{"data":{"filter_options":{"titles":[{"name":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office","value":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office"},{"name":"Partner","value":"Partner"},{"name":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono","value":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono"},{"name":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer","value":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer"},{"name":"Partner / General Counsel","value":"Partner / General Counsel"},{"name":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops","value":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops"},{"name":"Partner / Chairman, Saudi Arabia Practice","value":"Partner / Chairman, Saudi Arabia Practice"},{"name":"K\u0026S Talent Partner","value":"K\u0026S Talent Partner"},{"name":"Partner / Chief Human Resources Officer","value":"Partner / Chief Human Resources Officer"},{"name":"Chairman","value":"Chairman"},{"name":"Senior Counsel","value":"Senior Counsel"},{"name":"Associate Director, E-Discovery Operations","value":"Associate Director, E-Discovery Operations"},{"name":"Counsel","value":"Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Associate","value":"Senior Associate"},{"name":"Associate","value":"Associate"},{"name":"Senior Attorney","value":"Senior Attorney"},{"name":"Senior Lawyer","value":"Senior Lawyer"},{"name":"Attorney","value":"Attorney"},{"name":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor","value":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor"},{"name":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions","value":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions"},{"name":"Senior Government Relations Advisor","value":"Senior Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Associate General Counsel","value":"Associate General Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Advisor","value":"Senior Advisor"},{"name":"Patent Agent","value":"Patent Agent"},{"name":"Consultant","value":"Consultant"},{"name":"Government Relations Advisor","value":"Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration","value":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration"},{"name":"Chief Financial Officer","value":"Chief Financial Officer"},{"name":"Chief Information Officer","value":"Chief Information Officer"},{"name":"Chief Revenue Officer","value":"Chief Revenue Officer"},{"name":"Chief Recruiting Officer","value":"Chief Recruiting Officer"},{"name":"Chief Lawyer Talent Development Officer","value":"Chief Lawyer Talent Development Officer"},{"name":"Chief Marketing Officer","value":"Chief Marketing Officer"},{"name":"Tax Consultant","value":"Tax Consultant"},{"name":"Director of Community Affairs","value":"Director of Community Affairs"},{"name":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations","value":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations"},{"name":"Senior Office Manager","value":"Senior Office Manager"},{"name":"Director of Operations","value":"Director of Operations"},{"name":"Pro Bono Deputy","value":"Pro Bono Deputy"},{"name":"Director of Office Operations","value":"Director of Office Operations"},{"name":"Director of Operations Europe","value":"Director of Operations Europe"},{"name":"Law Clerk","value":"Law Clerk"},{"name":"Deputy General Counsel","value":"Deputy General Counsel"}],"schools":[{"name":"(Commercial Law), in front of Monash University, Australia","value":3045},{"name":"Aberystwyth University","value":3004},{"name":"Albany Law School","value":2118},{"name":"American University Washington College of Law","value":3042},{"name":"American University, Washington College of Law","value":3024},{"name":"Appalachian School of Law","value":2891},{"name":"Ateneo de Manila University","value":2914},{"name":"Ave Maria School of Law","value":2892},{"name":"Baylor University School of Law","value":181},{"name":"Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law","value":2619},{"name":"Binghamton University","value":3002},{"name":"Boston College Law School","value":245},{"name":"Boston University School of Law","value":247},{"name":"BPP Law School Leeds","value":2642},{"name":"BPP Law School London","value":2782},{"name":"BPP University","value":2984},{"name":"Brooklyn Law School","value":2705},{"name":"Cairo University, Law School","value":2962},{"name":"California Western School of Law","value":315},{"name":"Capital University Law School","value":327},{"name":"Case Western Reserve University School of Law","value":345},{"name":"Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law","value":2235},{"name":"Chapman University School of Law","value":377},{"name":"Charleston School of Law","value":2910},{"name":"City Law School, London","value":2998},{"name":"City Law School","value":2857},{"name":"Clark University","value":3006},{"name":"Cleveland-Marshall College of Law","value":426},{"name":"Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs","value":3008},{"name":"Columbia University School of Law","value":485},{"name":"Columbia University","value":3126},{"name":"Columbus School of Law, Catholic University of America","value":3010},{"name":"Columbus School of Law","value":350},{"name":"Concord Law School of Kaplan University","value":1026},{"name":"Cornell Law School","value":512},{"name":"Creighton University School of Law","value":518},{"name":"Creighton University","value":3025},{"name":"Cumberland School of Law","value":1759},{"name":"CUNY School of Law","value":2893},{"name":"David A. Clarke School of Law","value":2399},{"name":"Deakin University School of Law","value":2907},{"name":"DePaul University College of Law","value":565},{"name":"DePaul University College of Law","value":3060},{"name":"Dickinson School of Law","value":2719},{"name":"Drake University Law School","value":609},{"name":"Duke University School of Law","value":613},{"name":"Duquesne University School of Law","value":614},{"name":"Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law","value":173},{"name":"Edinburgh Law School","value":3160},{"name":"Emory University School of Law","value":659},{"name":"ESADE Business and Law School – Universidad Ramon Llull","value":3215},{"name":"Fachseminare von Fürstenberg","value":2918},{"name":"Faculté Libre de Droit, Université Catholique de Lille","value":3055},{"name":"Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb","value":2983},{"name":"Faculty of Law","value":2944},{"name":"Faculty of Law","value":3039},{"name":"Federal University of Rio de Janeiro","value":3022},{"name":"Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul School of Law (Brazil)","value":3062},{"name":"Florida A\u0026M University College of Law","value":699},{"name":"Florida Coastal School of Law","value":2894},{"name":"Florida International College of Law","value":707},{"name":"Florida State University College of Law","value":720},{"name":"Fordham University School of Law","value":722},{"name":"Franklin Pierce Law Center","value":734},{"name":"Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena","value":3015},{"name":"George Mason University School of Law","value":752},{"name":"George Washington University Law School","value":753},{"name":"Georgetown University Law Center","value":755},{"name":"Georgia State University College of Law","value":761},{"name":"Ghent Law School","value":2793},{"name":"Golden Gate University School of Law","value":770},{"name":"Gonzaga University School of Law","value":772},{"name":"Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva","value":2997},{"name":"Hamline University School of Law","value":811},{"name":"Harvard Law School","value":824},{"name":"Hebrew University of Jerusalem Faculty of Law","value":2994},{"name":"Hofstra University School of Law","value":858},{"name":"Howard University School of Law","value":872},{"name":"Huazhong University of Science and Technology","value":3016},{"name":"Humboldt University of Berlin","value":3012},{"name":"Indiana University School of Law","value":2711},{"name":"Indiana University School of Law","value":890},{"name":"International Association of Privacy Professionals","value":3009},{"name":"J. Reuben Clark Law School","value":262},{"name":"Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center","value":2084},{"name":"James Cook University of North Queensland","value":3034},{"name":"Jean Moulin University Lyon 3, France","value":2938},{"name":"Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health","value":2992},{"name":"Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen Rechtswissenschaft (Germany)","value":3063},{"name":"Kansas City School of Law","value":2247},{"name":"Keio University","value":2968},{"name":"Kent College of Law","value":883},{"name":"Kline School of Law","value":611},{"name":"KU Leuven","value":3007},{"name":"Levin College of Law","value":2189},{"name":"Lewis and Clark Law School","value":1089},{"name":"Liberty University School of Law","value":1094},{"name":"Lincoln College of Law","value":2253},{"name":"LL.M. in International Crime and Justice UNICRI","value":2937},{"name":"Loyola Law School","value":2895},{"name":"Loyola University Chicago School of Law","value":1135},{"name":"Loyola University New Orleans College of Law","value":1136},{"name":"Marquette University Law School","value":1176},{"name":"McGeorge School of Law","value":2402},{"name":"McGill University","value":2659},{"name":"Melbourne Law School","value":2899},{"name":"Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law","value":1221},{"name":"Mexico Autonomous Institute of Technology","value":2996},{"name":"Michael E. Moritz College of Law","value":2728},{"name":"Michigan State University College of Law","value":1245},{"name":"Mississippi College School of Law","value":1285},{"name":"Moscow State University","value":2815},{"name":"National and Kapodistrian University of Athens","value":3032},{"name":"National Law University Jodhpur","value":3020},{"name":"National University of Singapore, Faculty of Law","value":2662},{"name":"New England School of Law","value":2886},{"name":"New York Law School","value":1403},{"name":"New York University School of Law","value":1406},{"name":"Norman Adrian Wiggins School of Law","value":323},{"name":"North Carolina Central University School of Law","value":1417},{"name":"Northeastern University School of Law","value":1430},{"name":"Northern Illinois University College of Law","value":1432},{"name":"Northwestern Pritzker School of Law","value":1451},{"name":"Notre Dame Law School","value":2278},{"name":"Ohio Northern University Law School","value":3036},{"name":"Oklahoma City University School of Law","value":1487},{"name":"Osgoode Hall Law School","value":3124},{"name":"Pace University School of Law","value":1516},{"name":"Panteion University","value":3033},{"name":"Paul M. Hebert Law Center","value":2713},{"name":"Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson School of Law","value":1562},{"name":"Pepperdine University School of Law","value":1570},{"name":"Pettit College of Law","value":1473},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile","value":3203},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru","value":3011},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Javeriana","value":3013},{"name":"Pontificia Universidade Catolica de Sao Paulo","value":3095},{"name":"Prince Sultan University College of Law","value":3167},{"name":"Queens College, Cambridge","value":3003},{"name":"Quinnipiac University School of Law","value":1626},{"name":"Ralph R. Papitto School of Law","value":1686},{"name":"Regent University School of Law","value":1649},{"name":"Rice University","value":3043},{"name":"Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg","value":3049},{"name":"Rutgers University School of Law-Newark","value":1699},{"name":"Rutgers University School of Law","value":1697},{"name":"S.J. Quinney College of Law","value":2408},{"name":"Saint Louis University School of Law","value":1732},{"name":"Salmon P. Chase College of Law","value":1433},{"name":"Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law","value":103},{"name":"Santa Clara University School of Law","value":1771},{"name":"Seattle University School of Law","value":1787},{"name":"Seton Hall University School of Law","value":1790},{"name":"Shepard Broad Law Center","value":1460},{"name":"South Texas College of Law","value":2721},{"name":"Southern Illinois University School of Law","value":1849},{"name":"Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law","value":1852},{"name":"Southern University Law Center","value":1857},{"name":"Southwestern Law School","value":1876},{"name":"St. John's University School of Law","value":2724},{"name":"St. Mary's University School of Law","value":1896},{"name":"St. Thomas University School of Law","value":1746},{"name":"Stanford Law School","value":1904},{"name":"Stetson University College of Law","value":1910},{"name":"Sturm College of Law","value":2184},{"name":"Suffolk University Law School","value":1921},{"name":"Syracuse University College of Law","value":1956},{"name":"Temple University Beasley School of Law","value":1974},{"name":"Texas A\u0026M School of Law","value":1980},{"name":"Texas Tech University School of Law","value":1994},{"name":"Texas Wesleyan University School of Law","value":1996},{"name":"The College of Law Australia","value":3091},{"name":"The College of Law, London","value":2935},{"name":"The John Marshall Law School","value":2034},{"name":"The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School","value":2896},{"name":"The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law","value":2990},{"name":"The University of Akron School of Law","value":2143},{"name":"The University of Alabama School of Law","value":2045},{"name":"The University of Birmingham, U.K.","value":2796},{"name":"The University of Iowa College of Law","value":2206},{"name":"The University of Texas School of Law","value":2055},{"name":"The University of Tulsa College of Law","value":2407},{"name":"Thomas Jefferson School of Law","value":685},{"name":"Thomas M. Cooley Law School","value":2729},{"name":"Thurgood Marshall School of Law","value":1992},{"name":"Tianjin University of Commerce","value":2995},{"name":"Tulane University Law School","value":2113},{"name":"UC Davis School of Law","value":2160},{"name":"UCLA School of Law","value":2162},{"name":"Universidad Católica de Honduras","value":2916},{"name":"Universidad Francisco Marroquin","value":3090},{"name":"Universidad Panamericana","value":2904},{"name":"Universidad Torcuato di Tella","value":3035},{"name":"Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Direito","value":3028},{"name":"Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie","value":2977},{"name":"Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi","value":3135},{"name":"University at Buffalo Law School","value":1928},{"name":"University College Dublin Law School","value":2900},{"name":"University of Alberta Faculty of Law","value":3088},{"name":"University of Amsterdam","value":2980},{"name":"University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law","value":2149},{"name":"University of Arkansas School of Law","value":2154},{"name":"University of Baltimore School of Law","value":2156},{"name":"University of California College of the Law","value":3196},{"name":"University of California Hastings College of Law","value":2158},{"name":"University of California Irvine School of Law","value":2161},{"name":"University of California, Berkeley, School of Law","value":2159},{"name":"University of California, Davis","value":3019},{"name":"University of Cambridge, U.K","value":2991},{"name":"University of Canterbury","value":2981},{"name":"University of Central Florida","value":3027},{"name":"University of Chester Law School","value":3005},{"name":"University of Chicago Law School","value":2174},{"name":"University of Chicago","value":3038},{"name":"University of Cincinnati College of Law","value":2175},{"name":"University of Colorado School of Law","value":2177},{"name":"University of Connecticut School of Law","value":2180},{"name":"University of Dayton School of Law","value":2182},{"name":"University of Detroit Mercy School of Law","value":2185},{"name":"University of East Anglia","value":3000},{"name":"University of Florida, Levin College of Law","value":3188},{"name":"University of Georgia School of Law","value":2190},{"name":"University of Houston Law Center","value":2197},{"name":"University of Hull","value":3040},{"name":"University of Idaho College of Law","value":2201},{"name":"University of Illinois College of Law","value":2204},{"name":"University of Kansas School of Law","value":2208},{"name":"University of Kentucky College of Law","value":2210},{"name":"University of La Verne College of Law","value":2211},{"name":"University of Law, London","value":2999},{"name":"University of Lethbridge","value":3030},{"name":"University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law","value":2214},{"name":"University of Maine School of Law","value":2391},{"name":"University of Maryland School of Law","value":2224},{"name":"University of Miami School of Law","value":2236},{"name":"University of Michigan Law School","value":2237},{"name":"University of Minnesota Law School","value":2243},{"name":"University of Mississippi School of Law","value":2244},{"name":"University of Missouri School of Law","value":2246},{"name":"University of Montana School of Law","value":2048},{"name":"University of Nebraska College of Law","value":2744},{"name":"University of New Mexico School of Law","value":2262},{"name":"University of North Carolina School of Law","value":2266},{"name":"University of North Dakota School of Law","value":2271},{"name":"University of Oklahoma Law Center","value":2747},{"name":"University of Oregon School of Law","value":2281},{"name":"University of Pennsylvania Law School","value":2282},{"name":"University of Pittsburgh School of Law","value":2354},{"name":"University of Richmond School of Law","value":2370},{"name":"University of San Diego School of Law","value":2377},{"name":"University of San Francisco School of Law","value":2378},{"name":"University of South Carolina School of Law","value":2750},{"name":"University of South Dakota School of Law","value":2387},{"name":"University of Southern California Gould School of Law","value":3051},{"name":"University of St. Thomas School of Law","value":2751},{"name":"University of Sydney Law School","value":3031},{"name":"University of Tennessee College of Law","value":2051},{"name":"University of the West of England, Bristol","value":3001},{"name":"University of Toledo College of Law","value":2406},{"name":"University of Toronto","value":2912},{"name":"University of Utah","value":3026},{"name":"University of Virginia School of Law","value":2410},{"name":"University of Washington School of Law","value":2412},{"name":"University of Wisconsin Law School","value":2419},{"name":"University of Wyoming College of Law","value":2429},{"name":"University of Zürich","value":3037},{"name":"University Paris Dauphine","value":2976},{"name":"University Paris II Assas","value":2975},{"name":"University Paris II Assas","value":3052},{"name":"USC Gould School of Law","value":2389},{"name":"Utrecht University","value":3085},{"name":"Valparaiso University School of Law","value":2441},{"name":"Vanderbilt University School of Law","value":2442},{"name":"Vermont Law School","value":2451},{"name":"Villanova University School of Law","value":2454},{"name":"Wake Forest University School of Law","value":2471},{"name":"Washburn University School of Law","value":2482},{"name":"Washington and Lee University School of Law","value":2484},{"name":"Washington College of Law","value":61},{"name":"Washington University in St. Louis School of Law","value":2489},{"name":"Wayne State University Law School","value":2493},{"name":"West Virginia University College of Law","value":2517},{"name":"Western New England College School of Law","value":2528},{"name":"Western State College of Law","value":2897},{"name":"Wharton School of Business","value":3044},{"name":"Whittier Law School","value":2564},{"name":"Widener University Delaware Law School","value":2569},{"name":"Willamette University College of Law","value":2573},{"name":"William \u0026 Mary Law School","value":462},{"name":"William H. Bowen School of Law","value":2150},{"name":"William Mitchell College of Law","value":2758},{"name":"William S. Boyd School of Law","value":2256},{"name":"William S. Richardson School of Law","value":2195},{"name":"Wilmington University","value":2993},{"name":"Yale Law School","value":2605}],"offices":[{"name":"Abu Dhabi","value":13},{"name":"Atlanta","value":1},{"name":"Austin","value":12},{"name":"Brussels","value":23},{"name":"Charlotte","value":8},{"name":"Chicago","value":21},{"name":"Dallas","value":28},{"name":"Denver","value":22},{"name":"Dubai","value":6},{"name":"Frankfurt","value":9},{"name":"Geneva","value":15},{"name":"Houston","value":4},{"name":"London","value":5},{"name":"Los Angeles","value":19},{"name":"Miami","value":25},{"name":"New York","value":3},{"name":"Northern Virginia","value":24},{"name":"Paris","value":14},{"name":"Riyadh","value":27},{"name":"Sacramento","value":20},{"name":"San Francisco","value":10},{"name":"Silicon Valley","value":11},{"name":"Singapore","value":16},{"name":"Sydney","value":26},{"name":"Tokyo","value":18},{"name":"Washington, D.C.","value":2}],"capabilities":[{"name":"Corporate, Finance and Investments","value":"cg-1"},{"name":null,"value":72},{"name":null,"value":26},{"name":null,"value":40},{"name":null,"value":27},{"name":null,"value":80},{"name":null,"value":28},{"name":null,"value":35},{"name":null,"value":10},{"name":null,"value":134},{"name":null,"value":121},{"name":null,"value":78},{"name":null,"value":29},{"name":null,"value":32},{"name":null,"value":31},{"name":null,"value":33},{"name":null,"value":126},{"name":null,"value":36},{"name":null,"value":82},{"name":null,"value":37},{"name":null,"value":115},{"name":"Government Matters","value":"cg-2"},{"name":null,"value":1},{"name":null,"value":6},{"name":null,"value":71},{"name":null,"value":21},{"name":null,"value":23},{"name":null,"value":116},{"name":null,"value":24},{"name":null,"value":135},{"name":null,"value":25},{"name":null,"value":110},{"name":null,"value":20},{"name":null,"value":11},{"name":"Trial and Global Disputes","value":"cg-3"},{"name":null,"value":129},{"name":null,"value":2},{"name":null,"value":38},{"name":null,"value":3},{"name":null,"value":5},{"name":null,"value":19},{"name":null,"value":7},{"name":null,"value":4},{"name":null,"value":136},{"name":null,"value":13},{"name":null,"value":14},{"name":null,"value":15},{"name":null,"value":17},{"name":null,"value":18},{"name":null,"value":16},{"name":"Industries / Issues","value":"cg-4"},{"name":null,"value":133},{"name":null,"value":106},{"name":null,"value":124},{"name":null,"value":111},{"name":null,"value":132},{"name":null,"value":131},{"name":null,"value":102},{"name":null,"value":125},{"name":null,"value":127},{"name":null,"value":107},{"name":null,"value":112},{"name":null,"value":105},{"name":null,"value":109},{"name":null,"value":103},{"name":null,"value":128},{"name":null,"value":123},{"name":null,"value":118}]},"title_id":null,"school_id":null,"office_id":null,"capability_id":"14","extra_filter_id":null,"extra_filter_type":null,"q":null,"starts_with":null,"per_page":12,"people":[{"id":442405,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":1250,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRoberto Aguirre Luzi specializes in counseling multinational corporations on complex arbitration. A partner in our International Arbitration practice, Roberto is experienced in administrative and civil law, government contracts, oil and gas contracts, public utilities, and power and infrastructure projects.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch5\u003eForeign Legal Consultant, Authorized to Practice law in Argentina (not licensed in Texas)\u003c/h5\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRoberto represents clients in complex arbitrations before the World Bank Group\u0026rsquo;s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes and UN Commission on International Trade Law, as well as in arbitration under the International Centre for Dispute Resolution and International Chamber of Commerce rules. Roberto also has extensive experience in civil and administrative law, government contracts, oil and gas contracts, public utilities, and power and infrastructure projects.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eListed as a leading member of the international arbitration bar in the 2011 \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eGlobal Arbitration Review\u003c/em\u003e 45 Under 45 rankings, Roberto has also been individually recognized by \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eChambers Latin America\u003c/em\u003e and featured in \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eWho\u0026rsquo;s Who in International Arbitration.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRoberto worked for five years as an associate for Marval, O\u0026rsquo;Farrell \u0026amp; Mairal before joining King \u0026amp; Spalding in 2003. He was born in San Juan, Argentina. Roberto is fluent in Spanish and English, and reads French, Italian and Portuguese.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"roberto-aguirreluzi","email":"raguirreluzi@kslaw.com","phone":"+1 832 814 5375","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLinea Amarilla S.A\u003c/strong\u003e.C. (owned by VINCI Highways) against the City of Lima in a toll road project regarding the nullity of the concession agreement. Lima is claiming the nullity of the concession based on the alleged imbalance of the economic terms of several agreements entered into during the contract execution. The case also involves construction claims against the City of Lima. It is a high-profile case, involving criminal proceedings against former mayors and government officials.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea French company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute under the France-Peru Bilateral Investment Treaty.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSociedad Aeroportuaria Kuntur Wasi S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCorporaci\u0026oacute;n Am\u0026eacute;rica S.A\u003c/strong\u003e. in an ICSID arbitration under the Peru-Argentina bilateral investment treaty, a concession contract for the construction and operation of the new airport in Cuzco, and a guaranty contract (Contrato Ley), involving the unlawful termination and unfair treatment provided to both investors. The Peruvian government has initiated criminal proceedings regarding the concession and its addenda.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGente Oil Ecuador Pte.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLtd\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a UNCITRAL arbitration administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration arising out of a dispute involving a risk service oil contract with Ecuador. The matter also includes allegations of corruption and fraud, including proceedings before criminal courts and the Comptroller Office (Contralor\u0026iacute;a).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eReficar\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration against CB\u0026amp;I, an EPC contractor. The dispute concerns costs and delays in connection with the construction of a refinery in Colombia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eTeinver S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Argentina involving the nationalization of the two largest airlines in that country.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSalini Impregilo SpA\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in three international arbitrations against Argentina involving its investments in a water management concession, a roadway concession and a bridge.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eMurphy Oil\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Ecuador concerning the violation of a bilateral investment treaty.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEuropean company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a potential arbitration against a state and a state-owned energy company. The dispute concerns the nationalization of the energy company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSempra Energy International\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its arbitration claim against Argentina involving its investment in two natural gas distribution licenses and in a potential arbitration against another South American country involving its investment in a power distribution company, and advised it in two ICC arbitrations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003etwo American oil and gas companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two ICSID arbitrations against Argentina, one of which involved claimant\u0026rsquo;s investment in two power plants and a natural gas field.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor American oil company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multibillion-dollar U.S. claim against a South American state concerning the breach of a bilateral investment treaty, an oil concession agreement and an environmental claim initiated against the oil company in the courts of the South American state.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCity Oriente Limited\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID contract arbitration against Ecuador and Petroecuador concerning the violation of an Oil Production Sharing Agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eglobal supplier of power plants\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its arbitration claim involving an engineering, procurement and construction contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eNoble Energy, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eand MachalaPower Cia. Ltda.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in their arbitration claim against a South American country concerning the violation of a bilateral investment treaty, an investment agreement and a concession contract for the construction and operation of a power plant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003etelecommunications company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Argentina concerning the violation of a treaty and the nationalization of its concession contract with the Argentine Government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCamuzzi Internacional\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its arbitration claim against Argentina involving its investment in two natural gas distribution licenses.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003elarge international water company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its ICSID arbitration against Argentina.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor American energy company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in preparing an ICSID arbitration against a Central American state concerning the breach of different contracts with distribution companies for the purchase of electricity.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor independent company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a potential LCIA arbitration under a Joint Operating Agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eNorthrop Grumman\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its US$200 million bidding to, and contract work for, the Argentine government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eParticipated in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;initiated by P\u0026eacute;rez Companc against Enersys.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":121}]},"expertise":[{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":4,"guid":"4.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":116,"guid":"116.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":132,"guid":"132.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":108,"guid":"108.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Aguirre Luzi","nick_name":"Roberto","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Roberto","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"J.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Ranked for Latin America-wide arbitration, he is \"very skillful presenting arguments and cross-examining witnesses.” ","detail":"Chambers Global 2017"},{"title":"“Knowledgeable, highly proactive attitude”; a “high-level bilingual lawyer.” ","detail":"Chambers Latin America"},{"title":"45 Under 45 ","detail":"Global Arbitration Review, 2011"},{"title":"","detail":"Who’s Who in International Arbitration"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/aguirre-luzi-roberto-7120852b/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRoberto Aguirre Luzi specializes in counseling multinational corporations on complex arbitration. A partner in our International Arbitration practice, Roberto is experienced in administrative and civil law, government contracts, oil and gas contracts, public utilities, and power and infrastructure projects.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch5\u003eForeign Legal Consultant, Authorized to Practice law in Argentina (not licensed in Texas)\u003c/h5\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRoberto represents clients in complex arbitrations before the World Bank Group\u0026rsquo;s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes and UN Commission on International Trade Law, as well as in arbitration under the International Centre for Dispute Resolution and International Chamber of Commerce rules. Roberto also has extensive experience in civil and administrative law, government contracts, oil and gas contracts, public utilities, and power and infrastructure projects.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eListed as a leading member of the international arbitration bar in the 2011 \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eGlobal Arbitration Review\u003c/em\u003e 45 Under 45 rankings, Roberto has also been individually recognized by \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eChambers Latin America\u003c/em\u003e and featured in \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eWho\u0026rsquo;s Who in International Arbitration.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRoberto worked for five years as an associate for Marval, O\u0026rsquo;Farrell \u0026amp; Mairal before joining King \u0026amp; Spalding in 2003. He was born in San Juan, Argentina. Roberto is fluent in Spanish and English, and reads French, Italian and Portuguese.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLinea Amarilla S.A\u003c/strong\u003e.C. (owned by VINCI Highways) against the City of Lima in a toll road project regarding the nullity of the concession agreement. Lima is claiming the nullity of the concession based on the alleged imbalance of the economic terms of several agreements entered into during the contract execution. The case also involves construction claims against the City of Lima. It is a high-profile case, involving criminal proceedings against former mayors and government officials.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea French company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute under the France-Peru Bilateral Investment Treaty.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSociedad Aeroportuaria Kuntur Wasi S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCorporaci\u0026oacute;n Am\u0026eacute;rica S.A\u003c/strong\u003e. in an ICSID arbitration under the Peru-Argentina bilateral investment treaty, a concession contract for the construction and operation of the new airport in Cuzco, and a guaranty contract (Contrato Ley), involving the unlawful termination and unfair treatment provided to both investors. The Peruvian government has initiated criminal proceedings regarding the concession and its addenda.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGente Oil Ecuador Pte.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLtd\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a UNCITRAL arbitration administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration arising out of a dispute involving a risk service oil contract with Ecuador. The matter also includes allegations of corruption and fraud, including proceedings before criminal courts and the Comptroller Office (Contralor\u0026iacute;a).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eReficar\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration against CB\u0026amp;I, an EPC contractor. The dispute concerns costs and delays in connection with the construction of a refinery in Colombia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eTeinver S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Argentina involving the nationalization of the two largest airlines in that country.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSalini Impregilo SpA\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in three international arbitrations against Argentina involving its investments in a water management concession, a roadway concession and a bridge.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eMurphy Oil\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Ecuador concerning the violation of a bilateral investment treaty.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEuropean company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a potential arbitration against a state and a state-owned energy company. The dispute concerns the nationalization of the energy company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSempra Energy International\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its arbitration claim against Argentina involving its investment in two natural gas distribution licenses and in a potential arbitration against another South American country involving its investment in a power distribution company, and advised it in two ICC arbitrations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003etwo American oil and gas companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two ICSID arbitrations against Argentina, one of which involved claimant\u0026rsquo;s investment in two power plants and a natural gas field.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor American oil company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multibillion-dollar U.S. claim against a South American state concerning the breach of a bilateral investment treaty, an oil concession agreement and an environmental claim initiated against the oil company in the courts of the South American state.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCity Oriente Limited\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID contract arbitration against Ecuador and Petroecuador concerning the violation of an Oil Production Sharing Agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eglobal supplier of power plants\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its arbitration claim involving an engineering, procurement and construction contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eNoble Energy, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eand MachalaPower Cia. Ltda.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in their arbitration claim against a South American country concerning the violation of a bilateral investment treaty, an investment agreement and a concession contract for the construction and operation of a power plant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003etelecommunications company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Argentina concerning the violation of a treaty and the nationalization of its concession contract with the Argentine Government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCamuzzi Internacional\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its arbitration claim against Argentina involving its investment in two natural gas distribution licenses.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003elarge international water company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its ICSID arbitration against Argentina.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor American energy company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in preparing an ICSID arbitration against a Central American state concerning the breach of different contracts with distribution companies for the purchase of electricity.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor independent company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a potential LCIA arbitration under a Joint Operating Agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eNorthrop Grumman\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its US$200 million bidding to, and contract work for, the Argentine government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eParticipated in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;initiated by P\u0026eacute;rez Companc against Enersys.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Ranked for Latin America-wide arbitration, he is \"very skillful presenting arguments and cross-examining witnesses.” ","detail":"Chambers Global 2017"},{"title":"“Knowledgeable, highly proactive attitude”; a “high-level bilingual lawyer.” ","detail":"Chambers Latin America"},{"title":"45 Under 45 ","detail":"Global Arbitration Review, 2011"},{"title":"","detail":"Who’s Who in International Arbitration"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":4503}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-11-05T05:04:26.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-05T05:04:26.000Z","searchable_text":"Aguirre Luzi{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked for Latin America-wide arbitration, he is \\\"very skillful presenting arguments and cross-examining witnesses.” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global 2017\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Knowledgeable, highly proactive attitude”; a “high-level bilingual lawyer.” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Latin America\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"45 Under 45 \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Global Arbitration Review, 2011\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who’s Who in International Arbitration\"}{{ FIELD }}Representing a Linea Amarilla S.A.C. (owned by VINCI Highways) against the City of Lima in a toll road project regarding the nullity of the concession agreement. Lima is claiming the nullity of the concession based on the alleged imbalance of the economic terms of several agreements entered into during the contract execution. The case also involves construction claims against the City of Lima. It is a high-profile case, involving criminal proceedings against former mayors and government officials.{{ FIELD }}Representing a French company in a dispute under the France-Peru Bilateral Investment Treaty.{{ FIELD }}Representing Sociedad Aeroportuaria Kuntur Wasi S.A. and Corporación América S.A. in an ICSID arbitration under the Peru-Argentina bilateral investment treaty, a concession contract for the construction and operation of the new airport in Cuzco, and a guaranty contract (Contrato Ley), involving the unlawful termination and unfair treatment provided to both investors. The Peruvian government has initiated criminal proceedings regarding the concession and its addenda.{{ FIELD }}Representing Gente Oil Ecuador Pte. Ltd in a UNCITRAL arbitration administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration arising out of a dispute involving a risk service oil contract with Ecuador. The matter also includes allegations of corruption and fraud, including proceedings before criminal courts and the Comptroller Office (Contraloría).{{ FIELD }}Representing Reficar in an ICC arbitration against CB\u0026amp;I, an EPC contractor. The dispute concerns costs and delays in connection with the construction of a refinery in Colombia.{{ FIELD }}Representing Teinver S.A. in an ICSID arbitration against Argentina involving the nationalization of the two largest airlines in that country.{{ FIELD }}Representing Salini Impregilo SpA in three international arbitrations against Argentina involving its investments in a water management concession, a roadway concession and a bridge.{{ FIELD }}Representing Murphy Oil in an ICSID arbitration against Ecuador concerning the violation of a bilateral investment treaty.{{ FIELD }}Representing a European company in a potential arbitration against a state and a state-owned energy company. The dispute concerns the nationalization of the energy company.{{ FIELD }}Represented Sempra Energy International in its arbitration claim against Argentina involving its investment in two natural gas distribution licenses and in a potential arbitration against another South American country involving its investment in a power distribution company, and advised it in two ICC arbitrations.{{ FIELD }}Represented two American oil and gas companies in two ICSID arbitrations against Argentina, one of which involved claimant’s investment in two power plants and a natural gas field.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major American oil company in a multibillion-dollar U.S. claim against a South American state concerning the breach of a bilateral investment treaty, an oil concession agreement and an environmental claim initiated against the oil company in the courts of the South American state.{{ FIELD }}Represented City Oriente Limited in an ICSID contract arbitration against Ecuador and Petroecuador concerning the violation of an Oil Production Sharing Agreement.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global supplier of power plants in its arbitration claim involving an engineering, procurement and construction contract.{{ FIELD }}Represented Noble Energy, Inc. and MachalaPower Cia. Ltda. in their arbitration claim against a South American country concerning the violation of a bilateral investment treaty, an investment agreement and a concession contract for the construction and operation of a power plant.{{ FIELD }}Represented a telecommunications company in an ICSID arbitration against Argentina concerning the violation of a treaty and the nationalization of its concession contract with the Argentine Government.{{ FIELD }}Represented Camuzzi Internacional in its arbitration claim against Argentina involving its investment in two natural gas distribution licenses.{{ FIELD }}Represented a large international water company in its ICSID arbitration against Argentina.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major American energy company in preparing an ICSID arbitration against a Central American state concerning the breach of different contracts with distribution companies for the purchase of electricity.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major independent company in a potential LCIA arbitration under a Joint Operating Agreement.{{ FIELD }}Advised Northrop Grumman in its US$200 million bidding to, and contract work for, the Argentine government.{{ FIELD }}Participated in an ICC arbitration initiated by Pérez Companc against Enersys.{{ FIELD }}Roberto Aguirre Luzi specializes in counseling multinational corporations on complex arbitration. A partner in our International Arbitration practice, Roberto is experienced in administrative and civil law, government contracts, oil and gas contracts, public utilities, and power and infrastructure projects.\nForeign Legal Consultant, Authorized to Practice law in Argentina (not licensed in Texas)\n\nRoberto represents clients in complex arbitrations before the World Bank Group’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes and UN Commission on International Trade Law, as well as in arbitration under the International Centre for Dispute Resolution and International Chamber of Commerce rules. Roberto also has extensive experience in civil and administrative law, government contracts, oil and gas contracts, public utilities, and power and infrastructure projects.\nListed as a leading member of the international arbitration bar in the 2011 Global Arbitration Review 45 Under 45 rankings, Roberto has also been individually recognized by Chambers Latin America and featured in Who’s Who in International Arbitration.\nRoberto worked for five years as an associate for Marval, O’Farrell \u0026amp; Mairal before joining King \u0026amp; Spalding in 2003. He was born in San Juan, Argentina. Roberto is fluent in Spanish and English, and reads French, Italian and Portuguese. Roberto J Aguirre Luzi Partner Ranked for Latin America-wide arbitration, he is \"very skillful presenting arguments and cross-examining witnesses.”  Chambers Global 2017 “Knowledgeable, highly proactive attitude”; a “high-level bilingual lawyer.”  Chambers Latin America 45 Under 45  Global Arbitration Review, 2011  Who’s Who in International Arbitration University of Buenos Aires, Argentina  The University of Texas at Austin The University of Texas School of Law Foreign Legal Consultant, Texas Bar of the City of Buenos Aires, Argentina Representing a Linea Amarilla S.A.C. (owned by VINCI Highways) against the City of Lima in a toll road project regarding the nullity of the concession agreement. Lima is claiming the nullity of the concession based on the alleged imbalance of the economic terms of several agreements entered into during the contract execution. The case also involves construction claims against the City of Lima. It is a high-profile case, involving criminal proceedings against former mayors and government officials. Representing a French company in a dispute under the France-Peru Bilateral Investment Treaty. Representing Sociedad Aeroportuaria Kuntur Wasi S.A. and Corporación América S.A. in an ICSID arbitration under the Peru-Argentina bilateral investment treaty, a concession contract for the construction and operation of the new airport in Cuzco, and a guaranty contract (Contrato Ley), involving the unlawful termination and unfair treatment provided to both investors. The Peruvian government has initiated criminal proceedings regarding the concession and its addenda. Representing Gente Oil Ecuador Pte. Ltd in a UNCITRAL arbitration administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration arising out of a dispute involving a risk service oil contract with Ecuador. The matter also includes allegations of corruption and fraud, including proceedings before criminal courts and the Comptroller Office (Contraloría). Representing Reficar in an ICC arbitration against CB\u0026amp;I, an EPC contractor. The dispute concerns costs and delays in connection with the construction of a refinery in Colombia. Representing Teinver S.A. in an ICSID arbitration against Argentina involving the nationalization of the two largest airlines in that country. Representing Salini Impregilo SpA in three international arbitrations against Argentina involving its investments in a water management concession, a roadway concession and a bridge. Representing Murphy Oil in an ICSID arbitration against Ecuador concerning the violation of a bilateral investment treaty. Representing a European company in a potential arbitration against a state and a state-owned energy company. The dispute concerns the nationalization of the energy company. Represented Sempra Energy International in its arbitration claim against Argentina involving its investment in two natural gas distribution licenses and in a potential arbitration against another South American country involving its investment in a power distribution company, and advised it in two ICC arbitrations. Represented two American oil and gas companies in two ICSID arbitrations against Argentina, one of which involved claimant’s investment in two power plants and a natural gas field. Represented a major American oil company in a multibillion-dollar U.S. claim against a South American state concerning the breach of a bilateral investment treaty, an oil concession agreement and an environmental claim initiated against the oil company in the courts of the South American state. Represented City Oriente Limited in an ICSID contract arbitration against Ecuador and Petroecuador concerning the violation of an Oil Production Sharing Agreement. Represented a global supplier of power plants in its arbitration claim involving an engineering, procurement and construction contract. Represented Noble Energy, Inc. and MachalaPower Cia. Ltda. in their arbitration claim against a South American country concerning the violation of a bilateral investment treaty, an investment agreement and a concession contract for the construction and operation of a power plant. Represented a telecommunications company in an ICSID arbitration against Argentina concerning the violation of a treaty and the nationalization of its concession contract with the Argentine Government. Represented Camuzzi Internacional in its arbitration claim against Argentina involving its investment in two natural gas distribution licenses. Represented a large international water company in its ICSID arbitration against Argentina. Represented a major American energy company in preparing an ICSID arbitration against a Central American state concerning the breach of different contracts with distribution companies for the purchase of electricity. Represented a major independent company in a potential LCIA arbitration under a Joint Operating Agreement. Advised Northrop Grumman in its US$200 million bidding to, and contract work for, the Argentine government. Participated in an ICC arbitration initiated by Pérez Companc against Enersys.","searchable_name":"Roberto J. Aguirre Luzi","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":436413,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3400,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSajid Ahmed is a Partner in the London office of King \u0026amp; Spalding.\u0026nbsp; He specialises in international arbitration and trade matters.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSajid\u0026rsquo;s cases are typically high-value complex disputes, often dealing with political, commercial and/or social issues involving State owned entities and governments. \u0026nbsp;Sajid represents both claimants and respondents in arbitral proceedings under all the major arbitral rules and institutions including the ICC, LCIA, ICSID and UNCITRAL. While sector agnostic, Sajid is particularly well-known for handling disputes in energy, mining, life sciences, financial services, and media where he is listed as a \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ename to note\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;.\u0026nbsp; Although experienced across various geographies, Sajid is prominently known for his disputes work in India, Turkey and Central Asia. Correspondingly, Sajid's global clientele include multi-nationals and State/State entities in those regions.\u0026nbsp; As a recipient of a number of recognitions from legal directories and industry commentators over the years, \u0026nbsp;Sajid is described as having \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eindispensable leadership\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;(IBLJ (2022)) and as being \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ean excellent lawyer with good business acumen and understands client\u0026rsquo;s perspective and overall business context and comes out with pragmatic solutions\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (Legal 500 UK, 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSajid also has notable experience in international trade matters including export controls and sanctions. He assists clients prepare disclosures of export control and economic sanctions laws violations and represents them in regulatory investigations.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"sajid-ahmed","email":"sahmed@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRecent Representations \u0026ndash; Arbitration Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr /\u003eAn Asian\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eExploration \u0026amp; Production company\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein an ad hoc UNCITRAL\u0026nbsp;arbitration against the Government of India with respect to cross-boundary gas migration issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAn\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eIndian pharmaceuticals company\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein a LCIA arbitration in London against a major Canadian generics producer with respect to a breach of exclusivity provisions in a licence agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA significant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil \u0026amp; gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitrations against an Asian sovereign state, one relating to the company\u0026rsquo;s right to cost recovery under a PSC and the other relating to gas pricing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eRepublic of Turkey\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eTurkish state-owned\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eentity BOTAS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Paris against the Republic of Iraq in relation to a dispute concerning an intergovernmental pipeline agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA significant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eTurkish E\u0026amp;P company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against the Republic of Kazakhstan in an ICSID arbitration brought under the Turkey\u0026ndash;Kazakhstan bilateral investment treaty relating to a tax stabilization clause.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAn\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eIndian electrical engineering company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in London against a UK company involving claims of defective products provided pursuant to a Supply Agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emultinational life sciences company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against a US company in an ICC arbitration in London concerning a breach of a licence agreement with respect to the marketing of a biopharmaceutical product.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003esignificant Asian company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration in London against a U.S. investment bank relating to breaches of a services agreement in connection with an M\u0026amp;A deal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003esignificant pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration proceeding in New York against a German company relating to breaches of a manufacturing and supply agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eRecent Representations \u0026ndash; Export Controls and Sanctions Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr /\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on EU-Russia sanctions concerning the provision of loans, capital market instruments and other types of financial instruments to Russia-related persons.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor Middle East petrochemicals company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on EU sanctions with respect to Iran and Syria and potential exposure based on business transactions with Iranian and Syrian entities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003esignificant Middle East sovereign wealth fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on the successful de-listing of one its associated companies from the EU sanctions list.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA major Asian oil and gas company in connection with the EU relaxation of sanctions on investments in the Iranian hydrocarbons sector and on Iranian oil exports under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003esignificant aircraft manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on export sales of aircraft and aircraft parts from certain EU countries to the Middle East region and South America.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAn\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eaerospace client\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its UK voluntary self-disclosures due to potential violation of UK/EU export control rules. The representation included review of customer due-diligence policies and procedures as well as sales contracts for the purposes of export controls and sanctions compliance.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":12}]},"expertise":[{"id":25,"guid":"25.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":23,"guid":"23.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1142,"guid":"1142.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1188,"guid":"1188.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":128,"guid":"128.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":108,"guid":"108.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1327,"guid":"1327.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Ahmed","nick_name":"Sajid","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Sajid","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":174,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"“Indispensable Leadership” ","detail":"India Business Law Journal (2022)"},{"title":"Recognized as “an excellent lawyer with good business acumen\"","detail":"LEGAL 500, 2021"},{"title":"\"Understands client’s perspective and overall business context and comes out with pragmatic solutions\" ","detail":"Legal 500, 2021"},{"title":"Recognized as “a name to note”","detail":"LEGAL 500, 2021"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSajid Ahmed is a Partner in the London office of King \u0026amp; Spalding.\u0026nbsp; He specialises in international arbitration and trade matters.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSajid\u0026rsquo;s cases are typically high-value complex disputes, often dealing with political, commercial and/or social issues involving State owned entities and governments. \u0026nbsp;Sajid represents both claimants and respondents in arbitral proceedings under all the major arbitral rules and institutions including the ICC, LCIA, ICSID and UNCITRAL. While sector agnostic, Sajid is particularly well-known for handling disputes in energy, mining, life sciences, financial services, and media where he is listed as a \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ename to note\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;.\u0026nbsp; Although experienced across various geographies, Sajid is prominently known for his disputes work in India, Turkey and Central Asia. Correspondingly, Sajid's global clientele include multi-nationals and State/State entities in those regions.\u0026nbsp; As a recipient of a number of recognitions from legal directories and industry commentators over the years, \u0026nbsp;Sajid is described as having \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eindispensable leadership\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;(IBLJ (2022)) and as being \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ean excellent lawyer with good business acumen and understands client\u0026rsquo;s perspective and overall business context and comes out with pragmatic solutions\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (Legal 500 UK, 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSajid also has notable experience in international trade matters including export controls and sanctions. He assists clients prepare disclosures of export control and economic sanctions laws violations and represents them in regulatory investigations.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRecent Representations \u0026ndash; Arbitration Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr /\u003eAn Asian\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eExploration \u0026amp; Production company\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein an ad hoc UNCITRAL\u0026nbsp;arbitration against the Government of India with respect to cross-boundary gas migration issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAn\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eIndian pharmaceuticals company\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein a LCIA arbitration in London against a major Canadian generics producer with respect to a breach of exclusivity provisions in a licence agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA significant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil \u0026amp; gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitrations against an Asian sovereign state, one relating to the company\u0026rsquo;s right to cost recovery under a PSC and the other relating to gas pricing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eRepublic of Turkey\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eTurkish state-owned\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eentity BOTAS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Paris against the Republic of Iraq in relation to a dispute concerning an intergovernmental pipeline agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA significant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eTurkish E\u0026amp;P company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against the Republic of Kazakhstan in an ICSID arbitration brought under the Turkey\u0026ndash;Kazakhstan bilateral investment treaty relating to a tax stabilization clause.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAn\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eIndian electrical engineering company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in London against a UK company involving claims of defective products provided pursuant to a Supply Agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emultinational life sciences company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against a US company in an ICC arbitration in London concerning a breach of a licence agreement with respect to the marketing of a biopharmaceutical product.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003esignificant Asian company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration in London against a U.S. investment bank relating to breaches of a services agreement in connection with an M\u0026amp;A deal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003esignificant pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration proceeding in New York against a German company relating to breaches of a manufacturing and supply agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eRecent Representations \u0026ndash; Export Controls and Sanctions Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr /\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on EU-Russia sanctions concerning the provision of loans, capital market instruments and other types of financial instruments to Russia-related persons.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003emajor Middle East petrochemicals company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on EU sanctions with respect to Iran and Syria and potential exposure based on business transactions with Iranian and Syrian entities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003esignificant Middle East sovereign wealth fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on the successful de-listing of one its associated companies from the EU sanctions list.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA major Asian oil and gas company in connection with the EU relaxation of sanctions on investments in the Iranian hydrocarbons sector and on Iranian oil exports under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eA\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003esignificant aircraft manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on export sales of aircraft and aircraft parts from certain EU countries to the Middle East region and South America.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAn\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eaerospace client\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its UK voluntary self-disclosures due to potential violation of UK/EU export control rules. The representation included review of customer due-diligence policies and procedures as well as sales contracts for the purposes of export controls and sanctions compliance.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"“Indispensable Leadership” ","detail":"India Business Law Journal (2022)"},{"title":"Recognized as “an excellent lawyer with good business acumen\"","detail":"LEGAL 500, 2021"},{"title":"\"Understands client’s perspective and overall business context and comes out with pragmatic solutions\" ","detail":"Legal 500, 2021"},{"title":"Recognized as “a name to note”","detail":"LEGAL 500, 2021"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":6066}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:52:36.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:52:36.000Z","searchable_text":"Ahmed{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Indispensable Leadership” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"India Business Law Journal (2022)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as “an excellent lawyer with good business acumen\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEGAL 500, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Understands client’s perspective and overall business context and comes out with pragmatic solutions\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as “a name to note”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEGAL 500, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}Recent Representations – Arbitration MattersAn Asian Exploration \u0026amp; Production company in an ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitration against the Government of India with respect to cross-boundary gas migration issues.{{ FIELD }}An Indian pharmaceuticals company in a LCIA arbitration in London against a major Canadian generics producer with respect to a breach of exclusivity provisions in a licence agreement.{{ FIELD }}A significant oil \u0026amp; gas company in two ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitrations against an Asian sovereign state, one relating to the company’s right to cost recovery under a PSC and the other relating to gas pricing.{{ FIELD }}The Republic of Turkey and Turkish state-owned entity BOTAS in an ICC arbitration in Paris against the Republic of Iraq in relation to a dispute concerning an intergovernmental pipeline agreement.{{ FIELD }}A significant Turkish E\u0026amp;P company against the Republic of Kazakhstan in an ICSID arbitration brought under the Turkey–Kazakhstan bilateral investment treaty relating to a tax stabilization clause.{{ FIELD }}An Indian electrical engineering company in an ICC arbitration in London against a UK company involving claims of defective products provided pursuant to a Supply Agreement.{{ FIELD }}A multinational life sciences company against a US company in an ICC arbitration in London concerning a breach of a licence agreement with respect to the marketing of a biopharmaceutical product.{{ FIELD }}A significant Asian company in an LCIA arbitration in London against a U.S. investment bank relating to breaches of a services agreement in connection with an M\u0026amp;A deal.{{ FIELD }}A significant pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration proceeding in New York against a German company relating to breaches of a manufacturing and supply agreement.{{ FIELD }}Recent Representations – Export Controls and Sanctions MattersA major financial institution on EU-Russia sanctions concerning the provision of loans, capital market instruments and other types of financial instruments to Russia-related persons.{{ FIELD }}A major Middle East petrochemicals company on EU sanctions with respect to Iran and Syria and potential exposure based on business transactions with Iranian and Syrian entities.{{ FIELD }}A significant Middle East sovereign wealth fund on the successful de-listing of one its associated companies from the EU sanctions list.{{ FIELD }}A major Asian oil and gas company in connection with the EU relaxation of sanctions on investments in the Iranian hydrocarbons sector and on Iranian oil exports under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.{{ FIELD }}A significant aircraft manufacturer on export sales of aircraft and aircraft parts from certain EU countries to the Middle East region and South America.{{ FIELD }}An aerospace client in its UK voluntary self-disclosures due to potential violation of UK/EU export control rules. The representation included review of customer due-diligence policies and procedures as well as sales contracts for the purposes of export controls and sanctions compliance.{{ FIELD }}Sajid Ahmed is a Partner in the London office of King \u0026amp; Spalding.  He specialises in international arbitration and trade matters. \nSajid’s cases are typically high-value complex disputes, often dealing with political, commercial and/or social issues involving State owned entities and governments.  Sajid represents both claimants and respondents in arbitral proceedings under all the major arbitral rules and institutions including the ICC, LCIA, ICSID and UNCITRAL. While sector agnostic, Sajid is particularly well-known for handling disputes in energy, mining, life sciences, financial services, and media where he is listed as a “name to note”.  Although experienced across various geographies, Sajid is prominently known for his disputes work in India, Turkey and Central Asia. Correspondingly, Sajid's global clientele include multi-nationals and State/State entities in those regions.  As a recipient of a number of recognitions from legal directories and industry commentators over the years,  Sajid is described as having “indispensable leadership” (IBLJ (2022)) and as being “an excellent lawyer with good business acumen and understands client’s perspective and overall business context and comes out with pragmatic solutions” (Legal 500 UK, 2021).\nSajid also has notable experience in international trade matters including export controls and sanctions. He assists clients prepare disclosures of export control and economic sanctions laws violations and represents them in regulatory investigations. Sajid Ahmed Partner “Indispensable Leadership”  India Business Law Journal (2022) Recognized as “an excellent lawyer with good business acumen\" LEGAL 500, 2021 \"Understands client’s perspective and overall business context and comes out with pragmatic solutions\"  Legal 500, 2021 Recognized as “a name to note” LEGAL 500, 2021 Law Society of England and Wales Recent Representations – Arbitration MattersAn Asian Exploration \u0026amp; Production company in an ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitration against the Government of India with respect to cross-boundary gas migration issues. An Indian pharmaceuticals company in a LCIA arbitration in London against a major Canadian generics producer with respect to a breach of exclusivity provisions in a licence agreement. A significant oil \u0026amp; gas company in two ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitrations against an Asian sovereign state, one relating to the company’s right to cost recovery under a PSC and the other relating to gas pricing. The Republic of Turkey and Turkish state-owned entity BOTAS in an ICC arbitration in Paris against the Republic of Iraq in relation to a dispute concerning an intergovernmental pipeline agreement. A significant Turkish E\u0026amp;P company against the Republic of Kazakhstan in an ICSID arbitration brought under the Turkey–Kazakhstan bilateral investment treaty relating to a tax stabilization clause. An Indian electrical engineering company in an ICC arbitration in London against a UK company involving claims of defective products provided pursuant to a Supply Agreement. A multinational life sciences company against a US company in an ICC arbitration in London concerning a breach of a licence agreement with respect to the marketing of a biopharmaceutical product. A significant Asian company in an LCIA arbitration in London against a U.S. investment bank relating to breaches of a services agreement in connection with an M\u0026amp;A deal. A significant pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration proceeding in New York against a German company relating to breaches of a manufacturing and supply agreement. Recent Representations – Export Controls and Sanctions MattersA major financial institution on EU-Russia sanctions concerning the provision of loans, capital market instruments and other types of financial instruments to Russia-related persons. A major Middle East petrochemicals company on EU sanctions with respect to Iran and Syria and potential exposure based on business transactions with Iranian and Syrian entities. A significant Middle East sovereign wealth fund on the successful de-listing of one its associated companies from the EU sanctions list. A major Asian oil and gas company in connection with the EU relaxation of sanctions on investments in the Iranian hydrocarbons sector and on Iranian oil exports under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. A significant aircraft manufacturer on export sales of aircraft and aircraft parts from certain EU countries to the Middle East region and South America. An aerospace client in its UK voluntary self-disclosures due to potential violation of UK/EU export control rules. The representation included review of customer due-diligence policies and procedures as well as sales contracts for the purposes of export controls and sanctions compliance.","searchable_name":"Sajid Ahmed","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":174,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":444169,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":4211,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJoe Akrotirianakis is a partner in the Business Litigation Practice Group.\u0026nbsp; He is an accomplished trial lawyer who has first-chaired or co-chaired 35\u0026nbsp;trials and arbitrations.\u0026nbsp; He has never lost a jury trial or bench trial.\u0026nbsp; Mr. Akrotirianakis represents both plaintiffs and defendants across a broad spectrum of industries, including technology, pharmaceuticals and life sciences, and international shipping, transportation and logistics, among others.\u0026nbsp; A seasoned commercial litigator, and a decorated former federal prosecutor, Mr. Akrotirianakis has litigated matters of the most complex and difficult caliber throughout his more than 25-year career.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMr. Akrotirianakis regularly practices before federal and state courts throughout California and nationally in matters involving complex commercial litigation, unfair competition, business torts, intellectual property, and federal and state regulatory investigations and defense. His work prosecuting and defending matters involving cutting-edge legal theories in high-profile matters brought under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, the Lanham Act, the California Unfair Competition Law and similar laws in other states has been repeatedly recognized in the legal press and mainstream media.\u0026nbsp; Mr. Akrotirianakis is individually recommended by Chambers in the category of Litigation: General Commercial (California).\u0026nbsp; He has been named among Los Angeles' \"Top 100 Lawyers\" (\u003cem\u003eLos Angeles Business Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 2024), among 50 \"2024 Leading Commercial Litigators\" nationally (\u003cem\u003eDaily Journal\u003c/em\u003e), \"Recommended\" in the category of General Commercial Disputes (\u003cem\u003eLegal 500 U.S.\u003c/em\u003e, 2024), a \"Litigation Star\" in California and nationally (\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e, 2023), an \"Innovative Practitioner\" (\u003cem\u003eFinancial Times\u003c/em\u003e, 2022), and an legal \"MVP\" in the transportation industry (\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e), in addition to other honors received from\u0026nbsp;the \u003cem\u003eNational Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eThe Recorder\u003c/em\u003e, and other publications.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Mr. Akrotirianakis served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Central District of California, investigating and prosecuting complex fraud and financial crimes, political and law enforcement corruption, civil rights matters, racketeering, and various other violations of federal law, including the CFAA.\u0026nbsp; Following law school, Mr. Akrotirianakis served as a Law Clerk to the late Judge Harry Pregerson, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMr. Akrotirianakis was elected to the firm's Policy Committee in December 2021.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"joseph-akrotirianakis","email":"jakro@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented global biopharmaceutical company Amgen Inc. against Lanham Act and California\u0026rsquo;s false advertising and unfair competition claims in a federal court lawsuit by generic drugs giant Sandoz Inc. The litigation addressed cutting edge issues relating to the use of RWE in pharmaceutical advertising. The matter resolved two days before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs trial counsel, leading defense of an Israeli cyber-intelligence company against novel claims brought under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and analogous state law claims in five separate lawsuits filed by WhatsApp, Apple, and several individual plaintiffs in the Northern District of California and the Eastern District of Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs lead trial counsel, represented Everport Terminal Services Inc. in a matter with implications for much of the international trade on the Pacific Coast. In an appellate reversal of an NLRB decision, convinced the D.C. Circuit unanimously to recognize that the NLRB\u0026rsquo;s decision \u0026ldquo;would make the system of collective bargaining ... nonsensical and unworkable.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs co-lead counsel, represents American Kidney Fund (AKF) and other plaintiffs in a constitutional challenge to California AB 290. Secured a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of AB 290 on the eve of the statute\u0026rsquo;s effective date. The Court subsequently granted summary judgment in our clients\u0026rsquo; favor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs lead trial counsel, achieved a total victory including a permanent injunction and an award of attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees in a first-of-its-kind unfair competition lawsuit on behalf of Hope Pharmaceuticals alleging violations of the unfair competition and trade practices laws of California, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina and Connecticut.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented Americold Logistics, LLC, in a high-stakes commercial dispute against the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest publicly-traded grocery distributor, United Natural Foods, Inc. (UNFI). This matter settled on confidential terms shortly before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented plaintiffs, in a corporate valuation dispute against a defense industry manufacturer of millimeter wave aircraft radar components. After a bench trial, the court awarded the plaintiffs 387.5% of the defendant's prelitigation valuation, plus attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees, court costs, and more than two years of prejudgment interest.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresent an international cybersecurity technology company NSO Group in the defense of a groundbreaking lawsuit brought by Facebook, Inc., and WhatsApp Inc. under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and its California analogue. Obtained stay of district court proceedings while the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit considers the company\u0026rsquo;s claim that it is entitled to derivative foreign sovereign immunity.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company, as plaintiff, in an unfair competition action against a purported compounding pharmacy promoting and selling competing \u0026ldquo;compounded\u0026rdquo; drugs on a national basis. Obtained partial summary judgment as to liability on claims under the federal Lanham Act, California False Advertising Law, and California Unfair Competition Law.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe action resolved shortly thereafter on confidential terms, and the court imposed a permanent injunction against the counterparty\u0026rsquo;s false advertising and unlawful business practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of North America\u0026rsquo;s largest grain companies in a fraudulent transfer action against a former customer. Obtained summary judgment as to liability and a multimillion-dollar award including an award of punitive damages and successfully defended the matter on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs lead trial counsel, represented a global pharmaceutical company in an action for unfair competition and false advertising against a competitor selling drugs not approved by FDA. After obtaining partial summary judgment as to liability on claims under the federal Lanham Act and the California Unfair Competition Law, a jury awarded the client damages and the court imposed a permanent injunction against the counterparty\u0026rsquo;s unlawful business practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest international containerized freight shipping companies and its terminal operator subsidiary in a business \u0026ldquo;divorce\u0026rdquo; from a joint venture partner. Defeated motions for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction and obtained dismissal of the matter and an award of costs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest engineering and construction companies and its subsidiaries in a federal court action brought under the False Claims Act alleging overcharging in federal government contracts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented a domestic subsidiary of one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest international containerized shipping companies in defense of a federal court action for interim injunctive relief pursuant to Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act. Accomplished denial of the petition for injunction and dismissal of the action.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresents the U.S. West Coast\u0026rsquo;s largest marine terminal (by container lifts), responsible for over one million container moves per year in commercial and regulatory matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented a leading U.S. West Coast marine terminal operator in a labor relations action brought by a union representing mechanics previously employed at the terminal. After asserting a leading-edge position in a motion for judgment on the pleadings, obtained dismissal of the lawsuit and an award of costs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefeated class action lawsuit against largest marine container terminal on the U.S. West Coast. Plaintiffs had alleged unlawful collection of demurrage during the \u0026ldquo;West Coast Port Slowdown.\u0026rdquo; After demonstrating that a terminal cannot be \u0026ldquo;constructively\u0026rdquo; closed by labor activity not amounting to a strike, obtained dismissal of the action in its entirety.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePersuaded a federal agency to withdraw its notice of violation of anti-pollution regulations against a port terminal operator, avoiding approximately $9.2 million in potential penalties.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePersuaded the National Labor Relations Board to close investigations of marine terminal operator. After the union appealed, the NLRB\u0026rsquo;s Office of the General Counsel affirmed the declination decisions in the client\u0026rsquo;s favor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePersuaded the National Labor Relations Board to close investigations of international shipping line and its domestic agent.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a marine terminal operator in an investigation by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, mitigating the penalty to just nine percent of the penalty sought.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eServed as lead counsel in a federal criminal investigation of a nationwide ground shipping company suspected of aiding and abetting the trafficking of millions of dollars of counterfeit high fashion goods. No charges were filed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the CEO of a Southern California-based manufacturer, packager, and distributor of health food, nutritional supplements, and cosmetic products in a federal court criminal action alleging import violations. Matter was resolved with a probationary sentence.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented global network of YouTube content creators and brands in a trade secrets dispute with company\u0026rsquo;s former employees.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented president of Southern California-based construction company in state court criminal investigation concerning alleged theft of public monies. Client received a probationary sentence, and the conviction was expunged entirely shortly thereafter.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented associate general counsel of a Los Angeles-based investment fund in a state court criminal investigation. Investigation was dropped without the filing of any charges.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the CEO of China-based petroleum exploration, extraction, and production company in federal court securities action by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest engineering and construction companies and its subsidiaries in a federal court action brought under the False Claims Act alleging overcharging in federal government contracts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the largest health plan in California in a 40-day trial arising out of an enforcement proceeding brought by the California Department of Managed Health Care.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented California\u0026rsquo;s largest HMO in dozens of investigations and litigation conducted by the California Department of Managed Health Care.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the world\u0026rsquo;s leading satellite television provider in a major contract dispute with one of its largest retailers.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":104,"guid":"104.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":6,"guid":"6.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":125,"guid":"125.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1205,"guid":"1205.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1206,"guid":"1206.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":13,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":14,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Akrotirianakis","nick_name":"Joe","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Harry Pregerson, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","years_held":"1998 - 1999"}],"first_name":"Joseph","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2895,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"magna cum laude \u0026 Order of the Coif","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1998-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"“He is very thorough and very well experienced.”","detail":"Chambers Guide to the USA, 2025, Litigation: General Commercial - California"},{"title":"“Joe's most valuable attribute is his ability to anticipate potential issues or outcomes.”","detail":"Chambers Guide to the USA, 2025, Litigation: General Commercial - California"},{"title":"Named among Los Angeles' \"Top 100 Lawyers\"","detail":"Los Angeles Business Journal, 2024"},{"title":"Named among 50 \"2024 Leading Commercial Litigators\" (nationally)","detail":"Daily Journal, 2024"},{"title":"The Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation ","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America, 2024-present"},{"title":"Listed as \"Recommended\" in category of General Commercial Disputes","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., 2022-2025"},{"title":"Litigation Star (National)","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2023 - present"},{"title":"California Litigation Star","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2023 - present"},{"title":"Shortlisted as an \"Innovative Practitioner\"","detail":"Financial Times, 2022"},{"title":"Named as the only \"Plaintiff Trailblazer\" at a large law firm","detail":"National Law Journal, 2022"},{"title":"Named a \"Trailblazer: West\"","detail":"The American Lawyer, 2021"},{"title":"Named a \"California Trailblazer\"","detail":"The Recorder, 2020"},{"title":"Leaders of Influence: Litigators \u0026 Trial Lawyers","detail":"Los Angeles Business Journal, 2020"},{"title":"Named among \"Top 100 attorneys in Southern California,\" across all practice areas","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2017"},{"title":"Law360 \"MVP,\" Transportation - Among nation’s top five attorneys serving clients in the transportation industry","detail":"Law360, 2016"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/joseph-akrotirianakis-78bb3269/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJoe Akrotirianakis is a partner in the Business Litigation Practice Group.\u0026nbsp; He is an accomplished trial lawyer who has first-chaired or co-chaired 35\u0026nbsp;trials and arbitrations.\u0026nbsp; He has never lost a jury trial or bench trial.\u0026nbsp; Mr. Akrotirianakis represents both plaintiffs and defendants across a broad spectrum of industries, including technology, pharmaceuticals and life sciences, and international shipping, transportation and logistics, among others.\u0026nbsp; A seasoned commercial litigator, and a decorated former federal prosecutor, Mr. Akrotirianakis has litigated matters of the most complex and difficult caliber throughout his more than 25-year career.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMr. Akrotirianakis regularly practices before federal and state courts throughout California and nationally in matters involving complex commercial litigation, unfair competition, business torts, intellectual property, and federal and state regulatory investigations and defense. His work prosecuting and defending matters involving cutting-edge legal theories in high-profile matters brought under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, the Lanham Act, the California Unfair Competition Law and similar laws in other states has been repeatedly recognized in the legal press and mainstream media.\u0026nbsp; Mr. Akrotirianakis is individually recommended by Chambers in the category of Litigation: General Commercial (California).\u0026nbsp; He has been named among Los Angeles' \"Top 100 Lawyers\" (\u003cem\u003eLos Angeles Business Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 2024), among 50 \"2024 Leading Commercial Litigators\" nationally (\u003cem\u003eDaily Journal\u003c/em\u003e), \"Recommended\" in the category of General Commercial Disputes (\u003cem\u003eLegal 500 U.S.\u003c/em\u003e, 2024), a \"Litigation Star\" in California and nationally (\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e, 2023), an \"Innovative Practitioner\" (\u003cem\u003eFinancial Times\u003c/em\u003e, 2022), and an legal \"MVP\" in the transportation industry (\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e), in addition to other honors received from\u0026nbsp;the \u003cem\u003eNational Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eThe Recorder\u003c/em\u003e, and other publications.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Mr. Akrotirianakis served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Central District of California, investigating and prosecuting complex fraud and financial crimes, political and law enforcement corruption, civil rights matters, racketeering, and various other violations of federal law, including the CFAA.\u0026nbsp; Following law school, Mr. Akrotirianakis served as a Law Clerk to the late Judge Harry Pregerson, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMr. Akrotirianakis was elected to the firm's Policy Committee in December 2021.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented global biopharmaceutical company Amgen Inc. against Lanham Act and California\u0026rsquo;s false advertising and unfair competition claims in a federal court lawsuit by generic drugs giant Sandoz Inc. The litigation addressed cutting edge issues relating to the use of RWE in pharmaceutical advertising. The matter resolved two days before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs trial counsel, leading defense of an Israeli cyber-intelligence company against novel claims brought under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and analogous state law claims in five separate lawsuits filed by WhatsApp, Apple, and several individual plaintiffs in the Northern District of California and the Eastern District of Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs lead trial counsel, represented Everport Terminal Services Inc. in a matter with implications for much of the international trade on the Pacific Coast. In an appellate reversal of an NLRB decision, convinced the D.C. Circuit unanimously to recognize that the NLRB\u0026rsquo;s decision \u0026ldquo;would make the system of collective bargaining ... nonsensical and unworkable.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs co-lead counsel, represents American Kidney Fund (AKF) and other plaintiffs in a constitutional challenge to California AB 290. Secured a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of AB 290 on the eve of the statute\u0026rsquo;s effective date. The Court subsequently granted summary judgment in our clients\u0026rsquo; favor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs lead trial counsel, achieved a total victory including a permanent injunction and an award of attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees in a first-of-its-kind unfair competition lawsuit on behalf of Hope Pharmaceuticals alleging violations of the unfair competition and trade practices laws of California, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina and Connecticut.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented Americold Logistics, LLC, in a high-stakes commercial dispute against the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest publicly-traded grocery distributor, United Natural Foods, Inc. (UNFI). This matter settled on confidential terms shortly before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented plaintiffs, in a corporate valuation dispute against a defense industry manufacturer of millimeter wave aircraft radar components. After a bench trial, the court awarded the plaintiffs 387.5% of the defendant's prelitigation valuation, plus attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees, court costs, and more than two years of prejudgment interest.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresent an international cybersecurity technology company NSO Group in the defense of a groundbreaking lawsuit brought by Facebook, Inc., and WhatsApp Inc. under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and its California analogue. Obtained stay of district court proceedings while the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit considers the company\u0026rsquo;s claim that it is entitled to derivative foreign sovereign immunity.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company, as plaintiff, in an unfair competition action against a purported compounding pharmacy promoting and selling competing \u0026ldquo;compounded\u0026rdquo; drugs on a national basis. Obtained partial summary judgment as to liability on claims under the federal Lanham Act, California False Advertising Law, and California Unfair Competition Law.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eThe action resolved shortly thereafter on confidential terms, and the court imposed a permanent injunction against the counterparty\u0026rsquo;s false advertising and unlawful business practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of North America\u0026rsquo;s largest grain companies in a fraudulent transfer action against a former customer. Obtained summary judgment as to liability and a multimillion-dollar award including an award of punitive damages and successfully defended the matter on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs lead trial counsel, represented a global pharmaceutical company in an action for unfair competition and false advertising against a competitor selling drugs not approved by FDA. After obtaining partial summary judgment as to liability on claims under the federal Lanham Act and the California Unfair Competition Law, a jury awarded the client damages and the court imposed a permanent injunction against the counterparty\u0026rsquo;s unlawful business practices.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest international containerized freight shipping companies and its terminal operator subsidiary in a business \u0026ldquo;divorce\u0026rdquo; from a joint venture partner. Defeated motions for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction and obtained dismissal of the matter and an award of costs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest engineering and construction companies and its subsidiaries in a federal court action brought under the False Claims Act alleging overcharging in federal government contracts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented a domestic subsidiary of one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest international containerized shipping companies in defense of a federal court action for interim injunctive relief pursuant to Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act. Accomplished denial of the petition for injunction and dismissal of the action.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresents the U.S. West Coast\u0026rsquo;s largest marine terminal (by container lifts), responsible for over one million container moves per year in commercial and regulatory matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs lead counsel, represented a leading U.S. West Coast marine terminal operator in a labor relations action brought by a union representing mechanics previously employed at the terminal. After asserting a leading-edge position in a motion for judgment on the pleadings, obtained dismissal of the lawsuit and an award of costs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefeated class action lawsuit against largest marine container terminal on the U.S. West Coast. Plaintiffs had alleged unlawful collection of demurrage during the \u0026ldquo;West Coast Port Slowdown.\u0026rdquo; After demonstrating that a terminal cannot be \u0026ldquo;constructively\u0026rdquo; closed by labor activity not amounting to a strike, obtained dismissal of the action in its entirety.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePersuaded a federal agency to withdraw its notice of violation of anti-pollution regulations against a port terminal operator, avoiding approximately $9.2 million in potential penalties.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePersuaded the National Labor Relations Board to close investigations of marine terminal operator. After the union appealed, the NLRB\u0026rsquo;s Office of the General Counsel affirmed the declination decisions in the client\u0026rsquo;s favor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePersuaded the National Labor Relations Board to close investigations of international shipping line and its domestic agent.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a marine terminal operator in an investigation by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, mitigating the penalty to just nine percent of the penalty sought.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eServed as lead counsel in a federal criminal investigation of a nationwide ground shipping company suspected of aiding and abetting the trafficking of millions of dollars of counterfeit high fashion goods. No charges were filed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the CEO of a Southern California-based manufacturer, packager, and distributor of health food, nutritional supplements, and cosmetic products in a federal court criminal action alleging import violations. Matter was resolved with a probationary sentence.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented global network of YouTube content creators and brands in a trade secrets dispute with company\u0026rsquo;s former employees.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented president of Southern California-based construction company in state court criminal investigation concerning alleged theft of public monies. Client received a probationary sentence, and the conviction was expunged entirely shortly thereafter.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented associate general counsel of a Los Angeles-based investment fund in a state court criminal investigation. Investigation was dropped without the filing of any charges.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the CEO of China-based petroleum exploration, extraction, and production company in federal court securities action by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s largest engineering and construction companies and its subsidiaries in a federal court action brought under the False Claims Act alleging overcharging in federal government contracts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the largest health plan in California in a 40-day trial arising out of an enforcement proceeding brought by the California Department of Managed Health Care.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented California\u0026rsquo;s largest HMO in dozens of investigations and litigation conducted by the California Department of Managed Health Care.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the world\u0026rsquo;s leading satellite television provider in a major contract dispute with one of its largest retailers.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"“He is very thorough and very well experienced.”","detail":"Chambers Guide to the USA, 2025, Litigation: General Commercial - California"},{"title":"“Joe's most valuable attribute is his ability to anticipate potential issues or outcomes.”","detail":"Chambers Guide to the USA, 2025, Litigation: General Commercial - California"},{"title":"Named among Los Angeles' \"Top 100 Lawyers\"","detail":"Los Angeles Business Journal, 2024"},{"title":"Named among 50 \"2024 Leading Commercial Litigators\" (nationally)","detail":"Daily Journal, 2024"},{"title":"The Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation ","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America, 2024-present"},{"title":"Listed as \"Recommended\" in category of General Commercial Disputes","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., 2022-2025"},{"title":"Litigation Star (National)","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2023 - present"},{"title":"California Litigation Star","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2023 - present"},{"title":"Shortlisted as an \"Innovative Practitioner\"","detail":"Financial Times, 2022"},{"title":"Named as the only \"Plaintiff Trailblazer\" at a large law firm","detail":"National Law Journal, 2022"},{"title":"Named a \"Trailblazer: West\"","detail":"The American Lawyer, 2021"},{"title":"Named a \"California Trailblazer\"","detail":"The Recorder, 2020"},{"title":"Leaders of Influence: Litigators \u0026 Trial Lawyers","detail":"Los Angeles Business Journal, 2020"},{"title":"Named among \"Top 100 attorneys in Southern California,\" across all practice areas","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2017"},{"title":"Law360 \"MVP,\" Transportation - Among nation’s top five attorneys serving clients in the transportation industry","detail":"Law360, 2016"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11424}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-11T16:50:45.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-11T16:50:45.000Z","searchable_text":"Akrotirianakis{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“He is very thorough and very well experienced.”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Guide to the USA, 2025, Litigation: General Commercial - California\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Joe's most valuable attribute is his ability to anticipate potential issues or outcomes.”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Guide to the USA, 2025, Litigation: General Commercial - California\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named among Los Angeles' \\\"Top 100 Lawyers\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Los Angeles Business Journal, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named among 50 \\\"2024 Leading Commercial Litigators\\\" (nationally)\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Daily Journal, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America, 2024-present\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Listed as \\\"Recommended\\\" in category of General Commercial Disputes\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S., 2022-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Litigation Star (National)\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2023 - present\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"California Litigation Star\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2023 - present\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Shortlisted as an \\\"Innovative Practitioner\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Financial Times, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named as the only \\\"Plaintiff Trailblazer\\\" at a large law firm\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"National Law Journal, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a \\\"Trailblazer: West\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The American Lawyer, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a \\\"California Trailblazer\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Recorder, 2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leaders of Influence: Litigators \u0026amp; Trial Lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Los Angeles Business Journal, 2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named among \\\"Top 100 attorneys in Southern California,\\\" across all practice areas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2017\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Law360 \\\"MVP,\\\" Transportation - Among nation’s top five attorneys serving clients in the transportation industry\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}As lead counsel, represented global biopharmaceutical company Amgen Inc. against Lanham Act and California’s false advertising and unfair competition claims in a federal court lawsuit by generic drugs giant Sandoz Inc. The litigation addressed cutting edge issues relating to the use of RWE in pharmaceutical advertising. The matter resolved two days before trial.{{ FIELD }}As trial counsel, leading defense of an Israeli cyber-intelligence company against novel claims brought under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and analogous state law claims in five separate lawsuits filed by WhatsApp, Apple, and several individual plaintiffs in the Northern District of California and the Eastern District of Virginia.{{ FIELD }}As lead trial counsel, represented Everport Terminal Services Inc. in a matter with implications for much of the international trade on the Pacific Coast. In an appellate reversal of an NLRB decision, convinced the D.C. Circuit unanimously to recognize that the NLRB’s decision “would make the system of collective bargaining ... nonsensical and unworkable.”{{ FIELD }}As co-lead counsel, represents American Kidney Fund (AKF) and other plaintiffs in a constitutional challenge to California AB 290. Secured a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of AB 290 on the eve of the statute’s effective date. The Court subsequently granted summary judgment in our clients’ favor.{{ FIELD }}As lead trial counsel, achieved a total victory including a permanent injunction and an award of attorney’s fees in a first-of-its-kind unfair competition lawsuit on behalf of Hope Pharmaceuticals alleging violations of the unfair competition and trade practices laws of California, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina and Connecticut.{{ FIELD }}As lead counsel, represented Americold Logistics, LLC, in a high-stakes commercial dispute against the nation’s largest publicly-traded grocery distributor, United Natural Foods, Inc. (UNFI). This matter settled on confidential terms shortly before trial.{{ FIELD }}Represented plaintiffs, in a corporate valuation dispute against a defense industry manufacturer of millimeter wave aircraft radar components. After a bench trial, the court awarded the plaintiffs 387.5% of the defendant's prelitigation valuation, plus attorney’s fees, court costs, and more than two years of prejudgment interest.{{ FIELD }}Represent an international cybersecurity technology company NSO Group in the defense of a groundbreaking lawsuit brought by Facebook, Inc., and WhatsApp Inc. under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and its California analogue. Obtained stay of district court proceedings while the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit considers the company’s claim that it is entitled to derivative foreign sovereign immunity.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global pharmaceutical company, as plaintiff, in an unfair competition action against a purported compounding pharmacy promoting and selling competing “compounded” drugs on a national basis. Obtained partial summary judgment as to liability on claims under the federal Lanham Act, California False Advertising Law, and California Unfair Competition Law.{{ FIELD }}The action resolved shortly thereafter on confidential terms, and the court imposed a permanent injunction against the counterparty’s false advertising and unlawful business practices.\nRepresented one of North America’s largest grain companies in a fraudulent transfer action against a former customer. Obtained summary judgment as to liability and a multimillion-dollar award including an award of punitive damages and successfully defended the matter on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.\nAs lead trial counsel, represented a global pharmaceutical company in an action for unfair competition and false advertising against a competitor selling drugs not approved by FDA. After obtaining partial summary judgment as to liability on claims under the federal Lanham Act and the California Unfair Competition Law, a jury awarded the client damages and the court imposed a permanent injunction against the counterparty’s unlawful business practices.\nAs lead counsel, represented one of the world’s largest international containerized freight shipping companies and its terminal operator subsidiary in a business “divorce” from a joint venture partner. Defeated motions for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction and obtained dismissal of the matter and an award of costs.\nRepresented one of the nation’s largest engineering and construction companies and its subsidiaries in a federal court action brought under the False Claims Act alleging overcharging in federal government contracts.\nAs lead counsel, represented a domestic subsidiary of one of the world’s largest international containerized shipping companies in defense of a federal court action for interim injunctive relief pursuant to Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act. Accomplished denial of the petition for injunction and dismissal of the action.\nRepresents the U.S. West Coast’s largest marine terminal (by container lifts), responsible for over one million container moves per year in commercial and regulatory matters.\nAs lead counsel, represented a leading U.S. West Coast marine terminal operator in a labor relations action brought by a union representing mechanics previously employed at the terminal. After asserting a leading-edge position in a motion for judgment on the pleadings, obtained dismissal of the lawsuit and an award of costs.\nDefeated class action lawsuit against largest marine container terminal on the U.S. West Coast. Plaintiffs had alleged unlawful collection of demurrage during the “West Coast Port Slowdown.” After demonstrating that a terminal cannot be “constructively” closed by labor activity not amounting to a strike, obtained dismissal of the action in its entirety.\nPersuaded a federal agency to withdraw its notice of violation of anti-pollution regulations against a port terminal operator, avoiding approximately $9.2 million in potential penalties.\nPersuaded the National Labor Relations Board to close investigations of marine terminal operator. After the union appealed, the NLRB’s Office of the General Counsel affirmed the declination decisions in the client’s favor.{{ FIELD }}Persuaded the National Labor Relations Board to close investigations of international shipping line and its domestic agent.\nRepresented a marine terminal operator in an investigation by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, mitigating the penalty to just nine percent of the penalty sought.\nServed as lead counsel in a federal criminal investigation of a nationwide ground shipping company suspected of aiding and abetting the trafficking of millions of dollars of counterfeit high fashion goods. No charges were filed.\nRepresented the CEO of a Southern California-based manufacturer, packager, and distributor of health food, nutritional supplements, and cosmetic products in a federal court criminal action alleging import violations. Matter was resolved with a probationary sentence.\nRepresented global network of YouTube content creators and brands in a trade secrets dispute with company’s former employees.\nRepresented president of Southern California-based construction company in state court criminal investigation concerning alleged theft of public monies. Client received a probationary sentence, and the conviction was expunged entirely shortly thereafter.\nRepresented associate general counsel of a Los Angeles-based investment fund in a state court criminal investigation. Investigation was dropped without the filing of any charges.\nRepresented the CEO of China-based petroleum exploration, extraction, and production company in federal court securities action by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.\nRepresented one of the nation’s largest engineering and construction companies and its subsidiaries in a federal court action brought under the False Claims Act alleging overcharging in federal government contracts.\nRepresented the largest health plan in California in a 40-day trial arising out of an enforcement proceeding brought by the California Department of Managed Health Care.\nRepresented California’s largest HMO in dozens of investigations and litigation conducted by the California Department of Managed Health Care.\nRepresented the world’s leading satellite television provider in a major contract dispute with one of its largest retailers.{{ FIELD }}Joe Akrotirianakis is a partner in the Business Litigation Practice Group.  He is an accomplished trial lawyer who has first-chaired or co-chaired 35 trials and arbitrations.  He has never lost a jury trial or bench trial.  Mr. Akrotirianakis represents both plaintiffs and defendants across a broad spectrum of industries, including technology, pharmaceuticals and life sciences, and international shipping, transportation and logistics, among others.  A seasoned commercial litigator, and a decorated former federal prosecutor, Mr. Akrotirianakis has litigated matters of the most complex and difficult caliber throughout his more than 25-year career. \nMr. Akrotirianakis regularly practices before federal and state courts throughout California and nationally in matters involving complex commercial litigation, unfair competition, business torts, intellectual property, and federal and state regulatory investigations and defense. His work prosecuting and defending matters involving cutting-edge legal theories in high-profile matters brought under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, the Lanham Act, the California Unfair Competition Law and similar laws in other states has been repeatedly recognized in the legal press and mainstream media.  Mr. Akrotirianakis is individually recommended by Chambers in the category of Litigation: General Commercial (California).  He has been named among Los Angeles' \"Top 100 Lawyers\" (Los Angeles Business Journal, 2024), among 50 \"2024 Leading Commercial Litigators\" nationally (Daily Journal), \"Recommended\" in the category of General Commercial Disputes (Legal 500 U.S., 2024), a \"Litigation Star\" in California and nationally (Benchmark Litigation, 2023), an \"Innovative Practitioner\" (Financial Times, 2022), and an legal \"MVP\" in the transportation industry (Law360), in addition to other honors received from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, The Recorder, and other publications.\nBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Mr. Akrotirianakis served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Central District of California, investigating and prosecuting complex fraud and financial crimes, political and law enforcement corruption, civil rights matters, racketeering, and various other violations of federal law, including the CFAA.  Following law school, Mr. Akrotirianakis served as a Law Clerk to the late Judge Harry Pregerson, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.\nMr. Akrotirianakis was elected to the firm's Policy Committee in December 2021.  \n  Partner “He is very thorough and very well experienced.” Chambers Guide to the USA, 2025, Litigation: General Commercial - California “Joe's most valuable attribute is his ability to anticipate potential issues or outcomes.” Chambers Guide to the USA, 2025, Litigation: General Commercial - California Named among Los Angeles' \"Top 100 Lawyers\" Los Angeles Business Journal, 2024 Named among 50 \"2024 Leading Commercial Litigators\" (nationally) Daily Journal, 2024 The Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation  The Best Lawyers in America, 2024-present Listed as \"Recommended\" in category of General Commercial Disputes Legal 500 U.S., 2022-2025 Litigation Star (National) Benchmark Litigation, 2023 - present California Litigation Star Benchmark Litigation, 2023 - present Shortlisted as an \"Innovative Practitioner\" Financial Times, 2022 Named as the only \"Plaintiff Trailblazer\" at a large law firm National Law Journal, 2022 Named a \"Trailblazer: West\" The American Lawyer, 2021 Named a \"California Trailblazer\" The Recorder, 2020 Leaders of Influence: Litigators \u0026amp; Trial Lawyers Los Angeles Business Journal, 2020 Named among \"Top 100 attorneys in Southern California,\" across all practice areas Super Lawyers, 2017 Law360 \"MVP,\" Transportation - Among nation’s top five attorneys serving clients in the transportation industry Law360, 2016 Whittier College Whittier Law School Loyola Law School Loyola Law School Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Central District of California U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida California Law Clerk, Harry Pregerson, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit As lead counsel, represented global biopharmaceutical company Amgen Inc. against Lanham Act and California’s false advertising and unfair competition claims in a federal court lawsuit by generic drugs giant Sandoz Inc. The litigation addressed cutting edge issues relating to the use of RWE in pharmaceutical advertising. The matter resolved two days before trial. As trial counsel, leading defense of an Israeli cyber-intelligence company against novel claims brought under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and analogous state law claims in five separate lawsuits filed by WhatsApp, Apple, and several individual plaintiffs in the Northern District of California and the Eastern District of Virginia. As lead trial counsel, represented Everport Terminal Services Inc. in a matter with implications for much of the international trade on the Pacific Coast. In an appellate reversal of an NLRB decision, convinced the D.C. Circuit unanimously to recognize that the NLRB’s decision “would make the system of collective bargaining ... nonsensical and unworkable.” As co-lead counsel, represents American Kidney Fund (AKF) and other plaintiffs in a constitutional challenge to California AB 290. Secured a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of AB 290 on the eve of the statute’s effective date. The Court subsequently granted summary judgment in our clients’ favor. As lead trial counsel, achieved a total victory including a permanent injunction and an award of attorney’s fees in a first-of-its-kind unfair competition lawsuit on behalf of Hope Pharmaceuticals alleging violations of the unfair competition and trade practices laws of California, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina and Connecticut. As lead counsel, represented Americold Logistics, LLC, in a high-stakes commercial dispute against the nation’s largest publicly-traded grocery distributor, United Natural Foods, Inc. (UNFI). This matter settled on confidential terms shortly before trial. Represented plaintiffs, in a corporate valuation dispute against a defense industry manufacturer of millimeter wave aircraft radar components. After a bench trial, the court awarded the plaintiffs 387.5% of the defendant's prelitigation valuation, plus attorney’s fees, court costs, and more than two years of prejudgment interest. Represent an international cybersecurity technology company NSO Group in the defense of a groundbreaking lawsuit brought by Facebook, Inc., and WhatsApp Inc. under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and its California analogue. Obtained stay of district court proceedings while the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit considers the company’s claim that it is entitled to derivative foreign sovereign immunity. Represented a global pharmaceutical company, as plaintiff, in an unfair competition action against a purported compounding pharmacy promoting and selling competing “compounded” drugs on a national basis. Obtained partial summary judgment as to liability on claims under the federal Lanham Act, California False Advertising Law, and California Unfair Competition Law. The action resolved shortly thereafter on confidential terms, and the court imposed a permanent injunction against the counterparty’s false advertising and unlawful business practices.\nRepresented one of North America’s largest grain companies in a fraudulent transfer action against a former customer. Obtained summary judgment as to liability and a multimillion-dollar award including an award of punitive damages and successfully defended the matter on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.\nAs lead trial counsel, represented a global pharmaceutical company in an action for unfair competition and false advertising against a competitor selling drugs not approved by FDA. After obtaining partial summary judgment as to liability on claims under the federal Lanham Act and the California Unfair Competition Law, a jury awarded the client damages and the court imposed a permanent injunction against the counterparty’s unlawful business practices.\nAs lead counsel, represented one of the world’s largest international containerized freight shipping companies and its terminal operator subsidiary in a business “divorce” from a joint venture partner. Defeated motions for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction and obtained dismissal of the matter and an award of costs.\nRepresented one of the nation’s largest engineering and construction companies and its subsidiaries in a federal court action brought under the False Claims Act alleging overcharging in federal government contracts.\nAs lead counsel, represented a domestic subsidiary of one of the world’s largest international containerized shipping companies in defense of a federal court action for interim injunctive relief pursuant to Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act. Accomplished denial of the petition for injunction and dismissal of the action.\nRepresents the U.S. West Coast’s largest marine terminal (by container lifts), responsible for over one million container moves per year in commercial and regulatory matters.\nAs lead counsel, represented a leading U.S. West Coast marine terminal operator in a labor relations action brought by a union representing mechanics previously employed at the terminal. After asserting a leading-edge position in a motion for judgment on the pleadings, obtained dismissal of the lawsuit and an award of costs.\nDefeated class action lawsuit against largest marine container terminal on the U.S. West Coast. Plaintiffs had alleged unlawful collection of demurrage during the “West Coast Port Slowdown.” After demonstrating that a terminal cannot be “constructively” closed by labor activity not amounting to a strike, obtained dismissal of the action in its entirety.\nPersuaded a federal agency to withdraw its notice of violation of anti-pollution regulations against a port terminal operator, avoiding approximately $9.2 million in potential penalties.\nPersuaded the National Labor Relations Board to close investigations of marine terminal operator. After the union appealed, the NLRB’s Office of the General Counsel affirmed the declination decisions in the client’s favor. Persuaded the National Labor Relations Board to close investigations of international shipping line and its domestic agent.\nRepresented a marine terminal operator in an investigation by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, mitigating the penalty to just nine percent of the penalty sought.\nServed as lead counsel in a federal criminal investigation of a nationwide ground shipping company suspected of aiding and abetting the trafficking of millions of dollars of counterfeit high fashion goods. No charges were filed.\nRepresented the CEO of a Southern California-based manufacturer, packager, and distributor of health food, nutritional supplements, and cosmetic products in a federal court criminal action alleging import violations. Matter was resolved with a probationary sentence.\nRepresented global network of YouTube content creators and brands in a trade secrets dispute with company’s former employees.\nRepresented president of Southern California-based construction company in state court criminal investigation concerning alleged theft of public monies. Client received a probationary sentence, and the conviction was expunged entirely shortly thereafter.\nRepresented associate general counsel of a Los Angeles-based investment fund in a state court criminal investigation. Investigation was dropped without the filing of any charges.\nRepresented the CEO of China-based petroleum exploration, extraction, and production company in federal court securities action by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.\nRepresented one of the nation’s largest engineering and construction companies and its subsidiaries in a federal court action brought under the False Claims Act alleging overcharging in federal government contracts.\nRepresented the largest health plan in California in a 40-day trial arising out of an enforcement proceeding brought by the California Department of Managed Health Care.\nRepresented California’s largest HMO in dozens of investigations and litigation conducted by the California Department of Managed Health Care.\nRepresented the world’s leading satellite television provider in a major contract dispute with one of its largest retailers.","searchable_name":"Joseph Akrotirianakis (Joe)","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":443972,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6906,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAbdulaziz Al Fahad is a Saudi national admitted to the bar in Saudi Arabia and has been practicing law since 1985. Al Fahad handles matters across a broad spectrum of work in Saudi Arabia. He has handled cases before Saudi courts and tribunals and handled matters for international and local lenders and sponsors to major projects, mergers, acquisitions, and IPOs.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAl Fahad was an advisor to the Saudi Ministry of Commerce and Industry on the proposed accession of Saudi Arabia to the World Trade Organization, to a global energy company on the proposed Saudi Gas Initiative and on several projects related to the privatization of government entities. He has represented parties in major and complex disputes in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAl Fahad is a graduate of Michigan State University (B.A,) School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University (M.A.) and Yale Law School (JD).\u0026nbsp; In addition, Al Fahad was the recipient of a fellowship at Harvard University, where he was appointed jointly as a Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies and a Research Fellow at Harvard Law School. Al Fahad was a member of the Advisory Commission to the Supreme Economic Council between 1999-2003.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"abdulaziz-al-fahad","email":"aalfahad@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":3141}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":75,"guid":"75.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Al Fahad","nick_name":"Abdulaziz","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Abdulaziz","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":32,"law_schools":[{"id":2605,"meta":{"degree":"Juris Doctor","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1984-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Eminent Practitioners: Dispute Resolution, Saudi Arabia","detail":"Chambers Global Guide 2024"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":"Abdulaziz Hamad Al Fahad is a Saudi national admitted to the bar in Saudi Arabia and has been practicing law since 1985. Read more about him.","primary_title_id":143,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAbdulaziz Al Fahad is a Saudi national admitted to the bar in Saudi Arabia and has been practicing law since 1985. Al Fahad handles matters across a broad spectrum of work in Saudi Arabia. He has handled cases before Saudi courts and tribunals and handled matters for international and local lenders and sponsors to major projects, mergers, acquisitions, and IPOs.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAl Fahad was an advisor to the Saudi Ministry of Commerce and Industry on the proposed accession of Saudi Arabia to the World Trade Organization, to a global energy company on the proposed Saudi Gas Initiative and on several projects related to the privatization of government entities. He has represented parties in major and complex disputes in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAl Fahad is a graduate of Michigan State University (B.A,) School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University (M.A.) and Yale Law School (JD).\u0026nbsp; In addition, Al Fahad was the recipient of a fellowship at Harvard University, where he was appointed jointly as a Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies and a Research Fellow at Harvard Law School. Al Fahad was a member of the Advisory Commission to the Supreme Economic Council between 1999-2003.\u003c/p\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"Eminent Practitioners: Dispute Resolution, Saudi Arabia","detail":"Chambers Global Guide 2024"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12405}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-05T05:02:12.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T05:02:12.000Z","searchable_text":"Al Fahad{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Eminent Practitioners: Dispute Resolution, Saudi Arabia\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global Guide 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}Abdulaziz Al Fahad is a Saudi national admitted to the bar in Saudi Arabia and has been practicing law since 1985. Al Fahad handles matters across a broad spectrum of work in Saudi Arabia. He has handled cases before Saudi courts and tribunals and handled matters for international and local lenders and sponsors to major projects, mergers, acquisitions, and IPOs.\nAl Fahad was an advisor to the Saudi Ministry of Commerce and Industry on the proposed accession of Saudi Arabia to the World Trade Organization, to a global energy company on the proposed Saudi Gas Initiative and on several projects related to the privatization of government entities. He has represented parties in major and complex disputes in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.\nAl Fahad is a graduate of Michigan State University (B.A,) School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University (M.A.) and Yale Law School (JD).  In addition, Al Fahad was the recipient of a fellowship at Harvard University, where he was appointed jointly as a Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies and a Research Fellow at Harvard Law School. Al Fahad was a member of the Advisory Commission to the Supreme Economic Council between 1999-2003. Abdulaziz Al Fahad Partner / Chairman, Saudi Arabia Practice Eminent Practitioners: Dispute Resolution, Saudi Arabia Chambers Global Guide 2024 Michigan State University Michigan State University College of Law Yale University Yale Law School Johns Hopkins University  Saudi Arabia Member of the Committee for the Development of International Trade, Chamber of Commerce, Riyadh Member of the Advisory Commission to the Supreme Economic Council (1999-2003) Member of the Academic Committee, Legal Experts Commission, Council of Ministers (2002 - 2008)","searchable_name":"Abdulaziz Al Fahad","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":32,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":443980,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6903,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eIbrahim Alkhudair specializes in complex commercial litigation and arbitration, project finance, commercial transactions, and general corporate matters. Ibrahim has over 15 years\u0026rsquo; experience in Saudi Arabia. Ibrahim has acted as counsel in connection with numerous KSA \u0026amp; GCC mergers and acquisition transactions. He frequently advises both sponsors and lenders on project finance.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIbrahim cases are generally high-value complex commercial disputes. He represented high-net-worth individuals, corporations, financial institutions, and government entities in resolving disputes via arbitration, litigation, and mediation. He is experienced in representing clients in arbitrations before major forums, including the ICC, PAC, SCCA, and ad hoc arbitrations, as well as award enforcement. Ibrahim also regularly represents clients before Saudi courts and judicial committees at all levels of litigation including the Saudi Supreme Court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe has notable experience in advising parties on financing high-value projects, cross-border M\u0026amp;A, and joint ventures. Ibrahim's practice also includes advising institutional investors on their investments in private investment funds and sponsors on fund formations. His deep experience in Saudi court rulings puts him in a unique position when advising clients on various types of transactions in Saudi Arabia.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"ibrahim-alkhudair","email":"ialkhudair@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a financial institution in proceedings before the Specialized Chamber for Large Claims in the General Court in Riyadh - successfully defending against a (3 Billion+) SAR claim.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting the defendant in a lawsuit before the Specialized Chamber for Large Claims in the General Court in Dammam - successfully defending against requests to nullify the disposal of 33 real estates.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eArbitrator for a claim by a company manager regarding unpaid wages and benefits - the claim amount (5 Million+) SAR.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eICC arbitration regarding disputes between mining contracting companies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully obtained the first urgent relief awarded from an emergency arbitrator appointed under the SCCA arbitration rules. the urgent relief was successfully enforced.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully reducing fines imposed by the Customs Authority from (30 Million+) SAR down to less than (40k) SAR before the Customs Committees.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised lenders on debt restructuring/financing of a chemical factory amount (3.7 Billion+) USD.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised sponsors on financing a medical company - amount (250 Million+) SAR.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised lenders on financing a drilling/mining company - amount (120 Million +) SAR.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":4,"guid":"4.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":75,"guid":"75.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1220,"guid":"1220.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Alkhudair","nick_name":"Ibrahim","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Ibrahim","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":32,"law_schools":[{"id":1245,"meta":{"degree":"LL.M.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2015-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eIbrahim Alkhudair specializes in complex commercial litigation and arbitration, project finance, commercial transactions, and general corporate matters. Ibrahim has over 15 years\u0026rsquo; experience in Saudi Arabia. Ibrahim has acted as counsel in connection with numerous KSA \u0026amp; GCC mergers and acquisition transactions. He frequently advises both sponsors and lenders on project finance.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIbrahim cases are generally high-value complex commercial disputes. He represented high-net-worth individuals, corporations, financial institutions, and government entities in resolving disputes via arbitration, litigation, and mediation. He is experienced in representing clients in arbitrations before major forums, including the ICC, PAC, SCCA, and ad hoc arbitrations, as well as award enforcement. Ibrahim also regularly represents clients before Saudi courts and judicial committees at all levels of litigation including the Saudi Supreme Court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe has notable experience in advising parties on financing high-value projects, cross-border M\u0026amp;A, and joint ventures. Ibrahim's practice also includes advising institutional investors on their investments in private investment funds and sponsors on fund formations. His deep experience in Saudi court rulings puts him in a unique position when advising clients on various types of transactions in Saudi Arabia.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a financial institution in proceedings before the Specialized Chamber for Large Claims in the General Court in Riyadh - successfully defending against a (3 Billion+) SAR claim.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting the defendant in a lawsuit before the Specialized Chamber for Large Claims in the General Court in Dammam - successfully defending against requests to nullify the disposal of 33 real estates.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eArbitrator for a claim by a company manager regarding unpaid wages and benefits - the claim amount (5 Million+) SAR.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eICC arbitration regarding disputes between mining contracting companies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully obtained the first urgent relief awarded from an emergency arbitrator appointed under the SCCA arbitration rules. the urgent relief was successfully enforced.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully reducing fines imposed by the Customs Authority from (30 Million+) SAR down to less than (40k) SAR before the Customs Committees.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised lenders on debt restructuring/financing of a chemical factory amount (3.7 Billion+) USD.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised sponsors on financing a medical company - amount (250 Million+) SAR.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised lenders on financing a drilling/mining company - amount (120 Million +) SAR.\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12400}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-05T05:02:16.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T05:02:16.000Z","searchable_text":"Alkhudair{{ FIELD }}Representing a financial institution in proceedings before the Specialized Chamber for Large Claims in the General Court in Riyadh - successfully defending against a (3 Billion+) SAR claim.{{ FIELD }}Representing the defendant in a lawsuit before the Specialized Chamber for Large Claims in the General Court in Dammam - successfully defending against requests to nullify the disposal of 33 real estates.{{ FIELD }}Arbitrator for a claim by a company manager regarding unpaid wages and benefits - the claim amount (5 Million+) SAR.{{ FIELD }}ICC arbitration regarding disputes between mining contracting companies.{{ FIELD }}Successfully obtained the first urgent relief awarded from an emergency arbitrator appointed under the SCCA arbitration rules. the urgent relief was successfully enforced.{{ FIELD }}Successfully reducing fines imposed by the Customs Authority from (30 Million+) SAR down to less than (40k) SAR before the Customs Committees.{{ FIELD }}Advised lenders on debt restructuring/financing of a chemical factory amount (3.7 Billion+) USD.{{ FIELD }}Advised sponsors on financing a medical company - amount (250 Million+) SAR.{{ FIELD }}Advised lenders on financing a drilling/mining company - amount (120 Million +) SAR.{{ FIELD }}Ibrahim Alkhudair specializes in complex commercial litigation and arbitration, project finance, commercial transactions, and general corporate matters. Ibrahim has over 15 years’ experience in Saudi Arabia. Ibrahim has acted as counsel in connection with numerous KSA \u0026amp; GCC mergers and acquisition transactions. He frequently advises both sponsors and lenders on project finance.\nIbrahim cases are generally high-value complex commercial disputes. He represented high-net-worth individuals, corporations, financial institutions, and government entities in resolving disputes via arbitration, litigation, and mediation. He is experienced in representing clients in arbitrations before major forums, including the ICC, PAC, SCCA, and ad hoc arbitrations, as well as award enforcement. Ibrahim also regularly represents clients before Saudi courts and judicial committees at all levels of litigation including the Saudi Supreme Court.\nHe has notable experience in advising parties on financing high-value projects, cross-border M\u0026amp;A, and joint ventures. Ibrahim's practice also includes advising institutional investors on their investments in private investment funds and sponsors on fund formations. His deep experience in Saudi court rulings puts him in a unique position when advising clients on various types of transactions in Saudi Arabia. Partner King Saud University College of Law \u0026amp; Political Sciences  Michigan State University Michigan State University College of Law Saudi Arabia Admitted to the Saudi Bar Association Representing a financial institution in proceedings before the Specialized Chamber for Large Claims in the General Court in Riyadh - successfully defending against a (3 Billion+) SAR claim. Representing the defendant in a lawsuit before the Specialized Chamber for Large Claims in the General Court in Dammam - successfully defending against requests to nullify the disposal of 33 real estates. Arbitrator for a claim by a company manager regarding unpaid wages and benefits - the claim amount (5 Million+) SAR. ICC arbitration regarding disputes between mining contracting companies. Successfully obtained the first urgent relief awarded from an emergency arbitrator appointed under the SCCA arbitration rules. the urgent relief was successfully enforced. Successfully reducing fines imposed by the Customs Authority from (30 Million+) SAR down to less than (40k) SAR before the Customs Committees. Advised lenders on debt restructuring/financing of a chemical factory amount (3.7 Billion+) USD. Advised sponsors on financing a medical company - amount (250 Million+) SAR. Advised lenders on financing a drilling/mining company - amount (120 Million +) SAR.","searchable_name":"Ibrahim Alkhudair","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":32,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":436417,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3488,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJessica Beess und Chrostin is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Trial and Global Disputes Group.\u0026nbsp; Jessica\u0026rsquo;s practice focuses on complex international dispute resolution, with particular expertise in high-stakes commercial, investor-state, construction, and global award enforcement disputes.\u0026nbsp; Jessica regularly represents clients in international disputes in the infrastructure, oil and gas, mining, construction, and renewable energy sectors, and has significant experience in consumer goods, real estate, and telecommunications disputes.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJessica is a zealous advocate for her clients and strives tirelessly to ensure they receive the best legal representation. She understands that representing her clients\u0026rsquo; interests requires understanding their business and objectives, and tailoring the strategy to achieve the best possible outcome, whether inside or out of the hearing room. Jessica represents clients in arbitrations before all major arbitral forums, including the AAA, ICC, ICDR, ICSID, JAMS, LCIA, and SCC as well as ad hoc arbitrations, such as UNCITRAL. She is experienced in all phases of international arbitration and award enforcement, and handles disputes from inception to collection. Jessica also regularly represents clients global award recognition and enforcement efforts as coordinating counsel and in litigations before U.S. courts under the New York Convention and the Federal Arbitration Act.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJessica represents clients in jurisdictions across the world. Her matters include representing a wind farm owner in a construction arbitration dispute with a turbine supplier and operations \u0026amp; maintenance provider (concerning the latter\u0026rsquo;s failure to comply with O\u0026amp;M obligations and failure to remediate certain serial defects); representing a client in a multi-hundred million dollar commercial dispute with Oman over a project in the extractive industries (concerning certain licenses and failure to use best efforts to support the project); representing Chevron Corporation (U.S.A.) and Texaco Petroleum Company (U.S.A.) in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (concerning the scope of environmental release agreements and due process violations by a court of Ecuador that issued a multi-billion dollar fraudulent judgment against Chevron); and representing a sovereign state in a global campaign to enforce an ICC arbitration award against another sovereign.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJessica is a frequent writer and speaker on topics relating to international arbitration and has been recognized by IFLR Americas as a Rising Star in Commercial Arbitration and by CPR as a Rising Star in Alternative Dispute Resolution. In 2023, she was awarded the prestigious Smit-Lowenfeld Prize, which recognizes annually an outstanding article published in the previous year on any aspect of international arbitration, for her article on \u0026ldquo;The Illegality Objection in Investor-State Arbitration\u0026rdquo; (co-authored with Caline Mouawad, published in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eArbitration International\u003c/em\u003e, Volume 37, Issue 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJessica is fluent in English and German, and proficient in French and Spanish. She received her J.D.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ecum laude\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;from Harvard Law School and her B.A.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ecum laude\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;from Columbia University. She has conducted legal studies at Cambridge University.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"jessica-beess-und-chrostin","email":"jbeessundchrostin@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting sovereign award creditor in global enforcement proceedings against another sovereign relating to a multibillion-dollar ICC award\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting numerous investors in disputes against Spain and Italy under the Energy Charter Treaty regarding changes to the regulatory regime applicable to certain renewable energy producers in the wind and solar sectors (renewable energy)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Dutch investor in UNCITRAL arbitration against the Government of Vietnam under the Netherlands-Vietnam Bilateral Investment Treaty (real estate and human rights; obtained favorable award, including largest moral damages award in favor of an individual in investment arbitration)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Bear Creek Mining Corporation in an ICSID Arbitration against the Republic of Peru under the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement (mining sector; obtained favorable award of damages)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Chevron Corporation (U.S.A.) and Texaco Petroleum Company (U.S.A.) in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (concerning scope of environmental release agreements and due process violations by a court of Ecuador that had issued a multi-billion dollar judgment against Chevron; obtained favorable award declaring,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;inter alia\u003c/em\u003e, that the Ecuadorian judgment was the product of fraud)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented KBR, Inc. in a NAFTA arbitration against the United Mexican States (concerning Mexican court\u0026rsquo;s annulment of a commercial arbitral award and related US enforcement proceedings)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Reficar in an ICC arbitration against Chicago Bridge \u0026amp; Iron (construction sector; obtained favorable multibillion-dollar award)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Sergei Viktorovich Pugachev in an UNCITRAL arbitration against the Russian Federation (construction and real estate sectors)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented international producer of household goods in an UNCITRAL arbitration against Latin American country under bilateral investment treaty (consumer goods; obtained favorable award)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented major telecommunications company in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ead hoc\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;arbitration against another telecommunications company regarding fraudulently originated telephone traffic and resulting disputed charges under global hubbing agreement (telecommunications sector; obtained favorable award)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Indian pharmaceuticals manufacturer in contract dispute against U.S. pharmaceutical company (pharmaceuticals sector; successfully settled claims)\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":4,"guid":"4.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":35,"guid":"35.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":40,"guid":"40.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1303,"guid":"1303.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Beess und Chrostin","nick_name":"Jessica","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Jessica","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":35,"law_schools":[{"id":824,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude","is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Ones to Watch - New York","detail":"Best Lawyers in America 2025"},{"title":"Future Leaders","detail":"Who's Who Legal (WWL): Arbitration 2024"},{"title":"Rising ADR Stars 2023","detail":"International Institute for Conflict Prevention \u0026 Resolution"},{"title":"Rising Star Awards Americas, Commercial Arbitration","detail":"IFLR, 2020 and 2021"},{"title":"Smit-Lowenfeld Prize for the Best Article in the Field of International Arbitration Published in 2021","detail":"The International Arbitration Club of New York; https://www.arbitrationclub.org/smit-lowenfeld-prize"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJessica Beess und Chrostin is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Trial and Global Disputes Group.\u0026nbsp; Jessica\u0026rsquo;s practice focuses on complex international dispute resolution, with particular expertise in high-stakes commercial, investor-state, construction, and global award enforcement disputes.\u0026nbsp; Jessica regularly represents clients in international disputes in the infrastructure, oil and gas, mining, construction, and renewable energy sectors, and has significant experience in consumer goods, real estate, and telecommunications disputes.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJessica is a zealous advocate for her clients and strives tirelessly to ensure they receive the best legal representation. She understands that representing her clients\u0026rsquo; interests requires understanding their business and objectives, and tailoring the strategy to achieve the best possible outcome, whether inside or out of the hearing room. Jessica represents clients in arbitrations before all major arbitral forums, including the AAA, ICC, ICDR, ICSID, JAMS, LCIA, and SCC as well as ad hoc arbitrations, such as UNCITRAL. She is experienced in all phases of international arbitration and award enforcement, and handles disputes from inception to collection. Jessica also regularly represents clients global award recognition and enforcement efforts as coordinating counsel and in litigations before U.S. courts under the New York Convention and the Federal Arbitration Act.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJessica represents clients in jurisdictions across the world. Her matters include representing a wind farm owner in a construction arbitration dispute with a turbine supplier and operations \u0026amp; maintenance provider (concerning the latter\u0026rsquo;s failure to comply with O\u0026amp;M obligations and failure to remediate certain serial defects); representing a client in a multi-hundred million dollar commercial dispute with Oman over a project in the extractive industries (concerning certain licenses and failure to use best efforts to support the project); representing Chevron Corporation (U.S.A.) and Texaco Petroleum Company (U.S.A.) in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (concerning the scope of environmental release agreements and due process violations by a court of Ecuador that issued a multi-billion dollar fraudulent judgment against Chevron); and representing a sovereign state in a global campaign to enforce an ICC arbitration award against another sovereign.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJessica is a frequent writer and speaker on topics relating to international arbitration and has been recognized by IFLR Americas as a Rising Star in Commercial Arbitration and by CPR as a Rising Star in Alternative Dispute Resolution. In 2023, she was awarded the prestigious Smit-Lowenfeld Prize, which recognizes annually an outstanding article published in the previous year on any aspect of international arbitration, for her article on \u0026ldquo;The Illegality Objection in Investor-State Arbitration\u0026rdquo; (co-authored with Caline Mouawad, published in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eArbitration International\u003c/em\u003e, Volume 37, Issue 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJessica is fluent in English and German, and proficient in French and Spanish. She received her J.D.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ecum laude\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;from Harvard Law School and her B.A.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ecum laude\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;from Columbia University. She has conducted legal studies at Cambridge University.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting sovereign award creditor in global enforcement proceedings against another sovereign relating to a multibillion-dollar ICC award\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting numerous investors in disputes against Spain and Italy under the Energy Charter Treaty regarding changes to the regulatory regime applicable to certain renewable energy producers in the wind and solar sectors (renewable energy)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Dutch investor in UNCITRAL arbitration against the Government of Vietnam under the Netherlands-Vietnam Bilateral Investment Treaty (real estate and human rights; obtained favorable award, including largest moral damages award in favor of an individual in investment arbitration)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Bear Creek Mining Corporation in an ICSID Arbitration against the Republic of Peru under the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement (mining sector; obtained favorable award of damages)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Chevron Corporation (U.S.A.) and Texaco Petroleum Company (U.S.A.) in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (concerning scope of environmental release agreements and due process violations by a court of Ecuador that had issued a multi-billion dollar judgment against Chevron; obtained favorable award declaring,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;inter alia\u003c/em\u003e, that the Ecuadorian judgment was the product of fraud)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented KBR, Inc. in a NAFTA arbitration against the United Mexican States (concerning Mexican court\u0026rsquo;s annulment of a commercial arbitral award and related US enforcement proceedings)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Reficar in an ICC arbitration against Chicago Bridge \u0026amp; Iron (construction sector; obtained favorable multibillion-dollar award)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Sergei Viktorovich Pugachev in an UNCITRAL arbitration against the Russian Federation (construction and real estate sectors)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented international producer of household goods in an UNCITRAL arbitration against Latin American country under bilateral investment treaty (consumer goods; obtained favorable award)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented major telecommunications company in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ead hoc\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;arbitration against another telecommunications company regarding fraudulently originated telephone traffic and resulting disputed charges under global hubbing agreement (telecommunications sector; obtained favorable award)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Indian pharmaceuticals manufacturer in contract dispute against U.S. pharmaceutical company (pharmaceuticals sector; successfully settled claims)\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Ones to Watch - New York","detail":"Best Lawyers in America 2025"},{"title":"Future Leaders","detail":"Who's Who Legal (WWL): Arbitration 2024"},{"title":"Rising ADR Stars 2023","detail":"International Institute for Conflict Prevention \u0026 Resolution"},{"title":"Rising Star Awards Americas, Commercial Arbitration","detail":"IFLR, 2020 and 2021"},{"title":"Smit-Lowenfeld Prize for the Best Article in the Field of International Arbitration Published in 2021","detail":"The International Arbitration Club of New York; https://www.arbitrationclub.org/smit-lowenfeld-prize"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":10178}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:52:49.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:52:49.000Z","searchable_text":"Beess und Chrostin{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ones to Watch - New York\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in America 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Future Leaders\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who's Who Legal (WWL): Arbitration 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Rising ADR Stars 2023\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"International Institute for Conflict Prevention \u0026amp; Resolution\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Rising Star Awards Americas, Commercial Arbitration\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"IFLR, 2020 and 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Smit-Lowenfeld Prize for the Best Article in the Field of International Arbitration Published in 2021\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The International Arbitration Club of New York; https://www.arbitrationclub.org/smit-lowenfeld-prize\"}{{ FIELD }}Representing sovereign award creditor in global enforcement proceedings against another sovereign relating to a multibillion-dollar ICC award{{ FIELD }}Representing numerous investors in disputes against Spain and Italy under the Energy Charter Treaty regarding changes to the regulatory regime applicable to certain renewable energy producers in the wind and solar sectors (renewable energy){{ FIELD }}Represented Dutch investor in UNCITRAL arbitration against the Government of Vietnam under the Netherlands-Vietnam Bilateral Investment Treaty (real estate and human rights; obtained favorable award, including largest moral damages award in favor of an individual in investment arbitration){{ FIELD }}Represented Bear Creek Mining Corporation in an ICSID Arbitration against the Republic of Peru under the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement (mining sector; obtained favorable award of damages){{ FIELD }}Representing Chevron Corporation (U.S.A.) and Texaco Petroleum Company (U.S.A.) in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (concerning scope of environmental release agreements and due process violations by a court of Ecuador that had issued a multi-billion dollar judgment against Chevron; obtained favorable award declaring, inter alia, that the Ecuadorian judgment was the product of fraud){{ FIELD }}Represented KBR, Inc. in a NAFTA arbitration against the United Mexican States (concerning Mexican court’s annulment of a commercial arbitral award and related US enforcement proceedings){{ FIELD }}Represented Reficar in an ICC arbitration against Chicago Bridge \u0026amp; Iron (construction sector; obtained favorable multibillion-dollar award){{ FIELD }}Represented Sergei Viktorovich Pugachev in an UNCITRAL arbitration against the Russian Federation (construction and real estate sectors){{ FIELD }}Represented international producer of household goods in an UNCITRAL arbitration against Latin American country under bilateral investment treaty (consumer goods; obtained favorable award){{ FIELD }}Represented major telecommunications company in ad hoc arbitration against another telecommunications company regarding fraudulently originated telephone traffic and resulting disputed charges under global hubbing agreement (telecommunications sector; obtained favorable award){{ FIELD }}Represented Indian pharmaceuticals manufacturer in contract dispute against U.S. pharmaceutical company (pharmaceuticals sector; successfully settled claims){{ FIELD }}Jessica Beess und Chrostin is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding’s Trial and Global Disputes Group.  Jessica’s practice focuses on complex international dispute resolution, with particular expertise in high-stakes commercial, investor-state, construction, and global award enforcement disputes.  Jessica regularly represents clients in international disputes in the infrastructure, oil and gas, mining, construction, and renewable energy sectors, and has significant experience in consumer goods, real estate, and telecommunications disputes.\nJessica is a zealous advocate for her clients and strives tirelessly to ensure they receive the best legal representation. She understands that representing her clients’ interests requires understanding their business and objectives, and tailoring the strategy to achieve the best possible outcome, whether inside or out of the hearing room. Jessica represents clients in arbitrations before all major arbitral forums, including the AAA, ICC, ICDR, ICSID, JAMS, LCIA, and SCC as well as ad hoc arbitrations, such as UNCITRAL. She is experienced in all phases of international arbitration and award enforcement, and handles disputes from inception to collection. Jessica also regularly represents clients global award recognition and enforcement efforts as coordinating counsel and in litigations before U.S. courts under the New York Convention and the Federal Arbitration Act.\nJessica represents clients in jurisdictions across the world. Her matters include representing a wind farm owner in a construction arbitration dispute with a turbine supplier and operations \u0026amp; maintenance provider (concerning the latter’s failure to comply with O\u0026amp;M obligations and failure to remediate certain serial defects); representing a client in a multi-hundred million dollar commercial dispute with Oman over a project in the extractive industries (concerning certain licenses and failure to use best efforts to support the project); representing Chevron Corporation (U.S.A.) and Texaco Petroleum Company (U.S.A.) in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (concerning the scope of environmental release agreements and due process violations by a court of Ecuador that issued a multi-billion dollar fraudulent judgment against Chevron); and representing a sovereign state in a global campaign to enforce an ICC arbitration award against another sovereign.\nJessica is a frequent writer and speaker on topics relating to international arbitration and has been recognized by IFLR Americas as a Rising Star in Commercial Arbitration and by CPR as a Rising Star in Alternative Dispute Resolution. In 2023, she was awarded the prestigious Smit-Lowenfeld Prize, which recognizes annually an outstanding article published in the previous year on any aspect of international arbitration, for her article on “The Illegality Objection in Investor-State Arbitration” (co-authored with Caline Mouawad, published in Arbitration International, Volume 37, Issue 1).\nJessica is fluent in English and German, and proficient in French and Spanish. She received her J.D. cum laude from Harvard Law School and her B.A. cum laude from Columbia University. She has conducted legal studies at Cambridge University. Partner Ones to Watch - New York Best Lawyers in America 2025 Future Leaders Who's Who Legal (WWL): Arbitration 2024 Rising ADR Stars 2023 International Institute for Conflict Prevention \u0026amp; Resolution Rising Star Awards Americas, Commercial Arbitration IFLR, 2020 and 2021 Smit-Lowenfeld Prize for the Best Article in the Field of International Arbitration Published in 2021 The International Arbitration Club of New York; https://www.arbitrationclub.org/smit-lowenfeld-prize Columbia University Columbia University School of Law Harvard University Harvard Law School University of Cambridge, UK  New York City Bar of New York, International Law Committee Representing sovereign award creditor in global enforcement proceedings against another sovereign relating to a multibillion-dollar ICC award Representing numerous investors in disputes against Spain and Italy under the Energy Charter Treaty regarding changes to the regulatory regime applicable to certain renewable energy producers in the wind and solar sectors (renewable energy) Represented Dutch investor in UNCITRAL arbitration against the Government of Vietnam under the Netherlands-Vietnam Bilateral Investment Treaty (real estate and human rights; obtained favorable award, including largest moral damages award in favor of an individual in investment arbitration) Represented Bear Creek Mining Corporation in an ICSID Arbitration against the Republic of Peru under the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement (mining sector; obtained favorable award of damages) Representing Chevron Corporation (U.S.A.) and Texaco Petroleum Company (U.S.A.) in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (concerning scope of environmental release agreements and due process violations by a court of Ecuador that had issued a multi-billion dollar judgment against Chevron; obtained favorable award declaring, inter alia, that the Ecuadorian judgment was the product of fraud) Represented KBR, Inc. in a NAFTA arbitration against the United Mexican States (concerning Mexican court’s annulment of a commercial arbitral award and related US enforcement proceedings) Represented Reficar in an ICC arbitration against Chicago Bridge \u0026amp; Iron (construction sector; obtained favorable multibillion-dollar award) Represented Sergei Viktorovich Pugachev in an UNCITRAL arbitration against the Russian Federation (construction and real estate sectors) Represented international producer of household goods in an UNCITRAL arbitration against Latin American country under bilateral investment treaty (consumer goods; obtained favorable award) Represented major telecommunications company in ad hoc arbitration against another telecommunications company regarding fraudulently originated telephone traffic and resulting disputed charges under global hubbing agreement (telecommunications sector; obtained favorable award) Represented Indian pharmaceuticals manufacturer in contract dispute against U.S. pharmaceutical company (pharmaceuticals sector; successfully settled claims)","searchable_name":"Jessica Beess und Chrostin","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":35,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":426402,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3251,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eVanessa Benichou, Head of the Paris Litigation Department, is specialized in Dispute Resolution in all its forms: in international arbitration, litigation before Civil, Commercial and Criminal Courts or in the context of settlements or mediation. She is also qualified to act as arbitrator and mediator.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHer litigation practice includes commercial and business law, corporate law, unfair and parasitic competition, advertising and\u0026nbsp;entertainment, intellectual property, commercial leases and contracts, construction and product liability.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe also has extensive experience in distribution agreements, especially in franchise.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVanessa Benichou is highly ranked by Leaders League - Decideurs every year.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe is fluent in English, French and Hebrew and conversant in Spanish.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"vanessa-benichou","email":"vbenichou@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of the \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eFrench Government\u003c/strong\u003e before French courts and before the Indian Supreme Court in connection with the dismantling of the military aircraft carrier Cl\u0026eacute;menceau in India.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLa Fran\u0026ccedil;aise des Jeux (the French State Lottery company),\u003c/strong\u003e before the Criminal Court of Paris in a case brought pursuant to a complaint by the producers of the hit French movie, \u0026ldquo;Les Choristes,\u0026rdquo; and the cinema industry, for conspiracy of piracy and trademark infringement because its advertising was available on peer-to-peer websites where the movie was offered for illegal downloading.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLa Fran\u0026ccedil;aise des Jeux (the French State Lottery company),\u003c/strong\u003e before the Paris Commercial Court in a case brought by a majority of its network's members alleging a wrongful termination of their distribution contracts and asking for damages in an amount of \u0026euro;550 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of Canada-based \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCaisse de D\u0026eacute;p\u0026ocirc;t et Placement du Qu\u0026eacute;bec\u003c/strong\u003e, in a lawsuit involving claims of wrongful termination of credit related to bankruptcy of a France-based company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of a \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLebanese company\u003c/strong\u003e in an ICC Arbitration against the French company Sodexho International, regarding a wrongful termination of a joint venture.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of the French leading hairdresser network company, \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eProvalliance,\u003c/strong\u003e in a litigation regarding wrongful termination of distribution contracts and trademark infringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of the French leading hairdresser network company, \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eProvalliance,\u003c/strong\u003e in a litigation brought by its main competitor for unfair business.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of an \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003einternational grain trading company\u003c/strong\u003e, in a couple of arbitration proceedings before the International Arbitration Chamber of Paris, regarding the application and the interpretation of the provisions of an international trading contract.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":6}]},"expertise":[{"id":4,"guid":"4.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Benichou","nick_name":"Vanessa","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Vanessa","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eVanessa Benichou, Head of the Paris Litigation Department, is specialized in Dispute Resolution in all its forms: in international arbitration, litigation before Civil, Commercial and Criminal Courts or in the context of settlements or mediation. She is also qualified to act as arbitrator and mediator.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHer litigation practice includes commercial and business law, corporate law, unfair and parasitic competition, advertising and\u0026nbsp;entertainment, intellectual property, commercial leases and contracts, construction and product liability.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe also has extensive experience in distribution agreements, especially in franchise.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVanessa Benichou is highly ranked by Leaders League - Decideurs every year.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe is fluent in English, French and Hebrew and conversant in Spanish.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of the \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eFrench Government\u003c/strong\u003e before French courts and before the Indian Supreme Court in connection with the dismantling of the military aircraft carrier Cl\u0026eacute;menceau in India.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLa Fran\u0026ccedil;aise des Jeux (the French State Lottery company),\u003c/strong\u003e before the Criminal Court of Paris in a case brought pursuant to a complaint by the producers of the hit French movie, \u0026ldquo;Les Choristes,\u0026rdquo; and the cinema industry, for conspiracy of piracy and trademark infringement because its advertising was available on peer-to-peer websites where the movie was offered for illegal downloading.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLa Fran\u0026ccedil;aise des Jeux (the French State Lottery company),\u003c/strong\u003e before the Paris Commercial Court in a case brought by a majority of its network's members alleging a wrongful termination of their distribution contracts and asking for damages in an amount of \u0026euro;550 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of Canada-based \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCaisse de D\u0026eacute;p\u0026ocirc;t et Placement du Qu\u0026eacute;bec\u003c/strong\u003e, in a lawsuit involving claims of wrongful termination of credit related to bankruptcy of a France-based company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of a \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLebanese company\u003c/strong\u003e in an ICC Arbitration against the French company Sodexho International, regarding a wrongful termination of a joint venture.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of the French leading hairdresser network company, \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eProvalliance,\u003c/strong\u003e in a litigation regarding wrongful termination of distribution contracts and trademark infringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of the French leading hairdresser network company, \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eProvalliance,\u003c/strong\u003e in a litigation brought by its main competitor for unfair business.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of an \u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003einternational grain trading company\u003c/strong\u003e, in a couple of arbitration proceedings before the International Arbitration Chamber of Paris, regarding the application and the interpretation of the provisions of an international trading contract.\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12236}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T04:52:28.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T04:52:28.000Z","searchable_text":"Benichou{{ FIELD }}Representation of the French Government before French courts and before the Indian Supreme Court in connection with the dismantling of the military aircraft carrier Clémenceau in India.{{ FIELD }}Representation of La Française des Jeux (the French State Lottery company), before the Criminal Court of Paris in a case brought pursuant to a complaint by the producers of the hit French movie, “Les Choristes,” and the cinema industry, for conspiracy of piracy and trademark infringement because its advertising was available on peer-to-peer websites where the movie was offered for illegal downloading.{{ FIELD }}Representation of La Française des Jeux (the French State Lottery company), before the Paris Commercial Court in a case brought by a majority of its network's members alleging a wrongful termination of their distribution contracts and asking for damages in an amount of €550 million.{{ FIELD }}Representation of Canada-based Caisse de Dépôt et Placement du Québec, in a lawsuit involving claims of wrongful termination of credit related to bankruptcy of a France-based company.{{ FIELD }}Representation of a Lebanese company in an ICC Arbitration against the French company Sodexho International, regarding a wrongful termination of a joint venture.{{ FIELD }}Representation of the French leading hairdresser network company, Provalliance, in a litigation regarding wrongful termination of distribution contracts and trademark infringement.{{ FIELD }}Representation of the French leading hairdresser network company, Provalliance, in a litigation brought by its main competitor for unfair business.{{ FIELD }}Representation of an international grain trading company, in a couple of arbitration proceedings before the International Arbitration Chamber of Paris, regarding the application and the interpretation of the provisions of an international trading contract.{{ FIELD }}Vanessa Benichou, Head of the Paris Litigation Department, is specialized in Dispute Resolution in all its forms: in international arbitration, litigation before Civil, Commercial and Criminal Courts or in the context of settlements or mediation. She is also qualified to act as arbitrator and mediator. \nHer litigation practice includes commercial and business law, corporate law, unfair and parasitic competition, advertising and entertainment, intellectual property, commercial leases and contracts, construction and product liability. \nShe also has extensive experience in distribution agreements, especially in franchise. \nVanessa Benichou is highly ranked by Leaders League - Decideurs every year. \nShe is fluent in English, French and Hebrew and conversant in Spanish.  Vanessa R Benichou Partner Representation of the French Government before French courts and before the Indian Supreme Court in connection with the dismantling of the military aircraft carrier Clémenceau in India. Representation of La Française des Jeux (the French State Lottery company), before the Criminal Court of Paris in a case brought pursuant to a complaint by the producers of the hit French movie, “Les Choristes,” and the cinema industry, for conspiracy of piracy and trademark infringement because its advertising was available on peer-to-peer websites where the movie was offered for illegal downloading. Representation of La Française des Jeux (the French State Lottery company), before the Paris Commercial Court in a case brought by a majority of its network's members alleging a wrongful termination of their distribution contracts and asking for damages in an amount of €550 million. Representation of Canada-based Caisse de Dépôt et Placement du Québec, in a lawsuit involving claims of wrongful termination of credit related to bankruptcy of a France-based company. Representation of a Lebanese company in an ICC Arbitration against the French company Sodexho International, regarding a wrongful termination of a joint venture. Representation of the French leading hairdresser network company, Provalliance, in a litigation regarding wrongful termination of distribution contracts and trademark infringement. Representation of the French leading hairdresser network company, Provalliance, in a litigation brought by its main competitor for unfair business. Representation of an international grain trading company, in a couple of arbitration proceedings before the International Arbitration Chamber of Paris, regarding the application and the interpretation of the provisions of an international trading contract.","searchable_name":"Vanessa Benichou","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":436409,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3246,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eHarry Burnett focuses on international commercial and investor-state arbitration matters, along with general domestic and international litigation. A partner in our International Arbitration practice, Harry represents clients in a broad array of international disputes and frequently serves as an arbitrator in international disputes.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith more than 25 years of litigation and arbitration experience, he represents clients in arbitration of international commercial disputes under rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), JAMS International and the CPR International Institute for Conflict Prevention \u0026amp; Resolution, and in investor-state arbitrations under the rules of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the ICSID Additional Facility, the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the ICC related to claims under bilateral investment treaties, the Energy Charter Treaty, multilateral investment instruments and local investment laws.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition, Harry frequently serves as a mediator as well as arbitrator in international disputes, whether as sole arbitrator, party-appointed arbitrator or chair.\u0026nbsp; He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHarry has been ranked in C\u003cem\u003ehambers Global,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers USA,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eChambers Latin America\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u003cem\u003e Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e for International Arbitration\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e He has also been recognized by \u003cem\u003eThe International Who\u0026rsquo;s Who of Oil \u0026amp; Gas Lawyers\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eThe International Who\u0026rsquo;s Who of Energy Lawyers and is an Approved Leading Private Practitioner in Arbitration \u0026ndash; Latin American Corporate Counsel Association\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA frequent speaker and author, Harry is fluent in English, Spanish and Portuguese.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND ILLINOIS; AND\u0026nbsp;FLORIDA\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"henry-burnett","email":"hburnett@kslaw.com","phone":"+1 917 763 6098","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting claimant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSouth American Silver Ltd.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a UNCITRAL arbitration brought under the UK-Bolivia bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns a silver, indium and gallium mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting claimant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eThe Renco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a UNCITRAL Arbitration against Peru brought under the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement. The dispute concerns a copper mining project and poly-metallic smelting operation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting claimant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eBear Creek Mining Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Peru in the first case brought under the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement. The dispute concerns a silver mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Asian mining company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a potential investor-state arbitration against a Latin American state concerning a large iron ore mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea state-owned entity\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multibillion dollar ICC arbitration in a construction dispute relating to expansion of an oil refinery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Latin American pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration related to claims arising out of the sale of the company to an international pharmaceutical company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ei\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003enternational telecommunications provide\u003c/strong\u003er in ICC arbitration involving breach of contract and fraud claims concerning a master services IT agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean international telecommunications provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ad hoc arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules concerning breach of contract claims and counterclaims for monies allegedly owed for termination of international call traffic.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean Argentine client\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICDR arbitration against South American gas distribution company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003einternational hospitality company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in international disputes related to hotel properties in Mexico, Chile, Brazil, Korea and Guam.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eKhan Resources Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the jurisdictional phase of an Energy Charter Treaty arbitration (including contract and investment law claims) against Mongolia concerning a Uranium mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean Asian electronics company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICC arbitration against another Asian electronics company in dispute related to patent license agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea multilateral, quasi-governmental entity\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ad hoc arbitration under UNCITRAL Rules in a dispute with an Asian supplier.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Brazilian product manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against U.S. distributor in ICDR arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Brazilian product manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against U.S. joint-venture party in arbitration under the JAMS International Arbitration Rules.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained arbitral award for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Brazilian product distributor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in international arbitration (ICDR) after multiple hearing days, multiple expert witnesses and multiple languages in connection with complex claims, counterclaims and jurisdictional issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Brazilian claiman\u003c/strong\u003et in enforcement action in the United States under the Panama Convention of an arbitral award rendered by a tribunal in an arbitration seated in Brazil.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained dismissal on jurisdictional grounds of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean ICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;commenced against client,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean Eastern European governmental entity,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;seeking over $40 million in damages for breach of contract and related claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEastern European government\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in parallel proceedings before two international arbitral institutions.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained separate arbitral awards against telecommunications companies in two West Africa countries on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean international voice and data communications company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ad hoc arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Rules.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean international voice and data communications company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two separate ICDR proceedings against South American telecommunications companies; obtained favorable settlements for client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of investor in case under NAFTA against one of the member states for violations of NAFTA and international law in connection with a mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defeated anti-suit injunction action brought against client,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea South American corporation,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;seeking to enjoin the client from proceeding with an action in South America.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePresident of arbitral tribunal in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean ICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;involving breach of contract and related claims between two Caribbean-based companies and their North American joint venture partner.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePresident of arbitral tribunal in between\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean ICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between Asian manufacturer of digital devices against North American reseller seeking amounts allegedly owed under supplier agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-arbitrator in multiparty dispute under\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eICDR Rules\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;concerning claims to respective interests in an online gaming business.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-arbitrator in dispute between a South American party and an Australian party under\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eICDR Rules\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;related to breach of contract and related claims concerning shipments of coal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSole arbitrator in arbitration under\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe AAA Commercial Rules\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between a South American company and a North American company concerning breach of contract and related claims arising out of joint venture for the purchase and sale of pig iron.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSole arbitrator in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between Asian manufacturer of office supplies and North American purchaser involving claims for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSole arbitrator in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCDR arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between a South American company and a North American company concerning breach of contract and related claims for failure to procure multiple performances in South America by internationally renowned recording artist.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eMediator in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ereal estate dispute\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between North American- and Caribbean-based company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSole Arbitrator in a dispute under the AAA Commercial Rules, administered by the ICDR, related to alleged breach of contract related to commission payments under referral agreement for raising financing. (Finance)\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":72}]},"expertise":[{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":4,"guid":"4.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":6,"guid":"6.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":104,"guid":"104.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":970,"guid":"970.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":112,"guid":"112.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":114,"guid":"114.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1188,"guid":"1188.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1233,"guid":"1233.smart_tags","index":13,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1270,"guid":"1270.smart_tags","index":14,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":132,"guid":"132.capabilities","index":15,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Burnett","nick_name":"Harry","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Henry","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2442,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":null,"is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"1989-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Who's Who Legal: Mining 2024","detail":"WWL"},{"title":"Inclusion in the 30th edition of The Best Lawyers in America® in International Arbitration - Commercial","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®"},{"title":"Chambers Brazil","detail":"2022"},{"title":"A Global Perspective: M\u0026A Deals and Disputes Heading into 2022","detail":"Berkeley Research Group’s Publication, 2022"},{"title":"“He understands client service, how different cultures work, is always on top of the case and is easy to interact with.\"","detail":"Chambers Global 2022"},{"title":"Who’s Who Legal: Oil \u0026 GAS","detail":"GAR"},{"title":"Who’s Who Legal: Energy","detail":"GAR"},{"title":"Who’s Who Legal: Thought Leaders – Arbitration","detail":"GAR"},{"title":"Leading Individual","detail":"Legal 500 Latin America 2022"},{"title":"Named a leading lawyer for International Arbitration by The Latin American Corporate Counsel Association","detail":"LACCA"},{"title":"International Arbitration","detail":"Chambers Global"},{"title":"\"He is a tough negotiator and he helped us get a really great deal.\"","detail":"Chambers USA"},{"title":"\"He knows how to fight, how to analyze the case as a whole and how to go into detail.\"","detail":"Chambers Latin America"},{"title":"He has \"invaluable expertise,\" \"was really exceptional,\" and \"really led the way...\"","detail":"Chambers Latin America"},{"title":"\"Henry Burnett has a long experience and good reputation in the region.\"","detail":"Latin Lawyer 250"},{"title":"The Legal 500 Latin America","detail":""},{"title":"The International Who's Who of Oil \u0026 Gas Lawyers","detail":""},{"title":"The International Who's Who of Energy Lawyers","detail":""}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/henry-g-harry-burnett-1952721b/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eHarry Burnett focuses on international commercial and investor-state arbitration matters, along with general domestic and international litigation. A partner in our International Arbitration practice, Harry represents clients in a broad array of international disputes and frequently serves as an arbitrator in international disputes.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith more than 25 years of litigation and arbitration experience, he represents clients in arbitration of international commercial disputes under rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), JAMS International and the CPR International Institute for Conflict Prevention \u0026amp; Resolution, and in investor-state arbitrations under the rules of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the ICSID Additional Facility, the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the ICC related to claims under bilateral investment treaties, the Energy Charter Treaty, multilateral investment instruments and local investment laws.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition, Harry frequently serves as a mediator as well as arbitrator in international disputes, whether as sole arbitrator, party-appointed arbitrator or chair.\u0026nbsp; He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHarry has been ranked in C\u003cem\u003ehambers Global,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers USA,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eChambers Latin America\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u003cem\u003e Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e for International Arbitration\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e He has also been recognized by \u003cem\u003eThe International Who\u0026rsquo;s Who of Oil \u0026amp; Gas Lawyers\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eThe International Who\u0026rsquo;s Who of Energy Lawyers and is an Approved Leading Private Practitioner in Arbitration \u0026ndash; Latin American Corporate Counsel Association\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA frequent speaker and author, Harry is fluent in English, Spanish and Portuguese.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND ILLINOIS; AND\u0026nbsp;FLORIDA\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting claimant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSouth American Silver Ltd.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a UNCITRAL arbitration brought under the UK-Bolivia bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns a silver, indium and gallium mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting claimant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eThe Renco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a UNCITRAL Arbitration against Peru brought under the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement. The dispute concerns a copper mining project and poly-metallic smelting operation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting claimant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eBear Creek Mining Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Peru in the first case brought under the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement. The dispute concerns a silver mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Asian mining company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a potential investor-state arbitration against a Latin American state concerning a large iron ore mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea state-owned entity\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multibillion dollar ICC arbitration in a construction dispute relating to expansion of an oil refinery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Latin American pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration related to claims arising out of the sale of the company to an international pharmaceutical company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ei\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003enternational telecommunications provide\u003c/strong\u003er in ICC arbitration involving breach of contract and fraud claims concerning a master services IT agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean international telecommunications provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ad hoc arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules concerning breach of contract claims and counterclaims for monies allegedly owed for termination of international call traffic.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean Argentine client\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICDR arbitration against South American gas distribution company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003einternational hospitality company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in international disputes related to hotel properties in Mexico, Chile, Brazil, Korea and Guam.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eKhan Resources Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the jurisdictional phase of an Energy Charter Treaty arbitration (including contract and investment law claims) against Mongolia concerning a Uranium mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean Asian electronics company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICC arbitration against another Asian electronics company in dispute related to patent license agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea multilateral, quasi-governmental entity\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ad hoc arbitration under UNCITRAL Rules in a dispute with an Asian supplier.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Brazilian product manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against U.S. distributor in ICDR arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Brazilian product manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against U.S. joint-venture party in arbitration under the JAMS International Arbitration Rules.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained arbitral award for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Brazilian product distributor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in international arbitration (ICDR) after multiple hearing days, multiple expert witnesses and multiple languages in connection with complex claims, counterclaims and jurisdictional issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Brazilian claiman\u003c/strong\u003et in enforcement action in the United States under the Panama Convention of an arbitral award rendered by a tribunal in an arbitration seated in Brazil.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained dismissal on jurisdictional grounds of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean ICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;commenced against client,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean Eastern European governmental entity,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;seeking over $40 million in damages for breach of contract and related claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEastern European government\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in parallel proceedings before two international arbitral institutions.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained separate arbitral awards against telecommunications companies in two West Africa countries on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean international voice and data communications company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ad hoc arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Rules.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean international voice and data communications company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two separate ICDR proceedings against South American telecommunications companies; obtained favorable settlements for client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresentation of investor in case under NAFTA against one of the member states for violations of NAFTA and international law in connection with a mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defeated anti-suit injunction action brought against client,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea South American corporation,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;seeking to enjoin the client from proceeding with an action in South America.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePresident of arbitral tribunal in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean ICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;involving breach of contract and related claims between two Caribbean-based companies and their North American joint venture partner.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePresident of arbitral tribunal in between\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean ICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between Asian manufacturer of digital devices against North American reseller seeking amounts allegedly owed under supplier agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-arbitrator in multiparty dispute under\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eICDR Rules\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;concerning claims to respective interests in an online gaming business.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-arbitrator in dispute between a South American party and an Australian party under\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eICDR Rules\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;related to breach of contract and related claims concerning shipments of coal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSole arbitrator in arbitration under\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe AAA Commercial Rules\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between a South American company and a North American company concerning breach of contract and related claims arising out of joint venture for the purchase and sale of pig iron.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSole arbitrator in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eICC arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between Asian manufacturer of office supplies and North American purchaser involving claims for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSole arbitrator in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCDR arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between a South American company and a North American company concerning breach of contract and related claims for failure to procure multiple performances in South America by internationally renowned recording artist.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eMediator in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ereal estate dispute\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;between North American- and Caribbean-based company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSole Arbitrator in a dispute under the AAA Commercial Rules, administered by the ICDR, related to alleged breach of contract related to commission payments under referral agreement for raising financing. (Finance)\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Who's Who Legal: Mining 2024","detail":"WWL"},{"title":"Inclusion in the 30th edition of The Best Lawyers in America® in International Arbitration - Commercial","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®"},{"title":"Chambers Brazil","detail":"2022"},{"title":"A Global Perspective: M\u0026A Deals and Disputes Heading into 2022","detail":"Berkeley Research Group’s Publication, 2022"},{"title":"“He understands client service, how different cultures work, is always on top of the case and is easy to interact with.\"","detail":"Chambers Global 2022"},{"title":"Who’s Who Legal: Oil \u0026 GAS","detail":"GAR"},{"title":"Who’s Who Legal: Energy","detail":"GAR"},{"title":"Who’s Who Legal: Thought Leaders – Arbitration","detail":"GAR"},{"title":"Leading Individual","detail":"Legal 500 Latin America 2022"},{"title":"Named a leading lawyer for International Arbitration by The Latin American Corporate Counsel Association","detail":"LACCA"},{"title":"International Arbitration","detail":"Chambers Global"},{"title":"\"He is a tough negotiator and he helped us get a really great deal.\"","detail":"Chambers USA"},{"title":"\"He knows how to fight, how to analyze the case as a whole and how to go into detail.\"","detail":"Chambers Latin America"},{"title":"He has \"invaluable expertise,\" \"was really exceptional,\" and \"really led the way...\"","detail":"Chambers Latin America"},{"title":"\"Henry Burnett has a long experience and good reputation in the region.\"","detail":"Latin Lawyer 250"},{"title":"The Legal 500 Latin America","detail":""},{"title":"The International Who's Who of Oil \u0026 Gas Lawyers","detail":""},{"title":"The International Who's Who of Energy Lawyers","detail":""}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":8611}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:52:19.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:52:19.000Z","searchable_text":"Burnett{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Who's Who Legal: Mining 2024\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"WWL\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Inclusion in the 30th edition of The Best Lawyers in America® in International Arbitration - Commercial\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Brazil\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"A Global Perspective: M\u0026amp;A Deals and Disputes Heading into 2022\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Berkeley Research Group’s Publication, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“He understands client service, how different cultures work, is always on top of the case and is easy to interact with.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Who’s Who Legal: Oil \u0026amp; GAS\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"GAR\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Who’s Who Legal: Energy\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"GAR\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Who’s Who Legal: Thought Leaders – Arbitration\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"GAR\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leading Individual\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Latin America 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a leading lawyer for International Arbitration by The Latin American Corporate Counsel Association\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LACCA\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"International Arbitration\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"He is a tough negotiator and he helped us get a really great deal.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"He knows how to fight, how to analyze the case as a whole and how to go into detail.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Latin America\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"He has \\\"invaluable expertise,\\\" \\\"was really exceptional,\\\" and \\\"really led the way...\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Latin America\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Henry Burnett has a long experience and good reputation in the region.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Latin Lawyer 250\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"The Legal 500 Latin America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"The International Who's Who of Oil \u0026amp; Gas Lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"The International Who's Who of Energy Lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"\"}{{ FIELD }}Representing claimant South American Silver Ltd. in a UNCITRAL arbitration brought under the UK-Bolivia bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns a silver, indium and gallium mining project.{{ FIELD }}Representing claimant The Renco Group in a UNCITRAL Arbitration against Peru brought under the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement. The dispute concerns a copper mining project and poly-metallic smelting operation.{{ FIELD }}Representing claimant Bear Creek Mining Company in an ICSID arbitration against Peru in the first case brought under the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement. The dispute concerns a silver mining project.{{ FIELD }}Representing a Asian mining company in a potential investor-state arbitration against a Latin American state concerning a large iron ore mining project.{{ FIELD }}Representing a state-owned entity in a multibillion dollar ICC arbitration in a construction dispute relating to expansion of an oil refinery.{{ FIELD }}Representing a Latin American pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration related to claims arising out of the sale of the company to an international pharmaceutical company.{{ FIELD }}Representing an international telecommunications provider in ICC arbitration involving breach of contract and fraud claims concerning a master services IT agreement.{{ FIELD }}Representation of an international telecommunications provider in ad hoc arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules concerning breach of contract claims and counterclaims for monies allegedly owed for termination of international call traffic.{{ FIELD }}Representation of an Argentine client in ICDR arbitration against South American gas distribution company.{{ FIELD }}Representation of an international hospitality company in international disputes related to hotel properties in Mexico, Chile, Brazil, Korea and Guam.{{ FIELD }}Representation of Khan Resources Inc. in the jurisdictional phase of an Energy Charter Treaty arbitration (including contract and investment law claims) against Mongolia concerning a Uranium mining project.{{ FIELD }}Representation of an Asian electronics company in ICC arbitration against another Asian electronics company in dispute related to patent license agreement.{{ FIELD }}Representation of a multilateral, quasi-governmental entity in ad hoc arbitration under UNCITRAL Rules in a dispute with an Asian supplier.{{ FIELD }}Representation of a Brazilian product manufacturer against U.S. distributor in ICDR arbitration.{{ FIELD }}Representation of a Brazilian product manufacturer against U.S. joint-venture party in arbitration under the JAMS International Arbitration Rules.{{ FIELD }}Obtained arbitral award for a Brazilian product distributor in international arbitration (ICDR) after multiple hearing days, multiple expert witnesses and multiple languages in connection with complex claims, counterclaims and jurisdictional issues.{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented a Brazilian claimant in enforcement action in the United States under the Panama Convention of an arbitral award rendered by a tribunal in an arbitration seated in Brazil.{{ FIELD }}Obtained dismissal on jurisdictional grounds of an ICC arbitration commenced against client, an Eastern European governmental entity, seeking over $40 million in damages for breach of contract and related claims.{{ FIELD }}Representation of an Eastern European government in parallel proceedings before two international arbitral institutions.{{ FIELD }}Obtained separate arbitral awards against telecommunications companies in two West Africa countries on behalf of an international voice and data communications company in ad hoc arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Rules.{{ FIELD }}Representation of an international voice and data communications company in two separate ICDR proceedings against South American telecommunications companies; obtained favorable settlements for client.{{ FIELD }}Representation of investor in case under NAFTA against one of the member states for violations of NAFTA and international law in connection with a mining project.{{ FIELD }}Successfully defeated anti-suit injunction action brought against client, a South American corporation, seeking to enjoin the client from proceeding with an action in South America.{{ FIELD }}President of arbitral tribunal in an ICC arbitration involving breach of contract and related claims between two Caribbean-based companies and their North American joint venture partner.{{ FIELD }}President of arbitral tribunal in between an ICC arbitration between Asian manufacturer of digital devices against North American reseller seeking amounts allegedly owed under supplier agreement.{{ FIELD }}Co-arbitrator in multiparty dispute under the ICDR Rules concerning claims to respective interests in an online gaming business.{{ FIELD }}Co-arbitrator in dispute between a South American party and an Australian party under the ICDR Rules related to breach of contract and related claims concerning shipments of coal.{{ FIELD }}Sole arbitrator in arbitration under the AAA Commercial Rules between a South American company and a North American company concerning breach of contract and related claims arising out of joint venture for the purchase and sale of pig iron.{{ FIELD }}Sole arbitrator in ICC arbitration between Asian manufacturer of office supplies and North American purchaser involving claims for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment.{{ FIELD }}Sole arbitrator in ICDR arbitration between a South American company and a North American company concerning breach of contract and related claims for failure to procure multiple performances in South America by internationally renowned recording artist.{{ FIELD }}Mediator in a real estate dispute between North American- and Caribbean-based company.{{ FIELD }}Sole Arbitrator in a dispute under the AAA Commercial Rules, administered by the ICDR, related to alleged breach of contract related to commission payments under referral agreement for raising financing. (Finance){{ FIELD }}Harry Burnett focuses on international commercial and investor-state arbitration matters, along with general domestic and international litigation. A partner in our International Arbitration practice, Harry represents clients in a broad array of international disputes and frequently serves as an arbitrator in international disputes.\nWith more than 25 years of litigation and arbitration experience, he represents clients in arbitration of international commercial disputes under rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), JAMS International and the CPR International Institute for Conflict Prevention \u0026amp; Resolution, and in investor-state arbitrations under the rules of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the ICSID Additional Facility, the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the ICC related to claims under bilateral investment treaties, the Energy Charter Treaty, multilateral investment instruments and local investment laws.\nIn addition, Harry frequently serves as a mediator as well as arbitrator in international disputes, whether as sole arbitrator, party-appointed arbitrator or chair.  He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.\nHarry has been ranked in Chambers Global, Chambers USA, Chambers Latin America and Legal 500 for International Arbitration. He has also been recognized by The International Who’s Who of Oil \u0026amp; Gas Lawyers and The International Who’s Who of Energy Lawyers and is an Approved Leading Private Practitioner in Arbitration – Latin American Corporate Counsel Association\nA frequent speaker and author, Harry is fluent in English, Spanish and Portuguese.\n \nADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND ILLINOIS; AND FLORIDA Henry Burnett Partner Who's Who Legal: Mining 2024 WWL Inclusion in the 30th edition of The Best Lawyers in America® in International Arbitration - Commercial The Best Lawyers in America® Chambers Brazil 2022 A Global Perspective: M\u0026amp;A Deals and Disputes Heading into 2022 Berkeley Research Group’s Publication, 2022 “He understands client service, how different cultures work, is always on top of the case and is easy to interact with.\" Chambers Global 2022 Who’s Who Legal: Oil \u0026amp; GAS GAR Who’s Who Legal: Energy GAR Who’s Who Legal: Thought Leaders – Arbitration GAR Leading Individual Legal 500 Latin America 2022 Named a leading lawyer for International Arbitration by The Latin American Corporate Counsel Association LACCA International Arbitration Chambers Global \"He is a tough negotiator and he helped us get a really great deal.\" Chambers USA \"He knows how to fight, how to analyze the case as a whole and how to go into detail.\" Chambers Latin America He has \"invaluable expertise,\" \"was really exceptional,\" and \"really led the way...\" Chambers Latin America \"Henry Burnett has a long experience and good reputation in the region.\" Latin Lawyer 250 The Legal 500 Latin America  The International Who's Who of Oil \u0026amp; Gas Lawyers  The International Who's Who of Energy Lawyers  University of Notre Dame Notre Dame Law School Vanderbilt University Vanderbilt University School of Law Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Florida Illinois New Jersey New York Approved Leading Private Practitioner in Arbitration – Latin American Corporate Counsel Association Director, Brazilian-American Chamber of Commerce, New York Visiting Professor, \"Investor-State Arbitration\", Vanderbilt Law School Director, Miami International Arbitration Society, 2023 Adjunct Professor, University of Miami School of Law Representing claimant South American Silver Ltd. in a UNCITRAL arbitration brought under the UK-Bolivia bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns a silver, indium and gallium mining project. Representing claimant The Renco Group in a UNCITRAL Arbitration against Peru brought under the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement. The dispute concerns a copper mining project and poly-metallic smelting operation. Representing claimant Bear Creek Mining Company in an ICSID arbitration against Peru in the first case brought under the Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement. The dispute concerns a silver mining project. Representing a Asian mining company in a potential investor-state arbitration against a Latin American state concerning a large iron ore mining project. Representing a state-owned entity in a multibillion dollar ICC arbitration in a construction dispute relating to expansion of an oil refinery. Representing a Latin American pharmaceutical company in an ICC arbitration related to claims arising out of the sale of the company to an international pharmaceutical company. Representing an international telecommunications provider in ICC arbitration involving breach of contract and fraud claims concerning a master services IT agreement. Representation of an international telecommunications provider in ad hoc arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules concerning breach of contract claims and counterclaims for monies allegedly owed for termination of international call traffic. Representation of an Argentine client in ICDR arbitration against South American gas distribution company. Representation of an international hospitality company in international disputes related to hotel properties in Mexico, Chile, Brazil, Korea and Guam. Representation of Khan Resources Inc. in the jurisdictional phase of an Energy Charter Treaty arbitration (including contract and investment law claims) against Mongolia concerning a Uranium mining project. Representation of an Asian electronics company in ICC arbitration against another Asian electronics company in dispute related to patent license agreement. Representation of a multilateral, quasi-governmental entity in ad hoc arbitration under UNCITRAL Rules in a dispute with an Asian supplier. Representation of a Brazilian product manufacturer against U.S. distributor in ICDR arbitration. Representation of a Brazilian product manufacturer against U.S. joint-venture party in arbitration under the JAMS International Arbitration Rules. Obtained arbitral award for a Brazilian product distributor in international arbitration (ICDR) after multiple hearing days, multiple expert witnesses and multiple languages in connection with complex claims, counterclaims and jurisdictional issues. Successfully represented a Brazilian claimant in enforcement action in the United States under the Panama Convention of an arbitral award rendered by a tribunal in an arbitration seated in Brazil. Obtained dismissal on jurisdictional grounds of an ICC arbitration commenced against client, an Eastern European governmental entity, seeking over $40 million in damages for breach of contract and related claims. Representation of an Eastern European government in parallel proceedings before two international arbitral institutions. Obtained separate arbitral awards against telecommunications companies in two West Africa countries on behalf of an international voice and data communications company in ad hoc arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Rules. Representation of an international voice and data communications company in two separate ICDR proceedings against South American telecommunications companies; obtained favorable settlements for client. Representation of investor in case under NAFTA against one of the member states for violations of NAFTA and international law in connection with a mining project. Successfully defeated anti-suit injunction action brought against client, a South American corporation, seeking to enjoin the client from proceeding with an action in South America. President of arbitral tribunal in an ICC arbitration involving breach of contract and related claims between two Caribbean-based companies and their North American joint venture partner. President of arbitral tribunal in between an ICC arbitration between Asian manufacturer of digital devices against North American reseller seeking amounts allegedly owed under supplier agreement. Co-arbitrator in multiparty dispute under the ICDR Rules concerning claims to respective interests in an online gaming business. Co-arbitrator in dispute between a South American party and an Australian party under the ICDR Rules related to breach of contract and related claims concerning shipments of coal. Sole arbitrator in arbitration under the AAA Commercial Rules between a South American company and a North American company concerning breach of contract and related claims arising out of joint venture for the purchase and sale of pig iron. Sole arbitrator in ICC arbitration between Asian manufacturer of office supplies and North American purchaser involving claims for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment. Sole arbitrator in ICDR arbitration between a South American company and a North American company concerning breach of contract and related claims for failure to procure multiple performances in South America by internationally renowned recording artist. Mediator in a real estate dispute between North American- and Caribbean-based company. Sole Arbitrator in a dispute under the AAA Commercial Rules, administered by the ICDR, related to alleged breach of contract related to commission payments under referral agreement for raising financing. (Finance)","searchable_name":"Henry Burnett (Harry)","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":436398,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3099,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRuth Byrne KC specialises in international commercial and investment disputes, with a particular focus on energy, life sciences, fraud and enforcement.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRuth has advised clients on disputes arising in multiple jurisdictions and has appeared as counsel in 100+ arbitrations as well sitting regularly as arbitrator.\u0026nbsp; She also appears frequently in the English High Court, in particular in proceedings in support of arbitration, as well as more generally in international commercial litigation.\u0026nbsp; Recognised in several legal directories over the years, Ruth is described as \u0026ldquo;superb\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;an exceptional litigator\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;an excellent advocate wise beyond her years\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;a persistent, credible case builder\u0026rdquo;.\u0026nbsp; Clients note her \u0026ldquo;ability to marshal enormous doses of information, retain key facts, be diligent and patient, and follow through as if it were her personal matter \u0026ndash; her analysis is always based on facts, the law and the cultural sensibilities of the jurisdictions involved\u0026rdquo; and that she is \u0026ldquo;very strategic in her thinking and able to pare down arguments to what's important\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRuth writes and speaks regularly on a variety of international arbitration topics. \u0026nbsp;Ruth is a member of the ICC UK Selection Subcommittee, the Delos ROAP faculty and a former YIAG Co-Chair.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"ruth-byrne","email":"rbyrne@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnergy and Related Areas\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eArbitration\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;European buyer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of substantial\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egas pricing disputes\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;with one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest suppliers of LNG.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emultinational oil, gas and petrochemical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eemergency ICC arbitration proceedings\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to restrain a counter-party from acquiring substantial gas assets alone and in breach of exclusive joint bidding arrangements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejoint venture company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a significant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLNG\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;dispute arising from repeated failures to supply by a seller and involving allegations of misrepresentation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean asset management firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute with the buyers of its of oil and gas assets in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCentral America\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;regarding contingent consideration payable for those assets.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea trading company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two multi billion dollar arbitrations regarding failures in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLNG\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;supply during the COVID 19 pandemic.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an arbitration in Nigeria on a nine-figure dispute regarding\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eallocation of hydrocarbon product\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eat a handling facility.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil and gas trader\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against claims as to the alleged existence of a contract to supply\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLNG\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;involving questions of authority and custom and practice in the LNG sector.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major gas supplier\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eon the applicability of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eforce majeure\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;provisions under its long term LNG sales agreements and potential gas pricing disputes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor Asian energy company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration regarding the break-down of its relationship with a minority partner under a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejoint operating agreement\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eindependent oil company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute with its\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLNG off-taker\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eregarding quantities to be delivered under their agreed annual delivery program and a long-term sale and purchase agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNorth American oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its rights of first refusal upon the sale of rights in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoilfield concessions\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eenergy sector contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in LCIA proceedings regarding allegations of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003econtractual mistake\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the context of indemnity obligations of a major equipment supplier.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multi-billion dollar proceedings regarding failure by a co-venturer to pay its share of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eexploration and development costs\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;under a joint operating agreement and interference with recovery of those costs from government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etwo private equity funds\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICC proceedings against an African government regarding\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eforce majeure\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;events that led to the failure of a substantial renewables project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading global provider of energy equipment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against claims that milestone payments due against supply of power plant equipment were\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eunenforceable penalties\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas drilling contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings to recover unpaid contract sums from its former\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elocal partner in Nigeria\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor Asian energy company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute with an international commodities company regarding the impact of\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;sanctions\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on obligations to deliver LNG.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in relation to disputed payments for the sale of a significant asset in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLatin America\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading global provider of energy equipment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings regarding its alleged warranty liability for with respect to equipment supplied to an Eastern European\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epower plant\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration regarding the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edefective design of a floating offshore unit\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003elocated offshore South America and on related\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einsurance\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration regarding claims of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emisrepresentation and duress\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;by a former consultant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its contractual rights with regard to the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ereview of the contract price under a long-term LNG sales agreement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein the Asian market.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in relation to the termination of a longstanding\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eshareholder relationship\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Eastern Europe and early resolution of potential LCIA arbitration proceedings in that regard.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading global provider of energy equipment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SCC arbitration under Russian law regarding liability for the supply of spare parts to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epower stations\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEmployer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in urgent ICC proceedings to prevent its contractor\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;injuncting\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;it from drawing down on\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eperformance guarantees\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a chemical plant construction project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration regarding the existence and value of an alleged minority interest in two\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eproduction sharing contracts\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of multi-million dollar disputes under the UNCITRAL Rules arising out of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efailed joint venture\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Kazakhstan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration regarding liability for tax in connection with its sale of an\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;interest in an oil field\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Western Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute under a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejoint operating agreement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ewith respect to North Sea assets and its entitlement as operator to payment of certain costs from its co-venturers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNorthern European investor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its rights under a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebilateral investment treaty\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;with respect to treatment of its investment in an agro-energy project in sub-Saharan Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edrilling contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on a dispute with its South East Asian employer regarding\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etermination rights\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand payments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an expedited LCIA arbitration regarding the applicability of\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;pre-emption rights under a joint operating agreement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eupon the sale of an interest in an oil asset.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003econstruction company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in expedited LCIA proceedings regarding disputed entitlements to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edraw down on performance guarantees\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a project to construct oil processing facilities and civil unrest.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an arbitration under the UNCITRAL Rules with regard to claims for breaches of a drilling contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multi-billion dollar contentious proceedings regarding oil and gas rights in East Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute with its\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edrilling contractor\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eregarding fees for stacking and/or termination.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003econstruction company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration regarding a failed road-building project in West Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eproperty developer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its investment treaty rights in relation to a failed project in West Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior international oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its rights in a dispute regarding allegedly unpaid cash calls under a joint operating agreement with an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil major\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor gas infrastructure company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on disputes regarding failure to pay sums due under construction and operation contracts on a project in Central Asia and related\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebank guarantee rights and obligations\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egroup of Kuwaiti investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multi-million dollar dispute under the ICC Rules regarding a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efailed joint venture\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the oil and gas sector in Kazakhstan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEastern European engineering company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration regarding its lender\u0026rsquo;s disputed rights to execute on various\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eguarantee\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003earrangements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor shipping company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ead hoc\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003earbitration proceedings seated in London for the return of a down-payment on a major acquisition that was frustrated by\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esanctions\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003estate entity\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against claims brought before the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCommon Court of Justice and Arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;by an international construction company regarding the delayed construction of a hotel in North Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCommercial Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Commercial Court proceedings regarding the interpretation of the contract for the sale of substantial European assets and the consideration payable for those assets (\u003cem\u003eConocoPhillips v. Chrysaor E\u0026amp;P Limited\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egroup of Saudi investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings in the Channel Islands with respect to a failed real estate project and involving alleged breaches of fiduciary duty.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Commercial Court proceedings involving allegations of fraud and duress and subsequent Court of Appeal proceedings on related claims regarding contractual interpretation of termination rights (\u003cem\u003eMonde Petroleum SA v WesternZagros Limited\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[2016] EWHC 1472 (Comm) and [2018] EWCA Civ 25).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading global provider of energy equipment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings regarding liability for a series of unplanned outages at a UK power plant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFraud, Enforcement, Challenges to Awards and Asset Tracing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUnion Fenosa Gas\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in successful proceedings for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003erecognition of its USD 2+ billion ICSID award\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Egypt, involving issues of sovereign immunity and the correct approach to recognition of ICSID awards in England \u0026amp; Wales (\u003cem\u003eUnion Fenosa Gas v Arab Republic of Egypt\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[2020] EWHC 1723 (Comm))\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejudgment creditor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of hearings to recover a USD 2+ billion judgment debt resulting from a substantial international fraud and involving applications maintain/extend\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efreezing injunction relief, including by the exercise of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChabra\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;jurisdiction\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethree defendants\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to claims for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emisselling\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of certain financial instruments/conspiracy and successfully challenging the jurisdiction of the English courts on their behalf (\u003cem\u003eTsareva v Ananyev\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;[2019] EWHC 2414 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvising a well-known\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emultinational\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on proceedings in New York, London and Central Africa on disputes arising from alleged\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebribery and corruption\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a major power project in sub-Saharan Africa.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etrading company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;freezing injunction\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and substantive proceedings in the Commercial Court regarding allegedly fraudulent transactions in West Africa.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor shipping company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in five UNCITRAL arbitrations and English Commercial Court proceedings to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003erecover the proceeds of a fraudulent scheme\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting the defendant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esovereign wealth fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a billion-dollar claim in the English Commercial Court arising out of alleged breach of contract, duress and misrepresentation, in particular successfully overturning summary judgment at an appeal hearing before Burton J (Catalyst Managerial Services v Libya Africa Investment Portfolio, unreported).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe Claimant\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in claims brought in the English Commercial Court for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efraudulent misrepresentation\u003c/strong\u003e, in particular appearing at hearings securing a worldwide freezing injunction and to resist an application for security for costs (Terra Raf Trans Traiding Ltd v Aidar Assaubayev \u0026amp; Ors, unreported).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending an oil and gas company against the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eattempted appeal under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of an arbitral award concerning a failed joint venture in Kazakhstan.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAppearing in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Court on jurisdictional issues\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand to secure evidence with respect to a London-seated international arbitration (\u003cem\u003eSilver Dry Bulk Company Limited v Homer Hulbert Maritime Company Limited\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[2017] EWHC 44 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAppearing in the Commercial Court on a challenge to an award under\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSection 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand on an application for security in related court proceedings (\u003cem\u003eMonde Petroleum SA v Westernzagros Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;[2015] EWHC 67 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on a challenge to an arbitral award brought in the English Commercial Court under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and related security applications (PT Transportasi Gas Indonesia v ConocoPhillips (Grissik) Ltd [2016] EWHC 2834 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emining company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in English court proceedings to enforce a USD 1 billion + award against a Latin American State.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAppearing in the Commercial Court to secure an order for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003erecognition of an ICC award\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;for damages arising from a failed joint venture in Nigeria.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor shipping company\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eresisting the attempted appeal of an arbitral award under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 before the Commercial Court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMoldovan investor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings to enforce a USD half billion dollar award in the Commercial Court and related applications for security (\u003cem\u003eStati v Kazakhstan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;[2015] EWHC 2542 (Comm); [2017] EWHC 1348 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending an oil and gas company against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eworldwide freezing order\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eapplications in the Commercial Court during the pendency of a related arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvising an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAfrican investment fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on strategy to recover substantial sums owed by a loan debtor in Nigeria.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eIndian car manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to resist proceedings brought in the English Commercial Court by its former U.S. distributor to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003echallenge and appeal\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;a final UNCITRAL arbitration award in its favour under Sections 68 and 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996, including successful applications for security for costs and in the amount of the award.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting the claimant,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einternational construction company\u003c/strong\u003e, in multi-jurisdictional proceedings to enforce an ICC arbitration award against an African State, including appearing to secure third party debt orders in the English Commercial Court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings to enforce an arbitral award under the SIAC Rules before the English Court and to obtain\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eurgent worldwide freezing order relief\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in support of that enforcement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eaward creditor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings to execute the award against assets of a South East Asian State and related freezing injunction proceedings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egroup of investors from the Middle East\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings in the English and Cayman Islands Courts involving claims for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLife Sciences/Product Liability/IP and Related Areas\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eArbitration\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian life sciences company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ead hoc\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;arbitration regarding alleged breaches of contractual prohibitions on distribution of its pharmaceuticals in certain territories and related allegations of duress and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edrilling contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in LCIA proceedings regarding the apportionment of liability for alleged patent infringement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor engineering company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on several disputes regarding allegedly patented technology in the ship-building sector and alleged liability for defects in that technology.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian life sciences company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an UNCITRAL arbitration regarding exclusive development and distribution rights with respect to pharmaceutical products.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epharmaceuticals company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute regarding the break-down of its relationship for the joint development of cancer treatments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eIndian manufacturing company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICC arbitration proceedings seated in New Delhi regarding liability for allegedly defective electronic components and related proceedings with insurers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ewell-known multinational\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in LCIA proceedings regarding the alleged breach of a distributorship agreement for medical products in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esports federation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in relation to claims against a competitor for anti-competitive behaviour and interference with contractual rights.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emanufacturing and retail business\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of LCIA arbitration proceedings seated in London and related litigation in Italy arising from an M\u0026amp;A transaction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLatin American company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in LCIA proceedings arising out of the alleged breach of an agreement for the distributorship of books and other publications.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSaudi company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multi-million dollar ICC arbitration claim for breach of a publishing licence.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLitigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einternational manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of claims regarding alleged defects in its household products.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emedical device manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in English court proceedings regarding alleged breach of supply contracts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einternational pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multi-jurisdictional proceedings regarding alleged patent infringement (\u003cem\u003eOtsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd v GW Pharma Ltd \u0026amp; Anor\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[2022] EWCA Civ 1462).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emedical device multinational\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of proceedings regarding alleged product liability with respect to its surgical devices.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esmall business\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against multiple claims of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebreach of copyright\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with web-based imagery.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMiddle Eastern technology company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in English court proceedings to restrain its counterparty from drawing down on a bank guarantee.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArbitral Appointments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an arbitration regarding the alleged under-delivery of contractual quantities of gas and wrongful retention of advance payments against delivery.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eActing as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSole Arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on a licensing dispute regarding fees allegedly due with respect to the use of TV trademark.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSole Arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on a dispute regarding the remedies applicable upon a buyer\u0026rsquo;s failure to pay for and take delivery of a commodity during volatile market conditions arising during the pandemic.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eof an arbitral tribunal on an LCIA arbitration regarding the break-down of contractual arrangements for the sale of goods to an Indian buyer.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eon an arbitration regarding the breakdown of a tv channel joint venture in Eastern Europe.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an LCIA arbitration seated in London between North American and Sub-Saharan African entities regarding wire transfer services.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eco-arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on two LCIA disputes seated in London regarding the alleged breach of settlement terms and involving challenges to the Tribunal\u0026rsquo;s jurisdiction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esole arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an LCIA arbitration seated in London in a dispute between a law firm and its former client regarding unpaid fees.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an ICC arbitration regarding a failed television joint venture in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eco-arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an ICC arbitration seated in Geneva regarding the failure of a real estate venture in London involving allegations of fraud and jurisdictional challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esole arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an ICC arbitration seated in London regarding the sale and purchase of commodities and alleged force majeure in connection with civil unrest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esole arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration seated in London under Illinois law in a dispute regarding alleged breach of exclusivity under a manufacturing contract involving applications for emergency relief.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esole arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration seated in London under English law concerning the quality of metals delivered under an international supply contract.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":163}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":38,"guid":"38.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":4,"guid":"4.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":128,"guid":"128.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Byrne","nick_name":"Ruth","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Ruth","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"M.D.","name_suffix":"K.C.","recognitions":[{"title":"\"highly experienced arbitration practitioner known for her prowess in the energy sector\" ","detail":"Chambers Global, 2023"},{"title":"\"highly adept at handling complex commercial and investment disputes in the energy space\" ","detail":"Chambers UK 2023"},{"title":"\"grasps the important stuff, and has a great collaborative work style – infinitely patient\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, 2023"},{"title":"\"Ruth Byrne is someone clients want to have in control of a case\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, 2023"},{"title":"\"popular among energy and life sciences sector clients\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, 2022"},{"title":"\"very easy to work with, very attentive ...incredibly practical in terms of how to achieve your goal\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2022; Chambers Global, 2022"},{"title":"\"a quick-thinking and effective oral advocate\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2022; Chambers Global, 2022"},{"title":"\"her analysis is always based on facts, the law and the cultural sensibilities of the jurisdictions involved\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, Civil Fraud, 2021"},{"title":"\"has the ability to marshal enormous doses of information...and follow through as if it were her personal matter..\"","detail":"Legal 500 UK, Civil Fraud, 2021"},{"title":"\"Ruth Byrne is an exceptional litigator and extremely calm in complex situations.\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, Commercial Litigation, 2021"},{"title":"\"She's an impressive clear thinker...She's very smart and experienced. She's excellent at what she does.\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2021; Chambers Global, 2021"},{"title":"\"The \"superb\" Ruth Byrne .. described as \"very strategic in her thinking..\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2020; Chambers Global, 2020"},{"title":"Clients appreciate her \"ability to cut through the nonsense and home in on the real issues.\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2019"},{"title":"\"An excellent advocate ... She will be a dominant character in the arbitration world for years to come\"","detail":"Who's Who Legal, Future Leaders - Arbitration 2017"},{"title":"\"Extremely bright, personable and diligent”","detail":"Chambers UK, 2016"},{"title":"\"Especially known for her expertise in energy-related disputes, and in court hearings regarding arbitration matters.\"","detail":"Chambers UK, 2016"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRuth Byrne KC specialises in international commercial and investment disputes, with a particular focus on energy, life sciences, fraud and enforcement.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRuth has advised clients on disputes arising in multiple jurisdictions and has appeared as counsel in 100+ arbitrations as well sitting regularly as arbitrator.\u0026nbsp; She also appears frequently in the English High Court, in particular in proceedings in support of arbitration, as well as more generally in international commercial litigation.\u0026nbsp; Recognised in several legal directories over the years, Ruth is described as \u0026ldquo;superb\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;an exceptional litigator\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;an excellent advocate wise beyond her years\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;a persistent, credible case builder\u0026rdquo;.\u0026nbsp; Clients note her \u0026ldquo;ability to marshal enormous doses of information, retain key facts, be diligent and patient, and follow through as if it were her personal matter \u0026ndash; her analysis is always based on facts, the law and the cultural sensibilities of the jurisdictions involved\u0026rdquo; and that she is \u0026ldquo;very strategic in her thinking and able to pare down arguments to what's important\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRuth writes and speaks regularly on a variety of international arbitration topics. \u0026nbsp;Ruth is a member of the ICC UK Selection Subcommittee, the Delos ROAP faculty and a former YIAG Co-Chair.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnergy and Related Areas\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eArbitration\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;European buyer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of substantial\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egas pricing disputes\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;with one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest suppliers of LNG.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActing for a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emultinational oil, gas and petrochemical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eemergency ICC arbitration proceedings\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to restrain a counter-party from acquiring substantial gas assets alone and in breach of exclusive joint bidding arrangements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejoint venture company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a significant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLNG\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;dispute arising from repeated failures to supply by a seller and involving allegations of misrepresentation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean asset management firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute with the buyers of its of oil and gas assets in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCentral America\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;regarding contingent consideration payable for those assets.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea trading company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two multi billion dollar arbitrations regarding failures in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLNG\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;supply during the COVID 19 pandemic.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an arbitration in Nigeria on a nine-figure dispute regarding\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eallocation of hydrocarbon product\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eat a handling facility.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil and gas trader\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against claims as to the alleged existence of a contract to supply\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLNG\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;involving questions of authority and custom and practice in the LNG sector.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major gas supplier\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eon the applicability of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eforce majeure\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;provisions under its long term LNG sales agreements and potential gas pricing disputes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor Asian energy company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration regarding the break-down of its relationship with a minority partner under a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejoint operating agreement\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eindependent oil company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute with its\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLNG off-taker\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eregarding quantities to be delivered under their agreed annual delivery program and a long-term sale and purchase agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNorth American oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its rights of first refusal upon the sale of rights in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoilfield concessions\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eenergy sector contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in LCIA proceedings regarding allegations of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003econtractual mistake\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the context of indemnity obligations of a major equipment supplier.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multi-billion dollar proceedings regarding failure by a co-venturer to pay its share of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eexploration and development costs\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;under a joint operating agreement and interference with recovery of those costs from government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etwo private equity funds\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICC proceedings against an African government regarding\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eforce majeure\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;events that led to the failure of a substantial renewables project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading global provider of energy equipment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against claims that milestone payments due against supply of power plant equipment were\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eunenforceable penalties\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas drilling contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings to recover unpaid contract sums from its former\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elocal partner in Nigeria\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor Asian energy company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute with an international commodities company regarding the impact of\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;sanctions\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on obligations to deliver LNG.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in relation to disputed payments for the sale of a significant asset in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLatin America\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading global provider of energy equipment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings regarding its alleged warranty liability for with respect to equipment supplied to an Eastern European\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epower plant\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration regarding the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edefective design of a floating offshore unit\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003elocated offshore South America and on related\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einsurance\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration regarding claims of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emisrepresentation and duress\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;by a former consultant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its contractual rights with regard to the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ereview of the contract price under a long-term LNG sales agreement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein the Asian market.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in relation to the termination of a longstanding\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eshareholder relationship\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Eastern Europe and early resolution of potential LCIA arbitration proceedings in that regard.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading global provider of energy equipment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SCC arbitration under Russian law regarding liability for the supply of spare parts to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epower stations\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEmployer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in urgent ICC proceedings to prevent its contractor\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;injuncting\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;it from drawing down on\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eperformance guarantees\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a chemical plant construction project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration regarding the existence and value of an alleged minority interest in two\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eproduction sharing contracts\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of multi-million dollar disputes under the UNCITRAL Rules arising out of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efailed joint venture\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Kazakhstan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration regarding liability for tax in connection with its sale of an\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;interest in an oil field\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Western Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute under a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejoint operating agreement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ewith respect to North Sea assets and its entitlement as operator to payment of certain costs from its co-venturers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNorthern European investor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its rights under a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebilateral investment treaty\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;with respect to treatment of its investment in an agro-energy project in sub-Saharan Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edrilling contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on a dispute with its South East Asian employer regarding\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etermination rights\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand payments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an expedited LCIA arbitration regarding the applicability of\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;pre-emption rights under a joint operating agreement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eupon the sale of an interest in an oil asset.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003econstruction company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in expedited LCIA proceedings regarding disputed entitlements to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edraw down on performance guarantees\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a project to construct oil processing facilities and civil unrest.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an arbitration under the UNCITRAL Rules with regard to claims for breaches of a drilling contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multi-billion dollar contentious proceedings regarding oil and gas rights in East Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute with its\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edrilling contractor\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eregarding fees for stacking and/or termination.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003econstruction company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration regarding a failed road-building project in West Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eproperty developer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its investment treaty rights in relation to a failed project in West Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior international oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on its rights in a dispute regarding allegedly unpaid cash calls under a joint operating agreement with an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil major\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor gas infrastructure company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on disputes regarding failure to pay sums due under construction and operation contracts on a project in Central Asia and related\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebank guarantee rights and obligations\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egroup of Kuwaiti investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multi-million dollar dispute under the ICC Rules regarding a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efailed joint venture\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the oil and gas sector in Kazakhstan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEastern European engineering company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration regarding its lender\u0026rsquo;s disputed rights to execute on various\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eguarantee\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003earrangements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor shipping company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ead hoc\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003earbitration proceedings seated in London for the return of a down-payment on a major acquisition that was frustrated by\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esanctions\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003estate entity\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against claims brought before the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCommon Court of Justice and Arbitration\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;by an international construction company regarding the delayed construction of a hotel in North Africa.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCommercial Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Commercial Court proceedings regarding the interpretation of the contract for the sale of substantial European assets and the consideration payable for those assets (\u003cem\u003eConocoPhillips v. Chrysaor E\u0026amp;P Limited\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egroup of Saudi investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings in the Channel Islands with respect to a failed real estate project and involving alleged breaches of fiduciary duty.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejunior oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Commercial Court proceedings involving allegations of fraud and duress and subsequent Court of Appeal proceedings on related claims regarding contractual interpretation of termination rights (\u003cem\u003eMonde Petroleum SA v WesternZagros Limited\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[2016] EWHC 1472 (Comm) and [2018] EWCA Civ 25).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading global provider of energy equipment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings regarding liability for a series of unplanned outages at a UK power plant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFraud, Enforcement, Challenges to Awards and Asset Tracing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUnion Fenosa Gas\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in successful proceedings for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003erecognition of its USD 2+ billion ICSID award\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Egypt, involving issues of sovereign immunity and the correct approach to recognition of ICSID awards in England \u0026amp; Wales (\u003cem\u003eUnion Fenosa Gas v Arab Republic of Egypt\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[2020] EWHC 1723 (Comm))\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ejudgment creditor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of hearings to recover a USD 2+ billion judgment debt resulting from a substantial international fraud and involving applications maintain/extend\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efreezing injunction relief, including by the exercise of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChabra\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;jurisdiction\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethree defendants\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to claims for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emisselling\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of certain financial instruments/conspiracy and successfully challenging the jurisdiction of the English courts on their behalf (\u003cem\u003eTsareva v Ananyev\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;[2019] EWHC 2414 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvising a well-known\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emultinational\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on proceedings in New York, London and Central Africa on disputes arising from alleged\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebribery and corruption\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a major power project in sub-Saharan Africa.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etrading company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;freezing injunction\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and substantive proceedings in the Commercial Court regarding allegedly fraudulent transactions in West Africa.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor shipping company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in five UNCITRAL arbitrations and English Commercial Court proceedings to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003erecover the proceeds of a fraudulent scheme\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting the defendant\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esovereign wealth fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a billion-dollar claim in the English Commercial Court arising out of alleged breach of contract, duress and misrepresentation, in particular successfully overturning summary judgment at an appeal hearing before Burton J (Catalyst Managerial Services v Libya Africa Investment Portfolio, unreported).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe Claimant\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in claims brought in the English Commercial Court for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efraudulent misrepresentation\u003c/strong\u003e, in particular appearing at hearings securing a worldwide freezing injunction and to resist an application for security for costs (Terra Raf Trans Traiding Ltd v Aidar Assaubayev \u0026amp; Ors, unreported).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending an oil and gas company against the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eattempted appeal under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of an arbitral award concerning a failed joint venture in Kazakhstan.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAppearing in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Court on jurisdictional issues\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand to secure evidence with respect to a London-seated international arbitration (\u003cem\u003eSilver Dry Bulk Company Limited v Homer Hulbert Maritime Company Limited\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[2017] EWHC 44 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAppearing in the Commercial Court on a challenge to an award under\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSection 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand on an application for security in related court proceedings (\u003cem\u003eMonde Petroleum SA v Westernzagros Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;[2015] EWHC 67 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor oil and gas company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on a challenge to an arbitral award brought in the English Commercial Court under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and related security applications (PT Transportasi Gas Indonesia v ConocoPhillips (Grissik) Ltd [2016] EWHC 2834 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emining company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in English court proceedings to enforce a USD 1 billion + award against a Latin American State.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAppearing in the Commercial Court to secure an order for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003erecognition of an ICC award\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;for damages arising from a failed joint venture in Nigeria.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor shipping company\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eresisting the attempted appeal of an arbitral award under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 before the Commercial Court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMoldovan investor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings to enforce a USD half billion dollar award in the Commercial Court and related applications for security (\u003cem\u003eStati v Kazakhstan\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;[2015] EWHC 2542 (Comm); [2017] EWHC 1348 (Comm)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending an oil and gas company against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eworldwide freezing order\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eapplications in the Commercial Court during the pendency of a related arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvising an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAfrican investment fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on strategy to recover substantial sums owed by a loan debtor in Nigeria.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eIndian car manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to resist proceedings brought in the English Commercial Court by its former U.S. distributor to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003echallenge and appeal\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;a final UNCITRAL arbitration award in its favour under Sections 68 and 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996, including successful applications for security for costs and in the amount of the award.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting the claimant,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einternational construction company\u003c/strong\u003e, in multi-jurisdictional proceedings to enforce an ICC arbitration award against an African State, including appearing to secure third party debt orders in the English Commercial Court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean oil and gas major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings to enforce an arbitral award under the SIAC Rules before the English Court and to obtain\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eurgent worldwide freezing order relief\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in support of that enforcement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eaward creditor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings to execute the award against assets of a South East Asian State and related freezing injunction proceedings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003egroup of investors from the Middle East\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in proceedings in the English and Cayman Islands Courts involving claims for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLife Sciences/Product Liability/IP and Related Areas\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eArbitration\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian life sciences company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ead hoc\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;arbitration regarding alleged breaches of contractual prohibitions on distribution of its pharmaceuticals in certain territories and related allegations of duress and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edrilling contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in LCIA proceedings regarding the apportionment of liability for alleged patent infringement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor engineering company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on several disputes regarding allegedly patented technology in the ship-building sector and alleged liability for defects in that technology.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian life sciences company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an UNCITRAL arbitration regarding exclusive development and distribution rights with respect to pharmaceutical products.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epharmaceuticals company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a dispute regarding the break-down of its relationship for the joint development of cancer treatments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eIndian manufacturing company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICC arbitration proceedings seated in New Delhi regarding liability for allegedly defective electronic components and related proceedings with insurers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ewell-known multinational\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in LCIA proceedings regarding the alleged breach of a distributorship agreement for medical products in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvising a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esports federation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in relation to claims against a competitor for anti-competitive behaviour and interference with contractual rights.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emanufacturing and retail business\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of LCIA arbitration proceedings seated in London and related litigation in Italy arising from an M\u0026amp;A transaction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLatin American company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in LCIA proceedings arising out of the alleged breach of an agreement for the distributorship of books and other publications.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSaudi company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multi-million dollar ICC arbitration claim for breach of a publishing licence.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLitigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einternational manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of claims regarding alleged defects in its household products.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emedical device manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in English court proceedings regarding alleged breach of supply contracts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einternational pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multi-jurisdictional proceedings regarding alleged patent infringement (\u003cem\u003eOtsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd v GW Pharma Ltd \u0026amp; Anor\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[2022] EWCA Civ 1462).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emedical device multinational\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a series of proceedings regarding alleged product liability with respect to its surgical devices.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esmall business\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against multiple claims of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebreach of copyright\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with web-based imagery.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMiddle Eastern technology company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in English court proceedings to restrain its counterparty from drawing down on a bank guarantee.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eArbitral Appointments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an arbitration regarding the alleged under-delivery of contractual quantities of gas and wrongful retention of advance payments against delivery.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eActing as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSole Arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on a licensing dispute regarding fees allegedly due with respect to the use of TV trademark.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSole Arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on a dispute regarding the remedies applicable upon a buyer\u0026rsquo;s failure to pay for and take delivery of a commodity during volatile market conditions arising during the pandemic.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eof an arbitral tribunal on an LCIA arbitration regarding the break-down of contractual arrangements for the sale of goods to an Indian buyer.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eon an arbitration regarding the breakdown of a tv channel joint venture in Eastern Europe.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an LCIA arbitration seated in London between North American and Sub-Saharan African entities regarding wire transfer services.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eco-arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on two LCIA disputes seated in London regarding the alleged breach of settlement terms and involving challenges to the Tribunal\u0026rsquo;s jurisdiction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esole arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an LCIA arbitration seated in London in a dispute between a law firm and its former client regarding unpaid fees.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChair\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an ICC arbitration regarding a failed television joint venture in the Middle East.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eco-arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an ICC arbitration seated in Geneva regarding the failure of a real estate venture in London involving allegations of fraud and jurisdictional challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esole arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on an ICC arbitration seated in London regarding the sale and purchase of commodities and alleged force majeure in connection with civil unrest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esole arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration seated in London under Illinois law in a dispute regarding alleged breach of exclusivity under a manufacturing contract involving applications for emergency relief.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSitting as\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esole arbitrator\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration seated in London under English law concerning the quality of metals delivered under an international supply contract.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"\"highly experienced arbitration practitioner known for her prowess in the energy sector\" ","detail":"Chambers Global, 2023"},{"title":"\"highly adept at handling complex commercial and investment disputes in the energy space\" ","detail":"Chambers UK 2023"},{"title":"\"grasps the important stuff, and has a great collaborative work style – infinitely patient\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, 2023"},{"title":"\"Ruth Byrne is someone clients want to have in control of a case\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, 2023"},{"title":"\"popular among energy and life sciences sector clients\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, 2022"},{"title":"\"very easy to work with, very attentive ...incredibly practical in terms of how to achieve your goal\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2022; Chambers Global, 2022"},{"title":"\"a quick-thinking and effective oral advocate\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2022; Chambers Global, 2022"},{"title":"\"her analysis is always based on facts, the law and the cultural sensibilities of the jurisdictions involved\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, Civil Fraud, 2021"},{"title":"\"has the ability to marshal enormous doses of information...and follow through as if it were her personal matter..\"","detail":"Legal 500 UK, Civil Fraud, 2021"},{"title":"\"Ruth Byrne is an exceptional litigator and extremely calm in complex situations.\" ","detail":"Legal 500 UK, Commercial Litigation, 2021"},{"title":"\"She's an impressive clear thinker...She's very smart and experienced. She's excellent at what she does.\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2021; Chambers Global, 2021"},{"title":"\"The \"superb\" Ruth Byrne .. described as \"very strategic in her thinking..\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2020; Chambers Global, 2020"},{"title":"Clients appreciate her \"ability to cut through the nonsense and home in on the real issues.\" ","detail":"Chambers UK, 2019"},{"title":"\"An excellent advocate ... She will be a dominant character in the arbitration world for years to come\"","detail":"Who's Who Legal, Future Leaders - Arbitration 2017"},{"title":"\"Extremely bright, personable and diligent”","detail":"Chambers UK, 2016"},{"title":"\"Especially known for her expertise in energy-related disputes, and in court hearings regarding arbitration matters.\"","detail":"Chambers UK, 2016"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":4574}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:52:04.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:52:04.000Z","searchable_text":"Byrne{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"highly experienced arbitration practitioner known for her prowess in the energy sector\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"highly adept at handling complex commercial and investment disputes in the energy space\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers UK 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"grasps the important stuff, and has a great collaborative work style – infinitely patient\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 UK, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Ruth Byrne is someone clients want to have in control of a case\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 UK, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"popular among energy and life sciences sector clients\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 UK, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"very easy to work with, very attentive ...incredibly practical in terms of how to achieve your goal\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers UK, 2022; Chambers Global, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"a quick-thinking and effective oral advocate\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers UK, 2022; Chambers Global, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"her analysis is always based on facts, the law and the cultural sensibilities of the jurisdictions involved\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 UK, Civil Fraud, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"has the ability to marshal enormous doses of information...and follow through as if it were her personal matter..\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 UK, Civil Fraud, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Ruth Byrne is an exceptional litigator and extremely calm in complex situations.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 UK, Commercial Litigation, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"She's an impressive clear thinker...She's very smart and experienced. She's excellent at what she does.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers UK, 2021; Chambers Global, 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"The \\\"superb\\\" Ruth Byrne .. described as \\\"very strategic in her thinking..\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers UK, 2020; Chambers Global, 2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Clients appreciate her \\\"ability to cut through the nonsense and home in on the real issues.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers UK, 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"An excellent advocate ... She will be a dominant character in the arbitration world for years to come\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who's Who Legal, Future Leaders - Arbitration 2017\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Extremely bright, personable and diligent”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers UK, 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Especially known for her expertise in energy-related disputes, and in court hearings regarding arbitration matters.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers UK, 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}Energy and Related Areas\nArbitration\nRepresenting a European buyer in a series of substantial gas pricing disputes with one of the world’s largest suppliers of LNG.{{ FIELD }}Acting for a multinational oil, gas and petrochemical company in emergency ICC arbitration proceedings to restrain a counter-party from acquiring substantial gas assets alone and in breach of exclusive joint bidding arrangements.{{ FIELD }}Representing a joint venture company in a significant LNG dispute arising from repeated failures to supply by a seller and involving allegations of misrepresentation.{{ FIELD }}Representing an asset management firm in a dispute with the buyers of its of oil and gas assets in Central America regarding contingent consideration payable for those assets.{{ FIELD }}Representing a trading company in two multi billion dollar arbitrations regarding failures in LNG supply during the COVID 19 pandemic.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil and gas major in an arbitration in Nigeria on a nine-figure dispute regarding allocation of hydrocarbon product at a handling facility.{{ FIELD }}Defending an oil and gas trader against claims as to the alleged existence of a contract to supply LNG involving questions of authority and custom and practice in the LNG sector.{{ FIELD }}Advising a major gas supplier on the applicability of force majeure provisions under its long term LNG sales agreements and potential gas pricing disputes.{{ FIELD }}Representing a major Asian energy company in an LCIA arbitration regarding the break-down of its relationship with a minority partner under a joint operating agreement.{{ FIELD }}Representing an independent oil company in a dispute with its LNG off-taker regarding quantities to be delivered under their agreed annual delivery program and a long-term sale and purchase agreement.{{ FIELD }}Advising a North American oil and gas company on its rights of first refusal upon the sale of rights in oilfield concessions in the Middle East.{{ FIELD }}Representing an energy sector contractor in LCIA proceedings regarding allegations of contractual mistake in the context of indemnity obligations of a major equipment supplier.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil and gas company in multi-billion dollar proceedings regarding failure by a co-venturer to pay its share of exploration and development costs under a joint operating agreement and interference with recovery of those costs from government.{{ FIELD }}Representing two private equity funds in ICC proceedings against an African government regarding force majeure events that led to the failure of a substantial renewables project.{{ FIELD }}Defending a leading global provider of energy equipment against claims that milestone payments due against supply of power plant equipment were unenforceable penalties.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil and gas drilling contractor in proceedings to recover unpaid contract sums from its former local partner in Nigeria.{{ FIELD }}Representing a major Asian energy company in a dispute with an international commodities company regarding the impact of sanctions on obligations to deliver LNG.{{ FIELD }}Advising an oil and gas major in relation to disputed payments for the sale of a significant asset in Latin America.{{ FIELD }}Representing a leading global provider of energy equipment in proceedings regarding its alleged warranty liability for with respect to equipment supplied to an Eastern European power plant.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil and gas major in an ICC arbitration regarding the defective design of a floating offshore unit located offshore South America and on related insurance claims.{{ FIELD }}Representing a junior oil and gas company in an ICC arbitration regarding claims of misrepresentation and duress by a former consultant.{{ FIELD }}Advising an oil and gas major on its contractual rights with regard to the review of the contract price under a long-term LNG sales agreement in the Asian market.{{ FIELD }}Advising an oil and gas major in relation to the termination of a longstanding shareholder relationship in Eastern Europe and early resolution of potential LCIA arbitration proceedings in that regard.{{ FIELD }}Representing a leading global provider of energy equipment in an SCC arbitration under Russian law regarding liability for the supply of spare parts to power stations.{{ FIELD }}Representing an Employer in urgent ICC proceedings to prevent its contractor injuncting it from drawing down on performance guarantees in connection with a chemical plant construction project.{{ FIELD }}Representing a junior oil and gas company in an ICC arbitration regarding the existence and value of an alleged minority interest in two production sharing contracts in the Middle East.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil and gas company in a series of multi-million dollar disputes under the UNCITRAL Rules arising out of a failed joint venture in Kazakhstan.{{ FIELD }}Representing a junior oil and gas company in an LCIA arbitration regarding liability for tax in connection with its sale of an interest in an oil field in Western Africa.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil and gas major in a dispute under a joint operating agreement with respect to North Sea assets and its entitlement as operator to payment of certain costs from its co-venturers.{{ FIELD }}Advising a Northern European investor on its rights under a bilateral investment treaty with respect to treatment of its investment in an agro-energy project in sub-Saharan Africa.{{ FIELD }}Advising a drilling contractor on a dispute with its South East Asian employer regarding termination rights and payments.{{ FIELD }}Representing a junior oil and gas company in an expedited LCIA arbitration regarding the applicability of pre-emption rights under a joint operating agreement upon the sale of an interest in an oil asset.{{ FIELD }}Representing a construction company in expedited LCIA proceedings regarding disputed entitlements to draw down on performance guarantees in connection with a project to construct oil processing facilities and civil unrest.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil and gas company in an arbitration under the UNCITRAL Rules with regard to claims for breaches of a drilling contract.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil and gas major in multi-billion dollar contentious proceedings regarding oil and gas rights in East Africa.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil major in a dispute with its drilling contractor regarding fees for stacking and/or termination.{{ FIELD }}Representing a construction company in an LCIA arbitration regarding a failed road-building project in West Africa.{{ FIELD }}Advising a property developer on its investment treaty rights in relation to a failed project in West Africa.{{ FIELD }}Advising a junior international oil and gas company on its rights in a dispute regarding allegedly unpaid cash calls under a joint operating agreement with an oil major.{{ FIELD }}Advising a major gas infrastructure company on disputes regarding failure to pay sums due under construction and operation contracts on a project in Central Asia and related bank guarantee rights and obligations.{{ FIELD }}Representing a group of Kuwaiti investors in a multi-million dollar dispute under the ICC Rules regarding a failed joint venture in the oil and gas sector in Kazakhstan.{{ FIELD }}Representing an Eastern European engineering company in an LCIA arbitration regarding its lender’s disputed rights to execute on various guarantee arrangements.{{ FIELD }}Representing a major shipping company in ad hoc arbitration proceedings seated in London for the return of a down-payment on a major acquisition that was frustrated by sanctions.{{ FIELD }}Defending a state entity against claims brought before the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration by an international construction company regarding the delayed construction of a hotel in North Africa.{{ FIELD }}Commercial Litigation\nRepresenting an oil and gas major in Commercial Court proceedings regarding the interpretation of the contract for the sale of substantial European assets and the consideration payable for those assets (ConocoPhillips v. Chrysaor E\u0026amp;P Limited).\nRepresenting a group of Saudi investors in proceedings in the Channel Islands with respect to a failed real estate project and involving alleged breaches of fiduciary duty.\nSuccessfully defending a junior oil and gas company in Commercial Court proceedings involving allegations of fraud and duress and subsequent Court of Appeal proceedings on related claims regarding contractual interpretation of termination rights (Monde Petroleum SA v WesternZagros Limited [2016] EWHC 1472 (Comm) and [2018] EWCA Civ 25).\nRepresenting a leading global provider of energy equipment in proceedings regarding liability for a series of unplanned outages at a UK power plant.{{ FIELD }}Fraud, Enforcement, Challenges to Awards and Asset Tracing\nRepresenting Union Fenosa Gas in successful proceedings for the recognition of its USD 2+ billion ICSID award against Egypt, involving issues of sovereign immunity and the correct approach to recognition of ICSID awards in England \u0026amp; Wales (Union Fenosa Gas v Arab Republic of Egypt [2020] EWHC 1723 (Comm)).\nRepresenting a judgment creditor in a series of hearings to recover a USD 2+ billion judgment debt resulting from a substantial international fraud and involving applications maintain/extend freezing injunction relief, including by the exercise of Chabra jurisdiction.\nRepresenting three defendants to claims for the misselling of certain financial instruments/conspiracy and successfully challenging the jurisdiction of the English courts on their behalf (Tsareva v Ananyev [2019] EWHC 2414 (Comm)).\nAdvising a well-known multinational on proceedings in New York, London and Central Africa on disputes arising from alleged bribery and corruption in connection with a major power project in sub-Saharan Africa.\nRepresenting a trading company in freezing injunction and substantive proceedings in the Commercial Court regarding allegedly fraudulent transactions in West Africa.\nRepresenting a major shipping company in five UNCITRAL arbitrations and English Commercial Court proceedings to recover the proceeds of a fraudulent scheme.\nRepresenting the defendant sovereign wealth fund in a billion-dollar claim in the English Commercial Court arising out of alleged breach of contract, duress and misrepresentation, in particular successfully overturning summary judgment at an appeal hearing before Burton J (Catalyst Managerial Services v Libya Africa Investment Portfolio, unreported).\nRepresenting the Claimant in claims brought in the English Commercial Court for fraudulent misrepresentation, in particular appearing at hearings securing a worldwide freezing injunction and to resist an application for security for costs (Terra Raf Trans Traiding Ltd v Aidar Assaubayev \u0026amp; Ors, unreported).\nDefending an oil and gas company against the attempted appeal under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 of an arbitral award concerning a failed joint venture in Kazakhstan.\nAppearing in the Commercial Court on jurisdictional issues and to secure evidence with respect to a London-seated international arbitration (Silver Dry Bulk Company Limited v Homer Hulbert Maritime Company Limited [2017] EWHC 44 (Comm)).\nAppearing in the Commercial Court on a challenge to an award under Section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and on an application for security in related court proceedings (Monde Petroleum SA v Westernzagros Ltd. [2015] EWHC 67 (Comm)).\nRepresenting a major oil and gas company on a challenge to an arbitral award brought in the English Commercial Court under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and related security applications (PT Transportasi Gas Indonesia v ConocoPhillips (Grissik) Ltd [2016] EWHC 2834 (Comm)).\nRepresenting a mining company in English court proceedings to enforce a USD 1 billion + award against a Latin American State.\nAppearing in the Commercial Court to secure an order for the recognition of an ICC award for damages arising from a failed joint venture in Nigeria.\nRepresenting a major shipping company resisting the attempted appeal of an arbitral award under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 before the Commercial Court.\nRepresenting a Moldovan investor in proceedings to enforce a USD half billion dollar award in the Commercial Court and related applications for security (Stati v Kazakhstan [2015] EWHC 2542 (Comm); [2017] EWHC 1348 (Comm)).\nDefending an oil and gas company against worldwide freezing order applications in the Commercial Court during the pendency of a related arbitration.\nAdvising an African investment fund on strategy to recover substantial sums owed by a loan debtor in Nigeria.\nRepresenting an Indian car manufacturer to resist proceedings brought in the English Commercial Court by its former U.S. distributor to challenge and appeal a final UNCITRAL arbitration award in its favour under Sections 68 and 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996, including successful applications for security for costs and in the amount of the award.\nRepresenting the claimant, an international construction company, in multi-jurisdictional proceedings to enforce an ICC arbitration award against an African State, including appearing to secure third party debt orders in the English Commercial Court.\nRepresenting an oil and gas major in proceedings to enforce an arbitral award under the SIAC Rules before the English Court and to obtain urgent worldwide freezing order relief in support of that enforcement.\nRepresenting an award creditor in proceedings to execute the award against assets of a South East Asian State and related freezing injunction proceedings.\nRepresenting a group of investors from the Middle East in proceedings in the English and Cayman Islands Courts involving claims for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud.{{ FIELD }}Life Sciences/Product Liability/IP and Related Areas\nArbitration\nRepresenting an Asian life sciences company in an ad hoc arbitration regarding alleged breaches of contractual prohibitions on distribution of its pharmaceuticals in certain territories and related allegations of duress and fraud.\nRepresenting a drilling contractor in LCIA proceedings regarding the apportionment of liability for alleged patent infringement.\nAdvising a major engineering company on several disputes regarding allegedly patented technology in the ship-building sector and alleged liability for defects in that technology.\nRepresenting an Asian life sciences company in an UNCITRAL arbitration regarding exclusive development and distribution rights with respect to pharmaceutical products.\nRepresenting a pharmaceuticals company in a dispute regarding the break-down of its relationship for the joint development of cancer treatments.\nRepresenting an Indian manufacturing company in ICC arbitration proceedings seated in New Delhi regarding liability for allegedly defective electronic components and related proceedings with insurers.\nRepresenting a well-known multinational in LCIA proceedings regarding the alleged breach of a distributorship agreement for medical products in the Middle East.\nAdvising a sports federation in relation to claims against a competitor for anti-competitive behaviour and interference with contractual rights.\nRepresenting a manufacturing and retail business in a series of LCIA arbitration proceedings seated in London and related litigation in Italy arising from an M\u0026amp;A transaction.\nRepresenting a Latin American company in LCIA proceedings arising out of the alleged breach of an agreement for the distributorship of books and other publications.\nRepresenting a Saudi company in a multi-million dollar ICC arbitration claim for breach of a publishing licence.\nLitigation\nRepresenting an international manufacturer in a series of claims regarding alleged defects in its household products.\nRepresenting a medical device manufacturer in English court proceedings regarding alleged breach of supply contracts.\nRepresenting an international pharmaceutical company in multi-jurisdictional proceedings regarding alleged patent infringement (Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd v GW Pharma Ltd \u0026amp; Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1462).\nRepresenting a medical device multinational in a series of proceedings regarding alleged product liability with respect to its surgical devices.\nDefending a small business against multiple claims of breach of copyright in connection with web-based imagery.\nRepresenting a Middle Eastern technology company in English court proceedings to restrain its counterparty from drawing down on a bank guarantee.{{ FIELD }}Arbitral Appointments\nSitting as Chair on an arbitration regarding the alleged under-delivery of contractual quantities of gas and wrongful retention of advance payments against delivery.\nActing as Sole Arbitrator on a licensing dispute regarding fees allegedly due with respect to the use of TV trademark.\nSitting as Sole Arbitrator on a dispute regarding the remedies applicable upon a buyer’s failure to pay for and take delivery of a commodity during volatile market conditions arising during the pandemic.\nSitting as Chair of an arbitral tribunal on an LCIA arbitration regarding the break-down of contractual arrangements for the sale of goods to an Indian buyer.\nSitting as Chair on an arbitration regarding the breakdown of a tv channel joint venture in Eastern Europe.\nSitting as Chair on an LCIA arbitration seated in London between North American and Sub-Saharan African entities regarding wire transfer services.\nSitting as co-arbitrator on two LCIA disputes seated in London regarding the alleged breach of settlement terms and involving challenges to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.\nSitting as sole arbitrator on an LCIA arbitration seated in London in a dispute between a law firm and its former client regarding unpaid fees.\nSitting as Chair on an ICC arbitration regarding a failed television joint venture in the Middle East.\nSitting as co-arbitrator on an ICC arbitration seated in Geneva regarding the failure of a real estate venture in London involving allegations of fraud and jurisdictional challenges.\nSitting as sole arbitrator on an ICC arbitration seated in London regarding the sale and purchase of commodities and alleged force majeure in connection with civil unrest.\nSitting as sole arbitrator in an ICC arbitration seated in London under Illinois law in a dispute regarding alleged breach of exclusivity under a manufacturing contract involving applications for emergency relief.\nSitting as sole arbitrator in an ICC arbitration seated in London under English law concerning the quality of metals delivered under an international supply contract.{{ FIELD }}Ruth Byrne KC specialises in international commercial and investment disputes, with a particular focus on energy, life sciences, fraud and enforcement.  \nRuth has advised clients on disputes arising in multiple jurisdictions and has appeared as counsel in 100+ arbitrations as well sitting regularly as arbitrator.  She also appears frequently in the English High Court, in particular in proceedings in support of arbitration, as well as more generally in international commercial litigation.  Recognised in several legal directories over the years, Ruth is described as “superb”, “an exceptional litigator”, “an excellent advocate wise beyond her years” and “a persistent, credible case builder”.  Clients note her “ability to marshal enormous doses of information, retain key facts, be diligent and patient, and follow through as if it were her personal matter – her analysis is always based on facts, the law and the cultural sensibilities of the jurisdictions involved” and that she is “very strategic in her thinking and able to pare down arguments to what's important”.\nRuth writes and speaks regularly on a variety of international arbitration topics.  Ruth is a member of the ICC UK Selection Subcommittee, the Delos ROAP faculty and a former YIAG Co-Chair. Ruth M.D. Byrne Partner \"highly experienced arbitration practitioner known for her prowess in the energy sector\"  Chambers Global, 2023 \"highly adept at handling complex commercial and investment disputes in the energy space\"  Chambers UK 2023 \"grasps the important stuff, and has a great collaborative work style – infinitely patient\"  Legal 500 UK, 2023 \"Ruth Byrne is someone clients want to have in control of a case\"  Legal 500 UK, 2023 \"popular among energy and life sciences sector clients\"  Legal 500 UK, 2022 \"very easy to work with, very attentive ...incredibly practical in terms of how to achieve your goal\"  Chambers UK, 2022; Chambers Global, 2022 \"a quick-thinking and effective oral advocate\"  Chambers UK, 2022; Chambers Global, 2022 \"her analysis is always based on facts, the law and the cultural sensibilities of the jurisdictions involved\"  Legal 500 UK, Civil Fraud, 2021 \"has the ability to marshal enormous doses of information...and follow through as if it were her personal matter..\" Legal 500 UK, Civil Fraud, 2021 \"Ruth Byrne is an exceptional litigator and extremely calm in complex situations.\"  Legal 500 UK, Commercial Litigation, 2021 \"She's an impressive clear thinker...She's very smart and experienced. She's excellent at what she does.\"  Chambers UK, 2021; Chambers Global, 2021 \"The \"superb\" Ruth Byrne .. described as \"very strategic in her thinking..\"  Chambers UK, 2020; Chambers Global, 2020 Clients appreciate her \"ability to cut through the nonsense and home in on the real issues.\"  Chambers UK, 2019 \"An excellent advocate ... She will be a dominant character in the arbitration world for years to come\" Who's Who Legal, Future Leaders - Arbitration 2017 \"Extremely bright, personable and diligent” Chambers UK, 2016 \"Especially known for her expertise in energy-related disputes, and in court hearings regarding arbitration matters.\" Chambers UK, 2016 University College London, UK  University of Cambridge, UK  Dubai International Financial Centre Courts England and Wales The Law Society of England and Wales (2006) (#357290) Ireland The Law Society of England and Wales Energy and Related Areas\nArbitration\nRepresenting a European buyer in a series of substantial gas pricing disputes with one of the world’s largest suppliers of LNG. Acting for a multinational oil, gas and petrochemical company in emergency ICC arbitration proceedings to restrain a counter-party from acquiring substantial gas assets alone and in breach of exclusive joint bidding arrangements. Representing a joint venture company in a significant LNG dispute arising from repeated failures to supply by a seller and involving allegations of misrepresentation. Representing an asset management firm in a dispute with the buyers of its of oil and gas assets in Central America regarding contingent consideration payable for those assets. Representing a trading company in two multi billion dollar arbitrations regarding failures in LNG supply during the COVID 19 pandemic. Representing an oil and gas major in an arbitration in Nigeria on a nine-figure dispute regarding allocation of hydrocarbon product at a handling facility. Defending an oil and gas trader against claims as to the alleged existence of a contract to supply LNG involving questions of authority and custom and practice in the LNG sector. Advising a major gas supplier on the applicability of force majeure provisions under its long term LNG sales agreements and potential gas pricing disputes. Representing a major Asian energy company in an LCIA arbitration regarding the break-down of its relationship with a minority partner under a joint operating agreement. Representing an independent oil company in a dispute with its LNG off-taker regarding quantities to be delivered under their agreed annual delivery program and a long-term sale and purchase agreement. Advising a North American oil and gas company on its rights of first refusal upon the sale of rights in oilfield concessions in the Middle East. Representing an energy sector contractor in LCIA proceedings regarding allegations of contractual mistake in the context of indemnity obligations of a major equipment supplier. Representing an oil and gas company in multi-billion dollar proceedings regarding failure by a co-venturer to pay its share of exploration and development costs under a joint operating agreement and interference with recovery of those costs from government. Representing two private equity funds in ICC proceedings against an African government regarding force majeure events that led to the failure of a substantial renewables project. Defending a leading global provider of energy equipment against claims that milestone payments due against supply of power plant equipment were unenforceable penalties. Representing an oil and gas drilling contractor in proceedings to recover unpaid contract sums from its former local partner in Nigeria. Representing a major Asian energy company in a dispute with an international commodities company regarding the impact of sanctions on obligations to deliver LNG. Advising an oil and gas major in relation to disputed payments for the sale of a significant asset in Latin America. Representing a leading global provider of energy equipment in proceedings regarding its alleged warranty liability for with respect to equipment supplied to an Eastern European power plant. Representing an oil and gas major in an ICC arbitration regarding the defective design of a floating offshore unit located offshore South America and on related insurance claims. Representing a junior oil and gas company in an ICC arbitration regarding claims of misrepresentation and duress by a former consultant. Advising an oil and gas major on its contractual rights with regard to the review of the contract price under a long-term LNG sales agreement in the Asian market. Advising an oil and gas major in relation to the termination of a longstanding shareholder relationship in Eastern Europe and early resolution of potential LCIA arbitration proceedings in that regard. Representing a leading global provider of energy equipment in an SCC arbitration under Russian law regarding liability for the supply of spare parts to power stations. Representing an Employer in urgent ICC proceedings to prevent its contractor injuncting it from drawing down on performance guarantees in connection with a chemical plant construction project. Representing a junior oil and gas company in an ICC arbitration regarding the existence and value of an alleged minority interest in two production sharing contracts in the Middle East. Representing an oil and gas company in a series of multi-million dollar disputes under the UNCITRAL Rules arising out of a failed joint venture in Kazakhstan. Representing a junior oil and gas company in an LCIA arbitration regarding liability for tax in connection with its sale of an interest in an oil field in Western Africa. Representing an oil and gas major in a dispute under a joint operating agreement with respect to North Sea assets and its entitlement as operator to payment of certain costs from its co-venturers. Advising a Northern European investor on its rights under a bilateral investment treaty with respect to treatment of its investment in an agro-energy project in sub-Saharan Africa. Advising a drilling contractor on a dispute with its South East Asian employer regarding termination rights and payments. Representing a junior oil and gas company in an expedited LCIA arbitration regarding the applicability of pre-emption rights under a joint operating agreement upon the sale of an interest in an oil asset. Representing a construction company in expedited LCIA proceedings regarding disputed entitlements to draw down on performance guarantees in connection with a project to construct oil processing facilities and civil unrest. Representing an oil and gas company in an arbitration under the UNCITRAL Rules with regard to claims for breaches of a drilling contract. Representing an oil and gas major in multi-billion dollar contentious proceedings regarding oil and gas rights in East Africa. Representing an oil major in a dispute with its drilling contractor regarding fees for stacking and/or termination. Representing a construction company in an LCIA arbitration regarding a failed road-building project in West Africa. Advising a property developer on its investment treaty rights in relation to a failed project in West Africa. Advising a junior international oil and gas company on its rights in a dispute regarding allegedly unpaid cash calls under a joint operating agreement with an oil major. Advising a major gas infrastructure company on disputes regarding failure to pay sums due under construction and operation contracts on a project in Central Asia and related bank guarantee rights and obligations. Representing a group of Kuwaiti investors in a multi-million dollar dispute under the ICC Rules regarding a failed joint venture in the oil and gas sector in Kazakhstan. Representing an Eastern European engineering company in an LCIA arbitration regarding its lender’s disputed rights to execute on various guarantee arrangements. Representing a major shipping company in ad hoc arbitration proceedings seated in London for the return of a down-payment on a major acquisition that was frustrated by sanctions. Defending a state entity against claims brought before the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration by an international construction company regarding the delayed construction of a hotel in North Africa. Commercial Litigation\nRepresenting an oil and gas major in Commercial Court proceedings regarding the interpretation of the contract for the sale of substantial European assets and the consideration payable for those assets (ConocoPhillips v. Chrysaor E\u0026amp;P Limited).\nRepresenting a group of Saudi investors in proceedings in the Channel Islands with respect to a failed real estate project and involving alleged breaches of fiduciary duty.\nSuccessfully defending a junior oil and gas company in Commercial Court proceedings involving allegations of fraud and duress and subsequent Court of Appeal proceedings on related claims regarding contractual interpretation of termination rights (Monde Petroleum SA v WesternZagros Limited [2016] EWHC 1472 (Comm) and [2018] EWCA Civ 25).\nRepresenting a leading global provider of energy equipment in proceedings regarding liability for a series of unplanned outages at a UK power plant. Fraud, Enforcement, Challenges to Awards and Asset Tracing\nRepresenting Union Fenosa Gas in successful proceedings for the recognition of its USD 2+ billion ICSID award against Egypt, involving issues of sovereign immunity and the correct approach to recognition of ICSID awards in England \u0026amp; Wales (Union Fenosa Gas v Arab Republic of Egypt [2020] EWHC 1723 (Comm)).\nRepresenting a judgment creditor in a series of hearings to recover a USD 2+ billion judgment debt resulting from a substantial international fraud and involving applications maintain/extend freezing injunction relief, including by the exercise of Chabra jurisdiction.\nRepresenting three defendants to claims for the misselling of certain financial instruments/conspiracy and successfully challenging the jurisdiction of the English courts on their behalf (Tsareva v Ananyev [2019] EWHC 2414 (Comm)).\nAdvising a well-known multinational on proceedings in New York, London and Central Africa on disputes arising from alleged bribery and corruption in connection with a major power project in sub-Saharan Africa.\nRepresenting a trading company in freezing injunction and substantive proceedings in the Commercial Court regarding allegedly fraudulent transactions in West Africa.\nRepresenting a major shipping company in five UNCITRAL arbitrations and English Commercial Court proceedings to recover the proceeds of a fraudulent scheme.\nRepresenting the defendant sovereign wealth fund in a billion-dollar claim in the English Commercial Court arising out of alleged breach of contract, duress and misrepresentation, in particular successfully overturning summary judgment at an appeal hearing before Burton J (Catalyst Managerial Services v Libya Africa Investment Portfolio, unreported).\nRepresenting the Claimant in claims brought in the English Commercial Court for fraudulent misrepresentation, in particular appearing at hearings securing a worldwide freezing injunction and to resist an application for security for costs (Terra Raf Trans Traiding Ltd v Aidar Assaubayev \u0026amp; Ors, unreported).\nDefending an oil and gas company against the attempted appeal under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 of an arbitral award concerning a failed joint venture in Kazakhstan.\nAppearing in the Commercial Court on jurisdictional issues and to secure evidence with respect to a London-seated international arbitration (Silver Dry Bulk Company Limited v Homer Hulbert Maritime Company Limited [2017] EWHC 44 (Comm)).\nAppearing in the Commercial Court on a challenge to an award under Section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and on an application for security in related court proceedings (Monde Petroleum SA v Westernzagros Ltd. [2015] EWHC 67 (Comm)).\nRepresenting a major oil and gas company on a challenge to an arbitral award brought in the English Commercial Court under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and related security applications (PT Transportasi Gas Indonesia v ConocoPhillips (Grissik) Ltd [2016] EWHC 2834 (Comm)).\nRepresenting a mining company in English court proceedings to enforce a USD 1 billion + award against a Latin American State.\nAppearing in the Commercial Court to secure an order for the recognition of an ICC award for damages arising from a failed joint venture in Nigeria.\nRepresenting a major shipping company resisting the attempted appeal of an arbitral award under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 before the Commercial Court.\nRepresenting a Moldovan investor in proceedings to enforce a USD half billion dollar award in the Commercial Court and related applications for security (Stati v Kazakhstan [2015] EWHC 2542 (Comm); [2017] EWHC 1348 (Comm)).\nDefending an oil and gas company against worldwide freezing order applications in the Commercial Court during the pendency of a related arbitration.\nAdvising an African investment fund on strategy to recover substantial sums owed by a loan debtor in Nigeria.\nRepresenting an Indian car manufacturer to resist proceedings brought in the English Commercial Court by its former U.S. distributor to challenge and appeal a final UNCITRAL arbitration award in its favour under Sections 68 and 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996, including successful applications for security for costs and in the amount of the award.\nRepresenting the claimant, an international construction company, in multi-jurisdictional proceedings to enforce an ICC arbitration award against an African State, including appearing to secure third party debt orders in the English Commercial Court.\nRepresenting an oil and gas major in proceedings to enforce an arbitral award under the SIAC Rules before the English Court and to obtain urgent worldwide freezing order relief in support of that enforcement.\nRepresenting an award creditor in proceedings to execute the award against assets of a South East Asian State and related freezing injunction proceedings.\nRepresenting a group of investors from the Middle East in proceedings in the English and Cayman Islands Courts involving claims for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud. Life Sciences/Product Liability/IP and Related Areas\nArbitration\nRepresenting an Asian life sciences company in an ad hoc arbitration regarding alleged breaches of contractual prohibitions on distribution of its pharmaceuticals in certain territories and related allegations of duress and fraud.\nRepresenting a drilling contractor in LCIA proceedings regarding the apportionment of liability for alleged patent infringement.\nAdvising a major engineering company on several disputes regarding allegedly patented technology in the ship-building sector and alleged liability for defects in that technology.\nRepresenting an Asian life sciences company in an UNCITRAL arbitration regarding exclusive development and distribution rights with respect to pharmaceutical products.\nRepresenting a pharmaceuticals company in a dispute regarding the break-down of its relationship for the joint development of cancer treatments.\nRepresenting an Indian manufacturing company in ICC arbitration proceedings seated in New Delhi regarding liability for allegedly defective electronic components and related proceedings with insurers.\nRepresenting a well-known multinational in LCIA proceedings regarding the alleged breach of a distributorship agreement for medical products in the Middle East.\nAdvising a sports federation in relation to claims against a competitor for anti-competitive behaviour and interference with contractual rights.\nRepresenting a manufacturing and retail business in a series of LCIA arbitration proceedings seated in London and related litigation in Italy arising from an M\u0026amp;A transaction.\nRepresenting a Latin American company in LCIA proceedings arising out of the alleged breach of an agreement for the distributorship of books and other publications.\nRepresenting a Saudi company in a multi-million dollar ICC arbitration claim for breach of a publishing licence.\nLitigation\nRepresenting an international manufacturer in a series of claims regarding alleged defects in its household products.\nRepresenting a medical device manufacturer in English court proceedings regarding alleged breach of supply contracts.\nRepresenting an international pharmaceutical company in multi-jurisdictional proceedings regarding alleged patent infringement (Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd v GW Pharma Ltd \u0026amp; Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1462).\nRepresenting a medical device multinational in a series of proceedings regarding alleged product liability with respect to its surgical devices.\nDefending a small business against multiple claims of breach of copyright in connection with web-based imagery.\nRepresenting a Middle Eastern technology company in English court proceedings to restrain its counterparty from drawing down on a bank guarantee. Arbitral Appointments\nSitting as Chair on an arbitration regarding the alleged under-delivery of contractual quantities of gas and wrongful retention of advance payments against delivery.\nActing as Sole Arbitrator on a licensing dispute regarding fees allegedly due with respect to the use of TV trademark.\nSitting as Sole Arbitrator on a dispute regarding the remedies applicable upon a buyer’s failure to pay for and take delivery of a commodity during volatile market conditions arising during the pandemic.\nSitting as Chair of an arbitral tribunal on an LCIA arbitration regarding the break-down of contractual arrangements for the sale of goods to an Indian buyer.\nSitting as Chair on an arbitration regarding the breakdown of a tv channel joint venture in Eastern Europe.\nSitting as Chair on an LCIA arbitration seated in London between North American and Sub-Saharan African entities regarding wire transfer services.\nSitting as co-arbitrator on two LCIA disputes seated in London regarding the alleged breach of settlement terms and involving challenges to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.\nSitting as sole arbitrator on an LCIA arbitration seated in London in a dispute between a law firm and its former client regarding unpaid fees.\nSitting as Chair on an ICC arbitration regarding a failed television joint venture in the Middle East.\nSitting as co-arbitrator on an ICC arbitration seated in Geneva regarding the failure of a real estate venture in London involving allegations of fraud and jurisdictional challenges.\nSitting as sole arbitrator on an ICC arbitration seated in London regarding the sale and purchase of commodities and alleged force majeure in connection with civil unrest.\nSitting as sole arbitrator in an ICC arbitration seated in London under Illinois law in a dispute regarding alleged breach of exclusivity under a manufacturing contract involving applications for emergency relief.\nSitting as sole arbitrator in an ICC arbitration seated in London under English law concerning the quality of metals delivered under an international supply contract.","searchable_name":"Ruth M.D. Byrne, K.C.","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":101,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":447506,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6804,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAndrew J. Calica is a partner in our New York office and a member of King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Product Liability and Mass Torts practice group. He represents chemical and pharmaceutical companies in toxic tort, product liability and mass and class actions. Andrew also has substantial multi-district litigation experience representing financial institutions in antitrust and commodities litigation.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAndrew also advises clients in complex commercial disputes and on resolution strategies. Andrew\u0026rsquo;s recent engagements include representing global chemical companies in water contamination cases.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe is a co-author of several chapters in the \u003cem\u003eElectronic Discovery Deskbook\u003c/em\u003e, a treatise on electronic discovery and records management published by the Practicing Law Institute.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"andrew-calica","email":"acalica@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global chemical company in PFAS personal injury, medical monitoring, property damage, water district, customer class, and natural resource damages cases.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSecured trial victory for global bank on claim of breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in connection with a revolving credit agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained dismissal of Commodity Exchange Act claims against global bank in LIBOR class action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented global pharmaceutical company in connection with N.Y. False Claims Act claim by New York Attorney General.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented brand name pharmaceutical companies as national counsel supervising cases involving 8,000 product liability plaintiffs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBell v. Pfizer (8th Cir. 2013); Fullington v. Pfizer (8th Cir. 2013); Strayhorn v. Wyeth (6th Cir. 2013); Eckhardt v. Qualitest (5th Cir. 2014); Huck v. Trimark (Iowa 2014); Smith v. Wyeth (6th Cir. 2011); Mensing v. Wyeth (8th Cir. 2009).\u003c/em\u003e Obtained dismissal for brand name pharmaceutical company in failure to warn cases involving ingestion of generic pharmaceuticals.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAssisted a multi-national pharmaceutical company in a licensing dispute before the ICC International Court of Arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an owner participant in a contested bankruptcy proceeding concerning tax indemnity claims arising out of the purchase of aircraft.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in connection with an internal investigation arising out of a clinical trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended a leading broker dealer against $500 million claims that it colluded to inflate the valuation of mortgage-backed securities held by a hedge fund customer.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended a global bank in a commercial arbitration that involved an accounting dispute with the bank\u0026rsquo;s former subsidiary.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":699,"guid":"699.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":826,"guid":"826.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1206,"guid":"1206.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Calica","nick_name":"Andrew","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Andrew","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":512,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2004-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Product Liability Rising Star ","detail":"Law360"},{"title":"New York Metro Super Lawyers Rising Star","detail":"SuperLawyers"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrew-calica-40607467/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAndrew J. Calica is a partner in our New York office and a member of King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Product Liability and Mass Torts practice group. He represents chemical and pharmaceutical companies in toxic tort, product liability and mass and class actions. Andrew also has substantial multi-district litigation experience representing financial institutions in antitrust and commodities litigation.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAndrew also advises clients in complex commercial disputes and on resolution strategies. Andrew\u0026rsquo;s recent engagements include representing global chemical companies in water contamination cases.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe is a co-author of several chapters in the \u003cem\u003eElectronic Discovery Deskbook\u003c/em\u003e, a treatise on electronic discovery and records management published by the Practicing Law Institute.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global chemical company in PFAS personal injury, medical monitoring, property damage, water district, customer class, and natural resource damages cases.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSecured trial victory for global bank on claim of breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in connection with a revolving credit agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained dismissal of Commodity Exchange Act claims against global bank in LIBOR class action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented global pharmaceutical company in connection with N.Y. False Claims Act claim by New York Attorney General.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented brand name pharmaceutical companies as national counsel supervising cases involving 8,000 product liability plaintiffs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBell v. Pfizer (8th Cir. 2013); Fullington v. Pfizer (8th Cir. 2013); Strayhorn v. Wyeth (6th Cir. 2013); Eckhardt v. Qualitest (5th Cir. 2014); Huck v. Trimark (Iowa 2014); Smith v. Wyeth (6th Cir. 2011); Mensing v. Wyeth (8th Cir. 2009).\u003c/em\u003e Obtained dismissal for brand name pharmaceutical company in failure to warn cases involving ingestion of generic pharmaceuticals.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAssisted a multi-national pharmaceutical company in a licensing dispute before the ICC International Court of Arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an owner participant in a contested bankruptcy proceeding concerning tax indemnity claims arising out of the purchase of aircraft.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global pharmaceutical company in connection with an internal investigation arising out of a clinical trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended a leading broker dealer against $500 million claims that it colluded to inflate the valuation of mortgage-backed securities held by a hedge fund customer.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended a global bank in a commercial arbitration that involved an accounting dispute with the bank\u0026rsquo;s former subsidiary.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Product Liability Rising Star ","detail":"Law360"},{"title":"New York Metro Super Lawyers Rising Star","detail":"SuperLawyers"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11993}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-04-13T22:05:53.000Z","updated_at":"2026-04-13T22:05:53.000Z","searchable_text":"Calica{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Product Liability Rising Star \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"New York Metro Super Lawyers Rising Star\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"SuperLawyers\"}{{ FIELD }}Represented a global chemical company in PFAS personal injury, medical monitoring, property damage, water district, customer class, and natural resource damages cases.{{ FIELD }}Secured trial victory for global bank on claim of breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in connection with a revolving credit agreement.{{ FIELD }}Obtained dismissal of Commodity Exchange Act claims against global bank in LIBOR class action.{{ FIELD }}Represented global pharmaceutical company in connection with N.Y. False Claims Act claim by New York Attorney General.{{ FIELD }}Represented brand name pharmaceutical companies as national counsel supervising cases involving 8,000 product liability plaintiffs.{{ FIELD }}Bell v. Pfizer (8th Cir. 2013); Fullington v. Pfizer (8th Cir. 2013); Strayhorn v. Wyeth (6th Cir. 2013); Eckhardt v. Qualitest (5th Cir. 2014); Huck v. Trimark (Iowa 2014); Smith v. Wyeth (6th Cir. 2011); Mensing v. Wyeth (8th Cir. 2009). Obtained dismissal for brand name pharmaceutical company in failure to warn cases involving ingestion of generic pharmaceuticals.{{ FIELD }}Assisted a multi-national pharmaceutical company in a licensing dispute before the ICC International Court of Arbitration.{{ FIELD }}Represented an owner participant in a contested bankruptcy proceeding concerning tax indemnity claims arising out of the purchase of aircraft.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global pharmaceutical company in connection with an internal investigation arising out of a clinical trial.{{ FIELD }}Defended a leading broker dealer against $500 million claims that it colluded to inflate the valuation of mortgage-backed securities held by a hedge fund customer.{{ FIELD }}Defended a global bank in a commercial arbitration that involved an accounting dispute with the bank’s former subsidiary.{{ FIELD }}Andrew J. Calica is a partner in our New York office and a member of King \u0026amp; Spalding’s Product Liability and Mass Torts practice group. He represents chemical and pharmaceutical companies in toxic tort, product liability and mass and class actions. Andrew also has substantial multi-district litigation experience representing financial institutions in antitrust and commodities litigation.\nAndrew also advises clients in complex commercial disputes and on resolution strategies. Andrew’s recent engagements include representing global chemical companies in water contamination cases.\nHe is a co-author of several chapters in the Electronic Discovery Deskbook, a treatise on electronic discovery and records management published by the Practicing Law Institute. Partner Product Liability Rising Star  Law360 New York Metro Super Lawyers Rising Star SuperLawyers Wesleyan University  Cornell University Cornell Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan New York Chair Wesleyan University Annual Fund (fmr) Vice-Chair Wesleyan University Alumni Association (fmr) Chair, Wesleyan University Alumni Elected Trustee Nominating Committee (fmr) Represented a global chemical company in PFAS personal injury, medical monitoring, property damage, water district, customer class, and natural resource damages cases. Secured trial victory for global bank on claim of breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in connection with a revolving credit agreement. Obtained dismissal of Commodity Exchange Act claims against global bank in LIBOR class action. Represented global pharmaceutical company in connection with N.Y. False Claims Act claim by New York Attorney General. Represented brand name pharmaceutical companies as national counsel supervising cases involving 8,000 product liability plaintiffs. Bell v. Pfizer (8th Cir. 2013); Fullington v. Pfizer (8th Cir. 2013); Strayhorn v. Wyeth (6th Cir. 2013); Eckhardt v. Qualitest (5th Cir. 2014); Huck v. Trimark (Iowa 2014); Smith v. Wyeth (6th Cir. 2011); Mensing v. Wyeth (8th Cir. 2009). Obtained dismissal for brand name pharmaceutical company in failure to warn cases involving ingestion of generic pharmaceuticals. Assisted a multi-national pharmaceutical company in a licensing dispute before the ICC International Court of Arbitration. Represented an owner participant in a contested bankruptcy proceeding concerning tax indemnity claims arising out of the purchase of aircraft. Represented a global pharmaceutical company in connection with an internal investigation arising out of a clinical trial. Defended a leading broker dealer against $500 million claims that it colluded to inflate the valuation of mortgage-backed securities held by a hedge fund customer. Defended a global bank in a commercial arbitration that involved an accounting dispute with the bank’s former subsidiary.","searchable_name":"Andrew Calica","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":446377,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6888,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJennifer Chambers is a strategic commercial litigator with extensive experience advising multinational and major Australian corporations and boards across a wide variety of commercial matters. Her practice spans both complex domestic and cross-border disputes, as well as high-stakes regulatory investigations and proceedings, particularly in the energy, resources, and financial services sectors. Jennifer is also a trusted adviser to boards and individual company officers in respect of director and officer duties and corporate governance issues.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJennifer has significant experience both in private practice and at the commercial bar, representing major corporates and directors in high stakes commercial arbitration and litigation matters throughout the superior courts of Australia (including the High Court). Such matters include multibillion-dollar claims alleging misleading or deceptive conduct, breach of director and trustee duties, complex cross-border disputes, class action defence, and contentious members\u0026rsquo; schemes of arrangements.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, Jennifer advises global energy, resources, and financial services clients \u0026nbsp;with respect to regulatory developments and associated litigation risks. Jennifer handles high-profile regulatory investigations and\u0026nbsp;advises clients with respect to corporate and director liability, including civil penalties and criminal liability arising out of corporate crises and\u0026nbsp;investigations, including workplace misconduct,\u0026nbsp;incidents and fatalities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJennifer is a driver of Diversity, Equality and Inclusion initiatives and, over the course of her career, has provided pro bono legal services to a diverse client base, including asylum seekers and First Nations people.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"jennifer-chambers","email":"jchambers@kslaw.com","phone":"+61 403 788 969","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003ca name=\"_GoBack\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial litigation and arbitration \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a prominent oil and gas company in a significant ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitration relating to the recovery of project costs under a production sharing contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the board of a major resources company in defense of multibillion-dollar claims in the Supreme Court of NSW and Court of Appeal alleging breach of director\u0026rsquo;s duties, trustee duties and oppression of the minority shareholders.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Western Australian government in Supreme Court of WA proceedings concerning the distribution to creditors of over $1.8 billion in the liquidations of the Bell Group. The matter raised complex issues concerning the rights of bond holders and the proper construction of funding agreements and trust deeds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global telecommunications company in connection with significant national security and cybersecurity matters.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a former State Solicitor in Federal Court proceedings in which it was alleged that the State engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct to deprive the applicant of multimillion-dollar iron ore assets.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the board of a major resources company in a commercial arbitration concerning a multibillion-dollar dividend dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised an oil and gas major in relation to matters relevant to its participation in the Australian retail fuel market including long term fuel supply agreements, licensing and assignment agreements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActed for a director and shareholder in complex litigation before the Victorian Supreme Court regarding the receivership and multibillion-dollar sale by a major Australian bank of Burrup Fertilisers, the world\u0026rsquo;s largest ammonia plant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the \u003cstrong\u003ePepper Group Limited\u003c/strong\u003e on the $675M acquisition by KKR of a controlling interest in Pepper by way of a members\u0026rsquo; scheme of arrangement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eGetSwift Limited\u003c/strong\u003e in its \"top hat\" scheme of arrangement to create a new holding company and re-domicile to Canada which was opposed by the corporate regulator, ASIC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRegulatory Investigations and Proceedings \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global professional services firm in connection with its participation in a Commonwealth investigation into government procurement and probity issues and work health and safety matters on a multimillion-dollar project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a former banking executive in connection with a case brought by the corporate regulator in which it was alleged that a major Australian bank had engaged in insider trading and unconscionable conduct in executing a $12 billion interest rate swap transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global financial services client in connection with potential exposure in ASIC, AUSTRAC and gaming regulator AML/CTF investigations into a major casino operator.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a significant investment manager in investigating allegations of fraud, bribery and corruption claims involving the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission and successfully resolved subsequent court proceedings involving the same parties.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActed for an executive director of a property developer in connection with the corporate regulator\u0026rsquo;s investigation into alleged unfair lending practices, including the negotiation of an enforceable undertaking.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClass Actions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global ride sharing company in its defense of a class action brought on behalf of taxi, hire-car, limousine, and charter vehicle industry participants in the Supreme Court of Victoria.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised the Australian board of a public company in connection with the settlement of multibillion-dollar litigation, including a securities class action, relating to statements in a project prospectus which were alleged to be misleading or deceptive.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnergy Transition and Sustainability \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvised a superannuation fund in respect of a greenwashing investigation conducted by the corporate regulator ASIC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs part of a global team, advised major energy companies and other clients in relation to Australian and global ESG regulatory frameworks, laws, policies and trends, including litigation and reputational risks such as greenwashing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHuman Capital and Compliance \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eActed for the board of directors of an ASX-listed entity in connection with multiple fatalities at an Australian theme park, including representation at a high-profile coronial inquest and related investigations conducted by the work health and safety regulator.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a multinational manufacturing company in defending claims of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment before the Australian Human Rights Commission and subsequent proceedings before the Federal Circuit Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an agricultural asset manager in regulatory investigations and a criminal prosecution in connection with a workplace fatality.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised a global payments company in relation to allegations of workplace bullying and harassment and psychosocial hazards in the workplace.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSelect Experience at the Bar\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAppeared in a landmark case before the High Court of Australia concerning the loss of a chance and damages claim for loss of opportunity (led by B Walker AO SC and J Lonergan (as her Honour then was)); \u003cem\u003eTabet v Gett \u003c/em\u003e(2010) 240 CLR 537.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAppeared for Radio 2UE in a case in which the High Court clarified that the common law test for defamation applies to an imputation concerning any aspect of a person's reputation, including the person's professional or business reputation (led by R McHugh SC (as his Honour then was)); \u003cem\u003eRadio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton \u003c/em\u003e(2009) 238 CLR 460.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented several medical practitioners who challenged the Constitutional validity of the Medicare scheme (led by David Jackson AM KC and Mark Robinson); \u003cem\u003eWong v Commonwealth of Australia; Selim v Lele \u003c/em\u003e(2009) 236 CLR 573.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":3317}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":27,"guid":"27.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":111,"guid":"111.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":699,"guid":"699.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1114,"guid":"1114.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Chambers","nick_name":"Jennifer","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Jennifer","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Doyles Guide 2025: Leading Arbitration Lawyers, Australia – Recommended","detail":"Doyles Guide 2025"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in Australia: Recognized in Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers in Australia, 2020-2024"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/jennifer--chambers","seodescription":"Jennifer Chambers is a partner in our International Disputes Practice Group. Read more about him.","primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJennifer Chambers is a strategic commercial litigator with extensive experience advising multinational and major Australian corporations and boards across a wide variety of commercial matters. Her practice spans both complex domestic and cross-border disputes, as well as high-stakes regulatory investigations and proceedings, particularly in the energy, resources, and financial services sectors. Jennifer is also a trusted adviser to boards and individual company officers in respect of director and officer duties and corporate governance issues.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJennifer has significant experience both in private practice and at the commercial bar, representing major corporates and directors in high stakes commercial arbitration and litigation matters throughout the superior courts of Australia (including the High Court). Such matters include multibillion-dollar claims alleging misleading or deceptive conduct, breach of director and trustee duties, complex cross-border disputes, class action defence, and contentious members\u0026rsquo; schemes of arrangements.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, Jennifer advises global energy, resources, and financial services clients \u0026nbsp;with respect to regulatory developments and associated litigation risks. Jennifer handles high-profile regulatory investigations and\u0026nbsp;advises clients with respect to corporate and director liability, including civil penalties and criminal liability arising out of corporate crises and\u0026nbsp;investigations, including workplace misconduct,\u0026nbsp;incidents and fatalities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJennifer is a driver of Diversity, Equality and Inclusion initiatives and, over the course of her career, has provided pro bono legal services to a diverse client base, including asylum seekers and First Nations people.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003ca name=\"_GoBack\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial litigation and arbitration \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a prominent oil and gas company in a significant ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitration relating to the recovery of project costs under a production sharing contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the board of a major resources company in defense of multibillion-dollar claims in the Supreme Court of NSW and Court of Appeal alleging breach of director\u0026rsquo;s duties, trustee duties and oppression of the minority shareholders.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Western Australian government in Supreme Court of WA proceedings concerning the distribution to creditors of over $1.8 billion in the liquidations of the Bell Group. The matter raised complex issues concerning the rights of bond holders and the proper construction of funding agreements and trust deeds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global telecommunications company in connection with significant national security and cybersecurity matters.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a former State Solicitor in Federal Court proceedings in which it was alleged that the State engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct to deprive the applicant of multimillion-dollar iron ore assets.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the board of a major resources company in a commercial arbitration concerning a multibillion-dollar dividend dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised an oil and gas major in relation to matters relevant to its participation in the Australian retail fuel market including long term fuel supply agreements, licensing and assignment agreements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActed for a director and shareholder in complex litigation before the Victorian Supreme Court regarding the receivership and multibillion-dollar sale by a major Australian bank of Burrup Fertilisers, the world\u0026rsquo;s largest ammonia plant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the \u003cstrong\u003ePepper Group Limited\u003c/strong\u003e on the $675M acquisition by KKR of a controlling interest in Pepper by way of a members\u0026rsquo; scheme of arrangement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eGetSwift Limited\u003c/strong\u003e in its \"top hat\" scheme of arrangement to create a new holding company and re-domicile to Canada which was opposed by the corporate regulator, ASIC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRegulatory Investigations and Proceedings \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global professional services firm in connection with its participation in a Commonwealth investigation into government procurement and probity issues and work health and safety matters on a multimillion-dollar project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a former banking executive in connection with a case brought by the corporate regulator in which it was alleged that a major Australian bank had engaged in insider trading and unconscionable conduct in executing a $12 billion interest rate swap transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global financial services client in connection with potential exposure in ASIC, AUSTRAC and gaming regulator AML/CTF investigations into a major casino operator.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a significant investment manager in investigating allegations of fraud, bribery and corruption claims involving the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission and successfully resolved subsequent court proceedings involving the same parties.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActed for an executive director of a property developer in connection with the corporate regulator\u0026rsquo;s investigation into alleged unfair lending practices, including the negotiation of an enforceable undertaking.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClass Actions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a global ride sharing company in its defense of a class action brought on behalf of taxi, hire-car, limousine, and charter vehicle industry participants in the Supreme Court of Victoria.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised the Australian board of a public company in connection with the settlement of multibillion-dollar litigation, including a securities class action, relating to statements in a project prospectus which were alleged to be misleading or deceptive.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEnergy Transition and Sustainability \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvised a superannuation fund in respect of a greenwashing investigation conducted by the corporate regulator ASIC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAs part of a global team, advised major energy companies and other clients in relation to Australian and global ESG regulatory frameworks, laws, policies and trends, including litigation and reputational risks such as greenwashing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHuman Capital and Compliance \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eActed for the board of directors of an ASX-listed entity in connection with multiple fatalities at an Australian theme park, including representation at a high-profile coronial inquest and related investigations conducted by the work health and safety regulator.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a multinational manufacturing company in defending claims of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment before the Australian Human Rights Commission and subsequent proceedings before the Federal Circuit Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an agricultural asset manager in regulatory investigations and a criminal prosecution in connection with a workplace fatality.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvised a global payments company in relation to allegations of workplace bullying and harassment and psychosocial hazards in the workplace.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSelect Experience at the Bar\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAppeared in a landmark case before the High Court of Australia concerning the loss of a chance and damages claim for loss of opportunity (led by B Walker AO SC and J Lonergan (as her Honour then was)); \u003cem\u003eTabet v Gett \u003c/em\u003e(2010) 240 CLR 537.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAppeared for Radio 2UE in a case in which the High Court clarified that the common law test for defamation applies to an imputation concerning any aspect of a person's reputation, including the person's professional or business reputation (led by R McHugh SC (as his Honour then was)); \u003cem\u003eRadio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton \u003c/em\u003e(2009) 238 CLR 460.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented several medical practitioners who challenged the Constitutional validity of the Medicare scheme (led by David Jackson AM KC and Mark Robinson); \u003cem\u003eWong v Commonwealth of Australia; Selim v Lele \u003c/em\u003e(2009) 236 CLR 573.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Doyles Guide 2025: Leading Arbitration Lawyers, Australia – Recommended","detail":"Doyles Guide 2025"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in Australia: Recognized in Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers in Australia, 2020-2024"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12320}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-03T05:01:45.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-03T05:01:45.000Z","searchable_text":"Chambers{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Doyles Guide 2025: Leading Arbitration Lawyers, Australia – Recommended\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Doyles Guide 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in Australia: Recognized in Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in Australia, 2020-2024\"}{{ FIELD }}Commercial litigation and arbitration \nRepresenting a prominent oil and gas company in a significant ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitration relating to the recovery of project costs under a production sharing contract.{{ FIELD }}Represented the board of a major resources company in defense of multibillion-dollar claims in the Supreme Court of NSW and Court of Appeal alleging breach of director’s duties, trustee duties and oppression of the minority shareholders.{{ FIELD }}Represented the Western Australian government in Supreme Court of WA proceedings concerning the distribution to creditors of over $1.8 billion in the liquidations of the Bell Group. The matter raised complex issues concerning the rights of bond holders and the proper construction of funding agreements and trust deeds.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global telecommunications company in connection with significant national security and cybersecurity matters.{{ FIELD }}Represented a former State Solicitor in Federal Court proceedings in which it was alleged that the State engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct to deprive the applicant of multimillion-dollar iron ore assets.{{ FIELD }}Represented the board of a major resources company in a commercial arbitration concerning a multibillion-dollar dividend dispute.{{ FIELD }}Advised an oil and gas major in relation to matters relevant to its participation in the Australian retail fuel market including long term fuel supply agreements, licensing and assignment agreements.{{ FIELD }}Acted for a director and shareholder in complex litigation before the Victorian Supreme Court regarding the receivership and multibillion-dollar sale by a major Australian bank of Burrup Fertilisers, the world’s largest ammonia plant.{{ FIELD }}Represented the Pepper Group Limited on the $675M acquisition by KKR of a controlling interest in Pepper by way of a members’ scheme of arrangement.{{ FIELD }}Represented GetSwift Limited in its \"top hat\" scheme of arrangement to create a new holding company and re-domicile to Canada which was opposed by the corporate regulator, ASIC.{{ FIELD }}Regulatory Investigations and Proceedings \nRepresented a global professional services firm in connection with its participation in a Commonwealth investigation into government procurement and probity issues and work health and safety matters on a multimillion-dollar project.{{ FIELD }}Represented a former banking executive in connection with a case brought by the corporate regulator in which it was alleged that a major Australian bank had engaged in insider trading and unconscionable conduct in executing a $12 billion interest rate swap transaction.{{ FIELD }}Represented a global financial services client in connection with potential exposure in ASIC, AUSTRAC and gaming regulator AML/CTF investigations into a major casino operator.{{ FIELD }}Represented a significant investment manager in investigating allegations of fraud, bribery and corruption claims involving the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission and successfully resolved subsequent court proceedings involving the same parties.{{ FIELD }}Acted for an executive director of a property developer in connection with the corporate regulator’s investigation into alleged unfair lending practices, including the negotiation of an enforceable undertaking.{{ FIELD }}Class Actions\nRepresented a global ride sharing company in its defense of a class action brought on behalf of taxi, hire-car, limousine, and charter vehicle industry participants in the Supreme Court of Victoria.{{ FIELD }}Advised the Australian board of a public company in connection with the settlement of multibillion-dollar litigation, including a securities class action, relating to statements in a project prospectus which were alleged to be misleading or deceptive.{{ FIELD }}Energy Transition and Sustainability \nAdvised a superannuation fund in respect of a greenwashing investigation conducted by the corporate regulator ASIC.{{ FIELD }}As part of a global team, advised major energy companies and other clients in relation to Australian and global ESG regulatory frameworks, laws, policies and trends, including litigation and reputational risks such as greenwashing.{{ FIELD }}Human Capital and Compliance \nActed for the board of directors of an ASX-listed entity in connection with multiple fatalities at an Australian theme park, including representation at a high-profile coronial inquest and related investigations conducted by the work health and safety regulator.{{ FIELD }}Represented a multinational manufacturing company in defending claims of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment before the Australian Human Rights Commission and subsequent proceedings before the Federal Circuit Court.{{ FIELD }}Represented an agricultural asset manager in regulatory investigations and a criminal prosecution in connection with a workplace fatality.{{ FIELD }}Advised a global payments company in relation to allegations of workplace bullying and harassment and psychosocial hazards in the workplace.{{ FIELD }}Select Experience at the Bar \nAppeared in a landmark case before the High Court of Australia concerning the loss of a chance and damages claim for loss of opportunity (led by B Walker AO SC and J Lonergan (as her Honour then was)); Tabet v Gett (2010) 240 CLR 537.{{ FIELD }}Appeared for Radio 2UE in a case in which the High Court clarified that the common law test for defamation applies to an imputation concerning any aspect of a person's reputation, including the person's professional or business reputation (led by R McHugh SC (as his Honour then was)); Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton (2009) 238 CLR 460.{{ FIELD }}Represented several medical practitioners who challenged the Constitutional validity of the Medicare scheme (led by David Jackson AM KC and Mark Robinson); Wong v Commonwealth of Australia; Selim v Lele (2009) 236 CLR 573.{{ FIELD }}Jennifer Chambers is a strategic commercial litigator with extensive experience advising multinational and major Australian corporations and boards across a wide variety of commercial matters. Her practice spans both complex domestic and cross-border disputes, as well as high-stakes regulatory investigations and proceedings, particularly in the energy, resources, and financial services sectors. Jennifer is also a trusted adviser to boards and individual company officers in respect of director and officer duties and corporate governance issues. \nJennifer has significant experience both in private practice and at the commercial bar, representing major corporates and directors in high stakes commercial arbitration and litigation matters throughout the superior courts of Australia (including the High Court). Such matters include multibillion-dollar claims alleging misleading or deceptive conduct, breach of director and trustee duties, complex cross-border disputes, class action defence, and contentious members’ schemes of arrangements.\nAdditionally, Jennifer advises global energy, resources, and financial services clients  with respect to regulatory developments and associated litigation risks. Jennifer handles high-profile regulatory investigations and advises clients with respect to corporate and director liability, including civil penalties and criminal liability arising out of corporate crises and investigations, including workplace misconduct, incidents and fatalities.\nJennifer is a driver of Diversity, Equality and Inclusion initiatives and, over the course of her career, has provided pro bono legal services to a diverse client base, including asylum seekers and First Nations people. Jennifer Chambers lawyer Partner Doyles Guide 2025: Leading Arbitration Lawyers, Australia – Recommended Doyles Guide 2025 Best Lawyers in Australia: Recognized in Litigation Best Lawyers in Australia, 2020-2024 University of Technology Sydney  University of New South Wales  High Court of Australia Supreme Court of New South Wales Federal Court of Australia Corporations Law Committee, Business Law Section of the Law Council of Australia Graduate of the Yale School of Management Executive Education Program Graduate of the Australian Institute of Company Directors Australian Centre for International Commercial Arbitration - South Pacific Taskforce Commercial litigation and arbitration \nRepresenting a prominent oil and gas company in a significant ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitration relating to the recovery of project costs under a production sharing contract. Represented the board of a major resources company in defense of multibillion-dollar claims in the Supreme Court of NSW and Court of Appeal alleging breach of director’s duties, trustee duties and oppression of the minority shareholders. Represented the Western Australian government in Supreme Court of WA proceedings concerning the distribution to creditors of over $1.8 billion in the liquidations of the Bell Group. The matter raised complex issues concerning the rights of bond holders and the proper construction of funding agreements and trust deeds. Represented a global telecommunications company in connection with significant national security and cybersecurity matters. Represented a former State Solicitor in Federal Court proceedings in which it was alleged that the State engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct to deprive the applicant of multimillion-dollar iron ore assets. Represented the board of a major resources company in a commercial arbitration concerning a multibillion-dollar dividend dispute. Advised an oil and gas major in relation to matters relevant to its participation in the Australian retail fuel market including long term fuel supply agreements, licensing and assignment agreements. Acted for a director and shareholder in complex litigation before the Victorian Supreme Court regarding the receivership and multibillion-dollar sale by a major Australian bank of Burrup Fertilisers, the world’s largest ammonia plant. Represented the Pepper Group Limited on the $675M acquisition by KKR of a controlling interest in Pepper by way of a members’ scheme of arrangement. Represented GetSwift Limited in its \"top hat\" scheme of arrangement to create a new holding company and re-domicile to Canada which was opposed by the corporate regulator, ASIC. Regulatory Investigations and Proceedings \nRepresented a global professional services firm in connection with its participation in a Commonwealth investigation into government procurement and probity issues and work health and safety matters on a multimillion-dollar project. Represented a former banking executive in connection with a case brought by the corporate regulator in which it was alleged that a major Australian bank had engaged in insider trading and unconscionable conduct in executing a $12 billion interest rate swap transaction. Represented a global financial services client in connection with potential exposure in ASIC, AUSTRAC and gaming regulator AML/CTF investigations into a major casino operator. Represented a significant investment manager in investigating allegations of fraud, bribery and corruption claims involving the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission and successfully resolved subsequent court proceedings involving the same parties. Acted for an executive director of a property developer in connection with the corporate regulator’s investigation into alleged unfair lending practices, including the negotiation of an enforceable undertaking. Class Actions\nRepresented a global ride sharing company in its defense of a class action brought on behalf of taxi, hire-car, limousine, and charter vehicle industry participants in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Advised the Australian board of a public company in connection with the settlement of multibillion-dollar litigation, including a securities class action, relating to statements in a project prospectus which were alleged to be misleading or deceptive. Energy Transition and Sustainability \nAdvised a superannuation fund in respect of a greenwashing investigation conducted by the corporate regulator ASIC. As part of a global team, advised major energy companies and other clients in relation to Australian and global ESG regulatory frameworks, laws, policies and trends, including litigation and reputational risks such as greenwashing. Human Capital and Compliance \nActed for the board of directors of an ASX-listed entity in connection with multiple fatalities at an Australian theme park, including representation at a high-profile coronial inquest and related investigations conducted by the work health and safety regulator. Represented a multinational manufacturing company in defending claims of unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment before the Australian Human Rights Commission and subsequent proceedings before the Federal Circuit Court. Represented an agricultural asset manager in regulatory investigations and a criminal prosecution in connection with a workplace fatality. Advised a global payments company in relation to allegations of workplace bullying and harassment and psychosocial hazards in the workplace. Select Experience at the Bar \nAppeared in a landmark case before the High Court of Australia concerning the loss of a chance and damages claim for loss of opportunity (led by B Walker AO SC and J Lonergan (as her Honour then was)); Tabet v Gett (2010) 240 CLR 537. Appeared for Radio 2UE in a case in which the High Court clarified that the common law test for defamation applies to an imputation concerning any aspect of a person's reputation, including the person's professional or business reputation (led by R McHugh SC (as his Honour then was)); Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd v Chesterton (2009) 238 CLR 460. Represented several medical practitioners who challenged the Constitutional validity of the Medicare scheme (led by David Jackson AM KC and Mark Robinson); Wong v Commonwealth of Australia; Selim v Lele (2009) 236 CLR 573.","searchable_name":"Jennifer Chambers","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":445366,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":1812,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eWade Coriell is\u0026nbsp;the Co-Head of our International Disputes practice group, a recent member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s ten-person Policy Committee, and a member of the Singapore International\u0026nbsp; Arbitration Centre's Court of Arbitration.\u0026nbsp; He has represented clients in several of the largest international commercial and investment arbitrations on record in Asia and the Americas, particularly in the energy sector. \u003cem\u003eChambers Global \u003c/em\u003eranks Wade as a global market leader in international arbitration, while\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAsia-Pacific \u003c/em\u003eranks him as a Band 1 practitioner in Singapore, calling him \"an excellent advocate whose level of experience and ability make him stand out\" and reporting that clients \"would trust him to lead our most important and sensitive international dispute matters and consider him to have become one of the pre-eminent practitioners in Singapore\u003cem\u003e.\"\u0026nbsp; The Legal 500 \u003c/em\u003enotes that Wade \"has an excellent record in oil \u0026amp; gas cases, particularly in Indonesia and the Philippines; he is in the forefront of LNG price review disputes;\" and that his \"abilities as a terrific advocate and a pragmatic advisor make him stand out among his competitors.\"[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWade has particular strength in handling high-profile matters pending simultaneously in multiple jurisdictions, often involving elements of public, investor and government relations.\u0026nbsp; Clients report to \u003cem\u003eChambers \u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;that he \"is very thorough and cuts through complex commercial issues and simplifies them in such a form that they are easily understood,\" and that \"[h]is advocacy skills are amazing.\"\u0026nbsp; Wade has handled disputes against the governments of Argentina, Armenia, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Korea, Peru, the Philippines, Romania, Thailand, and Venezuela, as well as international arbitrations for commercial clients in these and numerous\u0026nbsp;other countries. His recent work includes handling four Asia-based disputes and one Latin American dispute of over $1 billion each.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWade has represented clients before the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, the International Chamber of Commerce, the London Court of International Arbitration, the American Arbitration Association, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, and other institutions.\u0026nbsp; In addition to his role on the Court of Arbitration, he also regularly serves as an arbitrator under the SIAC Rules.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSince 2015, \u003cem\u003eChambers\u003c/em\u003e has ranked Wade annually for his strong international arbitration practice, and he is currently ranked as a Band 1 practitioner in Singapore and a Band 5 practitioner globally. He also is listed in \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eWho\u0026rsquo;s Who, Arbitration Future Leaders, Benchmark Litigation,\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eGlobal Arbitration Review 100,\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eLatin Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003eThe Global Arbitration Review\u003c/em\u003e has called him \"a lawyer to know.\"\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"wade-coriell","email":"wcoriell@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean Australian mining company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID dispute against the Republic of India, arising out of the expropriation of a gold mining project in the state of Rajasthan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth well over $1 billion in an UNCITRAL arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea Philippine electricity provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;under a Concession Agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a $100 million award on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea consortium of sellers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a Singapore-seated LNG price review arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea Southeast Asian conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration over share ownership in a joint venture that owns and manages the tollways in the capital of the Philippines.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a baseball-style coal price review arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea coal producer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Illinois basin.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth over $4 billion in an ICC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etwo international oil majors\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst a Southeast Asian government, arising out of a revenue-allocation dispute under a gas service contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth approximately $9.5 billion, as well as four groundbreaking interim measures awards, awards on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Ecuador, arising out of Chevron\u0026rsquo;s claim for violation of the U.S.-Ecuador bilateral investment treaty as a result of the government\u0026rsquo;s involvement in a fraudulent Ecuadorian court judgment against Chevron for alleged environmental contamination.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth approximately $1.5 billion in an AAA arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea U.S. LNG company\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst one of its customers, arising out of a dispute over gas volumes at a new tolling facility.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a $360 million award for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBurlington Resources\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Ecuador, arising out of the expropriation of an oil concession and associated counterclaims for alleged environmental contamination.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an $85 million award for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eConocoPhillips\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an UNCITRAL arbitration concerning the proper tariff charged by a gas pipeline in Indonesia. The case involved the application of a contract's various representations and warranties to hold the gas transporter liable for a tariff increase decreed by Indonesia's pipeline regulators.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a $50 million award in an SIAC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eConocoPhillips China\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against its counterparty in a farm-out agreement arising out of three coal-bed methane concessions in China.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a $30 million lost-profits award in a Geneva-seated ICC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea Turkish electricity distribution company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against the Turkish government, for breach of a privatization contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a favorable award for declaratory relief in an ICC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePhillips 66\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against PDVSA and one of its subsidiaries, arising out of the price protection mechanism in a long-term crude oil supply agreement for a Texas refinery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAustralia Pacific LNG (APLNG\u003c/strong\u003e) on an LNG SPA price review negotiation with a foundation North American customer, with a multi-billion-dollar price differential in dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eShell\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against the Philippines, arising out of a dispute over the tax assumption provisions in the service contract for the offshore Malampaya gas project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major Philippine conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration against its Indonesian joint venture partner, arising out of a dispute over shares in a Dutch venture that owns and operates the major toll roads in and around Manila.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea construction contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration, arising out of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eforce majeure\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;dispute related to an oil refinery in Kurdistan. The case settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePT Medco E\u0026amp;P Brantas\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an AAA arbitration against Lapindo Brantas, Inc., arising out of an environmental indemnification dispute related to their joint operating agreement for oil exploration and production in Indonesia. The case settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Gold Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID claim against Armenia under the U.S.-Armenia BIT, arising from Armenia\u0026rsquo;s repudiation and violation of mining licenses issued to Global Gold for mineral exploration and exploitation in several Armenian oil fields. The case settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major U.S. electrical contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in several lawsuits and AAA arbitrations for breach of contract. The cases settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":3778}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":4,"guid":"4.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":104,"guid":"104.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":114,"guid":"114.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1015,"guid":"1015.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":128,"guid":"128.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1237,"guid":"1237.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":579,"guid":"579.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":132,"guid":"132.capabilities","index":13,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":14,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Coriell","nick_name":"Wade","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Sidney A. Fitzwater, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas","years_held":"2001-2002"}],"first_name":"Wade","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":35,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"\"Wade is well known for his strategic thinking and unwavering commitment to achieving the best possible results.\"","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade is excellent in advocacy, especially in arbitration, and provides clear and concise advice to his clients.\" ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade's ability to navigate complex legal frameworks make them an invaluable asset to any client.\" ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade has deep understanding of cross-border disputes.\"","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"Wade Coriell - Recommended Lawyer","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Energy - Foreign Firms, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"Wade Coriell - Recommended Lawyer","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Projects - Foreign Firms, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"Wade Coriell - Leading Partner ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"Wade Coriell - Leading Partner","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade Coriell is a brilliant litigator.\"","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"\"Clients and colleagues alike consistently praise Wade's professionalism, integrity, and results-driven approach.\"","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"Wade is a leading expert in international arbitration, with outstanding credentials in both the US and Singapore","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade is a first-class leading practitioner, an excellent advocate and strategist.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"“Wade is the head of the team. He instills a high degree of trust, brings a wealth of experience...\"","detail":"Chamber Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade Coriell is a household name.\" ","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2025"},{"title":"\"His advocacy skills are amazing, and he is incredibly persuasive as well.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025"},{"title":"\"Wade Coriell's strength is oral argumentation.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2025"},{"title":"\"... He provides excellent service and quick responses, and has great commercial vision.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2024"},{"title":"\"Wade is very effective in oral arguments.\" ","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2024"},{"title":"\"Wade leads the King \u0026 Spalding team and is quite well known.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2024"},{"title":"\"I would trust him to lead our most important and sensitive international dispute matters.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2022"},{"title":"\"A dynamic oral advocate with a sharp legal mind.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2022"},{"title":"\"An excellent advocate whose level of experience and ability make him stand out.\"","detail":"Chambers Global"},{"title":"\"A lawyer to know.\"","detail":"The Global Arbitration Review 100"},{"title":"A Leading Practitioner in International Arbitration","detail":"Who's Who, Arbitration Future Leaders, Global Arbitration Review, Legal 500, Latin Lawyer"},{"title":"One of Five Rising Stars in International Energy Law","detail":"Law360, 2013"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":"Wade Coriell is a lawyer of our International Disputes Practice Group. Read more.","primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eWade Coriell is\u0026nbsp;the Co-Head of our International Disputes practice group, a recent member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s ten-person Policy Committee, and a member of the Singapore International\u0026nbsp; Arbitration Centre's Court of Arbitration.\u0026nbsp; He has represented clients in several of the largest international commercial and investment arbitrations on record in Asia and the Americas, particularly in the energy sector. \u003cem\u003eChambers Global \u003c/em\u003eranks Wade as a global market leader in international arbitration, while\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAsia-Pacific \u003c/em\u003eranks him as a Band 1 practitioner in Singapore, calling him \"an excellent advocate whose level of experience and ability make him stand out\" and reporting that clients \"would trust him to lead our most important and sensitive international dispute matters and consider him to have become one of the pre-eminent practitioners in Singapore\u003cem\u003e.\"\u0026nbsp; The Legal 500 \u003c/em\u003enotes that Wade \"has an excellent record in oil \u0026amp; gas cases, particularly in Indonesia and the Philippines; he is in the forefront of LNG price review disputes;\" and that his \"abilities as a terrific advocate and a pragmatic advisor make him stand out among his competitors.\"[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWade has particular strength in handling high-profile matters pending simultaneously in multiple jurisdictions, often involving elements of public, investor and government relations.\u0026nbsp; Clients report to \u003cem\u003eChambers \u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;that he \"is very thorough and cuts through complex commercial issues and simplifies them in such a form that they are easily understood,\" and that \"[h]is advocacy skills are amazing.\"\u0026nbsp; Wade has handled disputes against the governments of Argentina, Armenia, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Korea, Peru, the Philippines, Romania, Thailand, and Venezuela, as well as international arbitrations for commercial clients in these and numerous\u0026nbsp;other countries. His recent work includes handling four Asia-based disputes and one Latin American dispute of over $1 billion each.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWade has represented clients before the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, the International Chamber of Commerce, the London Court of International Arbitration, the American Arbitration Association, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, and other institutions.\u0026nbsp; In addition to his role on the Court of Arbitration, he also regularly serves as an arbitrator under the SIAC Rules.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSince 2015, \u003cem\u003eChambers\u003c/em\u003e has ranked Wade annually for his strong international arbitration practice, and he is currently ranked as a Band 1 practitioner in Singapore and a Band 5 practitioner globally. He also is listed in \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eWho\u0026rsquo;s Who, Arbitration Future Leaders, Benchmark Litigation,\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eGlobal Arbitration Review 100,\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eLatin Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003eThe Global Arbitration Review\u003c/em\u003e has called him \"a lawyer to know.\"\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ean Australian mining company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID dispute against the Republic of India, arising out of the expropriation of a gold mining project in the state of Rajasthan.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth well over $1 billion in an UNCITRAL arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea Philippine electricity provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;under a Concession Agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a $100 million award on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea consortium of sellers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a Singapore-seated LNG price review arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea Southeast Asian conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration over share ownership in a joint venture that owns and manages the tollways in the capital of the Philippines.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a baseball-style coal price review arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea coal producer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Illinois basin.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth over $4 billion in an ICC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etwo international oil majors\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst a Southeast Asian government, arising out of a revenue-allocation dispute under a gas service contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth approximately $9.5 billion, as well as four groundbreaking interim measures awards, awards on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Ecuador, arising out of Chevron\u0026rsquo;s claim for violation of the U.S.-Ecuador bilateral investment treaty as a result of the government\u0026rsquo;s involvement in a fraudulent Ecuadorian court judgment against Chevron for alleged environmental contamination.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth approximately $1.5 billion in an AAA arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea U.S. LNG company\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst one of its customers, arising out of a dispute over gas volumes at a new tolling facility.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a $360 million award for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBurlington Resources\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Ecuador, arising out of the expropriation of an oil concession and associated counterclaims for alleged environmental contamination.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an $85 million award for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eConocoPhillips\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an UNCITRAL arbitration concerning the proper tariff charged by a gas pipeline in Indonesia. The case involved the application of a contract's various representations and warranties to hold the gas transporter liable for a tariff increase decreed by Indonesia's pipeline regulators.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a $50 million award in an SIAC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eConocoPhillips China\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against its counterparty in a farm-out agreement arising out of three coal-bed methane concessions in China.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a $30 million lost-profits award in a Geneva-seated ICC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea Turkish electricity distribution company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against the Turkish government, for breach of a privatization contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a favorable award for declaratory relief in an ICC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePhillips 66\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against PDVSA and one of its subsidiaries, arising out of the price protection mechanism in a long-term crude oil supply agreement for a Texas refinery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAdvising\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAustralia Pacific LNG (APLNG\u003c/strong\u003e) on an LNG SPA price review negotiation with a foundation North American customer, with a multi-billion-dollar price differential in dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eShell\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against the Philippines, arising out of a dispute over the tax assumption provisions in the service contract for the offshore Malampaya gas project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major Philippine conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration against its Indonesian joint venture partner, arising out of a dispute over shares in a Dutch venture that owns and operates the major toll roads in and around Manila.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea construction contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an LCIA arbitration, arising out of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eforce majeure\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;dispute related to an oil refinery in Kurdistan. The case settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePT Medco E\u0026amp;P Brantas\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an AAA arbitration against Lapindo Brantas, Inc., arising out of an environmental indemnification dispute related to their joint operating agreement for oil exploration and production in Indonesia. The case settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Gold Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID claim against Armenia under the U.S.-Armenia BIT, arising from Armenia\u0026rsquo;s repudiation and violation of mining licenses issued to Global Gold for mineral exploration and exploitation in several Armenian oil fields. The case settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major U.S. electrical contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in several lawsuits and AAA arbitrations for breach of contract. The cases settled favorably.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"\"Wade is well known for his strategic thinking and unwavering commitment to achieving the best possible results.\"","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade is excellent in advocacy, especially in arbitration, and provides clear and concise advice to his clients.\" ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade's ability to navigate complex legal frameworks make them an invaluable asset to any client.\" ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade has deep understanding of cross-border disputes.\"","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"Wade Coriell - Recommended Lawyer","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Energy - Foreign Firms, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"Wade Coriell - Recommended Lawyer","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Projects - Foreign Firms, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"Wade Coriell - Leading Partner ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"Wade Coriell - Leading Partner","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade Coriell is a brilliant litigator.\"","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"\"Clients and colleagues alike consistently praise Wade's professionalism, integrity, and results-driven approach.\"","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"Wade is a leading expert in international arbitration, with outstanding credentials in both the US and Singapore","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade is a first-class leading practitioner, an excellent advocate and strategist.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"“Wade is the head of the team. He instills a high degree of trust, brings a wealth of experience...\"","detail":"Chamber Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2026"},{"title":"\"Wade Coriell is a household name.\" ","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2025"},{"title":"\"His advocacy skills are amazing, and he is incredibly persuasive as well.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025"},{"title":"\"Wade Coriell's strength is oral argumentation.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2025"},{"title":"\"... He provides excellent service and quick responses, and has great commercial vision.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2024"},{"title":"\"Wade is very effective in oral arguments.\" ","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2024"},{"title":"\"Wade leads the King \u0026 Spalding team and is quite well known.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2024"},{"title":"\"I would trust him to lead our most important and sensitive international dispute matters.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2022"},{"title":"\"A dynamic oral advocate with a sharp legal mind.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2022"},{"title":"\"An excellent advocate whose level of experience and ability make him stand out.\"","detail":"Chambers Global"},{"title":"\"A lawyer to know.\"","detail":"The Global Arbitration Review 100"},{"title":"A Leading Practitioner in International Arbitration","detail":"Who's Who, Arbitration Future Leaders, Global Arbitration Review, Legal 500, Latin Lawyer"},{"title":"One of Five Rising Stars in International Energy Law","detail":"Law360, 2013"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":5987}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-01-29T22:11:12.000Z","updated_at":"2026-01-29T22:11:12.000Z","searchable_text":"Coriell{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade is well known for his strategic thinking and unwavering commitment to achieving the best possible results.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade is excellent in advocacy, especially in arbitration, and provides clear and concise advice to his clients.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade's ability to navigate complex legal frameworks make them an invaluable asset to any client.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade has deep understanding of cross-border disputes.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Wade Coriell - Recommended Lawyer\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Energy - Foreign Firms, Singapore 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Wade Coriell - Recommended Lawyer\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Projects - Foreign Firms, Singapore 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Wade Coriell - Leading Partner \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Wade Coriell - Leading Partner\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade Coriell is a brilliant litigator.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Clients and colleagues alike consistently praise Wade's professionalism, integrity, and results-driven approach.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Wade is a leading expert in international arbitration, with outstanding credentials in both the US and Singapore\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade is a first-class leading practitioner, an excellent advocate and strategist.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Wade is the head of the team. He instills a high degree of trust, brings a wealth of experience...\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chamber Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade Coriell is a household name.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"His advocacy skills are amazing, and he is incredibly persuasive as well.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade Coriell's strength is oral argumentation.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"... He provides excellent service and quick responses, and has great commercial vision.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade is very effective in oral arguments.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Wade leads the King \u0026amp; Spalding team and is quite well known.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"I would trust him to lead our most important and sensitive international dispute matters.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"A dynamic oral advocate with a sharp legal mind.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"An excellent advocate whose level of experience and ability make him stand out.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Global\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"A lawyer to know.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Global Arbitration Review 100\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"A Leading Practitioner in International Arbitration\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who's Who, Arbitration Future Leaders, Global Arbitration Review, Legal 500, Latin Lawyer\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"One of Five Rising Stars in International Energy Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2013\"}{{ FIELD }}Representing an Australian mining company in an ICSID dispute against the Republic of India, arising out of the expropriation of a gold mining project in the state of Rajasthan.{{ FIELD }}Won an award for declaratory relief worth well over $1 billion in an UNCITRAL arbitration on behalf of a Philippine electricity provider under a Concession Agreement.{{ FIELD }}Won a $100 million award on behalf of a consortium of sellers in a Singapore-seated LNG price review arbitration.{{ FIELD }}Won an award for declaratory relief on behalf of a Southeast Asian conglomerate in an SIAC arbitration over share ownership in a joint venture that owns and manages the tollways in the capital of the Philippines.{{ FIELD }}Won a baseball-style coal price review arbitration on behalf of a coal producer in the Illinois basin.{{ FIELD }}Won an award for declaratory relief worth over $4 billion in an ICC arbitration on behalf of two international oil majors against a Southeast Asian government, arising out of a revenue-allocation dispute under a gas service contract.{{ FIELD }}Won an award for declaratory relief worth approximately $9.5 billion, as well as four groundbreaking interim measures awards, awards on behalf of Chevron against Ecuador, arising out of Chevron’s claim for violation of the U.S.-Ecuador bilateral investment treaty as a result of the government’s involvement in a fraudulent Ecuadorian court judgment against Chevron for alleged environmental contamination.{{ FIELD }}Won an award for declaratory relief worth approximately $1.5 billion in an AAA arbitration on behalf of a U.S. LNG company against one of its customers, arising out of a dispute over gas volumes at a new tolling facility.{{ FIELD }}Won a $360 million award for Burlington Resources in an ICSID arbitration against Ecuador, arising out of the expropriation of an oil concession and associated counterclaims for alleged environmental contamination.{{ FIELD }}Won an $85 million award for ConocoPhillips in an UNCITRAL arbitration concerning the proper tariff charged by a gas pipeline in Indonesia. The case involved the application of a contract's various representations and warranties to hold the gas transporter liable for a tariff increase decreed by Indonesia's pipeline regulators.{{ FIELD }}Won a $50 million award in an SIAC arbitration on behalf of ConocoPhillips China against its counterparty in a farm-out agreement arising out of three coal-bed methane concessions in China.{{ FIELD }}Won a $30 million lost-profits award in a Geneva-seated ICC arbitration on behalf of a Turkish electricity distribution company against the Turkish government, for breach of a privatization contract.{{ FIELD }}Won a favorable award for declaratory relief in an ICC arbitration on behalf of Phillips 66 against PDVSA and one of its subsidiaries, arising out of the price protection mechanism in a long-term crude oil supply agreement for a Texas refinery.{{ FIELD }}Advising Australia Pacific LNG (APLNG) on an LNG SPA price review negotiation with a foundation North American customer, with a multi-billion-dollar price differential in dispute.{{ FIELD }}Representing Shell in an ICSID arbitration against the Philippines, arising out of a dispute over the tax assumption provisions in the service contract for the offshore Malampaya gas project.{{ FIELD }}Representing a major Philippine conglomerate in an SIAC arbitration against its Indonesian joint venture partner, arising out of a dispute over shares in a Dutch venture that owns and operates the major toll roads in and around Manila.{{ FIELD }}Represented a construction contractor in an LCIA arbitration, arising out of a force majeure dispute related to an oil refinery in Kurdistan. The case settled favorably.{{ FIELD }}Represented PT Medco E\u0026amp;P Brantas in an AAA arbitration against Lapindo Brantas, Inc., arising out of an environmental indemnification dispute related to their joint operating agreement for oil exploration and production in Indonesia. The case settled favorably.{{ FIELD }}Represented Global Gold Corporation in an ICSID claim against Armenia under the U.S.-Armenia BIT, arising from Armenia’s repudiation and violation of mining licenses issued to Global Gold for mineral exploration and exploitation in several Armenian oil fields. The case settled favorably.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major U.S. electrical contractor in several lawsuits and AAA arbitrations for breach of contract. The cases settled favorably.{{ FIELD }}Wade Coriell is the Co-Head of our International Disputes practice group, a recent member of the firm’s ten-person Policy Committee, and a member of the Singapore International  Arbitration Centre's Court of Arbitration.  He has represented clients in several of the largest international commercial and investment arbitrations on record in Asia and the Americas, particularly in the energy sector. Chambers Global ranks Wade as a global market leader in international arbitration, while Chambers Asia-Pacific ranks him as a Band 1 practitioner in Singapore, calling him \"an excellent advocate whose level of experience and ability make him stand out\" and reporting that clients \"would trust him to lead our most important and sensitive international dispute matters and consider him to have become one of the pre-eminent practitioners in Singapore.\"  The Legal 500 notes that Wade \"has an excellent record in oil \u0026amp; gas cases, particularly in Indonesia and the Philippines; he is in the forefront of LNG price review disputes;\" and that his \"abilities as a terrific advocate and a pragmatic advisor make him stand out among his competitors.\"\nWade has particular strength in handling high-profile matters pending simultaneously in multiple jurisdictions, often involving elements of public, investor and government relations.  Clients report to Chambers  that he \"is very thorough and cuts through complex commercial issues and simplifies them in such a form that they are easily understood,\" and that \"[h]is advocacy skills are amazing.\"  Wade has handled disputes against the governments of Argentina, Armenia, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Korea, Peru, the Philippines, Romania, Thailand, and Venezuela, as well as international arbitrations for commercial clients in these and numerous other countries. His recent work includes handling four Asia-based disputes and one Latin American dispute of over $1 billion each.\nWade has represented clients before the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, the International Chamber of Commerce, the London Court of International Arbitration, the American Arbitration Association, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, and other institutions.  In addition to his role on the Court of Arbitration, he also regularly serves as an arbitrator under the SIAC Rules.\nSince 2015, Chambers has ranked Wade annually for his strong international arbitration practice, and he is currently ranked as a Band 1 practitioner in Singapore and a Band 5 practitioner globally. He also is listed in Legal 500, Who’s Who, Arbitration Future Leaders, Benchmark Litigation, Global Arbitration Review 100, and Latin Lawyer. The Global Arbitration Review has called him \"a lawyer to know.\"\n  Wade Coriell lawyer Partner \"Wade is well known for his strategic thinking and unwavering commitment to achieving the best possible results.\" Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026 \"Wade is excellent in advocacy, especially in arbitration, and provides clear and concise advice to his clients.\"  Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026 \"Wade's ability to navigate complex legal frameworks make them an invaluable asset to any client.\"  Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026 \"Wade has deep understanding of cross-border disputes.\" Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026 Wade Coriell - Recommended Lawyer Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Energy - Foreign Firms, Singapore 2026 Wade Coriell - Recommended Lawyer Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Projects - Foreign Firms, Singapore 2026 Wade Coriell - Leading Partner  Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026 Wade Coriell - Leading Partner Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026 \"Wade Coriell is a brilliant litigator.\" Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2026 \"Clients and colleagues alike consistently praise Wade's professionalism, integrity, and results-driven approach.\" Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026 Wade is a leading expert in international arbitration, with outstanding credentials in both the US and Singapore Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, International Arbitration, Singapore 2026 \"Wade is a first-class leading practitioner, an excellent advocate and strategist.\" Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2026 “Wade is the head of the team. He instills a high degree of trust, brings a wealth of experience...\" Chamber Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2026 \"Wade Coriell is a household name.\"  Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2025 \"His advocacy skills are amazing, and he is incredibly persuasive as well.\" Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025 \"Wade Coriell's strength is oral argumentation.\" Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution, Philippines 2025 \"... He provides excellent service and quick responses, and has great commercial vision.\" Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2024 \"Wade is very effective in oral arguments.\"  Chambers Asia-Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2024 \"Wade leads the King \u0026amp; Spalding team and is quite well known.\" Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2024 \"I would trust him to lead our most important and sensitive international dispute matters.\" Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2022 \"A dynamic oral advocate with a sharp legal mind.\" Chambers Asia-Pacific, 2022 \"An excellent advocate whose level of experience and ability make him stand out.\" Chambers Global \"A lawyer to know.\" The Global Arbitration Review 100 A Leading Practitioner in International Arbitration Who's Who, Arbitration Future Leaders, Global Arbitration Review, Legal 500, Latin Lawyer One of Five Rising Stars in International Energy Law Law360, 2013 Georgetown University Georgetown University Law Center Harvard University Harvard Law School New York Texas Houston Bar Association State Bar of Texas Board Member of International Law Students Association Editorial Board Member of AAA Dispute Resolution Journal Member of SIAC Court of Arbitration Law Clerk, Sidney A. Fitzwater, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Representing an Australian mining company in an ICSID dispute against the Republic of India, arising out of the expropriation of a gold mining project in the state of Rajasthan. Won an award for declaratory relief worth well over $1 billion in an UNCITRAL arbitration on behalf of a Philippine electricity provider under a Concession Agreement. Won a $100 million award on behalf of a consortium of sellers in a Singapore-seated LNG price review arbitration. Won an award for declaratory relief on behalf of a Southeast Asian conglomerate in an SIAC arbitration over share ownership in a joint venture that owns and manages the tollways in the capital of the Philippines. Won a baseball-style coal price review arbitration on behalf of a coal producer in the Illinois basin. Won an award for declaratory relief worth over $4 billion in an ICC arbitration on behalf of two international oil majors against a Southeast Asian government, arising out of a revenue-allocation dispute under a gas service contract. Won an award for declaratory relief worth approximately $9.5 billion, as well as four groundbreaking interim measures awards, awards on behalf of Chevron against Ecuador, arising out of Chevron’s claim for violation of the U.S.-Ecuador bilateral investment treaty as a result of the government’s involvement in a fraudulent Ecuadorian court judgment against Chevron for alleged environmental contamination. Won an award for declaratory relief worth approximately $1.5 billion in an AAA arbitration on behalf of a U.S. LNG company against one of its customers, arising out of a dispute over gas volumes at a new tolling facility. Won a $360 million award for Burlington Resources in an ICSID arbitration against Ecuador, arising out of the expropriation of an oil concession and associated counterclaims for alleged environmental contamination. Won an $85 million award for ConocoPhillips in an UNCITRAL arbitration concerning the proper tariff charged by a gas pipeline in Indonesia. The case involved the application of a contract's various representations and warranties to hold the gas transporter liable for a tariff increase decreed by Indonesia's pipeline regulators. Won a $50 million award in an SIAC arbitration on behalf of ConocoPhillips China against its counterparty in a farm-out agreement arising out of three coal-bed methane concessions in China. Won a $30 million lost-profits award in a Geneva-seated ICC arbitration on behalf of a Turkish electricity distribution company against the Turkish government, for breach of a privatization contract. Won a favorable award for declaratory relief in an ICC arbitration on behalf of Phillips 66 against PDVSA and one of its subsidiaries, arising out of the price protection mechanism in a long-term crude oil supply agreement for a Texas refinery. Advising Australia Pacific LNG (APLNG) on an LNG SPA price review negotiation with a foundation North American customer, with a multi-billion-dollar price differential in dispute. Representing Shell in an ICSID arbitration against the Philippines, arising out of a dispute over the tax assumption provisions in the service contract for the offshore Malampaya gas project. Representing a major Philippine conglomerate in an SIAC arbitration against its Indonesian joint venture partner, arising out of a dispute over shares in a Dutch venture that owns and operates the major toll roads in and around Manila. Represented a construction contractor in an LCIA arbitration, arising out of a force majeure dispute related to an oil refinery in Kurdistan. The case settled favorably. Represented PT Medco E\u0026amp;P Brantas in an AAA arbitration against Lapindo Brantas, Inc., arising out of an environmental indemnification dispute related to their joint operating agreement for oil exploration and production in Indonesia. The case settled favorably. Represented Global Gold Corporation in an ICSID claim against Armenia under the U.S.-Armenia BIT, arising from Armenia’s repudiation and violation of mining licenses issued to Global Gold for mineral exploration and exploitation in several Armenian oil fields. The case settled favorably. Represented a major U.S. electrical contractor in several lawsuits and AAA arbitrations for breach of contract. The cases settled favorably.","searchable_name":"Wade Coriell","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":35,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null}]}}