Daniel Fletcher

• LCIA arbitration
  Acting for a global financial institution in a dispute with a sovereign state. The dispute concerns whether the state has used all reasonable endeavours in good faith to recover the proceeds of a substantial fraud.
• LCIA arbitration
  As sole counsel, advising in relation to claims concerning an F1 sponsorship agreement.
• UNCITRAL arbitration
  Defending a consumer goods business from claims for tens of millions of pounds under the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993. The case involved novel legal issues as to whether those regulations applied to the parties’ cost-sharing arrangement, and detailed quantum issues as to the sharing of costs and liabilities as that arrangement was wound down.
• ICC arbitration
  Defending claims under a contract for the sale of aluminium fluoride. Dan was the advocate for two CMCs and was to conduct the four-day main hearing until the case settled at the last minute. The case involved allegations of forgery, expert evidence on foreign law and a successful application to preserve the confidentiality of the proceedings.
• LCIA arbitration
  While at White & Case (London), defending a claim for the price of a controlling stake in one of the Ukraine’s largest companies. The defence concerned risks that the company would be renationalised because the seller had failed to ensure compliance with a privatisation agreement.
• LCIA arbitration
  While at White & Case (London), acting for a minority shareholder bringing claims in relation to an oil and gas project in Kazakhstan. The case involved technical drilling issues, mismanagement by the project’s operator and disputes about the shareholders’ funding obligations.

• The Public Institution for Social Security v Al Rajaan (Comm)
  Defending a Swiss bank that allegedly laundered hundreds of millions of dollars of bribes allegedly paid to the former director-general of a Kuwaiti pension fund. 
• LCIA arbitration
  Acting for a global financial institution in a dispute with a sovereign state. The dispute concerns whether the state has used all reasonable endeavours in good faith to recover the proceeds of a substantial fraud.
• NMC Opco Ltd v Noor Bank PJSC (ADGM)
  Acting for the claimant in proceedings against certain former bankers of the NMC Healthcare group for fraudulent trading. The claim involved allegations of bribery and complicity in a multi-billion-dollar fraud on the group by its former owners and managers.
• Obsidian Achernar Limited v Payinc Group Ltd (KBD)
  As sole counsel, acting for a Ghanaian financial services firm in proceedings for repayment of a loan made to an international payment services business. The claim settled shortly before a hearing of Dan’s client’s application for summary judgment.
• Sterritt v Investec Wealth & Investment Limited (Comm)
  Acting for an individual claiming millions of pounds after his asset manager lost the share certificate for most of his shares in an AIM-listed company. The loss of the certificate prevented the claimant from selling the shares before substantial falls in the company’s share price. In July 2022, Dan was heavily involved in successfully resisting an application to strike-out parts of the claim. He was then the advocate for the CCMC, after which the case settled.
• StormHarbour Securities LP v Noor Bank PJSC (DIFC)
  Defending a bank from claims for millions of dollars allegedly due from an aviation finance transaction. The case involved issues of contract interpretation and rectification against the background of a complex sukuk structure. Dan was the advocate for the CMC and was heavily involved in disclosure applications and trial preparation until the case settled.
• Sogexia SAS v R Raphael & Sons Limited (ChD)
  Defending a former bank from claims for breach of two BIN sponsorship and card services agreements. Dan was heavily involved in successfully resisting an application for an injunction that would have prevented the bank from making a dividend to its shareholder and entering members’ voluntary liquidation. He was also involved in successfully obtaining a substantial security for costs order at the first CCMC, after which the case settled.
• RateSetter Trustee Services Limited v Purvis (Comm)
  As sole counsel, defending a former company director from claims under his personal guarantee of a loan made to the company. Dan was the advocate for the CCMC, dealing with disclosure issues and costs budgets.

• Bourlakova v Bourlakov (ChD)
  Acting for the claimants in proceedings against a deceased oligarch and his associates to unravel their attempts to put assets worth billions of dollars beyond the claimants’ reach in Monegasque matrimonial and estate proceedings. The claim involves allegations of deceit, forgery, offshore asset misappropriation and the deliberate destruction of evidence. Substantial hearings have included a five-day jurisdiction hearing ([2022] 4 WLR 79) and a three-day amendment and joinder hearing ([2023] EWHC 2233 (Ch)), both of which resulted in substantial victories for Dan’s clients.
• The Public Institution for Social Security v Al Rajaan (Comm)
  Defending a Swiss bank that allegedly laundered hundreds of millions of dollars of bribes allegedly paid to the former director-general of a Kuwaiti pension fund. 
• NMC Opco Ltd v Noor Bank PJSC (ADGM)
  Acting for the claimant in proceedings against certain former bankers of the NMC Healthcare group for fraudulent trading. The claim involved allegations of bribery and complicity in a multi-billion-dollar fraud on the group by its former owners and managers.
• Acting for a private equity firm in a dispute with the founders of an industrials business in which the firm had invested. The claim involves allegations that the founders lied about the resignation of a senior employee, and about the business’ historic and forecast revenues.
• Ahsan v Khan (ChD)
  As sole counsel, acting for an individual bringing claims against his former solicitor and the solicitor’s family to recover funds stolen from the client account. The case involved applications for Bankers Trust orders and for permission to serve a defendant out of the jurisdiction and by alternative methods. The solicitor was later struck off the roll.
• Omers Administration Corporation v Tesco plc (ChD)
  Acting for institutional investors claiming hundreds of millions of pounds in respect of the profit overstatement that Tesco revealed in autumn 2014. Until the claim settled shortly before trial, it would have been one of the first under FSMA section 90A to proceed to trial. It alleged fraudulent misrepresentations by Tesco to the knowledge of senior management.
• Rosdale Pte Limited v Degevol UK Limited (Comm)
  Acting for companies that sought to recover Kazakh mining assets that had been misappropriated by the companies’ former directors and controllers. The case settled shortly after detailed particulars of claim were provided to the defendants.

Below are some selected cases, beyond those included in other categories.

• United Utilities Water Ltd v Exela Technologies Ltd (Comm)
  As sole counsel, acting for a water company bringing claims in relation to various losses that arose when its payment services provider failed to process certain Direct Debit payments properly.
• Qatar Airways Group QCSC v Airbus SAS (TCC)
  Defending Airbus from multi-billion-dollar claims in relation to Qatar Airways’ fleet of A350 aircraft and whether Airbus was required to deliver a further fleet of A321neo aircraft. The case was one of The Lawyer’s Top 20 cases for 2023, but then settled before trial.
• Döser v Capriles (KBD)
  As sole counsel, defending a claim for delivery up of a vintage Porsche. The case involves issues as to the scope of the authority of the claimant’s agent, and about the rules in the Factors Act 1889 in relation to sales by mercantile agents.
• Oceana GZ Trading Ltd v Herrco Cosmetics Ltd (Comm)
  As sole counsel, defending a cosmetics manufacturer from claims by a former client in relation to alleged delays in designing and developing new products. An application by the claimant for summary judgment was successfully resisted in February 2023. The claim was later struck out after a successful application for security for costs.
• The Air Ambulance Service v Specialist Aviation Services Limited (Comm)
  As sole counsel, defending rebate claims under a contract for the provision of air ambulance helicopters. The case involved legal issues as to the interpretation of force majeure and rebate provisions, and detailed factual issues as to historic service levels.
• SPIE UK Limited v Garside (Comm)
  Successfully defending the former owner of a construction business from claims for repayment of an earn-out under the sale and purchase agreement. The case involved legal issues as to whether the earn-out accounts could be re-opened, factual issues as to the buyer’s awareness of certain liabilities of the business, and accountancy issues as to the proper treatment of those liabilities in the earn-out accounts. After the claimant discontinued its claim, Dan was the advocate for a successful application for indemnity costs.
• Hayes v Goodwin
  As sole counsel, acting for the claimant in a five-day trial of claims between investors in a residential property development. The case involved issues as to the disputed terms of an oral contract, the ownership of the development site, alleged misuse of project money, the parties’ respective contributions to the project and the division of the overall loss on the development.
• Da Silva v Lucas (ChD)
  Defending the owners of a Portuguese residential development project from a claim for specific performance of a call option in respect of their stake in the project.

• The Air Ambulance Service v Specialist Aviation Services Limited (Comm)
  As sole counsel, successfully resisting an application (withdrawn by consent) for an order for delivery up of various documents and technical specifications in relation to the interiors of certain helicopters.
• Honeycomb.TV Limited v Ad Signal Limited (ChD)
  Acting for the claimant in proceedings against a former employee and a former contractor for copyright infringement, breach of confidence and various breaches of contract in relation to the creation of a competing business.
• BGC Brokers LP v Tradition (UK) Ltd (QBD)
  Defending Tradition, one of the City’s main inter-dealer brokerage firms, from high-value and bitterly fought claims by one of its main competitors. The claimants alleged breaches of confidence and an unlawful “team move” of brokers. Dan was heavily involved in a string of successful pre-trial hearings and appeals, preparing factual and expert evidence, and then the trial in late 2019. The case settled during cross-examination of the claimants’ key witnesses.

• Advising a fund manager on claims for breach of a lock-out agreement in relation to the financing of a gold mine in West Africa.
• While at White & Case (London), acting for the minority shareholder in LCIA proceedings concerning an oil and gas project in a former Soviet state. The case involved technical drilling issues, mismanagement by the operator and disputes about the shareholders’ funding obligations.
• While at King & Wood Mallesons (Sydney), acting for the majority shareholder in a joint-venture dispute concerning the construction of a diesel storage facility. The case involved technical construction issues, alleged breaches of directors’ duties and allegations of procurement fraud against the contractor and minority shareholder.
• While at King & Wood Mallesons (Sydney), acting for borrowers and lenders on a range of project finance transactions across the coal, gas, and clean energy sectors.

• Bourlakova v Bourlakov (ChD)
  Various applications for worldwide freezing orders, proprietary injunctions, asset protection orders and other injunctive relief to protect the Claimants’ position in a dispute worth more than USD 3 billion.
• The Air Ambulance Service v Specialist Aviation Services Limited (Comm)
  As sole counsel, successfully resisting an application (withdrawn by consent) for an order for delivery up of various documents and technical specifications in relation to the interiors of certain helicopters.
• As sole counsel, advising on prospects and strategy for an interim injunction to maintain a business' operations despite a shareholder dispute as to the business' ownership and management.
• Sogexia SAS v R Raphael & Sons Limited (ChD)
  Successfully resisting an application for an injunction sought to restrain the defendant from making a dividend to its shareholder before entering members’ voluntary liquidation. The injunction was sought on the basis that the dividend would breach section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986, as the defendant was allegedly insolvent and making allegedly inadequate provisions for the claimant’s claims for damages in the underlying proceedings.
• As sole counsel, advising on prospects and strategy for interim injunctions to hold a former employee to their post-termination restrictive covenants, and in support of claims against former employees for misusing confidential information.

• Acting for solicitors in proceedings against their former client’s legal expenses insurer. The case involved issues as to the scope of coverage and whether the solicitors should have ceased to act because of alleged concerns as to the prospects of the former client’s claims.
• Advising insurers on the scope of a professional indemnity policy.
• Advising on potential claims against a solicitor’s run-off insurers.

• Honeycomb.TV Limited v Ad Signal Limited (ChD)
  Acting for the claimant in proceedings against a former employee and a former contractor for copyright infringement, breach of confidence and various breaches of contract in relation to the creation of a competing business.
• Pixdene Limited v Paddington and Company Ltd [2022] EWHC 2765 (IPEC)
  Acting for the claimant in proceedings to enforce an audit clause in a royalty distribution agreement in relation to merchandising income from the Paddington Bear character. Dan was solely responsible for all pleadings and was the advocate for the CMC and the consequentials hearing, at which he successfully resisted an application for the claimant to pay the defendant’s costs of the proceedings. Press coverage here.
• Cosmetic Warriors Limited v Lush Handmade Cosmetics Limited (ChD)
  Acting for the claimant in proceedings to recover the internet domain name “lush.com” for the benefit of the well-known cosmetics brand. Dan was the advocate for the first CCMC, dealing mostly with issues under the disclosure pilot scheme. The case later settled before trial.
• Pixdene Limited v Paddington and Company Limited [2020] EWHC 3907 (IPEC)
  Application for pre-action disclosure in respect of possible claims for breach of a Braganza duty.

• Bourlakova v Bourlakov [2023] EWHC 2233 (Ch)
  At a three-day hearing, successfully resisting jurisdiction challenges to proposed amendments. The case is a leading authority on the effect of Article 67(1)(a) of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement and its effect on the scope of the Brussels I Regulation (Recast) in relation to new claimants and claims being introduced to proceedings commenced prior to the end of the Brexit transition period.
• Bourlakova v Bourlakov [2022] 4 WLR 79
  At a five-day hearing, successfully resisting jurisdiction challenges that raised issues of contested domicile, forum non conveniens, lis alibi pendens, an arbitration stay and service pursuant to the Hague Convention. The proceedings involve substantive claims under English, Monegasque, Panamanian and Swiss law.
• Kirk v Letschew (ChD)
  As sole counsel, successfully resisting a jurisdiction challenge in contribution proceedings against a German national (full-day hearing).
• Rosdale Pte Limited v Degevol UK Limited (Comm)
  Acting for companies that sought to recover Kazakh mining assets that had been misappropriated by the companies’ former directors and controllers. The case involved parties in six different countries, claims under several sets of applicable law, and challenges to the English court’s jurisdiction. It settled shortly after detailed particulars of claim were provided to the defendants.

• As sole counsel, defending several commercial tenants from claims for turnover rent. The case involves issues of contract interpretation and rectification, and an alternative Part 20 claim against the solicitors who advised the tenants in relation to the leases.
• As sole counsel, acting for a design business bringing claims against its former HR adviser in respect of advice on a contested redundancy. The case settled shortly before a defence was due.
• As sole counsel, advising individuals on claims against their tax advisers for failing to recommend a more tax-efficient structure for selling their business.
• As sole counsel, acting for an accounting firm claiming overdue fees and defending a counterclaim arising out of a fraud allegedly committed on one of the firm’s former clients.

• Baugh v Work It Group Ltd (ChD)
  Half-day CCMC, including various pleading disputes.
• Oceana GZ Trading Ltd v Herrco Cosmetics Ltd (Comm)
  Full-day CCMC, including a successful application for security for costs, which later led to the claim being struck-out.
• Oceana GZ Trading Ltd v Herrco Cosmetics Ltd (Comm)
  Successfully resisting an application for summary judgment at a full-day hearing.
• Oceana GZ Trading Ltd v Herrco Cosmetics Ltd (Comm)
  Half-day hearing dealing with various requests for further information, an extension of time for the defence, and security for costs.
• SPIE UK Limited v Garside (Comm)
  Successful application for indemnity costs following the claimant’s discontinuance of its claim.
• Hayes v Goodwin
  Five-day trial of claims between investors in a residential property development. The case involved issues as to the disputed terms of an oral contract, the ownership of the development site, alleged misuse of project money, the parties’ respective contributions to the project and the division of the overall loss on the development.
• ICC arbitration
  Defending claims under a contract for the sale of aluminium fluoride. Dan was the advocate for two CMCs and was to conduct the four-day main hearing until the case settled at the last minute.
• Kirk v Letschew (ChD)
  Obtaining summary judgment on a claim for contribution and successfully resisting an application for permission to amend the defence.
• Kirk v Letschew (ChD)
  Successfully resisting a jurisdiction challenge in contribution proceedings against a German national (full-day hearing).

• Acting for a private equity firm in a dispute with the founders of an industrials business in which the firm had invested. The claim involves allegations that the founders lied about the resignation of a senior employee, and about the business’ historic and forecast revenues. The founders allege that, after the firm’s investment, they were wrongly excluded from the business.
• Baugh v Work It Group Ltd (ChD)
  As sole counsel, defending claims brought by a former employee in relation to their shareholding in a fitness business. The case concerns the scope and application of good/bad leaver provisions in the company’s articles of association, and an alleged oral agreement to grant share options in a further company.
• As sole counsel, acting for individuals seeking to regain control of a nightclub in which they had invested. The dispute involved alleged failures to issue shares in the holding company, alleged exclusion from management, potential injunctive relief, and contested contributions to the business.
• Parsadoust v Hanging Gardens Limited [2021] EWHC 1594 (Comm)
  Acting for the successful claimant in proceedings to enforce a call option in respect of shares in Babylon Health, the digital healthcare provider. Dan was heavily involved from pre-action through to obtaining summary judgment. The case involved issues about a disputed oral agreement, alleged implied terms, the penalty doctrine, and relief from forfeiture.
• Kirk v Letschew (ChD)
  As sole counsel, acting for the successful claimant in contribution proceedings arising out of a judgment against a company and its shareholders for software copyright infringement. Dan was the advocate for all three hearings in the case, including in successfully resisting an application for permission to amend the defence to introduce allegations that the claimant had misappropriated company assets.
• Norwich Craft Beer Company Limited v Evans (ChD)
  Defending a majority shareholder and former director in proceedings against a minority shareholder for control of the Bullards brands of beer and gin. Dan drafted several pleadings and successfully obtained security for costs at the first CCMC.