The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon
Work 0207 242 8018
Fax 0207 611 0015

London: Dispute resolution

Banking litigation: investment and retail
Banking litigation: investment and retail - ranked: tier 5


DaySparkes is a specialist litigation boutique firm, where named partners Michael Sparkes and John Day 'actually handle clients' cases, rather than delegating them to inexperienced trainees and associates'. Sparkes heads the banking litigation department, and has handled a number of complex disputes against major international banks. Day specialises in commercial fraud disputes. Gopi Binning is a dispute resolution lawyer within the firm who has extensive experience of advising on freezing orders and other forms of interim relief.

Practice head(s):Michael Sparkes

Other key lawyers:John Day; Gopi Binning


'It is a boutique firm that has well-known expertise in bank litigation. The team has expert knowledge of the banking industry and explains the intricacies of the law in a clear and concise manner.'

'John Day and Michael Sparkes are both seasoned litigators in the financial sector, who bring to bear their considerable experience, attention to detail and client care, and hire the best specialist barristers known to them, when and as required.'

Key Clients

Simon Robinson

Daniel Wagner

Joanne Dove

Gary Wells

Juli Probett

Vivien Carne

Work highlights

  • Acted for Simon Robinson, former managing director of Remnant Media, in his £50m-plus claim against Lloyds Banking Group and others in relation to the HBOS Reading fraud.

[back to top]

Commercial litigation
Commercial litigation - ranked: tier 7


DaySparkes is 'a class outfit that comprises super lawyers with great experience'. Commercial litigation and dispute resolution head John Day's  work frequently has an international dimension, with increasing amounts of trust, fraud, insolvency and international arbitration work. Michael Sparkes recently handled several complex disputes against international banks.

Practice head(s):John Day

Other key lawyers:Michael Sparkes


'A highly committed micro-boutique with partners who are no-nonsense, hands-on litigators'.

'John Day and Michael Sparkes understand what clients need in conflict situations and never fail to deliver'.

Key Clients

Simon Robinson

RM Auctions

Daniel Wagner

Mahmood Al-Najar

John Cozens

Work highlights

  • Defended a property developer against alleged property fraud and freezing injunction proceedings.

[back to top]

Further information on DaySparkes

Please choose from this list to view details of what we say about DaySparkes in other jurisdictions.


Offices in London

Legal Developments in the UK

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • 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 ‚Äėcentre of life test‚Äô 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 ‚ÄúRegulations‚ÄĚ). It further found that it is not to be applied when Judges assess ¬†Surinder Singh ¬†cases that appear before them.
  • 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 ‚Äúa¬† majority shareholder in the overseas business‚ÄĚ.
  • Immigration Skills Charge - A Guide for Employers

    As a Sponsor, you may be required to pay the Immigration Skills Charge (ISC) each time you sponsor a migrant in the  Tier 2 General  or  Intra-Company Transfer (ICT) Long-term Staff  subcategory.
  • 5 FAQS about paragraph 320(11)

    In applications for entry clearance where the applicant has a negative immigration history in the UK, the application may be refused under the general grounds for refusal, which are found in part 9 of the Immigration Rules. Where an applicant has ¬†‚Äėpreviously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Immigration Rules‚Äô,¬† the application could be refused under paragraph 320(11). In this post we look at five frequently asked questions about paragraph 320(11).¬†
  • Multiple nationality and multiple citizenship (including dual nationality and dual citizenship)

    British nationality law permits multiple nationality and multiple citizenship, including dual nationality and dual citizenship.
  • Applying for Indefinite Leave to Remain in the Exceptional Talent or Promise Category

    The  Exceptional Talent  and Exceptional Promise categories are for individuals who are recognised leaders or emerging leaders in their field of expertise. There are a number of endorsing bodies for lots of different fields of work, including  artists and musicians ,  architects ,  digital experts ,  scientists  and  academics . While there isn’t an endorsing body for every expert, the growing list means that many individuals could enjoy the flexibility that this category has to offer. 

    Syedur Rahmanconsiders the factors that determine when civil proceedings can go ahead before,or at the same time as, criminal proceedings relating to the same circumstances.
  • Rights of appeal after the Immigration Act 2014

    The Immigration Act 2014 (‚Äúthe 2014 Act‚ÄĚ) reduced the circumstances in which the refusal of an immigration application will give rise to a right of appeal.¬†The¬† explanatory notes ¬†to the 2014 Act state that the Act was intended to restructure rights of appeal to the Immigration Tribunal. Previously, a right of appeal to the Immigration Tribunal existed against any of the 14 different immigration decisions listed in s.82 of the¬† Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 ¬†(‚Äúthe 2002 Act‚ÄĚ). As explained below, whether or not the refusal of an immigration application currently generates a right of appeal depends on the subject matter of the application rather than its categorisation.