Administrative and Public LawBanking and Financial Markets LitigationCivil Fraud, Asset Tracing and RecoveryCommercial LitigationCompetition LawConstruction and Engineering DisputesContentious Trusts, Estates and Private Wealth DisputesGroup Action LitigationInsolvency LitigationInsurance and Reinsurance LitigationInternational ArbitrationInvestigations and White Collar CrimeProduct LiabilityProfessional Negligence LitigationToxic Tort and ESG
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
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
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 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 MOREPartner Daniel Spendlove, Counsel Alasdair Glass and Associates Simon Fitzpatrick and Patrick Edwards acted for the successful respondent in High Court proceedings brought by a director and shareholder in the recent case Re Pocket Renting Limited [2024] EWHC 2948 (Ch), instructing Tom Smith KC and Jon Colclough of South Square. The claimant sought an order under paragraph 81 of Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986 to remove administrators over a company which owned a property portfolio in London. The claimant alleged (amongst other things) that Signature’s client had made a series of representations which estopped (prevented) it from enforcing on a loan made to that company. The proceedings were expedited, and a four-day trial took place in September 2024.
The Court rejected the claimant’s case on all grounds, holding that the alleged representations which were said to form the estoppel were not made. The Judge also rejected the director’s case that there was a common mistake, said to arise out of the operation of a “rule” in the UK Finance Handbook for Lenders. Finally, the Judge found that the director’s pleaded case that Signature’s client acted with an ‘improper motive’ in appointing administrators had “no foundation at all”.
Read the judgment here.
