Skip to content

Andrew Denny

Partner

London

Denny Andrew
Andrew Denny

Partner

London

Andrew is a partner in the Litigation Department and head of the firm’s UK public law practice.

He specialises in commercial and financial litigation, public and administrative law and human rights issues.  He has particular expertise in cross-border disputes, including jurisdiction challenges, anti-suit injunctions and managing parallel claims in different jurisdictions.

Andrew advises corporate clients on human rights issues including defending claims in the UK courts in relation to alleged human rights impacts in other jurisdictions.  He leads the editorial board of the group's publication The Business & Human Rights Review.  Andrew chairs Allen & Overy's Human Rights Working Group, heading up the Executive Committee responsible for formulating policy and strategy to guide the firm's human rights work. He also acts for non-governmental organisations on a pro-bono basis in relation to human rights challenges against the UK government. 

Experience highlights

Office

London

Allen & Overy LLP
One Bishops Square
London
E1 6AD

View office →

Qualifications

Professional

Admitted as barrister and solicitor, New Zealand, 1995

Admitted as solicitor, England and Wales, 2000

Academic

BA, Economics, The University of Auckland, 1994

LLB Hons, The University of Auckland, 1994

LLM, University of Cambridge, 1999

Pro-bono experience

Andrew chairs the firm’s Human Rights Working Group which is responsible for co-ordinating the firm’s pro bono human rights work. His own pro bono experience includes acting for:

  • Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID) in pro bono interventions in several Supreme Court cases involving issues of access to justice and the availability of adequate remedies for immigrants in detention, including in an appeal against the UK Government’s “deport first, appeal later” policy, which resulted in judgment which significantly undermined that policy. 
  • The AIRE Centre, a specialist charity which assists marginalised individuals and those in vulnerable circumstances, in intervening in a Supreme Court case regarding the application of the Refugee Convention and the UK government’s responsibilities in connection with refugee families living on the Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus. 
  • JUSTICE in applying to intervene in the appeal brought by the UK Government against the Court of Appeal's decision to grant a writ of habeas corpus on a petition brought by a Pakistani national captured by British forces in Iraq, but handed over to US forces and transferred to Bagram airbase in Afghanistan. The Supreme Court held that the rendition and detention was a breach of international human rights law. 

Recognition

Published work

  • Andrew has written articles on public law issues for publications such as
    Judicial Review

News & insights

Publications: 04 SEPTEMBER 2019

Can the UK Parliament stop a no-deal Brexit?

There are less than 100 days until 31 October 2019, when the UK will leave the European Union without a deal by default, unless between now and then the UK and EU27 are able to agree a deal or further extension to the Article 50 period (or the UK revokes its Article 50 notice).

Read more

Publications: 03 SEPTEMBER 2019

Updated: can the UK Parliament stop a no-deal Brexit?

At the end of July we published a paper looking at the options available to Members of the UK Parliament (MPs) should they seek to prevent a no-deal Brexit on 31 October 2019.

Read more

Publications: 17 APRIL 2019

Vedanta: Supreme Court rules that Zambians can seek legal redress in the UK against parent company

The UK Supreme Court has decided that a claim for negligence and breach of statutory duty against a Zambian mining company and its English parent can be heard by the English courts. The much anticipated decision has important ramifications for British multinationals whose subsidiaries and suppliers operate abroad, particularly in regions where there is a higher risk of adverse environmental and human rights impacts and claimants face practical barriers to accessing effective judicial remedies. It also is an important decision for potential claimants motivated to seek access to judicial remedies against multinational corporations in their home jurisdictions. Vedanta Resources PLC and another v Lungowe and orthers [2019] UKSC 20, 10 April 2019

Read more

Publications: 25 FEBRUARY 2019

Landmark benchmark manipulation claim fails

Marme v Natwest Markets & Others The High Court today (25 February 2019) handed down judgment in the case of Marme Inversiones v Natwest Markets plc & Others([2019] EWHC 366 (Comm)), dismissing Marme's misrepresentation claims regarding the EURIBOR benchmark, which had sought rescission of interest rate swaps with five banks, and granting the Defendants' requests for declaratory relief in relation to the validity of the termination of those swaps.  

Read more