Bhavul Haria | Fieldfisher
Skip to main content
Professional background

Professional background

I have over 10 years' experience in commercial litigation, both domestic and international. I have advised clients in a wide range of complex and high value disputes, and I have extensive High Court experience in cases involving fraud, insolvency, employment, banking and contractual disputes. My clients include corporate entities as well as ultra-high-net-worth individuals. I am also a member of Fieldfisher's CIS group.

My recent work for clients includes:

  • Acting as the lead associate for an ultra-high-net worth client in a fraud claim worth USD 3 billion (JSC Commercial Bank PrivatBank v Kolomoisky & Others). This case is one of the largest and most high-profile disputes to ever come before the English Courts. The dispute involved multiple interlocutory hearings both at the High Court and the Court of Appeal in relation to the Court’s jurisdiction and the discharge of a Worldwide Freezing Order (along with other interlocutory issues). The dispute culminated in a fifteen-week trial in 2023. This trial was one of the Lawyer magazine's 'Top 20 Cases of 2022'. The trial judgment has been appealed, and the case will be heard before the Court of Appeal in May 2026.
  • Acting for a high-net-worth Singaporean businessman in a multi-million pound fraud claim. The dispute spans multiple jurisdictions including the BVI, Thailand and the Maldives, and involves complicated issues of jurisdiction and security for costs.
  • Acting for a wealthy Indian client in an LCIA Arbitration claim in relation to a shareholder dispute. The arbitration spans multiple jurisdictions including India, the BVI and Jersey.
  • Assisting a worldwide international mobile payments company in conducting an internal corporate investigation regarding allegations of fraud.
  • Acting for an ultra-high-net-worth client in respect of an application to set aside a Worldwide Freezing Order in respect of a claim alleging conspiracy to divert oil monies valued at over US$350 million.
  • Acting for a Dutch company in a multi-million dollar Bilateral Investment Treaty arbitration claim under ICSID Rules relating to an investment made in a household name transport business in the host State.
  • Acting for a major publishing and promotions company in its contractual dispute with sponsors.
  • Acting for a major UK manufacturing business in its contractual dispute against Nigerian entities.

Prior to joining Fieldfisher, I completed a Classics degree at Durham University and worked at an asset management firm for six months. In my spare time, I am a Harlequins RFC season ticket holder, and also enjoy cricket, golf and skiing.

Education

Education

Kaplan Law School

Legal Practice Course (Distinction)

University of Durham

2:1 in Classics

King's College School, Wimbledon

11 A*s at GCSE, 40 points in the International Baccalaureate

Authored pieces

All Resources
Dispute Resolution
Insight

High Court allows rugby brain injury claims despite disclosure failures

02.09.2026
The High Court has allowed more than 500 former rugby players to continue their brain injury claims despite serious disclosure failures by their former legal representatives.
Learn more
Dispute Resolution
Insight

Good faith does not let directors go it alone

11.08.2026
Learn more
A bronze statue of Lady Justice holding scales in her left hand and a sword in her right hand, with a blindfold covering her eyes. The background is a clear, bright blue sky with light clouds. The image focuses on the statue, symbolizing fairness and law.
Dispute Resolution
Insight

CAS upholds suspension in Canadian horse abuse case

12.09.2025
Learn more
Dispute Resolution
Insight

Privy Council abolishes the Shareholder exception to Legal Advice Privilege

07.08.2025
Learn more
Insight

Scam-dunk: Court rejects claim for unjust enrichment arising from fraud

26.05.2022
In Tecnimont Arabia Ltd v National Westminster Bank Plc [2022] EWHC 1172 (Comm), the High Court deemed that a bank that had received monies from an innocent third party was not liable in restitution for the dissipation of monies as a result of its own customer's fraud, even though it was deemed reasonable for the victim to believe that the fraudster was genuine.
Learn more