Arbitration lawyers

Rodrigo Nelson

Partner

Ecija Otero

Rodrigo Rabines

Senior Associate

Cuatrecasas

Rodrigo Riquelme Yañez

Rodrigo Riquelme is a partner in the Public Law practice of Garrigues' Chile office. With 20 years of experience, he has a recognized practice in construction and infrastructure matters, with a special focus on disputes, covering both public and private law. Specialist in arbitration and litigation related to concessions, construction and infrastructure, participating in proceedings before the CAM Santiago, ICC, as well as in special instances such as the Concessions Technical Panel, the Constitutional Court and the Arbitration Commissions of the Public Works Concessions Law, among others.

Garrigues Chile

Rodrigo Salomão

Partner

Salomão Advogados

Rodrigo Tellechea

Partner

Souto Correa Advogados

Roey Sasson

Partner, Litigation

Arnon, Tadmor-Levy

Roger Bamber

Partner and joint head of the national family law team, which is one the largest in the country. Roger is recognised as one of the leading family lawyers in the country. He is a leading practitioner in dispute resolution, having been a mediator since 1990, and having helped to set up the Collaborative Law movement. He also qualified as a family arbitrator in 2012. He specialises in complex financial cases, and has recently been involved in the mediation of an international family dispute, and one of the largest international trust cases brought before the High Court. He has lectured extensively in Europe and the UK, and has written numerous books and articles. He has promoted innovation within family law, through his own YouTube channel, his website www.divorce.co.uk and the Divorce UK app.

Mills & Reeve LLP

Roger E. Barton

Managing Partner

Barton LLP

Roger Phang

Roger is an experienced junior with a broad commercial practice. He practices across all areas of commercial law, including banking and finance, corporate insolvency, securities, civil fraud, bankruptcy and general commercial litigation. His expertise also extends to land, trusts and contentious probate matters. Roger is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, and maintains a busy arbitration practice. He is frequently instructed both as a junior in high-stakes litigation and arbitrations, and as sole counsel in the High Court and the District Court. Before joining the Bar, Roger qualified as a Solicitor in 2013 following his training at an international law firm. He has been recognized as a rising star in Commercial Disputes in the Legal 500 Asia-Pacific guide for the Hong Kong Bar 2021. RECENT HIGHLIGHTS Delco Participation BV v HWH Holdings Limited: Acting for the defendant in the multi-million-dollar claims arising out of the foreign party’s exit from a Sino-foreign joint venture successfully listed in 2010 (with William Wong S.C. and Norman Nip S.C.). The dispute has generated numerous interlocutory decisions in the CFI and CA since 2016. The case is now pending judgment after a 15-day trial held in July 2021. Chow Tai Fook Nominee Limited v Diamond City Limited and Others[2021] HKCFI 3019: Acting for the lender in the summary judgment and striking-out applications for the repayment of loans of over US$68 million (with Ambrose Ho S.C.). Li Man Wai v Ngan Suet Fong Bonnie [2021] HKCFI 931: Acting for the successful defendant in resisting a claim to set aside the transfer of a property registered in the joint names of the defendant and her husband, who was subsequently adjudged bankrupt, on the basis that it was held on a common intention constructive trust for the defendant solely (with Michael Yin). Securities and Futures Commission v Chiu Duncan and Another [2021] HKCFI 302: Acting for the Commission in the petition for disqualification orders under s.214 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance arising out of the respondents’ mishandling of corporate funds and misleading disclosures to the corporation’s shareholders (with Horace Wong S.C.). OTHER NOTABLE CASES Banking & Finance DBS Bank (Hong Kong) Ltd v Sit Pan Jit[2016] 5 HKC 104: Acting for the bank in resisting an appeal arising out of a financial mis-selling claim (with Horace Wong S.C. and Victor Dawes S.C.). One of the issues was whether the investor was precluded by contractual estoppel from alleging misrepresentation. The investor’s application for leave to appeal to the CFA was dismissed (FAMV 45/2016, 17 February 2017). Advising an investor on a financial mis-selling claim worth US$16 million arising out of an offer of margin financing by a sales representative of a major bank in Hong Kong. Corporate Insolvency GS Harvest Limited v Forever Winner International Development Limited[2021] HKCFI 3029: Acting for the petitioner in a winding-up petition against a guarantor. The case concerned the formal validity of an assignment of the underlying debt at the time of the presentation of the petition. Re Capella Capital Limited[2020] 2 HKLRD 274: Acting for the corporate respondents in an application for striking-out of winding-up petitions for want of jurisdiction (with Norman Nip (now Norman Nip S.C.)). Friendship Investments Ltd v To Chun Fan and Others[2020] HKCFI 356: Acting for the subsidiary to strike out the petition naming it as a respondent on the ground that no relief is sought against it. The Court refused to strike out the petition against the subsidiary on the basis that discovery by the subsidiary may be necessary. Friendship Investments Ltd v To Chun Fan and Others[2019] HKCFI 1669: Acting for the subsidiary of a company sought to be wound up in opposing the petitioner’s application for an injunction requiring the respondents to notify the petitioner of any intention to deal with the properties owned by the subsidiary. Securities Securities and Futures Commission v Zheng Dunmu and OrsHCMP 1462/2019: Acting for the Commission in a petition for disqualification and other orders under s.214 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance (with Ambrose Ho S.C.). Market Misconduct Tribunal Inquiry into dealings in the securities of Fujikon Industrial Holdings Limited: Acting for the Commission in the MMT proceedings arising out of a breach of a disclosure requirement under ss.307A, 307B and 307G of the Securities and Futures Ordinance (with Horace Wong S.C.). Securities and Futures Commission v Cheong Kai Tjieh Augustine and Anor[2018] HKCFI 437: Acting for the Commission in an application for orders under s.213 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance (with Victor Dawes S.C.). Market Misconduct Tribunal Inquiry into dealings in the securities of Titan Petrochemicals Group Limited: Acting for the Commission in the MMT proceedings arising out of insider dealing contrary to s.270 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance (with Victor Dawes S.C.). Civil Fraud NongHyup Bank (as trustee of PacificBridge Gold Income Fund I) v Universe Income Builder Fund VI LLC: Acting for the plaintiff in its proprietary, misrepresentation, conspiracy and dishonest assistance claims to recover over US$32 million of investments into a suspected Ponzi scheme. For a recent decision arising from one of the defendant’s interpleader application, see [2021] HKCFI 3519. Aleksandr Narimanovich Kushaev v Greenly Holdings Limited and Ors[2019] HKCFI 2745: Acting for the defendants in their applications to discharge an ex parte Mareva injunction on the grounds of material non-disclosure. Gerald Metals SA v Sanson Metal (International) Limited and Ors[2019] HKCFI 1103: Acting for the plaintiff in obtaining urgent ex parte Mareva injunctions in aid of arbitrations to be commenced in London and Hong Kong. Bankruptcy Re Ding Yi, a bankrupt[2019] HKCA 1195: Acting for the creditor in resisting an application for leave to appeal out of time. The CA considered whether it is reasonably arguable that the legal title to post-bankruptcy income is not vested in the trustees-in-bankruptcy and a claim for an anti-suit injunction to prevent the applicant from being personally restrained from leaving Mainland China is a chose in action. Re Qin Jun, a bankrupt[2019] HKCFI 2515: Acting for the trustees-in-bankruptcy in resisting an application to challenge the Hong Kong court’s jurisdiction. One of the main issues was whether the Hong Kong court has subject matter jurisdiction to set aside transfers of properties situated in the United States under s.49 of the Bankruptcy Ordinance. Ding Yi v Shum Tung[2019] 2 HKLRD 1177, [2019] HKCFI 1232: Acting for the creditor in resisting an application for an anti-suit injunction by the bankrupt to restrain the creditor from enforcing an arbitral award in Mainland China. The case considered whether a bankrupt has standing to make the application. Commercial Litigation High Fashion New Media Corporation Limited v Leong Ma Li: Acting for the defendant in committal proceedings against her for breach of an injunction restricting her dealing with joint venture assets. For a recent decision concerning the defendant’s successful application under s.48 of the Evidence Ordinance to compel the plaintiff to call a person as a witness at trial, see [2021] HKCFI 3466. Delco Participation BV v HWH Holdings Limited and Ors[2020] 5 HKLRD 712: Acting for the defendants in an appeal which raised a construction point as to whether an amendment to plead an additional debt as part of an existing defence of set-off introduces a “claim” within the meaning of s.35 of the Limitation Ordinance (with William Wong S.C. and Norman Nip (now Norman Nip S.C.)). Delco Participation BV v Chiho Environmental Group Limited and Anor [2020] HKCFI 1643: Acting for one of the defendants in resisting an application for summary judgment and interim payment based on an alleged admission by affidavit (with William Wong S.C. and Norman Nip (now Norman Nip S.C.)). One of the issues which arose was whether the fraud exception was engaged where the fraud alleged was not perpetrated against the plaintiff. Delco Participation BV v HWH Holdings Limited [2020] HKCFI 608: Acting for the defendant in an application for leave to appeal (with William Wong S.C.). One of the issues considered was whether leave was required under O.59, r.21(1)(a) where the very point on appeal was whether the proposed pleading introduces a new “claim”. WEA International Inc v Soliton (HK) Limited[2019] HKCFI 751: Acting for the successful plaintiff in an application for summary judgment for payment of a “non-refundable prepayment” after termination of contract. General Appliance (Hong Kong) Limited v Friendship Investments Limited and Ors[2019] HKCFI 631: Acting for the successful plaintiff in an application for summary judgment and an interlocutory mandatory injunction requiring the defendants to deliver up to the plaintiff the title deeds of the plaintiff’s properties (with Anthony Chan). G H Property Holdings Ltd v Able Profit Investment Ltd[2018] HKCFI 2480: Acting for the defendant in resisting an O.14A application for summary disposal on a point of law involving the principles of foreign illegality (with Jin Pao S.C.). Kwai Tak Ming v K.S. Capital One Ltd and Ors[2017] HKLRD 19: Acting for the appellant in an appeal against judgment setting aside a sale and purchase agreement on the grounds of misrepresentation (with Horace Wong S.C.). Arbitration Acting for the respondents in an HKIAC arbitration involving a claim for repayment of earnest money in the amount of RMB1 billion. Acting in an HKIAC arbitration under the UNCITRAL Rules arising out of the registration and use of trademarks related to a Michelin-starred restaurant group. Acting in an ad hocarbitration under HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules arising out of the breach of an agreement for sale and purchase of property in Mainland China. Acting for the claimant in an HKIAC arbitration under the UNCITRAL Rules involving a USD100 million claim for repurchase of shares under a shareholders’ agreement. Acting for the defendant in an ad hocarbitration under the UNCITRAL Rules arising out of the non-payment of financial advisory fees following a successful introduction of a buyer. Dana Shipping and Trading SA v Sino Channel Asia Ltd[2017] 1 HKC 329: Acting for the defendant in application for security for costs of an appeal against the setting aside of leave to enforce a foreign arbitral award in Hong Kong which has been set aside in the seat of arbitration. Land, Trusts, and Contentious Probate Chan Yeuk Nam and Ors v Chan Yeuk Shan[2021] HKCFI 3649: Acting for the executrix in an application to remove her and appoint independent administrators in her place on the grounds of conflict of interest and loss of confidence. Anthony Francis Li and Clarence A Li, Managers of Li To Wan Tso v Kwok Wui Knitters Limited [2021] HKCFI 2408: Acting for the purchaser of a Tso to enforce a provisional agreement said to be null and void and unenforceable as a result of an absence of consent from the District Office. For a recent case management decision on whether the action should proceed by writ, see [2021] HKCFI 2408. China City Construction & Development Co., (HK) Limited v Huinong Fund International Investments Ltd and Anor[2020] HKCFI 1925: Acting for the defendants in resisting an application for proprietary and Mareva injunctions and preservation orders based on alleged breaches of trust in respect of listed company shares worth over HK$200 million. Wong Tak Chung and Anor v Wong Ping Shing[2020] HKCFI 1914: Acting for the successful co-owners in application for an order for sale of land under the Partition Ordinance. The application was conducted in Chinese (both written and oral submissions). Ho Kwok Wing v Chan Mei Mui [2020] 3 HKLRD 548: Acting for the successful defendant in resisting an appeal (with Horace Wong S.C.). One of the issues on appeal was whether the plainly wrong test applied when seeking to overturn a finding of fact which involved both an assessment of demeanour or credibility and drawing of inferences from primary facts. For the first-instance judgment where the defendant succeeded in establishing that the property registered in the joint names of herself and one of her sons was held on a common intention constructive trust for herself solely, see [2018] HKCFI 1135. Ho Man Lap v Chan Shui Cheong and Anor[2020] HKDC 65: Acting for the successful plaintiff in an assessment of damages for trespass to land, including an award for aggravated and exemplary damages. Ku’s Investment Co., Ltd v The Incorporated Owners of Landwide Commercial Building[2018] HKLDT 73: Acting for the successful plaintiff in a trial concerning the incorporated owners’ duty to maintain the external wall and roof and related disputes over the proper construction of the DMC (with Horace Wong S.C.). DIRECTORY RANKING / QUOTES Ranked as a Rising Star in Commercial Disputes in The Legal 500 Guide to the Hong Kong Bar “A rising-star – hardworking, highly-responsive… and strategic” (2021) “Roger has very solid legal knowledge, and provides advice that is both practical and commercial. He is practicing at a level way beyond his level of seniority.” (2022)

Rede Chambers

Roger Thalmann

Roger Thalmann’s main practice areas include liability and insurance law, transportation law (with a special interest in liability matters), and commercial and corporate law. Roger's practice involves advisory work, as well as representing his clients in proceedings before state courts and arbitral tribunals.

gbf Attorneys-at-law Ltd

Roger Wakefield

Director

Werksmans Attorneys

Rogério Fernandes Ferreira

Managing partner Areas of practice: Tax & Business Private Clients Internationalization Tax Litigation Customs Special consumption taxes VAT Accounting law Social Security and Labour Corporate Budget and Public Accounting Energy and infraestructure Litigation Tax Arbitration Criminal law and Tax related infringements Others

RFF Lawyers

Rolando Suria

Senior Associate

Mayora & Mayora, S.C.

Rolf Häfliger

Partner

Barandun AG

Roman Grigel

Senior Associate, Litigation & Arbitration, Employment Law, Corporate, Real Estate

CERHA HEMPEL Šiška & Partners s. r. o.

Roman Martinez

Roman Martinez is Global Chair of the firm’s Supreme Court & Appellate Practice. He represents clients in their highest-stakes appeals in federal and state appellate courts around the country. Roman has argued 16 cases in the Supreme Court, and was recently the subject of the Bloomberg Law documentary, Supreme Advocacy: What It Takes to Argue at the Supreme Court. He previously served as Deputy Office Managing Partner of the Washington, D.C. office. Roman handles civil and criminal matters involving a wide range of constitutional, statutory, and administrative law issues. Roman’s Supreme Court experience includes important cases in the fields of the First Amendment, administrative law, arbitration, copyright, election law, patent law, criminal law, civil rights, employment, and civil and criminal procedure. In addition, he has argued dozens of appeals in the D.C., First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, and Federal Circuits, as well as in New York, California, New Jersey, Ohio, and Tennessee appellate courts, among others. Roman also regularly participates in district court litigation raising complex questions of federal law. During the Supreme Court’s 2023 term, Roman secured a significant victory for one set of petitioners in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which the Court overruled the Chevron deference doctrine. He regularly represents clients bringing constitutional and Administrative Procedure Act (APA) challenges to unlawful agency action. The Court recently appointed him as amicus curiae to brief and argue a major First Amendment campaign-finance case in defense of the judgment below. In the 2022 and 2024 Supreme Court Terms, Roman prevailed in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools and A.J.T. v. Osseo School District, in both of which the Court expanded legal protections for children with disabilities. His other recent victories in the Supreme Court include ZF Automotive v. Luxshare, in which the Supreme Court clarified that US courts lack authority to grant discovery for use in private commercial arbitrations conducted abroad, and Vega v. Tekoh, in which the Court clarified the scope of civil liability for violations of Miranda v. Arizona. In the 2020 Term, Roman was part of teams that successfully represented Facebook and the Government of Guam in unanimous Supreme Court victories under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Comprehensive Environmental, Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). In 2020, he successfully persuaded the Court to invalidate portions of TCPA under the First Amendment. Roman has prevailed in 33 of the last 38 cases he has argued to a decision in the federal appellate courts. His wins have included: Fifteen victories in securities or ERISA cases, in the First, Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits Eight victories in the Ninth Circuit, including a 6-5 Ninth Circuit en banc victory upholding a forum selection clause limiting derivative claims to Delaware court Victory overturning a US$37 million adverse jury verdict based on asbestos-related product liability claims, in the New Jersey Appellate Division Victories overturning a US$31 million adverse jury verdict based on fraud and contract claims, in Tennessee Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Victory overturning a US$23 million adverse jury verdict based on a defamation claim arising from a shareholder proxy fight, in the Fourth Circuit Victory in an antitrust class action alleging extraterritorial violations of the Sherman Act, in the Second Circuit Victory overturning trial court’s rejection of L.A. County pension fund’s plenary authority to control personnel and administration under California Constitution Federal Circuit en banc victory unanimously overturning (11-0) circuit precedent restricting veterans’ rights to challenge unlawful action by the Department of Veterans Affairs In 2016, Roman rejoined Latham after serving as an Assistant to the Solicitor General at the US Department of Justice. Earlier in his career, he served as a law clerk to Chief Justice John G. Roberts of the Supreme Court of the United States and to then-Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of the D.C. Circuit. From 2002 to 2005, Roman served as an advisor on the Iraqi political and constitutional process, in various roles at the White House, at the US Embassy and Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, and at the US Department of Defense. He received the Secretary of Defense Medal for the Global War on Terrorism and the US Department of Defense Distinguished Public Service Award for his service in Iraq. Roman serves on the US Chamber of Commerce’s Administrative Law & Government Litigation Advisory Committee, and the Federalist Society’s Administrative Law & Regulation Practice Group. He previously served as a member of the D.C. Circuit’s Advisory Committee on Procedures, the US District Court for the District of Columbia’s Committee on Grievances, and on the Advisory Council of the Federal Circuit. Roman’s commentary has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and other publications, and he has appeared on PBS NewsHour and other television programs to discuss the Supreme Court.

Latham & Watkins

Roman Vydra

Roman is a Partner at BBH. His core areas of expertise include contract law, corporate law, and general commercial law. As a key member of the BBH team, Roman has participated in various M&A projects across multiple industries, as well as several real estate transactions. Furthermore, Roman’s practice focuses on dispute resolution, where he primarily represents creditors in asserting their claims in court litigation, insolvency proceedings, and alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Roman is consistently recommended by The Legal 500 for Dispute Resolution in the Slovak Republic.

BBH advokátska kancelária, s.r.o.

Romy Zhuo

Partner

Fangda Partners

Ron Berkman

Founding Partner

Berkman & Co

Ron Nobbs

Partner – Head of Construction, Middle East

Stephenson Harwood Middle East LLP

Ronald Brown

Partner

DLA Piper LLP (US)

Ronaldo Gallo

Partner

Madrona Advogados

Ronan Geary

Ronan heads up the firm's Commercial Dispute Resolution team. He and his team represent commercial clients before the superior Courts and also in other forums, including Mediations, Arbitrations, Tribunals and Oral Hearings. He has a recognised expertise in particular in contract disputes, company law disputes, judicial review, landlord & tenant disputes and planning matters. Ronan has been the lead partner on a number of the most prominent Commercial Court shareholder disputes in recent years as well as acting in a number of highly publicised Commercial Court judicial reviews (regarding tenders, planning and State Aid). He also advised a manufacturing client plaintiff in the leading Irish multi-jurisdictional, multi-party product liability case; Clients consistently praise Ronan’s pragmatism in providing the best possible commercial advices and his detailed knowledge of a broad range of legal areas. Clients also comment again and again on his and his team’s tenacity in achieving the best possible outcome for them. He has authored chapters on dispute resolution and product liability in a number of international law publications, is recognised consistently in Legal 500 in the areas of dispute resolution and planning, and is the lead lecturer to the Law Society of Ireland on both the Commercial Court and Mediation. Ronan has been a CEDR accredited Mediator since 2006 and regularly acts for clients in large commercial mediations and other alternative dispute resolution forums.

RDJ LLP

Ronen Adini

Ronen Adini & Co