Consultancy services

He is a solicitor-advocate and APIL Fellow with vast technical expertise. He also brings strategic awareness of the conduct of complex and catastrophic injury litigation.

If you have a need for the input of Richard’s expertise in cases on your books then please get in touch. Richard can provide short term support if you face an unexpected increase in demand or other unforeseen pressures. Richard can also provide expertise in helping you to unpick particularly complex problems, helping you to transform weak cases into winners. It may alternatively be that you lack the expertise needed to run more complex cases. Whatever the position, Richard is happy to discuss appropriate consultancy fee sharing arrangements. We will also enter into a guaranteed ‘no poaching’ agreement, giving you complete peace of mind.

Examples of cases where Richard has overcome the odds to bring a claim to a successful outcome include:

• Acting for a vulnerable homeless individual with severe addiction problems. The claim was brought under the Occupier’s Liability Act 1957. The incident concerned a fall from a fourth floor window of a hostel. The Claimant suffered extensive polytrauma with injuries to the brain and spine. Liability was in dispute with several contested facts. The claim proceeded to a High Court trial. The Claimant succeeded on the contested facts. Judgment was entered for two thirds of the claim. The Claimant went on to recover substantial (undisclosed) damages. The Claimant was a pre-existing amputee and the award included damages for single level accommodation and care needs.
• Acting for a Matron in the NHS in a claim for occupational stress. Representation was refused by union lawyers. The Claimant had significant pre-breakdown psychiatric history. The claim settled for substantial six figure damages.
• Acting for a female in a claim following a road accident. Subtle brain injury markers were identified but no damage was evident on imaging. The Claimant reported cognitive and behavioural changes consistent with brain damage. The presence of a brain injury was disputed. Surveillance evidence was disclosed and multiple experts reported. The claim settled just before trial for c£2m.