Michael is a respected and sought after senior junior specialising in Construction and Insurance litigation with a particular focus on domestic and international construction and engineering disputes, professional negligence claims and property damage.
A robust advocate and pragmatic advisor, Michael has a busy practice dealing with high-value, technical and complex cases.
Michael is also well placed to advise as to effective and efficient methods of handling e-disclosure and information management. He is the author of the leading textbook on e-disclosure together with Charles Raffin (published by OUP in 2017) and he regularly lectures on the topic.
Michael is a Member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, is a TECBAR accredited adjudicator and an ADR Group Accredited Mediator.
Michael is a TECBAR accredited adjudicator and regularly handles adjudications both as adjudicator and counsel:
Kersfield Developments (Bridge Road) Ltd v Bray & Slaughter Ltd [2017] EWHC 15 (TCC). Leading Junior (leading Michael Levenstein) acting for the successful contractor in the enforcement of £1.2m adjudicator’s decision. Case considered important issues as to the validity of notices, estoppel by convention, stays of enforcement on Vago and Estura grounds and whether the line of authorities from ISG v Seevic was correctly decided.
Rydon Maintenance Ltd v Afinity Sutton Housing Ltd [2015] EWHC 1306 (TCC). Acted for the employer in a series of natural justice challenges.
Beck Interiors Ltd v Classic Decorative Finishes Ltd [2012] EWHC 1956 (TCC) – Acting for the main contractor in this case which considers the extent to which equitable set-o can be raised as a defence to enforcement.
Beck Interiors Ltd v UK Flooring Contractors Ltd [2012] EWHC 1808 (TCC); [2013] BLR 417; [2012] CILL 3209 – Acting for the main contractor in this case where the court permitted the severance of a dispute that was only part-crystallised.
Acting with Paul Reed KC in two linked £2 million adjudications relating to alleged defective dewatering works on a major civil engineering project.
Acting with Paul Reed KC, in a £1.8 million adjudication relating to civil engineering works at a water treatment plant.
Acting with Nigel Jones KC in a £2m adjudication relating to allegations of historic under invoicing on a PPM contract.
Acting as leading junior (leading Brenna Conroy) in a series of adjudications relating to the refurbishment of a pharmaceutical plant.
Acting as leading junior (leading Brenna Conroy) in a final account adjudication involving several hundred of disputed items.
Acting as sole counsel in a £1.2 million adjudication arising in relation to waste carriage and muck-away.
Acting as sole counsel for the employer in £1 million dispute on a residential development.
The mainstay of Michael’s practice encompasses all kinds of domestic and international construction and engineering disputes.
He acts, for contractors, employers, developers, construction professionals, insurers and others working in the construction industry. He is recommended as a leading junior for his construction work by Legal 500, Chambers UK and Chambers Global.
Standard Life Assurance Ltd v Gleeds & Ors [2020] EWHC 3419 (TCC); [2021] BLR 125 – Initially junior counsel to Joanna Smith KC, now sole counsel in a c.£38m claim relating to allegations of negligent design in a mixed-use development. Considering issues as to the pleading of professional negligence claims by way of sampling and extrapolation.
CIP Properties (AIPT) Ltd v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd & Ors –junior counsel to Joanna Smith KC in a c.£10m claim relating to allegations of defective car park ventilation. Resulted in three significant reported cases:
CIP Properties (AIPT) Ltd v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 3546 (TCC), (2014) 156 Con L.R. 202; [2014] 6 Costs LR 1026 is now the leading authority clarifying when the Court will order Costs Management in high value cases worth over £10m.
CIP Properties (AIPT) Ltd v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd & Ors (Costs Judgment No. 2) [2015] EWHC 481 (TCC); 158 Con LR 229; [2015] 2 Costs LR 363; [2015] CILL 3641. Widely discussed decision on costs management. CIP’s costs budget of £9m was held to be “wholly unreasonable” and “wholly disproportionate” and the budget itself was found to be an “entirely unreliable document”. Coulson J therefore slashed CIP’s costs to £4.2m.
CIP Properties (AIPT) Ltd v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd & Ors (No. 3 Amendments) [2015] EWHC 1345 (TCC); (2015) 160 Con. L.R. 73 is an important decision on the principles to be applied when considering whether to let a party amend its claim. Importantly, Coulson J made a finding that the old approach (that amendments should be allowed if any prejudice could be compensated for in costs) was no longer sound. He confirmed the proper approach to be applied when considering amendments.
R&S Security Services Ltd v Fire Defence Plc [2013] EWHC 4222 (Ch); [2013] BCLC 92; [2013] BLR 500; [2013] B.P.I.R. 1085. The first case to consider the effect of the new payment provisions under the Construction Act as amended in 2009.
Junior to Paul Reed KC in $70m USD ICC Arbitration relating to the supply of components for a process plant in Chile.
Junior to Joanna Smith KC in a £18m claim relating to defective M&E services at a landmark development in north London.
Acting for the designers in a $14m USD LCIA Arbitration concerning allegations of delay to the design of a shipyard in Kazakhstan.
Acting for project managers in a £20m claim arising out of the installation of gantry cranes at new factory premises.
Advising structural concrete subcontractors in a £16m time/cost claim relating to the 2012 Olympic athletes’ village.
Leading junior (leading Katrina Hanstock acting for the tenant in a multi-million pound, multi-party claim against structural engineers and D&B contractors arising out of subsidence damage to a warehouse floor.
Leading Junior (leading Catherine Piercy) defending a c. £8m claim against Building Control approved inspectors following the collapse of a swimming pool roof at a landmark hotel.
Acting for M&E design and build contractors in a £10m payment dispute relating to a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility.
Acting for M&E design and build contractors in a £10m claim relating to the valuation and management of multi-disciplinary works at a pharmaceutical production facility.
Michael is a Member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and he acts as an advocate or arbitrator in domestic and international arbitrations under ICC, LCIA and other rules. He is experienced in ad hoc references and with domestic arbitration under CIMAR and other industry rules.
LGK v MPB [2020] EWHC 90 (TCC); [2020] BLR 222; jurisdiction challenge based on incorporation of Arbitration Agreement.
Acting, together with Paul Reed KC and David Pliener, on behalf of CAR insurers in this US$136m international arbitration, seat Cayman Islands, relating to Hurricane damage to a substantial Caribbean Hotel development.
Junior to Paul Reed KC in $70m USD ICC Arbitration relating to the supply of components for a process plant in Chile.
Acting for the Claimant in a c. $14m USD LCIA Arbitration, seat London, concerning allegations of delay to the design of a shipyard in Kazakhstan.
Acting for the Claimant in a £5m ICC arbitration, seat London, relating to the dismantling and relocation of a coal-fired power plant from Bulgaria to Turkey.
Acting for the Respondent in a c.£2m ICC arbitration, seat Zurich, arising out of the supply of components for solar energy generation.
Acting for the contractor in a long-running security for costs dispute in a domestic CIMAR arbitration.
Acting for the contractor in domestic CIMAR final account dispute.
Advising as to challenges to enforcement of ICC Arbitral award.
Advising as to enforceability of escalator dispute resolution clauses in arbitration agreement.
Advising as to the incorporation and enforceability of numerous arbitration agreements.
Michael has a heavyweight practice in domestic and international construction, professional negligence and insurance matters; this background means that Michael’s skillset is ideally suited to handling claims concerning property damage, which combine all of these elements.
Michael has a wealth of experience of claims arising out of fire, floods, storms, explosions and subsidence. Michael’s experience of utilities also gives him a keen understanding of cases involving damage to electricity, gas and water infrastructure.
Relevant Work:
Acting with Paul Reed KC for the insured in a US$150m claim following the catastrophic failure of a smelting plant in the middle-east.
Acting, together with Paul Reed KC and David Pliener on behalf of CAR insurers in this US$136m international arbitration, seat Cayman Islands, relating to Hurricane damage to a substantial Caribbean Hotel development.
Leading junior (leading Catherine Piercy) defending a c. £8m claim against Building Control approved inspectors following the collapse of a swimming pool roof at a landmark hotel.
Leading junior (leading Katrina Hanstock acting for the tenant in a multi-million pound, multi-party claim arising out of subsidence damage to a warehouse floor.
Acting for M&E Engineers in a multi-million pound, multi-party claim following escapes of water from the LTHW system at a NHS hospital.
Acting for structural engineers in a multi-million pound claim following damage to the floor slab and dock levellers at a large distribution centre.
Advising Building Services Contractors in relation to an escape of water at Sea Containers House.
Advising adjoining owners in relation to fire damage to two listed historic cottages.
Advising developers in relation to water damage at 18 properties.
Acting for Facilities Managers in relation to an escape of water at DEFRA premises caused by the negligence of cleaning staff.
Acting for the developer in a Party Wall Act etc. dispute relating to damage caused by defective underpinning.
Acting for the developers in various claims under performance bonds following the insolvency / default of the main contractor.
Linked to his Insolvency work, Michael has extensive experience of disputes relating to plant hire and, in particular, the recovery of goods, plant and scaffolding from sites where developers or main contractors have entered into insolvency.
Generation (UK) Ltd v Advance Scaffolding Services Ltd [2012] EWHC 2646 (Ch) – Damages not an adequate remedy for scaffolding hire companies seeking to protect the integrity of their security paint system.
Trad Hire & Sales Ltd v Holbrook Investments Ltd & Anor [2010] EWHC 90 (Ch) – Considers the test for orders for interim delivery-up.
Advising crane hire contractors in relation to the helicopter collision on the London Southbank.
Claims for the recovery of plant and equipment.
Claims for hire charges and off-hire charges under CPA Terms.
Acting for the Main Contractor in a claim to recover a large quantity of plant stolen from site. Also acting in ancillary claim against security consultants.
Michael has extensive experience of insolvency and restructuring and he has seen a marked increase in construction related insolvency work.
He advises employers, contractors and other interested parties such as bondsmen when construction projects enter financial difficulty.
Michael “is particularly well known for his handling of cases where construction law, insolvency and insurance interconnect.” Chambers UK
Relevant Work:
R&S Security Services Ltd v Fire Defence Plc [2013] EWHC 4222 (Ch); [2013] BCLC 92; [2013] BLR 500
First case to consider the impact of the new payment provisions under the Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (as amended). Confirmed that absent a valid pay-less notice, sums due under the Act are indisputable for the purposes of insolvency proceedings.
Generation (UK) Ltd v S L Dower [2011] EWHC 3547 (Ch) Appeal confirming the restriction on the court’s power to adjourn a properly presented bankruptcy petition. Also considers the dangers of allowing time for a debtor to trade out of his debt given the risk that transactions will be rendered void.
A v B (2011) Advising the liquidator of a maintenance company in this £500k claim to recover monies wrongfully withheld by a main contractor.
Agilo Ltd v William Henry & Anor[2010] EWHC 2717 (Ch); [2011] BPIR 297
Appeal establishing that an agent had no right to issue a statutory demand absent an express contractual right.
Henry v Agilo Ltd [2010] EWHC 2045 (Ch) Considers the requirement for the Appellant to adduce evidence of inability to pay if seeking a stay of costs orders pending appeal.
Nationwide Air Conditioning Ltd v Archer-Hoblin Ltd [2010] ChD Acting for the contractor in these proceedings based on the absence of withholding notices.
Sarkis v Mirza [2006] BPIR 146, CA Appeal against committal for contempt of court in respect of failure to comply with Orders for the disclosure of assets in freezing injunctions issued in a £1.2 million debt recovery action.
Sullivan v City Electrical Factors Ltd (2005) ChD Considered the proper approach when admitting new evidence on appeals relating to the setting aside of statutory demands.
AMCD Property Services Ltd v G (2004) All ER (D) 125, ChD Application under the new administration procedure considering the circumstances in which administration orders are appropriate.
In addition to Michael’s expertise in construction disputes (see above) and professional negligence claims against under-performing members of the design and build teams (see below), he is also well placed to deal with related property and financial issues commonly encountered by property developers.
Knight v Goulandris [2018] EWCA Civ 237; leading case in relation to the interpretation of the notice provisions of the Party Wall Act.
Acting in a Party Wall dispute following the collapse of a retaining wall at a development adjacent to railways.
Acting for the developer in relation to rights of light in the construction of new student halls of residence.
Acting in a £2m dispute concerning rights to light issues at a substantial east London hotel development.
Acting for the developer in a substantial Party Wall / trespass claim relating to defective underpinning of a £40m property.
Acting for the developer in relation to alleged nuisance / negligence caused by defective foundation works.
Michael acts for insurers and assureds in the construction sector. He is also instructed by loss adjusters to advise on coverage and technical issues of liability.
Michael acts and advises in relation to coverage and avoidance issues, subrogated claims and professional indemnity disputes. He also acts in disputes for and against Lloyd’s underwriters, managing agents and brokers.
“His excellent construction offering is bolstered by his significant experience of insurance disputes” Chambers UK 2018.
“Well regarded for his efforts in insurance-related construction cases. He is experienced in issues relating to policy coverage and liability.” Chambers UK, 2015
Recent Work:
Acting with Paul Reed KC for the insured in relation to coverage under a CAR policy following the catastrophic failure of a smelting plant in the middle-east.
Leading Junior (Leading Louis Zvesper) acting for the insured in a coverage dispute under a CAR policy following damage to tiles throughout a prestigious riverside development.
Acting for the insured in relation to coverage under a combined PII, PL and CAR policy following the failure of transformers in an off-shore windfarm.
Junior Counsel to Mark Simpson KC advising insurers in relation to coverage under PII policy in relation to the alleged defective construction of 300+ properties.
Advising insurers in relation to a £2m+ subrogated recovery following the failure of bespoke furniture at a prestigious religious building; involving questions as to notification under a PII policy.
Advising insured in relation to coverage under CAR (PL extension) and PII in relation to c.£2m losses following the failure of defective underpinning.
Advising insurers as to coverage under PII policy in relation to restitutionary claim against D&B Contractors.
Advising insurers as to coverage under PII following flood damage at a major office development and the rejection of cover by PL insurers.
Advising Contractors as to waiver of subrogated rights / no fault regime in connection with modified CPA hire terms and All Risks Plant Insurance.
NHBC
Advising Developers in relation to negotiations with NHBC following the emergence of project-wide defects
Advising Developers in relation to the application of NHBC cover to defects arising in M&E systems outwith the boundaries of the Home.
Advising Builders in relation to the application of NHBC cover and the enforceability of NHBC personal indemnities.
Michael has been handling professional indemnity cases for many years, usually in relation to construction projects and property damage cases. His recent cases include:
Chalcraft v John Tompkins Associates [2011] EWHC 2079 QB (Merc). Acting with Paul Reed KC in a £1.2m professional indemnity dispute concerning allegations of negligent certification of construction works.
Acting in a £20m professional indemnity dispute relating to the construction of gantry cranes.
Acting in a £2m professional indemnity dispute concerning rights to light issues at a substantial east London hotel development.
Advising loss adjusters/ CAR insurers following the catastrophic failure of the roof of an Irish sports complex.
Acting for professional indemnity insurers for M&E engineers in this £400,000 flood damage claim.
Acting for professional indemnity insurers for building services engineers in claim for negligent design of HVAC.
Acting in subrogated recovery actions following the theft of plant from construction sites.
Acting in business interruption claims caused by local authority construction works.
Acting with Paul Reed KC in relation to damage and delay in start-up following slag run-out at a large-scale smelting plant. Damage c. $150m USD.
Acting, together with Paul Reed KC and David Pliener on behalf of CAR insurers in US$136m international arbitration, relating to Hurricane damage to a substantial Caribbean Hotel development.
Fire
Advising insurers as to the scope and applicability of a hot-works exclusion following a catastrophic fire at a well-known hospital.
Advising as to the interplay between professional indemnity and public liability insurance following a catastrophic fire at a new-build residential development.
Advising adjoining owners in relation to fire damage to two listed historic cottages.
Flooding / Escape of Water
Advising as to the interplay between professional indemnity and public liability policies following an escape of water at a major London office block.
Advising professional indemnity insurers in relation to an escape of water during the refurbishment of an office block.
Advising Professional Indemnity Insurers in relation to an escape of water at Sea Containers House.
Advising Public Liability insurers in a flooding claim at an electronics manufacturing plant.
Advising developers in relation to water damage at 18 properties.
Advising PL insurers in relation to an escape of water at DEFRA premises caused by the negligence of cleaning staff.
Michael is recommended by Legal 500 as a leading Junior in Professional Negligence where he is described as “first rate” and “technically excellent”.
Michael is also a leading junior in construction litigation and he has acted for and against architects, engineers, surveyors and project managers and Michael has particular experience of cases relating to building services engineers and project monitors.
Architects/ Contract Administrators
Standard Life Assurance Ltd v Gleeds & Ors [2020] EWHC 3419 (TCC); [2021] BLR 125 – Initially junior counsel to Joanna Smith KC, now sole counsel in a c.£38m claim relating to allegations of negligent design in a mixed-use development. Considering issues as to the pleading of professional negligence claims by way of sampling and extrapolation.
Chalcraft & Anor v John Tompkins Associates [2011] EWHC 2079 QB (Merc) – Acting with Paul Reed KC for the Architect in this claim alleging negligent certification. Considered complex issues of authority under the Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2001.
Acting for the homeowner in a £4m multi-party claim against Architects and Structural Engineers arising out of defects in the construction of a basement in a central London “Grand Designs” property.
Acting in a £3.7m claim relating to various alleged defects in substantial residential construction of a country estate.
Acting in a £2m claim relating to alleged delays in producing design information, negligent design and buildability.
Project Managers
Acting in a £20m claim arising out of negligent specification of gantry cranes in a manufacturing facility.
Acting in a £2m claim alleging various failures to deal with rights of light issues.
Engineers
Junior to Joanna Smith KC in a £18m claim relating to defective M&E services at a landmark development in north London.
Acting for M&E design and build contractors in a £10m claim relating to the management of multi-disciplinary works at a pharmaceutical production facility.
Leading junior (leading Katrina Hanstock acting for the tenant in a multi-million pound, multi-party claim against structural engineers and D&B contractors arising out of subsidence damage to a warehouse floor.
Acting for structural engineers in a multi-million pound claim following damage to the floor slab and dock levellers at a large Amazon distribution centre.
Acting for M&E consultants in a £2m claim relating to alleged defects in a pharmaceutical R&D facility.
D&B Contractors
CIP Properties (AIPT) Ltd v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd & Ors –junior counsel to Joanna Smith KC in a c.£10m claim relating to allegations of defective car park ventilation.
Acting for specialist roofing contractors in relation to design defects in car showroom roof.
Advising the employer as to a claim against D&B contractors for negligence in the commissioning of LPHW and domestic cold water systems in an industrial estate.
Building Control Professionals
Leading Junior (leading Catherine Piercy) defending a c. £8m claim against Building Control approved inspectors following the collapse of a swimming pool roof at a landmark hotel.
Project Monitoring Surveyors
Acting, with Mark Simpson KC, for Monitoring Surveyors in a £8m claim alleging negligence in feasibility studies and negligence in Project Monitoring services.
Acting for property valuers in a £4m claim seeking contribution or indemnity from monitoring surveyors following a negligent appraisal / feasibility report.
Acting for Monitoring Surveyors in a £1m claim relating to alleged fraudulent overvaluation.
Acting for the Lender in a £2m claim against Monitoring Surveyors relating to negligent and fraudulent overvaluation.
Michael has extensive experience in claims against solicitors, barristers and other legal professionals related to negligence in litigation or transactional work.
Michael also has experience of related costs matters such as wasted costs and non-party costs orders against solicitors.
Acting in a number of claims against solicitors arising out of failures to advise in relation to ‘toxic ground rent’ provisions in long leases.
Acting for the defendant construction claims consultant in a claim for the negligent conduct of a construction arbitration.
Acting in a claim against counsel for negligent advice and failing to advance arguments in litigation.
Acting in a claim against union representatives for the negligent conduct of an employment claim.
Acting and advising in numerous claims relating to title defects and/or failure to advise in relation to property transactions.
Acting and advising in numerous claims relating to failures to issue proceedings within the relevant limitation period and the likely quantum of such claims.
Michael has a significant practice in property-related professional negligence disputes, whether the defendants are solicitors (see legal professionals above), surveyors or other property professionals in relation to both residential and commercial properties.
Recent Work:
Acting for the surveyor in a £6m claim involving novel allegations of duty to advise the borrower under a floating facility.
Acting for the surveyor in a c.£4m claim alleging negligent valuation of development land.
Acting for the surveyor in a c. £1.5m claim alleging negligent valuation of a series of holiday lets.
Acting for the valuer in £1m claim alleging negligent valuation of a going concern business.
Acting for the surveyor in £750k claim alleging negligent overvaluation of a restaurant premises.
Acting for valuers in a £600k claim alleging negligent valuation including “no loss” issues where a subsequent advance cleared the initial facility.
Acting for valuers in a £600k claim alleging negligent valuation of agricultural / commercial property in respect of a series of construction/development loans.
Acting for valuers in a £500k claim alleging negligent valuation of a rural residential property and failure to note an agricultural tie.
Michael is experienced at handling international construction and engineering disputes, including professional negligence claims and property damage.
He has worked in various jurisdictions under various arbitration rules and has particular expertise in relation to disputes involving Asia, the Middle East and the Caribbean.
Junior counsel in AED 5bn DIAC Arbitration arising out of the construction of an Airport in the Middle-East
Acting, together with Paul Reed KC and David Pliener, on behalf of CAR insurers in this US$136m international arbitration, seat Cayman Islands, relating to Hurricane damage to a substantial Caribbean Hotel development.
Junior to Paul Reed KC in USD $150m claim arising out of the explosion of ilmenite smelter in the Middle East
Junior to Paul Reed KC in USD $70m ICC Arbitration relating to the supply of components for a process plant in Chile.
Acting for the Claimant in a c. $14m USD LCIA Arbitration, seat London, concerning allegations of delay to the design of a shipyard in Kazakhstan.
Acting for the Claimant in a £5m ICC arbitration, seat London, relating to the dismantling and relocation of a coal-fired power plant from Bulgaria to Turkey.
Acting for the Respondent in a c.£2m ICC arbitration, seat Zurich, arising out of the supply of components for solar energy generation.
Professional associations
TECBAR
Society of Construction Law (UK and Gulf)
Adjudication Society
Kings College Construction Law Association
Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
COMBAR
BILA
SCMA
Publications
Co-Author of Electronic Disclosure Law and Practice, Oxford University Press, 2017 (with Charles Raffin).
Contributor to Paul Reed KC’s Construction All Risks Insurance, Sweet & Maxwell, published in March 2014, second Edition in 2016, third Edition in 2021.
Chalcraft & Anor v John Tompkins Associates [2011] EWHC 2079 QB (Merc)
Generation (UK) Ltd v S L Dower [2011] EWHC 3547 (Ch)
Trad Hire & Sales Ltd v Holbrook Investments Ltd & Anor [2010] EWHC 90 (Ch)
Agilo Ltd v William Henry & Anor [2010] EWHC 2717 (Ch); [2011] BPIR 297
Henry v Agilo Ltd [2010] EWHC 2045 (Ch)
Sarkis v Mirza [2006] BPIR 146, CA
AMCD Property Services Ltd v G (2004) All ER (D) 125, (Ch)
Directory recommendations
Michael has been recommended as a leading construction junior for many years in Chambers UK, Chambers Global, and The Legal 500. He is also recommended for his professional negligence and insurance work by Legal 500. Michael is also recommended in Who’s Who Legal for both Construction and Professional Negligence.
“Sensible and amiable in client conferences and able to think quickly. Great on his feet, better in writing and approachable.” (The Legal 500, Professional Negligence)
“His advocacy is consistently impressive.” (The Legal 500, 2024, Construction)
“Michael is particularly good at document-heavy and complex disputes, and at ensuring tactical considerations are at the forefront of his advice.” (The Legal 500, 2024, Insurance and Reinsurance)
“Michael is excellent. He’s very personable, responsive, clients like him and he is good on his feet, with a good commercial sense.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Construction)
“Michael always has the answer. He has a very, very strong understanding of the law and of construction, but is very easy to work with and takes on a very commercial approach. His written advice is always spot on.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Construction)
“He’s great at getting up to speed and provides commercial and supportive advice.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Construction)
“Michael Wheater is robust but realistic and gets the job done.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Professional Negligence: Technology & Construction)
“Michael always has the answer; he has very strong technical understanding of the law and of construction but is very easy to work with and takes a very commercial approach.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Professional Negligence: Technology & Construction)
“He is very calm and measured.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Professional Negligence: Technology & Construction)
“He is extremely user-friendly and is wonderful with clients.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Professional Negligence: Technology & Construction)
“Michael Wheater is very personable, responsive and is very good on paper. Clients like him because he is good on his feet and has a good commercial sense.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Property Damage)
“He always has the answer; he has a very, very strong technical understanding of the law but is very easy to work with and takes a very commercial approach.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Property Damage)
“His written advice is always spot-on and he presents it in a very thorough, clear way that the clients understand. He has exceptional conduct before clients.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Property Damage)
“He’s very user-friendly, down-to-earth and provides excellent written advice. He’s also an excellent advocate and is one of the best counsel strategically that I’ve come across.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Property Damage)
“His advocacy is quietly forceful and persuasive. He’s very calm and measured, which judges tend to like.” (Chambers and Partners 2024, Property Damage)
“He is an all-round excellent barrister – very bright, user-friendly and very commercial.” “A solution-orientated and user-friendly barrister whose written work is highly impressive.” (Chambers UK, 2023)
“Michael is very good both on paper and his feet.” (Chambers UK, 2023)
“His written work and advice is absolutely spot on. He is incredibly responsive. Tactically, Michael is second to none. He is an excellent advocate and is fantastic with clients.” (Chambers UK, 2023)
“Michael is an oracle, he knows everything.” (Chambers UK, 2023)
“Michael is an excellent ally to have in the most difficult cases. Very good on both paper and his feet.” (Chambers UK, 2023)
“He is incredibly responsive, fantastic with clients and an excellent advocate.” (Chambers UK, 2023)
“Michael’s ability to turn things around and absorb huge amounts of information verges on impossible – unbelievable.” (Chambers UK, 2023)
“A very good senior junior. He quickly got to grips with all the various issues and made a tremendous contribution to our success.” (Chambers UK, 2023)
“A very bright individual. He is a robust advocate who provides first-class written advice.” (The Legal 500, 2023)
“Michael is an exceptional advocate with the ability to digest huge volumes of information, distil the key points and strategic implications, and produce laser-focussed submissions. A real team player for whom no task is too big or too small.” (The Legal 500, 2023)
“Michael is extremely approachable and user friendly, while also technically excellent. He more than holds his own against opposing silks and is a very persuasive and capable advocate.” (The Legal 500, 2023)
“A strong barrister and an excellent advocate who commands a wealth of expertise and knowledge. He is user-friendly and great with clients.” (Chambers UK)
“He is extremely intelligent, hardworking and commercially astute. He is a great team player and always comes through for us under pressure.” (Legal 500)
“He’s excellent – incredibly diligent and his research and drafting is, without exception, excellent.”(Chambers UK)
“Extremely intelligent and comes through for clients.” (Legal 500)
“Incredibly hardworking, his written work is second to none and he gets a complete grip on even the most complex of cases.” (Chambers UK)
“He is an excellent tactician and a good courtroom fighter.” (Chambers UK)
“He is extremely good technically and his written product is first class.” (Chambers UK)
“A very good technical lawyer. He knows his subject matter, his written work is excellent and he’s great with clients.” “Exceptional. He is incredibly knowledgeable and able to perceive problems before they come up and deal with them.” (Chambers UK)
“His written work is excellent, he’s great with clients and he’s very user-friendly.” (Chambers UK)
“He is very thorough with an excellent knowledge of construction issues” (Legal 500)
“He’s incredibly bright, tactically excellent, very user-friendly and approachable. His written work is first class, as is his advocacy.” Chambers UK
“He delivers clear and pragmatic advice” (Legal 500)
“He gives the correct advice without pulling any punches” (Legal 500)
“He was really responsive and really, really good in helping with the technical side of the case.” Chambers UK
“In addition to having a fantastic knowledge of the law, his commercial judgement is excellent and he is tactically brilliant.” Chambers UK
“Knowledgeable yet commercial and pragmatic. Quick to respond to queries with sound strategy advice.” Chambers UK
“Knows construction law, procedure and technicalities inside out – his drafting and written legal submissions are second to none.” Legal 500
“Incredibly bright, but very user friendly and down to earth.” Legal 500
“An excellent advocate, who provides robust and commercially astute advice.”Legal 500
“First rate” Legal 500
“Grasps issues quickly and is able to present advice to clients in a very clear, concise way.” Chambers Global
“A current and rising star.” Legal 500
“Incredibly diligent, hard-working, very good on the law.” Chambers UK
“Technically excellent.” Legal 500
“A bona fide construction specialist.” Legal 500
“Commercial, user friendly and helpful.” Chambers UK
“A very good technical lawyer. He knows his subject matter, his written work is excellent and he’s great with clients.” “Exceptional. He is incredibly knowledgeable and able to perceive problems before they come up and deal with them.” Chambers Global
“A highly regarded junior who continues to be instructed on large and important cases.” Chambers Global
Insights
Gatehouse Chambers shortlisted in 11 categories at the Legal 500 Bar Awards 2022
06/07/2022
Gatehouse barristers succeed in major new coinsurance decision
03/05/2022
Gatehouse Chambers makes a strong showing in the Chambers Global 2022 Guide
17/02/2022
Sarah McCann’s Construction Insolvency textbook published by Sweet & Maxwell
07/02/2022
Dates announced for Construction All Risks webinar programme
17/08/2021
Third edition of Construction All Risks Insurance now published
07/06/2021
Hardwicke makes strong showing in Chambers Global 2021
19/02/2021
Hardwicke Construction, Real Estate and Arbitration Team Members in Who’s Who Legal Top Barristers
15/01/2020
Electronic Disclosure Law & Practice
17/05/2019
Construction Professional Indemnity Insurance
28/01/2019
Past events
The Next Building Crisis? An Introduction to RAAC and Related Claims
23/10/2023
Behind the Façade Series Webinar: A reminder of the relevant construction and property concepts and terminology
24/11/2021
#HardwickeBrew – Insolvency – Advantages and disadvantages of adjudication for insolvent estates, creditors and litigation funders
02/07/2020
#HardwickeBrew – Break the log jam with online ADR – Online mediation: practicalities and tips part II
18/05/2020
Let’s be professional about this…
12/02/2020
Michael Wheater speaks at Grant Thornton’s Technology in Disputes seminar
12/09/2018
Introduction to edisclosure
18/01/2018
Videos
The Next Building Crisis? An Introduction to RAAC and Related Claims
23/10/2023
Behind the Façade Series Webinar: A reminder of the relevant construction and property concepts and terminology
29/11/2021
Custom PDF
Which sections would you like to include in your PDF download?
X
Manage Cookie Consent
We use cookies to optimize our website and our service. Not consenting or withdrawing consent may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
We use cookies to optimise our website and our service.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
