Armando Neris

Represented a Balkan State and two government-owned entities in relation to two related LCIA arbitrations arising out of a commercial dispute in connection with a major investment in the tourism sector.

Represented a charterer in an LMAA arbitration brought by a shipowner in connection with the termination of a charterparty.

Represented a private equity firm in an HKIAC arbitration against the majority shareholder of a portfolio company, seeking declarations as to the construction of a shareholders’ agreement.

Represented an energy company in an ICC arbitration brought by a former joint venture partner in connection with the termination of the joint venture.

Representing a petrochemical investor in an ICSID arbitration against an Eastern European State, alleging breaches of the Energy Charter Treaty in connection with its investment in the oil refining and petrochemicals sector. This matter involves allegations of fraud, corruption and money laundering.

Represented a bank and its majority shareholders in an ICSID arbitration against Latvia, alleging breach of a bilateral investment treaty. This matter involved allegations of corruption and attempted extortion against the then Governor of the Central Bank of Latvia and the prudential regulator.

Represented a petroleum exploration company in an ICC arbitration in connection with a dispute arising out of a production sharing agreement.

Represented a renewable energy producer in an ICSID arbitration against Italy, alleging breaches of the Energy Charter Treaty as a result of measures which reduced the incentives available to investors in the photovoltaic sector.

Represented an international audit firm in defending complex and high-value audit negligence claims in an American Arbitration Association arbitration brought by the liquidators of a billion-dollar hedge fund.

*These arbitration matters have been anonymised for confidentiality reasons; and a number of these matters were handled prior to joining 33 Chancery Lane.

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.

Representing the majority shareholder of Viva Wallet, which is Europe’s first neobank, in a major shareholder dispute with J.P. Morgan International Finance Limited. Instructed by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan UK LLP.

Represented (as a solicitor) a private equity firm in a major deceit claim against Barclays Bank arising out of alleged fraudulent misrepresentations made in the course of the Bank’s £7.3 billion capital raising from Middle Eastern investors in late 2008. This dispute featured as one of The Lawyer’s ‘Top 20 Cases’.

Represented (as a solicitor) a former senior executive of Deutsche Bank in defending a complex investigation into alleged corrupt hiring practices and the recovery of deferred compensation which the Bank proposed to forfeit.

Represented (as a solicitor) a group of institutional investors, asset managers, pension funds, and family offices in competition litigation against major banks relating to the alleged manipulation of foreign exchange benchmark rates.

Represented the successful appellant on a pro bono basis as junior counsel in the Court of Appeal. The appeal determined that the term ‘landlord’ under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 does not include those who have merely an alleged equitable interest in a property, and provided valuable guidance on the ingredients of estoppel by representation and estoppel by convention in finding that the appellant could not be estopped from denying that the respondent was its ‘landlord’. Instructed by Mayer Brown International LLP.

Represented (as a solicitor) a UAE-based bank in a Commercial Court dispute in connection with the enforcement of security arising out of lending to the Abraaj Group prior to its collapse.

Represented (as a solicitor) a UAE-based security services company in a claim against Barclays Bank plc arising out of a push-payment fraud perpetrated by a customer of the Bank. The case raised complex issues concerning the availability of claims against a receiving bank in negligence and for unjust enrichment where the Bank was alleged to be on notice that its accounts were being used unlawfully.

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.

Selected appearances as junior counsel between 2012 and 2014 before the New Zealand High Court and Court of Appeal included: Morley v Earthquake Commission [2013] NZHC 230New Zealand Steel Ltd v Attorney-General [2013] NZHC 3524Kraal v Earthquake Commission [2015] 2 NZLR 589 (NZCA)Miah v National Mutual Life Association of Australasia Ltd [2015] NZHC 993

Institutional investors who held contingent convertible (AT1) bonds in the Spanish bank Banco Popular Español in claims against the Single Resolution Board before the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union. This matter involved claims under Spanish and EU law.

Represented institutional investors in connection with proceedings before the German courts arising out of the allegedly wrongful devaluation of bonds prior to the sale of a German bank. This matter involved claims under German law.

Represented a UAE-based bank against a Ghanaian bank arising from a default in the repayment of a special-purpose trade finance loan following the bank’s insolvency. This matter involved claims under Ghanaian law.

Represented (as a solicitor) a Caucasus-based State-owned entity which was seeking to recover misappropriated assets over which it asserted a proprietary interest for the purposes of section 281 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.