After a 20 year successful career in civil & commercial litigation, Richard came to the bar in 2012 and joined Exchange Chambers in 2017.
His practice covers all aspects of commercial litigation work including contractual disputes, sales of goods, consumer credit, insolvency, professional negligence, banking & asset recovery, insurance disputes and director disqualification.
He has particular expertise in motor insurance disputes including the long standing challenge between motor insurers and credit hire organisations. He has advised and acted for all of the major credit hire company heavyweights on matters of policy and litigation procedure & practice. He is also regularly instructed by motor insurers to defend claims for credit hire, especially when an element of exaggeration or fraud is suspected.
Costs & Litigation Funding
Since joining the bar, Richard has developed a successful and extensive costs practice. Having spent in excess of 20 years in a solicitor’s environment, he is well placed to understand the commercial needs of solicitors in relation to all legal costs & litigation funding issues.
He regularly advises solicitors and costs draftsman on all aspects of costs, including funding, recoverability of additional liabilities, retainers, cost budgeting, security for costs and solicitor & client assessments. Richard is retained counsel for NHS Resolution and regularly represents them and the MDU in the County & High Court (SCCO) and appellate courts dealing with high value costs arising out of clinical negligence claims.
Richard has represented the NHS in a number of high profile cases including an examination of the relationship between cost budgeting and detailed assessment and the application of the ‘recoverability of costs insurance premiums in clinical negligence proceedings (No 2) Regulations 2013’.
Merrix v Burton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust  The Court considered the relationship between CPR 3.18 and CPR 44 & CPR 47
Murrells v Cambridge University NHS Foundation Trust  Senior Courts Costs Office – the applicability of the new test of proportionality to pre Jackson additional liabilities.
Rezec-Clarke v Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust  Senior Courts Costs Office – Master Simons held that an ATE premium of £31,000 was disproportionate against a claim for damages which would never have exceeded £5000, applying the new test of proportionality.
McMenemy v Peterborough & Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust  Ongoing – Appeal against decision to dismiss ATE premium as not being reasonably incurred. Second appeal heard by Court of Appeal in October 2017 – judgment awaited.
Mewis v Burton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust  – Appeal against decision to disallow an ATE premium as not reasonably incurred. Apology by NHS Trust amounted to a de facto admission of breach.