mobil Sales v Sinochem (stay and exclusive jurisdiction clause, Comm ct)
  • Franklin Mint (proceedings against Diana Princess of Wales Fund, Ch Div)

Arbitration

  • D v R (s44 applications in comm. ct, subsequent energy arbitration involving gas supply in middle east) 
  • Kolomoisky v Lanebrook (LCIA oligarch arbitration)
  • Westacre v Jugoimport (foreign arbitration award and public policy-conflict of laws) (Comm ct and CA)
  • Base Metal Trading v Rual Trade (enforcement of Russian arbitration award, in BVI)
  • Astra v Sphere Drake
  • Astra v Yasuda
  • (Romanian law-jurisdiction of arbitrators in dispute as to universal succession, Comm ct
  • Appeared in many arbitrations-as counsel or as arbitrator- shipping, shipbuilding, energy, sports (see sports law).

Energy, oil, gas and electricity

Recommended by the Legal 500 for energy litigation.

Arbitration, litigation and expert determination involving:

  • D v R (s44 applications in comm. ct, subsequent energy arbitration involving gas supply in middle east) 
  • Eggborough Power Station
  • Drax Power station
  • Electricity-hedging contracts and effect of NETA
  • Forties Field and other North Sea fields (numerous oil and gas disputes)
  • CATS pipeline and J block
  • Corby power station
  • Saipem (heavy lifting barge market)
  • Petrogal (crude oil refining)

Banking and finance

Many of these matters are referred to under major commercial litigation. Derivatives, letters of credit, cheques and other negotiable instruments. Disputes involving the acquisition and sale of companies, including many warranty claims.

  • Calyon v PZL (long comm. ct trial before David Steel J, settled after conclusion of trial, involving  ISDA terms and Polish law)
  • Enterprise Power v ESBI (warranty claims)
  • Banco Santander v Bayfern (letter of credit fraud)
  • BVA v National Bank of Pakistan (UCP Art 44)

Financial Services and Regulation

Charles’ practice includes regulatory and financial services work. He appears in regulatory and disciplinary tribunals. He also appears in disciplinary tribunals in sporting matters (see sports law). He has acted both for and against the FSA (and previously SFA). The Fox Hayes case, which is concerned with approval of financial promotions in relation to overseas boiler rooms, involved Charles in an eight day trial before the Financial Services and Markets Tribunal after a RDC hearing, and was decided by the Court of Appeal in February 2009.

  • FSA v Fox Hayes
  • Sir Michael Richardson (advance fee fraud warning)
  • Marconi (profit warning)
  • My Travel (profit warning)
  • Barings (acted for Ron Baker, Leeeson’s boss)

Commercial Fraud

Freezing injunctions, search orders, Norwich Pharmacal and Bankers Trust orders, asset tracing and breach of trust remedies:

  • Bloomsbury International v Holyoake (alleged fraud in seafood business)
  • Petroval v Stainby (BVI action tracing proceeds of money laundering-see under commercial litigation)
  • Rosenberg v Nazarov (share transfer fraud in partnership involving Russian aluminium, Ch Div)
  • Crown Dilmun v Sutton (breach of fiduciary duty, trust remedies, Peter Smith J)
  • Wheatley v Raprofil (tracing rights from Israel British Bank frauds, Ch Div)
  • BMTL v NKAZ and Rual Trade (asset tracing in BVI transfer pricing dispute)
  • Secilpar v Fiduciary Trust (Gibraltar Court of Appeal- attempts to determine beneficial ownership of trust, Norwich Pharmacal)
  • Sultan of Brunei v Prince Jefri (High Court of Brunei)

Professional Negligence

Nominee for 'Professional Negligence Silk of the Year 2009', Chambers Bar Award.

Recommended by Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500 for Professional Negligence.

Negligence claims involving solicitors, barristers, accountants and auditors, actuaries, insolvency practitioners and investment bankers, stockbrokers and fund managers

  • Baxendale-Walker v Deloittes and others (claim by ex-solicitor and tax expert for conspiracy against Deloittes and others)
  • Composite ("Son of TAG" litigation against 88 firms of solicitors for negligence, Comm Ct, managed by Flaux J and Teare J
  • The Accident Group Litigation (claim by insurers of after-the-event insurance schemes against 634 firms of solicitors for negligence: Comm Ct, managed by Aikens J and David Steel J-see under commercial litigation)
  • Reachbyte v Brewin Dolphin (claim against stockbroker for breach of duty)
  • Green Denman & Co v Skandia Life Insurance (claim for breach of duty by IFA against pension provider)
  • Paragon v Freshfields (solicitors negligence)
  • Lombard v Williams de Broe (stockbrokers negligence)
  • Kyrris v Oldham
  • Kyrris v Burger King (claims against administrators for breach of duty)
  • NRG (claims against actuaries, accountants and investment bankers arising from acquisition of reinsurer)

Conflicts of Interest

Charles has written the leading book on the law of conflicts of interest, and regularly lectures on the topic. He advises very many of the leading law firms on dealing with conflicts of interest, and confidential information, both generically and in relation to specific problems that occur.

  • Rim v DLA (application to injunct law firm in Blackberry litigation)
  • Skjevesland v Geveran Trading Co (conflicts of interest involving counsel)
  • Bloomsbury International v Holyoake (conflict on interest of company administrators)

EU Law

Recommended by the Legal 500 for EU law.

Charles has in recent years acted in a number of significant High Court trials involving EU and competition issues and freedom of establishment. Viking, which involves union ship boycotts in Finland, started life as a commercial court trial which Charles argued and, since the ECJ decision, is now the leading case on freedom of establishment. The “Open Skies” litigation, involving a BA pilots’ strike, gave rise to similar issues. Attheraces involved the High Court finding that the British Horseracing Board was guilty of excessive pricing in breach of Article 82 in relation to data rights after a four week trial, a decision subsequently reversed by the Court of Appeal. In Adidas the Claimants argued that the application by the tennis Grand Slam Committee of the dress code to the three stripes logo was discriminatory and in breach of both Art 81 and 82. H3G is the first important authority on the application of pre-action disclosure to competition cases. In BAGS the issue in a seven week trial earlier in 2008 was whether exclusive licence agreements for picture rights from racecourses involved price fixing and were in breach of art 81.

  • Purple and Meteor Parking v Heathrow Airport Ltd (airport parking monopoly)
  • Jones v Ricoh UK (breach of NDA in photocopier market)
  • Derwent v Mercedes-Benz (termination of 17 Mercedes distributorships)
  • Sel-Imperial v British Standards Institute (breach of competition act in over-rigorous standards)
  • Viking Line v ITF and FSA (freedom of establishment (Gloster J and CA, case settled after ruling by ECJ prior to referral back to CA)
  • BA v BALPA (freedom of establishment-pilots’ strike)
  • Attheraces v British Horseracing Board (Etherton J and CA-excess pricing under Article 82 in relation to pre-race data)
  • Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Services v Amrac (Morgan J- Turf TV, exclusive agreements and Art 81)
  • Hutchison3G v O2 (pre-action disclosure in Art 81 mobile phone claim)
  • Adidas-Salomon v Draper Morritt VC (tennis dress code as breach of Art 81 and 82)

Documentary Evidence

As a result of his well-known book Documentary Evidence, which is regularly cited in court, Charles has been involved in many of the leading cases in relation to the law of documents, disclosure and legal professional privilege, Norwich Pharmacal and letters rogatory. He has lectured on these topics for many years and on numerous occasions given affidavit expert evidence for foreign courts, particularly US courts: see eg In Re Trygg Hansa 1995 596 Fed Supp 624, 628. He gives regular advice on document creation, document management policies for corporations, and particular problems relating to disclosure and privilege.

  • Terra Firma v Citibank (expert evidence on English law in NY dispute re purchase of EMI)
  • Baha Musa Inquiry (whether waiver of privilege in AG's advice on applicability of ECHR in Iraq)
  • Hutchison 3G v O2 Ltd (pre action disclosure in Art 81 claim, David Steel J)
  • West London Pipeline and Storage v Total UK (Buncefield: litigation privilege dominant purpose-Comm Ct)
  • Winterthur Swiss Insurance Company v The Accident Group (rights of access to insurers and privilege) Aikens J
  • Three Rivers DC v Bank of England (No 6) (privilege-HL)
  • Three Rivers DC v Bank of England (No 4) (non-party disclosure, CA)
  • USA v Philip Morris (litigation privilege for letters rogatory claim, CA)
  • Black v Sumitomo (pre-action disclosure CA)
  • Paragon v Freshfields (waiver of privilege CA)
  • NRG v Bacon & Woodrow (No 1) (waiver of privilege- Colman J)
  • Interbrew v Financial Times (Lightman J and CA) (Norwich Pharmacal-leaked takeover documents)
  • Axa v Nat West (Norwich Pharmacal)
  • PPG v Boeing (letters rogatory)
  • Rush & Tompkins v GLC (without prejudice privilege-HL)

Sports Law

Recommended by Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500 for sports law.

Charles has long been known as having a particular expertise in sports litigation. He has appeared in a large number of sports cases, appearing in the High Court, in disciplinary tribunals, arbitration, and before the Court of Arbitration In Sport. He has chaired disciplinary and doping tribunals in athletics, football, yachting swimming and weightlifting. He has also been Chairman of the Bar Sports Law Group.

Charles was involved in the Greek Athletes case before CAS (leading Greek athletes alleged to have faked motorbike accident to avoid drugs test) and two sets of litigation against West Ham FC in relation to the Carlos Tevez transfer. Attheraces involved the High Court finding that the British Horseracing Board was guilty of excessive pricing in breach of Article 82 in relation to data rights after a four week trial, a decision subsequently reversed by the Court of Appeal. In Adidas the Claimants argued that the application by the tennis Grand Slam Committee of the dress code to the three stripes logo was discriminatory and in breach of both Art 81 and 82. In BAGS the issue in a seven week trial earlier in 2008 was whether exclusive licence agreements for picture rights from racecourses involved price fixing and were in breach of art 81. Charles argued the Digicel v West Indies Cricket Board arbitration in relation to the Stanford 20/20 cricket tournament.

Cases include:

Athletics

  • IAAF v Kenteris and Thanou (Greek athletes case before CAS)
  • IAAF v Katrina Krabbe (drugs)
  • IAAF v Linford Christie (drugs)
  • BOA v Whitlock (Chaired drugs panel)

Football

  • Colchester United v Norwich City (FA commission-tapping up manager)
  • MSI/ Just Sports v West Ham (Ch Div-Carlos Tevez)
  • Joorabchian v West Ham (Ch Div)
  • FA v Arsene Wenger (Chair)
  • Wimbledon FC v Football League (Chair-Wimbledon move to Milton Keynes)
  • Sunderland FC v Uruguay Montevideo FC (QBD)
  • Sports Management Services v Bolton Wanderers and Okocha (Manchester Merc court)
  • Southend FC v Rotherham FC (Arbitration)
  • Crystal Palace v Bradford City (Chair)

Horseracing

  • Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Services v Amrac (Turf TV-Article 81) (Ch D)
  • Attheraces v British Horseracing Board (Art 82 excess pricing- Ch D and CA)
  • Goodwood Racecourse v SIS (Ch D-pre race data)

Cricket

  • Digicel v West Indies Cricket Board (Arbitration-Stanford 20/20)
  • Stanford v Digicel (Comm ct-Stanford 20/20)
  • Kookaburra cricket bat (Ricky Ponting bat)

Boxing

  • Don King Productions v Frank Warren (partnership dispute)

Tennis

  • Adidas-Salomon v Draper (Article 81/82-dress code in grand slam events)

Rugby

  • Rotherham FC Enquiry (failure to win promotion)
  • Leeds Rhinos v Bradford Bulls and Iestyn Harris (rugby league-inducing breach of contract)

Polo

  • Pictet v Hurlingham Polo Assn (disciplinary proceedings)

Swimming

  • BOA v Mark Foster (Chair-non-selection for Olympic team)

Yachting

  • RYA v Johnston (Chair-drugs panel)

Other sports

  • Weightlifting (Chair- drugs panel)
  • Motor racing (logos, marketing disputes, Formula 1 disputes, lawfulness of cars)
  • Snooker (challenge to rules brought by Davis/Hearn)
  • Bobsleigh (Chaired appeal in relation to team selection for Vancover 2010)

Media and Entertainment

Charles' media work dovetails with his sports expertise. He recently acted for Barclays in upholding an injunction preventing The Guardian publishing details of tax avoidance documentation on its website.

  • Barclays v Guardian Newspaper (publication of tax avoidance scheme details)
  • Skype v Joltid (worldwide litigation relating to Skype software license)
  • Excelsior v Yorkshire TV (royalties for "Darling Buds of May")
  • VPL v Chart Show (reference to Copyright Tribunal in relation to music video royalties)
  • TV3 v Granada (satellite overspill affecting TV in Ireland)
  • Cashman v Hewson (U2 disputed memorabilia)
  • Acted for Major Charles Ingram (accused of cheating on "who wants to be a millionaire"), Caroline Quentin (fraudulent agent) and in relation to Party Poker contracts and "The Ossie Clark diaries".
  • BPI v MCPS (composers' royalties-first reference before copyright tribunal)

Reported Cases

  • Erlson v Hampson Industries plc (fraudulent misrepresentation on sale of company/attribution of knowledge) Field J 20.4.11
  • Hawksford Trustees v Botterill (discharge of third party injunction -non-disclosure) December 2010
  • Baxendale Walker v Deloittes (strike out of conspiracy claim by tax adviser, Supperstone J)2011 EWHC 998 (QB)
  • Sel-Imperial v British Standards Institute 2010 EWHC 854 (ch) Roth J (competition law breach in restrictive British Standard)
  • Bloomsbury International v Holyoake 2010 EWHC 1150 (Ch) Floyd J (administrator conflict of interest)
  • Skype v Joltid (antisuit injunction-exclusive jurisdiction) 2009 EWHC 2783 (Ch) Lewison J
  • Axa v Akther and Darby (Composite litigation) 2009 EWCA Civ 1166 (CA); 2009 PNLR (Flaux J) (limitation); permission to appeal to Supreme Court granted
  • Excelsior v Yorkshire TV (Darling Buds of May royalties) 2009 EWHC 1751 (Comm) Flaux J
  • Arla Foods v Barnes (milk supply agreement) 2009 1BCLC 699 Sir E Evans Lombe 
  • Rayden v Edwardo and Tchenguiz 2008 EWHC 2689 Comm Gloster J (liability of guarantor where primary debtor in liquidation)
  • Fox Hayes v FSA 2009 EWCA Civ 76 CA (financial promotions)
  • Investec v The Retail Group Plc 2009 EWHC 476 Ch Sales J (construction/rectification)  
  • Barclays v Guardian Newspapers 2009 EWHC 591 QB King J (publication of confidential tax avoidance scheme documentation)
  • Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Service v AMRAC and SIS (Turf TV-Article 81) 2008 EWHC Ch Morgan J 8.8.08
  • Viking Line v ITF and FSU 2005 EuLR 1036 Gloster J, 2006 EuLR 509, CA settled before further CA hearing after ECJ ruling (freedom of establishment)
  • H3G v O2 (UK) Ltd 2008 EWHC 55 David Steel J (pre-action disclosure in competition law)
  • Rosenberg v Nazarov 2008 EWHC 812 Ch (fraud-partnership dispute)
  • West London Pipeline and Storage Ltd v Total UK Ltd 2008 EWHC Comm 25.9.08 (privilege-Buncefield) Comm ct
  • Jayam v Diamond Trading Company 2007 EWCA Civ 1360 (allocation of diamonds by de Beers) CA
  • Kyrris v Burger King 2007 EWHC 753 Ch Blackburne J (negligence claim against insolvency practitioners)
  • Winterthur Swiss Insurance Company v The Accident Group Ltd 2006 EWHC 839 Comm Aikens J (after the event insurance-rights of inspection and privilege)
  • Green Denman & Co v Scandia Life 2006 EWHC 1626 Ch (wrongful interference claim against pension provider) Ch Div
  • Adidas-Salomon AG v Draper 2006 EuLR 1057 (Art 81-82, rules on dress code for tennis grand slams) Morritt VC
  • British Horseracing Board v Attheraces 2006 FSR 20 Etherton J, 2007 EWCA Civ 38 CA
  • (Art 82, excess pricing of horseracing data)
  • NBTY Europe v Nutricia 2005 2 Lloyds Rep 350 (compromise/mistake) Comm ct
  • Three Rivers DC v Bank of England 2005 1AC 610 HL (privilege appeal)
  • USA v Philip Morris 2004 EWCA 330 (letters rogatory and privilege) CA
  • Base Metals Trading Ltd v Shamurin 2004 1All ER (Comm) 159, Tomlinson J, 2005 1WLR 1157 CA (proper law/metal trading)
  • Goodwood Racecourse v Satellite Investment Services 11.10.04 Sir Donald Rattee (pre-race data)
  • Granville Baird v Blackden 2004 EWHC 72 QB Simon J (investment bank arrangement fee)
  • Commerzbank v Price Jones Times 8.12.03 CA (restitution-mistaken payment)
  • Crown Dilmun v Sutton 2004 1BCLC 468 Peter Smith J (constructive trusts-sale of Fulham Football ground)
  • Tigana v Decoro 2003 EuLR 148 (commercial agents) Davis J
  • Three Rivers v Bank of England (No 4) 2002 4 All ER 881 CA (non-party disclosure)
  • RC Residuals v Linton Fuels 2002 1 WLR 2782 CA (relief from sanctions)
  • American Speciality lines v Abbott Laboratories 2003 1 All ER 267 (antisuit injunction) Cresswell J
  • Black v Sumitomo 2002 1 WLR 1562 CA (pre-action disclosure)
  • Skjevesland v Geveran Trading Co 2003 1 All ER 1 CA (conflicts of interest involving counsel)
  • Interbrew SA v Financial Times 2002 1 Lloyds Rep 542 Lightman J, 2002 2 Lloyds Rep 229 CA (Norwich Pharmacal-leak of takeover documents)
  • Standard Bank v Apostolakis 2002 CLC 939 David Steel J (Art 13, Brussels Convention)
  • Criterion Properties v Stratford 2002 2 BCLC 151 (poison pills) Ch D
  • Sunderland FC v Uruguay Montevideo FC 2001 2 All ER Comm 881 (football) QBD
  • Sinochem v Mobil Sales (No 1) 2000 1 Lloyds Rep 339 CA (set off rights)
  • Sinochem v Mobil Sales (No 2) 2000 1 Lloyds Rep (exclusive jurisdiction clause) Rix J
  • Astra v Sphere Drake Insurance 2000 2 Lloyds Rep 550 (Romanian law/ jurisdiction of arbitrator David Steel J
  • Govt of Zanzibar v British Aerospace 2000 1 WLR 2333 (exclusion clauses/misrepresentation) Comm Ct
  • Astra v Yasuda 1999 CLC 950 (Romanian law/ jurisdiction of arbitrator) Toulson J
  • Re Barings, DTI v Baker (No 3) 1999 1 All ER 311 CA (directors disqualification-abuse of process) CA
  • Re Barings, DTI v Baker (No 5) 1999 BCLC 433 (directors disqualification) J Parker J
  • Paragon v Freshfields 1999 1 WLR 1183 CA (waiver of privilege)
  • Petrogal v BP 1999 1 Lloyds Rep 854 (remission of arbitrator’s award) Comm ct
  • R v Advertising Standards Authority ex parte Robertson (jurisdiction of ASA) Times 26.11.99 Moses J Admin ct
  • Westacre v Jugoimport 1999 3 All ER 864 CA (foreign arbitration award-public policy)
  • Quadrant v Quadrant Research (No 1) 27.11.98 New Law Digest (patent infringement/contractual repudiation) Pumfrey J
  • Quadrant v Quadrant Research (No 2) 1999 FSR 918 (non-party costs) Pumfrey J
  • Zockoll v Mercury 3.3.98 New Law Digest (premium phone numbers-unfair terms) CA
  • Don King Productions v Frank Warren 1998 2 All ER 608 (partnership dispute) Lightman J
  • Stabilad v Stephens & Carter (No 1) 1998 4 All ER 129 (security for costs appeal) CA,
  • Stabilad v Stephens & Carter (No 2) 1999 2 All ER (Comm) 651 (contractual intention) CA
  • Axa Equity and Life v Nat West 1998 PNLR 433 CA (Norwich Pharmacal)
  • IM Properties v Cape & Dalgleish 1998 3 All ER 203 CA (jurisdiction to award s35A interest)
  • Glolite v Jasper Conran Times 28.1.98 Neuberger J (material and irremediable breach)
  • NRG v Bacon & Woodrow (No 1) 1995 1 All ER 976 (waiver of privilege) Colman J
  • NRG v Bacon & Woodrow (No 2) 1995 2 Lloyds Rep 77 (admissibility of evidence) Colman J
  • NRG v Bacon & Woodrow (No 3) 1997 Lloyds Rep IR 678 Colman J
  • Sarrio v Kuwaiti Investment Office 1997 1 Lloyds Rep 113 (CA), 1997 4 All ER 929 (HL) (Brussels Convention, competing jurisdictions)
  • Macsteel v Thermasteel 1996 CLC 1403 CA (jurisdiction)

Books

  • “Documentary Evidence” 1st ed 1985, 10th ed 2009
  • “Conflicts of Interest” 1st ed 2000 3rd ed 2008
  • Phipson on Evidence (editor with others ) 17th ed 2009