Source: https://tgchambers.com/member-profile/paul-mcgrath/
Timestamp: 2019-07-21 09:40:28
Document Index: 591750786

Matched Legal Cases: ['EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ']

Paul McGrath – Temple Garden Chambers
pmcgrath@tgchambers.com
Paul’s practice is generally split between the following main areas: insurance law (particularly motor), insurance fraud, personal injury / fatal accident, and consumer law. He also has considerable past experience of employment cases.
Insurance: Paul has significant and broad experience in this area. In relation to ‘pure’ insurance law issues, he has represented clients in relation to disputes between insurers, avoidance disputes between insured and insurer (including claims for contractual indemnity), disputes between insurers and third parties (e.g. issues arising under ss151-152 Road Traffic Act 1988), representations to third parties (such as the MIB, Financial Ombudsman Service, etc), and interpretation of insurance contracts and any resulting declaratory proceedings. His work has mostly been in connection with motor insurance, but he has also acted in cases involving disputes about life insurance and legal expenses policies. Mason v TNT and Groupama Insurance saw him acting for a successful insurer on a point of great significance to the industry: whether an insurer was liable for the ‘same damage’ as a tortfeasor for its (potential) breach of indemnity.
Paul also acts in insurance fraud cases (chiefly motor insurance). He has significant experience of drafting, advising and representing in the full range of fraud cases from the small opportunistic claims to large scale, nationwide, fraud rings. He also has considerable experience of declaratory proceedings, recovery actions (including tort of deceit), enforcement actions and committal proceedings. He was recently in the Court of Appeal in Hamid v Khalid and Co-Operative Insurance.
Personal injury / fatal accident: his work involves predominantly Multi-Track cases in the County or High Court and also includes appellate work in the High Court and Court of Appeal. He is also regularly instructed to attend mediations and JSMs. He has considerable experience acting for cruise companies and airlines in relation to personal injury claims arising from incidents at sea (involving jurisdictional issues and issues under the Athens Convention and The Merchant Shipping Act 1995) and on board aircraft.
Consumer: Paul is targeted as a leading junior for many of the most significant consumer law cases and has appeared in the County Court, High Court and Court of Appeal. His work involves vast experience of credit hire cases, including those of the greatest value and / or significance, including the seminal case of Burdis v Livsey. His work also involves issues arising under the Consumer Credit Act, the Package Tour Regulations, the flight cancellation Regulations (EU Regulation 261/2004), the Sale of Goods Act, the Supply of Goods and Services Act and the Consumer Protection Act.
Employment: Paul has steered his practice away from employment to concentrate on the above mentioned areas. However, Paul has significant experience of employment litigation (mostly instructed by Respondents) and has made a great number of appearances in the Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal. Paul continues to act for clients pro bono via the Bar Pro Bono Unit and has recently appeared in the Court of Appeal concerning the National Minimum Wage provisions.
Lord Justice Holker major scholarship award from Grays Inn (1996)
Lee Essay Prizewinner (1995) (judged by Lord Mustill)
Chartered Secretaries and Administrators Award for Excellence (achieving top A Level mark in the country, 1993)
Recommended as demonstrating ‘considerable expertise’ in motor fraud cases and employing ‘enthusiasm and drive’. He is also noted to have an ability to ‘slowly take the opposition apart in an almost surgical fashion rather than in a theatrical style – he’s a silent assassin’ and to be ‘very strong both on paper and in court’, knowing ‘how to get the best result for the client’ and good at ‘understanding a large amount of information’. Chambers and Partners, 2018
Recommended in Tier 1, ‘Personal Injury, Industrial Disease and Insurance Fraud’ as ‘Experienced in all manner of motor insurance fraud cases’. Legal 500, 2017.
“Recommended for personal injury, motor and credit hire work”. Legal 500, 2015
“Very well regarded for all things personal injury, motor and credit hire”. Legal 500, 2014
Paul McGrath is recommended as a leading junior for consumer law and described as being “noted for his ‘deep knowledge of the issues'”. Legal 500, Consumer, 2013
“Paul McGrath is praised for his ‘robust and sensible advice'”. Legal 500, Employment, 2011
LAWRENCE V NCL (BAHAMAS) LTD (‘THE NORWEGIAN JADE’) [2017] EWCA CIV 2222 (COURT OF APPEAL), [2018] 1 Lloyd’s Law Rep 607; Lloyd’s Maritime Law Newsletter (2018) 996 LMLN 1; Lloyd’s Law Reporter 22 January 2018; [2016] EWHC (ADMLTY); [2016] 5 WLUK 109 (ADMIRALTY REGISTRAR, JERVIS KAY QC)
Claim in the Admiralty Division for an accident aboard a tender vessel. The judgment considers questions of the scope of the Athens Convention along with whether liability was established for an accident aboard a third party’s vessel.
Hamid v (1) Khalid (2) Co-Operative Insurance [2017] EWCA Civ 201
Alleged fraud case. Court of Appeal decision following an insurers appeal against a finding that an accident had been proven on a balance of probabilities. Guidance given on when an appeal Court can interfere, when an acquittal of fraud can be set aside and the factors to be borne in mind, adequacy of reasons and the role that proportionality might have to play in this and whether an adverse inference ought to have been drawn. Appropriate costs order when fraud pleading fails to be proven.
Chimel v Chibwana and Another (unrep. HHJ Simpkiss, Brighton CC) Available on Lawtel
Whether an insurer’s admission made under the MoJ Portal is binding on insured in separate proceedings.
Churchill Insurance v Shajahan and another (unrep. Mr Recorder Tidbury, Birmingham CC) Available on Lawtel
Tort of deceit case considering the appropriate award in a staged road traffic cases for exemplary damages, considering the relevant authorities and approaches in other Courts.
Zurich Insurance plc v Umerji [2014] EWCA Civ 357
Instructed by a non-party to advise, and draft potential argument, on the significant points in relation to impecuniosity and whether insured benefits are to be left out of account in the assessment of compensation.
Dickinson v Tesco plc and others [2013] EWCA Civ 36; [2013] All ER (D) 17 (the 'Autofocus Appeals')
Four tests cases in the Court of Appeal dealing with multiple issues of fraud, consumer law (particularly in relation to the hiring of vehicles in credit), and practice on appeals in relation to the introduction of fresh evidence.
Locke v Liddle [2013] EWHC 2620 (QB)
Successful appeal. The normal rule was to order that costs be assessed forthwith. Under the CPR particular regard was to be had to proportionality. There was an element of proportionality in having all the costs dealt with on one occasion: it would be quicker to assess the costs at one hearing. However, that was not a sufficient reason to displace the normal rule. C was entitled to have his costs assessed in detail at the present stage. It was not pragmatic to award him costs and interest at a later date.
Court of Appeal decision on apportionment in a road traffic case involving sudden braking.
Laleye v Community Service Volunteers EAT / 0321 / 09 HHJ Birtles
Grievance procedures. Lengthy but intractable grievance was judged to frustrate the object of the statutory grievance procedure and thus not qualifying as a grievance and the claim was accordingly time-barred.
Mason v TNT and Groupama Insurance (unrep. Oxford CC, HHJ Harris QC, lead case on insurance contribution) Available on Lawtel
Whether an insurer can be liable to a tortfeasor to contribute for its alleged breach of indemnity in dealing with the consequences of the tort. Meaning of ‘same damage’.
Gydnia America Shipping Lines (London) Limited -v- Chelminski [2004] EWCA Civ 871; [2004] ICR 1523; [2004] IRLR 725; [2004] 3 All ER 666; (2004) 148 SJLB 877 Times LR (20 July 2004); Independent LR (9 July 2004)
Croucher v Fire Brigade Union [2004] All ER (D) 357
Appeal against a finding of unfair dismissal. Appropriate test. Considering Sainsburys Supermarkets v Hitt.
Burdis v Livsey [2002] EWCA Civ 510; [2003] QB 36 (CA); [2002] 3 WLR 762 (Court of Appeal); [2001] 1 WLR 1751 (High Court) [petition to House of Lords refused: [2003] 1 WLR 394):
TGC Fraud Updates
The Use of Experts in the Employment Tribunal (EMIS publishing, 2002)
Email, the Internet and the Law (EMIS Publishing, 2001)
Various articles in publications such as the Solicitors Law Journal, New Law Journal, etc
TGC appoints Pro Bono Champion
Temple Garden Chambers has appointed Paul McGrath as its Pro Bono Champion. Pro Bono Champions are Chambers’ representatives working closely with the Bar Pro Bono Unit to champion pro bono work and to encourage active participation in pro bono work within Chambers.
Refusal of late medical evidence overturned on appeal
Paul McGrath acted for the successful Appellant in an appeal before Mr Justice Foskett. The Master had refused the Defendant a retrospective extension of time to file and serve his orthopaedic evidence.
Court of Appeal to decide on Dispute over National Minimum Wage
Paul McGrath appears before Court of Appeal concerning a dispute over whether a contract foster carer was paid the National Minimum Wage. Paul McGrath was acting pro bono.
QOCS AND SET-OFF: In the balance
Paul McGrath highlights when defendants should consider obtaining an order and/or assessment of costs.
Hamid v (1) Khalid (2) Co-Operative Insurance
Paul McGrath appeared in the Court of Appeal in the case of Hamid, which gave guidance in relation to appeals concerning fraud allegations.
Insurer’s admission in MoJ Portal binding on insured in separate proceedings
Admission made in MoJ Portal and claim settled – was this binding on insurer’s driver who later wanted to bring her own proceedings – could she apply to withdraw the admission – consideration of conflicting cases of Ullah v John and Malak v Nasim. Held: admission was binding and the admission could not be withdrawn given settlement; case struck out. Paul McGrath appeared for D1. Lionel Stride appeared for D2
I am registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as a Data Controller for the personal data that I hold and process as a barrister. My registered address is Temple Garden Chambers, 1 Harcourt Buildings, Temple, London EC4Y 9DA and my registration number is Z7716147.
All, or the vast majority of, information that I hold about you is provided to or gathered by us in the course of your case and/or proceedings. Your solicitor and/or I will tell you why we need the information and how we will use it.
Our Lawful Basis is acting as a legal representative providing advice and representation which may include direct (implied or express) consent, performing the services of a contract, complying with a legal obligation, protecting vital interests where appropriate (though unlikely to be applicable save for exceptional cases), performance of a task in the public interest or by Court Order, and and our Legitimate Interest is where the data subject is a client, where it is reasonably required to prevent unauthorised access, to prevent or detect fraud, and to report possible criminal acts or threats to public safety.
Communicate with you about news, updates and events
Make statutory returns as required by, e.g. HMRC
Pupil, or mini pupil, under my training
In the event that personal data is transferred to third countries or international organisations indirectly via the Temple Garden Chambers email service then I will satisfy myself that such transferred data is fully protected and safeguarded as required by the General Data Protection Regulation.
I retain your personal data while you remain a client unless you ask me to delete it and in which case I may retain it for purposes set out below. My Retention and Disposal Policy (copy available on request) details how long I hold data for and how I dispose of it when it no longer needs to be held. I will delete or anonymise your information at your request unless:
The information needs to be retained to protect my position in relation to any potential claim or complaint;
This is a Notice of recommended practice. The contents of this Notice are in no way contractual.
You may request access to, correction of, or a copy of your information by contacting me at Temple Garden Chambers, 1 Harcourt Buildings, Temple, London EC4Y 9DA.
You may opt out of receiving emails and other messages from me by following the instructions in those messages or alternatively emailing me directly with such a request.
Cookies are small text files that are stored on your browser or device by websites, apps, online media, and advertisements. The Chambers website may use cookies to:
I will occasionally update my Privacy Notice. This Privacy Notice will be published on my website profile.