We are City barristers with an uncompromising kemp and kemp quantum of damages pdf on quality, value and our clients’ success. An excellent advocate who has an amazing eye for detail and is very approachable. He answers solicitors’ queries with lightning speed!
Member of 5-person working party responsible for the Judicial College Guidelines for the Assessment of General Damages in Personal Injury Cases. Appointed to the Technical Board responsible for reviewing the Law Society’s Personal Injury Panel for solicitors nation wide. Stuart specialises in the highest value catastrophic injury claims involving complex issues and multiple experts. He works for many of the leading personal injury and clinical negligence solicitor firms in the country and almost all of his practice is at the High Court. Clinical Negligence Junior of the Year at the Legal 500 Bar Awards 2018 and is a previous winner of Personal Injury Barrister of the Year at the Eclipse Proclaim Personal Injury Awards.
Stuart is currently instructed as junior counsel on a large number of very high-value catastrophic claims. Stuart is one of only three Barrister members of the working party responsible for the Judicial College Guidelines for the Assessment of General Damages in Personal Injury Cases. Kemp: Practice and Procedure’ on the subject of Periodical Payment Orders. In addition to the above publications, Stuart is the co-organiser of the Annual Cambridge Medico-Legal Conference at Peterhouse College, where he speaks on a regular basis and was the chair in 2016. His technical knowledge of medical evidence and the experts practicing within medico-legal work is widely appreciated and has been integral to his success at the Bar. Away from work, Stuart likes to spend time with his young family and watch sport. Without doubt the leading personal injury junior.
Almost legendary in terms of maximising claims for his clients. Has an amazing knowledge of spinal injury cases, he really does add a lot of value to cases. He’s incredibly hard-working and extraordinarily bright. Widely considered to be a future silk. Admired for his amazing service. An amazing advocate, who is astonishingly efficient. Masterful on very high-value claims.
A real specialist in catastrophic injury cases. A powerhouse barrister with the gravitas and presence of a QC. The defendant driver was subsequently convicted of Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving and Drink Driving and sentenced to a substantial term of imprisonment. The Claimant has been left with a range of neurocognitive and neuropsychological problems, superimposed on a significant pre-existing history of learning difficulties. This gave rise to complex arguments on causation and quantum. 8 million and this was accepted on behalf of the Claimant. The settlement was approved at the RCJ on 29th November 2017 by Mr.
Justice Martin Spencer, who commended Stuart on the quality of his advice and confirmed that he had no hesitation in approving the settlement and granting an anonymity order for the Claimant. The claim for accommodation was compromised separately incorporating a conventional Roberts v. The Claimant is entitled to return to court for further damages in the event of further deterioration in his syrinx. Approval was obtained at the High Court to avoid any question marks over the validity of settlement in view of conflicting opinions on capacity. Stuart acted in conjunction with Rob Weir QC and was instructed by Minster Law. Claim against MOD on behalf of a civilian forensic scientist who was injured in an explosion whilst working at a MOD laboratory in Kandahar, Afghanistan in 2011. At the time of the explosion the Claimant, Mr.
Lee Peters, was examining an item that had been passed as safe to handle by MOD personnel. In fact, this item was an IED that exploded whilst being handled, causing very significant damage to his left hand and blast injuries to his eyes. Despite his injuries the Claimant had returned to work in Afghanistan. Junior Counsel for catastrophically brain damaged child. Thought to be the highest ever damages award made or approved by a Court. At the same time, in view of the impending announcement of the outcome of the discount rate review, the parties agreed a formula for recalculating the future recurring losses element of the lump sum damages in the event that the discount rate was reduced. As a result of the reduction in the discount rate to -0.