Q: Having studied history, how and when did you decide to pursue a career in law?
I started attending careers fairs in my second year at Manchester, and the law fair was where I felt most at ease. I applied for vacation schemes in my final year and received a training contract offer through one of them. Although it felt strange to accept a training contract without ever opening a legal textbook, I have never regretted the decision. I didn't always know I wanted to be a lawyer, but the path felt right at key moments, and I held on through the harder ones.
Q: You achieved one of the highest GDL grades in the country. Do you have any tips for students starting the GDL, LPC or SQE?
I found the GDL genuinely fascinating. Before studying it, I understood little about how government operates or the checks and balances within the legal system. There is no shortcut to consistent work throughout the year followed by intensive exam preparation. As a litigator, I am grateful for the strong grounding in first principles that the GDL provided. I encourage aspiring lawyers to engage deeply with their technical studies, as this foundation supports confidence throughout practice.
Q: What specifically appealed to you about litigation and arbitration?
I was not initially gripped by civil litigation on the LPC, and my first commercial litigation seat was challenging. In hindsight, this was because my supervisor pushed me to develop my skills. After returning to a contentious seat following transactional work, I realised I preferred the creativity of starting with a blank page rather than a precedent contract. Litigation proved exciting and intellectually stimulating, even if there are easier ways to earn a living.
Q: How do you balance comprehensive advice with commercial clarity? Do you follow a particular structure?
This is a key skill for junior lawyers. I begin with the advice in a nutshell, expressed in two or three sentences. The body of the note explains the reasoning and sets out the assumptions. If advice depends on assumptions, these must be flagged clearly because incorrect assumptions can materially change the direction of the advice. I conclude by summarising the advice, mirroring the opening paragraph.
Q: Do you expect group litigation to increase following the Post Office scandal? What challenges arise in class actions?
Group litigation is growing in England and Wales. The Post Office scandal reflects this growth rather than causing it, although it may accelerate it. Opt‑out actions are progressing before the Competition Appeal Tribunal, but the Supreme Court's judgment in Lloyd v Google requires civil group claims to proceed on an opt‑in basis. This means claimant groups must be built individually, which is costly and time-consuming. Many viable claims may never proceed because no one is willing to take on the risk of building the group. Despite this, I expect continued growth and am working on several funded group claims.
Q: After recent rulings such as Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil, do you expect ADR to become more widespread?
Yes. Courts increasingly expect parties to give serious consideration to ADR. Those who decline unreasonably may face punitive cost consequences. ADR will become the norm rather than a voluntary option.
Q: How distinct are high‑net‑worth clients' expectations of their counsel?
Acting for high‑net‑worth clients involves building deep relationships and advising on their most pressing commercial and personal matters. They expect the highest standards of service, and my role is to ensure we add value commensurate with our fees. It is a privilege to advise dynamic wealth creators and stewards.
Q: You previously worked as General Counsel. How does in‑house work differ from private practice, and what skills did you develop?
Working as General Counsel was a career highlight. I recommend secondments at any stage. The role involved advising colleagues internally and receiving advice from external counsel, which gave me insight into what clients truly need. The most important lesson was understanding a client's risk appetite. Tailored advice becomes far more effective when aligned with what matters to the client.
Q: How much Jersey law features in your current practice?
A great deal. I work closely with Jersey clients on English and international matters. My three years living and working in Jersey provided valuable regulatory and legal insight. International experience broadens perspective, strengthens networks and enriches professional development.
Q: What attracted you to Forsters, and what should lawyers consider when choosing a firm?
Returning from Jersey at around eight years qualified, I wanted to progress to partnership. Forsters' strength in private wealth and real estate made it a natural fit. I was also drawn to the gender balance within the partnership, which was evenly split across approximately seventy partners. I am pleased with my decision and encourage ambitious lawyers to consider joining.
Q: What traits do you look for in trainees, and how has this changed since your own training contract?
I look for strong academics, clear writing and the ability to analyse large volumes of information quickly. These expectations remain consistent with my own training. A positive development is the increased focus on diversity, including partnerships with Rare Recruitment to widen socioeconomic representation.
Q: What advice would you give your younger self as a new graduate?
First, do not be intimidated by how much there is to learn. With consistent effort, you'll learn what you need now and what you can research later. The constant learning is part of what makes the career fulfilling.Second, treat mental health as seriously as physical health. The profession is demanding, and each stage brings new challenges. Develop healthy coping mechanisms, recognise unhealthy habits early and seek help when needed.
Not sure how close you are to qualifying?
The path-fit quiz reads your situation and shows you which routes you are ready for, and exactly what to do next. Four minutes, no account needed to start.
Check your readiness