Recent work highlights

• Acting for the Consumers’ Association (Which?) as intervener in Philipp v Barclays Bank UK Plc [2022] EWCA Civ 318, an APP fraud case in which the Court of Appeal decided unanimously that the duty of care identified in Barclays Bank Plc v Quincecare Ltd could apply to an individual customer’s instructions and not just an agent’s, including where they are a victim of APP fraud.
• Acting on a multi-million pound professional negligence claim against a law firm for allegedly negligent advice given to a start-up business providing OTC derivatives valuations data to risk managers and product controllers at market making institutions.
• Advising a 50% shareholder of a £30 million business in relation to a claim for unfair prejudice against directors of the business.
• Defending a substantial claim brought against a biotechnology client, by a shareholder, in relation to an alleged breach of an IP licence agreement.
• Providing advice to the trustee in relation to the targets’ challenge to a financial support direction in ITV Plc and others v The Pensions Regulator and Box Clever Trustees Ltd [2018] UKUT 0164 (TCC).

Related news & insights

• The Law Society’s guidance on climate change: reducing or raising the risk of professional negligence claims?
• Philipp v Barclays Bank - Supreme Court judgment finds payment service providers are not liable to reimburse victims of 'APP' fraud
• Fiona Philipp v Barclays Bank UK Plc - no common law protection for victims of APP fraud
• How to implement a Consumer Duty implementation plan
• APP fraud: the PSR’s quest for mandatory reimbursement

Read more news & insights