James Willan

• Home
• Members

James Willan has a broad commercial practice, focussing on substantial commercial disputes including civil fraud and banking/finance.

As well as acting as junior counsel on heavyweight litigation, James appears as sole counsel in the High Court, Court of Appeal and arbitration. He has substantial experience of applications for interim relief (including freezing orders, in particular).

James is also frequently instructed to appear in, or assist with, litigation abroad. He has appeared in the British Virgin Islands Commercial Court and the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal, as well as arbitrations in Singapore and the Cayman Islands. He has been admitted ad hoc as an advocate in the Isle of Man.

What others say

James is recommended in Chambers and Partners for Commercial Dispute Resolution (2013) as "an adept young advocate, with a natural talent. He is 'stunningly impressive' and has 'thoroughly arrived'... 'Certainly one to watch for the future,' he has 'a flourishing practice' and is noted for his 'ability to assimilate large amounts of information very quickly'".

James is also recommended by Chambers and Partners for International Arbitration, where he is described as a "commercial junior who handles arbitrations with aplomb" and "absolutely excellent".

The Legal 500 recommends James as a leading junior for civil fraud, describing him as "absolutely brilliant".

In 2010, James was selected by Legal Week as one of the "Stars of the Bar" under 10 years' call, being described by instructing solicitors as "one of the brightest up-and-coming juniors".

Examples of recent decisions

Examples of recent decisions, which are typical of James' practice, include:

• Britannia Bulk v Bulk Trading: James appeared alone for Britannia Bulk before the Court of Appeal, arguing a point of construction of the ISDA Master Agreement, in the conjoined ISDA appeals sub nom. Lomas v JFB Firth Rixson [2012] 2 All ER Comm 1076; his submissions were described as 'attractively advanced'.
• Yukos Capital v Rosneft: acting for Yukos in its claim to enforce awards, worth US$0.5bn, which have been set aside in Russia in allegedly corrupt judicial proceedings. Important decisions include [2010] EWHC 784 (Comm) (availability of freezing orders against non-party SPVs) and [2012] 2 Lloyd's Rep 208 (Court of Appeal) (a modern restatement of the Act of State/non-justiciability doctrines).
• Linsen International Ltd v Humpuss Sea Transport Pte Ltd [2011] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 663 and [2011] EWCA Civ 1042: successfully discharging a Freezing Order based on a claim to 'pierce the veil' for lack of a good arguable case and want of jurisdiction.
• Telenor East v Altimo Holdings [2011] EWHC 735 (Comm): application for an interim injunction to restrain US$6.5bn acquisition of a telecoms business.
• Oceanbulk Shipping & Trading v TMT Asia [2011] 1 Lloyd's Rep 96 (Supreme Court): admissibility of negotiations conducted "without prejudice".