Contact details

Rebecca Garrick

T: +44 20 7809 2548 Email Rebecca | vCard Office: London

Rebecca Garrick Senior knowledge lawyer

Contact details

Rebecca Garrick

Rebecca Garrick
Senior knowledge lawyer

T: +44 20 7809 2548 Email Rebecca | vCard Office: London

Rebecca is a senior knowledge lawyer in the corporate and commercial disputes team.
  • Profile
  • Services

Rebecca is an experienced litigator and keeps the team up to date with the latest legal developments. She contributes to internal and external articles and client briefings, provides training to lawyers and supports business development activities.

Prior to becoming a knowledge lawyer, Rebecca trained and practised as a senior associate at Stephenson Harwood. Rebecca has experience of a broad range of major commercial disputes for international clients including sovereign states, banks, corporates and high net worth individuals.

  • Commercial litigation

Dispute between sovereign states

Acting for a sovereign state in a multi-million pound widely reported banking dispute before the High Court involving arguments of non-justiciability and multi-jurisdictional complexities.

Securities litigation 

Acting for a global asset manager in connection with litigation relating to a portfolio of RMBS and CMBS assets including securities fraud claims in New York. 

Solicitors' negligence

Acting on a claim against London solicitors for negligent advice and drafting of contracts in connection with transactions for the acquisition and subsequent disposal of a valuable asset.

Acting for a fund manager in connection with claims in professional negligence against a global law firm arising in relation to contractual documentation entered into as part of a restructuring of a large European bank.

More: Commercial litigation

Latest news & insights

17 Nov 2023

From Insights

Enforcement of foreign judgments: Invest Bank v El-Husseini

A recent Commercial Court decision has raised an intriguing question of private international law: can a foreign judgment be enforced in England and Wales if it is not..

More

31 Aug 2023

From Insights

Privilege in the spotlight: Al Sadeq v Dechert LLP

The recent judgment in Al Sadeq v Dechert LLP [2023] EWHC 795 (KB) provides insight into a number of interesting issues relating to legal professional privilege

More

04 Aug 2023

From Insights

Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses: A European conundrum - France's referral to the CJEU

Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses generally give one party - usually a bank - the liberty to choose where it brings proceedings.

More

31 Jul 2023

From Insights

We are never ever getting back together: getting termination notices right

In Topalsson GmbH v Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Ltd [2023] EWHC 1765 (TCC) the court held that the defendant ("Rolls-Royce") had validly terminated a software agreement wit..

More

15 Mar 2023

From Insights

When conclusive isn't quite conclusive: Sara & Hossein v Blacks

In the recent judgment of Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd v Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd [2023] UKSC 2, the majority of the Supreme Court found that the correct contrac..

More

24 Feb 2023

From Insights

The myth of decentralised governance of bitcoin? Tulip Trading Ltd v van der Laan

The Court of Appeal in Tulip Trading Ltd v van der Laan has overturned the High Court's decision in Tulip Trading Ltd v Bitcoin, finding for the first time that develo..

More

19 Dec 2022

From Insights

Take care when terminating: James Kemball Ltd v "K" Line (Europe) Ltd

In James Kemball Ltd v "K" Line (Europe) Ltd [2022] EWHC 2239 (Comm), the claimant purported to terminate a service agreement on the grounds that the defendant was in ..

More

01 Dec 2022

From Insights

Litigation privilege: Loreley v Credit Suisse

Court of Appeal determines that, generally, the identities of those giving instructions are not covered by litigation privilege: Loreley v Credit Suisse

More

30 Nov 2022

From Insights

When is an Event of Default no longer "continuing" under the ISDA Master Agreement?

When an Event of Default is "continuing" is not defined or addressed in the ISDA Master Agreement. Until now it does not appear to have been expressly considered in ca..

More

25 Oct 2022

From Insights

Inadvertent waiver of privilege and concerns over independence: Pickett v Balkind

The Court has recently reminded litigants of the care needed to avoid inadvertent waivers of privilege and the circumstances in which disclosure of otherwise privilege..

More

10 Oct 2022

From Insights

Witness statements under PD57AC

What is the purpose of a witness statement?

More

18 May 2022

From Insights

Clarification that litigation privilege and legal advice privilege are not mutually exclusive: Loreley Financing v Credit Suisse

In Loreley Financing (Jersey) No 30 Ltd v Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) Ltd [2022] EWHC 1136 (Comm), the Defendants, four members of the Credit Suisse group (toget..

More

12 May 2022

From Insights

Reliance on force majeure in the face of sanctions: MUR Shipping v RTI

In MUR Shipping BV v RTI Ltd, the Commercial Court affirmed a contracting party's right to invoke force majeure where the parent company of its counterparty is subject..

More

18 Mar 2022

From Insights

Key changes to UK sanctions regime - The Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act 2022

On 15 March 2022, the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act (the "ECA") received Royal Assent after being fast-tracked through Parliament in response to th..

More

15 Mar 2022

From Insights

Knowing retention not knowing receipt?

In Byers and others v Saudi National Bank [2022] EWCA Civ 43, the Court of Appeal (Newey, Asplin and Popplewell LJJ) dismissed the Claimants' appeal, confirming that a..

More

15 Nov 2021

From Insights

Directors' duties to avoid conflicts of interest – how long do they last? Burnell v Trans-Tag Ltd

Whilst it is well established that a director cannot simply resign in order to exploit "property, information or opportunity" of which he or she became aware while hol..

More

print-footer
logo
© Stephenson Harwood LLP 2016. Any reference to Stephenson Harwood in this document means Stephenson Harwood LLP and/or its affiliated undertakings. Any reference to a partner is used to refer to a member of Stephenson Harwood LLP.