The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

Katten

PATERNOSTER HOUSE, 65 ST PAUL'S CHURCHYARD, LONDON, EC4M 8AB, ENGLAND
Tel:
Work 020 7776 7620
Fax:
Fax 020 7776 7621
Email:
Web:
Katten.com

London: Corporate and commercial

Financial services: non-contentious/regulatory
Financial services: non-contentious/regulatory - ranked: tier 6

Katten

Katten's experienced finance and regulatory team works across its US, London and Shanghai offices, representing a range of financial institutions, including banks, financial holding companies and investment funds. John Ahern leads the London financial services group and focuses on banking and financial services regulation. Also notable for the firm in this area are Nathaniel Lalone, Neil Robson, Carolyn Jackson and David Brennand.

Practice head(s):John Ahern

Other key lawyers:Nathaniel Lalone; Neil Robson; Carolyn Jackson; David Brennand

[back to top]

London: Finance

Derivatives (including commodities)
Derivatives (including commodities) - ranked: tier 4

Katten

The London office of Katten is part of the firm's transatlantic practice, which advises on regulatory, compliance, transactional, documentation and structural matters. The firm is adept at futures, cleared and uncleared swaps, including their use in structured products. Among its clients are investment firms, including broker-dealers; end users such as proprietary trading groups, hedge funds, commodity pools, pension  plans, corporations and municipalities; clearinghouses, exchanges, multilateral trading facilities and swap execution facilities. It also works with intermediaries; clearing firms; alternative investment fund managers; and swap dealers in the US and EU. Regulatory expert John Ahern joined from Jones Day in early 2018 to lead the financial services practice.  Carolyn Jackson provides US financial regulatory legal advice to commercial banks, investment banks, trade associations and OTC derivatives service providers. Nathaniel Lalone and Neil Robson are also recommended for regulatory and compliance advice.

Practice head(s):John Ahern

[back to top]

London: Real estate

Commercial property: hotels and leisure
Commercial property: hotels and leisure - ranked: tier 1

Katten

Katten’s hospitality practice represents a client base of hotel managers, developers, investors, restaurants, theme parks, casinos and resorts, among others. It operates on an international scale, working with large international conglomerates to small boutique hotels from markets such as the US, Europe, Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Australia. In addition to real estate matters, the department draws on the wider firm’s expertise of financial, tax, litigation, IP, insolvency, restructuring and corporate issues to provide a full-service offering. Managing partner Peter Sugden heads the practice and is particularly reputed for his transactional experience.

Practice head(s):Peter Sugden

Key Clients

Shiva Hotels

Wyndham Worldwide (and subsidiaries)

BridgeStreet Worldwide (and subsidiaries)

Union Hanover Securities

Luxury Hotel Partners

KOP Properties

Aprirose

AccorHotels/FRHI Hotels & Resorts

Fattal Hotels

Cheval

Work highlights

  • Instructed by Aprirose on the purchase of the freehold interest in De Vere Hotel in Cheshunt owned by the Starwood group.
  • Handled numerous hotel management agreements for FRHI Hotels & Resorts.

[back to top]

Property finance
Property finance - ranked: tier 7

Katten

Terry Green and the 'excellent' Peter Sugden are the key names at Katten, which handles acquisition, development and investment finance across a range of asset classes, as well as loan acquisitions and disposals and secured lending. The team is active on the lender and borrower side, advising banks, funds, private investors and property companies.

Other key lawyers:Terry Green; Peter Sugden

[back to top]


Further information on Katten

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

London

Offices in London

United States

Offices in Washington DC, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Charlotte, Irving, Austin, Houston, Los Angeles, Costa Mesa, Oakland, and Dallas

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. 
  • PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS ‚Äď CIVIL AND CRIMINAL

    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.