Charles practises as both an English Barrister and Jersey Advocate. His practice covers a broad range of commercial and chancery work with a focus on contentious trusts, civil fraud, insolvency and contractual disputes.
He has particular expertise in cross border disputes involving offshore structures and has acted in cases involving Jersey, Guernsey, Cyprus, Isle of Man, Switzerland, BVI, Cayman, Bahamas, Turks & Caicos, Singapore, Hong Kong, Dubai, Brazil, China, India, Japan and the United States.
Charles is among a small number of London based practitioners who are dual qualified in England and Jersey and appear in the courts of both jurisdictions. Before joining chambers he practised with a leading offshore firm and has extensive experience appearing before the Jersey courts, both as sole counsel and led by senior members of the Jersey Bar. In May 2023 he was appointed to the Attorney General’s panel of Independent Monitors for the purpose of The Criminal Justice (Deferred Prosecution Agreements) Law 2023.
The Legal 500 has ranked Charles as a Next Generation Lawyer in each of the last six editions. He has published extensively on offshore dispute resolution, spoken on a wide range of subjects at international legal conferences and taught English contract law on the LLB course at the Jersey Institute of Law.
Charles has been instructed in a broad range of commercial and civil fraud proceedings.
HSRE CI Holdco Limited v Crosslane Property Group UK Limited and Ors
Acted for the successful respondent to an application for an injunction in the form of an order for rectification under Article 47(1) of the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 (“Art 47”). It was the first time the issue had been considered in Jersey. The Court refused the application on the basis that, in order for Art 47 relief to be available, HSRE had to establish legal title to the shares in question – and that was a question to be determined at trial.
Sheyko v Consolidated Minerals Limited
Acted for the claimant in a c$15m breach of contract claim against his former employer – a Jersey company controlled by its Chinese parent and UBO. These proceedings included a $10m freezing order and successful application to have the defendant struck out for discovery failings. That decision was upheld on appeal and in November 2022 leave to bring a petition of doléance was refused by the Privy Council.
Emirates NBD Bank P.J.S.C v Almakhawi and Ors
Acted for the claimant bank to obtain a series of freezing and disclosure orders and draft proceedings to enforce a judgment of the Dubai Court of Cassation and unwind a c$21m disposition into a Jersey trust as a fraud on creditors (Pauline Action).
Satfinance Investments Limited v Valla Limited
Acted for the victim of a substantial art fraud to obtain Norwich Pharmacal disclosure from a Jersey corporate service provider. In a subsequent application the clamant sought to use the disclosed information for a collateral purpose. In the absence of an equivalent to CPR 31.22, the Royal Court held that the principles set out in the English case law applied in Jersey and granted the application pursuant to its inherent jurisdiction.
Fletcher-Wilson v Higuchi and Others
Acted for the claimant in multi jurisdictional proceedings across Jersey, Japan, Isle of Man, Cayman, and the Turks and Caicos Islands to recover the proceeds of a fraud perpetrated in Japan. Proceedings included injunctive relief, substantive claims and the enforcement of foreign judgments.
Dalemont Ltd v Senatorov and Others
Acted for the claimant to freeze the assets of a Jersey foundation and enforce Russian judgments for c$44m on the grounds that transfers into the foundation were intended to defraud creditors.
Charles has extensive experience in cases involving trusts and insolvency, particularly applications under Art 51 of the Trusts (Jersey) Law 1984, public law trusts proceedings and the recognition of foreign insolvency office holders.
In the Matter of the I Trust, the J Trust, the K Trust and the L Trust
Acted for the beneficiaries of four substantial family trusts to obtain disclosure from the trustee and successfully argued that the trustee’s indemnity did not apply in respect of its costs.
Prospective Applicant v Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police
Acted for the applicant in judicial review proceedings pertaining to the decision of the States of Jersey Police to withdraw consent to transact (under the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999) in respect of two Jersey trusts.
Robert Tantular v Her Majesty’s Attorney General
Acted for the Viscount of Jersey (Executive Officer of the Royal Court) in proceedings to restrain trust assets in support of an application by the Attorney General to enforce confiscation orders made in Indonesia. In June 2023 the Privy Council handed down an important judgment in respect of the extra territoriality of the saisie judiciaire regime in Jersey and the costs liability of foreign states in proceedings commenced by the Attorney General.
Hellard and Richardson v Young and Young
Acted for the liquidators of three BVI companies used by the former Mayor of São Paulo to perpetrate a substantial fraud against the Federal Republic of Brazil and the Municipality of São Paulo. Appeared in the recognition proceedings and the first reported case in Jersey of Norwich Pharmacal relief being granted against a law firm.
Margaret Smith (as the Chapter 7 trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of Joseph M DeMauro) v Nedbank Private Wealth Limited, Jersey Branch
Appointed by the United States Bankruptcy Court (Southern District of Florida) as Special Counsel to the Trustee in Bankruptcy. Appeared for the trustee in a successful application for recognition in Jersey and disclosure against Nedbank.
Charles is able to accept instructions directly from members of the public, companies and other entities through the public access scheme (also known as direct access). He is happy to accept instructions on a direct basis in appropriate cases. If you wish to instruct Charles on a direct basis, please speak to the clerks.
For more information on public access, please see the Bar Council website.
“young, aggressive, with a good understanding of the law and with a level of gravitas that far exceeds his years of practice”
“very responsive, well-organised and sound, with an extensive knowledge of litigation matters”