Mr David Semark > Chambers of Simon Croall QC > London, England > Lawyer Profile
Chambers of Simon Croall QC Offices
QUADRANT HOUSE, 10 FLEET STREET
- Go to...
Mr David Semark
Dry shipping disputes; energy, trade and commodities litigation; insurance and reinsurance. Co-author of ‘P&I Clubs: Law & Practice’ (4th ed 2010 Informa).
Called 2009; Lincoln’s Inn. Shepstone & Wylie, Durban South Africa, attorney (qualified 2000); Richards Butler, solicitor 2001(qualified 2002); Reed Smith Richards Butler LLP partner 2007; transferred to the Bar October 2009.
British Maritime Law Association; COMBAR.
SACS, Cape Town; University of Stellenbosch (1994 B. Comm; 1996 LLB); University of Southampton (1998 LLM Maritime Law).
Lawyer Rankings(Leading Juniors) Ranked: Tier 4
Quadrant Chambers has the ‘strongest consolidated offering of shipping skills at the London Bar‘ and offers a ‘very wide range of very able counsel and juniors‘, according to clients. The set covers a full spectrum of dry and wet shipping mandates, and houses in-depth expertise across marine insurance, fraud, insolvency, finance and other commercial shipping disputes. The set is regularly involved in Supreme Court cases and landmark case Volcafe v Compania Sud Americana de Vapores, where Simon Rainey QC and David Semark faced John Russell QC and Benjamin Coffer, concerned the correct interpretation of the Hague-Visby Rules as to the burden of proof in cargo claims, was a notable highlight. Lionel Persey QC and Benjamin Coffer appeared in the Court of Appeal for Sea Tank Shipping AS v Vinnlustodin HF (‘The Aqasia’), which is one of the leading cases on Hague Rules and limitation of liability. Classic Maritime v Limbungan Makmur SDN BHD, which examined on the correct application of standard force majeure clauses in long-term shipping contracts of affreightment, was a notable case for Simon Rainey QC and Andrew Leung. Elsewhere, Nigel Cooper QC acted against Michael Nolan QC in Kaefer Aislamientos SA de CV v AMS Drilling Mexico SA de CV, which provides guidance on the approach to take in a dispute over jurisdiction.