We use cookies to offer you a better experience and analyse site traffic.
By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
Arfan Khan has a high profile specialist appellate practice in Chancery, Commercial and Public law. He is instructed in exceptionally difficult appeals. He has led and argued landmark appeals in the Court of Appeal, the High Court, and in the UK Supreme Court for over close to two decades. He appeared successfully as sole Counsel in Day v Haine [2008] BCC 84, a landmark appeal where the Court of Appeal reversed the Court at first instance, holding that protective awards were provable debts in a company liquidation. The Court of Appeal decision in Day v Haine paved the way for the UK Supreme Court decision in Re Nortel [2013] UKSC, where the correctness of his approach in Day v Haine was confirmed. He was instructed on appeal to the Court of Appeal in a widely reported case concerning the gifted drawings of the late Francis Bacon. Recently, when leading a tax barrister, and a tax litigator on appeal to the Court of Appeal, he persuaded the Upper Tribunal to grant permission to appeal against its own decision on a point of law.
He has also appeared in landmark public law cases. In Wokuri v Kassam [2013] Ch 80, he succeeded in contending that the diplomat was not entitled to immunity. He successfully led the intervention for 4A law in the Court of Appeal, and in the UKSC in Benkharbouche v Libya & Others [2018] IRLR 123, where the UK Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision to set aside the State Immunity Act 1978, in order to give effect to certain claims falling within the material scope of EU law. He has also appeared successfully as lead or sole Counsel in other high profile cases raising free speech and national security issues such as Geert Wilders v SSHD [2010] INLR 337, and Geller & Anor v SOS [2015] All ER (D) 54. He appears in litigation against or for the government with appropriate security clearance. In 2009, Arfan Khan was named Times Lawyer of the Week.
Whilst the core of his practice is appeals, where he is increasingly instructed to lead, or appear as sole Counsel, he is frequently instructed as sole or lead Counsel in the High Court. These include trials, and interlocutory disputes, where the sums involved are substantial.
He regularly participates in the Bar Council’s outreach scheme to encourage children from social groups currently underrepresented at the Bar to consider a career as a barrister. He was a spokesperson for the Bar Council in a speech to the College of Law entitled “Changes to the Bar”, outlining amongst other issues, the issue of retention and attrition in the case of women at the Bar.
He is highly regarded by the profession with solicitors and barristers describing him as follows:
Mr. Eason Rajah QC, sitting as a judge of the Chancery Division, delivered a judgment in a historic case involving millions taken out of South Africa during the Apartheid.
4th November 2021 Read moreThe Court of Appeal has delivered a guidance decision in three cases on the interpretation and effect of s.3C of the Immigration Act 1971 in indefinite leave to remain cases.
27th August 2021 Read moreArfan Khan led Joseph Howard in the Court of Appeal on a first time tax appeal of general public importance.
19th March 2020 Read moreFowler v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions (2019) EWCA (Court of Appeal)
21st November 2019 Read moreLord Sumption (with whom Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Clarke and Lord Wilson agree), dismissed the appeal of the Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and affirmed an order of the Court of Appeal.
15th August 2019 Read moreOn 26/8/2016, the Court of Appeal granted Mrs Diana Loson permission to appeal on a second appeal. On 17/4/2018, the Court of Appeal determined the appeal. It provided guidance on the correct test to vary a judgment debt under CPR r 40.9A.
13th August 2019 Read moreThe Appellant, a former solicitor, claimed he held a beneficial interest in property by way of constructive or resulting trust. The property was purchased as an investment. It was registered in the sole name of the Appellant’s wife.
22nd May 2019 Read moreThe Appellant, a former solicitor, claimed he held a beneficial interest in property by way of constructive or resulting trust.
22nd May 2019 Read moreChambers is delighted to welcome Arfan Khan to 42 Bedford Row today.
8th April 2019 Read moreThe Claimant claimed that the Defendant had played sound recordings, which infringed copyright in relation to two songs, contrary to s.16 of the Copyright & Patents Act 1988 (“the CPDA”).
17th June 2018 Read moreThe Applicants appealed a decision of the Upper Tribunal refusing to grant permission to appeal a costs decision made in judicial review proceedings. The Upper Tribunal refused permission to appeal by applying the second appeals test referred to in section 13(6) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
13th January 2018 Read moreArfan Khan was instructed as lead Counsel and led on the appeal to the Court of Appeal. The appeal was allowed. The case is reported as Yadly Marketing v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] WLR (D) 621; [2016] EWCA Civ 1143.
28th November 2016 Read moreArfan Khan successfully defended complex claims in the High Court Chancery Division. The claims were pursued by a bank against the Defendants for £9.5 million plus interest, including possession of land. A legal charge was procured by the bank to secure the alleged indebtedness.
1st July 2016 Read more
