Michael is a Manchester-based business and property law barrister, regularly instructed to deal with difficult and high-value cases, often involving allegations of fraud, or complex legal issues, and typically against significantly more senior opponents.
As well as taking on factually-difficult cases, which often depend upon fraud being proven, he is also at ease dealing with a wide range of black-letter areas of law, and not least property, landlord and tenancy, insolvency, company, contract and consumer credit, but also cases involving aspects of EU law, public law and judicial review and banking and finance.
Before being called to the Bar, Michael taught judicial review and public law to undergraduates and studied EU law to masters level. More recently, he has been awarded a PhD in banking reform, and corporate governance. Given his grounding in public, EU and commercial law, Michael is at ease dealing with all manner of regulatory and commercial cases, often with international dimensions. He also has a developed practice in probate and inheritance matters, partnership, professional negligence, and all aspects relating to trusts.
Michael speaks French, and is well travelled. As well as travel and foreign languages, his hobbies include writing, chess and wine.
Court of Appeal
Ehrentreu v IG Index Ltd  EWCA (Civ) 79
IG Index Limited v Ehrentreu  EWCA Civ 326;
Weymont v Place  EWCA Civ 289;
Cantt Pak Ltd v Pak Southern China Properties Investment Ltd  EWHC 2564 (Ch) – The Vice-Chancellor, Mister Justice Barling – 7 day trial dealing with legal and factual arguments around whether a seller who refused to give vacant possession because they believed the buyer was unable to raise finance was ready able and willing to complete and thus entitled to rescind their sale agreement
Khan v Anwar and anr  Mister Justice King – resisted C’s appeal of a decision of the County Court in which HHJ Platts granted permission to re-litigate issues which had been raised and determined in previous proceedings on the basis that the earlier judgment might have been obtained by collusion;
Davies v GE Money  Manchester High Court – resisted an abuse of process strike out application in which C alleged D was wasting disproportionate resources by re-litigating issues raised previously in other proceedings struck out;
Malik v Anwar  – 5 day multi track trial – established that C had sold D’s UK property notwithstanding that the debt secured by C’s charge had already been repaid albeit via a payment made in Pakistan by a third party to a fourth party pursuant to C’s oral agreement to accept payment in such manner.
Atkinson v Boyle  – 3 day multi-track trial – established that various written agreements were shams and that the true orally agreed arrangement was that C notionally bought D’s property but held it on trust for her to enable him to borrow money which he agreed C could use to repay her debts.