Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

United Kingdom > London Bar > Financial services regulation > Law firm and leading lawyer rankings



Index of tables

  1. Financial services regulation - Leading sets
  2. Leading Silks
  3. 2018 Silks
  4. 2019 Silks
  5. Leading Juniors

Leading Silks

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3

2018 Silks

  1. 1

2019 Silks

  1. 1
    • Nicholas Mecroft QC - Fountain Court ChambersHe has a deserved reputation for being a formidable opponent, and will thrive in silk.

Leading Juniors

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3

The Financial services rankings are distinct from the Banking and finance section in that it is focused on contentious and non-contentious regulatory issues, rather than civil claims. Barristers ranked in this section are those with experience working for and against foreign and domestic regulators, such as the Financial Conduct Authority, and advising commercial clients on non-contentious regulatory matters.

3 Verulam Buildings remains 'a go-to set for any dispute with a financial services angle', according to instructing solicitors. Recently members such as Richard Brent QC have advised on several major test cases affecting the financial services industry. Members, including Rory Phillips QC, Robert Purves, and Sophie Mallinckrodt  also acted for the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Financial Conduct Authority on the Part VII transfers of Barclays Bank, Lloyds Bank, HSBC, and Santander.

Blackstone Chambers is a 'go-to set for complex financial services work', where you are 'spoilt for choice' because the 'juniors and QCs are outstanding and have always make time for you'. Recent highlights include R (Holmcroft) v KPMG LLP and others before the Court of Appeal in which seven members were involved, including Javan Herberg QC and Hanif Mussa for KPMG, Ben Jaffey QC for Barclays Bank, (an interested party), and Monica Carss-Frisk QC and Daniel Burgess for the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). Members also acted for the FCA on the issuance of the Tesco market abuse Final Notice.

Fountain Court Chambers is praised for its 'excellent all-round service' and 'remains one of the standout chambers for financial services regulation work', according to its instructing solicitors. The set has experienced members at every level, offering contentious and non-contentious regulatory advice. Highlights for members, such as Bankim Thanki QC, Richard Lissack QC, and Eleanor Davison,  include successfully guiding Barclays Bank through numerous proceedings arising from the £11bn Qatar capital raising in 2008.

4 Stone Buildings houses members with experience representing a broad range of parties affected by the UK's financial services regulatory framework. The set's barristers also have strong expertise advising on regulatory issues in other key jurisdictions, including Dubai, where Sharif Shivji is experienced. In the UK, notable mandates include appearing before the Supreme Court in FCA v Macris, where Jonathan Crow QC represented the Financial Conduct Authority.

Gough Square Chambers has 'a strong reputation for banking disputes with a regulatory focus – clients do not need to be persuaded to instruct counsel from this set', say solicitors. Recently, members such as Thomas Samuels  were involved in R (Berkeley Burke SIPP Administration Ltd) v Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd & Others. Simon Popplewell represented Fortwell Finance in  Halstead v Fortwell Finance Ltd which went to the Court of Appeal.

Henderson Chambers is 'a good set for work of this nature' and 'always able to provide counsel at the right level of experience for claims of all sizes'. Members regularly act for and against regulators including the Financial Conduct Authority, with recent cases including FCA v Gopee (in which Julia Smith represented the regulatory body) , and are also highly experienced on the non-contentious side.

Outer Temple Chambers has some excellent barristers, many of whom, including Michael Bowes QC, work in the cross-section between criminal, civil and regulatory law. Members have strong expertise advising on domestic and global regulatory investigations, both for and against the regulators.

Interview with...

Law firm partners and practice heads explain how their firms are adapting to clients' changing needs

GC Diversity and Inclusion Report

In partnership with...

International comparative guides

Giving the in-house community greater insight to the law and regulations in different jurisdictions.

Select Practice Area

Press releases

The latest news direct from law firms. If you would like to submit press releases for your firm, send an email request to

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 ‘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.
  • 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”.
  • 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  ‘previously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Immigration Rules’,  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 (“the 2014 Act”) 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  (“the 2002 Act”). 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.

Press Releases in the UK

The latest news direct from law firms. If you would like to submit press releases for your firm, send an email request to