Karl Anderson

Karl Anderson

Call 2017

Overview

Karl maintains a broad commercial chancery practice with a particular focus on banking and financial services disputes, civil fraud, commercial litigation (including offshore disputes) and insolvency. Ranked as a ‘Rising Star’ in the fields of civil fraud and insolvency in the Legal 500, Karl is frequently instructed as part of a wider counsel team in complex, heavy commercial litigation, but is equally happy acting as sole counsel in both the High Court and County Court.

Prior to joining Chambers, Karl read law at Queens’ College, Cambridge and studied for the BCL at Christ Church, Oxford, before completing the BPTC at BPP. During this time he was awarded numerous scholarships and prizes, including the prize for best performance on the Principles of Civil Procedure module on the BCL. Karl maintains an academic interest in law and has published extensively on topics within his practice areas. In addition to various articles and case notes, Karl is a contributing editor to Zuckerman on Civil Procedure 4th Ed. (2021) (Sweet & Maxwell) and a contributor to Loose and Griffiths on Liquidators 9th Ed. (LexisNexis 2019).

Areas of expertise

  • Banking & Finance

    Karl has extensive experience of banking and financial services litigation. His experience extends to acting on behalf of both banks and financial service providers on the one hand and their customers on the other. His previous instructions have ranged from representing banks in respect of claims to recover loans, to advising on disputes arising out of complex financial services products.

    Some examples of recent cases include:

    • Advising the shareholder of a listed company in administration in relation to the shareholder’s ability to prove an inchoate financial services claim under FSMA 2000 in the administration.
    • Bank of Singapore Ltd v Marj Holding Ltd and Ors CFI-090-2022 – Karl (led by Richard Hill KC) was instructed by a Cayman Islands company and a UAE national in respect of a c. $50 million claim brought against them by the DIFC branch of a Singapore bank in respect of sums allegedly due under a loan agreement. The proceedings involved a counterclaim for compensation for an alleged breach by the bank of its regulatory duties under the DFSA Rules.
    • Advising a borrower in relation to his prospects of challenging the terms of a bridging loan for breach of the general prohibition under s.19 FSMA 2000.
    • Autonomy Corporation Ltd v Lynch [2022] EWHC 1178 (Ch) – a c.$8 billion civil fraud claim, brought inter alia under Schedule 10A of FSMA 2000, involving a 10 month trial which was described by the trial judge as “amongst the longest and most complex in English legal history”, and which featured as one of The Lawyer’s “Top 20 Cases of 2019”.
    • IDBI v Mabani Delma General Contracting Co LLC and Ors CFI-070-2018 – a c. $8 million debt claim by a DIFC registered bank in respect of a loan made to and secured by various Dubai and Abu Dhabi based companies. Karl (led by Sharif Shivji KC) successfully obtained an order striking out the Defence and entering judgment for the claimant bank.
    • A multi-million pound fraud claim brought in the Chancery Division arising out of the sale of financial services products and which involved applications for worldwide freezing orders, proprietary injunctions and criminal restraint orders under POCA 2002. Karl spent a significant period of time acting as sole counsel for one of the defendants (who faced claims of c. £40 million), including drafting pleadings and representing him at various CMCs against and alongside silks acting for other parties.
    • Acting (with Sharif Shivji) for a financial service provider in relation to claims for declarations of non-liability.
    • Advising a digital bank in relation to its money laundering obligations under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
  • Chancery: Commercial

    Karl has been instructed on a wide array of commercial chancery cases. He has appeared, as part of a larger counsel team, in some of the most complex and high profile cases to be issued in the Chancery Division in recent years. At the same time, Karl is equally comfortable when instructed as sole counsel, and has successfully represented clients in commercial chancery matters in both the High Court and the County Court when acting on his own.

    Some notable examples include:

    • Sahota v Sohal and Ors [2022] EWHC 2459 (Ch) – a High Court trial in which Karl (acting as sole counsel) successfully argued that various deeds of trust were not shams or illusory trusts and validly created an equitable interest in a high value London property in favour of the Second Defendant. The case also included a claim that the deeds of trust were transactions defrauding creditors under s. 423 IA 1986.
    • Autonomy Corporation Ltd v Lynch [2022] EWHC 1178 (Ch) – a c.$8 billion civil fraud claim involving a 10 month trial which was described by the trial judge as “amongst the longest and most complex in English legal history”, and which featured as one of The Lawyer’s “Top 20 Cases of 2019”.
    • A multi-million pound fraud claim brought in the Chancery Division arising out of the sale of financial services products and which involved applications for worldwide freezing orders, proprietary injunctions and criminal restraint orders under POCA 2002. Karl spent a significant period of time acting as sole counsel for one of the defendants (who faced claims of c. £40 million), including drafting pleadings and representing him at various CMCs against and alongside silks acting for other parties.
    • General Electric Company v AI Alpine US Bidco Inc [2021] EWHC 45 (Ch) – a Part 8 claim concerning the proper interpretation of a share purchase agreement by which the Claimant agreed to sell its distributed power business to the Defendants for around $3.2bn. Karl, led by Sharif Shivji QC, acted for the Claimant, including in an interim application concerning whether the claim ought to be stayed pending the outcome of an ongoing expert determination process. The decision now represents one of the leading authorities on when the Court will grant declarations concerning the correct approach to an expert determination before the expert’s decision.
    • Successfully resisting (as sole counsel) an application for a worldwide freezing order brought in the Chancery Division against a company domiciled in the Isle of Man. Karl was also subsequently instructed to assist with the substantive claim, which was issued in the Isle of Man.
    • Acting as sole counsel in a claim in the Chancery Division for an account and inquiry in respect of rental profits due to a co-owner of land.
    • An urgent application brought by representatives of the company trading as “UniLad” for an injunction to prevent the sale of the business by the company’s administrators to rival business “LADbible”. Karl (led by John Brisby QC and Alexander Cook) represented the applicants.
  • Commercial Dispute Resolution

    Commercial dispute resolution forms a core part of Karl’s practice. He has been instructed on a wide variety of complex, high-value commercial disputes, many of which have included international elements and questions of jurisdiction, choice of law and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. He has acted both led and unless not only in the Chancery Division, the Commercial Court and London Circuit Commercial Court but also in arbitrations and offshore.

    Some notable examples include:

    • Deinon Insurance Brokers LLC v VWP Waste Processing Ltd – an ongoing London Circuit Commercial Court claim in which Karl (led by John Brisby KC) acts for the Defendant in relation to a claim for repayment of sums allegedly due under an oral loan agreement.
    • GR Sowwah Retail Ltd v Abu Dhabi National Insurance Company PSJC and Ors ADGMCFI-2023-093 and ADGMCFI-2023-115 – two related sets of proceedings arising out of a c. AED 30 million claim brought by a policyholder under a business interruption insurance policy following the closure of a mall in Abu Dhabi during the coronavirus pandemic.
    • JTrust Asia PTE Ltd v Konoshita and Ors CFI-034-2023 – a claim for the recognition and enforcement in the DIFC of two judgments of the Courts of Singapore and the BVI. The judgments arose out of a substantial $200 million fraud committed against the Claimant. Karl (led by David Holloway) was successful in obtaining an order for the recognition and enforcement of those judgments in the DIFC and an order that the Defendants pay the Claimant’s costs on the indemnity basis.
    • An ad-hoc arbitration seated in London in which Karl (led by John Brisby KC) acted for the Defendant in respect of a claim concerning the proper construction of a loan agreement. The arbitration has given rise to various applications under ss. 66, 68 and 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
    • An upcoming three-day trial in the County Court at Central London in which Karl (acting as sole counsel) represents the Claimants in a claim for monies due under the terms of a share purchase agreement, and in which a counterclaim is brought for breach of warranty and fraudulent misrepresentation.
    • Autonomy Corporation Ltd v Lynch [2022] EWHC 1178 (Ch) – a c.$8 billion civil fraud claim involving a 10 month trial which was described by the trial judge as “amongst the longest and most complex in English legal history”, and which featured as one of The Lawyer’s “Top 20 Cases of 2019”.
    • IDBI v Mabani Delma General Contracting Co LLC and Ors CFI-070-2018 – a c. $8 million debt claim by a DIFC registered bank in respect of a loan made to and secured by various Dubai and Abu Dhabi based companies. Karl (led by Sharif Shivji KC) successfully obtained an order striking out the Defence and entering judgment for the claimant bank.
    • General Electric Company v AI Alpine US Bidco Inc [2021] EWHC 45 (Ch) – a Part 8 claim concerning the proper interpretation of a share purchase agreement by which the Claimant agreed to sell its distributed power business to the Defendants for around $3.2bn. Karl, led by Sharif Shivji QC, acted for the Claimant, including in an interim application concerning whether the claim ought to be stayed pending the outcome of an ongoing expert determination process. The decision now represents one of the leading authorities on when the Court will grant declarations concerning the correct approach to an expert determination before the expert’s decision.
    • A multi-million pound fraud claim brought in the High Court arising out of the sale of financial services products and which involved applications for worldwide freezing orders, proprietary injunctions and criminal restraint orders under POCA 2002. Karl spent a significant period of time acting as sole counsel for one of the defendants (who faced claims of c. £40 million), including drafting pleadings and representing him at various CMCs against and alongside silks acting for other parties.
    • Successfully resisting (as sole counsel) an application for a worldwide freezing order brought in the High Court of England and Wales against a company domiciled in the Isle of Man. Karl was also subsequently instructed to assist with the substantive claim, which was issued in the Isle of Man.
    • Mayr v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP, one of The Lawyer’s “Top 20 Cases of 2019.” The case concerned claims by an investment manager against his former solicitors for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of confidence. Karl (led by Jonathan Crow QC and James Knott) represented the Claimant at trial.
  • Company Law

    Karl’s practice spans a wide variety of company law cases. A significant portion of Karl’s company law practice involves advising clients in relation to technical issues arising under a company’s articles of association and the CA 2006 and representing companies in applications or litigation arising in those contexts. Karl’s past instructions have concerned, for example: the registrations of charges (ss. 859A-859Q CA 2006) and applications to rectify the register (s. 1096 CA 2006); the convening of meetings in the event of a deadlock at board and shareholder level (s. 306 CA 2006); applications to rectify a company’s register of members (s. 125 CA 2006); and share buybacks (s. 659 CA 2006).

    In addition, Karl has extensive experience in representing both claimants/petitioners and defendants/respondents in director and shareholder litigation. He has particular expertise in claims against directors for breach of their director’s duties and unfair prejudice petitions under s. 994 CA 2006.

    Examples of recent instructions include:

    • Representing a director in a claim at common law and under s. 388 CA 2006 for delivery up of a company’s accounting records which his co-directors had refused to disclose.
    • Advising a company and majority shareholder in relation to the consequences of a minority shareholder and director’s breach of fiduciary duty.
    • Advising a charge holder in relation to an application to rectify the register under s. 1096 CA 2006 after incorrect documents were filed at Companies House following the execution of a debenture.
    • Representing a majority shareholder in an unfair prejudice petition brought against him under s.994 CA 2006. The petition will involve a preliminary issue trial in relation to the extent of the parties’ respective shareholdings.
    • Representing a private limited company in a claim against one of its directors for breach of duty and breach of confidence.
    • Advising a third party in relation to potential methods of acquiring 100% of the issued share capital of a private limited company in circumstances where the company had adopted complex, bespoke articles in relation to pre-emption rights, share transfers (including compulsory transfers) and drag-along rights.
    • Advising (with Andrew de Mestre QC) a Jersey domiciled company in relation to a shareholder dispute concerning the alleged misuse of confidential information belonging to group companies.
    • Representing (as sole counsel) a defendant director in a claim against him for breach of his director’s duties. The matter included a successful application by Karl for security for costs.
    • Advising a company director on the prospects of appealing a decision in which he had been held to have acted in breach of duty and could not rely on section 1157 of the Companies Act 2006 as a defence.
    • Successfully representing a creditor in an application to extend time to register a charge under s. 859F CA 2006.
  • Fraud: Civil

    Karl is a highly motivated, highly intelligent fraud lawyer, who is already very experienced for his call. He shows excellent judgement and has a rather wonderful polite but firm manner

    Rising star Karl Anderson is particularly focused on civil fraud matters involving both the UK and overseas.’ – Legal 500 (2024).

    Ranked as a ‘Rising Star’ for civil fraud work in the Legal 500, Karl has an extensive civil fraud practice. He has been instructed on a wide variety of fraud disputes: from acting as sole counsel in claims for damages for fraudulent misrepresentation, to being instructed in the $8 billion Autonomy litigation, described by the trial judge as one of the most complex fraud claims in English legal history. Karl’s practice spans the entire spectrum of civil fraud litigation, in terms of complexity, causes of action, value and industries.

    In addition to his trial and appellate work, Karl also has wide-ranging experience in acting for both claimants and defendants at the interim stage in civil fraud disputes, particularly in the context of applications for worldwide freezing orders, proprietary injunctions, disclosure orders, Anton Piller relief and the developing jurisdiction to award imaging orders.

    Examples of notable cases include:

    • JTrust Asia PTE Ltd v Konoshita and Ors CFI-034-2023 – a claim for the recognition and enforcement in the DIFC of two judgments of the Courts of Singapore and the BVI. The judgments arose out of a substantial $200 million fraud committed against the Claimant. Karl (led by David Holloway) was successful in obtaining an order for the recognition and enforcement of those judgments in the DIFC and an order that the Defendants pay the Claimant’s costs on the indemnity basis.
    • Autonomy Corporation Ltd v Lynch [2022] EWHC 1178 (Ch) – a c.$8 billion civil fraud claim involving a 10-month trial which was described by the trial judge as “amongst the longest and most complex in English legal history”, and which featured as one of The Lawyer’s “Top 20 Cases of 2019”.
    • A multi-million pound fraud claim brought in the High Court arising out of the sale of financial services products and which involved applications for worldwide freezing orders, proprietary injunctions and criminal restraint orders under POCA 2002. Karl spent a significant period of time acting as sole counsel for one of the defendants (who faced claims of c. £40 million), including drafting pleadings and representing him at various CMCs against and alongside silks acting for other parties.
    • An upcoming three-day trial in the County Court at Central London in which Karl (acting as sole counsel) represents the Claimants in a claim for monies due under the terms of a share purchase agreement, and in which a counterclaim is brought for breach of warranty and fraudulent misrepresentation.
    • Advising a borrower in relation to a potential claim against a lender for damages for fraudulent misrepresentation following a restructuring of the borrower’s loan.
    • Successfully resisting (as sole counsel) an application for a worldwide freezing order brought in the High Court of England and Wales against a company domiciled in the Isle of Man. Karl was also subsequently instructed to assist with the substantive claim, which was issued in the Isle of Man.
  • Insolvency & Restructuring

    Karl is a skilled and efficient cross-examiner’ – Legal 500 (2024)

    Ranked as a ‘Rising Star’ for insolvency work in the Legal 500 (2024), insolvency disputes have always constituted a significant part of Karl’s practice. His instructions span the entire spectrum of contentious insolvency work: from bankruptcy and winding-up petitions to multi-million pound claims by officeholders in respect of antecedent transactions and everything in between. Karl also has substantial experience in acting in an advisory capacity in the insolvency context: from providing guidance to chargeholders as to their rights to appoint administrators, to advising liquidators in relation to the prospects of successfully bringing claims against former company directors for breach of fiduciary duty.

    Karl is frequently instructed as sole counsel to represent both creditors and debtors in winding-up and bankruptcy proceedings. His practice encompasses all types of disputes and applications which can arise in those contexts, such as: applications (urgent or otherwise) for validation orders under s. 127 IA 1986; disputed debt hearings; and applications to set aside statutory demands (in the bankruptcy context) or to restrain presentation or advertisement of a winding-up petition (in the corporate context).

    In addition, Karl has published extensively on the topic of insolvency law. He is a contributor to the textbook ‘Loose and Griffiths on Liquidators’ 9th Ed (2019). He is also the author of a number of Lexis PSL Practice Notes concerning compulsory winding-up and creditors’ voluntary liquidation, and frequently authors analyses of insolvency cases and answers Q&As as part of LexisNexis’ team of legal experts in Restructuring and Insolvency.

    Some notable examples of recent cases include:

    Antecedent Transaction Litigation

    • Sahota v Sohal and Ors [2022] EWHC 2459 (Ch) – a High Court trial in which Karl (acting as sole counsel) successfully argued that various deeds of trust were not shams or illusory trusts and validly created an equitable interest in a high value London property in favour of the Second Defendant. The case also included a claim that the deeds of trust were transactions defrauding creditors under s. 423 IA 1986.
    • Representing a trustee in bankruptcy in a claim against a third party to reverse transactions at an undervalue under s. 339 IA 1986.
    • Anthony Davidson v DD Caroline Ltd – Acting (as sole counsel) for a company in an application to strike out a claim brought against it in the High Court by a liquidator under s. 127 IA 1986.
    • Advising a former company director in relation to a potential claim against him by the liquidator of his company for causing it to make preference payments in breach of s. 239 IA 1986.

    Insolvency Act Applications

    • Representing the former director of a company in an application brought against her by the company’s liquidator for an order for a private examination under ss. 236 and 237 IA 1986.
    • An application under s. 366 IA 1986 for an inquiry into a bankrupt’s dealings. Karl represented the successful trustee in bankruptcy.
    • An urgent application brought by representatives of the company trading as “UniLad” for an injunction to prevent the sale of the business by the company’s administrators to rival business “LADbible”. Karl (led by John Brisby QC and Alexander Cook) represented the applicants.
    • An application for a block transfer order in relation to the cases of a retiring insolvency practitioner, pursuant to rule 12.36 of the Insolvency Rules 2016.
    • Successfully representing the trustees of a charity in an application for an order under s.320 IA 1986 vesting two freehold properties in the charity following a disclaimer by a trustee in bankruptcy.

    Bankruptcy and Winding-Up Petitions

    • Representing a petitioning creditor in bankruptcy proceedings in respect of a petition debt of c. £1.5 million.
    • Acting for a petitioning creditor and obtaining a bankruptcy order in respect of a petition debt of c. £4.1 million. Karl successfully argued that no adjournment ought to be granted to allow the debtor to put forward IVA proposals.
    • Representing a debtor company in successfully applying for the dismissal of a winding-up petition on the basis that the debtor had a cross-claim against the petitioner which would exceed the petition debt.
    • Successfully resisting an application for an injunction to restrain a creditor from presenting a winding-up petition in respect of a debt for unpaid commercial rent. The application raised issues concerning the interaction between winding-up proceedings and the Commercial Rent (Coronavirus) Act 2022.

    Advisory work

    • Advising the shareholder of a listed company in administration in relation to the shareholder’s ability to prove an inchoate financial services claim under FSMA 2000 in the administration.
    • Advising a floating charge holder as to whether it was entitled to appoint administrators under the terms of a debenture following a potential event of default.
  • Offshore Litigation

    Many of Karl’s cases involve international and cross-border elements and raise questions of jurisdiction, choice of law and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.

    In addition to his extensive experience in litigating multinational disputes before the Courts of England and Wales, Karl is often instructed in proceedings brought in various offshore jurisdictions. Karl is particularly well-versed in disputes brought in the Middle East and frequently appears (both led and unled) before the Courts of the DIFC (where he is registered in Part II of the DIFC’s Register of Legal Practitioners) and the ADGM. Karl also has experience acting as sole counsel and as part of a wider counsel team in proceedings in other jurisdictions such as Guernsey, the BVI and the Isle of Man.

    Karl’s clerks are always happy to discuss the possibility of his being called in a foreign jurisdiction on an ‘ad-hoc’ basis for a particular dispute.

    Notable offshore cases include:

    DIFC, ADGM and the UAE

    • GR Sowwah Retail Ltd v Abu Dhabi National Insurance Company PSJC and Ors ADGMCFI-2023-093 and ADGMCFI-2023-115 – two related sets of proceedings arising out of a c. AED 30 million claim brought by a policyholder under a business interruption insurance policy following the closure of a mall in Abu Dhabi during the coronavirus pandemic.
    • JTrust Asia PTE Ltd v Konoshita and Ors CFI-034-2023 – a claim for the recognition and enforcement in the DIFC of two judgments of the Courts of Singapore and the BVI. The judgments arose out of a substantial $200 million fraud committed against the Claimant. Karl (led by David Holloway) was successful in obtaining an order for the recognition and enforcement of those judgments in the DIFC and an order that the Defendants pay the Claimant’s costs on the indemnity basis.
    • Bank of Singapore Ltd v Marj Holding Ltd and Ors CFI-090-2022 – Karl (led by Richard Hill KC) was instructed by a Cayman Islands company and a UAE national in respect of a c. $50 million claim brought against them by the DIFC branch of a Singapore bank in respect of sums allegedly due under a loan agreement.
    • IDBI v Mabani Delma General Contracting Co LLC and Ors CFI-070-2018 – a c. $8 million debt claim by a DIFC registered bank in respect of a loan made to and secured by various Dubai and Abu Dhabi based companies. Karl (led by Sharif Shivji KC) successfully obtained an order striking out the Defence and entering judgment for the claimant bank.
    • AEFO Technical Services LLC v Aquarius Global Ltd ADGMCFI-2020-026 – a c. AED 20 million claim by a company domiciled onshore in Dubai against a company incorporated in the ADGM for breach of contract in respect of a failure to provide ‘PPE’ equipment during the coronavirus pandemic. Karl assisted with advising the Claimant in successfully obtaining judgment against the Defendant. The case involved various interim applications, such as: the Claimant successfully resisting a jurisdiction challenge; a successful application by the Claimant for an interim payment, and what is thought to be one of the first considerations by the ADGM Courts of their jurisdiction to grant penalty orders in response to a contempt of court ([2021] ADGMFCI 0003).
    • A claim by a company incorporated in the Dubai Multi Commodities Centre to terminate a joint venture agreement executed with a company incorporated onshore in Dubai and which concerned a joint venture project in West Africa. Karl acted with Richard Hill QC in advising the claimant in respect of its rights of termination.

    Isle of Man and Channel Islands

    • Successfully resisting (as sole counsel) an application for a worldwide freezing order brought in the High Court of England and Wales against a company domiciled in the Isle of Man. Karl was also subsequently instructed to assist with the substantive claim, which was issued in the Isle of Man.
    • Advising (with Andrew de Mestre QC) a Jersey domiciled company in relation to a shareholder dispute concerning the alleged misuse of confidential information belonging to group companies.

    BVI

    • Advising (as sole counsel) a BVI domiciled company in relation to whether it could bring a claim for repayment of several loans it had made or whether those loans had been orally varied or written off (including advice as to applicable law).
    • Assisting Alexander Cook in successfully applying for interim orders in relation to the administration of a discretionary trust settled in the BVI and for an order for service out of the jurisdiction by an alternative method on the trustees.

Other information

  • Cases of Interest
    • JTrust Asia PTE Ltd v Konoshita and Ors CFI-034-2023 – a claim for the recognition and enforcement in the DIFC of two judgments of the Courts of Singapore and the BVI. The judgments arose out of a substantial $200 million fraud committed against the Claimant. Karl (led by David Holloway) was successful in obtaining an order for the recognition and enforcement of those judgments in the DIFC and an order that the Defendants pay the Claimant’s costs on the indemnity basis.
    • Sahota v Sohal and Ors [2022] EWHC 2459 (Ch) – a High Court trial in which Karl (acting as sole counsel) successfully argued that various deeds of trust were not shams or illusory trusts and validly created an equitable interest in a high value London property in favour of the Second Defendant. The case also included a claim that the deeds of trust were transactions defrauding creditors under s. 423 IA 1986.
    • Autonomy Corporation Ltd v Lynch [2022] EWHC 1178 (Ch) – a c.$8 billion civil fraud claim, brought inter alia under Schedule 10A of FSMA 2000, involving a 10 month trial which was described by the trial judge as “amongst the longest and most complex in English legal history”, and which featured as one of The Lawyer’s “Top 20 Cases of 2019”.
    • General Electric Company v AI Alpine US Bidco Inc [2021] EWHC 45 (Ch) – a Part 8 claim concerning the proper interpretation of a share purchase agreement by which the Claimant agreed to sell its distributed power business to the Defendants for around $3.2bn. Karl, led by Sharif Shivji QC, acted for the Claimant, including in an interim application concerning whether the claim ought to be stayed pending the outcome of an ongoing expert determination process. The decision now represents one of the leading authorities on when the Court will grant declarations concerning the correct approach to an expert determination before the expert’s decision.
  • Career & Appointments
    • COMBAR
    • Chancery Bar Association
    • Insolvency Lawyers’ Association
  • Education & Awards
    • 2017: BPTC, BPP (Outstanding)
    • 2016: Bachelor of Civil Law, Christ Church, University of Oxford (Distinction)
    • 2015: BA (Hons) law, Queens’ College, University of Cambridge
    • 2017: Certificate of Honour, Middle Temple
    • 2016: Queen Mother Scholarship, Middle Temple
    • 2016: Lord Justice Sachs Exhibition, Middle Temple
    • 2016: Advocacy Scholarship, BPP
    • 2016: Clifford Chance Prize for best overall performance in Principles of Civil Procedure on the BCL, University of Oxford
    • 2015: HEFCE Graduate Scholarship, University of Oxford
    • 2014: Foundation Scholarship, Queens’ College, University of Cambridge
  • Publications

    Textbooks

    • ‘International Law and Jurisdiction’ in Daniel Clarry (ed), The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Volume 10: 2018–2019 Legal Year (Appellate Press 2021) 707 (co-authored with Jonathan Crow QC).
    • Zuckerman on Civil Procedure 4th Ed. (2021) (Sweet & Maxwell) (editor)
    • Loose and Griffiths on Liquidators 9th Ed. (LexisNexis 2019) (contributor)
    • ‘Equity’ in Daniel Clarry (ed), The UK Supreme Court Yearbook, Volume 9: 2017–2018 Legal Year (Appellate Press 2019) 510 (co-authored with Jonathan Crow QC)

    Articles & Case Notes

    • ‘Question of Proof’ (2023) CLJ 82(2), 216-219
    • ‘Identifying the Complainant in PPI Mis-Selling Complaints Brought by Trustees in Bankruptcy’ (2023) JIBFL (7), 494-495
    • ‘Lost luggage and judicial baggage: Harb v HRH Prince Abdul Aziz’ [2016] EWCA Civ 556, (2016) CJQ 35(4) (cited in De Smith’s Judicial Review (8th Ed))
    • Regular contributor to LexisPSL Case Analysis and Q&A

    Other

    • Contributor to Practical Law Corporate: Questions for Counsel
    • Lexis PSL Practice Notes concerning compulsory winding-up (co-authored with Eleanor Holland)
    • Lexis PSL Practice Notes concerning creditors’ voluntary liquidation
    • Contributor to 4 Stone Buildings publications ‘Litigation in the Time of Covid-19’ (2021) and ‘Commercial and Insolvency Litigation in the DIFC’ (2022)
  • Languages
    • Spanish (advanced)
  • What the Directories Say
    • Legal 500 (2024) (Civil Fraud) Karl is a highly motivated, highly intelligent fraud lawyer, who is already very experienced for his call. He shows excellent judgement and has a rather wonderful polite but firm manner.
    • Legal 500 (2024) (Civil Fraud) Rising star Karl Anderson is particularly focused on civil fraud matters involving both the UK and overseas.’
    • Legal 500 (2024) (Insolvency) Karl is a skilled and efficient cross-examiner.’ 

Related posts

Menu