Iain Wishart is a highly experienced QS with extensive contractor experience.  Following qualification, he was head hunted to work on a seconded basis for at that time one of the world’s largest international contractors.  He was resident in Saudi Arabia for close to 11 years.

In that time, he worked initially on self-contained sites with aggregate values in excess of USD 1.5 billion (inflated to today’s rates) and was responsible for the commercial success of those projects.  He was promoted subsequently as the contractor’s subcontract manager where he was responsible for all subcontracts placed In-Kingdom.  Addressing problems that had occurred, he reorganised subcontract procedures to make them more efficient.  In conjunction with local counsel he also restructured the standard subcontract form to address serious problems that had manifested themselves and affected some projects.  Subsequently promoted to contract manager he was responsible for all projects in Kingdom and some 40 QSs on the projects.  The aggregate value of contracts that he was responsible for at one time was in excess of USD 12 billion (inflated to today’s rates).

He was also responsible for managing disputes that could not be resolved on sites including an international arbitration where the contractor faced a USD 280 million claim (inflated to today’s rates) from a sole source American supplier on a project for Aramco.  Iain and his team formulated and valued counterclaims against the supplier for deficient and delayed deliveries and the consequent effect on the project, including the withholding of LD’s.  He was also the link between the in-Kingdom management and a major London law firm and appointed Counsel. Iain provided testimony in that arbitration.  The result was a net Award for the contractor against the supplier.

Returning to the United Kingdom, Iain formed the specialist consultancy group, Fairway, with his then employer and an American consultancy group.  He built it into a multi-million-pound turnover company that operated in over 74 countries worldwide.  After selling his shares in Fairway in 2011 he resigned as Chairman of the company.

Iain formed his own consultancy group now called Iain Wishart LLP in 1994, in 2013 formed Iain Wishart Associates in Dubai to serve the Middle Eastern market and in 2015 co-founded Wishart Bradley LLP.

He has provided testimony well over 35 times on over 30 different disputes; in Abu Dhabi, Amsterdam, Bahrain, Dubai, Geneva, Istanbul, Paris, Rome, Toronto, Venice, Washington D.C. and Zurich as well as London and other locations in the United Kingdom.  He has testified in the Queen’s Bench Division – Technology and Construction Court in London.  He has been appointed on a number of occasions as a Single Joint Expert and as a Tribunal’s Expert and has provided testimony in that role.

Iain has been retained by Governments, Contractors, Project Clients, Insurance Companies and Consultants to act as an Independent Expert.

Described by a leading law firm as having “…pre-eminent expertise and experience as a quantum expert”, Iain has been praised by judges, arbitrators, counsel, instructing solicitors and his clients.

Iain has lectured extensively to client and contractor organisations and has prepared and delivered seminars and training sessions in the United Kingdom, China, Germany, Japan, Malaysia, The Netherlands and Trinidad & Tobago on contract dispute matters and the training of contract administrators.

Iain has had articles published in Construction Law Journal titled “Delay and Disruption – a Separable Duo”, “Follow the Money” and “Disruption Claims – The Art of the Possible”.

Recent publications for Construction Law include “How to save money in Disputes & Arbitration”, “Record, review, respond and react” and “The importance of being Earnest”.

Iain’s Abilities as an Expert

An English High Court Judge:

“…The only expert evidence before me is that of Mr Wishart. I judge him to be an independent witness, who is both highly experienced and impressive. The court’s duty is to consider his evidence as evidence in the case in the light of the instructions he has been given by the parties and to give it the appropriate weight after cross-examination and any testing there may be, together with all of the other evidence there may be. Merely because a witness is a jointly instructed expert does not mean that he is deciding the case on these issues. Nonetheless, where the approach of the expert is careful and reasoned and where by his approach he demonstrates that he is both an experienced and well-qualified witness in the field that he is giving evidence in, the court would have to have very good reason for substituting another view and for not giving considerable weight to his evidence. It is evident in this case that Mr Wishart was put under pressure of time. That of course can affect the degree of care that can be given to the consideration of the technical issues. Where it did so, Mr Wishart properly pointed that out. Where he would have wanted substantiation, and either none was available, or incomplete substantiation was provided, he said so and the effect upon his ascertainment figures was apparent and clear to the court…”

A leading English QC:

“I have known Iain for about 10 years and, in particular, he has appeared as expert in two large cases of mine. In each of these, he had to do a great deal of preparatory work, as well as giving evidence orally for lengthy periods. His work was uniformly excellent – thorough, careful, well-reasoned and persuasive. He also showed at all times very good judgement as to what were and were not sensible points, and achieved consistently good relations with all concerned: the Judge, the client, and even the other side! I have no hesitation whatever in recommending him – and would add that he is a thoroughly nice and decent chap, and very easy to work with.”

A New York Attorney:

“lain worked extensively with our firm in connection with an ICC arbitration heard in Istanbul a few years ago. He provided substantial ongoing assistance to the litigation team in connection with various aspects of our damages evidence. lain was always available to us and provided valuable input. His evidence at trial was given substantial deference by the arbitrators, and he demonstrated on cross-examination his ability to think on his feet and to defend his analysis with intelligence and aplomb. I recommend lain for work as an expert, particularly on the question of damages.”

A partner in a leading London law firm:

“The particular case related to a dispute over the cost of rebuilding certain oilstorage facilities in the UK which had been completely destroyed in a series of explosions and fires in December 2005. My client was the defendant in those proceedings and had been found liable for the costs of reinstating the facilities in a prior trial.

My client was presented with the outcome of a Front End Engineering Design (FEED) which had been prepared by the Claimant with the assistance of a well known firm of oil industry engineers, estimating the cost of rebuilding the terminal at somewhere in the region of £80M.

Following his instruction Mr Wishart very quickly formed the view that the level of cost information supporting the Front End Engineering Design (FEED) was entirely inadequate and following discussions with me, engaged with his opposing expert who had come to the same conclusion and agreed to carry out a ground up valuation of the project. In doing so, Mr Wishart exposed a number of gross over estimates by the Claimant particularly in respect of material costs and labour rates.

Unusually in litigation of this type, Mr Wishart worked very closely with his opposing expert and took a proactive role in ensuring that as much of the quantum evidence was agreed as possible, subject to engineering issues. This allowed the issues to be narrowed such that the court was largely being asked to determine only engineering issues as depending upon the outcome of the engineering issue, the quantum was largely agreed.
Mr Wishart and his team were very thorough in their preparation for expert meetings such that their opponents invariably accepted their position to the extent that the claimant’s position based upon the FEED costings effectively become redundant.

The case concluded before trial on terms with which my client was delighted.
I have personally found Mr Wishart very easy to work with, very thorough in his analysis and presentation and has a great depth of experience that I have not seen in many of his contemporaries.

…what I can say is that to my knowledge, in the past, my firm has instructed Mr Wishart as an expert witness on a number of matters in both the oil and power generation industries and we will continue to do so as and when we are able to do so.”

An American Attorney:

“As I assume you know, he has many years of residential experience in the Middle East and only last year was Chairman of the Fairway organisation. I first met Iain at the time Fairway was formed by an American consultancy group and the UK based Gardiner & Theobald. I have worked with Iain on many occasions including complex arbitrations of large value claims on construction projects in the Middle East. He is my first choice when I need a Chartered Surveyor services in connection with engineering and construction contract disputes.

I value the fact that when serving as an expert he is truly independent and gives me his professional assessment without being influenced by argument or any other form of pressure from the party which I am representing. His written work is clear, logical and as brief as circumstances will permit. In testimony during hearings he is convincing and deals very well with cross-examination. It has been my experience that his testimony is readily accepted by arbitrators. Also he has the personality to enable him to confer with other experts and often reach considerable consensus prior to hearing.

My recommendation of Iain is without any hesitation and I am confident that if you and your client select him he will be very well served.”

---

Iain’s ability as a Mediator

The Managing Director of one of the UK’s largest construction companies:

“At all times Mr Wishart displayed a totally professional and impartial attitude towards all parties. He showed considerable technical ability in understanding the project, the problems such a project can encounter, and equally important, a significant grasp of the commercial issues at stake.

He communicated well with all parties and was well respected, to my knowledge, by all the individuals involved in the process.

We eventually reached a conclusion, which was accepted by all concerned and there is no doubt that this would not have been achieved without Mr Wishart’s involvement.”

A partner in a leading London law firm:

“Iain proved to be a very able mediator. He conducted the process in a very professional manner, and he was approachable and efficient. The mediation continued for a second day during which Iain was asked to provide a non-binding view on various issues. Following an exchange on settlement proposals, a compromise was reached and the mediation was concluded.”

An in-house Lawyer for a company:

“You very quickly grasped the key issues …and you were focused on the merits which made a refreshing change from some of the other mediators we have experienced.”