Source: https://www.4newsquare.com/barristers/can-yeginsu/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 07:08:19+00:00

Document:
Can Yeginsu is a leading barrister practising in commercial litigation and international arbitration, civil fraud, professional liability, public law and human rights, and both private and public international law.
Can is consistently ranked by Chambers Global, Chambers UK Bar, and Legal 500 as an outstanding junior in four practice areas: (i) commercial litigation; (ii) international arbitration; (iii) administrative and public law; and (iv) civil liberties and human rights. In 2019, he was shortlisted for the ‘International Arbitration Junior of the Year’ by Legal 500.
In 2013, Can was recognised as one of ten “Stars” practising at the Commercial Bar by Legal Week Magazine where he was identified as possibly one of “the Bar’s true polymaths…able to advocate in a wide variety of legal areas, with seemingly effortless fluency“.
Frequently appearing in the Commercial Court, Administrative Court, and the Chancery Division, Can has also acted in over 25 cases in the Court of Appeal, UK Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights. In addition, he has experience acting as co-counsel in proceedings before the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the Federal Court of Malaysia, the Turkish Constitutional Court, and the Supreme Court of The Gambia. Can is admitted to the Bar of the DIFC Courts.
In his arbitral practice, Can is regularly instructed to act in commercial disputes under the LCIA, ICC, LMAA, and CIArb Rules, as well as in ad-hoc arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Rules. He has received, and continues to accept, appointments as an arbitrator. Can has particular expertise in investor-state arbitration, including claims brought pursuant to the ICSID Rules and the ICSID Additional Facility Rules.
Can is Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown Law in Washington D.C. and Koç University Law School in Istanbul where he teaches investor-state arbitration. Can is also Lecturer-in-Law at Columbia Law School where he teaches international human rights law. He is the co-author of The Protections for Religious Rights: Law and Practice a leading practitioners’ text, published by Oxford University Press and Partner Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, University of Cambridge.
Can has a thriving practice across a broad range of commercial litigation, including significant trial experience in the Commercial Court and in the Chancery Division.
The strength of Can’s commercial practice set him apart in 2013 as one of Legal Week’s ten “Stars of the Bar”. Interviewees commented “he has an excellent mind with a real talent for picking out the key issues” “very persuasive…inspiring confidence” and that he “regularly acts on million-pound litigation cases as sole counsel“.
Applications for pre-action disclosure and urgent injunctive relief (including freezing and proprietary injunctions).
Bringing and resisting applications for security for costs.
Enforcement proceedings (including the enforcement of arbitral awards).
Claims giving rise to issues of choice of law and/or jurisdictional disputes.
Civil fraud, with particular experience in conspiracy and economic tort claims, and frauds arising in the investment context, shareholder disputes, and agency contracts, as well as advanced fee frauds.
Disputes between franchisors and franchisees.
Wrotham Park, or Licence Fee, Damages.
Bringing substantial claims for damages under s. 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998, alternatively commercial just satisfaction claims in the European Court of Human Rights, for violation of property rights under Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention.
The Sale of Goods Act 1979 and Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.
Matters concerning the enforcement of loans and guarantees.
Can has also given evidence abroad as an expert in English commercial law.
Can is a member of the Commercial Bar Association (COMBAR) and the IBA Litigation Committee. He is Co-Editor-in-Chief of Turkey’s leading English language commercial law journal, Turkish Commercial Law Review.
5 week trial between asset management professionals, listed by The Lawyer as one of the Top 20 cases of 2016-7. Led by Stuart Ritchie Q.C. of Fountain Court Chambers for lead D. Leggatt J awarded nominal damages.
See also other reported decisions:  EWHC 479;  2 Costs LR 255 (Costs).
Commercial Court claim for €59m brought by Guernsey fund, including allegations of fraud. Led by David Turner QC.
Led by Patrick Lawrence QC, in a £195 million claim for damages under s. 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 for violation of the Claimants’ rights under Article 1 of the First Protocol (ECHR), following the government’s proposed retrospective changes to the feed-in-tariffs scheme for solar photovoltaic installations. Successful in the trial of preliminary issues at first instance ( EWHC 2257) and in the Court of Appeal ( EWCA Civ 408). Trial settled in 2017.
Acting (unled) for two family members of a leading conglomerate in a substantial dispute involving multiple commercial vehicles and spanning multiple jurisdictions, involving allegations of fraud and interests in excess of US $120 million.
Sole counsel, representing a Ukrainian Bank in the Commercial Court in a claim for declaratory relief (and linked enforcement proceedings) relating to rights under a number of ship mortgages, following arrests of the vessels in foreign waters. The case is part of the multiple proceedings relating to the hundreds of millions of pounds of state assets believed to have been owned or used by the ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and his circle.
Junior Counsel (led by John Powell QC and Graham Chapman QC) in a 18 week trial in the Commercial Court in a c.£50m complex claim involving multiple tax avoidance schemes and allegations of fraud against individuals and professional advisors. Issues arising included breach of trust, dishonest assistance, conspiracy, insurance and coverage points, and causes of action under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. One of The Lawyer’s Top 20 cases of 2012, 2011, 2010.
Junior Counsel (led by Jamie Smith QC) acting for Part 20 Defendants in a claim in the Chancery Division of the High Court featuring complex arguments on agency and fraudulent misrepresentation in the investment context. The Part 20 claims were settled on the morning of the start of the trial. The terms of the settlement were not disclosed but the Court was informed that they did not involve the payment of any money by the Part 20 Defendants to the Defendants in the main action.
Leading Court of Appeal authority on prohibitory injunctions  EWCA Civ 668;  LLR 440.
In a case where a jockey had entered into an agreement with a racehorse owner that placed him under a positive obligation to ride that owner’s horse when asked, and a negative obligation not to ride a rival horse, the court granted an interim injunction preventing him from breaching his obligations by riding a rival owner’s horse in the Epsom Derby.
Nominated for the ‘International Arbitration Junior of the Year‘ (2019) award by Legal 500.
Can is recognised by the leading directories are one of the leading international arbitration juniors at the English Bar. He regularly appears as counsel in international commercial and investment arbitrations, both in London and abroad, and under a wide variety of laws and institutional rules, including LCIA, ICC, ICSID, LMAA, CiARB, and UNCITRAL.
Can is also developing a strong reputation as an arbitrator and teaches international arbitration as Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown Law (Washington D.C.) and Koç University Law School (Istanbul).
Can is a member of the LCIA, ICC, ICCA and the Swiss Arbitration Association. He is a founder member of the Istanbul Arbitration Association and a member of the Investment Treaty Forum (ITF) at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law.
Acting for a foreign investor in a $100m+ claim relating to investments in textile sector against a Central Asian State.
Lead counsel for a national telecommunications operator in a substantial ICC arbitration (foreign law).
Acting as sole counsel for a European commodity distributor in an ad hoc arbitration seated in England against a European steel supplier.
Acting for an investment company in a US $80 million LCIA arbitration under the terms of a shareholders’ agreement in a dispute relating to the operation of an oil terminal connected to the CPC pipeline.
Acting for and advising an investor in arbitration proceedings against a Eurasian State (with Roger Stewart QC).
Acting as counsel in an ICC arbitration relating to the alleged breach of a US $80 million project finance agreement for a cement plant in Asia.
Acting and advising in a substantial LCIA arbitration relating to contracts for the purchase of aircraft jet engines.
Advising in relation to a dispute to be referred to an LCIA arbitration for damages of some £40 million, in connection with foreign construction projects in Central Asia.
Advising on enforcement issues relating to a US $60 million ICC Award against a State.
Advising in relation to an LMAA arbitration in a dispute regarding contracts to build super yachts.
Acting with Roger Stewart QC in a major insurance coverage arbitration concerning cross-border property transactions.
Can has a strong professional liability practice which encompasses claims for and against a range of professionals including: valuers, mortgage brokers, surveyors, accountants, actuaries, construction professionals, lawyers – both barristers and solicitors – and insurance brokers in the county courts as well as in the Queen’s Bench and Chancery Divisions of the High Court.
Can has a particular expertise in claims arising out of the mis-selling of mortgages, having appeared successfully as counsel in the Administrative Court and Court of Appeal in Emptage v the Financial Services Compensation Scheme  EWCA Civ 729. Can has a very busy practice in this area advising in claims for compensation to the Financial Ombudsman Service and Financial Services Compensation Scheme and he appears in related applications for judicial review.
Can edits, with Jonathan Hough QC, the chapter on Litigation (encompassing group actions and expert evidence) in Jackson & Powell on Professional Liability (Sweet & Maxwell, 8th Edition, 2017). Can is a member of the Professional Negligence Bar Association (PNBA).
Defending, led by David Turner QC, auditors being sued in the Commercial Court by a Guernsey fund in the recovery of €59m.
Acting for and advising an international professional services firm (with Graham Chapman QC) in proceedings before Malaysia’s highest court in a landmark appeal concerned with the duty of care owed by auditors to third parties.
Instructed with Ben Hubble QC for a group of actuary defendants in a professional liability claim, listed for a 10 day trial in the Chancery Division, arising out of the requirement to implement equalisation between men and women in an occupational pension scheme.
Instructed for a number of IFAs in the £75 million claim brought in the Commercial Court by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme.
Instructed as lead counsel for the claimant in a professional negligence claim against a bank relating to the conveyance of a £40m property.
Acted, led by Mark Cannon QC, for the successful applicant in a landmark judicial review of the FSCS’s decision to award compensation pursuant to the compensation scheme established under part XV of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, and administered by FSCS  EWCA Civ 729.
Instructed as lead counsel for the claimants against a leading accountancy firm in a claim relating to failed film schemes.
Instructed as sole counsel for an accountancy firm in a claim arising out of tax advice.
Acted as junior counsel in  EWHC 1321 in an 18 week trial of a c. £50m claim involving complex tax avoidance schemes and allegations of fraud against individuals and professional advisers, led by John Powell QC and Graham Chapman QC. Can was also instructed in the proceedings before the Court of Appeal which were subsequently compromised between the parties.
Instructed (with Jamie Smith QC) to represent Part 20 solicitor Defendants in a 10 day trial in the Chancery Division.
The strength of Can’s civil fraud practice was recognised by Legal Week Magazine which named him as one of ten “Stars at the Bar” working at the Commercial and Chancery Bar.
Can is well-versed in using the coercive powers of the High Court for the securing of evidence and the preservation, tracing and recovery of assets, including drafting and obtaining search, freezing and disclosure orders, travel restraint orders, and orders to obtain information from judgment debtors under CPR Part 71.
Acting as sole counsel in a £13 million secret commission and action for damages for fraud claim.
Instructed for the lead defendant (led by Stuart Ritchie QC) in a £40 million unlawful means conspiracy claim in the Commercial Court. Listed as one of The Lawyer‘s Top 20 cases of 2016-2017.
Acting as lead counsel in a €3.5 million fraud claim before the Commercial Court against a French tycoon based in Paris. Involving issues relating to jurisdiction and enforcement.
Acting (with Neil Hext QC) for a foreign conglomerate in a fraud claim (and related injunctive proceedings) arising out of a substantial advance fee fraud.
Representing a leading Ukrainian Bank in the Commercial Court in a claim for declaratory relief (and linked enforcement proceedings) relating to rights under a number of ship mortgages, following arrests of the vessels in foreign waters. The case is part of the multiple proceedings relating to the hundreds of millions of pounds of state assets believed to have been owned or used by the ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and his circle.
constitutional petitions in European, African and common law jurisdictions.
The right to freedom of expression. Can has become a preferred choice of counsel for a number of free speech organisations, publishers and media organisations, and has acted as lead counsel on over 10 free speech cases in the Court of Appeal, Supreme Court, and European Court of Human Rights. He is one of two barristers appointed Global Freedom of Expression Expert at Columbia University, New York.
The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Can was sole counsel in Rotsztein and is co-author, with Sir James Dingemans, of the leading practitioner text The Protections for Religious Rights: Law and Practice. He has a very busy advisory practice in this area.
The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions. Can regularly acts in commercial human rights claims. He was counsel for the successful claimants in Breyer (Admin and CA) and is acting for HSH Nordbank in a US $75 million property rights claim before the ECtHR.
In judicial review claims, Can has a particularly strong reputation for: (i) representing coroners in the Administrative Court (and has acted as sole counsel in a number of important reported decisions); (ii) bringing applications against the Legal Ombudsman, Financial Ombudsman Service and Financial Services Compensation Scheme (he was counsel in the Court of Appeal in Emptage); and (iii) party political finance cases (he was counsel in the Supreme Court in UKIP v Electoral Commission).
Can also conducts constitutional litigation abroad, subject to local requirements. He has experience of acting as co-counsel in cases before the Supreme Court of the Gambia, The Federal Court of Malaysia, and the Turkish Constitutional Court.
Can is a member of the Constitutional and Administrative Bar Association (ALBA), as well as Lawyers for Liberty.
Acting for Media Legal Defence Initiative, the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, Mass Media Defence Centre, Ossigeno Per L’Informazione, and Media Development Centre in the Art. 10 challenge to Hungarian laws forbidding journalists from entering and reporting from parliamentary premises. The issues raised by this case are of increasing public importance considering the trend of parliaments inside and outside Europe to restricting the media from accessing and reporting from their premises, including recent examples Macedonia and Poland.
Acting for the leading journalists’ protection NGO, Media Legal Defence Initiative, in the Article 10 challenge to the extension of defamation liability under Russian law to online blogs which link to third party content. The applicant Aleksey Navalnyy, a prominent Russian opposition politician, alleges that the Russian government is restricting his journalism and activism for political purposes, and the case also raises novel questions of how traditional legal models relating to defamation applies to blogging and web platforms.
Acting (leading Miranda Butler) for 16 free expression and media freedom organisations intervening in the Art. 8 and Art. 10 application brought against Azerbaijan by UNESCO World Press Freedom Prize winning journalist, Khadija Ismayilova.
Led by Adrienne Page QC in the UK Supreme Court in an appeal relating to the proper scope of the tort in Wilkinson v Downton ( QB 57) in the appeal of an injunction prohibiting the publication of a memoir by the concert pianist, author and television film maker, James Rhodes. Submissions were focussed on the right to freedom of expression under Article 10, ECHR.
Instructed as lead counsel by Article 19, English PEN and Media Legal Defence Initiative in in the High Court and Court of Appeal intervening in the challenge brought to the use of the Terrorism Act 2000 to detain David Miranda when he was carrying material from the Edward Snowden NSA leaks. The Court of Appeal issued a rare declaration of incompatibility, concluding that the Terrorism Act power used were incompatible with Art. 10, ECHR.
Instructed in judicial review proceedings relating to the approach to be taken by coroners when ordering invasive post mortem examinations in circumstances where the family of the deceased has raised religious objections under Art. 9, ECHR. The case was identified by the court as one of public importance and is now the leading authority in this area.
Led by Hugh Southey QC in Art. 10 ECHR challenge to the lawfulness of the UK’s contribution to worldwide government systems of communications interception.
Instructed (led by Hugh Southey QC) in an application before the European Court of Human Rights challenging the scope of the secret interception and use of communications by the UK under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
Acting for a European Bank (leading Anthony Jones) on a US $75 million property rights claim before the ECHR challenging a state’s handling of enforcement proceedings relating to ship mortgages. The application raises arguments under Art. 6 of the Convention and Art. 1 of the First Protocol, and is the first case before the Strasbourg Court specifically concerned with the Convention compliance of the international ship financing and enforcement regime.
Acting as lead co-counsel on behalf of leading journalists in The Gambia in a challenge before the Supreme Court of The Gambia to the constitutionality of certain sedition and criminal defamation laws on the basis that they violate fundamental human rights under the Gambian Constitution, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Related proceedings are being brought at the regional level in the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States for which Can is also instructed.
Acted (led by Mark Cannon QC) for the successful applicant in a landmark judicial review  EWHC 2708 of the FSCS’s decision to award compensation pursuant to the compensation scheme established under part XV of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, and administered by FSCS. The case raised important issues of principle about the proper application of the Scheme to cases where an applicant has borrowed money pursuant to a regulated mortgage contract.
Can also appeared successfully resisting the FSCS’s appeal in the Court of Appeal  EWCA Civ 729.
Instructed as sole counsel by PEN International to intervene in two successful applications before the European Court of Human Rights relating to press freedom.
Acted as sole counsel successfully defending the Coroner in resisting a judicial review application challenging his decision to direct a postmortem examination. The Claimant had sought to argue that the decision constituted, in the circumstances of the case, a disproportionate interference with her right to manifest her religious beliefs under Article 9 and her right to respect for her private and family life under Article 8.
Appeared (led by Patrick Lawrence QC) before a seven-strong UK Supreme Court, acting for UKIP in its successful appeal in respect of the proper interpretation of the domestic law on the funding of political parties in the United Kingdom and its compatibility with the European Convention. This case remains the leading authority on the law of political donations.
Acted as sole counsel successfully defending the Coroner in judicial review proceedings in which the Claimant raised issues in relation to: (i) the scope of the inquest and Art. 2, ECHR; (ii) the law on circumstances in which a coroner must, alternatively may, decide to sit with a jury; and (iii) the law on “neglect”.
Can has developed a significant practice in public international law which is evenly split between: (i) investment treaty arbitration work; and (ii) international human rights law.
He acts as counsel for foreign governments, multinational companies, banks, individuals (including foreign investors), and international organisations before a number of international arbitral tribunals, as well as the English (and other domestic) courts, the European Court of Human Rights, and the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice. Can is also regularly instructed in an advisory capacity.
Can is Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown Law (Washington D.C.) and Koç University Law School (Istanbul), where he teaches investor-state arbitration and public international law. He is Partner Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, University of Cambridge.
Before coming to the Bar, Can worked at the Permanent Mission for Turkey to the United Nations in New York.
Instructed (leading Anthony Jones) on behalf of an investor in a pending ICSID claim against a Central Asian state relating to expropriation and unfair treatment, and raising complex issues of treaty interpretation.
Acted as lead counsel for a leading African journalism union and leading Gambian journalists in the challenge before the regional ECOWAS Court of Justice against treatment by the former Jammeh regime in The Gambia, allegedly in breach of The Gambia’s obligations at customary international law and under various multilateral treaties, including the Revised ECOWAS Treaty, the African Charter, and the ICCPR. Judgment is expected in early 2018.
Advising on the applicability of the State Immunity Act 1978 in the context of an action brought against a state-owned corporation for the enforcement of an ICC arbitral award against the state.
Instructed as lead counsel by Article 19, English PEN and Media Legal Defence Initiative in in the High Court and Court of Appeal intervening in the challenge brought to the use of the Terrorism Act 2000 to detain David Miranda when he was carrying material from the Edward Snowden NSA leaks.
Instructed to make submissions on public international law. The Court of Appeal issued a rare declaration of incompatibility, concluding that the Terrorism Act power used were incompatible with Art. 10, ECHR.
Advising an international technology company on the potential effects of international treaty obligations on a state in connection with the legality of new legislation proposed to govern the scope of state surveillance.
Advising a foreign government (through its embassy) on the scope of diplomatic immunities.
Can has a strong reputation in football-related matters where he advises players, agents and clubs in the context of arbitrations under Rule K of the Rules of the Football Association. Can frequently advises on issues (and acts in disputes) arising out of representation contracts between footballers and their agents.
In addition, Can holds expertise in horse-racing matters. He was instructed with Patrick Lawrence QC by the owner of Native Khan, a leading runner in the Epsom Derby, to seek an interim injunction against the 3-times derby-winning jockey, Kieren Fallon, to prevent Mr. Fallon from riding a rival horse, Recital, in the Derby. The injunction was refused by the High Court but granted by the Court of Appeal, following a successful appeal, on the morning of the Derby. The decision of the Court of Appeal (Araci v Fallon,  EWCA Civ 668) remains the leading authority on prohibitory injunctions. Can was retained as sole counsel for the subsequent proceedings.
Investment Treaty Forum, British Institute of International and Comparative Law.
Vice Chairman, British Turkish Lawyers’ Association.
Bar Liaison Committee, International Committee, and Library Committee, Inner Temple.
Co-Editor-in-Chief, The Turkish Commercial Law Review.
Memberships: IBA, COMBAR, LCIA, ICC, ICCA, ASA, BICCL, ALBA, ILI, IPBA, and Lawyers for Liberty.
University College, Oxford: Double First Class B.A. in English Language and Literature; College Scholar, Master’s Scholar, and the Stephen Boyd Memorial Prize recipient for the top First in Finals.
Princeton University: Jane Eliza Procter Fellow.
City University, University of London: First Class LL.B. (1st in year).
Harvard Law School: LL.M. and Cravath International Scholar.
Inner Temple: Treasurer’s Prize, Major Scholar, and Princess Royal Scholar.
4 New Square’s juniors mentioned in The Lawyer’s “Whatever happened to…” series.
Criminalizing Speech to Protect Religious Peace?
Discusses the 12 September 2010 constitutional referendum in Turkey.
He has the gravitas of a natural leader and possesses a giant intellect.
A first-class international advocate...in a class of his own.
A brilliant arbitration senior junior, equally at home dealing with commercial or investment claims.
A polymath who can turn his hand to any area of litigation, he has the judgement of a far more senior counsel.
Fiercely clever but also a true team player...a very elegant and effective advocate.
Exceptionally bright, with a superb knowledge of the law...turns around work really quickly and it is always of a superb quality.
Rightly instructed in a number of the highest profile cases in the field.
An outstanding advocate with impeccable judgement and formidable brainpower.

References: EWCA 
 EWCA 
 EWCA 
 EWCA 
 Art. 10
 Art. 8
 Art. 10
 Art. 10
 Art. 9
 Art. 10
 Art. 6
 Art. 1
 EWCA 
 Art. 2
 Art. 10
 EWCA