Julien specialises in commercial dispute resolution and has 25 years’ experience.

Julien is a Ranked Lawyer in Chambers and Partners Guide 2024 where it is stated ‘he has notable experience on matters concerning the utilities sector’. Julien has in depth expertise in energy and utilities litigation and acts for all of the participants in the energy supply chain: transporters, shippers, suppliers, intermediaries & brokers. Julien also regularly acts on behalf of commercial and industrial end users who are significant consumers of gas, electricity and for those who have entered into water & sewage broking agreements; when those clients are in dispute with suppliers & intermediaries.

Julien also regularly litigates claims in the Business & Property Courts and is very familiar with the rules as to Extended Disclosure, governed by Practice Direction 57AD of the Civil Procedure Rues and which are particular to those Courts.

Julien also specialises in advising clients to pursue and defend Employment contract Restrictive Covenant disputes. He has handled several high value 'team move' injunctions which are subject to the ‘speedy trial’ jurisdiction of the High Court. Having acted on both sides of such disputes, Julien has the tactical insight to be able to advise clients on all aspects of those claims.

He also specialises in the registration and enforcement of foreign judgements in England & Wales.

Jurisdiction: England & Wales


  • Julien acted for Manchester internet and fashion entrepreneur, Mr Adam Frisby of In the Style plc, in the High Court successfully defending a claim brought against him valued at £125M for allegedly stealing and exploiting the Claimant’s confidential business plan for In the Style at the time of its establishment in 2013 (Clements v Frisby [2023] EWHC 320 (Ch)). Mr Frisby’s defence was that the claim was entirely fraudulent, and that the Claimant was advancing the claim dishonestly, knowing full well that he had played no role at all in the establishment, development or success of In the Style, and that that he had no cause of action against Mr Frisby. All claims against Mr Frisby were dismissed. The decision attracted widespread national media coverage and legal insights; including in respect of an earlier judgment in the case concerned with unintentional waiver of privilege over legal advice  (Clements v Frisby [2022] EWHC 3124 (Ch).

  • Successfully defending an interim Injunction application to enforce non-compete post termination of employment restrictions in a client’s contract of employment. The application was brought in the High Court against an individual director following his move to a competitor business. (Sparta Global Limited (1) Condor Topco Limited (2) -v- (1) Ben Hayes (2) Kubrick Group Limited [2024] EWHC 100 (KB))

  • Acting for six individual defendants who were former employees of a multi-national business and who were alleged to have orchestrated a 'team move' to a competitor. Instructions were provided to deal with an Injunction Application at the Royal Courts of Justice, on three days' notice and subsequent successful defence of a multi-million pound claim.
  • Acting for a large national recruitment business in pursuing a high value claim for damages against a former key employee who was alleged to have breached their post-termination restrictions in their contract of employment. Successfully pursued damages and costs.
  • Acting for a Norwegian client in pursuing the registration and enforcement of a multi-million pound judgement debt in England & Wales.
  • Acting for five individual defendants who were former employees of a recruitment agency as well as acting for their new employer, a competitor recruitment agency. The claimant alleged that the individual defendants were subject to enforceable non-competition covenants which precluded them from working for their new employer and sought an interim injunction preventing them from continuing to do so. Before Mr Justice Snowden, the Vice Chancellor of the County Palatine of Lancaster, TLT were successful in dismissing the application with a costs order made in favour of the defendants. [Affinity Workforce Solutions Ltd v McCann [2019] EWHC 2829 (Ch)]
  • Acting for a team of individuals in defending a springboard injunction application and proceedings where multi-million pounds in damages were sought. [Chess Limited (1) Chess People Limited (2) -v- Henderson & Others [2019] EWHC 3264 (QB)]
  • Acted on only the second Claim to be tried as part of the Capped Costs List Pilot Scheme under Practice Direction 51W in the Civil Procedure Rules. A feature of the Claim was two of the witnesses gave oral evidence by telephone because they were self-isolating during the COVID-19 pandemic. Trial Judge HHJ Pearce made various observations about practice and procedure to be adopted under the Capped Costs List. [Silvercloud Finance Solutions Ltd (t/a Broadscope Finance) v High Street Solicitors Ltd [2020] EWHC 878 (Comm)]


View all