Commercial Fraud
Stephen has extensive experience in the field of commercial fraud acting for Claimants and for Defendants alike as well as for innocent third parties who find themselves caught up in a fraud or in proceedings arising from that fraud. He is incredibly bright and incredibly commercial (Chambers and Partners 2023). He is not distracted by new matters as they unfold, he remains calm under pressure and is an advocate to have in your corner for a case heading for trial (Legal 500 2024).
Stephen adopts a proactive and team based approach in connection with his commercial fraud work. He is regularly instructed on urgent interim relief applications, whether to freeze assets or preserve documents and property or to resist the making of such orders or to seek to have them set aside where obtained without notice. He has a deserved reputation as an excellent advocate who is particularly effective in injunctions and interim relief applications (Legal 500 2016). He is pragmatic in his advice and very clear in his plan of operation (Chambers and Partners 2023).
Interim relief apart, a substantial part of Stephen’s practice is prosecuting and defending substantial commercial fraud matters through to trial. At any given time Stephen is instructed on a wide range of commercial fraud claims including common law claims in deceit and restitution, equitable claims for breach of trust and breach of fiduciary duty, accessory claims for knowing receipt and dishonest assistance that arise from such claims and economic tort claims for conspiracy and inducement to breach and similar.
As claims in commercial fraud so often require, Stephen is an exceptional advocate who really gets to the nitty gritty of papers and leaves no stone unturned. His cross examination is second to none and his client handling skills are superb. (Legal 500 2021). He appears regularly unled against Leading Counsel.
Commercial Fraud Cases
Jusan Technologies Limited v Uconinvest LLC [2025] EWHC 704 (Ch) – Acted for the Respondent (led by Paul Chaisty KC) in successfully defending the claim of the Applicant to rectify its own shareholders register with retrospective effect so as to remove the Respondent on grounds that the directors of the Applicant had acted ultra vires their powers in registering the Respondent as a shareholder. The case gives rise to important questions as to the ambit of section 40 of the Companies Act 2006 so far as shareholder registration is concerned and as to the scope and exercise of the Court’s discretion under section 125 of the Companies Act 2006 to grant or to refuse rectification of a company’s shareholders register.
Burdett v Burdett [2025] EWHC 480 (Ch) – Acted for the Respondent in successfully defending a petition brought by the widow and executor of a deceased shareholder under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006 in relation to a quasi-partnership company and involving multiple allegations of forgery, fraud, misrepresentation, improper use and disposal of company assets and improper filings at Companies House.
Uconinvest LLC v Jysan Holdings LLC [2024] EWHC 1532 (Ch) – Acted for the Claimant (led by Paul Chaisty KC) in successfully resisting an application to stay the proceedings in favour of arbitration and in obtaining fresh Freezing Order relief to a value of US$8.4 million following the initial Freezing Order being set aside for material non-disclosure.
Akbar v Ghaffar [2024] EWHC 50 (Ch) – Acted for the Claimant in striking out the defence of the Defendant to the Claimant’s £4 million fraud and fraudulent breach of trust claim.
Akbar v Ghaffar [2023] EWHC 1275 (Ch) – Acted for the Claimant in successful resisting an application of the Defendant to set aside £4 million Proprietary and Freezing Orders on the grounds of alleged material non-disclosure. Application dismissed with indemnity costs.
G v N (2023) – acted for the Defendants in defending multi-million pound breach of warranty and fraudulent misrepresentation claim and in counterclaiming for unpaid deferred consideration. Settled following mediation and prior to hearing of the Defendant’s application for summary judgment.
O’Brien v Phipps [2023] EWHC 1153 (Ch) – Acted for the Claimant against Leading Counsel in a multi-million pound breach of trust claim arising out of a failed business relationship. The Claimant’s claim was successful, with tracing and proprietary injunctive relief granted against the Defendant. Permission to appeal refused by the Court of Appeal.
Clements v Frisby [2023] EWHC 320 (Ch) – Acted for the Defendant (led by Giles Maynard-Connor KC) is defending a £125 million claim brought against a high-profile fashion and internet entrepreneur in relation to the establishment and ownership of his business. The claim was dismissed as being a fraudulent claim and permission to appeal was refused.
Edhem v Edhem [2022] UKUT 243 (LC) – Acted for the Claimant in First Tier and Upper Tribunal, Property Chamber proceedings against her Defendant son to rectify the register by setting aside the Transfer of a £1 Million plus residential property that had been forged at the hand of the Defendant. 8 days of trial and a 1 day appeal, followed by Freezing Order relief against the Defendant.
P v D (2018) – Acted for two of four Defendants against Leading Counsel in opposing £15 million fraud claim and in prosecuting a £2 million deferred consideration claim. Applied successfully for reverse summary judgment so as to strike out the fraud claim and obtain judgment for the deferred consideration.
B v K (2018) – Acted for one of five Defendants in opposing a substantial fraud and breach of duty claim. Applied successfully to strike out the claim and successfully resisted the appeal from that strike out.
I v B (2018) – currently acting for Claimant company in injunctive proceedings against former senior employee and co-conspirators in connection with misappropriation and misuse of confidential information.
P v D (2018) – currently acting for Defendants defending warranty claims brought on the basis of allegations of fraud with an asserted value of over £6 million.
A v J (2018) – currently advising the Claimant in connection with prospective proceedings arising out of the administration and liquidation of a limited company involving substantial claims under both the Insolvency Act for voidable preference and TUV and also claims for breach of duty by de jure and de facto directors.
E v J (2018) – currently acting for Claimant company in proceedings for breach of trust, breach of fiduciary duty and accessory claims against former nominee and investment manager in connection with the misappropriation and misuse of trust assets to a value of £2 million plus. Successful in obtaining and thereafter maintaining freezing and proprietary orders and Norwich Pharmacal relief.
Eden v Parker [2016] EWHC 3302 (Ch) – acted for the Claimant in 3 week trial involving claims in deceit and breach of fiduciary duty by a member of an LLP arising out of a substantial property development.
Hy-Fly v Salisbury (2015) – acted for the Claimant in equitable fraud proceedings seeking to recover substantial sums that had been paid to the Defendant as deposit monies for the purchase and construction of commercial wind turbines which never materialised. Following trial and on the eve of judgement being handed down, favourable settlement terms were agreed.
VC v J (2015) – acted for the Claimant in proceedings against its former managing director for misuse of confidential information and breach of covenant claiming losses in excess of £1 million. The proceedings began with Anton Pillar and Freezing Order relief which was maintained on applications being made to set the same aside. Claim subsequently settled at mediation.