Alexander acts on behalf of claimants and defendants in a wide range of personal injury work at fast-track and multi-track level. Alexander is regularly in trial as well as undertaking the usual array of interim and case & costs management hearings.
Along with a busy court based practice, Alexander also undertakes a wide array of paperwork. This includes advising on liability and quantum as well as drafting Particulars of Claim, Schedule of Loss, Defences, Counter-Schedules, Part 18 Requests for Further Information and Part 35 Questions to Experts.
Alexander has experience of claims involving fraud and fundamental dishonesty for the purposes of both QOWCS and s.57 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015. Alexander has experience drafting or amending Defences to explicitly plead such points or putting claimants on notice about points that cause a defendant concern and may give rise to the issue of fundamental dishonesty/fraud arising later at an appropriate point. This is in addition to acting successfully for both sides at trial where fundamental dishonesty is raised.
As well as personal injury work, Alexander’s experience and client care is demonstrated by cases against the Criminal Injury Compensation Authority and inquest work. The former comprised sensitive claims with vulnerable clients including sexual abuse survivors and children. Inquest experience includes acting for an Interested Party who was the final person to see a vulnerable person alive before their murder. A verdict of Unlawful Killing by persons unknown was made.
Notable cases include:
- N & N v M & AXA Insurance –secured finding of fundamental dishonesty against a claimant after discontinuance at trial following his evidence. Involved consideration of process for pursuing the issue where multiple claimants discontinue but only one has given evidence.
- S v M Bar – drafting counter schedule of loss and specific disclosure application in occupiers’ claim to reply to excessive care claim. Claim discontinued soon after.
- T & L v C – acting for 2 claimants, occupancy concerns at trial defeated.
- W v I – advising nurse injured in road traffic accident, claim settled for £120,000 net of interim payments and CRU
- C v G Tyres Ltd - £150,000 settlement net of interim and CRU achieved at joint settlement meeting. Included consideration of whether the Claimant was ‘disabled’ for the purposes of Ogden calculations and future loss of earnings.
Harmsworth Scholar, Middle Temple
BPTC “Very Competent”, Kaplan Law School
LLB(Hons) First Class, University Of Durham