Zac Sammour

Zac accepts instructions in all areas of commercial dispute resolution. He has particular experience in claims for civil fraud or which concern the breakdown of shareholder, director or executive employment relationships. Zac is often instructed in commercial disputes which raise issues of privacy or data protection.

Zac has extensive experience of commercial matters in the High Court at all stages of proceedings, from injunctive work through to trial and appeal. He has acted both led and unled in heavy injunction applications, including on applications for freezing injunctions and imaging orders.

Zac’s recent and current instructions include:

• Sheikh Mohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber & Ors v Salfiti & Ors (Chancery Division). Zac acted for five defendants in combined and complex multi-million-pound civil fraud proceedings involving allegations of identity theft, document manipulation, bribery and secret commissions. The claim settled at trial. Zac acted throughout the proceedings, and succeeded in discharging a freezing injunction obtained ex parte against Mr Salfiti with indemnity costs ordered in his client’s favor ([2018] 11 WLUK 46). Zac was led by Olivier Kalfon, of Maitland Chambers, and acted with Charles King (also of Maitland Chambers) and James Partridge (of 2TG).
• MBI International & Partners Inc (in Liquidation) v Sheikh Mohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber, Salfiti & Ors (Chancery Division). Zac acted for Mr Salfiti in a cross-border insolvency claim for c.£250 million brought by the liquidator of a BVI company. The claim against Mr Salfiti was discontinued following the exchange of witness statements.
• Allen & Anr v Rabobank (Commercial Court). Zac acted for the Claimants who seek indemnification from their former employer in respect of their legal costs in defending criminal proceedings arising out of the LIBOR scandal. The claim was the subject of an unsuccessful application for summary judgment ([2020] EWHC 1902 (Comm), in which Zac was led by Richard Leiper KC). Zac was instructed by Michelmores.
• Durlston Partners v Franco & Others (Queen’s Bench Division). Zac acted for the Claimant in a team move/breach of confidence case involving claims for breach of post-termination restraints, breaches of fiduciary duty, breaches of confidence and unlawful means conspiracy. Zac succeeded in obtaining undertakings over to a speedy trial (given at the hearing of the application for injunctive relief). The case was settled before trial. Zac was instructed by RWK Goodman.
• Rollingson v Hollingsworth & Ors (Queen’s Bench Division). Zac acted for the Claimant in a team move case involving claims for breaches of contract, breaches of fiduciary duty, dishonest assistance, unlawful means conspiracy and inducement. The claim settled before trial, following an unsuccessful application by the Defendants for strike out and/or reverse summary judgment on significant aspects of the claim which raised interesting questions as to the scope of without prejudice privilege in the context of negotiations to acquire a right of action ([2020] EWHC 3568 (QB)). Zac was led by Richard Leiper KC and instructed by Lewis Silkin.
• Richard Pease v Henderson Administration Ltd [2018] EWHC 661; [2019] EWCA Civ 158. Zac acted for the claimant, an investment fund manager, who brought a claim against his former employers for breach of contract arising out of its failure to pay him c. £4 million in management fees and its failure to allow him to replace the manager of a £1 billion investment fund on termination of his employment. Mr Pease successfully defended Henderson’s counterclaim for c.£2 million in the High Court, a decision which was reversed on appeal to the Court of Appeal. Zac was led in both the High Court and Court of Appeal by Richard Leiper KC, and instructed by Michelmores.

Zac also has experience of arbitration proceedings in partnership disputes.

“He is a tenacious advocate: very effective in his cross-examination and submissions” (Chambers & Partners, Employment, 2024)

“Zac is very flexible and will go the extra mile. He really thinks outside the box and is incredibly imaginative but has a down-to-earth demeanor.” (Chambers & Partners, Employment, 2024)

“Zac provides an excellent level of service for us in complex tribunal cases” (Chambers & Partners, Employment, 2024)

“Zac is responsive, has great attention to detail, puts clients at ease and has strong advocacy skills.” (Legal 500, Employment)

Zac regularly appears as sole counsel in the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal in high value and complex claims. Zac has particular experience in whistleblowing and discrimination claims, and an interest in cases involving discrimination on grounds of belief.

Zac is regularly instructed against more senior counsel, including King’s Counsel.

In addition to the commercial employment work listed above, Zac’s recent employment law work includes:

• Miller v University of Bristol. Zac acted successfully for Professor David Miller in a high-profile claim against the University of Bristol in which the University was found to have discriminated against Professor Miller because of his anti- Zionist beliefs.
• Belidca v British Council [2024] EAT 92. Zac acted successfully for the British Council in its appeal against a judgment on territorial jurisdiction. The EAT’s judgment contains important guidance on the relationship between state immunity, diplomatic immunity, Article 6 and the jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunals.
• Gale & Ors v Yorkshire Cricket Club. Zac acted for Yorkshire Cricket Club in relation to high profile claims for unfair dismissal, victimization and (in two cases) race discrimination brought by former coaches of Yorkshire Cricket Club who were dismissed by the Club in connection with the widely publicised allegations of racial discrimination and harassment made by former player Azeem Rafiq. Zac was successful in obtaining deposit orders in relation to claims of racial discrimination. All claims were settled before trial.
• Thompson v Informatica, EAT, 13 October 2021. Zac acted for the Respondent in both the Employment Tribunal and the EAT. Before the ET, the Respondent successfully defended a whistleblowing and ordinary unfair dismissal claim brought by a senior executive who had been dismissed for breaching the employer’s anti-bribery and corruption policies. The trial was heard over 6 days. The Claimant appealed the dismissal of his unfair dismissal claim to the EAT. That appeal was dismissed.
• Successfully resisting an application for interim relief in a whistleblowing claim involving allegations of unpaid tax.
• Fleming v East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust , EAT, 28 November 2017. Zac acted for the appellant, who successfully challenged a decision of the Employment Tribunal to exclude his covert recording of the private discussions of a disciplinary panel. The EAT ruled that the recordings were admissible, except those parts that were caught by legal professional privilege (led by Jane McCafferty, instructed by Steeles Law).

“A formidable junior counsel.” (Legal 500, Data Protection 2024)

“He’s incredibly clever. He sees the arguments others do not.” (Chambers & Partners, Data Protection 2024)

“He’s pragmatic and happy to get into the weeds. He’s a strategic thinker and has good judgement for his years.” (Chambers & Partners, Data Protection 2024)

“He has a formidable intellect, he’s dynamic and he is a good team player. He is a proven performer. The written work is excellent in terms of results he achieves.” (Chambers & Partners, Data Protection 2024)

Zac has a broad media and data protection practice and has acted in a number of high profile and complex matters, including a number of large group actions. His recent and current (non- confidential) instructions include:

• SMO v TikTok Inc. Zac acted for TikTok in representative proceedings brought by a child on behalf of all children who used TikTok, alleging wide ranging breaches of the GDPR. The claim was discontinued following a hearing before Nicklin J ([2022] EWHC 489) in which the Court declined to extend time for the Claimant to serve her claim form on certain foreign domiciled defendants, and refused to permit alternative service. Zac was led by Anya Proops KC, instructed by Hogan Lovells.
• Smith & Ors v TalkTalk. Zac acts for TalkTalk in ongoing proceedings in the Media and Communications Court brough by c.400 individual claimants alleging breaches of the DPA 1998 in relation to two data incidents that occurred in 2014 and 2015 (respectively). The Court (Saini J) struck out a claim for misuse of private information in May 2022, and granted the Claimants permission to amend other of their claims ([2022] EWHC 1311 (QB)). Zac is led by Anya Proops KC, and instructed by Mason Hayes Solicitors.
• Oldknow v Evans [2021] EWHC 1028 (QB). Zac acts for the Labour Party in ongoing, high- profile proceedings brought by a former senior Labour Party official in connection with the leak of an internal report concerning the Party’s handling of anti-semitism complaints (led by Anya Proops KC, instructed by Greenwoods GRM).
• Various Claimants v Labour Party. Zac acts for the Labour Party in ongoing, high profile proceedings arising out of the leak of the Party’s internal report. The Labour Party has brought a Part 20 Claim against the individuals whom it says are responsible for the leak of that report in these proceedings (led by Anya Proops KC, instructed by Greenwoods GRM).
• Whyte v CBS Interactive Inc & Anr (Media and Communications List), a claim by the well- known boxer Dillian Whyte arising out of the publication of an article discussing Mr Whyte testing positive for a banned substance in advance of a high profile fight. Zac acts for the Defendants (led by Anya Proops KC, instructed by Howard Kennedy).
• Newman v Southampton City Council [2020] EWHC 2148 (Fam); [2021] EWCA Civ 437. Zac acted for Ms Newman, a journalist seeking access to court documents in relation to care proceedings. Her application for access to the Court file was rejected at first instance, and her appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed. The claim has contributed to the ongoing debate within the Family Courts as to the proper scope of journalistic (and public) access to public law hearings, and has attracted judicial and extra-judicial comment (Led by Anya Proops KC with Kate Temple-Mabe, instructed by Howard Kennedy).
• Facebook v Information Commissioner (EA/2018/0256). Zac acted for Facebook in its appeal against a monetary penalty notice issued by the Information Commissioner in connection with the Cambridge Analytica matter (led by Anya Proops KC with Robin Hopkins, instructed by Baker McKenzie).
• Neil Gerrard v ENRC & Diligence. Zac acts for Diligence in a privacy/harassment claim brought by a City lawyer in connection with surveillance activities. The claim is ongoing.
• Acting for a prominent newspaper editor in High Court proceedings involving an alleged misuse of private information (led by Anya Proops KC).
• Acting for a number of large and well-known entities in relation to widely publicised data breach issues.
• Providing data protection advice to very high profile individuals.

In addition to the cases above, Zac is regularly instructed in relation to very large and very high profile regulatory investigations concerning data breaches, many of which remain confidential.

Zac has appeared, both as sole and junior counsel, in a number of information law cases, including Galloway v Information Commissioner (2017) and All Party Parliamentary Group on Drones v ICO and Ministry of Defence (2017) (led by Timothy Pitt-Payne KC). He has also advised on a range of data protection issues, and has appeared in the county court in data protection matters.

Zac has also acted for the Information Commissioner in a number of cases, including in Department for Works and Pensions v Information Commissioner, a case in which the Department for Works and Pensions called evidence from Sir Oliver Letwin.

Zac has a broad public law practice, and has appeared in a number of claims for judicial review. His work encompasses human rights, local government, asylum and constitutional law. His current and recent work includes:

• Zac is part of the counsel team acting for the Claimant in Al Haq v Secretary of State for Business and Trade, a high-profile challenge to the SSBT’s decisions in 2023 and 2024 not to suspend arms-licenses for exports to Israel in light of the ongoing war in Gaza. Zac is led by Phillippa Kaufmann KC and Blinne Ni Ghralaigh, instructed by Bindmans, together with other junior colleagues from a number of chambers.
• Zac acts for the Claimant in Diaspora Alliance v Secretary of State for Education in a challenge to the SSE’s decision to adopt the IHRA working definition of antisemitism as the cornerstone of a proposed training programme for schools, colleges and universities, without making proper provision for the protection of free speech and equality obligations. The claim is currently stayed.
• Acting for the Claimant in Bouchti v Enfield LBC [2022] EWHC 2809, a statutory review of orders providing for a lower traffic neighborhood in Enfield. The claim was dismissed by Eyre J in November 2022. Zac was led by Clive Sheldon KC.
• Acting for the Claimants in R (on the application of Tax Returned Ltd) v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2022] EWHC 2515, a challenge to the adoption of a new mandatory form for claims for PAYE tax relief. The Claimants obtained permission for their claim following a contested hearing in September 2022, in which the Court granted retrospective permission for service of the Claim Form by alternative means (judgment of Heather Williams J, [2022] BTC 29. Zac is led by Joanna Clement KC, and instructed by Hill Dickinson.
• Acting for the Claimant in R (on the application of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government in the High Court ([2017] EWHC 1502 (Admin)), the Court of Appeal ([2018] EWCA Civ 1284) and the Supreme Court ([2020] UKSC 16; [2020] 1 WLR 1774), a challenge to guidance from the defendant Secretary of State which sought to prohibit the administering authorities of the local government pension schemes from adopting policies of boycott, divestment and sanction against foreign nations (led by Nigel Giffin KC, instructed by Bindmans). The Supreme Court held that the challenged part of the guidance was contrary to the Padfield principle.
• Acting for the Claimant in Good Law Project v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care , a challenge to the lawfulness of the Secretary of State’s award of a number of high value contracts for the supply of PPE during the Covid-19 pandemic. The claim raised important questions as to the scope of the duties of equal treatment and transparency in the context of contracts awarded under regulation 32 of the PCR 2015, and resulted in a number of judgments on matters of procedure ([2021] 5 WLUK 226; [2021] 5 WLUK 316). Judgment on the substantive challenge is awaited.
• Acting for the Claimant in (R on the application of Tirkey) v the Lord Chancellor & the Director of Legal Aid Casework [2017] EWHC 3403, a challenge to the operation of the statutory charge (led by Peter Oldham KC, instructed by the Anti-Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit).
• Acting for Leicester City Council in R (on the application of Jewish Human Rights watch) v Leicester City Council in both the High Court ([2016] EWHC 1512 (Admin)) and the Court of Appeal ([2018] EWCA Civ 1551), a challenge to a resolution of the Council calling for a boycott of goods produced in Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The Council successfully defended that claim in the Divisional Court and in the Court of Appeal (led by Andrew Sharland KC).
• Acting for the Claimant in Gulf Center for Human Rights v the Prime Minister in both the High Court ([2016] EWHC 1323 (Admin)) and the Court of Appeal ([2018] EWCA Civ 1855), a challenge against changes to the Ministerial Code (led by Jason Coppell KC and Hannah Slarks, instructed by Deighton Pierce Glynn).
• Acting for the Claimant in a claim for judicial review against the Secretary of State for the Home Office’s refusal to grant her temporary leave to remain in the United Kingdom on grounds of her The claim settled in 2018.

Zac has a growing PIL practice, both in domestic courts and international courts and tribunals. His recent work includes:

• Acting for Palestine in advisory proceedings before the ICJ concerning the legal consequences arising from Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Zac was led by Philippe Sands KC and Paul Reichler, together with colleagues from outside of chambers.
• Acting for Guyana in Venezuela v Guyana, contentious proceedings before the ICJ concerning the boundary between those two states. Zac is led by Paul Reichler and Phillippe Sands KC, again working with a number of colleagues outside of chambers.
• Acting for Al Haq in Al Haq v Secretary of State for Business and Trade, a challenge to the SSBT’s decision not to suspend arms licenses to Israel during the ongoing war in Gaza. That challenge raises complex questions of IHL and IHRL, together with issues under the Genocide Convention and Arms Trade Treaty.
• Acting for the British Council in Belidca v British Council [2024] EAT 92, an appeal concerning the relationship between state immunity, diplomatic immunity and the right to fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Zac was involved in human rights litigation conducted in a key African jurisdiction which raised a number of important public international law and human rights law issues, and which ended successfully for his client at appellate level.

‘Brilliant mind with a good eye for detail. Works very hard – prepares assiduously.’ (Legal 500, Sports Law 2024)

 Zac has recent experience in substantial sports-law cases.

• ECB v Yorkshire Cricket Club & Ors. Zac acts for Yorkshire Cricket Club in relation to ongoing disciplinary proceedings before the Cricket Discipline Commission. He also acts for Yorkshire in proceedings in the High Court.
• Zverev v Ace Group International (Chancery Division). Zac acted for the Claimant, a prominent tennis player, in his dispute with his former manager. Mr Zverev alleged that his representation agreement with his manager was an unenforceable restraint of trade, and sought declaratory relief to that effect. The claim settled at trial (led by Anya Proops KC, instructed by Howard Kennedy).
• Whyte v CBS. Zac acts for the Defendant to a claim brought by high-profile boxer, Dillian Whyte. The claim raises issues as to the confidentiality and privacy of anti-doping tests undertaken by professional athletes.
• The Football League v Wigan Athletic Football Club. Zac acted for the EFL in disciplinary proceedings against Wigan Athletic arising out of the Club’s failure to pay wages as they fell due.

Zac has also advised in relation to disciplinary proceedings in tennis.

Zac acted for the Claimant in Serco v Secretary of State for Defence, a large and complex procurement challenge relating to a substantial contract worth c. £1billion. The claim settled before trial, and following a successful application by the Claimant for specific disclosure (on which the Claimant was awarded its costs on the indemnity basis: [2019] EWHC 515 (TCC)) and an unsuccessful application by the Defendant for strike out ([2019] EWHC 549 (TCC)). Zac acted for Serco throughout the proceedings, led by Joseph Barrett and instructed by DWF.

Zac has also acted as both junior and sole counsel in a number of other procurement matters. He acted for Camelot in an interlocutory hearing before O’Farell J in the IGT v Gambling Commission litigation ([2023] EWHC 1420 (TCC)).

Zac also has experience in competition law. He acted for the Claimant in Balmoral Tanks Limited v CMA in both the CAT ([2017] CAT 23) and the Court of Appeal ([2019] 4 CMLR 25; [2019] EWCA Civ 162)), the first decision of the UK courts on information exchange infringements.

Zac has experience with EU law issues outside of the context of procurement and competition law. Zac acted for a claimant in a claim for judicial review which argued that guidance issued by the Secretary of State was contrary to the IORP Directive R (on the application of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (led by Nigel Giffin KC).