Nick is regularly instructed in clinical negligence matters including consent cases, failure to diagnose and/or treat cases and cases of failure to provide appropriate medical care.

Nick is regularly instructed on a broad range of probate disputes, including challenges to the validity of wills, and to the disposition of the deceased’s estate by claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.

He regularly acts on contentious and non-contentious matters relating to the administration of estates.

Recent cases include:

In the Estate of B

Represented the Claimant in her claim for reasonable financial provision, pursuant to s.1 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, arising out of the death of her mother, the Will leaving the entire estate, save a small pecuniary legacy, to her sibling. The claim settled on favourable terms at mediation.

In the Estate of S

Advised and represented the Defendant PR and sole beneficiary in proceedings in the Family Division for removal of a Caveat, and in later proceedings in the Chancery Division in proceedings brought by the deceased’s adult children challenging the will, alleging fraud, undue influence, lack of testamentary capacity and want of knowledge and approval.

In the Estate of B

Advised and represented the Claimant co-habitant of the deceased at the 3 day trial of his claim for reasonable financial provision, pursuant to s.1 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975 following the death of the deceased intestate.

In the Estate of O

Drafted Part 8 proceedings under s.50 Administration of Justice Act 1985, for removal and replacement of beneficiary PR’s and will trustees, who were acting in a conflict of interest, and appeared at Court at disposal of those proceedings on behalf of the Claimant beneficiary.

In the Estate of A

Advised and represented the Defendant PR and beneficiary at a 5 day trial of a claim brought against her by her siblings, all adult children of the deceased, alleging failure of the will to make reasonable financial provision for them pursuant to s.1 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975.

Nick is listed in the Legal 500 as a leading personal injury junior. His practise encompasses the whole range of injury work, but Nick has a particular interest in employers liability work and high value quantum claims.

Some recent examples of cases include:

Burnett v Morgan Sindall BAM Nuttal Joint Venture

High Court PI claim in which Nick acted for the Claimant who suffered multiple life threatening and life-changing injuries when he was run over by a dumper truck on a construction site. The Claimant suffered significant permanent disability and was incapable of work. The claim settled at JSM for a significant 7 figure sum.

Jeffries v Allen & Orr Ltd

Nick acted for the Claimant who suffered a hand injury on unguarded machinery at work, with significant physical and psychological sequalae. The Defendant alleged that he was faking his ongoing symptoms and was Fundamentally Dishonest, relying on  orthopaedic / hand surgery expert evidence. The court found in favour of the Claimant who was awarded substantial damages.

TBC (A Protected Party) v MIB

Nick acted for the adult Claimant in this complex moderate brain injury claim, obtaining orders that the Claimant lacked capacity. Liability was split and there were significant causation issues, with the Defendant alleging that the Claimant lacked capacity prior to the accident due to mental health issues, substance misuse and a learning disability, and that accident related sequalae were minimal.  Nick was instrumental in negotiating settlement, and in steering the matter through the approval process, where an anonymity order was made to protect the Claimant’s interests.

Murphy v P Russon & Sons:

Nick acted for a teenage Claimant who suffered devastating injuries to his right arm in an accident at work, returning to work with significant limitations. The claim involved complex issues surrounding future losses, and whether the Claimant met the Ogden 8 definition of disability. The claim settled at JSM for a high 6 figure sum.

Sorescu v Poundstretcher Ltd

Nick acted for the Claimant in this employers liability matter arising out of an accident in the Defendant’s warehouse. The Claimant who was not an English speaker faced allegations of Fundamental Dishonesty, arising out of disparities between the medical records and his presentation to experts and his witness statements. The Court was persuaded at trial that cultural and language factors as well as psychological factors caused or exacerbated by the accident, rather than dishonesty were responsible for any disparities. The Claimant was awarded substantial damages.

Nick is instructed in claims against Solicitors arising out of negligent conduct of litigation, in particular under settlement in personal injury and clinical negligence matters. He is regularly instructed in claims for alleged negligent conduct of non contentious matters involving claim against solicitors, surveyors, architects and other professionals.

Recent matters include:

TVC v CW LLP

Nick advised the Claimant in relation to its claim in breach of contract of retainer / professional negligence, against previously instructed solicitors, arising out of a commercial property transaction in which Solicitors failed to communicate to the buyer the existence of an onerous restrictive covenant.

LB v CW LLP

Advised the Claimant in respect of her claim arising out of the alleged negligence of Solicitors in failing to take reasonable steps to ensure that an elderly and unwell testator had signed her proposed Will prior to her death.

Nick is experienced in complaints to the Financial Ombudsman Service in respect of unsuitable advice or unfair treatment by financial advisers or pension providers, particularly in relation to investments in high risk or unregulated investments.

Cases include:

Mr F v Thomas Hall Partnership (THP)

Mr F succeeded in his complaint that THP gave him unsuitable advice to invest in unregulated collective investment schemes (UCIS), which the Ombudsman agreed were unsuitable for him. The Ombudsman found that THP shouldn’t have promoted these non-mainstream, specialist investments to Mr F, and that risk warnings signed by him were not effective in that they were superficial and “generic,” failing to disclose the main risks of each fund, other than their unregulated nature and resulting lack of FSCS protection. Mr F was compensated in a six figure sum.

The Estate of Ms R v MW

The Executor of Ms R’s estate succeeded in her complaint, drafted by Nick, against a SIPP provider, arising out of its acceptance of Ms R’s application for a SIPP to hold Store First Ltd storage pods. MW acted unfairly in accepting her request knowing that she was an unsophisticated investor, and when they had failed to carry out any due diligence on Stores First Ltd. The Ombudsman ordered MW to compensate the estate in a six figure sum.

• College of Law – Law conversion 1996.
• Inns of Court School of Law – BVC 1997.

• Personal Injury Bar Association.
• Midland Circuit.