Riz Majid > Bark&co > London, England > Lawyer Profile
14 NEW BRIDGE STREET
- Go to...
Head of Litigation
Riz Majid is Head of Litigation at Bark & Co.
He has over 16 years’ experience as a qualified solicitor.
His emphasis on work is split between Civil Fraud Litigation and Property Litigation.
Civil Fraud Litigation
He has conducted numerous matters in the County Court, High Court, Court of Appeal and European Court of Justice.
He has been successful in high value (multi million pound) High Court claims, often with a complicated factual and legal matrix. He has acted for defendants in one of the biggest civil fraud claims at the High Court in London, involving a Worldwide Freezing Order and associated claim for £1.5 billion. He is currently instructed on various matters including a multi-million pound tax related matter and a restitutionary claim for unjust enrichment of £2 million pounds.
Examples of recent court civil fraud litigation includes:
B v P and others (Queen’s Bench Division, High Court of Justice)
Advised and acted for the Defendants, in a £17 million claim and associated proprietary injunction in a breach of contract and trusts claim. Successful in managing to get the proprietary injunction application refused and subsequently the claim was discontinued.
S v S and others (Commercial Court, High Court of Justice)
Advised and acted for multiple defendants, in the Commercial Court, in a £1.5 billion claim for fraud arising out of tax allegedly due to a foreign sovereign state. The claim commenced with a Worldwide Freezing Order and the subsequent claim involved multiple defendants across multiple jurisdictions, and included advising clients on law in other jurisdictions, preparing their defence and conducting court litigation.
W & Others v K & Others (Chancery Division, High Court of Justice)
Successfully obtained a Worldwide Freezing Order in a complex claim worth in excess of £3.7 million with regard to allegations of fraud, breach of duty, obligation, contract and conversion in respect of cryptocurrency and loans. An expert report was obtained in respect of cryptocurrency, and the injunction application incorporated the then just published LawTech Delivery Panel’s UK Jurisdiction Taskforce report on the legal status of cryptocurrency as property in the England and Wales jurisdiction.
D v W & Others (Chancery Division, High Court of Justice)
Successfully acted for a high profile West End gentleman’s club owner and others following allegations of unlawful means conspiracy. After an application for security for costs and specific disclosure of CCTV evidence, the claimant discontinued its claim.
Riz has conducted numerous matters in the County Court, High Court, Court of Appeal, First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
His work has included property related disputes, including boundary disputes, nuisance, trespass and claims under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
Riz has advised on numerous adverse possession applications and associated litigation involving adverse possession law and procedure. Riz successfully acted for Mr Keith Best (against the Land Registry) at the High Court and Court of Appeal in a leading court case on adverse possession.
Examples of recent property litigation includes:
J v R (Chancery Division, High Court of Justice)
Advised and acted for a Claimant in a claim involving a property dispute which included allegations of deceit and fraudulent misrepresentation.
J v K (Chancery List, County Court at Oxford)
Successfully acted for Claimants in a dispute involving ownership of a £1 million property.
P v K (Chancery Division, High Court of Justice)
Advised and acted for a claimant in a claim arising out of a £1.5 million pound High Court property dispute, involving allegations of fraud and misrepresentation.
B v M (Chancery List, County Court at Central London)
Defended lease forfeiture proceedings on behalf of an established and iconic London nightclub, who had a Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 protected lease.
N v H (Administrative Division, High Court of Justice)
Judicial Review, on behalf of a leaseholder’s group, against a local authority housing ALMO.
E v H (First Tier Tribunal, Property Chamber)
Successful in a contested adverse possession tribunal claim for a residential house worth £400,000.
D (in an application for Adverse Possession)
Successful in an application for adverse possession of a London terraced house worth £800,000.
K (in an application for Adverse Possession)
Successful in an application for adverse possession of a London town house worth £1.4 million pounds