The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

The 36 Group

Work 020 7421 8000
Fax 020 7421 8035
360 LDE
London, Singapore

Ravi Aswani

Work 020 7440 6900
The 36 Group (The 36 Group)

Work Department

36 Stone


Ravi Aswani is a commercial dispute resolution barrister. He has a broad practice which covers a number of areas including in particular shipping and international trade, commodities, energy and oil and gas, metals and mining, insurance and re-insurance, banking and finance.  As well as litigation in the English courts, Ravi has an extensive international arbitration practice.  He has been instructed in arbitrations seated in a number of jurisdictions under a number of applicable laws, both ad hoc (in particular LMAA) as well as institutional arbitration (in particular ICC, LCIA and SIAC).  Ravi has considerable experience of being instructed to appear alone against QC opposition, as well as acting as co-counsel with foreign lawyers. 

As well as acting as counsel, he has a growing practice as arbitrator and as mediator. He is regularly asked to provide expert evidence on English law for use in foreign courts and arbitral tribunals. He frequently speaks at conferences on subjects arising out of his practice areas, both in the UK and abroad.

Recent representative arbitrations include: an LMAA arbitration (English seat, English law) arising out of alleged repudiation of high value shipbuilding contracts; an ICC arbitration (English seat, English law) arising out of contract for the supply of agency, logistics and customs clearances services ancillary to the construction of a large factory in West Africa; an SIAC arbitration (Singapore seat, English law) arising out of an industrial disaster; and an LCIA arbitration (English seat, English law) arising out of alleged breach of loan facility agreement and ancillary guarantee.

Recent representative arbitration applications in Court include:  Dera Commercial Estate v Derya Inc [2019] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 57 – a leading authority in English law about the proper approach to the dismissal of claims in arbitration for inordinate and inexcusable delay, and A v B [2018] EWHC 2325 (Comm) – s67 and s68 challenges relate to complex damages calculations in the context of an admitted irregularity.

Recent representative litigation includes: multi-million dollar banking litigation in the Commercial Court on behalf of a foreign lender in which Ravi is instructed alone raising questions of the impact of provisions of foreign law said by the borrower to be mandatory and to provide a defence to non-payment to the lender, and consolidated litigation of an arbitration claim (with permission of the tribunal) and a related claim against a party said to be in breach of warranty of authority to enter into the arbitration clause on behalf of the party to the arbitration claim.

Ravi has a significant international perspective to his practice and has developed particular links across the Middle East and Asia Pacific, as well as throughout the UK and Europe.

Ravi has a longstanding interest in matters of equality, diversity and inclusion as well as the next generation of practitioners.  As well as a Chambers pupil supervisor, he has acted as a “buddy” in the Young ICCA Mentoring Programme.


Called to Bar of England and Wales 2000, Lincoln’s Inn.

Judicial assistant to Sir Andrew Morritt VC and Lord Phillips MR, 2001-02.

CEDR Accredited Mediator 2009.

Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (MCIArb), 2012.

Deputy District Judge (Civil), 2013.

ICC Global Commission on Arbitration and ADR (UK Member), 2019.




Arbitration Ireland, Association Internationale des Jeunes Avocats, British Maritime Law Association, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (MCIArb), Commercial Bar Association, FDI International Moot Competition (College of Arbitrators), ICC Global Commission on Arbitration and ADR (UK Member), Indian Maritime Association (UK), International Council for Commercial Arbitration, Inter-Pacific Bar Association, London Common Law and Commercial Bar Association, LCIA European Users’ Council, LMAA Supporting Member, Scottish Arbitration Centre, Singapore Chamber of Maritime Arbitration - Individual Member, Worshipful Company of Arbitrators (Freeman).


University College London (1999 LLB (first class honours)).

London Bar


Within: Leading Juniors

Ravi Aswani - The 36 Group ‘ A rising star who is both intelligent and user-friendly. ’

Within: Commodities

36 Stone, part of The 36 Group, is a dedicated commodities, shipping and international trade set. Its members have extensive experience in matters relating to shipping and commodities contracts in the civil and criminal courts, arbitrations, inquiries and other tribunals in the UK and overseas. It has highly regarded specialists including international trade and commodities specialist Vasanti Selvaratnam QC, who acted for a respondent Malaysian Bank in Deutsche Bank AG v CIMB Bank Berhad, which concerned discrepancies in documents in a commodity transaction. Highly experienced junior Charles Debattista practices in commodities, dry shipping and international trade disputes, both as counsel and as arbitrator. Ravi Aswani frequently handles the physical and paper elements of commodities transactions, and has experience in arbitrations before specialist trade bodies including GAFTA and FOSFA.

[back to top]

International arbitration: counsel

Within: Leading Juniors

Ravi Aswani - The 36 Group ‘ A rising star in international arbitration. ’

[back to top]


Within: Leading Juniors

Ravi Aswani - The 36 Group ‘ A tough and tenacious advocate who gives clear and lucid presentations in arbitration and before the court. ’

Within: Shipping

36 Stone, which is part of The 36 Group, is a dedicated international trade and shipping set which is 'user-friendly' and has a 'wealth of experience'. Vasanti Selvaratnam QC and James Shirley were successful in Nautical Challenge v Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd, which is a leading ship collision case on the inter-relationship between the crossing rule, the narrow channel rule and the general rule of good seamanship in the approaches to a narrow channel. Ravi Aswani appeared in Dera Commercial Estate v Derya Inc, which examined the dismissal of claims for inordinate and inexcusable delay under section 41 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and whether a geographic deviation would deprive a carrier from the benefit of the limitation period in the Hague Rules.

[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”.