+44 (0)20 7235 8000

Generic filters

Navid Hakimmaani

Dispute Resolution
+44 (0)20 7201 3559
+44 (0)7415 224581

Click to send email

I have a varied and complex civil and commercial litigation practice, with a particular interest in property.

With over 12 years’ experience, I joined Child & Child’s dispute resolution team in 2018. I have a varied and complex civil and commercial litigation practice, with a particularly interested in property related litigation.

My commercial litigation practice encompasses all aspect of professional negligence, company and partnership disputes, debt recovery, insolvency, contractual and tortious claims.

Acting for private and corporate landlords, high net-worth individuals, national landlord associations and property development companies, I advise on all litigious property disputes. This includes licensing, trusts (claims brought under ‘TOLATA’), commercial and residential landlord and tenant (including rent arrears and forfeiture), restrictive covenants, easements, boundary disputes, enfranchisement, lease extensions and party wall disputes.

I am fluent in Farsi and Swedish.

Notable Cases

  • Goyal v Florence Care Ltd and others [2020] EWHC 659 (Ch). A successful appeal alleging breach of contract, fiduciary duties, and involving Quistclose trusts and accounts of profits.
  • R on the application of Subramanian v City of London Magistrates Court [2019] EWHC 1240 (Admin). A successful Judicial Review of a Party Wall Award under s.17 Party Wall etc. Act 1996. The Court considered the nature of agreements and awards under the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 and the extent to which an award can be treated as impliedly determining matters other than the specific issues in dispute.
  • Southern Landlords Association v Brighton and Hove City Council [2018] (Admin). A successful challenge on behalf of the SLA (now iHowz) to the decision of BHCC to introduce selective licensing of private rented sector property in 12 wards in Brighton and Hove under Part 3 of the Housing Act 2004, including judicial review proceedings and representations made to the Secretary of State.
  • The RBS Rights Issue Litigation [2016] EWHC 3161 (Ch). High Court held that certain employees of the Royal Bank of Scotland did not form part of the ‘client’ for the purposes of legal advice privilege
  • Van Collem v Van Collem [2015] EWHC 2184 (Ch). Claim alleging breach of trust, fiduciary duty and the unlawful dissipation of assets.
  • Greenwood v. Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc [2014] EWHC 227 (Ch). Representing shareholders in claims against RBS relating to its rights issue of April 2008 and obtained a novel order that the shareholder’s costs liability should be proportionate to the amounts they stood to gain in the litigation.
  • Successful dismissal of a winding up petition presented by the UK distributor of an international external cladding manufacturer. The outcome turned on it being at least arguable that said cladding was not safe in light of the Grenfell disaster, despite satisfying building regulations.