Operation Whitehouse 2005 – 2008 Defending as Leading Junior £5.5million mortgage fraud. D jointly charged with his then solicitor as co-defendant. Multiple issues concerning Regional Director of high street bank and other high net worth client investment co-ordinators on the issue of disclosure and knowledge in relation to high value mortgage and re-mortgage.  

Re Clearsearch Ltd 2007 Defending £35 million internet/investment fraud. Acting as Junior alone against Queen’s Counsel in successful application for stay of proceedings on the grounds of the ill health of defendant. Structuring and presenting complex medical evidence in relation to a condition that required no less than 6 separate consultants.  

Re Free Dot Net 2006 Defending, as Junior to Queen’s Counsel, former solicitor charged by SFO with multi million pound fraudulent prospectus fraud.  

Hansford v.Southampton Magistrates’ Court exp HM Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office 2007-8 Judicial Review relating to the behaviour and remuneration of a High Court appointed Receiver charged with recovering assets for the purposes of a Crown Court confiscation order. Issue as to whether the Receiver should pay over sums realised through the receivership gross or net of his own fees. They should be, on the facts, paid over gross resulting in a considerable reduction in the outstanding confiscation order and a quashing of the warrant of committal in default.  

Operation Peregrine 2006 Prosecuting Gross Negligence Manslaughter and Health and Safety breaches as Junior led by Queen’s Counsel. Naval diving incident resulting in death of a diving student at the Defence Diving School. Joint Health and Safety and CPS prosecution. Sensitive issues as to practice procedure and disclosure.  

HSE v Ward: Ben Compton and Oliver Assersohn appeared on behalf of the Defendant in this prosecution arising from a fatal explosion at an old peoples home in Surrey. On behalf of Ward it was succesfully argued that the 5 year delay in bringing the prosecution was an abuse of process. As a result the prosecution was stayed. One of Ward's co-defendants (seperately represented) had previously pleaded guilty. HHJ Mitchell 

Asbestos disease claim – limitation – 15 year delay in commencing proceedings – successful application to extend time pursuant to s.33 Limitation Act 1980. 

World wide proceedings to recover in excess of US$1 billion 

On May 4th 2007, HH Judge Bullimore, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, handed down judgment in Corbett v South Yorkshire Health Authority. In April 2004 John Paul Corbett, acting through his mother as litigation friend, issued a claim against the South Yorkshire Health Authority contending that their predecessors were responsible for the brain injuries John sustained at birth. The Defendants admitted liability and interim payments have been made. Represented by Harry Trusted, the case deals with two important topics: - (i) The indexation of periodical payments. The Judge held that where a claimant is to receive regular annual payments to cover future costs of care, those payments should increase each year. The increase should not be according to the Retail Price Index (RPI) but to the appropriate percentile of an index of carers' earnings. In making this finding, the Judge followed the judgment of Swift J in Thompstone v Glossop HA (November 2006) and rejected the submissions of the Defendant's counsel and experts to the effect that the RPI would be appropriate in these cases. Permission to appeal has been granted on this point and it is anticipated that the Court of Appeal will hear the argument in November 2007. (ii) The Working Time Regulations and the Assessment of Care Costs It was successfully argued that a carer who is responsible for meeting the night needs of the Mr Corbett was on duty during the night within the meaning of the Working Time Regulations 1998. Hence, the care package contended for by the claimant (which involved a roster of carers) was to be preferred to the "live-in" carer contended for by South Yorkshire Health Authority. This finding has not been appealed. The Judge held that if a carer has to provide any significant level of care of support at night, the carer will not enjoy the uninterrupted break required by the regulations. The Judge did not find that the care package proposed by the health authority was in breach of the Minimum Wage Regulations, but he doubted whether any person of sufficient calibre would be prepared to work for the wage offered.  HHJ Bullimore 

Grand Chamber Judgment of 10th April 2007. Shortly to be reported. Robin Tolson QC and Susan Freeborn represented Natallie Evans in her long and ultimately unsuccessful fight for the use of her stored embryos. Raising profound issues under Articles 8 and 14, Ms Evans contended that these embryos represented her last chance to have a child that was genetically hers – and as her former partner knew this perfectly well when giving consent originally before later withdrawing it – she must have the right to implantation. Before the European Court of Human Rights the case was lost 5-2 (4th Section) and 13-4 (Grand Chamber), the Court holding that as there was no European consensus on the issue it would not interfere with the UK Government’s stance that ongoing consent in all cases was necessary.  

Acting in an ICC international commercial arbitration (seat in London) between global car manufacturer and its logistics supplier for in excess of US$300m ICC 

An international commercial arbitration with its seat in London by a Global car manufacturer against its logisitics supplier for various breaches of contract in a case worth in excess of US$300m 

A decision of the Court of Appeal as to the meaning of the word “parent”, and as to who may be a parent of a child born by artificial insemination by donor. Robin Tolson QC represented the child on behalf of CAFCASS Legal.  

A decision of the Court of Appeal as to the availability of damages as a remedy for breach of human rights in children’s cases. Robin Tolson QC represented the appellant mother. 

Widely reported in the media and shortly to be reported in the law reports. Robin Tolson QC represented the father, Tim Williams in his successful fight for the return of his 3 children after 2 years in foster care. The judgment of the High Court contains damning criticism not just of the actions of the local authority and health authority involved, but of the diagnostic criteria applied nationally in respect of sexual abuse.  

On 23rd June 2005 the High Court (Chancery Division) made an Order referring three questions to the European Court of Justice for a ruling pursuant to Article 234 of the EC Treaty. Richard Hitchcock represented the Defendant, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. The Claimants challenged the compatibility of UK law with Article 8 of Directive 80/987/EEC. In essence the question was whether the measures taken by the UK Government to protect workers' pensions on the insolvency of their employer were sufficient and, if not, whether the breach of the Directive was sufficiently serious to attract Francovich damages. The Advocate General's Opinion is due on 13th July 2006 Neuberger J 

In relation to an application by a company's prospective creditors for an administration order over the company, although the court was satisifed that the company was unable to pay its debts, it was not satisfied that an order was likely to achieve the purpose of administration as the company was subject to an interim receiving order under s.246 Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and it was likely that all the company's assets were recoverable property and not available to creditors. Rimer J 

Inquest Re: Fatality of elderely patient delivered to the wrong address 

Charles Foster, instructed by Alexander Harris, acted for the parents in the headline-making case of MB, the 18 month old child suffering from spinal muscular atrophy. All the treating clinicians and all the experts in the case thought that it was in the child's best interests for artificial ventilation to be withdrawn, allowing him to die. The parents disagreed. After a trial lasting 6 days the judge ordered that the benefits of continued life outweighed the detriments, and that the child should continue to be ventilated.  Mr Justice Holman www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13513920,00.html MB - Judgment.pdf

Doctor charged with having been found guilty of Fraud in Civil Proceedings. 

Challenge to Governments use of the Parliament Act to force through legislation Since its amendment in 1949 debate has raged as to the lawfulness of the process by which the Commons using the Parliament Act can force the Lords to come to heel over legislation. Now, the highest court has ruled. 

Successfully appealed decision of Employment Tribunal that the Claimant was not entitled to an extension of time under the Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004.  

Whitehead v Searle and Hibbert, Pownall & Newton [2007] EWHC 1060 (QB) Claim against solicitors and barrister for negligence arising out of conduct of wrongful birth claim against Health Authority. Claim against solicitors for failing to prosecute claim expeditiously and against both for advising on and settling at an undervalue and without proper authority. Recent judgment obtained against solicitor on primary claim. (with Gordon Bebb, QC) (Griffith-Williams J)  

Human Rights Act challenge to the ban on hunting with dogs arising out of the Hunting Act 2004 Moses J 

Duty of care owed by participants in games. Sir Andrew Morritt VC, Clarke LJ, Dyson LJ 

Where a claimant had suffered asbestos-induced mesothelioma after having been negligently exposed to asbestos dust during the course of employment with more than one employer, in circumstances where he could not prove which defendant's breach of duty was the cause of the disease, it was sufficient for a claimant to prove that a defendant materially increased the risk of injury. Such a claimant did not have to satisfy the 'but for' causation test. House of Lords 

Judicial review concerning the Government's decision not to hold a public inquiry into the outbreak of foot and mouth disease. 

refusal of the CA to countenance the imposition of a joint expert by the court on issues of causation in a clinical negligence case.  

claims by group of women for negligent delay in diagnosing breast cancer; instructed as sole claimants’ counsel to give generic advice 1999-2001 

Public inquiry into the deaths of children at BRI 

Principles applicable when dealing with care and supervision orders 

Representing the Health & Safety Officer for Costains in the Inquest into the Avonmouth Bridge Gantry Collapse 

R -v- Mayhew & Others (Alleged Fraud) 

Manslaughter by gross negligence. Public Inquiry