Good morning, Emma, and welcome to Commodity Conversations. Could you please tell me a little about yourself?
I grew up and went to school in Bristol, UK, and studied law at the London School of Economics (LSE). I started my career as a solicitor in 2009, beginning my training contract at Clyde & Co. I trained for two years, including a six-month stint in their Dubai office, which was a very interesting experience, especially at that time – in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. I then qualified into the London office, specialising in commodities trading and shipping.
My client base included trading houses that buy and sell commodities across the entire value chain, from upstream to downstream. I remained at Clyde & Co. until 2020, when I joined Stephenson Harwood as a partner, developing my own portfolio. My clients encompass all commodity classes, including oil and gas, metals, agricultural products, and biofuels.
Could you tell me about Stephenson Harwood?
We are an international full-service law firm with five core sectors, one of which is Transportation and Trade. I oversee the delivery of our trade services. The others are Energy Transition, Life Sciences and Healthcare, Private Capital and Funds, and Technology.
We have offices in all major trading hubs, including Singapore, Dubai, Seoul, Hong Kong, and Shanghai. We also service our shipping clients from our Athens. Although we do not have offices in the US, we maintain strong relationships with US law firms (I am on the delivery team for our US offering) and can effectively meet our clients’ needs across any jurisdiction.
Our firm has approximately 210 partners (ever expanding), with our headquarters in London.
What drew you to the commodity sector? Did you deliberately choose to enter it, or did you end up here by chance?
Part of what drew me to it was that it’s an almost secret world that supplies food to our tables, petrol for our cars, and metal for everything we build. Not many people see under the bonnet.
I started my career in the shipping team at my previous firm, representing shipowners and charterers. However, I then shifted my focus to sale contracts, and supply chain management. I find this area particularly interesting because of how goods are extracted, transported globally, and transformed.
The complexity surrounding it is intellectually challenging, and I was eager to learn more. I continue to learn because the world is constantly changing; something new occurs every day. You never do the same thing twice.
Another advantage is that my clients are fascinating, clever people. They think quickly, and we must keep pace with them. I enjoy that from an intellectual and problem-solving standpoint, because problem-solving is ultimately why they engage us.
What does your role involve?
I’ve been a partner now for five years, and my role has changed since I was an associate. As an associate, I spent my time conducting background research, investigating and understanding issues, writing briefs, and performing research, among other tasks. When you become a partner, your focus shifts to strategy. As a partner, you must still pay attention to the details but also assemble a trusted team.
I spend my day working with my teams, ensuring I stay on top of the cases, understand what they are doing, and that they feel comfortable with their work.
My role is to determine the drivers, whether the parties wish to settle this case or proceed to trial, and to understand the reasons behind their decisions. I must ensure they understand the costs and the implications of that.
There is also a business development aspect. We’re always seeking to expand our team by bringing in new partners and associates. I also travel regularly to meet potential and current clients, ensuring they are satisfied with our services or identifying new opportunities we can offer.
Building and maintaining relationships are essential aspects of my role.
Which commodity group takes up most of your time, and which one is the most challenging?
Recently, there has been a three-way split between oil & gas, metals, and agriculture, but this balance shifts continuously. Recently, I’ve had a significant dispute involving cargoes of ULSD (ultra-low-sulphur diesel) which were affected by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
I’ve also had metals disputes, involving elements of fraud, and alongside that, I have a general underlying practice of disputes that are usually on GAFTA and FOFSA terms, for grains, and RSA/SAL terms (for sugar).
I’m well known in the softs sector, as I’ve worked closely with the Grain and Feed Trade Association, GAFTA, for many years. I present and teach their courses, as well as FOSFA’s. I am well-known in that market.
However, regarding the second part of your question, which is the most challenging, it genuinely depends. That’s such a lawyer’s answer, but it truly does depend on many different factors. It depends on what the client wants from the case, the quality of the case, and its initial strength. How much evidence exists, and the difficulty of obtaining that evidence, especially if a lot of time has passed. It’s not always the cases you expect to be complicated that turn out to be complicated.
How is AI transforming your job?
We’re starting to see people using AI in briefs where they’ve used an AI tool to summarise something or suggest potential issues in a case.
The risk here is that the product may appear impressive. It may seem correct at first glance. It looks very well written and makes a lot of sense on its face. However, upon closer inspection, you might realise, Oh no, it’s completely missing the point. It can then become obvious that it’s been written by AI, even if that’s not immediately apparent.
I’m not suggesting we should abandon AI. Of course not. It’s here to stay, and these tools will be continually improved, with people learning how to utilise them effectively and recognising when the human touch is necessary. But I believe that process is still ongoing.
You must also be careful with confidentiality, as you can’t upload your client’s confidential documents to open-source AI. We have an internal closed system, which many companies and law firms now use.
One area I consider very good is translation, especially where clients use different forms of language that change depending on who they’re speaking to and whether it’s formal or informal. AI can pick up on those differences, and it can also recognise some acronyms, slang, and other terms that you wouldn’t find just by searching through Google. AI is here to stay and will continue to help; it is already doing so.
What do you most enjoy about your job?
Solving a problem. Clients typically encounter an issue that requires resolution. I prefer it when I can help them resolve it quickly, efficiently, and with minimal expenditure on their part. That, for me, is a success.
You can attend a hearing and win. It’s a success because you’ve won, but the greater success, often, is when the client reaches an earlier resolution they are happy with.
It’s essentially a symbiotic relationship where you have mutual trust with a client, allowing them to trust you and you to trust them. You’re working it out and solving the problem together, and then, at the end of it, if they’re happy, I’m happy.
What part of your job do you enjoy the least?
I genuinely enjoy my job, but sometimes administrative tasks can be frustratingly slow.
What percentage of disputes end up in mediation, arbitration, or in court, do you think?
Funnily enough, I have a mediation scheduled in a few weeks, but they aren’t very common. You need many things to be in alignment for a mediation to occur. The proportion of disputes that are mediated is likely to be around 20%, although there are almost always written exchanges around settlement.
Arbitration provides an alternative method of dispute resolution to litigation, and clients generally favour resolving disputes through arbitration. There are two reasons for this. First, it is a confidential process, and commodities traders value confidentiality for obvious reasons. Second, an arbitration award can be enforced under the New York Convention. It can be simpler to enforce across jurisdictions that have adopted that convention than to enforce a court judgment.
With arbitration, you can still turn to the court for interim procedures, such as freezing assets worldwide, which can be an effective mechanism in the English courts.
Some traders prefer court resolution because they are not concerned about others knowing about it. Sometimes it’s a show of strength, as they’re saying, ‘No, we’re not going to stand for this; we’re taking this company to court. ‘
Another reason some of our clients prefer court is that they consider arbitration to be a slightly slower process at times. They believe they’ll receive a more definitive resolution from a judge in the High Court.
When discussing commodities, roughly 70% is likely arbitration and 30% court, if I had to put a number on it.
What advice would you offer to a trader or operator to prevent disputes?
Ensure you have comprehensively documented all your trades. A key issue I frequently advise on is whether a contract exists.
A client approaches me saying, I contracted to buy 5,000 tons of corn, but now my sellers are refusing to deliver. I want to take legal action against them. However, when you do that, the seller claims, ‘There’s no contract. I was not obliged to deliver those goods because we didn’t finalise the agreement.’ Something has happened: the price has changed, and the seller has gone elsewhere to sell those goods at a higher price. They are trying to find a reason not to pay out in arbitration. They are reviewing the contract to see if it was truly finalised.
Often, you’ll receive an offer that commits to selling you a specific quantity of a commodity at a fixed price and for a specified delivery date. The other party might then respond with, ‘Yes, all fine, but can we adjust the delivery date or the quality?’ This can lead to prolonged negotiations without resulting in a clear, accepted offer.
My advice is always to make sure you have a solid, enforceable contract with a law and jurisdiction clause, so you can, if necessary, take disputes to arbitration, court, or whichever process you’ve agreed on to protect your rights.
Does a contract need to be signed to be legally valid?
Not in England. There is a difference between England and Wales and some other jurisdictions because, in certain places, a signed contract is required. Therefore, when parties from those countries agree to English law, they sometimes assume that the contract must be signed (and might assume that they did not agree a contract because they did not sign it). However, under English law, this isn’t necessary. You can have an oral contract or agreement.
Two traders can have a phone discussion and agree on a trade. That constitutes your contract. However, you must have proof of it. Usually, there’s a follow-up email stating, ‘As we just agreed on the phone, here are the terms.’ So, it’s primarily about proof, and that’s why having it written down, even if not signed, is essential proof that you have a contract.
Are most commodity deals concluded under English law?
Yes, at least the ones we see are, because we are English solicitors. However, you’re correct; English law remains a fair and unbiased forum for resolving disputes. The judicial system is generally trusted. We have a substantial body of law, especially in the shipping and trade sectors, to rely on. In arbitration, you can trust that the arbitrators will be unbiased and free from any conflict of interest, as there are mechanisms to challenge arbitrator appointments.
What is the most common mistake traders and operators make, apart from failing to clarify the contract?
Many common disputes concern quality and quantity issues, as well as whether the correct procedure was followed for loading the goods: having the appropriate surveyor at the port, keeping the proper samples, and similar matters.
When a problem occurs and a lawyer is engaged, communications must be handled carefully. If you want to terminate the contract, are you actually able to do so? Has there been a breach that justifies termination? Sometimes, what we see is a client proceeding to terminate the contract, but upon closer examination, they might not have the legal right to do so. Suddenly, they find themselves at a disadvantage, and even if they have a valid claim, they could end up in breach themselves.
It’s important to communicate effectively when something goes wrong and not waiving rights when doing so. Many communications can be quite informal, but these are the ones that are scrutinised later. It’s crucial to get them right to protect your rights if issues arise.
What has been the most challenging case you’ve been involved in?
Early in my career, I faced a challenging case involving three parties. It was a back-to-back re-delivery dispute over a vessel, with our client in the middle of the chain. The case should have settled early, but there were two arbitrations with us involved in both and caught between the other two parties. We attempted to find a resolution, but each effort revealed it was nearly impossible without exposing ourselves.
And I encountered another similar case (i.e. with three parties involved) a few years ago. It involved a ship-to-ship transfer of ethanol cargo, and a dispute arose over who should have obtained a permit, which was not acquired. As a result, the vessel was detained. Once again, it involved three parties with numerous arguments about who should have done what.
It is simpler when only two parties are involved. Introducing a third party adds complexity, and people can become entrenched in their positions and emotional, especially when things seem to be dragging on.
I see you posted on LinkedIn about the issue of sugar and sand in Brazil.
Yes, I was involved in a major arbitration regarding this issue over ten years ago. I was recently in Geneva, speaking with my sugar trading clients, and they brought it up, mentioning that it was happening again.
A fraud is taking place at Brazilian ports, where sugar is being stolen at some point before loading, probably from the trucks, and replaced with sand. It’s not anyone’s fault per se (except, of course, the thieves); traders are aware of it and are managing it as best they can.
There are various measures they can take to mitigate the issue, such as testing the sugar at different stages of the loading process. In my earlier case, the problem wasn’t discovered until the sugar was being processed, and it clogged the deep-bed filters at the processing plant.
Some of it even reached the end users and was only discovered when delivered to the bakeries. By that point, the costs were enormous because they had to clean the filters regularly as they attempted to remove the sand, and also dispose of huge quantities of sand.
Currently, I notice that parties are settling early by recognising the issue. They then determine the amount of sugar involved and subsequently enter into amendment agreements to adjust the price. Since it is a known issue, they resolve it commercially. The problem occurs when you do not realise it is happening. In my case, the issue escalated through the process, eventually resulting in a substantial expense and a significant claim that was determined only through arbitration.
To what extent has organised crime infiltrated or impacted the commodity industry?
I was once involved in a case where cocaine, disguised as wooden pallets, ended up in the wrong place and so was discovered. Clearly, something went wrong along the cocaine supply chain.
I don’t come across it that often. There are instances of fraud involving warehouse receipts or cargoes that claim to be one thing but ultimately prove to be something else. It’s documentary fraud, and an issue the market will have to keep addressing.
Why are there so few women traders?
I’ll begin with my personal experience as a female lawyer because I imagine there are similarities between being a female partner in a law firm and being a senior trader. My role is demanding and involves a lot of travel. There may be some things in your life that require you to make a choice. It’s a myth that you can have everything, because choices must be made. If I travel to Singapore for a week – I am missing a week at home with my partner and other social engagements.
If a mother spends more time at work, she has less time at home, and I know from speaking to my female colleagues that that is a continual tension. Some people, especially those in more junior roles, look up to senior individuals but often fail to find the role models they desire. Instead, they see people who are merely struggling. We need more role models, specifically more women in senior positions who can support other women in their chosen careers.
I aim to set a good example by maintaining a healthy balance between working hard and knowing when to take a break and go home. Law firms have traditionally struggled with this, but they are making significant improvements.
I’m not familiar with the intricacies of a trader’s daily routine, but I can imagine it is demanding, with long hours. Companies should operate in a way that helps both men and women better manage their work-life balance. Because it’s not just women who are caregivers. Indeed, in my firm, most of the male partners, especially those of a similar age to me, often take on caregiving roles equal to that of their partners.
Therefore, that has also changed. We need to discuss how we support men and women with childcare or other caregiving responsibilities—people who care about their work, are skilled at their jobs, but want to find a balance between work and home life.
What would you say to a young woman to encourage her to consider a career in commodities or in the legal profession related to commodities?
It’s one of the most fascinating areas of law because you’re not just a lawyer; you need to become a specialist in various types of commodities and businesses. You might have a case involving a quality dispute over a cargo of ULSD, and suddenly, you find you need to be a chemistry expert (or at least understand enough about it to fight your client’s case effectively).
Or if you’re dealing with a case involving a hedging arrangement, you’ll suddenly become an expert in price risk management or pricing structures. It covers a wide range of areas, making it quite impossible to get bored.
It’s relevant to our daily lives. Events in the news, such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict or the collapse of oil prices in 2020 during the COVID-19 outbreak, affect the prices of commodities for my clients. Things change every day, and we must be there right alongside them.
A prime example is the energy transition, where many of our traditional oil and gas clients are transitioning to solar, wind, hydrogen, or biofuels, and they require assistance because it is a new venture for them. It is exciting to be able to assist companies in guiding them into the future.
Additionally, it is important to encourage people into partnerships in law firms as well. What I love about being a partner is having control over my own business, while working to further the broader strategy of my firm. Having the freedom to say, I believe this is a new and emerging area, and I plan to focus on it, visit that country, and meet those people.
I’ve genuinely enjoyed becoming a partner and growing my practice and team, and I would strongly recommend this path to others considering it.
Which countries do you typically visit each year?
This year, I have spent a lot of time in Switzerland (Geneva, Lugano, and Zurich) and also visited Brazil, speaking at an arbitration conference. Over the next few months, I will be travelling to Dubai and Singapore.
I will be back in Geneva at the end of November for the International Commodities Show.
Why are you participating in the Commodities Show? What motivates you? What messages will you be conveying?
When Mathilde and Maryana approached me, I thought it was a unique idea—something that didn’t already exist. There are many conferences for industry insiders to meet and do business, but they can be very costly and therefore inaccessible to many. You need to be a senior figure within the industry to access that community.
They are striving for a more democratic approach. This event offers an excellent opportunity for people to learn more about what we do, access this world and industry, see if they like it, and consider getting involved.
Our firm will have a stand there, and I will be bringing two colleagues from my team (Sophie Morrison and Kelly Hubble), who will manage the stand and explain why ours is the best job in the world.
Is that the message you’d like to get across—that this is the best job in the world?
Yes.
Finally, I wanted to ask why people should attend. However, I believe you’ve already covered that — it’s a democratic and affordable event that provides young people and others with access to top traders and the industry.
Absolutely!
© Commodity Conversations® 2025