Rory has a commercial-chancery practice focusing on litigation in the following areas: commercial law (including civil fraud); trusts/probate; and insolvency. He regularly appears in the High Court and has appeared several times as sole counsel in the Court of Appeal. He has particular expertise in applications for injunctive relief.
He is rated as a ‘leading junior‘ in the Legal 500; the 2016 edition notes that he is ‘extremely measured in his delivery‘, and includes client testimonials that ‘Rory is an excellent cross examiner and a persuasive advocate with the rare gift of coupling those skills with the ability to deal with clients and solicitors on the level‘.
The 2015 edition states ‘he pays attention to detail and provides clear and accurate advice‘.
Rory is often instructed to advise and represent clients in alternative dispute resolution. He can take instructions and advise in German and Italian as well as English and is an active member of the British Italian Lawyers Association; British-German Jurists Association and International Sub-Committee of the Chancery Bar Association. Much of his practice involves cross-jurisdictional disputes or has an international dimension.
- In the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice, Rory Brown advised and represented the respondent beneficiary to an application by trustees for Re Beddoe relief (whether to defend and counterclaim) and prospective costs orders. Master Matthews gave a judgment setting out the principles governing the grant of such relief to trustees (Pettigrew v Edwards  EWHC 8 (Ch)).
- Represented the appellants in an appeal in the Court of Appeal, the questions for the Court being a) whether the trial judge was wrong to allow an amendment to plead forgery on the first day of a contested probate trial and b) whether the judge acted in breach of the Defendant’s right to a fair trial by electing not to allow the defendant time to amend his pleadings or to put in evidence to counter the forgery allegation (on which basis the claim succeeded) (Ahmed v Choudhury,  EWCA Civ 686). The Court of Appeal distinguished the Practice Note: Swain Mason v Mills & Reeve  EWCA Civ 14,  1 W.L.R. 2735.
- Represented an executor of an estate worth several million pounds (in which the principal beneficiaries were charities) in her action in the Commercial Court against a bank for negligently failing to prevent a fraud against the Deceased perpetrated by two of his carers. The matter was settled by confidential agreement before trial.
- Advised and represented two Italian beneficiaries of a substantial trust in the High Court trial of a claim for removal of the trustees for acting contrary to the interests of other beneficiaries. The background to the dispute was a struggle for control of a prominent Italian ceramics company after the company’s default on a £7 million loan. Rory was instructed as sole counsel for his ability to advise the Italian professional and lay clients in Italian on the application of English law by the English courts to the trust (December, 2016).
- Represented Executor-Beneficiaries in a six day trial before the Honourable Mr Justice Mann in the Chancery Division of the High Court. The Judge held that the challenges to the will based on undue influence, want of knowledge and approval, and testamentary capacity were not supported by the evidence. He also dismissed a late application to amend to plead forgery. The comprehensive judgment conveniently collects together the law governing challenges to the substantial validity of wills (Murray v Bernard  EWHC 245 (Ch))
- At trial in the Chancery Division of the High Court, represented an applicant for reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance Act 1975 on the basis she was a live-in and dependent girlfriend of the Deceased not, as the Respondent administrator asserted, a mere lodger (Wright v Legister  EWHC 2041 (Ch),  WTLR 1675).
- In the Court of Appeal, resisted an application for permission to appeal brought on the basis a Circuit Judge had misapplied the Etridge test for undue influence (Khan v Khan  EWCA 465).
Commercial (inc. fraud)
- Rory Brown led by John Wardell QC advised and represented the appellant pharmaceutical company in its appeal to the Court of Appeal against the decision of Andrew Hochhauser QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) that the Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain a claim that the Defendants had unlawfully interfered with (alternatively conspired to injure) the appellant’s business selling a probiotic food product Actial Farmaceutica LDA v De Simone  EWCA Civ 1311.
- Represented the applicant property developer in his application in the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice to set aside a statutory demand presented in respect of an instalment payment of £2 million said to be due under a contract for the sale of shares in a corporate property development vehicle (Doherty v Fannigan)  EWHC 2098 (Ch).
- Currently representing Saverio Moschillo, an Italian fashion mogul, in the context of his dispute with the English Fashion Designer John Richmond and related companies over the trademarks to the name John Richmond. The English proceedings are brought by Moschillo against liquidators of Akkurate Ltd in relation to their sale at secret auction of the Richmond trademarks worth £2.5 million.
- Represented Johnson Matthey PLC, a UK FTSE 100 chemical-engineering company, in the successful settlement of its £250,000 contractual claim against a Polish manufacturing company for unpaid sums in respect of obsolete parts in the context of an international car-manufacturing supply chain.
- Represented the Respondent, a banker who is a witness in respect of an alleged international fraud of an estimated US$9.2 billion perpetrated against the Ahmad Hamad Algosaibi and Brothers Company, in a contested application for private examination in the High Court (Akers v Hayley  EWHC 2447 (Ch)).
- Represented a large Cayman fund in proceedings in the Chancery Division of the High Court in its claim for payment of $3,000,000 under a contract for shares (Mittal v RP Explorer Fund  BPIR 1537 ChD).
- In June 2014, represented Massimo Cellino’s Leeds United FC in the Chancery Division of the High Court in respect of the winding up petition presented against it by Sport Capital Ltd in respect of an alleged debt of c. £1,000,000 (see www.itv.com/../leeds-united-winding-up-hearing-delayed).
- In April 2014, acted for a Panamanian company – owned by a member of the Saudi Arabian Royal family – seeking the recovery of £16,000,000 held on trust by receivers, pending resolution of a claim by a third party (law firm) seeking to be declared a preferred creditor.
- In July 2011, represented for the prominent designer, Gnyuki Torimaru, in his contractual claim against an agent engaged to sell his valuable archive of dresses and sketches.
- Appeared (led by Treasury Counsel) in the Court of Appeal on the question of whether, notwithstanding the statutory invalidity of a wagering contract, a person entrusting money to an agent to bet on the horses might recover that money in a restitutionary action when the agent misappropriates the money for his own purposes (Close v Wilson  EWCA 5).
- Represented the Respondent to an application under s236 Insolvency Act 1986 in his application for costs of and incidental to representation at the private examination at which he was questioned in relation to an alleged cross-border fraud of US$9.2 billion (Re Saad Investments Company, Akers v Hayley,  Lexis Citation 69;  All ER (D) 103 (Jun)).
- In the Chancery Division of the High Court, appeared for the liquidator respondents to an application by solicitors for costs of compliance with orders obtained by the liquidators for production of documents relating to an alleged international fraud of an estimated £500,000,000. The judgment seeks to reconcile conflicting High Court authorities on whether there is jurisdiction to award such costs and if so in what circumstances they will be awarded (Re. Harvest Finance Ltd (No. 2)  EWHC 4237 (Ch);  All ER (D) 216 (Dec)).
- Appeared for the liquidators in the Chancery Division of the High Court in their application against solicitors and their firm for disclosure of privileged documents. The Court, after considering the authorities and ordering disclosure, set out the appropriate test to be adopted where liquidators seek disclosure of confidential documents in the context of a large-scale, international fraud investigation (Re. Harvest Finance Limited (No. 1)  BPIR 1020).
- Advised a trustee in bankruptcy of a company director in respect of a proof of debt in excess of £250 million submitted by a finance house and based on an issued but unlitigated antecedent claim against the bankrupt in, inter alia, deceit, fraud and conspiracy arising out of an alleged scheme involving multiple fictitious finance contracts.
- Appeared for the Defendant in the trial in the Chancery Division of the High Court of an application for a declaration a transaction was made with the intention of defrauding creditors. A pro bono costs award was made in favour of the Access to Justice Foundation in the sum of £7,500 (Bibby ACF Limited v Agate  BPIR 685, ChD).
- Acted for the solicitors where the questions arose a) whether a defective statutory demand for unpaid solicitor’s fees, being based on an unliquidated sum, could be cured by a later admission prior to the bankruptcy petition by the debtor that said sum was due and owing, and b) whether a debtor having admitted the debt was estopped from arguing that the demand was defective as against the petitioner who had relied to its detriment on his admission (Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP v Frohlich  BPIR 169).
Public/Public International Law
- In the High Court of Justice, QBD, Admin. Court, (acting pro bono) represented the Applicant for a Declaration of Incompatibility of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 with the Human Rights Act 1998. The judgment, given by Thirlwall J, is authority for two new propositions of law. First, where Parliament legislates to bring UK law in line with the Convention, the legislation it enacts is justiciable. This is so, even if the Minister has made a formal statement that the new law is HR-compliant. Second, being a (post-operative) transsexual person constitutes an ‘other status’ for the purposes of Art. 14 (Carpenter v Secretary of State for Justice  EWHC 464 (Admin.);  1 W.L.R. 4111).
- In 2014, represented an Iranian torture victim, granted asylum in the UK, in his successful appeal against a determination he was fit to work, where the decision-maker had failed to consider or failed to give adequate weight to the consideration of the symptoms of his post-traumatic stress disorder.
- In the Court of Appeal, represented the appellant in his appeal against a decision of a High Court Judge to determine an application to set aside a Civil Restraint Order without affording the applicant an oral hearing. The Court of Appeal held that it was not open to the Judge to determine the aforesaid application on paper and that his decision was void for unfairness (Deeds v Various Respondents  EWCA Civ 1678, CPR News, 1/2014, pp2 & 7-8).
- Acted for the appellant in an appeal as to whether the Gender Recognition Panel had misdirected itself in law, failed to consider relevant considerations or breached Articles 1, 6, 8 and 14 of the ECHR, read together, by denying a post-operative transsexual certification of her acquired gender (Carpenter v Secretary of State for Justice  All ER (D) 93 (Oct)).
- In March 2014, represented the successful appellant in his appeal against a suspension of disability benefit during a period of imprisonment for a conviction which had been quashed by the Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal as unsafe on the grounds that the decision-maker had taken into account irrelevant considerations.
- Advised a representative charitable body for Tamils – who alleged they were victims of war crimes and/or attempted genocide at the hands of members of the Sri Lankan armed forces – as to their remedies in the UK and internationally.
- Brown, Fighting Monsters: British-American War-making and Law-making (2011, Hart Publishing)
- 2009 – PhD (European University Institute) – Philosophy of Law and War
- 2008 – Founding Editor-in-Chief: European Journal of Legal Studies (www.ejls.eu)
- 2006 – MRes (European University Institute, Italy) – European, Comparative and International Law
- 2004 – Mae (Cantab.) (Double First Class Hons.) – Law (including year at Regensburg University, Germany)
- 2007 – Visiting Scholarship (Columbia Law School, NYC)
- 2006 – Fully funded PhD Award, European University Institute
- 2004 – Foundational Scholar of Jesus College, Cambridge
- 2004 – Russell Vick Prize
- 2003 – Major Inner Temple Award
- 2002 – Erasmus Scholarship
- International Sub-Committee of the Chancery Bar Association
- British Italian Lawyers Association
- British German Jurists Association
- Inner Temple
- Bar Pro Bono Panel
- Chancery Bar Association
- Hawks Club
- Glanville Williams Society
- Fighting monsters: British-American war-making and law-making (2011, HART PUBLISHING)
Articles, Chapters and Interviews
- ‘The Seven Principles of Freezing Injunctions’ CORPORATE RESCUE INSOLVENCY, July 2016
- ‘Gender recognition: what legal recognition and rights can post-operative transsexuals expect in the UK?’ LexisNexis Interview May 26, 2015
- ‘Of lodgers, lovers and liars?’ TRUSTS AND ESTATES LAW & TAX JOURNAL (July/August 2015)
- ‘Section 234 and 236 orders—who pays for the costs of complying?’ LexisNexis Interview, January 13, 2015
- ‘When is a winding up petition an abuse of process’ CORPORATE RESCUE INSOLVENCY, October, 2013
- ‘Access to Justice for Torture Victims’, in N. Ronzitti, F. Francioni, T. Scovazzi, and M. Gestri (eds.) Accesso alla giustizia dell’individuo nel diritto internazionale e dell’Unione Europea (Giuffré, 2009)
- ‘Editorial: The geology of governing society’, EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES 2008 www.ejls.eu
- ‘The Legality of Shooting Down Civilian Aircraft’, QUEBEC JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW (2008) www.rqdi.org
- ‘The Problems faced by Judges due to Multilevel Regulation’ in R. Wessel, A. Fǿllesdal, and J. Wouters (Eds.), Multilevel Regulation and the EU, BRILL, 2008
- ‘Excellence in Discourse’, EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE REVIEW, Summer 2007, 46
- ‘Access to Justice for the Victims of Torture’ in Access to Justice, F. Francioni (ed.), OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS (2007), www.oup.com/us/catalog
- ‘Torture, Terrorism, and the Ticking Bomb’, JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND POLICY, www.law.upenn.edu/groups/jilp/4-1_Brown_Rory_Stephen.pdf
- ‘Executive Power and Judicial Supervision at European Level: Kadi v Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities’  EUROPEAN HUMAN RIGHTS LAW REVIEW (4) 457
- ‘The UK House of Lords Ruling on Torture Evidence: A and others (Appellants) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)’  ITALIAN YEARBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
- Tony Coady and Michael O’Keefe (eds.), Righteous Violence: The Ethics and Politics of Military Intervention (Melbourne, 2005)  MILLENNIUM
- Stephen Holmes, The Matador’s Cape: America’s Reckless Response to Terror, (Cambridge University Press, 2007) MILLENNIUM
- Andrea Bianchi and Alexis Keller (eds.), Counterterrorism: Democracy’s Challenge, (Hart Publishing, 2008)  ITALIAN YEARBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
- Prof. Günther Teubner, ‘The corporate codes of multinationals: company constitutions beyond corporate governance and participation’, (from the German)
- Prof. Benedetto Conforti, ‘The Role of the Judge in International Law’, (from the Italian) EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES (2008)1
Rory Brown is an independent self-employed barrister registered with the Bar Standards Board of England (ref. no 56112); whose practice is governed by the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales which code can be found at www.barstandardsboard.org.uk; has full professional liability insurance provided by the Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund Limited (ref BM 2930/060) (details of the world-wide cover are provided at www.barmutual.co.uk); is registered for VAT (reg. no. 998 9348 23); and can be contacted during chambers opening hours by telephone at 02074045055 or by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.