Practice overview
For more than a dozen years, Charles has been recommended in the legal directories as a leading practitioner. He won Clinical Negligence Silk of the Year at the 2024 Chambers UK Bar Awards. He also won Personal Injury Silk of the Year at the 2023 Legal 500 Bar Awards (and was nominated for the same award at the 2023 Chambers UK Bar Awards). He took silk in 2018 and is a specialist barrister in the fields of personal injury, clinical negligence, civil procedure and related insurance issues. He sits part-time as a Deputy High Court Judge, a Recorder (Crime & Civil) and as a Deputy King's Bench Master. He was successful in the election to be Chair of the Personal Injuries Bar Association, for a two year term from April 2022. He is a governing Bencher of the Inner Temple. He is on the Editorial Boards of Kemp & Kemp: the Quantum of Damages and also the Personal Injuries and Quantum Reports.
Charles’ practice is in acting for Claimants and Defendants in complex and high value injury and clinical negligence claims as well as having a particular specialism in secondary victim litigation and fatal accident claims.
He also has a niche practice in procedural law, having led on appeals in the Court of Appeal and Privy Council arising out of procedural points in his specialist fields and civil litigation generally, both domestic claims and appeals from overseas jurisdictions.
He has advised major insurers in various high value cases being litigated in the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, the Bahamas and Gibraltar respectively. He has acted as an expert witness on English law in foreign jurisdictions.
He is sought after by insurers for cases where fraud and exaggeration are suspected in high value injury and clinical negligence claims.
Charles also advises insurers on coverage and policy interpretation issues arising in his specialist fields.
Areas of expertise
- Clinical negligence & personal injury
- Clinical negligence
Clinical negligence
Charles is highly rated for his forensic skills, strong negotiating and persuasive advocacy in sensitive and complex cases. His extensive clinical negligence practice for Claimants and Defendants is in high value and complex claims in a wide range of clinical fields, particularly those resulting in fatalities, maximum severity brain and spinal consequences, birth injuries, psychiatric injury/ secondary victims, amputations and loss of sight. He advises and represents Claimants and Defendants domestically and also internationally in numerous jurisdictions. He is a successful appellate advocate including in the Court of Appeal and the UK Supreme Court (most recently in the landmark Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust secondary victim Supreme Court decision, described by Professor Dominic Regan as “the Tort case of the century.”).
Example reported cases:
- Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS (and other conjoined appeals) [2024] UKSC 1 (judgment here): acted for all 3 successful Defendants in this landmark case in which the UK Supreme Court by a 6-1 majority (Lord Burrows dissenting) dismissed the Claimants’ conjoined appeals against the strike out of their psychiatric injury claims from witnessing the death of close relatives from the Defendants’ alleged (or admitted) clinical negligence. Charles was the only Defendant Counsel to have appeared at every stage of the case: 1st instance: [2019] EWHC 2893 (QB); [2020] PIQR P5; 1st appeal: [2020] EWHC 1415 (QB); [2020] PIQR P19; 2nd appeal (Court of Appeal): [2022] EWCA Civ 12; [2023] QB 149; 3rd appeal (Supreme Court): [2024] UKSC 1.
- Paling v Sherwood Forest NHS [2021] EWHC 3266 (QB): acted for Defendant in application in which the Court accepted that it had jurisdiction to stay a child’s clinical negligence claim in default of the Claimant and his parents agreeing to undergo genetic testing to see if there was an identifiable genetic cause for his symptoms which he alleged were caused by a brain injury resulting from the Defendant’s negligence in failing to diagnose and treat neonatal hypoglycaemia. On the facts, the Court declined to order a stay holding that the effect of testing on the Claimant and his parents would be significant and outweighed the potential benefit to the Defendant.
- Azam v University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 3384 (QB): successfully acted for the Respondent/ Claimant in opposing an appeal against an exercise of discretion to permit a clinical negligence claim to proceed 18 years out of time. Was the fact that the allegedly negligent surgeon had died since the expiry of the primary limitation period, “the epitome of prejudice” meaning the case should not have been allowed to proceed? No, held Saini J, as the Trust’s failure to make good the assertion of prejudice by any evidence at the Limitation trial meant that the trial Judge had been entitled to find that there was no significant real prejudice in defending the claim by the passage of time. The appeal was dismissed. The judgment can be found here.
- Price v Cwm Taf University Health Board [2019] EWHC 938 (QB): successfully acted for NHS Wales (leading Vanessa McKinlay) in opposing an appeal touching on a range of issues relevant to clinical negligence and civil procedure. Birss J dismissed the Claimant’s appeal against the judgment of HHJ Petts itself dismissing the Claimant’s claim for a large seven-figure sum in damages arising out of arthroscopic treatment and a subsequent partial-knee replacement from which there had been a poor but (as it was upheld on appeal) non-negligent outcome. It also provides useful guidance for those considering appeals on findings of fact. A copy of the judgment can be found here.
- Wild v Southend Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] PIQR P3; [2014] EWHC 4053: successful at trial in secondary victim claim arising out of death in utero and stillbirth; the first reported application of Taylor v Novo in the clinical negligence context.
- Tanner v Dr Sarkar (MPS) [2016] 12 WLUK 259: successful defence at trial in the first reported secondary victim claim brought by a child who, aged 5 (16 at trial) witnessed death of her brother in ambulance due to failure to diagnose sepsis.
- Taylor v A.Novo (UK) Ltd [2014] QB 150; [2013] Med LR 100; [2013] EWCA Civ 194: successful appeal to the Court of Appeal in novel secondary victim claim (led by Charles Cory-Wright QC), a decision which was held to be correctly decided by the Supreme Court and central to its decision in Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust in 2024.
- Personal injury
Personal injury
Charles won Personal Injury Silk of the Year at the 2023 Legal 500 Bar Awards. He is highly rated for his forensic skills, strong negotiating and persuasive advocacy in sensitive and complex cases. He acts for both Claimants and Defendants, in high value claims, usually arising from catastrophic brain injuries, spinal fractures and amputations. He also has a particular specialism in fatal accident claims, as well as psychiatric injury and secondary victim litigation. He is a successful appellate advocate including in the Court of Appeal and the UK Supreme Court (most recently in the landmark Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust secondary victim Supreme Court decision, described by Professor Dominic Regan as “the Tort case of the century.”).
His cases often have an international element such as incidents abroad or Claimants based abroad. He advises and represents Claimants and Defendants internationally in numerous overseas jurisdictions and in appeals to the UK Privy Council.
He is known for his expertise in cases involving allegations of exaggeration and dishonesty. He also advises insurers on coverage and policy interpretation issues arising in injury claims.
Recent Work and reported decisions:
- Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS (and other conjoined appeals) [2024] UKSC 1 (judgment here): acted for all 3 successful Defendants in this landmark case in which the UK Supreme Court by a 6-1 majority (Lord Burrows dissenting) dismissed the Claimants’ conjoined appeals against the strike out of their psychiatric injury claims from witnessing the death of close relatives from the Defendants’ alleged (or admitted) clinical negligence. Charles was the only Defendant Counsel to have appeared at every stage of the case: 1st instance: [2019] EWHC 2893 (QB); [2020] PIQR P5; 1st appeal: [2020] EWHC 1415 (QB); [2020] PIQR P19; 2nd appeal (Court of Appeal): [2022] EWCA Civ 12; [2023] QB 149; 3rd appeal (Supreme Court): [2024] UKSC 1.
- GJC v Walker [2024] EWHC 182 (KB): an example of an instruction in one of numerous severe brain injury claims. This one was ultimately settled and, in a written judgment, approved by the Court at £4.75m.
- Re: Jehangir (Deceased): instructed in multiple claims arising from road accident causing 6 fatalities and several other serious injuries in Birmingham underpass; involves issues of illegality (drug use and criminality): https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/dec/17/six-dead-in-birmingham-crash.
- Re: Neata: claim pleaded at £35 million for brain injury. Novel issues arise around whether standard PI discount rate should be departed from as Claimant has returned to live in Romania.
- Spence-Green v Westfield & Securitas: acting for security firm in claim by a trainee doctor who was paralysed when a man who had leapt from the Westfield atrium landed on her: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7605495/Woman-paralysed-man-leapt-shopping-centre-floor-comforted-fact-saved-life.html
- Hoff (a child) v Multiple Defendants: acted for the manufacturer of a granite picnic table which collapsed onto a 6-year-old French boy in a school playground, in Richmond, resulting in a catastrophic brain injury. Complex litigation involving multiple parties including the school, local authority, architects and project managers for the playground project, and the installers of the table.
- Mrs B v Highways England: acted for Claimant, a young woman whose upper arm had to be amputated just below the shoulder, following injuries in a road accident, when her car turned over after hitting a flooded area on a motorway. Complex issues arose about whether C should undergo osseo-integration surgery (metal implant into bone). Settled for £3.33m gross.
- Paling v Sherwood Forest NHS [2021] EWHC 3266 (QB): novel case concerning whether the Court can order a Claimant to undergo genetic testing.
- Winter v Roberts: acted for insurers in medically complex lower limb amputation claim brought by young man. Settled for £4.45m.
- Azam v University Hospital Birmingham NHSFT [2020] EWHC 3384 (QB): acted for Claimant- successful on appeal in limitation case where the claim was 18 years out of time and a key Defendant witness had died.
- DP v Topmark Claims Management Ltd [2020] UKUT 0106 (AAC): the first time the Diffuse Mesothelioma Payment Scheme had been considered at an appellate level. It gave guidance on the scope of the scheme, as well as wider points on the nature of an appeal before the First Tier Tribunal and on statutory interpretation. Judgment here.
- JX MX (Protected party): Defended claim by teenage girl with locked-in syndrome who communicated by blinking and eye-gaze technology; 8 figure settlement with PPO achieved shortly before trial.
- Denker v Lufthansa: Led Jasmine Murphy, acting for an airline defending a claim for £7m by a mature male model for loss of income following an accident at Munich Airport. Claimant later accepted an offer, out of time, for less than 4% of the value of the claim sought, paying a substantial contribution to Lufthansa’s costs.
- Fraud
Fraud
Charles is sought after by insurers for cases where fraud and exaggeration are suspected in high value injury and clinical negligence claims. They value his forensic approach to identifying the issues, providing and seeing through a clear strategy on achieving the best outcome.
Charles was successful in one of the first Court of Appeal cases to question whether a dishonest Claimant should recover any damages at all, where a significant part of the claim was dishonest, long before such a power gained statutory force in Section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015: Molloy v Shell UK Ltd. [2001] EWCA Civ 1272, [2002] PIQR P7.
Since then, he has been instructed in numerous such claims, securing favourable outcomes for insurers in Court or at JSMs.
Charles is also Editor of the Chapter in Kemp & Kemp dealing with Fraudulent and Dishonest Claimants.
Recent Work
- CF v LT NHS Trust
Seven figure claim based on allegations of unremitting pain and disability from negligently performed abdominal surgery. Charles advised on appropriate investigations into the Claimant’s DWP records and a case strategy maximising the impact of surveillance showing the Claimant driving, shopping and throwing a ball for her dog. A compromise was ultimately reached whereby the Claimant accepted a low offer two years out-of-time, paying the Trust a substantial sum in costs. - Burke v Hersant (Caymans)
Charles advised the Defendant’s insurers in this injury case pleaded at CI$6m and was briefed for trial in the Cayman Islands. Credibility issues arose. The Plaintiff claimed significant disability and incapacity but was found to have completed a 1 mile charity swim and was filmed carrying out normal day-to-day activities. The claim was compromised shortly before trial for around 5% of the amount originally sought. - LB v Local Authority
A Claimant who alleged severe consequences from a hand injury had bragged on social media about his forthcoming boxing matches and training exploits. Charles’ strategy to amend the Defence pleading conscious exaggeration and making an application for further disclosure, resulted in the claim being struck out for non-compliance. A fully enforceable costs order was made in his client’s favour. - ABC v Matalan
Charles’ carefully drafted CPR 18 Requests for Information resulted in answers wholly inconsistent with the Claimant’s presentation to the DWP in benefits claims and on surveillance. At a subsequent JSM a favourable settlement was reached.
- CF v LT NHS Trust
- Product liability
Product liability
Charles has extensive experience in product liability cases arising out of fatalities and serious injuries for both Claimants and Defendants. Further details can be found under ‘Personal Injury’. He also advises insurers on coverage and policy interpretation issues arising in this area.
Recent work
- JM v Leading Watersports Manufacturer
Defending product liability claim on behalf of the world’s leading watersports equipment manufacturer. Claim by a kite surfer who sustained multiple spinal fractures when he struck the sea bed after performing a freestyle stunt. He alleged a product defect. Charles represented the company at a pre-action negotiation and a confidential settlement was reached. - BCC v Geesink Norba
Defending product liability claim involving technical engineering evidence and contractual issues for worldwide manufacturer of refuse vehicles. Sued by City Council which sought recovery of damages paid to an employee who had been paralysed when he was crushed by mechanism which was alleged to have operated unexpectedly. Claimed at £1 million + and settled for £365,000 including costs. Opponent was leading PI silk. - Teall v Inztec & 2 others Defending product liability claim by lorry driver struck by a large roller shutter door which fell from its mountings resulting in a below knee amputation of his leg. Acting for occupier of building. At JSM, secured settlement in which Charles’ client did not have to pay any damages or costs and co-Defendant paid entirety of Claimant’s substantial damages and costs.
- JM v Leading Watersports Manufacturer
- Inquests & inquiries
Inquests & inquiries
Charles has been a specialist injury and clinical negligence barrister for over 20 years and, since the start of his practice, he has been instructed for interested parties in Coroner’s inquests of all types.
He has drafted written submissions/ responses, appeared as advocate before (and sat on/ chaired) a range of different panels, tribunals, inquiries and committees.
Examples of his experience in the inquest field include:
- A 5 day jury inquest into the death in custody of an asylum seeker at an immigration detention centre run by a private contractor. The death was highly sensitive and provoked a serious riot causing extensive damage to the centre;
- A 3 day inquest into the death of a motorcycle racer at a major racetrack, when a mock-emergency drill led to a fatal collision between the motorcyclist and an emergency vehicle, at the conclusion of a race;
- Inquests concerning the provision of medical treatment, such as an inquest into the sudden death of a toddler, 6 hours after her arrival in Accident and Emergency, from undiagnosed myocarditis. Acting for the bereaved family.
- Jury inquests into deaths at work (often multiple deaths in the same incident) including construction site accidents, falls from height, crane/ machinery collapses, collapse of excavations and asphyxiation;
- Numerous inquests into fatal road traffic accidents.
Other:
- Chaired a panel for a sporting body investigating an allegation of assault by a spectator at a competition;
- Charles has been a panel member of the Bar Disciplinary Tribunal since 2012 and a panel chair since 2018.
- Clinical negligence
- International
International
Charles is instructed in an increasing amount of international injury litigation often involving cross-border issues. He has recently advised major international insurers in various high value injury and clinical negligence cases being litigated in the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, the Bahamas and Gibraltar respectively.
His UK litigated cases also often have an international dimension with current or recent instructions having cross-border issues involving a range of jurisdictions including the USA, Brazil, India, Poland, France, Bulgaria and Belgium. He also has experience acting as an expert witness on UK law for foreign courts and as an accredited mediator.
Recent Work
- At any one time, Charles has a series of ongoing instructions in high value and complex injury and clinical negligence claims ongoing for Defendants, their insurers and also Claimants/ Plaintiffs in a range of overseas jurisdictions. He also specialises in handling points of procedural law and coverage disputes, as well as expert witness work on UK law for foreign courts.
- Grimm v David Copperfield: representing celebrity magician in defence of a seven-figure claim by a former employee arising out of a boating accident at a luxury resort in The Bahamas.
- H v A (the Cayman Islands) Acting for insurers in a multi-million CI$ claim by a businesswoman injured in accident.
- Igelski v Scamp (Gibraltar) Advising an employer’s liability insurers arising out of the death of a commercial diver whilst working on a vessel in Gibraltar harbour.
- Burke v Hersant (Cayman Islands) Charles advised the Defendant’s insurers in this injury case pleaded at CI$6m and was briefed for trial in the Cayman Islands. Credibility issues arose. The claim was compromised shortly before trial for around 5% of the amount originally sought.
- Farmer v Smith (Bahamas) Charles advised and drafted the skeleton argument for an application to set aside the extension of time to serve a writ long after its validity had expired. The Court granted the application, set aside the extension and struck out the case. The outcome was overturned by the Bahamas Court of Appeal. Charles was lead Counsel for the insurers in the application to the UK Privy Council.
- Re Bullard (Bermuda): acted for a private hospital in Bermuda, arising out of a claim for the fatal consequences of a hospital acquired infection.
- Expert witness on UK law for Dutch Court on various points of civil procedure, in high value construction dispute.
- Expert witness on UK personal injury law for specialist immigration tribunal, concerning effect on ongoing injury claim if individual were to be deported from the UK to India.
- AX WX (Protected party): $18m claim by student repatriated to the US following brain injury in UK RTA; led project involving US financial experts to evidence and advance argument that more favourable US discount rates should be used instead of UK rates, post discount rate change. Claim settled at 7 figures on basis of US rates.
- Denker v Lufthansa: Led Jasmine Murphy, acting for a major European airline defending a claim for £7m by a mature male model for loss of income following an accident at Munich Airport. Claimant later accepted an offer, out of time, for less than 4% of the value of the claim sought, paying a substantial contribution to Lufthansa’s costs.
- Insurance coverage
Insurance coverage
Charles advises insurers on coverage and policy interpretation issues arising mainly in injury, clinical negligence and property damage claims. For instance:
Examples of Work
- DM v QBE Insurance & others – Charles acts (leading Tom Bell) for a catastrophically injured young man pursuing a claim under the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010. The Claimant was put in a headlock and partially strangled by a doorman resulting in a devastating stroke due to the dissection of the internal carotid artery. He now lacks mental capacity and will need lifelong care. The PL insurers for the doorman’s employer (now in liquidation) declined cover due to the purported failure to satisfy certain notification conditions. Following the entry of judgment against the doorman’s employer following a trial, the claim again the insurers is currently proceeding to trial on the 2010 Act claim.
- He advised two major insurers as to whether a public, employer’s or road traffic liability policy should answer where various bus drivers had assaulted members of the public following road accidents.
- Fire Damage: Charles advised on issues arising in a seven figure claim for consequential loss and business interruption arising from a HGV fire in a loading bay at a large supermarket.
- Madonna Stage Collapse Litigation: Charles advised on various policy issues arising out of this incident, in Marseille, which resulted in a fatality, serious injuries and major consequential losses.
- Insurance funded disputes
Insurance funded disputes
Charles regularly acts in clinical negligence and personal injury claims involving insurers. You can see details of his experience in the Clinical Negligence and Personal Injury sections of his profile.
CSR & pro bono
- Advocacy and Ethics trainer for Inner Temple students and new practitioners.
- Passionate about striving for greater equality, diversity and inclusion at the Bar: speaker and group leader for Inner Temple Outreach events including Pathways to Law, PASS and Schools Days programmes for Y12/13 and university students. Speaker at Qualifying Sessions and Insight events.
- Inaugural Chair of PI Bar Association Outreach Committee
- Pupil supervisor and Group Leader for pupil supervisor training
- Careers speaker and mentor for various school and student audiences
- Qualified British Swimming Referee (volunteer role) at club and national level.
- Charity open water swimmer: six cross-Solent charity swims between 2014 and 2021; Needles headland swims 2015 & 2016.
- Example of Charles’ pro bono work: DP v Topmark Claims Management Ltd [2020] UKUT 0106 (AAC): the first time the Diffuse Mesothelioma Payment Scheme has been considered at an appellate level. It gave guidance on the scope of the scheme, as well as wider points on the nature of an appeal before the First Tier Tribunal and on statutory interpretation. You can see the judgment here. Charles acted pro bono for the widower (leading Leon Glenister) via the Free Representation Unit.
Directory recommendations
Charles won Personal Injury Silk of the Year at the 2023 Legal 500 Bar Awards (and was nominated for the same award at the 2023 Chambers & Partners UK Bar Awards).
He is recommended in both The Legal 500 and Chambers UK for Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence and in Legal 500 for the additional field of Travel Law (including jurisdictional issues).
Testimonials
- “Superb knowledge of both law and procedure. An excellent eye for detail. Immensely respected by claimants and defendants alike. His advocacy is smooth, fluent and persuasive.” (The Legal 500 2025, Clinical Negligence)
- “Charles is always impressive and understandably in demand.” “Charles is excellent. His preparation and attention to detail is just wonderful. He cares very much about the cases he is involved in and is excellent from a procedural point of view.” “Charles is unrivalled for his ability to handle complex matters whilst also being extremely down to earth and approachable.” “His pleadings are very clear and persuasive and he has an excellent eye for detail.” (Chambers and Partners 2025, Clinical Negligence)
- “His meticulous attention to detail is second to none. He is highly calm and efficient in his manner and practical in his advice.” “Charles is quite cerebral – he thinks carefully about things and is logical and organised.” (Chambers and Partners 2025, Personal Injury)
- “Charles has developed into a leader in his field. He has all the attributes you want to see in a barrister. It is not just that he knows the law but you accept his advice because it comes from someone with such authority. He is charming but tough. He is efficient and approachable.” (The Legal 500 2025, Personal injury)
- “Charles is approachable, personable and pragmatic. He has an incredible eye for detail whilst still managing to keep sight of the wider picture.” (The Legal 500 2024, Personal Injury, Industrial Disease and Insurance Fraud)
- “Charles is extremely clever, detailed and his attention to detail is impressive.” (The Legal 500 2024, Clinical Negligence)
- “Charles has an extremely strong analytical brain and attention to detail.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Clinical Negligence)
- “He’s a very powerful advocate who is very structured and composed.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Clinical Negligence)
- “He has top notch intellect and puts clients at ease.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Clinical Negligence)
- “Charles is a very precise, thoughtful barrister.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Personal Injury)
- “His technical knowledge is outstanding, and his tactical and strategic knowledge is incredibly impressive.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Personal Injury)
- “Charles is very approachable, incredibly helpful and produces results. His tactical awareness and thorough pleadings put his clients at a distinct advantage.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Personal Injury)
- “Charles takes complex legal arguments and makes them simple for the court to understand. He is very persuasive.” (Chambers and Partners, 2023)
- “He is very, very thorough and always well prepared.” (Chambers and Partners, 2023)
- “Charles is calm, approachable, pragmatic and empathetic.” (Chambers and Partners, 2023)
- “The complete barrister; technical and legal capabilities not in question.” (The Legal 500, 2023)
- “Charles has a strong niche practice dealing with complex cross border disputes and applying local quantum factors outside of jurisdiction to UK cases.” (The Legal 500, 2023)
- “Charles shows fantastic attention-to-detail and provides very practical advice, particularly on making difficult calls with respect to interlocutory applications and settlement decisions.” (The Legal 500, 2023)
- “He is extremely well respected and his advice carries real gravitas. He’s thorough and can provide very balanced advice.”
- “A great advocate who is always liked by clients.” (Chambers UK)
- “He is very knowledgeable, robust in his advice, proactive and responsive.” (Chambers UK)
- “He’s consistently hard-working, very thorough and has an exceptionally good grip on procedural matters.” (Chambers UK)
- “Very good on the law and very accomplished.” (Chambers UK)
- “Approachable and excellent both in writing and on his feet. Logical, methodical and analytical in his approach to complex issues.” (Chambers UK)
- “An exceptional barrister who achieves real results with his analytical but user-friendly approach. A quiet, incisive mind.” (Chambers UK)
- “He is an astute analytical thinker who is exceptional in managing clients’ expectations.” (Chambers UK)
- “He is highly regarded for cross-border injury cases.” (Legal 500)
- “An extremely strong, confident advocate, who is succinct and clear, and never knowingly fazed. Charles is able to consider issues from all angles and provide calm, clear advice.” (Legal 500)
- “Very good technical lawyer, but also calm and personable, works well as part of a team. Not afraid to stand by his views and fight to trial in appropriate cases.” (Legal 500)
- “Has great attention to detail and his measured approach is appreciated by clients.” (Legal 500)
- “He has laser-like focus, identifying the core issues remarkably swiftly and then providing robust strategies.” (Legal 500)
- “He has a fantastic eye for detail but combines it with a sensible commercial approach.” (Legal 500)
- “He is a superb barrister who has the rare skill of having his eye to the future of litigation; ably assists clients on how to manage a large loss portfolio.” (Legal 500)
- “He writes arguments accurately, coherently and simply, and in an accessible style.” (Legal 500)
- “He uses the law creatively but pragmatically to achieve the best possible results for his clients.” (Legal 500)
- “an encyclopedic knowledge of the law” (Chambers UK)
Appointments
- Deputy High Court Judge (2021 – )
- Recorder of the Crown Court (2018-) and Civil Courts (2019-)
- Deputy King’s Bench Master: High Court (2015-)
- Bar Disciplinary Tribunal Panel Member (2012-2018); Panel Chair (2018-)
- Governing Bencher of Inner Temple
- Formerly a Deputy District Judge (2010-2018)
Publications
Charles is on the Editorial Boards of Kemp & Kemp: the Quantum of Damages and also the Personal Injuries and Quantum Reports.
Professional associations
- Elected Chair of the Personal Injuries Bar Association for 2022-24; Vice Chair 2021-22; Inaugural Chair of PIBA EDI, Retention and Outreach Committee 2020-2022; PIBA Continuing Education Coordinator (2000-2021)
- London Common Law and Commercial Bar Association
- British Insurance Law Association
- Commonwealth Lawyers Association
Qualifications
- LLB Law with French (Leicester); & Dip E.J.F.: Diploma in French Law (Lyons)
Languages
French (Fluent)