CL-2022-000522 - [2025] EWHC 2739 (Comm)

EXPERT EVIDENCE

Mr Colin Knight was instructed on behalf of the Claimants. He is a financial consultant with a background in investment banking, risk management, and M&A advisory. He provided two expert reports and participated in a joint memorandum with Mr Frank Pedder.

In cross-examination, Mr Knight was challenged on the recentness of his direct M&A experience. He accepted that his last direct M&A role was over two decades ago. When asked why his report did not reference any recent M&A transactions, he responded that he had remained engaged with M&A through reading and trading activities, including merger arbitrage. He acknowledged that his last direct experience dated back 24 years and that his more recent involvement was indirect.

Although I have no doubt that Mr Knight was expressing his genuinely-held views, I felt that at several points in his written and oral evidence he strayed beyond his proper role. Examples were evidence about what role Euronav envisaged RMK having, whether Mr De Stoop had ‘underestimated’ the amount of advisory work involved in the transaction, and whether Euronav had acknowledged that RMK was doing work beyond the scope of the Advisory Agreement. Mr Knight in cross-examination sought to explain these points by saying he had been attempting to add “colour” and explain what was going on. In my view, he did go clearly beyond his proper role in putting forward that evidence.

Mr Frank Pedder was instructed on behalf of the Defendant. He is a financial expert with experience in corporate finance and M&A advisory, particularly in the maritime sector. He provided two reports and participated in the joint expert meeting. He was an excellent witness, providing his evidence in a candid, clear, fair, logical and straightforward manner.