MichelleBradfield

Partner

London + 44.20.7039.5126

Michelle Bradfield has more than 20 years of experience as a lawyer, with a focus on complex international arbitration often involving public international law. She has been recognized in legal directories for more than a decade, and The Legal 500 describes her as "among the best in London." She advises and represents states and private entities on a wide array of matters, including investment treaty arbitration, international commercial arbitration, and boundary and maritime disputes.

Michelle has significant experience in investor-state arbitration and commercial arbitration. She is regularly involved in "bet-the-company" disputes and has worked for numerous FTSE 100 and Fortune 100 companies in disputes around the globe, including in the United States, Australia, India, Sudan, China, Spain, Brazil, Nigeria, and the United Arab Emirates. Additionally, she has worked for many States, including Australia, Malaysia, Croatia, Turkey, Barbados, Oman, China and sovereign wealth funds.

In relation to public international law, Michelle has advised on maritime and boundary disputes, outer continental shelves and deep-sea mining issues, relinquishment of sovereignty in relation to a multibillion dollar infrastructure project, and numerous issues regarding Northern Cyprus.

Michelle is also a member of the International Chamber of Commerce's (ICC) UK arbitration and ADR Committee and a founding member of the Green Arbitration Committee, which now has a significant presence globally. She lectures on boundary disputes and investment treaty arbitrations at King's College London and has published extensively on these subjects. Prior to working in London, Michelle was a Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law at the University of Cambridge.

Experience

The following represents experience acquired prior to joining Jones Day.

Investment Treaty Arbitration

Sovereign wealth fund v. Asian state: acted for the claimant in an investment treaty arbitration.

Sudapet Company Ltd v. Republic of South Sudan: acted for the claimant in a US$3 billion International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) arbitration against South Sudan in relation to the expropriation of its interests in various oil blocks in South Sudan. This case was the first investment treaty case to examine an expropriation arising out of the creation of a new state.

Silver Ridge Power B.V. v. The Republic of Italy: acted for the claimant in an ICSID arbitration against Italy that was initiated pursuant to the Energy Charter Treaty and concerned the government's change in policy towards the solar industry.

Philip Morris Asia Ltd v. Commonwealth of Australia: advised the respondent in a United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) arbitration that related to Australia's plain-packaging tobacco legislation.

OI European Group v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela: acted for the claimant in an ICSID arbitration against Venezuela, which related to the expropriation of glass manufacturing plants.

Karmer v. Republic of Georgia: acted for the claimant in an ICSID arbitration against Georgia, which related to the construction of a highway and the operation of a hotel and casino.

Dutch company v. Republic of Turkey: acted for the claimant in an ICSID arbitration against Turkey concerning an expropriation of an electricity generation concession agreement.

Adria Beteiligungs v. Republic of Croatia: acted for the respondent in an UNCITRAL arbitration, under the aegis of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which related to an alleged expropriation of a gaming concession agreement and considered issues of the breakdown of the former Yugoslavia.

Commercial Arbitration

Private medical research university: acted for the claimant in a London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) matter related to a groundbreaking investment in Asia. The case was governed by English law and involved issues of breach of contract and misrepresentation.

International investment bank: acted for the claimant in an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration against Polish developers. Also represented the client in the enforcement proceedings in Poland and advised on several satellite claims commenced by the respondents in the Polish courts.

Azerbaijan developer: acted for the respondent in an ICC arbitration, which related to the construction of a large development in Baku. The dispute was governed by Azerbaijan law and involved allegations of breach of contract.

Aircraft company: acted for the claimant in an LCIA arbitration relating to the leasing of planes. The dispute was governed by English law and involved allegations of breach of contract.

Large Spanish company: acted in an ICC arbitration that related to the construction of a power plant in Russia. The dispute was governed by Russian law.

Multinational oil and gas company: represented one of the world's largest publicly traded international oil and gas companies in an arbitration regarding onshore and offshore pipelines. The value of this dispute was in excess of US$500 million. The arbitration was under UNCITRAL Rules and governed by Nigerian law.

Public International Law

Sultanate of Oman: advised the government on its submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf.

Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission: served as assistant to the president of the Commission, which delimited and demarcated the entire boundary between the two States.

Malaysia: acted for Malaysia in its dispute with Singapore over the sovereignty of Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks, and South Ledge, which was heard by the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

A sovereign wealth fund: acted for the fund in negotiations with a State in connection with a proposed multibillion dollar infrastructure project, which involved the State relinquishing sovereignty over its territory.

A State and company: provided advice on the public international law issues between Cyprus and Northern Cyprus.

Government of Barbados: advised the government on its dispute with the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, which related to the delimitation of Exclusive Economic Zones and Continental Shelves of both States. Advised the government on its Outer Continental Shelf entitlement and prepared its submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf.