Health and safety & Inquests: advocacy and advisory experience in health and safety prosecutions in the Magistrates and Crown Courts primarily for Defendant companies facing prosecution under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and related health and safety regulations, and in civil litigation for personal injury arising out of workplace accidents. Regularly instructed to appear at Coroner’s Inquests on behalf of Interested Parties including Article 2 Inquests. Representative cases include the Buncefield criminal prosecution (junior to Roger Henderson QC and Prashant Popat QC) which led to a 3 month jury trial at St Albans Crown Court; Defended company prosecuted under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (led by Prashant Popat QC). The prosecution was dismissed at a pre-trial review following legal argument as to the correct interpretation of the RRO; Inquests on behalf of Ministry of Justice re prison suicides. Product Liability & Commercial disputes including Group Actions: Regularly instructed to advise in claims under the CPA 1987 and/or in negligence in relation to various products. For example, instructed by leading pharmaceutical company in relation to cases concerning medicinal products. Other recent representative cases include acting for food manufacturer re EU regulatory regimes governing food additives and enzymes, acting for manufacturers re claims for property damage arising from flooding due to defective tap valves, acting for manufacturer of equipment used by disabled persons for access to pools.Instructed in commercial disputes including supply chain disputes re conformance to specification of products supplied under contract; third party claims between contractors and sub contractors.In Group Actions regularly instructed for example in a group action (led by Charles Gibson QC) arising out of two oil spills in the Niger Delta brought in the English courts by several thousand Nigerian nationals. Instructed by MOD in over 100 claims brought in respect of hearing loss and re adequateness of hearing protection/PPE provided. Instructed by MOJ in over 1,000 claims brought for historic child sex abuse in detention centre in 1970/1980s.Further experience in Employment law; for example recently acted in 5 day disability discrimination trial for employer and regularly instructed to appear in Tribunal.Junior Counsel to the Crown (C Panel).
Henderson Chambers
hendersonchambers.co.uk hendersonchambers.co.ukBarristers
Barrister specialising in the law of the European Union, in particular choice of legal basis issues, direct effect of community provisions, employment, sex discrimination and protection of fundamental rights; environment; the law relating to the internal market, including public procurement and product liability; competition; anti-dumping and external relations generally; agriculture; fisheries; and education. Formerly, Director, Legal Service, Council of the EU 1987-94. Areas of responsibility in the Council’s Legal Service were at various times: institutional questions; the Budget; agriculture and fisheries; external relations, including the WTO and the CFSP. Recent cases before the European Court of Justice include: (in the employment field) Cases C-397 to C-403/01, ‘Pfeiffer’, on the possibility of reliance on Article 6 of the Working Time Directive to challenge the validity of German legislation allowing on-call workers to be employed in excess of the 48-hour weekly limit; case C-411/05, ‘Palacios de la Villa’, where compulsory retirement clauses in collective agreements were found, in the circumstances, to be compatible with the prohibition against age discrimination in Directive 2000/78; Case C-427/06, ‘Bartsch’, on the compatibility with the same directive of an age-gap clause in an occupational pension scheme; (in the field of counter-terrorism) Cases C-402 and 415/05P, ‘Kadi and Yusuf’, on appeal from the CFI, where the ECJ held that it has jurisdiction to review the legality, on fundamental rights grounds, of Community measures implementing UN Security Council resolutions, freezing the assets of individuals suspected of being associated with terrorism; ((in the WTO field) Case C-431/05, ‘Merck Genericos’, on the application of the TRIPS Agreement within the Community legal order; Case C-13/07, on the rules governing the agreement of the EU to the accession of Vietnam to the WTO opinion 1/08, on the amendment of the EC’s schedule of GATS commitments; (in the EU constitutional field) Case C-91/05, ‘Small Arms and Light Weapons’, on the interface between Community development co-operation policy and the common foreign and security policy; Cases 77 and 137/05 on the UK’s special status under the Schengen Protocol; Case C-303/05, ‘Advocaten voor de Wereld’, on the Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant; and opinion 1/09 on the establishment of a European patent jurisdiction.
Barrister; QC (2018); Counsel to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry (2017-); Junior Counsel to the Crown (A Panel) 2011-2018; Junior Counsel to the Crown (B Panel) 2008-2011; Junior Counsel to the Welsh Government (A panel – Public Law) 2011-2018; Junior Counsel to the Welsh Government (A Panel) 2008-2011
Arnold specialises in heavy commercial litigation but accepts instructions across a spread of Chambers’ practice areas. He has particular expertise in insolvency, banking and consumer finance – as well as a focus on group litigation and product liability. Arnold’s background in high value multi-party litigation has seen him regularly appear as sole counsel in the High Court. In that capacity he has been involved in numerous recent precedent-setting decisions in his specialist areas (see Capital Funding One Limited v Esqulant [2020] EWHC 981 (QB); Wolf Rock (Cornwall) Limited v Raila Langhelle [2021] B.C.C. 67 and Points of View v Erre DB Group SA [2021] 2 WLUK 70 to name a few). He also acts in high value international arbitrations and has recently (as sole counsel) concluded a multi-million dollar ICC oil arbitration involving an African State, the State-owned oil company and its oil-exploration partners. In 2021, Arnold is instructed (as sole counsel) on a £4m claim in the High Court concerning an intention to defraud creditors (s.423 Insolvency Act 1986) and is acting for an investment bank in a £3m Commercial Court action against a South African gold mining company, arising from a $50m brokerage contract. In 2022 he will appear for the respondent in the Supreme Court in a generationally decisive case on unjust enrichment (Barton v Gwyn Jones [2019] EWCA Civ 1999). Indeed, he has a particular interest in cases with an international element. In 2020 he obtained a security for costs order against a China-domiciled Claimant and appeared (as sole counsel) before the QBD of the High Court in a case concerning the conversion of an Italian freezing injunction into an English remedy for the purpose of enforcement (Manetta v De Filippo [2020] EWHC 3460 (QB)).
Head of chambers; specialises in commercial law (particularly fire, accident and business loss claims); product liability (often involving group actions and insurance); environment; health and safety; professional negligence; insurance; sports law; food law. Other areas of practice include: public law; public inquiries; regulatory law and disciplinary tribunals. Group actions include the Bomu-Bonny Pipeline litigation; the Abidjan litigation; the Columbian pipeline litigation; MMR; Sabril; Seroxat; Sudan Red; the Shiley Heart Valve; Lariam; Prozac; Norplant contraceptive implants; Benzodiazepines; Minocin; the tobacco litigation; the sheep dip litigation; the Barlow Clowes litigation; drink contamination/product recall claims; mesothelioma/asbestosis claims; contaminated water claims; the interest rate swap litigation; mine radiation claims; holiday claims. Also has significant experience of major inquiries and inquests, having appeared at: the Potters Bar Inquest; the Kings Cross Fire Inquiry; the Clapham Rail Accident Inquiry; the Severn Tunnel Rail Accident Inquiry; reported cases include: The Atomic Veterans Litigation – limitation – causation; The Abidjan Personal Injury Litigation; Dalkia v Celtech – breach – penalty clauses, rectification construction; Arkin v Bourchard – costs liabilities – third party funders; FA de Muynck v Fouha – guarantees – contractual construction; Nash v Eli Lilly & Co, limitation of action – group actions – personal injuries – power to override time limits; West Wiltshire District Council v Garland, negligence – duty of care – district auditor; Connelly v RTZ Corp Plc and Another, practice – stay of proceedings – foreign causes of action – appropriate forum – legal aid factor; Hodgson and Others v Imperial Tobacco Ltd and Others, costs – conditional fees – order for costs – interlocutory application; Lubbe v Cape Plc – publication of proceedings in chambers; Lubbe v Cope Plc (HL) – practice – jurisdiction – group action; Bass Britvic v Terra – sale of goods – product recall – damages. Bacardi v Terra – duty of care – economic law; UCC v Todd Construction – damages – mitigation – contract.
Chloe has a civil and commercial practice focusing on product liability and group actions. She has particular expertise working in medical device product liability group actions. She is currently acting for Johnson and Johnson on the English claims in the worldwide vaginal mesh litigation, having been instructed in both the stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse litigation. She is also junior counsel to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, which allows her to apply her group action and product liability experience in the public inquiry context. Chloe recently appeared for Professor Shanks in the Supreme Court in Shanks v Unilever PLC & Others [2019] UKSC 45, a landmark medical device patents decision in which Professor Shanks was awarded £2 million as a fair share of the outstanding benefit which Unilever received from a device used for blood glucose testing by diabetics. Chloe acts for both claimants and defendants in the full range of potential litigation issues in the area of medical devices and product liability, as well as in personal injury, health and safety, public inquiries, intellectual property, banking, investment and commercial disputes.
Barrister specialising in all aspects of employment law: including wrongful and unfair dismissal, discrimination, redundancy, restrictive covenants, confidential information, injunctive relief (including freezing and search orders), employee share agreements, status of agency workers, stress related claims, actions involving fraudulent employees, health insurance, transfer of undertakings, bonus claims; related commercial work undertaken. Representative cases include Onwuka v Spherion and others (EAT 21 March 2007) regarding the scope of the Igen v Wong guidelines in race discrimination claims; Glidepath BVI and Others v J Thompson and Others (High Court April 2005 AER) intervener’s action for disclosure of court file for related employment action, jurisdiction in issue, limit of confidentiality within arbitration proceedings; Astbury v Gist (on referral from the EAT 2005 and 2007) whether the employment agency should be joined as a party in order to examine a Dacas-type tripartite arrangement and subsequently substantial wages claim; Lake v Larco Ltd (EAT 2004), regarding the effect of refusing a ‘Calderbank’ offer where offer made on the basis of ‘overwhelming evidence’ against the party refuting the offer; Olatokun v Ikon (EAT May 2004 and August 2005), race discrimination whether the employer’s insistence that the employee produce her passport or be dismissed was a discriminatory act; Elliott v Pertemps (EAT 2003) for employer – time for assessment of impairment under DDA; Steen v Ikon (EAT 2003) for employer – meaning of notice where employer entitled to vary terms and bonus on notice; Clark v CPS (EAT 2002) for employee – whether late evidence is admissible, whether certain words (‘Mad Mary’) discriminating per se; Secondsite Ltd v Rowlatt & Vass (High Court 2002) injuncture relief – whether restrictive covenants valid – whether claimant entitled to seek relief given full admissions prior to issue; LSE v Pearson & Evans (High Court 2000), for employee contracts manager – allegations of secret profits and conspiracy with subcontractor to defraud college; Maynard v Dyno Rod Plc (ET 2000), for employer – alleged wrongful/unfair dismissal of managing director/share options/counterclaim of misappropriation of company funds; Dolce Vita Leisure Ltd & Intournet v Kostas Markou (High Court 2000) – junior counsel for defendant – variation of time clauses in agreement to transfer shares valued at circa £25m; Mindworks Ltd v Shear (High Court 2000), for employee director – validity of restrictive covenants – whether Anton Pillar appropriate relief – security for costs. An ADR-accredited mediator, he advises and acts in the mediated resolution of employment disputes and chairs university Academic Appeals Panel.
George specialises in all areas of commercial litigation, with a particular emphasis on group litigation and disputes concerning defective products. He is regularly instructed by FTSE 100 companies and major governmental departments. George also has an extensive property practice and has successfully appeared in the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.
Barrister specialising in commercial and common law with an emphasis on multi-party litigation, group actions, mass tort claims, cross-border and jurisdictional litigation, product liability/product safety, pharmaceutical claims, major property damage and contamination claims, sale of goods, insurance/reinsurance, international arbitration, professional indemnity, environmental, pollution and nuisance, and public procurement, public procurement. Pharmaceutical and medical device product liability GLOs/multi-party claims include: PIP breast implant litigation, metal-on-metal hip implant litigation, Acomplia litigation, Avandia litigation, Foetal Anti-consultant litigation (FACs), Factor VIII/blood products litigation. Food and drink contamination and recall claims include Sudan 1, Para Red, Benzene Litigation. Property damage/contamination claims include the 2007 petrol contamination litigation, major explosions, fires, plant and pipeline failures in petrochemical industry, power-generation industry and construction industry. International arbitration, including insurance coverage disputes, ICC, UNCITRAL, LCIA, ad hoc etc. Further details: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk.
Hannah’s practice spans a broad range of areas including general common law, employment, property, commercial, health and safety and regulatory. She assisted the counsel team led by Charles Gibson QC that represented the Ministry of Defense in the Supreme Court appeal brought by the Nuclear Test veterans, Ministry of Defence v AB and others [2012] UKSC 9. Hannah undertakes advisory work for the Office of Fair Trading in relation to a wide spectrum of consumer protection issues, and is currently involved in the OFT’s investigation into health and fitness club contracts under the Enterprise Act 2002. As a pupil Hannah gained extensive experience in all of Chambers’ core practice areas. She assisted Patrick Green in the Supreme Court appeal Autoclenz v Belcher [2011] UKSC 41, concerning employee/ worker status, and maintains a particular enthusiasm for employment law.
Henry Warwick KC is a leading practitioner at the Bar in England & Wales in commercial disputes, in group litigation and collective redress, and, among other areas, banking and financial services. Henry has particular expertise in large scale multi-party actions. He acted for the successful claimants in The Post Office Group Litigation, for GSK in the Seroxat Group Litigation and has acted for claimants and defendants alike in a range of financial services, consumer law and other multi-party disputes, including environmental claims. Henry’s commercial practice ranges from high profile sovereign wealth fund litigation, such as Libyan Investment Authority v. King & others, to claims arising from corporate restructuring, agency, joint venture and other investment disputes. He has particular expertise in fraud, the economic torts and in financial sanctions regimes. Henry is routinely instructed in associated costs and funding disputes, including by household name professional funders in the London litigation funding market. Henry represented UK nationals in the remaining 27 EU member states in R (Miller & others) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 6, and in a challenge to EU measures inhibiting Brexit negotiations in Fair Deal v Commission (T-713/16). He appears in all divisions of the High Court, principally the Business and Property Courts, in appeals, arbitrations and in mediations; he also acts in claims conducted in offshore jurisdictions including Gibraltar and the Isle of Man.
Isha has a broad commercial litigation practice. She regularly appears in the County Court and the Winding Up Court. She has recently been instructed as sole counsel in the High Court in a £200,000 commercial case. Isha has worked on matters across a spectrum of practice areas within Chambers, encompassing group litigation, product liability, property, health and safety, employment, consumer credit, data protection, civil fraud, and harassment cases. Isha recently embarked on a one-month secondment with Griffiths and Partners in the Turks and Caicos Islands, gaining invaluable experience while working closely with the litigation team on a range of cases. Isha graduated top of her year in Law at the University of York and has completed the BCL at the University of Oxford. She received the Queen Mother scholarship from Middle Temple. Isha has also spoken at the House of Lords. Before starting pupillage, she volunteered for the Citizens Advice Bureau. Isha welcomes instructions in all practice areas within Chambers, both as sole and junior counsel.
Jack focuses on commercial, financial services, product liability, employment, procurement, environmental and public law, and accepts instructions as sole and junior counsel. He acts for claimants and defendants in both individual and group claims.
Common law: product liability, personal injury, professional negligence, health and safety, consumer credit and general insurance. Employment law: wrongful and unfair dismissal, discrimination, TUPE and whistleblowing claims, directors’ duties, restraint of trade, non-solicitation and injunctive relief. General commercial: contractual and shareholders disputes, property insurance risks and company directors disqualification. Reported cases include: Gardner v Marsh & Parsons [1997] 1 WLR 489 (CA), measure of damages – surveyor’s negligence; Banco Exterior v Mann [1995] 1 All ER (CA), undue influence – bank entitled to assume company solicitor would give independent advice to wife; Allen & Others v BREL CA [2001] PIQR QIO, personal injury – apportionment of damages between concurrent negligent and non-negligent causes.
Barrister specialising in commercial and public law, with expertise in group actions, product liability, health and safety, personal injury, environment, inquests and employment.
Employment (including leading Court of Appeal case on “worker” status – Westwood v HMG [2012]) IRLR 834, as junior to Patrick Green QC, and a major ECJ decision on holiday pay – King v Sash Window Workshop C-214/16 [2018] ICR 693); product liability and group actions (including recently in the Seroxat Litigation, the British Coal Coke Oven Workers Litigation and the Volkswagen Vehicle Emissions Litigation); general commercial and company law (including important case on restraining internet publication of confidential material - AMP v Persons Unknown [2011] EWHC 3454 (TCC)); common law work including inquests, industrial disease and workplace H&S.
Barrister dealing with property and commercial law: options, mortgages, sale of land, easements, boundary disputes, co-ownership, undue influence, nuisance, trespass, adverse possession, enforcement of covenants; landlord and tenant: disputes over commercial and residential leases, forfeiture, 1954 Act renewals, rent review, dilapidations, enfranchisement; professional negligence: claims against valuers, solicitors, insurance brokers, licensed conveyancers, surveyors, accountants, financial advisers, planners, architects and engineers; commercial law, company acquisitions (lending, contractual claims, guarantee claims, domestic and international sale of goods, consumer and partnership); other areas of practice include telecoms, information technology, product liability, construction, franchising, company, consumer credit, insurance, insolvency, probate and registration under the Care Standards Act; in addition, has particular expertise in the commercial and property aspects of the leisure industry, and in franchising disputes; noteworthy cases include: Salman v Salman [2010] EWHC 1315 (Ch) – probate, due execution, attestation, forgery; Lambe v Saunders, LTL 14/12/09 (Blake J) – planners’ professional negligence; Wellington Pub Co v Hancock [2009] 48 EG 108 – enforcement of guarantees under the judgement regulation; Rouf v Cafe Rouge [2009] All ER (D) 29 – concerning the effect of multiple disclaimers; Clarkson v Credit Agricole [2008] EWHC 41 (QB) – as to the enforcement of European mortgage debts; Anderson Antiques (UK) Ltd v Anderson Wharf (Hull) Ltd and others [2007] EWHC 2086 (Ch) – exploring statutory tort under the Land Registration Act; Carnegie v Elsword and Giessen and Others [2005] EWCA 191 [2005] ALL E RD 22 – upholding the validity of a charging order and real property denominated in a foreign currency; Stotardt v Selkent [2003] All ER (D) 315 – automatism as a defence in tort; In Re a Debtor (No 503 SD 2001) reconsideration of the law as to the substantial invalidity of statutory demands; Thames Water Facilities Plc v Snowcrest Ltd (unreported) 4 November 1999 (CA), successful appeal against refusal at first instance to strike out part of claim on the ground of abuse of process following six months’ delay in its prosecution; Ayelsbond Estates Ltd v MacMillan & Garg (No1) 32 HLR 1 (CA), the jurisdiction of the Land Valuation Tribunal; Chase Property (UK) Ltd v Barton 27 February 1996 (QBD), relief from forfeiture and waiver; Prudential Property Services Limited v Capital Land Holdings Ltd (1992) 66 P & CR 398, rent review.
Specialist practice areas: banking and finance and consumer law, including consumer credit, mortgages, sale and supply of goods, unfair contract terms and unfair commercial practices. Cases include: Office of Fair Trading v Ashbourne Management Services Limited [EWHC] 1237 (Ch), [2011] All E R (D) 276 (May) – unfair terms and unfair commercial practices in relation to gym membership agreements. Sternlight v Barclays Bank plc [2010] EWHC 1865 (QB) – test cases on whether mismatch in credit card agreement between stated APR and stated interest rate renders interest rate inaccurate and agreement unenforceable under the CCA; Adris v The Royal Bank of Scotland plc [2010] EWHC 941 (QB), [2010] 4 Costs LR 598 – non-party costs orders against claimants’ solicitors and a claims management company; Carey v HSBC Bank plc, [2009] EWHC 3417 (QB), [2010] BusLR 1142 – test cases on the true copy requirements, unfair relationships and the burden of proving improper execution under the CCA; McGuffick v The Royal Bank of Scotland plc [2009] EWHC 2386 (Comm), [2010] 1 All E R 634 – test case on whether banks may report unenforceable debts to credit reference agencies; Abbey National Bank Plc v Stringer [2006] EWCA Civ 338, CA – whether express agreement for property to be held on trust for the sole benefit of one of two registered proprietors could be inferred; Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB and others [2004] EWHC 2600 (Comm); [2005] 1 All E R 843 – whether arrangements between card issuers, card networks, merchant acquirers and suppliers are ‘arrangements’ for the purposes of section 12(b) of the CCA; Thew v Cole [2003] EWCA Civ 1828, [2004] RTR 25, CA – whether credit hire agreement was exempt and so not a regulated credit agreement for the purposes of the CCA; Farrell v Sandwell MBC, [2001] EWCA Civ 1107, [2002] RVR 11 – level of compensation payable for the compulsory purchase of property; Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No2) [2001] UKHL 44, [2002] 2 AC 773 – undue influence and extent of a solicitor’s duty when advising a third party provider of security; Jarrett v Royal Bank of Scotland Plc [1999] QB 1, CA – jurisdiction of UK courts to hear a claim under section 75 of the CCA where credit was provided to finance a timeshare in foreign property; First National Bank plc v Syed [1991] 2 All ER 250, CA – discretion to make a time-order under section 129 of the CCA.
Kate has a broad commercial practice, with a particular interest in product liability, insurance, and consumer finance, as well as in environmental law. She acts for claimants and defendants in both individual and group claims. Prior to pupillage, Kate undertook an internship at UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, and was a volunteer representative in early-stage employment disputes for CAIWU.
Kathleen Donnelly has a broad commercial litigation practice and is a specialist in group action claims. Kathleen is described by the directories as “a formidable advocate”, “fantastic commercially and has a fantastic manner with clients; she’s unbelievably hard-working”; “excellent attention to detail with good judgement and court presence”, “skilled in managing large scale litigation”, “a very effective and tenacious advocate”, “always on top of the brief” and that “her enthusiasm and intellect make her a pleasure to work with”. Kathleen has appeared in many high profile group actions, including the Buncefield oil depot explosion, the OCENSA pipeline litigation, Sports Direct bonus claims, and the long running NOx emissions litigation, in which she is first junior to Volkswagen. Kathleen was also first junior for the claimants in the Post Office group litigation concerning the legal status and contracts of subpostmasters and the operation of the Horizon accounting system, which has been widely reported and publicised in the legal and national press. In her employment practice Kathleen has developed a significant international practice acting for international civil servants.
Barrister specialising in contract and business law; professional negligence (legal and medical practitioners, accountants, architects and valuers); insurance; personal injury (including disaster claims and advising in relation to the Watford, Southall and Ladbroke Grove train crashes); tribunal and disciplinary work (medical, accountancy and financial services); environmental law; general Chancery work; and judicial review; has wide experience in most areas of common law work; counsel at the Southall and Ladbroke Grove Rail Accident Inquiries for the passenger group funded by the HSE and DETR; representing passengers interests on the crucial issue of the regulatory framework of the rail industry and the establishment of better management system.
Barrister specialising in environmental; personal injury; medical negligence; product liability; commercial; other areas of practice include professional negligence; and insurance; was a member of the team that handled all of the defence work for the Canadian Medical Protection Association in Ontario; regularly advises water undertakers, industrial concerns and others on environmental matters and has extensive experience in product liability cases including those involving food products; agrochemicals; petrochemicals; pharmaceuticals and other medical products; electrical equipment; and exposure to contaminants; cases include: Hughes v McKeown [1985] 1 WLR 963, damages – loss of earnings – future earnings; Thake v Maurice [1985] 2 WLR 215, public policy – damages – birth of child following vasectomy; Thake v Maurice [1986] 2 WLR 337, medical practitioner – contract – operation; Stubbings v Webb [1993] AC 498, limitation of action – personal injuries – power to override time limit; Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather Plc [1994] 2 AC 264, Rylands v Fletcher – chemical solvent – pollution of underground water supply; Merchant Retail Group Plc v Northumberland County Council – local authority’s liability for flooding; Chappell v Imperial Design Ltd [2002] All ER (D) 1619 – contributory negligence of an infant; Joint Replacement Instrumentation Ltd Ceramtec AG [2001] All ER (D) 194 – jurisdiction of the English courts, contract; Howarth v Green [2001] All ER (D) – personal injury, negligent stage hypnotist; Afzal v Chubb Guarding Services [2002] All ER (D) 369 – defence against fraudulent personal injury claim; Donoghue v Folkestone Properties [2003] All ER (D) 382, leading authority on the Occupiers Liability Act 1984; Warrilow v Norfolk and Norwich University NHS Trust [2006] – clinical negligence; Hazelwood v Teignbridge BC [2006] – local authority liability for flooding; United Utilities v Environment Agency [2006] – applicability of the Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations to sewerage undertakers; Mesothelioma Trigger Litigation [2008] and [2010] – liability of employers liability insurers for mesothelioma claims; PIP litigation – group action arising out of breast implants; Johnson Lafouric- failed cosmetic surgery claim.
Commercial barrister with a particular emphasis on product liability, property damage, property and related areas. Much of her practice concerns mass torts and group actions. Lucy is particularly well known for her expertise in matters with a technology element.
Barrister practising in product liability (including pharmaceutical and medical device litigation); commercial law and arbitration; personal injury; landlord and tenant including covenant enforceability and leasehold enfranchisement; commercial property including 1954 Act work, dilapidation claims, mortgages and easements; health and safety; human rights; insurance; professional negligence cases involving solicitors, architects, brokers, surveyors and valuers; general contract and tort; has appeared before a variety of tribunals, including the House of Lords and Court of Appeal, and has advocacy experience as a junior in a range of High Court litigation. Reported cases include: Motto and others v Trafigura and others [2011] EWCA civ 1150; Young v Catholic Care and others [2008] UKHL 6; Sun Life Assurance Plc v Thales Tracs Ltd [2001] 1 WLR 1562; [2001] 34 EG 100; Dunlop v Medd Racing and Racing Lines (GB) Ltd [2002] BLD 180102111. Before taking silk Malcolm was junior counsel to the Crown (‘A’ panel) by the Attorney General and is a part-time Judge of the First-tier Tribunal (Land Registration).
Nazeer Chowdhury has developed a broad practice in consumer credit and financial services law, advising and representing both finance houses and consumers in complex financial disputes. His experience in contract law ranges from claims under the Sale of Goods Act 1979, the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, UCTA 1977, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 to complex disputes under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. He was seconded to the Financial Services Authority in 2005 to assist in numerous matters arising out of the operation of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, secondary financial services legislation and in particular the FSA handbook. Among other things, he has advised the Financial Services Authority on the application of the Insurance Directives to the reinsurance sector. He regularly acts for local authorities in a broad variety of tortious and contractual claims, including matters arising from landlord and tenant (residential and business) and property law.
Barrister specialising in employment; landlord and tenant; health and safety; product liability.
Ognjen Miletic’s practice has an emphasis on commercial work and group litigation. He also focuses on product liability, property, insolvency and company law. Ognjen was instructed as junior counsel for the Claimants in the Post Office Group Litigation, during which successful judgments were obtained in relation to important issues of admissibility of evidence ([2018] EWHC 2698 (QB)), contract law ([2019] EWHC 606 (QB)), applications for recusal ([2019] EWHC 871 (QB)), costs orders in Group Litigation ([2019] EWHC 1373 (QB)) and expert evidence in an IT trial ([2019] EWHC 3408 (QB)). BBC ran a Panorama programme on the underlying subject matter of this group action. The case was also listed by The Lawyer as one of the ‘Top 20 Cases of 2018’, with Civil Litigation Brief announcing it as the publication’s civil litigation case of the year in 2019. Ognjen is also currently instructed on multiple group actions, most of which involve environmental and international mass tort claims. One of these matters was heard by the Supreme Court in January of 2019 on the issue of jurisdiction (Lungowe v Vedanta), while another concluded successfully in the summer of 2019 with the Supreme Court refusing permission to appeal the decision of the Court of Appeal (AAA v Unilever). In terms of his commercial work, Ognjen was recently instructed as junior counsel for the Part 20 Defendant in a matter in the Commercial Court, with a claim value of over US$60million. The international nature of this case was demonstrated by the parties arguing in respect of the application of six different governing laws.
Oliver specialises in health and safety, product liability, environmental and regulatory claims. For the last decade he has been engaged in many of the most significant cases in those fields including: the VW NOx emissions group litigation; the Marks & Spencer asbestos prosecution; the Grenfell Inquiry; the OCENSA Pipeline group litigation; the Network Rail and Sellafield sentencing appeals; the 'metal on metal hip' group litigation; the Google 'Safari Workaround' litigation; the prosecution arising out of the Hatfield train crash; and the British Cycling prosecution. He has particular experience of serious regulatory prosecutions and group actions.
Specialist in commercial law, employment law, public law/judicial review and ADR. Recent appeal cases of interest include: Hertfordshire CC v LB Hammersmith v Fulham [2011] EWCA Civ 77 (mental health – local authority liability for after-care); Jones v Neath Port Talbot CBC [2011] EWCA Civ 92 (liability of Local Education Authorities); and Shanks v Unilever [2010] EWCA Civ 1283 (employee patent compensation); Autoclenz v Belcher [2009] EWCA Civ 1046 (leading case on employee and worker status, going to the Supreme Court); and Neary v St Albans Girls’ School [2009] EWCA Civ 1190 (striking out and relief from sanctions); Masdar v The Commission, [2008] EUECJ C-47/07 ECJ (non-contractual liability of Community institutions). He is co-author (with Adam Heppinstall of Henderson Chambers) of The Manual of Employment Appeals (Jordans: December 2008), which was favourably cited by Mummery LJ in Woodhouse School v Webster [2009] EWCA Civ 91 and which is shortly to go into its 2nd edition. He is often instructed in novel or high-profile cases.
Barrister specialising in complex contract litigation, with particular experience of acting in contractual disputes about bespoke or customised computer systems and website designs; construction and engineering disputes; commercial litigation in both the Queen’s Bench and Chancery Divisions of the High Court, including interim and final remedies for breach of contract; the interpretation and drafting of commercial contracts, and insurance, public procurement, company law, employment and other issues arising in relation to commercial transactions and disputes; product liability, consumer and other financing contracts; professional negligence claims, including those against accountants, architects, solicitors, surgeons and surveyors; broadcasting and telecommunications law; and other litigation involving technology, more than one area of law, complicated issues or facts, or other difficulties.
Prashant’s product liability and group action expertise encompasses many of the largest, most involved and high-profile cases of the past 20 years. These include litigation concerning: VW NOx emissions, Metal-on Metal hip implants, PIP breast implants, Seroxat, MMR, Sabril, Benzodiazepines and Norplant. His commercial product liability practice includes Commercial Court and QB litigation and arbitrations and non-contentious advisory work concerning a variety of products, including gastric bands, fire appliances, mobile phones, motor vehicles and electronic devices. Prashant has been involved in some of the leading reported cases in this field, including Court of Appeal decisions on the substitution of parties after the expiry of the 10 year long stop provided by the Product Liability Directive (Re: Horne Roberts) and the seminal costs sharing appeal (Sayers v Smith Kline Beecham) and the European Court of Justice and House of Lords/Supreme Court decisions in O’Byrne v Sanofi-Aventis. Prashant has been instructed by defendants in many of the largest, high profile health and safety cases (and associated inquiries and inquests) of recent times. These have included corporate and individual manslaughter prosecutionssuch as R v Hawkins (Eastbourne Pier fall), R v MNS (Glesion mine flooding), R v Woodward(Atherstone warehouse fire), R v Ward (demolition collapse), R v CAV (collapse of aviation materials), R v. Network Rail (Hatfield rail disaster) and R v Railtrack (Slade Lane disaster).Prashant’s work for defendants charged with breaches of HSWA 1974 has included hundreds of cases including R v Rogers (Hanover Square window frame collapse), R v Falcon Cranes (crane collapse), R v HOSL (Buncefield fire), R v Network Rail (Ladbroke Grove, Potters Bar, Grayrigg and Southall disasters) and R v Davison (mine poisoning). His work has encompassed incidents in industries including construction, transport, retail, oil and gas, manufacturing and, mining. His list of clients includes BT, BP, Laing O’Rourke, Network Rail, McCain, Berkeley Group, Thames Water and Tarmac. He is also instructed in a relation to a number of ongoing investigations including those following the Grenfell fire and the Didcot Power Station collapse. In addition to private sector companies, his public sector clients have included HertfordshireFire Service and the Metropolitan Police Authority. Prashant has twice been awarded the title of Health and Safety Silk of the year by Chambers & Partners and been nominated on two other occasions. He was a founding and committee member of the Health & Safety Lawyers’ Association.
Rachel has a commercial and common law practice, with an emphasis on commercial litigation, product liability and health and safety. She regularly appears in court, at both trial and appellate level, and is equally at home working as sole counsel or as a member of a larger team. Recent instructions include: representing multiple defendants in a conspiracy claim arising out of joint venture arrangements brought by the Libyan Investment Authority; acting for one of the biggest Claimant groups in the Volkswagen Emissions Litigation; advising in the early stages of a high value ad hoc arbitration relating to the collapse of a partnership; and acting for a litigation funder in a complex commercial conspiracy claim proceeding in the Supreme Court in Gibraltar. Rachel also has an interest in vexatious & abusive litigation and fraud across all areas of her practice. She has recently been commissioned by OUP to author a new book on abuse of process in the civil courts.
Advocate and legal scholar of over 50 years’ experience who undertakes a very wide range of work at the highest levels; major areas of practice include commercial law; company law; insurance law; shipping (both litigation and arbitration); all aspects of the law relating to computer hardware and software; credit and leasing (litigation, advisory work and commercial drafting for most of the major finance houses); financial services (acting for banks and drafting banking legislation); local authority law (acting for many local authorities including most of the London boroughs in respect of local government finance, competitive tendering and public procurement, planning, traffic control, local authority contracts and employment; and advising Passenger Transport Executives on questions such as financing of development, competitive tendering, privatisation, redundancy schemes, bus companies and the like); human rights; reported cases include: Stubbings v Webb [1993] 2 WLR 120, limitation of action; St Albans City and District Council v International Computers Limited [1996] 4 All ER 481, computer – whether computer software ‘goods’ within meaning of Sale of Goods Act 1979 and Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 – measure of damages for breach of contract/unfair contract terms; Finnegan v Parkside Health Authority [1998] 1 WLR 411, practice – dismissal of action for want of prosecution – notice of appeal out of time; Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2) [2001] UKHL 44, equity – presumption and constructive notice of undue influence – husband and wife – bank charge over matrimonial home – wife receiving legal advice before entering into transaction – principles to be applied in determining whether provision of legal advice rebuts presumption of undue influence and whether bank put on inquiry to ascertain whether wife acted under husband’s undue influence; Foskett v McKeown HL [2001] 1 AC 102 – tracing money applied in breach of trust. Delaware Mansions Ltd v Westminster CC [2001] UKHL 55 – nuisance – title to sue – measure of damages; Southern Pacific Securities v Walker [2010] UKSC 32 Consumer Credit Act 1976- definition of ‘credit’ and ‘charge for credit.’
Thomas has a broad commercial practice and is ranked in Tier 1 for Group Litigation (Legal 500) and in Band 3 for Product Liability (Chambers UK). Thomas’ recent cases include The VW NOx Emissions Group Litigation, in which he was instructed on behalf of Volkswagen, and the high-profile commercial dispute concerning the A350 aircraft Qatar Airways v Airbus, in which he was instructed on behalf of Qatar Airways. Thomas has also recently acted in a long running case arising out of fires in a range of agricultural machinery, and has recently advised in multi-million-pound factory fire, vehicle fire and construction cases. He is co-authoring the latest edition of Hodges on Multi-party Actions. Allied to this, Thomas has a particular depth of experience in consumer protection matters arising out of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (both regulatory and contentious). He has contributed to the Journal of International banking and Finance Law.
Thom has a broad practice that includes commercial, finance and insurance, group actions, product liability, data protection, health and safety, and intellectual property.
Thom’s practice concentrates on consumer, financial services and commercial matters. He regularly appears, both led and unled, at all levels of Court dealing with a range of specialist technical issues. In particular, those arising under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. His clients include: national and international retailers across a range of sectors, banks, insurers, pensions providers, start-ups, local authorities, charities and regulators, as well as high net-worth individuals. Thom has been instructed in relation to all of the major consumer “mis-selling” scandals of the past 10 years including payment protection insurance (PPI), green energy/solar panels (ESG), self-invested personal pensions (SIPPs) and timeshares/holiday products. He has also been retained in a number of high-profile judicial review claims giving rise to consumer and financial services issues on behalf of both claimants and defendants. In addition, Thom maintains a non-contentious advisory practice. He regularly advises on points of technical regulatory compliance for start-ups (including fintechs) and blue chip corporates launching new products. Thom is also frequently instructed to assist with due diligence in high-value debt-sale and securitisation transactions. Notable work includes: Beavis v Parking Eye Limited [2016] AC 1172 (penalties/unfair terms), Berkeley Burke litigation [2017–19] (SIPP mis-selling), and Jackson v Ayles [2021] EWHC 995 (Ch) (FSMA “by way of business” test). Publications Mis-Selling Financial Services (2nd ed.) (co-author); Encyclopedia of Banking Law (contributor)
Tim Green has been recognised by both Chambers UK and Legal 500 for 13 years as one of the Bar’s outstanding advocates in regulatory crime and corporate defence work. His practice includes investigations into companies and their officers arising from: (1) death or severe injury at work; (2) inquests and inquiries; (3) complex and high value financial wrongdoing. Clients include most of the ranked law firms in these fields, as well as multi-national manufacturers, financial institutions, company officers, off-shore regulators and governments.
Barrister specialising in consumer law, environmental law, inquests and inquiries, health and safety, and product liability.
Weishi focuses on commercial, insolvency, product liability, consumer finance, and property law, and accepts instructions as sole and junior counsel. She acts for claimants and defendants in both individual and group claims. Before joining chambers, Weishi completed pupillage at a leading commercial set. Prior to pupillage, she was the main research assistant on the Electronic Trade Documents project in the Law Commission of England and Wales. She also worked as a casework volunteer at Advocate.
Specialist in commercial aspects of consumer-facing finance and financial services (including consumer credit, mortgages and banking) and consumer protection law (including unfair contract terms, unfair commercial practices, advertising, package holidays and timeshare). Also food law, food labelling, cosmetics and medicines. Reported cases include: Popely v Scott (2001) 165 JP 742 - reliance on legal advice as due diligence; Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank plc [2002] 1 AC 481 – analysis of Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) [2002] QB 74 (CA), [2004] 1 AC 816 (HL) - whether irredeemable unenforceability under Consumer Credit Act compatible with Human Rights Act; Uren v First National Home Finance Ltd [2005] EWHC 2529 (Ch) (Times 17th November 2005) - no free-standing claim of “unjust enrichment”; Goshawk Dedicated (No 2) Ltd v Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland [2006] 2 AER 610 - wording of prescribed notices of cancellation rights under Consumer Credit Act; Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank Ltd [2005] 1 AER 843 (QBD Comm), [2006] 2 AER 821 (CA), [2008] 1 AC 318 (HL) - lender's liability under s.75 Consumer Credit Act for credit card transactions financing foreign transactions; Conister Trust Ltd v John Hardman & Co [2009] CCLR 4 and Sutherland Professional Funding Ltd v Bakewells [2014] CTLC 1- solicitor's liability for client's litigation funding agreement that was unenforceable under the Consumer Credit Act; Meah v GE Money Home Finance Ltd [2013] 1 P&CR DG 18 - mortgagee's liability in respect of valuation of repossessed property; RTA (Business Consultants) Ltd v Bracewell [2015] Bus LR 800 - sole trader selling his business not a “consumer”, but sale agent’s contract void for illegality because of non-compliance with money laundering regulations; Warwickshire CC v Halfords Autocentres Ltd [2019] 1 W.L.R. 3597 - Trading Standards Officer’s test purchase can establish unfair commercial practice in relation to supplies to consumers..