Aviation litigation – both in court and arbitration – makes up a growing and exciting part of Edward’s practice. He has extensive experience of conducting cases both as sole counsel and as junior to a silk, dealing with commercial disputes relating to the purchase, lease and maintenance of aircraft as well as international carriage claims, accident claims and regulatory work. Solicitors favour him both for his “superb advocacy skills” and because “he is very bright and understands the technical details of a case“.

Edward’s expertise in aviation litigation is recognised by both the leading directories. Legal 500 has long recommended him as a leading aviation junior, describing him as “one to watch for the future“. Legal 500 (2015) says that “He has fantastic knowledge and is very user friendly“. Chambers and Partners (2016) also recommends him as a leading aviation junior, with sources describing him as “making a name for himself in aviation cases” and saying that “He’s absolutely one to watch; if his star hasn’t risen already, it’s certainly rising quickly“.

Previous editions have said of him: “Enormously user-friendly and punches well above his weight – a real star“; “A very promising and bright young junior doing commercial litigation“; and that he is “incredibly enthusiastic even when working 22 hour days“.

He has recently acted as sole counsel in Boulevard Two v Air Italy, a multi-million pound dispute in the High Court regarding the redelivery of a Boeing 737-300 that raised interesting questions regarding the application of the rules against penalties in the context of ‘holdover rent’; and in SmartLynx v Air Nigeria (formerly Virgin Nigeria), a substantial dispute arising from the early termination of a lease of a Boeing 737-200, in which he successfully obtained summary judgment for more than US$15 million on behalf
of the Latvian airline.

Prior to this, from 2011 to 2013, he appeared in Olympic Airlines SA (in special liquidation) v ACG Acquisition XX LLC [2013] EWCA 369 and [2012] EWHC 1070 (Comm), the first case to consider the meaning of ‘airworthiness’ of an aircraft. Edward, led by Philip Shepherd QC, represented Olympic Airlines both in the Court of Appeal and in the Commercial Court trial of this US$17million dispute over a Boeing 737-700 which was found to have been unairworthy at the time that it was delivered to the Greek flag carrier airline. Hamblen J’s judgment on the Claimant’s summary judgment application, in ACG Acquisition XX LLC v Olympic Airlines SA [2010] EWHC 923, was the first reported decision in which a court has refused summary judgment for rent in spite of the lessee signing a certificate of acceptance. The case garnered considerable industry attention and Teare J’s decision at trial (upheld in the Court of Appeal by Rix LJ, Tomlinson LJ and Kitchin LJ albeit, importantly, on different grounds) has important implications for both lessees and lessors.

Throughout 2010 and 2011 Edward advised a leading Icelandic airline, as sole counsel, in relation to a multi-million dollar contractual dispute arising from wet leases of 2 Boeing 747-300 aircraft and, in late 2011, he appeared on its behalf in a related and substantial LCIA arbitration.

In the past year Edward has also been retained by a major airline to represent it in a variety of ongoing disputes with other airlines: one concerns a significant claim for the inadequate maintenance of an Airbus A320 and another concerns multi-million pound sums due under wet leases of 2 Boeing 737-400 aircraft.

Edward represented Air France as part of a team of counsel from XXIV Old Buildings (led by Steven Thompson) in Eagle Aircraft Leasing v Air France (2009-10), a large Commercial Court dispute, with an expedited trial timetable, concerning the delivery condition and documentation of 6 Boeing 747-400s pursuant to agreements for their sale and purchase.

He has also successfully obtained summary judgment in an air charter claim and assisted Philip Shepherd QC and Bajul Shah in the trial of a claim for for delivery up of various aircraft.

Edward has a broad experience of a range of banking and financial services disputes (both retail and commercial, domestic and international) in addition to his particular experience of hedge fund disputes.

He has advised on cases involving capital markets and the trading of financial derivatives including disputes over contracts for differences, spread bets and options. He has developed a good understanding of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (‘FSMA 2000′), as well as having particular experience of financial and corporate regulation in Guernsey (where he is presently instructed on a multi-million pound claim for fraudulent/negligent investment advice) and the BVI.

He also frequently acts on and advises in relation to cases involving guarantees, indemnities and security rights in relation to real and personal property (particularly where they may involve challenges to creditors’ rights).

Edward has experience of a wide variety of mis-selling claims (acting for financial institutions, other businesses and retail customers). In recent years he has developed particular expertise in disputes arising from the sale by various major banks of interest rate hedging products (including swaps, caps, floors and collars) to small business customers.

He was recently instructed, with Alexander Pelling, in a FFA dispute in the Commercial Court and regularly undertakes a range of work for spread-betting companies.

He is presently heavily engaged in Re Carlyle Capital Corporation (in liquidation) (ongoing). Edward acts for the Carlyle Group (the renowned American based global asset management firm) and its high-profile directors in a multi-jurisdictional, $1billion investment management dispute arising from the insolvency of Carlyle Capital, its Guernsey-based mortgage investment spin-off. The matter has been the subject of bitterly disputed and ongoing jurisdiction battles in Delaware, Washington DC, New York and now Guernsey.

Edward has a particular interest in civil fraud and asset recovery disputes. He has acted in several major dishonesty and fraud cases, often involving international elements, and has extensive experience of freezing injunctions (including their discharge and abuse), orders for disclosure and other asset preservation and tracing remedies (including those involving offshore trusts).

Recent work in this area includes:

• Thomas & Pick (as liquidators of GBI Investments Ltd) v Jakes & Nestarec [2012] EWHC 525 (Ch), [2011] EWHC 2619 (Ch): acting as sole counsel Edward successfully pursued an application to commit two company directors to prison for contempt of court in (a) transferring bearer shares to a third party, despite an order that they deliver them up to English liquidators, and (b) deliberately deceiving the court at an earlier hearing by advancing a false case. Each respondent was sentenced to 1 year’s imprisonment.
• Edward continues to advise the liquidators of GBI Investments Ltd regarding ongoing international asset recovery matters (encompassing jurisdictions including Slovakia, the Czech Republic and the United States).
• Being instructed on behalf of receivers in Cadogan Petroleum Plc v Tolley a major fraud claim in the Chancery Division.
• Assisting a Manx company in a multi-million pound claim before the Royal Court of Guernsey for fraudulent investment advice.
• Acting for one of the oldest art galleries in the world in a claim against the sole director of a sales agent for dishonest assistance and knowing receipt.

Together with Elspeth Talbot Rice QC he successfully opposed an application for permission to amend to allege fraud in Fattal and others v Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd and others [2011] 1 All ER (Comm) 647, [2010] EWHC 2767 (Ch), a case concerning alleged mismanagement and abuse of a complex offshore trust and corporate structure.

Edward deals with a wide range of contractual and other commercial and business disputes in the High Court, the County Court and arbitration. Having studied in the USA at the University of Pennsylvania Law School and the Wharton Business School, Edward has particular strength in international and offshore matters in line with XXIV Old Buildings’ expertise in this area. He has extensive recent experience of disputes in which important principles of the conflict of laws (including jurisdiction and proper law disputes) have proved decisive, and of applications for anti-suit injunctions.

He is recommended for commercial dispute resolution by Chambers & Partners 2014, which notes that “[s]ources are quick to highlight him as a junior to pay close attention to whose expertise belies his year of call” and observes that Edward “has already developed superb advocacy skills and has sound judgment“.

Highlights of his recent work include:

• Re Carlyle Capital Corporation (in liquidation) (ongoing): Edward acts for the Carlyle Group (the renowned American based global asset management firm) and its high-profile directors in a multi-jurisdictional, $1billion investment management dispute arising from the insolvency of Carlyle Capital, its Guernsey-based mortgage investment spin-off. The matter has been the subject of bitterly disputed and ongoing jurisdiction battles in Delaware, Washington DC, New York and now Guernsey;
• Acting on behalf of a leading London art dealer in the latest round of litigation in HRH Prince Jefri Bolkiah v Brunei Investment Authoritybeing pursued in both London and New York;
• A multi-jurisdictional banking dispute worth around US$100 million between a Bahamian company (for which Edward acted along with David Brownbill QC) and a leading Swiss financial services provider. Edward was heavily involved with a jurisdiction challenge in Singapore which was ultimately resolved by the Singapore Court of Appeal (Singapore’s highest court);
• Acting as sole counsel against a leading silk in an LCIA arbitration concerning an aviation dispute worth over US$11million;
• Acting with Alan Steinfeld QC and Elspeth Talbot Rice QC in major Chancery Division litigation by which one of four offshore trusts claimed to be entitled to exercise a right of pre-emption in relation to another trust’s interest in companies owning a substantial London commercial and residential property;
• Chapman v Wilson and others [2010] EWHC 1746 (Ch): Edward appeared on behalf of the successful defendants in a week-long Chancery Division trial of this multi-million pound dispute. The case concerned the validity of a creditor’s appointment of LPA receivers over various assets, including debts and work in progress, of a troubled solicitor’s firm and raised novel questions about the steps necessary under the Bills of Sale Acts to perfect and allow enforcement of various types of security over an individual’s assets;
• Eagle Aircraft Leasing v Air France (2009-2010): Edward was led by Steven Thompson (as part of a team of counsel from XXIV Old Buildings representing Air France) in this complex Commercial Court claim concerning the delivery of six Boeing 747-400s pursuant to agreements for their sale and purchase;
• Appeared with Elspeth Talbot Rice QC for creditors of Oilexco North Sea Limited, both at first instance and on the expedited appeal, in Oilexco North Sea Ltd and others v Harms Offshore AHT “Taurus” GmbH & Co KG and another [2010] Ch 187, [2010] 2 WLR 349 the leading Court of Appeal judgment on the courts’ power to grant anti-suit injunctions in support of insolvency proceedings;
• Representing the estate of a significant artist in a dispute over one of the artist’s most significant pieces (with Elspeth Talbot Rice QC);
• Advising a well-known provider of financial services about its potential liability as custodian of a Guernsey-based hedge fund affected by the Madoff litigation and potential clawback issues (with David Brownbill QC);
• Lady Henrietta St George & others v Sir Jack Hayward & others (2008-2009): Edward was instructed (with Stephen Moverley Smith QC and David Herbert) in litigation concerning ownership and control of Freeport, the second-largest port in the Bahamas;
• Alberg v Kenexa Corp (2008): appeared on behalf of a director and former majority shareholder of a market-leading psychometric testing company in a dispute over ‘earn out’ provisions of a share purchase agreement and associated disclosure requirements;
• Successfully defending the former chief executive of a prominent sporting body against a claim alleging that he had personally guaranteed certain of the body’s debts;
• Successful applications for a worldwide freezing injunction both with and without notice in support of a claim regarding the sale of a property in breach of trust in the High Court;
• Appearing for a well-known clothing brand in a multi-jurisdictional dispute over a terminated distribution agreement with the brand’s French distributor;
• Acting for a leading hotel and conference centre in a claim against a professional body for unpaid fees relating to a national conference, involving counter-allegations that the facilities and services provided were inadequate; and
• A wide variety of claims concerning sale of goods, breaches of warranty and the extent of indemnities in share purchase agreements.

His experience also covers a range of interim and enforcement measures, including freezing orders (their discharge and abuse), orders for disclosure (in particular working with leading and junior counsel on an application for non-party disclosure under CPR 31.17), applications to set aside default judgment, security for costs, unless orders, charging orders and third party debt orders.

Edward has written an article on “Economic torts after Douglas v Hello” with Philip Shepherd QC.

More details of Edward’s experience of financial services disputes, hedge fund disputes, civil fraud claims and asset tracing can be found by clicking the relevant box .

Edward has particular experience and expertise in company law and related matters, including:

• Unfair prejudice petitions pursuant to s.459 of the Companies Act 1985 and s.994 of the Companies Act 2006 (together with applications for urgent injunctions in support of such petitions);
• Petitions for just and equitable winding-up;
• Winding-up petitions in the Companies Court;
• Applications for injunctions restraining presentation and/or advertisement of winding-up petitions;
• Derivative actions;
• Actions for specific performance of share transfer agreements, including a recent claim concerning a fund based in Hong Kong and investing in North Korea;
• Claims concerning directors’ duties and responsibilities;
• Civil fraud claims in a corporate context;
• Drafting of share purchase agreements;
• Drafting of memoranda and articles of association, minutes and other corporate documents;
• Advisory work on company structuring and the launch/listing of offshore funds;
• Directors’ disqualification proceedings and applications for permission to act as a director notwithstanding disqualification.

Edward was led by Lawrence Cohen QC in obtaining evidence in aid of proceedings in Texas concerning the valuation of a unique type of very high-value redeemable preference shares in a multinational oil-trading company: L v L (2009).

Edward was also recently instructed on an urgent basis for a major shareholder and director in a dispute with other shareholders and directors over control of a large group of computer software companies based in both the US and the UK.

Edward has an exceptional understanding of hedge fund structures and operation having twice been retained for a substantial period of time to advise one of the leading offshore firms on a number of fund matters – both litigious and transactional – in both Guernsey and the British Virgin Islands.

His experience of hedge fund disputes, multinational shareholder disputes, asset tracing claims (involving offshore trusts and listed multinational companies) and international civil fraud matters includes having recently:

• advised regarding provisions in the articles and offering memorandum of a (Cayman Islands) fund relating to gating redemptions and redemption management;
• advised a well-known provider of financial services about its potential liability as custodian of a Guernsey-based hedge fund affected by the Madoff litigation and potential clawback issues (with David Brownbill QC);
• acted on behalf of the administrator of another Guernsey-based fund in relation to a potential negligence claim against its auditors; and
• been instructed in a multi-million pound dispute between managing partners of a hedge fund as to how the fund’s profits and losses from its various domestic and international operations should be distributed between them;
• acting for the Carlyle Group (the renowned American based global asset management firm) and its high-profile directors in a multi-jurisdictional, $1billion investment management dispute arising from the insolvency of Carlyle Capital, its Guernsey-based mortgage investment spin-off.

Edward has a particular interest in both corporate insolvency and bankruptcy. He has been repeatedly recognised as a leading insolvency junior by Legal 500 which has recommended him as a “rising star“. He has developed a well-respected practice and has a particularly loyal client base. As well as being an expert contributor to Tolley’s Insolvency Law, his recent work includes:

• Thomas & Pick (as liquidators of GBI Investments Ltd) v Jakes & Nestarec [2012] EWHC 525 (Ch), [2011] EWHC 2619 (Ch): Edward has advised the liquidators of GBI Investments Ltd on various matters arising from the complicated liquidation of the company, including many difficult issues of cross-border insolvency. Most recently he successfully pursued an application to commit two directors to prison for contempt of court in (a) transferring bearer shares to a third party, despite an order that they deliver them up to the liquidators, and (b) deliberately deceiving the court at an earlier hearing by advancing a false case. Each respondent was sentenced to 1 year’s imprisonment.
• Appearing successfully at first instance and on appeal in one of the leading recent cases on the remuneration of officeholders which was cited with approval in Brook v Reed [2011] EWCA Civ 331, the leading Court of Appeal authority. Edward successfully opposed an appeal by a trustee-in-bankruptcy against an order fixing the amount of his remuneration and expenses at a little over a tenth of the total amount he sought before Proudman J: Hunt v Yearwood-Grazette [2009] BPIR 810.
• Acting (with Elspeth Talbot Rice QC) for creditors of Oilexco North Sea Limited both at first instance and on the expedited appeal in Oilexco North Sea Ltd and others v Harms Offshore AHT “Taurus” GmbH & Co KG and another [2010] Ch 187, [2010] 2 WLR 349, [2009] 2 BCLC 473, the leading Court of Appeal judgment on the courts’ power to grant anti-suit injunctions in support of insolvency proceedings.
• Pursuing a complicated challenge to an IVA in Re Tappenden (2011-2012).
• Advising a major multi-national group regarding migration of its COMI under the EC Regulation on Insolvency.
• An application in the High Court on behalf of a trustee-in-bankruptcy in which he successfully obtained a worldwide freezing injunction against the assets of a bankrupt and his wife.
• Frequent applications to the High Court in respect of administrators’ appointments.
• Frequent applications for annulment of bankruptcy orders.
• Written advice concerning the application of the Insolvent Partnerships Order 1994.
• Written advice on the consequences of annulment of a bankruptcy order.
• Litigation and advice in relation to the Company Directors’ Disqualification Act 1986 including applications for permission to act notwithstanding disqualification. Edward also regularly speaks about this area to professional audiences.
• Litigation and advice in relation to possession and sale proceedings.
• Frequent appearances in the Companies Court pursuant to winding-up petitions, on applications to restrain presentation and/or advertisement of winding-up petitions and on applications for validation orders.

Edward, together with Elspeth Talbot Rice QC, has produced a Legal Update on the Court of Appeal’s decision in Bloom v Harms Offshore GmbH & Co KG [2010] 2 Ch 187.

Their article “How long is insolvency’s arm?” has been published in Insolvency Intelligence on 7th July 2010 and the Solicitors’ Journal in October 2010.

His latest podcast with Elspeth Talbot Rice QC is on the topic of “Anti-suit injunctions in insolvency proceedings” (Clicking on this link takes you to CPDCast’s website where you can access the podcast by setting up a (free) account).

Edward has acted in a wide range of partnership and joint venture disputes, an area of practice in which his business experience proves particularly invaluable.

In Keegan v Fitzgerald (2011) LTL AC0130343 Edward successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of the defendant in a bitter joint venture dispute. He persuaded the court that a partner who had been required by the set-off provisions in a facility letter, by which a bank had extended a multi-million pound loan to the partnership, to allow funds which the bank held for him personally to be used to reduce the loan to the partnership could only recover a contribution from the defendant by the taking of an account in equity after the dissolution of the partnership. He was not entitled to pursue a debt claim under CPR Part 7.

He has also recently advised on a claim for the dissolution of a solicitors’ partnership (where one partner was suspected of frequent unauthorised withdrawals from the partnership account) and a dispute between former partners of a major hedge fund (where there were LLPs and partnership assets in both the UK and the Cayman Islands). He also appeared successfully in a dispute over a partnership which conducted a travel agency business specialising in flights for the Hajj.

In 2010 and 2011 much of Edward’s time was spent on a massive joint venture dispute in the Chancery Division (see, for example, Fattal and others v Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd and others [2011] 1 All ER (Comm) 647, [2010] EWHC 2767 (Ch) and Fattal and others v Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd and others [2010] EWHC 3049 (Ch)) by which one of four trusts claimed to be entitled to exercise a right of pre-emption in relation to another trust’s interest in companies owning a substantial London commercial and residential property. Edward was instructed together with Alan Steinfeld QC and Elspeth Talbot Rice QC.

Edward has acted and advised in a range of professional negligence claims against
trustees, auditors, custodians, investment managers both in England and
offshore. Recent highlights of his experience include:

• a multi-million pound claim for allegedly fraudulent/negligent investment advice given to a Manx company by a Guernsey-based investment advisor;
• advising the administrators of a prominent Middle Eastern bank about potential claims against its auditors;
• acting in a claim against a firm of accountants arising from the way in which they handled a client’s bonus payments which were paid to them rather than their client;
  and
• advising a well-known provider of financial services about its potential
  liability as custodian of a Guernsey-based hedge fund affected by the
  Madoff litigation and potential clawback issues (with David Brownbill QC).

Edward has a broad experience of property disputes, including possession actions, residential and commercial landlord and tenant (in particular distress and issues arising from service of notices), proprietary estoppel and constructive trust claims and disputes regarding boundaries and rights of way in the High Court, County Courts and Leasehold Valuation Tribunal. In particular:

• Edward successfully represented a large group of leaseholders in the three-day trial of a half-a-million pound service charge dispute with their local authority freeholder in the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal: Fleury & Ors v Westminster City Council (LON/00BK/LSC/2007/0086). See here for the 2008 judgment.
• He represents a residential tenant in an ongoing dispute with her landlord, its managing agent and the cleaners of the block of flats after the cleaners entered her flat whilst she was away and threw out all of her belongings rather than an adjacent flat which had recently become vacant at the end of a tenancy.
• Zambra Investments Ltd v Patel & Bagasrawala (LON/00AJ/LBC/2010/0018) (2010): Edward acted for the successful Respondent in this claim for a declaration under s.168 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 that the Respondents had breached covenants in their leases.
• RSPCA v Bowe (2008-2009): Edward successfully acted on behalf of the RSPCA in this Chancery Division claim against a former employee for sums owed under the terms of an employee shared equity scheme.
• He was recently instructed on behalf of a restaurant owner in the trial of a claim by owners of the property neighbouring the restaurant that his user breached the terms of a restrictive covenant which permitted only the running of a “high-class” restaurant from the premises.
• Edward frequently advises and has particular experience of both pursuing and defending claims for fees and commission in respect of ‘introductions’ to property transactions.
• He also has experience of construction-related disputes and multi-party litigation arising from property-development joint ventures. This year he has represented a builder in the three-day trial of a dispute arising from his construction of a loft conversion in which Edward’s rigorous cross-examination proved decisive and is currently acting for a firm which seeks to recover significant unpaid fees in respect of the construction of a development of 30 sustainable “eco-homes”.

As a keen sports enthusiast Edward takes particular interest in the field of sports law. He has been instructed on a variety of matters – often of a sensitive or confidential nature – concerning Formula One, Moto GP, football and cricket.

His recent experience includes acting for a leading Championship football club in a dispute with a recently sacked manager, successfully defending the former chief executive of a prominent cricketing body against a claim alleging that he had personally guaranteed certain of the body’s debts, acting on behalf of a prominent Premier League footballer (and former captain of his national side) and representing a Formula One team in the High Court in a sponsorship dispute. Edward has particular experience of issues arising from the financing of football clubs and football club insolvencies (including the impact of FA and league rules).

Edward has a particular interest in this central area of practice at XXIV Old Buildings as well as international trust advice and litigation. Clients are impressed by the breadth of his experience of both contentious and advisory work, partly resulting from time spent on secondment, early in his career, to the contentious trust and probate department of one of the pre-eminent London firms of solicitors.

He is now recommended for chancery work by both Chambers and Partners and Legal 500, and is said to be “A regular participant in heavyweight trust litigation who often takes instructions from notable UK and offshore law firms. He also represents clients in a wide range of other key areas, including Inheritance Act claims, probate disputes and proprietary estoppel suits.”

The directories released in late 2015 recommend Edward as a leading junior, with sources saying that “He is a lion in court” and “He is very engaging, highly confident and
he has a good head on his shoulders.” He is also described as “A human dynamo – always available for a call and ready to assist.“

Chambers & Partners (2014) recommended Edward as a leading junior, noting “his strength in both traditional and commercial chancery work in the UK and abroad” and that he has both “a distinct trusts and estates flavour to his practice” and “considerable experience in the financial services field” which make him “a junior in high demand.“

“He is straight talking and distils legal issues effectively and quickly. A formidable advocate, while at the same time very good at client facing”

“He brings to the table substantial courtroom experience and a fearlessness that makes him fight hard for his clients.”

Chambers & Partners (2013) recommended Edward as an ‘up and coming’ junior, describing him as providing “advice that is bullish as well as accurate and realistic” and keeping “busy with a mix of traditional and commercial chancery works“.

Chambers & Partners (2012) recommended him saying:

“Edward Cumming is surely destined for great things, given market feedback. As with his fellows at XXIV Old Buildings, he has cut his teeth on tricky and often deeply bitter international trusts, probate and succession cases. In these cases, he has shown himself to be ‘confident, thorough and an excellent drafter of documents.’”

He regularly appears in both trials and interlocutory hearings
of contentious trust and probate matters. His recent work includes:

• C and others v C and others: major ongoing trust litigation in both Jersey and Mauritius, involving claims for more than US$100million for alleged breaches of trust.
• Re K: a bitterly fought dispute in the High Court regarding the administration of a substantial and high-profile estate.
• Fattal and others v Walbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd and others [2011] 1 All ER (Comm) 647, [2010] EWHC 2767 (Ch) and [2010] EWHC 3049 (Ch): Edward appeared with Alan Steinfeld QC and Elspeth Talbot Rice QC in this major trust litigation by which one of four trusts claimed to be entitled to exercise a right of pre-emption in relation to another trust’s interest in companies owning a substantial London commercial and residential property;
• Obtaining various orders for the urgent and/or interim appointment of administrators in order to safeguard estate assets;
• Griffin v Griffin (2010):
  appearing at the much-publicised trial of this dispute between two
  brothers over a sum allegedly owed by one to the other in relation to the
  administration of their mother’s estate;
• Re Bell (2008-2010): a procedurally difficult and
  bitterly-contested probate claim involving allegations of undue
  influence, want of knowledge and approval and fraud;
• Re Radford (2009): defending proceedings brought under
  the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 by a
  deceased husband’s first wife against his wife at his death;
• Re D’Aguilar (2009): advising the Costa Rican descendants
  of a Spanish conquistador about a claim to substantial monies paid into
  Court as part of 18th century litigation over his estate;
• Davies v Davies & Atlas Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd (2007-2009):
  acting for the Jersey trustees of an employee benefit trust in English
  ancillary relief proceedings in the Family Division of the High Court;
• Read v Read & Read (2008-2009): successfully
  representing two brothers, one of whom was executor of their late
  father’s estate, in various claims brought by a third brother in the
  Chancery and Family Divisions of the High Court relating to the
  administration of the estate;
• Acting for the Guernsey trustees of an Isle of Man trust in English proceedings relating to Manx divorce proceedings;
• Advising as to the tax-efficient reconstruction of a complicated offshore structure involving both Jersey and Guernsey trusts and a Liechtenstein foundation;
• Claims for breach of trust and breach of fiduciary duty;
• Variation of trusts;
• Substitution of trustees;
• Applications by trustees for directions;
• A wide variety of contentious probate claims (including allegations of fraud, undue influence, lack of capacity and want of knowledge and approval);
• Applications for grants of interim letters of administration and grants ad colligenda bona;
• Proprietary estoppel claims;
• Claims and trials of claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975;
• Proceedings in the Court of Protection in relation to Enduring Powers of Attorney;
• IHT and CGT planning.

Edward has twice been retained for a substantial period of time
to advise the business and trust law department of one of the leading offshore
firms on a number of matters requiring a detailed understanding of many aspects
of international estate planning and offshore trust and corporate structures in
both Guernsey and the British Virgin Islands. He therefore has a good working
knowledge of the trust laws of these offshore jurisdictions.