Luka Krsljanin

Luka acted for the successful Claimant in this case concerning a claim based on a transaction defrauding a creditor under s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986.

Acting for the Claimant sellers pursuing claims arising out of the termination of SPAs in respect of Brazilian mining assets, under which over US$1 billion was payable. A 5-week trial is listed for June 2024.

Luka acts in an international commercial arbitration valued at several billion dollars, involving numerous applicable laws.

Luka represented the Appellant (led by James Segan KC) in this appeal concerning contractual construction and, in particular, (1) the characteristics which are to be attributed to the 'reasonable reader' construct employed by the Court when construing a contract; and (2) the circumstances in which business common sense is permissible as an aid to construction, and the proper approach to be taken when seeking to apply business common sense.

Luka acted for a successful Respondent in this significant appeal to the Court of Appeal. This important judgment clarifies the proper approach to be taken by Courts in determining whether or not a Settlement Agreement was intended to release parties from claims in fraud, conspiracy and similar wrongdoing.

Luka acted for the successful defendant/applicant (led by Andreas Gledhill QC) in this summary judgment application which concerns the scope of s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986, and in particular the subjective "purpose" that must be demonstrated on the part of a transferor in order for a claimant to claim relief. 

Luka acted for the successful defendant, the international law firm which held c.$325 million in an escrow account, alleged to be connected with the major 1MDB corruption scandal, which had been frozen by an Arrest Warrant issued by the Californian District Court on application by the DOJ. The judgment gives valuable guidance on the circumstances in which the Court will make an order which might be contrary to foreign law or foreign sanctions. An appeal is being pursued.

Luka acts for the Claimant, the renowned estate agency, in this claim for injunctions to restrain breaches of restrictive covenants, including non-solicitation and non-compete clauses, in respect of the Defendants' attempts to establish a rival business. Luka secured an imaging order in respect of data in the Defendants' control (before Knowles J), adding to the recent case law considering the appropriate safeguards in respect of imaging orders.

Luka acts for a number of Respondents to a s.994 Unfair Prejudice Petition, in which the Petitioners allege that other shareholders have attempted unlawfully to secure the Petitioners’ shareholding at nominal value including by instituting disciplinary proceedings against the Petitioners to oust them from the company. The Petitioners are accused of fraud, bribery and corruption; these being the basis of the ousting.

The case involves complex questions of disclosure – including the question of a shareholder’s entitlement to inspect legal advice given in respect of ongoing disciplinary proceedings against that shareholder. The judgment noted above provides valuable guidance on the approach to interim injunctions in the context of an Unfair Prejudice Petition.

Luka acted for the successful defendant in this claim, by which a major Venezuelan oil and gas company sought to obtain an injunction preventing the transfer of c.$350 million from an escrow account, pending the outcome of a challenge to an arbitration in Paris. An appeal is being pursued.

Luka acted for Sheffield United Ltd in this major dispute concerning the ownership of the Club as between two 50% co-owners: Mr Kevin McCabe and Saudi Prince Abdullah. The case involved allegations of deceit, conspiracy and bribery and corruption. The case led to a landmark judgment on the Disclosure Pilot in the Business & Property Courts from the Chancellor, Sir Geoffrey Vos ([2019] EWHC 914 (Ch)). The substantive trial of the case, which lasted for 6 weeks, also led to a significant judgment from Fancourt J on matters including: implied terms, obligations of good faith, unfair prejudice, and conspiracy ([2019] EWHC 2322 (Ch)).

Luka acted on behalf of the successful Appellant in this landmark Court of Appeal case on the limits of litigation privilege. The appeal came in the context of a claim brought by the owners of West Ham Football Club against the leasehold owner of the London Stadium (the former Olympic Stadium). West Ham alleged that E20, the Stadium owners, were unlawfully preventing West Ham from accessing certain seats in the Stadium, and therefore depriving West Ham of substantial ticketing revenue. The claim involved allegations that E20 has failed to act in good faith. The case involved numerous significant judgments including that of the Court of Appeal noted above. In particular, a judgment of Snowden J on the redaction of commercially sensitive documents ([2018] EWHC 2578 (Ch)) and a judgment on applications for third party disclosure ([2018] EWHC 2971 (Ch)).

Luka acted (unled) for the successful Applicant, both at a without notice hearing and return date, which secured worldwide freezing orders against two judgment debtor Respondents. The return date judgment includes a valuable analysis of what is required to establish a real risk of dissipation; how the test may be satisfied in the absence of evidence of specific dissipatory acts; and the role of adverse inferences in relation to the issue of risk of dissipation.

Luka acted for the Plaintiff (having been called to the Bar of the Cayman Islands), led by Lord Falconer, in this major civil fraud trial which ran from November 2023 to January 2024. Luka conducted cross-examination of witnesses and made closing submissions

This claim arises out of the notorious and widely-publicised collapse of the Abraaj Group, believed to be the largest ever collapse of a private equity investment platform (valued at over $13.6 billion) as a result of years' worth of alleged financial mismanagement and fraud, whilst the Group purported to act as a world leader in impact investing. The Plaintiff brings claims in deceit against certain Abraaj Group entities in respect of loans of over US$300 million procured by fraud in a belated attempt to rescue the business.

Luka acted for the successful Claimant in this case concerning a claim based on a transaction defrauding a creditor under s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986.

Luka acted as sole counsel for the Claimant in an investor fraud claim concerning the fraudulent sale of purported Bonds to foreign national investors. Luka acted unled for the claimant at ex parte and on-notice hearings securing freezing orders and asset disclosure orders; and also secured orders for damages in favour of the Claimant.

Luka acted for the Claimant in this case concerning claims in deceit and for breaches of directors' duties, arising out of an investment fraud that resulted in the collapse of a Cayman Islands investment fund.

Luka acted for a successful Respondent in this significant appeal to the Court of Appeal. This important judgment clarifies the proper approach to be taken by Courts in determining whether or not a Settlement Agreement was intended to release parties from claims in fraud, conspiracy and similar wrongdoing.

Luka acts (led by Andrew Hunter KC) in this civil fraud dispute in which a Worldwide Freezing Order of US$1 billion has been imposed.

Luka acts for the Claimant, a leading IT company, in this deceit claim concerning a long-running fraud perpetrated by a former employee.

At a without notice hearing, Luka successfully secured freezing injunctions and delivery-up orders (before Mr Justice Bourne). Subsequently, at two on notice hearings, Luka secured: (i) the continuation of all freezing orders to trial, (ii) robust disclosure orders requiring detailed asset disclosure, and (iii) rare orders requiring respondents to attend court to be cross-examined (before Deputy High Court Judges Webb and Williamson).

Luka acted (as sole counsel) in a claim in deceit arising out of the collapse of a family-run business, involving parallel family proceedings. Luka acted in the application for freezing orders in connection with different family members alleged to have been involved in the frauds.

Luka acts for the Claimant, the renowned estate agency, in this claim for injunctions to restrain breaches of restrictive covenants, including non-solicitation and non-compete clauses, in respect of the Defendants' attempts to establish a rival business. Luka secured an imaging order in respect of data in the Defendants' control (before Knowles J), adding to the recent case law considering the appropriate safeguards in respect of imaging orders.

Luka acts for a number of Respondents to a s.994 Unfair Prejudice Petition, in which the Petitioners allege that other shareholders have attempted unlawfully to secure the Petitioners’ shareholding at nominal value including by instituting disciplinary proceedings against the Petitioners to oust them from the company. The Petitioners are accused of fraud, bribery and corruption; these being the basis of the ousting.

The case involves complex questions of disclosure – including the question of a shareholder’s entitlement to inspect legal advice given in respect of ongoing disciplinary proceedings against that shareholder. The judgment noted above provides valuable guidance on the approach to interim injunctions in the context of an Unfair Prejudice Petition.

Luka acted for Sheffield United Ltd in this major dispute concerning the ownership of the Club as between two 50% co-owners: Mr Kevin McCabe and Saudi Prince Abdullah. The case involved allegations of deceit, conspiracy and bribery and corruption. The case led to a landmark judgment on the Disclosure Pilot in the Business & Property Courts from the Chancellor, Sir Geoffrey Vos ([2019] EWHC 914 (Ch)). The substantive trial of the case, which lasted for 6 weeks, also led to a significant judgment from Fancourt J on matters including: implied terms, obligations of good faith, unfair prejudice, and conspiracy ([2019] EWHC 2322 (Ch)).

Luka acts as Sole Counsel for a leading F1 team in a confidential arbitration concerning a high value sponsorship contract.

Luka acted for a well-known international boxer in a private arbitration concerning contractual promotion rights.

Acting in disputes concerning alleged breaches of the Financial Fair Play / Profit & Sustainability Rules in the Premier League.

Luka acted for FIFA in a Rule K arbitration concerning football agents’ case that The FA should not implement imminent new FIFA rules on the regulation of football intermediaries, on the basis that the regulations were said to be unlawful.    

Luka acted for a leading football club in a claim concerning alleged breaches of an agency contract, proceeding under FA Rule K

Luka acted for Fulham FC, the successful appellant, in this leading case on civil injury claims in the sports context. Luka succeeded in persuading the appeal court to overturn a judgment that had found Fulham liable for a reckless tackle, and the judgment confirmed that the threshold for civil liability in the sporting context is set at a very high level. Fulham succeeded on all four of its grounds of appeal.

After the Defendant's successful appeal, the claim was discontinued.

Luka acts for Brighton, the well-known Premier League Football Club, which was charged by the FA with alleged breaches of the FA Regulations on Working with Intermediaries; a significant case dealing with the changing landscape for Intermediaries dealings (led by Nick de Marco QC).

Luka acted for a well-known football club in an arbitration claim brought by a former player - a high-profile, international football player - for alleged unpaid wages and contingency fees following termination of the employment contract.

Luka acted for the leading Premier League Football Club in a major arbitration under Section X of the Premier League Rules, concerning the proposed sale of the Club to a Consortium involving the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia. Led by Shaheed Fatima QC and Nick de Marco QC.

Luka acted for the French Ligue One Football Club Stade Rennais, owned and controlled by the well-known Pinault family, the owners of such world-famous companies as Gucci, Yves Saint Laurent and Balenciaga. Stade Rennais are alleged to have induced a breach of contract by ‘poaching’ a high-profile agent/manager from Sports Invest, an English-based football agency, to serve as their Director of Football. Complex disclosure issues are concerned, in particular with regard to the limits of privilege under French Law. 

Luka acted for Sheffield United Ltd in this major dispute concerning the ownership of the Club as between two 50% co-owners: Mr Kevin McCabe and Saudi Prince Abdullah. The case involved allegations of deceit, conspiracy and bribery and corruption. The case led to a landmark judgment on the Disclosure Pilot in the Business & Property Courts from the Chancellor, Sir Geoffrey Vos ([2019] EWHC 914 (Ch)). The substantive trial of the case, which lasted for 6 weeks, also led to a significant judgment from Fancourt J on matters including: implied terms, obligations of good faith, unfair prejudice, and conspiracy ([2019] EWHC 2322 (Ch)).

Luka acted on behalf of the successful Appellant in this landmark Court of Appeal case on the limits of litigation privilege. The appeal came in the context of a claim brought by the owners of West Ham Football Club against the leasehold owner of the London Stadium (the former Olympic Stadium). West Ham alleged that E20, the Stadium owners, were unlawfully preventing West Ham from accessing certain seats in the Stadium, and therefore depriving West Ham of substantial ticketing revenue. The claim involved allegations that E20 has failed to act in good faith. The case involved numerous significant judgments including that of the Court of Appeal noted above. In particular, a judgment of Snowden J on the redaction of commercially sensitive documents ([2018] EWHC 2578 (Ch)) and a judgment on applications for third party disclosure ([2018] EWHC 2971 (Ch)).

Luka acted on behalf of the owners and operators of West Ham United, in their claim against the leasehold owner of the London Stadium (the former Olympic Stadium). West Ham alleged that E20, the Stadium owners, were unlawfully preventing West Ham from accessing certain seats in the Stadium, and therefore depriving West Ham of substantial ticketing revenue. The claim involved allegations that E20 has failed to act in good faith, and so invokes complex consideration of good faith issues. Prior to its settlement at trial, the case involved numerous complex case management issues, and interim applications which led to valuable High Court Judgments on the redaction of commercially sensitive documents ([2018] EWHC 2578 (Ch)) and applications for third party disclosure ([2018] EWHC 2971 (Ch)).

Luka acted for the successful Claimant in this case concerning a claim based on a transaction defrauding a creditor under s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986.

Luka acted for the Plaintiff (having been called to the Bar of the Cayman Islands), led by Lord Falconer, in this major civil fraud trial which ran from November 2023 to January 2024. Luka conducted cross-examination of witnesses and made closing submissions

This claim arises out of the notorious and widely-publicised collapse of the Abraaj Group, believed to be the largest ever collapse of a private equity investment platform (valued at over $13.6 billion) as a result of years' worth of alleged financial mismanagement and fraud, whilst the Group purported to act as a world leader in impact investing. The Plaintiff brings claims in deceit against certain Abraaj Group entities in respect of loans of over US$300 million procured by fraud in a belated attempt to rescue the business.

Luka acted for the successful defendant/applicant (led by Andreas Gledhill QC) in this summary judgment application which concerns the scope of s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986, and in particular the subjective "purpose" that must be demonstrated on the part of a transferor in order for a claimant to claim relief. 

Luka represented the Claimant, a Liquidator of an insolvent Cayman Islands investment fund, in a Chancery Division trial before Richards J (May 2023) concerning claims of fraud and breaches of duty made against the founders and managers of the investment fund. Judgment is awaited.