Simon Davenport KC
Barrister
3 Hare Court; practises in Russian and CIS commercial and commercial fraud cases.
Barrister
3 Hare Court; practises in Russian and CIS commercial and commercial fraud cases.
Can persons on the receiving end of targeted sanctions challenge this designation, & where do their legal representatives stand? Simon Davenport QC & Matthew Happold investigate
Simon Davenport QC, Daniel Goldblatt & Sergey Litovchenko on finding third party litigation funding in the age of COVID-19
After a fêted introduction, UWOs have had a stop-start beginning. But are things about to change, ask Simon Davenport QC & Helen Pugh
Simon Davenport QC & Helen Pugh consider how the limbo land of Brexit could affect Russian/CIS litigation in London
Simon Davenport QC & Helen Pugh examine the reasons behind the buoyancy of Russian/CIS litigation in London
Show
8
Results
8
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams
Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant
Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias
International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner
Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven
Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth
NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
