Joe-han Ho


Year of Call 2016 (Solicitor: 2015)



General Profile


Joe-han has a broad commercial practice. He has experience in a range of commercial matters, including contractual disputes, insolvency, civil fraud, banking, financial services (including interest rate swaps litigation) and international arbitration.

 

Before transferring to the Bar, Joe-han qualified and practised as a solicitor at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP. He also taught Trusts & Equity at King’s College London for a number of years, and has published articles (inter alia, in the Journal of Business Law, and Trusts & Trustees) that addressed commercial law issues in contract law and trusts law.

Joe-han holds law degrees from Durham University (LL.B.; ranked 1st in year), Harvard Law School (LL.M.), and the University of Oxford (B.C.L.). He is also a Jarman Scholar of the Inner Temple (ranked 1st in year in advocacy). He also speaks Mandarin Chinese and Cantonese.


Prior experience


Between 2013 to 2016, Joe-han qualified and practised as a dispute resolution solicitor at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP. Selected matters include:

  • Advising a Brazilian corporation as to the proper interpretation of a pharmaceuticals supply contract with a South Korean joint venture counterpart.
  • Advising a global bank on privilege issues in the context of an internal investigation.
  • Representing an Italian corporation in an ICC arbitration arising out of an oil and gas dispute in Africa, involving allegations of misrepresentation and breach of contract.
  • Defending a £250m fraud claim (Commercial Court) brought by a group of companies alleging misappropriation, conspiracy, and breach of fiduciary duty. Advised on satellite trusts litigation, and interim measures relating to freezing injunctions.
  • Defending a $300m fraud claim (Commercial Court) brought by a foreign bank. The claim was dismissed in full, and the $300m worldwide freezing order was discharged.



At the Bar, Joe-han has experience in a range of commercial matters. Recent instructions and matters on which he has worked include:

  • Yaroslavna Lasytsya v Inter Export LLC (Court of Appeal): A fraud claim brought by a Ukrainian company against the director of a contractual counterparty regarding the sale of sunflower oil. The appeal raised complex issues regarding Lord Tenterden’s Act and the application of the tortious measure of damages. (Led by Hugh Jory QC)
  • Dubai First PJSC v Wright: Instructed as sole Counsel in an appeal regarding a statutory demand for c. £250,000, raising issues of private international law and procedural irregularity.
  • Perkins Engines Company Ltd & Anor v Ilkerler Otomotiv Sanayi Ve Ticaret AS (unreported) (Comm): A dispute regarding the termination of a distributorship agreement, raising issues as to contractual interpretation, estoppel, and laches.
  • Deutsche Bank AG v Comune Di Savona [2017] EWHC 1013 (Comm): A dispute regarding the scope of an exclusive jurisdiction clause in an interest rate swap claim.
  • Kotak v Kotak & Ors [2017] EWHC 1821 (Ch): A partnership dispute, raising issues as to the scope of a bank account mandate, estoppel, and agency.
  • EMA Sarl v Universal Music Publishing Ltd [2017] EWHC 1058 (IPEC): A dispute regarding the IP rights to a Mungo Jerry song, raising issues as to misrepresentation, warranties, and indemnities.
  • Ambrose v Barking Betty Ltd (unreported): A dispute regarding damage to property, raising issues as to negligence and bailment for reward.
  • Kenyon v AIG (Europe) Limited (unreported): A road traffic accident dispute, raising issues as to the recoverable rate of hire, and the duty to mitigate.
  • SCC Arbitration: Allegations of asset-stripping of a company, raising issues as to the validity of a contract, sham trusts, breach of fiduciary duty, and corporate capacity.
  • ICC Arbitration: A dispute regarding the termination of agreements relating to international payment systems, raising issues as to variation and breach of contract.
  • LCIA Arbitration: A dispute arising out of the collapse of a long-term JV between a Fortune 500 company and its local partner in an emerging market economy, raising issues as to privilege, contractual interpretation, and breach of contract.
  • Intended litigation: Advising on a civil fraud claim, raising issues as to sham sale and leaseback agreements, guarantees, indemnities, and actual/apparent authority.
  • Intended litigation: Advising on a dispute about whether assets vested in a bank or the trustee-in-bankruptcy, raising issues as to quasi-security, trusts, and set-off.
  • Intended litigation: Advising on a professional negligence claim against solicitors regarding a facility agreement.



Publications


‘Sham Trusts’ (2016) 22(4) Trusts & Trustees 464 (co-authored with Sunil Gadhia and Konrad Rodgers)

‘TAEL One Partners: contractual interpretation as an iterative process’ (2015) 5 Journal of Business Law 393 (co-authored with Konrad Rodgers)

 

 

 

Privacy notice


Joe-han collects, uses and is responsible for your personal information collected during the course of providing legal services as a barrister. He is the data controller in respect of this information for the purposes of the Data Protection Act 2018 and the General Data Protection Regulation.


The members of Enterprise Chambers have a privacy policy which sets out what information they obtain about you, why and how they use it.  This policy also sets out your rights.  Members also have a data retention policy which sets out how long they keep information for and why.


You can download copies of these policies here: (1) privacy policy (2) data retention policy .  Hard copies are available on request by contacting any branch of Enterprise Chambers.