The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

Chambers of Gavin Kealey QC

Work 020 7910 8300
Fax 020 7910 8400

Richard Southern QC

Work 020 7910 8300
7 King's Bench Walk (Chambers of Gavin Kealey QC)


Barrister specialising in commercial litigation and arbitration, including shipping, international trade, energy, professional negligence, insurance and reinsurance. He has represented several FTSE 100 companies in oil related and other disputes. Recent cases include: OMV Petrom v Glencore International ([2015] EWHC 666 (Flaux J.) – measure of damages for deceit and [2014] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 308 (Blair J.) – abuse of process; Synergy Health UK Ltd v CGU Insurance plc [2011] Lloyd’s Rep IR 500 – professional negligence (insurance broker); Dolphin Tanker v Westport Petroleum [2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 550 – oil majors approvals clause; Glencore Energy UK Ltd v Transworld Oil Ltd [2010] 1 CLC 284 – oil trading dispute. Much of his practice is in arbitration, including commercial fraud, contracts of affreightment, and commodities.


Qualified 1987; silk 2006.


Cambridge University (MA).

London Bar


Within: Leading Silks

Richard Southern QC - 7 King's Bench WalkHe has a strong instinct for how a case will play out and is fantastic in oral hearings.

[back to top]

Insurance and reinsurance

Within: Leading Silks

Richard Southern QC - 7 King's Bench WalkA razor-sharp cross-examiner with an outstanding intellect and huge experience of insurance claims.

[back to top]


Within: Leading Silks

Richard Southern QC - 7 King's Bench WalkHe is ferociously clever but a real team player.

Within: Shipping

7 King's Bench Walk is a 'thoroughbred stable' for shipping work, 'always impresses with its expertise in the sector'. Supreme Court case the B Atlantic, which examined the scope of cover for malicious third parties in marine insurance cover, and the construction of the exclusion of an infringement of customs regulations in the standard war risks form, is a key highlight for Alistair Schaff QC and Alexander MacDonald. Peter MacDonald Eggers QC and Sandra Healy appeared in the Court of Appeal in Aspen v Kairos, a $22m claim relating to the loss of the vessel, the Atlantik Confidence. Richard Southern QC acted in Classic Maritime v Limbungan Makmur Sdn Bhd, a $20m claim for non-performance of a contract of affreightment. Elsewhere, Suez Fortune v Talbot, a marine insurance claim under a war risks policy is a high-profile instruction for Peter MacDonald Eggers QC, Tim Jenns and Richard Waller QC.

[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
  • Communiqué 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 Communiqué on Equity Crowdfunding [1] . The CMB has now officially published the Communiqué on Crowdfunding No. III-35/A (“ Communiqué ”), on October 3, 2019. The Communiqué 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”.