We provide expert advocacy and advisory services across the full spectrum of corporate and personal insolvency, with particular strength in complex matters involving POCA, asset forfeiture, high-value receiverships, enforcement, and financial crime.
Our members are regularly instructed by leading solicitors, insolvency practitioners, institutions, office holders, and public bodies in high-value, contentious, and technically demanding cases. We combine strong courtroom advocacy with practical, commercially focused advice at every stage of a dispute.
Our expertise includes:
Administration orders, winding-up petitions, voluntary and compulsory liquidations, CVAs and IVAs
Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy Restriction Orders, statutory demands, insolvency disputes, and trustees in bankruptcy matters
Directors’ disqualification, breach of duty, misfeasance, wrongful trading, and fraudulent trading claims
Insolvent partnerships, receiverships, supervening administration applications, and antecedent transactions
Transactions at an undervalue, POCA-related insolvency issues, asset recovery, forfeiture, and enforcement proceedings
We act for office holders, insolvency practitioners, banks and lending institutions, accountants, major corporations, bondholders, private individuals, court-appointed receivers, trustees in bankruptcy, and government bodies including the Secretary of State and the Official Receiver.
Our senior members include Fellows of R3, reflecting longstanding involvement in and contribution to the insolvency and restructuring profession.
Clients choose us for our proven track record in complex, high-value cases, robust advocacy in contentious and technical matters, and specialist expertise where insolvency, asset recovery, and financial crime intersect.
Representative cases
Close cases
R v James Stunt
Barry continues to act for the Trustees in Bankruptcy of James Stunt in relation to the CPS criminal proceedings with a retrial to commence soon.
Acting for an administrator (PKF Smith Cooper) seeking a retrospective extension of an administration order following a procedural irregularity in the deemed consent procedure which had rendered an earlier presumed extension of the administration period void.
Acting for the liquidators (PKF Smith Cooper) of a large steel company in multi-jurisdictional claims brought against other members of the insolvent company’s group arising out of preferential transactions.
FCA v Gopee
Successfully acted for the Official Receiver and Liquidator of various restrained companies in seeking a variation of the defendant’s restraint order to sell properties and recover direct and indirect costs of realisation etc incurred exercising his powers under the Insolvency Act 1986. HH J Beddoe ordered that S. 426 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 was no bar to the relief granted.
Bartlett v Somaia 1 December 2020, HC [2020] 12 WLUK 11
Barry acted for the court appointed Receiver. The court ordered the discharge of an enforcement receiver and a contingency sum of £10,000 to cover any costs or expenses incurred after her discharge.
R – Craig Brookes & others
Successfully acted for the Liquidator of Bric Global Limited in obtaining the release of c£300k in cash forfeiture proceedings brought by the Met. March 2020.
Hedge Capital Investments Ltd v Sustainable Wealth Investments (UK) Ltd (In Liquidation) [2015] EWHC 1674 (Ch)
Barry successfully acted for the joint liquidators resisting an application for pre-action disclosure against a company in liquidation where a restraint order and management receivership order were in place.
Independent Trustee Services Limited v GP Noble Trustees Limited & Others [2009] EWHC 161 (Ch)
Acted for the SFO who had obtained a Restraint Order against funds in Switzerland. Application to claim legal costs and funding for a corporate venture in Thailand in Chancery Proceedings refused.
Acting for the liquidator (Mazars) of a company seeking to recover c.£1m from a Company director arising out of misfeasant transactions, an overdrawn director’s loan account, and preferential transactions.
Acting for the respondents to various claims brought by a trustee in bankruptcy seeking to recover 12 properties from various family members of the bankrupt which it was alleged the bankrupt owned beneficially.
Moskalev v Yanishevskiy [2021] EWHC 1575 (Ch)
Acting for a Russian national, domiciled in Cyprus in resisting insolvency proceedings brought against him in England and Wales.
Microsoft Corporation v Matthew Anness Chancery Division Intellectual Property
Barry was initially instructed to seek a variation of a Freezing Order to allow D to sell a property for c£2m. D had been made bankrupt following the making of a Settlement Order with C. Following Barry’s advice and drafting, investigations with the TIB and negotiations with C’s Solicitors, the Freezing Order was discharged by way of a Consent Order.
FCA v Gopee
Barry successfully acted for the Official Receiver and Liquidator of various restrained companies in seeking a variation of the defendant’s restraint order to sell properties and recover direct and indirect costs of realisation etc incurred exercising his powers under the Insolvency Act 1986. HH J Beddoe ordered that S. 426 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 was no bar to the relief granted - Instructing Solicitors: TLT LLP 7 May 2020.
Choudhury
Acting successfully in highly contentious bankruptcy proceedings for the Trustee in Bankruptcy in TUV claims against a convicted defendant subject to confiscation proceedings. Claims settled.
Brandon Barnes v Eastenders Plc & CPS [2012] EWHC 4 April 2012 - (instructed by the former Receiver)
Decision of Underhill J as to recoverability of receivership costs.
Representative cases
R v James Stunt
Barry continues to act for the Trustees in Bankruptcy of James Stunt in relation to the CPS criminal proceedings with a retrial to commence soon.
Acting for the liquidator (Mazars) of a company seeking to recover c.£1m from a Company director arising out of misfeasant transactions, an overdrawn director’s loan account, and preferential transactions.
Acting for an administrator (PKF Smith Cooper) seeking a retrospective extension of an administration order following a procedural irregularity in the deemed consent procedure which had rendered an earlier presumed extension of the administration period void.
Acting for the respondents to various claims brought by a trustee in bankruptcy seeking to recover 12 properties from various family members of the bankrupt which it was alleged the bankrupt owned beneficially.
Acting for the liquidators (PKF Smith Cooper) of a large steel company in multi-jurisdictional claims brought against other members of the insolvent company’s group arising out of preferential transactions.
Moskalev v Yanishevskiy [2021] EWHC 1575 (Ch)
Acting for a Russian national, domiciled in Cyprus in resisting insolvency proceedings brought against him in England and Wales.
FCA v Gopee
Successfully acted for the Official Receiver and Liquidator of various restrained companies in seeking a variation of the defendant’s restraint order to sell properties and recover direct and indirect costs of realisation etc incurred exercising his powers under the Insolvency Act 1986. HH J Beddoe ordered that S. 426 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 was no bar to the relief granted.
Microsoft Corporation v Matthew Anness Chancery Division Intellectual Property
Barry was initially instructed to seek a variation of a Freezing Order to allow D to sell a property for c£2m. D had been made bankrupt following the making of a Settlement Order with C. Following Barry’s advice and drafting, investigations with the TIB and negotiations with C’s Solicitors, the Freezing Order was discharged by way of a Consent Order.
Bartlett v Somaia 1 December 2020, HC [2020] 12 WLUK 11
Barry acted for the court appointed Receiver. The court ordered the discharge of an enforcement receiver and a contingency sum of £10,000 to cover any costs or expenses incurred after her discharge.
FCA v Gopee
Barry successfully acted for the Official Receiver and Liquidator of various restrained companies in seeking a variation of the defendant’s restraint order to sell properties and recover direct and indirect costs of realisation etc incurred exercising his powers under the Insolvency Act 1986. HH J Beddoe ordered that S. 426 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 was no bar to the relief granted - Instructing Solicitors: TLT LLP 7 May 2020.
R – Craig Brookes & others
Successfully acted for the Liquidator of Bric Global Limited in obtaining the release of c£300k in cash forfeiture proceedings brought by the Met. March 2020.
Choudhury
Acting successfully in highly contentious bankruptcy proceedings for the Trustee in Bankruptcy in TUV claims against a convicted defendant subject to confiscation proceedings. Claims settled.
Hedge Capital Investments Ltd v Sustainable Wealth Investments (UK) Ltd (In Liquidation) [2015] EWHC 1674 (Ch)
Barry successfully acted for the joint liquidators resisting an application for pre-action disclosure against a company in liquidation where a restraint order and management receivership order were in place.
Brandon Barnes v Eastenders Plc & CPS [2012] EWHC 4 April 2012 - (instructed by the former Receiver)
Decision of Underhill J as to recoverability of receivership costs.
Independent Trustee Services Limited v GP Noble Trustees Limited & Others [2009] EWHC 161 (Ch)
Acted for the SFO who had obtained a Restraint Order against funds in Switzerland. Application to claim legal costs and funding for a corporate venture in Thailand in Chancery Proceedings refused.
Our Insolvency Barristers
For a confidential conversation please contact Chief Executive and Director of Clerking, Sam Carter.
“The clerks always go above and beyond to assist. They understand the needs of instructing solicitors, particularly in identifying suitable counsel for cases”
Chambers & Partners
“A friendly and integrated service. The clerks systems and client handling are excellent - with a can-do attitude, enabling easier planning on my side.”
Legal 500
People / Barristers
Address
For a confidential conversation please contact Chief Executive and Director of Clerking, Sam Carter.
“The clerks always go above and beyond to assist. They understand the needs of instructing solicitors, particularly in identifying suitable counsel for cases”
Chambers & Partners
“A friendly and integrated service. The clerks systems and client handling are excellent - with a can-do attitude, enabling easier planning on my side.”
Legal 500
People / Barristers
Address
For a confidential conversation please contact Chief Executive and Director of Clerking, Sam Carter.
“The clerks always go above and beyond to assist. They understand the needs of instructing solicitors, particularly in identifying suitable counsel for cases”
Chambers & Partners
“A friendly and integrated service. The clerks systems and client handling are excellent - with a can-do attitude, enabling easier planning on my side.”
Legal 500
People / Barristers
Address