Our Team

Pietro Marino
Senior Consultant
  • Fraud
  • Investment Arbitration
  • Partnership Disputes
  • Energy
  • Law Society of England and Wales
Qualifications & Education
  • Law (BA), Durham University 1988
  • Law Society Finals 1989
  • Italian (fluent)
  • Spanish (working knowledge)
  • French (working knowledge)

Pietro has a broad commercial disputes practice with a strong emphasis on high value commercial fraud, asset tracing/ value recovery, offshore contentious trust litigation and cross border disputes in the oil & gas and metals sectors.

He frequently acts as lead lawyer in litigation straddling several jurisdictions, advising on strategy and its implementation, including the deployment of, or reacting to, insolvency related litigation initiatives. Pietro represented the successful appellant in the Privy Council decision in Vadim Schmidt v. Rosewood (concerning disclosure of documents by Trustees of discretionary trusts) and acted in the Bank of New York money laundering investigation. Pietro co-ordinated a team comprising various overseas law firms in a cross-border commodities fraud case where the lead action was litigated successfully before the Singapore Court. He represented a group of former Hammonds partners in their dispute against their former firm and advised Boris Berezovsky in his successful opposition to Roman Abramovich’s application to strike out Mr Berezovsky’s claim. Pietro has acted in several disputes concerning the breakdown of joint venture and other commercial relationships in the telecoms, metals and oil & gas sectors in former CIS countries which have given rise to worldwide related litigation and arbitration.


Pietro graduated from Durham University. He qualified with Theodore Goddard in 1992 and became a partner at that firm in 1999. Following the merger with Addleshaw Booth & Co, Pietro formed the Fraud and Financial Regulatory Contentious Group (part of the Contentious Group), which he headed until his departure in 2010.

Cases include
  • The Libyan Investment Authority -v- Goldman Sachs [2016] EWHC 2530 (Ch); [2014] EWHC 3364 (Ch)
  • The Libyan Investment Authority v. Société Générale S.A. & Ors [2016] EWHC 2773 (Comm); [2016] EWHC 375 (Comm); [2015] EWHC 1720 (QB); [2015] EWHC 550 (QB)
  • Vadim Schmidt -v- Rosewood (2003) UK PC 26
  • Malaysian International Trading Corp Sdn Bhd -v- Interamerica Asia Pte Ltd [2002] 2 SLR (R)
  • Global Multimedia International Ltd -v- ARA Media Services [2007] 1 ALL ER (Comm) 1160
  • Hammonds (A Firm) v. Danilunas [2009] EWHC 216 (CH)
  • Berezovsky -v- Abramovich [2010] EWHC 647 (Comm)
  • Erste Group Bank AG -v- JSC “VMZ Red October” & Ors [2013] EWHC 2926 (Comm) 
  • Anglo Petroleum -v- TFB (Mortgages) Ltd  [2003] EWHC 3125
  • Global -v- AMS & MBC [2006] EWHC 3107 (Ch)
  • Ackerman -v- Ackerman [2012] EWCA Civ 768
Dec 4, 2023
Canada Square Operations Ltd v Potter –  Supreme Court provides clarity on limitation periods in fraud context  
Introduction Section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980 provides for the postponement of the limitation period in cases of fraud,...
Nov 29, 2023
Oliver Rule joins Enyo Law from Allen & Overy
We are delighted to welcome Oliver Rule, who joins the firm as a partner. Oliver has almost two decades of...
Nov 22, 2023
The wide remit of a section 423 Insolvency Act claim
It is well known that courts are extremely reluctant to “pierce the corporate veil” and disregard the fundamental principle of...
Nov 15, 2023
High Court reiterates need to prove reliance on implied misrepresentations
The High Court has dismissed claims against Credit Suisse relating to its sale of a collateralised debt obligation (“CDO”) “as...