Chris redden norton rose

Christopher Pelham is an experienced trial lawyer and former federal prosecutor who helps clients resolve sensitive and complex issues through commercial dispute advocacy, internal investigations, compliance counselling and representations before government agencies and regulators.

As an Assistant US Attorney in Los Angeles, Christopher investigated and prosecuted cases involving racketeering, organized crime and fraud, which culminated in nine jury trials and four appellate appearances.

As a trial lawyer in private practice, Christopher's experience includes litigating commercial disputes in federal and state court as well as in arbitral proceedings, representing clients that have been the targets or subjects of federal criminal investigations, and conducting complex internal investigations. Christopher has experience resolving disputes related to allegations of trademark and copyright infringement, false advertising, breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation.

Before joining Norton Rose Fulbright, Christopher led an investigation and litigation practice in Shanghai, China for another international law firm. During that period, Christopher was one of only a handful of former US prosecutors working directly from mainland China. For four years, Christopher's practice included representing and defending clients in high-profile cross-border criminal and regulatory matters, leading clients through cross-border commercial disputes, and conducting internal investigations concerning among other issues violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act FCPA.

Christopher represented both individual and institutional clients, based both in the US and in Asia, before US regulatory and investigative bodies. With his significant local and international experience, Christopher's current practice extends to all aspects of cross-border commercial and white-collar matters.

Christopher has also been active with several Los Angeles-based nonprofits, including School on Wheels and the L. Use of cookies by Norton Rose Fulbright. We use cookies to deliver our online services.

Details and instructions on how to disable those cookies are set out at nortonrosefulbright. By continuing to use this website you agree to our use of our cookies unless you have disabled them. People search. More information can be found in our Cookies and Privacy Policy.

A trio of firms have been called in to act for two Unaoil executives who have been charged by The Serious Fraud Office SFO in relation to its ongoing investigation into allegations of bribery, corruption and money laundering.

He has advised on many international and cross-border financings across several sectors such as oil and gas, infrastructure, mining and energy. Before that, he also spent time as an associate in Clayton Utz, Linklaters and legacy Freehills. It is understood that 34 HDY partners will join the combined firm.

However, around 20 HDY partners have left the firm since the announcement earlier this year. Prior to the merger, Norton Rose Fulbright has made several lateral hires and promotions in Australia. More recently, in elected Sydney based competition lawyer Belinda Harvey and Melbourne corporate lawyer Chris Mitchell to partner. The Austrian Federal Competition Authority, together with the German Federal Cartel Office, has published an update to its guidelines on the application of the transaction value thresholds.

The unquantifiable part of subjecting a dispute to the arbitration of a court is the litigation risk. Shoosmiths explores what those risks are and why it is essential that they should never be ignored. The end of saw an upsurge in mortgage portfolio transactions, which we are expecting to continue throughout the coming year, as well as a general focus on building portfolios with the introduction of various new funding structures. Make your next move with The Lawyer Careers.

In this situation, the usual form of security is taken over specific agreed collateral e. ABL priority collateral and a featherweight security is taken over all other assets of the company. The featherweight security interest is a particular mechanism which has been developed to deal with Administration Risk and although commonly used in Australia, its effectiveness has not been tested in an Australian court.

As a result, this approach should only be used in circumstances where all assets security is not available 7. Examples of these priority claims are detailed below and include certain employee entitlements as well as some costs of an administrator and liquidator depending on the timing of enforcement of the relevant security.

Clearly, wherever possible, a secured creditor will want to ensure that its secured property is not circulating assets.

Assets will be circulating assets if:. In an ABL transaction, the assets material to the financing will fall within the first limb. The assets deemed by the PPSA to be circulating assets are as follows 10 :. As noted above, personal property is not a circulating asset if secured party has control of the property and registers that control. In an ABL transaction where receivables, bank accounts and inventory underpin the borrowing base, it is critical to protect the priority of the security over those assets by establishing control where possible.

If the secured party is the ADI then the test for control is easily satisfied under paragraph a i above assuming paragraph b , discussed below, is also satisfied. Many foreign asset-based lenders do not have Australian branches, with the result that the account bank and the secured party are separate entities.

In this situation, the test for control under paragraph a ii above is satisfied by the foreign secured party and the company entering into an appropriately drafted account control deed with the relevant ADI. The key purposes of the account control deed are to:. Even where the secured party is the ADI, an account control deed is sometimes required in syndicated ABL transactions because of the different roles of the ADI as both secured party and account bank.

This is not necessary from a control perspective and market practice in Australia at this time is generally not to require an account control deed in these circumstances. The requirement above if the secured party is not the ADI — depositing an amount the ADI account does not result in any person coming under a present liability to pay the debtor or a related body corporate of the debtor has created some uncertainty in the market. However, it is generally accepted that the provision is there as an anti-avoidance mechanism rather than a requirement for a blocked account.

However, at the date of this article, there is no judicial authority supporting springing dominion in Australia and as such, many lenders in the receivables lending market and many foreign ABL lenders prefer to have full dominion over the primary collection account i.

There is a prescriptive statutory test in the PPSA to determine whether a secured party has control of accounts A secured party will have control of accounts if:. As with the statutory test for control of an ADI account see above , the inclusion of this last requirement has created uncertainty, particularly where the secured party is not the account bank with respect to the ADI account since in that situation, an equivalent provision also applies in respect of the ADI account itself.

A secured party has control of inventory if:. It is unclear, in the absence of judicial guidance, whether the secured party must specifically and expressly consent to each and every disposal of inventory which in many cases would be unworkable or whether there could be some degree of batching.

It is, at least, generally accepted that a pre-agreed blanket consent at the outset will not work. While it may be possible from a commercial perspective to control particular inventory in the event that the value of that inventory warranted specific consent to a disposal, it is accepted that it would not be practical for a lender to control all inventory of a grantor and ABL lenders do not seek to do so in Australian ABL transactions. Firstly, a security interest over certain assets may be perfected by control 16 i.

These two concepts of control can sometimes be confused. However, perfection by control is relevant to security over ADI accounts. Perfection by registration is the most common method of perfection and is available for all kinds of collateral. Perfection by control where available enhances the priority position of the security interest beyond what it would have by registration alone The kinds of assets which can be subject to perfection by control include ADI accounts, shares, units and other marketable securities, letters of credit and certain negotiable instruments However, even where a security interest is perfected by control, it is prudent to make a registration in respect of the interest as well.

This is because control can be lost in certain situations and having a registration ensures that the security interest will not become unperfected if control is lost It also enables the secured party to ensure that the security interest will be perfected in respect of all proceeds from the original collateral Perfecting a security interest over an ADI account by control provides the secured party with priority over any other security interest in the ADI account, including prior registered interests A secured party can only perfect a security interest in an ADI account by control if the secured party is the ADI with which the account is held In ABL transactions, this will not always be the case and registration may be the only method of perfection available.

Where the secured party wants to ensure that the ADI account is not a circulating asset, that contractual arrangement would also include the provisions referred to above.