Alan Steinfeld QC

Alan has extensive experience, both as counsel and arbitrator, of large scale, high value and often high profile arbitrations usually of an international nature.  An acknowledged leader of the Bar, the scale and variety of his experience makes him a natural choice, particularly in those areas in which he is a recommended expert, namely: commercial disputes and civil fraud; trust and probate work; company and partnership; insolvency, pensions and professional negligence.

The majority of his matters are necessarily confidential but the following give a flavour of the types of arbitration in which he has acted both as arbitrator and counsel:

• Computer software arbitration: Alan sat on an arbitral tribunal in a complicated and bitterly fought dispute between two major computer software companies.
• Capital Trust Investment Ltd -v- Radio design AB [2002] 2All ER 159 Court of Appeal.  In this case it was held that a party who had brought an application for a stay of proceedings pending an arbitration had not taken a step in the action within the meaning of s.9(3) Arbitration Act 1996 if, either simultaneously or subsequently, he invoked or accepted the court's jurisdiction bringing a further application for summary judgment, provided that he only did so conditionally on his stay application failing.
• Alan has acted as arbitrator and counsel in several partnership disputes.

Alan is recommended for civil fraud in both Chambers & Partners and Legal 500; Legal 500 commenting that he is "one of the leading lights".  He has been involved in some of the largest fraud cases in recent times and his acknowledged expertise in areas such as trusts and company means he adds considerable value to the cases entrusted to his care.  He is known for his ability to think creatively, his ability as an advocate and his relentless determination to achieve the best possible result for clients.

Recent cases include:

• Collapse of large BTA Bank: this complex case involves very substantial fraud allegations.
• Multi-million pound international dispute: This massive dispute ranges over a number of jurisdictions including the UK, New York, Florida and Monaco
• Icelandic bank dispute: Dispute concerning shareholding in Somerfield supermarket chain held by a major trust over which Kaupthing held security.
• Billion dollar litigation in Gibraltar in which the allegations of fraud play a central role.
• Multi-million pound dispute relating to a very substantial Bahamian trust.  
• Diva Sports Ltd v Carnegie Group Ltd (2008): Breach of warranty under a share sale agreement.
• Phillips v Symes: This widely reported litigation principally concerns International asset tracing and subsequent asset recovery in relation to a very successful partnership trading in high value antiquities. The value of the claim is estimated to be well in excess of $150m. Litigation has been conducted in the UK, Isle of Man, Jersey, Guernsey, USA, Greece, Switzerland (Geneva, Zürich and Aargau), Liechtenstein, Gibraltar and Germany.   Recently the action has been against a major International bank in Gibraltar for its failure to comply with local money laundering regulations, which concern the complex area of law of knowing receipt / dishonest assistance.
• Architects of Wine v Barclays [2007] EWCA Civ 239: Major banking case which held that no agreement could be inferred authoring the payment of cheques owned by a company into the bank account of an associated company where the company's sole director had acted in a fraudulent manner in relation to the company owning the cheques.

Alan has a well-deserved reputation for the excellence of his advice and advocacy on all manner of business dispute, often involving fraud.  As Chambers & Partners says: "he is never rattled by large scale instructions" commenting that his "exceptionally good legal mind" provides a fertile breeding ground for "case winning arguments".  Legal 500 comments that he "commands a strong sense of calm to a case and is respected for taking good points".

Always at the forefront of the litigation arena, Alan is currently involved in various aspects of the disarray in the financial sector such as the collapse of some of the Icelandic banks.

Listed below are some of the business disputes in which he has recently or is currently involved.  More details of his practice are available from Nicholas Luckman, the Senior Practice Manager.

• Fiduciary Management Services: This massive dispute concerns the battle for ownership of Freeport in Grand Bahama.
• Collapse of BTA Bank: Alan is heavily involved in the complex litigation arising out of the demise of a leading Eastern European bank.
• Multi-million pound international dispute (on-going): This massive dispute ranges over a number of jurisdictions including the UK, New York, Florida and Monaco
• Major litigation in Bermuda involving substantial Bermudian trust
• Billion $ claim concerning a failed investment fund established as an offshore company.
• Billion $ dispute in Gibraltar following wide-ranging allegations of fraud.
• Kaupthing dispute:  Dispute involving holding in Somerfield supermarket chain held by a major trust over which Kaupthing held security.
• Multi-million pound dispute relating to a very substantial Bahamian trust.  
• Templeton Insurance v Booth (PC)(2010): This high level insurance business dispute looked at various issues such as breach of fiduciary duty and reviewed the law on ex turpi causa.
• Trident Trust: claim involving action to recover funds moved from England to Germany.
• Diva Sports Ltd v Carnegie Group Ltd (2008): Breach of warranty under a share sale agreement.
• Oxus Mining plc v Templeton Insurance (2008):  £2.5m claim over whether the defendant was entitled to exercise warrants and whether the warrants were a reward for services which the defendant had in fact not
  carried out.
• Architects of Wine (2008): Dispute concerning the way in which all banks clear cheques and whether that process is inherently negligent.
• Land Securities & Ors v Fladgate Fielder [2009] EWHC 577 (Ch): a firm of solicitors succeeded in striking out a claim brought by a property development company on the basis that the firm's prior commencement of judicial review proceedings against the grant of planning permission in favour of the company in relation to its proposal to redevelop 2 sites, did not constitute the tort of abuse of process.
• Phillips v Symes: This widely reported litigation principally concerns International asset tracing and subsequent asset recovery in relation to a very successful partnership trading in high value antiquities. The value of the claim is estimated to be well in excess of $150m. Litigation has been conducted in the UK, Isle of Man, Jersey, Guernsey, USA, Greece, Switzerland (Geneva, Zürich and Aargau), Liechtenstein, Gibraltar and Germany.   Recently the action has been against a major International bank in Gibraltar for its failure to comply with local money laundering regulations, which concern the complex area of law of knowing receipt / dishonest assistance.
• Trust fund fraud action: This is an action to recover funds which were moved from England to Germany amidst allegations of fraud.
• Shaker -v- Mohammed Al-Bedwari & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 1452 Court of Appeal : The so-called "Prudential principle" did not preclude an action brought by a claimant not as a shareholder but as a beneficiary under a trust against his trustee for an account of profits received in relation to shares which were the subject of the trust, unless it could be shown that the whole of the claimed profit reflected what the company had lost and which it had a cause of action to recover.

Company law instructions form an important part of Alan's practice and he has been recommended in the legal directories for many years.  As the examples of his recent cases set out below show, he advises on some of the most high profile, high value and complicated company issues around. 

Legal 500/2011 says Alan is  "highly recommended" and "valued for his ability to reduce the complexities into a few reaily understandable issues".  He is also recommended by Chambers & Partners/2012.

Alan is the editor of Blackstone's Guide to the Companies Act 2006.

Some examples of this work are set out below but further details are available from Nicholas Luckman, the Senior Practice Manager:

• Currently involved in high value litigation arising out of the liquidation of a Carlyle invesment vehicle involving Delaware and Guernsey among other jurisdictions.
• Fiduciary Management Services: This large scale litigation concerns the battle for ownership of Freeport in Grand Bahamas
• Green v Exista HF: Alan has represented an Icelandic company which was the majority shareholder in an Icelandic bank. 
• Lincoln Castings v Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform: A multi-million pound directors' disqualification case.
• Diva Sports Ltd v Carnegie Group Ltd:  Heavy weight multi-million dollar breach of warranty claim under a share sale agreement.
• Cayzer v Beddow: In the circumstances there was no contract, trust relationship or partnership between the parties in relation to the shares of the acquisition of the shares in a joint venture company.
• Dashfield v Davidson Ch D Bristol: a resolution signed by all three shareholders of a private company requiring the personal representatives of a deceased shareholder to see the shares to the company did not contravene s164 Companies Act 1985.  Non-compliance also waived by application of Duomatic principle.
• Oxus Mining plc v Templeton Insurance [2006] EWHC 864 (Comm) (2007): £2.5m claim over whether the defendant was entitled to exercise warrants and whether the warrant were a reward for services which the defendant had in fact not carried out.
• Halton International Inc (Holding) SARL & Anor v Guernroy (HL) [2005] EWHC 1968 (Ch): Where a voting agreement had given a shareholder an absolute discretion in the manner in which it chose to raise funds on a new issue of shares, the shareholder had the right to chose investors, including himself and others, and the right to waive pre-emption rights in the company's articles.  The voting rights agreement imposed no fiduciary duties on the shareholder in relation to the selection of investors and the subsequent issue of shares.
• Criterion Properties Plc -v- Stratford UK Properties & Ors [2004] 1 WLR 1846 House of Lords : The approach of the courts below in determining the issue of 'want of authority' on the basis of whether the respondent's conduct was unconscionable was incorrect.
• Rock Nominees Ltd -v- RCO (Holdings) Ltd [2004] 1BCLC 439 Court of Appeal : The petitioning company could not claim for relief under Companies Act 1985 s.459(1) where it was found on the evidence that the sale of shares was not at an undervalue.
• Johnson -v- Gore Wood [2002] 2 AC 1 House of Lords : A shareholder cannot recover damages for a loss which is merely reflective of the loss suffered by the company for which the company has its own cause of action..
• Shaker -v- Mohammed Al-Bedwari & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 1452 Court of Appeal : The so-called "Prudential principle" did not preclude an action brought by a claimant not as a shareholder but as a beneficiary under a trust against his trustee for an account of profits received in relation to shares which were the subject of the trust, unless it could be shown that the whole of the claimed profit reflected what the company had lost and which it had a cause of action to recover.

Alan is a trusted and popular adviser and advocate in relation to banking and finance disputes where he is able to draw on his considerable expertise in commercial litigation, company, partnership, trusts and insolvency as well as his pre-eminent offshore/international experience:

• BTA Bank: Proceedings in the BVI and the UK by a Kazakstan bank against (inter alia) the majority shareholder and a director for assets alleged to have improperly obtained by fraud.
• Kaupthing disputes : Various disputes relating to a £500m shareholding in Somerfield supermarket held in a major trust over which Kaupthing had security.  The shareholding had allegedly been moved to BVI companies. 
• Madoff related dispute: Alan advised in relation to US3.2 billion of assets invested in Madoff related funds.
• Trident Trust: Action to recover funds moved from England to Germany.
• Architects of Wine v Barclays [2007] EWCA Civ 239: This important case established that you could not infer an agreement authorising the paynment of cheques owned by a company into the bank account of an associated company where the company's sole director had acted in a fraudulent manner in relation to the company owning the cheques.

Alan is regularly recommended in this area in the legal directories, including the current editions of Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners, drawing praise as "an intelligent and focused practitioner".

Set out below are details of some of his recent cases. However, the sensitivity of many  his recent cases (many of which result from the recent credit crunch) is such that details of the majority of his cases cannot be published so those interested in Alan's experience should contact Nicholas Luckman, the Senior Practice Manager, direct.

• Kaupthing dispute: Dispute relating to a holding by a major trust in Somerfield supermarkets over which the insolvency Icelandic bank, Kaupthing, held security.
• BTA Bank: Proceedings in the BVI and UK by a Kazakstan bank agains the majority shareholder and a director for assets alleged to have been improperly obtained by fraud.
• Massive claim concerning a failed investment fund established as an offshore company.
• Claim by pension scheme for priority in relation to the collapse of a Bahamian insurance company

Alan is a CEDR qualified mediator.  He has taken part in numerous mediations and other settlement negotiations where his extensive experience across a wide range of practice areas is particularly valued.

Alan is an acknowledged expert on partnership law, attracting accolades in both Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners.  Legal 500/2011, for example, comments that "on partnership issues, no one is better".   Much of his caseload in this areas is by its nature confidential.  However, those cases in the public eye have included:

• Hammonds v Danilunas [2009] EWHC Ch 216: a high profile partnership dispute concerning the recovery of over-drawings from former partners.
• Drake v Harvey [2010] EWHC 1446 (Ch), Mann J: the construction of a clause in a partnership deed which provided for a dying partner's share automatically to accrue to the surviving partners subject to them paying for such share by reference to the last annual accounts, the question being whether those last annual accounts should reflect a fair value of the partnership's assets or only their book value.
• BBGP Managing General Partner Ltd v Babcock & Brown [2010] EWHC (Ch) 2176: dispute between partnership formed under Limited Partnerships Act 1907 as investment vehicle and former managing general partner and its associates. Also concerned questions of disclosure and access to partnership documents and legal professional privilege as well as whether the fraud iniquity exception applied.
• Don King Productions Inc -v- Frank Warren, Sports Network USA & Ors [2000] Ch 291 Court of Appeal: An agreement to assign contracts to a partnership was ineffective as the contracts concerned the rendering of personal services and included express provisions prohibiting and assignment of such contracts. Each partner instead became a trustee of the non assignable contracts.

Regularly recommended as expert in pensions in both Legal 500 and Chambers & Prs, Alan Steinfeld is said to be "superb and possessed of fantastic judgement".  He is seen as "a very ballsy advocate who is unwavering when under fire" with an "ability to provide incisive legal advice without being overly technical".

Pension work is invariably confidential and few cases are taken to court.  We therefore recommend that those interested contact Nicholas Luckman, the Senior Practice Manager, to learn more of Alan's experience.  Of his recent cases, the following have been reported:

• BT Pensions Trustees v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (2010): This case concerns the scope of the obligations of the employer under the pension scheme's rules and the scope of the statutory guarantee by the Crown of those obligations. 
• Pilots National Pensions Fund (2009): Alan advised on this multi-million pound dispute.
• In the Matter of K & J Holdings Ltd - Capital Cranfield Trustees Ltd -v- Pinsent Curtis [2004] EWHC : On the construction of the provisions of a company's pension scheme, once the company purported to terminate its liability to contribute to the scheme, the trustee still had the power to demand from the company a contribution in a sum equal to any shortfall in the scheme's funds needed to enable the trustee to secure members' benefits by the purchase from an insurance company of policies in accordance with the rules of the scheme.
• Bank of New Zealand -v- Bank of New Zealands Officers' Provident Ass [2003] UKPC 58 Privy Council : The Court of Appeal of New Zealand had been right to hold that the power to amend the rules of the Bank of New Zealand superannuation scheme, under which benefits were generally taken as tax-free lump sums, permitted amendments intended to increase benefits to members including persons who had been members but had left the bank's employment at any time after 1 November 1995.
• National Grid, National Power -v- Mayes [2001] 1 WLR 864 - House of Lords : Appeared for representative members of an occupational pension scheme in the House of Lords. Arrangements by which two employers dealt with actuarial surpluses in a pension scheme, by treating accrued corporate liabilities as being discharged out of that surplus, did not in the event amount to a payment to the employers out of the monies of the scheme, and hence were valid. Pensions Act 1995 (c 26 ), s 37(1).

Alan has also been advising on the construction and effect of a statutory guarantee; allegations of negligence concerning a pensions scheme; the extent to which employers are liable to top up certain pensions and on an alleged failure to advise properly on a pensions scheme.

Recommended in both Legal 500 and Chambers & Prs for his professional expertise, Alan is an acknowledged expert in this field. 

Recent cases include:

• Architects of Wine (2008): Dispute concerning the way in which all banks clear cheques and whether that process is inherently negligent.
• Claim against a silk for allegedly negligent tax advice.
• Claim concerning an alleged failure to advise properly regarding a pension scheme.
• Claim over failure to meet a time limit in a company liquidation, as a result of which the claimant lost the ability to prove in the insolvency.
• Geoffrey Paul Smith -v- Henniker-Major & Co (a firm) [2002] EWCA Civ 762 Court of Appeal : A purported assignment of a cause of action decided on by a director at an inquorate board meeting was not validated either (1) under section 35A Companies Act 1985, or (2) by ratification.
• Johnson -v- Gore Wood [2002] 2 AC 1 House of Lords : The defendant solicitors owed a duty of care to the claimant personally, as well as to his company, when giving advice in relation to both the exercise of an option and proceedings for specific performance of that option.
• Malcom Douglas Carr -v- Bower Cotton (a firm) [2002] EWCA Civ 1788 Court of Appeal : The defendant firm's authority to pay an investment fund belonging to the claimant out of its client account was not on the facts of the case restricted to payment only for certain specified investment purposes. There was no obligation on the firm to ensure that the fund was actually required or applied for an authorised purpose.
  

Property issues and instructions have always formed a staple part of Alan's practice.  He is well versed in dealing with both landlord and tenant as well as more general property litigation, often in relation to trusts assets (see the trusts section).

Recently he has been involved in:

• Baxter v Mannion [2010] EWHC 573 (Ch): An appeal against the Land Registry adjudicator in relation to the registration of a person claiming adverse possession. An appeal has been lodged.
• Crest Nicholson v Regional Investments Guildford (2010): a claim for the return of a deposit as the sale conditions required vacant possession but the land contained a lease of an electrical substation.  The defendant claimed rectification and unsubstantiality.  It has now settled.
• Midill (97PL) Ltd v Park Lane Estates & Gomba International Investements Ltd (2008) case.  The judgment in this case was that, in order for the court to exercise its discretion under section 49(2) Law of Property Act 1925 to order repayment of a deposit, there needed to be something special or exceptional to justify overriding the ordinary contractual expectations of the parties that the seller could retain the deposit if the buyer defaulted.
• Land Securities & Ors v Fladgate Fielder [2009] EWHC 577 (Ch): A firm of solicitors succeeded in striking out a claim brought by a property development company on the basis that the firm's prior commencement of judicial review proceedings against the grant of planning permission in favour of the company in relation to its proposal to redevelop 2 sites, did not constitute the tort of abuse of process.
• Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Ayres & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 52: A supplemental deed limiting the liability of an assignee of an underlease to partnership assets related only to the assets against which recourse could be had by the tenant in the event of default and did not operate to alter the terms of the relationship between the tenant and the subtenant established under a licence to assign, which provided that the tenant was entitled to recover from the subtenant any losses arising from the assignee's default without limitation.
  

Alan has built up an impressive practice in trusts, probate and estates work.  He  "bestrides the Chancery courts like a colossus" states Chambers & Partners/2012 which recommends Alan for both traditional and commercial Chancery work as well as commercial litigation.  He is also recommended in Legal 500/2011 which comments that he is "unquestionably a star of the Chancery Bar".  His recent cases illustrate his experience.  More detail is available from Nicholas Luckman, Senior Practice Manager:

• 2011 Ongoing - Multi million pound dispute in the Bahamas relating to a dispute between brothers about the proceeds of a partnership.
• 2011 Ongoing - Large scale trust dispute in Bermuda relating to a major trust.
• [2010] Major litigation in Gibraltar between oligarchs where there are wide-ranging allegations of fraud.
• [2010] Multi million pound dispute relating to the administration of an offshore trust and calls into question the administration of the trust by the Protectors.
• Family trust dispute: which occasioned in 2009 the largest ever Beddoes application.
• Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd & Ors v William Fattal & Ors [2009] EWHC 1446 (Ch): The judge was held to have erred in striking out of a claim by trustees as an abuse of process on the basis that it could have been brought in earlier proceedings between the parties.  In the earlier proceedings, the trustees did not have all the information necessary to bring their claim.   Also [2009] EWHC 1446 (Ch): the court made declarations in relation to the complex trust arrangements by which four families owned equal shares in an investment property.
• Olins v Walters [2008] EWCA Civ 782: Where there was ample evidence that codicils executed by the defendant and his deceased wife satisfied the conditions for the establishment of mutual wills, the judge had been entitled to declare that they bound the deceased's estate in the hands of the defendant and his personal representatives.
• Gregson v HAE Trustees & Ors [2008] EWHC 1006 (Ch): The claims that a trust company had against its directors for various breaches of duty could not, in the circumstances, be transposed to the beneficiary under that trust to pursue in her own right so her claim was struck out.
• Lemos -v- Coutts [1990-2005] Grand Court of the Cayman Islands, Court of Appeal, Privy Council : Multi-million dollar Cayman Islands trust dispute concerning a large family shipping trust. Since 1990 there have been a series of cases. Among the various facets of this dispute have been an application that the Court direct the sale by trustees of certain shipping assets resulting in volumes of detailed expert evidence on the shipping market and eventually in an order dividing the trust assets between various branches of the family, and further substantial litigation (complicated by the existence of the directly held shipping assets) regarding the actual division. The ongoing litigation continued in 2005 with a substantial claim for compensation for breach of trust against the former trustees arising out of their management of the shipping fleet, and an appeal to the Privy Council on a preliminary issue.
• Vadim Schmidt -v- Rosewood Trust Ltd [2003] AC 709 Privy Council : The right to seek disclosure of trust documents was an aspect of the court's inherent jurisdiction to supervise and if necessary to intervene in the administration of trusts and did not depend on the right or claim of a beneficiary to a proprietary interest in the trust property.