Andrew Maguire

Andrew has a well-established banking and financial services practice, specialising in high value and complex disputes relating to personal guarantees and indemnities; Andrew was successful in the Court of Appeal which provided guidance on the extent of an “all monies” guarantee in the important case of National Merchant Buying Society v Bellamy [2013] EWCA Civ 452; regulated mortgage contracts and claims for breach of trust, fiduciary duty and disputes regarding unregulated securities and cases involving commercial fraud including freezing injunctions and asset recovery, both for and against lenders. Andrew is frequently instructed on matters involving cross-border enforcement of judgments and anti-suit injunctions, arising from financial investment disputes; in particular, Bitcoin and other Cryptocurrencies.

Andrew is widely regarded as one of the foremost financial services juniors at the Bar with extensive experience of regulatory investigations and enforcement actions, having been involved in some of the most significant regulatory interventions post

Lehman, involving mis-selling of financial investments (such as group actions involving Keydata, Arch Cru, Sterling Mortimer and Harlequin); as well the interface between regulatory duties and enforceability of contracts under sections 19 and 26 of FSMA 2000 on Regulated Mortgage Contracts and cases concerning complex derivatives and the meaning and effect of complex securitisation, loan, security and ISDA documentation. Andrew was instructed on the judicial review of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme’s decision to levy £32 million on independent financial advisers, which is reported as R (on the application of ABS Financial Planning Ltd and others) v Financial Services Compensation Scheme Ltd reported at [2012] 2 BCLC 267.

Andrew is regularly instructed on matters relating to regulatory aspects of investments and loans, which engage FSMA 2000 and its regulations and additionally as to large-scale professional negligence disputes arising from mis-selling of investments;.Recently, Andrew acted as lead counsel in an 8 days’ trial relating to a Land Banking Scheme and successfully dismissed claims for an Unregulated Collective Investment Scheme and deceit.

Recent work includes:

The successful claim for summary judgment subsequent to obtaining a freezing injunctive relief against the thieves and their accessories and a proprietary freezing order against the wallet provider as well as a direction that service by a NFT airdrop into the blockchain was permitted in Gary Jones v Persons Unknown and Huobi Global Ltd [2022] EWHC (Ch).

The successful claim for a freezing injunctive relief against the thieves and their accessories and a proprietary freezing order against the wallet provider as well as a direction that a cross-undertaking in damages was not required in XY v Persons Unknown and Binance Holdings Ltd [2021] EWHC 3352 (Comm).

A claim for £3M in which various claims under FSMA 2000 and the RAO are raised relating to a loan agreement and involves a security in Belgium which was subject to proceedings in Brussels, in which Andrew was led by Richard Lissack QC.

Terracorp v Mistry [2020] EWHC 1645 (Ch), (reported in Estates Gazette 2020 2043, 42) and, on appeal, [2020] EWHC 2623 (Ch), [2020] Costs LR 1435, in which the claimant company, which had sold parcels of land to the defendant purchasers under a land banking scheme, appealed against a declaration that the true interpretation of covenants in the sales contracts meant that the defendants were not liable to pay “covenant charges”. Andrew was successful in defeating, at trial, eight out of nine heads of claim including a UCIS claim and a claim in fraudulent misrepresentation.

The widely reported breach of fiduciary duty and deceit case of BCS Acceptances Ltd and Ors v Daniel Terry [2019] EWHC 1645 (QB).

Andrew has extensive experience of injunctive applications in the High Court. These include freezing and proprietary orders, anti-suit injunctions, as well as enforcement of restrictive covenants, breach of fiduciary duties, database rights, confidential information and economic torts. In addition, Andrew has extensive experience of contested committal applications arising from breaches of freezing and proprietary injunctions, in the reported cases of Thursfield v Thursfield [2012] EWCA Civ 840 and Hewlett Packard Enterprises v Peter Sage [2017] EWHC 66, where Jay J. praised Andrew for his “measured and realistic submissions” and a committal claim arising from misfeasance and wrongful trading claims against company directors in the Floors2Go litigation: Power v Hodges [2016] BPIR 162; as well as varying a freezing injunction: Andrews v Stanway [2017] EWHC 3734 (QB) and acting for the bank in an important claim relating to duties of disclosure on a without notice freezing injunction in Cole v National Westminster Bank [2014] EWHC 992 (Ch).

Andrew has extensive experience in cases involving civil fraud, particularly with an international context involving cross border and conflicts of law issues.

Many of Andrew’s case have involved applications for urgent relief and serious wrongdoing; particularly in the banking and financial services field with various instances of mis-selling such as Keydata, Arch Cru, Sterling Mortimer and Harlequin and other Ponzi-scheme frauds; sometimes acting on a group class action basis.

In addition, many such cases arise within a corporate governance setting, where Andrew is regularly instructed in misfeasance and wrongful trading claims against company directors; such as the Floors2Go litigation: Power v Hodges [2016] BPIR 162, in which misfeasance and wrongful trading claims and a contested committal for contempt made against company directors by a Liquidator for £9.5M and the successful defeat of a £2M deceit and fiduciary duty claim against his clients for an alleged fraudulent undervaluation of a business in a MBO and the obtaining of indemnity costs and Part 36 additional sums: Trow v Durmast Group Ltd [2017] EWHC 1485 (Ch).

Many of Andrew’s cases are founded on deceit and breaches of fiduciary duty claims, such as the £5M case of BCS Acceptances Ltd and Ors v Daniel Terry [2019] EWHC 1645 (QB).

A number of cases have resulted in committal proceedings for breaching freezing injunctions in fraud claims, where Andrew has extensive experience: Thursfield v Thursfield [2013] EWCA Civ 840 and Hewlett Packard Enterprises v Peter Sage [2017] EWHC 66, where Jay J. praised Andrew for his “measured and realistic submissions”.

Frequently, Andrew is instructed on contested disclosure applications, involving trusts and offshore accounts, such as Thursfield v Thursfield [2012] EWHC 3742 (Ch), which involved a contested application for a North Shore Ventures Order relating to a Bahamian trust.

Current cases:

Andrew is currently instructed by Botswanan clients in an enforcement of a Ugandan High Court judgment of $211M, arising from a fraudulent mining scheme, in the English High Court.

A claim for £3M in which various claims under FSMA 2000 and the RAO are raised relating to a loan agreement and in which Andrew is led by Richard Lissack QC.

A £2.75M claim, arising from the non-payment of a deferred purchase agreement in a JV, giving rise to claims for breach of fiduciary duty, conspiracy and inducing a breach of contract; injunctive relief being claimed over confidential information and database rights.

A claim in the CFI of the DIFC arising from a JVA in Dubai resulting from the non-payment of $50M in relation to a hotel development.

A claim in deceit and fiduciary duty for £40M made against Andrew’s client in relation to an alleged JVA.

Andrew has considerable experience in relation to international and domestic fraud and asset-tracing cases, often involving pre-emptive injunctions, particularly freezing injunctions.

Most of Andrew’s work, in court and in arbitration, has a strong international element, with his clients coming from all around the world, including the Middle East, Africa, India, China, Russia, and the USA. The cases on which he is instructed often raise complex jurisdictional and conflict of laws issues, including the interplay between proceedings in court and arbitration. Andrew is regularly instructed in international and domestic arbitrations and in English court proceedings in aid of arbitral proceedings and in connection with the enforcement of arbitration awards and foreign judgments.

Frequently, Andrew is instructed on contested disclosure applications, involving trusts and offshore accounts, such as Thursfield v Thursfield [2012] EWHC 3742 (Ch), which involved a contested application for a North Shore Ventures Order relating to a Bahamian trust.

Andrew has extensive experience of foreign jurisdictions and has worked, among others, with lawyers in the Bahamas, Belgium, Bermuda, Botswana, Canada, China, France, Germany, Gibraltar, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Portugal, Russia and the former CIS, Scotland, Spain, the UAE and USA.

Andrew spent 6 months in Bermuda and the USA working in law firms as a Pegasus Scholar and was a mentor on the Lord Chancellor’s Training Scheme for Chinese Lawyers and in 2011 formed part of the Bar Council’s official delegation to China.

Andrew has been called to the Bar of England and Wales, Ireland, Northern Ireland and Gibraltar and is a registered advocate at the DIFC Courts as well as a panel member on the DIFC-LCIA panel of arbitrators and mediators.

Recent work:

Grand Valley General Trading LLC v GGICO Sunteck Ltd [2019] DIFC CFI 044 and CA 007/2019, acting with HFW Dubai in relation to a challenge to the jurisdiction of DIFC Courts by reason of an agreement for LCIA arbitration in Singapore and further claims relating to the joinder of the parent company of the Second Defendant and security for costs in the DIFC CFI and a jurisdiction appeal in the DIFC Court of Appeal.

An LCIA arbitration in Dubai relating to a joint venture dispute, involving jurisdiction, joinder and security for costs issues.

An enforcement of a Ugandan High Court judgment of $211M in the English High Court.

A commercial dispute between a Serbian company and a Kosovan company, subject to ICC Rules.