William
McCormick KC

Represented a defendant Colombian company facing attempts to enforce an LCIA arbitration award for £60m +. The claimant has secured freezing order over insurance monies held in London. The client company had entered into administration in Colombia and sought recognition of those proceedings which the claimant opposed on the basis that it was a sham.

Insurance company arbitration – Arbitration between ATE insurer and solicitor which issued thousands of policies under a number of coverholder agreements. The insurer claimed that the solicitor had agreed to bear a proportion of adverse costs awarded and then committed wholesale breaches of the terms of the agreement and concealed the extent of the losses being sustained for many years.

Khazakhstan Kagazy Plc & Ors v Zhunus & Ors (2020-2021)
Engaged as leading counsel on behalf of a number of Trustee Companies defending claims to enforce against their assets which (it was alleged) represented the proceeds of frauds committed by one of the settlors of those Trusts. The value of the assets at stake was between £100m and £140m. The legal team took over the case at a time when the Defendants were alleged to be in default of orders for the provision of information concerning the loss of electronic records complicated by contested allegations as to the medical condition of the moving mind of the Trustees.

The Claimant sought judgment in default of compliance with these orders which was successfully resisted ([2020] EWHC 2431 (Comm)). Extensions of time were obtained over the objections of the Claimants to allow disclosure and then exchange of factual and expert (foreign law) evidence.

SKAT (Danish Tax Authority) Litigation (2019-2020)
Successfully defended the Gerant (CEO) of a Luxembourgish Company who was alleged to have negligently failed to identify conduct said to be part of a world-wide conspiracy that has defrauded the Danish Tax Authorities of more than £1.2bn. The claim was discontinued in the face of an application for summary judgment by the defendant.

William has a broad range of commercial work encompassing contractual disputes and claims based upon breaches of duty. Examples of his work are:

Defending a claim for in excess of £10m for commission in respect of the supply of PPE.

Advised a Jersey Company on the availability of remedies as against its professional advisors in connection with losses of £150m due to systematic frauds committed against its wholly owned subsidiaries in Hong Kong and China.

Defended a Gibraltarian Financial Services Company against allegations of breach of fiduciary duty in connection with an allegedly fraudulent investment scheme in which up to £15m was obtained from investors. The claimant discontinued the claim 6 weeks before trial.

Defended a Hong Kong Company against a claim for £8m based upon an alleged guarantee given to the NHS in favour of a UK subsidiary.

Khazakhstan Kagazy Plc & Ors v Zhunus & Ors (2020-2021)
Engaged as leading counsel on behalf of a number of Trustee Companies defending claims to enforce against their assets which (it was alleged) represented the proceeds of frauds committed by one of the settlors of those Trusts. The value of the assets at stake was between £100m and £140m.

Uavend Properties Inc v Adsaax Ltd & Vistra (Singapore) [2020] EWHC 2073 (Comm)
Represented a Seychelles company suing a Singapore-based Trust Company for procuring breach of contract relating to a major property development in London. The defendant both held 95% of the shares in the defaulting company and required its employees to serve as directors of the corporate director of the defaulting company by Company for which it provided directors.

SKAT (Danish Tax Authority) Litigation (2019-2020)
Successfully defended the Gerant (CEO) of a Luxembourgish Company who was alleged to have negligently failed to identify conduct said to be part of a world-wide conspiracy that has defrauded the Danish Tax Authorities of more than £1.2bn. The claim was discontinued in the face of an application for summary judgment by the defendant.

AMP Advisory and Management Partners v Force India Formula One Team Limited [2019] EWHC 2426 (Comm) in which he successfully secured a quantum meruit for work done (without a contract) in assisting in the securing of the title sponsor (BWT) for the F1 team now known as Racing Point (which produced the well-known colouring of the team’s cars).

Gemini Europe Ltd v Sawyer [2020] EWHC 3377 (QB); Affinity Workplace Solutions Limited v McCann and others [2019] EWHC 2829 (Ch) and Monex Europe Limited v Pothecary & another [2019] EWHC 1714 (QB), all of which involved proceedings to enforce/resist post-termination restrictive covenants.

Representing a German business in a claim for compensation in excess of £4m under the Commercial Agent Regulations and in its claim for negligence against the solicitors who initially advised it to deny that the agent was an employee.

William led the team representing Rangers International FC, The Rangers Football Club Ltd and its Chairman Dave King in the dispute with Mike Ashley and Sports Direct PLC. He secured the dismissal as an abuse of process of an application to commit Mr King to prison [2016] EWHC 85 (Ch), the striking out of parts of that substantive claim and the imposition of terms upon Sports Direct PLC when it sought to discontinue the balance of its claim on the eve of the trial. Rangers Retail v TRFC [2017] EWHC 737 (Ch) – a case concerning the ability of a JV partner to bring a derivative action when the JV agreement purports to exclude any right to sue the defendant.

In the trial of a dispute between competing funeral plan suppliers, following cross-examination of the claimant company’s witnesses the claimant discontinued its claim and its managing director (and final witness) resigned the following day.

Energenics & Neuftec v Hazarika [2014] EWHC 1845 (Ch), resisted claims for damages based on breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty against the seller of a Dominican company.

Patel v Mirza [2013] EWHC 1892 (Ch) and [2014] EWCA Civ 1047 – represented the defendant at trial and in the Court of Appeal arguing issues of illegality in the context of restitution.

Namalco v EMBD and others – advised surveyors on their defences to third party claims made in multi-million US$ highway contracts.

In Trinidad & Tobago his cases include disputes over the development/construction of multi-million pound hotel and villa leisure resorts and substantial highway contracts:.

Real Time Ltd v Renraw Ltd [2014] UKPC 6 – a series of disputes between a number of companies controlled by high-profile individuals in Trinidad & Tobago.

William is regularly instructed to deal with claims of unfair management of companies or breach of the duties owed by directors. Examples of this aspect of his caseload are:

Advising the Respondent to an unfair petition alleging that the openly executed removal of part of a family owned business retail business many years previously was a breach of fiduciary duty, conspiracy and unfairly prejudicial conduct entitling the Petitioner to a 50% share of that part of the business and of the profits (claimed at in excess of £20m) since then.

Advising the Petition in a claim for unfair prejudice based upon the breach of a Shareholders’ Agreement. The Respondents wished to expand the care home business by acquiring and developing further properties which would restrict the ability to pay dividends for a number of years. The Shareholders’ Agreement required the consent of all members for certain steps – there was a dispute as to whether it covered this step and if not, whether such conduct was unfairly prejudicial management of the company’s affairs. The case settled on the first day set for the trial.

Disputes between family members and the companies they controlled as to ownership of a chain of Service Stations and residential properties, including litigation over breaches of the agreement compromising the first series of disputes.

Disputes over the management of care home, engineering, retail and media businesses.

Re Ruskin Private Hire Ltd [2017] resisted claims by a liquidator against the finance director for breach of duty and trust.

Rangers Retail v TRFC [2017] EWHC 737 (Ch) – represented the claimant in a case concerning the ability of a JV partner to bring a derivative action when the JV agreement purports to exclude any right to sue the defendant.

Energenics & Neuftec v Hazarika [2014] EWHC 1845 (Ch), resisted claims for damages based on breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty against the seller of a Dominican company.

Killen v Horseworld Ltd [2012] EWHC 363 (QB) obtained an account from a defaulting director who diverted corporate opportunities to a new company bought by her after she had been dismissed for attempting a similar diversion.

Re Mister Dee International [2009] EWHC 1902 (Ch) and [2010] EWCA Civ 1408 – successfully resisted a claim for unfair prejudice relief and the setting aside of a share transaction in a 3 week trial and in the Court of Appeal.

Cordes v Sentinel [2008] UKPC 60. Successfully appealed from the Bahamian Court of Appeal a case concerning the payment for the sale of shares.

Representing a father and son defending claims that a property portfolio had been transferred by the father whilst awaiting trial for murder in order to avoid liability for a compensation claim by the decease’s estate.

Representing former directors of a company being pursued by liquidators for the repayment of salaries and dividends alleged to have been paid when the company was insolvent.

Represented a defendant Colombian company facing attempts to enforce an LCIA arbitration award for £60m +. The claimant had secured freezing order over insurance monies held in London. The client company had entered into administration in Colombia and was seeking recognition of those proceedings which the claimant opposed on the basis that it was a sham.

Resisted an application for administration by a construction company which was based upon wholly artificial arguments as to insolvency and was prompted by intra-family animosity.

Aldermore Bank plc v Lynch [2022] EWHC 3050 (Ch) Acting for debtor on an appeal by a bank against the reversal by the ICC Judge of a trustee’s acceptance of a debt of £1.2m based upon a guarantee alleged by the debtor to have been forged.

Re Ruskin Private Hire Ltd [2017] Resisted claims by a liquidator against the finance director for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of trust and fraudulent preference.

William has long been recommended in the field of defamation and privacy where his trial experience and ability to provide early well-focused advice enable him to provide a complete service.

Having acted as junior in a series of large libel trials, his first day in court as a QC was to take the Court of Appeal’s judgment in the ground-breaking case of British Chiropractic Association v Singh [2010] EWCA Civ 350 (in which he represented Mr Singh) which contributed to the eventual passing of the Defamation Act 2013.

In addition to defamation and privacy work he has represented sports and media personalities in connection with contractual issues including obligations to agencies.

Banks v Cadwalladr [2019] EWHC 345 (QB) & [2022] EWHC 1417 (QB)
William represented Arron Banks in a libel action against Carol Cadwalladr arising out of her allegations that he lied about a secret relationship with the Russian Government in relation to accepting foreign funding in breach of UK referendum law. The Judge dismissed the claim on the basis that although the defendant had not had a defence since April 2020 (and publication until that date had caused serious harm to the claimant’s reputation) the claimant had not proved that publication since that date had done so. On appeal, it was decided that the publication since April 2020 had caused serious harm to the Claimant’s reputation and that he was entitled to judgment on that basis.

Riley v Murray (No.2) [2021] EWHC 1417 (QB) & [2022] EWCA Civ 1146 

Represented the defendant to a claim brought by Rachel Riley. The Judge found for the claimant on the basis that although her tweet about an attack on Jeremy Corbyn MP had been provocative and mischievous and she must have realised that it would be taken by some persons to mean that Mr Corbyn deserved to be attacked, because the defendant had not reflected another meaning of the tweet, she had no defence. The Court of Appeal upheld that decision on appeal.

Millett v Corbyn

Represented Mr Corbyn who faced a claim for libel arising out of statements made in an interview on the Andrew Marr Show. The case was listed for a 3 week trial in October 2022 involving 37 witnesses. The claim was discontinued 3 weeks before the trial was due to begin.

Aneel Mussarat v Worldview Media [2022] EWHC 1604 (QB)

Obtained damages, and injunction and a declaration of falsity for Mr Mussarat in respect of allegations made on an Indian TV channel broadcast in the UK that he was engaged in anti-India activities, a covert agent of the Pakistani secret services and encouraging terrorism.

Napag Trading Ltd v Gedi Gruppo Editoriale SpA [2020] EWHC 3034 (QB)

Represented the claimants in respect of claims in libel against Italian publishers which raised complicated issues of construction of the then applicable CJEU cases and of s.1 Defamation Act 2013.

He also represented the owners of the nationally known “heir hunter” Anglia Research Services Limited in their successful libel claim against a competitor, for statements made in emails to sales persons.

Representing the defendant in a libel claim brought by the manufacturer of a protein powder in which a report said (inaccurately) that a dead mouse had been found. The publicity is alleged to have resulted in a temporary dip in sales with a profit value of c £1m and this sum is claimed as special damage.

Euroeco Fuels (Poland) Ltd & others v Szczecin and Swinoujscie Seaports Authority SA & others [2018] EWHC 1018 (QB) & [2019] EWCA Civ 1932
Represented a Polish Port authority (and its president and an employee) in an action for libel and malicious prosecution brought against them in England by the operator and owners and executives of a recycling plant in Poland (based on statements made in Poland and in Polish that the plant had breached local environmental laws. The Judge at first instance declined of jurisdiction as a matter of discretion (the first time this had occurred in a libel case) under the Recast Brussels Regulation. The CA overturned that decision.

Barron & others v Collins & UKIP [2018] EWHC 253 (QB)
Obtained an order that UKIP was liable for the costs of three Labour MPs who sued UKIP MEP Jane Collins for libel in a speech delivered at the UKIP Conference because it had manipulated her defence of that action in the hope of political advantage in the 2015 general election.

Miller v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2017] UKSC 33
Successfully represented the claimant in this conjoined appeal heard over 3 days in which the attempt by various newspapers to strike down the recoverability of additional liabilities in publication cases failed. The Court’s judgment referred to his submissions as “spirited and impressive”.

Represented Tamara Ecclestone’s former partner in the dispute in which each alleged mis-use of private information against the other and Ms Ecclestone sought unsuccessfully to reclaim the Lambourghini Aventador that she had given him as a birthday present (and the number plate she gave him for Christmas).

Dr Liam Fox MP v  Boulter  [2013] EWHC 1435 (QB), secured a settlement on the eve of trial for allegations arising out of Dr Fox’s public life.

Lord McAlpine v Bercow [2013] EWHC 1342 (QB), represented the defendant in what was the first “twitter libel” arising out of unfounded reports on BBC’s Newsnight of child sexual abuse by the claimant.

Tesla Inc v BBC [2013] EWCA Civ 152, sued Top Gear for the manner in which it reported on the Tesla Roadster.

Cooper v Associated Newspapers Ltd & Evening Standard Ltd (one of the last jury trials for libel) in which he secured an award of £65,000 for an individual wrongly accused of masterminding the Millbank riots.

MPS & SOCA v Times Newspapers Lld & Gillard [2011] EWHC 776, 1566 & 2705.
In the allied field of breach of confidence he successfully resisted the intended use by Times Newspapers (in its defence of separate libel proceedings) of documents obtained by its journalist in breach of confidence which contained sensitive material that could have expose evidence-gathering methods and sources of information.

He advised Tony Blackburn over his contractual position following his temporary departure from the BBC in 2016.

In addition to having advised sportspersons on media related issues William has experience of advising on sports contracts (including Formula One) and has experience of contractual disputes in boxing (Sports Network v Calzaghe [2009] EWHC 480 (QB) [2010] EWHC 71 (QB)) and football, having been instructed on behalf of Glasgow Rangers FC in its long-running dispute with Sports Direct over their commercial relationship: [2016] EWHC 85 (Ch) and [2017] EWHC 737 (Ch).

In AMP Advisory and Management Partners v Force India Formula One Team Limited [2019] EWHC 2426 (Comm) he obtained a quantum meruit on behalf of the claimant for work done without an agreed contact in connection with the title sponsorship for the Formula One Team.

Cases include:

Represented a claimant who alleged the negligent drafting of a share sale agreements leaving him exposed to being forced out on unfavourable terms.

Advised a Jersey Company on the availability of remedies as against its professional advisors in connection with losses of £150m due to systematic frauds committed against its wholly owned subsidiaries in Hong Kong and China.

Defended a Gibraltarian Financial Services Company against allegations of breach of fiduciary duty in connection with an allegedly fraudulent investment scheme in which up to £15m was obtained from investors. The claimant discontinued the claim 6 weeks before trial.

A claim against solicitors for failing to properly advise the business as to its exposure to risk under the Commercial Agents Regulations (leading the “employee” to bring such a claim which required to be settled).

A claim alleging that the negligence of expert witnesses and solicitors had led to a conviction for murder.

Representing a UK business in an action for negligence against solicitors for failing to take proper steps to register its design rights in the Far East in respect of a new type of hairbrush.

Representing an insurer in proceedings against a firm of solicitors in respect of the issuing of ATE policies and the conduct of the linked litigation.

Scullion v BoS (t/a Colleys) [2011] EWCA Civ 693
William represented the claimant in Court of Appeal in seeking to establish a duty of care to buy-to-let purchasers. The appeal to the Supreme Court was compromised weeks before it was due to be heard.

In 2019 William represented claimants seeking to enforce their rights against a joint venturer developer of property transferred or charged by them to him.  Their claim was met with pleas of fraud, forgery, misrepresentation and breach of the joint venture agreement on their part. On the eve of trial the developer abandoned his case.

Patrick v McKinley [2017] EWCA Civ 2068
Successfully representing the respondent to an appeal in respect of alleged beneficial interests in properties arising over a period of years.

Dattani v Damac Ltd (DIFC March 2015)
Resisted the appeal of a developer against judgment for damages based upon the failure to complete a residential and retail project in Dubai.

His case-load in Trinidad & Tobago has covered cases concerning the development/construction of multi-million pound hotel and villa leisure resorts.

‘ A seasoned practitioner who inspires instant confidence with the clients. ’

Legal 500 – 2022 – Company and Partnership

“A go-to barrister who is responsive, hard-working and very intelligent.” “He is a fearsome advocate with excellent cross-examination skills.”

Chambers Global Guide – 2021 – Dispute Resolution: Commercial

“He has a practical approach coupled with a razor-sharp mind. He is also very approachable and clients like him.” “He’s responsive, hard-working and very intelligent.” “Precise, creative and committed.”

Chambers and Partners – 2021 – Defamation/Privacy

”A judge-friendly tenacious advocate.” “He has a huge amount of experience and is a ferocious cross-examiner.” “You want him on your side.”

Chambers and Partners – 2021 – Commercial Dispute Resolution

‘An absolute star at the Bar, he stands out for his forensic ability to focus on the relevant issues in hand and as a superb courtroom performer.’

Legal 500 – 2021 – Defamation and Privacy

‘A seasoned silk who combines brilliant advocacy and analysis with a user-friendly style: he always adds value.’

Legal 500 – 2021 – Company and Partnership

“A very good advocate who is passionate in his delivery and very user friendly.”

Chambers and Partners – 2020 – Defamation/Privacy

“He’s a proper street fighter who really gets involved in the case and works with solicitors in a joint effort.”

Chambers and Partners – 2020 – Commercial Dispute Resolution

“A tenacious and formidable barrister who is hard-working and deadly in cross-examination..”

Chambers and Partners – 2020 – Commercial Dispute Resolution

“He is noted for his insightful analysis, his cutting straight to the core issues and his unambiguous approach.”

Legal 500 – 2020 – Company and partnership

“Extremely user-friendly”

Legal 500 – 2020 – Defamation/Privacy

“Very accomplished. Very engaging and good with the court.”

Who’s Who Legal 2020 – William McCormick QC is a “truly excellent” barrister and “well liked by clients”. He “gives thoughtful advice and is assured in court”.