Fountain Court Chambers

London & Singapore

Nik YeoCall Date: 2000

Nik has a commercial practice specialising in complex cases, particularly involving banking, financial services, professional negligence, energy/natural resources, insurance and reinsurance, in both litigation and international commercial arbitration.

Nik was named Professional Negligence Junior of the Year at the 2016 Chambers and Partners Bar Awards. Click here.

Nik Yeo is a ranked as a leading junior in:

  • Banking & Finance – by Chambers & Partners 2019; Legal 500 2018; Who’s Who Legal
  • Professional Negligence – by Chambers & Partners 2019; Legal 500 2018
  • Financial Services – by Legal 500 (2018)

He was named by Legal Week as one of the up-and-coming Stars at the Bar.

He is variously described in recent directories as having:

  • “Very knowledgeable on the law and application of it to difficult products and facts.
  • “Technically superb, responsive and a pleasure to work alongside.”
  • “Immense intellectual ability and great commercial acumen. Destined for the very top”
  • “A powerful and persuasive advocate.”
  • Technically superb, practical, client-friendly and very responsive – a real star of the Bar
  • “Crisp and clear in his advice and advocacy”
  • Articulate and quick thinking on his feet”
  • “Very gifted.” 
  • “Gets to grips with the issues of a case very quickly”
  • “Combines impressive legal abilities with a numeracy rare at the Bar’”
  • He is technically superb while at the same time very practical and client friendly.  He was a solicitor before re-qualifying at the Bar and this certainly gives him a good understanding of client needs”.
  • “He is excellent; incredibly diligent, bright, engaging and a real team player.”
  • “He is very detailed-orientated and thorough in his preparation”.
  • “Those instructing him are quick to praise his “super-responsive and hard-working” approach
  • He has familiarity with structured finance products, which is rare at the Bar.” 
  • “He is very committed and hard-working”
  • “Very good on technical banking disputes.”
  • “He can really get to the heart of financial cases because of his great product knowledge.”

Areas of Expertise

  • Banking & finance
  • Professional negligence
  • Financial services
  • International arbitration
  • Commercial dispute resolution
  • Energy & natural resources
  • Telecommunications
  • Insurance and reinsurance

Recent practice

Banking & finance

Nik has been litigating derivatives, securitisations and other structure finance products and capital markets instruments since the beginning of the financial crisis, and before that was a transactional solicitor (at Slaughter and May) concentrating on structured finance, including working with financial institutions (and their quants) to craft innovative securitisations (eg of equity release schemes) and bespoke swap-based instruments (eg weather swaps, and swap-based hedge fund structures).  He has had extensive experience of the interpretation of financial instruments, including swaps and capital markets instruments.

Securitisation/structured finance interpretation & how capital markets instruments are traded

Nik has extensive experience of Part 8 construction disputes arising out of structured finance/securitisation documentation, including the following significant cases:

  • Representing Lehman Bros Inc (the US broker dealer) in Lehman RASCALS case [2011] EWCA Civ 1544 (Ch) – a dispute arising from the internecine claims of the various entities within the LB group against one another, including a US$2 billion claim by LBI
  • Representing Lehman Bros Inc (the US broker dealer) in Lehman Extended Liens case [2012] EWHC 2997 (Ch) – cited in Beale et al The Law of Security; Yeowart Law of Financial Collateral; Gullifer Corporate Finance Law:  Principles and Policy;
  • Both these Lehman cases involved very detailed investigation of
    • how dematerialised securities are traded, including the operation of clearing systems, the role played by participants in those clearing systems, and the nature of rights of each party at each level of the chain;
    • how the LB group itself managed the trading and booking of trades in dematerialised securities with third parties.
  • Representing the claimant, an SPV issuer of CMBS notes, in Gemini v Danske [2012] EWHC 3103 (Comm);
  • Napier Park European Credit Opportunities Fund Limited v Harbourmaster Pro-Rata CLO 2 BV [2014] EWHC 1083 (Ch).

Other securitisation / structured finance cases

He has litigated securitisations and other structured finance products in a wide range of significant cases, including:

  • Representing RBS in two cases concerning CPDOs, perhaps the most complex of structured products to arise from the pre-financial crisis period: McGraw-Hill (Standard & Poor’s) v Deutsche Apotheker & RBS [2014] EWHC 2436 (Comm), a case concerning where investors sought to hold a rating agency liable directly to them; and WestLB v RBS
  • IXIS v WestLB & Terra Firma (the “Box Clever” securitisation) – a 6 month trial raising important questions about the role and effect of securitisations (including complex financial modelling), CDOs (collateralised debt obligations), ABCP (asset backed commercial paper), the role and efficacy of “conduits” and commercial paper, mezzanine or subordinated finance, interest rate swaps (Nik represented Terra Firma, with Mark Hapgood QC and Tim Howe QC) – settled on last day of trial;
  • Gemini v CBRE & Warwick Street – a 3.5 month securitisation overvaluation trial (Nik represented the claimant, with Mark Simpson QC) – settled just before trial;
  • Representing a prominant investor in distressed Greek sovereign debt during the Greek financial crisis/restructuring
  • Representing Soc Gen in a €100m “credit crunch” dispute arising from the devaluation of a structure note programme relating to underlying investments in illiquid hedge funds, involving allegations of negligent asset management and related breaches of contract;
  • Various high street lenders – Nik has advised a large number of major mortgage lenders (including Lloyd’s TSB, Bradford & Bingley, Northern Rock, Kensington, Merrill Lynch) on legal strategy for pursing claims against valuers for professional negligence where the mortgage loans are within a securitisation structure.
  • Representing a large UK telecoms company in a series of disputes arising from a £2.38 billion securitisation
  • Representing a leading hedge fund in a confidential arbitration concerning an approximately $3 billion transaction
  • Acting for a major UK asset manager in connection with potential “credit crunch” claims in excess of £300 million arising from investments in a programme of Structured Notes.
  • On the instructions of foreign lawyers, for an institutional investor in a Madoff feeder fund
  • Dispute between international insurance company and investment manager over multi-billion dollar portfolio, involving restructuring of leveraged investments in ABS (asset backed securities) of various kinds

Nik was involved in perhaps the highest value structured finance transaction ever in the UK, the £½ trillion “Asset Protection Scheme” – the scheme put in place by the UK Government designed to protect RBS and Lloyd’s assets.  Nik was instructed by HM Treasury (unled) to advise on the final few drafts of the documentation for that scheme, from the point of view of how it could be interpreted, and whether there were any aspects where the drafting could be improved.  This required a rigorous review of both the commercial aims of the scheme and its draft documentation, in light of case law on interpretation.  The Lawyer described this as a “genuinely innovative” transaction which “had, and will continue to have, significant ramifications on the national economy and the banks”, and as “the most complex and important mandate of the credit crunch”.

ISDA interpretation

For instance, at the Bar, he has litigated the interpretation of ISDA in a large number of cases including:

  • Goldman Sachs v Videocon [2013] EWHC 2843 (Comm) (for Goldman) – cited in Firth on Derivatives and Proctor The Law and Practice of International Banking, as well as in numerous articles;
  • Goldman Sachs v Videocon [2014] EWHC 4267 (Comm); [2016] EWCA Civ 130 (Nik was unled at first instance, and although he was led in the CA, the CA determined the appeal in his client’s favour on the basis of the written submissions largely prepared by Nik, without calling on his leader);
  • LBF v KBC (for KBC) – close out dispute, giving rise to questions of construction over what the process for determining “Loss” meant;
  • HSBC Private Bank v LBF (for HSBCPB) – close out dispute giving rise to questions of construction over, among other things, what “default interest” meant;
  • SPB (Icebank) v Commerzebank (for Icebank), which involved the close out by Commerzbank of a complex credit derivative transaction referenced on iTraxx LevX;
  • SPB (Icebank) v Merrill Lynch (for Icebank), which involved termination of equity default swaps referenced against two notional portfolio of equities;
  • Standard Bank v Omimex (for SB) – oil and gas hedging dispute giving rise to complex issues of construction of the swaps.

Other ISDA cases

Other ISDA cases he has been involved in include:

  • Calyon v PZL [2009] EWHC 1914 (Comm) – FX swaps; jurisdictional challenge;
  • Bank Leumi v Wachner [2011] EWHC 656 (Comm) – FX swaps; misselling (Nik worked on the case up to trial);
  • Bank of India v Svizera [2013] EWHC 4097 (Comm) – FX swaps; enforcement;
  • State Bank of India v Wockhardt ­– credit default swaps;
  • [Confidential] v Soc Gen – credit default swaps;
  • Numerous FFA advices during the shipping market crash.
  • Dispute over enforcement of commodity hedging arrangements

Commercial banking disputes – enforcement of loans, guarantees, security

  • Nik has represented high street lenders (such as NatWest, Lloyds TSB, Barclays) in numerous commercial lending disputes arising out of its business and consumer lending operations, such as realisation of securities (including overriding interests under the LRA), conversion of negotiable instruments, breach of mandate, Liggett defence, enforcement of consumer credit agreements, subrogation, including Sainsbury’s v. Olympia (2005, Ch Div) option over land (for the earlier liability decision, see [2005] EWHC 1235; [2006] 1 P & CR 17; [2005] 25 EGCS 193; [2005] NPC 79)
  • Dispute in relation to sale to overseas investors of exposures to hedge funds, involving allegations of breach of fiduciary duties and breach of FSMA COBs
  • Enforcement of £100m loan / security package in Russia
  • Cattan v Mortlock dispute arising out of margin call demands by ANZ under PRIN instruments, entitling holders to a synthetic interest in ex-Russian Federation sovereign debt, including questions of regulatory compliance and professional negligence
  • Moody v. Condor Insurance Ltd [2006] 1 WLR 1847; [2006] 1 All ER 934 guarantees, deed poll, deed inter partes, capital market guarantee. Rare and important case on enforceability of unilateral guarantees /deeds poll provided in support of loan notes.
  • Standard Bank London Ltd v. Omimex de Columbia Ltd (Comm Crt) derivatives, swaps, commodity (oil and gas) hedging, ISDA terms, acquisition finance, binding force of mandate letters and term sheets, implied agreement, intention to create legal relations, misrepresentation, economic duress
  • North Cascade Ltd v. Smith (Ch Div) secured acquisition finance, acquisition of trade finance / forfaiting business, enforcement, foreclosure, fraud, conspiracy
  • Communications Technology International Ltd v. International Environmental Management Ltd [2005] All ER (D) 19 (May) (Ch Div) “private equity” finance, energy, trading in Kyoto Protocol carbon emission reduction credits, interpretation of indemnity agreement, conditions precedent, service out of jurisdiction, enforcement of English judgments abroad
  • Nik has settled finance precedents for a magic circle law firm, advising on drafting of finance and security documentation, for example in relation to creation of a fixed (cf floating) charge, particularly in light of FCAR.
  • Application and interpretation of the Financial Collateral Arrangements Regulations (FCAR): Lehman Extended Liens case [2012] EWHC 2997 (Ch) – cited in Beale et al The Law of Security; Yeowart Law of Financial Collateral; Gullifer Corporate Finance Law:  Principles and Policy;

Financial regulation

A significant part of Nik’s practice concerns financial regulation work, including advising clients (both pure advisory work and in cases where litigation has already begun) on the scope of the FSA/FCA’s regulatory reach and in particular whether the client needs authorisation to carry on their particular business activity. He has recently been instructed by a number of participants in the cryptocurrency / DLT / blockchain space, and has a good technical understanding of the technology so far as it impacts on regulatory and other legal concerns (including contentious issues, including freezing injunctions).  A sample of instructions in this field includes:

  • Advising a cryptocurrent wallet provider in relation to e-money and regulated activities under Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA).
  • Advising distributed ledge technology (DLT) platform in respect of regulatory aspects of platform, particularly the issuance and dealings in utility tokens (coins) issued on that platform.
  • Advising cryptocurrency exchange in relation to AML and freezing injuctions.
  • Advising the provider of an electronic fund-selection platform aimed at IFAs as to whether various proposed functionalities fell within the regulatory reach of the FCA.
  • Chopra v Bank of Singapore [2015] EWHC 1549 (Ch), which turned in large part on whether a foreign-based private bank’s relationship manager had to be authorised.
  • Advising an extremely large sports betting organisation on the scope of the FCA’s regulatory reach and whether particular activities it conducts would require the organisation to be authorised.
  • FSA v Cavendish Moore, representing the provider of a UK land banking scheme in proceedings brought by the FSA.
  • Advising on the effect of FCA regulation on the conduct of financial business by certain limited partnerships
  • Advising on whether a single-member scheme set up for a solicitor’s firm was a collective investment scheme and attracts regulation as “financial promotion”.
  • Advising on market abuse and other regulatory matters under FSMA

Professional Negligence

Acting in numerous professional negligence disputes, particularly with a finance-related angle, including:

  • Gemini v CBRE & Warwick Street dubbed by the press “the Valuation Trial of the Century”. A 3½ month securitisation overvaluation trial involving alleged surveyor negligence in overvaluing a large number of commercial properties in a portfolio which was securitised by way of a CMBS, causing loss of more than £200m.  Perhaps the most complex professional negligence valuer case in English legal history, involving what is believed to be an unprecedented 37 expert valuation reports filed by the claimant, running to a total of 13,000 pages (including exhibits), of which 1,300 were principal report.  Settled just before trial.
  • Cattan v Mortlock professional negligence action against a solicitor and a barrister arising from a dispute over margin call demands by ANZ under PRIN instruments, entitling holders to a synthetic interest in ex-Russian Federation sovereign debt
  • McGraw-Hill (Standard & Poor’s) v Deutsche Apotheker & RBS [2014] EWHC 2436 (Comm), representing RBS in various investors’ claims of negligence against RBS and the rating agency, S&P in relation to highly complex products known as CPDOs
  • WestLB v RBS representing RBS in another investor’s claim of negligence against RBS in relation to highly complex products known as CPDOs
  • Acting in numerous action brought by lenders against valuers in relation to negligent valuation of security
  • IXIS v WestLB & Terra Firma Acting in complex multi-party Commercial Court proceedings arising out of the £1 billion securitisation of the Box Clever group involving negligence claims against leading international investment banks as Arrangers and Joint Lead Managers
  • Acting for broker in claim brought against it for negligence in the conduct of its mandate to trade on a discretionary basis
  • Acting for lender in a claim against its solicitor for negligence in signing a Certificate of Title in respect of a borrowing by a partner of that solicitors firm who subsequently absconded

Telecommunications

  • Nokia v IPCom representing Nokia in dispute arising out of disputed payments for mobile phone patent licences; determining what a “FRAND” licence means
  • HTC v Nokia representing Nokia in multi-dispute arbitration arising out of mobile phone licences
  • Sigma v Samsung representing Samsung in arbitration arising out of pre-installation of mobile phone apps
  • AT Holdings Ltd v. Canon (UK) Ltd, acting for telecoms company in dispute with Canon arising out of share purchase agreement breach of warranty relating to number of customers and liabilities under pension scheme, including reliance upon Disclosure Letter
  • Representing a large UK telecoms company in a series of disputes arising from a £2.38 billion securitisation of major telecoms assets
  • Spectra International v. Tiscali UK Ltd [2002] EWHC 2084 (Comm); [2002] All ER (D) 209 (Oct) (Comm) dispute between ISP and manufacturer of internet-enabled televisions
  • Communications Technology International Ltd v. International Environmental Management Ltd [2005] All ER (D) 19 (May) (Ch Div), “private equity” finance, energy, trading in Kyoto Protocol carbon emission reduction credits, interpretation of indemnity agreement, conditions precedent, service out of jurisdiction, enforcement of English judgments abroad

Commercial dispute resolution / civil fraud

  • Collier v. Williams; Marshall v. Maggs [2006] 1 WLR 1945 (CA); [2006] CP Rep 22; [2006] PIQR P18, appearing (without a leader) before the Court of Appeal in this leading authority on service of proceedings on “last known residence”, extensions of time for service, role of appeal court
  • Arc International plc v. Sullivan (QBD) commercial fraud, conspiracy (alleged theft of competitor’s customer information and pricing)
  • Dollfus Mieg & CIF v. CDW International Ltd (Comm Crt) joint ventures, fraudulent alteration to accounts, freezing orders, security for cross undertaking
  • NCM Credit Insurance v. Dovertower (Comm Crt) credit insurance fraud, conspiracy
  • North Cascade Ltd v. Smith (Ch Div) secured acquisition finance, acquisition of trade finance / forfaiting business, enforcement, foreclosure, fraud, conspiracy
  • Ponzi fraud – bank’s fidelity policy, Ponzi fraud committed by employees, whether policy covers third party liability or only first party liability
  • Coupers Partnership Ltd v. Basarik [2007] All ER (D) 289; (2007) 151 SJLB 195; [2007] EWCA Civ 40, appearing (without a leader) before the Court of Appeal in appeal arising out of business premises ratings valuation dispute
  • CMC Spreadbet defending various users of a spreadbetting platform accused of misuse of that platform
  • Battista v. Bassano [2007] All ER (D) 111, appearing (without a leader) before the Court of Appeal on inadequate reasons of trial judge and seeking admission of new evidence
  • Yarm Road Ltd v. Cleveland Bridge (UK) Ltd (Comm Crt) complex accounting claims arising out of a management buy out (MBO) of Kvaerner plc’s suspension bridge and structural steel business, acting for purchasers
  • Powergen plc v British Sugar plc [2006] EWHC 316 (QB) acting for Powergen, interpretation of sale of electricity supply business, billing errors, whether included assigned rights included rights to recover underpayments from customers
  • AT Holdings Ltd v. Canon (UK) Ltd, acting for telecoms company in dispute with Canon arising out of share purchase agreement breach of warranty relating to number of customers and liabilities under pension scheme, including reliance upon Disclosure Letter
  • US$60m IT-supply fraud claim (foreign jurisdiction), acting for world leader in supply of that component
  • Costain Ltd v Bechtel Ltd [2005] EWHC 1018 (TCC); [2005] TCLR 6; [2005] Adj LR 05/20 procuring breach of multi-billion pound infrastructure contract (Channel Tunnel Rail Link), interpretation of NEC form of construction contract, role of project manager, interlocutory injunctions, effect on third parties
  • Spectra International v. Tiscali UK Ltd [2002] EWHC 2084 (Comm); [2002] All ER (D) 209 (Oct) (Comm) computer contracts, information technology, internet service provision, internet-enabled televisions, joint venture negotiations, intention to create legal relations (cited in Chitty on Contract)
  • Sporting body dispute between world governing body of high-profile sport and participants, disciplinary hearings, procedural fairness/natural justice
  • Southend United Football Club v. Rebus Insurance, acting for sponsor in sponsorship dispute

Conflict of laws & Private International Law:

A significant part of Nik’s practice raises conflict of laws issues, for example

  • Chopra v Bank of Singapore [2015] EWHC 1549 (Ch) (unled) jurisdiction, what constitutes service within the jurisdiction, stays.
  • McGraw-Hill (Standard & Poor’s) v Deutsche Apotheker & RBS [2014] EWHC 2436 (Comm), representing RBS (unled) in jurisdictional challenge where there were interrelating proceedings in The Netherlands
  • Nokia v IPCom (Ch Div) representing Nokia in dispute arising over preclusive effect of prior German judgments relating to alleged breach of patent (res judicata of foreign judgments)
  • Film finance dispute, advising on effect of foreign arbitration Award on proceedings brought by person who was not a party to that award in England, including issues of recognition of foreign arbitration awards and issue estoppel
  • Representing trustee of notes in complex multi-jurisdictional dispute concerning the Courts of Nigeria, France, England and New York
  • Representing Man Group in warranty/completion accounts dispute arising from M&A transaction
  • British Sugar v. Babinni (SCCO) conflict of laws, jurisdiction over detailed costs assessment; “Brussels” Regulation No 44/2001, lis alibi pendens, Italian proceedings
  • DACA Inc v. Carver Boat Corporation (Comm Crt) application to set aside service out of the jurisdiction (US), choice of law, Rome Convention, agency, misrepresentation
  • Manhattan Investment Fund v. Bear Stearns (QBD) (junior to Anthony Boswood QC) letters rogatory from US court, differences between US and English disclosure
  • Communications Technology International Ltd v. International Environmental Management Ltd [2005] All ER (D) 19 (May) (Ch Div), “private equity” finance, energy, trading in Kyoto Protocol carbon emission reduction credits, interpretation of indemnity agreement, conditions precedent, service out of jurisdiction, enforcement of English judgments abroad
  • service out of jurisdiction (Singapore and Australia), enforcement of English judgments abroad
  • Forum shopping advising (both English and overseas solicitors) on tactics for litigating in multi-jurisdictional disputes in England and resisting litigation elsewhere
  • Gathering evidence in England for use in the US advising US lawyers about the extent and manner in which evidence for US proceedings can be gathered in England
  • Regularly lectures to law firms in London (and occasionally overseas) on Conflict of Laws topics.

International arbitration

Nik has extensive experience in arbitration, both as sole or lead counsel and being led in arbitrations under various institutional (but predominantly ICC and LCIA) and ad hoc rules.  He has represented clients in arbitrations across sectors, including:

  • in the technology field (he has represented various major mobile phone manufacturers in a number of arbitrations in relation to licensing or collaboration agreement disputes, including in Russia),
  • in the energy space (a Geneva arbitration concerning Yemeni oil arising out of the Masri litigation, a dispute under a take-or-pay agreement of Nigerian oil, a dispute over a joint venture to construct a West African power station),
  • in relation to shareholder or M&A disputes (including various option agreement disputes in relation both to Russian energy resources and Russian and Kyrgyz mobile phone operators, he represented one of the world’s largest hedge funds in relation to interpretation of an SPA, and he represented a client in a dispute over interpretation of an option over a mobile phone operator in Russia and Kyrgyzstan),
  • insurance and reinsurance arbitrations, including
    • a dispute over the authority of a US cover holder
    • various coverage disputes under reinsurances, including those concerning captive reinsurers
    • a dispute over aggregation
    • a dispute under a D&O policy for a UK major infrastructure owner
  • banking arbitrations, including
    • a dispute concerning liabilities for pension misselling
    • for recovery of corporate loans to Russian enterprises
    • a dispute between insurer and investment manager over multi-billion dollar portfolio maintained for the insurer, involving restructuring of leveraged investments in ABS (asset backed securities) of various kinds
  • general contractual claims (eg disputes unpaid agency fees)
  • enforcement of foreign arbitration award in face of decision of Cairo court to nullify award
  • film finance arbitration, and related questions of issue estoppel of foreign award subject to court approval and appeal in English proceedings.

Approximately half of Nik’s arbitrations have proceeded through to a final award.  Many also involve applications to the English courts for relief under ss. 9 and 44 of the 1996 Act or for enforcement of arbitration agreements (for example, enforcement of an award in respect of a take-or-pay agreement of Nigerian oil), and questions of the jurisdiction of the tribunal, particularly where there are conflicting choice of court and arbitration agreements in a suite of complex financing documents (for example, in Masri).

Energy & Natural Resources

Nik has significant experience of the energy and natural resources sector, both since coming to the Bar (including the cases below) and before that as a solicitor working in limited recourse financing for that sector:

  • a Geneva arbitration concerning Yemeni oil arising out of the Masri litigation
  • an arbitration under a take-or-pay agreement of Nigerian oil
  • an arbitration over a joint venture to construct a West African power station
  • Powergen v British Sugar [2006] EWHC 316 (QB) (on own and junior to Bankim Thanki QC) see under Commercial Litigation above
  • Powergen v Dalkia acting for Powergen in dispute with reseller of electricity
  • British Gas v Solihull acting for British Gas in dispute with commercial customer over take-over of supply of gas, restitution, quantum meruit, quantum valebat
  • Standard Bank v Omimex oil and gas commodity swaps (see under Banking and Finance above)

Insurance & Reinsurance

  • Film finance dispute, concerning insurance / guarantee
  • NCM Credit Insurance v. Dovertower (Comm Crt) ) credit insurance fraud, conspiracy
  • Society of Lloyd’s v. Tropp [2004] EWHC 1396 (Comm) representing Society of Lloyd’s in Names litigation, liability of Names under Reconstruction and Renewal Scheme (permission to appeal refused by Court of Appeal [2004] EWCA Civ 1544)
  • Tropp v. Society of Lloyd’s [2004] EWHC 3335 (Comm) Names litigation, counterclaim by Name, liability of Lloyd’s to Names
  • Society of Lloyd’s v. Ilse (Comm Crt) representing Society of Lloyd’s in Names litigation
  • Society of Lloyd’s v. Harrison (Comm Crt) representing Society of Lloyd’s in Names litigation, deceased Name, role of estate
  • Various Lloyd’s of London arbitrations, including
    • a dispute over the authority of a US cover holder
    • various coverage disputes under reinsurances, including those concerning captive reinsurers
    • a dispute over aggregation
    • a dispute under a D&O policy for a UK major infrastructure owner

Nik is familiar with Lloyd’s market practices and procedures.

Recommendations

Nik Yeo is recommended in the International Arbitration: General Commercial & Insurance, Banking & Finance and Professional Negligence sections of Chambers and Partner 2015 edition and in the Banking & Finance and Professional Negligence sections of  Legal 500 2017 edition.

Nik was awarded Professional Negligence Junior of the Year 2016 by Chambers and Partners.

Nik is held in high regard by those who work with him.

He has familiarity with structured finance products, which is rare at the Bar.” (Legal 500 2017)

Technically superb, practical, client-friendly and very responsive – a real star of the Bar.” (Legal 500 2017)

“Combines impressive legal abilities with a numeracy rare at the Bar.’” (Legal 500 2015)

“Very gifted.” (Legal 500 2015)

“Very good on technical banking disputes; crisp and clear in his advice and advocacy.” (Legal 500 2014)

“He is excellent; incredibly diligent, bright, engaging and a real team player.”  (Chambers & Partners 2014)

“Immense intellectual ability and great commercial acumen. Destined for the very top” (Legal 500 2014) 

“Very good at technical banking disputes.”  (Chambers & Partners 2014)

“He can really get to the heart of financial cases because of his great product knowledge.” (Chambers & Partners 2014)

“Those instructing him are quick to praise his “super-responsive and hard-working” approach” (Chambers and Partners 2013)

Nik was named by Legal Week as one of the up-and-coming Stars at the Bar (October 2010), citing one comment that “He is technically superb while at the same time very practical and client friendly.  He was a solicitor before re-qualifying at the Bar and this certainly gives him a good understanding of client needs”.

 

Education

  • LLB (Hons), BA (Hons), Melbourne University
  • BCL, First Class honours, Oxford University

Appointments, memberships

  • Member of COMBAR
  • Member of LCLCBA
  • Member of LCIA
  • Trustee of the PB Carter Trust – legal educational charity
  • Sometime member of the Bar Standards Board Standards Committee
  • Sometime trustee of law firm’s pension fund
  • Sometime lecturer in law, Wadham College, Oxford
  • Sometime lecturer in the Law of Security, Melbourne University

Other experience

  • Nik Yeo is a CEDR Accredited Mediator.
  • He has published on legal professional privilege (B Thanki QC (ed) The Law of Privilege OUP, 2006) and conflict of laws (S Worthington (ed) Commercial Law and Commercial Practice Hart, 2003; also [2003] LMCLQ 525).
  • Nik undertakes work for the Bar Pro Bono Unit.

BSB Barristers' Register