Giles Wheeler#4842

Giles Wheeler, KC

Giles Wheeler is a barrister at Fountain Court Chambers with a broad commercial practice. Giles has handled a wide range of commercial litigation, including many cases with an international dimension giving rise both to disputes over jurisdiction and to the application of foreign law. Giles has particular experience of banking disputes (including disputes concerning derivatives of various kinds) and professional negligence (including litigation arising from the collapse of the Guernsey-based Arch Cru investment funds, the collapse of Independent Insurance and the collapse of Barings Bank). Recent cases in which Giles has appeared include: Barclays Bank plc v UniCredit Bank [2014] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 59 (CA) and [2013] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 1, SPL v Arch Financial Products LLP and Farrell (judgment pending) and Roadchef Employee Benefit Trustees Limited v Ingram Hill [2014] EWHC 109 (Ch).
Contributed to

4

A comparison between enforcement procedures under Brussels I and Brussels I (recast) [Archived]
A comparison between enforcement procedures under Brussels I and Brussels I (recast) [Archived]
Practice notes

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note considers the most significant changes to the provisions in Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) relating to the recognition and enforcement of judgments obtained in other EU Member States by comparison with the equivalent provisions of Regulation (EC) 44/2001, Brussels I.

E&W Brussels I (recast)—enforcement of judgments
E&W Brussels I (recast)—enforcement of judgments
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers the provisions in Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) dealing with the enforcement of foreign judgments between EU Member States. It considers what judgments can be enforced, as well as what happens when conflicting judgments are encountered. The general rules in enforcement are set out together with the documents required including any translations. Also considered is the application process for the enforcement of a judgment of the courts of an EU Member State, any appeal as well as the grounds on which enforcement of a judgment may be refused.

E&W Brussels I (recast)—recognition of judgments
E&W Brussels I (recast)—recognition of judgments
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers the provisions in Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) dealing with the recognition of judgments. It sets out the general provisions and then looks in some detail at the grounds on which recognition might be refused followed by how to make an application requesting that the court refuses to recognise the judgment.

E&W Brussels I—recognition of judgments
E&W Brussels I—recognition of judgments
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers the provisions in Articles 32–37 of Regulation (EC) 44/2001, Brussels I dealing with recognition of judgments. It sets out the general provisions and then looks at whether an application for recognition is required. Applications for recognition are addressed, both when seeking recognition in England and Wales, as well as in another EU Member State. The Practice Note also considers in some detail the grounds on which recognition might be refused, namely judgment in default of an appearance by the defendant, irreconcilable judgments/same EU Member State, irreconcilable judgments/different EU Member State or the judgment was in breach of the rules in the regulation dealing with consumer, employment or insurance matters.

Practice Area

Panel

  • Contributing Author

Qualified Year

  • 1998

Education

  • LL.M(Cantab) First Class; M.A. (Cantab) First Class

If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.