Santosh Carvalho

Santosh is developing a broad Commercial and Construction Law practice, building on his previous career as a Management and Strategy Consultant, and work in the technology industry.

He was seconded as consultant counsel to Farrer and Co. LLP and advised them on a range of complex commercial litigation matters including contractual disputes, breach of confidence claims, shareholder disputes, and cross-border insolvency claims.

Santosh’s recent instructions include:

• Defending a high-value contractual dispute in the R&D sector, including claims of civil fraud, led by David Hopkins.
• Drafting amendments to a defence to an indemnity claim valued at over £25M, led by Terence Mowscheson KC and Philippe Kuhn.
• Advising on the merits of the construction of terms to a private equity contract in a High Court claim valued at ~£1M.
• Advising on the merits of a software sales agreement dispute between Microsoft and its resellers, including unjust enrichment claims and breach of statutory duty.
• Applying for judicial assistance under section 426 of the Insolvency Act in a cross-border cryptocurrency exchange insolvency, involving parallel issues of fraud and breach of director’s duties.
• Obtaining an injunction to restrain the presentation of a winding up petition in the High Court.
• Acting for a petitioner in High Court insolvency proceedings to wind up a company despite the substantive objections of the debtor and competing creditors.
• Obtaining relief from sanctions application for late service of the Particulars of Claim in the High Court.
• Advising on the merits of, and drafting, a professional negligence claim against a solicitors’ firm for losses arising out of the sale of a company. Led to a successful settlement.
• Advising on the merits of, and draft, a claim against a bank for breaches of statutory, contractual, and common law duties arising from delays to completing a loan transaction. Led to a successful settlement. 
• Drafting a claim against a property management company for breach of lease covenants, common law duty, and statutory duty arising out of flood damage to a commercial property. Led to a successful settlement.  

During pupillage, Santosh gained deep experience in a variety of commercial disputes including:

• Drafted a skeleton argument for an application for summary judgment on the basis of a complete defence to an alleged negligent misstatement by a company director.
• Drafted a defence to an additional claim made against a sub-contractor for building defects.
• Drafted a defence to an indemnity claim against a guarantor on the basis of a material variation of terms to the guarantee. 
• Advised a distributor on the merits of a breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and estoppel claim against its long-term supplier.
• Advised on the interpretation of dispute resolution, jurisdiction, and governing law clauses in an equipment hire dispute.

Santosh gained further experience by marshalling with Justice Andrew Baker in the Commercial Court and observed an interim application in Arcadia v Bosworth, Hurley & Kelbrick.

Santosh intends on developing a broad public law practice. He has been instructed on a range of complex public law matters including:

• Successfully applying to intervene on behalf of the Secretary of State for the Home Department in High Court family law proceedings. The intervention concerned the impact to the government’s policies on unaccompanied children and small boat crossings in a Hague Convention matter.
• Led by Steve Broach KC and Jake Thorold to intervene on behalf of the Children’s Commissioner of England in Re J (A Child) in the Court of Appeal. The case concern’s whether a local authority can consent of behalf of a child to the deprivation of their liberty, where there is no dispute that confinement is in their best interests, to avoid the ambit of Article 5 ECHR.
• Advising the Secretary of State for the Home Department on the appropriate quantum for damages arising from claims for breaches of Article 3, 5, and 8 of the ECHR.

Santosh is currently seconded to the Financial Ombudsman Service as consultant counsel. He advises them on issues arising under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.

During pupillage, Santosh gained experience on a range of complex public law matters including:

• Assisted Steve Broach KC on a variety of challenges to local authority’s decisions in relation to EHC plans of individuals with SEND needs.
• Advised a Central Government Department regarding its consultation duties in the context of formulating a policy response to fulfil some of its domestic and international environmental law obligations.
• Advised several local authorities as to the lawfulness of their age assessment decisions.
• Advised on the merits on a claim against an NHS Integrated Care Board for a delay in implementing an increased care package following a review of the care plan. 
• Advised the Office of the Schools Adjudicator on the appropriate statutory construction of several provisions of the Schools Standards and Framework Act 1998.
• Advised the Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office (FCDO) on the lawfulness of its sanction designation of a Russian national. 
• Advised on the merits of a disability discrimination challenge against a school’s decision to exclude a SEND pupil.
• Advised the General Medical Council on the merits of an appeal made by a doctor against a disciplinary decision made by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal. 
• Drafted submissions to the Secretary of State of Health and Social Care for a decision on ‘ordinary residence’ for the purposes of determining the local authority responsible for the care of a vulnerable individual pursuant to the Mental Health Act 1983.
• Drafted a notice of objection to the Supreme Court in response to a permission to appeal on the grounds of an Article 8 ECHR infringement in an entry clearance case. 
• Drafted a jurisdictional challenge to a claim against an international institution.

Prior to pupillage, he volunteered at Lambeth Law Centre as a caseworker dealing with challenges to the local authority’s housing provision decisions and the lawfulness of utility companies’ pursuing the debts of vulnerable individuals.

Cases of note:

• R(TS) v London Borough of Hackney [2023] EWHC 3063 (Admin) - Assisted Steve Broach KC in relation to the skeleton argument for a successful judicial review against Hackney LBC’s assessment of a 13-year-old child’s social care needs and the care package provided for the same.

Santosh has an interest in Planning and Environmental Law. During pupillage, Santosh gained experience across a broad spectrum of work including:

• Advised on the merits of an appeal against a decision by the Valuation Office to impose a Community Infrastructure Levy.
• Advised on the interpretation of a restrictive planning condition imposed by a local authority and its implication for invoking rights granted by the GPDO.
• Advised on the application of the Murfitt principle in light of the court’s judgment in Caldwell v SSHCL [2024] EWCA Civ 467.
• Drafted the opening submissions in a 2-week inquiry for the successful defence of a refusal of a large urban extension.
• Drafted the skeleton for the successful judicial review of a local authority’s decision to commence works as part of its Transport Improvements Scheme on the grounds of unlawful reliance on the GPDO.
• Drafted closing submissions for the appellant in successfully resisting enforcement action following a 4-day inquiry.

During pupillage, Santosh assisted members of Chambers on several complex disputes including:

• Drafted grounds of appeal to the Supreme Court.
• Advised on the court’s likely approach to breach of contractual and tortious duty in claims for defective medical products.