Graham Brodie KC

Commercial Wrongdoing

"He is able to deal with the whole round of criminal and civil fraud and the asset recovery and regulatory sides of those cases."
Chambers & Partners 2024

“Graham has an incredible legal and strategic intellect. He is also commercial and team-oriented. In short, he is superb.” 
Legal 500 2024

"Graham is a careful and skilled advocate. He never gets lost in the small points, is always focused on the bigger picture and overall strategy, meaning that he is able to achieve successful outcomes for clients in alignment with their broader goals."
"Graham is contactable without fail, responsive, dedicated, and always plays 5 moves ahead. He has vast experience in white collar criminal cases and is incredibly knowledgeable and savvy."
“Graham was excellent. He has a sharp mind and quick wit which makes him a joy to work with."
Chambers and Partners High Net Worth 2023

‘Graham is exceptional. He is tactically-astute and a very good strategist who gets results.' 
Legal 500 2023 

“He provides expert counsel to a variety of corporate clients, and has a particular focus on cases with overlapping civil and criminal elements.” 
Chambers and Partners 2023 

“His approach combines intellectual rigour with a no-nonsense attitude to great effect."
“He is a very clever guy and a good advocate.”
“He is good on the crossover between civil and criminal."
“Very personable and very easy to speak to. His real skill is in problem solving and unravelling tricky situations."
Chambers and Partners

“A master at strategy. Technically superb on complex POCA matters. Straddles both criminal and civil fraud and he is at the top of the tree in both.”
“Graham is an outstanding silk. A commanding advocate with a searing intellect. He is tenacious, tactically shrewd, and finds creative solutions to extremely complicated problems.”
“Graham has an exceptional intellect and is a master at strategy. He finds creative solutions to extremely complicated problems. His provision of a well thought out plan of attack in any case - and sticking to it - gives reassurance and structure to the running of a case.”
“One of a very select group of silks who specialise in both civil and criminal fraud. He is excellent and a first choice for complex multi-jurisdictional cases involving commercial wrongdoing.”
Legal 500

• Re: M Acted for company director in SFO prosecution concerning the operation of the SANGCOM project for the provision of telecommunication equipment and related services to the Saudi Arabian National Guard. (2024)

• Re: P Acted for CEO in FCA prosecution for market abuse.  Prosecution withdrawn following representations that it violated the prohibition against double-jeopardy. (2024)

• Re: T Instructed to advise and represent a suspect in an SFO investigation into a fraudulent investment scheme. (Current)

• Re: G Instructed to advise company director in connection with investigation into fraud concerning the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme. (Current)

• Re: W Instructed to advise company director in connection with investigation into corruption and money-laundering in relation to building work for NHS trust. (Current)

• Re: M Instructed to advise company director in connection with investigation into perversion of the course of justice in relation to corporate prosecution. (Current)

• Re: S Instructed to advise company director in connection with investigation into fraud arising out of the sale of residential property. (Current)

• Re: B Instructed to represent an engineering company in prosecution alleging corruption. (2022)

• Re: S Instructed to represent a company director in prosecution for corporation tax group relief fraud. (2021)

• Re: H Instructed to advise company director in connection with allegations of fraud in the management of a classic car dealership. (2019)

• Re: I Instructed to advise company director in connection with HMRC investigation into employee benefit trust tax avoidance scheme. (2019)

• Re: E and Re: W Instructed to advise on the recovery of costs following the collapse of two separate private prosecutions. (2019)

• Re: B Instructed to represent defendant in private prosecution alleging fraud on the estate of a deceased businessman. (2018)

• Re: X Instructed to advise suspect in connection with a domestic investigation into money laundering following a withholding tax fraud that is alleged to have been committed in Denmark.

• Re: Y Instructed to advise oil major on avoiding the commission of offences under POCA which it was feared might be committed in the course of an M&A transaction.

• Re: R Instructed to advise in a money laundering investigation into a former Goldman Sachs banker.

• Re: R Instructed to advise on whether proposed conduct in relation to a €1.3 billion trust fund would represent a money laundering offence.

• Re: O Instructed to advise and represent a company in an investigation into corruption arising out of the sale of offshore oil exploration block.

• R v W Instructed to represent a company director in prosecution for fraud in relation to the sale of construction material and applications for government grants.

• R v P Instructed to represent senior executive of chemical manufacturing company in prosecution for corruption of public officials in Indonesia.

• R v H Instructed to represent young businessman accused of (i) advertising and providing investment advice without FSA authorisation, and (ii) fraudulent trading.

• Re: S Limited Advising engineering company in investigation into suspected breaches of the UN Oil for Food Programme.

• R v H Instructed to represent financial columnist in ‘City Slickers’ prosecution of Daily Mirror journalists for market abuse.

• R v L Chartered accountant extradited from Switzerland and prosecuted for fraudulently operated company purchase scheme whereby £55M of corporation tax was evaded. Instructed following conviction in renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction and appeal against sentence.

• R v W Prosecution concerning police corruption involving detective agency used by high-profile figures, including Matthew Mellon, which obtained information using illicit means.

• R v Hanson [2007] 1 WLR 1123, [2007] 1 Cr.App.R. 15 Prosecution for tax evasion concerning allegation of dishonest claim that foreign-registered company was centrally managed and controlled in UK. Dismissal of charges followed by Prosecution appeal to Court of Appeal.

Civil Fraud

Graham is an extremely effective advocate. His willingness to go the extra mile for those instructing him, and his ability to deliver in the courtroom, put him one step ahead of his peers.’
Legal 500 2024

‘Graham is at the very pinnacle of the profession in this area at the moment. As well as doing top drawer business crime cases, he is unique in that he specialises in civil work conducted in the shadow of possible criminal proceedings.’
Legal 500 2023

“An advocate with great gravitas.”
“He has a searing intellect.”
Legal 500

"He is an absolute master at what he does." “He is tenacious, intelligent and hugely effective both on paper and in court. His written work is succinct and his ability to think out of the box is hugely impressive. Very strategic in his approach, he is able to adapt and think on his feet effortlessly.”
“His tactical acumen is particularly impressive - you can trust him with the most serious and complex cases without hesitation." "He has a brilliant analytical mind.”
Chambers & Partners

• FCA v Papadimitrakopoulos and another [2023] Ch 101 Acted for CEO of Globo PLC in civil claim for market abuse.  Claim withdrawn following High Court finding that the conduct of the FCA in the context of the claim represented an abuse of the process. (2024)

• Akhmedova v Akhmedov and others [2021] 4 W.L.R. 88 Instructed to represent Liechtenstein-based fiduciaries in various applications for the enforcement of matrimonial financial order. (2021)

• Re: P Instructed to act for party in trust and fraud litigation in Cayman Islands. (2021)

• Re: D Instructed to advise professional in defence of civil fraud claim made by firm in which they had previously been a partner. (2019)

• Re: M Instructed to act for defendant/counterclaimant in claim for breach of contract and counterclaim for unlawful means conspiracy in the sale of electronic equipment. (2018)

• Re: B Instructed to advise international construction group in relation to historic misconduct in local authority contracting. (2017)

• Re: L Advising defendant in fraud claim arising out of high-yield investment schemes promoted by partner of large international legal practice. (2016)

• Re: L Instructed to advise on the impact of historic corruption on the sale of assets for £100 million. (2015)

• Re: B Instructed to defend civil claim for corruption in engineering industry. Claim settled on confidential terms. (2014)

• HMRC v Sunico A/S and others Civil action for £42M based on allegation of unlawful means conspiracy involving mobile phone trading.

• Amitel Ltd v HMRC Appeal to the First Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) against £18M assessment for VAT raised on the basis of an allegation of constructive knowledge of participation in transactions connected with VAT fraud.

• FSA v E Claim by FSA alleging the operation of an unauthorized collective investment scheme.

• Termina Computer Services Ltd (In Liquidation) v A and others Civil claim for £41M based on allegation of dishonest assistance in breach of fiduciary duty.

• F v S High value civil action based on allegation of fraudulent misrepresentation against property developer.

• Campaign Against Arms Trade v M Norwich Pharmacal proceedings in which the claimants (who were applying for judicial review of the decision of the Director of the Serious Fraud Office to discontinue the criminal investigation into corruption in the Al Yamamah arms deal) sought assistance to identify the source of leaked privileged material which had found its way into the hands of BAE.

• British Library Board v Farhad Hakimzadeh High value civil action arising out of the theft of pages from rare antiquarian books belonging to the British Library.

Restraint and Confiscation

"He has a wonderful manner with clients and exudes calmness. That calmness, however, conceals great intellectual power."
Chambers and Partners 2024

‘Strategically brilliant, easy to work with and extremely persuasive in front of the court.’
Legal 500 2024

"Graham is always proactive and willing to assist. He is very creative and has good ideas."
"He is a really polished performer. He thinks outside the box."
Chambers and Partners 2023

‘Hugely bright, provides clear and pragmatic advice and very user friendly. Really one of the team and rolls his sleeves up when required.'
Legal 500 2023

“Has deep experience of handling both the criminal and civil aspects of POCA work.”
“He has an excellent manner with clients and a very strong grasp of the detail of the case, all the time retaining a broader strategic overview of matters.”
“Very good at exploiting all of the commercial angles of a white-collar criminal case. He is fantastically commercially astute, which is very important if you have a case with criminal-civil crossover.”
“He is very creative and a fantastic problem solver.”
Chambers and Partners

• Re: B Instructed to represent company in application for account freezing order.

• Re: S Instructed to advise financial institution in relation to risk of an order restraining its assets pursuant to a foreign request for mutual legal assistance.

• R v H Successful appeal against confiscation order on the basis of misapplication of statutory assumptions.

• R v W Successful appeal against refusal of Crown Court judge to discharge restraint order in largest ever direct tax prosecution.

• Re: Power Consulting Limited Successful application on behalf of a company for the variation of a restraint order to release from its ambit funds of which the company claimed beneficial ownership.

• R v L Confiscation proceedings (with an agreed benefit figure of £98M) which required the multi-jurisdictional movement of £55 million to be traced over a period of sixteen years. Allegation of hidden assets successfully resisted.

• Re: P Challenge to a restraint order obtained by SFO pursuant to Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 s 41. Order replaced, following negotiation, with undertaking to court by alleged offender.

• R v S SFO confiscation proceedings; settled following argument concerning (1) jurisdiction of court to make compensation order after sentence and (2) status of assets in trust fromwhich defendant was an excluded person.

• SFO v X [2005] EWCA Civ 1564 CA Requirements to be met by defendant seeking variation of restraint order to pay legal fees when Prosecution allege that defendant has assets hidden out of the jurisdiction.

• D (UK) Ltd v RCPO [2005] EWCA Crim 2919 Challenge by third party to a restraint order made pursuant to Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 s41.

• Re: O Restraint proceedings stayed on basis of misconduct on the part of Central Confiscation Branch of CPS.

• HM Customs and Excise v Hughes and others [2003] 1 WLR 177 CA Responsibility for payment of remuneration of receiver appointed pursuant to provisions of Criminal Justice Act 1988.

• In the matter of El Heri [2001] EWCA Civ 1782 CA Application of privilege against self-incrimination to statement required from defendant in restraint proceedings.

Public Law and Human Rights

“He has a commanding presence while being quite friendly and laid back about things. It is clear that the court appreciates that he knows exactly what he is doing.”
“He produces really beautiful written work, so much so that he often wins an argument in a case before it gets into court.”
Chambers & Partners

• Re: H Judicial review challenge to the conduct of a search pursuant to an investigation into tax fraud. (2017)

• Re: R Judicial review of production order issued following a request for mutual legal assistance. (2017)

• Re: R Judicial review challenge to the conduct of a search pursuant to a foreign request for mutual legal assistance. (2015)

• Abbey Election Petition [2008] EWHC 501 (QB) Election petition concerning failure of returning officer to include 45.8% of the votes cast in the count.

• Aston Election Petition [2008] EWHC B5 (QB) Election petition concerning allegation of illegal practice (namely, the making of false statements of fact in relation to the personal character and conduct of a Liberal Democrat Party candidate for the purpose of affecting that candidate’s return) on the part of Labour Party candidate in election campaign in Birmingham.

• R (Payne) v Attorney-General Judicial review challenge of conduct of Attorney-General in giving advice to Cabinet on lawfulness of use of force in Iraq.

• R (North Cyprus Tourism Centre Ltd and another) v Transport for London [2005] EWHC 1698 (Admin) Challenge to refusal of TfL to accept advertising for Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.

• Bordesley Green Election Petition [2005] EWHC 2365 (Admin) Election petition concerning corruption of postal vote system on the part of Labour Party candidates in election campaign in Birmingham, followed by application for permission to seek judicial review of judgment.

• R (Consistent Group Ltd) v Secretary of State Home Department and others [2004] EWHC 3020 (Admin) Challenge to (1) treatment of applications to take advantage of right of establishment pursuant to association agreement between Poland and European Union, and (2) conduct of an investigation by National Crime Squad.

• R (Consistent Hotel Staff Ltd) v Commissioners of Inland Revenue Challenge to issue of enforcement notice pursuant to National Minimum Wage legislation.

• R v Jones [2002] UKHL 5, [2003] 1 AC 1 HL Propriety of Crown Court trial in absence of defendant.

• Yusof v Granada and Bashir Application to restrain broadcast of confidential information.