Stephen is an experienced, specialist civil practitioner who regularly deals with matters in the High Court, Court of Appeal, as well as all lower courts including Companies Court and in mediations.
Stephen writes papers, articles and gives presentations on topical or requested subjects, most recently in respect of relief from sanctions, the future of CPR Part 36 and professional negligence claims.
Stephen regularly advises on complex issues of construction and breach of contractual terms, including restraint of trade and confidentiality clauses. He is noted for his attention to detail with his drafting and his persuasive advocacy abilities at trial, interlocutory hearings and ex parte injunctions. His skill with costs arguments makes him very sought after for Costs and Case Management hearings.
Examples of work undertaken:
Two day trial concerning whether a debt was owed by the Defendant in his capacity as a director and shareholder of the former company of his deceased son and/or owed in his personal capacity following a promise given to the Claimant’s directors. There were detailed legal argument in respect of personal guarantee, indemnity and estoppel; following which the court reserved judged and handed down detailed written judgment.
Instructed to advise upon and represent defendant property owners in two consolidated claims against them and also against their tenant, by claimant pedestrians on the public highway struck by debris when the roof suffered a catastrophic collapse. Dispute as to whether the owners or the tenant are liable in the tort of negligence or in nuisance. As between the owners and tenant there was an Additional Claim in respect of the construction of the lease, an oral agreement as to insurance and indemnity and as to the inspection, maintenance and repairing obligation of the tenant under the lease, involving expert engineering evidenceThere are also disputes as to the termination of the lease and outstanding rent.
Building dispute concerning monies owed under written and oral agreements in respect building work undertaken at retirement property on Isle of Man. The counterclaim sought damages for defective work that either required repair or complete rebuilding, it also included a claim for personal injury suffered as a result of the poor state of the building site. At the first five day trial, the court determined the personal injury claim but dismissed the building dispute on the basis that the building contract was illegal under Manx law. On appeal to the High Court, the finding of the lower court was overturned and the building dispute relisted for trial.
Recent commercial dispute Stephen successfully resisted winding-up application in Companies Court for outstanding invoices of over 350,000, assisted mediation and drafted pleadings for a more substantial cross claim involving issues of breach of contract, certainty of terms, construction of express and implied terms together with quantification of loss of productivity and loss of reputation.
Cases
Appeared in the Supreme Court, having successfully represented the Respondent at the Court of Appeal Telchadder v Wickland (Holdings) Ltd [2012] H.L.R. 35, upon the issue of the validity of a notice before action for termination of a mobile home licence. The dispute related to the duration and content of the notice together with issues of discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the Equality Act 2010. Stephen had obtained an order terminating the licence agreement, following a three day hearing in the County Court.
In a contractual dispute as to whether the sums totalling 200,000 were personal loans or investments in companies (no longer trading), Stephen successfully dismissed an application for summary judgment and subsequently excluded a letter on the basis that it was without prejudice correspondence, although not headed ‘without prejudice’. This was upheld on appeal in the High Court, Bill v Simes [2013] All ER (D) 330.
Achieved substantial damages for monies owed arising from the purchase of an online printer business, following the setting aside of Judgment in Default. The issues included personal guarantees owed by the Second and Third Defendants and whether ‘earn out’ consideration could be offset due to failure to use “reasonable endeavours” to maximise profit, pursuant the sale agreement.
Obtained favourable determination of the terms and purpose of a trust deed in respect of residential property, following a Beddoe Application for the benefit of trustee. Whilst, one trustee and beneficiary no longer resided at the property another beneficiary continued to reside and claimed a right to remained pursuant to the trust deed, which contained contradictory clauses. Paseana v Letrex Holdings Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 1539
Recent Talks and Articles
Part 36’s self contained procedural code continues to attract some discretion
Claimant Secures Costs Despite ‘Dishonest’ Conduct
Part 36 Update
Recommendations
“Stephen is calm, down to earth, and very good with clients.”
Legal 500 2023 - Professional Negligence
Qualifications
BSc (Hons), Bristol 1995
Dip Law, BPP Law School 1996
BVC (Very Competent), Inns of Court School of Law 1997
