Andrew was called to the Bar of England and Wales in 1992. He is a senior general civil practitioner with a tendency to commercial/Chancery litigation. Andrew has extensive experience in High Court Litigation and commercial advisory work.
X v Y – acting for beneficiary of £multi-million trust established by will against one of the richest families in UK
Khan v Bark-Jones – serious partnership dispute between two City of London solicitors – settled favourably for client (Bark & Co) after extensive Chancery Division litigation where Andrew was lead by James Dingemans QC.
Re Minrealm – complex Companies Act litigation (then s 459 Companies Act 1985, now s 996 Companies Act 2006) – many tangential issues and satellite litigation (involving eg insolvency) – came before Court of Appeal on sole point of costs under reference  EWCA Civ 780:
11 March 2013 – Bhandal v Irish Nationwide Building Society In this case Andrew was instructed by Whitworth and Green on behalf of the Claimant and obtained judgment for £113,214,374.20. The Chancery Division action was a claim for breach of duty by mortgagee in the receivership/sale of Updown Court, a notorious property the subject of many articles in the press.
4 December 2013 – Palmer & Harvey McLane Ltd v Garrad This case is notable for the fact that Andrew represented the Defendants by himself under Direct Public Access without solicitors whereas the Claimant was represented by Herbert Smith Freehills who had instructed leading counsel and two junior counsel. On the Claimant side there were rarely fewer than six lawyers in court. The case had trial bundles of about fifty or more lever arches and the trial lasted 13 days. At the time of instruction Andrew was expecting his clients to instruct leading counsel. In preparation and during trial Andrew was working eighteen hour days in succession.
18 March 2015 – Magnic Ltd v (1) Ul-Hassan; (2) Malik  EWCA Civ 224 In this case, important in the area of forfeiture of commercial leases, Andrew’s clients (the tenants) succeeded in the Court of Appeal in a unanimous judgment of the Master of the Rolls (Lord Dyson), Patten LJ and Tomlinson LJ. The commercial lease in question had been forfeited pursuant to an order of Brentford County Court. In the first appeal to HHJ Powles QC and in the second appeal to the Court of Appeal Andrew was instructed by Tann and Tann and lead by Peter Knox QC.
23 October 2015 – Byblos Country Club Golf SA litigation In this case Andrew was instructed by Carter Lemon Camerons LLP on behalf of Dag Frode Nordset and TM Hejoriola SL (the Claimants). The litigation concerned La Manzanilla (UK) Ltd and the Byblos Golf and Country Club in Spain. The action was instituted by Part 8 Claim issued 14 July 2015 seeking remedies under the Companies Act 2006, namely:section 1029 (restoration of company); sections 170-174 (duties of officers to company); section 260 (derivative claim on behalf of company); section 994 (unfair prejudice to shareholders). The litigation also involved: ex parte injunction to protect assets including real property overseas and sole bearer share in a Panama-registered company; registration of a Spanish judgment under CPR 74.6 and Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (“the Brussels Regulation”); conclusion by agreement of the Claimants, nine Defendants and the Registrar of Companies/Government Legal Department. An order by consent disposing of the litigation was approved by Peter Smith J on 23 October 2015.
2016- General commercial advisory work, employment, intellectual property and trusts. Noncontentious work includes: corporate acquisitions, memoranda of understanding, coproduction deals in television and film, terms of licences of photographic media. In 2017 the most significant matter has involved a complex structure including on-shore and off-shore subsidiary structures (companies and trusts) holding UK assets with a value of about £20m.
23 August 2017 – The High Court (Snowden J) has given guidance on the difference between dilapidations (which are not subject to VAT) and fees payable under a licence of premises (which may be subject to VAT). The legislative text is VAT Notice 742 (at paragraph 10.12) and the judgment is West End Commercial Ltd v London Trocadero (2015) LLP  EWHC 2175 (Ch) (at paragraphs 58 to 62). In this case Andrew was instructed by Consilium Legal on behalf of the licensee.
Areas of Expertise
Landlord and Tenant (Commercial and Residential)