Stone Chambers | Barristers

Tom Whitehead Commercial Profile

Tom Whitehead is a barrister specialising in commercial law, including the carriage and sale of goods, international trade, arbitration, jurisdiction and the conflict of laws. He regularly appears in the Commercial Court and in arbitrations. He is recommended in Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500 as a leading barrister. In the Legal 500 (2010) he was singled out as ‘a star in the making’.

Tom has considerable experience of jurisdiction disputes and claims to anti-suit injunctions (both seeking and resisting such orders).

Tom is increasingly instructed in insurance litigation and a growing number of joint venture disputes.

Cases of Interest:

Joint Ventures

LCIA Arbitration: instructed as junior Counsel on behalf of the Claimant in a US$30m+ claim arising out of a joint venture agreement for the operation of an East European airline (with Steven Gee QC). Issues include the existence and scope of fiduciary duties in the joint venture context.
LCIA Arbitration: instructed as junior Counsel on behalf of the Respondent to a US$35m claim arising out of a share purchase agreement concerning the purchase of shares in an East European airline (with Steven Gee QC).
Trafigura v Soboh Petroleum (Com Ct): instructed on behalf of defendants in an on-going multi-million dollar joint venture dispute concerning the supply of jet fuel.

Jurisdiction

Ensco 69 (Com. Ct & Dallas State Court): US$65million insurance claim arising out of the alleged expropriation of an oil rig by the Government of Venezuela. Instructed (with Steven Gee QC) by London market underwriters in English proceedings seeking to uphold a London arbitration clause, and to provide expert evidence on English law to a Texas Court in opposition to an anti suit injunction granted to the assured by the Texas court to restrain the English proceedings.
National Navigation Co v Endesa Generacion SA (The Wadi Sudr) - Court of Appeal [2009] EWCA Civ 1397; [2010] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 193; [2009] 2 CLC 1004; [2010] I.L.Pr. 10; Times, February 8, 2010; Gloster J [2009] EWHC 196 (Comm); [2009] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 666; [2009] 1 CLC 393: the leading case on recognition and enforcement in England and Wales of a foreign judgment obtained from a court in another EU Member State in breach of a London arbitration clause under the Judgments Regulation (EU Regulation 44/2001). Tom addressed the Court of Appeal on the scope of the Judgments Regulation and as to when a judgment would qualify for recognition and enforcement thereunder (following Vasanti Selvaratnam QC). The Court of Appeal interpreted the recent ECJ decision The Front Comor as not only precluding the English Courts from granting an anti-suit injunction to prevent litigation in breach of an arbitration agreement, but also as having the wider consequence that a decision of the foreign court on the question of whether there was an arbitration agreement between the parties would be binding on both the London tribunal and the English Court, if obtained before a judgment of the English Court to the contrary. In such circumstances, the London tribunal would be bound to conclude that it had no jurisdiction, and no action to recover damages for breach of the arbitration agreement could be brought.
The Hijaz (Com Ct) 2010; The Ibn Hayyan (Com Ct) 2010: instructed as junior Counsel on applications for anti-suit injunctions to restrain Gulf State proceedings. Issues raised included the validity of the exercise of an option in favour of English jurisdiction post-dispute (with Vasanti Selvaratnam QC).

Expert Evidence for Foreign Courts

Tom has provided expert evidence on English law for foreign courts. For example, Tom has been instructed to provide opinions for use in four separate claims before the South Korean courts, and has travelled to Texas to act as an expert witness in proceedings before the Dallas State Court.