Practice Overview

Lisa’s practice covers a broad range of commercial and chancery litigation.

Her commercial practice covers disputes over commercial contracts, partnership disputes and commercial property litigation. She is frequently instructed to advise and act in cases involving more complex issues of law such as those concerning defective guarantees, penalty clauses, and difficult cases of interpretation and rectification of contracts.

Lisa appears regularly in the Business and Property Courts where she has substantial experience in dealing with a broad spectrum of applications and claims under the Insolvency Act 1986 and Companies Act 2006. Examples of cases include shareholders’ disputes (unfair prejudice petitions), derivative claims, contentious winding up petitions and acting for office holders and respondents on misfeasance claims. She frequently deals with more difficult and contentious issues which may arise under the Insolvency Act, for example, contentious administration applications, remuneration challenges and issues over trustees’ conduct under section 303 of the Insolvency Act.

Lisa is particularly adept at researching niche points of law and using various authorities to support her case at Court. With vast advocacy experience Lisa is able to deal with more complex litigation where her thorough preparation is always an asset. She is valued for her attention to detail, thorough preparation and excellent trial advocacy skills. Lisa is able to review and critique substantial expert surveyor reports with ease. Clients have described her as “methodical and tenacious” during cross examination.

Lisa is on the Attorney General’s Panel B of Regional Counsel and is frequently instructed in public interest winding up petitions and director’s disqualification proceedings.

Examples of Cases:

• Successfully acted for the creditor in the case of Advance Global Capital Limited v Coombes [2023] EWHC 1822 (Comm) involving the enforcement of a guarantee and indemnity where the Court considered important res judicata issues in relation to summary judgment and applications to set aside a statutory demand.
• Successfully acting for the Secretary of State in directors’ disqualification proceedings against directors in a number of trials including numerous cases involving breaches of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme and misuse of loan funds.
• Acting in numerous applications brought by directors for permission to act following disqualification, including acting for the Secretary of State in the case of Wilson v The Secretary of State for Business and Trade [2025] EWHC 691 (Ch), where the Court refused the director’s application for permission.
• Acting as Junior Counsel for a Defendant in a high profile and complex alleged claim of £12m by company administrators. The claim involved allegations of dishonest assistance and knowing receipt of breach of trust and alleged breaches of directors’ duties relating to a share sale by the Defendant.
• Acting as junior counsel for the Claimant in a high value and complex claim involving issues of breach of trust against the Defendant executor for misappropriating sums from the deceased’s estate with a value of over £2m.
• A v OE Ltd -Successfully acting for the purchasers of a freehold property on a new build development in relation to the recoverability of estate charges following a three-day trial. Case involved technical and complex issues of construction of the TP1.
• K v W – Successfully acting for a mortgagee in a 3-day trial and successfully obtained possession in a case involving technical issues as to whether mortgage was enforceable.
• D v S – Acting for a defendant in a 5-day contempt of court trial arising from some 30 alleged breaches of undertakings not to interfere with a neighbour’s right of way. Successfully resisted findings of breach on most of the allegations by raising technical points as to enforceability of the undertakings. The Defendant was able to avoid a custodial sentence despite some admitted breaches.
• Successfully acting for Highways England in a multi-track quantum only trial where the Defendant had caused a significant oil spill resulting in damage to the motorway. The trial involved complex issues on causation in respect of the extent of damage, nuanced legal arguments as to whether general or special damages were appropriate and detailed cross examination of the Defendant’s expert quantity surveyor.
• Acting for directors and administrators in an application to regularise a defective appointment due to the lack of FCA consent: Gregory & Others v A.R.G. Mansfield Limited (In Administration) [2020] EWHC 1133
• Acting on behalf of a bankrupt in a complex application to compel a trustee to conclude a 6-year bankruptcy pursuant to section 303 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and for permission to challenge remuneration and expenses.
• Successfully acting for a liquidator in a trial in respect of claims against a director for breach of duty, wrongful trading and payments of unlawful dividends which involved a complex disputes of fact and detailed analysis of accounts and bank statements.
• Resisting an application to set aside a statutory demand which was issued for nearly £1m as sums due under a personal guarantee. Case involved consideration of commissions and clawbacks in contracts with insurance intermediaries.
• Successfully resisting an application to set aside a statutory demand for sums due under a personal guarantee. Case involved analysis of technical legal points surrounding whether the applicant could be estopped from challenging the guarantee on the basis that it had not been properly witnessed and consideration of the principles in Shah v Shah [2001] EWCA Civ 527
• Successfully acting for Claimants in a complex professional negligence claim against conveyancing solicitors where solicitors had failed to protect the client from purchase monies being taken by a third party
• Acted for the Respondents in successfully resisting an appeal before a Circuit Judge against an order for possession made against trespassers. The appeal involved arguments over the applicability of the Equality Act 2010 including the extent of the Respondent’s public sector equality duty and interference with the Appellant’s Article 8 rights.