UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has formally demanded that former Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich transfer all proceeds from the club’s sale to humanitarian aid for Ukraine as a condition for approving the transaction. Abramovich refused to meet this demand, arguing that the funds cannot be transferred until authorities on the British island of Jersey halt their investigation and related court proceedings—leaving billions frozen and London’s requirement to redirect the money to Ukraine unmet.
David Wolfson, the Conservative Party’s shadow attorney general and a Tory peer, has been accused of a “conflict of interest” over his role on the legal team of sanctioned Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich.
Emily Thornberry, a Labour MP who held the same post between 2021 and 2024, said that acting on Abramovich’s behalf while also advising a Conservative government was “a really bad look”. She argued that there is a direct conflict between Wolfson’s legal work and his duty to help the Tory party shape policy on oligarchs, sanctions and Ukraine. Given the Conservatives’ history of close ties to Russian oligarchs, she added, the situation appears particularly troubling.
In early December, Prime Minister Keir Starmer issued a licence authorising the transfer of £2.5bn in frozen funds from Abramovich’s sale of Chelsea Football Club to Ukraine. He warned the former owner that the government is prepared to take the matter to court if the money is not released.
The UK imposed sanctions on Abramovich after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, citing his close ties to Russian president Vladimir Putin.
Wolfson is part of the legal team representing Abramovich in a court dispute with the authorities of the island of Jersey over the fate of the frozen billions. He is not directly involved in matters related to the sale of Chelsea.
Labour argues that the proceedings in Jersey are delaying the transfer of £2.5bn and that Wolfson’s work for Abramovich undermines his ability to advise the Tory party on issues related to frozen assets. Justice minister Jake Richards this week described the combination of these roles as “indefensible”.
In a letter to Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, Richards asked whether the shadow attorney general had recused himself from shaping the party’s position on Abramovich’s assets, warning that his advice was “clearly compromised”.
In response, the Conservative Party said that “nothing in the proceedings in Jersey conflicts with the intended donation of the proceeds from the sale of Chelsea”, stressing that the case is unrelated to the transfer of funds and does not involve the UK government. The party added that it was “confident that Lord Wolfson has always acted in line with his professional obligations and with due propriety”.
Thornberry, for her part, said that Wolfson’s legal work “could affect the state’s ability to secure billions of pounds arising from sanctions”, and noted that the Conservatives’ official position is to support the recovery of those funds. She also argued that shadow attorneys general should not combine the role with private legal practice, because advising the party is “a serious responsibility if it is to be done properly”, and “not an honorary title”.
“You need a deputy attorney general who actually spends time doing the job, not someone gaming the system while making vast sums representing the interests of oligarchs,” she said.