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.
Having taught and studied JR and EU law, Michael is comfortable dealing with all manner of regulatory cases, and he also has a developed practise 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 on banking reform, chess and wine.
Court of Appeal
IG Index Limited v Ehrentreu  EWCA Civ 326;
Weymont v Place  EWCA Civ 289;
Khan v Anwar and anr (2017) 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 (2017) 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 (2016) – 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 (2016) – 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.
Insolvent divorces, N.L.J. 2008, 158(7347), 1667-1668
Sole searching, N.L.J. 2008, 158(7329), 995
Banking reform and the importance of ownership, PhD thesis, University of Manchester (2017)