Barristers Chambers

Overview

Before commencing her career at the Bar, she read Law with Legal Studies in Europe at Oxford University and spent a year in Konstanz reading German Law before completing her LLM (in German) in comparative law.

In March 2004 Rachel was appointed as Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel C. She was promoted to Panel B in March 2008. In 2010 Rachel was appointed as a member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates.

Rachel is ranked as a leading band 1 shipping junior in the UK Legal 500 2015 and is recommended as a leading barrister for both Shipping & Commodities and Employment law in Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500, where she has been described as ‘exceptional’. They note:

'Absolutely fantastic junior with a great reputation in the superyacht field' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2016)

Has a particularly broad shipping practice that encompasses both wet and dry matters, ranging from shipbuilding disputes to admiralty claims. She has additional expertise in international trade cases. (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2015)

'She is very proactive and does not rely on instructing solicitors.' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2015)

‘A very able advocate with excellent tenacity.' (Legal 500 2014)

'She is extremely industrious and easy to work with.' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2014)

Commentators say that Rachel Toney offers 'more or less the complete package.' She allies charm to tenacity and is known for always giving clients a good run for their money. (Chambers & Partners 2013)

The 'tenacious' Rachel Toney 'has the complete package - pragmatism, intelligence and client skills,' sources say. Her practice covers a wide range of commercial disputes including international trade, shipping, sale and carriage of goods and insurance matters. (Chambers & Partners 2012)

Rachel Toney of Stone Chambers is praised for 'her ability to whip very messy cases into fantastic shape.' She is 'very pragmatic and certainly has an excellent technical grasp of the law.' (Chambers & Partners 2012)

Rachel Toney ‘gives confidence about the depth of legal analysis and advice provided, yet brings a commercial perspective’ to the table. (Legal 500 2011)

... 'a barrister with phenomenal attention to detail' (Chambers & Partners 2011)

Rachel Toney is a favourite junior at the set, whose practice covers both dry and wet matters. She impresses with her 'ability to communicate legal detail at an understandable level,' and with her 'good technical mind which allows her to assimilate complex information coming at her from different perspectives.'  (Chambers & Partners 2011)

Rachel Toney ‘is very bright, and delivers no-nonsense advice’. (Legal 500 2009)

Appointments:

 Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel C 2004

 Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel B 2008

 Member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates - 2010

Awards and Scholarships:

Hardwicke Scholar (1998-1999)

Sir Thomas More Bursary (1998-1999)

Wolfson Scholar (1997-1998)

Exhibitioner at Christ Church (1994-1997)

Education

1993-1997    Christ Church, Oxford University BA (Hons 1st Class)
     Law with Legal Studies in Europe
     Exhibitioner 1994-1997
1995-1996    Konstanz University, Germany, LLM (finalised December 1999)
     German/Comparative law
1989-1993    Lutterworth Grammar School
     GCSE, A-Levels and S-Levels (distinction)

Languages

German (fluent) & French (good working knowledge)

Rachel Toney Shipping & International Trade

Before commencing her career at the Bar, Rachel read Law with Legal Studies in Europe at Oxford University and spent a year in Konstanz reading German Law before completing her LLM (in German) in comparative law.

Rachel’s wide-ranging shipping practice includes all aspects of shipping and maritime work (“dry” shipping – all aspects including most particularly shipbuilding disputes, a wide variety of bills of lading/charterparty disputes, indemnity claims, Agency Agreement disputes, contamination and cargo claims; “wet” shipping/Admiralty claims, primarily collisions/allisions including jurisdictional and procedural issues), international trade, contracts for the sale and carriage of goods together with insurance and re-insurance. Rachel is experienced in mediation as well as arbitration and has developed a very successful shipbuilding and superyacht practice, an area in which she has represented Owners and Builders and has developed an impressive reputation being instructed in many of the significant, high-value new-build disputes involving a number of the world’s largest superyachts. Rachel has also contributed to legal publications providing opinion and commentary in relation to superyacht law and practice. Rachel has been instructed recently in a number of significant, varied and high value collision/allision cases involving bulk carriers, tankers and also a number of vessels and craft operated by the Ministry of Defence. Rachel has also advised recently in relation to and appeared in a number of Applications before the Commercial Court requesting urgent interim injunctive relief (including anti-suit).

In March 2004 Rachel was appointed as Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel C. She was promoted to Panel B in March 2008. In 2010 Rachel was appointed as a member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates.

Rachel is ranked as a leading band 1 shipping junior in the UK Legal 500 2015 and is recommended as a leading barrister for both Shipping & Commodities and Employment law in Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500, where she has been described as ‘outstanding’. They note:

'Absolutely fantastic junior with a great reputation in the superyacht field' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2016)

Has a particularly broad shipping practice that encompasses both wet and dry matters, ranging from shipbuilding disputes to admiralty claims. She has additional expertise in international trade cases. (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2015)

'She is very proactive and does not rely on instructing solicitors.' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2015)

‘A very able advocate with excellent tenacity.’ (Legal 500 2014)

'She is extremely industrious and easy to work with.' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2014)

Commentators say that Rachel Toney offers 'more or less the complete package.' She allies charm to tenacity and is known for always giving clients a good run for their money. (Chambers & Partners 2013)

The “tenacious” Rachel Toney “has the complete package - pragmatism, intelligence and client skills,” sources say. Her practice covers a wide range of commercial disputes including international trade, shipping, sale and carriage of goods and insurance matters. (Chambers & Partners 2012)

Rachel Toney of Stone Chambers is praised for 'her ability to whip very messy cases into fantastic shape.' She is 'very pragmatic and certainly has an excellent technical grasp of the law.' (Chambers & Partners 2012)

Rachel Toney ‘gives confidence about the depth of legal analysis and advice provided, yet brings a commercial perspective’ to the table. (Legal 500 2011)

... 'a barrister with phenomenal attention to detail' (Chambers & Partners 2011)

Rachel Toney is a favourite junior at the set, whose practice covers both dry and wet matters. She impresses with her 'ability to communicate legal detail at an understandable level,' and with her 'good technical mind which allows her to assimilate complex information coming at her from different perspectives.' (Chambers & Partners 2011)

Rachel Toney ‘is very bright, and delivers no-nonsense advice’. (Legal 500 2009)

Shipping Cases:

Superyacht – build dispute (2010- 2013): instructed on behalf of a (Respondent) Purchasing Company of multi-million Euro “superyacht” (100+m) in relation to a dispute with the Builder which arose during construction of the “superyacht”. The dispute and issues between the parties concerned allegations regarding Permissable Delay, “changes and modifications”, late delivery of decisions, late supply, costs overruns and time delays. At the time (and up until earlier in 2013) the superyacht was the largest of its kind ever to have been built. Rachel was heavily involved (as Junior Counsel) in preparations for the Preliminary Issues trial (proceeding in LMAA arbitration). This included a number of visits (as sole Counsel) to the foreign shipyard and Vessel whilst under construction (and to meet in conference with clients and foreign lawyers also advising in relation to the on-going dispute) and responsibility for preparation and presentation of the technical evidence. Further to the outcome of the Preliminary Issues Arbitration, Rachel became heavily involved in advising, drafting and general preparations in relation to the Defence of (and Counterclaim in relation to) the “Main (multi-million Euro) Claim” including detailed work with factual and expert witnesses.

Superyacht – brokerage dispute: instructed on behalf of a purchaser of a multi-million Euro “superyacht” (100+m) to defend a substantial claim proceeding in (LMAA) arbitration for alleged losses and damage suffered as a result of an alleged wrongful repudiation of a written brokerage agreement and as a result of alleged breaches of the Respondent’s obligation of confidentiality arising under that agreement. Counterclaim arose out of various alleged breaches by the Claimant of clauses of the Agreement, fiduciary and other duties. Complex legal issues in relation to the alleged breaches of confidentiality and breaches of fiduciary duties relating to the alleged receipt of “secret commissions”.

Superyacht – build dispute (2013-2015): instructed on behalf of shipyard in multi-million Euro arbitration dispute and Commercial Court appeal defending claims for liquidated damages and advancing claims for damages for additional build costs, breach of terms of build contract including terms relating to advertising and promotional activities and late payment of instalments etc. Claims formed part of an intellectual property dispute which arose with the Owner of one of the world’s largest “superyachts” (100+m).

Confidential (2015): representing buyers and managers in relation to  a number of significant and complex multi-million dollar shipbuilding disputes with foreign shipyard arising under arbitration clauses providing for an expedited procedure. Alleged non-conformities with contract/specifications and issues of deliverability of a number of vessels (relating largely to manoeuvrability, light running margin, boiler capacity deficiencies, fuel consumption and Energy Efficient Design Index notations, passage through barred speed range). Cases proceeding in arbitration but advising and appearing also in a number of associated High Court applications including those for urgent interim injunctive relief; section 30 and 32 Arbitration Act jurisdiction disputes; section 68 and s69 Arbitration Act 1996 challenges/appeals). Advising on issues relating to Refund Guarantees, re-sale to third parties, Flag State and Class certification and intervention and securities. 

Confidential: providing advice during re-fit in relation to one of world’s largest superyachts.

“FLASH” advising on various charterparty issues arising out of grounding off Tunisia.

X v Y : instructed to represent Owner of a superyacht (the very first in a new class of luxury superyachts) in his multi-million £ dispute with the Builder in relation to substantial and numerous alleged defects in the yacht. Advising in relation to potential claims under the SGA 1979, breach of warranties, rescission, damages, entire agreement clauses, quantum and potential negligence claims against former solicitors.

Confidential: advising Secretary of State for Defence in relation to a number of Admiralty cases including collision between a Naval and other vessel; an allision between a work vessel and pontoons/shore-side equipment and facilities owned by the MoD.

Confidential: Rachel is currently advising Owner in relation to its significant potential warranty claim against Builder and manufacturer.

White Cloud: 65m motoryacht - instructed to advise in relation to a legal dispute pertaining to damage of coral reefs (alleged anchor dragging) in the Turks and Caicos Islands.

YR [2014] EWHC 4406: Rachel is instructed as Junior Counsel on behalf of the Owners of a Panamax bulk carrier (the vessel) in relation to a multi-million dollar dispute arising out of an incident concerning the interaction between the wash of another bulk carrier and the vessel in Brazil and in particular the generation of hydrodynamic pressure fields. The incident is alleged to have caused damage to the vessel and shore loading equipment giving rise to significant third party claims.

“X”: Rachel was instructed on behalf of the Claimant Owners of a 175m bulk carrier in relation to an allision which took place within the enclosed dock system of a port where contact was made between the vessel and a swing bridge. Damage is alleged to have been caused to the vessel and oil pollution resulted leading to significant clean-up operations. Allegations relating to port safety and management (incl. PMSC), risk assessment process and procedure, navigational error, pilotage and the reasonableness and effectiveness of fuel oil recovery operations.

“X”: Rachel is currently instructed to advise Owners’ insurers in relation to a cargo dispute (advice on vessel arrest and anti-suit injunctive and declaratory relief).

“BB”: instructed to advise intended Claimant in relation to alleged damage sustained by a number of consignments for shipment on board reefer vessels. Rachel provided urgent advise in relation to contractual issues (waybills, BIFA terms and conditions, limitation of liability, time bar and jurisdiction).

LS In Administration: instructed to assist insolvency team in relation to shipping issues arising out of company going into administration whilst consignments en route in container ships from Far East to England

Confidential: instructed to advise on urgent basis on behalf of multi-million Euro yacht owner in relation to a financing/security dispute which had arisen with the shipyard

O v P  [2013] EWHC 3855 (Comm): instructed to advise and to appear on behalf of international shipping logistics Applicant/Intended Claimant in ex parte application in Commercial Court for an anti-suit injunction. Advice in relation to shipping Agency dispute and evidence generally and more specifically in relation to procedure and anti-suit injunction (in light of recent Supreme Court authority), supporting declaratory relief.

MC” [2012] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 471: instructed on behalf of the Claimant insurers of a passenger cruise vessel in Admiralty Court litigation against Transport for London in relation to an allision between the vessel and Westminster Bridge which is said to have caused considerable damage to (and the near loss of) the vessel on the Thames. Claimant alleged that TfL had failed in their duties to maintain and properly repair the bridge and to ensure that the pier buttresses (and the relatively narrow low water channel through the arch) were sufficiently marked to enable vessels to transit safely (the Defendant denies any breach). The Defendant (TfL) alleged negligence on the part of the Master (which was denied). Complex expert issues as to structural integrity, maintenance and repair of the various parts of the bridge structures involved and engineering complexities vis-à-vis causation of damage to vessel in light of chosen method of buttress protection.

G and others and TC plc: instructed on behalf of the insurers of a Thames Clipper in relation to an Admiralty action regarding a collision with (and alleged destruction of) a cutter. Multi-party advice in relation to liability and personal injury quantum.

S v Secretary of State for Defence: as part of her Attorney-General Panel work, Rachel was instructed on behalf of the Secretary of State for Defence advising in relation to an intended Admiralty claim for damages intimated by the insurers of a proposed Claimant in relation to an alleged allision which took place in the Eastern Solent.

GS”: Counsel on behalf of Claimant Owners in relation to an LMAA Arbitration Charterparty dispute concerning shipment of an alleged dangerous cargo of bulk iron ore. Case also involves consideration of issues and argument in relation to legal principles concerning very recent Court of Appeal authority on demurrage time-bars.

Grenco BV v J & E Hall Limited, Jackstone Froster Limited & Others: Rachel acted as Junior Counsel on behalf of Defendant suppliers of vertical stack plate freezers for industrial use on land and on-board ocean-going vessels. Defending substantial claims for damages and loss of profits for breach of contract and/or negligence concerning amongst other things the design and supply of aluminium freezers. Numerous points arising for consideration and advice in relation to expert issues of plate susceptibility to corrosion, corrosion inhibitors, design and integrity of marine freezer systems, weld procedures and general causation and mitigation.

MV SEA CRESTA: Rachel acted as Junior Counsel on behalf of shippers and charterers defending claims brought by Owners for damages arising out of the carriage of a cargo of Direct Reduced Iron from Trinidad to Canada. Issues arising in relation to the carriage of alleged dangerous cargo, the use and/or suitability of Thermocouples for monitoring temperature changes and the seaworthiness of the vessel.

H v HMM: Rachel provided advice in relation to breaches of shipping Agency Agreement, jurisdiction and alleged breaches of the Commercial Agents Directive Regulations.

“Jack O Lantern”: Rachel was instructed on behalf of Claimant racing yacht Owner in relation to claim for damages arising out of alleged demasting during the course of the Round Britain and Ireland race.

“OML”: Junior Counsel on behalf of Claimant Owners in relation to a claim involving alleged delamination and structural failing of a racing yacht.

“Lady Kathryn”: Rachel represented Claimant charterer at Arbitration alleging breaches of MYBA Charter Agreement and misrepresentations in relation to private charter of a luxury yacht.

“MV Gallant”: appeared on behalf of shipowners in German arbitration (Hamburg), in relation to charterparty dispute referred to arbitration subject to the Rules of the German Maritime Arbitrator’s Association.

Glencore International AG (and others) v Metro Trading International Inc, (and others): multi-party complex litigation, conflict of laws, relevant rules of Fujairah and English law, title to blended/commingled oil and priorities, jurisdictional issues). Numerous interlocutory applications in relation to subsidiary claims including freezing injunction relief, second Junior Counsel and junior Counsel in relation to Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the litigation [2001] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 284 (Phase 1); appeared as Junior Counsel in Court of Appeal appealing first instance decision granting anti-suit injunction relief against shipowners [2002] EWCS Civ 524.

“The Great Peace [2001] 151 NLJ 1696, [2002] 3 W.L.R. 1617: instructed as Junior Counsel on behalf of salvors in the Court of Appeal in relation to claim for unpaid hire. Arguably, now the leading case on mistake. Court of Appeal did away with the equitable doctrine of common mistake overruling Solle v Butcher.

Voaden v Champion and Ors

“The Baltic Surveyor [2002] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 623: instructed as Junior Counsel to advise and appear on behalf of respondents in Court of Appeal. Quantum dispute in relation to sinking of appellants’ vessel.

Appointments:

Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel C 2004

Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel B 2008

Member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates - 2010

Awards and Scholarships:

Hardwicke Scholar (1998-1999)

Sir Thomas More Bursary (1998-1999)

Wolfson Scholar (1997-1998)

Exhibitioner at Christ Church (1994-1997)

Education:

1993-1997  Christ Church, Oxford University BA (Hons 1st Class)
   Law with Legal Studies in Europe
   Exhibitioner 1994-1997
 1995-1996  Konstanz University, Germany, LLM (finalised December 1999)
   German/Comparative law
 1989-1993   Lutterworth Grammar School
   GCSE, A-Levels and S-Levels (distinction)

 

Languages:    

German (fluent) & French (good working knowledge)

Rachel Toney -  Commercial Litigation & International Arbitration

Before commencing her career at the Bar, Rachel read Law with Legal Studies in Europe at Oxford University and spent a year in Konstanz reading German Law before completing her LLM (in German) in comparative law.

Rachel’s wide-ranging commercial practice (covering contentious and non-contentious matters) includes all commercial aspects of international and domestic disputes, but particularly international trade, shipping and maritime work, construction disputes, agency disputes, contracts for the sale and carriage of goods, insurance and re-insurance. Rachel is experienced in mediation as well as arbitration and has also advised in relation to and appeared on a number of recent commercial High Court applications for injunctive relief (anti-suit and freezing orders). Rachel has substantial shipping and employment practices, and separate CVs for this work are available.

In March 2004 Rachel was appointed as Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel C. She was promoted to Panel B in March 2008. In 2010 Rachel was appointed as a member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates.

Rachel is recommended as a leading barrister in Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500, where she has been described as ‘outstanding’. They note:

'Absolutely fantastic junior' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2016)

'She is very proactive and does not rely on instructing solicitors.' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2015)

‘A very able advocate with excellent tenacity.' (Legal 500 2014)

'She is extremely industrious and easy to work with.' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2014)

Commentators say that Rachel Toney offers 'more or less the complete package.' She allies charm to tenacity and is known for always giving clients a good run for their money. (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2013)

The 'tenacious' Rachel Toney 'has the complete package - pragmatism, intelligence and client skills,' sources say. Her practice covers a wide range of commercial disputes including international trade, shipping, sale and carriage of goods and insurance matters. (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2012)

Rachel Toney of Stone Chambers is praised for 'her ability to whip very messy cases into fantastic shape.' She is 'very pragmatic and certainly has an excellent technical grasp of the law.' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2012)

Rachel Toney ‘gives confidence about the depth of legal analysis and advice provided, yet brings a commercial perspective' to the table. (Legal 500 2011)

... 'a barrister with phenomenal attention to detail' (Chambers & Partners 2011)

Rachel Toney is a favourite junior at the set, whose practice covers both dry and wet matters. She impresses with her 'ability to communicate legal detail at an understandable level,' and with her 'good technical mind which allows her to assimilate complex information coming at her from different perspectives.' (Chambers & Partners 2011)

Rachel Toney ‘is very bright, and delivers no-nonsense advice'. (Legal 500 2009)

Commercial Cases:

O v P [2013] EWHC 3855 (Comm): instructed to advise in relation to and to appear on behalf of international logistics group company Applicant/Intended Claimant in ex parte application in Commercial Court for an anti-suit injunction and declaratory relief. Advice in relation to shipping Agency dispute and evidence generally and more specifically in relation to procedure and anti-suit injunction, supporting declaratory relief.

“X” Bank v “Y”: instructed to advise in relation to and to appear on behalf of international bank in its Commercial Court claim against a well known international IT software and services provider. Rachel successfully obtained urgent interim injunctive and declaratory relief against the IT company and acted on behalf of the bank in bringing its substantive claim in the Commercial Court.

X Bank v Other Banks: instructed by an international bank to provide advice in relation to an application for Norwich Pharmacal (and other ) relief before the Commercial Court against a number of banks within and outside the jurisdiction; advising in relation to evidence and procedure, potential substantive proprietary and breach of contract/duty claims, identification of proper parties.

“LS”: instructed to advise on an urgent basis in relation to financing dispute which had arisen between shipyard and Owner company.

“H”: Rachel is instructed to advise Owners’ insurers in relation to a substantial cargo dispute. Rachel’s assistance was required at the outset in particular regarding vessel arrest and anti-suit injunctive relief.

“X”: Rachel is instructed to advise Owners in relation to a jurisdictionally complex contractual warranty dispute

“V”: instructed as Junior Counsel in relation to a complex shipbuilding dispute. Advising ship builder in relation to numerous contractual disputes with the buyer relating to interpretation and application of contractual clauses and issues relating to alleged breaches of duties of confidentiality.

“Project S: represented Defendant (counterclaiming) shipyard in lengthy arbitration in relation to a multi-million Euro dispute which has arisen with the Owner of a multi-million Euro “superyacht”. Defending claims for liquidated damages and advancing claims for Permissible Delay and damages for additional build costs, breach of terms of build contract, including terms relating to advertising and promotional activities and late payment of instalments. Claims form part of an intellectual property dispute which has arisen with the Owner. Rachel was most recently involved in 2015 in relation to the Commercial Court appeal and complex costs disputes.

“Project X”: represented Respondent purchaser of “superyacht” defending a claim for alleged losses and damage suffered as a result of an alleged wrongful repudiation of a written brokerage agreement and as a result of alleged breaches of Respondent’s obligation of confidentiality arising under that agreement. Counterclaim arising out of various alleged breaches by the Claimant of clauses of the Agreement, fiduciary and other duties.

“Project Y”: instructed on behalf of Purchaser of multi-million Euro “superyacht” to advise and appear at LMAA Arbitration in relation to on-going disputes which arose with the Builder during construction of the “superyacht”. Disputes concerned allegations regarding “changes and modifications”, late delivery of decisions, late supply, costs overruns and time delays.

Grenco BV v J & E Hall Limited, Jackstone Froster Limited & Others: acted as Junior Counsel on behalf of Defendant suppliers of vertical stack plate freezers for industrial use on land and on-board ocean-going vessels. Defending substantial claims for damages and loss of profits for breach of contract and/or negligence concerning amongst other things the design and supply of aluminium freezers. Numerous points arising for consideration and advice in relation to expert issues of plate susceptibility to corrosion, corrosion inhibitors, design and integrity of marine freezer systems, weld procedures and general causation and mitigation.

GEAG v A & P: instructed to advise and represent Claimant in its Commercial Court claim against supplier of alleged faulty fully welded plate heat exchanger installed in major UK refrigeration plant.

A v H: Junior Counsel in relation to potential claims against land management company regarding (i.a.) conduct at Planning Inquiry; concerned tenders for planning permissions for development sites for motorway service stations; possible breaches of joint venture agreement.

AMEC v The Secretary of State for Transport (Instructed by the Treasury): Rachel acted as Junior Counsel for the Secretary of State for Transport in multi-million pound heavy contractual dispute. SoS for Transport was defending complex allegations of disruption and delay by the contractor. Multi-million pound counterclaim concerning overpayments, revisions of various extensions of time and reimbursement of liquidated damages etc. Wide-ranging civil engineering and programming issues. Heavily involved in drafting and presenting engineer witness evidence.

SM v Secretary of State for Transport: instructed by and advising Defendant in relation to a substantial s278 Highways Act contribution dispute which arose with Developer of major (road) construction scheme.

H v HMM: advice in relation to breaches of shipping Agency Agreement, jurisdiction and alleged breaches of the Commercial Agents Directive Regulations.

Bim Kemi v Blackburn Chemicals: instructed as junior Counsel in 4-week trial - claims and cross claims for breaches of knowhow licence and distribution agreements. Presentation of complex evidence in relation to chemical specifications/compositions.

Glencore International AG (and others) v Metro Trading International Inc, (and others): multi-party complex litigation, conflict of laws, relevant rules of Fujairah and English law, title to blended/commingled oil and priorities, jurisdictional issues). Numerous interlocutory applications in relation to subsidiary claims including freezing injunction relief, second junior Counsel and junior Counsel in relation to Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the litigation [2001] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 284 (Phase 1); appeared as junior Counsel in Court of Appeal appealing first instance decision granting anti-suit injunction relief against shipowners [2002] EWCS Civ 524.

Shipping:

Rachel also has a full shipping practice, a shipping profile is available on request.

Employment:

Rachel also has a full employment practice, an employment profile is available on request.

Appointments:

Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel C 2004

Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel B 2008

Member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates - 2010

Awards and Scholarships:

Hardwicke Scholar (1998-1999)

Sir Thomas More Bursary (1998-1999)

Wolfson Scholar (1997-1998)

Exhibitioner at Christ Church (1994-1997)

Education:

1993-1997 Christ Church, Oxford University BA (Hons 1st Class)

Law with Legal Studies in Europe

Exhibitioner 1994-1997

1995-1996 Konstanz University, Germany, LLM (finalised December 1999)

German/Comparative law

1989-1993 Lutterworth Grammar School

GCSE, A-Levels and S-Levels (distinction)

Languages: German (fluent) & French (good working knowledge)

Rachel Toney Employment

Before commencing her career at the Bar, Rachel read Law with Legal Studies in Europe at Oxford University and spent a year in Konstanz reading German Law before completing her LLM (in German) in comparative law.

Rachel has successfully carved a thriving practice in employment law and is regularly instructed on behalf of a wide-ranging variety of Respondents such as Health Care Trusts, employment agencies, Government entities and agencies (such as the Ministry of Justice, Her Majesty’s Prison Service, Secretary of State for Transport, Secretary of State for Defence, Home Office UK Border Agency, Her Majesty’s Land Registry, the House of Commons, Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs), national charities (such as Action for Children), leading high street retailers, auditors, accountants and Lloyd’s of London. Rachel appears in Courts and Tribunals in a wide variety of (often very sensitive and confidential) cases and has particular experience in cases involving High Court applications for injunctive relief and complex issues of remedy. Rachel is often brought in to advise on and to bring order to “messy”, sensitive cases. Rachel has also recently acted on behalf of a number of Claimants in high profile cases which have received wide publicity in the National press. Her practice encompasses all aspects of unfair dismissal, discrimination (particularly age and disability), breaches of contract and PI. Rachel advises in relation to vires, applicability and enforcement of Governmental pay policies and Notices to Staff, wide-ranging contractual disputes, employment contracts/policies, procedures, legislation, personal injury and recovery of sums regarding shares and share options.

In March 2004 Rachel was appointed as Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel C. She was promoted to Panel B in March 2008. In 2010 she was appointed as a member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates.

Rachel is recommended as a leading barrister for both Employment law and Shipping & Commodities in Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500, where she has been described as ‘outstanding’ and ‘exceptional’. They note:

'Absolutely fantastic junior' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2016)

'She is very proactive and does not rely on instructing solicitors.' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2015)

‘A very able advocate with excellent tenacity.’ (Legal 500 2014)

'She is extremely industrious and easy to work with.' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2014)

Rachel 'allies charm to tenacity and is known for always giving clients a good run for their money' (Chambers & Partners UK Bar 2013)

The 'tenacious' Rachel Toney 'has the complete package - pragmatism, intelligence and client skills,' sources say. (Chambers & Partners 2012)

Rachel Toney of Stone Chambers is praised for 'her ability to whip very messy cases into fantastic shape.' She is 'very pragmatic and certainly has an excellent technical grasp of the law.' (Chambers & Partners 2012)

At the junior end, the ‘exceptional’ Rachel Toney at Stone Chambers ‘demonstrates a keen grasp of the law and is a formidable asset in any Employment Tribunal case. (Legal 500 2011)

Rachel Toney ‘gives confidence about the depth of legal analysis and advice provided, yet brings a commercial perspective’ to the table. (Legal 500 2011)

...'a barrister with phenomenal attention to detail' (Chambers & Partners 2011)

She impresses with her 'ability to communicate legal detail at an understandable level,' and with her 'good technical mind which allows her to assimilate complex information coming at her from different perspectives.' (Chambers & Partners 2011)

Employment Cases:

H v Ministry of Justice and others [2014] EWHC 2535

Rachel represented the Respondents over a significant period of time in relation to sensitive and complex claims brought against the Respondents in the Employment Tribunal and High Court by a member of the Civil Appeals Office of the Royal Courts of Justice. The Claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct (including alleged bullying and harassment of female colleagues over a period of time; inappropriate remarks including comments of a sexual nature). The Claimant pursued an internal appeal and was reinstated pending a further investigative procedure. A protective claim (for unfair dismissal, sex discrimination, disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, whistle blowing detriment, notice pay/wrongful dismissal and holiday pay) was issued in the ET. Claimant issued an application in the High Court for an interim injunction restraining the Respondent from continuing with the disciplinary process pending the outcome of his intended breach of contract claim in the High Court. Rachel successfully defended that application. The Claimant then launched an appeal which was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. Rachel was also instructed to represent the Respondent defending the complex breach of contract claim (including over twenty separate allegations of breach). The case received comment in the legal press and its development was closely followed by leading practitioners in the field.

Wooster v London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2009] IRLR 980

Rachel represented and successfully appeared on behalf of Mr Wooster before ET and Employment Appeal Tribunal in relation to his seven figure claim for (i.a.) unfair dismissal and age discrimination. In September 2009, the Appeal Tribunal, led by the President of the EAT (Mr Justice Underhill), refused to overturn Tribunal’s decision on age discrimination in a case said (by the Appellant Council) to be of significant importance to local authorities across the country. Appearing against Leading and Junior Counsel on behalf of Tower Hamlets, Rachel successfully argued on behalf of Mr Wooster that whilst it would have been unlawful for the Council to have kept Mr Wooster in employment for the sole purpose of obtaining his enhanced pension rights, the Council had discriminated against him by effectively deliberately ignoring its own redundancy and redeployment policy because of Mr Wooster’s impending entitlement to early retirement benefits. Mr Wooster argued for what was considered to be the largest compensation award in UK age discrimination case history. Case received the support of the Equal Opportunities Commission. Rachel was instructed to represent and appear on behalf of Mr Wooster before the Court of Appeal. Case received much publicity in legal press.

H v Ministry of Justice

Rachel was instructed to represent the Respondent at first instance and on appeal in 2014 in a highly sensitive case defending a decision taken by the Governing Governor of a London Prison to dismiss one of its prison officers for gross misconduct arising out of an alleged assault/use of unnecessary force by the officer on a prisoner. The Claimant alleged discrimination and wrongful dismissal in addition to unfair dismissal.

Y v SoS for Health

Rachel was instructed to advise and represent the Respondent defending a particularly complex and difficult case which had been set down for five weeks in the ET in 2014. Claims brought by a former chief pharmacist of an NHS Trust for unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal, direct sex discrimination, disability discrimination, whistleblowing, victimization, wrongful dismissal and damages for personal injury as well as aggravated damages.

B v Action for Children

Rachel successfully represented the Respondent Charity defending claims of unfair dismissal and age discrimination relating to the reorganisation and restructuring of the Respondent’s Children’s Services Department. The Respondent was successful in relation to each of the claims raised against it. Rachel also succeeded in obtaining a number of important and favourable procedural rulings at the outset of the hearing which included a ruling as to the inadmissibility of particular evidence and the subsequent withdrawal (in its entirety) by the Claimant’s representatives of the age discrimination case. This case was heard subsequent to Rachel successfully representing the Charity on another 6-day Tribunal hearing defending serious allegations of disability discrimination and unfair dismissal.

S v Home Office (UK Border Agency)

Rachel was instructed on behalf of the Secretary of State for the Home Office defending claims of unfair dismissal, disability discrimination and “whistleblowing” arising from a gross misconduct dismissal (which included allegations of serious repeated breaches of Border Control National Tactical Operations Team and Crown Prosecution Service protocols for arrests at home addresses) within the BCNTO Team. Although the specific nature and detail of the evidence to be considered and presented remains highly confidential, the case received general widespread National press coverage when the Claimant took his allegations of “sham marriages” to the newspapers.

C v Her Majesty’s Court Service/Ministry of Justice

Instructed to defend a claim brought by a Court Usher against HMCS/MoJ for unfair dismissal in relation to decisions taken not to renew fixed term contract. Questions surrounding duties imposed under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 and the Fixed Term Workers Regulations 2002.

S v Her Majesty’s Land Registry

Rachel was instructed to represent the Respondent defending a number of complex claims brought (and continuing to be brought) relating to alleged sex discrimination, detriment contrary to section 146 TULRCA, less favourable treatment contrary to the Part-Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, breach of Article 141 of the EC Treaty and breach of the Safety Representatives and Safety Committee Regulations 1977. Case is factually and legally complex and is potentially of vast national impact and significance in terms of remuneration of Part-Time and/or Trade Union representatives across HMLR nationally. Rachel has been particularly instrumental in the case in pulling the numerous overlapping issues into proper order and legal structure in order that the voluminous (and somewhat dense statistical and numerical) evidence may be marshalled accordingly.

Child Maintenance Group

Instructed to appear on behalf of Respondent defending claims of associative disability discrimination, sex discrimination and breach of the flexible working regulations.

Confidential

Instructed to advise an individual director/shareholder of a major mutual insurance firm in relation to a claim of unfair treatment, discrimination (age and sex) and personal injury

H v DWP

Instructed to appear on behalf of the Respondent in relation to a dispute which had arisen between the parties further to the Claimant having been dismissed for gross misconduct for having allegedly accessed confidential system records without legitimate business reason. Allegations of bullying and disability discrimination, jurisdictional issues and strike out.

SHL v Ministry of Justice

This was a lengthy 7-day hearing in which Rachel successfully represented the Respondent defending substantial and very serious allegations of bullying and harassment relating to a gross misconduct dismissal. The case was particularly demanding given the voluminous and incredibly detailed documentation (stretching back some 8 years). The case necessitated particularly sensitive, yet robust and meticulous cross-examination of the disabled Claimant whose first language was not English and who was partially deaf and partially sighted. Rachel’s client succeeded on every issue before the Tribunal. The solicitor described the outcome as “a really brilliant result” which was “very much down to Rachel’s total commitment and thoroughness towards the case”.

W-T v Action for Children

Rachel successfully represented the Respondent Charity in a 6-day Tribunal hearing defending serious allegations of disability discrimination (direct, disability related discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments) relating to the Claimant’s complex regional pain syndrome, and unfair dismissal following the reorganisation and restructuring of the Respondent’s Children’s Services Department. The claim against Rachel’s lay clients was dismissed in its entirety. The Judgment of the Tribunal followed the Respondent’s written submissions particularly closely and determined that none of the Claimant’s allegations of unfair/unlawful treatment was made out.

Pine v (1) Cinven Ltd (2) MP

Represented Claimant in relation to her six figure claim for (i.a.) unfair dismissal, disability discrimination (“ME”), harassment and victimisation. Case received wide publicity in National press. Evidence given via video link.

Rowden v BSkyB

Advised and successfully represented Claimant former Head of Acquisitions at Sky in relation to her six figure claim for (i.a.) unfair dismissal and sex discrimination (dismissal for a reason relating to pregnancy). Case received wide publicity in National press.

N v Ministry of Justice

Instructed on behalf of Respondent to advise and appear at complex remedy hearing. Case involved complex issues of apportionment of loss (physical and purely pecuniary) arising from separate breaches (race discrimination found to have taken place within Official Solicitor and Public Trustee’s Office) and/or the state of the Claimant’s health (pre-existing and otherwise). Advising the Official Solicitor.

X v Secretary of State for Justice

Rachel successfully represented the Respondent at a 5 day Tribunal hearing (obtaining a substantial costs award against the Claimant as a result of the findings made) defending multi-faceted allegations of race discrimination (including institutionalised racism and campaigns of racism and harassment) by the Governing Governor (and others) of a sex offenders prison. The case involved sensitive handling of delicate and confidential information and evidence. Rachel’s cross-examination successfully enabled the Tribunal to conclude that the allegations made by the Claimant were beyond credibility and on occasion “deliberately misrepresented” the actuality.

M v Secretary of State for Justice

Rachel was instructed to advise and represent the Secretary of State in relation to a claim of unlawful deduction of wages (which was viewed as potentially becoming a national “test” case for the Respondent). The case demanded close scrutiny of a number of complex Government pay Policies and Codes, Notices and Guidance to Staff alongside consideration of Payroll Management Unit determinations and representations. Complex evidence to be considered in relation to contractual provisions, inter partes discussions and representations and statute as well as contractual variation, estoppel and change of position. A number of difficult time-bar issues and complex questions of legal authority (actual and ostensible) and vires.

Dr W v Ministry of Defence

Instructed on behalf of Claimant consultant anaesthetist (who had worked for the MoD in a hospital abroad) in High Court action for damages in relation to alleged breaches of contract of employment. Subsequently appeared as Junior Counsel led by Steven Gee QC at mediation.

CO&D plc v H

Advised and represented Applicant company in High Court Application for interim injunctions (and Orders for Delivery up etc) in support of covenants in employment contract (unauthorised taking of confidential business information; restraint of trade and non-solicitation clauses).

W v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry

Successfully represented Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. Costs issues arising from a claim brought by Claimants that they were owed certain payments by either their employer or (given that the employer was placed into administration) the Secretary of State as guarantor of statutory payments from the National Insurance Fund. Interpretation of relevant insolvency proceeding for the purposes of Regulation 8(2)-(6) or 8(7) of the Transfer of Undertaking Regulations 2006.

Appointments:

Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel C 2004

Junior Counsel to the Crown – Panel B 2008

Member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates - 2010

Awards and Scholarships:

Hardwicke Scholar (1998-1999)

Sir Thomas More Bursary (1998-1999)

Wolfson Scholar (1997-1998)

Exhibitioner at Christ Church (1994-1997)

Education:

1993-1997 Christ Church, Oxford University BA (Hons 1st Class)

Law with Legal Studies in Europe

Exhibitioner 1994-1997

1995-1996 Konstanz University, Germany, LLM (finalised December 1999)

German/Comparative law

1989-1993 Lutterworth Grammar School

GCSE, A-Levels and S-Levels (distinction)

Languages: German (fluent) & French (good working knowledge)

award
award

Contact Details

Stone Chambers London
4 Field Court, Gray's Inn, London WC1R 5EF
LDE 483
T: +44(0)20 8000 0373
F: +44(0)20 8000 037
E: clerks@stonechambers-uk.com

Contact Details

Stone Chambers Singapore
10 Collyer Quay, Ocean Financial Centre Level 40, Singapore 049315
T: +65 6808 6161
F: +65 6808 6299
E: singapore@stonechambers-uk.com