Practice

Joseph has a litigation-focussed commercial chancery practice, which includes advice, drafting and representation in matters across 4 Stone Buildings’ core practice areas. He is instructed both on his own and (in high-profile and high-value cases) led by senior barristers both in and out of Chambers, appearing in both the Commercial Court and the Chancery Division as well as the County Courts.

He is ranked as a leading junior in the 2020 edition of Chambers and Partners, being described as a “talented junior who is building a considerable reputation among the Commercial Chancery Bar and “…a great junior barrister who is user-friendly, impressive on the law and robust on his feet. Previous editions have described him as … one that the market should keep its eye on due to his ability to work hard, take on responsibility and deliver when under pressure” and a barrister who “…has an excellent grasp of the issues and is a pleasure to work with.

Practice areas

Chancery: commercial

First ranked as a leading commercial chancery junior in the 2016 edition of Chambers and Partners and described in the 2020 edition as “building a considerable reputation among the Commercial Chancery Bar…, Joseph has extensive experience in commercial chancery litigation and advice including fraud and asset recovery. Joseph acts in a broad range of litigation and advisory work in this field, appearing in both the Commercial Court and the Chancery Division as well as the County Courts, including in relation to:

  • the protection of minority shareholders’ interests through s. 994 petitions, derivative claims, just and equitable winding-up petitions and (for offshore jurisdictions) oppression claims;
  • claims for breaches of fiduciary duties against directors;
  • the construction of commercial contracts; and
  • the effect of equitable and legal assignments.

Examples of Joseph’s current instructions and recent experience of note in this area include:

  • Acting as sole counsel for the potential claimant in protecting his interests as a minority shareholder in a Delaware-incorporated company and its wholly owned English subsidiary.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the claimant purchaser of a commodity trading business on its claim arising out of a share sale and purchase agreement.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the respondent in opposing a charge-holder’s application to release monies held in escrow to compensate relevant parties in respect of any interests, charges or claims in various properties following the closure of the titles thereto.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the petitioning contributory on her petition to wind up a deadlocked company on the just and equitable ground.
  • Acting (with Alan Maclean QC) for the applicant real estate companies on their application for urgent injunctive relief and their claim for consequential damages in respect of the entry of unilateral notices against their £2 billion property portfolio.
  • Advising (with Jonathan Hall QC) the Crown Prosecution Service, Proceeds of Crime Unit, in relation to an investigation into suspected fraud and money laundering of over £1 billion as to various trust / concealment / evasion / corporate veil issues.
  • Acting (with John Brisby QC) for the defendants in opposing a substantial claim pursuant to s. 188 Law of Property Act 1925 to divide a highly valuable collection of Chinese porcelain held as tenants in common.
  • Acting (with David Cavender QC and Conn MacEvilly) for the defendant in relation to a quantum enquiry into an account of profits arising out of a breach of fiduciary duty related to the alleged commercialisation of ultrasound oilfield technology.
  • Acting (with Stephen Atherton QC and Andrew Clutterbuck) for the defendant in opposing the imposition of fiduciary duties allegedly owed to the claimant as part of a joint venture.
Insolvency & restructuring

Described in the 2020 edition of Chambers and Partners as “…extremely knowledgeable in relation to the technicalities of insolvency law…” and having “…notable capabilities in contentious insolvency…”, much of Joseph’s practice contains an element of insolvency law. He appears regularly (on his own and led) in the High Court and the County Courts in relation to both corporate insolvency and bankruptcy, advising and acting for petitioners, insolvency practitioners and debtors in winding-up and bankruptcy proceedings, including in relation to:

  • applications for injunctions to restrain presentation/advertisement of winding-up petitions;
  • applications to set aside statutory demands;
  • applications for validation orders;
  • applications for rescission/annulment;
  • potential claims against former directors under the IA 1986, including phoenix provisions; and
  • alternatives to compulsory liquidation or bankruptcy, including CVLs, MVLs, CVAs.

His experience ranges from high-value cases, such as acting for the debtor in Edgeworth Capital (Luxembourg) Sarl v Maud, which, were the petitioners to succeed on all issues, would be one of the biggest bankruptcies in English legal history, to representing and advising creditors, debtors and insolvency practitioners in relation to both corporate insolvency and bankruptcy matters, work that he typically handles on his own. Examples of Joseph’s current instructions and recent experience of note in this area include:

  • Acting (with Peter Arden QC) for the respondent debtor, Glenn Maud, in continuing to oppose a bankruptcy petition on an alleged debt of £51 million presented in 2015 by joint petitioners, an investment company financed by the Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund and, Edgeworth, a company associated with Robert Tchenguiz.
  • Acting as sole counsel for liquidators in relation to potential claims against former directors in respect of various transactions in the total sum of over £4 million, including on their successful application for orders for production of documents and information and examination pursuant to ss. 235 & 236, IA 1986.
  • Acting (with Michael Fealy QC) for Irish businessman, Derek Quinlan, both (1) in his claim for an injunction restraining Edgeworth, a company associated with Robert Tchenguiz, from pursuing a bankruptcy petition on a petition debt of approximately €119 million, and (2) in opposing the petition itself.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the respondent former liquidators in opposing the current liquidators’ claim for misfeasance and the repayment of various fees and disbursements which they allege were paid without the consent of the floating charge-holder in breach of rr. 4.218A-E, IR 1986.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the respondent company, a special purpose vehicle for the construction of an anaerobic digestion facility, on its application to restrain advertisement and strike out a winding-up petition.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the defendant former director and shareholder of an insolvent company, in relation to a claim an invoice discounting provider for repayment of sums advanced to the company on grounds of fraudulent misrepresentation and as to a possible claim pursuant to s. 212, IA 1986.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the respondent trustee in bankruptcy in relation to the bankrupt’s application to challenge the trustee’s remuneration and expenses pursuant to r. 18.35, IR 2016.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the claimant law firm in its attempts to recover substantial unpaid fees through applications under s.423, IA 1986.
  • Advising (with Jonathan Hall QC) the Crown Prosecution Service, Proceeds of Crime Unit, as to the impact upon a worldwide restraint order of the appointment of administrators over the suspect’s companies.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the petitioning solicitors firm on its bankruptcy petition against a former client who was a citizen of Pakistan and was disputing the English court’s jurisdiction.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the wife of the bankrupt former director of a company in liquidation in opposing claims against her in multiple proceedings pursuant to ss. 239, 339 and 423, IA 1986.
Commercial dispute resolution

Described in the 2020 edition of Chambers and Partners as having “…notable capabilities in … commercial litigation…” and in an earlier edition as “good at commercial disputes generally”, Joseph advises and acts in a broad range of disputes in this area. Examples of Joseph’s current instructions and recent experience of note include:

  • Acting as sole counsel for the claimant provider of business services on its claim for damages on account of the defendant solicitors’ firm repudiatory breach of a 36-month £250,000 contract to upgrade its scanning capabilities.
  • Acting for the defendant PLC in opposing the claimants’ claim in respect of £4 million earnout payments allegedly due under a share sale and purchase agreement.
  • Acting for the defendant Canadian technology and professional services provider in opposing the claimant’s US$9 million claim for damages for alleged breach of contract in failing to provide various services related to the delivery of billing and customer care solutions.
  • Acting (with George Bompas QC) on the claimant’s US$8 million claim for unpaid fees under an agency agreement for the development of business importing liquified natural gas into Egypt.
  • Acting as sole counsel for a former shareholder in a company which operated an internet flights comparison website on its claim for deferred consideration in excess of £12 million following the reorganisation and sale of the company for £30 million.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the claimant on this substantial claim arising out of a share sale and purchase agreement to purchase the entire shareholding of a commodity trading business in Dubai.
  • Advising the proposed claimant in relation to its potential claim against its investment manager for damages in excess of US$2 million on account of losses suffered on its investment portfolio.
  • Acting for the claimant, which had been engaged as the defendants’ agent on the sale of a property for in excess of £19 million, on its claim for damages on account of the defendants’ failure to pay commission.
  • Acting (with John Brisby QC) for a former shareholder in a company in relation to its claim for deferred consideration in excess of £4 million pursuant to a share sale and purchase agreement.
  • Acting (with Jonathan Crow QC and Sam Neaman) for the defendant in a £250 million claim for damages, equitable compensation and an account of profits arising out of the sale of the Thistle Hotel Group.
  • Acting (with Anthony de Garr Robinson QC and Andrew Clutterbuck) for the claimant, various Aberdeen investments funds, on their claim for damages in deceit against Satyam arising out of a fraud (described as ‘India’s Enron’), including on Satyam’s application for a stay of proceedings on forum conveniens grounds – while judgment was pending, the parties agreed to settle the claim for US$68 million.
Company law

Joseph has a strong company law practice, with particular experience in shareholder disputes, unfair prejudice petitions (s.994 petitions), just and equitable winding-up and substantial claims against directors and shareholders (for example questions of breach of duty, of directors’ authority (actual or apparent), and of return of dividends). Current and recent instructions include:

  • Acting (with Andrew de Mestre QC) for the defendant PLC, which owns £4 billion of London real estate, in opposing a claim by shareholder, Hong Kong billionaire, Samuel Tak Lee, that a non pre-emptive placing by which Shaftesbury raised £265 million, was carried out for an improper purpose.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the potential claimant in protecting his interests as a minority shareholder in a Delaware-incorporated company and its wholly owned English subsidiary. Advising a shareholder in an insurance brokers on a potential s. 994 petition on account of the majority shareholders’ actions in restructuring the business.
  • Advising a company on potential breaches of ss. 691-694 Companies Act 2006 in purchasing its own shares.
  • Advising a director and 50% shareholder of a company as to how to protect his interests following the death of the only other director and 50% shareholder.
  • Acting as sole counsel for a company in relation to its claim against a former director and shareholder for breach of director’s duties and breach of non-compete provisions contained in a shareholders agreement.
Banking & finance

Joseph has advised on and appeared in relation to numerous disputes relating to banking and financial services, including the mis-selling of investment products (particularly complex derivative products) to individuals and SMEs and large-scale litigation involving multi-national investment banks. Recent experience in this area includes:

  • Acting (with Richard Hill QC) for the proposed claimant in relation to his claim against a DFSA-regulated bank for over US$4.5 million in damages on account of the bank’s misrepresentations and/or breaches of contractual and/or tortious and/or fiduciary duties as part of the banker-customer relationship.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the proposed claimant in relation to its proposed claim against its investment manager for damages in excess of US$2 million on account of losses suffered on its investment portfolio.
  • Advising an internet television provider, the defendant to a claim by an FCA-registered lender for repayment of monies lent, as to available defences and potential counterclaims including for damages on account of the lender’s alleged breach of contract in refusing to advance further monies.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the claimant stockbroker in its attempts to recover trading debts from the defendant investor – key issues included whether the defendant was an ‘execution only’ client, whether trading was authorised and whether there had been an unauthorised extension of credit to the defendant.
  • Acting as sole counsel representing the defendant trustee of a pension fund in relation to a claim brought by the fund’s stockbroker arising from a missed margin call in respect of put options in Northern Rock.
  • Being seconded to a major international bank to assist with its review of its sales of interest rate hedging products, including structured collars, swaps, simple collars and cap products, to unsophisticated customers.
  • Assisting Sharif Shivji in a two-week trial before Gloster J in the Commercial Court acting for a hedge fund in a test case about the duties owed by a bank in closing out a customer’s portfolio following a missed margin call.
Fraud – civil

In circumstances where fraud does not lend itself to strict categorisation in particular practice areas or divisions, many of the matters on which Joseph is instructed, whether in the Chancery Division, the Commercial Court or in offshore jurisdictions, contain serious allegations of civil fraud and dishonesty. Examples of Joseph’s experience involving such allegations include:

  • Acting (with John Brisby QC) for the additional defendants in their application in the DIFC to strike out Barclays’ claim for a contribution in respect of the claimant’s claim against Barclays in deceit and/or negligence and/or unlawful conspiracy for damages of over US$24 million.
  • Acting (with Anthony de Garr Robinson QC and Andrew Clutterbuck) for the Aberdeen claimants who claimed damages in deceit against Indian company, Satyam, on the basis that they had been fraudulently induced (by means of a fraud described as ‘India’s Enron’) to purchase shares in Satyam in India – the claim was ultimately settled for US$68 million.
  • Advising (with Jonathan Hall QC) the Crown Prosecution Service, Proceeds of Crime Unit in relation to an investigation into suspected fraud and money laundering of over £1 billion.
  • Acting as sole counsel for N, a Russian national on his claim in unjust enrichment and for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the alleged actions of P, another Russian national, in taking a secret commission and in fraudulently diverting sums from N’s personal bank account in respect of a number of property transactions.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the sixth defendant on the defendants’ application to strike out a claim, which alleged fraudulent acts or omissions on the part of each of the defendants including substantive acts of dishonesty and/or fraud and the misappropriation of funds, and for an extended civil restraint order.
Alternative dispute resolution

Joseph also has experience of commercial arbitration and mediation. Examples of current and recent instructions in this area, which is by its nature confidential, include:

  • Advising and acting (with George Bompas QC) on the claimant’s US$8 million claim under LCIA Arbitration Rules for unpaid fees under an agency agreement.
  • Advising and acting for the potential claimant in connection with arbitration proceedings under CIETAC rules in Beijing, arising out of a contractual dispute.
  • Advising and acting as sole counsel for the claimant BVI investment vehicle on its arbitration proceedings under ICC rules in London against its Cayman Islands investment manager for damages on account of breaches of its tortious and contractual duties.
  • Advising and acting as sole counsel for the defendant in connection with arbitration proceedings under ICC rules in London arising out of a contractual dispute.
  • Advising and acting as sole counsel for the defendant trustee of a pension fund in a mediation in relation to a claim brought by the fund’s stockbroker arising from a missed margin call in respect of put options in Northern Rock.
  • Advising and acting as sole counsel for the claimant agent in a mediation on its claim for damages on account of the defendants’ failure to pay commission on the sale of a property for in excess of £19 million.
  • Being instructed by the Ministry of Defence as part of the counsel team in a multi-million pound arbitration in London relating to marine and terrestrial construction disputes (with Sarah Hannaford QC and Piers Stansfield).
Offshore litigation

A large proportion of the cases on which Joseph is instructed have an offshore element, in particular litigation involving offshore trust and corporate structures. In addition to acting and advising in relation to such matters, Joseph has appeared on a number of occasions in the courts of the Dubai International Financial Centre (“DIFC”), being a registered advocate with rights of audience in that jurisdiction. Examples of current and recent instructions in relation to such matters include:

  • Acting as sole counsel for the claimants on their substantial claim in the DIFC arising out of a share sale and purchase agreement to purchase the entire shareholding of a commodity trading business.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the applicant company on its application to set aside an immediate judgment order enforcing a Singapore judgment in the DIFC.
  • Acting (with Richard Hill QC) for the proposed claimant in relation to his potential claim in the DIFC for over US$4.5 million in damages on account of a DFSA-regulated bank’s misrepresentations and/or breaches of contractual and/or tortious and/or fiduciary duties as part of the banker-customer relationship.
  • Acting (with Orlando Fraser QC) on behalf of the protector of two Nevis trusts on the trustee’s application for directions.
  • Acting (with John Brisby QC) for the additional defendants in their application in the DIFC to strike out Barclays’ claim for a contribution in respect of the claimant’s claim against Barclays in deceit and/or negligence and/or unlawful conspiracy for damages of over US$24 million.
  • Advising as sole counsel the proposed claimant BVI company in relation to its proposed claim against its investment manager, a Cayman company, for damages in excess of US$2 million on account of losses suffered on its investment portfolio.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the defendant Canadian company in relation to the claimant Maldives’ company’s £8 million claim for damages on account of the defendant’s alleged breach and/or anticipatory breach and/or repudiatory breach of contract.
  • Acting (with John Brisby QC) for a former shareholder in a BVI company in relation to its claim for deferred consideration in excess of £4 million pursuant to a share sale and purchase agreement.
  • Acting as sole counsel for the claimant, who was engaged as the defendant BVI company’s agent on its claim for damages on account of the defendants’ failure to pay commission in breach of an agency agreement.

Additional info

Cases of Interest
  • Maud, Re [2020] EWHC 1469 (Ch); [2020] B.P.I.R. 903 (insolvency; bankruptcy petitions; costs): acting as sole counsel for the debtor at a consequential hearing before Snowden J – issues included whether, where there were two bankruptcy petitions and a bankruptcy order was made on the first but not the second, the costs of the second should be paid as a bankruptcy expense.
  • Maud, Re [2020] EWHC 974 (Ch); [2020] B.P.I.R. 903 (insolvency; bankruptcy petitions; abuse of process; class interest): acting as sole counsel for the debtor at 5-day adjourned hearing before Snowden J of a bankruptcy petition presented in 2015 by the petitioner (a company associated with Robert Tchenguiz) on an undisputed debt of over €50 million – issues included (i) whether the petition should be struck out as an abuse of process; and (ii) what order was in the interests of creditors owed in excess of €250 million.
  • Saboowala v (1) Nair (2) Veluthedath (3) RAG Foodstuff Trading LLC (CFI 037/2017; 17 April 2019) (commercial dispute resolution; offshore – DIFC; jurisdiction) – acted as sole counsel for the applicant on full-day hearing of contested amendment application which raised complex issues of jurisdiction.
  • Reliance Wholesale Ltd v AM2PM Feltham Ltd [2019] EWHC 1079 (Ch) (insolvency; appeal; costs): appeared as sole counsel for the appellant/petitioner before Morgan J on successful appeal against decision not to award costs on dismissal of winding-up petition upon payment in full.
  • Maud, Re [2019] EWHC 398 (Ch) (insolvency; disclosure): appeared before Snowden J for the applicant on successful application for specific disclosure in insolvency proceedings.
  • Deansgate 123 LLP v Workman [2019] EWHC 2 (Ch); [2019] B.P.I.R. 341 (insolvency; Henderson v Henderson abuse of process): appeared as sole counsel for the claimant before HHJ Eyre QC in opposing the defendants’ applications to strike out the claimant’s applications under s.423, IA 1986.
  • Passport Special Opportunities Fund, LP v ARY Communications Ltd et al (CFI 039/2016; 29 October 2018) (offshore – DIFC; enforcement; jurisdiction): appeared as sole counsel for the applicant on application to set aside immediate judgment order enforcing a Singapore judgment.
  • Aabar Block SARL v Maud [2018] EWHC 1414 (Ch) (insolvency; bankruptcy petitions; collateral purpose; class interest; joint petitioners): appeared (with Andrew Clutterbuck QC) before Snowden J on the adjourned hearing of the bankruptcy petition. Held that a collateral purpose which diminished the value of a debtor’s assets should be considered on class question and that where joint petitioners disagreed on seeking a bankruptcy order, the power of the court to act on a claim by only one of the petitioners was dependent upon him showing that the other was acting in breach of trust.
  • Hussein v Hussein; Re Haus of Vanity Limited [2017] EWHC 2615 (Ch) (commercial chancery; insolvency; winding-up petitions; just & equitable ground): appeared as sole counsel for the petitioning creditor/contributory on a winding-up petition on the just & equitable ground heard over two days before Chief Registrar Briggs.
  • Aabar Block SARL v Maud [2016] EWHC 2175 (Ch) [2016] Bus. L.R. 1243; [2016] B.P.I.R. 1486 (insolvency; bankruptcy petition; appeal; collateral purpose; class interest): appeared (with Andrew Clutterbuck QC) for the debtor before Snowden J on his successful appeal over two days against a bankruptcy order – issues included whether, once it had been determined that a petition was not an abuse of process, the motives of the petitioner in seeking a bankruptcy order had any relevance.
  • Aabar Block SARL v Maud [2016] EWHC 1319 (Ch) (insolvency; bankruptcy petition; stay pending appeal): appeared (with Andrew Clutterbuck QC) before Snowden J on the debtor’s successful urgent application for a stay of a bankruptcy order pending appeal.
  • Reynolds Porter Chamberlain v Senator Khan [2017] I.L.Pr. 13; [2016] B.P.I.R. 722 (insolvency; bankruptcy petition; jurisdiction; residency): appeared as sole counsel for the petitioning firm of solicitors – the principal issue in dispute on which there was cross-examination was whether the debtor, a citizen of Pakistan, had been ordinarily resident, or had had a place of residence, in the jurisdiction.
  • Edwards v Panesar [2016] EWHC 1944 (Ch) (insolvency; application for possession and sale; application to set aside; appeal): instructed by bankruptcy trustees in relation to possession and sale application and appeared before Henderson J on application to set aside an order of Nugee J by which the trustees’ appeal against a refusal of relief from sanction had been struck out.
  • Butler v Butler [2016] EWHC 1793 (Ch); [2016] 4 W.L.R. 133; [2016] W.T.L.R. 1519 (commercial chancery; tenants in common): instructed (with John Brisby QC) on the 8-day trial before HHJ Simon Barker QC of this substantial claim pursuant to s. 188 Law of Property Act 1925 to divide a valuable collection of Chinese porcelain held as tenants in common.
  • Global Energy Horizons Corp v Gray [2015] EWHC 2232 (Ch) (commercial chancery; account of profits; breach of fiduciary duty; oilfield technology): represented (with David Cavender QC and Conn MacEvilly) the defendant at a five-week quantum enquiry into an account of profits arising out of a breach of fiduciary duty related to the alleged commercialisation of ultrasound technology for application to oilfields before Asplin J.
  • Aabar Block SARL v Maud [2015] EWHC 3681 (Ch); [2016] B.P.I.R. 2271486 (insolvency; bankruptcy petition; collateral purpose; class interest): appeared (with Peter Arden QC and Herman Boeddinghaus) for the debtor on the hearing of a bankruptcy petition – issues included whether the petitioners had an ulterior motive.
  • Corinth Pipeworks S.A. v Barclays Bank PLC v (1) Afras Limited (2) Radhakrishnan Nanda Kumar [2010] DIFC CFI 024 (21 April 2014) (commercial dispute resolution; civil fraud; offshore – DIFC): appeared (with John Brisby QC) in DIFC for the Part 21 defendants in their application to strike out Barclays’ claim for a contribution in respect of the claimant’s claim against Barclays in deceit and/or negligence and/or unlawful conspiracy for damages of over US$24 million.
  • Global Energy Horizons Corp v Gray [2012] EWHC 3703 (Ch) (commercial chancery; breach of fiduciary duty; joint venture; oilfield technology): representing (with Stephen Atherton QC and Andrew Clutterbuck) the defendant in a 12-day trial before Vos J concerning the imposition of fiduciary duties allegedly owed to the claimant as part of a joint venture.
  • Aberdeen Global v Satyam Computer Services Ltd (Comm) (commercial dispute resolution; banking & finance; civil fraud; jurisdiction): acted (with Anthony de Garr Robinson QC and Andrew Clutterbuck) for the Aberdeen claimants who claimed damages in deceit against Satyam on grounds they had been fraudulently induced (by means of a fraud described as ‘India’s Enron’) to purchase shares in Satyam in India, including on Satyam’s application for a stay of proceedings on forum conveniens grounds heard over four days in the Commercial Court before Gloster J. While judgment was pending, the parties agreed to settle the claim for US$68 million.
What the directories and judges say

Chambers UK Bar 2020 – Chancery: Commercial, Band 4, & Chambers Global 2020 – Dispute Resolution: Commercial Chancery, Band 4:

“A talented junior who is building a considerable reputation among the Commercial Chancery Bar. He is regularly instructed on a wide array of matters, including notable capabilities in contentious insolvency and commercial litigation.”

“Joe is a great junior barrister who is user-friendly, impressive on the law and robust on his feet.”

“He’s thorough, tenacious and extremely knowledgeable in relation to the technicalities of insolvency law.”

Chambers UK Bar 2017 – Chancery: Commercial, Up and Coming:

“Promising junior with experience of handling insolvency and general commercial litigation in the Chancery Division. He represents clients in UK-based and international cases.”

“He has an excellent grasp of the issues and is a pleasure to work with.”

Chambers UK Bar 2016 – Chancery: Commercial, Up and Coming::

“A well-regarded junior who is building a wide-ranging and impressive practice.”

 “He has taken significant instructions in the areas of insolvency and is good at commercial disputes generally.”

 “Certainly one that the market should keep its eye on due to his ability to work hard, take on responsibility and deliver when under pressure.”

Career & appointments

Member of the Commercial Bar Association

Member of the Chancery Bar Association

Associate Member of the Insolvency Lawyers’ Association

Registered advocate with rights of audience before the courts of the DIFC, Dubai

Education & awards

MA (Oxon)
GDL, City University, London

Middle Temple: Queen Mother’s Scholarship (2009); Lord Diplock Scholarship (2008)
Oriel College, Oxford: Academic Scholarship (2006)