Michael regularly advises on disputes relating to the interpretation of agreements in a variety of contexts often on the instructions of insurers pursuing subrogated claims including product licensing and asset sale agreements. He also advises commercial clients in relation to regulatory issues.
- Instructed in claim based on Sale Agreement transferring the claimant’s business to the defendant – issues as to scope of indemnity for contingent liabilities; implied terms; whether indemnity applied where the claimant’s insurance was available; estoppel by convention.
- Acted for proprietor of SPV developer resisting enforcement of personal guarantee by large retail bank; issues as to duties owed by bank to sureties of customer’s liabilities under hotel building contract; collateral warranty to funder; bank’s step in right; equitable duties owed by bank to sureties of customer’s liabilities to bank; Administrative Receiver’s obligations.
- Acted for HMRC: whether action lies for breach of statutory duty in relation to the processing and issuing of Construction Industry Tax deduction certificates and administrative mistakes made in carrying out tasks pursuant to those statutory functions.
- Acted for business park developer; allegations of fraudulent misuse of confidential information in connection with commercial development opportunity – valuation of lost net development value – constructive trusts.
- Instructed by liability insurers of Royal Mail Group on issue of devolution of liabilities of following privatisation of telecoms.
- Acted for estate agency chain in test case brought by the OFT in which the OFT sought injunctions and declarations pursuant to EU Council Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts and the 1999 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations; scope of power to seek injunction conferred by EU Council Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts and the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.
- Instructed by Commissioners of Customs & Excise re VAT treatment of service charges.
- Instructed by Commissioners of Customs & Excise: satellite broadcasting – place of supply under Art 9 EC Directive 77/388 – Broadcasting Act 1990.
- Cape Distribution Ltd v Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd (no 1)  EWHC 1119 (QB);  Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 499;
- Royal Bank of Scotland v Chandra  EWHC 105 (Ch);  1 Lloyd’s Rep 677 –
- BT v Royal Mail Group Ltd  EWHC 8 (QB)
- Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons Ltd  EWCA Civ 288;  1 WLR 663;  3 All ER 697 – Scope of power to seek injunction conferred by EU Council Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts and the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.
- HOLMES v S&B Concrete Ltd  EWHC 2277 (QB)
- Crown Office Chambers feature in three of The Lawyer’s Top 20 cases of 2019
- Michael Kent QC reviews the Supreme Court judgments of Barclays Bank Plc & WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc
- Inns of Court School of Law (1973 – 1975)
- BA (Hons) Politics, University of Sussex (1970 – 1973)
- Nautical College, Pangbourne (1965 – 1969)
- Recorder of the Crown Court
- Deputy High Court Judge (Queen’s Bench Division and Administrative Court).
- He is a Bencher of the Middle Temple
- London Common Law and Commercial Bar Association (Chairman 2011-13)
- Administrative Law Bar Association
- Chairman of working group on expert witnesses for Inns of Court College of Advocacy (2018)
“Regarded with the utmost respect by peers and also by the judiciary.”
Legal 500, 2021
“Always a calm and measured presence in conference and courtroom alike. His advocacy skills are excellent, as is his ability to provide clarity in the most complex of cases.”
Legal 500, 2021
“He has the most wonderful advocacy style – he’s calm, silky and measured.” “He is hugely intelligent and pleasure to work with.”
Chambers & Partners, 2020
“He is particularly strong handling high-profile group litigation.”
Legal 500, 2020
“A highly skilled advocate who is able to get to grips with the most complex of issues…The epitome of a smooth operator. An excellent QC whom I can’t recommend highly enough.”
Chambers & Partners, 2018
“A very high-quality silk.”
Legal 500, 2017
“He has a profound understanding of legal principles and how to construct a case.”
Legal 500, 2017
“he is very well respected and you would instruct him in any significant disease cases”
Chambers & Partners, 2016
very intelligent and capable of very quick thinking on his feet”
Legal 500, 2016
a highly intelligent advocate, who has particular experience in group actions”
Chambers & Partners, 2015
“a highly intelligent, very responsive silk”
Legal 500, 2015
“extremely bright..the finest appeal advocate I have ever seen”
Chambers & Partners, 2014