Having joined Chambers as a pupil as long ago as 1992, Richard is a hugely experienced practitioner who now specialises predominantly in Personal Injury and Costs work. He has been consistently highly rated, year on year, by the independent legal directories for his work in these fields. Editor of the Judicial College Guidelines on the Assessment of General Damages since 2012 and member of CADR (Costs Alternative Dispute Resolution service) and the PIcARBS Arbitration Panel. He is a qualified Arbitrator and an Accredited Costs Mediator, able to offer both Facilitative and Evaluative Costs Mediation. In 2018 Richard was elected as the Secretary of the Personal Injury Bar Association (PIBA).
Described by the directories as “a real costs guru” Richard appears regularly in the SCCO and appellate Courts in costs litigation. He has extensive experience of all aspects of costs’ work including advisory work (for example on funding / drafting issues), cost budgeting issues, the assessment of costs between parties and solicitor / client disputes. He acts for both paying and receiving parties and is instructed by a wide range of clients from City Solicitors to High Street firms across the full spectrum of litigation disputes including commercial, privacy, clinical negligence, family and personal injury.
Richard was instructed in the seminal Court of Appeal case of Mitchell v NGN in relation to cost budgeting / relief from sanctions and has acquired enormous experience in the field of cost budgeting, not only in personal injury / clinical negligence claims but across many areas of litigation. He lecturers regularly on costs issues to a broad range of audiences.
Richard’s knowledge of costs is a considerable asset to his clients in the personal injury field where he has gained an excellent reputation for his work representing both Claimants and insurers in high value / complex PI cases. Praised by the directories for his “outstanding powers of forensic analysis” he has a wealth of experience in handling seven figure catastrophic injury claims (in particular head injury and spinal injury claims) both acting alone or as part of a team with Leading Counsel. He also takes a particular interest in chronic pain and has dealt with a considerable number of claims arising from conditions such as Fibromyalgia, CRPS, Somatoform Disorders etc.
Richard’s knowledge of inquests dovetails with his experience in dealing with fatal accident claims. For example he represented the widow of a submariner murdered on board HMS Astute by a drunken colleague through both the 9 day Inquest and subsequent successful civil proceedings against the MOD.
At this stage in his career there are few areas of personal injury litigation with which Richard is not familiar. In addition to the main areas of road accident, employer’s liability, occupational disease work and occupier’s liability claims, he has experience of more niche areas such as jurisdiction issues / claims with a ‘foreign’ element, sports injuries and product liability claims.
He also has experience of group litigation claims having represented the Claimants in the “Porton Down” litigation against the MOD and one of the Defendants in the “Scania lorry” litigation.
Richard has also been instructed in several high profile cases away from his main practice areas, including acting as Counsel to the Inquiry to the Southall and Joint Train Protection public inquiries and appearing in the public inquiry into the death of Victoria Climbié. In 2006 he was appointed by the Attorney General as a Special Advocate to act in cases of national security interest.
Outside of work, Richard’s main interests lie in the sporting arena. He (still) plays football and tennis regularly, golf irregularly (in every sense) and watches as much sport as work and family commitments allow. He has on occasion managed to combine his outside interests with his work when representing professional football clubs such as Tottenham Hotspur FC and Gillingham FC in sports injury claims.
“Good analytical brain who gives massive support on cases”
Chambers & Partners (2018) Costs
“A standout counsel and an extremely safe pair of hands”
Chambers & Partners (2018) Personal Injury
“An experienced advocate with a good knowledge of the field.”
Legal 500 (2017) Costs
“A measured, thoughtful and skilful tactician.”
Legal 500 (2017) Personal Injury
“The first choice for any case that demands a highly technical legal mind.”
Legal 500 (2016) Personal Injury
‘Well prepared and extremely thorough.”
Legal 500 (2016) Costs
“He has become a real costs guru, which has become vital post-Jackson.” “He makes clients aware that he knows their case inside and out and that inspires a lot of confidence in them.”
Chambers & Partners (2016) Personal Injury
“He is incredibly analytical and a very clever costs lawyer. He has become a real costs guru.” “He is excellent, detailed, thorough and very well prepared.”
Chambers & Partners (2016) Costs
“He has outstanding powers of forensic analysis and is entirely unflappable.”
Legal 500 (2015) Personal Injury
“Thorough, knowledgeable and easy to work alongside.”
Legal 500 (2015) Costs
“His attention to detail is second to none, and he is approachable and totally realistic about cases.” “He comes across as very knowledgeable and very approachable, and gives good, sensible advice.” Chambers & Partners (2015) Personal Injury
“He has a great knowledge of costs law and is both steady and meticulous, exactly the skills we are looking for in a costs specialist”
Chambers & Partners (2015) Costs
“He has outstanding powers of forensic analysis and is entirely unflappable.”
Legal 500 (2014) Personal Injury
“Thorough, knowledgeable and easy to work alongside.”
Legal 500 (2014) Costs
Personal Injury Bar Association (“PIBA”)
Decision of Mr Justice Jay in relation to the liability for costs following discontinuance by Claimant of claim against Belgian Joint Venture joined erroneously to proceedings. Defendant ordered to pay Claimant’s costs up until after proceedings were served due to unreasonable conduct on D’s part.
Conflict of laws case under Regulation 44/2001. Successfully represented Claimant in defeating challenge to jurisdiction by Belgian Defendants to PI claim arising from accident at work on construction site in Belgian involving multiple Defendants. D unsuccessfully contended there was no risk of irreconcilable judgments under Art 6(1) from concurrent proceedings in Belgium and/or that the dispute arose from an individual contract of employment under Art 18 and 19 of the Brussels Regulation. D’s subsequent application to CA for permission to appeal refused.
Richard Wilkinson represented the Defendant / insurer in proceedings brought by a solicitor against her former employer arising from accident at work. Claimant suffered from Fibromyalgia pre-accident but claimed to have developed disabling CRPS post-accident. Claim advanced for damages in excess of £1.7m, settled at JSM for £190,000.
Representing receiving party in respect of two Bills claiming costs in excess of £3.3m for work done in proceedings in the TCC and Court of Appeal in relation to a call by the Claimant on an insurance Bond arising from a construction dispute. Attending preliminary hearing and subsequently advising through to settlement shortly before full DA hearing
Successfully representing paying party at first instance and on appeal striking out receiving party’s Bill of Costs for failure to comply with Court Order requiring the Receiving Party to request a Detailed Assessment hearing.
Acted on behalf of highly respected Press Association Editor who sustained severe arm injury in road traffic accident in Romania whilst attending NATO summit on transport organised by Prime Minister’s office. Criticisms made by Claimant of the safety of the travel arrangements. Represented Claimant at two separate JSMs at which issues of liability and then quantum were respectively resolved. Quantum issues included assessment of his lost chance of a career in political broadcasting and the potential earnings arising therefrom. Character evidence obtained from two former Prime Ministers on Claimant’s behalf.
MacDuff J approves settlement of claim by Claimant rendered PVS / Minimally Conscious State following RTA.
Represented young male Claimant pedestrian who sustained traumatic brain injury whilst working home in the early hours along unlit dual carriageway in what witnesses had described as an erratic fashion. Life expectancy reduced to 12 ½ years. Liability denied and contributory negligence alleged, but settlement agreed at £875,000.
Advising and representing paying party in detailed assessment in respect of two Bills of costs of +£1.4m from proceedings in the High Court and Court of Appeal arising from a £90m claim for damages under the Public Procurement Regulations.
Representing the MP, Andrew Mitchell, in the Court of Appeal in the well-known relief from sanction / cost-budgeting appeal.
Mr Justice Bean approved settlements of the Claimant’s claims for damages following head injury.
Acting with Andrew Ritchie QC on behalf of the Claimant who had sustained head injury and severe vestibular disturbance following RTA. Damages agreed for all heads except Court of Protection Costs at JSM on terms that D pay lump sum of £1.1m and PPOs for care of £14,857 for 10 years & £10,000 pa thereafter for life. The issue of C’s entitlement to damages in respect of anticipated Court of Protection costs in circumstances where she had borderline mental capacity was subsequently settled and approved on the basis of an additional lump sum payment.
Above knee amputee claim following RTA.
Advising and representing Defendant at JSM.
Issues concerning C’s life expectancy from unrelated health issues and his need for alternative accommodation. Claim pleaded at +£1.5m settled for £450,000.
Advising and representing Claimant who sustained multiple severe injuries, including a sciatic nerve injury resulting in foot drop and severely compromised mobility. Claim settled at JSM on payment of a lump sum of £2.25m. The Claimant was in receipt of Direct Payments from her Local Authority in respect of care received since her accident. The agreed settlement terms included an Indemnity granted by D in the event of the local authority seeking repayment of past care costs and the Claimant electing to forego future reliance on Direct Payments for future care costs.
Represented Defendant in employer’s liability claim in which Claimant developed Complex Regional Pain Syndrome following injury to knee at work. Claim valued by C at in excess of £1.6m but settled at JSM for £585,000.
Represented the widow at 9 day Inquest into the death of Lt Comm Molyneux following a murderous rampage by a drunken colleague whilst serving on board the nuclear submarine, HMS Astute. The inquest explored the Royal Navy’s procedures in relation to alcohol testing for serving submariners and resulted in the Coroner adopting the 18 recommendations under Rule 43 contended for on behalf of the family of the Deceased.
Mrs Justice Lang approved settlement of the Claimant’s claim on a provisional damages basis for £3m plus an indemnity (worth up to €780,000) in respect of any liability for tax in Spain on the award of loss of earnings.
Led by Frank Burton QC represented Spanish national injured in RTA whilst working in the UK. Claimant suffered severe head injury resulting in Organic Personality Disorder and returned to live with his family in Spain. Consideration of the cost of care in Spain and whether the Discount Rate should be disapplied because C’s damages would not be invested in the U.K.
Costs appeal before Butterfield J concerning the relevance of late Part 47 offers made and rejected shortly prior to commencement of DAH.
Steel J approves settlement of employer’s liability claim by schoolboy knocked from bicycle during paper round for £2.5m following an agreed 45/55 split on liability (claimed valued at £5.5m on full liability basis).
Led by Neil Garnham QC. During the course of his delivery round C rode his bicycle from a property straight into the path of an on-coming vehicle suffering severe head injury as a result. No culpability on the part of the other motorist so the claim was pursued against the newsagency that employed C on the basis of the inadequate assessment of the safety of his round. C was left with significant cognitive deficit and behavioural issues requiring life-long care.
Appeal before Mr Justice Burton in relation to the enforceability of a CFA agreement.
Successfully represented Claimant at trial (with Richard Lynagh QC) in personal injury action in which Claimant developed Complex Regional Pain Syndrome affecting both hands following a laceration to finger in the course of his employment as a vehicle technician. Claimant defended against allegations of exaggeration advanced by Defendants in reliance of extensive surveillance and other evidence.
Conjoined costs appeal in Court of Appeal in relation to quantum of success fees.
Thank you for choosing to instruct me in your case. I will need to collect and hold your personal information in order to represent you. This Privacy Notice describes the information I collect about you, how it is used and shared, and your rights regarding it.
I am registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as a Data Controller for the personal data that I hold and process as a barrister. My registered address is Temple Garden Chambers, 1 Harcourt Buildings, Temple EC4Y 9DA and my registration number is Z4640749.
All of the information that I hold about you is provided to me or gathered in the course of your case and/or proceedings. Your solicitor and/or I will tell you why we need the information and how we will use it.
Our Lawful Basis for processing your information
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) requires all organisations that process personal data to have a Lawful Basis for doing so. The Lawful Bases identified in the GDPR are:
- Consent of the data subject
- Performance of a contract with the data subject or to take steps to enter into a contrac
- Compliance with a legal obligation
- To protect the vital interests of a data subject or another person
- Performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller.
- The legitimate interests of ourselves, or a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests, rights or freedoms of the data subject.
Examples of legitimate interests include where the data subject is a client or in the service of the controller;
My Lawful Basis is that the processing is necessary in relation to legal proceedings; for obtaining legal advice; or otherwise for establishing, exercising or defending legal rights and I therefore have a Legitimate Interest in processing your data.
I use your information to:
- Provide legal advice and representation
- Investigate and address your concerns
- Investigate or address legal proceedings relating to your use of my services/products, or as otherwise allowed by applicable law;
- Respond to any legitimate requests from my regulatory body (the Bar Standards Board).
- Assist in training of Chambers’ pupils and mini-pupils.
I do not use automated decision-making in the processing of your personal data.
I collect and process both personal data and special categories of personal data as defined in the GDPR. This may include:
- Phone number;
- Payment or bank details;
- Date of birth;
- Location details;
- Device IP address;
- Financial information
- Employment history / details
- Medical Records / details
- Criminal Records
I may share your personal data with:
- Instructing solicitors
- Pupil or mini pupil, under my training
- Opposing Counsel, for the purposes of resolving the case
- My Chambers’ management and staff who provide administrative services
- My regulator or legal advisors in the event of a dispute or other legal matter
- Law enforcement officials, government authorities, or other third parties to meet our legal obligations;
- Any other party where I ask you and you consent to the sharing.
Transfers to third countries and international organisations
I do not transfer any personal data to third countries or international organisations.
I retain your personal data while you remain a client unless you ask me to delete it. My Retention and Disposal Policy (copy available on request) details how long I hold data for and how I dispose of it when it no longer needs to be held. I will delete or anonymise your information at your request unless:
- There is an unresolved issue, such as claim or dispute
- I am legally required not to; or
- There are overriding legitimate business interests, including but not limited to fraud prevention and protecting customers’ safety and security.
The General Data Protection Regulation gives you specific rights around your personal data. For example, you have to be informed about the information I hold and what I use it for, you can ask for a copy of the personal information I hold about you, you can ask us to correct any inaccuracies with the personal data I hold, you can ask us to stop sending you direct mail, or emails, or in some circumstances ask us to stop processing your details. Finally, if I do something irregular or improper with your personal data you can seek compensation for any distress you are caused or loss you have incurred. You can find out more information from the ICO’s website http://ico.org.uk/for_the_public/personal_information and this is the organisation that you can complain to if you are unhappy with how I dealt with you.
Accessing and Correcting Your Information
You may request access to, correction of, or a copy of your information by contacting me at my Chambers at the address given above.
You may opt out of receiving emails and other messages from my Chambers by following the instructions in those messages.
- Validate users;
- Remember user preferences and settings;
- Determine frequency of accessing our content;
- Analyse site visits and trends.
I will occasionally update my Privacy Notice. When I make significant changes, I will notify you of these through either mail or by publishing the updated Notice on my website profile.