Sundeep Virk (2004)

Sundeep Virk (2004)

England and Wales
Membership Status: Barrister - Full Member Qualified in 2004 Public Access Accredited


General Information

Sundeep Virk undertakes property and insolvency work and has a particular interest in pursuing and defending high credit hire charges and associated claims for insurance companies or their associated/referral partners. Sundeep has been Defendant Credit Hire Group Head since 2017.

He is a team player and the go to person in chambers for complex and unusual cases. Sundeep has represented and advised both claimants and defendants in heavy litigation at first instance and on appeal. He is renowned for his highly effective written work and has been described as a smart, talented and tenacious barrister.
Sundeep has a strong chancery background having developed a broad commercial/common law practice.

He is willing to undertake work across England and Wales.

Sundeep is also a qualified mediator with a worldwide practice and public access accredited.


• Property
• Insolvency
• Credit Hire
• Professional negligence


City University, London
Inns of Court School of Law


Member of the Honourable Society of Grays Inn
Bar Council Elected Representative (7 years’ call) – 2013 to 2016


Sundeep is married and enjoys spending time with his son and family. He is a keen cricketer and loves to travel. In 2013 Sundeep ran the London Marathon for Save the Rhino and in 2016 he summited Mount Kilimanjaro for Zoes’ Place Baby Hospice.



• Acting for a residential landlord in claim for possession where the defendant / tenant sought to counterclaim rightful occupation on the premise of having done works to the property.

• Acting for a commercial landlord in claim for possession following service of a section. 25 Landlord and tenant Act 1954 (as Amended) where the landlord sought to undertake business himself on the commercial premises.


• Providing immediate written advice to Administrators on a potential challenge to their appointment and the implications of Paragraph 25(a) of Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and Practice Directions, Part E3 (E 11), Para 11.1.

• Acting on behalf of directors in an application pursuant to s.234/s.236 Insolvency Act 1986 made by the liquidator.

• Appearing in opposition to a bankruptcy petition based on demand for circa
£170,000.00 (including a substitution figure of £100,000.00).

• Advising and appearing in a complex application for possession and sale on behalf of the respondent spouse and successfully obtaining a costs order against the trustee following an interlocutory application hearing. In conclusion the trustee agreed to pay the respondent spouse’s costs agreed at £35,000.00 and withdraw his claims.

• Acting on behalf of the director respondent in an application made pursuant to s.234/s.236 Insolvency Act 1986 by the liquidator.

• Appearing in the High Court opposing a winding up petition on a debt of circa £200,000.00.

• Advising the liquidator on the implications of applying for summary judgment on circa £40,000.00 in a claim worth approximately £90,000.00.


• AMANJ TAHA AMIN (1) H. A. KARIM (3) M. T. AMIN (4) F. FRYAD v (1) ANGELA RICE (2) COVEA INSURANCE PLC – Appearing before Recorder Burton QC in a multi track action, Sundeep successfully represented the Claimant and recovered 156 days of credit hire charges and general damages for injury following a rear end shunt.

• PHILIP BARRETT v RUSHMERE NURSERIES LIMITED – Sundeep successfully recovered for the Claimant credit hire charges for a Mercedes Benz C63 AMG taken on hire in replacement for an Aston Martin Vantage V12. Apart from Period and Rate, Sundeep successfully argued the need for a like for like vehicle.

• ZIA HAQ v MICK DETHERIDGE (In the Birmingham County Court) - Sundeep successfully represented the Claimant in beating allegations of fraud following a RTA on a roundabout involving an alleged stooge vehicle.

• CHOUDHRY SHAMIM AKHTAR v CHARLES BLACKWOOD & SAKAVAT ALI v JOHN WHITE (T/A ARENA GLOBAL) - Sundeep represented the Claimants in two consecutive multi track trials before Lady Justice Patterson DBE.

• ERVINS KUPCE (1) OLGA BONDARENKO (2) RATIS KUPCE (3) v MOHAMMAD SAMGHAN (1) FIRST CENTRAL INSURANCE MANAGEMENT LIMITED (2) AVIVA INSURANCE LIMITED (3) – Sundeep represented the Claimants in this multi party consolidated action where he successfully argued that liability fell on the 2nd Defendant’s insurance company pursuant to Article 75 of MIB and it’s interplay with Sections 151, 152 and 153 Road Traffic Act 1988. The said insurer became liable in the circumstances of the case notwithstanding that the insurance policy was obtained by fraud, misrepresentation, non-disclosure of material facts or mistake.


• Acting for the claimant in an undue influence claim and counterclaim concerning freehold property valued in excess of £1.5 million.

• Acting on behalf of and against Intervenors in family proceedings in claims for life interests, beneficial and constructive trust in property and pleadings of proprietary estoppel and promissory estoppel.

• Advising shareholders in respect of derivative actions, claims for unfair prejudice pursuant to s.994 of the Companies Act 2006 and just and equitable winding up.

• Advising both claimants and defendants in partnership disputes ranging from circa £250,000.00.

• Advising the claimant following a trustee’s breach of duties in the misapplication of approximately £140,000.00 of trust funds.

• Acting for a residential landlord in claim for possession where the defendant / tenant sought to counterclaim rightful occupation on the premise of having done works to the property.


• SPORTS AND RACING EUROPE LIMITED (1) W J RILEY (2) v NATINAL WESTMINISTER BANK PLC – Sundeep appeared for and advised the Claimant, a small motor vehicle manufacturer in a High Court claim for alleged misrepresentation and mistake relating to a series of commercial loan agreements. The matter settled but not before an appeal to the Court of Appeal on a interlocutory decision made by Mr. Justice Hamblen.

• SALVADOR BONIFACIO HERNANDEZ ALAMO v SSE ENERGY SUPPLY LIMITED (1) WESTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION PLC (2) – Sundeep acted for SSE in successfully striking out a multi-track action where the Claimant was seeking compensation for damage done to property, personal injury and electricity charges. Sundeep obtained summary judgment on the counterclaim.

• Advising Boots optician franchisees in respect of alleged breaches of their franchise agreements.

• Acting in a number of cases for the Performing Right Society Limited in actions seeking royalties for breach of contract/license.

• Advising a national energy company on its rights to terminate a contract for telephone call service provisions based on non-competitive charging structures.

• Advising in a circa £200,000.00 claim concerning a contract for the supply of telecommunication goods involving allegations of breach of terms, breach of collateral warranty, ss.12, 13 and 14 Sale of Goods Act 1979, repudiation, rescission and negligent misrepresentation.

• Advising in a claim worth circa €300,000.00 concerning a sub-contract for development investment, manufacture and supply of eco products.

• Advising in a circa £100,000.00 claim concerning the supply of digital telecommunication equipment on hire arrangements and required for the performance civic services.

• Advising a partner of a national accountancy firm on potential causes of action following breaches of an asset sale agreement resulting in loss of goodwill payments.

• Advising a company tasked with providing civic services on the implication of various terms of an agreement to sub contract civic duties to a third party.

• Advising in various insurance claims following fires which caused damage to real property and commercial goods between £500,000.00 and £800,000.00.

• Advising in respect of a circa £30,000.00 insurance claim concerning use of the ‘calibrated digital tyre depth gauge’ and the implications of flawed expert evidence.

• Advising on issues of enforceability in respect of Dubai property resale agreements.


• Advising the Claimants in a Professional Negligence dispute where their accountant and tax advisors wrongly advised that an application for a Extra Statutory Concession C-16 be made as opposed to placing the said company into a Members Voluntary Liquidation.

• Being instructed by Aon Insurance Services to provide advice and act for solicitors in a wasted costs application.

• Advising the Claimant in an action against his conveyancing solicitors for their negligent failure in mishandling the transfers.



Fees and Feedback

Fees and Feedback

Details regarding our approach to fees can be found at the following link:


Please see “profile” tab for description of the legal services provided by this barrister.

We aim to complete and return all paperwork within 14 days (2 weeks) of receipt if no specific deadline is provided. We can work to much faster timescales if requested or we can agree a specific target date for each individual circumstance. We will always advise at the outset if counsel is unable to meet any deadline.

Each barrister has a standard hourly rate for their work. The individual hourly rate can be agreed when instructions are acknowledged if preferred. We welcome early discussion as to the suitability of a specific barrister for a specific case. The right barrister will have the relevant expertise to deal with the case but will not be too junior, or too senior depending on the complexities.

We aim to allocate all cases to the correct level of experience & seniority which we believe will prove most to be the most cost effective solution for our clients.

If, due to urgency, we allocate paperwork to a more senior member of Clerksroom, we will charge the appropriate hourly rate for the work, not for the barrister. We welcome early discussion to ensure the correct fee is applied to the case at the outset.


All our barristers are regulated by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and hold a current practising certificate, details can be found at the following link Barristers’ Register

Complaints information

If you are not satisfied with the service provided, you can make a complaint to Chambers. Information on the chambers’ complaints procedure is available at the following link:

If you are not satisfied with the response you receive from my chambers, you can make a complaint to the Legal Ombudsman. You must contact the Legal Ombudsman either within 6 months following the conclusion of our handling your complaint, within 6 years from the date of the act/omission, or 3 years from the date that you should reasonably have known there were grounds for complaint (if the act/omission took place before the 6 October 2010 or was more than six years ago).

The Legal Ombudsman’s details are as follows:

Legal Ombudsman
PO Box 6806
Tel: 0300 555 0333

The Bar Standards Board regulates barristers and specialised legal services businesses in England and Wales, and would like to ask you about the information you found on your legal services provider’s website. Your response will help to inform future changes in this area.   

This survey should take 5-10 minutes to complete. Your responses will be kept anonymous and confidential, not shared with your legal services provider and only used for research purposes.

If you complete this survey and provide the Bar Standards Board with your e-mail address, you will be entered into a prize draw to win a £100 Amazon voucher.

Can't find what you are looking for or prefer to talk? Call Us On 01823 247 247