Andrew is a partner in the Litigation group. He has considerable experience in litigation and dispute resolution, alternative dispute resolution, professional liability and product liability. He focuses on company law and corporate governance, including the rights of shareholders, directors and partners; civil fraud investigations and actions and urgent injunctive relief corporate; and issues arising from corporate transactions.

Andrew is experienced in both civil search and seizure orders (or Anton Piller orders, as they are formerly called) including executing for clients and supervising as an appointee of the court. He has also led clients through many mediations. He acts for public and large private companies, professional partnerships and their shareholders, directors and partners. Chambers Guide to the UK Legal Profession regards him as an acknowledged leader in his field.

Andrew has held seminars to brief colleagues, clients or intermediaries on civil fraud detection and action, shareholder rights and remedies, warranty claims and capital reductions.

Key experience:

• Acting for a joint venture (JV) company when a JV partner decided to terminate a five-year manufacturing venture early, ostensibly because the other JV partner found a more lucrative venture in which to place its manufacturing facilities. Andrew successfully recovered multi-million pound damages based on expected earnings over the lifetime of the original JV, with damages being paid annually but supported by a bank guarantee. To procure an immediate cash advantage to the client, a settlement deed and guarantee was negotiated with a second bank for an immediate payment, discounted to reflect accelerated receipt.
• Acting for the successful party in the professional negligence case of Pitt-v-Mond [2001] BPIR 624 concerning the duties of an accountant acting as an insolvency practitioner in an individual voluntary arrangement (IVA) and as nominee. A claim for approximately £3m was successfully defeated.
• Acting for the company and the private equity firm that had acquired it in seeking damages potentially exceeding £15m for breach of warranty by vendors. It was alleged that the warrantors had concealed the true state of relationships with important customers whose long-term supply contracts were essential to meet warranted business forecasts. The company was acquired on a multiple of earnings. There was also a preliminary issue required to settle meaning and effect of certain contractual provisions. An interesting feature of this complex case was that the most substantial complaints against the warrantors related in effect to the goodwill value of the business, it becoming apparent that the vendors' modus operandi in agreeing onerous contracts with its business partners had so enraged them that future business relations were likely to prove impossible and the business was therefore on a potentially downward curve.
• Acting for the company and majority of its board in bringing a claim against the vendors of the business to a private equity firm. The vendors remained on the board as joint managing directors. It was alleged that they had set up a secret parallel business and were diverting the company's business, for which they had been paid, to their new venture. A search order was obtained and executed to recover evidence. Substantial damages of approximately £1m were achieved eventually through mediation. This case presented significant challenges because the diverted business was primarily overseas, and involved business relationships which the other parties were also keen to conceal. A discreet approach to the gathering of evidence was required using the powers available to the claimant.
• Acting for the 50% shareholder of a substantial computer retailer alleging unfair prejudice and breach of terms of agreement with the other partner, and seeking a buyout of his shares.
• Acting for the owner of shares in a major retailer who was an accountant, defending a claim by the other shareholder, who was also a former client of the accountant, for breach of trust and professional obligations in which the former client sought to deprive the accountant of his shares. Claim against accountant defeated.
• Acting for a family-run company and three-quarters of its shareholders in defending a claim brought by the remaining shareholders seeking a buyout for unfair prejudice and breach of alleged agreement between the shareholders. The background to the dispute concerned family members who jointly and equally owned the business but had competing interests in connection with transferring the business to a younger generation.
• Acting for a major chemical manufacturer who alleged that 15,000 tonnes of specialist powder chemicals for use in manufacturing processes had become contaminated whilst in the hands of warehousemen. In this case, Andrew appointed an expert analytical chemist to establish the nature of the contaminants and their origin, and a professor of statistics to extrapolate from the distribution of contaminants found in small quantities to establish the contamination of the entire stockpile. The claim resulted in damages, interest and costs of approximately £1.5m.
• Advising the manufacturer in several product recalls involving foods and beverages and car components. Such cases have by their nature involved urgent action under circumstances of trade confidentiality and damage limitation, involving working in a team of different disciplines.
• Acting for the owner of a £15 million turnkey manufacturing plant in a dispute over the functionality and performance of the manufacturing installation, including related disputes over the funding arrangements.
• Acting for a partner of a professional firm against a former partner and his insurers seeking a substantial contribution towards the legal costs of defending a negligence action. A substantial recovery was made.
• Acting for a major franchisee of a well-known fast food chain against a member of staff accused of fraud and running a shadow business from the same premises. These included a separate preliminary issue trial to establish ownership of assets identified as prospectively belonging to the principal defendant but claimed by a third party. Freezing orders were utilised to secure assets.
• Acting for a government agency to recover money defrauded by a senior officer who had disbursed public grant aid to non-existent recipients. Freezing orders and search and seizure orders obtained. Assets were seized and sold to achieve recovery.

Back to top

"partner" refers to a member of DLA Piper UK LLP

Professional Qualification

• Solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales