Michael has extensive arbitration experience, particularly relating to partnership and property matters.

More detail on his particular experience is available from Nicholas Luckman.

Michael has many years experience of dealing with a varied collection of commercial litigation cases.  He continues to act in a number of high profile, high value matters:

• The failure of various film partnerships to bring the tax returns promised.  These cases  involve large sums and multiple claimants.  For example, Take 3 (on-going) and also The Evolution Film Partnership Litigation in which Michael acted on behalf of over 100 claimants who brought proceedings as the result of a failed tax scheme.  The litigation was conducted as a GLO and ultimately concluded at a mediation.
• Claim against accountants for bad tax advice concerning group relief to a group of companies.  This matter has now settled.
• Howd v Consol-Verma: a claim for fraud and misrepresentation concerning the sale of a valuable house in Richmond.
• Adler Jensen v Ashraf Kamal: a claim regarding the transfers of various valuable properties to the defendant.

More details are available from Nicholas Luckman.

Michael is an accredited qualified mediator who has completed over 50 mediations to date (2012).

He has particular expertise in trust related disputes (often involving estates and probate) as well as partnership disputes.

Michael has received independent recommendations by ACTAPS (the Association of Contentious Trust and Probate Specialists) to act as a mediator in disputes referred to them by both their members and from more general external enquiries.

If you are interested in appointing Michael as a mediator, please speak to Paul Matthews.

Michael has long been recommended by both Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners as a leading partnership law barrister, it being said that he is a "real presence" in this area.   He has acted and advised in a multitude of partnership related matters, not all contentious.  Those that are disputed are almost invariably confidential and usually settled.  Where mediation is involved, Michael also has a considerable edge being an experienced and popular mediator.

Client confidentiality precludes identifying names but the following gives an indication of his experience:

• Offshore Partnerships:  Advising a leading offshore firms  in relation to various issues such as the departure of partners.
• Solicitor and Accountancy Partnerships:  Michael regularly acts for and advises London and provincial firms.  For example, one of his disputes raised the difficult area of alleged discrimination by a firm against one of the partners.  Another an arbitration involving substantial disputes relating to goodwill and breach of restraint of trade covenants.
• Film partnership scheme disputes: There have been a substantial number of these disputes involving film financing schemes which failed to deliver promised tax advantages.  Multiple claimants are involved.
• Hedge fund partnerships: Michael has seen an increasing number of partnership disputes involving hedge funds.
• Advising on changing into an LLP
  
• Farming Partnerships:  Michael has acted in a number of family partnership disputes, one involving the conduct of a receivership.

More details are available from Nicholas Luckman, Senior Practice Manager.

Michael is frequently instructed in professional negligence cases, principally involving solicitors, accountants and surveyors:   

• Film financing schemes: Michael has been involved in a number of very large piecees of litigation involving multiple claimants relating to film financing schemes which failed to bring the promised tax benefits.  For example, in November 2005, after three years of litigation, Michael King successfully completed a major piece of litigation conducted under a Group Litigation Order involving a complex tax scheme which failed. A major part of the case involved the argument that a Quistclose trust had arisen which provided the claimants with an additional remedy to that of professional negligence.
• Claim against accountants who negligently advised a group of companies on group tax relief.

Property issues have always been at the centre of Michael’s practice.  The following areas are emphasised.

Easements
Michael regularly advises and acts in numerous cases, particularly in private rights of way.

Restrictive Covenants
Land owners and developers frequently instruct Michael on the construction and enforceability of restrictive covenants; many recent matters have concerned the issue as to whether the benefit of the covenant has been properly annexed to land

Proprietary Estoppel 
This, together with all other factors affecting the title to land, is a staple of Michael’s property practice.

Contentious property disputes
Michael advises on various property disputes, often related to trust, probate and estate matters and whether in the context of freehold or leasehold.   For example, Michael has recently advised on:

• the transfer of various properties by a vulnerable patient to her surgeon.
• the sale of a valuable property in Richmond where there were allegations of fraud and misrepresentation.

More details are available from Nicholas Luckman, Senior Practice Manager.

Trusts, probate and estate work rests at the core of Michael King’s practice and he is recommended by both Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners for his expertise.  Chambers & Partners notes that "his work straddles traditional and commercial chancer, and he is a noted trusts expert..often called on to unpick exasperatingly intricate wealth protection structures".  His experience includes:

• A Court of Protection case. There are two main issues. The first concerns the court's powers under the old Mental Health Act to make lifetime gifts on behalf of patients. The second relates to the court's powers under the new Mental Capacity Act and in particular the interpretation of "in the best interests of the patient".
• Blenkinsop: When new trustees were appointed, they went to court for directions against the former trustees and another part of the family (also beneficiaries). This case has involved the largest ever Beddoes application.
• A case concerning a £15m estate and who the actual beneficiaries were. The deceased's capacity was also at issue.
• Take 3: There are some 300 claimants involved in this dispute concerned a failed film partnership scheme based on investment in British film and television productions.
• OJJEH: This massive case relates to a deal done between trustees and a beneficiary in 1999. The allegation is that the trustees failed to inform the court of matters which made the trust fund considerably larger than that valued.
• Diana Lindsay v Beverley Lindsay (July 2011): Family dispute in which a mother claimed a beneficial interest in a property in the daughter's name or repayment of a loan.
• Various Inheritancy (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975 claims involving high value estates  For example, he acted for a disabled daughter claiming against the estate of her estranged father, whose claim was opposed by his second wife and children.
• bad tax advice given by an accountant concerning group relief for companies.
• Howd v Console-Verma: allegations of fraud and misrepresentation concerning the sale of a house in Richmond.
• Rathbone Jersey Ltd v Cummin: Trial involving sorting out various issues concerning a substantial trust.

• Case involving an application for variation of trust in a very large settlement.

• Adler-Jensen v Ashraf Kamal: the claimant placed her confidence in the defendant who took huge transfers of property from her. Although this matter has now settled, the defendant is being pursued for payment.

Michael regularly lectures and writes articles on all aspects of trust, probate and estate issues.

Charities

Michael has worked for most of the major charities including RSPCA, Barnardos, NSPCC, SCOPE and MIND. Most of his work in this area relates to pieces of advice but occasionally matters go to court such as:

• Ulrich & Ors -v- Treasury Solicitor & Ors [2005] EWHC 67 Ch : The Charitable Trusts (Validation) Act 1954 was not confined in its operation to cases where a charitable purpose had been expressed. The trust in the instant case was validated on the basis that no one could have complained if the trustees had, from the outset, regarded the trust as being one for the relief of poverty.

As well as giving seminars to specialist law firms Michael has regularly been an invited speaker at the annual Charity Legacy Officers conference.

Ecclesiastical

Throughout his practice Michael has, at various times, advised and acted on matters involving Church property and in the obtaining of faculties; a recent case concerned a disputed application for a faculty to build a church hall on consecrated ground at Alvechurch.

More details are available from Nicholas Luckman.