Home Barristers Caley Wright

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Caley Wright

Call 2008


Caley specialises in commercial litigation with a focus on Civil Fraud, Company and Insolvency matters.

He is experienced both as part of a team in large scale commercial litigation, having acted as a junior in JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov for a number of years, and acting as sole Counsel in the High Court and appellate courts. He has recently acted unled in two multi-week trials in the High Court in Patel v Ferdinand and Marahta v Taylor Hampton, as well as for the successful appellant in the Court of Appeal in JEBR v Binstock.

He is instructed on all manner of offshore as well as onshore matters including in the BVI and Cayman Islands, and is a registered practitioner in the DIFC Court, in which he acts as junior Counsel in Nest Investments v Deloitte & Touche.

Commercial Litigation

Caley has extensive experience of all interlocutory matters, with particular experience of: issues surrounding challenges to jurisdiction; a wide range of applications relating to obtaining disclosure and privilege; applications concerning the use of documents obtained; and unless orders and other sanctions for non-compliance.

He has significant trial experience, acting as sole Counsel in two multi-week trials in the Chancery Division over the last year.

Civil Fraud

Caley has acted in some of the largest civil fraud litigation in the English courts in recent years, most notably acting as junior Counsel for the Bank in the long-running JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov. The case involved all manner of interlocutory applications including freezing injunctions, search orders, novel applications for disclosure, receivership orders and committal for contempt of court.

He has also acted both as sole Counsel and as a junior in substantial cases such as Chodiev v Stein in the Commercial Court and litigation arising out of the fraud of the well-known art dealer Timothy Sammons. He is currently instructed in Eurasia Sports v Tsai in the Queen’s Bench Division.

Company and Insolvency

Caley acts in all manner of contentious company and insolvency disputes including shareholder disputes, petitions under s.994 of the Companies Act, and acting for or against office holders in Insolvency Act claims. He has a particular interest in company valuation, and has been involved in a number of ‘take private’ cases emanating from the Cayman Islands merger regime.

Notable/Recent Cases

Nest Investment Holding Lebanon SAL & others v Deloitte and Touche (M.E.) & Joseph El Fadl (CFI-027-2016)– junior Counsel for the Claimants in the DIFC Court in a claim by a group of investors seeking damages for fraud and recklessness against the auditors of Lebanese Canadian Bank, which went into liquidation after allegations of money laundering and terrorist financing

Marahta v Taylor Hampton Solicitors, 2017 – sole Counsel for the Claimant in the 10-day trial of a professional negligence action in the Chancery Division against the Claimant’s former solicitors for the loss of the opportunity to bring proceedings against a company’s accountants and auditors, including wide-ranging issues on company valuation

JEB Recoveries LLP v Binstock – acted initially as junior and later as sole Counsel in the High Court and Court of Appeal for the Defendant on a £30 million claim for breach of contract in respect of professional services. The case involved numerous interlocutory matters and is a leading authority on the issue of Champerty. Reported at:

  • [2017] EWHC 1123 (Ch) (unless order requiring payment of interim costs orders)
  • [2016] EWCA Civ 1008, [2017] C.P. Rep. 5 (successful appeal to the Court of Appeal on a challenge to jurisdiction)
  • [2015] EWHC 1063 (Ch) (High Court application to strike out the claim for Champerty)
  • [2015] EWHC 1168 (Ch) (jurisdiction challenge in the High Court)

JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov –junior Counsel for the Bank over a number of years on one of the largest civil fraud actions ever in the English Courts. Acted in numerous interlocutory matters including obtaining wide-ranging and novel disclosure orders, freezing injunctions, search orders and receivership orders, and the committal trial and appeal of Mr Ablyazov’s. Relevant reported decisions include:

  • [2016] EWHC 3071 (trial of a claim under s.423 of the Insolvency Act)
  • [2016] EWHC 2606 (Ch) (use of documents obtained pursuant to search orders)
  • [2015] EWHC 3871 (Comm) (use of funds subject to freezing injunction for legal fees)
  • [2013] EWHC 2772 (Comm) (application to reverse transaction effected in breach of freezing and receivership orders)
  • [2012] EWCA Civ 1411; [2013] 1 W.L.R. 1331; [2013] 2 All E.R. 515; Times, January 8, 2013 (Court of Appeal’s dismissal of appeal from committal order)
  • [2012] EWHC 455 (Comm) (unless order requiring contemnor to attend the tipstaff)
  • [2012] EWHC 237 (Comm) (committal trial of Mr Ablyazov)
  • [2011] EWHC 2163 (Ch); [2013] Ch 1, [2012] 3 W.L.R. 559, [2011] C.P. Rep. 46 (disclosure order made against defendant’s former solicitors)

Insol Funding Co Ltd v Cowlam [2017] EWHC 1822 (Ch) – acted as sole Counsel for the Claimant addressing issues such as constructive trust, equity of exoneration and equitable subrogation

Patel v Ferdinand, Re Shires Defence Solicitors – acted as sole Counsel on a 7-day trial of a s.994 petition in the High Court, successfully establishing unfair prejudice. Reported at:

  • [2016] EWHC 2362 (Ch) (costs and consequential matters from trial)
  • [2016] EWHC 1524 (Ch) (trial of s.994 petition)

MA Lloyd & Son Ltd (In Administration) v PPC International Ltd [2016] EWHC 2162 (QB) – sole Counsel for the Defendant obtaining a wasted costs order in excess of £130,000 against solicitors for the unreasonable conduct of litigation. Also established for the first time that a party cannot obtain security for the costs of a wasted costs application [2016] EWHC 1583 (QB)

Chodiev v Stein [2015] EWHC 1428 (Comm) – acted as junior Counsel for the Claimants attempting to set aside a judgment on the grounds that it was obtained by a fraud which went solely to issues of credibility. Also acted as junior Counsel on an application regarding the use of documents disclosed during the course of proceedings [2016] EWHC 1210 (Comm)

Joshi & Welch v Taj Foods [2015] EWHC 3905 (QB) - sole Counsel obtaining relief from sanctions where judgment in default had been entered on the failure to serve a defence to counterclaim in circumstances where it was acknowledged that the failure had had no effect on the proceedings

Belton Massey v Kozub [2015] EWHC 2259 (QB) – sole Counsel on an application seeking to establish that the Court’s foreign process service was incompatible with EU regulations on the service of documents abroad.

Nordic v Land Resources [2014] EWHC 1093 (Ch) – sole Counsel for the successful defendant in a 3-day trial in the Chancery Division relating to the termination of a joint venture agreement

Peterkin v LB Merton [2011] EWHC 376 (Ch) – sole Counsel for the respondent trustee in bankruptcy on interpretation of an individual voluntary arrangement


Chancery Bar Association
Commercial Bar Association
Young Fraud Lawyers Association
Fraud Lawyers Association
Commercial Fraud Lawyers Association


MA (Oxon) Classics (First)