Home / People / Stephanie Woods
Portrait of Stephanie Woods

Stephanie Woods

Senior Associate

CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP
Cannon Place
78 Cannon Street
United Kingdom
Languages English

Stephanie is a Senior Associate in the Litigation and Arbitration team specialising in commercial dispute resolution and pre-litigation strategic advice.

She regularly advises on disputes relating to breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation, shareholder and joint venture disputes, with a focus on disputes in the technology and media sectors.

more less

Relevant experience

  • An individual in his USD 2bn fraud claim against a former business partner, brought in the Commercial Court in London.
  • A high net worth individual defending fraud claims arising out of the sale of a major Thai renewable energy business.
  • A nation state in proceedings under the Arbitration Act 1996 challenging an arbitral award.
  • A global technology company in relation to proceedings arising from delivery of an IT system.
  • Obtaining court orders to facilitate the identification of the perpetrator of a data breach.
  • A franchisor in respect of claims brought by a former franchisee for misrepresentation.
more less


  • 2009 – Legal Practice Course, BPP Law School, London
  • 2008 – Graduate Diploma in Law, BPP Law School, London
  • 2007 – BA, Durham University, Durham 
more less


Top 10 Ques­tions asked by Cor­por­ate Coun­sel con­sid­er­ing Third Party Fund­ing...
Third Party Fund­ing is where a com­mer­cial fun­der agrees to cov­er some or all of the leg­al fees and ex­penses in­curred by a party (usu­ally a claimant) in re­la­tion to a dis­pute. In re­turn, if the party is suc­cess­ful in the dis­pute, the fun­der will re­ceive a re­turn on its in­vest­ment, usu­ally a share of the sums re­covered (of­ten cal­cu­lated as either, or a com­bin­a­tion of, a mul­tiple of its in­vest­ment or a per­cent­age of the amount re­covered), plus, as a pri­or­ity, re­pay­ment of the amount paid out. Third Party Fund­ing is be­com­ing of in­creas­ing in­terest to busi­nesses as a source of cap­it­al to fin­ance and off­set the risk of dis­putes they are in­volved in. In this flash brief­ing, we an­swer 10 of the most fre­quently asked ques­tions cor­por­ate coun­sel have about Third Party Fund­ing.*The an­swers in this doc­u­ment re­flect the ap­proach taken by Omni Bridge­way and in­dustry best prac­tice. Due di­li­gence should be con­duc­ted on any spe­cif­ic fun­der in re­spect of their ap­proach to the same.foot­note­Watch Third Party Fund­ing video series
Jur­is­dic­tion of the Eng­lish courts in third-party dis­clos­ure ap­plic­a­tions
In an im­port­ant rul­ing, the Court of Ap­peal has held that in cer­tain cir­cum­stances, third-party dis­clos­ure or­ders can be made against per­sons out­side the jur­is­dic­tion pur­su­ant to s.34 of the Seni­or Courts...
Tech­no­logy Trans­form­a­tion: Man­aging Risks in a Chan­ging Land­scape
Chan­ging tech, chan­ging risks
Ad­miss­ib­il­ity versus jur­is­dic­tion: pre-con­di­tions in ar­bit­ra­tion agree­ments
In NWA and oth­ers v NVF and oth­ers [2021] EWHC 2666 (Comm), the Com­mer­cial Court dis­missed an ap­plic­a­tion un­der sec­tion 67(1)(a) of the Ar­bit­ra­tion Act 1996 to set aside an award on the basis that non-com­pli­ance...
Dis­putes 101 - Emer­gency Meas­ures
Wel­come to the Dis­putes 101: CMS Au­tumn We­bin­ar Series This series will take place over 11 weeks, every Wed­nes­day from 8 Septem­ber – 1 Decem­ber 2021 at 2-3pm. Part­ners and as­so­ci­ates from CMS’ lit­ig­a­tion...
Dis­putes 101: CMS Au­tumn We­bin­ar Series 2021
Wel­come to the Dis­putes 101: CMS Au­tumn We­bin­ar Series 2021 This series ori­gin­ally took place over 11 weeks, every Wed­nes­day from 8 Septem­ber – 1 Decem­ber 2021 at 2-3pm. Part­ners and as­so­ci­ates from...
Fu­ture Fa­cing Dis­putes - Is there a fu­ture for robo-dir­ect­ors?
‘Robo-dir­ect­ors’ and ‘Robo-ad­visors’ - li­ab­il­ity for bad de­cisions based on AI tech­no­lo­gies AI tech­no­lo­gies are in­creas­ingly in­flu­en­cing the de­cisions we make in our private and pro­fes­sion­al...
Lon­don In­ter­na­tion­al Dis­putes Week 2021 - Tech­no­logy Dis­putes of the Fu­ture,...
CMS is proud to be a Found­ing Mem­ber of Lon­don In­ter­na­tion­al Dis­putes Week (LIDW). With the theme: ‘Look­ing for­ward: change, chal­lenge and op­por­tun­ity’, LIDW21 will provide cru­cial in­sights on the...
Fu­ture Fa­cing Dis­putes: Ac­count­ab­il­ity in a chan­ging leg­al land­scape
Every day, our lives and busi­nesses are af­fected by the ac­tions and de­cisions of oth­ers. The ques­tion of how we hold de­cision-makers ac­count­able for their ac­tions is by no means a new one, but it will...
In­junc­tions against per­sons un­known: the im­port­ance of val­id ser­vice
Back­ground On 16 Oc­to­ber 2020 Mr Justice Nick­lin made a case man­age­ment or­der seek­ing to man­age 38 sep­ar­ate claims brought by vari­ous loc­al au­thor­it­ies in which sim­il­ar in­junc­tions had been gran­ted (some­times...
Up­date on the ser­vice of or­ders against ‘per­sons un­known’ and com­mit­tal...
The High Court has cla­ri­fied the cir­cum­stances in which ‘per­sons un­known’ can be held to have been served with a court or­der and, con­sequently, when pro­ceed­ings for con­tempt of court can be brought...
Civil Justice Coun­cil re­port re­com­mends wider en­cour­age­ment of ADR
The Civil Justice Coun­cil Work­ing Group on ADR has pub­lished its fi­nal re­port on al­tern­at­ive dis­pute res­ol­u­tion (ADR) and civil justice, mak­ing a raft of re­com­mend­a­tions in­clud­ing steps to raise pub­lic...