William J. Boddy Partner

Experience

• Resolving a cross border dispute for an international hospitality client arising from the late delivery of a business-critical software platform via pre-action mediation.
• Acting for a global private equity client in relation to various substantial business warranty and tax covenant claims following two separate cross-border corporate acquisitions.
• Representing a group of shareholders in a 30 million Euro dispute alleging breaches of fiduciary duty and fraudulent conspiracy in connection with the unlawful dilution of the shareholders’ minority interest in the overseas holding structure of a UK financial services company.
• Defending an international pharma distributor against a substantial cross border profit share claim brought by a third party in relation to the supply of coronavirus testing kits during the pandemic, including securing the dismissal of proceedings in California.
• Acting in complex and high value cross border tort claims.  Examples include defending a claim against transportation company in relation to catastrophic brain injuries suffered in a road traffic accident, and bringing a jurisdictional challenge on behalf of an education provider facing litigation arising from an alleged workplace injury.
• Representing a pharma company in a substantial multi-jurisdictional contractual dispute regarding a cancelled order of a pharmaceutical product as a result of alleged fraud by a downstream supplier.
• Acting for a substantial aviation client in relation to conflict of laws issues arising in relation to various US and UK proceedings.
• Advising two investment vehicles in relation to the enforcement of a complex security package over shares in companies incorporated across a number of jurisdictions.
• Representing a UK technology company and its US parent in relation to an investigation and subsequent self-report to the Serious Fraud Office in relation to improper payments made through agents to secure contracts in China, Korea and India. Successfully secured the second Deferred Prosecution Agreement to be approved in the UK. The DPA is the only one to date that has been granted to an SME, and included a substantial discount to reflect the company’s decision to self-report, ongoing cooperation with the SFO, and its ability to pay.
• Successful representation of a British Virgin Islands company in a U.S. $33 million arbitration before the Netherlands Arbitration Institute (NAI) in respect of a cement plant development in Kazakhstan, involving fraudulent conduct by an agent, including appearing as advocate at evidentiary hearings in Amsterdam and Paris respectively.
• Acting for the purchaser of a group of companies in a GB £4 million breach of warranty claim against the sellers in relation to alleged undisclosed tax liabilities (TEOCO UK Limited v Aircom Jersey 4 & Anor, 2016 EWHC (Ch) unreported; 2018 EWCA Civ 23).
• Appearing as sole advocate in arbitral proceedings addressing whether in all the circumstances a member organisation of a global sport governing body could lawfully be expelled for breach of the terms of its membership or whether doing so would amount to treating the member in an unfairly prejudicial manner.
• Instruction by third parties companies that own a U.S. $300 million plus asset in Russia and had been affected by the freezing and receivership orders granted in relation to the High Court fraud case bought by JSC BTA Bank against Mukhtar Ablyazov (JSC BTA Bank v. Mukhtar Ablyazov & Ors 2013 EWHC 1869 (Comm); 2014 EWCA Civ 602; 2015 EWHC (Ch) unreported). The case raised important issues as to the extent of the Masri / Chabra jurisdiction for extending freezing orders to third parties.
• Acting for a technology company in a claim against a former employee and a former agent for misuse of its intellectual property and trade secrets, including obtaining injunctive relief and ultimately an order that the agent was in contempt of court.
• Instruction by the General Director of a Russian company in a corporate governance dispute before the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA).
• Representation of a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands in a U.S. $200 million Commercial Court commission claim against a Nigerian company in relation to a Nigerian offshore oil field, including obtaining a freezing order and interim injunction (Energy Venture Partners v Malabu Oil and Gas 2013 EWHC 2118 (Comm), 2011 EWHC 2215 (Comm); 2012 EWCA Civ 995; 2013 EWHC 2118 (Comm); 2014 EWHC 663 (Comm)).
• Acting for a tenant steel manufacturer in a dispute with its landlord as to whether a multi-million pound steel manufacturing plant was sufficiently affixed to the realty to belong to the landlord or whether it remained a tenant’s fixture (Peel Land and Property (Ports No 3) Ltd v TS Sheerness Steel Limited 2013 EWHC 1658 (Ch); 2013 EWHC 2689 (Ch); 2014 EWCA Civ 100).
• Instruction by individual claimants in a complex jurisdiction dispute in the Commercial Court and Court of Appeal in relation to U.S. $400 million claims in contract, quantum meruit, conspiracy and constructive trust in respect of a disputed shareholding in an Afghan telecommunications company (Cecil and others v Bayat and others 2010 EWHC 641 (Comm); 2011 EWCA Civ 523).
• Defense of Bestnet Europe Limited against an allegation that its directors misused confidential information belonging to the claimant relating to the manufacture of long lasting mosquito nets with insecticide incorporated into the plastic. Coordinating related proceedings in four other jurisdictions. Despite a finding of misuse, the imposition of an injunction on Bestnet’s then current product was effectively resisted and the case is recognised as a leading authority on trade secrets matters. (Vestergaard Frandsen v Bestnet Europe 2009 EWHC 1456 (CH); 2011 EWCA Civ 424).
• Representation of a property development company incorporated in the Isle of Man in Chancery Division proceedings against sales agents, who sold fractional shares in a country club development, for wrongful retention of in excess of GB £1 million, including obtaining an interim injunction.
• Defence of a group of companies incorporated in the British Virgin Islands and Turks and Caicos Islands in U.S. $75 million interpleader proceedings in the Commercial Court concerning whether the Courts of England and Wales should recognize a receivership order made by a U.S. Court, and whether there was a sufficient connection to the U.S (Robb Evans v Lakeshore & Others 2009 EWHC (Comm) unreported).
• Defence of an insolvent Dutch technology company in summary judgment proceedings in the Chancery Division in which the claimant sought specific performance of a debenture and an option agreement (Ford v Polymer Vision 2009 EWHC 945 (Ch)).