Ian McDonald

Ian McDonald has a broad practice, with a particular focus on commercial litigation, international arbitration, private international law, and international human rights law. He is regularly instructed in complex, high-value cases, often with an international dimension.

Ian recently represented Nick Suppipat and his companies in their $US 2billion fraud claims against multiple defendants in the Commercial Court (one of The Lawyer’s ‘Top 20 Cases of 2022’). He has a particular expertise, also, in private international law, and has worked as a teaching assistant on the Conflict of Laws module on the Bachelor of Civil Law at the University of Oxford. Ian recently appeared in VP Fund Solutions (Luxembourg) SA v. GI Globinvestment Ltd [2022] EWHC 1872 (Comm), successfully resisting a jurisdiction challenge (under both the recast Brussels I Regulation and the common law rules) in a multi-million-pound unlawful means conspiracy claim. He is also presently instructed in a number of international commercial and investment arbitrations, including under the UNCITRAL and ICC Rules and the ICSID Convention.

Prior to being called to the Bar, Ian spent five years at Liberty, the human rights organisation. He has a strong interest in international human rights law, and the rights to liberty and security and freedom of expression in particular. Ian is currently acting for the Moscow bureau of the international media group RFE/RL in their application to the European Court of Human Rights, challenging Russia’s use of ‘foreign agent’ laws, and is presently part of the Counsel team representing the British-Egyptian writer and pro-democracy activist, Alaa Abd el-Fattah, before the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. He is also an officer of the Human Rights Law Committee of the International Bar Association.

Practice Area

Panel

  • Contributing Author

Qualified Year

  • 2017

Membership

  • Liberty
  • CFLA
  • COMBAR

Education

  • BCL, University of Oxford (Distinction)
  • LLB, University of London (First Class Honours)
  • BPTC, BPP University (Very Competent)

1 Contributions by Ian McDonald

Brussels I (Recast) Articles 33–34 and third‑state proceedings: discretionary stays, relatedness/irreconcilability tests, exclusive jurisdiction clauses, Owusu, and UK post‑Brexit transitional application
PRACTICE NOTES
Brussels I (Recast) Articles 33–34 and third‑state proceedings: discretionary stays, relatedness/irreconcilability tests, exclusive jurisdiction clauses, Owusu, and UK post‑Brexit transitional application
E&W Brussels I (recast) and proceedings in third states (arts 33 and 34) [Archived] ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note explores the effect of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) where identical or related proceedings are pending before the courts of a non‑EU Member State (commonly called a third state). The principal provisions engaged are Articles 33 and 34 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). It also discusses how the relevant provisions apply to the UK as a third state following its departure from the EU, subject to the application of transitional provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement. For general guidance on these articles, together with other provisions of the regulation pertinent to third states, see Practice Note: E&W Brussels I (recast)—application to third states [Archived]. Articles 33 and 34 Articles 18(1), 21(2), 24, 25 and 26 Impact of UK’s departure from the EU Following exit day (ie 31 January 2020), the UK became a third state for the purposes of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast)...
Dispute Resolution
Expert page AD
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.