The Lawyer Africa Elite 2014 features an in-depth look at 46 leading independent firms’ strategies in 15 key sub-Saharan jurisdictions, as well as the views of in-house counsel from some of Africa’s largest companies... Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
Weil Gotshal & Manges has secured a partial victory in the battle between the Barclay brothers and Irish property tycoon Paddy McKillen over the Maybourne Hotel Group.
The Court of Appeal handed down a second judgment in favour of Sir David and Sir Fred Barclay in the hotly contested case over the control of Maybourne Hotels, which owns Claridges, the Connaught and the Berkeley hotels.
The Weil litigation team, led by partner Matthew Shankland, argued before The Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Lewison and Lord Justice Toulson that the brothers had the right to own the £660m debt held against the properties.
The main legal claim has yet to be decided. McKillen, who is being advised by Herbert Smith partners John Whiteoak and Kevin Lloyd, is suing the brothers alleging that they tried to bypass his right to buy more shares to get control of the company from Irish National Asset Management Agency (NAMA) without consulting shareholders.
Shankland was assisted by associate Hannah Field-Lowes, and partner Jamie Maples. Deal partner Marco Compagnoni acted on the main Maybourne transactions and banking partner James Hogben acted on the debt transfer from NAMA.
Counsel instructed by Weil in the case are a One Essex Court team of Lord Grabiner QC, Kenneth McLean QC, Jeffery Onions QC, Sa’ad Hossain and Edmund Nourse.
For McKillen Herbert Smith has instructed Serle Court’s Philip Marshall QC to lead 4 Stone Buildings’ Richard Hill and Gregory Denton-Cox.
Shankland said: “Our clients have now won both preliminary issues in the case and the Courts have confirmed that their status as shareholders in, and the principal creditors of, Coroin is beyond doubt. This places the company, its employees and assets in a certain position once again.”
Herbert Smith was accused of being “lackadaisical” by Mr Justice Richards in its approach to disclosure in the case (14 May 2012).