• Woodhouse Investment and West Cumbria Mining v United Kingdom (ICSID) Acting for the United Kingdom in its defence of an investment treaty claim.
• Apple v Optis (UKSC). Acting for Apple in a FRAND licensing dispute.
• Case C-894/24 Commission v United Kingdom (CJEU).  Acting for the United Kingdom in a dispute with the European Union regarding intra-EU bilateral investment treaties.
• X v Y (PCA, Singapore, Swedish law).  Acting for an state-owned energy company in a gas pricing dispute.
• UniCredit Bank GmbH v Rus Chem Alliance LLC [2025] EWCA Civ 99 (CA).  Acting as Advocate to the Court in a case relating to the revocation of anti-suit injunctions.

Thomas has acted in international commercial arbitrations conducted under all of the major institutional rules.

He has particular expertise in: (1) disputes governed by Indian law (given his dual qualification in India); (2) contractual disputes involving states or state-owned entities (especially in cases involving regulated utilities and networks); and (3) gas price review arbitrations (where he deploys his expertise in handling economic evidence).

Thomas also has experience of acting in arbitration-related court applications.

Cases

Relevant cases include: 

• VXJ v FY & ors [2025] EWHC 2394 (Comm).  Acted for the defendants in an application for witness summonses under Section 43 of the AA 1996.
• X v Y (LCIA, London, English law). Acting for a high-net worth individual in a dispute about the validity of a share purchase agreement.
• X v Y (PCA, Singapore, Swedish law).  Acting for an energy company in a gas pricing dispute.
• UniCredit Bank GmbH v Rus Chem Alliance LLC [2025] EWCA Civ 99 (CA).  Acted as Advocate to the Court in a case relating to the revocation of anti-suit injunctions.
• Naftogaz v Gazprom (SCC Arbitrations, Swedish law). Acted for Gazprom in several complex arbitrations regarding the transit and supply of gas to and through Ukraine. The sums in dispute exceeded USD 100 billion and the arbitrations involved two 4-week hearings.
• US pharmaceutical company v Indian pharmaceutical company (LCIA, Mumbai, Indian law). Acted for a US pharmaceutical company in an arbitration concerning the allocation of tax liabilities under a share purchase agreement and a tax deed.
• ICC Arbitration, Singapore (Indian law). Acted for the Indian party in a private equity dispute regarding exit from a real estate investment. The sums in dispute exceeded USD 100 million.
• Port De Djibouti SA v DP World Djibouti FZCO [2023] EWHC 1189 (Comm).  Acted for the claimant in a Section 67 jurisdiction challenge application before the Commercial Court.
• European investor v Asian state (Comm). Acted for a foreign investor in a Section 67 jurisdiction challenge application arising from an investor-state award.
• LCIA Arbitration, London (English law). Acted for a Mauritius company in a dispute arising out of a renewable energy asset acquisition in India.

Thomas has broad experience across competition and regulatory litigation. He is on the CMA’s Panel of Standing Counsel and is a contributor to the current edition of Competition Litigation: UK Practice and Procedure (2nd Edn, 2019).

Cases

Relevant cases include:

• Epic v Google, Coll v Google and Rodger v Google (CAT). Acting for Google in three large claims relating to the Android operating system and the Google Play Store.
• Allianz v Mastercard and Visa (CAT).  Acted for Allianz in umbrella proceedings concerning multilateral interchange fees.
• Dye & Durham Ltd v CMA [2023] CAT 46 (CAT).  Acted for the CMA its defence of a decision rejecting a novel merger remedy proposed by a provider of could-based services for property transactions.
• Sportradar v Football Data Co and another (CAT). Acted for the Premier League and other UK football leagues in a claim about sports data and rights to confidential information.
• FX collective action (CAT). Acted for MUFG in the FX collective proceedings.
• Allianz v Barclays and others (Comm). Acted for MUFG.
• Trucks competition damages litigation (CAT). Acted for DAF Trucks.
• Interchange competition damages litigation (SC). Acted for the European Commission as intervener in the Supreme Court.
• GSK and ors v CMA (CAT). Acted for the CMA in various challenges to a decision regarding “pay for delay” settlements of patent litigation.
• Emerald Supplies Ltd & Ors v British Airways (Ch. D). Acted for Singapore Airlines and various other Part 20 Defendants in the air cargo cartel damages cases.

Thomas has wide-ranging expertise in EU law and is well-placed to act in cases where EU law intersects with other areas of law (including domestic English law, investment treaty law, WTO law and public international law).  He retains an Irish qualification and is, therefore, able to appear in the European courts.

Cases

Relevant cases include:

• Case C-894/24 Commission v United Kingdom (CJEU).  Acting for the United Kingdom in a dispute with the European Union regarding intra-EU bilateral investment treaties.
• Case C-378/22 British Airways v Commission (CJEU). Acted for British Airways in a case arising from the Commission’s investigation into the air cargo cartel.
• Case C-213/19 Commission v United Kingdom (CJEU). Acted for the United Kingdom in a multi-billion euro case regarding UK contributions to the EU budget.
• Case C-591/16 Lundbeck v Commission (CJEU). Acted for the United Kingdom as intervener in a case concerning “pay for delay” patent settlements.
• Advising the UK on potential infraction proceedings relating to the duty of sincere cooperation.

Thomas has unrivalled WTO law expertise and extensive experience in investment treaty law.

He has represented states and corporations in over 20 treaty cases and has appeared before a wide range of international tribunals including arbitral tribunals established under bilateral investment treaties, WTO panels, the WTO’s Appellate Body and the CJEU.

Thomas combines his broad legal knowledge with an in-depth understanding of the commercial, regulatory and political factors that give rise to trade and investment treaty disputes.

Earlier in his career, Thomas practiced at the Advisory Centre on WTO Law in Geneva where he represented a wide range of developing countries in inter-state disputes before the WTO.

Thomas is a member of the “A Panel” of Junior Counsel to the Crown (Attorney General’s Public International Law Panel) and regularly acts for UK government departments on international economic law matters.

Cases

Relevant cases include:

WTO

• Bahrain — Measures Relating to Trade in Goods and Services, and Trade- Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, DS 527 (Qatar v Bahrain). Acted for Bahrain in a dispute regarding sanctions imposed on national security grounds.
• Australia – Certain Measures Concerning Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging Requirements, DS 458 (Cuba v Australia). Acted for Cuba in a dispute regarding plain packaging requirements imposed on tobacco products.
• South Africa – Anti-Dumping Duties on Frozen Meat of Fowls from Brazil, DS 439 (Brazil v South Africa). Acted for South Africa in a dispute regarding antidumping measures imposed on imports of poultry.
• Thailand – Customs and Fiscal Measures on Cigarettes from the Philippines, DS 371 (Philippines v Thailand). Acted for Thailand in its defence of fiscal and regulatory measures applied to imported cigarettes.
• European Communities – Regime for the Importation of Bananas, DS 361 (Colombia & ors v EU). Acted for Colombia in multi-state mediation proceedings regarding the European Union’s import regime for bananas conducted by WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy.
• United States – Measures Relating to Shrimp from Thailand, DS 343 (Thailand v United States). Acted for Thailand in its challenge to enhanced bonding requirements imposed by the United States on importers of shrimp.
• Korea – Anti-Dumping Duties on Imports for Certain Paper from Indonesia, DS 312 (Indonesia v Korea). Acted for Indonesia in its challenge to anti-dumping duties imposed on imports of paper.
• European Communities – The ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, WT/L/ 616, WT/L/625, First and Second Recourse to ad-hoc arbitration pursuant to the Doha Ministerial Decision of 14 November 2001 (Ecuador & ors v EU). Acted for Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Guatemala in their challenges to proposed European Union import tariffs on bananas.
• European Communities – Export Subsidies on Sugar, DS 283 (Thailand v EU). Acted for Thailand in its challenge to the European Union’s subsidy regime in respect of sugar.
• European Communities – Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries, DS 246 (India v EU). Acted for India in its challenge to tariff preferences granted by the European Union to textile products from twelve developing countries.

Investment treaty arbitrations

• X v European State, ICSID arbitration. Acting for a defendant European state in a dispute relating to a telecoms and media investment.
• Case C-894/24 Commission v United Kingdom (CJEU).  Acting for the United Kingdom in a dispute with the European Union regarding intra-EU bilateral investment treaties.
• X v European State, ICSID arbitration. Acting for a defendant European state in a dispute relating to an energy investment.
• X v Central Asian State, ICSID arbitration.  Acting for a Central Asian state in a dispute relating to a telecoms infrastructure investment.
• X v United Kingdom. Advised the United Kingdom government on potential BIT liabilities arising from a regulatory measure.
• X v MENA state. Advised an investor in potential BIT claims against a Middle Eastern State in connection with measures affecting the banking sector.
• French investor v South Asian State, UNCITRAL arbitration, London. Acted for a French investor in a dispute relating to an infrastructure investment.
• French investor v European State, UNCITRAL arbitration, The Hague. Acted for a European State in a dispute arising from the revocation of marketing authorisations for pharmaceutical products.
• US investor and Dutch investor v Central Asian State, ICSID arbitration, London. Acted for two energy companies in a dispute relating to the imposition of price controls in the electricity sector on competition law grounds.
• Millicom v Senegal, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/20, Paris. Acted for a telecom operator in a dispute relating to the revocation of a telecom license.

Thomas is well-placed to advise on the full-spectrum of trade and customs-related matters arising following Brexit. He draws on his knowledge of EU law, WTO law, and UK and EU policy processes to design solutions for his clients and frequently acts for UK government departments on complex trade and regulatory matters involving the TCA and other treaties.

Thomas also has considerable experience of assisting in trade remedies investigations and is used to working closely with economic and accounting experts in that context.  He has acted for private respondents and for investigating authorities (including the UK’s Trade Remedies Authority) in anti-dumping, countervailing duty and safeguards investigations.

• Advised an exporter in an anti-dumping investigation conducted by the UK’s Trade Remedies Authority.
• Advised a Japanese multinational on rules of origin under the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement.
• Advised an importer of steel products on the scope of a price undertaking.
• Advised a UK magic circle law firm on post-Brexit market access to the EU.
• Advised a stock exchange on GATS and FTA-compatibility of certain policies implemented by a regulator.
• Advised a UK importer on anti-circumvention rules in connection with an EU anti-dumping measure.
• Advised a German importer on customs classification issues.
• Advised a Taiwanese corporation on an Indian anti-dumping investigation.
• Advised a US corporation on a Chinese anti-dumping investigation.
• Advised an importer on quota allocation rules imposed by DEFRA.

Competition Law:“He’s extremely intelligent and unfailingly calm under pressure. He’s a real diplomat, excellent at liaising with clients and adept at plotting a path through difficult legal challenges.” “Thomas is very, very good on the detail. For complex matters he’s really excellent – he doesn’t fluff over any details and gets right down to the nitty gritty.” – Chambers & Partners UK and Global 2026

Public International Law: “He is a straight shooter. He is very direct, honest and thorough.” – Chambers & Partners UK and Global 2026

Competition Law: “He is one seriously talented individual.” “The cornerstone of his practice is his superlative client-handling skills.” “Thomas is simply one of the very best juniors around.” – Chambers & Partners UK and Global 2025

Public International Law: “He’s very thoughtful, considered and measured – a real intellect!.” “Thomas is an extremely clever academic mind.” “He has great depth of expertise.” “Thomas is a very fine public international lawyer.” – Chambers & Partners UK and Global 2025

Public International Law: The English Bar: “Thomas was readily accessible, very smart and exceptionally easy to work with.” – Chambers & Partners UK and Global 2025

Competition: “Thomas has strong forensic drafting skills and a very broad knowledge of competition law and its application to commercial agreements.” – The Legal 500 2025

International Arbitration: “Tom is superb, calm and leads management of a difficult case as well as can be imagined. High intelligent and incisive. Keen mind for the commercial realities in a case.” – The Legal 500 2025

Public International Law:  “One of the most insightful minds at the Bar in my view. Enormously intelligent but wears it lightly. Diligent, super smart and an all-round class act.” – The Legal 500 2025

Public International Law: “Thomas was readily accessible, very smart and exceptionally easy to work with.” – Chambers & Partners UK and Global 2024

Public International Law: ‘Best barrister in the market when it comes to international trade, but also a first-rate PIL generalist – in terms of both analytical and strategic thinking, he is one of the best senior juniors in PIL.’ – The Legal 500 2024

International Arbitration: ‘Outstanding analysis and a lovely drafting style. Great team player, contributes strongly to all aspects of a case – he is a pleasure to work with.’ – The Legal 500 2024

Public International Law: “On trade law he’s as good as it gets.” “An outstanding advocate and WTO expert renowned for his trade law knowledge.” “When it comes to WTO law he’s in a league of his own.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2023

Competition Law: “A very experienced and assured senior junior, and a very strong drafter.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2023

Public International Law: “Tom is an excellent advocate, and has great strategic judgement. This is someone you want in your team for the most complex and challenging international law disputes, particularly if it involves a trade element.” – Legal 500, 2023

International Arbitration: Counsel: “Tom has a razor sharp mind and is an excellent advocate – highly recommended.” – Legal 500, 2023

‘Insightful and a clear thinker, Tom is user friendly and works well in a team.’ – Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2023 – the English Bar

Competition: “Tom has a razor sharp mind and is an excellent advocate.” – Legal 500, 2023

“Stands out as “very experienced in WTO matters”, receiving widespread praise for his top-tier practice.” – International Trade & Commodities, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2022

Recommended in Arbitration, Who’s Who Legal UK Bar 2022

‘Insightful and a clear thinker, Tom is user friendly and works well in a team.’ – Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2022 – the English Bar

Public International Law: “He is user-friendly and approachable. He combines his substantive Indian law experience with his general expertise in international law and arbitration.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2022

Competition Law: “He is good at refining the points and getting down to something that is compelling. He is good at drafting and shaping up the arguments.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2022

Public International Law: “Tom is absolutely brilliant. He’s the total package – calm, client-friendly, super smart and an excellent advocate.” – Legal 500, 2022

International Arbitration: Counsel: “Absolutely brilliant. He’s the total package – calm, client-friendly, super smart and an excellent advocate. He is also without doubt the leading expert at the Bar on WTO and trade law.” – Legal 500, 2022

Competition: “Tom is technically excellent, but his key strength is his approachability. There are no barristers currently working at the Bar in London that offer better client service.” – Legal 500, 2022

Recommended in Trade & Customs, Who’s Who Legal 2021

Public International Law: “Very clever, thorough and a go-to for WTO matters.” – Chambers Global, 2021 – The English Bar – Global-wide

“He is very responsive, and provides comprehensive advice that takes into account all aspects of the dispute.” – Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2021 – the English Bar

Competition: “Definitely a future star.” – Chambers UK and Chambers Global, 2021

Public International Law: “Very clever, thorough and a go-to for WTO matters.” – Chambers UK, 2021

Public International Law: ‘‘One of the most experienced, if not the most experienced, counsel on trade law issues in the UK, he is also excellent on investment treaty issues.’’ – Legal 500, 2021

International Arbitration: Counsel: ‘‘Very responsive and always make himself available to discuss matters and turns work around promptly – his advice is comprehensive and accounts not only for the strict legal merits of the position, but also considers the broader strategic perspective of the case.’’ – Legal 500, 2021

Competition: ‘‘Significant expertise in competition disputes and gives high quality advice which is measured and considered; calm and composed and easy to deal with.’’ – Legal 500, 2021

Career

• 2012 onwards:Barrister, London
• 2010-2012: Allen & Overy LLP, London
• 2002-2009: Advisory Centre on WTO Law, Geneva

Education

• MPhil, Oxford University (2001)
• BCL, Oxford University (2000)
• BA, LLB (Hons), National Law School of India University (1999)

Awards

• Visiting Professor, London School of Economics (2017-2020)
• Rhodes Scholarship, India (1999)