Simon Ross

Call 1999

ross@exchangechambers.co.uk

"Strengths are the ability to provide straightforward clear advice along with a no-nonsense approach that invariably sits well with clients."

The Legal 500 2021
Photo of Simon Ross

Professional Negligence

Simon practised as a solicitor prior to transferring across to the Bar. He was employed by DAC Beachcroft and worked within a specialist Professional & Financial Risk team defending solicitors and surveyors from claims of professional negligence.

At the Bar, he has remained interested in professional negligence claims and in particular those arising from personal injury claims.

Simon was appointed as a Deputy District Judge in 2010.

Cases

  • Advised a firm of solicitors regarding the prospects of defending a claim arising from a clinical negligence claim. The firm considered that the professional negligence claim was doomed to fail because the underlying claim had no merit. However, a thorough review of the file of papers revealed that that assessment had been incorrectly informed by the failure to fully investigate the material issues and secure relevant evidence in the underlying claim. Claim settled. 
  • Advised the claimant on a proposed claim against solicitors who had acted for him defending a contentious probate claim that had been pursued through to a 4 day trial in the High Court. The underlying claim involved complex issues of procedure and jurisdiction and the legal test to apply when determining whether a Hindu marriage was lawful under the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. 
  • Acted on behalf of claimants in a number of successful claims against conveyancers who had failed to carry out appropriate searches when acting for property purchasers. 
  • Advised on a potential professional negligence claim against a solicitor who had failed to provide advice in respect of a clinical negligence claim for wrongful birth. Complicated issues arose in respect of limitation and causation. 
  • Advised in respect of a potential professional negligence claim against solicitors alleged to have settled a fibromyalgia claim at an undervalue and/or failed to instruct appropriate experts. Issues arose in respect of scope of duty, causation and diagnosis of the underlying condition. 
  • Advised a claimant in respect of the merits of a claim against solicitors. The underlying claim concerned allegations that the claimant had developed Complex Hypersensitivity Syndrome or Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Syndrome due to exposure to chemicals at work.