Service Temporarily Unavailable
We are currently doing some urgent maintenance to our website.
During the hours of 18.00 and 18:30 today (2.8.2012) the log in facility will be unavailable.
If you are attempting to register for the Myview Portal, please re-visit our website after 18.30pm
We apologise for the inconvenience.
Regards
Myview support team
Legal Procurement Conference
17 September 2012
Supported by Riverview Law and AdviserPlus, this FREE, Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply (CIPS) conference will provide attendees with an extensive insight into the evolving legal services marketplace. Leading procurement and legal experts, including Sir Nigel Knowles, joint CEO of DLA Piper, the world's largest law firm, and Professor Stephen Mayson, Director of the Legal Services Institute at the College of Law, will consider the implications and opportunities for buyers of legal services.
Giving the procurement perspective will be Richard James who heads up the Professional and Financial Services category for Proxima, the number one procurement outsource consultancy in Europe and Anne-Marie Amatt, a strategic sourcing specialist with one of the world’s leading power and gas companies, E.ON.
The event will be chaired by Gerard Chick, Head of Knowledge and Research at CIPS.
“The truth is lawyers have been rumbled! They’ve had it good for a long time, but they’re not quite performing as they should; and if it takes something from outside to shake them up, then that’s probably what needs to happen.”
Speaker, Professor Stephen Mayson, Director of the Legal Services Institute.
Key topics to be considered at the event include:
- How the legal market is changing
- How legal services will be delivered in the future
- The changes that law firms need to make to stay competitive
- How professional buyers can benefit from the changes
For further information on how to attend this event please contact Rebecca Chapman via email – [email protected]
Speakers include
 |
Sir Nigel Knowles
Joint CEO and Managing Partner, DLA Piper
|
 |
Prof. Stephen Mayson
Professor of strategy and Director of the Legal Services Institute
|
Geoffrey is a highly respected family law specialist. He has particular expertise in resolving financial disputes, often of a complex nature, between divorcing or separating couples. In addition to representing professional families from a range of backgrounds and businesses, he also frequently acts for high net worth individuals in “big money” cases (typically involving assets in excess of £5 million).
Geoffrey is currently ranked as a leading junior in Chambers and Partners, where he is singled out as “a convincing advocate” who is “particularly experienced in financial work for high net worth individuals and often undertakes work involving complex business structures and trusts.” Commentators add that “he is always well prepared” and praise his exceptional ability to “see the bigger picture without getting bogged down in minutiae.”
As well as appearing in Court, Geoffrey’s considerable advocacy skills extend to representing clients at round-table meetings and Financial Dispute Resolution (FDR) meetings. He also sits as a Recorder.
Geoffrey describes his own style in Court as “forceful but civilised” and says that he especially enjoys working in the family law sphere because: “It’s rewarding to have a genuine role in the mechanism that brings closure to an unhappy period in my clients’ lives. I’m also lucky that I get to meet a vast array of interesting people.”
Outside his busy work commitments, Geoffrey finds time to coach rugby to youngsters and is also a keen fisherman.
Areas of expertise:
- Financial remedies upon divorce or dissolution of civil partnerships
- Applications under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989
- Property disputes between cohabitees
- Disputes regarding children
Notable cases:
- S v S (2012): Represented highly successful businessman whose fortune was mainly generated subsequent to separation. Involved complicated issues of valuation of shares in a privately owned company.
- M v M (2012): Represented wife of retired businessman where there were significant funds but issues regarding the classification of matrimonial and non-matrimonial assets.
- L v L (2012): Representing wife who was the co-owner of a boutique estate agents.
- S v S (2012): Representing wife in farming case where the husband alleged there were no available assets from which to make an award to her. Substantial issues regarding post-nuptial settlement.
- K v K (2011): Representing wife in case where the husband alleged that the assets all belonged to his family and nothing belonged to him.
- V v V (2011): Representing wife where she alleged that the husband had sought to defeat her claims by selling his shares in a private company at an undervalue.
- M v M, S v AS etc (2012 & 2011): Representing policemen (current and retired) where the significant issue was the treatment of his pension.
- M v M (2010): Representing highly successful business with complicated issues revolving around foreign trusts and EBTs.
- L v L (2010): Representing retired Premiership footballer where the assets were spread around the globe and where consideration of the significant liabilities incurred in a film partnership” was required.
Appointments & Memberships:
- Family Law Bar Association
- Personal Injury Bar Association
Profile coming soon
Zoe has enjoyed an extremely successful career in family law during her 15 years at the Bar. She is highly experienced in matrimonial finance, co-habitation disputes, residence / contact disputes, and in representing parents, guardians and local authorities in care proceedings. Zoe is also a fully accredited mediator (ADR Group), qualified in both family mediation and civil / commercial mediation.
Her outstanding legal talents were recognised at an early stage in her career with the award of the Harold G Fox Scholarship from Middle Temple in 1997, which enabled her to work for a year at a top Canadian law firm before returning to the UK to complete her pupilage at Cloisters Chambers, London. She has since worked with leading sets across the country, including St Johns Buildings Chambers, Manchester and No 5 Chambers, Birmingham. She has also previously undertaken international work experience in the Cayman Islands, Hong Kong, Thailand and Australia.
Zoe consistently reaps positive feedback from clients and peers and has been described in recent testimonials as "a very able lawyer and a very enthusiastic and determined advocate" who displays "cheerfulness and good humour even when under pressure” and whose “ability to inspire trust and confidence with clients is really quite remarkable".
Zoe herself says she chose to specialise in family law because: “I love the human aspect of it and the ability it offers to form genuine relationships with clients.” Her practice is currently London-based. She lives in the Cotswolds and in her free time enjoys competitive horse riding, skiing and adventurous travel.
Christopher is rightly revered for his high-profile work in divorce and matrimonial finance. He frequently acts for high net worth individuals and his cases typically involve businesses and/or complex financial arrangements, including both onshore and offshore trusts. He is also an expert in pre-nuptial agreements, financial disputes between unmarried couples, and inheritance issues.
Christopher has a dazzling reputation within the legal profession. Chambers and Partners has noted that “Pocock's wizardry when it comes to figures is legendary” and that he consistently impresses clients and peers with his “excellent financial brain”, as well as his ability to “identify the killer question” and his willingness to “get his hands dirty in difficult cases”. In Court he is admired for his “robust advocacy” and his “very concise and punchy delivery” that make him “popular with judges”. He is also praised for his “very easy-going manner with clients”, his “aura of calm” and his “highly pronounced human side” that makes him “the clients’ darling” and “a joy to work with”.
Educated at St Dunstan’s College and Pembroke College, Oxford, Christopher was called to the Bar in 1984 and took silk in 2009. He was voted Chambers and Partners’ Family Junior of the Year in 2007. In addition to his advocacy skills, Christopher is able to provide impartial dispute resolution services in an out-of-court setting. He is a fully trained collaborative lawyer (a member of London Family Solutions www.londonfamilysolutions.com and a qualified Family Arbitrator).
Christopher believes that one of the keys to his success is: “Engaging each client in the decision-making process. I don’t just tell them what to do, I explain precisely why they should be doing it.
Notable cases:
SW v RC [2008] 1 FLR 1703
H v H [2007] 2 FLR 548
Tracey v Tracey [2007] 1 FLR 196 CA
P v P (Ancillary Relief: Proceeds of Crime) [2004] 1 FLR 193
G v G (Financial Provision: Equal Division) [2002] 1 FLR 1143
Clibbery v Allen and Another [2002] Fam 261 CA
A v A (Maintenance Pending Suit( (no 2) [2001] 1 FLR 377
A-M v A-M (Divorce: Jurisdiction: Validity of Marriage) [2001] 2 FLR 6
Appointments & Memberships:
Member of the SE Circuit
Member of the Family Law Bar Association
Publications:
Encyclopaedia of Financial Provision in Family Matters, Wildblood & Eaton (Sweet & Maxwell).
Co-author of Consensus (by Class Publishing), a computer program for the legal profession that aids in the drafting of nuptial and other cohabitation agreements.
Byron is a talented family law specialist with particular expertise in matrimonial finance and international children cases involving leave to remove (either permanently or temporarily) from the jurisdiction. He also handles Inheritance Act cases, insolvency, cohabitation disputes and cases involving Trusts of Land.
Byron appears in both County Courts and the High Court. He also frequently acts in an advisory capacity, especially with regard to Inheritance Act and Trust of Land matters. Advice is usually via a face-to-face conference, since, as Byron remarks: “I find it’s often more useful for the client to talk through the problem and have their queries answered on-the-spot, rather than wade through endless pages of written opinion.”
Educated at Bedford School and King’s College London, Byron was called to the Bar in 2006. During his training he was the recipient of two prestigious awards, the Mould Scholarship and the Prince of Wales Scholarship. In 2011, he was named Hershman Young Child Lawyer of the Year by the Association of Lawyers for Children.
Byron’s excellent reputation is borne out by numerous testimonials. Clients report that he “instantly instils complete confidence”, “gets straight to the heart of the matter” and “displays a level of good judgment that’s far beyond his years”. He is also appreciated for his “very clear advice” and “reasonable, personable approach”.
He says that he knew from an early age that he would pursue career in the law and chose to specialise in family law because: “It’s about the private concerns of individuals and fighting hard on their behalf is something that just comes naturally to me.”
Notable cases:
N v N (Financial Order: Appellate Role) [2011] EWCA Civ 940 (Thorpe, Longmore, Stanley Burnton LLJ)
Re C-L (Children) (2011) EWCA Civ 1441 (Ward, Etherton LLJ)
Other:
Byron has written over 50 articles for various legal journals and has recorded podcasts for CPDCast and webinars for CLT Online.
Byron regularly lectures at the Surrey Law Society on a variety of topics.
Jeremy is Riverview Law’s Director of Operations and as such, is involved in just about every aspect of the business. In a nutshell, his overall role is managing the entire customer experience and the process by which it is delivered.
His day-to-day responsibilities include receiving initial client briefs, assembling the hand-picked teams that work on each case, overseeing pricing and quotations, and monitoring/managing case progress. He is also closely involved in business development.
Having spent his entire career in the legal profession, in both clerking and senior legal practice management roles, Jeremy’s knowledge of delivering high-quality legal services is second to none. Immediately prior to joining Riverview Law, he was Practice Manager at the highly respected specialist commercial chambers 3 Verulam Buildings. Previously, he held positions as Director of Clerking/Senior Clerk at a number of other prestigious chambers. He also gained early legal services experience as a Justices' Clerk at Bow Street Magistrates’ Court and as an Underwriting Clerk at a major insurance group.
In addition, he is particularly renowned as an authoritative legal practice blogger, and as a regular contributor to several key legal publications, including The Lawyer and Law Business Review.
Jeremy says: “At Riverview Law, it’s my job to first understand the nature of a client’s problem, then to ensure that they get the best possible team for their needs and the highest level of customer service to match.”
Jeremy is based in London and when not working or spending time with his family, he is a dedicated runner with two marathons under his belt and more in the pipeline.
Steve is Riverview Law’s Business Development Manager. His primary role is identifying and developing new markets and opportunities to complement our core business. This includes the development of a number of bespoke products and services aimed at assisting businesses with specific topical legal issues. He is also closely involved in day-to-day sales activities, working alongside our Sales Team.
Steve has a wealth of experience in sales, marketing and product innovation within the legal profession. He began his career as a barrister’s clerk at 2 Paper Buildings and subsequently went on to set up three highly successful legal services companies. One of these, Argent Law, was the very first company set up to take advantage of the new ‘Procureco’ legal services model that allows Chambers to form separate businesses as a means of winning work directly from companies and public bodies. Steve is unique in having experience of both traditional clerking and selling legal services direct to the corporate market.
He says he is delighted to be a part of the Riverview Law team: “I’ve always been interested in exploring alternative ways to sell and deliver legal services and at Riverview Law we don’t just say we’re different – we are. We want companies to put us to the test, because we’re confident that we can deliver on what we promise.”
Divorce
Sensible, pragmatic advice and representation at fixed prices from the country’s top divorce barristers
By removing the uncertainty of your legal costs and providing access to some of the most respected divorce barristers in the country we aim to soften the burden of divorce proceedings.
We also offer pre-emptive advice, namely:
- pre-nuptial agreements i.e. agreements to resolve financial claims prior to the marriage; and
- post-nuptial agreements i.e. agreements to resolve financial claims after the marriage has taken place.
As a client you are able to deal direct with your Barrister who will represent you from the beginning of the dispute to settlement and/or the Court trial.
Our Expertise:
Our divorce and family team offers advice and representation in the following main areas of law:
- Divorce
- All aspects of financial claims arising out of the divorce/marital breakdown(including foreign divorces)
- Jurisdictional conflicts relevant to the divorce proceedings
- Pre-nuptial agreements
- Post-nuptial agreements
- Commercial advice in relation to the financial structures, including onshore and offshore company structures and asset reorganisation, of the divorcing parties
- Tax advice in relation to the financial structures of the divorcing parties
Our unique model
We have designed a transparent structure of fixed pricing based upon the four main stages of divorce proceedings. You pay only for the best advice and not for unnecessary overlay and correspondence. Our model is designed for situations involving assets in excess of £500,000.
Our teams are led by divorce QC’s, top rated by Chambers & Partners and other legal directories, with a wealth of experience in advising on complex matrimonial issues. They are supported, as appropriate, by Junior Barristers, Solicitors and other experts e.g. tax specialists and accountants.
The four stages
Initial Conference
The first stage is the initial conference which is an opportunity to look at the merits of your case and decide upon the legal and commercial strategy.
Fixed, all inclusive pricing for the initial conference, including assessing and preparing the case and instructing Counsel, including a conference with Counsel. Fees start at £1,000 + VAT for a Junior Barrister led team and £2,000 + VAT for a QC led team.
The First Appointment
The next stage, the Case Management Discussion, is to issue proceedings (or defend them) and prepare the relevant Court forms and documentation for a first appointment before a Judge who will set down a number of orders and directions as to how the case should progress. This involves:
- completing a schedule of assets and filing all relevant court papers i.e. a Form A notice and Form E;
- liaising with the Court and the other side;
- dealing with all correspondence and advising generally on the strategy and legal issues; and
- preparing the case for the first case management hearing (the first appointment) which deals with the directions from the Court in order to progress the case further.
Fixed, all inclusive pricing, including preparation, care and conduct and representation, for the case management discussion, starts at £5,000 + VAT for a Junior Barrister led team and £7,500 + VAT for a QC led team.
Financial Dispute Resolution
The third stage is a mandatory obligation for both parties to proceed to a Financial Dispute Resolution hearing (FDR). This is a without prejudice hearing where the case is prepared for trial to be heard by a Judge. The Judge will provide his opinion on the case and inform the parties about what he would award if the matter was heard by him at the final trial. The parties can either accept the Judge’s indication or reject it. If they accept it then the case can be settled and a consent order drafted by the parties. Indeed, the whole philosophy behind this hearing is that it is designed to persuade parties to settle the case rather than go to a full blown trial.
We will prepare for the case for the FDR hearing and advise you on all aspects of the case including:
- strategy and the legal issues;
- liaison with the Court and the other side including all necessary correspondence;
- preparation of all the trial bundles and witness statements as well as the legal arguments in preparation for the hearing itself; and
- In cases where the FDR leads to settlement, providing the draft the settlement order.
Fixed, all inclusive pricing, including preparation, care and conduct and representation, for the Financial Dispute Resolution hearing, starts at £17,500 + VAT for a Junior Barrister led team and £25,000 + VAT for a QC led team.
Trial
The fourth stage, assuming the FDR has not led to settlement, is a full blown trial of the case. We will provide Care and Conduct from the FDR to the trial itself (assuming the FDR has not led to settlement) and representation at the trial.
We will agree a fixed fee, all inclusive price, including preparation, care and conduct and representation at the trial, on a bespoke basis.
Pre-divorce advice
As an alternative to the above it is now possible, due to recent developments in the law, to avoid the uncertainty, stress and expense of the entire divorce process by entering into a contractual arrangement with your partner before things start to go wrong. With this in mind we have designed pre-divorce solutions.
Fixed, all inclusive pricing for pre-divorce advice, starts at £2,500 + VAT for a Junior Barrister led team and £5,000 + VAT for a QC led team.
Any necessary disbursements (e.g. valuation costs, experts’ reports) will be quoted separately.
If you wish to discuss our divorce package or your requirements please contact Chris Baylis on 0207 489 2010 or email [email protected]
Sir Oliver is a fully accredited arbitrator and mediator, specialising in high-value employment, sporting and financial services disputes. He brings with him a unique breadth of relevant experience and expertise, gained during a highly successful legal career spanning four decades.
He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and is accredited as a mediator by the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR). He is also a member of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Lausanne) and the Sports Dispute Resolution Panel. As a member of the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) Disciplinary Panel, he has been closely involved in both MCC and International Cricket Council (ICC) investigations into corruption in sport. In addition, he has wide experience in professional negligence and financial disputes. He is a member of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) and the City Disputes Panel.
Prior to establishing his current practice in mediation and arbitration, Sir Oliver was one of England's most distinguished High Court Judges. He became the Senior Judge of the Queen's Bench Division, where his cases ranged from murder to insurance and media trials. As the judge in charge of the Defamation list, he presided over cases such as the Jonathan Aitken and Al Fayed libel actions. He conducted the Inquiry into the fire at the Bradford football ground and problems of hooliganism, crowd control and safety at sports grounds. In his judicial capacity, he was also President of the Employment Appeal Tribunal, Chairman of Accountants' Disciplinary Appeal Tribunal and, as a member of the Wages Council, acquired considerable experience in resolving industrial disputes.
Before being appointed a Judge, Sir Oliver was an extremely successful barrister for over 30 years, called to the Bar in 1951 and becoming a QC in 1969. He acted for numerous media organisations, such as Thames Television, as well as appearing for many major insurance companies in complex insurance claims.
Sir Oliver says that he has great faith in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as a means of settling disputes where appropriate: “The enhanced privacy, informality and speed of ADR proceedings can bring many benefits. Mediation and arbitration both present an option that is less adversarial and, in many cases, less costly than traditional Court proceedings.”
Memberships and appointments
1951 - called to the Bar
1969 - appointed Queen's Counsel
1969 - appointed Recorder of Burton on Trent and Deputy Chairman of Oxfordshire Quarter Sessions
1971 - appointed a Recorder of the Crown Court
1980 - member of the Aarvold Committee on Restricted Patients
1983 - appointed High Court Judge
1985 - appointed Chairman of the Bradford Inquiry into Crowd Control and Safety at Sports Grounds
1986 - appointed President of the Employment Appeal Tribunal
1986 - appointed Vice Chairman of the Parole Board
1995-1996 - appointed President of the MCC
1996 - admitted as a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
2000 - admitted as a Chartered Arbitrator and Mediator, LCIA
2000 - appointed a Member of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Lausanne)
2000 - appointed a Member of the Sports Dispute Resolution Panel
Publications:
In addition to numerous legal articles and academic papers, Sir Oliver has written two acclaimed non-fiction books:
Benchmark: Life, Laughter and the Law - his autobiography, first published in 2003
Hallmark: A Judge’s Life at Oxford - published in 2009, an account of Sir Oliver’s recent experiences as Oxford University’s oldest-ever undergraduate, having originally graduated in Law from Cambridge in 1950. He gained his BA in Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE) from Oxford in 2006, at the age of 78. He subsequently went on to achieve a Masters degree in History of International Relations from the London School of Economics in 2008.
Andy is Riverview Law’s Vice President, North America and plays an integral part in our International and Business teams. His primary role is developing and managing relationships with US-based law firms and corporations that want direct access to top UK lawyers - with minimum hassle and maximum price certainty.
Andy provides Riverview Law’s US clients with a single, local point of contact offering seamless liaison with our innovative UK operation. He is based in our New York office, which is ideally positioned to service the East coast business hubs, but also well connected to Central and Western areas.
Andy’s impressive business credentials have included senior roles with a major FTSE-listed company, and with the Legal & Regulatory division of Thomson Reuters, the world’s largest multimedia news agency. He joined Riverview Law from AdviserPlus Business Solutions in the UK, where he spent five years as Client Director. He was closely involved in the creation and delivery of the company’s ground-breaking advisory services offering, working alongside the HR and employment law teams of some of the UK’s largest multinationals. He is the recipient of several awards for business innovation and development.
Andy spells out Riverview Law’s message to US law firms and corporations: “You can instruct our team of top UK lawyers direct, from the US, at fixed prices. We do things differently to traditional law firms because we’ve built our business from the customer up, not from the lawyer down. Our business model with its low overheads, bespoke end-to-end technology platform, first-class support staff and unique pricing structure means US clients can expect an exceptional service.”
Andy relocated permanently to New York to take up his role with Riverview Law, along with his American wife and his young children, who he says are delighted to be living near their relatives on the ‘other side of the pond’.
Nicola has built an outstanding reputation as a leading family law barrister during her 20 years at the Bar. She specialises in high-value financial relief for divorcing couples.
The Legal 500 has described her as “a money silk in the making”, “extremely capable and decisive”, “a robust advocate with a high level of attention to detail” and “capable of penetrating difficult material very quickly… has an impressive grip on the principles and the detail.”
Nicola typically acts for high net worth individuals, often in the High Court, in cases where assets amount to £5 million-plus. Her cases frequently involve family businesses and/or privately owned companies. She has considerable experience in matters concerning complex domestic and overseas trusts.
Nicola is based in Leeds and routinely appears in locations throughout the UK, particularly Manchester, Liverpool and London.
Clients warm to her “understanding and approachable manner” and report that “she is always impeccably well-prepared… a great listener and someone you feel is never less than 100% on your side.”
A graduate in Law from the University of Cambridge, Nicola first set her sights on becoming a barrister at the age of 14. She says that she has a particular affinity for family law because: “It’s an area where I feel I can make a real difference to people’s lives. I like the human side of it, as well as getting my teeth into the hard facts of a case.”
Outside the courts, Nicola enjoys keeping fit and is a fanatical skier.
Notable cases:
Richardson v Richardson [2011] EWCA Civ 79
AR v AR [2011] EWHC 2717 (Fam)
Other:
Nicola has been engaged to deliver lectures to both the Family Law Bar Association (FLBA) and Resolution
Hugh is a highly experienced advocate. During his 20 years’ practice at the Bar he has represented clients at all levels of judicial tribunal up to and including the High Court and Court of Appeal.
He has developed a number of areas of specialism over the years, and is currently expanding his employment and business law practice. He represents both individuals and companies in cases that vary from the relatively straightforward to those that require detailed analysis of complex legal and factual issues.
In the field of employment law Hugh has considerable experience of a wide variety of issues including unfair dismissal, discrimination claims, and redundancy. In business law, he is particularly strong in contractual disputes and related issues.
A client-focused attitude characterises Hugh’s approach: “Each client is unique and their objectives and interests must always be the focus of a litigator’s consideration. This includes giving realistic advice so that an appropriate balance can be struck in each case between the costs of litigation and the prospective benefits to be achieved.”
Clients have described Hugh as “straightforward, realistic and very commercial” and “not afraid to argue a point tenaciously, as long as it has merit”. They also note that he is “caring and conscientious” and “committed to fully understanding the client’s needs.” He is based in London and undertakes cases throughout the UK.
Hugh graduated in Law from Cambridge University and was called to the Bar in 1988 and to the Bar of Northern Ireland in 1995. Whilst in practice, Hugh completed postgraduate studies at King’s College London and graduated with a masters degree in Construction Law and Arbitration.
Appointments:
Part-time Chairman of the Industrial Tribunals and the Fair Employment Tribunal of Northern Ireland
John has over a decade’s experience as a commercial mediator and negotiation adviser. He is a recognised leader in the use of advanced analytical techniques to resolve a wide variety of business disputes, and is accredited by the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR).
His clients include multinational corporations, domestic businesses, professional firms, individuals, Government departments and public bodies. His mediation cases range from complex multi-million pound claims to the more routine day-to-day matters that may affect an organisation. These include: General contractual disputes; employment/wrongful dismissal claims; construction issues; partnership disputes; IP infringements; professional indemnity cases; personal injury claims.
In addition to conducting mediations, John regularly advises companies on tactics and strategy ahead of high-value commercial negotiations. He has particular experience of international/cross-border scenarios. Guidance includes constructing decision trees, personality profiling, formulating bid strategy, and conducting role-plays and simulations. He also undertakes interactive training in advanced negotiation skills/analysis for managers, directors and other senior personnel.
Before becoming a full-time mediator, John was a consultant with McKinsey & Co, frequently advising the boards of blue-chip companies and senior Government figures on issues of strategy, economics and international relations. He wrote the UK Government’s strategy papers on eGovernment and Sport and Physical Activity, on behalf of the Prime Minister. As well as an MBA, he holds a PhD in Game Theory (the branch of economics that examines interactive decision problems) and has previously taught at both the London Business School and Oxford University.
Clients are full of praise for John’s mediation style, saying that he has “excellent presence” and is “good at establishing rapport”, as well as being “well-prepared, energetic and committed” plus “very good at boiling decisions down to the essentials”. Other testimonials add that “his commercial background is invaluable in helping structure a solution” and that “his mastery of decision trees and risk analysis brings a welcome dose of realism to proceedings.”
John himself observes that: “More and more companies recognise professional mediation as a valuable tool for resolving commercial disputes. When deployed appropriately and effectively, it increases the chances of settlement and can lead to considerable cost savings in the long run.”
Affiliations and appointments:
Registered by CEDR
Chair of Oxford Mediation
Riverview Solicitors
Working together to provide you with an integrated legal solution
The legal advice provided to Riverview Law customers is delivered through Riverview Solicitors and Riverview Chambers.
The senior Partner of Riverview Solicitors is Andrew Reeves Solicitor LLB (Hons) Bsc. Andrew has spent over 15 years advising motor retailers on all aspects of motor law. He is a recognised expert in consumer law, dealer agreements, competition law, trading standards and intellectual property and has considerable experience of commercial litigation in the High Court and County Court, as well as cases in the Magistrates Courts and Alternative Dispute Resolution.
Riverview solicitors is registered in England and Wales under number 564803 and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
Oba is widely acknowledged as one of the UK’s and Nigeria’s leading barristers. He has a broad international practice with a particular interest in Africa. He provides high-level advice and representation for corporate clients and other organisations (including NGOs) in matters ranging from business and general crime to corrupt practices, commercial litigation, contractual disputes and health and safety.
He is qualified in both the UK and Nigeria and is highly experienced in the courts of both countries. He advises both the Nigerian Federal Government, several State Governments and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, as well as having appeared as an expert witness in several UK cases involving Nigerian law. In addition, he routinely works in other overseas jurisdictions such as Germany, the Cayman Islands, Tanzania, Ghana, South Africa and Zimbabwe. He is frequently involved in multi-jurisdictional cases.
Oba is able to provide expert regulatory guidance to businesses needing to comply with the legal framework in Nigeria. Furthermore, through a close network of established and highly specialist partner firms, he is able to cover other African jurisdictions as well. He is regularly called upon to advise on the drafting of contracts and commercial agreements, as well handling contentious contractual issues and other litigation, for some of the world’s largest companies in the oil and gas, leisure, banking, financial and publishing sectors. In the Cayman Islands his cases typically involve offshore trusts or insolvency, often with criminal recovery aspects. In addition, he has considerable alternative dispute resolution experience as both an Arbitrator and Counsel instructed in international arbitrations.
Called to the Bar in 1985, when Oba took silk in 2002 aged only 39,he was described in a leading law commentary as “a rising star of the Bar of England and Wales”. He commands considerable respect from both clients and peers. Numerous entries in Chambers and Partners over the years have described him as “a first-class advocate” as well as “a true gentleman who deserves his fabulous reputation”, adding that he has a “fine forensic mind” and is admired for his “technical excellence”. Contributors to the directory have also remarked that he is “fabulously personable, easy-going, and adored by judges and juries”, “works extremely well in a team” and “impresses interviewees with his calm and genial manner”.
Current and Recent Cases:
Acting for Personal Assistant to former Nigerian Governor charged with money laundering in substantial case before UK courts
Acting as arbitrator in large contractual dispute involving multinational contracted to store and distribute petroleum in Tanzania and Zanzibar
Advising UK solicitors on Nigerian law of damages in major oil spill claim involving UK based multinational
Advising UK solicitors representing media company alleged to have slandered well known Nigerian individual in a radio programme aired in UK
Advising UK company on contractual dispute involving supply of security equipment to African country
Advising UK based professional on applicability of Bribery Act 2010 and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act to actions of large multinational utility company with business in Nigeria
Advising a large multinational investment bank on validity of pension funds managed by it
under Nigerian Law
Advising a multinational tobacco company on large scale litigation in Nigeria with numerous parties and claimants
Acting for Lagos State in large scale arbitration involving Enron
Acting for Norwegian based insurers and marine geophysical company in arbitration involving collision between vessel and offshore platform in Nigerian coastal waters
Advising another medium sized tobacco company on validity of agreements under Nigerian Law entered into with Nigerian company for production and storage of tobacco
Acting as arbitrator in substantial arbitration involving a multinational oil company and its Nigerian oil services party where breaches of contracts and bailment alleged
Advising multinational bank seeking to establish card services in Nigeria on compliance with applicable regulatory and banking regulations
Advising large Nigerian construction company over contractual dispute with local company constructing a hotel in Lagos
Advising local Nigerian company on complex construction dispute with developer re: Lekki Expressway construction
Acting for UK pilot suing Virgin Nigeria for breach of contract in the Lagos High Court
Acting as expert witness on Nigerian Law for the largest African Hotel Group in arbitral dispute with leading Nigerian company in which a multi million dollar claim for damages made for alleged breaches of agency and marketing agreements in establishment of 5 star hotel in Nigeria.
Reported Cases:
R v P Ltd and Another [Times Law Report 13th August 2007]
Leading case on mens rea of officer of a body corporate under s.37 HSWA 1974
R v Davies (David Janway) [2002] EWCA 2949 at 586
Leading case on reverse burden in health and safety cases and impact of Human Rights Act
R v Howe & Son (Engineering) Ltd [1999] 2 ALL ER 249
Leading case on sentencing in health and safety cases
R v Hampshire [1995] 2 ALL ER 1019
Competency of child’s evidence in sexual cases
R v. Rachel [CA] 1993 Cr App R. (S) 265
Sentencing in Manslaughter cases
Howard v Shirlstar Container Transport Ltd [1990] 1 WLR 1992
Contract involving illegal performance – effect
Krumpa & Anor v. DPP [1989] Crim LR 295
S39 Public Order Act 1986
Memberships and appointments:
1999: Appointed Crown Court Recorder
2002: Appointed Queen’s Counsel
2004/8: Chair of the British Nigeria Law Forum
2004: Gray’s Inn Advocacy Trainer – Grade A
2005: Elected Bencher of Gray’s Inn
2007: Head, Pump Court Chambers
2006: Elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts (FRSA)
2006/10: Legal Advisor to Central Association of Nigerians in the UK (CANUK)
2007: Legal Assessor for the General Medical Council
2010: Visiting Professor of Law, City University
2011: Trustee of the Africa Centre
Overseas appointments:
2005: Appointed Senior Advocate of Nigeria
2005: Member of the Body of Benchers, Nigeria
2006: Chair of g50 business group (Investing in Nigeria)
2007: Fellow Nigeria Leadership Initiative (NLI)
Michael is an acknowledged expert in commercial property cases, construction-related litigation, professional liability, and landlord and tenant law. With over 25 years’ experience at the Bar and an exemplary reputation, his clients range from major corporations to local authorities and individuals.
Michael has substantial experience of conducting Technology and Construction Court (TCC) and other building litigation. His cases cover a wide range of disputes from major construction developments to industrial workplaces. As a TECBAR Adjudicator since 1998, he is also extremely well placed to advise on the performance and enforcement of adjudications.
Michael frequently brings his experience of construction and property cases to bear in professional negligence claims against surveyors, valuers, architects, and solicitors, in both local and international transactions.
In landlord and tenant matters, Michael’s cases include dispositions of freehold and leasehold interests, possession, rent arrears, disrepair, dilapidations and service charges. He is also highly experienced in boundary disputes, restrictive covenants and general property work, including advice on contractual issues.
Michael is also an accredited mediator and is increasingly in demand to assist with preparing cases for mediation and to act as an advocate during mediations.
In addition, Michael is a seasoned employment law practitioner, appearing regularly before the employment tribunals in cases involving sex and disability discrimination, unfair dismissal, TUPE, and disputes over employment status.
Clients consistently praise the quality of Michael’s work. Recent testimonials have noted that he has “exceptional people skills”, is “hugely approachable”, and that “despite a busy schedule, he consistently turns instructions around quickly… he adopts a practical and balanced approach, putting clients at ease even during the most stressful litigation periods.” He is also known for being “extremely dedicated to providing expert advice in a professional manner” and has been described as “possibly the most decent man in the legal profession."
Notable Cases
Western Challenge Housing Association v. Percy Thomas Partnership (1995) CILL 1018 QBD - one of the Legal Times/Masons “Best Ten Construction Cases, 1996”
West Kent Housing Association v. Davies (1999) 31 HLR 415 [1998] EGCS 103 CA
R -v- London Borough of Greenwich HBRB ex parte Dhadly LTL 21/10/99, (2000) 32 H.L.R. 829
Berthon Boat Co.Ltd -v- Hood Sailmakers Ltd[2000] E.G.L.R 39, [2000] 08 EG 175
An application under section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925 by Alan Howard Fisher LP/31/2006 http://www.landstribunal.gov.uk/judgmentfiles/j527/LP-31-2006.pdf and an appeal against a prohibition notice under para 7(1) of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 2004 Ref. No. LON/
AJ/HPO/2009/0008 http://www.rpts.gov.uk/Files/2010/April/000048FQ.htm
Johnson v Luxcool Ltd & Ors [2008] EWHC 1591, QB,[2008] All ER (D) 185
R (Copyright Canary City Ltd) v Thames Magistrates' Court [2010] EWHC 2185 (Admin), [2010] LLR 664
QBD, Ouseley J, 12 August 2010
Francis v London Borough of Southwark [2011] EWCA Civ 1418, [2011] All ER (D) 54 (Dec) CA
Memberships and Affiliations
Member of Society of Construction Law, Civil Mediation Council, Professional Negligence Bar
Association and TECBAR
Member of the Bar Council
Member of Middle Temple Finance Committee
Middle Temple Sponsor
Additional information:
Addressed seminars on arbitration and expert witnesses for the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and Professional Solutions and Services Ltd.
Received training in Advanced Mediation Advocacy
Health & Safety Law
Over 650 plain English advice pages and over 450 documents, letters and templates.
The legal library includes advice and guidance and document templates for use in your business. The library contains three sections: Business Law, HR & Employment Law and Health & Safety Law, each covering a broad range of topics.
The Health & Safety section covers the health and safety at work act, COSHH, risk assessment, legislation, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), environmental health, H&S, health and safety at work act 1974, occupational health, health and safety policy, fire safety, computer health and safety, health and safety at work and much, much more, including:
|
Health and Safety Practices
|
Administration
Responsibilities
|
You may be wondering why we’re providing access to this comprehensive resource tool, for free, when other parties charge for this type of content. Well, quite simply, we want to make sure that Riverview Law is at the forefront of your mind when your business next needs legal advice! We want to develop a relationship with your business and we’re prepared to invest in developing this. What better way to do this than to show you what we can do.
So, Register Now, at no cost, for Myview membership and have immediate and unlimited access to our Legal Library and the other support tools that make up Myview membership. There are no catches, no hidden costs.
HR and Employment Law
Over 650 plain English advice pages and over 450 documents, letters and templates.
The legal library includes advice and guidance and document templates for use in your business. The library contains three sections: Business Law, HR & Employment Law and Health & Safety Law, each covering a broad range of topics.
The employment law section covers, redundancy, TUPE, employment tribunal matters, legislation, discrimination, unfair dismissal, equal opportunities, harassment, employment law advice, contract of employment, employee rights, employment rights, age discrimination, employment tribunals, employment contract and much more, including:
|
Disputes
Employee Rights and Concerns
Family Rights
Leavers and Dismissal
Performance and Behaviour
|
Recruitment and Training
Sickness Absence and Health
Types of Workers
Working Practices
|
You may be wondering why we’re providing access to this comprehensive resource tool, for free, when other parties charge for this type of content. Well, quite simply, we want to make sure that Riverview Law is at the forefront of your mind when your business next needs legal advice! We want to develop a relationship with your business and we’re prepared to invest in developing this. What better way to do this than to show you what we can do.
So, Register Now, at no cost, for Myview membership and have immediate and unlimited access to our Legal Library and the other support tools that make up Myview membership. There are no catches, no hidden costs.
Business Law
Over 650 plain English advice pages and over 450 documents, letters and templates.
The legal library includes advice and guidance and document templates for use in your business. The library contains three sections: Business Law, HR & Employment Law and Health & Safety Law, each covering a broad range of topics.
The Business Law section covers directors responsibilities, commercial contracts, bribery, disputes, data protection, legal structures, sale of goods and services, business finance, business finance and security, dealing with Companies House, indemnities, warranties, guarantees, employment law, health and safety and much, much more, including:
|
Business Law Basics
Commercial Contracts
Data Protection
|
Disputes
Intellectual Property Rights
Trading
|
You may be wondering why we’re providing access to this comprehensive resource tool, for free, when other parties charge for this type of content. Well, quite simply, we want to make sure that Riverview Law is at the forefront of your mind when your business next needs legal advice! We want to develop a relationship with your business and we’re prepared to invest in developing this. What better way to do this than to show you what we can do.
So, Register Now, at no cost, for Myview membership and have immediate and unlimited access to our Legal Library and the other support tools that make up Myview membership. There are no catches, no hidden costs.
Leslie has 22 years’ experience at the Bar and is recognised as a specialist in complex, high-value employment cases, particularly in the areas of discrimination and unfair dismissal. His discrimination work includes sex, race, religion, disability and sexual orientation cases, often linked with stress at work claims.
Leslie read Law at Cambridge University and subsequently gained a Masters Degree in Criminology from the University of Toronto. He was called to the Bar in 1989 and took Silk in 2011. He has extensive advocacy experience in the employment tribunals, the County Court, the High Court and the Court of Appeal. He acts for both for claimants and defendants.
He is also highly regarded for his experience in judicial review and undertakes a substantial quantity of work in this area. His cases have involved challenges to both local authority and central Government decision-making, as well as challenges to autonomous bodies such as the Kennel Club and the Scout Association.
In addition to his advocacy work Leslie is an accredited mediator (ADR Group, 2005). He has been involved in this capacity in many complex employment disputes, often concerning intractable issues and/or potentially high-value claims. He also has considerable experience in mediating all forms of employment claims.
Leslie has a reputation among clients for his “ability to cut straight to the chase” and is valued for his “measured, but persistent” advocacy style as well as his overall “user-friendly manner”. Peers also note that he is “skilled at simultaneously conveying that he’s up for a fight, but that he’ll consider settling where it’s in his client’s best interest.”
Leslie lives with his family in London. When time permits, he enjoys theatre, gardening, running and all sports, including watching AFC Wimbledon.
Notable cases:
Southampton City College v. Randall [2006] IRLR 18 – successful appeal in the EAT involving disability discrimination.
Re D [2006] 2 FLR 1053 – reported decision on disclosure rules.
R (L) v Nottinghamshire County Council [2007] EWHC 2364 (Admin) – Judicial Review concerning local authority accommodation duties towards teenage children.
Cave v Portsmouth City Council [2008] All ER (D) 313 (May) – successful appeal in the EAT involving agency workers.
Re S and C (Children) [2008] EWCA Civ 658 – Court of Appeal case concerning local authority duties towards children
R (EW and BW) v Nottinghamshire County Council [2009] EWHC 915 (Admin) [2009] 2 FLR 974 – Judicial Review concerning local authority assessment and accommodation duties towards teenage children
Appointments:
Deputy District Judge 2003
Briefings
review all the available business briefings
Checklists
review all the available business checklists
Document Library
review the complete list of briefings and guides
Business Growth
from buying a franchise to making an acquisition
How do I
review all the available ‘How do I … ? guides
IT and Infrastructure
from the internet to networks and software
Business Law
from the role of the company secretary to top red tape tips
Health and Safety
from employee and director responsibilities to risk assessments
Business Management
from managing change to quality systems and processes
Sales and Marketing
from generating PR through pricing to closing that sale
Managing People
from induction and performance to managing leavers
Managing Finance
from monitoring your cash flow to managing the bank
Richard was called to the Bar in 1997 and has since garnered an impressive reputation, particularly in environmental law, planning law and related public law areas. He regularly appears at public inquiries and in both the civil and criminal courts. His practice also encompasses: Administrative law; Health and Safety; Highways, Footpaths and Rights of Way; Local Government and Rating; Compulsory Purchase and Compensation; Utilities and Energy.
The outstanding quality of Richard’s work is regularly acknowledged in the principal legal directories:
"always a pleasure to work with"
Chambers and Partners 2012
"excellent client skills"
Chambers and Partners 2012
"well respected for his contentious planning abilities"
Chambers and Partners 2012
"…engages with solicitors and clients in such a manner that they feel they're getting an extremely special service"
Chambers and Partners 2011
"…both approachable and extremely capable. In cross-examination, he is able to find the killer punch but also knows when to let an issue be"
Legal 500, 2011
"commercially astute and a pleasure to work with"
Chambers and Partners 2010
"…possesses all the competence and commercial know-how that clients require from a commercial barrister"
Chambers and Partners 2008
"…extremely bright...[possessing] the focus and dedication to carve a great name for himself."
Chambers and Partners 2006
Richard is General Editor of Sweet & Maxwell’s Encyclopedia of Environmental Law, Co-Author of Butterworth’s Highways Law and Practice and Contributor to Tolley’s Environmental Impact Assessment – Law and Practice. He regularly presents papers on topics within his areas of specialisation.
Notable Cases
London Borough of Waltham Forest v (1) Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (2) Mr Lusha CO/10696/2011
Judicial review of Secretary of State’s Guidance re Permitted Development Rights
Sea and Land Power Energy Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government CO/13120/2010
Statutory appeal under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against decision of a planning inspector refusing permission for a 10 MW wind-farm on land in Hemsby in Norfolk.
Environment Agency v (1) Commercial Recycling Limited (2) Greenway Ireland Ltd
Defence of a waste disposal and recycling company in Crown Court criminal proceedings, brought by the Environment Agency, which include allegations under the Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Regulations 2007, Environmental Permitting Regulations 2007 & 2010, and Hazardous Waste Regulations 2005.
R (oao Louis Olivier Bancoult) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CO/8288/2010
Judicial review of the decision of Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs to designate a marine protected area around the Chagos Archipelago.
Rooney v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government [2010] EWHC 3327 (Admin), [2011] EWHC Civ 1556, UKSC 2012/0036
Statutory appeal under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 considering whether the principles established in Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45 applies to statutory challenges in planning cases.
R (Walker) v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change (2011)
Judicial review of the decision of the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate to justify the use of the EDF’s EPR and Westinghouse’s AP-1000 nuclear reactor designs.
R (Hillingdon LBC & Ors.) (Claimants) v Secretary of State for Transport (Defendant) & Transport for London (Interested Party) [2010] EWHC 626 (Admin)
Judicial review challenge to the Secretary of State for Transport’s support for a third runway at Heathrow airport.
Francis Roy Morgan (2) Catherine Margaret Baker (Appellants) v Hinton Organics (Wessex) LTD (Respondent) & CAJE (Intervenor) [2009] EWCA Civ 107
Consideration of the Aarhus Convention principle that costs in environmental proceedings should not be "prohibitively expensive".
(1) Azzopardi (2) Express Homes v London Development Agency [2009] UKUT 110 (LC)
Lands Tribunal Compensation claim under s5 of Land Compensation Act 1961
Choudhry v (1) Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government (2) Harrow London Borough Council [2009] EWHC 1179 (Admin)
Statutory appeal under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 re adequacy of reasons for a refusal of planning permission.
R (Surrey CC) v Secretary of State for Local Government & Dennis Read [2008] EWHC 2747 (Admin)
Statutory appeal under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 re Green Belt policy.
(1) Jonathan Sumption (2) Teresa Sumption v Greenwich LBC & Christopher Rokos (QBD) [2007] EWHC 2776 (Admin)
Judicial review of the grant (under section 192 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) of a certificate of lawfulness re erection of a boundary wall in the curtilage of a listed building.
John Sole v (1) Secretary of State for Trade & Industry (2) London Development Agency (QBD) [2007] 1527 (Admin)
Challenge brought under s23 of Acquisition of Land Act 1981 re the lawfulness of the London Olympics CPO.
O'Reilly v First Secretary of State & Anor [2005] EWHC 1286 (Admin)
Statutory appeal under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 re fairness and reasoning of a refusal to grant a certificate of lawfulness.
National Anti-Vivisection Society v First Secretary of State (QBD) [2004] EWHC 2074 (Admin)
Statutory appeal under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against the First Secretary of State's grant of permission for a non-human primate experimentation facility in Cambridge on grounds of predetermination, bias and perversity.
Carpenter v Pembrokeshire County Council [2004] EWCA Civ 226
Claim re a Highways Stopping Up Order and Traffic Regulation Order
Memberships:
Planning and Environment Bar Association (PEBA)
Administrative Law Bar Association (ALBA)
The UK Environmental Law Association
Appointments:
The Attorney General's B Panel of Counsel to the Crown: 2009
Trained and Accredited Mediator
Brighton University Visiting Lecturer (MSc Environmental Law)
United Kingdom Environmental Law Association Council Member
Former Judicial Assistant to the Court of Appeal
Helen was called to the Bar in 2004 and has a growing reputation for her work in civil and family law. She has a particularly strong presence in employment law and related matters.
Helen has experience representing both employers and employees before the employment tribunals and the Employment Appeal Tribunal. She has particular expertise in cases involving unfair dismissal, constructive dismissal and discrimination, along with redundancy and TUPE.
In 2010, she was appointed to the Attorney General’s panel of approved Counsel and is frequently instructed by a range of Government departments.
She also has an interest in personal injury law, regularly acting in fast-track and multi-track trials, and drafting pleadings, opinions and trial documents as required.
Helen’s private law family practice encompasses contact and residence hearings and cases with an international element, including abduction and leave to remove proceedings, and injunction proceedings. She is also experienced in cases involving domestic violence and human rights issues.
Helen’s style in court has been described as “not afraid to go in for the kill” and “extremely tenacious”. In addition to her court and tribunal appearances, she regularly provides advice and training for employers, including pre-tribunal guidance.
She describes her own approach as: “Pragmatic, and robust - I'm always keen to discuss potential problems and tactics with my client before the hearing, so that I can concentrate on the best way to proceed when it comes to my advocacy and feel confident that my approach is one that my client is happy with."
Notable cases
Pratt v Jobcentre Plus – Helen successfully resisted an appeal, heard in the EAT, against the strike-out of a case in the employment tribunal
B v S (Contempt: Imprisonment of mother) [2009] EWCA CIV 548; [2009] 2 FLR 1005
Helen's recent work has included an argument as to whether a Claimant was disabled for the purposes of the Equality Act, the successful defence of an allegation of sex discrimination, and several multi-day unfair dismissal hearings. Cases which are yet to be heard will include an argument about whether an employee resigned, or was dismissed, two age discrimination hearings, and a series of cases, through her Attorney General work, on behalf of a variety of Government departments.
Memberships
Employment Law Bar Association
Personal Injury Bar Association
Family Law Bar Association
Iain is one of the UK’s leading specialists in landlord / tenant law and personal injury law. His 25 years at the Bar have also given him depth of experience across a range of other legal disciplines, including professional negligence actions, environmental / food safety matters, boundary disputes and general contractual disputes.
He has represented numerous limited companies, as well as local authorities and individuals, in the County and Magistrates’ Courts, the High Court, the Divisional Court and the Court of Appeal. He is widely considered the barrister of choice for social landlords and has been involved in some extremely challenging and high-profile actions in this field.
Iain is renowned for being undaunted by difficult or even hostile situations in Court. As he says himself: “I’m not one to shy away from a tough case!” The vast majority of his work comes through referrals.
A graduate of Bristol University, Iain is a member of the Social Housing Law Association, the Professional Negligence Bar Association and the Personal Injuries Bar Association. A family man at heart, he also finds time to teach skiing, is involved in a number of school and community activities, and is a mad-keen mountain biker and photographer.
Iain says it’s primarily the human interaction that keeps him interested in his work: "I relish meeting new people and finding out what makes them tick. In this profession, I’m lucky that it happens almost every day.”
Notable cases:
Gloucester City Council v Nichols-Perry & Horsford (2011) – gang injunction served against two individuals, only the third to be granted in the UK at time
Carmarthenshire County Council v Lewis (2011) - housing, mental capacity
Newport City Council v Charles (2008) - housing, succession
South Gloucestershire Council v Titley & Clothier, on appeal from Severnside Valuation Tribunal [2006] - rating valuation
North Somerset Council v White & White (2002) - ASBO against youngest ever defendants at time
R v Salisbury District Council Ex p. McDonagh (2001) - introductory tenancies
Cheltenham Borough Council v Young (2001) - first ASBO banning an individual from their own home
City Council of Bristol v Mousah (1998) - housing, possession, drugs
Cheltenham Borough Council v Dellow (1998) - suspended possession order requiring tenant to exclude 16-year-old son from home
Andrew is a highly respected advocate with 25 years’ experience at the Bar. He has a broad-based business law practice, specialising particularly in the areas of financial services, pensions and other commercial trusts, professional negligence and disputes relating to the interpretation or breach of most types of commercial contract.
As well as appearing in Court, he provides expert technical and strategic advice to clients both in relation to complex civil litigation and in non-contentious situations (for example in the context of corporate mergers or takeovers, or in relation to the myriad of issues that may arise in the administration of large occupational pension schemes including dealing with the UK Pensions Regulator, or advising on pensions issues in the area of corporate insolvency, or over issues of contractual interpretation that arise in day-to-day commercial business life). He is also experienced in cases involving mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), plus regulatory cases in front of the Determinations Panel of the Pensions Regulator and the Upper Tribunal.
His clients include individuals, partnerships, companies (including financial institutions), pension scheme trustees / employers / members, Government departments, and participants in multiparty group actions.
In recent years, Andrew’s work has taken on a growing international dimension. He is a registered advocate at the Dubai International Financial Centre and is also particularly experienced in the growing number of cases where the UK Pensions Regulator seeks to impose a financial support direction (FSD) extra-territorially. He has been involved in three of the most significant recent cases in this field and remarks that “it’s an area of increasing concern for any multinational business whose UK employees are members of a pension scheme.” Andrew is Chairman of the North American Committee of the Commercial Bar Association (COMBAR).
Over the years, Andrew has been variously described in the legal directories as "highly valued", "seriously good", "reliable, commercial and pragmatic” and “very personable and down to earth”. He is ranked in the top tier (Band 1) for Pensions in Chambers and Partners 2012, which also notes that “having appeared in a large number of important cases in recent times [he] has demonstrated that he can mix it with the best, and do so with an easy, commercial manner." The Legal 500 adds that he is “definitely someone you want on your side… he has extensive expertise and is a real pleasure to work with.”
He lives with his family in Dorset and London.
Notable cases
Danks & others v QinetiQ Holdings & Peacock – Pending trial of the hot issue of whether pension scheme trustees have the power under the rules of the QinetiQ pension scheme to amend the rate of increase of pensions in payment and the rate of revaluation of deferred pensions from the Retail Price Index to the Consumer Price Index.
Lehman Brothers Pension Scheme – (Pensions Regulator Determinations Panel 2010). A massive and seminal case in the developing Pensions Regulator Financial Support Direction (“FSD”) jurisdiction arising out of what has rightly been described as the most complex corporate insolvency in history. FSD issued against 6 targets within the worldwide Lehman Brothers Group. Andrew acted for the American holding company (LBHI) and various other targets within the Group. References to and strike-out application in the Upper Tribunal pending 2012.
Chemtura Group of companies – The next big FSD case after Lehman. During 2011 Andrew acted on behalf of all six members of the worldwide Chemtura Group against which the Pensions Regulator sought the issuing of a FSD in respect of the large deficit in the Group’s UK pension scheme. Settled shortly before the hearing.
Pilots National Pension Fund Trust Company Ltd v Taylor & 7 others – [2010] EWHC 1573 (Ch) - One of The Lawyer’s Top 10 Cases for 2010 and one of the biggest pension trials ever, the decision of Warren J resolving many issues concerning the scope of amendment powers and the meaning of various pieces of pensions legislation. Went to the Court of Appeal twice in 2012, but was adjourned on each occasion. Final disposal by Court of Appeal awaited.
Stena Line Ltd v (1) Merchant Navy Ratings Pension Fund Trustees Ltd (2) P&O Ferries Ltd – [2010] EWHC 1805 (Ch) - This important case dealing with a large deficit-affected industry-wide scheme reached the Court of Appeal in 2011. The issue was the scope of the Trustee’s power of amendment and whether it extended to enabling deficit repair contributions to be demanded from former employers such as P&O or only current employers such as Stena. Andrew acted for P&O and other non-current employers.
X v Y - Andrew is currently advising the employer and trustees of a major UK pension scheme in relation to pending claims against the scheme’s former investment advisors and managers arising out of the scheme’s investment in 2008 of a high proportion of its assets in a portfolio of credit default swap contracts and in a cash portfolio with a significant exposure to US subprime mortgages.
Gate Gourmet Luxembourg IV SARL v Morby & Fernley Airport Services Ltd; Specialist Airport Services Ltd v Morby – A series of claims in the Chancery Division in related actions involving allegations of breaches of warranty in a share purchase agreement, breaches of fiduciary duty and trust by company directors and preferential payments.
Philips v Bacon & Woodrow and Hewitt Associates - Andrew acted for Philips and its UK pension scheme trustees in a multimillion pound claim for professional negligence against their actuarial advisors raising issues including the scope of the duty of care of a scheme actuary when undertaking an actuarial valuation, which settled in 2009.
Ruttle Plant Hire Ltd v DEFRA (No 2) – [2006] EWHC 3426 - Multi-million pound commercial litigation against DEFRA arising out of Classical Swine Fever clean up (multiple preliminary issues determined prior to eventual settlement.
Ruttle Plant Hire Ltd v DEFRA no.1 – [2004] EWHC 2152 (TCC); 104 ConLR 110 - Successful commercial litigation for damages in excess of £21m against DEFRA arising out of FMD clean up operation.
AIG Enhanced Variable Rate Fund mis-selling claims - Andrew advised in relation to allegations of negligence, breach of contract and statutory duty made against the financial services/wealth management departments of a number of banks by a group of investors whose assets were invested on their behalf by or on the advice of those banks in an AIG investment fund allegedly marketed as an alternative to a cash deposit account.
Equitable Life – Group action by several hundred policyholders alleging mis-selling of with-profit pension annuity policies.
In 2010, Andrew provided expert evidence on UK pensions legal issues to the Court in Ontario in proceedings arising there out of the UK Pension Regulator’s attempt to obtain an FSD against members of the Nortel Group of companies.
Appointments
Appointed Civil Recorder on the Western Circuit 2005
Appointed Deputy High Court Judge 2008
Admitted to the panel of registered advocates at the Dubai International Financial Centre 2008
Memberships
APL - Association of Pension Lawyers
CBA - Chancery Bar Association
COMBAR - Commercial Bar Association (Member of the Executive Committee and Chairman of the North American Committee)
FSLA - Financial Services Lawyers Association
LCLCBA - London Common Law & Commercial Bar Association
PNBA - Professional Negligence Bar Association (former Member of Executive Committee)
Gavin has over 20 years' experience as a specialist family law barrister. He handles all types of financial remedy proceedings in relation to relationship breakdown, with particular expertise in cases involving an international dimension.
Gavin is a leading expert on the international and domestic enforcement of maintenance orders, with a number of publications to his name in this field, including the authoritative chapters on the subject for Rayden & Jackson.
He also co-edits the financial practitioners' 'bibles', At A Glance and @eGlance, and co-authored the highly acclaimed Financial Remedies under the Family Procedure Rules, published in April 2011.
In parallel with his work as a barrister, Gavin has an expanding alternative dispute resolution (ADR) practice, being qualified both as a mediator and as a collaborative law practitioner. He was trained by Resolution, the specialist family law solicitors’ association.
Gavin is one of the very first practitioners or former judges to have been trained and accredited as arbitrators under the new family arbitration scheme which was introduced on 22 February 2012. As such, he is a member of the Family Arbitration Panel of the Institute of Family Law Arbitrators and a Member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.
Gavin believes it is important to offer clients a choice of process for resolving their disputes: “While there will always be a nucleus of cases which, for whatever reason, will require adjudication by a judge, I am convinced that the majority of cases are capable of resolution through some form of ADR. ADR has the clear advantages of being swifter, cheaper, less acrimonious and more private than the traditional court route.”
Before becoming a full-time barrister, Gavin graduated from Oxford University, then worked at the European Commission and the European Parliament, and as an EU affairs consultant. He says he finally chose family law because: “I wanted to provide a service to individuals, not big organisations.”
Notable cases
Gourisaria v Gourisaria [2010] EWCA Civ 1019; August 13, 2010
NA v MA [2006] EWHC 2900 (Fam), [2007] 1 FLR 1760: November 24, 2006
TL v ML and others [2005] EWHC 2860 (Fam), [2006] 1 FLR 1263: December 09, 2005
Chorley v Chorley [2005] EWCA Civ 68, [2005] 2 FLR 38, CA: January 12, 2005
C v C (Brussels II: French conciliation and divorce proceedings) [2004] EWHC 1959 (Fam), [2005] 2 FLR 14: June 28, 2004
Mubarak v Mubarik [2004] EWHC 1158 (Fam), [2004] 2 FLR 932: May 14, 2004
Dharamshi v Dharamshi [2001] 1 FLR 736, CA: December 05, 2000
Roker International Properties Inc v Couvaras [2000] 2 FLR 976: August 17, 2000
Abdi v Jama [1996] 1 FLR 407, CA: May 25, 1995
Other publications of note
Gavin co-authored Enforcing Financial Orders in Family Proceedings (Butterworths, 2000) and has recently written a well-received article on the enforcement aspects of the new EU Maintenance Regulation, published at [2011] International Family Law 187.
He produces a monthly 'Finance Cases Round-Up' for Class Legal, which can be accessed at http://www.classlegal.com/site.aspx?i=pg4610
Julie is a member of the Riverview team of solicitors and specialises in employment law. Having graduated in Law from the University of Leeds, she completed her solicitor’s training in 2008.
Julie provides expert commercial employment advice to HR business partners and owner/managers in a wide variety of businesses, from SMEs to large multinational organisations, across a range of sectors including manufacturing, education, retail, hospitality, leisure, charities and pharmaceuticals.
She advises on the full range of employment matters, including grievance, ill health, disciplinary situations, transfer of undertakings, preparation of bespoke contractual documents, and redundancy (frequently working in collective consultation scenarios). She also regularly advises clients in employment tribunal and employment appeal tribunal proceedings. In addition, she is often called upon to conduct client training and present bespoke seminars on employment law.
She is highly regarded by clients and peers, for example, a recent testimonial noted that: “Julie has a detailed knowledge of all areas of employment law and always provides clients with a cost effective solution to their employment issues.”
Julie is based in Riverview’s Wirral headquarters and outside the office enjoys keeping fit and attending/hosting local networking events.
Adam is Chief Operating Officer of Riverview Law. He has extensive senior management experience in the banking, investment and professional services sectors.
After reading Law at Clare College, Cambridge, Adam was called to the Bar in 1986, graduating top of the Bar Final examinations. In 1987 he joined SG Warburg’s Corporate Finance Division working in London and New York.
He joined Deutsche Bank in 1995 where he was a Managing Director specialising in mergers & acquisitions and equity capital markets business in the consumer and leisure sectors.
Adam joined Accord plc, a support services group with turnover of £285 million and over 3,500 employees, in 2002 as Chief Financial Officer. He led the sale of Accord in 2007 to Enterprise plc, a 3i-backed business.
In 2008 Adam became Managing Director of Palatium Investment Management, an FSA-regulated investment manager specialising in real estate and related debt investments. Adam joined LawVest in August 2011.
Adam says: “Our work with small businesses over many years shows that they value cost transparency and a quality service at a price they can budget for. That’s why all our services are fixed price with no hidden surprises. We can do this because we’ve built our model from the client up, rather than the lawyer down, as is the case in traditional law firms. Our message to business is test us, at no cost, and experience the Riverview Law difference.”
Adam is based in London and spends spare time with his family or on his bike – he is an enthusiastic amateur cyclist and recently completed the legendary 1,400km ride from Land’s End to John O’Groats.
Sir Peter is the most senior member of the Riverview Family Mediation and Arbitration team. He is a specialist family dispute resolution facilitator with a superb legal pedigree. During a highly distinguished career before the Courts, he practised as a barrister for 25 years (six of those in silk) and subsequently sat as a High Court Judge on the Family Division Bench for 18 years. He now utilises his vast experience in family law to provide high-level assistance to separating and separated couples attempting to reach agreement on finances and/or their children in an out-of-court and less adversarial setting.
Sir Peter accepts instructions to conduct private Financial Dispute Resolution (FDR) meetings either in parallel with or as an alternative to Court proceedings. The principal advantage of private FDR meetings is the speed with which they can be undertaken, in contrast to waiting for what may be several months for a comparable High Court hearing-date. “It’s also reassuring for clients to be able to choose the person who will be presiding at the meeting,” adds Sir Peter, “whereas in the High Court you have to accept whoever you draw on that day's list.”
Sir Peter also acts in a non-representative capacity as an independent and neutral mediator (trained by Resolution) in both domestic and cross-border child disputes. He brings substantial experience to bear in this area and has particular expertise in Hague Convention abduction cases, as well as those involving non-convention countries and relocation disputes generally.
He is also an Arbitrator accredited to undertake arbitrations subject to the Scheme Rules of the Institute of Family Law Arbitrators (IFLA), operating under the aegis of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators. The IFLA Scheme is available to those wishing to achieve an outcome to their family financial dispute with greater rapidity and confidentiality, retaining more control over the pace and nature of the process than is inherent in conventional court proceedings. This process often has the added bonus of overall cost savings.
In addition to his FDR, arbitration and mediation work, Sir Peter is able to provide an expert and authoritative opinion or to give evidence to assist foreign courts applying for or requiring evidence of UK domestic law in family disputes. He is also trained in collaborative law procedures.
Over the years, Sir Peter’s experience has spanned a wide range of family law issues and interests at the highest levels, both in the UK and overseas. As a barrister he appeared in Hong Kong and the Cayman Islands. He was a member of the UK judicial team that visited Pakistan in 2003, leading to the agreement of the UK-Pakistan Protocol for the return of abducted children. His numerous posts and appointments have included being Chairman of the Family Law Bar Association, Vice-President of the European Chapter of the international Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers and a member of the Family Justice Council's International Family Law Committee. He is currently the UK representative on a European Union working party considering means to promote the use of international family mediation.
Sir Peter also frequently lectures and presents to international conferences/seminars on topics such as cross-border family dispute mediation, child abduction, and forced marriage.
Publications
Sir Peter has been since its creation a member of the editorial board that produces the Family Law Bar Association’s annual publication At a Glance: Essential Court Tables for Ancillary Relief (now in its 20th edition); he is also one of the creators of and a contributor to both its companion software program @eGlance, and to the Duxbury calculator Capitalise.
Memberships
The Family Law Bar Association
Resolution
International Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers
Centre for Family Law and Practice
Central London Collaborative Forum
GEMME, the European Association of Judges for Mediation
Languages
Fluent French, modest German
Alison is head of the employment team within Riverview and is a highly regarded employment law specialist with 19 years’ experience at the Bar. She handles all types of employment litigation and is particularly in-demand for her expertise in discrimination, whistleblowing, TUPE, and re-structuring cases involving collective redundancy and trade union issues. She is frequently instructed in lengthy and/or complex cases.
She regularly appears in employment tribunals throughout the UK and before the Employment Appeal Tribunal. She also appears in the High Court on restrictive covenant and confidentiality injunctions and in the Court of Appeal.
Alison is highly recommended in Chambers and Partners for her “razor-sharp analysis and highly effective cross-examination skills”. The directory also notes that she “inspires confidence” and is “a joy to watch in court, whether she’s handling discrimination cases relating to age, disability or sexual orientation.”
In addition to her work in the courts and tribunals, Alison presents regular CPD-accredited employment law seminars in person and via the internet for a range of organisations, as well as delivering bespoke training to solicitors and corporate clients on all aspects of employment law. She is also an advocacy trainer for Middle Temple and a speaker on the Bar Council ‘Speak Up for Others - A Career as a Barrister’ scheme.
Alison says she especially enjoys “going into companies and learning about them first-hand. It’s important so that my legal advice can be as realistic, commercially relevant and practical as possible.”
Notable cases:
A v B [2009] UKEAT/0421/08
Johns v Solent SD Limited [2008] IRLR 88, EAT; [2008] IRLR 820, CA
Melia v Magna Kansei Ltd [2006] IRLR 117, CA
Voith v Stowe [2005] IRLR 228
Hayes v Quantum Business Media [2004] All ER (D) 65
Direct Line Accident Management Ltd v Zaidi [2001] All ER (D) 393
Kuttapan v LB Croydon [1999] IRLR 349
Lambert v Croydon College [1999] IRLR 346
Nash v Mash/Roe Group [1998] IRLR 168
Memberships:
Employment Lawyers Association
Employment Lawyers Bar Association
Bar Pro Bono Unit
Employment Judge (Fee Paid)
Gareth was called to the Bar in 1999 and practises across all areas of criminal (predominantly defence), common, civil, family and employment law. He specialises in serious fraud and issues relating to the use of the Human Rights Act in litigation.
He regularly appears in the High Court and the Court of Appeal as well as in the Crown and County Courts. He also has experience of cases with an international dimension, where he has successfully obtained disclosure of evidence from foreign jurisdictions.
Prior to becoming a barrister, Gareth gained valuable experience as a political researcher and speechwriter in the House of Commons and as a Senior Parliamentary Researcher for the Liberal Democrat Party, working for Simon Hughes MP and Lord Carlile amongst others.
Gareth’s clients report that he is personable and easy to work with, describing him as “a fluent advocate and a good talker in front of a jury” who “always remains calm.”
He says he is particularly fascinated by “the psychological relationship between the jury, judge and other participants. I am quite competitive by nature, so I do enjoy the challenge of being in Court! I’m also passionate about getting all the facts right from the outset.”
Outside his legal practice, Gareth’s interests include rugby union and athletics, having previously competed in both at club and national levels. He is also a published author of fiction and has written articles on politics and economics for several broadsheet newspapers. He lives near Wrexham, North Wales with his wife and 3 young children.
Notable cases
R v Egan (The Times, March 9th 2004) - concerning remand time being deducted from terms of custodial sentence
R v E (a juvenile) (The Times, March 23, 2003) - a challenge under Section 6 and 8 of the ECHR to the previous law relating to statutory rape
R v Jordan Blackshawe [2011] EWCA Crim 2312, - concerning the sentence of 4 years given to the appellant for inciting a riot on Facebook during the UK riots of August 2011
R v Hackney et al, - a year long complex fraud case at Birmingham Crown Court in 2005
R v Robinson et al, - a trial involving the illegal importation of millions of pounds of heroin by undercover customs officers in 2006, involving complex issues of character, PII and evidence from foreign jurisdictions
R v Carstairs et al, - a case of gold bullion being imported into the North West leading to an attempt to launder millions of pounds
R v Eastwick et al, - a case involving allegations of large scale Tax and VAT fraud amongst a firm of hauliers
Memberships
Wales and Northern Circuit
Andrew was called to the Bar in 1990, becoming a QC in 2010. He is highly sought-after for his work in employment, pensions and discrimination law and has an excellent reputation with both clients and peers.
Andrew’s employment practice covers everything from complex or sensitive dismissal and discrimination cases through TUPE to high value contract and equal pay claims. His pension work includes equalisation and other discrimination issues, preservation and revaluation, mistake, estoppel, construction and complaints to and appeals from the Ombudsman. He also undertakes professional negligence work, often though not always related to employment or occupational pension schemes. Andrew appears regularly in the employment tribunals, Employment Appeal Tribunal and other divisions of the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. His clients include national and international companies or organisations, public bodies, trustees, trade unions and individuals.
He is consistently highly recommended in the legal directories. Chambers and Partners has described him as the “Young Turk of the pensions silks”, “an increasingly strong force” and a “technically adept and precise barrister” who “garners praise for his forensic and thorough approach to employment matters.” He is also noted for being “pleasant in the corridors but unrelenting in court”. The Legal 500 singles him out as “an excellent performer on his feet” who is “very commercial” with “excellent instincts” and “a pleasure to work with.”
Andrew says of himself: “I find the problem-solving aspect of the job particularly satisfying - and I really do enjoy going to court!” He lives in Walthamstow, East London, and is a keen long-distance swimmer in his spare time.
Notable cases
Birmingham City Council v Abdulla [2011] Eq LR 81 – Jurisdiction of High Court and County Court in relation to claims relying upon Equal Pay Act
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/1412.html
Williams v British Airways plc [2011] EUECJ C-155/10; [2011] IRLR 948 – Construction of UK regulations in context of EC Directive.
http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2011/C15510.html
Woodcock v Cumbria PCT [2011] IRLR 119, EAT – Age discrimination, entitlement to early retirement benefits, justification: avoidance of windfall and cost.
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2010/0489_09_1211.html
The Trustees of the Hobourn Pension Scheme v Knell, Re: Hobourn Group Pension Scheme [2010] EWHC 650 (Ch), Norris J – Construction of pension scheme: amendments made so as to achieve equalisation.
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2010/16.html
Unison v Allen & Ors [2008] ICR 114, EAT – Pensions and equal pay; time limits and TUPE.
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2007/0056_07_2607.html
Foster Wheeler Ltd v Hanley & others [2008] EWHC 2926 – Decision revisiting Hodgson v Toray Textiles and the operation of European & domestic law where a pension scheme has been amended to equalize NRD for men and women, but without making express provision for the retained rights of members with pension accrued by reference to an NRD at age 60.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2008/2926.html
Regent Securities v Power [2008] IRLR 66, Court of Appeal – On appeal from EAT in [2007] IRLR 226. TUPE. Whether employee can rely upon improved terms agreed by reason of a transfer of an undertaking.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/1188.html
MGN Trustees v Wright [2007] EWCA Civ 1247, Court of Appeal – Acting for the appellant trustees on a preliminary issue on a point of interpretation concerning the pension scheme’s rules and the true interpretation of the consent requirements governing early retirement. Decision revisiting Hodgson v Toray Textiles and the operation of European & domestic law where a pension scheme has been amended to equalize NRD for men and women, but without making express provision for the retained rights of members with pension accrued by reference to an NRD at age 60.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2008/2926.html
Memberships
Association of Pension Lawyers
Employment Law Bar Association
Employment Law Association
Discrimination Law Association
Simon was called to the Bar in 2008 and practises in all aspects of civil law, with particular strengths in contracts, commercial disputes, property, personal injury and employment law. He is also instructed in both public and private family law cases.
Simon regularly appears in the County Courts, High Court and Leasehold Valuation Tribunal representing both companies and individuals. His experience in employment law includes matters relating to unfair dismissal, constructive dismissal and discrimination claims.
After graduating from Cambridge University, Simon gained valuable commercial experience working in the in-house legal department for a Fortune 500 company and then as a legal costs advocate, before becoming a barrister. His impressive legal talents gained him the top marks in his year in two of his Bar Finals exams at the College of Law and he was also awarded an Exhibition from the Inner Temple. In 2009 he was a national finalist in The Times/Herbert Smith Advocacy Competition.
In addition to his work before the courts, Simon accepts instructions for the drafting of documents and contracts and provides non-contentious advice in a range of areas. He remarks that “getting the right advice at an early stage in any commercial transaction is paramount. It saves time and money which my clients may have but rarely want to waste!”
Clients appreciate Simon’s personable manner combined with his thorough, efficient approach.
Katy is Riverview Law’s Product Manager. Her overall role is to ensure, from a commercial standpoint, that all aspects of our service fully meet our customers’ requirements.
Her responsibilities include product development and testing, managing sales and customer service, liaison with our PR and marketing teams, establishing relationships with strategic partners, and ensuring our technology interface is fit-for-purpose. Going forward, she will also play an important role in bringing new products to market.
Katy has over 10 years’ experience in customer service and product management with major companies such as Scottish & Newcastle and British Telecom. Immediately prior to joining Riverview Law, she was Commercial Product Manager for Sage UK Ltd, one of the UK’s leading business software and services providers.
Katy describes herself as “highly motivated and definitely a team player” and says that she thrives on meeting challenges head-on. Among colleagues and clients alike, she is noted for her superb organisational skills, her natural commercial instincts, and her seemingly inexhaustible enthusiasm.
She is based in our service delivery centre in the Wirral in North West England and outside her work enjoys reading, music, running and spending time with family and friends.
Andrew is the Senior Partner of Riverview Solicitors, and is responsible for strategic guidance and overall supervision of our experienced team of practitioners.
Andrew has been practising law for over 15 years. After graduating from the University of East Anglia and the University of Warwick, he trained with Eversheds Solicitors before setting up his own successful practice, later becoming a partner in MILS Solicitors, London.
He is a recognised expert in consumer law, dealer agreements, competition law, trading standards and intellectual property and has considerable experience of commercial litigation in the High Court and the County Courts, as well as the Magistrates’ Courts.
Andrew has particular expertise in the motor industry, advising and representing major motor retailers in all aspects of employment law and a wide range of other industry-related legal matters. He is also experienced in Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).
Clients describe Andrew as highly efficient and pragmatic, with a very commercial slant. He says that he and his team aim to “provide relevant, practical, timely advice that is tailored to the specific needs of each client’s business.”
Charles is a seasoned practitioner who has gained a first-class reputation during his 39 years at the Bar. He has a broad-based practice covering both civil and criminal law, with particular expertise in employment law, health and safety law and regulatory crime. He represents a wide range of businesses from major corporations to SMEs.
Charles is described in Chambers and Partners’ Health and Safety listings as having a "willingness to roll up his sleeves and forge ahead with cases" and is ‘highly recommended for cases involving technical issues… especially renowned for his esoteric understanding of complex scientific matters’. The directory also notes that, “he really gets stuck into each case that he deals with, and will rally a team of lawyers and clients well”.
Charles frequently appears before the employment tribunals in cases covering everything from discrimination and constructive dismissal to breach of confidentiality and redundancy. He has also appeared in numerous inquests and at disciplinary hearings before professional regulatory bodies. In addition, he is an Approved Counsel on the Attorney General’s list (Grade A) and is regularly instructed by a number of Government departments.
A complementary aspect of Charles’s work is conducting professional seminars and in-house training for industry, covering such topics as the Corporate Manslaughter Act, the Health and Safety at Work Act, and the Bribery Act. He is also an accredited mediator and is happy to advise at an early stage in any dispute to promote resolution and/or assist in case preparation.
In general commercial law, Charles routinely advises in matters such as employment contracts, share option agreements, intellectual property, terms and conditions of service, regulatory enforcement, employment of foreign nationals and breach of contract. “I’m a great fan of the carefully-crafted letter,” he says. “Getting it right at the outset can often prevent more costly problems further down the line.”
He has always managed his own business (farming) alongside his practice as a barrister and is also retained to advise the management of another small company: “It’s excellent real-world experience and gives me a good perspective on the day-to-day issues facing smaller commercial enterprises.”
Notable cases
R v Lemmon 12 C R App S 1991 - Drug trafficking Confiscation Order
R v Firetto 1991 Crim L R - Perverting the course of Justice
Health and Safety Executive v Nelsons Group Services (Maintenance) Ltd 1998, 4 AER 331 - Court of Appeal case concerning employer’s liability for the purposes of reasonable practicability when the fault is that of the employee
Regina v Crown Court at Swindon, ex parte Crown Prosecution Service (Squire joined) DC [2000] – Administrative Court- Review of legality of Crown Court judge’s sentence
The Verderers of the New Forest v Barnes and others, Administrative Court, December 2003 - Magistrates’ jurisdiction over the New Forest, and again Administrative Court December 2004, time for issuing a summons / consideration of a ‘continuing’ offence
Health and Safety Executive v Electric Gate Services Ltd [2009] EWCA Crim 1942 - Addresses the essential ingredients needed for the prosecution case and ‘material risk’
Attorney General v Dallas [2012] – Divisional Court- Contempt of court by juror; mode of trial
Memberships and appointments
Member of the Western Circuit
Criminal Bar Association
Health and Safety Lawyers Association
Qualified ADR Group Panel Mediator, 2008
Accredited Mediator, Association of Regulatory and Disciplinary Lawyers
Fellow of Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, 1994
Bar Council Remuneration Committee, 1992-2002
Rachel is a family law barrister and specialist mediator with over 15 years’ experience in disputes involving children.
She has appeared for parents and children in numerous complex disputes, including over 70 cases in the High Court acting for the Official Solicitor (the independent statutory office holder appointed to look after the interests of vulnerable individuals in Court).
She has extensive experience of private residence and contact disputes, applications for leave to remove children from the jurisdiction, and cases of child abduction.
After graduating from the London School of Economics and the University of London, Rachel was called to the Bar in 1989. After several successful years as an advocate, followed by a career break to start a family, her interests expanded into alternative dispute resolution, an area in which she now specialises.
In 1999 she qualified as a Family Mediator with the Family Mediation Association and in 2009 she completed further mediation qualifications with Resolution, where course leaders praised her “natural warmth “ and her ability to “capture and summarise clients' ideas and thoughts.” She is one of a very small number of legal practitioners to have specific training in direct consultation with children during mediation.
Described by clients as proactive, friendly and extremely hard working, Rachel says:
“I’m more interested in getting a practical outcome than in the legal contest. There’s nothing more satisfying to me than reaching a successful conclusion for my client.”
Rachel lives in Buckinghamshire with her husband, fellow barrister Nicholas Cusworth QC, and their two children.
During a decade at the Bar, Heather has built an impressive reputation in employment law, discrimination law and related areas.
She represents a wide cross-section of businesses, from multinational corporations to SMEs, as well as public bodies and individuals.
Heather has handled numerous cases before the employment tribunals, the Employment Appeal Tribunal and in the High Court; she is particularly in-demand for her expertise in disability discrimination, sexual orientation, unfair dismissal, redundancy, stress at work, bullying and harassment, whistleblowing and TUPE. She acts for both claimants and respondents. Heather has successfully obtained injunctive relief in the High Court. Heather has substantial experience in discrimination law. She has acted in several high-value cases for and against large organisations and public bodies, including Primary Care Trusts, schools and colleges, local authorities, police forces and major airlines.
In addition, Heather undertakes a considerable amount of advisory and mediation work and provides bespoke employer training for SMEs, including tribunal simulations and tactical advice during disciplinary and grievance procedures. She regularly lectures in employment and discrimination law at City University London.
Client testimonials have praised Heather as a “highly competent and reliable counsel” who is valued for her “patient and professional conduct”, her “ability to analyse and grasp detailed information“ and her “excellent preparation”. They add that she is a “tenacious advocate” who is “razor sharp both in cross-examination and her delivery”.
Heather says she loves her job: “I do have a passion for employment law. I enjoy going to court, but I also get great satisfaction from the advisory and teaching aspects of my work.”
She lives in London and her rare spare time is spent pursuing extreme sports and travelling.
Notable cases
Oni v NHS Leicester City (2011) UKEATPA/1138/11/LA – costs and list of issues.
Okoro & Okenwa v Taylor Woodrow Construction & Ors (2011) UKEAT/0319/10/ZT – continuous discrimination and jurisdiction.
Winchester & Eastleigh Healthcare NHS Trust v Walker UKEATPA/1794/10/LA – basic award, continuous service in the NHS.
McKinnon v Greater Manchester Police (2011) ET – 15 day race discrimination case brought by volunteer.
Hose Express Thurrock Ltd v Jacomb (2009) UKEAT 0389_08_3103 (unreported) – disability related discrimination (possible reference to the ECJ) following London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm [2008] 1 AC 1399.
Henry v (1) London Borough of Southwark (2) South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (2008) – race discrimination; application for review and new evidence; aiding and abetting race discrimination UKEAT/0520/07/DM (unreported).
Hamilton v Tesco Stores Limited (2007) ET – Damages of £320,000 for Disability Discrimination; overlapping claims in the County Court for Personal Injury and Professional Negligence
Memberships
Employment Law Bar Association
Employment Lawyers Association
Personal Injury Bar Association
Gary was called to the Bar in 1993. His practice covers the full range of employment law including all aspects of discrimination and collective labour law and restrictive covenants in relation to employment. His clients include businesses, individuals, trade unions and employer organisations. He represents both claimants and defendants.
He is well known for his appearances in the Employment Tribunals (ET) and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), including many legally significant cases. He also appears as an advocate in the County Court, the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
A growing area of Gary’s practice is advice and training for employers. His substantial experience in the courts and tribunals makes him much sought-after to advise company directors and HR professionals on employment policies, procedures and strategy.
Gary is passionate about employment law and has been actively involved in the field for most of his working life, including periods as a full-time union official and as an academic. He is also an accredited mediator, trained by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas). In addition, he was part of two working parties consulted by the Government over proposed employment law reforms in 2008 and 2009.
Gary believes it is essential for companies to protect themselves as far as possible against the potentially catastrophic effects of employment law claims: “Good preparation can make all the difference in mitigating the impact of a court case or tribunal. There are also many proactive measures that companies can take to avoid the need to go before a tribunal in the first place.”
Outside his legal practice, Gary divides his time between London and Shropshire and enjoys keeping fit including running, swimming and sculling on the River Thames.
Notable cases
Mr J. Iteshi v. The General Council of the Bar (The Bar Council) (30 March 2012) UKEAT/0161/11/DM. I represented Mr Iteshi under the Employment Law Appeal Advice Scheme (ELAAS) at the Rule 3(10) hearing. Clark J allowed an amended Notice of Appeal with four grounds to go forward to the a full hearing where I represented Mr Iteshi under the Free Representation Unit (FRU) scheme. The EAT found that the Employment Tribunal had not erred in concluding that section 12 of the Race Relations Act 1976 did not apply to the provision criterion or practice relied on (a rule imposed on barristers' chambers re: funding of pupillages) and further that there was no evidence of discriminatory effect. The claim was misconceived and Mr Iteshi's appeal was dismissed.
Meter U Ltd v. L. Ackroyd & Others (23 February 2011) ET case number 1806034/2010 & Others. I represented over 109 meter readers who had been dismissed by Meter U. The Claimants, and other meter readers who had not made Employment Tribunal claims, were replaced by independent franchise companies. Meter U contracted with 436 franchisees and 10 of those franchisees employed individuals that were not the individual named in the franchise agreement. The Employment Tribunal decided that the Claimants had been automatically unfairly dismissed under TUPE. On appeal (where I was not instructed) the EAT, [2012] IRLR 367 & UKEAT/0206/11/CEA & 0207/11/CEA, decided that the franchisees were not part of Meter U's workforce and set aside the finding that the Claimants had been automatically unfairly dismissed. The EAT found that the dismissals were for economic and organisational reasons entailing changes in the workforce and that the dismissals were for redundancy.
F v. G [2012] ICR 246, UKEAT/42/11 & [2011] EqLR 1219. I represented a College employer in the Employment Tribunal and the EAT. Underhill J (President) upheld the decision of the Employment Tribunal to make a permanent anonymity order to prevent publication of intimate details of facilities provided to disabled students under the College's Relationships and Sexuality Policy. There is a case report in the Employment Lawyers Association (ELA) Briefing, Volume 18, Number 8, September/October 2011.
Royal Bank of Scotland v. Ashton [2011] ICR 632, UKEAT/542/09. Ms Ashton was successful in her disability discrimination claims in the Employment Tribunal but the Bank's appeal to the EAT was allowed. I represented Ms Ashton in the EAT but not in the Employment Tribunal. The EAT decided that there was nothing to support Ms Ashton's claim that there had been a failure to make a reasonable adjustment and it also decided that her section 3A(1) Disability Discrimination Act 1995 comparator was in fact disabled but in any event could not be said to be in the same relevant circumstances as her. This case was reported in the New Law Journal, 4 March 2011, the ELA Briefing, Volume 18, Number 2, March 2011, Labour Research, June 2011, and Employers' Law, July/August 2011.
Jilley v. Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Trust, Recent Points [2008] ICR Part 2, (Points of interest in the EAT not calling for a full report in ICR) & (21 November 2007) UKEAT/155/07. This case was mentioned in Harvey on Industrial Relations and Employment Law, Bulletin No.358, in May 2008 and there is a case report in the ELA Briefing, volume 15, number 6, July 2008. I assisted the Appellant at the preliminary hearing under ELAAS. At the full hearing I represented her under the Bar Pro Bono Unit (BPBU) scheme and her appeal was successful. The Employment Tribunal's £127,000 costs award was remitted to the same Birmingham Employment Tribunal to ascertain her ability to pay.
Mr B. Crofton v. Mr S. Yeboah (16 May 2001) EAT/475/00, 1352/98, 1353/98, 1354/98 & 1356/98. The inter-partes hearing is published on the EAT web-site. I represented Mr Crofton, the Appellant, under the BPBU scheme on the s.33(1) RRA 1976 point as to whether he had knowingly aided an act of discrimination. His appeal was successful before the EAT but the Court of Appeal [2002] IRLR 634 & [2002] EWCA Civ 794 (where I was not involved) restored the decision of the Employment Tribunal.
Mr K. O'Connell v. Essex County Fire & Rescue Service (2 July 2001) EAT/1334/99. The inter-partes hearing is published on the EAT web-site and reported in Personnel Today's case round-up on 31 July 2001. I represented Mr O'Connell, the successful Appellant, at the EAT preliminary hearing. The EAT inter-partes hearing allowed the appeal and remitted Mr O'Connell's complaint of unfair dismissal to a fresh Employment Tribunal.
Mr N.W. Turner v. London Borough of Havering Recent Points [2001] ICR Part 6, & (23 November 2000) EAT/1066/99. I represented the Appellant at the EAT preliminary hearing under ELAAS and at the inter-partes hearing where I was instructed by the BPBU where the appeal failed. This case is published on the EAT web-site.
Theodosopoulou v. Bank of Cyprus (London) Ltd (31 January 2000) EAT/567/99. This case was mentioned in Harvey on Industrial Relations and Employment Law, Bulletin No.260, in March 2000. I appeared on behalf of the unsuccessful Appellant, Ms Theodosopoulou.
Readman v. The Post Office, IDS Brief 640, July 1999. I appeared for the relatively unsuccessful Applicant in the Employment Tribunal, a postal worker with epilepsy.
Mensah v. East Hertfordshire NHS Trust [1998] IRLR 531, CA, & (1998) Times Law Reports, 20 July, CA. I appeared for Mrs Mensah in the EAT where she was successful in her appeal. The Trust succeeded in their appeal to the Court of Appeal. This case was mentioned in Harvey on Industrial Relations and Employment Law, Bulletin No.243, in October 1998; the Sweet & Maxwell Employment Law Briefing, page 163, 1999; IDS Brief 625, November 1998; and the TUC's Employment Tribunals Newsletter, October 1998.
Teachers Pension Agency v. Hill [1999] ICR 435, ChD, & Times Law Reports, 20 July 1998. I appeared for Mrs Hill. The TPA were successful in their challenge to a decision of the Pensions Ombudsman.
Smallwood v. Regional Railways North East Recent Points [1998] ICR Part 6. I appeared for the unsuccessful Appellant, Mr Smallwood.
Roberts v. (1) Charge Crest Ltd (2) Harris Logistics (24 April 1998) EAT/536/98. This case was mentioned in Harvey on Industrial Relations and Employment Law, Bulletin No.240, in July 1998. I appeared for Ms Roberts the successful Appellant.
Appointments
Commission for Racial Equality's Panel of Advocates (B category), since 18 June 2002
Equal Opportunities Commission's Panel of Barristers, since 23 May 2003.
Memberships
Industrial Law Society
British Universities Industrial Relations Association
Employment Law Bar Association
Employment Lawyers Association
Keith has earned a superb reputation during his 20-plus years at the Bar, particularly in the field of health and safety law. He has appeared, mainly for the defence, in many of the most high profile health and safety cases of recent years. He also has a strong presence in employment, personal injury and administrative law, acting for both claimants and defendants.
In addition to representing some of the UK’s largest corporations and public bodies, Keith also assists a wide variety of medium-sized organisations and individuals, especially in the financial, construction and leisure industries. He frequently works alongside the client’s in-house Counsel.
Before becoming a QC in 2011, Keith was widely acknowledged as a leading junior barrister in the health and safety field.
Over the years, he has been variously described in Chambers and Partners as "an absolutely fabulous advocate", “a calm advocate who reflects wisely" and "a ferocious cross-examiner". The directory has also noted that he "works tirelessly and ceaselessly" and "outshines just about any other" with a "solid grasp of the law" and "great attention to detail". The Legal 500 says that he has “an excellent reputation for his tremendous manner in court”, is “direct, focused and incisive” and that he “reaps positive feedback from clients.”
As well as appearing in the Courts and at numerous Inquests and Public Inquiries, Keith also undertakes a considerable amount of behind-the-scenes work, acting in an advisory capacity.
When it comes to clients, he believes it’s all about developing good relationships: “I lead the discussion, but I don’t assume I’m always right. My approach is very collaborative. I have a deep appreciation of the fact that this is unfamiliar territory for every client. They come to me at a time of great vulnerability, whether corporately or individually, and I’m always sensitive to that.”
Keith is based in London and away from work enjoys travel, cycling and architecture.
Notable cases
R v Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings Limited (2011, Winchester Crown Court and Court of Appeal) – first prosecution under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007
Inquests into the London Bombings of 7 July 2005 – presided over by Lady Justice Hallett: Counsel for Transport for London
Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Inquiry (2010) – presided over by Robert Francis QC: Counsel to the Inquiry
Gurung and others v Ministry of Defence (2007) – one of a series of cases in which Keith represented the Ministry of Defence in claims brought by former Gurkha soldiers seeking to challenge the terms and conditions of service of soldiers serving in the Brigade of Gurkhas
R v Office of the Commissioner for Police of the Metropolis (2007, Central Criminal Court) – prosecution arising out of the Stockwell Shooting
R v Collins (2005) – Defence counsel for landowner prosecuted following electrocution of visitor to his premises
R v Edge (2004) – defence of company director prosecuted under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974
R v Thames Trains Ltd (2004) – prosecution arising out of the Ladbroke Grove rail crash
R v Sir John Stevens and Lord Condon (Central Criminal Court, 2003) – duties owed to police officers under Health and Safety legislation
Ladbroke Grove Rail Inquiry (2001) – presided over by Lord Cullen: Counsel for Thames Trains Ltd
Appointments
Appointed Junior Counsel to the Crown (London A Panel) 2003-2008 and 2009-2011
Previously appointed to London B Panel, 1997-2003
Memberships
Administrative Law Bar Association
Employment Lawyers Association
Health and Safety Lawyers Association
Justice
Natasha is a member of the Riverview team of solicitors. She has experience across a range of contractual and commercial matters and specialises in cases involving commercial property and landlord/tenant issues. She acts for both corporate clients and individuals and has dealt with a number of high-value cases.
Natasha’s litigation experience includes boundary disputes, adverse possession applications, leasehold and service charge disputes, disagreements about contractual terms and unpaid rent claims. She has developed particular expertise over the years in matters involving land registration applications, easements, and complex issues concerning overlapping freehold titles, bridges, tunnels and rivers. She regularly negotiates settlement agreements and prepares and drafts contracts, statutory declarations and witness statements.
Clients frequently remark on Natasha’s reliability and her confident and thorough approach to problem solving. She has been described as a highly motivated and extremely hard working individual who is “always willing to go the extra mile to ensure a successful outcome”. She is a graduate of Lancaster University and Nottingham Law School and currently lives in Chester with her husband, hens and tortoise. Outside of work Natasha has a passion for cooking and enjoys scuba diving and socialising with friends.
Tara has developed a successful mixed civil / family law practice since her call to the Bar in 2005. She has a particularly strong presence in employment law, general civil and commercial law and personal injury claims. She also undertakes matrimonial finance, inheritance law and private law children cases. She represents both claimants and defendants.
Tara is a graduate of Cambridge University, where she was the recipient of a Dr Cooper Law Studentship (Trinity Hall, 2004). She has also been awarded a Harmsworth Entrance Exhibition Award (Middle Temple, 2004) and a prestigious Pegasus Scholarship (Inner Temple, 2010). The latter enabled Tara to spend three months working overseas as a judicial assistant to the Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia.
In recent years, Tara has appeared in a growing number of commercial cases, representing several well-known companies in the areas of employment, civil and commercial law. She also regularly appears in personal injury matters, acting in fast-track and multi-track trials, and drafting statement of cases and opinions.
Clients and peers say Tara is “tenacious at the same time as being very pleasant and easy to work with” adding that they admire her “thorough, pragmatic and balanced approach”.
Tara is based in London and when she has some free time enjoys adventurous travel, theatre, ballet and learning languages.
Notable cases:
D v William Hill Ltd - Tara successfully defended a claim for payment of monies (£35,000) allegedly won on a gaming machine in the Defendant’s betting shop.
Memberships:
Family Law Bar Association
Personal Injury Bar Association
Member of the Western Circuit
Employment Law Association
Richard is Head of the Business and International teams at Riverview Law.
He is universally lauded by clients and peers for the outstanding quality of his work as a barrister. He provides top-level advice in commercial law, regulatory issues and public law across a range of areas, both nationally and internationally.
Richard’s practice is mainly high-profile complex litigation, with a strong corporate slant. He has appeared in many landmark cases over the last two decades, including the Maxwell pensions case, the Buncefield refinery incident, the Shipman Inquiry and the Hatfield rail crash.
Richard frequently works in overseas jurisdictions, including New York, Abu Dhabi, the British Virgin Islands, Italy, Switzerland, Luxembourg and Hong Kong. He has been admitted to the New York Bar (as a Foreign Legal Consultant), the Eastern Caribbean Bar and the Dubai International Financial Centre.
Richard’s remarkable skills are borne out by numerous entries in Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500 over the years. He is unique in being currently ranked as an expert or a ‘Star Individual’ in nine different categories: Banking and Finance; Financial Services; Commercial Litigation; Fraud; Employment; Health and Safety; Professional Discipline and Regulatory Law; Public Inquiries; Clinical Negligence and Healthcare.
The directories have variously described him as “QC of choice in any big case”, “a truly exceptional talent”, “a standout silk”, “a true leader”, “and “in a league of his own”. They add that he combines “forensic brilliance, a tactical approach and first-rate legal analysis ” with “excellent client care” and a “charming, personable” manner that “puts clients at ease” and makes him “a joy to work with”. He is noted for his “breathtaking advocacy” and for being “very intelligent and creative in undermining another side’s case”. He is also praised for “an amazing ability to grasp and analyse a vast body of information" allowing him to “get to the nub of the issue” whilst explaining complex legal points “entirely without pomposity”.
A self-confessed workaholic, Richard says: “I’m a great modernist. I like to present legal material in a different and updated way.”
Notable cases:
Please see www.rlqc.com
Memberships and appointments:
- Bencher, Inner Temple
- Member, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
- Financial Services Lawyers Association (Board Member)
- Human Rights Lawyers Association
- Commercial Bar Association
- International Bar Association
- Employment Law Bar Association
- Bar European Group
- Health and Safety Lawyers Association
- American Counsel Association
- Federal Bar Council of New York
- International Association of Defense Counsel
- Admitted to Eastern Caribbean Bar 2002
- Admitted to New York Bar (FLC) 2007
- Admitted to DIFC 2008
Publications and media:
- Co-authored Lissack and Horlick on Bribery, LexisNexis, 2011
- Contributing editor, Public inquiries, Oxford University Press, 2011
- Financial Services Law and Regulation, LexisNexis, 2009
- Richard has written and contributed to numerous articles for legal/business publications and is regularly called upon to provide expert commentary for national newspapers and radio
-
Other:
- President, S&WWH
- Ambassador for Action Aid
- Patron and Development Board member of RADA
Jennifer has a largely business-focused practice, specialising in employment law, property law, contract law, general commercial disputes and personal injury cases. She represents both claimants and defendants.
She graduated in Law from University College London and also holds a postgraduate degree from the London School of Economics. She was the recipient of the Hardwicke Entrance Award (2006) when embarking on her Bar training, and was subsequently awarded a Cholmeley Studentship (2008) to undertake her pupillage. She was called to the Bar in 2007.
Jennifer is known for her robust advocacy, an area of her work that she particularly enjoys. She also undertakes a great deal of behind-the-scenes advisory work, including drafting of documents and witness statements: “A really good, well-drafted document is often half the battle,” she says.
Jennifer is at ease in the full range of legal forums, from County Court level to the High Court, and before tribunals. Areas of particular expertise include employment disputes of all types, trusts of land disputes, real property, winding up/bankruptcy petitions, contractual disputes, sale of goods/supply of services, and insolvency.
In addition, she frequently appears in landlord and tenant cases (including possession claims involving business premises, boundary claims and construction) and has developed an in-depth knowledge of all matters relating to the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal.
Clients report that Jennifer is “personable and very thorough” with “impressive attention to detail” and knows “when to hold back and when to press the point home”.
She describes her own approach as: “Bullish, but principled. I am known for fighting my corner, but I also treat opponents in a civilised manner.”
Notable cases:
Kennedy v Clifford Devlin (Employment Tribunal, 2011) - acted for the Respondent employer in an unfair dismissal case. The matter proceeded to trial and Jennifer successfully applied for the claim to be dismissed. The Claimant was also ordered to pay Respondent’s costs.
Hamar v The Cavan Bakery (Employment Tribunal, 2011) - acted for the Respondent employer in an unfair dismissal and breach of contract case. Successfully argued that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction in respect of the unfair dismissal claim. The Tribunal also accepted that there was no breach of contract.
55 Elgin Crescent Ltd v Lawton, LON/00AW/LSC/2009/0212 (Leasehold Valuation Tribunal) - determination of service charges.
Lawton v 55 Elgin Crescent Ltd, LON/00AW/LSC/2009/0540 (Leasehold Valuation Tribunal) - whether application time barred or lessee estopped from challenging charges for major works.
Morgan v Quest Timber Products Ltd (High Court, unreported) - successfully applied for bankruptcy petition to be struck out.
Publications:
UCL Jurisprudence Review, 13th Volume (co-editor) (UCL Press, 2007).
'Employment Law in a Nutshell: Wrongful Dismissals', The Weekly Law Review Newsletter (Summer 2008), 20
'The UCL Jurisprudence Review Launch', The Weekly Law Review Newsletter (Summer 2007), 2
"A Changing Landscape?", New Law Journal (Volume 160, Issue 7422), employment law article on the issue of damages in wrongful dismissal claims, co-written with Spencer Keen.
"Much Obliged: The Level of Obligation Owed by Employers to Former Employees", New Law Journal, September 2011 (Vol. 161, Issue 7480).
"Withdrawal of Pre-Action Admissions: Woodland v Stopford & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 266", PI Brief Update Law Journal (July 2011).
Memberships and appointments:
Personal Injury Bar Association (PIBA)
International Bar Association (IBA)
Lincoln's Inn Denning Society
Ratified FRU social security representative
Citizens' Advice legal adviser (emphasis on Immigration and Employment Law)
Roderick was called to the Bar in 1993 and provides high-level specialist advice and representation in the fields of employment law, professional and sports discipline and family finance. He has a particularly strong reputation for his abilities in complex high-profile employment disputes, regularly appearing before Employment Tribunals throughout the UK, and in the High Court, the Employment Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Appeal.
Roderick is also an acknowledged expert in disciplinary hearings before professional and sports regulatory bodies. He is especially experienced in proceedings involving health professionals, and those involving horseracing, be they directed at owners, jockeys or trainers.
His family practice predominantly covers divorce cases involving high net worth individuals but he also provides advice and representation in disputes between cohabitants and in contentious probate matters. He is frequently able to draw upon his specialist knowledge of commercial and employment law when operating in the family sphere.
Whilst a significant proportion of his work is in an advisory capacity, helping clients to avoid going to court, Roderick is renowned for his tenacious advocacy style where a court appearance is unavoidable.
He is consistently highly recommended in the legal directories. Chambers and Partners says that he commands respect for his "outstanding cross examination skills and unflappable demeanour" and has both an "excellent grasp of the full spectrum of law" and an "exceptional grasp of intricate employment issues". He is also noted for combining his legal skills with an "approachable and user-friendly" manner and a “down-to-earth and non-stuffy approach".
Recent client testimonials have described Roderick as "calming", "just the very best person to have with you in those circumstances" and simply "awesome".
He lives on Exmoor with his interior designer wife, their two sons and numerous animals. His rare moments of spare time are spent indulging in country sports, going racing, and sailing.
Notable cases:
Cerberus v Rowley [2001] IRLR 160 – on the measure of damages for wrongful dismissal
Miller Bros v Johnston [2002] IRLR 386 – on the limitations on the contractual jurisdiction of Employment Tribunals
Dunnachie v Kingston upon Hull City Council, Weir Vales and Control UK v Armitage [2004] ICR 371 – on the heads of loss recoverable for unfair dismissal
Daw v Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd [2007] ICR 1318 – on issues of foreseeability and breach of duty in stress at work cases
Nicola is Office Manager at Riverview Law’s Wirral headquarters. She has overall responsibility for the smooth day-to-day running of the premises and provides proactive management of all our crucial support functions and teams.
Described by colleagues as highly capable, cool-headed and a born multi-tasker, Nicola is involved in the administration of numerous areas of the business such as recruitment and induction, IT, accounts, health and safety compliance, accommodation, and planning / scheduling meetings.
Prior to joining Riverview, Nicola gained wide experience in a variety of customer-facing environments, including as a Client Manager for AdviserPlus Business Solutions and as Advertising Manager at Lee & Nightingale Advertising.
Away from work, Nicola enjoys reading, cinema, scuba diving and travel - she recently backpacked around New Zealand, the highlight being a skydive from 15,000 feet over Lake Taupo.
A formidable advocate, Valentine has been practising law for over 30 years, becoming a QC in 2002. He is particularly renowned for his talents in financial relief cases following marital breakdown.
He has a special interest in cases concerning trusts, both nuptial and non-nuptial. Other areas of expertise include disputes over jurisdiction, professional negligence arising from divorce cases, private law children's cases and the drafting of pre-nuptial agreements.
Chambers and Partners describes him as having "a fantastic legal brain and great presentation skills… particularly impressive on pre-nuptial agreements and jurisdictional conflicts", while the Legal 500 simply says he is “brilliant.”
Educated at Shrewsbury School and the University of Durham, he was called to the Bar in 1977. He is currently a member of the Family Law Bar Association, the Professional Negligence Bar Association, the Western Circuit and the Bar Council Professional Practice Committee.
Valentine says that he never tires of tackling a new challenge: “I have a deep interest in the facts. They vary enormously from case to case and are key to formulating the best possible strategy for the client. I find every case takes me into unexpected realms.”
Valentine balances his professional and family commitments with a long-standing love of Chelsea Football Club, where he has been a season ticket holder for many years.
Notable cases
Macleod v Macleod [2008] UKPC 64 [2009] 1 FLR 641 – Resulting in landmark legal judgement by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, regarding pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements
N v N and F Trust [2005] EWHC 2908 (Fam) [2006] 1 FLR 856 – Acted for successful applicant in post-nuptial settlement of Guernsey trust
Charalambous v Charalambous [2004] 2 FLR 1093 – Trusts / post-nuptial agreements
Simon has over 25 years’ experience at the Bar and is an expert in complex property-related litigation, professional negligence, partnership disputes, general contractual disputes and public law.
He accepts instructions from both domestic and international clients, ranging from individuals to insurance companies and large multinational corporations. He is regularly instructed direct by American attorneys in UK jurisdictional disputes, and has also appeared before the Court of Appeal in Gibraltar.
Simon is first and foremost an advocate but is also happy to provide non-contentious advice, for example, drafting contracts and shareholder agreements, or advising on statutory interpretation.
In property matters, his early background in planning law and his extensive experience of property disputes in the Courts combine to make him an extremely popular choice. He can advise and represent across the full range of cases, including disputes arising out of freehold and leasehold interests, covenants, easements, boundaries, rights of light, party walls, land registration, and conveyancing.
His varied commercial practice encompasses many complex high-value disputes. For example, he is currently the leading lawyer advising an international company in a major long-running multi-jurisdictional contractual dispute.
Simon’s professional negligence work includes claims involving solicitors, surveyors, architects, insurance brokers and marine surveyors. His public law experience includes judicial review and licensing.
He is highly valued by clients and frequently recommended in testimonials for his “user-friendly manner”, his “clear, practical advice and hands-on approach” and his ability to “work well with teams”. He is also admired for his “strong forensic analysis, especially when cross-examining” and his “ability to spot the crucial points in a potential dispute at an early stage.”
Simon comments: “I’m completely comfortable handling tough negotiations, but I also gain great satisfaction from helping clients to avoid litigation where possible.”
Memberships and appointments
Property Bar Association
Professional Negligence Bar Association
Bencher of Inner Temple
Member of Bar Council Training for the Bar Committee
Other
Regularly presents in-house seminars to solicitors across the range of his practice areas
Accredited advocacy trainer
Trustee of the Cardinal Hume Centre
Foundation Governor of Wootton Academy Trust
Spencer was called to the Bar in 1998 and specialises in commercial and employment law. Prior to starting practice Spencer qualified as a solicitor in Australia with Blake Dawson (now Ashurst).
He frequently appears in a broad range of commercial contract disputes in the County Court and High Court. He has also appeared in injunction proceedings in a wide variety of matters, including actions for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and breach of restrictive covenant. His practice incorporates harassment and stress at work claims, health and safety claims, and actions both for and against directors and senior employees.
He regularly advises / represents a wide range of businesses on general contractual law matters, partnership disputes, agency disputes and disputes over commissions.
He is an acknowledged expert in discrimination law, particularly as it applies to employment, goods and services and education. He also has considerable experience in the interpretation and implementation of EC law in domestic courts and tribunals.
Clients describe Spencer as “tenacious” yet “measured in court” and “extremely thorough and knowledgeable”. He is also noted in Chambers and Partners as "good at cutting through detail and getting to the core issues."
On top of his busy day-to-day practice, Spencer recently co-authored the well-received legal textbook Disability Discrimination in Employment (Oxford University Press, 2009) and is a regular contributor to the New Law Journal. He also regularly lectures to solicitors in the areas of employment law and civil litigation.
Spencer says he loves his job because “I’m always learning something new and adding to my knowledge of the subject. I enjoy the challenge of getting to grips with complex issues.”
Notable cases:
Shea v Micros Fidelio [2011] UKEAT/0159/11/JOJ; UKEAT/0191/11/JOJ
This case concerned the question of how far a tribunal should intervene to
assist a litigant in person. Spencer appeared for Micros Fidelio.
X v Mid Sussex Citizen's Advice Bureau & Anor [2010] ICR 423 (EAT), [2011] ICR 460 (Court of Appeal), [2011] ICR 1156 (Supreme Court)
This is an ongoing case. Spencer is being led by John Lofthouse and is representing the Appellant who has applied for a reference to the ECJ. The Appellant argues, amongst other things, that the European Directive 2000/78 EC applies to persons in “occupation” and that therefore the DDA should provide protection to volunteers in the Appellant’s position.
Lisboa v Realpubs (2011) 155 Sol Jo (No.2) 30 [2011] All ER (D) 188 (EAT)
Spencer represented Realpubs in this case under the Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003.
Power v Greater Manchester Police [2010] All ER (D) 173 (EAT)
Spencer represented Greater Manchester Police in this case under the Equality (Reglion or Belief) Regulations 2003.
Gill v Humanware [2010] ICR 1343 (Court of Appeal)
Spencer represented the Respondent. The Appellant, a barrister, was appealing against a wasted costs order that was made against her, by the EAT, in her absence.
Gill v Humanware UKEAT/0312/08
Spencer successfully represented the Appellant who alleged bias against the tribunal chairman at first instance. This case also concerned the proper approach to take to constructive dismissal claims.
Mehta v Ealing Primary Care Trust EAT PA/0687/08/RN and PA/0686/08/RN
Spencer represented the Appellant on an expedited full hearing of an appeal from a case management order refusing a claimant permission to amend his claim.
Memberships:
Employment Lawyers Association
Discrimination Law Association
Equality And Human Rights Commission Panel Counsel
Adam was called to the bar in 2004. His practice covers both civil and criminal law, the majority of his work being in the civil arena, with a strong commercial bias. Adam specialises in employment law, personal injury claims, property law, contractual disputes and regulatory issues, representing both claimants and defendants. He is particularly noted for his expertise in claims involving restrictive covenants and induced breach of contract.
He appears for a variety of small and medium-sized businesses and individuals as well as in high-value cases involving large multinational organisations, local authorities and Government departments. He also undertakes advisory work, for example, helping companies to manage risks to employees and to mitigate against potential employment claims.
Adam regularly appears in a wide range of employment cases before tribunals at all levels as well as in the civil courts. He has substantial experience in constructive and unfair dismissal cases, redundancy, whistleblowing, discrimination and harassment claims.
Clients warm to Adam’s “approachable and good-humoured” manner, but also describe him as “very robust and determined” in front of a court.
Adam’s experience in criminal cases gives him an edge that he uses to his client’s advantage in the civil courts: “Although most of my work these days is in civil cases, I have found that the rigour and variety of criminal practice has greatly enhanced my advocacy skills.”
Adam is based in London.
Notable Cases
Notable recent cases have included sex and disability discrimination, allegations of racial discrimination and harassment and an allegation of sexual orientation discrimination.
Adam has developed particular expertise in claims involving restrictive covenants and induced breach of contract and has delivered seminars on the law in this regard.
Adam has also acted in a criminal prosecution under the trading standards legislation and successfully appealed sentence in such a case.
Peter was called to the Bar in 2007 and practices across all areas of civil law, including contractual disputes, personal injury, employer’s liability and occupier’s liability. He acts for both claimants and defendants.
After graduating from Oxford University, Peter worked in China as an English language teacher, then in the UK as a computer programmer, before deciding to take up the law.
Peter’s talent for his chosen profession soon became evident. During his law conversion course he gained the highest mark in his year for Contract Law and was subsequently awarded a Kalisher Bursary from the Kalisher Scholarship Trust, an award to assist talented students in training for the Bar.
Clients note that Peter is extremely dedicated and hardworking, with a genuine interest in their cases. In Court he is known for his thoroughness and precise knowledge of the facts, and has been described as “engaging, persuasive and incisive.”
He says he loves his job: “There are a million and one ways in which parties fall into disputes with one another. It’s endlessly fascinating and challenging. I find it very rewarding being able to assist them with their problems.”
Peter lives with his family in Newton-le-Willows, Merseyside. He is Captain of the Liverpool Bar XI cricket team and also enjoys football, chess and fishing.
Memberships
- PIBA
- Criminal Bar Association
- Northern Circuit
Edward is a member of the Riverview team of solicitors. He has experience in business law and landlord & tenant law and now specialises in employment law.
After graduating in Law with Government from the University of Ulster, Edward completed his Legal Practice Course at Chester College of Law and qualified as a solicitor in 2009. Clients especially value his excellent communication/interpersonal skills and his ability to express ideas concisely and clearly.
He handles Employment Tribunal Claims for employers, dealing with; unfair dismissals, sex, race, age and disability discrimination, whistleblowing, unlawful deductions from wages and redundancy. Edward also advises clients on a day to day basis, regarding a variety of general employment matters, including contracts of employment, policies and procedures and the management of grievances and disciplinaries.
His employment work also encompasses advising on compromise agreements and conducting settlement discussions with Acas.
Edward has an insightful awareness of the commercial realities in business together with a strong understanding of the law governing the employment relationship.
Married with a young boy, most of his leisure time is spoken for but he enjoys watching most sports, particularly motorsport, and some would say he has an unhealthy interest in fast cars and slow motorbikes. He also actively participates in a variety of youth work via his local church.
Daniella was called to the Bar in 2007 and has rapidly garnered an excellent reputation for the quality of her work. Her practice is predominantly in civil law, with particular expertise in employment law, personal injury claims and contractual disputes.
Peers frequently comment on Daniella’s remarkable ability to “punch above her weight” and she is increasingly instructed in complex/high-value cases. She has experience in the County Courts, the Magistrates’ Courts, the Crown Court and the High Court, as well as before employment tribunals and the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal.
Daniella regularly represents claimants and defendants on the multi-track, fast and small claims track of the County Courts, in matters including claims for breach of contract, misrepresentation, negligence, personal injury, credit hire claims, possession hearings and service charge disputes.
She also undertakes a considerable amount of written work, including drafting of pleadings and advices on matters including personal injury claims, employment tribunal claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination, breach of contract and wrongful interference with goods.
Numerous testimonials from clients and peers have praised Daniella’s “impressive analytical ability” and her ability to “explain legal issues in a manner that is easily understood, and set out the strengths and weaknesses of a case with clarity”. She is also described as a “fluent and persuasive advocate” who is “extremely driven, proactive and determined” with natural skills that “are usually found only in more senior barristers”. Clients also appreciate her “polite, approachable and reliable manner” and note that she “inspires confidence”.
Daniella says: “I make a point of making myself available to clients to answer queries and discuss matters. I always go the extra mile to ensure they are confident their case is being dealt with effectively.”
Notable cases:
Anfield v Bhardwaj (Central London County Court): Successfully defended a multi-track claim for breach of contract involving interpretation of personal guarantees and allegations of fraud.
Samambwa v Bay Park Management & Higham Station Avenue (Edmonton County Court): Successfully defended the second defendants in a multi-track claim in which they were alleged to be vicariously liable for damage caused by the negligence of the first defendant.
Clark v WG Motors (Bromley County Court): Represented appellants appealing the dismissal of their claim for breach of contract, relating to a defective motor vehicle.
McNab v West Coast Builders Ltd & Jeffrey (Taunton County Court): Represented second defendant in claim for breach of contract relating to defective building works. Issue was whether second defendant had contracted in his personal capacity.
Elliot v Marvin Architectural (Brentford County Court): Represented defendant in fast track claim for negligence and breach of contract arising out of the supply of defective windows. The claim for negligence was dismissed and damages for breach of contract substantially reduced.
R v Smith (Maidstone Crown Court): Represented defendant charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Successfully put forward the defence of self-defence and the defendant was acquitted.
Nicholas has earned a top-class reputation during his two decades at the Bar; he was called in 1992. He specialises in complex high-profile litigation, especially public law challenges and major criminal cases, and has appeared before significant public inquiries. He also has substantial expertise in professional disciplinary and regulatory work across a broad range of areas, as well as a niche practice in licensing law.
He has been involved in some of the most well-known and challenging proceedings of recent years, including the Rosemary Nelson Inquiry, the Bloody Sunday Inquiry and the Guantánamo Bay litigation. He acts for a range of organisations, individuals, public bodies and Government departments, overseeing teams of junior barristers or working alongside in-house Counsel.
Nicholas is also increasingly in demand to conduct discreet internal investigations for a range of corporate clients in situations where there are concerns over potential illegal or irregular activity or as part of a prevention strategy. His substantial experience in public inquiries and criminal matters means he is able to bring a wealth of expertise to bear in this area. He is used to handling extremely sensitive material and has considerable skills in the acquisition, preservation and analysis of complex evidence. Nicholas can advise at any or all stages of the process, from scoping the problem and setting terms of reference, right through to drafting reports and advising on associated matters such as legal professional privilege and data protection. He is happy to work either alone or alongside in-house teams.
Nicholas consistently rates very highly in the legal directories. Chambers and Partners has remarked that “for ten years or so now he has been in some of the major matters of the day” and confirmed that he is a “noted practitioner” in the field of public inquiries. Contributors to the directory also admire his professional demeanour and client-handling skills: “Always cool-headed, he’s excellent at managing small teams and taking responsibility.” He is also ranked in the Legal 500.
Numerous client testimonials over the years have praised his “informed yet straightforward approach”, noting that “he is a pleasure to work with”, “always superbly well-researched”, and that “refreshingly, he doesn’t have an ego; he just gets the job done.“
Notable cases
Public Inquiries
Representing Chief Constable Colin Port and other police officers in the Rosemary Nelson Inquiry
Representing senior officers and their soldiers in the Bloody Sunday Inquiry
Providing advice in relation to other inquiries and speaking at Butterworths Public Inquiries Conference 2011
Public Law litigation
The Guantánamo Bay litigation: representing the Security Service, the Secret Intelligence Service, the Home Office and other government departments in Al Rawi Others v The Security Service & Others, which was judge as “one of the largest cases the Treasury Solicitors have had to face by a substantial margin”. Nicholas’ responsibilities included oversight of the government disclosure exercise, which was unprecedented in its combination of scale, sensitivity and complexity. He directed the team of over 25 barristers reviewing the material.
Crime
Representing individuals, organisations and prosecuting authorities in cases of serious crime and fraud. Also advising the Crown Prosecution Service and police forces. He has worked with the police and other agencies in relation to lengthy, sensitive and high-profile investigations. He is security cleared to a high level.
Memberships
Bar Council Law Reform Committee
Constitutional and Administrative Law Bar Association (ALBA)
Criminal Bar Association (CBA)
International Bar Association (IBA)
Franco-British Lawyers Association (FBLA)
Appointments
Nicholas is appointed to advocate panels used by government departments and bodies in both criminal and civil cases. He is on the Crown Prosecution Service Advocate Panel (at the highest level, 4) and on the Attorney General’s Panel of Counsel (B).
Other
Assistant Commissioner, Boundary Commission for England. The BCE is an independent statutory body which reviews parliamentary constituency boundaries.
Contributor to Paterson’s Licensing Acts (LexisNexis/Butterworths) and Fraud: Law, Practice and Procedure (LexisNexis/Butterworths)
Tim is a noted employment law specialist with 14 years’ experience at the Bar and an excellent reputation. He is ranked as a leading individual in Employment in the current edition of Chambers and Partners.
Tim represents a wide range of business clients, including a number of blue-chip organisations such as B&Q and Sainsbury’s. He has substantial experience of all types of employment litigation including complex and multi-day hearings and cases involving sizeable compensation claims.
A large proportion of Tim’s work is before the employment tribunals and the Employment Appeal Tribunal, acting across the full spectrum of cases. He also regularly appears in County Court and High Court proceedings, particularly in employment-related matters such as protection from harassment claims, restraint of trade and negligent reference cases.
He is also experienced in criminal law, personal injury work, inquests and professional disciplinary/regulatory proceedings, and has previously acted in directors’ disqualification proceedings.
Clients describe Tim as “approachable and personable” whilst appreciating his “excellent preparation” and “very thorough knowledge of each case”. Chambers and Partners also notes that his “background and experience in criminal law allow him to provide ‘good cross-examination when before the tribunal’ ".
Tim is based in London and Winchester and in his time off enjoys adventurous travel and sports, including snowboarding, football and tennis.
Notable cases:
Williamson v Greater Manchester Police, November 2010 – Successfully represented the Respondent (GMP) on a 5-day disability discrimination case, which involved consideration of the extent of the obligations to make reasonable adjustments for probationer police officer.
A v BB Plc, June 2011 – Instructed on behalf the Claimant (a high level account manager) who had dismissed for alleged misconduct involving the use of class A drugs away from work. The case, which had the potential to be a high profile one, also raised issues of disability discrimination.
Scaife v EWGA Ltd, June 2011 – Acted for the Claimant is a successful claim for constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination in Bristol ET lasting 3 days.
Coombs & others v A1 Bathrooms & others, July 2011 – Represented the Respondent in a multi-party, complex TUPE matter which was listed for a 4 day Pre-Hearing Review. Case is still ongoing with a further 4-day hearing
Maris Interiors LLP v Pleckinger, Gregory, Heptullah, Marshall, Judge & Area Squared Ltd, August 2011 – Instructed on behalf of one of several Defendants to a significant High Court injunction matter involving alleged breaches of a restrictive covenant, confidentiality clauses and ‘team move’ issues. The claim against my client was settled at court on the morning of the hearing.
M v The Governing Body of Stratford School, December 2011 – Represented the Respondent on a 7-day unfair dismissal/ race discrimination claim in the East London ET. The case, which related to allegations going back some years, involved a considerable amount of witness and documentary evidence.
Memberships:
Employment Lawyers Bar Association
Western Circuit
Katharine is a highly respected family law practitioner, with particular expertise in complex, high value financial cases, often with international, corporate and / or trust elements. She also undertakes private law children disputes, in particular, applications for permission to remove children permanently from the jurisdiction.
After gaining an MA in Jurisprudence from Oxford University and a Certified Diploma in Accountancy, Katharine spent two successful years as an investment banker in Chicago and London before training to become a barrister. She was called to the Bar in 1987, becoming a QC in 2011.
She regularly appears in the Cayman Islands, including the Cayman Islands Court of Appeal, as well as in the UK Courts.
Chambers and Partners praises Katharine as “a seasoned practitioner who has a strong presence… [her] background in accountancy and investment banking makes her an excellent choice for complex ancillary relief cases”. Commentators also note that “she cares deeply about each and every client so they all get a fantastic service.”
When asked what she finds most satisfying about her job, she says: “The human side of it. My motivation is wanting to be part of the process of extricating people from an unhappy period in their lives. Knowing what’s at stake, I’m fairly obsessive about my preparation for a case.”
When not working, Katharine enjoys spending time with her husband and three children, in Devon and Switzerland. She is also an avid admirer and collector of contemporary art.
Notable cases
Grey v Grey [2009] EWCA Civ 1424
S v S [2008] EWHC 519 (Fam)
T v T (Financial Relief: Pensions) [1998] 1 FLR 1072
Baker v Baker (No. 2)(CA) [1997] 1 FLR 148
Re K (Abduction: Child’s Objections) [1995] 1 FLR 997
Re B (Minors) (Wardship: Power to Detain) (CA) [1994] 2 FCR 1142
Re D (Minors) (Conciliation: Privilege) (CA) [1993] 1 FLR 932
Publications
“The Future of Stack v Dowden” (2011) 127 LQR 13 (quoted by the Supreme Court in Jones v Kernott [2011] UKSC 53)
John is a fully qualified mediator, with a strong commercial background and vast experience in banking and finance. He specialises in mediating disputes between parties in the financial services sector. Particular areas of expertise include partnership disputes, corporate finance, hedge funds, private equity cases and divorces involving finance professionals.
He is accredited by the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR) and is a member of the Family Mediators Association (FMA).
Prior to becoming a full-time mediator, John spent more than 20 years in global equity markets, heading up the Research Departments of several internationally renowned financial organisations - invaluable real-world experience which he uses to great effect in his mediation practice.
He also has unusually extensive experience in cross-cultural disputes with an Asian dimension, having spent over half his life living and working in the Far East, including Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, China and Indonesia.
John consistently reaps highly positive feedback from clients:
“… likeable, personable and knowledgeable. All you could want in a mediator.”
“... John got to the heart of the dispute quickly and kept us focused on the key issues.”
“… having someone so experienced in equity valuation saved us a lot of time.”
“… charming… and a very incisive mind. He is great with clients.”
John says he finds great satisfaction in using his commercial acumen to help others resolve their differences: “I enjoy mediating in both commercial and family disputes. There’s a surprisingly high crossover in the skills required. I focus on the individuals involved, as well as the purely financial elements.”
Sarah is one of Riverview’s dedicated Legal Assistants. She provides essential support to our team of lawyers across a range of areas.
Described by colleagues as tenacious, hard working, dynamic and ambitious, Sarah recently graduated in Law from Liverpool University. In parallel with her studies, Sarah founded the University of Liverpool’s Advocacy Society and volunteered at the Liverpool University Law Clinic.
Sarah already has a wealth of legal work experience to her name, having completed placements at both chambers and solicitors’ firms in London and Liverpool, as well as at the Crown Prosecution Service. She has also worked for a number of high profile organisations, gaining HR and customer service experience at Unilever, the UK Border Agency and Marks & Spencer. She joined Riverview Law in 2011.
Sarah’s responsibilities at Riverview include case preparation and co-ordination, client liaison, document preparation, arranging and attending client meetings, and supporting our clients’ legal teams in court where appropriate.
She is based in the North West of England and in her spare time enjoys riding and looking after her horse, and boxing.
Julie is one of Riverview’s team of qualified Legal Assistants, providing vital support to Riverview’s solicitors across a range of areas.
She has considerable experience in support roles within the legal profession and is noted in testimonials for her first-class communication and written skills, excellent organisational abilities and exceptional attention to detail.
Prior to joining Riverview Julie worked for a number of top legal firms in London and Liverpool, including White & Case, Ashurst, Eversheds and Hill Dickinson, gaining experience across a variety of sectors including employment law, banking, capital markets, commercial property and corporate.
Julie’s day-to-day responsibilities include client liaison and updates, conference and meeting organisation, preparation of correspondence/documents, proofreading, co-ordination of travel and diaries and expenses management.
Outside of work Julie enjoys spending time with her partner and daughter, reading psychology magazines, keeping fit and socialising with friends. She is based at our Wirral headquarters.
Ivan has over 35 years’ experience at the Bar. He is a highly regarded specialist in commercial property and construction litigation, representing both claimants and defendants.
In addition to his Court appearances, Ivan’s expertise means that he is much sought-after to present in-house or external seminars on party walls, the use of expert witnesses and a variety of construction and property law issues. He is also a Visiting Senior Lecturer at the University of Greenwich School of Architect, Design and Construction and a qualified TECBAR Adjudicator.
Peers regularly remark on Ivan’s “encyclopaedic knowledge” of the law and his “forensic assessment of documents and other evidence” whilst clients appreciate his “meticulous preparation of a case” and his “practical and commercial approach”.
Ivan himself simply says: “I am good at solving problems.”
Notable cases
Pagemanor Ltd. v Ryan - distribution of property at an under value
Pagemanor Ltd. v Ryan (No2) - security for costs
Zavros v Pradham & Hakin - renewal of business tenancy
Hajigeorgiou v Vasiliou - disclosure of unwanted expert reports
Memberships:
TECBAR (Technology and Construction Bar Association)
Professional Negligence Bar Association
Ivan is qualified under the Public Access to Barristers Scheme
Interests:
In his spare time Ivan takes a keen interest in naval warfare with a particular interest in the history of the sailing navy and an occasional game of chess together with visits to concerts, the opera and the theatre.
Becky is Riverview Law’s Lawyer Support Manager and is the central point of contact and liaison for all our legal teams.
In addition to providing day-to-day administrative support, Becky’s role involves organising external seminars and events, compiling weekly updates of media coverage/relevant articles, commissioning and updating lawyer profiles for the Riverview Law websites, supporting lawyer participation in conferences, and co-ordinating the production of opinion pieces and editorial contributions.
Becky’s impressive organisational and communication skills were developed during her previous roles as Assistant to the Chairman and the Director of Representation & Policy at the Bar Council, and as an Events Executive at Newsdesk Media Group. She has organised numerous high-profile events such as a book launch at the House of Commons and a two-day conference for 500 delegates in New York, on behalf of the Kazakh Embassy. She joined Riverview Law in December 2011 and was closely involved in its public launch in February 2012.
Becky describes herself as having “a positive, ‘can-do’ mindset” and is appreciated by colleagues for her efficiency, her approachable manner and her ability to juggle many tasks at once. She is based in London and away from work is most likely to be found socialising with friends, practising yoga or running – she is currently in training for the Virgin London Marathon.
Nawazish specialises in consumer credit law, contractual disputes, property disputes and personal injury cases. He is also experienced in licensing work and large group litigation, specifically with regard to disclosure issues.
A graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies and the University of London, he was called to the Bar in 2003 and completed pupillage in 2007-2008. He regularly appears in the County Courts and the High Court and is a member of the South Eastern Circuit, the Administrative Law Bar Association and the Personal Injury Bar Association.
Before training as a barrister, Nawazish gained valuable experience as a business consultant with Accenture, a paralegal in a high street solicitors’ firm, and an intern at both the Centre for Capital Punishment Studies in Trinidad & Tobago - working on cases to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council - and the AIRE Centre (Advice on Individual Rights in Europe).
He credits a sizeable proportion of his career success to “a huge amount of perseverance, determination and attention to detail. I put my all into every case and I’m always prepared to go the extra mile.”
Clients warm to his approachable manner and his emphasis on finding practical solutions. He describes his style in Court as “fearless but polite, persuasive rather than aggressive – although I can be very robust when I need to be!”
Outside his work, Nawazish enjoys good food, rum, and spending time with family, friends and his German Shepherd, Caesar.
Ben is an internationally recognised specialist in health and safety law. In recent years, he has appeared in most of the UK’s major disaster cases, such as the Lyme Bay canoeing tragedy, the Potters Bar rail crash, and the landmark Chargot case in the House of Lords, widely regarded as the most important health and safety case of the last decade.
The majority of Ben’s work is representing corporate defendants and company directors in cases concerning fatalities or serious injury. He also has considerable experience in personal injury cases, medical negligence claims and medical disciplinary proceedings.
Called to the Bar in 1979, Ben spent many successful years as a criminal barrister before moving into health and safety, experience which proves invaluable in many of his cases. Ben was appointed a Recorder in 2005 and a QC in 2011.
In addition to his UK work, he regularly appears in the British Virgin Islands, and is currently expanding his practice to the Middle East and the USA.
Chambers and Partners says Ben is “rated highly by peers… he is ‘hugely industrious and commands the respect and trust of clients immediately.’ ” The Legal 500 singles him out as “extremely professional and communicates well with clients”.
Ben says of himself: “I’m a very gregarious, positive person. I particularly enjoy being in front of a jury and I love a challenge.”
Away from Court, Ben is most likely to be found on the family farm in Wiltshire, or pursuing his passion for adventurous travel and mountain climbing.
Notable cases
R v Chargot – landmark case in the House of Lords clarifying the extent to which a prosecution must identify acts and/or omissions in order to establish a prima facie breach of statutory duty
R v EGS Ltd – terminating ruling in Court of Appeal which further refined the judgement in Chargot and issued guidance on the need for proactive case management in health and safety cases. Defendant acquitted in subsequent retrial
HSE v Marble City Ltd – the first Appeal case to consider new Sentencing Guidelines concerning death in corporate manslaughter and health and safety cases
HSE v PC Harrington – concerning a crane fatality at Wembley Stadium, case involved a massive investigation into the working practices of the defendant company during the construction phase of the Stadium
Stroud DC v Clayton – Successful defence of Gatcombe Park’s Health and Safety advisor following the fatality of one of the Princess Royal’s son’s best friend during a quad biking incident
R v Stubbs – acting for Casework Directorate in internet fraud on HSBC’s corporate client accounts in Leicester, total amount stolen circa £20 million, conviction upheld in the Court of Appeal
Petra Resolva v University College London Hospital – acting for Claimant following substandard appendicectomy with resultant infection - case settled
In the Matter of Carmel Shellar – acting for Tesco at Inquest following the incorrect prescribing of medication from a Tesco pharmacy, which led to death of patient.
Hannah was called to the Bar in 2008 and is fast carving a name for herself as an employment law specialist.
She has extensive experience of advising and representing both claimants and respondents, across the full range of employment matters. She has particular expertise in cases involving unfair dismissal, discrimination, victimisation, redundancy, TUPE, unlawful deduction of wages and breach of contract (see below for full details of work undertaken and services offered).
She regularly appears before employment tribunals, on behalf of both companies and individuals.
Hannah says she enjoys her profession because “it’s so interesting - the law is constantly changing and you have to be able to adapt quickly. Plus I get to work with such a wide variety of people.”
After graduating from Bar School, Hannah worked full time as an employment adviser for the Kensington and Chelsea Citizens Advice Bureau. During her Bar training at City University School of Law, she also became an experienced employment representative for the Free Representation Unit (FRU). “Those experiences sparked my interest in employment law,” she says, “and they certainly taught me that the law is relevant and important to everyone, from all walks of life.”
Hannah is based in London and likes to spend her leisure time with friends and family. She also enjoys music and plays the piano.
Karl is Chief Executive of Riverview Law and has a long pedigree in starting, growing and managing successful companies.
After reading law at Birmingham University, Karl joined Guinness Mahon Investment Management (GMIM) in 1985. In 1987 he was Money Observer’s top-performing UK unit trust fund manager.
He left GMIM in 1989 to set up CRT Group plc (CRT), a consultancy, recruitment and training business. Under Karl’s leadership his team grew CRT, both organically and by acquisition, to a market capitalisation of over £600 million, sales in excess of £400 million with 2,500 employees operating from over 200 locations. In 1996 CRT sold 50.1% of its equity for £109 million to Knowledge Universe, a private US-based company whose major shareholders were Larry Ellison and Michael Milken.
Karl left CRT in 2000 and set up AdviserPlus Business Solutions in 2001. AdviserPlus is a leading advisory outsourcing organisation providing HR, employment law and H&S solutions to organisations ranging from FTSE 100 companies to SMEs. He joined LawVest with effect from 1 June 2011.
Karl is excited by the changes taking place in the legal market: “Rarely do market opportunities like this arise. The legal market is large, fragmented and has few brands. New entrants like Riverview Law*, with no baggage and a total focus on the customer, stand a very good chance of building big and sustainable businesses.”
Karl is based in London and Lincolnshire and couples his passion for business with a long-standing love of Chelsea Football Club where, over more than forty years, he has experienced the lows and highs that come with an irrational attachment to a football team.
*Riverview Law is a trading name of LawVest Limited.
Jonathan is one of the UK's most sought after and highly respected barristers. His main areas of practice are corporate liability, criminal and civil fraud, media law, financial regulation, health and safety law and inquiries. He appears frequently in courts outside of the United Kingdom, principally in Hong Kong and Singapore.
His clients include many FTSE 100 companies, national newspapers, television companies and high profile individuals. During his career over the last twenty five years he has also appeared in numerous public inquiries and represented clients before sporting and other disciplinary tribunals. He is representing one of the world's largest newspaper groups before the Leveson Inquiry into the ethics, culture and practices of the press.
His corporate liability and serious fraud work has included some of the UK's and Hong Kong's most high profile cases. In corporate liability and health and safety he represented P&O Ferries after the Zeebrugge disaster and First Great Western after the Southall rail crash. In serious fraud he has appeared in most of the largest and well known cases of the last two decades including Guinness, Blue Arrow, Barings Bank and Maxwell. He also now advises in international corruption cases. He has advised government regulators as well as corporate clients.
His professional reputation is second to none. Chambers and Partners sources say that "excellent client handling skills and an astute technical eye make him one of the most sought after silks of his generation" and that he is "one of the greats and can hold a jury in the palm of his hand". Other commentators add that he is "sublime, hugely experienced and a man of great charisma" as well as being "hard working and tremendously smart". The Legal 500 meanwhile singles him out as "calm, unflappable and very dedicated....the star silk for criminal fraud" and "a gifted tactician".
Jonathan says he feels privileged to practice at the Bar and enjoys the variety and teamwork involved. "A lot of it", he says, "is pure common sense and judgment. Every case has only one or two key points that matter. The key is to identify them and then to develop them".
Notable cases
Health, Safety and Environment
Zeebrugge disaster 93 Criminal Appeal Reports 72
Southall Rail Crash: Attorney General's Reference (2000) 3 WLR 195
Tebay Rail disaster (2007) EWCA 624
Alton Towers noise prosecution (2007) EWHC 624
Hatfield derailment (Balfour Beatty) (2007) Business Law Reports 77
Guidelines on Fire Safety Order (2010) EWCA Civ 1268
Fraud
Defending in Guinness, Blue Arrow, Maxwell and Barings Bank
Defending in FSA first insider dealing prosecution (2009) Times Law Report 23rd June 2009
Prosecuting for SFO for misleading statements to the market regarding Langbar Limited: May 2011
Defending in Allied Group prosecution in Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (2001) 1 HKLRD 599
Defending in construction of money laundering provisions in Hong Kong in Court of Final Appeal (2006) HKEC 43
Media
Representing Daily Mail in first internet contempt case in Administrative Court (2011) EMLR 17
Representing Daily Mirror in contempt proceedings argued by the Attorney General in person before Lord Chief Justice ((2011) EWHC 2074 (Admin))
Representing Channel 5 before OFCOM Sanctions Committee (phone in competitions) in 2007
Representing Channel 4 and ITN in numerous proceedings
Representing John Cleese in libel proceedings (2004) EMLR 37
Enquiries
Representing Great Western Trains in the Southall Rail Accident Inquiry
Representing Associated Newspapers Limited in the Leveson Inquiry
Representing Lord Mandelson in the Hammond Inquiry into the Hinduja Affair
Representing the Surrey Police in the Guildford Bombings Inquiry
Representing individuals before sporting and disciplinary inquiries
Crime
Representing numerous FTSE companies and high net worth individuals in a variety of criminal matters. Also advising on occasions the Serious Fraud Office and the Crown Prosecution Service and the Hong Kong Department of Justice.
Appointments
Queen's Counsel (1991)
Recorder of the Crown Court
Adjudicator of the Dubai Broadcasting and Publishers Standards Tribunal
Former Chairman of the Bar Council Public Affairs Committee
Bencher of Gray's Inn
Member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
Member of the Editorial Board of the Journal of Criminal Law (1990-2006)
Former Contributing Editor of "Fraud: Law, Practice and Procedure" (LexisNexis)
Corporate Liability Counsel 2011 Award (after a poll of thousands of readers of Finance Monthly)
On shortlist of three QCs for Criminal Silk of the Year 2010 by Chambers and Partners
Other
Chairman of BAFTA Management Limited
Patron Wiener Holocaust Library
Development Board of Royal Court Theatre (1997-2006)
Member of The Times Law Panel
Stacey is a member of Riverview Law’s team of trained Sales Advisers*.
She is an accomplished sales professional, well used to advising both SMEs and larger companies on product options and suitability, as well as ensuring that any queries or issues that arise are dealt with promptly and efficiently. She has been described by clients as “smart”, “dynamic” and “highly personable”.
Before joining Riverview Law in 2011, Stacey gained 10 years’ experience in sales, marketing and account management, primarily within the IT and computer hardware sectors. She previously held positions as a Sales Manager, a Senior Account Executive and as Assistant to the Operations Director, for three of the UK’s largest technology and hardware providers.
Outside her work, she enjoys horse-riding and weekend trips on her motorbike.
*Sales Advisers are based in our service delivery centre in the Wirral in North West England. They are available to talk existing or potential Riverview Law clients through our range of service offerings, advising on the relative costs and benefits of each according to customer needs/preference.
Eleanor was called to the Bar in 2008 and has established a successful mixed practice encompassing civil, employment, criminal and family law.
In her growing civil practice she has particular expertise in landlord and tenant matters, acting for both claimants and defendants, and frequently represents companies before the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal. In employment law she regularly appears before employment tribunals on behalf of both claimants and respondents and has substantial experience in cases involving claims of unfair dismissal, constructive dismissal and discrimination.
Eleanor says that her previous experience in the criminal courts has given her “the ability to communicate clearly and persuasively to a wide range of audiences” and to think quickly on her feet. This often proves advantageous in her civil practice, especially in matters where there is a potential crossover between employment and crime.
In addition to her advocacy work, Eleanor regularly provides non-contentious advice to a range of companies, including FTSE 100 firms. This has included in-house seminars and briefings on a variety of legal issues that affect employers, including unfair dismissal claims where there are pending criminal investigations, and employer responsibilities in the event of the arrest of an employee.
Eleanor’s clients report that they appreciate her “exceptionally thorough approach and attention to detail” adding that she “fights hard for her client, really giving the impression that she has done anything and everything she can to reach a successful outcome.”
Eleanor is based in London and grew up in Brazil. She speaks fluent French and Portuguese.
Beth is a member of the Riverview solicitors’ team. She is particularly experienced in employment law, advising on the full range of matters, including unfair dismissal and discrimination claims.
Whilst training to become a solicitor, her outstanding promise was recognised with the award of the Baroness Cohen of Pimlico Scholarship at BPP Law School, Manchester.
After completing her Law degree and Legal Practice Course (with Distinction), Beth joined a large legal practice in the North West of England, managing her own cases whilst simultaneously studying for her solicitor’s qualification, which she achieved in 2009.
From 2009 to 2011, Beth gained further commercial experience as a Technical HR Adviser for AdviserPlus, one of the UK’s leading business solutions outsourcing companies, whilst still working one day a week at a solicitors’ firm. Her in-depth knowledge of implementing HR solutions for a range of blue-clip clients combined with her legal expertise makes her an excellent choice for assisting corporates and SMEs in employment and related matters.
Clients have described her as “direct, focused and extremely thorough”, whilst remaining “friendly and approachable”. She is also noted for her ability to “grasp complex issues at great speed and explain legal jargon in plain English.”
In her free time, Beth is a keen sportswoman and enjoys netball, squash, swimming and mountain biking. She also loves adventurous travel and has backpacked in Asia, Italy and Australia.
Chris is Chief Executive of Riverview Chambers with more than 25 years' legal experience. He normally works with clients on a fixed fee annual retainer basis and as he is authorised by the Bar Council for direct/public access work, he is instructed mainly by in-house corporate teams.
He graduated with Honours in Philosophy from Exeter University and it was his Philosophy professor who first encouraged him to take up law. He was called to the Bar in 1986 and was awarded a major scholarship by the Inner Temple. He also gained 2 Masters degrees from London University (MTH and LLM) and 2 Masters degrees from Cambridge University (Trinity Hall) (MBA and MPhil). Whilst at Cambridge he was in the Cambridge University Boxing team fighting at light middleweight; he was awarded his Blue.
He is a specialist in motor industry law and advises a wide range of motor retail corporate clients. He is recognised as one of the UK's leading authorities on motor industry law and is retained by most of the UK's major motor retail groups (see client list below). He is also standing Counsel to the Retail Motor Industry Federation, the largest motor industry trade body in the UK.
Chris says : "I always get a thrill working out the best strategy from a commercial and a legal standpoint. The legal problem and the commercial strategy often raise separate issues; I therefore really enjoy the challenge of trying to find an answer to the client's problem. There is always a legal solution which fits with the commercial strategy provided you look hard enough and examine the problem from different aspects."
Chris conducts a significant amount of non-contentious work advising clients in the areas of expertise listed below and finding legal solutions which fit with the clients’ commercial strategy. Chris also regularly appears in the High Court, Employment Tribunals, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal. He also specialises in formal and informal mediations as an alternative to court litigation.
Chris lives with his family in London, Devon and Switzerland along with his dogs Hector (a Great Dane) and Thor (a miniature Daschund). Chris also enjoys skiing, boxing and walking on Dartmoor.
Chris is retained by the following Clients
Deborah’s formidable reputation as a family law barrister precedes her. She specialises in matrimonial finance, particularly “big money” cases. She also handles private law children matters, pre-nuptial agreements and Inheritance Act disputes.
Educated at Wycombe High School and the University of Exeter, Deborah was called to the Bar in 1981 and became a QC in 2006. During her 30-year career, she has appeared in numerous major / high profile cases and is renowned as a very tough opponent in Court.
She consistently rates extremely highly in legal directories. For example:
"A heavyweight QC with a long pedigree of work on major cases, she gets to the core of a case at frightening speed and is a very tough negotiator."
Chambers & Partners, 2011
“An extremely successful and effective advocate”
The Legal 500, 2011
“An extremely effective advocate who is climbing to the top of her profession. Peers view her as a dangerous opponent and clients admire her ‘tenacious and forceful’ approach.”
Chambers & Partners, 2010
“A ‘firecracker of a barrister’ she ‘is a robust advocate’ who will fight her client’s corner and gee them up if necessary. She is famed for her tenacious style and uncompromising approach. ‘You need shin pads and ear muffs to deal with her, but there’s no denying she is effective.’”
Chambers & Partners, 2009
Deborah lives in London with her twin teenage sons. When she can squeeze in some leisure time she enjoys theatre, watching football, kick boxing, fly fishing and travel.
Notable cases
AR v AR [2011] AER (D) 241 (Oct)
Golubovich v Golubovich [2011] AER (D) 72 (Apr)
Golubovich v Golubovich [2010] EWHC 2267 (FAM)
FZ v SZ & Anr. [2010] AER (D) 189 Jul
Golubovich v Golubovich [2010] AER (D) 136
VB v JP [2008] 1 FLR 742
P v P [2008] 1 FLR 742
North v North [2008] 1 FLR 158
C v C [2009] 1 FLR 8
MacFarlane v MacFarlane; Parlour v Parlour [2004] 1 FLR 893
Allan is Director of Customer Experience at Riverview Law. He has a pivotal role in co-ordinating and overseeing every aspect of how our ground-breaking services are delivered to clients. His responsibilities range from defining channels to market and developing brand/communications strategies, through to setting/monitoring service delivery standards, building partner channels and managing key relationships with both customers and stakeholders.
Allan started his career in advertising and was soon headhunted to join Spring Group plc, a leading international training and recruitment provider, as Advertising Manager and subsequently as Group Head of Marketing.
He left Spring Group in 2000 to start up AdviserPlus Business Solutions, where he was a founding member alongside Karl Chapman, now Chief Executive of Riverview Law. As a director of AdviserPlus, Allan managed strategic partnerships with leading professional services companies to provide new and innovative HR/business services to the SME market. He was also closely involved in product development.
Allan joined Riverview Law in August 2011 and has been instrumental in its public launch. He says: “Our business isn’t just about an innovative strategy; it’s about a whole philosophy as well. We want to bring a customer-centric approach to the legal market. That’s why everything about Riverview Law, from the technology platform to the people who work here, is focussed on giving each customer the best possible experience.”
Allan is based in our Wirral headquarters and lives in Chester with his wife and two children. When he can be lured away from work, he likes anything to do with science and nature, watching motorbike racing and listening to classic rock and early blues.
Lucinda Acland
Lucinda is Riverview Law’s Social Media Manager. Her primary role is developing brand awareness, generating referrals and establishing thought leadership, via the cultivation of strong links with relevant social media networks.
Lucinda oversees all our social media campaigns and manages Riverview Law’s online presence. Her day-to-day activities include: online brand advocacy; writing/co-coordinating editorial and opinion pieces; stimulating/responding to online debate by posting comments and responses; seeding content; monitoring and analysis; feeding back insights and information to management and stakeholders.
She works closely with the Riverview Marketing and PR teams to ensure consistent messaging and effective implementation of the Riverview marketing/branding strategy as a whole.
After graduating in English and Comparative law from The School of Oriental and African Studies - University of London and completing her Law Society Finals, Lucinda spent several years practising in commercial litigation, both as a solicitor and as a litigation support/ IT lawyer for international law firm Hogan Lovells. She also has substantial experience as a legal editor and writer - prior to joining Riverview, she was Legal Content Manager for The College of Law creating the curriculum for their online CPD course, COLmedia.
Lucinda is based in London and away from work enjoys spending time with family, visiting exhibitions, gardening and playing bridge with friends.
Piers is an internationally renowned specialist in the field of contentious intellectual property (IP) law. Called to the Bar in 1993, his practice encompasses all aspects of IP including patents, trade marks, passing off, copyright and related rights, registered and unregistered designs, and breach of confidence.
He has represented numerous high-profile clients in the courts and tribunals at all levels, including the High Court and the Court of Appeal, as well as before the European Patent Office. He is frequently instructed by in-house Counsel and by patent agents. He also appears in the Patents County Court (the cost-capped alternative to the Patents Court of the High Court) representing a range of small and medium sized businesses.
Piers has a strong scientific background and accepts instructions across a wide variety of technology areas. Before training for the Bar, he gained a First Class degree in Biochemistry from University College London and also holds a PhD in Molecular Virology. He is especially in-demand for cases involving chemical and pharmaceutical patents.
Chambers and Partners underlines Piers’ outstanding reputation, remarking that he “gets rave reviews across the board” for his “outstanding capabilities as a leading IP barrister, particularly when it comes to technically complex patent disputes.” Sources also say he is “probably the cleverest, most insightful and most dynamic specialist you'll come across; not just technically first-class, but incredibly gifted and highly respected by the judges." He is also highly recommended in the Legal 500 where he is described as "one of the stars of the future," and "a supremely skilful advocate". He was shortlisted for IP/IT Silk of the Year at the Chambers Bar Awards 2011.
Piers is based in London and when not working, likes to spend as much time as possible with his wife and three children.
Notable cases
Pro-Tec v Specialised Covers [2011] EWPCC 023 – Patents County Court, design right in caravan covers
Convatec v Smith & Nephew [2011] EWHC 2039 – patents for wound dressings, validity and infringement
Cephalon v Orchid [2011] EWHC 1591 – patents for drug formulation, validity and infringement
Norbrook [2011] – Technical Board of Appeal, EPO, formulation patent for insecticide
Actavis v Novartis [2010] EWCA Civ 82 – Court of Appeal, sustained release
formulation of fluvastatin, novelty and obviousness.
Blinx v Blinkbox [2010] – trade mark infringement, interim injunction.
Mars Inc [2009] – Technical Board of Appeal, EPO, patent for cocoa extracts containing
procyanidins.
Leo v Sandoz [2009] EWCA Civ 1188 – Court of Appeal, patent for vitamin D
analogue, novelty, obviousness.
Laboratorios Almirall v Boehringer [2009] FSR 12 – patents for combinations of
anticholinergic drugs and beta agonists, novelty, obviousness, insufficiency, method
of treatment.
Edwards v Cook [2009] FSR 27 – patent for artificial, heart valves, novelty,
obviousness, loss of priority.
Dyson Technologies v Samsung [2009] FSR 15 – patents for cyclonic vacuum
cleaners, novelty, obviousness, amendment, added matter.
CoreValve v Edwards [2009] FSR 8 – patent for artificial heart valves, novelty,
obviousness, insufficiency, infringement, experimental use defence.
Napp v Ratiopharm [2009] RPC 18 – Court of Appeal, patents for sustained release
formulations of oxycodone, obviousness, added matter, infringement.
Oxonica v Neuftec [2009] EWCA Civ 668 – Court of Appeal, construction of a patent
and know how licence.
LB Europe v Smurfit Bag in Box [2008] EWHC 510 (Pat) – inquiry as to damages for patent infringement.
Actavis v Janssen [2008] FSR 35 – patent for nebivolol, novelty, obviousness,
anticipation by prior disclosure.
LB Europe v Smurfit Bag in Box [2008] EWHC 510 (Pat) – inquiry as to damages for
patent infringement.
Actavis v Merck [2008] 1 All ER 196, Court of Appeal – pharmaceutical patent,
method of medical treatment, novelty and obviousness.
European Central Bank v Document Security Systems Inc [2008] EWCA Civ 192,
Court of Appeal – patent for preventing manufacture of counterfeit currency, added
matter.
Cantor Gaming Ltd v GameAccount [2008] FSR 4 – copyright in computer software,
whether injunctive relief appropriate.
Terms, Conditions & Privacy
1 This Agreement
This agreement sets out the terms on which we will procure the provision of legal advice to include Myview Membership, Website Advice and Documents and the Adviceline, as described at clause 3 (‘Services’). Please read this agreement carefully before you use the Services. You signify that you agree to and accept all the terms of this agreement if you access or otherwise use the Services in any way.
If you accept this agreement you can use the Services as described in this agreement. If you do not accept this agreement, you may not use the Services.
Legal advice is provided through Riverview Solicitors and Riverview Chambers. The Members of Riverview Chambers are regulated by the Bar Standards Board (Registration Numbers 7211, 7619 and 7620). Riverview solicitors is registered with The Law Society of England and Wales under number 564803 and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Riverview Law is a trading name of LawVest Limited – www.lawvest.co.uk
Riverview Solicitors and members of Riverview Chambers are only responsible for advice and guidance provided to your organisation from the point at which your contract with Riverview Law commenced. Riverview Law, Riverview Solicitors and Riverview Chambers can accept no responsibility or liability for matters which commenced prior to your contract with Riverview Law starting.
2 The parties to this agreement and definitions
2.1 This agreement is between:
- Riverview Law (Riverview Law is the trading name of LawVest Limited company registration number 7650291, VAT Registration No GB 899 3725 51, registered office: 39/40 Calthorpe Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 1TS United Kingdom); and
- you, the person or organisation that has subscribed for the Services.
2.2 The following words have specific meanings in this agreement: “Advice and Information” means the advice, recommendations and other information provided as part of the Services however we deliver it to you (whether written or oral, in paper form or electronic and whether or not generated by electronic means). “Myview Portal” means the secure case management tool through which you will be able to access written Advice and Information provided by the Adviceline. “Documents” and “Materials” means those documents and materials (respectively) provided as part of the Services, whether in paper or electronic medium. “Email” means (where it forms part of your subscription) any and all support provided as part of the Services by email. “Adviceline” means (where it forms part of your subscription) the telephone adviceline available as part of the Services. “Website” means the section of our web site at www.riverviewlaw.com which contains information relating to the Services and via which some of the Services may be delivered.
3 Service Details
3.1 This agreement only applies to those elements of the Services which you have subscribed or registered for including Myview Membership, Legal Counsel and/or a specific legal event.
3.2 Adviceline support
This paragraph only applies if you are entitled to receive Adviceline Support. If you are entitled to receive Adviceline support, we will provide it between the hours of 8.00am and 6.00pm on week days (other than on public holidays in England).
3.3 Our promises to you
Subject to the matters outlined below, we will use our reasonable endeavours to ensure that:
- Documents and Materials are prepared and maintained with reasonable care and skill; and
- the Advice and Information is prepared and maintained with reasonable care and skill and, to the extent that it is provided as a result of your use of the Myview Portal, Adviceline or Email, is provided having regard to the nature of the problem and the information provided by you;
- changes in the law are monitored and reasonable efforts are made to ensure that the Documents, Materials, Advice and Information are kept up to date.
3.4 Important website document disclaimers
- The Documents are standard form documents and as such may not be suitable for the use you intend. There may be facts that have a significant and disproportionate effect on your legal position but are not addressed by standard form documents. Consequently the Documents should be used as general drafting guides only and may need to be amended or supplemented in accordance with legal advice.
- The laws applicable to the Documents, Materials, Advice and Information are the laws of England and Wales. None of the Documents, Materials, Advice and Information are suitable for use outside England and Wales.
- The Documents, Materials and Advice and Information cannot take into account all individual circumstances so, save as advised by the Adviceline, cannot provide specific advice, such as whether you should enter a particular legal agreement or how a particular event will affect your legal position. If you are unsure about whether to use a particular Document or how such Advice and Information might affect you, we recommend that you call the Adviceline (if you are entitled to do so) or seek your own legal advice if necessary. If you sign any Document and use it you do so entirely at your own risk. If the matter is out-of-scope and you fail to take legal advice having been advised to do so, or if it is otherwise reasonable to do so, you do so entirely at your own risk. If you are re-using any Document or relying on any Advice and Information that you have used or relied upon previously, you should, in addition to seeking your own legal advice, check the Website to verify whether the Document and/or Advice and Information has been amended and/or any related Materials updated.
3.5 Third Party Disbursements
Your contract does not include any third party expenses incurred on your behalf (e.g. fees payable to the court, expert witnesses, and other third parties). You are responsible for such fees but we will, in advance, let you know how much such fees will be and, if you authorise them, when you are required to pay them. Please note that these are not fees that Riverview Law will benefit from, but are the fees of third parties who, with your prior approval, may be involved in a case/matter.
4. Our liability and responsibility to you
4.1 We accept no liability for the Services we provide to you if you fail to follow the advice provided promptly and/or if you fail to provide us with all facts relevant to the issue that is the subject of the Advice and Information provided as a result of your use of the Adviceline or Email.
4.2 If we have permitted you to use any of the Services to support your clients, you acknowledge that nothing in this agreement creates a contractual relationship between us and any client of yours, and that we have no liability whatsoever to you if you fail to ensure that any Advice and Information we provide to you is provided promptly to your client and/or if your client fails to follow the Advice and Information provided promptly and/or you fail to provide us with all facts relevant to the issue that is the subject of the Advice and Information resulting from your use of the Adviceline or Email. In addition, we have no liability at all to you if you fail to abide by the terms of this agreement.
4.3 Subject to clause 4.6, we will not in any circumstances be liable to you for any of the following types of loss arising from your use of or inability to use the Services, (a) indirect or consequential loss (b) loss of business or profits or anticipated savings, loss or corruption of data, loss caused by a virus, loss of or damage to property, claims of third parties, fines or penalties levied by any taxing or other authority or any other similar or analogous loss or damage, in each case whether arising directly or indirectly.
4.4 Our liability (including that of our affiliates and suppliers) to you in respect of losses or damages arising directly or indirectly from your use of or inability to use the Services or any part of them, irrespective of whether such loss or damage is based on contract, tort (including negligence) or otherwise, shall not exceed the higher of £250,000 per case.
4.5 You will not bring any claim in respect of any loss against any of our staff members personally, but this will not limit or exclude our liability for the acts or omissions of our staff members.
4.6 Nothing in this agreement limits our liability in relation to death or personal injury caused by our negligence, or for fraud, or limits our liability for any matter which may not be excluded by law.
5. Your rights to access and use the Services
5.1 You may permit the named user(s) approved by us and paid for by you, to access and use the Services for your own internal business purposes, for the period of your subscription, so long as you continue to pay the appropriate subscription fees in accordance with our invoice terms.
5.2 In addition to any other right or remedy available to us, we may suspend your ability to use the Services without giving you a refund, if we reasonably suspect you are using the Services to provide advice to any third party without our written consent and/or without paying the appropriate subscription fees.
5.3 If you have downloaded a Document, we grant you a non-exclusive, non-transferable licence for the period of your subscription to:
- view that Document and make such number of copies of the Document as are reasonably required in connection with the review, negotiation, modification and signing of that Document or a modified version thereof by the parties;
- modify that Document; and
- provide copies of that Document to parties signing that Document and their legal advisors, provided you do not remove or modify any copyright, notices, trademarks or other proprietary notices.
5.4 The licences granted in clauses 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 are subject to the condition that you use the Website, Myview Portal, the Documents, the Materials, the Advice and Information, any other contents of the Website, Myview Portal, Emails and the Adviceline strictly in accordance with this agreement, all relevant documentation and all applicable laws and regulations and for lawful purposes only.
5.5 You agree to ensure that the named users approved by us to use the Service do so in accordance with this agreement.
6. The Service limits
6.1 All uses of the Services (including your access to the Website and Myview Portal), the Documents, the Materials and any other content of the Website that are not expressly permitted by clause 5 above are prohibited (unless we agree otherwise in writing). These prohibited uses include (without limitation):
- any re-use of the Services or distribution of the product of the Services other than as specifically permitted by us in writing; and
- any re-use of the Services or distribution of the product of the Services other than as specifically permitted by us in writing; and
- any sale, licensing, rental, distribution, publication, posting, framing, transmission, display or reverse engineering of or creation of derivative works from the Documents, the Materials, the contents of the Website or any other product of the Services; and
- any attempt to amend the content of the Myview Portal or Website.
6.2 We make reasonable efforts to ensure that the Website, Myview Portal, Emails and their computer server are virus-free but cannot guarantee that this is the case. We recommend that you use virus protection software. You are responsible for the entire cost of any service, repairs or corrections required by you as a result of your use of the Website, and/or Myview Portal. We cannot guarantee that the Website and/or Myview Portal (including its contents) will be compatible with your browser or computer configuration or that your access to the Website and/or Myview Portal will be uninterrupted, because this is beyond our control.
7. Your information and data security
7.1 In performing our obligations in this agreement you may provide us with your personal data (as defined by the Data Protection Act 1998). Each party agrees to comply with its obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998 in relation to such personal data.
7.2 We will use any information you give us under this agreement to:
- manage how you use the Services;
- meet our obligations under this agreement or any other agreement we have with anyone who licenses us (our licensors), or our subcontractors;
- contact you to see if you would like to take part in our customer research;
- contact you about our other products and services and those of others which we think you will be interested in unless you have indicated that you do not wish to be contacted.
(If we do contact you in this way, we will try to speak to the relevant person in your organisation, and we may contact you directly, or use other organisations which we have hired to contact you for us.)
7.3 We may give information to other companies in our group of companies, our licensors and contractors, and other organisations described in relevant documents so far as required to ensure we can provide you with the Services contained in your contract with us.
7.4 If you give us information which could give away the identity of an individual, you are agreeing that we can use it as described in this clause 7. If at any time you do not want us to use such information in that way, please call us. For more information on how we use information about you, see the privacy policy on our website at www.riverviewlaw.com.
8. Suspending or withdrawing your access to Myview Portal and/or Website
Operation of the Adviceline, Website or Myview Portal may be suspended from time to time, whether for maintenance or repairs or other reasons.
9. How this agreement may be terminated
9.1 You may terminate this agreement within the first month of your contract and you will receive an immediate refund. From month two you may terminate your contract at any time by notifying us in writing but if you do so there will be no refund of the subscription fee, and if you make payments by periodic payment (for example direct debit), the whole outstanding sum will become immediately due and payable. We may terminate this Agreement as provided for in this clause 9 or by giving you thirty days’ written notice at any time. If we do so, we will refund to you such pro rata amount of the subscription fee as relates to the period from the date of expiry of our written notice to the end of the period of your subscription.
9.2 We may terminate this agreement immediately and without refund if you:
- commit a material or persistent breach of this agreement and, if that breach can be rectified, do not rectify it within fourteen days of written notice of the breach from us; or
- fail to pay any amount you owe us within seven days of the due date whether under this agreement or any other contract with us; or
- are in breach of any other contractual obligation to us; or
- are unable to pay your debts (within the meaning of section 123 of the Insolvency Act 1986) or you become insolvent, bankrupt or cease to exist (including if a partnership, you are dissolved), or an order is made or a resolution passed for your liquidation, administration, winding-up or dissolution (otherwise than for the purposes of a solvent amalgamation or reconstruction) or an administrative or other receiver, manager, liquidator, administrator, trustee or similar officer is appointed over all or any substantial part of your assets you enter into or proposes any composition or arrangement with your creditors generally or papers are filed at court seeking a moratorium in respect of you under Schedule A1 of the Insolvency Act 2000, or you cease to trade, or similar circumstances occur to you in any jurisdiction.
10. General terms
10.1 We may perform any of our obligations or exercise any of our rights ourselves or through any third party provider.
10.2 If we choose to ignore a breach by you of any part of this agreement on one occasion, we may still take issue with you if you breach the same or any other part of this agreement after the first breach.
10.3 A person who is not a party to this agreement shall have no right under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 to the benefit of any of this agreement, unless we agree otherwise in writing though both of us may change or terminate any of these terms without the approval of those parties.
10.4 If a court or similar body decides that any wording in this agreement cannot be enforced, that decision will not affect the rest of this agreement, which will remain binding on both of us. However, if the wording that cannot be enforced could be enforced if part of it is deleted, we will both treat the relevant part of the wording as if it is deleted.
10.5 If circumstances beyond our reasonable control arise, we will not be liable for failing to meet our responsibilities in this agreement because of those circumstances, for as long as those circumstances continue.
10.6 It is important to us to have a direct relationship with the users of the Services so you must not transfer this agreement to anyone else. We may transfer this agreement to another organisation which is part of our group of companies.
10.7 This agreement must be read together with any other formally accepted contract or agreement between us enabling your use of the Services, including without limitation our invoice terms, provided that this agreement shall take precedence over any terms submitted by you. This agreement shall be effective from the date you completed your registration and/or purchased a contract.
10.8 This agreement is governed by the laws of England and Wales and you and we both agree that the courts of England and Wales will be the only courts that can decide on legal disputes or claims about this agreement.
FAQs and News
If you can’t find what you want please
call or email us
OUR NO QUIBBLE REFUND
Q. What is your no quibble refund?
A. If you purchase one of our annual contracts and, in the first month, our service does not live up to your expectations, you can cancel your contract and we will refund your money. No questions, no quibbles, an immediate refund. We’re that confident about the quality of our service and our teams.
Q. Why have you offered this refund?
A. We believe you will be impressed with both our customer service and the quality of the plain-English advice provided by the legal team. We want to make your buying decision as easy as possible. What better way to do this than provide you with a no quibble exit and refund within the first month?
Q. Do you expect many organisations to cancel their contract in the first month?
A. No. We believe that businesses will be impressed with the service.
Q. Can I cancel after the first month?
A. No. Once you enter the second month your contract will run for the full year. We hope that at the end of the year the value of the service provided will result in you renewing your contract.
ABOUT RIVERVIEW LAW
Q. What is Riverview Law?
A. Riverview Law is a legal services organisation that aims to change the way businesses buy and use legal services. Riverview Law solves the ‘ticking clock’ problem businesses have with traditional law firms' hourly charging models by bringing transparency and certainty through fixed pricing, annual and multi-year contracts. Legal advice to Riverview Law customers is delivered through Riverview Solicitors and Riverview Chambers.
Q. Why was Riverview Law set-up?
A. Quality and affordable legal advice should be available to all business, regardless of their size and budget. The UK legal profession is going through a period of significant upheaval. Changes in regulation and customer expectation provide an opportunity for a more modern, flexible, and customer-centric approach to the provision of legal services. Riverview Law has been created to exploit these opportunities.
Q. What makes Riverview Law different?
A. Our business, pricing and customer models make us different. Traditionally law firms look at their costs and work out how many billable hours are required to generate a profit. We started from a different point, the customer. We analysed what was important to small, medium and large businesses. We then set about building a different, cost-effective, service delivery model that combined people and technology appropriately. We had all the advantages of the new entrant – a blank piece of paper. This is why we are working with Riverview Chambers and Riverview Solicitors, why all our services are fixed price and why we have the customer at the centre of all our sales, service and technology models.
Q. How big is Riverview at launch?
A. At launch there are approximately 75 people including Lawyers and Legal Assistants supporting Riverview Law members and customers. A list of some of the people involved can be found on the Riverview Law website. Riverview Law, Riverview Chambers and Riverview Solicitors are all currently recruiting.
Q. Does Riverview Law have offices?
A. We have two offices. Our main Customer Service Centre is based in Wirral. We also have a small London office. Our teams split their time between these and customer locations as required. We anticipate opening one or more Service Centres in England in the next 12-24 months.
ABOUT RIVERVIEW SOLICITORS AND RIVERVIEW CHAMBERS
Q. How are Riverview Solicitors and Riverview Chambers regulated?
A. Riverview Chambers is regulated by the Bar Standards Board (Registration Numbers 7211, 7619 and 7620). Riverview solicitors is registered in England and Wales under number 564803 and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
MYVIEW PORTAL AND MEMBERSHIP
Q. What is the Myview membership and portal?
A. The Myview membership allows businesses to experience the Riverview Law difference, first-hand, at no cost. We want long-term relationships with our customers and their businesses. Myview is our way of starting that process. It is part of our investment in building trust and confidence with potential and existing customers and members. It includes:
- Unlimited access to an online library containing over 650 advice pages and 450 documents, FAQs, letters and templates relating to running a business. The breadth and depth of advice and guidance in this library is unrivalled and will help business take a more pre-emptive approach to the running of their business. These cover subjects from HR to sales and marketing, finance and regulation to technology and health & safety.
- A complimentary call to one of the legal team, which is followed by a case note summarising your actions and next steps. These notes will be stored in a secure Myview portal unique and fully accessible to the member.
Q. Why are you giving away content and documents that other businesses charge for?
A. We don’t see it as giving the content away. We see it as a way of starting a relationship with you and demonstrating how good our services are. We want Riverview Law to be at the forefront of your mind whenever you need access to legal advice.
Q. How do you register?
A. It is very simple and efficient. Registration is online and takes less than a minute. All we require is name, company name, email and telephone.
THE SERVICES
Q. What is the full range of your offer to businesses?
A. We provide bespoke, fixed price solutions ranging from annual contracts for SMEs to legal advisory outsourcing for large corporations.
Legal Adviser: For businesses with up to 50 employees
Offers unlimited access to the legal team during business hours including all advice, guidance, document preparation and reviews, plus the management of all correspondence and solicitors' letters in any dispute up to the commencement of proceedings, after which a fixed price quote will be provided separately.
Legal Counsel: For businesses with up to 1000 employees
Uses Riverview Law’s ‘Legal Counsel Analyser’ to establish what services a client requires in addition to the core Legal Counsel service scope. Once this is captured, a detailed fixed price, flexible proposal is prepared for consideration. The Legal Counsel service scope is extensive so clients can expect full legal support in most business matters, plus the management of all correspondence and solicitors’ letters in any dispute up to the commencement of proceedings, after which a fixed price quote will be provided separately.
Legal Advisory Outsourcing: For large corporations
Large corporations can outsource their in-house legal function to Riverview Law on a fixed price, multi-year contract basis.
Q. What is the service scope for the annual contracts? Will there be a limit on the access clients will have to lawyers? What about for meetings?
A. Following detailed work with smaller businesses, the Legal Adviser and Legal Counsel Service Scopes have been designed to cover all the legal support that organisations typically require. Legal Adviser/Counsel includes all in-scope advice, guidance, document preparation and review, plus the management of all correspondence and solicitors’ letters in any dispute up to a claim form being issued in a Tribunal or a Court.
If additional support is required outside of this service scope, for example representation in a Court or Tribunal, a separate fixed price quote will be provided. You are under no obligation to accept this quote and, if you do not, we undertake to provide your chosen adviser with the necessary documents promptly so they can support you appropriately.
There is no limit on access for any client during normal business days between 8.00am to 6.00pm. Both the Legal Adviser and Legal Counsel services are designed so that advice is provided quickly and conveniently on the telephone or electronically, backed up by a comprehensive record of all contacts and advice through the Myview portal. Where required meetings will be arranged and included in contracts or priced separately.
Q. How can you offer high-quality legal advice and support at fixed-prices and make the numbers work?
A. We have a different service delivery, cost and business model. We started with a blank piece of paper and re-engineered the legal service delivery model so that it is focused on the customer. We’ve kept our overheads low. We do not have expensive city-centre premises to pay for. We do not have a large head-office or partner model to support. We use effective technology and workflow systems to enable our legal and support teams to work flexibly and efficiently. What we don’t do is cut corners in the quality or reliability of the legal advice we provide or the customer service we deliver. We see legal services as just that, a service, and have deliberately swept the cobwebs off the traditional client/lawyer interaction.
LAWVEST LIMITED
What is LawVest?
LawVest is a holding company set-up in May 2011 to exploit the significant opportunities that are being created by the structural, regulatory and commercial changes occurring in the legal market. Riverview Law is a trading name of LawVest. LawVest is owned by AdviserPlus Business Solutions, DLA Piper UK Nominees Ltd and a number of individuals, including the management team.
THE RIVERVIEW BRAND
Q. Why did you choose the name Riverview Law?
A. We wanted a name that could become a brand and that is both solid and reliable but capable of demonstrating that we have a different view on the legal market. As you’ll see from the branding, our website and all our communications and marketing there is a big play on us having a different view on matters.
Q. What is the story behind the brand?
A. At Riverview we believe that the way legal services are accessed and delivered really matters – to businesses, to individuals and to society in general. That’s the core theme underpinning our approach and propositions. We have a clear view on legal matters and we believe our customers should expect to have the same clarity.
It is our ambition for Riverview to become synonymous with legal innovation and leadership. Our first steps in delivering this can be seen in the characteristics underpinning our various services:
| Characteristics | How we do it |
|---|---|
| Transparency | Fixed pricing is provided for all services |
| Certainty | Annual contracts and fixed pricing means customers can budget confidently |
| Ease of Access | Customers can access their secure Myview Portal any time of the day or week, and the Adviceline has extended opening hours |
| Expertise | The professionals delivering the service, from the support teams to the lawyers in Riverview Chambers and Riverview Solicitors, are highly trained and customer focused |
| Innovation | From free content (business and legal documents, policies, forms, template letters, records and advice), through the Myview Portal and a free adviceline call, to annual contracts and our price guarantee |
| Low Risk | Customers can use the free adviceline call to test Riverview Law and, via the price guarantee, have a full no quibble refund of their annual contract if in the first month they decide the service is not for them |
| Membership | Relationships matter. We will develop long-term relationships with customers. Our Membership is free and provides significant lasting value. It is part of our investment in building trust and confidence with potential customers |
To achieve our ambitions all our people are guided by core values that inform and drive everything we do:
Remember who the law is for
The law is for us all. It is for our customers. We never forget our responsibility to put customer needs and expectations at the centre of everything we do.
Expert advice, good judgement
There is no short cut to building trust. We deliver high-quality, expert advice and build confidence through superb people. Much of what we deal with is not simple or clear cut. We have to assess the situation, consider all aspects and then exercise judgement on behalf of our clients so we can provide them with appropriate options and strategies. We value expertise and great judgement in our people and do everything we can to encourage, nurture and hone these skills. We know that our advice is only as good as the ability of our customers to act on it.
Be clear, assume nothing
Our success depends on two key factors: our ability to be precise and accurate with our judgements and our ability to articulate those recommendations clearly to clients. It is our responsibility to make sense of and explain complicated legal matters, and great communication relies on taking nothing for granted.
Looking forward, looking back
We respect the history and role of law. We recognise that the world is changing rapidly. Our view of the future, and understanding of the past, helps us innovate and establish trust with all our stakeholders. We help our clients deal with present issues and look ahead to what may be facing them in the future.
Above all our people know that they have the authority, without referral, to make decisions that are in the best interests of customers. They also know that they work in a culture and environment that means they are supported when they do this.
Search Legal Library
Over 650 plain English advice pages and over 450 documents, letters and templates
It would take too long to summarise the 650 plain English advice pages and over 450 documents, letters and templates that make up our legal library. From contracts of employment, risk assessment forms, and a staff handbook, through non-disclosure agreements and intellectual property rights to website terms and conditions, company rules and consultancy agreements.
Given this, the screen shots below will, hopefully, provide you with a flavour for how we’ve made it easy for you to find what you need. Alternatively just view our Legal Library Demonstration. At a glance you can see how comprehensive the document offerings are by reviewing the ‘Business Law’, ‘HR and Employment Law’ and ‘Health and Safety Law’ pages.
You may be wondering why we’re providing access to this comprehensive resource tool, for free, when other parties charge for this type of content. Well, quite simply, we want to make sure that Riverview Law is at the forefront of your mind when your business next needs legal advice! We want to develop a relationship with your business and we’re prepared to invest in developing this. What better way to do this than to show you what we can do.
So, Register Now, at no cost, for Myview membership and have immediate and unlimited access to our Legal Library and the other support tools that make up Myview membership. There are no catches, no hidden costs.
Register now or for more details call 0844 257 6000 or email [email protected] to arrange a call back.
Riverview Chambers
Working together to provide you with an integrated legal solution
The legal advice provided to Riverview Law customers is delivered through Riverview Solicitors and Riverview Chambers.
The Chief Executive of Riverview Chambers is Chris Baylis (Barrister BA (Hons) LLM, MTH, MPhil MBA (Trinity Hall) Cambridge University). With more than 25 years' legal experience, Chris advises a wide range of corporate clients on all aspects of company commercial law and employment law. He can be regularly found representing clients in the High Court, Employment Tribunals, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal. He also specialises in formal and informal mediations as an alternative to court litigation.
Riverview Chambers is regulated by the Bar Standards Board (Registration Numbers 7211, 7619 and 7620).
Contact Us
Call us between 8.00am-6.00pm or email
us out of hours
We're committed to providing you with an excellent customer experience and effective legal advice. All the people associated with Riverview Law have the authority, without referral, to make decisions that are in the best interests of customers. Contacting us is easy:
For businesses with up to 1000 employees
Sales Advisers
Tel: 0844 257 6000
Email: [email protected]
Myview Member Support
Tel: 0844 257 2508
Email: [email protected]
For large corporations
Tel: 0844 257 0027
Email: [email protected]
For Riverview Law - General Enquiries
Switchboard: 0844 257 0027
Email: [email protected]
For International Enquiries
Tel: +1 212 729 7724 (US only)
Tel: +44 (0) 207 489 2010 (All other regions)
Email: [email protected]
About Us
We’re not doing anything clever. We’re just applying common sense to the legal market
The UK legal services market is valued at approximately £24bn pa. It is highly fragmented with few brands. It's going through a period of significant upheaval. Changes in regulation and customer expectation provide an opportunity for a more modern, flexible, and customer-centric approach to the provision of legal services.
That's why, after nearly two years of research and analysis, we created Riverview Law in May 2011.
In creating Riverview Law we had all of the advantages of a new entrant. We had a blank piece of paper. No legacy technology systems, culture or people. No expensive offices and overheads. We were able to build our model from the customer up not from the law firm partner down.
Traditionally, law firms look at their costs and work out how many billable hours (lawyer utilisation rates) are required to generate a profit. We started from a different point, the customer. We analysed what was important to small, medium and large businesses. We then set about building a different, cost-effective, service delivery model that combined people and technology appropriately.
But we’re much more than a new entrant. We added to our view on the future of legal services the expertise and experiences of AdviserPlus Business Solutions and DLA Piper as strategic investors.
AdviserPlus delivers HR and Health & Safety outsourced solutions to businesses of all sizes. For many years it has provided these services to tens of thousands of small and medium sized businesses on a fixed-price annual contract basis. On a fixed-price multi-year contract basis, it also provides HR and H&S outsourcing services to large corporations including banks, utilities, insurance companies, telecoms businesses and logistics organisations.
DLA Piper is one of the largest global business law firms in the world.
To ensure that Riverview Law can provide high quality support, at fixed-prices, we’ve adopted and adapted the following principles:
- We’ve kept our overheads low
- We don't have expensive city-centre premises to pay for
- We don't have a large head-office or partner model to support
- We use effective end-to-end technology and workflow systems to enable our legal and support teams to work flexibly and efficiently
- We see legal services as just that, a service, and have deliberately swept the cobwebs off the traditional client/lawyer interaction
- We don't reward our people for the number of ‘billable-hours’ they generate
- We measure success in how effectively and quickly our teams satisfy customer legal requirements
And this is why we don’t think we’re doing anything clever. We’ve just had the luxury of being a well-funded business, with no baggage, that can innovate and make decisions quickly. We also have strategic investors and a strong management team led by Karl Chapman and Adam Shutkever who have experience in building large sustainable businesses.
Myview Membership
Experience the Riverview Law difference
at no cost to you
Choosing a legal partner is a big decision. You need to be confident they can deliver; that they understand your business and your requirements. You need to be able to work together.
We recognise this. We know we have to earn your trust. That’s why we created Myview membership.
Myview allows your business to experience the Riverview Law difference, first-hand, at no cost. Myview membership provides you with:
| Feature | Description | Benefit |
|---|---|---|
| Legal Advice Library | Unlimited access to a comprehensive, regularly updated library containing over 650 plain English advice pages and 450 documents, forms, records and templates (see Legal Library overview). At a glance you can see how comprehensive the document offerings are by reviewing the ‘Business Law’, ‘HR and Employment Law’ and ‘Health and Safety Law’ pages | At no cost you have access to online guidance, plus templates you can tailor for use in your business, saving you time and money |
| Complimentary Call | Call our legal team and ask for their advice on that legal issue or question you have. You must be a Myview member to make this call because a follow-up case note summarising your actions and next steps is sent to your secure Myview Portal. Using your free call is easy, just Register and then call | You can test the quality, relevance and customer-centric nature of the Riverview Law service without worrying about the cost |
| Secure Myview Portal | Access to your secure Myview Portal containing all the support tools provided by Riverview Law | Enables you to experience how Riverview Law works. Once registered, this portal is unique to you and remains with you. This makes it easy to work with Riverview Law in the future should you wish to do so |
|
E-Learning Modules |
Access to e-learning modules on 'Manage Your Time' and 'Business Networking' | Helps you become more effective as you run and grow your business |
Becoming a Member is quick and easy, just Register Now.
Our Philosophy
We know that our advice is only as good
as your ability to act on it
The UK legal profession is going through a period of significant upheaval. Changes in regulation and customer expectation provide an opportunity for a more modern, flexible, and customer-centric approach to the provision of legal services.
At Riverview we believe that the way legal services are accessed and delivered really matters – to businesses, to individuals and to society in general. That’s the core theme underpinning our approach and propositions. We have a clear view on legal matters and we believe our customers should expect to have the same clarity.
It's our ambition for Riverview to become synonymous with legal innovation and leadership. Our first steps in delivering this can be seen in the characteristics underpinning our various services:
| Characteristics | How we do it |
|---|---|
| Transparency | Fixed pricing is provided for all services |
| Certainty | Annual contracts and fixed pricing mean customers can budget confidently |
| Ease of Access | Customers can access their secure Myview Portal any time of the day or week, and the Adviceline has extended opening hours |
| Expertise | The professionals delivering the service, from the support teams to the lawyers in Riverview Chambers and Riverview Solicitors, are highly trained and customer focused |
| Innovation | From free content (business and legal documents, policies, forms, template letters, records and advice), through the Myview Portal and a free complimentary call, to annual contracts and our price guarantee |
| Low Risk | Customers can use the free complimentary call to test Riverview Law and, via the price guarantee, have a full no quibble refund of their annual contract if in the first month they decide the service is not for them |
| Membership | Relationships matter. We will develop long-term relationships with customers. Our membership is free and provides significant lasting value. It is part of our investment in building trust and confidence with potential customers |
To achieve our ambitions all our people are guided by core values that inform and drive everything we do:
Remember who the law is for
The law is for us all. It's for our customers. We never forget our responsibility to put customer needs and expectations at the centre of everything we do.
Expert advice, good judgement
There is no short cut to building trust. We deliver high-quality, expert advice and build confidence through superb people. Much of what we deal with is not simple or clear cut. We have to assess the situation, consider all aspects and then exercise judgement on behalf of our clients so we can provide them with appropriate options and strategies. We value expertise and great judgement in our people and do everything we can to encourage, nurture and hone these skills. We know that our advice is only as good as the ability of our customers to act on it.
Be clear, assume nothing
Our success depends on two key factors: our ability to be precise and accurate with our judgements and our ability to articulate those recommendations clearly to clients. It's our responsibility to make sense of and explain complicated legal matters, and great communication relies on taking nothing for granted.
Looking forward, looking back
We respect the history and role of law. We recognise that the world is changing rapidly. Our view of the future, and understanding of the past, helps us innovate and establish trust with all our stakeholders. We help our clients deal with present issues and look ahead to what may be facing them in the future.
Above all our people know that they have the authority, without referral, to make decisions that are in the best interests of customers. They also know that they work in a culture and environment that means they are supported when they do this.
To see how we’ve re-engineered the legal service delivery model so it works better for customers look at How we can offer fixed pricing.
Your Team
Top lawyers, administrators and customer support staff so you receive the service you need
We could use many words to describe how we, Riverview Chambers and Riverview Solicitors recruit, induct, develop, and retain the people who provide services to our clients. And why we don't reward them for the number of 'billable hours' they generate, but measure success by how effectively and quickly they satisfy your legal requirements.
But, while words are helpful the key is seeing who is actually delivering the legal advice. How good are they? What are their track records? Can you work with them?
Well, through Riverview Law we believe you have access to a top team but judge for yourself by reviewing the profiles below. As you will see, we can provide you with access to advice and support in all areas of business and commercial law plus some specialised personal areas such as family and matrimonial matters. Either search the list of lawyers alphabetically or use the side bar to view your team by areas of expertise.
International
Providing you with one stop, fixed price, access to the English Legal system
When we spend time with international law firms and businesses we are usually asked two questions: why do you have Solicitors and Barristers in England, and why does this division appear to increase our costs in obtaining advice on English legal issues and in accessing the English Courts?
This made us reflect on what we could do to make it easier for international organisations to access the English legal system. After all, for many years English Courts and Arbitrations have been a favoured jurisdiction for resolving international disputes. With increasing extraterritorial impact of legislation in fields such as Competition/Anti-trust, Anti-corruption, Money laundering, Intellectual Property and Environmental Law, many international corporations and professionals have a requirement for advice and representation in the English legal system.
Until now, this typically required the engagement of a firm of English Solicitors, who would then in turn engage a Barrister or team of Barristers, thereby duplicating cost and effort and reducing the customer’s direct access to the Barristers working on and advising on the strategy for the case.
We believe we have resolved this issue by creating a simple solution that provides the first truly seamless and integrated access point to the top talent of the English legal system.
We have completely re-engineered the legal service delivery process, to give our international customers direct access to teams led by leading Barristers, fully supported by teams of lawyers, legal practitioners, administration and customer service staff. And we do all this with transparent and fixed fees and no nasty surprises.
To ensure we can provide high quality support at fixed prices we have kept our overheads low. We do not have large expensive city-centre premises to finance. We do not have a head-office or partner model to support. We use effective technology systems to enable our Barrister-led teams and support staff to work flexibly and efficiently.
What we offer
We’re opening local offices in strategic international jurisdictions, and provide all our international clients with:
- Direct access to our expert Barristers
- Transparent and fixed fee pricing
- Lower costs
- A dedicated Barrister-led team from start to finish
- Leading practitioners in their fields
- Plain English advice you can act upon
A philosophy focused on addressing your legal requirements, not generating unnecessary legal work.
For more details call us on +1 212 729 7724 (US), +44 (0) 207 489 2010 (all other regions) or email [email protected]
Large Organisations
Through Riverview Chambers and Riverview Solicitors we provide legal support to large organisations via panels, specific project work and/or representation in negotiations or court.
But our proposition goes beyond this traditional support model. We help General Counsel and FDs address core questions about quality, risk management, cost/benefit and measurement:
- What is the proper role of the in-house legal function in the business?
- How are in-house activities aligned successfully with the wider objectives of the organisation?
- How does the in-house team work effectively with panels to provide value and avoid duplication?
- How do you measure the performance of the in-house team, panels and/or other legal advisers?
- Is the in-house function delivering demonstrable value and cost-benefit?
- What is the right balance between internal and external legal support?
Every in-house lawyer and legal function we interact with is busy. But being busy does not always mean being smart. In-house lawyers will often admit that they’re working on matters that are ‘routine’, that would be better and more cost-effectively delivered by a strategic legal partner. But the panel relationship is only a partial answer to this issue. Too often it duplicates effort and cost, not only in its creation but also in its maintenance and operation.
That’s why we see panels as just a stepping stone to the next natural evolution of the market - legal advisory outsourcing.
The Riverview Law 'Beyond Panels' Model
The business case for legal advisory outsourcing varies from organisation to organisation depending upon where they sit in the evolution curve. For example, some organisations can by-pass the ‘building a panel(s)’ process completely by jumping to strategic outsourcing with all the benefits this brings. For most General Counsel the headline benefits are to be found in these areas:
-
Transformation
It helps facilitate the transformation of the legal function from its ‘as is’ to the ‘to be’ future state.
-
Performance
It promotes consistency and client service as well as supporting and driving business performance.
-
Cost
It manages and reduces cost through fixed-price arrangements and a restructuring of the internal function.
-
Impact
It's quick to implement and has an immediate impact operationally and financially.
-
Measurement
It delivers comprehensive management information and reporting plus accurate performance measurement.
We believe we are leading one of the next big trends in the legal market. We’re confident that once you've experienced our approach and service model, from fixed pricing through to the quality of our lawyers and the power of our management information and reporting, we will develop a long-term partnership.
To discuss this model and/or to arrange an appointment for one of our Directors to visit and explain legal advisory outsourcing in more detail, please all 0844 257 6000
Mid-Market
We sit down with you, discuss your legal requirements, set the scope and fix the price
When we speak with MDs and FDs about their legal costs there is usually a pause, or a slow shake of the head before they respond. It’s as if they’re caught in a catch 22.
They know they need quality legal advice on that lease review, those employment issues and that customer contract. But they’re uncomfortable with the cost, the lack of price transparency and, generally, the customer service. In particular they dislike the hourly billing model popular with solicitors.
Indeed, many organisations tell us they would call a solicitor more frequently if they knew what the cost would be. They want advice but, because they’re worried about the ‘ticking clock’, they deal with the matter in-house, with all the risks this brings. That’s why we created Legal Counsel for organisations with less than 1000 employees.
Legal Counsel annual contract
At a fixed annual price, Legal Counsel has been designed to provide businesses with unlimited access to reliable legal advice and support for all their day-to-day legal requirements (adviceline 8.00am-6.00pm on normal working days and the secure Myview Portal 24/7). Put simply, our fixed-price annual contract means you don’t have to worry about the cost when you speak with our lawyers.
Legal Counsel includes all advice, guidance, document preparation and review, plus the management of all correspondence and solicitors letters in any dispute up to the ‘Commencement of Proceedings’. As will be seen, the core Legal Counsel service scope has, following detailed research with businesses, been deliberately designed to cover all the legal support organisations typically require. However, if additional support is required outside of the service scope, for example representation in a Court or Tribunal, a separate fixed-price quote will be provided; a quote that you are under no obligation to accept.
To help you manage your organisations’ cash-flow, you can either pay the annual fee on commencement of the service or by monthly direct debit.
No quibble refund and Myview membership
When we explain our approach to MDs and FDs they often comment that it seems too good to be true; how can you do this when law firms don’t? This made us think, a lot, about how we could address this question. How could we provide businesses with confidence that the service is as good (well better actually) than it appears?
So, we came up with our refund policy and Myview membership. If you purchase one of our annual contracts and, in the first month, our service does not live up to your expectations, you can cancel your contract and we will refund your money. No questions, no quibbles, an immediate refund. You can buy with confidence.
Myview membership allows your business to experience the Riverview Law difference, first hand. At no-cost, you can Register Now for Myview membership, use your complimentary call to test our legal team, and access our comprehensive Legal Library which has over 650 advice pages and over 450 documents, letters and templates.
We’re that confident about the quality of our service and our teams.
Establishing your service scope
To make sure we understand the service and support you need, we use our Legal Counsel Analyser to help us provide you with a fixed-price proposal. The questions in the Analyser help us establish what services, if any, you require in addition to the core Legal Counsel service scope. Once we’ve captured this information we prepare and send you a detailed proposal for your consideration. This is a collaborative process and usually involves a number of calls and meetings.
A long-term relationship
You can be confident that we’ll provide you with an excellent service. We’re seeking a long-term relationship with your organisation. We want you to renew your contract each year. We also want you to recommend us to your business network. We know you'll only do this if we deliver quality support, that you can act on, at fair prices.
To talk with one of our Sales Advisers and make an appointment for us to visit you please call 0844 257 6000 or email [email protected]
Small Business
Start-ups and businesses with up to
50 employees
When we ask businesses to add up how much they spend each year on legal matters we’re invariably greeted with the same response. Surprise at how much they’ve actually spent on that lease review, those employment issues and that solicitor's letter.
This surprise is quickly followed by memories of the uncertainty around the final bill. Rarely was it lower than expected. Frequently they had to query the hours they’d been charged for. Almost always the fees were unbudgeted or under-budgeted.
Many businesses told us they would call a solicitor more frequently if they knew what the cost would be. They want help and advice but, because they’re worried about the ‘ticking clock’, they deal with the matter in-house, with all the risks this brings. That’s why we created our services for small businesses:
- At no-cost, you can Register Now for Myview membership with its complimentary test call to one of our legal team, access to our comprehensive Legal Library which has over 650 advice pages and over 450 documents, letters and templates and much more;
- You can buy one of our annual contracts which provide unlimited support between 8.00am and 6.00pm during normal working days and flexible monthly payment options; and
- You can benefit from our no quibble refund policy. If you purchase one of our annual contracts and, in the first month, our service does not live up to your expectations, you can cancel your contract and we will refund your money. No questions, no quibbles, an immediate refund. We’re that confident about the quality of our service and our teams.
Following detailed work with smaller businesses, the Legal Adviser service scope has been designed to cover all the legal support that organisations typically require. Legal Adviser includes all in-scope advice, guidance, document preparation and review, plus the management of all correspondence and solicitors’ letters in any dispute up to a claim form being issued in a Tribunal or a Court.
If additional support is required outside of this service scope, for example representation in a Court or Tribunal, a separate fixed price quote will be provided. You are under no obligation to accept this quote and, if you don't, we undertake to provide your chosen adviser with the necessary documents promptly so they can support you appropriately.
Legal Adviser is for you if you’re looking for:
| Feature | Benefit |
|---|---|
| Fixed pricing | Delivers transparency and cost certainty |
| Extensive service scope | No need to spend time looking for additional support or having to explain your business to another party |
| Qualified solicitors and barristers | You can be confident you are receiving the right advice |
| Unlimited access to the legal team, during service hours, on normal working days | You can pick up the phone without worrying about hourly billing or unexpected costs |
| Same adviser from the start to the end of a piece of work | Provides consistency and saves ‘briefing’ time |
| Case note sent to you after each advice call | It’s easy to take the next step and all notes are securely stored in one place for easy access |
| Your unique and secure Myview Portal | Allows you to access your case notes, documents and other information online 24 hours a day, 7 days a week |
| 8.00am to 6.00pm adviceline hours during normal working days | You can access support at a time that suits you |
| Annual contract | Provides certainty but does not tie you in for a long period |
| Backed by Professional Indemnity Insurance | Peace of mind |
| Flexible payment options | Allows you to manage your cash-flow and budget |
| No quibble refund | You can buy an annual contract safe in the knowledge that you can cancel and receive a full refund in the first month |
From as little as £200 pcm the Legal Adviser annual contract comes in three packages to suit your organisation:
- 0-5 employees
- 6-24 employees
- 25-50 employees
You can be confident we’ll provide you with an excellent service. We want you to renew your contract each year. We also want you to recommend us to your business network. We know you'll only do this if we deliver quality support, that you can act on, at fair prices.
If you wish to discuss Legal Adviser, obtain a quote or if you have any doubt as to whether a legal area is in or out-of-scope, please call one of our Sales Advisers on 0844 257 6000 or email [email protected]
