Divya Kesar

Divya has successfully managed a myriad of commercial and civil litigation cases throughout her career. She has consistently delivered favorable results for clients, earning a reputation for reliability, diligence, and steadfast commitment to their best interests. Divya's effective communication and collaboration with solicitors and lay clients, combined with her high level of responsiveness, position her as a preferred choice for clients. She has represented Fortune 500 clients in prominent and landmark cases.

Previous work includes:

• Acted for a key player in the Indian steel industry in a dispute over the allocation of coal reserves by the Government of India, Ministry of Coal. The case involved petitioning under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to contest the allocation to a specific entity, raising concerns about fairness and compliance with relevant policies.
• Successfully represented Irish-American and Irish commercial aviation financing and leasing companies before the Delhi High Court in challenging the cancellation of registration for three aircraft by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) in India. Despite seeking relief from courts in London and Delhi, the petitioner's plea was rejected, and the DGCA's decision was upheld.
• Represented a multinational Emirati telecommunications company in ancillary civil proceedings related to the 2G scandal, seeking monetary compensation and civil relief for damages from purported irregularities in the distribution of telecommunications spectrum licenses.
• Acted for a global television network in disputes concerning Telecom policy interpretation and the fundamental right of freedom of speech.

Divya specializes in international arbitration, representing clients in international arbitrations across various sectors under institutional and ad hoc rules like ICC, LCIA, SIAC, and UNCITRAL. She adeptly handles procedural intricacies and is familiar with the interplay between domestic litigation concerning interim relief and concurrent international arbitration. Her practice often involves cross-cultural interactions, leveraging her understanding of the Indian legal system and experience in diverse jurisdictions.

Previous work includes:

• Acted as part of a larger counsel team for a Maltese company before the Delhi High Court for executing an LMAA arbitrators' award concerning a Charter Party agreement breach. Similarly acted for a Korean company in a Time Charter Party agreement breach case.
• Acted for a Canadian company in international commercial arbitration over a license agreement to manufacture and display patented technology equipment and define the minimum royalty.
• Acted for a Danish shipping company before the Delhi High Court to vacate interim relief granted to an Indian party regarding a cargo shipment from Turkey to Mauritius.
• Represented a leading Indian pharmaceutical company in international commercial arbitration over a distribution agreement for blood-plasma derivatives for rare disease patients.
• Sole counsel for a leading Indian sugar producer in arbitral proceedings regarding a breach of contract for purchasing white crystal sugar, with an arbitral tribunal comprising three retired Judges of the Delhi High Court.

Divya is also a mentee under the Worshipful Company of Arbitrators’ Mentorship Scheme, providing practical experience and mentoring for aspiring arbitrators, mediators, and adjudicators.

Previous work includes:

• Represented a company in a high-profile insolvency case, navigating complex debt restructuring negotiations and securing a favorable settlement, facilitating the company's financial recovery and ongoing operations.
• Managed a corporate insolvency matter involving the restructuring and reorganization of a distressed company, leading to a successful turnaround and preservation of business operations.
• Successfully represented minority shareholders in a case of unfair mismanagement and oppression, obtaining relief through court action and securing remedies to address the prejudicial conduct and protect the rights of minority shareholders under Indian company law.

Previous work includes:

• Successfully defended an arbitral award in favor of claimants in a construction dispute related to a hydroelectric project. The case involved delays and defaults by the respondents, leading to prolonged contract completion. The matter proceeded to arbitration, resulting in an award for the claimants, which was successfully defended.
• Acted for a key player in the Indian steel industry in a dispute over the allocation of coal reserves by the Government of India, Ministry of Coal, raising fairness and compliance concerns.
• Successfully represented a sugar company in challenging the electricity tariff imposed by the regulatory authority, involving regulatory aspects of electricity tariffs and their impact on industrial consumers.

Previous work includes:

• Acted for one of the world’s largest hospitality companies in a multi-million dollar dispute against an Indian entity for breach of license agreement and trademark, seeking interim protection under Section 9 of the Indian Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, while seeking reference of the matter to arbitration under Section 8 of the Act. The matter was eventually settled.
• Acted for a Canadian company in international commercial arbitration concerning a license agreement to manufacture and display equipment incorporating patented technology and defining the minimum royalty to be paid.
• Obtained a permanent injunction in a trade secret misappropriation case, preserving proprietary information confidentiality and preventing ongoing harm, thereby safeguarding valuable intellectual property assets.
• Advised on issues under Information Technology Law and Competition law, including IP and Pharma Regulatory litigation, drafting, and negotiating various commercial IP-related agreements.
• Advised on information technology, intellectual property laws, and confidentiality and non-disclosure aspects of employment contracts.
• Acted for a global television network in disputes concerning Telecom policy interpretation and the fundamental right of freedom of speech.
• Acted for a leading Indian television company in a dispute over tampering with viewership ratings.

Previous work includes:

• Successfully represented Irish-American and Irish commercial aviation financing and leasing companies before the Delhi High Court in challenging the cancellation of registration for three aircraft by the DGCA in India. Despite seeking relief from courts in London and Delhi, the petitioner's plea was rejected, and the DGCA's decision was upheld.
• Acted for a key player in the Indian steel industry in a dispute over the allocation of coal reserves by the Government of India, Ministry of Coal, raising fairness and compliance concerns.
• Successfully represented a leading wire and cable manufacturing company in India in a dispute over the interpretation of supply conditions in the bid document.
• Acted for a global television network in disputes concerning Telecom policy interpretation and the fundamental right of freedom of speech.

Public International Law Matters:

• Part of a larger counsel team in investment treaty arbitration against a host state, alleging breaches of fair and equitable treatment and expropriation under an investment treaty, resulting in a successful settlement and compensation for investment losses.
• Advised an Indian energy and construction company on arbitration under the India – Bangladesh Bilateral Investment Treaty concerning disputes arising from a thermal power plant contract breach and changes in local laws and investment policy.
• Represented a parent in a child custody dispute with international elements under Indian law, involving legal considerations related to the child's habitual residence, jurisdictional issues, and applicable bilateral agreements or treaties.

• Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava v Publicity Hub & Anr. Civil Miscellaneous (Main) No. 1559/2019, judgment on 04/03/2020 - Successfully obtained a summary judgment in a money recovery suit under the summary procedure of Order XXXVII of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
• Pawan Mantri v BMM Ispat Limited and Ors. Civil Appeal Diary No. 16558/2018, judgment on 07/05/2018 - Represented the client before the Supreme Court of India to set aside insolvency proceedings pending before the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi.
• Ruchi Agarwal & Ors. v Nicolian (India) & Ors. [2010 (2) AD (Delhi) 289] - Legal representatives of a party were denied a full opportunity to present their case during arbitral proceedings, leading to the impugned awards being set aside for violating principles of natural justice and public policy.
• Paramount Airways Pvt. Ltd. v Union of India & Ors. [2010 (4) AD (Delhi) 622] - Challenged the DGCA's cancellation of aircraft registration. Both the High Court of Justice in London and the Court of Appeal upheld the DGCA's decision, as did the Delhi High Court.
• Prakash Industries Ltd. v Union of India & Ors. P. (C) No. 7135/2008, judgment on 18/05/2010 - Dispute over coal reserves allocation by the Government of India, Ministry of Coal.
• Sonya Ghosh v Union of India & Ors. [2010 (4) AD (Delhi) 369] - Challenged the appointment and extension of a public official within an autonomous institution.
• Paramount Communications Ltd. v Union of India & Anr. P. (C) No. 3134/1997, judgment on 03/02/2010 - Dispute related to bid document interpretation and contract awarding terms.
• Inderjeet Singh v Federal Bank Ltd. & Ors. A. No. 8027/2009 in C.S.(OS) No. 1337/2008, judgment on 28/01/2010 - Dispute involving banking transactions, including bank guarantee limits and export invoice purchases.
• Usha International Ltd. v MEETCO (London) Ltd. & Ors. Execution No. 10/1988, judgment on 08/01/2010 - Dispute over payment legality, attachment orders, decree execution, and refund liability.

1. This is a privacy notice that describes how, why and for how long I will process or keep your personal data in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (‘GDPR’).
2. The GDPR governs how an individual’s personal data is used, and your rights in relation to that data.
3.  I, Divya Kesar, have been instructed by you or your litigation friend (usually a parent), through your solicitor or agent, or via the Bar Pro Bono Unit.
4.  It is necessary for me to process your personal data in order for me to provide you with legal services, for example:

• Advise on the prospects of litigation;
• Advise on the value of your claim;
• Representation at a court hearing;
• Representation at trial;
• Advise, review or comment on legal issues or evidence.

5. Processing means anything done to data such as: recording, organising, adapting, altering, copying, consulting, transmitting, combining, erasing or storing it.

6.The processing for the purposes listed above will take place in accordance with either Article 6(1)(a) GDPR or Article 6(1)(b) GDPR, depending on how you instructed me.

7. If you have instructed me on a direct access basis, or engaged a solicitor (or legal agent), to assist you in bringing or defending a claim then the processing is necessary to perform a contract to which you are a party (Article 6(1)(b) GDPR). To give effect to that contract (i.e. to bring a claim) it is necessary for me to process your personal data for litigation purposes.

8. If I am assisting you on a pro bono basis, it will be necessary for me to seek your consent to be able to represent you (Article 6(1)(a) GDPR). In this scenario, you will be sent a consent form.

Recipients of your data

9.  I may also be required to share your data with others, depending on the nature of your case. This may include:

(i)  Courts and other tribunals to whom documents are presented;

(ii) Your solicitors, or agent representing you, through whom I have been instructed;

(iii) Potential witnesses, experts and other persons involved in the case;

(iv) Solicitors, barristers, or other legal representatives;

(v) Ombudsman and regulatory authorities;

(vi) Education and examining bodies; and

(vii) Current, past or prospective employers.

Special Categories of Data

10.  In some cases I will have been given your personal data that is within the ‘special categories’ of data described in GDPR Article 9(1). For example, personal data that reveals your race, ethnicity, sexual preferences, political or religious beliefs, trade union membership or health. There are also restrictions for processing information regarding criminal convictions.

11. This type of personal data will only be processed where it is necessary in order to represent you in your legal claim, or advise on the prospects of a legal claim.

Retention

12. I will retain your personal data for no longer than is necessary, and where it is possible, I will anonymise your data.

13. How long your personal data is kept will depend on a number of factors. The retention period will be reviewed when the service I am providing you with is complete. However in general, I am obliged by the Bar Code of Conduct to retain records of my cases, and by HM Revenue and Customs to retain records for 6 years.

14. Once your case has concluded and fees have been paid, I shall retain only the personal data necessary for the following purposes:

(i) The legal and professional obligation to retain information relating to my cases;

(ii) To check for any potential conflict of interests that may arise in the future when I am instructed on other cases;

(iii) For use in the defence of potential complaints, legal proceedings or fee disputes;

(iv) To refer back to in future cases which raise similar legal, factual, or procedural issues.

15. The processing for the purposes listed in paragraph 14 (ii), (iii), and (iv) above, will take place in accordance with Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. That is, for the purposes of legitimate interests that are not outweighed by your interests or fundamental rights and freedoms.

16. The processing for the purposes listed in paragraph 14(i) above, will take place in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. That is, the processing is necessary for me to comply with a legal obligation. 

Your Rights

17. Where processing of your personal data was based on your consent (see paragraphs 6 and 8) you have the right to withdraw that consent at any time. This does not affect the lawfulness of the processing based on consent before its withdrawal.

18. Withdrawal of your consent to process such data will most likely mean that I am no longer able to provide you with the legal services you seek.

19. You may request confirmation that your personal data is being processed by me and details about the personal data, the source, the processing, the purposes of the processing, the recipients and the retention period.

20. You may request a copy of your personal data that is being processed by me. You may also request rectification (i.e. correction) where there are inaccuracies in the personal data.

21. You have the right to object, on grounds relating to your particular situation, at any time, to processing of your personal data in paragraph 14 of this privacy notice. Should you object, the processing will only continue where there are compelling legitimate grounds for the processing which override your fundamental rights, freedoms and interests. 

22. Where the processing or retention of your data is necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims, it will not be possible to object. 

23. You have the right to request that your personal data is erased where any of the following apply:

(i) The personal data are no longer necessary in relation to the purposes for which they were collected or otherwise processed;

(ii) You withdraw your consent where the basis of processing was based on consent and where there is no other ground for the processing;

(iii) Where your fundamental rights, freedoms and interests override the legitimate interests of processing in paragraph 14;

(iv) The personal data has been unlawfully processed; or

(v) The personal data have to be erased to comply with a legal obligation.

24. You have the right to request that your personal data is restricted from processing, so that it is simply stored, for the following reasons: as an alternative to deletion; so that it can be corrected; for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims; to verify if a legitimate ground exists (paragraph 14).

25. Where it is necessary to correct your personal data, or you have requested the restriction or erasure of your personal data, I shall endeavour to contact the recipients of the personal data, unless this involves disproportionate effort. 

Security

26. I take appropriate physical and technical procedures to safeguard your personal data to prevent it from being accidentally lost, used or accessed in an unauthorised way. 

Complaints or Queries

27. If you have any questions regarding this privacy notice, or how I use your personal data please email me: mailto: divya.kesar@tbgbarrister.co.uk, or my clerks: clerking@thebarristergroup.co.uk telephone 01823 247 247.

28. I shall aim to respond as soon as possible, and within 30 days.

29. You have the right to complain to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) if you believe I have not handled your request in an appropriate manner. For information on contacting the ICO please go to: https://ico.org.uk/global/contact-us/