Fountain Court Chambers

London & Singapore

Tetyana NesterchukCall Date: 2011

Tetyana has been practicing law since 2006 (first, as a solicitor) and has a broad commercial and public law practice. She has appeared as sole advocate in multiple High Court trials and arbitrations as well as in appellate proceedings. As a native Russian and Ukrainian speaker, Tetyana is often involved in CIS disputes and is able to provide quick advice without the need for translations.

Tetyana was recognised as one of the ten “Stars at the Bar 2016” by Legal Week, where one solicitor labelled her as a “very efficient and very able lawyer”, saying that “her knowledge of Russian language was a great plus, and actually an important factor in instructing her. Her ability to read and comprehend Russian documents and to communicate with Russian witnesses was very much valued”. Of particular note is her skill in handling expert witnesses, working intensively with her client’s witnesses on one case, and ably demolishing the case of her opponent’s: one lawyer noted her good ability in understanding complex and technical matters, saying her “cross-examination of the opposing party’s expert was very confident”.

In 2015, Tetyana was appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel.

From 2017, Tetyana has been recommended by The Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners, reflecting her previous experience as a solicitor at Slaughter & May and as a Judicial Assistant in the UK Supreme Court.

Recommendations

“She has the most incredible work ethic and a phenomenal ability to absorb detail and assimilate facts.” “She is an invaluable presence on any case; she is hard-working, diligent, completely on top of documentation and has an excellent grasp of the crucial details of the case.” – (Chambers & Partners, 2017)

Particularly adept at absorbing huge amounts of detail’ – (The Legal 500, 2017)

Exceptionally bright and driven.” “A former solicitor who knows what it is like to be in the trenches. She also brings intellectual rigour.” – (Chambers & Partners, 2018)

“Very clever, very capable and a very pleasant person to work with.”(Chambers & Partners, 2019)

“She both defends and prosecutes SDT and FRC cases.” – (Legal 500, 2019)

“Stunningly intelligent and very disciplined.” – (Legal 500, 2019)

“A hard-working barrister who makes herself available.” – (Chambers & Partners, 2019)

Selected recent cases

International commercial arbitration

  • ICC arbitration – successfully acting for one of the largest Russian banks in a mis-selling dispute brought by a high net worth individual, which involved issues of breach of contract, tort and breach of fiduciary duties.
  • LCIA arbitration – acting (as part of a team led by David Foxton QC) in a high profile dispute between Mr Pinchuk and Mssr Bogolyubov and Kolomoisky concerning the ownership of a Ukrainian iron ore mining business. The case raised a multitude of legal issues ranging from company law to contractual interpretation, trusts and civil fraud.
  • LCIA arbitration – acting in an arbitration arising out of a shareholder dispute concerning the ownership of a Russian mine.
  • Union Marine Classification Services v The Government of Comoros – acting in an ad hoc arbitration raising issues of shipping law as well as interpretation of the arbitration agreement.
  • LCIA arbitration – acting for the trustee defending a breach of contract claim on behalf of a consultant who previously worked for the trustee and bringing a counter-claim worth over €1 million.

Commercial litigation

  • BPP Holdings Limited (and others) v HMRC – acting for HMRC in an ongoing contractual dispute concerning the issue of whether a settlement agreement is void for unilateral mistake.
  • Bhardwaj v RBS [2017] EWHC 340 – successfully acting for RBS in a 3 day County Court trial and the appeal to the High Court (Chancery Division) raising issues of contractual interpretation and certainty of a settlement agreement, as well as issues of property law and the agreement’s compliance with the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989.
  • Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc v Zhunus [2014] 1 CLC 451 (led by Michael Brindle QC) – appearing in the Court of Appeal successfully resisting an application to discharge a freezing injunction obtained by a group of Kazakh companies against its former director and chief executive officer who were accused of conspiring in a complex USD 150 million fraud. The case raised difficult jurisdictional, legal and factual issues, including contribution as between two co-defendants, one of whom had settled with the claimant. In a ground-breaking decision the court held that freezing order could be granted in aid of a contribution notice.
  • JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank v Pugachev [2014] EWHC 4336 (led by Francis Tregear QC) – acting for Mr Pugachev on an application to dismiss a world-wide freezing injunction obtained by a Russian bank and a Russian state organisation responsible for conducting liquidations of credit institutions. Involved complicated issues of Russian as well as English law.

Banking and finance

  • ICC arbitration – acting for a Russian Bank in an arbitration concerning the mis-selling of certain derivatives, involving issues of causation of loss in an unstable financial market as well as cross-examination of experts on complex issues of valuation of derivatives and causation of loss.
  • Monks v National Westminster Bank plc [2015] EWHC 2310 (Ch) – acting for the NatWest bank in a 4 day High Court trial arising out of a mortgage contracts disputes raising issues of banking law and practice as well as interpretation and bank’s compliance with its duties to consumers under the FCA Code of Conduct.
  • Solomon v Barclays Bank plc [2015] EWHC 1495 (Fam) (judgment delivered in private and not published) – successfully acting for Barclays Bank in a 5-day High Court trial concerning the allegedly forged transfer of property secured to the Bank. The case raised issues of trusts and property law, as well as banking law and practice.
  • Patel v National Westminster Bank [2015] EWCA Civ 332 – acted as sole counsel for the Bank in High Court and Court of Appeal proceedings relating to non-payment of a Kenyan cheque, raising issues of conflict of laws in the context of claims on a foreign cheque and liability for loss of chance.

 

Civil fraud

  • Patel v Vaid – acted (led Paul Sinclair QC) for the defendants in a seven day Chancery Court trial (settled on the fifth day of hearing) raising issues of principal’s liability for agent’s deceit, unlawful means conspiracy, Quistclose trusts, knowing receipt and restitution of payments induced by fraud or mistake.
  • AHAB v Al Sanea – (led by Marcus Smith QC and Bridget Lucas QC) acted in civil fraud proceedings in the Cayman Islands raising complicated issues of tracing of assets through bank accounts.

 

Conflict of laws and jurisdiction

  • Erdenet v Government of Kazakhstan [2016] EWHC 299 (Comm) (led by Michael Brindle QC) – acting for one of the largest ore mining companies in Asia in a dispute with the Government of Kazakhstan regarding non-payment of a multi-million debt. The case involved the issue of when it would be appropriate to set aside service out of jurisdiction at an interlocutory stage when jurisdiction agreement was contained in an oral contract.
  • JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank v Pugachev [2014] EWHC 4336 (led by Francis Tregear QC) – an application to strike out all claims against Mr Pugachev in the English courts for lack of jurisdiction. The jurisdictional issues raised were complicated since different rules applied to different claims brought (including for subsidiary liability, tort and unjust enrichment under Russian law and insolvency law claims under Russian and English law). The Claimants ultimately conceded at the door of the court that all their claims in the English courts ought to be stayed.

 

Financial services 

  • P.F. (International) Limited v FCA – acting for the FCA on an application by the firm to suspend the effect of FCA’s supervisory notice.
  • R. (on the application of OJSC Rosneft Oil Co) v HM Treasury [2014] EWHC 4002 – appearing on behalf of the Financial Conduct Authority to resist an urgent application by Rosneft to stay the coming into force of UK secondary legislation implementing EU sanctions on companies providing certain oil exploration services in Russia. Raised the issue of interpretation of the FCA guidance concerning the interpretation of certain terms in the EU regulations imposing sanctions on Russia.
  • Bull v Gain Capital Holdings Inc [2014] EWHC 539 (led by Richard Handyside QC) – acting for a US foreign exchange platform in a class action brought by UK investors in a collapsed UK-based investment services company seeking restitution or damages under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. Raised complex legal issues of what amounts to a joint venture, when consumer remedies under FSMA become available and whether a restitutionary remedy is available to the consumers.
  • Cavendish Moore v FSA – defending a firm in an FSA investigation and, thereafter, High Court proceedings concerning the firm’s participation in an allegedly unlawful collective investment scheme.
  • Advising the FCA (led by Richard Coleman QC) on draft proposed regulatory rules and their application.

Competition law and public procurement

  • Acted in a number of cases challenging the procurement of pharmaceuticals by the NHS in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland. Each claim resulted in the NHS abandoning the challenged competition and re-running the process.

Public law and judicial review

  • R (on the application of the London Borough of Hillingdon and others) v Secretary of State for Transport (unreported) – acting for Arora Holdings Limited (an interested party) in a one day preliminary hearing in relation to the judicial review of the Airports National Policy Statement which contains the Government’s proposal for the expansion of Heathrow Airport.
  • R (Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board [2015] 3 WLR 121, [2015] EWCA Civ 421, [2014] HRLR 29, [2014] EWHC 28, [2013] EWHC 3289 (led by Timothy Dutton QC) – acting for the Bar Standards Board in a judicial review challenge of the QASA scheme brought by the Criminal Bar. Appearing at all levels from the Divisional Court to the Supreme Court. The case raised complex EU law and domestic public law issues including independence of advocates and judiciary, proportionality, compliance with the EU provision of services regulations and directives, compliance with Art 6 ECHR right to fair trial.
  • R. (on the application of OJSC Rosneft Oil Co) v HM Treasury [2014] EWHC 4002 (Admin)  – appearing on behalf of the Financial Conduct Authority to resist an urgent application by Rosneft to stay the coming into force of UK secondary legislation implementing EU sanctions on companies providing certain oil exploration services in Russia. Raised issues of EU law as well as domestic public law.

Professional discipline

  • SRA v Leigh Day (Case No. 11502-2016) (led by Patricia Robertson QC and Paul Gott QC) – successfully defending Leigh Day and the three individuals involved in the record seven week long trial in the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. Tetyana’s clients faced a total of 250 separate charges, all arising out of their representation of Iraqi clients alleging to have suffered personal injuries as a result of mistreatment by the British Army. Tetyana advised Leigh Day throughout all stages of the SRA’s investigation and prosecution.
  • SRA v Barnett and Swift (Case No. 11249-2014; Barnett v SRA [2016] EWHC 1160 (led by Timothy Dutton QC) – acting for the SRA in a successful prosecution of solicitors for misconduct (including dishonesty) arising out of the collapsed Axiom Legal Financing Fund. Successfully defending the SDT decision on appeal to the High Court.
  • ACCA v Ryman – successfully defended the chartered accountant member of ACCA against 7 allegations of professional misconduct (including dishonesty) that were investigated by ACCA over a period of 5 years and arose out of the member’s conduct as a receiver of a law firm.
  • Advising a magic circle law firm on its investigation and reporting obligations to the SRA arising out of a high profile judicial criticism of the firm’s handling of litigation.
  • SRA v KA (Case No. 11176-2013) – represented the SRA (as sole counsel) in a test case concerning the scope of SRA’s territorial jurisdiction to bring disciplinary proceedings against non-SRA-regulated lawyers practicing in SRA-regulated firms. The SDT agreed with Tetyana’s client that, in light of the purpose of SRA’s regulatory powers, their scope existed to regulating all lawyers within an SRA-regulated entity provided such lawyers were “involved in a legal practice” of a regulated firm.

Company law

  • LCIA arbitration – acting in shareholder dispute between two Cypriot companies raising issues of minority shareholder rights.
  • Advising a company on availability of civil and regulatory actions against its director for breach of directors’ duties.

Costs

  • BPP Holdings Limited (and others) v HMRC – acting for the HMRC in a costs dispute concerning the issue of whether a settlement agreement is void for unilateral mistake.
  • R (Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board  [2015] EWCA Civ 421 – appeared (as sole counsel) in the Court of Appeal on the costs application for judicial review which included issues of a protective costs order and a costs cap.

Please click on the Recent Practice tab below for a more detailed overview of Tetyana’s practice in each practice area.

Areas of Expertise

  • Banking & finance
  • Commercial dispute resolution
  • Company
  • Financial services
  • Fraud: civil
  • Insurance and reinsurance
  • International arbitration
  • Professional discipline
  • Professional negligence
  • Public procurement

Recent practice

International commercial arbitration (with emphasis on CIS-related work)

  • ICC arbitration – successfully acting for one of the largest Russian banks in a mis-selling dispute brought by a high net worth individual, which involved issues of breach of contract, tort and breach of fiduciary duties.
  • LCIA arbitration – acting (as part of a team led by David Foxton QC) in a high profile dispute between Mr Pinchuk and Mssr Bogolyubov and Kolomoisky concerning the ownership of a Ukrainian iron ore mining business. The case raised a multitude of legal issues ranging from company law to contractual interpretation, trusts and civil fraud.
  • LCIA arbitration – acting in an arbitration arising out of a shareholder dispute concerning the ownership of a Russian mine.
  • Union Marine Classification Services v The Government of Comoros – acting in an ad hoc arbitration raising issues of shipping law as well as interpretation of the arbitration agreement.
  • LCIA arbitration – acting for the trustee defending a breach of contract claim on behalf of a consultant who previously worked for the trustee and bringing a counter-claim worth over €1 million.
  • LCIA arbitration – acted (as junior counsel to Ray Cox QC) in LCIA arbitration proceedings relating to interest rate swaps and currency options under the ISDA Master Agreement, which raised issues of Indian regulatory law, misrepresentation and estoppel.

Commercial litigation

  • BPP Holdings Limited v HMRC – acting for HMRC in an ongoing contractual dispute concerning the issue of whether a settlement agreement is void for unilateral mistake.
  • Bhardwaj v RBS [2017] EWHC 340 – successfully acting for RBS in a 3 day County Court trial and the appeal to the High Court (Chancery Division) raising issues of contractual interpretation and certainty of a settlement agreement, as well as issues of property law and the agreement’s compliance with the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989.
  • Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc v Zhunus [2014] 1 CLC 451 (led by Michael Brindle QC) – appearing in the Court of Appeal successfully resisting an application to discharge a freezing injunction obtained by a group of Kazakh companies against its former director and chief executive officer who were accused of conspiring in a complex USD 150 million fraud. The case raised difficult jurisdictional, legal and factual issues, including contribution as between two co-defendants, one of whom had settled with the claimant. In a ground-breaking decision the court held that freezing order could be granted in aid of a contribution notice.
  • JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank v Pugachev [2014] EWHC 4336 (led by Francis Tregear QC) – acting for Mr Pugachev on an application to dismiss a world-wide freezing injunction obtained by a Russian bank and a Russian state organisation responsible for conducting liquidations of credit institutions. Involved complicated issues of Russian as well as English law.
  • Appeared (as sole counsel) on behalf of an airline in the Commercial Court application for an adjournment of determination of a multi-million dollar dispute arising out of the wet lease arrangements.
  • Instructed (as sole counsel) to defend proceedings brought by a water re-seller against a UK charity. The proceedings settled following exchange of pleadings and witness evidence.
  • Acted (as junior counsel to Marcus Smith QC and James Cutress) on behalf of a lender in a professional negligence dispute against the valuers of lender’s security.
  • Markov v Sotheby’s – acted in a dispute relating to the title of a rare Russian medal (proceedings settled).
  • Acted for a national hotel chain defending a claim for breach of contract.

Banking and finance

  • ICC arbitration – acting for a Russian Bank in an arbitration concerning the mis-selling of certain derivatives, involving issues of causation of loss in an unstable financial market as well as cross-examination of experts on complex issues of valuation of derivatives and causation of loss.
  • Monks v National Westminster Bank plc [2015] EWHC 2310 (Ch) – acting for the NatWest bank in a 4 day High Court trial arising out of a mortgage contracts disputes raising issues of banking law and practice as well as interpretation and bank’s compliance with its duties to consumers under the FCA Code of Conduct.
  • Solomon v Barclays Bank plc [2015] EWHC 1495 (Fam) (judgment delivered in private and not published) – successfully acting for Barclays Bank in a 5-day High Court trial concerning the allegedly forged transfer of property secured to the Bank. The case raised issues of trusts and property law, as well as banking law and practice.
  • Patel v National Westminster Bank [2015] EWCA Civ 332 – acted as sole counsel for the Bank in High Court and Court of Appeal proceedings relating to non-payment of a Kenyan cheque, raising issues of conflict of laws in the context of claims on a foreign cheque and liability for loss of chance.
  • Appeared, as sole counsel, in a number of County Court and High Court proceedings acting for high street banks in disputes raising a variety of legal issues from consumer credit and bankruptcy laws to complaints under the Equality Act 2010 and mis-sale of PPI.
  • Advised on and settled pleadings for a wide number of claims against retail banks for mis-sale of PPI and interest rate hedging products.
  • Advised on construction of the ISDA Master Agreement.
  • Belmont Park Investments PTY Limited (Respondent) v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Limited and Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc (Appellants) [2012] 1 AC 383 – as a judicial assistant in the Supreme Court, assisted Lord Collins with the appeal in this case concerning the application of the anti-deprivation principle of insolvency law in the context of structured derivative transactions.

 

Civil fraud

  • Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc v Zhunus [2014] 1 CLC 451 (led by Michael Brindle QC) – appeared in the Court of Appeal successfully resisting an application to discharge a freezing injunction obtained by a group of Kazakh companies against its former director and chief executive officer who were accused of conspiring in a complex USD 150 million fraud. The case raised complicated issues of limitation under English and Kazakh laws in the context of civil fraud.
  • Patel v Vaid – acted (led Paul Sinclair QC) for the defendants in a seven day Chancery Court trial (settled on the fifth day of hearing) raising issues of principal’s liability for agent’s deceit, unlawful means conspiracy, Quistclose trusts, knowing receipt and restitution of payments induced by fraud or mistake.
  • AHAB v Al Sanea – (led by Marcus Smith QC and Bridget Lucas QC) acted in civil fraud proceedings in the Cayman Islands raising complicated issues of tracing of assets through bank accounts.
  • LCIA arbitration – acting (as part of a team led by David Foxton QC) in a high profile dispute between Mr Pinchuk and Mssr Bogolyubov and Kolomoisky concerning the ownership of a Ukrainian iron ore mining business. The case raised a multitude of legal issues ranging from company law to contractual interpretation, trusts and civil fraud.
  • Defended proceedings brought against a number of CIS parties for unlawful means conspiracy.

 

Conflict of laws and jurisdiction

  • Erdenet v Government of Kazakhstan [2016] EWHC 299 (Comm) (led by Michael Brindle QC) – acting for one of the largest ore mining companies in Asia in a dispute with the Government of Kazakhstan regarding non-payment of a multi-million debt. The case involved the issue of when it would be appropriate to set aside service out of jurisdiction at an interlocutory stage when jurisdiction agreement was contained in an oral contract.
  • JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank v Pugachev [2014] EWHC 4336 (led by Francis Tregear QC) – an application to strike out all claims against Mr Pugachev in the English courts for lack of jurisdiction. The jurisdictional issues raised were complicated since different rules applied to different claims brought (including for subsidiary liability, tort and unjust enrichment under Russian law and insolvency law claims under Russian and English law). The Claimants ultimately conceded at the door of the court that all their claims in the English courts ought to be stayed.
  • Advised (as sole counsel) on various conflict of laws issues arising out of proceedings for non-payment of a Kenyan cheque.
  • As a judicial assistant in the Supreme Court, assisted Lord Collins with the appeals in NML Capital Limited v Republic of Argentina [2011] 2 AC 495 which raised issues of enforcement of a foreign judgment against a foreign state and interpretation of contractual waiver of immunity provisions and Lucasfilm Limited v Ainsworth [2012] 1 AC 208 concerning English court’s jurisdiction to try a claim for infringement of foreign copyright.

 

Financial services 

  • P.F. (International) Limited v FCA – acting for the FCA on an application by the firm to suspend the effect of FCA’s supervisory notice.
  • R. (on the application of OJSC Rosneft Oil Co) v HM Treasury [2014] EWHC 4002 – appearing on behalf of the Financial Conduct Authority to resist an urgent application by Rosneft to stay the coming into force of UK secondary legislation implementing EU sanctions on companies providing certain oil exploration services in Russia. Raised the issue of interpretation of the FCA guidance concerning the interpretation of certain terms in the EU regulations imposing sanctions on Russia.
  • Bull v Gain Capital Holdings Inc [2014] EWHC 539 (led by Richard Handyside QC) – acting for a US foreign exchange platform in a class action brought by UK investors in a collapsed UK-based investment services company seeking restitution or damages under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. Raised complex legal issues of what amounts to a joint venture, when consumer remedies under FSMA become available and whether a restitutionary remedy is available to the consumers.
  • Cavendish Moore v FSA – defending a firm in an FSA investigation and, thereafter, High Court proceedings concerning the firm’s participation in an allegedly unlawful collective investment scheme.
  • Advising the FCA (led by Richard Coleman QC) on draft proposed regulatory rules and their application.
  • Advising the FCA (led by Richard Coleman QC) on the case law and application of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Directive.
  • Advised on various issues including regulation of collective investment schemes, money laundering and reporting obligations arising from the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, treatment of client funds and breaches of the FCA Conduct of Business rules.

Competition law and public procurement

  • Acted in a number of cases challenging the procurement of pharmaceuticals by the NHS in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland. Each claim resulted in the NHS abandoning the challenged competition and re-running the process.
  • Brent London Borough Council and others v Risk Management Partners Limited (Respondent) [2011] 2 AC 34 – as a judicial assistant in the Supreme Court, assisted Lords Rodger and Brown with the first Supreme Court case concerning the application of the UK and EU public procurement rules.
  • As a solicitor at Slaughter and May, advised HM Treasury (under the supervision of relevant partners) on public procurement issues arising out of the bail-out of Northern Rock.
  • As a solicitor at Slaughter and May during secondment to the Hong Kong office, (under the supervision of relevant partners) drafted a response to the Hong Kong government’s proposals to introduce competition law in Hong Kong.

Public law and judicial review

  • R (on the application of the London Borough of Hillingdon and others) v Secretary of State for Transport (unreported) – acting for Arora Holdings Limited (an interested party) in a one day preliminary hearing in relation to the judicial review of the Airports National Policy Statement which contains the Government’s proposal for the expansion of Heathrow Airport.
  • Acting for six London Boroughs (led by Tim Dutton QC) in the JR challenge of the cuts to the local government funding.
  • R (Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board [2015] 3 WLR 121, [2015] EWCA Civ 421, [2014] HRLR 29, [2014] EWHC 28, [2013] EWHC 3289 (led by Timothy Dutton QC) – acting for the Bar Standards Board in a judicial review challenge of the QASA scheme brought by the Criminal Bar. Appearing at all levels from the Divisional Court to the Supreme Court. The case raised complex EU law and domestic public law issues including independence of advocates and judiciary, proportionality, compliance with the EU provision of services regulations and directives, compliance with Art 6 ECHR right to fair trial.
  • R. (on the application of OJSC Rosneft Oil Co) v HM Treasury [2014] EWHC 4002 (Admin)  – appearing on behalf of the Financial Conduct Authority to resist an urgent application by Rosneft to stay the coming into force of UK secondary legislation implementing EU sanctions on companies providing certain oil exploration services in Russia. Raised issues of EU law as well as domestic public law.
  • Anderson Solicitors v SRA [2012] EWHC 3659 – one of the leading authorities on the issue of publication of details of professional misconduct by the SRA. Tetyana successfully appeared as sole counsel for the SRA at the hearing dealing with issues of costs and the continuing effect of the interim anonymity order.

Professional discipline

  • SRA v Leigh Day (Case No. 11502-2016) (led by Patricia Robertson QC and Paul Gott QC) – successfully defending Leigh Day and the three individuals involved in the record seven week long trial in the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. Tetyana’s clients faced a total of 250 separate charges, all arising out of their representation of Iraqi clients alleging to have suffered personal injuries as a result of mistreatment by the British Army. Tetyana advised Leigh Day throughout all stages of the SRA’s investigation and prosecution.
  • SRA v Barnett and Swift (Case No. 11249-2014; Barnett v SRA [2016] EWHC 1160 (led by Timothy Dutton QC) – acting for the SRA in a successful prosecution of solicitors for misconduct (including dishonesty) arising out of the collapsed Axiom Legal Financing Fund. Successfully defending the SDT decision on appeal to the High Court.
  • Advising a magic circle law firm on its investigation and reporting obligations to the SRA arising out of a high profile judicial criticism of the firm’s handling of litigation.
  • ACCA v Ryman – successfully defended the chartered accountant member of ACCA against 7 allegations of professional misconduct (including dishonesty) that were investigated by ACCA over a period of 5 years and arose out of the member’s conduct as a receiver of a law firm.
  • SRA v Hale – appeared as sole counsel for the SRA in disciplinary proceedings against a solicitor resulting in a striking off for dishonesty and breach of the SRA rule.
  • SRA v Stott – appeared (led by Tim Dutton QC) in proceedings resulting in a striking off for dishonesty and breach of the SRA rules in proceedings arising out of the solicitor’s conduct in accepting and misusing funds lent to his firm by the Axiom Litigation Financing Fund.
  • SRA v KA (Case No. 11176-2013) – represented the SRA (as sole counsel) in a test case concerning the scope of SRA’s territorial jurisdiction to bring disciplinary proceedings against non-SRA-regulated lawyers practicing in SRA-regulated firms. The SDT agreed with Tetyana’s client that, in light of the purpose of SRA’s regulatory powers, their scope existed to regulating all lawyers within an SRA-regulated entity provided such lawyers were “involved in a legal practice” of a regulated firm.

 

Company law

  • Advising a director on an application for permission to act as director whilst disqualified
  • LCIA arbitration – acting in shareholder dispute between two Cypriot companies raising issues of minority shareholder rights.
  • Advising a company on availability of civil and regulatory actions against its director for breach of directors’ duties.
  • IGE Energy Services (UK) Limited v Baglan Operations Limited – acting for a company in an application for an extension of the period of registration of a charge.
  • Advised on various aspects of company law, including shareholder disputes, director’s duties and the law of shareholders’ meetings.
  • Enviroco v Farstad [2011] 1 WLR 921 – as a judicial assistant in the Supreme Court, assisted Lord Rodger with the appeal determining the meaning of “subsidiary” and “member” in the Companies Act 1985.
  • As a corporate solicitor at Slaughter and May, had wide experience of advising on and drafting documentation for both public and private corporate transactions.

 

Costs

  • BPP Holdings Limited (and others) v HMRC – acting for the HMRC in a costs dispute as to whether a valid settlement agreement was concluded, raising issues of mistake.
  • R (Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board  [2015] EWCA Civ 421 – appeared (as sole counsel) in the Court of Appeal on the costs application for judicial review which included issues of a protective costs order and a costs cap.
  • Appeared in several detailed assessment costs hearings.

Education

  • BA (Jurisprudence), Worcester College, Oxford (First Class Honours; ranked 1st in the year across University)
  • BCL, Worcester College, Oxford (Distinction)
  • LPC, BPP Law School (Distinction)

Appointments, memberships, prizes

Appointments

  • Attorney General’s C Panel
  • Member of the UK Bar Council’s International Committee

Memberships

  • Commercial Bar Association
  • London Common Law and Commercial Bar Association
  • ICC Young Arbitrators Forum
  • LCIA Young International Arbitration Group
  • Russian and CIS Arbitration Network
  • РЮМКА (Russian Speaking Lawyers in International Commercial Arbitration)
  • RusFor (Russian Speaking Legal Professionals’ Forum)
  • Association of Regulatory and Disciplinary Lawyers
  • Procurement Lawyers’ Association

Prizes

  • Gibbs Prize for the best performance in Final Honour School examinations in Tort, Contract, Land law and Trusts (Oxford University, 2004)
  • Martin Wronker Prize (proxime accessit) for the best performance in Final Honour School of Law (Oxford University, 2004)
  • Bruce Reynolds prize for the best performance in the BCL (Worcester College, Oxford, 2005)
  • Henriques Prize for the best performance in the Final Honour Schools of Lit. Hum., PPE, Modern History and Law (Worcester College, Oxford, 2005)
  • Waverley Scholarship for international students (Oxford University, 2001-2004)
  • Andrew Dixon Scholarship (Worcester College, Oxford, 2002-2004)
  • Winner of the Oxford University Crown Office Moot competition (2004)

Other experience

  • Judicial Assistant in the Supreme Court (assisted Lords Rodger, Brown and Collins) (2010-2011)
  • Solicitor at Slaughter and May (corporate department; advising on all aspects of company law, financial regulation, schemes of arrangement and mergers and acquisitions) (2006-2010)

Teaching experience

Tetyana enjoys teaching and held the following posts as a Lecturer in Law at Oxford University:

  • Lecturer in Trusts at Brasenose, Worcester, Lincoln and Oriel Colleges (2011-2014)
  • Lecturer in Torts at Pembroke College (2010-2011)
  • Lecturer in Roman law at Worcester College (2005-2006)

In October 2013, Tetyana read a course of lectures on English contract law (in Russian) at the M-Logos Legal Institute in Moscow. The course was directed at Russian-qualified in-house lawyers.

Publications

  • England and Russia: resolving jurisdictional disputes (co-written with Raymond Cox QC and Dr Anton Asoskov), Law Gazette, 22 April 2013
  • The view from behind the bench: the role of judicial assistants in the UK Supreme Courta contribution to Judge and Jurist: Essays in Memory of Lord Rodger of Earlsferry edited by A. Burrows, D. Johnson and R. Zimmermann
  • Anti-suit injunctions (Westlaw Insight)

Languages

  • Russian (native speaker)
  • Ukrainian (native speaker)

BSB Barristers' Register