Attorney Detail Banner
Back to Attorneys
Menezes, Jagdish J.

Jagdish J. Menezes

Associate

jagdishmenezes@quinnemanuel.com
Direct Tel: +44 20 7653-2014
London
Tel: +44 20 7653 2000 Fax: +44 20 7653 2100

Jagdish Menezes is an associate in Quinn Emanuel’s London office.  He joined the firm in 2014.  His practice focuses on international arbitration (investor-state and commercial), as well as multi-jurisdictional disputes involving issues of fraud and corruption.  He obtained his undergraduate degree from the National Academy of Legal Studies and Research, Hyderabad, India, where he graduated with eleven gold medals, including two medals in arbitration.  Thereafter, he obtained his B.C.L. from the University of Oxford, on a full scholarship.  He was also a member of the team that won the 19th Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot Court Competition in Vienna, 2012.  Prior to joining the firm, Jagdish worked with the Singapore International Arbitration Center, assisting with case management, legal research and the drafting of a script for a simulation of an arbitration.  He has previously also clerked with a judge of the Bombay High Court.  He is admitted to practice in India and as a Solicitor of England & Wales with Higher Rights of Audience.

Jagdish was recognised by the 2020 UK edition of Legal 500 as a key lawyer for commercial disputes and described in a testimonial as a “tremendous professional” with an “extremely impressive…degree of commitment and mastery of the case and applicable laws of multiple jurisdictions”.

  • University of Oxford
    (B.C.L., 2014)
  • National Academy of Legal Studies and Research, (NALSAR)
    (B.A. LL.B, Honours, 2013)
Solicitor of England & Wales; Higher Rights of Audience (Civil); Admitted to practice in India
  • English
  • Portuguese
  • Hindi
  • The Other Side of the Coin: India's 2015 Model BIT and Indian Investors Abroad, TDM 2 (2018) [ISSN: 1875-4120] (co-author).
  • Unnecessary Implications & Indian Arbitration Law: A Critical Assessment of Videocon Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, 2011(5)SCALE678, [1] NADR Rev. (2012) 127.
  • Simplicity, Clarity, and Consistency – What the Supreme Court should do in Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc., Ed. 6, Young Arbitration Review - Under40 International Arbitration Review 27 (2012).
  • Narayan Dutt v. State of Punjab [2011 (2) SCALE 712]: A Critical Scrutiny against the Contours of Pardoning Power, CNLU LJ (2) 2011-2012, 125 [ISSN: 0976-805X].
  • Creating Smaller States for Development: The Clash of Law, Economics and Political Expediency, 1(2) NULJ 236 [ISSN: 2249-1430].
  • Why the question of Life or Death Remains the Most Difficult One, 3 (Winter) Journal of Indian Law and Society 110 (2011).
  • Contamination of Outer Space: Liability under the Existing Corpus Juris Spatialis, 1(2) Int’l. Jour. Cont. Laws 2012 (www.ijcl.co.in_uploads_8_7_5_1_8751632_sa5_1) [ISSN: 2277-3649].
  • The Rationale behind Trade Mark Dilution: Has ITC v. Philip Morris proved to be the Light at the end of the Tunnel?, 1 NLIU J. of IP Law 111 (2012) .
  • Research Whaling: Implications for the Common Heritage of Mankind Principle, presented at the 4th Intl. Congress on Environmental Research, Surat, 2011, published in 1(3) A38 Journal of International Law (http://www.athirtyeight.com/2012/09/volume-i-edition-3.html)[ISSN 2277-9361].