London image

London

Founded in 2012, Signature Litigation has grown into one of London’s pre-eminent specialist dispute resolution practices. From the outset, we set out to do things differently: a conflict-free, disputes-only platform designed to give clients the undivided focus and strategic agility that complex, high-stakes matters demand.

FIND OUT MORE
Gibraltar image

Gibraltar

Established in 2017, Signature Litigation's Gibraltar office was founded to address growing demand for specialist expertise in commercial litigation and private wealth disputes on the Rock.

FIND OUT MORE
Paris image

Paris

Signature Litigation AARPI houses one of France’s most enviable product liability practices, with the team also handling commercial and corporate litigation, insurance and reinsurance, toxic tort and ESG, civil fraud and asset tracing, international arbitration, administrative and public law.

FIND OUT MORE
Frankfurt image

Frankfurt

Frankfurt has emerged as one of Europe's foremost financial and commercial centres and, increasingly, as a bridge between European and Asian markets. With that growth comes an increasing demand for sophisticated dispute resolution. Signature Litigation established its Frankfurt office to meet this need, bringing our conflict-free, disputes-only platform to the German market.

FIND OUT MORE

Founding Partner Graham Huntley comments in CDR Magazine

12 May 2017

"In-house lawyers in the United Kingdom face the risk of conflicts of interest between their duty to their employer and that to financial regulators. It is a worry to law firms and the bodies that represent them, as well as corporate counsel groups...

...Former London Solicitors Litigation Association president Graham Huntley, whose firm Signature Litigation is involved in the RBS rights litigation, supports the Law Society’s overall stance.

Huntley says: “It is clear that LPP has become something of an elastic band – at one end we see banks pulling it ever wider to seek to attach legal advice privilege to documents which those institutions are reluctant to admit were prepared with litigation in contemplation; and at the other end we see regulators arguing that LPP should be contracted in scope to enable the regulator to search deeper and wider into the corporate environment for the regulator’s own purposes.”

He adds: “Most of the problems come from the very different commercial objectives of those tugging away at each side of the LPP argument.”

He feels that it would be helpful to have more authoritative legal guidance on the precise boundaries of LPP, “where at the moment we have some arguably understandably general principles laid down by the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court several years ago which are now in need of fine-tuning and clarity”.

“Otherwise, we are in danger of leaving a fundamental plank of our justice system open to attack from increasingly polarised interpretations of what the law is,” Huntley concludes.."..