Source: https://3harecourt.com/content/view/robert-strang
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 14:50:04+00:00

Document:
Robert is an experienced and effective advocate with an international practice, specialising in commercial and public law.
He has appeared as an advocate many times at the highest level, having acted in several appeals to the Privy Council.
Robert has a broad practice covering all areas of commercial and business law. He has acted in substantial and fact-heavy disputes involving civil fraud. He is experienced in obtaining interim relief, including urgent injunctions.
He is a member of our professional negligence team and has a particular interest in claims concerning financial services; he has represented clients in many claims against financial services companies and advisors.
He has good knowledge of financial products and markets, having worked in the City himself for many years before coming to the Bar.
Robert has also acted for clients in litigation and advisory work in a number of Caribbean jurisdictions, in particular in disputes between commercial enterprises and public agencies and bodies.
Adamczyk v GPC SIPP Ltd (Ch D 2018) Acting for a large number of investors in a group claim against a SIPP provider, alleging breach of duty concerning the investment of personal pension funds in high risk and anomalous investments.
Lamar v Globomass (QBD 2017) Acting for an investor in a claim against an investee company, concerning investment in biomass electricity generation scheme, where investment funds were lost as a result of the fraudulent acts of the investee’s agent, involving questions of agency law.
KMR v Forsters LLP a claim in professional negligence in relation to a defective share transfer leading to loss of valuable oil exploration opportunity, which involved an appeal on the interpretation of a settlement agreement.
Organic Village v Goknur (QBD) long-running claim concerning contractual dispute between Turkish juice supplier and English distributor over an allegation that juice was fraudulently adulterated.
Other recent work includes: advising a film investment company on recovery of fees and investment funds fraudulently diverted; advising a Zambian financial institution on disputed loan agreements with a supra-national lending institution; bringing and successfully settling a claim by a group of investors against individuals involved in the collapsed Harlequin investment scheme.
Super Industrial Services v National Gas Company  UKPC 17 Advising and representing a large contractor in a dispute with a state-owned gas company, in litigation involving freezing injunctions, a procedural appeal to the Privy Council, and an arbitration over a disputed contract breach.
(News Report on) A&V Oil v Petrotrin: Advising a major oil services company in Trinidad in a dispute with a state-owned petroleum company, involving injunctive relief and a forthcoming arbitration over a disputed claim of fraud.
(News Report on) EMBD v Kallco et al: Representing contractors defending claims brought by a state-owned development agency alleging cartel activity, bribery and collusive bidding on public tenders.
Fundhaven v Securities Commission Acting for a Bahamian investment fund in an appeal to the Privy Council against an adverse regulatory decision, concerning interpretation of the relevant statutory rules.
Robert acts and advises in public law disputes, at first instance and on appeal, in particular from Caribbean jurisdictions. He has appeared, as both junior and sole counsel, in many constitutional and public law cases in the Privy Council, on appeal from Trinidad, Mauritius, St Vincent and Bermuda.
Sam Maharaj v Prime Minister  UKPC 37 appeared as sole counsel in this successful appeal in which the Privy Council confirmed that failure by a public body to observe the rules of natural justice entailed a breach of the appellant’s constitutional right to the protection of the law and led to a claim in damages in judicial review.
Attorney General v Dumas  UKPC 12 confirming that a citizen had the right in the public interest to bring a claim for interpretation of the constitution alleging failure by a public body to observe the constitutional limits on its powers.
United Policyholders Group v Attorney General  UKPC 17 concerning substantive legitimate expectations engendered by the government’s public promises to protect investors in the collapse of an insurance company.
Peerless v Gambling Regulatory Authority  UKPC 29 a case from Mauritius concerning the duty of full and frank disclosure in judicial review.
Alleyne v Attorney General  UKPC 3 a constitutional case concerning the state’s failure to make regulations.
Mitchell v Georges  UKPC 3 a successful appeal brought by the former Prime Minister of St Vincent, concerning bias in a public inquiry.
Paponette v Attorney General  UKPC 32 a landmark case on substantive legitimate expectations in public law.

References: UKPC 
 UKPC 
 UKPC 
 UKPC 
 UKPC 
 UKPC 
 UKPC 
 UKPC