The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

Gilbert + Tobin

Work +61 2 9263 4000
Fax +61 2 9263 4111
Melbourne, NSW 2000, Perth
Gilbert + Tobin, Neil Pathak, NSW 2000, AUSTRALIA

Lawyer rankings

Neil Pathak

Work +61 3 8656 3344
Gilbert + Tobin

Work Department

Mergers & Acquisitions / Corporate Advisory.


Leads Melbourne M&A practice, specialising in listed company takeovers and schemes, mining and resources transactions, cross-border acquisitions, equity capital market transactions and corporate governance matters.


2011 joined Gilbert + Tobin as head of the M&A group in Melbourne. Prior to that was Partner at Freehills and also worked at pre-eminent London/New York law firms.


Member of the Corporations Committee of the Law Council of Australia. Lectures in takeover and securities laws at University of Melbourne law school.


Neil has bachelor degrees in law (with first class honours) and commerce (Finance major) from the University of Melbourne (1994). He was editor of the Melbourne University Law Review in 1994. Neil also has a post graduate diploma in Applied Finance and Investment (1999). Neil was admitted to practice as a solicitor in the Supreme Court of Victoria and the High Court of Australia (1996) as well as being admitted to practice in England and Wales (1999).


Corporate and M&A

Within: Corporate and M&A

Gilbert + Tobin’s 30-partner team, which is co-led by Costas Condoleon and Neil Pathak, has seen a strong year during which it managed to attract high-value matters in a range of industries such as banking, pharmaceuticals, energy and natural resources, and entertainment. Notable work in the private equity arena included Peter Cook’s advice to Pacific Equity Partners and The Carlyle Group on the $930m acquisition of iNova Pharmaceuticals from Valeant Group, as well as Rachael Bassil’s advice to Quadrant Private Equity on the sale of Real Pet Food. Spotless instructed the practice in respect of the $1bn hostile takeover bid for it by Downer EDI, and Craig Semple advised IOOF on its multimillion-dollar acquisition of ANZ’s OnePath pensions and investments businesses. The practice also regularly acts for the government: Bill Spain advised the NSW government in relation to the $1.9bn concession of Land and Property Information NSW, the first such transaction on that scale in Australia.

[back to top]

Back to index

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • CommuniquĂ© on Equity Crowdfunding Is Officially Published

    By way of background, in January 2019, the Capital Markets Board (“ CMB ”) had issued an announcement on its website on the Draft CommuniquĂ© on Equity Crowdfunding [1] . The CMB has now officially published the CommuniquĂ© on Crowdfunding No. III-35/A (“ CommuniquĂ© ”), on October 3, 2019. The CommuniquĂ© entered into force as of October 3, 2019.
  • Beneficial Ownership Concept new interpretation from the Russian federal tax service

    The recent interpretative letter issued by the Russian Federal Tax Services (“FTS”) on 08th August 2019, has provided further guidance as to the application of the Beneficial Ownership Concept, further to the letter initially provided on the 12th of April 2018 which adopted a strict approach of the concept. 
  • Cyprus and Netherlands Double Tax Treaty Update

    Cyprus has concluded the negotiations for the avoidance of double taxation with the Netherlands. The double tax treaty was agreed at technocratic level in Hague. It is expected to be signed by the end of 2019 or early in 2020.
  • Vacancy - Senior Corporate Lawyer

    The Senior Corporate Lawyer, who will be reporting to Partners, will be working with both the firm’s legal team as well as the financial services team. The successful candidate will be requested to show initiative, take on certain responsibilities within the firm, work in a multinational environment and will immediately be given the opportunity to further advance their career within the law firm.

    The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on February 26, 2019, in the “Danish Beneficial Ownership Cases”, can be perceived as a landmark on the interpretation of the Beneficial Ownership concept under the Interest and Royalties Directive (IRD) and the Parent-Subsidiary Directive (PSD).
  • Court of Justice rules on source of income for Derivative Residence applications

    On 2 October 2019, the Court of Justice delivered its judgment in Bajratari v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Directive 2004/38/EC) Case C-93/18 which concerns Chen applications and the source of funds for self-sufficiency. 
  • End of the ‘centre of life test’ in Surinder Singh cases?

    In the recent case of  ZA (Reg 9. EEA Regs; abuse of rights) Afghanistan   [2019] UKUT 281 (IAC ), the Upper Tribunal found that there is no basis in EU law for the centre of life test, as set out in Regulation 9(3)(a) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (the “Regulations”). It further found that it is not to be applied when Judges assess  Surinder Singh  cases that appear before them.

    Italian rules on jointventures concerning public procurement and concession contracts are set out inlight of the European legal framework provided for in Directive 2014/23/EU and 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council. The European rules aim to ensurethe best use of public money so that EU citizens benefit from strategicinvestments and services at fair prices. In this context, public procurementand concessions represent key instruments that need to be regulated and standardisedin order to ensure free movement of goods, freedom of establishment and freedomto provide services.
  • Terms of employment as a sole representative

    In this article we examine the working arrangements of sole representatives, looking at the terms and conditions of employment that the Home Office will expect a sole representative to have in order to qualify as a representative of an overseas business.  
  • Can Sole Representatives Be Shareholders?

    The Immigration Rules require that an applicant for a  sole representative visa  is not “a  majority shareholder in the overseas business”.