Robert has been involved in many substantial cases (such as Alfa Telecom Turkey Ltd v Cukurova Finance International, TeliaSonera Finland OYJ v Alfa Telecom Turkey Ltd, and IPOC International Growth Fund Ltd v LV Finance Group Ltd) where issues have been arbitrated alongside court proceedings.  He also advised in the complicated international dispute concerning Econet Wireless, a Nigerian telecom company, not only in relation to the litigation attempted in the Commercial Court but also in relation to arbitration proceedings.

He has a great deal of experience of the arbitration process, and in a number of significant cases has been involved in settling arbitration submissions, advising on matters within arbitrations, enforcing awards and staying proceedings in favour of arbitration.

Robert has been recommended by both Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners for many years in this area.  He is very experienced in complex fraud and asset tracing claims, almost invariably on an international scale.  Some of his recent cases include:

• BTA Bank v Ablyazov [2010] 1 All ER (Comm); [2010] 1 WLR 976; [2009] EWHC 2833; [2009] EWHC 2840; [2010] 1 All ER (Comm); [2010] EWHC 90; [2010] EWHC 545; [2010] EWHC 1799; [2010] EWCA 1141; [2010] EWHC 2404; [2011] 1WLR 906; [2011] 1 WLR 888; [2011] EWHC 202; [2011] EWHC 1136. In these proceedings in the Commercial Court in London a claim is made by the largest bank in Kazakhstan that its former chairman and other officers misappropriated US$100 millions. The case commenced in August 2009 and has involved the grant of freezing and disclosure orders and numerous further orders in the Commercial Court. The decisions of the Court of Appeal handed down on 27 October 2009 are important rulings on the privilege against self-incrimination and the scope of the removal of that privilege in civil fraud cases.  In February 2011, with the specific approval of the Court, Robert was engaged by the supervising solicitors appointed under a search order, to ensure that documents attracting legal professional privilege were not divulged following the seizure of thousands of documents.
• BTA Bank v Stepanov. In these proceedings in the Chancery Division in London, the largest bank in Kazakhstan sought to recover in excess of US$350 million in unpaid loans and interest. The case involved the grant of freezing relief. Notwithstanding an expedited trial date, the Bank's application for summary judgment was successful, in the sum of US$468 million.

Robert is recommended as a leading silk for commercial litigation.  Clients value his approachable style and intelligence as well as  his capacity for hard work and commercial approach.  He is an effective and powerful advocate.  Some of his recent cases include:

• BTA Bank v Ablyazov[2010] 1 All ER (Comm); [2010] 1 WLR 976; [2009] EWHC 2833; [2009] EWHC 2840; [2010] 1 All ER (Comm); [2010] EWHC 90; [2010] EWHC 545; [2010] EWHC 1799; [2010] EWCA 1141; [2010] EWHC 2404; [2011] 1WLR 906; [2011] 1 WLR 888; [2011] EWHC 202; [2011] EWHC 1136 In these proceedings in the Commercial Court in London a claim is made by the largest bank in Kazakhstan that its former chairman and other officers have misappropriated US$100 millions. The case commenced in August 2009 and has involved the grant of freezing and disclosure orders and numerous further orders in the Commercial Court. The decisions of the Court of Appeal handed down on 27 October 2009 are important rulings on the privilege against self-incrimination and the scope of the removal of that privilege in civil fraud cases.
• Cukurova Finance International Limited v Alfa Telecom Turkey Limited [2009] 3 All ER 849; [2009] UKPC 19; [2009] All ER (D) 201 (Jun) Impact of Financial Collateral Arrangements Regulations (No.2) 2003 - whether lender had to aquire legal title to shares before he could be said to have validly exercised the new right of appropriation conferred on share mortgagees.
• R (on the application of Cukurova Finance International Limited) v HM Treasury [2008] EWHC 2567 (Admin); [2008] All ER (D) 02 Application for permission to challenge Regulations made by Tresaury under European Communities Act 1972.
• Dian AO v Davis Frankel & Mead (a firm) [2005] 1 All ER (Comm) 482, [2005] 1 All ER 1074, [2004] EWHC 2662 (Comm), [2004] All ER (D) 115 (Oct) Acted for Alfa Eco in its attempts to obtain material from the Court file of a case in England for use in proceedings in the BVI.
• IPOC International Growth Fund Ltd v LV Finance Group Ltd. This case concerned a share of the Russian mobile telecommunications industry worth several hundreds of millions of dollars, and includes allegations of moneylaundering against a serving member of the Russian Government (see eg. The Wall Street Journal, 25 July 2005, “Commerzbank Probe Focuses on Russia”). In the proceedings the clients successfully challenged the jurisdiction of the BVI Court. The case went to the Court of Appeal of the Eastern Caribbean (at a special 6 day sitting) and a 2 day hearing in the Privy Council.
• Alfa Telecom Turkey v Cukurova Finance International [2007 to date]. Substantial case concerning shareholding in Turkey's largest mobile telephone company (valued at as much as US$4bn, depending on share price fluctuations). Acting for Alfa group, a Russian conglomerate, which took security over shares following a loan to Cukurova of US$1.352bn. Case concerns (i) morgages of shares, (ii) the novel remdy of appropriation of financial collateral introduced by the Financial Collateral Arrangements (No 2) Regulations 2003. Case has involved c30 appearances before Courts of the Eastern Caribbean High Court (BVI) and Court of Appeal. Case also resulted in one interim appeal to Privy Council (see [2009] 3 All ER 849), and substantial judicial review in which Cukurova sought to challenge the vires of the Regulations.  Case is currently headed to the Privy Council where Alfa will be the Respondent, having prevailed on appeal. (See "Elephant traps in the law of tender" - R S Levy QC (2011) 6 JIBFL 327.)
• TeliaSonera Finland OYJ v Alfa Telecom Turkey - 2007 - 2009. Claim linked to the preceding matter in which TeliaSonera alleged that the Alfa/Cukurova transactions breached TeliaSonera's pre-existing contractual right to acquire the shares Cukurova charged to Alfa.
• Kaupthing Bank hf v Various Tchenguiz group companies/trusts [2008-2011]. Acted for Kaupthing Bank in its well-publicised battles against Robert Tchenguiz and companies controlled by a discretionary trust of which he was a beneficiary. Proceedings commenced in the BVI and involved a few hearings there, which were stayed pending the outcome of other proceedings in London. Also acted for the Bank in proceedings in the Commercial Court in proceedings commenced by the Trustees in their attempt to sue in London having proven in Kaupthing's insolvency process in Iceland. Case concerned whether the London proceedings should have been stayed under the Credit Institutions (Re-organisation and Winding-up) Regulations 2004 - see [2011] EWHC 566 (Comm).

Robert has many years' experience of company work, ranging from warranty disputes to complex shareholder claims.  Such claims often draw on his general commercial litigation as well as fraud and asset tracing experience; in both of which areas he is recommended in the legal directories.  Some of his reported cases include:

• Infiniteland Ltd v Artisan Contracting Ltd [2006] 1 BCLC 632. Share sale agreements and warranty claims. Upholding [2004] EWHC 955 (Ch), 3 week witness action before Park J., raising complex legal and factual issues on accounting standards, purchaser’s knowledge of breaches of warranty, and disclosure by the vendor.
• Secretary of State for Trade & Industry v Liquid Acquisitions Ltd [2003] 1 BCLC 375. Acted for the respondents. The case concerned the application for an order that the respondent company be wound up, in the public interest, as its sales techniques involved misrepresentations and deceit.

Robert's experience in major commercial litigation and fraud disputes has invariably led to his involvement in some major insolvencies such as that of Kaupthing Bank hf.  Some of his more recent and interesting cases are shown below:

• Kaupthing Bank hf v Various Tchenguiz group companies/trusts [2008-2011]. Acted for Kaupthing Bank in its well-publicised battles against Robert Tchenguiz and companies controlled by a discretionary trust of which he was a beneficiary. Proceedings commenced in the BVI and involved a few hearings there, which were stayed pending the outcome of other proceedings in London. Also acted for the Bank in proceedings in the Commercial Court in proceedings commenced by the Trustees in their attempt to sue in London having proven in Kaupthing's insolvency process in Iceland. Case concerned whether the London proceedings should have been stayed under the Credit Institutions (Re-organisation and Winding-up) Regulations 2004 - see [2011] EWHC 566 (Comm).
• 375 Plus Developments & Ors v Credit Suisse & Ors [2011 to date]. Acting for a consortium of investors in proceedings in Anguilla in claims arising from purchases of "off-plan" properties in premium development. The developer experienced financial troubles in the economic downturn, and receivers were appointed, who subsequently sold the property.
• Secretary of State for Trade & Industry v Liquid Acquisitions Ltd [2003] 1 BCLC 375. Acted for the respondents. The case concerned the application for an order that the respondent company be wound up, in the public interest, as its sales techniques involved misrepresentations and deceit.

Robert has considerable experience of real estate litigation.  Many of his cases are allied to the international commercial disputes, frauds and insolvencies which are dealt with in the other parts of his profile.  However, he has also been involved in some major cases such as:

• Mohamed v London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham [2002] 1 AC 547. This House of Lords case redefined the law relating to local connection in homelessness cases with three fundamental findings; (i) the material date for statutory review of local connection is the day on which the review takes place as opposed to the date of the application for such, (ii) interim accommodation constitutes a normal residence, notwithstanding that it has been provided by the local authority, and (iii) a statutory review was to take into account any facts which had come into existence subsequent to the original decision.
• Taj v Ali [2000] 3 EGLR 35. Acted for the respondent. This Court of Appeal case concerned the granting of suspended possession orders when the rent arrears and restricted earning capacity of the occupier were such as to require an almost indefinite period for repayment.
• 375 Plus Developments & Ors v Credit Suisse & Ors [2011 to date]. Acting for a consortium of investors in proceedings in Anguilla in claims arising from purchases of "off-plan" properties in premium development. The developer experienced financial troubles in the economic downturn, and receivers were appointed, who subsequently sold the property.