Adam Solomon KC

Adam’s commercial practice includes the areas of commercial fraud, breach of contract, and professional negligence. He also regularly appears in commercial cases requiring urgent injunctive relief, including obtaining or resisting freezing orders, Norwich Pharmacal relief and general restrictive covenant work. Adam also accepts instructions for arbitrations in this jurisdiction and internationally.

Adam is called to the Bar of the British Virgin Islands and (pro tem) in St Kitts and Nevis, and practices commercial law in those jurisdictions.

• Re Corbin & King Limited King and others v Minor International PCL and others (2022): shareholders dispute in the Corbin & King restaurant group, owners of The Wolseley and other famous London restaurants. Adam acts for the founders of the group and minority shareholders against the majority shareholder/investors, the Thai-based Minor Hotels group.
• Arani et al v Cordic Group Ltd [2021] EWHC 829. Adam acts for the sellers in this £25m dispute arising from allegedly fraudulent warranties given on the sale of a taxi technology company. Adam’s clients successfully applied for summary judgment, heard over three days, with judgment handed down in April 2021, in which Adam’s clients gained judgment for £2million.
• Bell v Ivy Technology Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1563, an appeal to the Court of Appeal concerning the liability of Adam’s client as a disclosed principal in circumstances in which the contract appeared to exclude his liability. In Bell v Ivy Technology [2019] All ER (D) 78 (Sep), Adam successfully discharged the freezing order against his client
• Rollingson v Hollingsworth, Gasser, Laurus et al [2020] EWHC 3568. Adam acted for the defendants in a claim alleging unlawful conspiracy, breach of fiduciary duty and misuse of confidential information, and Adam successfully struck out elements of the claim.
• ESL Fuels Limited v Fletcher, Prema Energy et al (2020): Adam represented the Claimant in this multi-million pound claim for breach of contract and breach of confidence, arising out of a settlement agreement compromising previous litigation (in which Adam also successfully represented the Claimant – ESL Fuels Ltd v Stephen Fletcher & Anor [2013] EWHC 3726 (Ch)).
• Petroceltic Resources Limited et al v Archer [2018] EWHC 671: contested world-wide freezing order
• Outlook Asset Management LP v Capstone Corporate et al (2018): a claim in the BVI by an asset management group for damages and injunctive relief based on passing off. Adam represented the claimant in a strike out hearing based on jurisdiction in the Commercial Court in March 2018, and in the appeal to the Court of Appeal in the BVI in October 2018.
• Oro Agri International Limited v Vivagro Sarl: Adam was instructed in this multi-million pound commercial claim for breach of confidence and breach of contract
• Lewis v dotcom Solicitors [2017] EWCA 229, concerning terms of a partnership in a firm of solicitors.
• Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Sinclair [2017] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 136, CA and also [2017] BLR 125 and also [2015] CP Rep 45. A series of claims and applications in related litigation, in the High Court and Court of Appeal in which Adam appeared both on his own and led by Charles Samek KC, and in which Adam has appeared in the Court of Appeal three times, all successfully, since 2015.
• CH Trustees SA v Omega Services Group Ltd et al 2015 [BVIHC] 0037: Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, Commercial Division. 5 day trial in July 2016. The claim was for relief for unfair prejudice, and for rectification of the company’s register, and was effectively a battle for control of a company group. Adam’s clients won, and Adam successfully responded to the appeal in the BVI Court of Appeal in July 2017.
• ARGC Ltd v Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority [2016] EWHC 460. Adam, led by Pushpinder Saini KC, acted on behalf of the claimant (HFEA), and successfully obtained judgment and struck out a counterclaim valued at £25 million, which was upheld on appeal
• Honeyrose Bakery Ltd v Lola’s Kitchen et al [2015] EWHC 1856 (QB). Adam was instructed by the defendant in this commercial claim for breach of contract. Adam successfully struck out central part of claim, and the decision was upheld on appeal to the Court of Appeal (Honeyrose Bakery Ltd v Lola’s Kitchen Ltd (t/a Lola’s Cupcakes) [2016] EWCA Civ 1205).
• Munday & Munday v Hilburn & Fields [2015] BPIR 684: complex commercial litigation, involving allegations of dishonesty and fraud, and an appeal to High Court on novel points of bankruptcy law and abuse of process
• Jervis v Skinner [2011] UKPC 2 in which Adam successfully represented the respondent in an appeal to the Privy Council from the Court of Appeal in Bahamas concerning a profit share from the sale of land.
• Hopkin v Financial Security Assurance (UK) Ltd [2011] All ER (D) 142, in which Adam successfully represented the respondent in the Court of Appeal in a case concerning the construction of a share vesting agreement.
• Glentree v Holbeton [2011] 28 E.G. 74, in which Adam was instructed on behalf of the Defendant in a claim by an estate agency for fees pursuant to the sale of a substantial property. There were a number of interlocutory applications (for freezing orders and other matters) and the claim was originally a multi-party claim, but eventually fought as between claimant and defendant. Adam successfully defended the claim, in which it was held that the Claimant was not the effective cause of sale. Adam was thereafter successful (as respondent) in the Court of Appeal.

Adam has an extensive off-shore practice.  He was called to the bar of the British Virgin Islands in 2007 and since then has advised on, and appeared in, a number of cases in the BVI.

In addition to his BVI work, Adam has appeared on numerous occasions in the Privy Council in appeals from various other off-shore jurisdictions.

Adam has also advised clients in relation to Cayman, Jersey, Mauritius and Bermuda litigation and arbitration matters.

• Kensington International v Montrow International (2008), a US$100m sovereign debt dispute in the BVI, involving allegations of sham corporate personality and fraud.
• Henley v Poco Loco Enterprises (2014):  Privy Council, a claim arising from insurance damage, and turning on contractual construction. The claim settled the day before the PC.
• CH Trustees SA v Omega Services Group Ltd et al 2015 [BVIHC] 0037: Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, Commercial Division. 5 day trial in July 2016. The claim was for relief for unfair prejudice, and for rectification of the company’s register, and was effectively a battle for control of a company group. Adam’s clients won, and Adam successfully responded to the appeal in the BVI Court of Appeal in July 2017.
• Jervis v Skinner [2011] UKPC 2 (from the Court of Appeal of Bahamas)
• Cheung v Adamas Ltd [2011] UKPC 32, [2011] IRLR 1014 (from the Supreme Court of Mauritius)
• Hanna v Imperial Life Assurance Company of Canada [2007] UKPC 29 (from the Court of Appeal of Bahamas)

Adam regularly appears in the High Court in relation to applications for emergency injunctive relief, and full trials arising from the employment relationship.

He accepts instructions on behalf of both claimants and defendants in respect of all aspects of the business relationship including claims relating to:

• enforcing or contesting restrictive covenants;
• confidential information;
• freezing or seizing assets;
• protecting or defending database rights;
• delivery up of documents or property;
• team moves; and
• bonus claims.

• Adam Solomon KC and Matthew Sheridan win for trader in covenant and springboard relief trial
• Littleton Barristers Successful in Preventing Interim Relief sought by Specialist Quant Fund
• Adam Solomon KC to represent oldest and fourth largest sovereign wealth fund in High Court dispute
• Adam Solomon KC and Sophia Berry in High Court Costs Victory

Adam has significant experience advising and appearing in Court in all aspects of company and partnership disputes, including

• the sale of shares and businesses,
• shareholder disputes
• unfair prejudice claims, and
• issues as regards director and fiduciary duties.

Adam’s cases are often multi-jurisdictional, and he has litigated company and shareholder disputes both in the Courts of England and Wales and overseas.

He is experienced in all the interlocutory aspects, including obtaining or resisting injunctive relief, and has successfully litigated claims to trial.

• JTrust Asia Pte Ltd v Group Lease Holdings Pte Ltd et al [2020] SG HC 29. Adam was instructed to advise in this ongoing claim in the Singapore High Court (and in other jurisdictions), which involves allegations of fraud in obtaining control of a company. The ongoing matter has had a series of interim injunctions and hearings.
• CH Trustees SA v Omega Services Group Ltd et al 2015 [BVIHC] 0037: Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, Commercial Division. Adam acted for the successful Claimant in a 5 day trial in the British Virgin Islands (BVI), in July 2016, and in the BVI Court of Appeal in 2017. The claim was for relief for unfair prejudice, and for rectification of the company’s register: the trial was effectively a battle for control of a company group. Adam’s clients won, and Adam successfully upheld the decision on appeal in the BVI Court of Appeal in July 2017.
• Lewis v dotcom Solicitors [2017] EWCA 229. Adam appeared for the appellant in the Court of Appeal in a claim concerning terms of a partnership in a firm of solicitors.
• Hopkin v Financial Security Assurance (UK) Ltd [2011] All ER (D) 142. Adam successfully represented the respondent company in both the High Court and the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, in a case concerning the construction of a share vesting agreement.·
• Re French Brothers Ltd. Adam acted for the majority shareholders of a leisure boat business in a multi-million-pound unfair prejudice petition, a claim in respect of unauthorised takings and a related partnership dispute. The claim settled just before trial.

Adam regularly appears in the High Court in relation to applications for injunctive relief, and full trials arising from the employment relationship. He is also often instructed in the ET, EAT and Court of Appeal, on behalf of both employers and employees, and covers all areas of employment litigation, in this jurisdiction and elsewhere. Adam has appeared on a number of occasions in the Privy Council on employment matters, including Adamas v Chung(PC) [2011] IRLR 1014.

Adam now has a total of 24 reported employment cases in the IRLRs, in addition to those in the ICRs.

• • • First Rate FX Ltd v Trading by Telephone Ltd et al [2014] EWHC 982 (QB). Adam represented the Claimant company. The claim was based on breaches of confidence and restrictive covenants, unlawful team move, conspiracy and inducing breach of contract. The case settled on the first day of trial, following a number of reported interim hearings.
    • East England Schools v Palmer et al [2014] IRLR 191. Adam successfully represented the Claimant company in the High Court, enforcing post-termination employment restrictive covenants
    • Engel v Joint Committee for Parking and Traffic Regulation outside London (PATROL) [2013] ICR 1086 : [2013] IRLR 787, an important case in the EAT determining the extent of judicial immunity.
    • ESL Fuels Limited v Fletcher et al [2013] EWHC 3726 (Ch). Confidential information and trade secrets. Adam successfully obtained an interim injunction in the Chancery Division against a former employee. Adam appeared on his own against leading counsel.

Adam regularly acts for regulators, and appears before regulatory bodies. During 2013 alone, his regulator clients included the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), the Law Society and Solicitors Regulatory Authority (SRA), the Care Quality Commission, the Architects Registration Board and various healthcare regulators. Adam has appeared both before the relevant regulatory boards themselves, and also before the High Court and Divisional Courts in challenges to regulatory decisions. He also advises and acts for individual professionals in the process of regulation, including dentists, doctors, lawyers, legal executives and accountants.

• Nowak v (1) Nursing and Midwifery Council (2) Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust [2014] EWHC 336 (QB) and [2013] EWHC 1932 (QB) (ongoing). Adam continues to act for the NMC in this litigation, which has already occasioned a number of reported judgments.
• Adesemowo v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2013] EWHC 2020 (Admin), [2013] All ER (D) 217 (Aug). Adam represented the SRA in this High Court challenge to a decision of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT). In an important judgment, the Court considered the scope of an appeal under Section 49(1) of the Solicitors Act 1974, and dismissed the claimant’s claim.
• R (on the application of Farrell) v Architects Registration Board [2013] NLJR 21. This case, recognised by the Judge to be “important”, was the first case to determine the scope and effect of CPR Part 3.3 as regards the correct procedure for costs in judicial review.
• R (on the application of Agarwal) v The University of Nottingham [2013] All ER (D) 322 (May). Adam represented the Defendant at the full merits hearing of this judicial review, and was successful in having the claim dismissed, with costs.

Adam has represented clubs, players and trainers in both civil litigation and regulatory work.

• Fretwell v O’Neill. Adam represented the champion racehorse trainer, Eoghan O’Neill, in a long-running partnership dispute in the Chancery Division concerning the stables and gallops.
• Newell v Luton Town Football Club. Adam represented the football club in the Employment Tribunal in this multi-million pound claim, following allegations of unfair dismissal and whistleblowing brought by the ex-manager.
• Football Association v Peter. Adam represented a former Director of Luton Town FC in disciplinary proceedings brought against him by the FA.
• McCallister v Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Adam successfully represented Spurs in a claim arising out of the employment relationship.
• Re Bishop’s Stortford Football Club. Adam represented the local authority in a planning matter before an inspector, and thereafter in the High Court, in relation to the football club’s development of its pitch and grounds.

• Everett v University of East London [2009] All ER (D) 38 (Jun). An urgent claim for injunctive relief which went to the Court of Appeal, to seek to prevent a University from dismissing a Vice Chancellor in breach of contract.
• K v Newham London Borough Council [2002] ELR 390 (High Court) – Adam successfully represented a pupil who challenged the refusal to admit her to the school, relying on the breach of her human rights (Art 2 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR).
• R (on the application of Leung) v Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine (2002) ELR 653 – Adam represented a student in the High Court challenging his university categorisation.
• R v Richmond upon Thames London Borough Council, ex p. JC [2001] ELR 21 (Court of Appeal) – a leading education case on school admissions.

Adam has acted in relation to a number of arbitrations including under the ICC and LCIA rules.  He has also advised and acted for clients seeking stays to enforce arbitration clauses, on the enforceability of arbitration clauses, and in respect of the enforceability agreements and awards.

• Junior Counsel (with Charles Samek KC and David Holland KC) in the appeal to the Court of Appeal from the judgment in Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Sinclair and others [2012] EWHC 2560 (Comm), concerning abuse of process following arbitral proceedings (judgment awaited)
• Maurice J Bushell & Co v Born [2013] EWHC 7 (Ch) – Adam successfully appealed to the High Court on behalf of the Claimant, setting aside an arbitral award under ss 68 and 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996
• Z et al v P Ltd (2016): Acting as sole counsel for Claimants in £25million claim concerning earn-outs following a business sale, under LCIA rules.
• X LLP & Y LLP v Z: Acting for Claimant LLP in an international arbitration against a former member concerning LLP member’s rights and obligations (ongoing). Ad hoc
• A Ltd v B LLP: Acting for Claimant in an ad hoc arbitration concerning breach of contract (ongoing)
• S LLP v L & K: Acting for Respondents in a London arbitration concerning a Bahamian LLP.