Karl Anderson

“A charming a first rate junior who produces written work of exceptional quality.” – Legal 500 (2025)

Ranked in the Legal 500 (2025) as a ‘Leading Junior’ (Band 3), 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:

• Barclays Bank Plc v Mason [2025] EWCA Civ 265 – Karl (led by James Knott) acted for the respondent, Barclays Bank plc, which succeeded in having the bulk of an appeal against findings of contempt of court dismissed.
• Advising the Commonwealth Climate and Law Initiative in a high-profile public opinion on the relationship between nature-related risks and directors’ duties. The opinion included analysis of potential claims against directors under FSMA 2000 for failure to comply with disclosure requirements concerning environmental and climate matters. A copy of the opinion can be found here.
• 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.
• Representing a borrower in a High Court claim 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”. Karl also represented Dr Lynch in the quantum trial, which took place in February 2024, and for which judgment is awaited.
• 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.
• In Re London Capital & Finance Plc – A high-profile, multi-million pound fraud claim brought in the Chancery Division arising out of the sale of ’mini bonds’ 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.

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:

• Barclays Bank Plc v Mason [2025] EWCA Civ 265 – Karl (led by James Knott) acted for the respondent, Barclays Bank plc, which succeeded in having the bulk of an appeal against findings of contempt of court dismissed.
• 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”.
• Chambi v Aristodemou and Anor [2024] EWHC 1610 (Ch) – a 5-day preliminary issue trial, in which Karl acted as sole counsel, to determine the extent of the Petitioner’s shareholding in the context of unfair prejudice proceedings.
• Porcelain Tiles Ltd v Granitifiandre SPA – an ongoing, multimillion pound dispute concerning a long term exclusive supply agreement, in which Karl is led by Alexander Cook KC. A two-week trial has been listed for January 2026.
• 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.
• In Re London Capital & Finance Plc – A high-profile, multi-million pound fraud claim brought in the Chancery Division arising out of the sale of ‘mini bonds’ 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 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 unled in the Chancery Division, the Commercial Court and the London Circuit Commercial Court, as well as in arbitrations and offshore jurisdictions.

Some notable examples include:

• Goldkorn v MPA (Construction Consultants) Ltd [2025] EWHC 385 (TCC) – Karl (led by John Brisby KC) appeared for the claimant in this preliminary issue trial to determine the claimant’s standing as an assignee, or alternatively as the beneficiary under a trust, of the second defendant’s claim against the first defendant.
• RRY v NKX [2025] EWHC 41 (Comm) – a claim to overturn an arbitral award under ss. 68 and 69 AA 1996. Karl, led by John Brisby KC, represented the Claimant, which identified a lacuna in the CPR with regards to the time limit for filing applications for permission to appeal under s. 69(6) AA 1996. The judgment suggests that the lacuna may be referred to the Civil Procedure Rules Committee.
• China Evergrande Group (in liquidation) v Mei – A c. $6 billion claim against multiple defendants in connection with allegedly unlawful dividends and arising out of the collapse and liquidation of the China Evergrande Group, the second largest property developer in China, which entered liquidation with estimated debts of $89 billion. Karl represented one of the Defendants to the claim, led by John Brisby KC and Tom Gentleman.
• 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”. Karl was also part of the counsel team which represented Dr Lynch in the quantum trial in February 2024.
• Winch Design Ltd v (1) Carl Le Souef (2) Somnio Superyachts PTY Ltd [2025] EWHC 120 (Comm) – a debt claim and rectification counterclaim arising out of a design contract in connection with the construction of the world’s largest superyacht. Karl acted as sole counsel for the Defendants at trial.
• 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 extant claims and applications under ss. 66, 68 and 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
• 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.
• In Re London Capital & Finance Plc – A high-profile, multi-million pound fraud claim brought in the High Court arising out of the sale of ‘mini bonds’ 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.
• 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.

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 complex 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. Karl is also the co-author of a seminal legal opinion on the relationship between nature-related risks and directors’ duties.

Examples of recent instructions include:

• China Evergrande Group (in liquidation) v Mei – A c. $6 billion claim against multiple defendants in connection with allegedly unlawful dividends and arising out of the collapse and liquidation of the China Evergrande Group, the second largest property developer in China, which entered liquidation with estimated debts of $89 billion. Karl represented one of the Defendants to the claim, led by John Brisby KC and Tom Gentleman.
• Advising the Commonwealth Climate and Law Initiative in a high-profile public opinion on the relationship between nature-related risks and directors’ duties under ss. 172 and 174 CA 2006, including analysis of potential derivative claims against directors in this context. A copy of the opinion can be found here.
• Chambi v Aristodemou and Anor [2024] EWHC 1610 (Ch) – a 5-day preliminary issue trial, in which Karl acted as sole counsel, to determine the extent of the Petitioner’s shareholding in the context of unfair prejudice proceedings.
• Gandesha v Gandesha and Ors – an ongoing derivative claim which represents part of a long-running dispute arising out of a family business.
• 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.
• Representing a respondent to an ongoing s.994 petition arising out of several restaurant and nightclub businesses in London.
• 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 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.

“Karl has a formidable intellect and adds great fire power to any legal team. He is an excellent tactician.” – Legal 500 (2025)

“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)

Ranked as a ‘Rising Star’ for civil fraud work in the Legal 500 in both 2024 and 2025, 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. He has successfully appeared in applications for orders to commit respondents for contempt of court for breach of such orders

Examples of notable cases include:

• Barclays Bank Plc v Mason [2025] EWCA Civ 265 – Karl (led by James Knott) acted for the respondent, Barclays Bank plc, which succeeded in having the bulk of an appeal against findings of contempt of court dismissed.
• 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”.#
• Barclays Bank Plc v Mason – an upcoming appeal in the Court of Appeal against a committal order made following breach by the Defendant of a freezing order. Karl, led by James Knott, acts for Barclays.
• China Evergrande Group (in liquidation) v Mei – A c. $6 billion claim against multiple defendants in connection with allegedly unlawful dividends and arising out of the collapse and liquidation of the China Evergrande Group, the second largest property developer in China, which entered liquidation with estimated debts of $89 billion. Karl represented one of the Defendants to the claim, led by John Brisby KC and Tom Gentleman.
• GTC Trading SA v (1) Hazen Abdolshahid Mahmoudi Rashed (2) HMR Investment Holding Ltd ENF-022-2023 ENF-023-2023 CFI-046-2023 – a claim brought in the DIFC to enforce a judgment for c. $25 million obtained in the ‘onshore’ courts of Dubai, following the fraudulent dissipation of assets by the First Defendant. Karl has represented the Claimant as sole counsel in successfully obtaining orders committing the First Defendant for contempt of court for failing to comply with the terms of a freezing order, and in continuing worldwide freezing orders against third parties who were connected with the First Defendant. Karl was also led by David Holloway in successfully resisting applications to discharge the freezing orders against the Defendants.
• 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.
• In Re London Capital & Finance Plc – A high-profile, 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.
• 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.

“Karl’s knowledge in the insolvency space is exceptional. In addition, he is very personable and has a keen commercial and economic eye.” – Legal 500 (2025)

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

Ranked as a ‘Leading Junior’ (Band 5) for insolvency work in the Legal 500 (2025), 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 misfeasance.

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 9^th Ed (2019). He is also the author of several 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 and Officeholder Litigation

• In Re London Capital & Finance Plc – A high-profile, multi-million pound fraud claim brought in the Chancery Division brought by the liquidators of London Capital & Finance and arising out of the sale of ‘mini bonds’ 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.
• 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 directors of a company operating a cryptocurrency exchange as to possible claims which might be made against them by the liquidators of the exchange following its winding-up.
• Advising a company domiciled in the Abu Dhabi Global Market as to various potential procedures for its winding up.
• 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.

“A very bright up-and-coming barrister. Very user friendly and confident advocate.” – Legal 500 (2025) Middle East (Commercial)

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, where he is ranked as a ‘Rising Star’ in the Legal 500, 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 QICDRC

• Al-Maadeed v Nexus Financial Services WLL CTFIC0033/2024; Al-Nasser v Nexus Financial Services WLL CTFIC0032/2024 – two related claims brought in the Qatar International Court and Dispute Resolution Centre against a mortgage mediation business for alleged breach of contract and regulatory duties.
• GTC Trading SA v Hazem Abdolshahid Mahmoudi Rashed and Ors ENF-022-20233, ENF-023-2023, CFI-046-2023 – A claim to enforce a judgment of AED 56,878,814.45 (around USD 15.5 million) of the onshore courts of Dubai in the DIFC. The case has given rise to multiple interim hearings, including a successful application for a worldwide freezing order and associated disclosure orders. Karl acted unled in successfully applying to commit the First Defendant for contempt of court for failure to comply with the terms of a freezing order. Karl, led by David Holloway, also successfully resisted applications to set aside various orders of the DIFC Court on jurisdictional grounds.
• Various detailed assessment proceedings (such as Sunset Hospitality Holdings Ltd and Ord v Hana Habib Mansoor Habib Al Herz CFI-024-2020 and Mashreq Bank PSC v Khoury CFI-046-2021) in which Karl has successfully represented receiving parties in obtaining substantial orders of costs from the DIFC Registrar.
• 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 and Cayman Islands

• China Evergrande Group (in liquidation) v Mei – A c. $6 billion claim against multiple defendants in connection with allegedly unlawful dividends paid out by a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands. The claim arises out of the collapse and liquidation of the China Evergrande Group, the second largest property developer in China, which entered liquidation with estimated debts of $89 billion. Karl represented one of the Defendants to the claim, led by John Brisby KC and Tom Gentleman.
• 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.

• Barclays Bank Plc v Mason [2025] EWCA Civ 265 – Karl (led by James Knott) acted for the respondent, Barclays Bank plc, which succeeded in having the bulk of an appeal against findings of contempt of court dismissed.
• Goldkorn v MPA (Construction Consultants) Ltd [2025] EWHC 385 (TCC) – Karl (led by John Brisby KC) appeared for the claimant in this preliminary issue trial to determine the claimant’s standing as an assignee, or alternatively as the beneficiary under a trust, of the second defendant’s claim against the first defendant.
• Winch Design Ltd v (1) Carl Le Souef (2) Somnio Superyachts PTY Ltd [2025] EWHC 120 (Comm) – debt claim and rectification counterclaim arising out of the construction of the world’s largest superyacht.
• RRY v NKX [2025] EWHC 41 (Comm) – a claim to overturn an arbitral award under ss. 68 and 69 AA 1996. Karl, led by John Brisby KC, represented the Claimant, which identified a lacuna in the CPR with regards to the time limit for filing applications for permission to appeal under s. 69(6) AA 1996. The judgment suggests that the lacuna may be referred to the Civil Procedure Rules Committee.
• 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”. Karl also represented Dr Lynch in the quantum trial, which took place in February 2024, and for which judgment is awaited.
• China Evergrande Group (in liquidation) v Mei – A c. $6 billion claim against multiple defendants in connection with allegedly unlawful dividends paid out by a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands. The claim arises out of the collapse and liquidation of the China Evergrande Group, the second largest property developer in China, which entered liquidation with estimated debts of $89 billion. Karl represented one of the Defendants to the claim, led by John Brisby KC and Tom Gentleman.
• Chambi v Aristodemou and Anor [2024] EWHC 1610 (Ch) – a 5-day preliminary issue trial, in which Karl acted as sole counsel, to determine the extent of the Petitioner’s shareholding in the context of unfair prejudice proceedings.
• 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.
• 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.

• COMBAR
• Chancery Bar Association
• Insolvency Lawyers’ Association
• Financial Services Lawyers’ Association

Education

• 2017: BPTC, BPP (Outstanding)
• 2016: Bachelor of Civil Law, Christ Church, University of Oxford (Distinction)
• 2015: BA (Hons) Law, Queens’ College, University of Cambridge

Awards

• 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

Textbooks

• Mithani: Directors’ Disqualification (LexisNexis) (forthcoming)
• ‘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 4^th Ed. (2021) (Sweet & Maxwell) (editor)
• Loose and Griffiths on Liquidators 9^th 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 (8^th 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)

• Spanish (advanced – DELE B2 certified)

Legal 500 (2025)

• Banking and Finance (Band 3) “A charming a first rate junior who produces written work of exceptional quality.”
• Civil Fraud (Rising Star) “Karl has a formidable intellect and adds great fire power to any legal team. He is an excellent tactician.”
• Insolvency (Band 5) “Karl’s knowledge in the insolvency space is exceptional. In addition, he is very personable and has a keen commercial and economic eye.”
• Middle East (Commercial) (Rising Star) “A very bright up-and-coming barrister. Very user friendly and confident advocate.”

Legal 500 (2024)

• Civil Fraud (Rising Star) “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.”
• Civil Fraud (Rising Star) “Rising star Karl Anderson is particularly focused on civil fraud matters involving both the UK and overseas.”
• Insolvency (Rising Star) “Karl is a skilled and efficient cross-examiner.”