Brick Court Chambers

Charles Hollander QC

Charles Hollander QC

YEAR OF CALL: 1978    YEAR OF SILK: 1999

"A terrific silk and brilliant to work with."
Legal 500 2021
  • .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) a
  • View Clerking Team
  • Add To Shortlisth

Charles practises as an advocate both in the English courts and internationally. He has been called to the Hong Kong Bar and also accepts instructions as a full member of Temple Chambers in Hong Kong. He has appeared in court in Cayman, Bermuda, Bahamas, BVI, Gibraltar and Brunei. 

He is principally a commercial litigator with a broad practice whose strength is his vast experience in court, whether at interlocutory, trial or appellate level or in arbitrations. His books Documentary Evidence and Conflicts of Interest are well-known and he has argued many of the leading cases in those areas.  He is also used as an advocate in major EU and competition matters

Expand All
  • Commercial M

    Commercial Litigation

    Charles has always been recommended by the directories in Commercial Litigation and Professional Negligence.

    Recent court work involves the Ukrainian banking dispute JSC Commercial Bank v Kolomoisky, acting for a QC accused of conspiracy to injure by deliberately misleading the court in King v Stiefel, and arguing the first ever Bilateral Investment Treaty case to come before the Hong Kong court in Starr v Russia. The Supreme Court has just given the other side leave to appeal on the question Charles argued whether the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act has extra-territorial effect in Roberts v MOD/SSAFA. Charles also argued China Medical Technologies v Bank of China before the HK Court of Final Appeal on extension of validity of a writ. In addition he argued whether a litigation expert is a fiduciary in Secretariat v Company A and also the first ever Hong Kong case on the ambit of the rule prohibiting enforcement of a foreign revenue law in Pico Projects International (going to the HK Court of Appeal). 

    Jurisdiction disputes:

    The Fundao dam litigation, Municipio de Mariana v BHP Billiton, is major environmental litigation, involving an 8 day jurisdiction hearing. China Medical Supplies v Paul Weiss, a professional negligence action against the international law firm seeking trial in New York, led to a 142 page judgment from the Hong Kong court. Roberts v SSAFA/MOD is a personal injury action  throwing up a host of difficult conflict of law problems and is about to be heard by the Supreme Court. His jurisdiction expertise includes a number of ant-suit injunction cases.

    Offshore work:

    This has involved a claim before the Bermuda Court of Appeal , Ivanishvili v Credit Suisse, arising from a fraud in the management of a Swiss law life portfolio; and a claim in the Bahamas involving the administration of a construction project, Winder v Baha Mar Ltd, with associated litigation in New York. A four week trial in Cayman concerning the ownership of the Ritz Carlton, RC Cayman v Ryan, which involved a number of hearings there, settled shortly before trial. Charles also argued the HK Court of Appeal case, Mayer BVI v Alliance Financial Intelligence, as to whether the HK court should follow the English Supreme Court decision in Takhar v Greenfield. Charles is recommended in the top tier for Commercial Dispute resolution in the Asia-Pacific edition of Legal 500.

    Commercial fraud:

    Most of Charles’ offshore cases involve commercial fraud. That often involves acting for administrators and liquidators, such as in the various China Medical Supplies litigations. Charles has argued a number of the leading cases on Norwich Pharmacal orders.

    Professional negligence and regulatory:

    In King v Stiefel after a six day hearing in the Commercial Court the court struck out a claim against a QC for whom Charles acted, accused of having deliberately misled the court. Other recent work has involved a series of Hong Kong large accountancy negligence claims (for claimants and defendants) which have stubbornly refused to reach trial, Sino Forest v BDO, Mingyuan Medical v Deloitte. China Medical Supplies v Paul Weiss, a large negligence action against the international law firm for failure to uncover a fraud, is ongoing. Charles was involved in the various Tchenguiz actions both in England and in Jersey and Guernsey. Charles’ conflict of interest practice, where he advises many of the law London law firms, spills into professional regulatory and disciplinary work as well as professional negligence. He has acted in negligence claims involving solicitors, barristers, accountants and auditors, actuaries, insolvency practitioners and investment bankers, stockbrokers and fund managers. The largest case in which he acted was The Accident Group which involved claims against 634 firms of solicitors and a second set of proceedings against 84 firms. Charles was a previous nominee for Professional Negligence Silk of the Year in the Chambers Bar Awards.

    Appellate work:

    Because of his great experience before appellate courts, Charles is often brought into cases at the appellate stage, such as Astex v Astra Zeneca, an appeal after an intellectual property trial in a drug discovery case. He was instructed on the appeal in Harb v Prince Abdul Aziz, where an agreement was found to have been made with the son of the Saudi king during a conversation at the Dorchester hotel and the appeal also raised allegations of bias as a result of communications with counsel by the trial judge (Peter Smith J).

    Group litigation:

    The TAG litigation, in which 634 firms of solicitors were sued for negligence in the first action and 84 more in the second, predated the current popularity of group actions. Recent work includes acting for defendants in the Trucks litigation in the CAT and the FX litigation, the Fundao dam litigation, Municipalia de Mariana v BHP Billiiton acting for 202,000 Brazilian claimants..

    International arbitration:

    RBF HK Ltd v ZPMC Offshore Service Ltd, a joint venture dispute about container vessels, was heard in September 2020. A related arbitration before a different panel, Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries Co Ltd v Adkins, was heard in December 2020. Sanofi v JHL is a HKIAC pharmaceutical arbitration raising issues as to the efficacy of a provision for pre-commencement negotiations. Dow v Luxi Chemicals was a two week Swedish Chamber of Commerce arbitration concerning copying of the specification for a Chinese Chemical plant. A lengthy arbitration in Hong Kong in relation to a joint venture for the construction of Studio City, Macau, Paul Y v Yau Li, settled just before commencement. Other recent international arbitrations include Invista Technologies v Yisheng Petroleum, a CIETAC arbitration under UNCITRAL rules involving a PRC chemical plant, and Helios Photo Voltaic v Jianxi Solar HiTech, a HKIAC UNCITRAL arbitration concerning photographic equipment.

    Conflicts of interest:

    Charles has written the leading book on the law of conflicts of interest (now in its 6th ed), and regularly lectures on the topic. He advises very many of the leading law firms on dealing with conflicts of interest, and confidential information.,  Charles was recently brought in to argue Secretariat International v A in the Court of Appeal as to whether a litigation expert owes a fiduciary duty to his appointor .

    Documentary Evidence:

    As a result of his well-known book, Documentary Evidence, (14th ed to be published shortly) 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.

    Sports law:

    Charles has had a practice in sports law for over 30 years and has argued cases involving almost every sport. Much has been in doping cases, in which he has been involved since the 1980s. Now most of his work in this area is as chair of arbitral, disciplinary or appeal panels. A former chair of the Bar Sports Law Group, since 2019 he has been worldwide chair of the World Athletics Disciplinary Panel, supervising and sitting on disciplinary matters across athletics. He is a chair of the UK National Anti-Doping Panel and a Tennis Anti-Corruption Officer, handling betting and match fixing cases in tennis, and a chairman member of the FA Judicial Panel. Recent sports work as arbitrator includes Hassey v Kelechi Iheanacho concerning the management and transfer of the Leicester City striker.

  • Competition M


    Charles is brought into competition and freedom of movement cases, for trials or court hearings for his advocacy experience. He is currently instructed on the defendant side both in the ongoing Trucks litigation and FX litigation. Competition Commission v Nutanix was the first reference under the new Hong Kong Competition Ordinance, and after a four week trial decided many of the important issues under that statute, as well as a prior decision in relation to privilege against self-incrimination under the ordinance. Charles is recommended in the top tier for Competition Law in the Asia-Pacific Legal 500. Apart from ongoing applications seeking CAT group action certification, Charles was involved in Emerald Supplies v British Airways.  A number of the major competition cases he argued have involved horseracing, including Attheraces and Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Services. Viking, which ultimately went to the CJEU, is a leading case on freedom of establishment.

    • Trucks litigation
    • FX litigation
    • Hong Kong Competition Commission v Nutanix 2019 HKCT 2 (bid rigging- first reference under new HK competition legislation) 2017 HKEC 2111 (privilege against self-incrimination)
    • Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways plc (air fuel surcharge cartel litigation) (group litigation)
    • Montpellier Estates Ltd v Leeds City Council 2013 EWHC 166 (QB) Supperstone J (fraud trial arising from public procurement)
    • Sel-Imperial v British Standards Institute 2010 EWHC 854 (ch) Roth J (competition law breach in restrictive British Standard)
    • Also involved (but not at trial) in Purple and Meteor Parking v Heathrow Airport Ltd (airport parking monopoly) and BA v BALPA (freedom of establishment-pilots’ strike)
    • Jones v Ricoh UK 2010 EWHC 1743 (Ch) (breach of NDA in photocopier market-strike out of competition claim)
    • Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Service v AMRAC and SIS (Turf TV-Article 81) 2009 ECC 13 Morgan J
    • 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)
    • 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)
  • Reported cases M

    APPELLATE CASES (as an advocate only)

    • China Medical Technologies v Bank of China 2020 HKCFAR 296 (extension of writ- HK Court of Final Appeal) 
    • Secretariat International v A 2021 EWCA Civ 6 (is a litigation expert a fiduciary?)
    • Ivanishvili v Credit Suisse Bermuda Court of Appeal 2020 1 CA (Bda) 13 Civ (inherent jurisdiction to make disclosure orders going beyond the rules)
    • Roberts v MOD/SSAFA 2020 EWCA Civ 926  (contribution act has extraterritorial effect)  
    • Chung Yuen Chu v Borelli 2019 HKCA CA (redemption of mortgage)
    • Mayer BVI v Alliance Financial Intelligence 2019 HKCA 777 CA (test for setting aside judgment for fraud)
    • Ashany v EcoBat Technologies 2018 EWCA Civ 1066 (costs appeal on discontinuance)
    • Investec Trust (Guernsey) v Glenalla Properties 2018 2WLR 1465 (Privy Council appeal on Tchenguiz Guernsey trust claim-abuse of process)
    • Paymaster (Jamaica) Ltd v Grace Kennedy Remittance Services Ltd 2018 Bus LR (Privy Council appeal - breach of confidence and copyright appeal from Jamaica)
    • Atlantisrealm Ltd v Intelligent Land Investments 2017 EWCA Civ 1029 (CA on inadvertent disclosure rules)
    • Ilkerler Otomotiv Perkins Engines 2017 EWCA Civ 183 (good faith obligations in termination of distributor agreement)
    • Li Sin Man Seline v Li Shu Chung 2017 HKEC 78 HK CA (discretionary trust)
    • Harb v Prince Abdul Aziz 2016 EWCA Civ 556 (Appeal from Peter Smith J judgment in relation to promise to ex-wife of Saudi king - apparent bias where judge wrote letter to head of Blackstone Chambers)
    • Ferster v Ferster 2016 EWCA Civ 717 (unambiguous impropriety in mediation)
    • Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees v SFO CA 2.3.16 (CPR 31.22 application)
    • Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees v Akers 2014 EWCA Civ 136 (Court of Appeal-litigation privilege / non party disclosure)
    • Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees v SFO 2014 EWCA Civ 1129 (inadvertent disclosure-public interest immunity / privilege)
    • FG Wilson v Holt Liverpool 2014 1WLR 2365 (CA divide 2-1 and give leave to appeal to Supreme Court; (Romalpa clause/no set off/ UCTA / s49 Sale of Goods Act); case settled before Supreme Court , also 2013 EWCA Civ 779 Tomlinson LJ (security for appeal)
    • RC Cayman v Ryan Cayman Court of Appeal, April 2013 rights of mortgagor of property, litigation settled after appeal before judgment
    • Tinkler v Elliott  2014 EWCA Civ 564 in relation to leave to commence contempt proceedings
    • Tinkler v Elliott 2012 EWCA Civ 1289 (CA judgment on setting aside judgment at trial);
    • Masri v Consolidated Contractors International 2011 UKPC 29 (Privy Council- judgment enforcement)
    • Axa v Akther and Darby (Composite litigation) 2009 EWCA Civ 1166 (CA); (limitation); CA divide 2-1,permission to appeal to Supreme Court granted, case settled before Supreme Court hearing
    • Fox Hayes v FSA 2009 EWCA Civ 76 CA (financial promotions)
    • Viking Line v ITF and FSU 2006 EuLR 509, CA on freedom of establishment -settled before further CA hearing after ECJ ruling
    • Jayam v Diamond Trading Company 2007 EWCA Civ 1360 (allocation of diamonds by de Beers) CA
    • British Horseracing Board v Attheraces 2007 EWCA Civ 38 CA (Art 82, excess pricing of horseracing data)
    • 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 2005 1WLR 1157 CA (proper law/metal trading)
    • Secilpar SL v Fiduciary Trust Ltd 24.9.2004 Gibraltar Court of Appeal (Norwich Pharmacal)
    • Commerzbank v Price Jones 2003 EWCA Civ 1663  CA (restitution-mistaken payment)
    • 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)
    • 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 2 Lloyd's Rep 229 CA (Norwich Pharmacal-leak of takeover documents)
    • Sinochem v Mobil Sales (No 1) 2000 1 Lloyd's Rep 339 CA (set off rights)


    • Ivanishvili v Credit Suisse Bermuda Court of Appeal 2020 1 CA (Bda) 13 Civ (inherent jurisdiction to make disclosure orders going beyond the rules)
    • Atlantisrealm Ltd v Intelligent Land Investments (inadvertent disclosure) 2017 EWCA Civ 1029 (inadvertent disclosure rules)
    • Tchenguiz v Grant Thornton UK 2017 1 WLR 2809 (meaning of “use” of documents for collateral undertaking)
    • Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees v SFO CA 2.3.16 (CPR 31.22 application)
    • Ferster v Ferster 2016 EWCA Civ 717 (unambiguous impropriety in mediation privilege)
    • ENRC v Dechert LLP 2014 EWHC 3389 (implied and limited waiver of privilege)
    • Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees v SFO 2014 EWCA 1129 (inadvertent disclosure-public interest immunity / privilege)
    • A v E 2014 EWHC 715 (Ch) (directors' rights of access to company documents)
    • Rawlinson & Hunter v Akers 2014 EWCA Civ 136  (non-party disclosure / litigation privilege)
    • Constantin v Ecclestone 2013 EWHC 2674 (Ch) (applications for non-party disclosure under CPR 31.17)
    • Montpellier Estates Ltd v Leeds City Council 2012 EWHC 1343 QB (electronic disclosure)
    • Hutchison 3G v O2 Ltd 2008 EWHC 55 (Comm)  (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 unreported 18.9.08 
    • Winterthur Swiss Insurance Company v The Accident Group 2006 EWHC 839 (Comm) (rights of access to insurers and privilege) Aikens J
    • Three Rivers DC v Bank of England (No 6) 2005 1 AC 610 (privilege-HL)
    • Three Rivers DC v Bank of England (No 4) 2002 4All ER 881 CA (non-party disclosure, CA)
    • USA v Philip Morris 2004 EWCA Civ 330 (litigation privilege for letters rogatory claim, CA)
    • Black v Sumitomo 2002 1WLR 1562 (pre-action disclosure CA)
    • Interbrew v Financial Times 2002 2 Lloyd's 229 and 2002 1 Lloyd's 542 (Lightman J and CA) (Norwich Pharmacal-leaked takeover documents)


    • Secretariat International v A 2021 EWCA Civ 6  (CA: is a litigation expert a fiduciary?)
    • Primary Group v Royal Bank of Scotland 2014 EWHC 1082 (Ch) Arnold J (banking confidentiality/Wrotham Park damages)
    • Harb v Prince Abdul Aziz 2016 EWCA Civ 556 (Appeal from Peter Smith J judgment in relation to promise to ex-wife of Saudi king - apparent bias where judge wrote a letter to head of Blackstone Chambers)
    • Jones v IOS (UK) Ltd 2012 EWHC 348 (Ch) ( breach of confidence/ Wrotham Park)
    • Volkswagen Aktiegesellschaft v Garcia 2013 EWHC 3080 Pat (Patents Court) Birss J (breach of confidence/freedom of expression/cracking code on VW immobiliser)
    • Bloomsbury International v Holyoake 2010 EWHC 1150 (Ch) Floyd J (administrator conflict of interest)
    • Barclays v Guardian Newspapers 2009 EWHC 591 QB King J (publication of confidential tax avoidance scheme documentation)
    • Skjevesland v Geveran Trading Co 2003 1 All ER 1 CA (conflicts of interest involving counsel)


    • JSC Commercial Bank v Kolomoisky 2021 EWHC 1910 (Ch) Trower J (Confidentiality clubs)
    • King v Stiefel 2021 EWHC 1045 (Comm) Cockerill J (conspiracy to injure claim against QC)
    • Autonomous Non-Commercial Organisation v Pico Projects International 2021 HKLRD 246 (enforcement of Russian revenue judgment)
    • Municipio de Mariana v BHP Billiton,  Fundao dam group action litigation, 2020 EWHC 928
    • Roberts v SSAFA/MOD 2020 EWHC 994 (QB) (trial as to proper law/ limitation under German law)
    • DBS Bank HK v Pan Jing 2020 HKEC 240 Blair J (“underground banking”- restitution of money paid by mistake)
    • China Medical Supplies v Paul Weiss 2019 HKEC 3472 (jurisdiction of HK court, prof neg claim for failing to spot a fraud)
    • Okada v Okada 2018 HKEC 3997 (exclusive jurisdiction clause, HK high court)
    • ITV Network v Performing Right Society 2017 LLR 341 Mann J, (meaning of “nonprecedential” in copyright tribunal reference)
    • Roberts v SSAFA 2016 EWHC 2744 (QB) (Art 8(2) of recast Brussels Regulation)
    • Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees v ITG Ltd 2015 EWHC 1557 (Ch) 2015 EWHC 1924 (Ch) Morgan J (issue estoppel and abuse of process - second bite at the cherry)
    • BHP Billiton v E-on (expedited commercial court trial on termination of gas sales agreement, settled just before judgment)
    • Libyan Investment Authority v Societe Generale SA 2015 EWHC 1925 (Comm) Flaux J (appointment of receiver over major litigation where dispute as to authority to act for LIA)
    • SC Johnson v Sara Lee 2013 EWHC 3080 Ch Roth J (claim for specific performance of sale agreement)
    • Pacific Electric Wire & Cable v Texan Management 2012 HKCF1505, Reyes J, Hong Kong commercial court (HK commercial fraud trial)
    • Ikos CIF v Hogan Lovells international 2011 EWHC 2724 and 2725 (Ch) (discontinuance/ solicitors/striking out in Ikos litigation)
    • Smith v Butler 2011 EWHC 2301 (Ch) (authority of managing director)
    • Calyon v PZL (Polish law banking dispute involving ISDA terms, settled after trial before judgment)
    • jSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov 2011 EWHC 2988 Teare J (setting aside service)
    • Erlson v Hampson Industries plc 2011 EWHC 1137 (Comm)  (fraudulent misrepresentation on sale of company/attribution of knowledge)
    • Baxendale Walker v Deloitte (strike out of conspiracy claim by tax adviser, Supperstone J)2011 EWHC 998 (QB)
    • Skype v Joltid (antisuit injunction-exclusive jurisdiction) 2009 EWHC 2783 (Ch) Lewison J
    • 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)
    • Investec v The Retail Group Plc 2009 EWHC 476 Ch Sales J (construction/rectification)
    • Rosenberg v Nazarov 2008 EWHC 812 (Ch) (joint venture, striking out, partnership assets)
    • Kyrris v Burger King 2007 EWHC 753 Ch Blackburne J (negligence claim against insolvency practitioners)
    • Green Denman & Co v Scandia Life 2006 EWHC 1626 Ch (wrongful interference claim against pension provider) Ch Div
    • NBTY Europe v Nutricia 2005 2 Lloyd's Rep 350 (compromise/mistake) Comm ct
    • Granville Baird v Blackden 2004 EWHC 72 QB Simon J (investment bank arrangement fee)
    • 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
    • American Speciality lines v Abbott Laboratories 2003 1 All ER 267 (antisuit injunction) Cresswell J
    • 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 2) 2000 1 Lloyd's Rep (exclusive jurisdiction clause) Rix J
    • Astra v Sphere Drake Insurance 2000 2 Lloyd's 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
  • Qualifications M
    • Deputy High Court Judge (Commercial Court, Queen's Bench and Chancery Divisions)
    • Crown and civil court Recorder
    • Called to the Bar in the Eastern Caribbean (BVI), Cayman, Bahamas, Gibraltar, and Brunei for particular cases
    • Called to the Bar in Hong Kong as full member
    • Board Member, Bar Standards Board 2006 to 2011
    • Chair, Standards Committee of Bar Standards Board 2006 to 2011
    • Worldwide Chair, World Athletics  Disciplinary Tribunal
    • Chair Member, National Anti-Doping Panel
    • Tennis Integrity Board Anti-Corruption Hearing Officer
    • Chair member, FA Judicial Panel
    • James Mould Scholar and Bacon Holt and Uthwatt prizewinner, Gray's Inn
    • King's College Cambridge 1974-77 (first class honours in Classics)
    • University College School, Hampstead (Scholar)
  • Publications M

    Documentary Evidence 1st ed 1985, 14th ed 2021

    Conflicts of Interest 1st ed 2000, 6th ed 2020

    Phipson on Evidence (editor with others) 20th ed 2021

    Competition Litigation (contributor) 1st ed 2010, 2nd ed 2020

    Documentary Evidence in Hong Kong 1st ed 2015, 2nd ed 2020

  • Directory Quotes M
    •  "He is sharp, focused and always has the bigger picture in mind. Exceptional on his feet." (Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2022)
    • "Outstanding on his feet and a pleasure to work with." (Chambers & Partners 2022)
    • "He has a very strong reputation, particularly for specialist advice on legal professional privilege." (Chambers & Partners 2022)
    • "Very clear and robust in his advice, but he is also an excellent listener who takes on board matters raised by other members of the team, regardless of seniority." (Legal 500 2022)
    • "A very detail-minded barrister with good memory of all the details, which is important to find the inconsistencies of the other side." (Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2021)
    • "He is an extremely talented, with lots of knowledge in his mind - a global barrister who can share global experiences and knowledge to analyse the intercontinental conflicts in law among different countries," (Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2021)
    • "A top name for cases with a lot of documentary evidence." "He's very user-friendly, he masters the detail in a case and he really understands the client's points of pressure." (Chambers & Partners 2021)
    • "He is very effective and has good judgement." (Chambers & Partners 2021)
    • "A terrific silk and brilliant to work with." (Legal 500 2021)
    • "He has seen it all before so there is sophistication and nuance in his approach, which really produces results."  (Legal 500 2021)
    • "Charles Hollander QC is acclaimed for his advocacy in civil fraud claims, where his expertise includes freezing injunctions and asset tracing." (Who's Who Legal - UK Bar: Civil Fraud 2020)
    • “Interviewees further note that, within a "wide breadth of commercial knowledge," he displays particularly finely-honed skill in competition and conflict of interest cases and those involving especially complex documentation or heard at the appellate level. They also testify extensively to his "rare clarity of expression" and "very detailed and meticulous cross-examinations," one observing: "His advocacy is forceful, and yet you can feel the gentleness of a London silk."”
      (Chambers Asia Pacific 2020, Hong Kong, Commercial Dispute Resolution) 
    • "He very quickly gets up to speed, he's good with clients and he understands the wider commercial issues." "He's an excellent advocate and an acknowledged expert on documentary evidence." (Chambers & Partners UK & Global 2020)
    • "An experienced silk who is admitted to practice at both the Hong Kong and UK Bars. As part of his wide-ranging commercial practice, he frequently takes on professional negligence cases involving solicitors' firms. He has particular specialist expertise in issues surrounding professional privilege and conflicts of interest." "He is seriously good opposition; he comes to a case with fresh arguments which people haven't thought of before." "He is a very effective and knowledgeable silk." (Chambers & Partners 2020)
    • "He masters new factual material with ease and has a calm and effective approach to case preparation." (The Legal 500 2020)
    • Charles Hollander QC is a “big hitter in the market” who “can cut through to the heart of the matter at hand”, most notably when it comes to search orders, asset tracing and freezing injunctions. (Who's Who Legal - UK Bar: Civil Fraud 2019)
    • "A delight to work with; in addition to being an excellent lawyer, he is very well liked by clients." "The master of disclosure issues and privilege, he's a good trial lawyer and a fine cross-examiner." (Chambers & Partners UK & Global 2019)
    • "He is very experienced." "He is very knowledgeable. Thorough but practical, and willing to respond very quickly in an emergency." (Chambers & Partners 2019)
    • "Massively experienced." (Chambers & Partners 2019)
    • "An excellent technical lawyer and a persuasive advocate." (The Legal 500 2018-19)
    • "He gives good advice in difficult areas, where judgement is needed as well as a good grasp of the law." (The Legal 500 2018-19)
    • "Brick Court Chambers’ Charles Hollander QC is also admitted to the Hong Kong Bar, where he is active in various disputes." "Excellent and robust – able to turn things around when the judiciary is not with you." (The Legal 500 2018-19 Asia Pacific: The English Bar - Commercial)
    • "He's candid on the prospects of a case, not overly cautious, and he doesn't beat around the bush." "He is an acknowledged expert on documentary evidence." (Chambers & Partners 2018)
    • "A go-to silk on heavyweight commercial disputes and claims involving discrete conflict or confidentiality issues." "Charming and highly able." (Chambers & Partners 2018)
    • "A highly experienced sport lawyer," who is "clear and decisive in his approach." (Chambers & Partners 2018)
    • "Seen as the leading lawyer on conflicts by many firms." (The Legal 500 2017)
    • "Charles has an excellent understanding of sports law and a great feel for tactics and the wider picture. He has great authority but remains highly approachable." (Chambers & Partners 2017)
    • "He has the ability to provide focused and practical solutions." "He is massively persuasive; it's very clear from a very early stage that he knows what he's talking about." (Chambers & Partners 2017)
    • "A sound, methodical thinker who is good at getting the court to listen to what he has to say." "He is good to work with, an excellent advocate and an acknowledged expert on documentary evidence." (Chambers & Partners 2017)
    • "A truly great and genuine team player suited to complex, large legal team litigation." (The Legal 500 2016)
    • "Experienced in a wide range of sports matters, including tennis, football and cricket." (The Legal 500 2016)
    • “He is incisive, flexible and good to work with. He is an excellent advocate and the acknowledged expert on documentary evidence." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
    • "Charles is naturally authoritative and unbelievably clever, but not a grandstander - he is very methodical and sensible." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
    • "Charles Hollander is first-rate for difficult claims against professionals. He has a good manner with clients in testing circumstances, he is strong on devising strategies and has a comprehensive knowledge of commercial and professional law. His judicial experience enables him to give authoritative and helpful advice on how defences are likely to be received. He inspires confidence and works extremely well with the solicitor teams on cases." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
    • “A silk held in high esteem by solicitors, who has significant courtroom presence and intellectual ability and a reputation for being very easy to work with. “ (Chambers & Partners 2015)
    • “He has an intricate mind and can devise points that few others can think of” (Chambers & Partners 2015)
    • “Ascends to the top tier of commercial silks after receiving outstanding feedback for a broad commercial and chancery practice. He is noted for sector specialisms pertaining to the media and sports industries.” (Chambers & Partners 2014)
    • "Charles is a formidable advocate and his intellect and ability to distil down complex issues are second to none." "A class act, brilliant on his feet and able to answer complex legal questions in a concise and user-friendly style." (Chambers & Partners 2014)
    • “The ‘phenomenal’ Charles Hollander QC at Brick Court Chambers handles Formula 1, boxing and football cases” (The Legal 500 2013)
    • "An extremely impressive advocate who is very thorough and handles matters with fantastic skill." Sources applaud his "piercingly crisp" advocacy, and use him for matters of great import." (Chambers & Partners 2013)
    • "A cerebral silk and a strong advocate" who is well loved by instructing solicitors as he forms "precise and steady views." He "knows everything there is to know about disclosure" and is "excellent with clients." "When we've got something really tricky we know we can count on him," say his devotees." (Chambers & Partners 2013)
    • "an absolute pleasure to work with and is always absolutely on top of his game." Sources are full of praise for his "direct, incisive advice - he doesn't hedge his bets." (Chambers & Partners 2011)
    • "renowned for possessing a formidable intellect and "a really good way of putting across complicated arguments in simple terms." "(Chambers & Partners 2011)
    • Universally known as a "great performer," he "always delivers incredibly erudite, balanced and well-polished arguments." (Chambers & Partners 2010)
    • brings a fantastic cerebral approach to cases, is extremely clever and preps cases thoroughly from a very early stage." (Chambers & Partners 2010)
    • "Authoritative and commercial,"; "a superb leader who shows an immense amount of tact and diplomacy in sensitive cases." (Chambers & Partners 2009)