Enforcement of Swiss Arbitral Award

Charles Fussell and Elizabeth Stoppelmoor of Charles Fussell & Co have been instructed to assist with the enforcement of a Swiss Arbitral Award made against a French and an English defendant.  The Award was made in 2014, but has been fiercely resisted by the defendants, who first challenged it in the Court of the Seat in Switzerland, before resisting enforcement in the French courts.  Charles Fussell & Co LLP has been instructed to register the Award in England and Wales and deal with enforcement here. 

Charles Fussell & Co LLP recognised in the 2020 edition of the Legal 500

Charles Fussell & Co LLP is pleased to be recognised in the 2020 edition of the Legal 500.

The Legal 500 has continued to recognise the firm in its dispute resolution rankings, but improving the firm’s ranking by one tier.  The firm is now recognised as at least the equal of several national firms in its niche area.

Charles Fussell & Co LLP is ‘A very strong boutique practice that has a focus on partner-led work’.  The rankings record that ‘Charles Fussell and Simon Winter are truly outstanding lawyers, who are also excellent with clients – a winning combination’.

Charles Fussell & Co LLP instructed in billion-pound multi-jurisdictional dispute

Charles Fussell & Co LLP has been instructed to act for the Thirteenth Defendant in a fifteen-party multi-jurisdictional claim brought by the Federal Government of Nigeria.

The case concerns OPL 245, an oil prospecting licence first granted by the Nigerian government in 1998 to Malabu Oil and Gas. Following a change in government, the licence was rescinded and re-awarded to a Nigerian subsidiary of Shell PLC. A dispute then arose between Shell and Malabu as to the true ownership of the OPL 245 licence, which was purportedly resolved by way of a settlement agreement in 2006. However, Malabu then sought to sell part of its interest in the licence, which was ultimately acquired by Shell and ENI, an Italian oil company, in a series of transactions using the Nigerian government as an intermediary in 2011 (the “2011 Agreements”).

The Federal Government of Nigeria now seeks to recover the monies paid from Shell and ENI to Malabu as part of the 2011 Agreements on the basis that the purchase price was not paid for the benefit of the Nigerian people but instead comprised bribes, kick-backs and other unlawful benefits to then-government officials and others, including high level executives within the Shell and ENI companies.

Charles Fussell & Co LLP acts on behalf of Energy Venture Partners Limited, a company which was initially hired by Malabu to source a purchaser for part or all of its interest in the OPL 245 licence. EVP has already successfully brought proceedings in respect of the transaction against Malabu and was awarded $110 million for work carried out as an introducer, but the Claimant now suggests that EVP was in fact part of a corrupt scheme to facilitate the bribes and kickbacks it alleges against the Shell and ENI defendants.

The Defendants are currently seeking to challenge jurisdiction on a number of grounds. The application is expected to be heard later this year.

Charles Fussell & Co LLP turns 12 years old

Charles Fussell & Co LLP is delighted to celebrate its 12th birthday as an independent boutique litigation firm.

Since being founded in 2007 by Managing Partner Charles Fussell, the firm has grown from strength to strength. Since 2009, the firm has consistently been involved in at least one of the Lawyer Top 20 cases, including

  • Berezovsky v. Abramovich

  • JSC BTA Bank v. Ablyazov

  • DAAR Al Arkan v. Al Refai

  • Peak Hotels & Resorts v. Tarek Investments

  • Libyan Investment Authority v. Goldman Sachs

  • Libyan Investment Authority v. SocGen

  • Bluewaters Communications Holdings v. Ecclestone.


Charles Fussell & Co LLP succeeds in insolvency jurisdiction battle

Charles Fussell & Co LLP has succeeded in defeating a creditor’s attempt to bankrupt a client in this jurisdiction.

Mr Deputy Registrar Baister handed down judgment today in Porter Capital Corporation v. Masters.  Despite its concerns about some aspects of the evidence, the Court was nevertheless persuaded that the evidence showed that the debtor’s centre of main interests was in Switzerland – and not England and Wales.  The creditor’s bankruptcy petition was therefore dismissed.

The debtor produced a considerable amount of evidence showing how his personal life was based in Switzerland.  The creditor sought to argue that (1) his involvement with a company incorporated in England and Wales and (2) his receipt, through an arrangement with his wife, of income from that company was sufficient to establish English jurisdiction because he was “exercising an independent business or professional activity” (in the words of article 3(1) of the EU Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings 2015 (Regulation (EU) 2015/848)).  The Regulation is also the subject of an authoritative commentary known as the Virgós-Schmit report.

The Court rejected the argument.  Taken to its logical conclusion, this would ignore the well-established concept of the separate legal personality of companies.  The argument did not sit with paragraph 75 of the Virgós-Schmit report and was also contrary to previous authorities.

As is clear, most of the legal argument centred around EU legislation and guidance.  It remains to be seen what rules (if any) will govern such disputes in the future.

Simon Winter acted for the debtor, assisted by Catherine Stockler.  Charles Fussell & Co LLP instructed Adam Al-Attar of South Square Chambers as Counsel.

Charles Fussell & Co LLP is delighted to participate in the forthcoming London Commercial Circuit Court seminar on 27 March 2019

The London Commercial Circuit Court forms a significant part of the firm’s practice and the firm is pleased to contribute to the effective working of the Court through Simon Winter’s membership of the Court’s user group. Simon was invited to become a member of the group on its formation by the judge in charge, now Mr Justice Waksman

Charles Fussell and Co LLP recognised in the 2018 edition of the Legal 500 rankings

Charles Fussell and Co LLP is pleased to be recognised in the 2018 edition of the Legal 500 rankings.

We are pleased that the 2018 edition of the Legal 500 rankings have listed the firm in the dispute resolution rankings. The firm is recommended for both the substantial litigation cases handled and the firm’s partners are recognised individually for their ligation skills.

Charles Fussell & Co LLP is 'capable of managing litigation of a much larger size than might be expected given the size of the firm'. The rankings note that our firm’s practice acts ‘predominantly for claimants in commercial disputes, fraud and professional negligence.’

The rankings recognise Charles Fussell as 'a very shrewd lawyer, with a great tactical overview of litigation'. Simon Winter is 'a very good and experienced tactician'.

 

Charles Fussell & Co LLP succeeds in setting aside transactions designed to defraud creditors

We acted for the successful claimants in an unusual case concerning transactions designed to defeat the claims of judgment creditors.  The judgment is available via BAILLI  and has attracted comment from a number of sources.

We acted for clients who had a strong contractual claim against a solicitor (“Mr Shone”) running a litigation funding vehicle incorporated as a limited partnership in Bermuda but run from an office in Singapore as an investment fund.

The clients had noticed serious irregularities in the accounts of the fund vehicle and, through sheer persistence, had forced Mr Shone to agree to buy them out personally.  Mr Shone’s liability to the clients under their contracts with him was around USD 2,400,000.  Unknown to the clients (at the time), they were not alone in their concerns and, under pressure on all sides, Mr Shone effectively abandoned his post as general partner of the fund. 

In the course of investigations, it became clear that Mr Shone had exploited delays in consular service in Singapore (which is required by the laws of that state and which he had obliged the clients to undertake by conspicuously failing to provide an address for service in England and Wales) to dissipate nearly all his assets to his supposedly-estranged wife (“Mrs Shone”) and to disappear to Bali in Indonesia with his girlfriend, a self-described “glamour model” and “male menopause therapist”.

Leaving aside the exotic facts, the importance of the case lies in the fact that a team led by Simon Winter, with support from Oliver Cox (who has now left the firm), obtained on 12 February 2015 one of the most draconian remedies available from the English Court, namely a worldwide asset freezing injunction not only against Mr Shone but also against Mrs Shone on the basis of the jurisdiction established in an authority known as Chabra.  Further (and very unusually) we persuaded the Court to allow service by alternative methods on both husband and wife and to allow delay in service to allow ancillary proceedings to be brought in Malaysia to preserve a valuable piece of real estate for potential enforcement there, both of which involved a significant exercise in logistics.   

This case is an important example of how this firm can deliver results for clients of the kind much larger practices could deliver but at a level of cost which made the case economically viable for the clients.  A larger practice could easily have spent more than the claim was worth.

Mrs Shone opposed the claim at every turn, instructing first Stewarts Law LLP then Benchmark Solicitors LLP, and tried and failed to discharge the freezing injunction on 18 June 2015.  Judgment was entered against Mr Shone on 24 July 2015 and against Mrs Shone on 20 May 2016.

That judgment is of general public importance and is a relatively rare High Court claim dealing with the application of Section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986.  That section gives the Court the power to set aside transactions designed to defeat the claims of creditors.  The case is out of the ordinary in that it concerned unusually high-value transfers brought not by an insolvency practitioner but by some of the creditors affected themselves.

Daniel Saoul of 4 New Square acted as Counsel throughout.