Nathan is a commercial barrister whose practice has a particular focus on insolvency, company law and contractual disputes. He is a meticulous barrister who always takes the particular circumstances of clients into account in order to arrive at the most pragmatic and commercial approach.
He is an established and articulate advocate with a reputation for thoroughness, regularly appearing in the High Court and County Court.
Nathan has an extensive insolvency practice and regularly acts for clients in both corporate and personal insolvency matters. He is experienced in handling broad range of insolvency applications including misfeasance claims, reviewable transactions, setting aside of statutory demands, restraining the presentation of winding up petitions and validation orders.
He is instructed by debtors, creditors and office holders and has a keen awareness of how insolvency legislation can be used to the best advantage of each.
Recent matters have included:
Nathan enjoys the variety of contractual disputes and has experience of acting for individuals, SMEs and larger businesses, so is well aware of the different issues which can be in play depending on the nature of the business and the need to tailor his advice and approach accordingly.
Recent matters have included:
Nathan’s focus on insolvency and commercial matters means there are significant areas of overlap with other areas of law, one being corporate law. In advising on company law matters he is able to bring his experience in other areas of law to bear to ensure that potential issues are identified and addressed, whether or not litigation has commenced.
Recent matters have included:
Nathan acts for clients in obtaining and resisting applications for injunctions.
He has particular experience of doing so where there is an insolvency angle, such as injunctions restraining the presentation and advertisement of winding up petitions, but also in other areas of law such as property law, for example acting for a client in successfully opposing an application brought by the owner of a commercial property who asserted an easement over a neighbouring residential property.
Cambridge University Law Society, Master of Moots, 2010-2011
Chancery Bar Association
‘Politicians, beware the investigative journalist: Tim Yeo v Times Newspapers Limited’ [2016] Ent LR 27(2), 74-75
‘Unexpected, illogical and unfair: the distinction between who can and who cannot sue for breaches of financial services rules’ [2017] BJIB & FL 32(9), 548-550
‘Getting consumer rights right’ [2017] NLJ 167, 13-14
‘Section 21 Notices and the Requirement to Provide a Gas Safety Certificate’ [2019] L & T Review, 23(6), 220-223’