Company | UK Bar

Erskine Chambers continues to justify its place as the foremost company set in London. Sources from across the market reach consensus when lauding it as the go-to set for the most sophisticated and prominent matters in this area of the law. Members of Erskine, both senior and junior, demonstrate market-leading capabilities in heavyweight contentious and non-contentious company matters, and receive routine instructions from the country's top solicitors. Barristers at Erskine possess a strong command of schemes of arrangement, M&A, partnership and shareholder disputes and general corporate advisory work, as part of an all-encompassing offering. Erskine's barristers have been active advising on the most significant corporate transactions of the past year, such as acting for Shell in opposing a derivative claim, and advising IGlobe on an appeal to the Privy Council from Antigua regarding “poison pill” arrangements. Other work highlights include defending Carillion's non-executive directors against disqualification proceedings brought by the UK government, and representing Jardine Strategic in one of the world's largest ever merger appraisals.

4 Stone Buildings is a standout set whose company law abilities are the subject of widespread praise. At both the senior and junior levels, its barristers provide high-quality advice on substantial matters. Within its broad company offering, the set enjoys an especially good reputation for its work concerning shareholder disputes and breaches of fiduciary duty. In recent times, 4 Stone members have handled the major offshore appraisal action relating to Jardine Matheson, along with other leading cases in the company field. Examples include: representing Barclays Bank in proceedings seeking the recovery of funds; Davies v Ford & Others, a significant breach of duty claim; and Ma v Wong Kie Yik and others, an offshore shareholder dispute.

Maitland Chambers houses a number of highly regarded company law barristers and is well known as a set with significant capabilities in the area. It is engaged by prominent solicitor firms to assist with matters both contentious and non-contentious, and is particularly noted for its abilities in litigation involving offshore jurisdictions. Barristers at Maitland have recently played a role in King & Ors v Primekings Holding Limited & Ors, a long-running unfair prejudice petition regarding a national security company. They have also continued to work on Global Distressed Alpha Capital I Limited v Herman, Eddlestone, a significant offshore breach of duty claim.

Serle Court has a solid reputation for company law work, particularly as it pertains to contentious matters such as breach of duty claims, derivative claims and shareholder disputes. Members here are frequently engaged to advise on matters with significant cross-border dimensions, including those in the BVI, Hong Kong and the Cayman Islands. Members have recently been involved in Re: 58.com Ltd, a shareholder dispute before the Chief Justice in the Cayman Grand Court, and Re: Bulb Energy Ltd, a company and insolvency matter regarding the administration of a UK energy supplier. Other matters handled include Ocean Sino, a shareholder dispute regarding shareholders in a BVI company that owned a Hong Kong shipbroking business, and Re: Hector Finance Group Limited, unfair prejudice proceedings.

South Square continues to garner praise for its fine company practice. Barristers at the set receive instructions from the foremost corporate law firms and advise on a range of company matters, including schemes of arrangement, shareholder disputes and directors' duties. Many of the cases they handle have a cross-border element. The set enjoys a strong reputation for its company work as it arises within the context of restructurings and insolvencies. Notable matters recently handled by members include Re AGPS Bondco (Re Adler), the first restructuring plan case to reach the Court of Appeal, and Bulb Energy Ltd, which involves the first ever application for an energy supply company administration order. China Shanshui is an example of the set's recent work on shareholder litigation heard at the appellate level.

New Square Chambers is widely respected for its solid company law practice, and houses a number of highly rated specialists who are well equipped to act in both transactional and litigious capacities. Barristers at the set exhibit demonstrable capabilities in schemes of arrangement, breach of duty claims and unfair prejudice claims, among a number of other matters. Breach of duty claims have been a noteworthy source of prominent cases in recent years. Examples include Ammar Al Assam and nine others v Dimitrios Tsouvelekakis, a high-value international dispute involving multiple jurisdictions. The set also represented Juno Nominees Limited and Juno Fund Services Ltd in a case concerning multi-party claims relating to shares in protected cell investment companies.

Radcliffe Chambers is well regarded for its expertise in company matters. The set houses numerous prominent barristers in this sector and is well equipped to handle complex litigation and advisory work. Members are experienced at handling a range of company law matters, including shareholder disputes, claims regarding directors' duties, derivate claims and unfair prejudice petitions. Recently, instructions for the set include working on notable director disqualification proceedings. Examples include Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy v Adam & others, the director disqualification proceedings relating to the Carillion PLC collapse, and Brown v Competition and Markets Authority.

Wilberforce Chambers represents an excellent choice of set for company matters. Its barristers frequently represent clients faced with domestic and cross-border shareholder disputes, issues of directors' duties and breaches of fiduciary duty, among other matters. Its reputation for handling offshore work is particularly strong. Notable recent instructions include: Garafalo v Crisp; Re Valorem Holdings, an unfair prejudice and breach of directors' duties case involving the breach of government sanctions; and Say Chong Lim v Francis Ong et al, which involves the intersection of company law and fraud relating to a high-value property portfolio.

Market sources are quick to highlight the strength of the company offering at XXIV Old Buildings, and reserve particular praise for the strength of its expertise in connection with offshore matters. A number of the market's leading barristers practise at the chambers and receive instructions in a variety of company matters. Recent highlights for the set include representing various shareholders in a compensation claim against Petrofac Limited, and the matter of Invest Bank v El Husseini, a case before the Court of Appeal relating to Section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 regarding assets owned by companies.