Unfair Dismissal 2 - Bargate Murray Solicitors

Posted by | November 01, 2011 | Uncategorized | No Comments

For the latest retrenchment in the law of unfair dismissal, look no further than the learned discourse featuring Philip Henson, Head of Employment, at http://bit.ly/uqIweK


About Quentin

In 2004, Quentin fulfilled a lifetime ambition when he set up his own law firm, Quentin Bargate & Co. In 2006, he was joined by his old friend and former colleague, Andrew Murray, and the firm changed its name to Bargate Murray. The firm has since enjoyed rapid expansion.Quentin is an advocate for alternative dispute resolution (ADR), but he also deals with cases in court when required. He occasionally sits as an arbitrator.Quentin handles high value superyacht transactions and advice to yacht managers, owners, builders and others in the industry. He is also responsible for managing the firm's highly regarded litigation and dispute resolution practice.Some recent cases handled by Quentin and his team:• Consolidated Contractors (Oil and Gas) Company SAL (acting by Mr. Lee Manning as receiver) v Canadian Nexen Petroleum Yemen & Others [2011] EWHC 837 (QB). . Cross border receivership litigation involving Yemeni, Lebanese and English law (amongst others), concerning the unprecedented attempt by an English court-appointed receiver to gain control of foreign assets located in the Middle East. The case eventually settled. • Gamit Ltd v Saudi Arabian Airlines Corp & Anor [2011] EWHC 989. Successfully defending the maintenance division of a jet engine manufacturer in a dispute over title to replacement jet engine parts. • Madoff Securities International Ltd (In liquidation) v Raven & Ors [2013] EWHC 3147. Defending a director allegedly involved in a global Ponzi scheme in litigation brought by the liquidator of an English Company. • Street v Larkins [2013] EWHC 1408 (Ch). Representing the Defendants in their successful defence of an interim application for a freezing injunction and the Defendants successful application for wasted costs. The Defendants were awarded their wasted costs on the basis of the Claimants’ unreasonable refusal to consent to an adjournment of the trial date. Claimants’ application for freezing injunction was dismissed on the grounds of failing to establish a “good arguable” case during the trial window. • Successfully litigating and eventually settling on favourable terms a highly complex and fractious corporate dispute between shareholders, where the majority shareholders sought to exclude our clients from their share of the profits in a real estate investment vehicle by devising elaborate commercial structures across a number of European jurisdictions. The settlement included payment to our clients of a substantial cash sfunds by our clients and agreement on the part of the Defendants to pay indemnity costs. • Successfully settling a professional negligence action brought by a high net worth individual with considerable real estate investments which were exposed by the repeated failures of a renowned top 20 law firm.His other interests include photography (Elsevier has published a technical book. "Microstock Photography" written by Quentin under his "Douglas Freer" pen name on stock photography), music and his family.

We're no-nonsense lawyers. Get in touch to find out what we can do for you Contact Us