The firm

Karim Sabbagh

Karim Sabbagh works on refusal-to-perform matters where an investor's money is held by a counterparty that will not pay out or will not explain why. His work sits at the point where a client's account statements and correspondence need to be read against what the counterparty is actually obliged to do.

How the work looks

The starting point is always the same document set: subscription or account agreement, the platform or fund terms in force at the relevant date, and every written exchange about the missed payment or refused redemption. From there the task is to separate what the terms actually permit a counterparty to delay or deny from what the counterparty is simply asserting. That distinction drives everything that follows, including whether a formal claim has any basis to stand on.

Much of the work is comparative across asset class and structure: a refusal on a fund redemption reads differently from a refusal on a custodied token balance, and the terms that govern each are drafted differently. Readers building their own understanding of that gap before instructing anyone can start with the firm's material on how platform terms limit redemption and on where these claims fail on evidence. Broader context on the categories of refusal the firm works across is set out at refusal to perform.