Commercial Litigation

Advising a litigant in proceedings before the High Court of St Vincent and the Grenadines in relation to a crypto fraud where one of crypto exchange servers was domiciled in the UAE. Martin advised on bringing proceedings in the ADGM Courts and DIFC Courts for Norwich Pharmacal Orders and Freezing Orders. Martin's work in the preparation to bring these claims resulted in a settlement by the UAE domiciled litigant.

Martin represents the Defendant in defending a claim for unpaid loans, post-termination severance entitlements, and a counterclaim for a breach of a non-solicitation clause. The case is ongoing.

Martin represents the Defendant seeking permission to appeal from the first instance judge in relation to an order made for recognition and enforcement. An arbitration claim had been issued and served by the Claimant seeking recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award from Singapore for approximately $3m concerning a maritime dispute. Following an unsuccessful jurisdictional challenge, the Court issued an ex parte order recognising and enforcing the arbitral award. The appeal concerns whether the ex parte order can be properly issued if the claim had been served. The parties are awaiting the outcome of the application seeking permission to appeal

Represented a major Dubai bank in opposing a mandatory interim injunction requiring the bank to keep thousands of prepaid debit cards used by low income workers operational.

Martin represented the first defendant and successfully opposed an urgent application seeking American Cyanamid injunction orders sought in aid of arbitration proceedings seated in Milan. The substantive proceedings touched upon the elections of the board of directors of a semi-public body incorporated in the mainland Dubai, and potential misconduct allegations made against the first claimant. The DIFC claim was for the preservation of the status quo and preservation of certain documentation pending arbitration proceedings. The submissions advanced covered the DIFC Courts' 'fundamental jurisdiction' drawing distinctions between freezing orders and American Cyanamid injunctions. Martin's submissions also focused on the discretionary element in granting injunctions including the applicants' failure to exhaust more appropriate remedies, i.e. using the Emergency Arbitrator procedure on an ex parte basis and then enforcing those orders in the mainland Dubai courts where D1 was incorporated. The Court concluded that it did not have fundamental jurisdiction and in any event would not exercise its discretion in granting the injunctions.

Martin represented the Defendant in opposing the recognition and enforcement of a Hong Kong judgment worth approximately £30m. The Claimant seeks recognition at common law. The Claimant also sought and obtained a domestic freezing injunction under s.25 Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982 by Part 8 proceedings. Martin appeared at a hearing opposing the granting of an 'unless order' sought by the Claimant following the Defendant's repeated failures to provide asset disclosure under the Hong Kong and English court orders.

$875m breach of trust claim against an international bank concerning the handling of a corrupt oil block deal.

Claim (proprietary) relating to Middle Eastern investment fraud.

Complex restraint proceedings (pre-charge) for a third party regarding the supply of medical materials during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Proprietary claim for misappropriated by a company finance director.

Successfully appeared for the first defendant in a multi-defendant cross-border freezing order application. The judgment provides important clarification on the strict application of procedural rules in arbitration-related applications and reinforces the absolute duty of candour on without notice applications. It confirms that tactical litigation considerations cannot override mandatory service requirements. Instructed by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan UK LLP

Acting for lenders in the recovery of significant sums owed (£10m) where enforcement required recovery by fixed charge receivers of unregistered land.

A claim for an inquiry into damages following the DIFC Court of Appeal setting aside worldwide freezing orders. The case is the first known case where the DIFC Court of First Instance permitted an inquiry into damages resulting in the award of damages comprising irrecoverable legal costs in related foreign proceedings. The case also comprehensively addressed the Court’s jurisdiction to grant an inquiry into damages where worldwide freezing orders were set aside for lack of jurisdiction.

Responding to a claim for an urgent interim injunction heard by the DIFC Digital Economy Court concerning the relationship between two terminated commercial contracts between a financial services provider and a prominent UAE bank in respect of the provision of pre-paid debit cards to low-income workers in the UAE.

Represented the Claimant as lead counsel at an ex parte interim anti-suit injunction claim before the DIFC Courts’ Arbitration Division, and on appeal before the DIFC Court of Appeal seeking to prohibit the main contractor in a construction project from continuing its suit in the local Dubai Courts in breach of a DIFC-LCIA arbitration agreement with the place of arbitration as Dubai.

Represented a subcontractor as lead counsel before the DIFC Courts’ Arbitration Division seeking to set default judgment aside granting declaratory relief arguing waiver in respect of an arbitration agreement.

Representing one of the individual defendants in a £2 billion claim for bribery and money laundering brought by Kuwait’s national pension fund. One of the largest fraud disputes ever heard in the Commercial Court, with a trial scheduled to run for some 42 weeks over 2025 and 2026, and featured as one of The Lawyer’s ‘Top 20 Cases’ of 2025. Instructed by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan UK LLP.

Represented the Claimant in anti-suit injunction appeal.

Advising former employees of an international bank based in the DIFC in respect of suspected regulatory breaches of the DFSA Rulebook in relation to onboarding of clients in breach of AML rules.

Successfully defended a complex commercial dispute involving the prestigious sports betting brand Parimatch. The case centered on a partnership dispute over a Turkish-speaking market venture. Following poor financial performance, the defendants terminated the arrangement after the initial trial period. Instructed by BCL Solicitors LLP. Judgment here.

Representing the joint liquidators of SP Commodities in a claim for misfeasance and to reverse other antecedent transactions; including obtaining freezing injunctions to prevent the former directors from dissipating assets pending judgment (ongoing proceedings in the Chancery Division).

Fresh View Swift Properties [2023] EWHC 605 (Admin) (forfeiture of unlicensed money service business proceeds).

Acted for stockbrokers in Bilta v Deutsche Bank and SVS (Commercial Court breach of trust proceedings).

(A Supermarket Company) Part 5 PoCA proceedings advanced on the basis of 'seemingly unorthodox' banking practices (defending).

Advising insurers and re-insurers in substantial on-going litigation concerning coverage issues arising out of D&O policies, claim value exceeds $40m.

Acting for a number of partners in a Doctor’s surgery in relation to the alleged mis-selling of loans to the GPs’ practice by Aviva.

Successfully obtaining a non-party costs order against the sole director of a Company which had been used as a vehicle to run a dishonest claim against an insurance company.

Martin and Aidan Casey KC are instructed to represent two companies that loaned £5,000,000 which remain unpaid. The case concerns whether the financial broker and/or accountant were negligent in failing to carry out due diligence in respect of the borrower who was later found to be insolvent. The matter is still at pre-action stage.

Martin represented the first defendant seeking to oppose the granting of a worldwide freezing injunction for over $100m. Martin's submissions centred on the DIFC Court's jurisdiction as to whether the Claimant is a Licensed DIFC Establishment, whether the doctrine of forum non conveniens needs reconsideration under the new Law 2 of 2025, and substantive submissions on the freezing injunction. The case concerned the divestments of assets globally allegedly in order to prevent enforcement of a Dubai Court's judgment. The claims are primarily based in tort under UAE law. The case is ongoing with Martin being led by Faisal Osman.

Martin represents the second defendant in a dispute concerning the liabilities of the first defendant to the claimant under a joint venture agreement and loan agreement for approximately £3,000,000. The second defendant's liability arises under an alleged oral guarantee agreement given over a telephone conversation. The trial is due for September 2026.

Represented the subcontractor in opposing the continuation of an anti-suit injunction where the subcontractor had brought proceedings in the Abu Dhabi courts in breach of an arbitration agreement and had secured payment under those proceedings.

Represented the Respondent (MAG) on appeal concerning the availability of Article 82 of the DIFC Contract Law (Force Majeure) in contracts which do not contain force majeure clauses, and the meaning of the phrase "Except with respect to a mere obligation to pay". Martin successfully argued that the words "Except with respect of a mere obligation to pay" relate to simple obligations untied to other obligations, which has universal application in all DIFC governed contracts absent force majeure clauses. The decision is the first and only Court of Appeal authority on the application of statutory force majeure in all commercial contracts.

As well as representing the DPP and the Trustee holding the bitcoin, acting for many thousands of Chinese victims of an investment scheme that transpired to be a Ponzi fraud. They are advancing a proprietary claim to a significant share of Bitcoin currently worth $5.5 billion that is held by the UK authorities pursuant to a property freezing order issued by the High Court.

Representing an individual seeking to enforce a Swiss judgment in England and Wales against a senior officer of Credit Suisse.

Competing civil claim by a corporate victim asserting proprietary interest and subrogation.

Contractual dispute arising out of a joint venture between a Ukrainian sports gaming provider and a Turkish speaking regions counter-party

Section 994 CA 2006 unfair prejudice claim on behalf of an aggrieved shareholder.

Acting for Chinese investors in a dispute concerning the management of a Cayman Islands holding company, arising out of a director (nominated by another major investor) frustrating a US IPO valued at in excess of $ 2 billion.

Advising a major company based in Dubai in respect of a Worldwide Freezing Order imposed by the DIFC Courts and the consequences of the order.

Representing and appearing as sole counsel for the Claimant in the DIFC Court of First Instance for employment related claims for notice pay, other contractual entitlements, penalties, loss of earnings, and successfully defending a $2,000,000 counterclaim brought in negligence and pure economic loss.

Representing the Claimant as lead counsel in a claim before the DIFC Court of First Instance seeking specific performance and/or mandatory injunction and damages requiring the Defendant as the local shareholding sponsor of a Dubai company to transfer shares held as a bare nominee pursuant to the Nominee Agreement.

Represented the Claimant as lead counsel in a Part 8 claim seeking declaratory relief for DIFC-LCIA arbitration with the main determination concerning the DIFC Courts’ jurisdiction under the DIFC Arbitration Law and Decree 34 of 2021.

Leading in the Commercial Court for the SFO in the Orb/ Gerald Smith £80m proceedings involving 27 parties, BVI and Jersey liquidators and High Court receivers to recover the proceeds of breach of trust and fraudulently obtained property. Contempt; Restraint Orders

Representing the Claimant claiming for unpaid rent, and other related damages, totalling in excess of £3m, where a variety of defences have been advanced including standing of the Defendants, and force majeure. The Defendants seek to argue that the Dubai Floods of April 2024 absolved their obligations to pay rent. Martin successfully opposed the Defendants' application for immediate / summary judgment seeking to remove the individual Defendants (D2 and D3) from the proceedings. Martin made an application for summary / immediate judgment concerning the availability of force majeure as a defence under the DIFC Contract Law where the obligation is a 'mere obligation to pay'. This application was successfully and the force majeure defence was dismissed. The trial of the matter is due for June 2026.

Represented the First Defendant as counsel in opposing immediate judgment in respect of a $34,000,000 fraud allegedly committed against Dr Shetty.

Acting for the Kingdom of Sweden in a substantial (ca. €120m) and complex fraud claim, brought under Swedish and Maltese law, arising out of a sophisticated fraud on the Swedish pension system. Instructed by Greenberg Traurig LLP. Judgment here.

Instructed to seek a variation of a Freezing Order to allow D to sell a property for £2m.

Representing a subsidiary of a major Hong Kong corporation seeking the appointment of administrators over an entity in which it is the majority shareholder (ongoing proceedings in the Chancery Division).

Following a request for mutual assistance made by the US authorities in respect of the forfeiture of funds (circa $300 million) constituting an arbitral award to a Venezuelan company which had allegedly been used as a vehicle for money laundering, the court imposed a prohibition order in respect of funds held in escrow in the Court Funds Office. The requirements of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (External Requests and Orders) Order 2005 had been met and there was a risk of dissipation if the order was not granted. The court also ordered that the funds should be held by a receiver (pursuant to Art. 141(1) & (2) of the 2005 Order).

Unlawful means conspiracy, breach of contract and duty, and dishonest assistance.

Acting in a claim against a subsidiary of Sports Direct for trademark infringement following the sale by a Swiss liquidator of all the intellectual property in the SKINS brand.

Acting for a private individual in a claim brought under the unfair relationship provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in relation to the sale of c.£40,000,000.00 loan by a building society for the purchase of Heron House, Manchester (occupied by GCHQ) which, it is alleged, contained an embedded derivative product.

Acting for two individuals seeking to recover significant sums paid under a mortgage contract which it is alleged was made in breach of the general prohibition.