麦邓肯  大律师

商事诉讼

• Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v Barclays and Others: Duncan was instructed (along with Charles Béar KC of Fountain Court and Matthew Cook KC of One Essex Court) on behalf of the British Bankers’ Association (BBA) in this long-running and high value matter, which was one of the most high-profile claims to be issued in the High Court in recent years. The claim involved a US federal agency suing the BBA and nine of the world’s largest banks for intentionally, collusively and fraudulently rigging the world-leading interest rate benchmark known as LIBOR, which has been billed as “the world’s most important number” because of the sheer number of contracts that use it. Duncan represented the BBA (and through it almost the entire British banking sector), which was responsible for administering LIBOR, in this claim worth hundreds of millions of pounds.
• Cancrie Investments Ltd v Haider: Duncan represents (along with George Hayman KC of Maitland Chambers) the assignee of a judgment debt for approximately £80m obtained against the Defendant in the UAE. Duncan’s client is attempting to enforce the judgement in England. The matter has been the subject of a number of high-profile judgments including the client’s successful obtaining and retention of a freezing injunction against the Defendant in [2024] EWHC 1877 (Comm) and successful Norwich Pharmacal applications against a third-party bank [2024] EWHC 2927 (Comm) and [2024] EWHC 3087 (Comm). 
• Al-Meqham v Al-Sanea: Claim brought by the trustee in bankruptcy of one of Saudi Arabia’s previously richest men. The trustee was appointed following the internationally reported collapse of the Saad Group, alleged to be part of the “largest Ponzi scheme in history”. The trustee seeks orders that 19 valuable English properties form part of the bankruptcy estate. Duncan represents the offshore companies that own the properties. Duncan’s clients succeeded in having a significant part of the trustee’s claim struck out for a failure to comply with the requirements of the Cross Border Insolvency Regulations: [2025] EWHC 322 (Ch).
• Bugsby Property LLC v LGIM Commercial Lending Ltd [2022] EWHC 2001 (Comm). In this claim, Duncan (along with Andrew Twigger KC and Thomas Munby KC, both of Maitland Chambers) represented a property investment sponsor which was suing companies in the Legal & General Group, the UK’s largest fund management group. The claim concerned the breach by L&G of an exclusivity and confidentiality agreement relating to Bugsby’s proposed purchase of the famous Olympia exhibition centre in West London. Duncan’s client was successful following a four-week Commercial Court trial, obtaining judgment for approximately £15m.
• Al Subaihi v Al Sanea [2022] EWCA Civ 1349. Duncan represented (along with James Aldridge KC of Maitnd Chambers and Richard Gillis KC of One Essex Court) a member of the Al-Sanea family, a prominent Saudi family, in this two-week trial in the Commercial Court. The claim was for unpaid legal fees amounting to more than US$15 million concerning litigation in Saudi Arabia arising out of the internationally reported collapse of the Saad Group. Duncan’s client sought to set aside various fee agreements on the basis of breach of fiduciary duty, duress and undue influence, and was successful on appeal to the Court of Appeal. Duncan represented his client as sole Counsel at all the procedural hearings, including two half day hearings in the Commercial Court seeking unless orders and further hearings as a respondent to a freezing injunction. Duncan’s submissions were described as “clear and forceful” by Cockerill J (Judge in charge of the Commercial Court) in her judgment on one of those applications ([2020] EWHC 3206 (Comm)).
• Maddox RP LLP v Grey GR Limited Partnership: Duncan was instructed (with Craig Orr KC of One Essex Court) to represent an entity owned by one of the UK’s largest pension funds. In the action, Duncan’s client sued an investment originator for in excess of £100m concerning the acquisition on its behalf of high-rise buildings following the Grenfell Tower Fire.
• Wood v Sureterm Direct Ltd [2017] UKSC 24: Duncan was involved (with Andrew Twigger KC of Maitland Chambers) in the issues arising following the Supreme Court’s judgment in this case, a leading case in the Supreme Court on contractual interpretation.
• FHR European Ventures LLP v Cedar Capital Partners LLC [2014] UKSC 45: Appeal in the Supreme Court (with Matthew Collings KC of Maitland Chambers), now the leading case on proprietary remedies and constructive trusts for bribes and secret commissions taken in breach of fiduciary duty. 
• Duncan was instructed to advise a global bank concerning clawback claims worth billions of dollars made by the liquidators of Fairfield Sentry and other feeder funds to the infamous Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme, described by the Privy Council as the “largest Ponzi scheme in history”.
• Red Kite Management Ltd v Barclays Bank PLC: Duncan was instructed as part of the Counsel team in a £850 million claim for breach of contract, breach of confidence and breach of fiduciary duty brought by a hedge fund against Barclays Bank concerning trading on the London Metal Exchange.
• GBM Minerals Engineering Consultants Ltd v GM Mineral Holdings Ltd [2015] EWHC 2954 (TCC) and GB Minerals Holdings Ltd v Short [2015] EWHC 1387 (TCC): Claim (appearing with Richard Slade KC of Brick Court) in the High Court (TCC) involving allegations of breach of contract, negligence and bribery as well as the initiation of contempt proceedings.
• HRH Prince Mohammed Al Saud v Back Talent Ltd: Duncan represented (as sole counsel) an English company in a shareholder dispute brought by a Saudi Prince.
• Trant v (1) Commerx Ltd (2) Kulhawy: Claim in the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court concerning payments under a Share Purchase Agreement. Duncan represented the successful Claimant against Defendants represented by a Silk.
• Nomad International Shipping Corp v DST Shipping Group SA: Claim (led by Andrew Ayres KC) in the Commercial Court arising out of a series of joint venture agreements concerning the ownership of a number of ships. The case involved an urgent application for interim injunctive relief with complex jurisdictional and arbitration issues.
• Sribaskaran v Kunapalan: Duncan was instructed as sole counsel in this multi-day trial concerning a dispute over the sale of a business and its premises.

 

仲裁

• Exportadora de Sal SA de CV v Corretaje MaritimoSud-Americano Inc [2018] EWHC 224 (Comm): Duncan acted (with Dominic Chambers KC of Maitland Chambers) for a Mexican state-owned salt mining company seeking to challenge an arbitrator’s substantive jurisdiction under s.67 Arbitration Act 1996 on the basis that his client had no capacity under Mexican law to enter into the arbitration agreement.
• Representing (as sole Counsel) a Chinese client in an LCIA arbitration. The claim concerns the security interests held over shares in a publicly listed Chinese company. Duncan has successfully reduced the Claimant’s claim against his client from US$200m to US$1m. Duncan’s client also has a counterclaim for approximately US$17m. The arbitration is currently in the procedural stages in which Duncan was successful in obtaining an order for security for costs on behalf of his client.
• Representing (with Charles Béar KC of Fountain Court) a high net worth individual in an LCIA arbitration concerning fees allegedly due under an agency agreement concerning the recovery of appropriated assets.
• Representing a Russian Bank (led by Richard Morgan KC of Maitland Chambers) in an LCIA arbitration claiming for the repayment of loans in the value of approximately US$30 million. Alleged defences included illegality arising as a result of US and EU sanctions against Russia.
• Advising and drafting proceedings on behalf of an investor in relation to a potential investment treaty claim with a value of over $1 billion (led by Paul Key KC of Essex Court).
• Representing Chinese clients (with Timothy Fancourt QC, now Mr Justice Fancourt) in an ad hoc arbitration concerning the proposed purchase of a large residential property in London. This included successfully applying (unled) to the Commercial Court for a freezing injunction against a BVI company in aid of the arbitration and subsequently successfully seeking to enforce a favourable award against the same company in competition with a global bank which was a secured creditor.
• LCIA arbitration (with Andrew Ayres KC) concerning a shareholder dispute in relation to a joint venture established for the purposes of a real estate development in Eastern Ukraine.
• LCIA arbitration (led by Michael Gibbon KC of Maitland Chambers) in relation to the shareholder dispute concerning the Russian social network VK.com. This not only involved an arbitration in London, but also proceedings in the BVI and New York, settling for a cash sum of $1.47 billion.

 

民事欺诈

• Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v Barclays and Others: Duncan was instructed (along with Charles Béar KC of Fountain Court and Matthew Cook KC of One Essex Court) on behalf of the British Bankers’ Association (BBA) in this long-running and high value matter, which was one of the most high-profile claims to be issued in the High Court in recent years. The claim involved a US federal agency suing the BBA and nine of the world’s largest banks for intentionally, collusively and fraudulently rigging the world-leading interest rate benchmark known as LIBOR, which has been billed as “the world’s most important number” because of the sheer number of contracts that use it. Duncan represented the BBA (and through it almost the entire British banking sector), which was responsible for administering LIBOR, in this claim worth hundreds of millions of pounds.
• Al Subaihi v Al Sanea [2022] EWCA Civ 1349. Duncan represented (along with James Aldridge KC of Maitland Chambers and Richard Gillis KC of One Essex Court) a member of the Al-Sanea family, a prominent Saudi family, in this two-week trial in the Commercial Court. The claim was for unpaid legal fees amounting to more than US$15 million concerning litigation in Saudi Arabia arising out of the internationally reported collapse of the Saad Group. Duncan’s client sought to set aside various fee agreements on the basis of breach of fiduciary duty, duress and undue influence, and was successful on appeal to the Court of Appeal. Duncan represented his client as sole Counsel at all the procedural hearings, including two half day hearings in the Commercial Court seeking unless orders and further hearings as a respondent to a freezing injunction. Duncan’s submissions were described as “clear and forceful” by Cockerill J (Judge in charge of the Commercial Court) in her judgment on one of those applications ([2020] EWHC 3206 (Comm)).
• FHR European Ventures LLP v Cedar Capital Partners LLC [2014] UKSC 45: Appeal in the Supreme Court (with Matthew Collings KC of Maitland Chambers), now the leading case on proprietary remedies and constructive trusts for bribes and secret commissions taken in breach of fiduciary duty. 
• Duncan was instructed to advise a global bank concerning clawback claims worth billions of dollars made by the liquidators of Fairfield Sentry and other feeder funds to the infamous Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme, described by the Privy Council as the “largest Ponzi scheme in history”.
• Red Kite Management Ltd v Barclays Bank PLC: Duncan was instructed as part of the Counsel team in a £850 million claim for breach of contract, breach of confidence and breach of fiduciary duty brought by a hedge fund against Barclays Bank concerning trading on the London Metal Exchange.
• GBM Minerals Engineering Consultants Ltd v GB Minerals Holdings Ltd [2015] EWHC 2954 (TCC) and GB Minerals Holdings Ltd v Short [2015] EWHC 1387 (TCC): Claim (appearing with Richard Slade KC of Brick Court) in the High Court (TCC) involving allegations of breach of contract, negligence and bribery as well as the initiation of contempt proceedings.
• Barham v Johnson: Duncan was instructed as sole trial advocate in his client’s successful application to the High Court to rectify a company’s register of shareholders under s.125 Companies Act 2006. The hearing extended over a number of days involving extensive cross-examination and allegations of dishonesty.
• Ellis v Mussett: Duncan represented as sole trial advocate the successful Defendant in this action concerning the sale of a property. The claim involved allegations of undue influence and conspiracy and the Claimant was represented by a Silk.

 

公司法&合伙

• Maddox RP LLP v Grey GR Limited Partnership: Duncan was instructed (with Craig Orr KC of One Essex Court) to represent an entity owned by one of the UK’s largest pension funds. In the action, Duncan’s client sued an investment originator for in excess of £100m concerning the acquisition on its behalf of high-rise buildings following the Grenfell Tower Fire. The action involves the interpretation of an extremely complex partnership agreement and other issues of partnership law. 
• Barham v Johnson: Duncan was instructed as sole trial advocate in his client’s successful application to rectify a company’s register of shareholders under s.125 Companies Act 2006. The hearing extended over a number of days involving extensive cross-examination and allegations of dishonesty.
• Bammant v Bammant: Duncan successfully appeared (as sole Counsel) in this claim concerning the dissolution of a family partnership with assets in the millions of pounds.
• Previously advised (with John McGhee KC) on a funds dispute concerning an LLP established to invest in residential property.
• While on secondment at a law firm in Jersey, Duncan assisted with a scheme of arrangement which effected a merger between Barrick and Randgold creating the world’s largest gold-mining company.

 

清盘法&资产追回

• Cancrie Investments Ltd v Haider: Duncan represents (along with George Hayman KC of Maitland Chambers) the assignee of a judgment debt for approximately £80m obtained against the Defendant in the UAE. Duncan’s client is attempting to enforce the judgement in England. The matter has been the subject of a number of high-profile judgments including the client’s successful obtaining and retention of a freezing injunction against the Defendant in [2024] EWHC 1877 (Comm) and successful Norwich Pharmacal applications against a third-party bank [2024] EWHC 2927 (Comm) and [2024] EWHC 3087 (Comm). 
• Al-Meqham v Al-Sanea: Claim brought by the trustee in bankruptcy of one of Saudi Arabia’s previously richest men. The trustee was appointed following the internationally reported collapse of the Saad Group, alleged to be part of the “largest Ponzi scheme in history”. The trustee seeks orders that 19 valuable English properties form part of the bankruptcy estate. Duncan represents the offshore companies that own the properties. Duncan’s clients succeeded in having a significant part of the trustee’s claim struck out for a failure to comply with the requirements of the Cross Border Insolvency Regulations: [2025] EWHC 322 (Ch).
• Duncan was instructed (as sole Counsel) by the wife of a bankrupt in applications brought by her husband’s trustees in bankruptcy for disclosure of documents under s.366 Insolvency Act 1986 and for orders for sale of jointly owned properties. The bankrupt was made bankrupt following judgment against him for hundreds of millions of dollars following a multi-week fraud trial. Duncan’s client successfully made applications against the Trustees for disclosure of Russian law advice they had received on the basis that the Trustees had waived privilege in that advice. The judgment addresses important issues concerning waiver of privilege in the context of insolvency applications: Re Yurov [2022] EWHC 2112 (Ch).
• Duncan was instructed to appear (unled) at a number of hearings on instructions from the Official Receiver seeking the appointment of special managers over seven companies in the Carillion group, which was the subject of one of the UK’s largest ever insolvencies.
• Advised a global bank concerning clawback claims worth billions of dollars made by the liquidators of Fairfield Sentry and other feeder funds to the infamous Bernie Madoff Ponzi Scheme, described by the Privy Council as the “largest Ponzi scheme in history”.
• TCG Pubs Ltd v The Master and Wardens or Governors of the Art or Mystery of the Girdlers of London [2017] EWHC 772 (Ch): Claim (led by Christopher Pymont KC of Maitland Chambers) involving the interpretation of an assignment provision in a lease. The case also involved seeking the permission of the Court to bring forfeiture proceedings against a company in administration.
• Appeared for the petitioning creditors in the bankruptcy proceedings of Craig Whyte, the former owner of Rangers Football Club.
• Advised (with Matthew Collings KC of Maitland Chambers) on the potential effects of a Russian bankruptcy on the affairs of a wealthy Russian client in London.

 

离岸事务 & 信托

• FHR European Ventures LLP v Cedar Capital Partners LLC [2014] UKSC 45: Appeal in the Supreme Court (with Matthew Collings KC of Maitland Chambers), now the leading case on proprietary remedies and constructive trusts for bribes and secret commissions taken in breach of fiduciary duty. 
• Duncan was instructed to advise a global bank concerning clawback claims worth billions of dollars made by the liquidators of Fairfield Sentry and other feeder funds to the infamous Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme, described by the Privy Council as the “largest Ponzi scheme in history”.
• Advised (with David Mumford KC of Maitland Chambers) a well-known private bank’s trustee business in proceedings brought for an account by a beneficiary.
• Re Liu: Duncan appeared for a Chinese client who was the beneficiary under an English will seeking to remove executors and have them replaced by an independent solicitor. Duncan’s client was successful in his application and was awarded indemnity costs. 
• Rogers v Lampo: Duncan was instructed by an executor to resist claims by an alleged creditor, successfully applying for summary judgment.

 

银行与金融

• Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v Barclays and Others: Duncan was instructed (along with Charles Béar KC of Fountain Court and Matthew Cook KC of One Essex Court) on behalf of the British Bankers’ Association (BBA) in this long-running and high value matter, which was one of the most high-profile claims to be issued in the High Court in recent years. The claim involved a US federal agency suing the BBA and nine of the world’s largest banks for intentionally, collusively and fraudulently rigging the world-leading interest rate benchmark known as LIBOR, which has been billed as “the world’s most important number” because of the sheer number of contracts that use it. Duncan represented the BBA (and through it almost the entire British banking sector), which was responsible for administering LIBOR, in this claim worth hundreds of millions of pounds.
• Red Kite Management Ltd v Barclays Bank PLC: Duncan was instructed as part of the Counsel team in a £850 million claim for breach of contract, breach of confidence and breach of fiduciary duty brought by a hedge fund against Barclays Bank concerning trading on the London Metal Exchange. 
• Bugsby Property LLC v LGIM Commercial Lending Ltd [2022] EWHC 2001 (Comm). In this claim, Duncan (along with Andrew Twigger KC and Thomas Munby KC,both of Maitland Chambers) represented a property investment sponsor which was suing companies in the Legal & General Group, the UK’s largest fund management group. The claim concerned the breach by L&G of an exclusivity and confidentiality agreement relating to Bugsby’s proposed purchase of the famous Olympia exhibition centre in West London. Duncan’s client was successful following a four-week Commercial Court trial, obtaining judgment for approximately £15m.
• Maddox RP LLP v Grey GR Limited Partnership: Duncan was instructed (with Craig Orr KC of One Essex Court) to represent an entity owned by one of the UK’s largest pension funds. In the action, Duncan’s client sued an investment originator for in excess of £100m concerning the acquisition on its behalf of high-rise buildings following the Grenfell Tower Fire. 
• Representing a Russian Bank (led by Richard Morgan KC of Maitland Chambers) in an LCIA arbitration claiming for the repayment of loans in the value of approximately US$30 million. Alleged defences included illegality arising as a result of US and EU sanctions against Russia.

 

慈善

• Bisrat v Kebede, In Re The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Debre Tsion, London: Duncan was instructed by certain trustees and members of the CIO in this long-running religious charity dispute, including successfully applying to the High Court for directions to the trustees arising from a dispute concerning the interpretation of the CIO constitution and the Court’s Orders.
• Choudhury v Stepney Shahjalal Mosque and Cultural Centre Ltd [2015] EWHC 743 (Ch): Appeared unled for the Respondent to a without notice injunction application in the High Court concerning the management of a charity. Duncan successfully obtained an order staying proceedings and discharging the injunction. He also successfully resisted a further application to the Court for permission to bring Charity Proceedings under s.115 Charities Act 2011.

• COMBAR
• 衡平法大律师协会（Chancery Bar Association）
• 金融服务法协会（Financial Services Law Association）
• 环太平洋律师协会（IPBA）
• 国际商会青年仲裁员论坛（ICC YAF）
• 青年国际仲裁群体（YIAG）

• 英格兰及威尔士大律师公会青年大律师委员会主席（2017）
• 林肯律师学院模拟法庭冠军
• 林肯律师学院Hardwicke奖学金、Haldane奖学金及 Denning奖学金
• 剑桥大学圣约翰学院McMahon Law奖学金

• ‘The Brexit Papers – Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments’  (2017) Bar Council of England and Wales（合著作者）
• “The Safety of Mankind”: The Civil Consequences of Bribery (2015) Journal of International Banking and Finance Law

以律师身份参与仲裁，仲裁裁决的执行，银行责任，信贷融资，金融产品不当销售，放债人诉讼，证券法，合同，法律冲突，衡平法，侵权，不当得利，可转让票据，合伙，公司治理，衍生诉讼，不公平损害呈请，破产，重组，债务偿还安排，清盘，信托，遗嘱、遗产及遗产管理，慈善，容许查察济助，资产追回，银行账簿令，文件披露，强制令，第三方披露令