INTERNATIONAL jUly 2010 COMMERCE Commerce Issue 1.pdfBlackBerry litigation, and the lessons learnt....

jUly 2010

INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE

Strategic, regulatory and operational insight from Holman Fenwick Willan

Private eqUity eyes shiPPing goldmine

Protectionism and tighter rUles sqUeeze commodities

insUrance PrePares as solvency ii looms

behind the rise of deUtsche Post dhl

alternative disPUte

resolUtionstrategies FOr stayiNg OUt OF

tHe COUrts

2 INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE JULY 2010

International businesses face unprecedented challenges from every side, whether it’s financial, strategic, regulatory or operational.

It’s an ideal time to be launching the new magazine from Holman Fenwick Willan, International Commerce,

which is designed to offer practical, strategic insight into the key issues and opportunities facing global businesses.

In our first issue we get to grips with legislative developments, in the form of Solvency II and what it means for companies (page 20) and economic issues for those involved in commodities (page 14).

But we’re not just focused on the current travails of business, we also explore the opportunities created by the current climate. We examine the developments in shipping finance (page 16), solutions such as alternative dispute resolution (page 6), and we showcase the successes at Deutsche Post DHL, a global business which has seen dramatic growth through overcoming challenge and grasping these opportunities. This $46.2 billion company is ample proof of the rewards available to those who can rise to the challenge.

Welcome

richard crUmP senior Partner holman fenWick Willan

10

3www.hfw.com INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE

04 in brief More controversy on Rotterdam Rules; Getting emissions

under control; New EU competition rules for insurers; Venezuela: oil industry should proceed with caution; Latest legal developments.

06 a better Way to resolve disPUtes There are a number of alternatives to litigation. The

key is to pick the right one for your circumstances and make sure it is implemented properly.

10 managing three decades of groWth Deutsche Post DHL has witnessed enormous growth over

the past 30 years and Geoff Cruikshanks has been at the legal helm every step of the way.

14 commodities set for a bUmPy ride Whether through tighter regulation, resurgent protectionism or potential anti-competitive practices, 2010 is set to bring upheaval for the commodities market.

16 a golden oPPortUnity After a year of licking its wounds and consolidating, there

are now new finance opportunities for shipping.

20 moderate, risk of storms later With Solvency II on the horizon, there are changes afoot

for the insurance and self-insurance industry. What is the forecast for risk management and finance?

22 somali Pirates Under attack Piracy is not just a threat to commercial shipping, but

to independent travellers and tourists, so there could be wide-ranging benefits if the industry unites to deal with Somali pirates.

Contents jUly 2010

Contents

14

Produced by Grist, 21 Noel Street, Soho, London, W1F 8GPPublishing director: Mark Wellings Editor: Sarah Coles Sub-editor: Jonathan Lalljee Art director: Andrew Beswick Commercial director: Andrew Rogerson Telephone +44 (0)20 7434 1447 Website: www.gristonline.com

Holman Fenwick Willan LLPFriary Court, 65 Crutched Friars, London EC3N 2AE. T: +44 (0)20 7264 8000 F: +44 (0)20 7264 8888

© 2010 Holman Fenwick Willan. All rights reserved.

Whilst every care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of the information at the time of publication, the information is intended as guidance only. It should not be considered as legal advice.

Holman Fenwick Willan LLP incorporates the firm’s London, Paris, Rouen, Brussels and Shanghai offices. Holman Fenwick Willan Middle East LLP incorporates the firm’s Dubai office. Holman Fenwick Willan International LLP incorporates the firm’s Piraeus office. Holman Fenwick Willan Singapore LLP incorporates the firm’s Singapore office. Our practices in Hong Kong, Melbourne and Sydney remain as partnerships.

Holman Fenwick Willan is the Data Controller for any data that it holds about you. To correct your personal details or change your mailing preferences please contact Craig Martin on +44 (0)20 7246 8109, or email [email protected]


IN bRIEFEmerging legal and commercial issues for international business

The vast scope and potential impact of the Rotterdam Rules continue to generate controversy. The convention is probably the most ambitious innovation in maritime and trade law for a century. Although 21 UN states have indicated an intention to ratify the convention, there remains plenty of forceful debate to come on the subject, says Craig Neame, Holman Fenwick Willan partner.

He explains: “The Rules regulate a far wider area of activity than earlier ocean carriage conventions. As well as governing the “tackle to tackle” liability of carriers, the convention can also apply to terminal handling and to the inland legs of multimodal movements that include a sea leg. Another key area covered by the Rules is e-commerce, with the Rules hoping to stimulate the global use of electronic transport documents instead of paper bills of lading.”

Some 20 states must ratify the Rules for them to become law. No state has ratified them yet, although 21 have indicated their intention to do so. The USA is committed to widespread adoption, but the UK will decide whether to ratify the Rules after a consultation exercise. Neame warns: “The Rules attempt to harmonise matters relating to jurisdiction and arbitration with ‘opt in’ provisions. Many states (including all EU states), however, won’t opt into these provisions and the concern is that this will lead not to uniformity but to uncertainty.”

Venezuela: oil industry should proceed with cautionRecent activity in the Orinoco oilfields shows Venezuela remains attractive to investors, despite President Chávez’s seizure of assets at scores of oil services companies.

Reuters reported that PDVSA, Venezuela’s state-owned oil company, owed over $8 billion to oil service companies, including ExxonMobil, by June last year. Yet, says Rebecca Warder, associate at Holman Fenwick Willan, “We have been consulted by oil services companies who are still very interested in Venezuela.”

“Careful risk assessment is vital,” adds Alistair Mackie, partner at Holman Fenwick Willan. “Go in with proper local law advice, an appropriate dispute resolution procedure in your contract and check where you can get insurance. For ongoing projects, keep abreast of political and legal risk and contingency planning. Should the worst happen, dispute resolution options range from local legal actions to international arbitration.”

Costs and regulatory reform dominate the latest legal developments, says Greg Gray, partner at Holman Fenwick Willan.

The Legal Services Act aims to simplify regulation and unify standards. Under its provisions, the Legal Services Board (LSB), which oversees regulators such as the Law Society, became operational on 1 January 2010. Towards the end of this year, the Office for Legal Complaints will begin filtering consumers’ grievances. Gray adds: “From 2012, alternative business structures will allow lawyers to form partnerships with non-lawyers, accept outside investment and operate under external ownership.”

Meanwhile, Lord Justice Jackson’s Review of Civil Litigation Costs, published in January, focuses on proportionality and fairness. For example, it proposes that success fees and

after the event (ATE) insurance premiums should no longer be recoverable from losing defendants in professional indemnity, clinical negligence and defamation cases involving conditional fee agreements. Qualified ‘one way costs shifting’ would mean unsuccessful claimants would make only a

small contribution to defendant costs. To offset the effects, general damages awards for personal injuries and other civil wrongs would be increased by 10%. Referral fees for personal injury cases would also be scrapped.

The report comes at a time when cost structures are increasingly flexible and alternative dispute resolution is more widely accepted. “Given support from the new government,” says Gray, “changes recommended by the report could begin as early as this summer.”

More controversy to come on Rotterdam Rules

Latest legal developments

Greg Gray, Holman

Fenwick Willan


The European Commission’s new block exemption regulation (BER), which came into force on 1 April 2010, creates traps for the unwary, warns Anthony Woolich, partner at Holman Fenwick Willan.

He highlights that if competition law is infringed in the UK, businesses face fines and actions for damages, agreements can be void, company directors can be disqualified for up to 15 years and individuals risk fines and imprisonment.

The EU is particularly concerned about the upward alignment of premiums which can happen when placing large or complex risks in the subscription market: a broker will negotiate terms with one insurer, who reserves the right to increase the premium if follow-on insurers for remaining portions of the risk require a higher premium. Some buying groups deny that this stifles competition, and maintain it can achieve higher capacity at a more competitive price. The EC also wishes to ensure that there is transparency for the customer. Woolich said: “If the European Federation of Insurance Intermediaries’ (BIPAR) High Level Principles

for placement of a risk with multiple insures are applied, the Commission appears to be relaxed. However, a follow-up review of the operation of the subscription market in practice and whether the BIPAR principles and any other solutions are fully addressing the Commission’s concerns, can be expected.”

The insurance sector has a transition period, ending on 30 September 2010, to comply with the new rules. Meanwhile, Woolich warns that precautions should be taken. Take care when dealing with competitors, including within industry associations, and with internal and external communications, review the agenda of meetings with competitors and take detailed minutes.

Organisations should also avoid statements suggesting anti-competitive behaviour, and staff should be trained to ensure they comply. If you are at a meeting where competitors exchange commercially sensitive information, object, walk out, make sure this is minuted and seek legal advice. Do not destroy documents which possibly point to unlawful behaviour.

Monaco Yacht ShowMonte Carlo, 22-25 September 2010An international team of Holman Fenwick Willan partners and associates will be attending the Monaco Yacht Show. The firm is also sponsoring the Marine Money Super Yacht Finance Forum event on 21 September, at which Jay Tooker, partner, will be speaking.

Marine Money AsiaSingapore, 28-29 September 2010Holman Fenwick Willan partners will be attending the Marine Money event in Singapore, bringing together our knowledge and capabilities in the shipping and transactional markets.

Managing Complex Commercial LitigationLondon, 12 October 2010Holman Fenwick Willan will host a seminar and discussion on managing complex commercial litigation. Keynote speaker James H Wallace, Wiley Rein LLP, will present an entertaining account of the RIM v NTP US BlackBerry litigation, and the lessons learnt.

Autumn Alumni PartyLondon, September/October 2010Holman Fenwick Willan will be hosting an autumn evening party for all its alumni.

International Commerce ConferenceMumbai, 23-25 November 2010Holman Fenwick Willan partners will join with Indian industry leaders to discuss a range of topics affecting international trade and transport.

For more information about any of these events please contact Melanie McBride, events executive: Telephone: +44 (0)20 7264 8324Email: [email protected]

New EU competition rules for insurers

The European Union’s market-based carbon trading scheme (the ETS) continues to press ahead in the absence of international consensus on how to tackle the issue of carbon emissions.

The ETS is scheduled to be expanded in 2012 with the inclusion of new sectors and the tightening of allocated credits. This is in spite of the inconclusive outcome from the recent talks in Copenhagen, the on-going controversy in the United States surrounding cap and trade and a stalemate at the International Maritime Organisation (IMO).

Under pressure to curb shipping sector emissions, the IMO has constituted the Marine Environment Protection Committee to find a solution but with no tangible outcome. Diana France, a partner at Holman Fenwick Willan explains, “The EU has said that it will act on its own if other agencies are ineffective in curbing emissions from ships but many questions remain to be answered as to how such steps will be implemented,” with commentators now suggesting that without agreement, the shipping sector could be included into an expanded ETS as early as 2011.

Will the shipping sector by caught by the EU’s Cap and Trade Scheme?

DIARy

neWs

Anthony Woolich,

Holman Fenwick Willan

EvENTs

Words LUCY TReveLYan

A bETTER wAy TO REsOLvE

DIspuTEs


There are several alternatives to litigation – the key is to pick the right one for your circumstances and make

sure it is implemented properly.

Arbitration clauses are often dealt with at the end of negotiations when the negotiators are tired, but they require care and attention. alex baykitch, Partner, holman fenWick Willan

Where you have commerce you will get disputes and where there are disputes there is always the threat of litigation. For most companies, this is the option of last resort – it is far better to

settle a dispute before it hits the courts. But there are a host of alternative dispute resolution approaches, from arbitration to mediation and adjudication.

In many cases, arbitration tends to be favoured over litigation. In some jurisdictions, such as the US, the costs and risks involved are far lower. However, the benefits can only be reaped with the right approach; a well-drafted arbitration clause is critical, according to Alex Baykitch, partner in Holman Fenwick Willan’s Sydney office, and an arbitrator and chairman of arbitral tribunals. “Unfortunately they are often dealt with at the end of negotiations when the negotiators are tired,” he says. “Arbitration agreements require care and attention. If disputes arise, the agreement will assume great importance.” It must be in writing, effectively submit the parties’ disputes to arbitration and contain a place or seat for the arbitration.

But arbitration isn’t always better than litigation. Although technically an alternative, arbitration should not be classed as alternative dispute resolution (ADR) but viewed in the same way as litigation, sharing common faults, says Noel Campbell, partner in Holman Fenwick Willan’s London office and a practising mediator. “Comparing litigation and arbitration is like comparing state and private school: the state system is the courts, the private system is arbitration where you pay for the judges to hear your case,” he says. “In both, the judge decides the case on a binding basis.” Campbell adds that in some places, arbitration is not cheap; in England, litigation is cheaper and quicker.

Alternative approachesIt is worth considering other approaches. ADR may be divided into those that require a third person to make a binding decision – such as expert determination, where the powers of the expert are agreed as a matter of contract between the parties – and those that do not, such as mediation. “Unlike

alternative dispute resolution



What causes a party to settle in mediation is how much they want to settle. A party with a cracking case but no money would be desperate to settle. noel camPbell, holman fenWick Willan

arbitration and litigation, ADR methods do not require the third person to apply due process in reaching a decision (other than, to some degree, adjudication in construction contracts), and none results in a decision that is enforceable like a court judgment or arbitration, unless a binding settlement is reached,” he adds.

Alternatives include adjudication, which tends to be restricted to building disputes because this is the only industry that has the procedure built into the law. “If there is a dispute as the contract is going along, rather than everything having to be dealt with at the end, there is a process for parties making submissions within a time frame to an adjudicator. They’ll say you have to pay £X and then the matter is left until the building is constructed,” says Campbell.

The far more common approach is mediation. This is an impartial means of dealing with a dispute on the basis of assisted negotiation but on a non-binding basis until a settlement is reached. A mediator should be neutral, with no axe to grind and ideally trained in the appropriate mediation techniques. There are two main types of mediation: facilitative, where the mediator is there to help the parties reach a settlement; and evaluative – where the parties want the mediation to focus almost exclusively on an evaluation of the legal merits. The problem with the latter is that mediation is not a courtroom so the

mediator does not have access to all the evidence.Campbell says: “My experience as a mediator is

that there are different drivers at play when a case is coming to be settled, other than the legal merits. What causes a party to settle in mediation is how much they want to settle. So you could have a party who has a cracking case but no money – they would be desperate to settle although they had the better case.”

Mediation at workWouter van Everdingen, in-house lawyer at Spliethoff Group, was involved in mediation when a yacht carried by one of his company’s vessels was damaged after its cradle collapsed between New Zealand and Texas. The four parties involved in the dispute (the carrier, stevedores, the cradle builder and the subrogated underwriter of the yacht), opted for mediation because the costs of proceedings would have been high due to the complicated nature of the matter. “A lot of expert evidence would have been needed and crew members would have to be flown in to testify. We opted for mediation because of these costs and the ever-present trial risk; the carrier could be held liable for the full amount. By agreeing to mediation we hoped to share the liability and costs among all parties,” says van Everdingen.

The case was settled after a full day’s mediation. Each party contributed to the loss, including the

Systems of litigation and arbitration differ

between jurisdictions so when an international

commercial dispute ends up in court, the parties

will wrangle over where the case is held. In terms

of litigation, unless the contract between the

parties specifies a particular country in which to

litigate, each party strives to have their case heard

where they feel they will get the most favourable

judgment – forum shopping between any relevant

jurisdictions.

Although sometimes viewed as costly, English

courts are a popular place for companies to

litigate, says Holman Fenwick Willan’s Noel

Campbell. “Commercial clients want reliability

and certainty – they like the fact that English

judges cannot be bribed and are held in high

regard around the world.” Non-US parties dislike

litigating in the US because of the fear of high

legal costs, of multiple damages and because

costs do not follow the award. Campbell adds:

“They have jury trials on many commercial

matters where you can get ridiculous damages.”

There is more scope for forum shopping

in cases of arbitration. Campbell says: “By

agreement, you can contract into another

jurisdiction which wouldn’t otherwise have

jurisdiction. So if you had a US company selling

infrastructure projects to Saudi Arabia, there is

unlikely to be any basis upon which the English

courts would have jurisdiction. You could have a

contract which expressly submitted the parties

to the jurisdiction of the English courts but big

entities in international situations don’t tend to do

that; they tend to go for arbitration.”

The differences in arbitration are less striking,

thanks to the effects of the New York Convention

and Model Law on arbitration. However, some

differences remain. Costas Frangeskides, a

partner at Holman Fenwick Willan, highlights

contrasts between the US and the UK. US

companies usually operate under the Federal

Arbitration Act, which favours freedom of

contract, allowing the parties involved to decide

how impartial they expect each arbitrator to be.

In England, the Arbitration Act places greater

emphasis on neutrality. Different approaches

and tactics therefore need to be employed in the

different jurisdictions.

forum shopping

• Lu

cy T

reve

lyan

writ

es fo

r a w

ide

rang

e of

law

and

bus

ines

s pu

blic

atio

ns


claimant underwriters, who lowered their claim proportionately. Van Everdingen says: “I was quite happy with the mediation, the way the parties can speak freely about the matter (within limits) and try to resolve it. Of course, it involves some theatre and horse-trading but my overall impression was good.”

Mediation can be combined with arbitration – “med-arb”. This involves the parties mediating but agreeing that if no settlement is reached, the mediation turns into arbitration, often with the same person serving as mediator and the arbitrator. The advantage for the parties is they know their dispute will definitely be resolved by the end of the process. Campbell says med-arb is an interesting concept but not without risk. “Part of the magic of the mediation process is that both sides reveal part of their hand to the mediator – but not necessarily to the other side – to try and facilitate a settlement. However, there might be a different position you would take before a mediator who might become the arbitrator.”

Natural progressionThe courts in many countries expect the parties to consider ADR before litigation – and can punish in costs if they refuse. Michael McIlwrath, senior counsel at GE Oil & Gas, and chairman of the International Mediation Institute, says some courts have recognised that aggressive use of mediation can help them dramatically reduce their busy dockets. “Despite this, in some countries, such as India, where dockets are legendary in their backlogs, there does not appear to be a huge effort to promote mediation except for private efforts led by mediation institutions, which, although noble, will not have the financial resources necessary to drive a dramatic change in the country’s many states and courts.”

McIlwrath says most large companies around the world probably underuse ADR because of a relative lack of knowledge or experience of it, but adds: “There is a natural progression, or evolutionary movement, in the direction of becoming more sophisticated embedded users, as large companies realise the commercial and cost benefits.”

Campbell warns that, as sophistication increases, there are risks that the system will be manipulated: “I think mediation is a good idea and should be encouraged but there is a risk that if someone says

‘let’s mediate’ that you do it cynically with no intention of settling. You find out about the other side’s case and their bottom settlement position and then later offer less. It’s manipulating the system – lawyers are getting more devious.”

However, Baykitch says he would always use ADR to resolve disputes because of the time it takes to do so through litigation and arbitration. “I would always, in an international context, provide for a multi-tiered ADR dispute clause that ultimately provided for arbitration to resolve the dispute.”

Although it is not suited to every case, where the facts are unclear (and the trial costs high) ADR can be a useful alternative to litigation, van Everdingen argues. “With ADR one generally also has a better control over the outcome, as opposed to litigation, which is often a lottery, especially in certain jurisdictions. It is important though that, from the outset, there is general consensus among the parties to resolve the matter without litigation.”

alternative dispute resolution

mediation versus litigation Efficiency criteria Mediation LitigationCost Low HighSpeed of process Fast SlowWho decides? Parties JudgeLikelihood of parties’ Low High relationship being destroyed Scope for tactical manoeuvring Some HighWho controls? Parties JudgeEvidence rules None ManyChance of successful >80% (chance of win-win <50% (most often outcome outcome very high) there is no real winner)What the parties focus on The future The pastNegotiation form Collaboration & consensus Argument & antagonismCommunication Intensive & personal Superficial & formalJurisdictional problems None PossiblyAbility to satisfy everyone High LowResult Win-win Win-loseCapacity to find solution Enormous Non-existent outside confines of dispute Stress factor Tension released Tension crystallized

Source: International Mediation Institute

For more information, please contact Noel Campbell, partner, Holman Fenwick Willan. +44 (0)20 7264 8272 [email protected]


MANAgINg ThREE DECADEs OF gROwTh


MANAgINg ThREE DECADEs OF gROwTh

Deutsche Post DHL has witnessed enormous growth over the past 30 years and Geoff Cruikshanks has been general counsel almost every step of the way. He talks about managing growth in a truly global business.

Client intervieW

Geoff Cruikshanks, general counsel at postal and logistics company Deutsche Post DHL, reveals: “I was a one-man band when I joined the company in

1982.” At that point, he was DHL’s only lawyer outside the US but, some 28 years later Cruikshanks, who divides his time between Brussels and Bonn, is the head of a legal department comprising some 185 lawyers in 142 countries.

Deutsche Post DHL’s revenue in 2009 was £46.2 billion and the company has more than 500,000 employees in 18,500 different locations. There has been what Cruikshanks describes as “a period of enormous acquisition-led growth over the past 12 years, which saw DHL at the heart of that growth.” Deutsche Post, Germany’s only universal postal services operator, bought DHL Worldwide Express in stages between 1998 and 2003, and applied the DHL brand to the forwarding and logistics businesses it has built or bought since the mid-1990s. “In total, over 100 acquisitions have been made since 1998, in order to build Deutsche Post’s

Words jon Robins


global footprint. But with that phase complete, now the group’s approach to acquisitions is far more selective and growth is mainly organic,” says Cruikshanks.

He says that, when he joined almost three decades ago: “The old DHL was coming to the end of its very early ‘pioneer’ phase.” At that time there was “virtually no management structure at all” and the company’s first chief executive officer wasn’t appointed until the beginning of the 1980s. “It was a very entrepreneurial, operations-led company with, for example, guys sleeping on airport floors in some far flung place in order to deliver the handful of packages that might arrive the next day. DHL was a phenomenal success because there was a huge demand for an international express service that was simply not being provided by the international postal service.”

Delivering changeCruikshanks describes his first legal work as the introduction of basic terms and conditions and customer-facing contracts. “But the main bread-and-butter work at that time was establishing a legal presence to do business in countries which were just being reached by the DHL Network. And then there was fire-fighting, such as avoiding postal monopolies, unblocking funds and resolving tax and regulatory disputes. Part of the problem was that as

a totally new industry many regulators and law enforcers did not know how to pigeon-hole us.”

The company has changed dramatically since then. Now, the group’s big three legal teams are in Germany, the UK and US. “In terms of legal work they are very hands-on and do a lot of work in house,” says Cruikshanks. “It also allows for specialisation and so there are property lawyers, employment and logistics lawyers.” He says the three countries account for “about half” of the legal work. Elsewhere, the set up is different. “For example, in the emerging markets we have over 100 countries and there are about four lawyers. Clearly there is only so much they can do in-house,” he says.

Global challengesOperating as an international business offers challenges as well as opportunities. “The world is getting smaller and there are huge benefits for a business which rides the wave of globalisation,” Cruikshanks says. “But there are challenges when every country has its own laws and every government feels uninhibited in making more.

“Our perspective is very much ‘think global, act local’,” Cruikshanks continues. “We strive to do things consistently in different countries where it makes sense to do so, such as our basic operational and IT platforms, but the culture of the company insists that local management acts entrepreneurially

It was an entrepreneurial company. Guys were sleeping on

airport floors in far flung places, to deliver packages that might

arrive the next day. geoff crUikshanks, deUtsche Post dhl

• Jo

n Ro

bins

writ

es fo

r The

Obs

erve

r, F

inan

cial

Tim

es a

nd T

he T

imes


Client intervieW

in selling services and responding to customer needs.” Originally, he explains, there was a tendency to have “expatriates running the DHL business”, as it opened up in new jurisdictions. “But it is much more common now to have locals at the helm. We are consistently trying to make the next generation of managers home grown whenever possible.”

Coordinating legal requirementsDifferent approaches to regulation also have to be factored in. Cruikshanks explains: “The challenge is not so much different laws as the conflict of laws and different approaches to extra-territoriality of laws.” By way of an example, he cites the US anti-trust legislation and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

“We are finding customers in the US are requiring us to provide undertakings which assume that our 1,500 legal entities around the world do business in compliance with their laws, which is not easy to do. They do not seem to understand that the laws of other countries may have different, or even conflicting standards, and the challenge then becomes finding the common denominator or the one-size-that-fits-all,” Cruikshanks continues.

Generally, he says, agencies are “becoming more aggressive about enforcing laws across jurisdictions and, despite claims to the contrary, they don’t seem to coordinate how they manage the problems this creates.”

As emerging economies become increasingly key to the business, their regulation needs to be factored in too. Cruikshanks says: “‘They need to have their versions of the laws as well. For example, China has an extensive set of competition laws and its own merger-clearance regime, and that’s where much of the extra regulation is coming from for a company like ours at the moment.”

To handle all this, Cruikshanks needs certain things from his legal advisers. “Obviously, I’d expect them to be good lawyers, qualified and proficient in the areas of law that are closest to our business.” He also expects external lawyers to be: “innovative, pragmatic, commercial and solution-orientated. We’re after a solution, not a 20-page legal opinion. And we don’t just want a hired gun. Rather, we want someone who can work with us and empower us to do our job as well as we can; before we hand the baton over in those really complex or specialised areas where you need outside counsel.”

Overview: Deutsche Post DHL is the world’s

leading postal and logistics services group

bringing together the DHL and Deutsche

Post brands. Deutsche Post is the German

national post office and DHL was started

in 1969 by three American entrepreneurs

(Adrian Dalsey, Larry Hillblom and Robert

Lynn), who began by shipping papers by air

from San Francisco to Honolulu.

Vital statistics: Deutsche Post DHL generated

revenue of 46.2 billion euros in 2009 and

now has about 500,000 employees in more

than 220 countries.

Services: National and international mail and

parcel services; dialog marketing services;

outsourcing and system solutions for the

mail business; international express; freight

(air, ocean and road); and contract logistics.

Growth: From a government-controlled,

deficit-ridden national agency, Deutsche

Bundespost, to a profitable European mail

and parcel service provider, Deutsche

Post became the global logistics market

leader and traded on the stock exchange.

Deutsche Post AG went public in 2000 and

progressively acquired DHL, as global air

express service provider from 1998 to 2003,

as well as other logistics companies, for

example, Danzas in 1999 and Exel in 2005.

Network: 120,000 destinations worldwide.

Business philosophy: General counsel Geoff

Cruikshanks explains: “Our philosophy can

be explained by reference to what we call

our three bottom lines: 1) Customers, by

becoming the provider of choice.

2) Shareholders, where we aim to be the

investor of choice. 3) Employees, for whom

we want to be employer of choice. This is

probably a bit different from many public

companies who just see one bottom line,

and its share price as its sole measure of

success.”

deutsche Post dhl: at a glance…


The past 12 months have hardly been an easy time for the commodities industry but anyone now hoping for a year where the dust settles and business can return to

normal will be sorely disappointed. A combination of regulation, protectionism and anti-competitive practices, means there are still trying times ahead.

The first driving force for change is a new regulatory world order, predicts Brian Perrott, a partner at Holman Fenwick Willan. “The key elements are the drive to have cleared derivatives trading – with the transparency and solvency that clearing houses bring – and a move, ultimately, to exchange trade.”

The tide has turned against over-the-counter (OTC) contracts, Perrott says. In the aftermath of the credit crisis, the vast quantities of OTC credit swaps that had been entered into were blamed for infecting the books of banks. “They were seen as toxic because of the unknown scale of the problem and the lack of transparency,” he explains. “OTC contracts gained huge momentum beforehand, but we have seen that obliterated. The bonanza has gone for good, although there will always be a place – assuming regulators do not ban the practice – for some cautious trading of this type.”

Knee-jerk regulationMikal Boe, Singapore-based director of Freight Investor Services, says many commodities markets have already moved in the direction of clearing over the past 18 months as a result of nervousness about counterparty risk and available credit.

He believes markets can adapt to any new environment but is nevertheless fearful of a knee-jerk reaction by regulators and politicians. “What we are

concerned about is over-zealous regulators using broad brushstrokes and saying that a swap is a swap. There’s a fairly big difference between a credit default swap and a commodities swap as used by end-users to hedge against volatility in the market.”

Boe says he is confident regulators will not make “that fatal mistake”, although he acknowledges they have done it before. “They need to focus attention on where the systemic risk is,” he says. “I think the credit market is where they will look first. The chances are the regulatory changes will come in stages – they will be loathe to do too much too soon.”

Often when global regulatory consensus is reached, examination of the fine print reveals major differences. However, this is one issue where the reality could match the rhetoric. More details will emerge in coming months and businesses should seek to influence the regulatory policy making, by lobbying or working through trade associations.

Adapt to regulationBusinesses also need to be aware of what they will not be allowed to do and adapt accordingly. “Take cleared trades, for example,” says Perrott. “In order to clear trades you have to have thumping great margins, whereas the beauty of OTC trading is that you don’t have to have a margin.” Some players – unable to afford those margins – may disappear from the market, he claims, while others will have to secure credit from banks.

This year will also see markets continue to deal with US President Barack Obama’s surprise announcement of a ban on proprietary trading by commercial banks. If implemented (and this seems increasingly unlikely) this will have a major impact

COMMODITIEs sET FOR A buMpy RIDEWhether it is through tighter regulation, resurgent protectionism or potential anti-competitive practices, the next few months look set to bring major upheaval for businesses in commodities markets.

To clear trades you need a thumping great margin; the beauty of OTC is that you don’t need a margin.brian Perrott, holman fenWick Willan

Words phiLip hoULT

• Ph

ilip

Hou

lt w

rites

for I

nter

natio

nal B

ar N

ews

and

the

Law

Gaz

ette


Commodities

because of the important role banks play in trading oil and other commodities, says Holman Fenwick Willan partner Damian Honey. “In a worst-case scenario, all banks will have to divest themselves of their commodity trading desks,” he warns. “Although, given the profitability of the desks, this is unlikely.”

At the same time as dealing with conflicting political and regulatory responses, commodities businesses will also have to deal with the fall-out from the global downturn. Two significant potential developments in this respect are the return of disputes over protectionism, and the risk of anti-competitive behaviour distorting markets.

Manage protectionismAccording to Holman Fenwick Willan partner and trade specialist Dan Horovitz, G20 leaders have taken on board the lessons of the Great Depression and recognised protectionism was not appropriate. Seeking to defuse tensions, the leading trading blocs have put many existing disputes on hold. “With the recovery, the question is what will happen now,” says Horovitz. “If you look at Europe, there is a backlog of cases where industries were looking for protectionist actions but were held back by the European Commission (EC).”

Governments are becoming more attentive to these demands and will be keen to see their

industries benefit from the recovery. Brussels has already intimated that there will be more trade remedy cases in 2010, which offers the prospect of tit-for-tat measures from those countries targeted. This is already happening elsewhere – the US and China have been at loggerheads over Chinese tyres and cement products, and US chickens.

Businesses in industries that are prone to protectionist measures should not wait for actions to be initiated but take steps in advance to limit their vulnerability, argues Horovitz. This might mean deciding against concentrating on a specific market or trying to be more strategic. A trade remedy action might even turn into a business opportunity, as Horovitz explains: “If a company is prepared, it can come out of the investigation in a much better way than its rivals who will feel the measures more acutely.”

Steps can also be taken if a foreign government is applying measures that hinder imports or exports. Legal action can be initiated in the country in question or via the EC, or a case can be brought via the World Trade Organization, by government or the EC.

Anti-competitive behaviourLike protectionism, anti-competitive behaviour often rears its head when economic conditions are tough. “There is a natural tendency in recessionary times for rivals to form cartels,” explains Holman Fenwick Willan competition partner Anthony Woolich. “It is like game theory – the participants say, ‘look, there is a limited amount of business and we don’t all want to go bust, so isn’t it better if we each take a share of the cake?’”

Woolich urges businesses to establish a robust competition-compliance programme, involving training and monitoring, so that directors, senior management and sales staff will be aware of what they can and cannot do. Such a programme is important for prevention but also as a mitigating factor when regulators consider sanctions.

With all the challenges that businesses in the commodities markets can expect to face this year, a policy of proper planning, effective risk management and good advice will be essential to secure the best possible outcome.

For more information, please contact Brian Perrott, partner, Holman Fenwick Willan. +44 (0)20 7264 8184 [email protected]


A gOLDEN OppORTuNITyAfter a year spent licking its wounds and consolidating, there are now fresh finance opportunities for shipping.

Words GRania LanGdon-down


We are not yet at the end of the tunnel. If one bank moves to write down its loans, there could be a snowball effect. alistair mackie, holman fenWick Willan

The global economic crash, the clampdown by banks on lending and the collapse of freight rates during 2009 resulted in a miserable year for ship owners and shipyards. But, never an

industry to wallow in the doldrums for long, there are moves afoot to reinvigorate shipping markets by attracting fresh capital from non-traditional sources through new investment strategies.

In fact, 2009 was not as bleak as it could have been. “Last year wasn’t as bad as feared because, while there was no money for new deals, banks were generally supportive of ship owners by restructuring existing deals,” says Holman Fenwick Willan partner John Forrester. Alistair Mackie, Holman Fenwick Willan partner specialising in transactional corporate and commercial law, agrees: “Banks have generally been quite pragmatic about the current problems and have been prepared to ride the storm.”

However, new funding has been practically non-existent and, even for existing borrowers, there remains a significant risk with bank lending. Mackie points out: “There are signs of recovery with demand coming back in some sectors but, while we can see the light, we are not yet at the end of the tunnel. If one bank decides it has had enough and moves to write down its loans, it could have a snowball effect and the worst-case scenario is that we could see a double-dip effect.”

OvercapacityParts of the industry were set for a fall. The tanker market survived slightly better than the bulk market because oil has always been in demand, while the container market hit the rocks. “The bulk market was a massive bubble waiting to burst,” says Forrester, “with rates that had gone up to US$130,000 a day. It was driven to a large extent by China, with building materials going in and products coming out, but demand on both fronts

private equity


For people new to the market, it is not like

investing in real estate, stresses John Forrester.

“Ships move around, with all the risks that

involves. Collisions, spillages and piracy are

covered by insurance but you need to feel

comfortable that the shipping company’s track

record ensures there won’t be any impact on

your brand or reputation.”

As a guide for investors, Forrester highlights

key areas to review: “You need to look for a

shipping company that has been around a long

time and that has been through good and bad

markets and survived. You cannot underestimate

the importance of a good reputation. There are

some ship owners who will bail out when things

get tough and leave their investors in the lurch –

others will stick by them and share the pain.”

Alistair Mackie agrees: “Find out about the

underlying business. What has it achieved? What

makes it different? Find out about the people

who are driving it, their track record and what

sets them apart. Shipping is a unique industry

and the risk profile is very different from other

investments. You need to feel comfortable with

that. When markets are high, investors provide

capital without a pre-identified transaction. Today,

go and see what you are getting for your money.”

Transparency is also important in an industry that

is traditionally family-owned, very private and not

good at disclosing what it is doing, says Forrester.

Reputation, experience and transparency

are critical. But, just as crucial, is timing. “The

evidence is there that if you invest in the right

time you can make a lot of money,” Forrester

says. “Invest at the wrong time and you can

lose a lot.”

Investors are aware of the returns that can be generated and are now analysing the industry’s potential in much greater detail. richard moore, syncaP marine

collapsed with the recession. However, despite this industry being historically both volatile and cyclical, there is ‘zero memory’ about the bad times. So when rates were at their peak in 2007/8, people put in lots of orders for new ships, which take 18 months to two years to arrive. The recession hit, the banking crisis froze the market and now there is the threat of serious overcapacity, which will further depress rates.”

Alternative sources of fundingHowever, this trough in the market actually makes the industry more attractive to alternative sources of funding. Richard Moore is managing director of SynCap Marine, an independent broker for a dedicated client base, which also structures and purchases vessels on behalf of private investors. “Over the last few years, the market highs have seen shipping making headlines and investors have become aware of the returns that can be generated,” he says. “The investors have now seen the market fall off considerably. But, given that the fundamental investment thesis is to come in when a market is low, this has prompted them to start analysing the industry’s potential in much greater detail.”

Forrester agrees, saying: “We have had lots of inquiries from private equity firms asking about the peculiarities of the industry. Shipping is attractive because of its distressed nature. Asset values, for

instance, are very low compared with three years ago, which is a very big upside if the market gets back to where it was. The dream scenario is it goes back to February/March 2008 but even 2005/6 would be good.”

So, while banks may not be lending, there is money out there looking for a home. Mackie says: “If I were a ship owner, I wouldn’t put much faith in raising money from my bank on terms I would find acceptable but there are other opportunities to raise cash.”

Alternatives also include raising money on the bond market, although that can be an expensive option. A new development is the creation of shipping investment funds, which are alliances between shipping managers and investors – high net-worth individuals who are happy to stake a couple of million dollars; private equity funds; and the

What should investors look for?


investment side of banks – to raise funds to buy their own fleet to charter. “If you target a particular strand of the market, or ships of a particular type where there is an under-supply, and team up with someone who knows shipping very well, then there are good opportunities,” Forrester says.

Choose a target carefullyChoosing your market carefully is important, agrees SynCap Marine’s Moore. He identifies the product tanker sector as “compelling”, with the potential to generate immediate returns. What makes this sector attractive, he says, is that the asset price and the freight rates are in a trough, so the downside is limited. Demand remains robust, with the refinery capacity migrating east, which will improve revenue and interest, he believes.

For one investment management company, the target market identified is the dry bulk sector. This spring, the Cayman-based company Prudent Asset Management launches its first shipping investment fund – The First Maritime Fund. Managing director Nikos Kouros says it has identified a gap in the sector and is planning to raise more than US$100 million from institutions and private investors to create a fleet of small to medium, 10-year-old vessels. These will be managed by Danad Shipping Company at Greece’s largest port, Piraeus, and operate globally.

“The structure of the fund is crucial,” Kouros says. “We have defined exit strategies for our investors, in order to make an investment in hard assets as liquid as possible, and transparent operational procedures including an unprecedented rule that no sale or purchase activity will be permitted between the ship manager and the fund or any of the companies in which any directors may have an interest.”

Another potential source of finance is through Islamic bond issues. Mackie says: “There is quite a lot of talk about Islamic finance but we haven’t seen a huge influx yet, although there is a lot of wealth in the Middle East. There may be opportunities there but it isn’t necessarily straightforward, as the bonds have to be shar’ia-compliant and you need those in charge to be expert on the cultural issues.”

Alternative sources of finance are also proving critical for ship owners who are finding it difficult to meet the final instalments on their new vessels as

banks balk at the drop in their value. This has prompted shipyards to offer ‘sellers’ credit’ so the owners can still take delivery and repay the loan once the vessel has started earning.

The funding gap is provoking disputes with the banks, says Jesper Kjaedegaard, president of the Chamber of Shipping and chair of Maritime UK, but it is also leaving room for ‘vulture’ or ‘opportunity’ funds to step in. “These funds have a lot of cash and will finance the last instalments. In return, they want not just the 40% injection of capital but maybe 80% of the ship and they hope to make money selling it in three to four years’ time.”

Adjusting to a different outlook This brings sharply into focus the benefits and drawbacks of non-traditional forms of financing. “The benefit for shipping companies is access to capital for growth,” says Moore. “The drawback is that institutional investors, private equity and hedge funds all have different expectations of return and liquidity and different exit strategies, so it is vital to choose the right pool of capital. For instance, private equity companies like an element of control with a representative on the board, which doesn’t always sit favourably with often very private, family-owned companies.”

From the investors’ perspective, Kjaedegaard, who is also a partner in the global marine consultancy Mercator International, says: “The benefits for private equity are huge opportunities to buy low and sell high in a few years. The drawback is they cannot assume they will make much profit from running the ships in between. For the industry, the drawback is you end up with a lot of ship owners whose hearts aren’t beating for shipping. Traditionally, it has been ‘once in shipping, always in shipping’. Now, suddenly, a lot of new investors are coming in with a much shorter view of the business. There is nothing wrong with this but the industry has to get used to it.”

So, despite the difficult year that the industry has undergone, and the fact that the light at the end of the tunnel for traditional funding still appears to be rather dim, there are some golden opportunities for investors and ship owners who can find the right solution for their business.

private equity

Shipping is attractive because of its distressed nature. Asset values are very low compared with three years ago, which is

a very big upside if the market recovers. john forrester, holman fenWick Willan

For more information, please contact John Forrester, partner, Holman Fenwick Willan. +44 (0)20 7264 8134 [email protected]•

Gran

ia L

angd

on-D

own

writ

es o

n la

w fo

r The

Tim

es a

nd T

he G

uard

ian


Regime change is always unsettling and proposed new rules for the insurance market, in the form of Solvency II, are making waves in the commercial insurance

market, for self-insureds and for captives. The question is what the impact of the new regime will be when the turbulence subsides. Will the industry come through the turmoil relatively unscathed, or will the changes have a profound effect on the way risk is managed and financed?

The Solvency II Directive is the beginning of a three-year process that will end in 2012 with various implementation measures being approved by the European Commission. The insurance industry has been heavily involved in the process (through 50 consultations, amassing 1,100 pages), but there are concerns as to its effect on risk management.

Impact on priceThe first and most obvious concern is the impact on price, because of the capital demands of the new regime. As Paul Barrett, assistant director in financial regulation and taxation at the Association of British Insurers (ABI), puts it: “If capital is the raw material and you need more of it, then the price of the product will shoot up.” Charles Allen, chief executive of Heritage Insurance Management, a company with offices inside and outside of Solvency II’s jurisdiction, agrees, saying: “The cost of the new capital requirements is the key factor.” With issues on price come concerns about choice: for instance, if you couple the increased capital requirement with the administrative and disclosure pressures of the new regime, this could undermine the viability of smaller insurance companies.

This restriction of choice could be extended to whole lines of insurance. The new risk-based approach means that risks will be assessed far more closely. For the larger insurers, re-evaluating risk may mean they are unwilling to tie up increasingly valuable capital in more volatile risks, or will make such risks so expensive that no-one will buy the product. Paul Wordley, head of insurance and reinsurance at Holman Fenwick Willan, says: “Products will have to be re-written because insurers will assess the risk afresh under the new rules.”

Risks to captivesInsurers are not the only ones likely to feel the effects of the directive. Captive insurance companies are particularly vulnerable for a number of reasons. First, captives tend to have only a single policyholder, the parent, and a single product, which means they cannot spread their risk in the way that Solvency II necessitates. Also, due to the time and resource implications of internal modelling, they are far less likely to be able to formulate their own internal model rather than using the standard model to calculate their specific capital requirement. This is important because internal modelling helps to reduce an insurer’s capital requirement – so a captive is doubly disadvantaged.

Fortunately, these particular vulnerabilities were recognised early in the formulation of Solvency II, along with the fact that captives are among the more stable components of the risk business and thus, perhaps, less in need of rigorous governance. Ulrich Zink, policy adviser on wholesale and reinsurance at the ABI, notes: “Let’s not forget that when Enron went down, its captive was the only thing that

MODERATE, wITh RIsk OF sTORMs LATERWith Solvency II on the horizon, there are changes afoot for the insurance and self-insurance business. What is the forecast for the industry, and what will it mean for risk management and finance?

Under Solvency II, a multinational may completely self-insure because the balance sheet looks better. PaUl Wordley, holman fenWick Willan

Words poLLY boTsfoRd

• Po

lly B

otsf

ord

writ

es fo

r Leg

al E

xecu

tive

Jour

nal a

nd th

e La

w G

azet

te


insuranCe

remained.” So measures specifically relating to captives, in particular CP79: Simplifications for captives, were intended to protect them from the full impact of Solvency II.

But there are serious concerns about CP79. Zink explains: “The draft proposals try to provide simpler rules for captives but their new definition of a captive is such that no existing captive would fall into it.” This could mean they will not be sufficiently safeguarded from the full force of the new rules. Zink concludes: “The worst-case scenario is that groups may start to move away from using the insurance market altogether to manage some non-compulsory lines of business. This would be self-destructive, leading to less business for the insurance industry, but also to FTSE-100 risk management disappearing totally from the radar of the Financial Services Authority.”

Despite these concerns, others see Solvency II as providing openings for captives. If larger, commercial insurers do have to increase their prices or refuse to write certain riskier classes of insurance, the corporate buyer may be more likely to set up a captive to obtain cost-effective insurance.

Furthermore, if commercial insurers simply find the capital required, captives may be the more reliable answer. As Wordley says: “Solvency II raises issues for a multinational which purchases its insurance externally. Given the focus on capital adequacy of the regime it may decide to completely self-insure because its balance sheet looks better.”

Another possibility is that multinationals shift away from captives and use protected cells (PCCs). PCCs’ unique structures have led to difficulties for the authors of Solvency II, and it is unclear how they will treat them, as Martin Le Pelley, head of compliance at Heritage, explains: “Perhaps the only burden for PCCs will be a regulatory one, not a capital one. This has not been resolved.”

Changes to jurisdictionAlternatively, corporate groups may stick with captives, but move them beyond the reach of the directive. As Le Pelley says: “Within Europe, captive insurance schemes will see the cost of doing business increase and there will be benefits for multinational groups moving captives to non-EU domiciles.” It is also possible that some non-EU captives will return to the EU, particularly Ireland (as XL Capital announced recently), or perhaps non-EU domiciles will introduce Solvency II equivalents – Guernsey is considering this.

More alarming scenarios include some businesses opting not to insure their risks at all. Instead, increasing costs may lead to buyers reconfiguring their risk profile. Allen explains: “If groups used to shop around for the cheapest price, as everything becomes more expensive, they may be thinking twice about paying for a particular insurance and will reassess how they risk manage.” Zink warns that this could leave some catastrophes uninsured: “If the consequences are that Solvency II makes such risks too expensive, then this could lead to particular areas being uninsured, as with Florida after Hurricane Katrina.”

It was Thomas Steffen, former chair of the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors, who said at its inception that Solvency II was not about capital but about “a change in behaviour”. We are about to find out whether he was right or not.

For more information, please contact Paul Wordley, head of insurance and reinsurance, Holman Fenwick Willan. +44 (0)20 7264 8438 [email protected]


opinion

Payment of ransom to pirates is not illegal under English law. james gosling and richard neylon, holman fenWick Willan

The industry has been working to get to grips with piracy. There has been unprecedented cooperation and increased understanding between

the military and commercial shipping. In addition, the International Maritime Organisation has agreed guidance on combating piracy, including Best Management Practices (BMP) to Deter Piracy in the Gulf of Aden and off the Coast of Somalia in 2009. The BMP’s objectives include reducing the number of reporting points for vessels in the area, simplifying methods of communication with navy taskforces, and expanding guidance on anti-piracy measures.

High court judgmentMeanwhile, those working to help the victims of hijacking should benefit from a recent English High Court judgment which found that ransom payments are not illegal. The case, Masefield AG v Amlin Corporate Member Ltd, concerned the Malaysian oil tanker Bunga Melati Dua which had been hijacked in 2008 by Somali pirates. Vessel, cargo and crew were released after ransom was paid. The owners of some of the cargo of bio-diesel brought a claim against their insurers under their insurance policy which covered loss arising from piracy and theft. In February this year, the court dismissed Masefield’s claim that the cargo was a loss under the Marine Insurance Act 1906.

For the industry as a whole, the findings on ransom payments were the most interesting aspect of the case. The claimants argued that payment of ransom was contrary to UK public

policy, and should be disregarded when considering whether vessel and cargo were either a total loss or a constructive total loss. Interestingly, the claimants accepted the widely-held view that payment of ransom to pirates was not illegal under English law.

The judgment gave welcome confirmation, which should end speculation from cargo-owners and their insurers about the legality of methods used to release vessels and crew.

It stated that payment of ransom is not contrary to public policy, and that to rule the opposite might make kidnap and ransom cover (a long-standing feature of the insurance market) unenforceable. In addition it found ransom payments are recoverable as an expense under the ‘sue and labour’ clause which binds the insured to try to prevent or minimise the loss. It added that although a ransom payment may encourage piracy, it is usually the only option available to ensure the crew’s safety.

Monitoring linksMeanwhile, those involved continue to monitor any potential link between piracy and terrorism. We are confident that in all the cases we have been involved in (more than 50 hijacks) there has been no reasonable cause to suspect that any ransom paid might be used for terrorism.

With new regulations being promulgated in the UK, EU and US affecting Somalia, the compliance issues associated with payment of ransom remain an integral consideration when resolving a hijacking.

sOMALI pIRATEs uNDER ATTACkPiracy is not just a threat to commercial shipping, but to independent travellers and tourists too, so a concerted effort by the shipping industry to deal with Somali piracy at all levels could have wide-ranging benefits.

For more information, please contact James Gosling, partner, Holman Fenwick Willan. +44 (0)20 7264 [email protected]

U.S.

NAV

Y PH

OTO

BY

MAS

S CO

MM

UNIC

ATIO

N S

PECI

ALIS

T

2ND

CLA

SS J

ASO

N R

. ZAL

ASKY

hFwAROuND ThE wORLD A shapshot of the latest developments from Holman Fenwick Willan’s 375 lawyers, operating around the world.

global neWs

Holman Fenwick Willan has offices in London, Paris, Rouen, Brussels, Piraeus, Dubai, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore, Melbourne and Sydney.

Middle East New ‘best friends’ in Middle East Holman Fenwick Willan formalised two ‘best friend’ associations with law firms in the Middle East – Allazzam Law Office in Saudi Arabia and Salem Al Maddfa Advocates & Legal Consultants in Abu Dhabi. These associations form part of the firm’s long-term strategy in the region, an important area for the firm’s broad client base.

UK Client Choice Award Holman Fenwick Willan has been awarded the International Law Office Client Choice Award 2010 for the UK. The awards recognise law firms and partners around the world that stand apart for excellent client care and quality of service. This is the second time Holman Fenwick Willan has won a Client Choice Award, with the Hong Kong office winning the accolade in 2008.

Singapore Advisers on $1.48 billion coal acquisition Holman Fenwick Willan’s international team represented PT Recapital Advisors and its subsidiary PT Bukit Mutiara, in connection with the $1.48 billion acquisition of interests constituting 90% of PT Berau Coal. The highly structured tax-driven transaction involved lawyers in Indonesia, Hong Kong, Labuan, Malta, Netherlands, Seychelles and BVI as well as Singapore.

2 31

Australia Arbitration activity in Sydney Holman Fenwick Willan opened its Sydney office in December 2009 as part of the firm’s development of its Australian practice, which began in Melbourne in 2006. The firm’s Sydney-based partner, Alex Baykitch, recently helped found the Australian International Disputes Centre for international arbitration hearings. The centre opened as a result of increasing international commercial arbitration cases in the Asia-Pacific region.

Copenhagen Seminars on shipping pools Holman Fenwick Willan has hosted two seminars on shipping pools, looking at the challenges and solutions, from a competition law perspective. Current market conditions are forcing many shipping companies to reduce costs and increase efficiencies. Shipping pools offer a solution, allowing resources to be shared and standards improved. However, failure to comply with competition law can result in arrangements being void, fines, actions for damages and criminal penalties.

New York Networking reception for contactsHolman Fenwick Willan hosted a drinks reception in New York for local lawyers, bankers and shipping contacts. The firm has an extensive network of legal contacts and experts who can be mobilised as required. They work with local counsel in all countries where instructed to represent a client and on a wide variety of assignments with leading local law firms.

5 64

1

2

4

6

3

5

Date post:	15-Apr-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

INTERNATIONAL jUly 2010 COMMERCE Commerce Issue 1.pdfBlackBerry litigation, and the lessons learnt....

Documents