George Burn

George Burn
  1. People /

George Burn

George Burn

Partner


London
George Burn
  1. People /

George Burn

George Burn

Partner


London

George Burn

Partner

London

Partner & Global Co-leader, International Arbitration

T: +44 (0) 20 3400 2615

LinkedInLinkedIn
VcardVcard
Download PDFDownload PDF
Print
Share

Biography

George Burn is the global co-leader of the firm’s International Arbitration Practice and a leading specialist in both investor-state and international commercial arbitration. With over 25 years’ experience of acting as arbitrator and counsel in complex high-stakes disputes, clients from across the world have come to rely on his strategic expertise and ingenuity to break new ground on important jurisdictional issues, among other questions of public as well as private international law.

George Burn stands out as a global leader in international arbitration. [He is] head and shoulders above most other practitioners in London.

Legal 500 UK: International Arbitration

George has a distinguished track-record of representing and advising clients across a broad-spectrum of disputes covering multiple sectors, including infrastructure, energy, banking and finance, military and defence, mining, construction, trade and commerce. These disputes have been seated throughout Europe, Asia, the Middle East, Africa and the Americas and governed by the principal arbitral rules. These include the ICC, LCIA, ICSID, UNCITRAL, SIAC, SCC, HKIAC, AAA-ICDR and PCA, as well as lesser known rules, such as the Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration, the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, the Investment Agreement of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and the Arbitration Foundation of Southern Africa.

He is a go-to person in international arbitrations, due to both his incredible ability and his wealth of experience.

Chambers & Partners UK: International Arbitration

George has received constant praise from the leading legal directories, having been featured in the Legal 500’s ‘Hall of Fame’ since 2022 and recognised by Best Lawyers since 2020. He is also active on practice-related issues, from being a member of the ICC UK Arbitration Committee and the ICC Commission, to being a regular speaker at international conferences such as the Investment Treaty Forum's Public Conference, the CDR Arbitration Symposium, the Swiss Arbitration Summit and the LCIA Tylney Hall Symposium.

 

Professional Affiliations

  • London Court of International Arbitration
  • International Chamber of Commerce UK National Committee
  • International Chamber of Commerce Commission on Arbitration and ADR
  • Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
  • Singapore International Arbitration Centre Users Council

 

Admissions

  • England and Wales

Related Capabilities

  • International Arbitration

  • Energy Transition

  • Banking & Finance Disputes

  • Anti-Bribery & Corruption

  • Betting & Gaming

  • Finance

  • Litigation & Dispute Resolution

  • Regulation, Compliance & Advisory

  • Licensing

  • Anti-Money Laundering Compliance

  • Funds Finance

  • Financial Institutions

  • Oil, Gas & Sustainable Fuels

  • Mining

  • Power

  • Renewables & Storage

  • Nuclear

  • Business & Commercial Disputes

Experience

  • Successfully represented a joint venture of Korean and Japanese construction companies in back-to-back ICC arbitrations arising out of a major project in Kuwait. One arbitration was brought against a regional bank, which refused to pay on various bonds issued in relation to work on the project. The bank’s counsel raised a wide range of legal theories in their attempt to avoid liability. Successfully addressed all of those theories, resulting in them all being dismissed by the tribunal. The second arbitration was brought against the clients by the main contractor. Successfully defended all of those claims and prevailed on most of the counterclaims presented.
  • Successfully represented a Pakistan gas pipeline operator, Sui Natural Gas Pipelines Limited, in defending an LCIA award issued in its favour against a power company, Quaid e Azam Thermal Power (Private) Limited. The challenge was brought under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, and included a range of assertions of unfairness and procedural impropriety in the underlying arbitration. The Commercial Court judge dismissed all of those arguments, confirming that the award against the opposing party was binding.
  • Successfully represented a British oil exploration company in an ICC arbitration against the Republic of Southern Sudan and its state-owned oil company following the termination of agreements relating to upstream oil and gas projects. The contracts in question predated South Sudan’s secession from Sudan, raising a range of complex legal issues under local law and international law. Having successfully navigated those issues, substantial compensation was recovered for the client.
  • Successfully represented Mr. Hesham al-Warraq in a landmark arbitration before an arbitral panel constituted under the Investment Agreement of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), arising out of the Republic of Indonesia’s prosecution and criminal conviction of Mr. Al-Warraq. The OIC tribunal’s ruling on jurisdiction was ground-breaking as it established that investors could, for the first time, sue States that have ratified the Investment Agreement of the OIC. The tribunal subsequently found that Indonesia had breached its fair and equitable treatment standard, thus negating the legal basis for the criminal conviction of Mr. al-Warraq.
  • Bringing a second novel arbitration, against INTERPOL, in the name of Mr. al-Warraq, alongside his business partner, Mr. Rafat Rizvi. This required overcoming the institution’s immunity from suit and establishing a freestanding legal right for individuals to bring legal actions against INTERPOL. Having established prima facie jurisdiction, it was possible to embark on intensive negotiations with INTERPOL, culminating in the cancellation of the Red Notices issued against Mr. al-Warraq and Mr. Rizvi, and an agreement to an array of unprecedented conditions.
  • Successfully represented a bank in an LCIA arbitration brought against a defaulting borrower, overcoming a range of defences and counterclaims based on the authenticity of signatures and doctrines of ostensible and actual authority.

Related Insights

Awards
Oct 16, 2025

Chambers 2026 UK guide ranks BCLP in 36 practice areas and recognises 76 individual lawyers

In the 2026 edition of Chambers UK BCLP received 36 practice area rankings and 76 individual lawyer recognitions. This year, the firm is recognized in six new practice areas and improved to a Band 1 ranking for Commercial Contracts, as well as a Band 2 ranking for Hotels and Leisure.  
News
Oct 01, 2025

The Legal 500 UK 2026

Insights
Jul 31, 2025

HK Court refuses borrower’s challenge to enforcement of arbitral award in favour of moneylender

In CCC v AAC [2025] HKCFI 2987[1], Sir William Blair[2], sitting as Deputy High Court Judge in the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“Court”), rejected a borrower’s challenge to the enforcement of an arbitral award in favour of a moneylender. In doing so, the Court made some interesting observations in respect of certain procedural aspect of the case, in particular relating to the importance of giving proper notice of the arbitration.
Insights
Jul 25, 2025

Legal Privilege – the King has been advised – the Shareholder Rule no longer applies under English Law

Yesterday in a landmark decision, Jardine Strategic Limited v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd and others, the Privy Council, on appeal from Bermuda’s Court of Appeal, has changed the law. “The status-based automatic Shareholder Rule is therefore now, and in truth has always been, a rule without justification. Like the emperor wearing no clothes in the folktale, it is time to recognise and declare that the Rule is altogether unclothed” [para 82].  Under English and Bermudian law, shareholders (and former shareholders) are no longer entitled to legally privileged communications belonging to the company during a dispute with them.
Insights
Jul 22, 2025

HK Security of Payment Ordinance – new rules regarding setting aside and enforcement of adjudication determinations

On 11 July 2025, the Hong Kong Government gazetted the Construction Industry Security of Payment Rules (“Rules”)[1]. The Rules, made by the Chief Judge of the High Court under section 50 of the Construction Industry Security of Payment Ordinance (Cap 652) (“SOP Ordinance”), provide the practice and procedure to be followed in respect of applications to set aside or enforce a determination made in adjudication proceedings (“Applications”) under sections 48 and 49 of the SOP Ordinance.
Insights
Jul 16, 2025

HK court confirms jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal in Cayman-related dispute

In PI 1 and PI 2 v MR [1], the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“Court”) dismissed the plaintiffs’ application to set aside an arbitral tribunal’s decision that it did have jurisdiction to hear a dispute. It is noteworthy that in this case, the Court applied a Privy Council decision on Cayman Islands law in determining whether the claims brought against a Cayman Islands company, in an arbitration seated in Hong Kong, were arbitrable. There were good reasons for this, as explained below.
Insights
May 13, 2025

Fake legal authorities – AI hallucination or professional negligence?

Artificial intelligence (“AI”) has the potential to make significant changes to various aspects of the practice of law. It is possible that many lawyers will incorporate AI in doing legal work, one way or the other and to some degree or other, in the foreseeable future. However, while AI is a powerful tool at lawyers’ disposal, work generated by AI can contain errors, and AI has the potential to “hallucinate”, i.e. make up false information or something that does not in fact exist. In two recent court cases in Canada and the UK, the lawyers submitted to the courts case authorities that did not exist, leading the other side’s lawyers and the court to suspect that those cases had been (mis-)generated by the use of AI.

Related Insights

Awards
Oct 16, 2025
Chambers 2026 UK guide ranks BCLP in 36 practice areas and recognises 76 individual lawyers
In the 2026 edition of Chambers UK BCLP received 36 practice area rankings and 76 individual lawyer recognitions. This year, the firm is recognized in six new practice areas and improved to a Band 1 ranking for Commercial Contracts, as well as a Band 2 ranking for Hotels and Leisure.  
News
Oct 01, 2025
The Legal 500 UK 2026
Insights
Jul 31, 2025
HK Court refuses borrower’s challenge to enforcement of arbitral award in favour of moneylender
In CCC v AAC [2025] HKCFI 2987[1], Sir William Blair[2], sitting as Deputy High Court Judge in the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“Court”), rejected a borrower’s challenge to the enforcement of an arbitral award in favour of a moneylender. In doing so, the Court made some interesting observations in respect of certain procedural aspect of the case, in particular relating to the importance of giving proper notice of the arbitration.
Insights
Jul 28, 2025
The UK’s new Arbitration Act comes into force
Insights
Jul 25, 2025
Legal Privilege – the King has been advised – the Shareholder Rule no longer applies under English Law
Yesterday in a landmark decision, Jardine Strategic Limited v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd and others, the Privy Council, on appeal from Bermuda’s Court of Appeal, has changed the law. “The status-based automatic Shareholder Rule is therefore now, and in truth has always been, a rule without justification. Like the emperor wearing no clothes in the folktale, it is time to recognise and declare that the Rule is altogether unclothed” [para 82].  Under English and Bermudian law, shareholders (and former shareholders) are no longer entitled to legally privileged communications belonging to the company during a dispute with them.
Insights
Jul 22, 2025
HK Security of Payment Ordinance – new rules regarding setting aside and enforcement of adjudication determinations
On 11 July 2025, the Hong Kong Government gazetted the Construction Industry Security of Payment Rules (“Rules”)[1]. The Rules, made by the Chief Judge of the High Court under section 50 of the Construction Industry Security of Payment Ordinance (Cap 652) (“SOP Ordinance”), provide the practice and procedure to be followed in respect of applications to set aside or enforce a determination made in adjudication proceedings (“Applications”) under sections 48 and 49 of the SOP Ordinance.
Insights
Jul 16, 2025
HK court confirms jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal in Cayman-related dispute
In PI 1 and PI 2 v MR [1], the Hong Kong Court of First Instance (“Court”) dismissed the plaintiffs’ application to set aside an arbitral tribunal’s decision that it did have jurisdiction to hear a dispute. It is noteworthy that in this case, the Court applied a Privy Council decision on Cayman Islands law in determining whether the claims brought against a Cayman Islands company, in an arbitration seated in Hong Kong, were arbitrable. There were good reasons for this, as explained below.
Insights
May 19, 2025
HK court grants worldwide Mareva and appoints interim receivers in aid of enforcing arbitral awards
Insights
May 13, 2025
Fake legal authorities – AI hallucination or professional negligence?
Artificial intelligence (“AI”) has the potential to make significant changes to various aspects of the practice of law. It is possible that many lawyers will incorporate AI in doing legal work, one way or the other and to some degree or other, in the foreseeable future. However, while AI is a powerful tool at lawyers’ disposal, work generated by AI can contain errors, and AI has the potential to “hallucinate”, i.e. make up false information or something that does not in fact exist. In two recent court cases in Canada and the UK, the lawyers submitted to the courts case authorities that did not exist, leading the other side’s lawyers and the court to suspect that those cases had been (mis-)generated by the use of AI.