Aidan Casey KC 

Fraud Asset & Recovery

Aidan has a substantial body of expertise in civil fraud and asset recovery, with a particular emphasis on large scale and complex international and commercial and fiduciary fraud and the identification and recovery of assets in that field. 

His civil fraud practice spans both litigation and arbitration, and many of his arbitration cases have involved allegations of complex fraud and fiduciary fraud.

Aidan regularly undertakes work involving urgent injunctive relief in the fraud context, including search orders, proprietary and freezing injunctions (and associated relief such as notification injunction), Norwich Pharmacal and Bankers Trust orders, and anti-suit injunctions.

He acts across the client spectrum, from foreign states, institutions and large corporates, to SMEs and private clients. 

Many of his fraud cases are cross-border and he regularly works in conjunction with lawyers in other jurisdictions (recent examples include Russia / CIS, Malta, Switzerland, Sweden, the UAE, New Zealand and the US) on multijurisdictional claims involving fraud and misfeasance and associated asset-tracing issues including offshore trusts, corporate governance and regulatory issues.

Aidan is ranked as a leading silk for civil fraud work in both The Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners.

Aidan is very charismatic. Solicitors, clients and judges respect him.'

Legal 500, Fraud: Civil

"Aidan's written work is very eloquent and clear. His ability to analyse facts and put forward the best arguments is incredibly impressive."

Chambers, UK – Fraud: Civil

Representative cases.

• Acting for the Kingdom of Sweden in a substantial (ca. €120m) and complex fraud claim, brought under Swedish and Maltese law, arising out of a sophisticated fraud on the Swedish pension system. Kingdom of Sweden v Serwin & Others. 

• Acting for a Ukrainian businessman in a c.$600m claim in relation to a Russian corporate raid or ‘raider attack’ (‘reiderstvo’), involving allegations that his strategically important steel business was wrongfully expropriated. Gerasimenko v VTB Capital & Others.

• Acting for many years for Aeroflot in its litigation against Boris Berezovsky, Nikolai Glushkov, and various corporate defendants, claiming for vast frauds said to have been carried out during the Yeltsin era.  Included securing the appointment of Kevin Hellard and Nick Wood as administrators of Berezovsky’s (ostensibly insolvent) estate upon his death. OJSC Aeroflot v Berezovsky & Others.

• Acting for the claimant Nigerian shipowning company in a dispute over the control of an Aberdeen-based ship management company, and an associated arbitration worth US$ several million. Prime Gulf International (UK) Ltd v Aquashield Oil & Marine Services Ltd.

• Acting for the ‘right hand man’ of Eric Watson, in a case involving allegations of dishonest assistance / the Marex tort – raised interesting issues as to Henderson abuse, and ‘quasi-proprietary’ claims. Sir Owen Glenn (1) Kea Investments Ltd (2) v Watson & Others.

• Acting for Dubai-based Swiss banker on appeal in a case involving a €100m fraud on the Allseas Group.  An important case as to the test for dishonesty in dishonest assistance, and as to the rules as to remoteness  and causation in such cases. Group Seven Ltd v Notable Services LLP.

• Advising a group of Kazakh claimants, including an ex Prime Minister, on claims arising out of corruption and state sponsored expropriation of assets by a former son-in-law of the President.

• Acting for the corporate vehicle of the author of the “Fifty Shades” works, in a dispute with its US merchandising licensee. COP Corp Ltd v Fifty Shades Ltd.

Crypto and Digital Assets.

Aidan has substantial experience in cryptocurrency work, having in particular regularly advised one of the major cryptocurrency exchanges, and having acted in a number of disputes in the cryptosphere. 

He has also spoken at a crypto-themed conference in the BVI, on jurisdictional / conflicts of law issues, and on Quincecare duties, constructive trusts and regulatory risks in the crypto context.

Representative cases. 

• Acting for the respondent crypto investor and offshore companies in a substantial s994 petition, in a hard fought and complex dispute concerning “Coinomi”, said to be the first multi-chain wallet, and the broadest non-custodial wallet (supporting more than 125 blockchains). The case involved substantial issues concerning the tracing of a very large number of movements of a wide range of high value coins and tokens. Ntzegkoutanis v Kimionis.

• Acting for a major cryptocurrency exchange in a claim by a well known crytpo investor, who claimed that by virtue of holding certain BTC/XRP derivatives, he was entitled (by contract or trust) to 902.109 BCH, following the hard fork that created BCH.  This dispute involved in particular issues about the technical and juridical mechanics behind the creation of BTC/XRP derivatives

• Acting for a major cryptocurrency exchange in a large claim by a depositor, which claimed to have suffered substantial losses following a phishing attack on the depositor

• Acting for a major cryptocurrency exchange in a claim by a customer following a hack of the exchange, resulting in the theft of some 20,000 BTC

• Advising major cryptocurrency exchange. Aidan has regularly advised one of the earliest established and largest cryptocurrency exchanges on a wide range of business issues and disputes

International. 

Aidan’s practice has a heavy International and offshore element.  He has appeared in courts in the Caribbean and in Mauritius, and he regularly appears in the Privy Council.  

He has been called pro hac to the Bars of The Bahamas and of Bermuda, and he has rights of audience in the DIFC. In addition, many of his cases – both litigation and arbitration – involve claims governed by foreign law, with his recent experience spanning claims under the laws of Russia, Cyprus, Malta, Sweden, Dubai / the UAE, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, and Mauritius.

His offshore work tends to fall into his main practice areas of asset recovery, civil fraud, commercial dispute resolution, and shareholder and corporate disputes.

He is ranked as a leading silk in The Legal 500 for Offshore work.

Aidan has an excellent communication style, providing clients with not only outstanding advice but in a manner which is easily understandable. Always calm and very quick to spot options in difficult situations.’

Legal 500, The English Bar Offshore: Commercial Disputes.

Representative cases.

• Acting for the Bermuda Police Commissioner in litigation in Bermuda concerning the protocol to be adopted in relation to potentially privileged material seized under MLAT legislation in conjunction with a very substantial US DOJ tax fraud investigation. Medlands (PTC) Ltd v Commissioner of the Bermuda Police Service. 

• Acting for the government of The Bahamas in urgent proceedings in The Bahamas seeking to restrain offshore drilling by Bahamas Petroleum Company Plc under an oil exploration licence granted by the government. R v Minister of the Environment ex p. Waterkeepers Bahamas Ltd.

•  Acting for the respondent in an ad hoc arbitration seated in Mauritius, on an application to the Supreme Court (Designated Court) of Mauritius to challenge the arbitral award on several bases provided for in the Model Law. Laxmanbhai & Co Ltd v Minaco (Pty) Ltd

• Acting for the ERT, in an appeal to the Privy Council concerning a challenge to its award concerning a large-scale redundancy of hospital employees by a healthcare business. C-Care (Mauritius) Ltd v Employment Relations Tribunal.

Privy Council 

Representative Cases.

• Acting for Cellplus Mobile Communications Ltd, a subsidiary of Mauritius Telecom Ltd, in an appeal to the Privy Council concerning a substantial damages award (554m rupees) for concurrence deloyale (essentially unlawful competition), based upon alleged breaches of licence conditions arising out of cross-subsidisation by the parent. Emtel Ltd v Mauritius Telecom Ltd & Others.

• Acting for and advising the government of The Bahamas (CA and Privy Council) in an appeal concerning restraint orders and associated relief granted following MLAT requests by the US DOJ, following a substantial fraud against Boeing in the USA. AG of The Bahamas v Reid & Valdez-Lopez.

• Acting for the appellant in a Bahamian appeal concerning liability for contamination of groundwater due to leakage from a petrochemical facility. This case raises important issues as to the proper interpretation of s23 of the Court of Appeal Act of The Bahamas, conferring leave to appeal as of right in certain cases. Rubis Bahamas Ltd v Russell.

• Acting for the government of The Bahamas in an appeal arising out of a dispute concerning objections to a marina development in Abaco, on environmental grounds. The judgment gives important guidance on the availability of security for costs in public law disputes. Responsible Developmemt for Abaco Ltd v Christie & Others.

• Acting for Alternative Power Solution Ltd in an appeal to the Privy Council from Mauritius. This cCase concerned the so-called “fraud exception” in relation to letters of credit. Alternative Power Solution Ltd v Central Electricity Board.

• Acting for the Employment Relations Tribunal of Mauritius in an appeal concerning the correct treatment of delay in applications to that tribunal. C Care (Mauritius) Ltd v Employment Relations Tribunal

• Acting for the Fair Rent Tribunal of Mauritius in an appeal concerning the correct approach to the determination of fair rent. St Nicholas Grammar School v Arnulphy

• Acting for the Ministry of Housing and Lands of Mauritius in an appeal concerning the doctrine of the condition suspensive in Mauritian law. Angteeah v Bathfield

• Acting for a Bahamian property investor in an appeal concerning constructive trusts and the application of Stack v Dowden in The Bahamas, in relation to investment properties. Marr v Collie

International Arbitration.

Aidan has significant experience in disputes involving Russia/the CIS, UAE, Mauritius, Cyprus, Sweden, BVI, Malta, Switzerland, Bermuda, and The Bahamas. 

He has experience of and international Arbitration in disputes under ICC, LCIA and adhoc rules, as well as satellite litigation arising including challenging an arbitral award.

This through a range of sectors including corporate, finance, energy and natural resources, construction, sports, and telecommunications. 

Representative cases.

• Acting in a series of six international arbitrations in a dispute between the shareholders in a large Russian retail bank, concerning a large number of complex issues centred around the exercise of a call option over a controlling stake. Case described in The Moscow Times as a “high-profile case which rocked Russia’s business community and spooked both foreign and Russian investors alike” and as “the most high-profile business dispute of recent years”. (LCIA, London seat, and ICAC, Moscow seat).

• Acting in an arbitration of a complex shareholders’ dispute, concerning a Cypriot holding company ultimately owning one of the largest open cast coal mines in Siberia. (LCIA, London seat).

• Acting for the respondent in an ad hoc arbitration seated in Mauritius, on an application to the Supreme Court (Designated Court) of Mauritius to challenge the arbitral award on several bases provided for in the Model Law. Laxmanbhai & Co Ltd v Minaco (Pty) Ltd (ad hoc, Mauritius).

• Acting for the successful claimant seeking final anti-suit injunctive relief from an arbitral tribunal, restraining proceedings brought in Cyprus by the respondent, in breach of an arbitration clause in a shareholders’ agreement (Cypriot proceedings were framed as brought by reference to the Cypriot SPV’s articles of association). (LCIA, London seat).

• Acting for a MENA state petroleum company in a dispute concerning the provision of services (and raising issues of dishonesty and ostensible authority / attribution) under a well services contract relating to oilfield drilling operations in Iraq (LCIA, London seat).

• Acting for the respondent in an arbitration concerning  a dispute between a large scale industrial battery supplier / user, and a provider of battery recycling services (ICC, London).

• Acting for the successful respondent minority shareholder in PJSC Orient Express Bank, resisting the grant of an anti-suit inunction sought on the basis that court proceedings by the bank were brought in collusion with the shareholder in order to impede arbitrations between the shareholders. Evison Holdings Ltd v International Co Finvision Holdings.

• Acting for the successful respondents in a Commercial Court challenge to an arbitral award which had granted final anti-suit relief. Important decision on the arbitrability of certain company law disputes NDK Ltd v Huo Holding Ltd [2022] EWHC 1682 (Comm). 

• Separate Commercial Court challenge to an arbitral award, raising issues as to the possibility of a shareholder acceding to an arbitration agreement by a unilateral deed of adherence NDK Ltd v Huo Holding Ltd (No.2) [2022] EWHC 2580 (Comm). 

POCA & Asset Recovery.

Aidan’s civil fraud expertise means that he is ideally placed to undertake proceeds of crime work, and related asset recovery work.  

He has substantial experience of restraint orders and associated procedures in the POCA context.

Representative Cases.

• Acting for and advising the government of The Bahamas (CA and Privy Council) in an appeal concerning restraint orders and associated relief granted following MLAT requests by the US DOJ, following a substantial fraud against Boeing in the USA. AG of The Bahamas v Reid & Valdez-Lopez

• Acting for the Bermuda Police Commissioner in litigation in Bermuda concerning the protocol to be adopted in relation to potentially privileged material seized under MLAT legislation in conjunction with a very substantial US DOJ tax fraud investigation. Medlands (PTC) Ltd v Commissioner of the Bermuda Police Service

• Acting for an offshore SPV in an important case concerning the true scope of the POCA legislation, and in particular establishing that disputes about corporate personality / the corporate veil, and about beneficial ownership of property, fall to be dealt with in accordance with the general law including as to sham trusts, and resulting and constructive trusts. RCPO v Larkfield Ltd

Commercial Litigation.

Aidan’s practice covers the full range of commercial dispute resolution, both in the High Court (and appellate courts), in arbitration and overseas.

He has a particular expertise in complex and large scale international and cross-border cases, ranging from disputes involving bad faith and dishonesty, to  international contractual disputes, and to company, joint venture and partnership disputes.  He has also in recent years advised and acted for several Premier League football clubs on commercial matters.

He is ranked in Chambers & Partners for Commercial Dispute Resolution and Chancery Commercial, and in the Legal 500 for Commercial Litigation and Offshore Commercial Disputes.

Aidan is incredibly responsive and gets on top of the facts and issues very quickly. He is extremely knowledgeable and technically astute but is also very commercial and practical.'

Legal 500: Commercial Litigation

"Aidan's written work is really fantastic; he is very eloquent and very clear. His ability to analyse facts and put forward the best arguments for clients is incredibly impressive."

"Aidan is a fantastic advocate who's trusted by judges."

Chambers, UK – Chancery: Commercial (London Bar)

"He is very approachable, business-minded and commercially aware."

"He is a fantastic advocate whom judges trust."

"He's very eloquent and highly lucid. His written work is also really fantastic."

Chambers, UK – Commercial Dispute Resolution.

Representative cases.

• Acting for the successful claimant seeking final anti-suit injunctive relief from an arbitral tribunal, restraining proceedings brought in Cyprus by the respondent, in breach of an arbitration clause in a shareholders’ agreement (Cypriot proceedings were framed as brought by reference to the Cypriot SPV’s articles of association).

• Acting for the successful respondent minority shareholder in PJSC Orient Express Bank, resisting the grant of an anti-suit injunction sought on the basis that court proceedings by the bank were brought in collusion with the shareholder in order to impede arbitrations between the shareholders. Evison Holdings Ltd v International Co Finvision Holdings.

• Acting for the successful respondents in a Commercial Court challenge to an arbitral award which had granted final anti-suit relief. Important decision on the arbitrability of certain company law disputes NDK Ltd v Huo Holding Ltd [2022] EWHC 1682 (Comm).

• Separate Commercial Court challenge to an arbitral award, raising issues as to the possibility of a shareholder acceding to an arbitration agreement by a unilateral deed of adherence NDK Ltd v Huo Holding Ltd (No.2) [2022] EWHC 2580 (Comm).

• Acting for the defendant in proceedings that formed part of a bitter and long running dispute between the heirs of a wealthy Venezuelan oil family.  Involving allegations of misuse of a PoA granted by the mother, in order to misappropriate funds held in a Swiss bank account. De Armas Davila v De Armas Davila. 

• Acting for defendant in a dispute over the purported dissolution of a successful UAE architectural practice.  Involved complex jurisdictional / conflicts issues, including as to the identification of the seat of the partnership and as to the implied reflexive effect of Article 24 of Brussels Recast. Mills v McMillan.

• Acting for the largest shareholder in Petropavlovsk Plc, in a derivative action seeking urgent injunctive relief, concerning a threatened sale at an undervalue of the company’s 29% shareholding in a Hong Kong listed Russian iron ore company.

• Acting for Chinese investors in a dispute concerning the management of a Cayman Islands holding company, arising out of a director (nominated by another major investor) frustrating a US IPO valued at in excess of $ 2 billion.

• Advising a group of seven Premier League clubs in relation to potential s994 and related claims, arising out of the Premier League’s proposed scheme for apportioning losses due to rebates payable to broadcasters (running to £ hundreds of millions) following disruption to the season due to COVID-19.

• Acting for a prominent Omani businessman in a claim for US$ several hundred million, arising out of alleged unauthorised dealings in Iranian oil by his JV partner, a prominent Greek shipowner.  Also acting for him on his related OFAC delisting petition (in order to remove his listing as a specially designated national).

• Acting for a management company which manages certain commercial rights on behalf of Team England (at any one time, the cadre of football players who play at the international level), in a claim against the FA for various forms of tortious interference.

• Acting for a Premier League club in a dispute with the Treasury, concerning conditions sought to be imposed on a roll-over of a Coronavirus Large Business Interruption Loan Scheme loan of in excess of £100m.

• Acting for a property investment SPV in a dispute raising interesting questions about the ability of a beneficiary to ‘cherry-pick’ where there has been a breach of fiduciary duty and the fiduciary has deployed the relevant funds profitably. Lapome Ltd v Kemp.

Sanctions. 

Aidan regularly advises and represents clients in relation to sanctions work, and the international nature of his practice is such that sanctions issues often arise. 

He has particular recent experience of dealing with the  Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 and associated legislation (and with the analogue legislation in the Caribbean) and experience of dealing with OFAC delisting petitions.

Representative Cases. 

• Advising a major London-listed sanctioned entity on whether the delisting of a subsidiary from the MOEX exchange would involve a breach of its obligations under the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019.

• Advising a major London-listed sanctioned entity on the potential application of its asset disclosure obligations under the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, to assets belonging to its subsidiaries.

• Advising and acting for a prominent African politician and businessman, who had been designated by the OFAC as a narcotics kingpin under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act, on an OFAC delisting petition.

• Advising a prominent Middle Eastern businessman, who had been designated pursuant to Executive Order 13224, for having allegedly dealt in Iranian oil, on an OFAC delisting petition.

Insolvency.

Representative Cases.

• Acting for joint provisional liquidators of an umbrella company, in substantial claim (ca. £30m) against the directors and their associates, seeking freezing and passport orders, and urgent ex p. s234 and s236 orders against law firms involved in various transactions using company funds. Umbrella Care Ltd (in liquidation) v Nisa & Others.

• Acting for the successful petitioner, resisting an application to strike out a winding up petition on the grounds of alleged fraud and breaches of regulatory requirements in the social housing sector. Re Windrush Alliance UK Community Interest Co.

• Acting for respondents to an application by the administrators of two insolvent insurance intermediaries, for directions relating to the distribution of money held in client accounts. The case involved complex questions as to the interpretation and application of the statutory trust regime in the FCA Handbook, CASS5. Re Allanfield Property Insurance Services Ltd (in Administration)