Mamta Gupta

Viewing: Personal Injury for Mamta Gupta

Mamta practices exclusively in the fields of personal injury and clinical negligence acting for both Claimants and Defendants. She is consistently recognised in the legal directories. The latest entry in Chambers and Partners 2020 quotes, “She’s just remarkably thorough; she really does work exceptionally hard for clients and is helpful and responsive.” The Legal 500 reports, ‘hugely impressive in cross examination of experts’.
Mamta has a well-established multi-track personal injury practice spanning the full spectrum of accidents and injuries. Her work increasingly includes high value claims of increasing complexity and value; she is regularly led. For more information in relation to Mamta’s serious injury work, the link is found on the right of this page.
Mamta is dedicated to working as part of the legal team alongside her instructing solicitors and delivering a first class service whilst making a difference for her clients. Mamta is often instructed in the most delicate of cases given her sensitive and empathetic approach.
Mamta works on all stages of a case from the initial risk assessment and drafting of the letters of claim/response to round table meetings and trial. She is regularly in Court attending all interlocutory hearings and trial as well as working with experts and advising in conference. She also has a substantial paperwork practice.
Recent cases include:
• Brain injury
• Spinal injury
• Road traffic accidents
• Employers liability
• Fraud cases
• Occupiers liability
“She’s just remarkably thorough; she really does work exceptionally hard for clients and is helpful and responsive.”
Chambers UK 2020
“Hugely impressive in cross-examination of experts.”
Legal 500 2020
“She is an impressively tenacious advocate who prepares her advice and submissions carefully. She can be relied upon to find the weaknesses in either side’s argument, which helps to head off problems later in the case.”
Chambers UK 2019
“Brilliant at cross-examining medical experts.”
Legal 500 2019
“A widely respected junior who is noted for her outstanding client skills. She comes particularly recommended for cases involving obstetrics and gynaecology. Great with clients - she does a good job of putting them at ease. She’s very easy to work with and turns work around quickly.”
Chambers UK 2018
“She fights her client’s corner with vigour.”
Legal 500 2017
“A widely respected junior, she is noted for her outstanding client skills and dedication. She is frequently instructed in cases involving obstetrics and gynaecology. She’s empathetic and you feel that she will go the extra mile for the clients. Always delivers what she promises.”
Chambers UK 2017
“Sources highlight her exemplary client care and her skilled handling of sensitive gynaecological and obstetric cases. A well-respected advocate, she is predominantly instructed on behalf of claimants.” Strengths: “She is excellent in gynaecological cases and great with clients, she does a good job of putting clients at ease. She is very easy to work with and turns work around quickly.”
Chambers UK 2016
Re: TS – (2016 -) with Leading Counsel. Cerebral Palsy case; causation and quantum in issue
Re: JL – (2016 - ) Fatal case where young wife/mother died after failures to treat sepsis, liability and quantum in issue – claim value around GBP 650K
Re: JG – (2015 -) with Leading Counsel. Erbs Palsy case, liability and causation in issue, compounding factor – no medical records of the delivery.
Re: B – fatal case where failures in treating sepsis resulted in death – claim settled at GBP 120K
Re: PD – (2014-) Delay in diagnosis of patellae malposition resulting in permanent disability in a wheelchair – claim value around GBP 950K, proceeding to JSM
Re: SC - (2014) with Leading Counsel. Gynaecological case settled at GBP 600K. Issue was that the Claimant’s prognosis for recovery was disputed and could only be confirmed upon the Claimant undergoing a PMP. Matter settled at JSM before Claimant entered into PMP
Re: JL - (2012) with Leading Counsel. Erbs Palsy settled at GBP 700K. Defendant admitted failure to carry out caesarean section given pathological CTG traces. Issue was whether the Claimant also suffered brain damage as a result of a prolonged period of hypoxia during labour. The case settled on the basis that no brain damage had been suffered
Re: PF - (2012) with Leading Counsel. Tetraplegic case. Liability was admitted and outstanding issue was causation and quantum. Work involved assimilating C and P evidence including case management and accommodation claims to value the claim.
Lincolns Inn Lord Denning Scholar [Bar Vocational Course]
Lincolns Inn Lord Wolfson Scholar [Pupillage]
Inner Temple Pegasus Scholar [New Zealand]
Personal Injury Bar Association
Professional Negligence Bar Association
BSc (Hons) Pharmacology 2(i)
Dip Law (Commendation)
Bar Vocational Course [Very Competent]
Dip International Relations [New York University]
Programme on Negotiation, [Harvard Law School]

Latest News & Publications

Seminar to focus on the use of CTG traces in obstetric casework ...

Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2018
Barristers welcome appointment of minister for suicide prevention...

Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018
This article originally appeared in the AvMA Lawyers Service Newsletter (June 2018) Cardiotoc...

Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018