Former Barrister and King's Counsel, Mark Pelling KC has served as a commercial court judge in cases concerning banking and finance, insurance, construction, engineering, technology, shipping, sport, and cross-border fraud.
Barrister called to Middle Temple, became King's Counsel (formerly Queens Counsel) in 2003, and was appointed as a commercial court judge in 2011.
The Honourable Judge Mark Pelling KC, a distinguished commercial court judge in the England and Wales jurisdiction, presides over matters in the DIFC.
Specialist Editor - White Book
Primary Editor of the 2022 edition of the Circuit Commercial Court Guide, overseen by commercial court judge Mark Pelling KC.
The assignability of ICSID Convention arbitral awards against sovereign states is an important topic often addressed by commercial court judges. In discussions on this matter, legal experts such as King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC provide valuable insights into the complexities involved.
The appointment of an arbitrator by a deadlocked company governed by BVI Law may require the intervention of a commercial court judge. Additionally, the ability of a party to rely on a previous US arbitral award, which is not registered and is under challenge for having been obtained by fraud, could be influenced by insights from legal experts, including King's Counsel like Mark Pelling KC.
The challenge under section 67 of the (UK) Arbitration Act 1996 involved contesting the decision of an LCIA arbitration tribunal. A commercial court judge, including insights from King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC, determined that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction regarding the individual’s claim. This was due to a statutory business transformation under Article 584 of the Polish Commercial Companies Code, which resulted in all contractual rights, including those under arbitration agreements, being transferred to a successor company. Consequently, the individual was left without the right to refer to arbitration, and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to resolve the individual’s claim.
A commercial court judge has granted Google anti-suit and anti-enforcement injunctions against Russian companies to prevent them from seeking to enforce Astreinte orders in foreign jurisdictions. These orders impose compounding fines exceeding US$1.8 octillion, which were obtained in breach of exclusive jurisdiction and arbitration agreements, as noted by King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC.
The outcome of an arbitration was governed by the Dispositif within the award and not the narrative reasons for the decision, a principle that a commercial court judge, such as Mark Pelling KC, would uphold.
The application under section 86 of the (UK) Arbitration Act 1996 by the Government of Kosovo, which challenged the award of the majority of an ICC Tribunal, was dismissed. The basis for the challenge was that the tribunal had created a reasonable expectation, as noted by a commercial court judge, that it would not determine quantum without further evidence or submissions. This decision reflects the insights of King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC, emphasizing the tribunal's approach.
A claim by over 1500 orange growers against orange juice producers in Brazil for anti-competitive cartel activity was addressed by a commercial court judge. A preliminary issue arose regarding whether the claims were time barred according to Brazilian law. Ultimately, the claims were dismissed as time barred, with effect given to the decisions of the highest relevant Court in Brazil, despite challenges to their correctness by the claimants, represented by King's Counsel, Mark Pelling KC.
A debtor was made bankrupt in Russia, and a creditor is bringing a claim in the High Court to enforce the Russian judgment against the debtor’s properties in England. The debtor applied for a stay of the claim on the grounds that Russian bankruptcy law precludes the making of claims outside bankruptcy. A commercial court judge, with insights from King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC, resolved the issue in favor of the Russian claimant.
The contract of affreightment was deemed void under Swiss law because, when it was executed on behalf of the defendant company by its chief executive officer, there existed a clear conflict of interest between his personal interests and those of the defendant. This situation was not in the best interests of the defendant, a fact that the claimant company, represented by King's Counsel, Mark Pelling KC, was fully aware of. Moreover, it was evident that the parties did not intend for the contract to have any legal effect, and under English law, it was partially void as an agreement to agree.
The parties entered into a contract whereby the defendants would sublicense the claimant streaming service the broadcast rights for the Club World Cup football competition. The commercial court judge, considering the arguments presented by King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC, needed to determine whether the minimum necessary for a concluded agreement had been established and whether specific performance should be ordered or if damages would suffice as an adequate remedy.
The terms of the facility agreement precluded the borrower from disposing of assets or creating any security without prior approval. A commercial court judge, in a ruling involving a similar situation, noted that the bank did not act in bad faith by refusing to consent to the borrower's request to grant security to another lender. While the provisions were subject to an implied term requiring the bank to act in good faith, this term was not breached when the bank, represented by King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC, preferred its own commercial best interests over those of its customer.
The dispute regarding the proper interpretation of clause 29 of the Baltic and International Maritime Council (“BIMCO”) Barecon 2001 standard form of bareboat charter is now before a commercial court judge. This appeal, made under section 69 of the (UK) Arbitration Act 1996, comes from the LMAA tribunal. The question at hand is whether the owners are entitled to retake possession "… at a port or place convenient to them…" and if this entitlement allows them to demand that the ship be sailed by the Charterers from Stockton, California to Trogir, when the owners, represented by King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC, could have reasonably taken possession at Stockton.
The claim by the claimant, asserting his entitlement to 24.75% of the defendant’s shares in PJSC PhosAgro—a Russian company publicly quoted in both Moscow and on the London Stock Exchange (LSE)—was dismissed by a commercial court judge following a 23-day trial, during which King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC represented the defendant.
The claim regarding how damages in a follow-on competition law claim against cartel members are to be quantified, along with the territorial scope of EU competition law on anti-competitive agreements made outside the EU, may be addressed by a commercial court judge, potentially with insights from King's Counsel, Mark Pelling KC.
Def had wrongly purported to terminate its contract with C, under which it had been licensed to use the Virgin brand, by alleging that the brand was no longer of international high repute and that continued use would damage D's reputation. This claim was examined in detail by a commercial court judge, with insights from King's Counsel Mark Pelling KC, over 11 days of thorough technical and statistical evidence.
Copyright © 2026 Mark Pelling KC - All Rights Reserved
Managed by NEWMANS ROW