Arthur Graham-Dixon

Call: 2017

: For enquiries call: +44 (0)20 7404 0102
: Download CV (PDF)
: Emailagd@atkinchambers.com
: Print
: Download vCard
: Save Profile
: Linkedin

Overview
Expertise
Related Insights, Events & Cases
Contact Clerks

Rob Bryant

Senior Practice Manager

Details

Overview Expertise Related Insights, Events & Cases

Arthur Graham-Dixon is an experienced trial advocate specialising in highly technical, high-stakes international disputes within Chambers’ core areas of practice (construction, engineering, infrastructure, energy, technology, and professional negligence), across a broad range of industries (from power plants to airports to abattoirs).

He has particular recent experience of acting in trials where contracts have been terminated by an employer mid-construction.

Over the past few years, Arthur has acted in:

A 3-week trial (2024) in an ICC arbitration between Chinese and Indian entities, regarding the termination of a contract and the delayed construction of 400km of linear signalling and telecommunications systems (sole junior).
A 4-week trial (2024) in an ICC arbitration between English and Spanish entities, regarding the termination of a contract and the delayed construction of a major biomass plant (sole junior).
An 8-week trial (2022) in an extremely heavy ICC arbitration between two entities based in Scandinavia and the Middle East, regarding the delayed construction of a major, international-hub airport. The case involved 49 witnesses of fact and more than 30 expert witnesses opining within 20 different fields of expertise. The claims involved the passing on of liability under arbitral awards in more than ten sets of other arbitral proceedings.
A 3-day evidentiary hearing (2026) in an ICC arbitration between an employer, a contractor, and a subcontractor based in Europe and South America, regarding the joinder of third parties and issues of jurisdiction and consent to multiparty arbitration, in the context of various ongoing disputes between the parties following the termination of the main contract.

Expertise

Construction, Engineering & Infrastructure

Sole junior in a £300m fraud claim in connection with the functionality of technology sold for use in an energy plant, involving complex procedural issues, such as the availability of injunctive relief where lawyers who have acted in an arbitration against Party B seek to act in different proceedings on behalf of a new client against Party B, and the availability of anonymity orders and reporting restrictions when seeking to enforce arbitral confidentiality.
Junior counsel in a £35m TCC dispute on the design, procurement, and construction of a UK abattoir, with a wide range of legal issues involving contractual limitation periods and UCTA; implied/inferred novation; duties to warn; and the application of CPR 17.4 (amendments after expiry of limitation): https://www.thelawyer.com/top-20-cases-2021/.
Sole junior in a £20m TCC dispute principally about the fire-safety design of a UK hospital.
Sole junior in a multi-million pound TCC dispute concerning alleged defects in the construction of various University buildings, including a strike out application and various other contested procedural issues: University of Manchester v John McAslan and Partners Ltd [2020] EWHC 3392 (TCC) (judgment on costs of strike out application); [2023] T.C.L.R. 2 | 205 Con. L.R. 56 | [2022] Costs L.R. 1607 (judgment on disclosure of expert-related material).
Sole junior acting for liquidators in £10m claim against an employer for payments falling due prior to insolvency, where the employer had paid sums directly to subcontractors post-insolvency.
Sole junior in a multi-million pound TCC dispute about the refurbishment under a PFI of hundreds of properties managed by a London Council.
Acting as sole counsel on behalf of a funder in relation to claims against developers and a building contractor regarding a major flooding incident and defective installation of pipework.
Acting as sole counsel on behalf of a design-and-build contractor in connection with alleged defects in the utilities system of a hospital centre and alleged non-compliance with HTMs.
Acting as sole counsel on behalf of homeowner in connection with the defective construction of a newly renovated period property (brickwork issues).
Acted as sole counsel on behalf of homeowners in connection with the defective construction of a new-build property (roofing and tiling issues).
Sole junior in a multi-million pound TCC dispute arising out of the delayed construction of a care home.
Advised in relation to the application of HRB regulations to pending major remedial works.
Advised in relation to limitation in a case involving alleged breach of life-cycle terms.
Advised in relation to privilege in connection with documents generated by a company during internal investigations connected with obligations under health-and-safety legislation.
Advised in a multi-million pound dispute between a UK and a German company concerning delay and defects in a contract for the design and supply of equipment for a gas-fired power generation plant (issues relating to liquidated damages, bills of quantities, & extensions to Defects Correction Period).

International Arbitration

Ongoing work in ICC arbitrations involving an employer, a contractor, and a subcontractor based in Europe and South America, following the termination of the main contract, including a 3-day evidentiary hearing regarding joinder, jurisdiction, and consent to multiparty arbitration.
14-day trial as sole junior on a £50m dispute concerning termination of a FIDIC-based contract and the delayed construction of 400km of linear signalling and telecommunications systems (seated in Singapore; governed by Indian law).
20-day trial as sole junior on a £200m dispute concerning termination of a FIDIC-based contract and the delayed and defective construction of a UK-based biomass plant, with a major claim for extension of time based on ‘changes of law’ during the COVID-19 pandemic.
42-day trial as junior counsel on a very high-value international arbitration, over a period of 4 years, concerning the design, procurement, and construction of a major airport in the Middle East (foreign seat and foreign applicable law; FIDIC-based contract). Lead responsibility from pleadings to trial for the part of the case involving the main terminal building, with counterclaims pleaded at USD 500m.

Professional Negligence

Junior counsel in a £15m TCC dispute concerning the project management, cost management, and design development (particularly MEP design) carried out by a multi-disciplinary firm of engineers for a police building whose construction was significantly delayed and over budget.
As sole counsel, acted in £800,000 multi-party High Court claim concerning sale of property, defects and architects’ certificates.
Advised on a professional negligence claim concerning an architect’s supervisory work.
Much of Arthur’s experience in construction and international arbitration work has involved cases in which allegations of professional negligence have been central to the dispute. This includes, of the cases described above, the disputes in relation to the fire-safety design of a UK hospital; the project management, cost management, and design development (particularly MEP design) of a police building; the design and construction of a UK abattoir; the design and construction of various University buildings; and the design, procurement, and construction of a major airport in the Middle East.

General Commercial

As sole counsel, currently acting for a defendant facing a claim for over £400,000 in lost profits alleged to have been suffered by failure to provide goods under a contract for the sale of used textiles.
As sole counsel, successfully acted for a defendant facing a claim for £200,000 issued in the Commercial Court, contesting jurisdiction under CPR 11. The claimant discontinued proceedings.
As sole counsel, successfully defended an Ireland-domiciled defendant facing default judgment for
£150,000, having identified that proceedings had not been served in accordance with the Service Regulation (1393/2007). The claimants discontinued proceedings after the point was raised.
As sole counsel, successfully obtained summary judgment in £175,000 High Court claim in respect of unpaid invoices on behalf of a recruitment company, together with the full suite of Part 36 consequences (indemnity costs, interest on costs, and a further 10% of the awarded sum), having originally advised on and prepared a Part 36 offer.
As sole counsel, following a strike out and summary judgment application, obtained a full recovery including 100% of the incurred costs, in a claim for the repayment of a £60,000 loan.
As sole counsel, successfully acted on behalf of an estate / widowed executrix pursuing recovery of a personal loan of over £1 million between the deceased and a personal acquaintance. Most of the sum claimed was recovered.

Adjudication

Sole counsel in £20m twelve-month adjudication arising out of the delayed construction of a major refurbishment of a council-owned heritage building.
Sole counsel in £10m six-month adjudication arising out of the delayed construction of a six-star hotel in central London.
Sole counsel in £12m adjudication relating to various defects in a hospital, involving limitation in relation to design defects under a design-and-build contract.
Sole counsel in £4m adjudication involving claims for recovery of overpayments made by an employer to its contractor for engineering services relating to an EFW plant under an EPCM Contract.
Sole counsel in Meadowside Building Developments Ltd (in liquidation) v 12-18 Hill Street Management Company Ltd [2019] EWHC 2651 (TCC), the leading case interpreting the Court of Appeal’s decision in Bresco v Lonsdale and cited with approval in the Supreme Court’s decision in Bresco v Lonsdale. Separately from the wider principles concerning adjudication enforcement and the insolvency regime, Arthur succeeded on behalf of the defendant in resisting enforcement on the unprecedented ground that the claimant’s funding arrangement was champertous and so gave rise to a question of abuse of process which could not be determined summarily.
Sole counsel successfully enforcing £500,000 adjudication decision where the defendant both alleged a failure by the adjudicator to consider a defence and also sought a Part 8 declaration overturning the adjudicator on a point of law.
Appointed as sole counsel to defend a £300,000 adjudication enforcement action in which the claimant intended to challenge the Court of Appeal decision in John Doyle Construction v Erith Contractors, relying on Meadowside and Bresco v Lonsdale (settled).
Sole counsel in £600k adjudication relating to the post-termination final account of an electrics / lighting / cabling subcontractor.
Sole counsel in multiple adjudications relating to the project management and cost management of a project manager and quantity surveyor on a £20m heritage asset and private residential project.
As sole counsel, defended three sets of adjudication proceedings simultaneously advanced by a main contractor across three projects, seeking remuneration on the basis of actual cost in the absence of any express payment terms.
Sole counsel in Indigo Projects London Ltd v Razin & Anor [2019] EWHC 1205 (TCC), the first case interpreting the Court of Appeal’s decision in Bresco v Lonsdale, in which the enforcing claimant was under a company voluntary arrangement (CVA).
Sole counsel in Fresh Lime Construction Ltd v Seymour Realty Ltd [2020] EWHC 3734 (TCC), successfully obtaining summary judgment (with indemnity costs) on an assigned claim to enforce an adjudication decision, against a Defendant outside the jurisdiction.
As junior counsel, successfully defended adjudication proceedings arising out of a final account claim for c. £2m (contract based on NEC3 ECC Option A).

Additional Information

Appointments

Arthur is an appointed member of the Attorney General’s London Panel C.

Memberships

Arthur is a member of TECBAR, COMBAR and the Society of Construction Law.

Notable Cases

University of Manchester v John McAslan and Partners Ltd [2023] T.C.L.R. 2 | 205 Con. L.R. 56 | [2022] Costs L.R. 1607 (judgment on disclosure of expert-related material)
Meadowside Building Developments Ltd (in liquidation) v 12-18 Hill Street Management Company Ltd [2019] EWHC 2651 (TCC); [2020] Bus. L.R. 917; [2020] B.L.R. 65; (2019) 186 Con. L.R. 148
Indigo Projects London Ltd v Razin & Anor [2019] EWHC 1205 (TCC); [2019] Bus. L.R. 1957; [2019] B.L.R. 454; (2019) 184 Con. L.R. 251; [2019] B.P.I.R. 861 (acting as sole counsel)
Fresh Lime Construction Ltd v Seymour Realty Ltd [2020] EWHC 3734 (TCC)

Qualifications & Awards

2016-2017

BPTC, City Law School
Lord Mansfield Scholar, Lincoln’s Inn
Hardwicke Scholar, Lincoln’s Inn
BPTC Scholarship, City Law School

2015-2016

GDL, City Law School
- Prize for Contract Law coursework at City Law School.
- Finalist, appearing before Lord Mance in the Supreme Court, in the City Law GDL moot.
- Represented City Law School in Vienna in the leading international arbitration ‘Vis Moot’.
- Before graduating as a law student, alongside his studies Arthur led a case to the SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disability) Tribunal, part of the First Tier Tribunal, appearing on behalf of the parents of an excluded child before a panel of three tribunal-members chaired by a District Judge (acting through the School Exclusion Project). Shortly after opening the case, a recess was called and the school agreed to withdraw the exclusion from the child’s record.

2011-2015

Double First (7^th in university) in Classics at Oxford (Literae Humaniores 1A)
Hugh Oldham Scholar, Corpus Christi, Oxford
Three Isaiah Berlin prizes, Corpus Christi, Oxford

Recent Recommendations

“Arthur is well-prepared, hard-working, and delivers incisive written submissions.”
“Arthur shows good judgment and instincts, and is able to get across the material in quick time.”
Construction, The Legal 500 2026

“Arthur is an exceptional construction junior. His ability to synthesise a significant factual record in a short timeframe, provide accurate and commercially informed advice, and to produce very high quality written work, is impressive.”
Construction, The Legal 500 2025

“Arthur is very user-friendly and easy to work with and was a real value add to the team. He has an incredible ability to get to grips and understand highly scientific and technical material and analyse this from a legal perspective and then distil his thoughts into easy-to-follow written advice.”
Construction, The Legal 500 2024

Privacy Notices

View Privacy Notice

Related Insights