Edward Knight

Areas of experience

Checked sections will be included in the PDF download.

Select: All | None

• Commercial Litigation

  Edward’s core litigation practice centers on commercial contract disputes, whether domestic or international. In addition to appearing at all levels of the English Courts and the Privy Council, he has appeared before the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, the Dubai International Financial Centre Court and has advised on claims in the Channel Islands and Africa.  He has substantial experience where matters coincide with fraud and/or insolvency. Recommended for commercial litigation in Legal 500, clients comment Edward is a “great team player. He has his eye on the detail but doesn’t overlook the commercial aspects”.

  His commercial litigation experience includes:

  • Hitex v Uniserve Ltd [2024] EWHC 1725 (Ch): Acting for the Jordanian manufacturer and agents in a claim relating to the supply of facemasks during the pandemic.  The claim included allegations of fraudulent misrepresentation and repudiatory breach.
  • Hikari Miso UK v Knibbs [2023] EWHC 1340 (Ch): Acting in a shareholder dispute over a manufacturer of tofu.  The claim centered on the impact of a shareholders’ agreement on the scope of directors’ fiduciary duties.
  • Re Milestar Ltd: Representing the claimant in a derivative action involving the misappropriation of corporate assets and breach of fiduciary duty.
  • Obuz v The Republic of Uzbekistan ICSID Case No. ARB/21-32: Lead counsel for a Turkish investor under a Bilateral Investment Treaty in this ICSID arbitration seated in Washington DC relating to the expropriation of investments.
  • In the matter of a Company: Lead counsel for a $1billion Saudi unicorn in a combined shareholder dispute, derivative action and unfair prejudice petition pursued in arbitration under DIAC/LCIA.
  • I v J (American Arbitration Association). Lead counsel for the Respondent in a shareholder dispute relating to a power station in East Africa, including allegations of fraud and breach of a shareholders’ agreement.
  • Glory Trading v Global Skynet [2022] UKPC 35 As sole counsel, Edward represented the appellant in an appeal from the Eastern Caribbean to the Privy Council over the ultimate beneficial ownership of an Anguillan offshore company.
  • ZCCM-Investment Holdings v Kansanshi Holdings Limited [2019] EWHC 1285 (Comm): Acting for the Respondent in an ad hoc arbitration under UNCITRAL rules against a Zambian state investment company.  The claim was a derivative action arising out of an African mining joint venture seeking in excess of $100 million, including allegations of dishonesty, fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. Edward continued to act in defeating the Claimant’s challenge to the Award, including, inter alia, grounds of fraud.
  • IPCO v Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation [2017] UKSC 16; [2015] EWCA (Civ) 1144 and 1145: Acting for a party seeking to enforce an international arbitration award for $300m+ in England. Amidst allegations that the award was procured by fraud.  The claim reached the Supreme Court in February 2017 and is now probably the foremost English case on enforcement under the New York Convention.
  • Crestar v Newton: Acting in a dispute over the distribution of funds out of escrow following the failure of contracts relating to the transfer of oil production assets in Nigeria.
  • GlobeMed v Oman Insurance Company: Edward acts in a claim relating to the renunciation of a contract for the provision of insurance administrative services in the Dubai International Financial Centre Court. The proceedings included reference to the JJC and appearance before the DIFC Court of Appeal.
  • Ahmad v Saba: Edward appeared in the DIFC Court in relation to a derivative action arising out of the unlawful disposal of company assets.
  • Aquarius v Barber & others: Claim, and associated injunctive relief, in the Commercial Court in respect of breaches of fiduciary duty of the captain of a superyacht and claim against associated recipients of that property.
  • Force India Formula One v Etihad  [2010] EWCA Civ 1051: Edward acted for Force India team in the Defendant’s appeal over breach of Formula One sponsorship contracts.
  • Rodriguez v Force India Formula One: Edward acted in respect of claims made against the Force India team in relation to a driver contract.
• Company

  Edward acts regularly in company disputes, including the removal of directors, disqualification under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, section 994 of the Companies Act 2006 and just and equitable petitions, both in the English courts and overseas. Ranked in the Legal 500

  His experience includes:

  • Hikari Miso UK v Knibbs [2023] EWHC 1340 (Ch). Acting in a shareholder dispute over a manufacturer of tofu.  The claim centered on the impact of a shareholders’ agreement on the scope of directors’ fiduciary duties.
  • Glory Trading v Global Skynet [2022] UKPC 35. Sole counsel representing the appellant in an appeal from the Eastern Caribbean to the Privy Council over the ultimate beneficial ownership of an Anguillan offshore company.
  • Re Milestar Ltd: Representing the claimant in a derivative action involving the misappropriation of corporate assets and breach of fiduciary duty.
  • Re East 63rd, Bamford v Mannheim: Acting in a petition for the just and equitable winding up of an investment company.
  • Re Milestar Limited: Acting in successful section 994 unfair prejudice proceedings relating to a company with both trading and property investment assets.
  • Re Culver Group: Acting for two directors in disqualification proceedings relating to a group of companies offering insurance, financial advice and legal services.
  • Ahmad v Saba: Appearing in the Dubai International Financial Centre Courts on a matter engaging the inter-relating aspects of dissolution and limitation in derivative and unfair prejudice actions.
  • Re Miller Gardner Partnership LLP: Acting for a solicitor in disqualification proceedings where the collapse had followed an adverse judgment in the Court of Appeal in group litigation undertaken by the partnership, which was subsequently overturned in the Supreme Court.
  • Re CCM Accountancy Ltd: Acting in a section 994 petition relating to the diversion of business and breach of fiduciary obligations.
  • Drozdov v Van Eck [2013] EWHC 3965 (Ch): Acting for the Claimant seeking a declaration as to the beneficial ownership of shares in a family company and consequent account.
  • Re Tulsesense [2010] EWHC 244 (Ch): Acting for a group of shareholders seeking a declaration that the purported sole director’s period of office had terminated and he had not been appointed informally on Duomatic principles.
  • Rolfe v Rolfe: A petition under section 994 on the grounds that the petitioners were unfairly prejudiced by the absence of management of the company.
• Insolvency

  Edward’s principal focus is on the identification and pursuit of assets and their recovery under company and insolvency legislation, particularly with respect to prior transactions. He is recommended in this area by Legal 500, client’s state “Edward’s USP is that he is also a trained accountant, so his skills with numbers and accounts are invaluable when it comes to complex insolvency claims”.

  His recent cases include:

  • Re Lynch: Acting for the bankrupt in a challenge to his trustee in bankruptcy’s admission of a proof of debt on the grounds of forgery.
  • Re Imperial Escrow: Representing a class of creditors in claims to a proprietary interest in an escrow account linked to an investment fraud.
  • Re Albermarle Hotels Limited: Acting for liquidators in claims to set aside prior transactions following the restructuring and insolvency of part of a group of hotel companies, seeking approximately £10 million.
  • Re Monkton Road Pharmacy Ltd: Acting for liquidators in relation to an application for their removal and a related application seeking the assignment of claims of the company in liquidation.
  • Re Hever Hotel & Others: Acting for creditors in a number of applications relating to the conduct of liquidations and administrations following the collapse of the Hever Hotel group amidst serious allegations of fraud.  The applications include the removal of liquidators owing to conflicts of interest.
  • Ahmed v Saba: Appearing in the Dubai International Financial Centre Courts on a matter engaging the inter-relating aspects of dissolution and limitation in derivative and unfair prejudice actions.
  • Re Litchfield Investments Ltd: Acting for a major creditor of two companies in CVA pursuing claims under product warranties.
  • Re Leeward Isles Resorts Limited [2015] UKPC 30: Acting for a major investor in, and creditor of, the Cap Juluca Resort in Anguilla.  The matter kept Edward regularly before the High Court in Anguilla, the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal and the Privy Council.
  • Re the Estate of Boris Berezovsky [2015] EWHC 2962 (Ch): Appeared for creditors dissatisfied by the administrators’ decision in relation to the date of currency conversion of debts and the period of interest allowed.
  • Re APX Realisations Limited: Acting in relation to the rejection of proof by liquidators notwithstanding concurrent litigation in Florida, and the liquidator’s power to make a dividend notwithstanding that litigation.
  • Re Colliers International [2012] EWHC 2942 (Ch); [2013] Ch 422: [2012] BPIR 1099: the court resolved conflicting authorities to find that it had jurisdiction to grant retrospective permission for the commencement of proceedings in insolvency cases including administration.
• Civil Fraud, Asset Tracing & Recovery

  As a chartered former accountant and auditor, Edward has specialist skill in the recognition, investigation and prevention of fraud. His knowledge of accountancy is also invaluable in the tracing and recovery of assets. He is recommended in this area by Legal 500, clients comment “Edward is an accomplished advocate who radiates confidence and competence. He is also really good with papers and very tolerant of difficult clients”.

  His experience includes:

  • Hitex v Uniserve Ltd [2024] EWHC 1725 (Ch): Edward acted for the Jordanian manufacturer and agents in a claim relating to the supply of facemasks during the pandemic.  The claim included allegations of fraudulent misrepresentation and repudiatory breach.
  • Obuz v The Republic of Uzbekistan [2024] ICSID Case No. ARB/21-32 Edward acted as lead counsel for a Turkish investor under a Bilateral Investment Treaty in this ICSID arbitration seated in Washington DC relating to the expropriation of investments.
  • In the matter of a Company: Edward acted as lead counsel for a $1billion Saudi unicorn in a combined shareholder dispute, derivative action and unfair prejudice petition pursued in arbitration under DIAC/LCIA.
  • I v J: American Arbitration Association Edward successfully acted as lead counsel for the Respondent in a shareholder dispute relating to a power station in East Africa, including allegations of fraud and breach of a shareholders’ agreement.
  • Glory Trading v Global Skynet [2022] UKPC 35 As sole counsel, Edward represented the appellant in an appeal from the Eastern Caribbean to the Privy Council over the ultimate beneficial ownership of an Anguillan offshore company.
  • Battenberg v Phillips:  Edward has successfully represented Australian executors in the High Court in their jurisdictional challenges to repeated claims against the deceased’s estate and in prolonged enforcement proceedings hampered by a campaign of forgery and collusion.
  • Gunes Tecstil & Others v The Republic of Uzbekistan ICSID Case No. ARB/13/19 Acting with a leading Turkish legal team in a claim under the Turkey-Uzbekistan Bilateral Investment Treaty relating to the expropriation of investments.
  • ZCCM-Investment Holdings v Kansanshi Holdings Limited [2019] EWHC 1285 (Comm): Acting for the Respondent in an ad hoc arbitration under UNCITRAL rules against a Zambian state investment company.  The claim was a derivative action arising out of an African mining joint venture seeking in excess of $100 million, including allegations of dishonesty, fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. Edward continued to act in defeating the Claimant’s challenge to the Award, including, inter alia, grounds of fraud.
  • IPCO v Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation [2017] UKSC 16; [2015] EWCA (Civ) 1144 and 1145: Acts for a party seeking to enforce an international arbitration award for $300m+ in England. Amidst allegations that the award was procured by fraud.  The claim reached the Supreme Court in February 2017 and is now probably the foremost English case on enforcement under the New York Convention.
  • Re Lynch: Acts for the bankrupt in a challenge to his trustee in bankruptcy’s admission of a proof of debt on the grounds of forgery.
  • Re Imperial Escrow: Representing a class of creditors in claims to a proprietary interest in an escrow account linked to an investment fraud.
  • Aquarius v Barber & others: Claim in respect of breaches of fiduciary duty of the captain of a superyacht and claim against associated recipients of that property.
  • Ackerman v Ackerman [2011] EWHC 2183 (Ch): Representing an expert adjudicator against allegations of fraudulent collusion with one of the parties in the demerger of a substantial property company.
  • Arbitration in Permanent Court of Arbitration: Acting for the investor in an Investor-State claim in the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague relating to the expropriation of environmental gas pipeline projects.
  • Berezovsky v Hine & Ors: Acting for the trustee of the principal assets of the late Badri Patarkatsishvili in the late Boris Berezovsky’s action against his estate and family.
• Professional Negligence

  Edward is recommended by Legal 500 for his professional negligence work. As a former chartered accountant and auditor, he has an in-depth knowledge and understanding of both accounting standards and audit practice. His accountancy background makes him a natural choice for related negligence disputes. His experience includes:

  • Angel Group v McBrides: Edward represented the defendants in claims of negligence and fraudulent breach of fiduciary duty as accountants and auditors.
  • Ackerman v Ackerman [2011] EWHC 2183 (Ch): Edward represented an expert adjudicator against allegations of negligence and/or fraudulent collusion with one of the parties in the demerger of a substantial property company.
  • Re McGregor: negligent advice by accountants in relation to estate administration and taxation.
  • Lexadon v Stephen Starr: a claim for negligent advice by accountants in relation to development property valuation and taxation.
• Arbitration

  International arbitration work represents a significant proportion of Edward’s practice. His experience also includes subsequent enforcement of awards.

  His experience includes:

  • Obuz v The Republic of Uzbekistan [2024] ICSID Case No. ARB/21-32 Edward acted as lead counsel for a Turkish investor under a Bilateral Investment Treaty in this ICSID arbitration seated in Washington DC relating to the expropriation of investments.
  • In the matter of a Company: Edward acted as lead counsel for a $1billion Saudi unicorn in a combined shareholder dispute, derivative action and unfair prejudice petition pursued in arbitration under DIAC/LCIA.
  • I v J: American Arbitration Association Edward successfully acted as lead counsel for the Respondent in a shareholder dispute relating to a power station in East Africa, including allegations of fraud and breach of a shareholders’ agreement.
  • Gunes Tecstil & Others v The Republic of Uzbekistan ICSID Case No. ARB/13/19 Edward has acted with a leading Turkish legal team in a claim under the Turkey-Uzbekistan Bilateral Investment Treaty relating to the expropriation of investments.
  • ZCCM-Investment Holdings v Kansanshi Holdings Limited [2019] EWHC 1285 (Comm): Edward successfully acted for the Respondent in an ad hoc arbitration under UNCITRAL rules against a Zambian state investment company.  The claim was a derivative action arising out of an African mining joint venture seeking in excess of $100 million, including allegations of dishonesty, fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. Edward continued to act in defeating the Claimant’s challenge to the Award, including, inter alia, grounds of fraud.
  • IPCO v Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation [2017] UKSC 16; [2015] EWCA (Civ) 1144 and 1145: Edward acted for a party seeking to enforce an international arbitration award for $300m+ in England. Amidst allegations that the award was procured by fraud.  The claim reached the Supreme Court in February 2017 and is now probably the foremost English case on enforcement under the New York Convention.
  • G v H: an arbitration under the ICC expedited procedure involving non-delivery of industrial manufacturing equipment.
  • E v F: Dubai International Arbitration Centre.  Edward represented a major overseas construction company in a dispute arising out of a large residential development.
  • C v D: Dubai International Arbitration Centre.  Edward appeared at the evidentiary hearing of a major overseas construction company in a claim arising out of a substantial infrastructure project.
  • A v B: Edward represented the Claimant in an LCIA arbitration relating to life science products.  Claims included fraudulent breach of  the licence agreement.
  • An Arbitration: Edward acted in an ad hoc arbitration relating to the assignment and set-off of mutual claims arising out of oil bunkers transactions.
  • Arbitration in Permanent Court of Arbitration: Edward acted for the investor in an Investor-State claim in the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague relating to the expropriation of environmental gas pipeline projects.

Other information

• Recommendations

  Insolvency

  Legal 500

  ‘Edward’s USP is that he is also a trained accountant, so his skills with numbers and accounts are invaluable when it comes to complex insolvency claims.’ (2025)

  ‘Pragmatic and highly capable. An excellent advocate.’ (2023)

  ‘Incisive with forensic attention to detail and great with clients.’ (2022)

  ‘Extremely bright and being a qualified accountant, he brings an unmatched level of forensic analysis to complex insolvencies, especially where the company has tried to mask its dishonesty.’ (2021)

   

  Commercial Litigation

  Legal 500

  ‘Great team player. He has his eye on the detail but doesn’t overlook the commercial aspects.’ (2025)

  ‘A pleasure to work with. He has a very calm manner even when under pressure and puts client’s worries at ease.’ (2023)

  ‘He has a gravitas and presence that demands attention. His brain is the size of a planet.’ (2022)

  ‘His judgment is always very reliable and he has the intellectual clout to intimidate most opponents.’ (2021)

   

  Professional Negligence

  Legal 500

  Leading junior (2023)

  Leading junior (2022)

  ‘A very able junior barrister.’ (2021)

   

  Fraud: Civil

  Legal 500

  ‘Edward is an accomplished advocate who radiates confidence and competence. He is also really good with papers and very tolerant of difficult clients.’ (2025)

  ‘Pragmatic and highly capable. An excellent advocate.’ (2023)

  ‘Incisive, with forensic attention to detail and great with clients.’ (2022)

  ‘Edward gives decisive advice which engenders confidence.’ (2021)

   

  Middle East: The English Bar – Commercial

  Legal 500

  ‘Edward Knight’s practice continues to focus on international commercial contract disputes, as well as significant activity in ICC, DIAC and other institutional arbitrations.’ (2025)

  Leading junior (2024)

  ‘Edward is excellent and very good on his feet.’ (2022)

  Leading junior (2021)

   

  Company

  Legal 500

  ‘Edward is an accomplished advocate who radiates confidence and competence.’ (2025)

• Academic history
  • MA (Cantab)
  • Former Chartered Accountant
• Professional memberships
  • Former Associate of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England & Wales (ACA)
  • Bar of Anguilla
  • Bar of the Dubai International Financial Centre
  • Chancery Bar Association
  • LCIA