Michael Fealy KC

Recommended by Legal 500, Michael Fealy is a '"strong advocate", singled out for his "excellent advice"'.  He has substantial experience in international commercial arbitration dealing with a range of disputes and governed by a variety of rules. He also has experience of expert determination in the electricity industry and rail industry, and in acting in LNG gas price reviews for both purchaser and seller.

 'Michael Fealy has a "real strength of conviction, which he supports with wonderfully considered legal argument"'.   (Legal 500)

His recent work includes:

• ICC Proceedings
  Acting for Middle Eastern company in shareholder dispute with Indian former partners.
  
• Ad hoc Canadian arbitration
  Acted as expert in English law in shareholders’ dispute concerning an Asian mining company.
  
• Rail Industry Dispute Rules
  Acted for regional transport authority in dispute with train operating company concerning payments to be made to the train operator under long-term franchise of suburban railway network.
  
• ICC Proceedings
  Acting for major energy company in a dispute concerning the price to be paid for LNG under long-term contract.
  
• ICC Proceedings
  Acted for a Thai electricity generating company in dispute with trading house under a long-term contract for the supply of coal. Damages of some US$400m claimed.
  
• Singapore International Arbitration Centre Proceedings
  Acting for Hong Kong-based commodity house in dispute concerning alleged breach of contract for the sale of coal.
  
• LCIA Proceedings
  For purchasers and sellers in price reviews for LNG sale contracts. Michael has acted as sole counsel in a number of matters in this specialist area.
  
• LCIA Proceedings
  Acted for Texas-based oil field services provider in a claim for costs incurred in a wrongful death claim in Texas; the case included mediation in New York.
  
• LCIA Proceedings
  For the claimant against a rig owner in a dispute arising out of a drilling campaign. The claim involved applications for security in many jurisdictions and Michael has advised leading US counsel on the interface between those applications and London arbitration.
  
• Ad hoc Arbitration under Bahamian Law
  Acted for lender hedge fund in a claim to enforce a loan agreement secured over shares. The claim raised issues about the enforceability of security given over uncertificated securities.

Recommended by both Chambers UK (Commercial Dispute Resolution and Energy & Natural Resources) and the Legal 500 (Energy and International Arbitration), Michael Fealy has a busy and diverse commercial practice dealing with all the major issues of the day in commercial law. This includes (but is not limited to) disputes arising out of share sale and purchase agreements, cases involving issues of a technical nature, environmental issues, trademark licensing disputes, warranty disputes and issues concerning agency agreements.

"A commanding advocate who has real presence in court." "Michael is extremely diligent and approachable, and he applies first-class legal analysis to a case." (Chambers UK 2020 - Commercial Dispute Resolution)

• Re Greensill Bank 
  Acting for insolvency administrator in resisting anti-suit injunction.
• Skatteforvaltningen (known as SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP
  From 2018 to 2022 Michael led a team of barristers representing SKAT, the Danish tax authority, in its £1.5bn fraud claim. The case is extremely complex and long-running, and Michael’s role involved coordination across jurisdictions and managing a significant team of lawyers.
• Apache v Shell, Esso and BP
  Represented the three energy companies in a dispute about the amount of money that Apache had to pay a security for the costs of decommissioning a North Sea oilfield. This is one of the first reported cases dealing with the impact of the end of the working life of these oilfields.
• Premier Oil v Shell
  Represented Shell in a High Court trial concerning the price of crude oil in long-term sale contracts with Premier.
• Raven v Entain
  Acted for Entain, a FTSE100 company in a complex dispute arising for the sale of a spread betting business by Entain. Michael devised a strategy that forced Raven to give up on almost all of its claim.
• Tulip Trading Limited v Bitcoin Association for BSV
  Acted for Claimant in High Court in $4bn in trailblazing claim arising from loss of control of bitcoin following a hack. The claim raised novel issues concerning the ability of bitcoin developers to enable the claimant to recover control of the bitcoin. This was the first contested case to consider the nature of bitcoin in law and the legal duties owed by those involved to each other.
• Sogexia v R Raphaels
  Acted for bank in voluntary winding up dispute with payment card operator.

Michael has particular experience in striking out claims for breach of warranty under a share purchase agreement, including striking out claims due to failure by the purchaser to comply with the notification requirements in the contract. Reported cases comprise:

• Stobart Group v Andrew Tinkler [2019] EWCA Civ 1376 (CA)
  Struck out a claim under an indemnity for taxes.
• Teoco v Aircom [2018] EWCA Civ 23, [2018] BCC 339
  Struck out a claim for tax liabilities in Brazil.
• Ipsos v Dentsu [2015] EWHC 1171
  Struck out a claim for breach of employment law in Brazil.
• Laminates Acquisition Co v. BTR Australia Ltd [2004] 1 All ER (Comm) 73
  For BTR, in the trial of a preliminary issue where the claimant was precluded by its failure to give notice in the specified form from bringing a claim in respect of the defendant's alleged breach of the antitrust warranty in a share sale agreement.

Michael Fealy has substantial expertise in this sector. He advises and acts for claimants and defendants in fraud and asset tracing claims and also has wide experience of freezing orders. He has particular experience in dividend-withholding tax fraud. He is currently contributing author for: Smith & Monkcom’s “Law of Betting, Gambling & Lotteries”, dealing with issues arising in the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

• SKAT v Solo Capital Partners (2018 - 2022)
  Acting for Danish tax office in multi-jurisdictional £1.5 billion dividend cum-ex fraud claim. Obtained freezing order in that sum. Numerous interlocutory hearings and applications. Acted in trial and appeal on Revenue Rule, establishing that claim could be brought in England.
• Ipsos v Aegis [2015] EWHC 117 (Comm) EWHC 1726 (Comm)
  Acted for the defendants in a £200 million claim for damages for fraud and breach of warranty following a share purchase. Michael has appeared in applications striking out large parts of the claim.

Michael's expertise in this sector covers litigation, arbitration and expert determination/adjudications, together with a substantial advisory practice, and he is regularly instructed by major international energy companies as well as international and domestic owners and operators in the oil and gas sector. His instructions include a broad range of disputes, including under joint operating agreements, unitisation agreements, decommissioning security agreements, oil and gas sale contracts, and drilling disputes.

"A standout lawyer – incisive with a great courtroom manner." (Legal 500 - Energy)

• Apache v Shell, Esso and BP [2023] EWHC 1171
  Represented the three energy companies in a dispute about the amount of money that Apache had to pay as security for the costs of decommissioning a North Sea oilfield. This is one of the first reported cases dealing with the impact of the end of the working life of these oilfields.
• Premier Oil v Shell [2023] EWHC 3269
  Represented Shell in a High Court trial concerning the price of crude oil in long-term sale contracts with Premier. The case involved difficult issues concerning the interaction between court proceedings and an expert determination process.
• Swedish SCC proceedings
  Acted for oil major in dispute concerning unitising agreement in West Africa.
• ICC Proceedings
  Acting for a major energy company in a dispute concerning the price to be paid for LNG under long-term contract.
• ICC Proceedings
  Acted for a Thai electricity generating company in dispute with trading house under a long-term contract for the supply of coal. Damages of some US$400m claimed.
• Singapore International Arbitration Centre Proceedings
  Acting for Hong Kong-based commodity house in dispute concerning alleged breach of contract for the sale of coal.
• LCIA Proceedings
  For purchasers and sellers in price reviews for LNG sale contracts. Michael has acted as sole counsel in a number of matters in this specialist area.
• LCIA Proceedings
  Acted for Texas-based oil field services provider in a claim for costs incurred in a wrongful death claim in Texas; the case included mediation in New York.

Michael has advised and acted in a number of jurisdiction challenges. He has considerable experience of dealing with issues of foreign law and the enforcement of foreign judgments. He acted for SKAT in establishing that its claims arising from cum-ex fraud were not claims to enforce a foreign revenue law claim.

• In Re Greensill Bank AG
  Acting for the administrator in complex jurisdictional dispute.
• Re UK regional airport
  Acted for regional airport in opposing enforcement of arbitration award made against sovereign state shareholder.
• Italian electricity supplier v Chinese insurance company
  Acted for Italian judgment creditor in seeking to enforce in London an Italian judgement against Chinese defendant.
• SKAT v Solo Capital Partners
  Acted for the Danish tax office in multi-jurisdictional £1.5 billion dividend cum-ex fraud claim. Case had complex issues as to whether it was the enforcement of a foreign revenue claim. Acted in trial and appeal on this issue.

Michael has acted in many injunction applications and is accustomed to accepting instructions at short notice and working under the pressure of an imminent hearing. He is currently acting for Greensill Bank AG in opposing anti-suit injunction made ex parte.

In 2018 he obtained a freezing order for £1.5 billion in SKAT v Solo Capital Partners against multiple defendants in many jurisdictions. He also acted in numerous interim applications arising as a consequence.

In 2017, he obtained an anti-suit injunction to prevent litigation in Pakistan in circumstances where parties had agreed to a non-exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the English courts.