JUDGEMENT DAY AT THE HIGH COURT
Stewart and I would like to give thanks to our legal team without whom I would never have won this case. Thanks to them, their belief in me and their commitment to the truth justice has been done.
Senior partner at Carter-Ruck and head of legal team
Andrew is a graduate of University College London and became a partner at Carter-Ruck in 1986. His knowledge of the law is impressive and he has unrivalled experience in advising high profile political figures on national and international reputational issues. Andrew is described by Chambers Guide to the Legal Profession as "exceptionally bright and collected in even the most tricky cases" and "giving considered, thought-through advice".
Whilst that is indeed true, Andrew is much more than this. He is genuine and compassionate man with a keen sense of justice, intent on gaining fairness and providing access to justice. He had no need to defend me. He chose to. In the two years that Andrew represented me, he was always there for me and worked tirelessly in the preparation of my defence. Andrew is quite simply, a decent and special human being and an exceptional solicitor.
Andrew and me outside the Royal Courts of Justice on judgement day
Dominic is a young solicitor with already an immense amount of experience under his belt. If there was one word to describe Dominic it would be gentleman, if there were two words the other would be professional. He is a clam and confident young man with the ability to bring perspective to stressful situations. He is thorough, persistent and nothing is too much trouble. He is always there for you when you need him.
Para legal (left)
Without Helena, I am not sure I could have sat through the trial. Helena is a Para Legal extraordinaire intent on qualifying as a solicitor. She should, she would be good one although it would be a loss to the Para Legal profession as her professionalism was second to none. Helena knew where everything was all of the time for each second of the day and advised counsel and solicitors when the need arose. She is kind, compassionate and caring and it was a true pleasure to meet with her and have her on the legal team.
THANKS TO OUR BARRISTERS AND 5RB CHAMBERS
James Price QC
James Price is quite simply one of the nicest people I have ever met. A dignified, kind and caring man entirely without pretension that showed, from the moment I met him, a genuine concern for our situation and the need that justice should be done. He was ruthlessly meticulous in his preparation and skilled in the execution of his craft. Andrew Stephenson and his team gave him the ammunition with which James fought, won and took no prisoners. Thank you James.
James Price QC has appeared in many high profile actions over recent years including Flood v Times Newspapers (argued in the Supreme Court in October 2011), Modi & IMG v Clarke, Ajinomoto v Asda Stores, OPQ v BJM, Primark v BBC, Reynolds v Times Newspapers, Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe, Campbell v MGN (Costs), X & Y v Persons Unknown, Browne v Associated Newspapers, Adelson v Associated Newspapers, Max Mosley v News Group Newspapers, Radu v Houston.
James Price QC is "particularly adept in cases requiring creative and lateral thinking." A first-rate choice for jury trials, thanks to "the style and panache that he brings." he successfully represented Max Mosley in his extremely high-profile privacy claim against News Group. Chambers and Partners 2010
James Price QC’s engagement in major privacy cases is particularly noteworthy, including in Mosley v News Group. Price is ‘composed and cool under pressure, and doesn’t fail to deliver‘; he is ‘a genuine powerhouse, entirely without pretension, or histrionics‘ Legal 500
Jonathan was Junior Counsel on our case and was there right from the word go when we made our first application for costs successfully. He is a gentleman in every respect. A talented traditional lawyer, thorough proper and meticulous giving huge support to us, our solicitors and lead counsel before and during the trial. Jonathan never doubted our integrity and was a source of security and honesty through the whole litigation process. Thank you Jonathan.
Jonathan's practice covers defamation, privacy, confidence, data protection, freedom of information, publishing, broadcasting and media law. He undertakes commercial, contract and agency cases, including sports disputes. He regularly advises on urgent reputation, privacy and confidence issues, often involving the Internet or other forms of electronic communication. He provides pre-publication advice to commercial publishers.
His cases include: Boehringer Ingelheim & Others v Vetplus, on the principles of interim injunctive relief in the context of comparative advertising; Murray v Big Pictures, the JK Rowling pushchair privacy claim; BBC v HarperCollins, on the revelation of the identity of "The Stig"; and Cooper v Turrell, addressing the principles for quantifying damages in libel, privacy and confidence.
Recently, he has acted for the claimants in two significant assessments of damages: the award of £175,000 libel damages in Al Amoudi v Kifle (led by Desmond Browne QC); and the awards totalling £120,000 in Cooper v Turrell (above). On the defendant side, he was junior counsel in the 2012 blogging libel trial of Mengi v Hermitage.
In addition to his court work, Jonathan has represented clients at the Broadcasting Standards Commission (now OFCOM), the Office of Fair Trading, the Employment Tribunals, in FA arbitration proceedings and in London Metal Exchange arbitration proceedings.