Six silks from commercial set 4 Pump Court are to launch a new venture in Hong Kong aimed at attracting arbitration specialists from around the globe.
The new structure, Arbitration Chambers Hong Kong, is being put together by Australian arbitration specialist Gavin Denton.
Christopher Moger QC explained: “It will be for arbitration and only arbitration. The idea is that we’ll draw in members from more than one jurisdiction.”
The six silks will be joined by seven juniors from the set. They will all be based in London but by banding together in Hong Kong aim to attract a fresh wave of instructions.
It follows an expansion drive by the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) in 2011 in which it doubled the size of its premises and ploughed investment into facilities.
Moger said Denton was currently in talks with a firm in South Korea with a view to adding more arbitrators from the jurisdiction after which it would look to the US and Australia for further additions.
“I hope our success will encourage other chambers members to become associates of the office at a later stage,” he added.
Moger said it was a “forward looking” decision taken by barristers who wanted to grow their practices internationally.
Competition to attract international arbitration between Hong Kong and Singapore has become fierce in recent years. Many believe the decision to plough investment into the HKIAC came in response to Singapore’s Maxwell Chambers.
Only two sets have so far looked to move into the South East Asia market by establishing a presence in the region. Essex Court Chambers and 20 Essex Street broke with tradition in 2009 by opening offices in Singapore (19 October 2009).
Arbitration Chambers Hong Kong is expected to go live in the summer, although the opening date is not set in stone. Moger said premises were currently being fitted out and there will be room for expansion. It is anticipated that growth will initially be cautious while the silks test appetite for their presence in the region.
The six silks are:
Christopher Moger QC. Year of call: 1972; Silk: 1992
Jeremy Nicholson QC. Year of call 1977; Silk 2000
Nicholas Vineall QC. Year of call 1988; Silk 2006
Alex Charlton QC. Year of call 1983; Silk 2008
Andrew Neish QC. Year of call 1988; Silk 2009
Sean Brannigan QC. Year of call 1994; Silk 2009
Readers' comments (25)
litigator | 22-May-2012 10:44 pm
wow. watch the other sets pile in now....
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 22-May-2012 10:51 pm
Whats this? Forward planning? Bravery? A proper business idea? What a very odd barristers chambers.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 22-May-2012 11:23 pm
This chambers is interesting. They are ranked in a lot of different areas and have one or two of the best young silks around, but have really come from nowhere over the last 10 years. This across the practice areas move appears to reflect that. If they can pull it off it will be a coup. But that is a big if... The only way they will be able to is if HK solicitors support the move.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
HK litigator | 23-May-2012 8:55 am
Setting up is one thing. Getting work here is another. I have only heard of one of these silks (the last one) actually doing work in Hong Kong before. That said, if the rest are as good this venture could well work.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
london calling | 23-May-2012 10:10 am
I dont see why HK firms would not support it: our HK office constantly complains about the inability to get good technical specialist advocates for large scale arbitrations from the local bar.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 23-May-2012 10:15 am
But surely the Hong Kong bar will not allow this?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 23-May-2012 10:40 am
Whether or not it will work will presumably depend on the quality of the silks being offered. A check check on Chambers and Partners suggests that at least one of them is highly ranked in International Arbitration relating to Construction/ Engineering of which there is an abundance in Hong Kong. That might drive work to this new chambers.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Arbitrator | 23-May-2012 10:58 am
Its interesting that they are targeting Hong Kong rather than Singapore. The thinking may be that that gives a better entry into mainland China work. It also gives them first mover status, which might be useful.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
sceptical | 23-May-2012 11:00 am
If this can be done why have no London chambers done it before? Surely its an obvious move?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 23-May-2012 11:09 am
Re the post @ 10.15 am: presumably the whole reason why they are keen to emphasise that only Arbitration instructions will be accepted through these new "arbitration chambers" is to sidestep the ability of the Hong Kong bar to block it?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment