Civil Fraud

"Top-class set for civil fraud."


The Legal 500

We offer unrivalled expertise in this field and have a long-standing position as the pre-eminent set for civil fraud.

Members at all levels have been instructed in virtually all recent leading cases and in jurisdictions all around the world.

Over the last decade, members appeared in Beresovsky v Abramovitch, Tajik Aluminium and BTA Bank v Ablyazov. More recent examples of our work include the Autonomy dispute, SFO v ENRC and Law Debenture v Ukraine, more information on which is set out below.

Fountain Court members are experts in dealing with cases concerning bank-related fraud claims including in relation to allegations of rate rigging, fraudulent misrepresentation, claims relating to conspiracy, disputes surrounding misappropriation of assets, claims arising out of investments in bogus schemes, breach of fiduciary duty claims and claims arising from emerging markets or involving complex jurisdiction challenges.

Members have considerable experience in dealing with Russian, CIS and Chinese parties, in cases raising every kind of fraud claim from dishonest assistance to conspiracy to defraud and including breaches of fiduciary duty and deceit. Large energy and natural resources claims are a speciality, as are claims involving offshore and onshore elements.

Civil fraud proceedings typically involve extensive interlocutory applications for injunctive relief including where appropriate the obtaining of world-wide freezing orders and ancillary relief. Fountain Court’s members are familiar with the suite of tools used by sophisticated litigation teams to safeguard their clients’ interests in making or defending such claims.

Our work includes cases relating to:

  • Bank related fraud cases including rate rigging
  • Fraudulent misrepresentation
  • Conspiracy
  • Claims involving complex jurisdiction challenges and privilege issues
  • Misappropriation of assets
  • Investment in bogus schemes
  • Breach of fiduciary duty
  • Claims arising from emerging markets and/or natural resources

  • Autonomy / Hewlett Packard litigation: Acting in these high-profile proceedings concerning breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and misrepresentation in relation to the acquisition of Autonomy by the Hewlett-Packard group, valued at $5 billion and was one of the largest cases before the courts at the time.
  • Law Debenture Trust Plc v Ukraine [2018] EWCA Civ 2026: A $3 billion Eurobond claim brought on behalf of the Russian Federation in the Financial List in London. Key issues revolve around the capacity of Ukraine to enter into the transaction, duress and the effect of Russia’s invasion of Crimea and whether those issues are justiciable in the English courts. Appeal heard by the Supreme Court in Dec 2019 with judgment reserved.
  • Byers v Saudi National Bank [2022] EWCA Civ 43: Acting for the appellant in the $300 million Court of Appeal decision re-stating the law of knowing / unconscionable receipt.
  • Marme Inversiones 2007 v (1) Royal Bank Of Scotland plc (2) HSH Nordbank (3) Bayerische Landesbank (4) ING bank (5) Caixa D’estalvis I Pensions De Barcelona: Royal Bank Of Scotland plc v Marme Inversiones [2016] EWHC 1570 (Comm); [2019] EWHC 750 (Comm): Representing NatWest Markets which won a landmark benchmark manipulation case alleging fraudulent misrepresentation against the bank, and based on EURIBOR rigging allegations, arising out of the European Commission cartel decision in relation to Euribor and the conviction of Barclays and Deutsche Euribor traders.
  • Group Seven Ltd v Notable Services LLP [2019] EWCA Civ 614: A seven-year dispute including two 30+ day trials, a private prosecution and two judgments of the Court of Appeal ends with an overseas bank found vicariously liable for the dishonest assistance of its employee and establishing a new test for dishonest assistance post Ivey.
  • SFO v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation [2018] EWCA Civ 2006: Court of Appeal reversing the controversial first instance judgment which had denied ENRC the right to claim legal professional privilege over substantial volumes of documentation concerning an SFO investigation into alleged corruption around the acquisition of mining rights.
  • Ahmad Hamad Algosaibi Brothers v Saad Investments Company Limited: Appeals are under way against the decision in May 2018 of the Cayman Islands’ Chief Justice who dismissed all AHAB’s claims after a trial lasting over 12 months, 129 days in court and evidence about what the Court described as one of the largest Ponzi schemes in history.
  • Public Institution for Social Security of Kuwait v Man Group PLC plus 37 other defendants: Acting in the $156 million claim by Kuwait’s investors in a landmark dispute involving alleged bribery and corruption, regarding billion-dollar investments over 30 years.
Show all cases

Civil Fraud Barristers

Richard Lissack QC

Richard Lissack KC

Call 1978 | Silk 1994

David Railton QC

David Railton KC

Call 1979 | Silk 1996

Michael McLaren QC

Michael McLaren KC

Call 1981 | Silk 2002

Raymond Cox QC

Raymond Cox KC

Call 1982 | Silk 2002

Charles Bear QC

Charles Béar KC

Call 1986 | Silk 2003

Bankim Thanki QC

Bankim Thanki KC

Call 1988 | Silk 2003

Patricia Robertson QC

Patricia Robertson KC

Call 1988 | Silk 2006

Timothy Howe QC

Timothy Howe KC

Call 1987 | Silk 2008

Mark Simpson QC

Mark Simpson KC

Call 1992 | Silk 2008

Richard Handyside QC

Richard Handyside KC

Call 1993 | Silk 2009

Jeffrey Chapman QC

Jeffrey Chapman KC

Call 1989 | Silk 2010

Derrick Dale QC

Derrick Dale KC

Call 1990 | Silk 2010

Akhil Shah QC

Akhil Shah KC

Call 1990 | Silk 2010

Andrew Mitchell QC

Andrew Mitchell KC

Call 1992 | Silk 2011

Richard Coleman QC

Richard Coleman KC

Call 1994 | Silk 2012

Stuart Ritchie QC

Stuart Ritchie KC

Call 1995 | Silk 2012

John Taylor QC

John Taylor KC

Call 1993 | Silk 2013

Patrick Goodall QC

Patrick Goodall KC

Call 1998 | Silk 2014

Ben Valentin QC

Ben Valentin KC

Call 1995 | Silk 2016

Clare Sibson KC

Call 1997 | Silk 2016

Rosalind Phelps QC

Rosalind Phelps KC

Call 1998 | Silk 2016

Henry King QC

Henry King KC

Call 1998 | Silk 2017

Adam Zellick QC

Adam Zellick KC

Call 2000 | Silk 2017

Bridget Lucas QC

Bridget Lucas KC

Call 1989 | Silk 2018

Paul Sinclair QC

Paul Sinclair KC

Call 1997 | Silk 2018

James Cutress QC

James Cutress KC

Call 2000 | Silk 2018

Nicholas Medcroft QC

Nicholas Medcroft KC

Call 1998 | Silk 2019

Giles Wheeler QC

Giles Wheeler KC

Call 1998 | Silk 2020

Edward Levey QC

Edward Levey KC

Call 1999 | Silk 2020

Robin Barclay QC

Robin Barclay KC

Call 1999 | Silk 2020

Ben Lynch QC

Ben Lynch KC

Call 2001 | Silk 2020

Chloe Carpenter QC

Chloe Carpenter KC

Call 2001 | Silk 2020

Tamara Oppenheimer QC

Tamara Oppenheimer KC

Call 2002 | Silk 2020

Laura John QC

Laura John KC

Call 2001 | Silk 2021

Alexander Milner QC

Alexander Milner KC

Call 2006 | Silk 2022

Simon Atrill

Simon Atrill KC

Call 2005 | Silk 2023

Deepak Nambisan

Call 1998

Nik Yeo

Call 2000

Paul Casey

Call 2002

Marianne Butler

Marianne Butler

Call 2003

David Murray

David Murray

Call 2004

Alex Barden

Alex Barden

Call 2005

Adam Sher

Adam Sher

Call 2007

Craig Ulyatt

Craig Ulyatt

Call 2008

Natasha Bennett

Natasha Bennett

Call 2009

Nico Leslie

Nico Leslie

Call 2010

Daniel Edmonds

Daniel Edmonds

Call 2010

Tetyana Nesterchuk

Tetyana Nesterchuk

Call 2011

Rebecca Loveridge

Rebecca Loveridge

Call 2011

Philip Ahlquist

Philip Ahlquist

Call 2012

Giles Robertson

Giles Robertson

Call 2012

Samuel Ritchie

Samuel Ritchie

Call 2012

Leonora Sagan

Leonora Sagan

Call 2012

Joseph Farmer

Joseph Farmer

Call 2013

Simon Paul

Simon Paul

Call 2013

Nick Daly

Nick Daly

Call 2014

Max Evans

Max Evans

Call 2015

Max Kasriel

Max Kasriel

Call 2015

Ian Bergson

Ian Bergson

Call 2015

Samuel Rabinowitz

Samuel Rabinowitz

Call 2016

Alexandra Whelan

Alexandra Whelan

Call 2016

Aaron Taylor

Aaron Taylor

Call 2017

Damien Bruneau

Damien Bruneau

Call 2016

Laurentia de Bruyn

Laurentia de Bruyn

Call 2018

Gillian Hughes

Gillian Hughes

Call 2018

Marcus Field

Marcus Field

Call 2019

Orestis Sherman

Orestis Sherman

Call 2019

Joseph Leech

Joseph Leech

Call 2020

Francesca Ruddy

Call 2020

Daniel Schwennicke

Daniel Schwennicke

Call 2020

Hannah Bernstein

Hannah Bernstein

Call 2020

Kit Holliday

Call 2021

Ian Simester

Call 2022

Charles Redmond

Call 2022

Tiffany Tang

Call 2022

Leah Gardner

Call 2022

Victoria Green

Call 2022

Sebastian Said

Sebastian Said

Call 2004

Michael Brindle QC

Michael Brindle KC

Call 1975 | Silk 1992

Brian Doctor QC

Brian Doctor KC

Call 1991 | Silk 1999

Stephen Rubin KC

Call 1977 | Silk 2000

Philip Brook Smith QC

Philip Brook Smith KC

Call 1982 | Silk 2002

Related insights View all

13/02/2024

Singapore International Commercial Court hands down judgment in high-profile challenge to US$147 million arbitration award

On 31 January 2024, a three-judge panel of the Singapore International Commercial…

Read more
15/01/2024

Fountain Court Team appears in landmark three-month Commercial Court “Tuna Bonds” Trial

The three-month trial of The Republic of Mozambique v Credit Suisse and…

Read more
11/01/2024

Fountain Court members contribute to The Practitioner’s Guide to Global Investigation – Edition 8

Six Fountain Court members have contributed to Edition 8 of The Practitioner’s…

Read more

Contact our clerks

For more information on our experience or to discuss a particular case, please contact us.

Call:    +44 (0)207 583 3335
Email: clerks@fountaincourt.co.uk

"They are absolutely top tier for complex fraud disputes."


The Legal 500

"Fountain Court Chambers has a number of very strong counsel in the civil fraud area."


The Legal 500

"A top choice for complex and high-value fraud disputes."


Chambers & Partners

"Top chambers and does a great deal of fraud work."


The Legal 500

"A leading set for high-value, multi-jurisdictional civil fraud disputes."


Chambers & Partners

"Obviously one of the top sets in the market in this area."


The Legal 500

"One of the leading chambers in this area, with a deservedly strong reputation."


Chambers & Partners

"Fountain Court is obviously one of the top sets in the market in this area."


The Legal 500

Featured insights

Hewlett-Packard prevails in its Autonomy-related fraud claims

The Court has found that Hewlett-Packard has “substantially succeeded” in its fraud…

Read more

Menu

Close

Portfolio Builder

Select the expertise that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Portfolio
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)