Instruct Mek
To instruct Mek please contact our clerks on +44 (0)20 7842 5555 or email [email protected].
He is described in the directories as a “go-to” junior and an “excellent advocate” who “grip with the pertinent issues and documents quickly”, is “very bright and easy to work with” and “manages difficult clients with ease”.
Mek regularly appears as sole counsel in the High Court and has appeared led in the Court of Appeal. He is instructed in disputes which are litigated, arbitrated, adjudicated, mediated, as well as those resolved through other fora.
Before coming to the Bar, Mek studied Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Corpus Christi College, Oxford and then completed his GDL and BPTC at City Law School, London. During his early years of practice, Mek appeared in Court on a near daily basis and cut his teeth in front of a variety of tribunals. He still frequently appears in Court in trials, costs/case management conferences and applications.
Mek is a TECBAR and CPA accredited Adjudicator and is regularly appointed to determine a variety of disputes. Mek is qualified to undertake public access work.
Mek is a long-suffering and (at least currently) optimistic Arsenal fan. He serves as a trustee of Kestrel Theatre Company, a charity that brings creative professionals to work within the criminal justice system, facilitating original pieces of drama and film-making.
Mek is ranked as a leading junior in the directories (Legal 500, Chambers & Partners (UK) and (Global)) in the following practice areas:
Comments in Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners have included:
Mek is regularly instructed to advise on and appear in Court in commercial disputes and has experience of a wide range of commercial areas including, sale of goods, supply of services, agency, bailment, landlord & tenant, jurisdiction, conflict of laws and insolvency and restructuring.
Russian Aviation Re/Insurance litigation: Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, approximately 500 foreign owned aircraft, with a market value of greater than US$10 billion, remained in Russia. Mek is instructed (led by Andrew Neish KC and Bankim Thanki KC) by a major market re/insurer in an aviation insurance claim made by an aircraft owner in response to the invasion. This is one of several claims against All Risks and War/Political Risks re/insurers currently running through the Commercial Court. Mek’s client is challenging the jurisdiction of the English courts.
Advising on potential grounds for resisting payment of a significant regulatory fine.
NHS Trust v Multinational contractor: Sole counsel in a £multi-million dispute relating to the cleaning of a large London hospital; issues of contractual interpretation, restitution and complex quantum.
Covid-19: Advising on contractual issues and generally in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic. In particular, matters he has and continues to advise on include the performance of obligations, frustration, force majeure under a standard form contract, repudiatory breach of contract and termination, as well as advising on issues of strategy and responding to binding and non-binding government guidance.
Melville Dunbar Associates v Carter: Mek appeared on appeal before HHJ Lewis in relation to a previously undecided point of interpretation of the CPR on costs.
Care Home v (1) Biomass Boiler Manufacturer and (2) Installer: Instructed as sole counsel advising a care home in a multi-million pound dispute against both (1) a supplier and (2) installer / maintenance contractor of boilers and peripheral equipment, for breach of contract and/or negligence. The case involved significant issues of contractual interpretation, exclusion clauses, fraudulent misrepresentation and was set against the backdrop of a government backed renewable energy scheme. The case has recently settled favourably for Mek’s client.
PFI/PPP arrangements: Mek has experience of the complex web of contractual arrangements and contractual provisions often found under long term PFI/PPP agreements. His experience extends to supply, leasing, operating, maintain provisions for the provision of a range of projects / long-term services including hospitals, prisons, power plants and medical services.
Medical Equipment Supplier v NHS Public Body [Expert Determination by senior commercial KC]: Instructed as sole counsel in a substantial termination dispute about a contract for the provision of primary care services. The matter was resolved through expert determination and involved issues of the validity of purported contractual termination, good faith clauses, exclusion clauses and remoteness, as well as technical issues relating to the fulfilment of obligations under the contract. The claims against Mek’s client were dismissed in their entirety. Mek continues to advise.
Individual v International Insurer: Mek is instructed as sole counsel in a £0.6m case relating to a guarantee / bond under a building contract progressing through the Commercial Court.
Mek has a wide range of experience of construction disputes and is familiar with the main contract forms including JCT, NEC, FIDIC, IChemE, LOGIC and RIBA forms. He has a wide range of experience (both as sole counsel and as part of a team) in litigation, arbitration and in heavy adjudications.
Mek is frequently instructed prior to and following adjudication proceedings, whether to provide advice on merits or strategy, and to pursue or resist the enforcement of Adjudicators’ decisions. He also regularly sits as an Adjudicator and is on the TECBAR and CPA nominating Panels.
FK Construction v ISG – These claims included a number of disputes across two projects, in relation to which the parties engaged in several adjudications and multiple sets of Court proceedings. Mek was instructed (led by Alex Hickey KC) for the sub-contractor. The wide range of matters in dispute include the interpretation of notice provisions and notice documentation, contractual and common law termination, delay and disruption, the provisions of the 1996 Construction Act, the interaction between Part 8 and enforcement proceedings, setting off against adjudicator’s decisions, natural justice and jurisdictional arguments.
ISG v FK [2023] EWHC 2012 (TCC): Leading decision on the availability of restitution of sums paid under an adjudicator’s decision that is later found by a Court to have been wrong (considering the Supreme Court’s decision in Aspect v Higgins).
ISG v FK [2023] EWHC 1718 (TCC): Leading decision on default payee notices under s.110B(4) of the Construction Act.
FK v ISG [2023] EWHC 1042 (TCC): Leading decision on the ability to set-off adjudicators decisions.
Building Safety Act and fire safety disputes: Mek represents leaseholders, landlords, developers, professionals and other interested parties in matters involving claims introduced by the Building Safety Act 2022. This includes seeking and defending Building Liability Orders, Remediation Orders and Remediation Contribution orders and claims against building product manufacturers. He is regularly instructed in the TCC and in the FTT. By way of example, was instructed in the proceedings in relation to Vista Tower, the first action brought under the Building Safety Act 2022 by MHCLG (led by Ben Pilling KC) and the Grenfell Tower civil litigation (led by Sean Brannigan KC).
Representing the insurers of contractor in a c.£30m claim proceedings brought by the corporate owner of a care home against the contractor, its insurers, the architect and structural engineer in relation to alleged structural, architectural and fire safety defects (led by Rachel Ansell KC).
BAE Systems v Ardmore (1) DMA (2) – Mek is instructed, with James Leabeater KC, for the defendant architect in this substantial cladding case in relation to a hotel in central London. 3-week trial in July 2025.
Management Company v Project Team – Mek is instructed, with James Leabeater KC, for the leaseholders of a high-end high-rise block of apartments in central London bringing claims against members of the project team in relation to defective glass heat-soaked glass which has shattered. Interesting issues include limitation, the extent of appropriate remedial works.
International investment fund v Main Contractor – Mek is instructed, with Alexander Nissen KC, on a c.£20m cladding dispute about a large development in central London. The issues include interesting arguments about the scope of duty of care in tort and the Building Safety Act 2022’s extension of the limitation period under the Defective Premises Act 1972.
International Energy Company v City Council – Mek is instructed, with Claire Packman KC, on two major an on-going disputes in relation to (i) allegations of extensive defective works including fire stopping issues and (ii) the completion / commissioning of the works under a PFI contract for the design and installation of a heating system across 200+ local authority properties.
Kier Construction v Alumet (1) and OEL (2) – Mek is instructed, with Claire Packman KC, for the defendant architect in this significant cladding claim. Issues include the interaction between an “absolute” obligation and an obligation to use reasonable skill and care, the scope of the architect’s appointment, reasonable reliance upon specialist consultants and contractors and the extent of a designer’s obligation to review its design.
Manchester Metropolitan University v Sir Robert McAlpine (1) Toshiba Carrier (2) – Mek is instructed in the defence of a claim following an explosion of a large chiller forming part of an air conditioning system. The claim raises issues including the scope of a designer’s duty, the appropriateness of warnings given by a designer and whether such warnings amounted to a break in the chain of causation.
Representing a building contractor in relation to the development of commercial bakery premises (with Jennie Gillies).
Mek was instructed as sole counsel in a series of 18 separate adjudications brought by a contractor against a well-known London hospital within a period of 3 months. The combined value of the dispute were several million pounds. The legal issues raised included the formation and terms of the contract, the alleged incorporation of documents into the contract, allegedly non-contractual instructions, delays and extensions of time, condition precedents, the validity of payment notices, alleged defects, claims for loss and expense, the categorisation and valuation of variations, the date and validity of the certification of practical completion and the valuation of the final account.
Covid-19: Mek is advising on contractual issues and generally in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic. In particular, matters he has and continues to advise on include the performance of obligations, frustration, force majeure under a standard form contract, repudiatory breach of contract and termination, as well as advising on issues of strategy and reacting to non-binding government guidance.
Advising on a claim against utilities provider in relation to it causing significant delays and costs caused to a £multi-million refurbishment of a large London hospital.
Instructed as sole counsel for two defendants, a developer and contractor, in relation to a claim brought by 9 claimants for alleged defects in a residential project. The issues range from contractual interpretation of leases and building contracts, the application of the DPA 1972, and many technical issues in relation to defects.
Instructed on this £multi-million, multi-party matter relating to defective “Grenfell” type cladding at a Hilton Hotel at Gatwick Airport. The case raises significant issues of causation, expert evidence and Approved Document B.
ICCT Ltd v Sylvein Pinto [2019] EWHC 2134 (TCC) (Waksman J; London TCC): Mek was successful in enforcing an adjudicator’s decision; this case raised a plethora of issues relating to natural justice and jurisdiction, the most important of which was how a party/parties may provide an adjudicator with ‘ad hoc’ jurisdiction in the context of the residential occupier carve out at s.106 of the Construction Act.
Protostar v 203 Willesden Lane LLP [2019] HT-2019-000084 (London TCC; before Alexander Nissen KC): Successfully obtained the enforcement of an adjudicator’s decision in the sum of c.£250,000 and indemnity costs.
Tolent Construction Ltd v Benchmark Leisure Limited [2018] (Leeds TCC; HHJ Raeside KC): Successfully obtaining summary judgment for the enforcement of a c.£200k Adjudicator’s decision. The Court considered whether the dispute arose from a separate agreement or a variation to the original contract.
Aifos Properties Ltd v GHM Construction Ltd (London TCC; Sir Antony Edwards-Stuart): Obtained summary judgment for the enforcement of an Adjudicator’s decision and indemnity costs; involved issues of jurisdiction, natural justice and allegations of fraud and other impropriety.
Instructed to defend an Approved Inspector in a large multi-party claim. The matter had several hard fought hearings before HHJ Klein and HHJ Davis-White.
Significant adjudication relating to matters of practical completion on a c.£8m project.
Ongoing adjudication relating to notifications (conditions precedent) and alleged delay under an NEC3 contract.
Acting for engineers in a multi-million pound claim arising from a private development that appeared on the “Grand Designs” programme and is alleged to require significant remedial works. The claim involves difficult questions of scope of duty, technical evidence and quantification arise, along with the unique feature of the building having its own television programme about it.
Mek’s experience of projects extends disputes over the construction of heavy infrastructure including roads, transport systems, power stations, energy facilities, hotels, and residential developments. He is regularly instructed in very heavy international arbitrations.
Consultancy v UAE Government [2020 – ongoing]: Assisting in a $multi-billion dispute defending a multi-disciplinary consultancy JV in relation to UAE airport project.
Main Contractor v Sub-Contractor [2016 – 2020]: Instructed in an ad hoc international arbitration concerning the construction of a coal-fired power station in South Africa.
Main Contractor v Sub-Contractor [2018 – 2020]: Instructed in a $150m ICC Arbitration relating to the construction of a rail system (Qatari Law; ICC)
Main Contractor v M&E Contractor: Instructed in a c. $200m ICC Arbitration between a Main Contractor and a MEP contractor (Qatari Law; ICC)
Main Contractor v M&E Contractor: Instructed in a c. $500m DIAC Arbitration between an M&E Contractor and a Main Contractor (Qatari Law; DIAC)
M&E Sub-Contractor v Main Contractor [2019]: Mek was instructed as sole counsel for a sub-contractor in relation to a multi-million pound International Arbitration arising out of M&E works at an alcohol plant. The case settled on favourable terms for Mek’s client, days before a 3-day evidentiary hearing (Law: English; Seat: Milan).
Insurance and reinsurance is a core area of Mek’s practice. He has a wide range of experience in such disputes covering a wide range of industries and lines (in particular PI, CAR, D&O and Property policies). He is regularly instructed in relation to coverage issues, allegations of non-disclosure and misrepresentation, incorporation and construction of terms, claims notification and co-operation clauses, waiver, aggregation, subrogation, double insurance and allocation of liability between insurers, fraudulent claims, other questions of policy construction and issues related to the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 1930 & 2010 as well as the Insurance Act 2015 and CIDRA 2012.
Peabody Trust v NHBC [2024] EWHC 2063 (TCC): Mek is instructed, led by Noel Casey KC, in this the leading case on the date of accrual of the cause of action under the insolvency cover of the widely-used NHBC Buildmark policy. (Consequential hearing: Peabody Trust v NHBC [2024] 2925 (TCC). The Court of Appeal has granted NHBC permission to appeal, which is likely to be heard in June 2025.
Russian Aviation Re/Insurance litigation [2022 – ongoing]: Mek is instructed (led by Andrew Neish KC, Bankim Thanki KC and James Leabeater KC) by major market reinsurers in the Russian Aviation insurance claim made by aircraft owners following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. One of The Lawyer’s Top 20 cases of 2024.
Bellhouse v Zurich Insurance Plc [2023] Commercial Court: Instructed on a c.£1 – 2m claim for a consumer following a large fire in a West London home. The claim involves allegations of fraudulent misrepresentation and raises important issues under CIDRA 2012.
Sky Central: Acting, with Rachel Ansell KC, for a member of the professional team in the Sky Central case which gave rise to the Court of Appeal’s decision in Sky v Riverstone [2024] EWCA Civ 1567 (overturning the Commercial Court’s decision in [2023] EWHC 1207, and currently on appeal to the Supreme Court) in relation to CAR insurance.
Covid 19 related insurance work: Acting as sole counsel on a number of high value claims concerning coverage and aggregation of Covid-19 losses.
Instructed in a £5m+ property insurance claim arising from a fire in commercial property in London.
Pure Gym v QIC (Commercial Court): Acting, with Ben Pilling KC, for an insurer defending in a large claim for loss following water ingress at a gym on the basis of non-disclosure / misrepresentation.
Cladding Claims / Building Insurance: Instructed on several £multi-million policy and coverage matters in relation to defective cladding and other fire safety matters. Issues include defect/damage, the need for immediate remedial action / risk to health & safety and matters of the measure of loss.
Dalamd v Butterworth Spengler [2018] EWHC 2558 (Comm): Mek, led by Daniel Shapiro KC, defended Butterworth Spengler against a claim for insurance broking negligence arising out of property damage, business interruption and CAR policies. This is a significant case on damages for loss of a chance, particularly in the context of insurance brokers.
Sole counsel in a claim relating to piling works at a prestige development in London, raising issues of duties to warn and the interpretation of the joint insurance provisions obtained by one of the parties and the extent of its cover.
Mek has previously completed secondments in the insurance departments of two international law firms, where he dealt with a range of multi-million pound disputes raising a range of policy coverage and liability issues.
Advising on a coverage dispute between an employers’ liability and a public liability policy in relation to a fatal accident at a school.
Advising a Lloyd’s syndicate on whether it was – and if so to what extent – contractually liable to indemnify the employee of an insured for costs incurred in defending a criminal prosecution brought against him.
Advising an insurer on issues of causation, liability and whether it could overcome a Mark Rowlands v Berni Inns defence in order to bring a subrogated claim against a tenant of its insured following a fire at a warehouse.
Advising a Lloyd’s syndicate on equitable and contractual set-off and limitation in relation to historic coverage for property damage and theft.
Advising an insurer on the applicability of a deliberate / illegal act clause in a coverage dispute.
Advising a school on a coverage dispute relating to its vicarious liability in matters of historic sexual abuse.
Mek has a wide range of experience of professional negligence, including matters involving construction professionals (including engineers, contractors, architects, approved inspectors, sound acoustic engineers, surveyors), legal professionals (solicitors and barristers), financial professionals (including investment funds, SIPP providers), insurance professionals (including insurance brokers, Lloyds syndicates), and others (including auctioneers and auction houses, boutique motor vehicle garages, crop production consultants) and a range of consultants. He has a wide range of experience of disputes relating to claims/counterclaims for professional fees. His professional liability work is often tied to instructions relating to professional indemnity insurance and related coverage / policy matters. Mek also has significant experience of property damage cases including floods, fires, water damage and tree roots cases.
Glovers v Fluid [2023 – 2024]: Claim against a firm of structural engineers for heads of loss including wasted costs and repayment of fees, following pilling damage caused to a prestigious London property and neighbouring properties. A summary judgment application was defeated by Mek’s client: Glover v Fluid [2023] EWHC 3219 (TCC) raising issues as to the scope of the Supreme Court’s decision in Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton to engineer’s duties and the recoverability of if services had not be provided or been provided so poorly that they were worthless.
Grenfell Tower litigation: Mek is instructed, led by Sean Brannigan KC, in the Grenfell Tower civil litigation.
Sky Central: Acting, with Rachel Ansell KC, for a member of the professional team in the Sky Central case which gave rise to the Court of Appeal’s decision in Sky v Riverstone [2024] EWCA Civ 1567 (overturning the Commercial Court’s decision in [2023] EWHC 1207, and currently on appeal to the Supreme Court) in relation to CAR insurance.
Sky Central: Acting, with Rachel Ansell KC, for a member of the professional team in the Sky Central case which gave rise to the Court of Appeal’s decision in Sky v Riverstone [2024] EWCA Civ 1567 (overturning the Commercial Court’s decision in [2023] EWHC 1207, and currently on appeal to the Supreme Court) in relation to CAR insurance.
Glovers v XL[2023 – 2024]: Claim against non-negligent policy insurer following pilling damage caused to a prestigious London property and neighbouring properties.
Individuals v Architect [2022 – 2024]: Confidential arbitration regarding professional negligence claim against firm of architects in relation to alleged failure to identify right of light issues relating to dispute with neighbour. 1 week arbitration trial listed.
Paradigm v Gallagher [2023] (insurance broker) [2022 – 2024]: Claim against insurance broker following declinature of insurance policy
Pickett v McQuin (interior designer) – Defending and interior designer in relation to wide ranging allegations of project mismanagement on a high end residential project.
McAvoy v Blue Sky Design (structural designer) [2019 – 2022]: Instructed as sole counsel (against a KC) in a claim relating to defects alleging to design life.
Individuals v Solicitors (solicitors/conveyancers) [2020 – ongoing]: Allegedly negligent conveyancing relating amongst other things to an overage clause.
Individual v Solicitors (solicitors) [2020 – ongoing]: Allegedly negligent conduct of underlying litigation.
McAvoy v Blue Sky Design (structural designer) [2019 – ongoing]: Instructed as sole counsel (against a KC) in a claim relating to defects alleging to design life (issues pertaining to Blackpool Borough Council v VolkerFitzpatrick Limited & Ors). CCMC listed in Manchester TCC in June 2021.
Dalamd v Butterworth Spengler [2018] EWHC 2558 (Comm): Defended Butterworth Spengler , with daniel Shapiro KC, against a claim for insurance broking negligence arising out of property damage, business interruption and CAR policies. This is a significant case on damages for loss of a chance, particularly in the context of insurance brokers.
McQuin v Pickett (interior designer) [2020 – 2023]: Mek is instructed to defendant an interior designer in relation to wide ranging allegations of project mismanagement on a high end residential project.
Defending an insurance broker in relation to alleged mis-selling and failures to comply with verification processes.
Claim about allegedly negligent conduct of litigation by solicitors met by a defence that the underlying claim was fraudulent and/or illegal; issues relating to Stoffel v Grondona [2020] UKSC 42.
Claim against a financial advisor; significant issues include scope of duty, causation and the SAAMCO cap. Listed for a 1 day summary judgment hearing.
Instructed in claim for breach of contract for the supply of allegedly defective glass.
Instructed in relation to a claim for allegedly defective design of slab foundations with significant issues of causation and limitation.
Claim in relation to allegedly negligent conduct by solicitors of adjudication / arbitration proceedings an underlying construction dispute.
Allegedly negligent conduct by solicitors of a judicial review action raising complex issues of the scope of implied retainer and loss of a chance.
On behalf of the freeholder of a building in claims worth c.£5m against its insurer and members of the construction professional team in relation to defective cladding and compartmentation issues.
Instructed as junior counsel for engineers in a multi-million pound claim arising from a private development that appeared on the “Grand Designs” programme and is alleged to require significant remedial works. The claim involves difficult questions of scope of duty, technical evidence and quantification arise, along with the unique feature of the building having its own television programme about it.
In Peabody Trust v National House Building Council [2024] EWHC 2063 (TCC), the High Court (TCC; Andrew Mitchell KC...
On Friday 15 December 2023, HHJ Stephen Davies (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) handed down judgment...
The Court of Appeal has given FK Construction permission to appeal both decisions of Adrian Williamson KC sitting as a...
Yesterday evening, Mek Mesfin spoke on a panel at a Gray's Inn hosted event 'Pathways to the Bar: Diverse Perspectives'....
To instruct Mek please contact our clerks on +44 (0)20 7842 5521 or email [email protected].
For help and advice talk to a member of our clerking team. They can advise on the best options for your matter.
Call: +44 (0) 20 7842 5555