Clare Dixon QC

Clare’s practice includes a broad spread of commercial work. She has acted in a wide variety of contractual disputes including claims arising under the sale of goods legislation and for breach of warranty following the sale of a business. She also has experience of obtaining urgent injunctive relief.

Notable instructions include:

• Acting for the vendors of a manufacturing business in a breach of warranty claim said to be worth several million pounds.
• Advising and acting in a claim against a Company Secretary which claim was said to be worth about £17million.
• Acting in a contractual dispute between a Local Authority and a supplier of meteorological data.
• Successfully obtaining an interim injunction for a medical reporting organisation to stop the downgrading of its status which change would have caused irreparable harm to the company. Having secured the position, Clare (led by Patrick Lawrence QC) was then instructed in  the subsequent judicial review proceedings.
• Acting for a software company in a dispute over the construction and application of a sale purchase agreement involving the sale of a website and associated assets.
• Acting for a financial services compliance company in a contractual dispute with a bank to whom it had provided services.
• Acting for a distribution company in a dispute with a well known food and drink supplier about the provision of warehousing services by the former to the latter.
• Acting for a glazing specialist in a contractual claim arising out of the supply of sealant for a construction project.
• A substantial dispute between a local authority and its services outsourcing provider (led by David Turner QC). The case involved the interpretation of multiple interrelated contracts and contractual documents, and their application to a variety of local authority procurement needs (eg highways and residential care homes).
• A claim in fraud by a professional indemnity insurer and a leading firm of solicitors against their former employee: Travelers Insurance Co Ltd & Denton Wilde Sapte v Advani [2012] EWHC 623. The case was concerned with whether the former employee had acted fraudulently and/or outside the scope of her employment so as to entitle the claimants to recover costs which they had expended in defending both the former employee and her then employer in a previous action. Clare was led by Justin Fenwick QC for the trial of the action but then acted alone on the subsequent freezing injunction applications. 
• Clare was instructed by Holman, Fenwick & Willan in a 12 week trial in the Commercial Court: Abu Dhabi Investment Company v Clarkson [2007] EWHC 1267 (Comm). The Claimants had invested in a joint venture container shipping line which was to be operated from Abu Dhabi: Abu Dhabi Container Lines (“ADCL”). ADCL purchased 10 container vessels to run on its line at a cost of about USD$400million. ADCL failed within months of its inception. Proceedings were brought against the ship brokers who had advised the Claimants, the joint venture partner who it was found had fraudulently misrepresented the earning capacity and viability of the vessels, and the bank who had provided funding for the venture.

Clare has experience of a broad range of construction disputes: both pure construction matters and construction professional liability. Clare regularly appears in the Technology and Construction Court and has experience of arbitrations and adjudications. She enjoys getting to grips with the technical information and expert evidence often involved in such dispute.

Examples of her cases include:

• Acting for a sub-contractor in relation to a dispute arising out of, amongst other things, the fire rating of cladding on a Birmingham office building.
• Clare has been instructed in several cases involving damage to cables in the course of construction works involving claims down the contractual chain and/or by third parties.
• Appearing (led by David Turner QC) for the supplier of aggregate used for the construction of motorway concrete safety barriers in Costain Limited v Tarmac Holdings Limited. The case raised issues as to the extent of the remedial works necessary to address contamination of the aggregate, the incorporation and application of the ADR provisions contained within Clause 93 of the NEC 3 Supply Short Contract, the effect of the duty of mutual trust and co-operation imposed by Clause 10.1 of the NEC 3 suite of contracts and whether the parties’ arbitration agreement was “null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed” within the meaning of s.9(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996.
• Instructed for a demolition sub-contractor in a claim brought by the main contractor arising out of works done during an office block refurbishment in Birmingham.
• Acting for a glazing sub-contractor in a claim brought by the main contractor arising out of the installation of windows in an atrium.
• Clare was instructed on behalf of the architect in a dispute concerning the major refurbishment of a restaurant.
• Clare was instructed for a project manager in a claim concerning building works at a sea front apartment block.
• Clare was instructed by Kennedys LLP in a multi-party construction dispute arising out of the insulation of chilled water pipework at Linklaters LLP’s City office. Two summary judgment applications were made. The first, Linklaters Business Services v Sir Robert McAlpine [2010] EWHC 1145, 130 Con LR 111 considered the duty of care owed by a sub-sub-contractor whose carelessness in installing insulation in a building had caused damage to other areas of that building. The other, Southern Insulation v How Engineering [2010] EWCA Civ 999 considered whether a sub-sub-contractor could owe a sub-contractor a duty of care such that the sub-contractor could recover sums which it was held liable to pay the main contractor.

Cases

Clare regularly advises on regulatory matters and appears in disciplinary forums.

Notable instructions include:

• Acting for two individual solicitors (Case Ref 11737), successfully defending loss of integrity charges arising out of admitted use of a client account as a banking facility.
• Clare has extensive experience of appearing before the Bar Disciplinary Tribunal having acted as a prosecutor for the BSB for a number of years.  Her cases include: BSB v Freeman; BSB v Knowlden; BSB v Carne; BSB v Khattak and BSB v Russell.  She was also instructed in R (on the application of Obi Ezekpazu) v Bar Standards Board [2018] EWHC 2051 (Admin) which involved the prosecution of a barrister who had failed to comply with a direction of the Legal Ombudsman.  The barrister was suspended for three months with the finding and sanction being upheld on appeal to the Administrative Court.
• Clare was instructed by a financial services company in a referral to the Upper Tribunal ([2017] UKUT 210 (TCC)) and appeal to the Court of Appeal.  The referral was concerned with whether the client should be named in two FCA Decision Notices which made findings against third parties and various consequent publication and privacy issues.
• Clare appeared for the solicitor in Case Ref. 11399 (Mashru). The focus of the case was on whether the solicitor had used the client account as a banking facility, had paid sufficient regard to compliance with the Money Laundering Regulations and had adequately supervised a solicitor who he knew to be subject to an ongoing SRA investigation. The case was dismissed.
• Clare was also instructed to act for the solicitor in Case Ref. 1137 (Devine), which involved allegations of using a client account as a banking facility, improper retention of client funds and acting where there was, or was a significant risk of, a conflict of interest. Prior to the hearing, the solicitor and the SRA agreed a statement of facts and a suggested outcome. The SDT took the opportunity at the hearing to provide guidance on the proper procedure to be adopted in those circumstances.

Cases

“She is quick to get to the real issues of the dispute, provides concise advice, and is very good with clients when difficult advice needs to be delivered.” (Legal 500, 2022)

“Clare has had a great year and she is very reliable.” “She is very robust in her views and doesn’t sit on the fence.” (Chambers & Partners, 2022)

“Firm in her view, all over the detail and one of my top three seniors. She is superb both on her feet and on paper, and delivers superb results.” (Legal 500, 2021)

“A go-to senior barrister who is more than capable of dealing with heavyweight cases.” “She’s completely on top of the technical legal arguments in cases.” (Chambers & Partners, 2021)

“A formidable opponent because of her robust style in written and oral advocacy and in negotiations.” (Legal 500, 2020)

“She is extremely good.“ (Chambers & Partners, 2020)

“Responsive, bright and provides excellent advice.” (Legal 500, 2019)

“She has good judgement and is technically excellent. A true team player.” “The quality of her written work is very high and she is a delight to deal with.” “Very bright and client-friendly.” (Chambers & Partners, 2019)

Clare’s practice includes a substantial insurance element. She has appeared three times in the Supreme Court in insurance cases including, most recently, in the FCA Test Litigation.  In 2020 Clare was shortlisted by Chambers & Partners for “Insurance Junior of the Year”.

Professional Indemnity Insurance

With extensive experience in both professional liability and insurance matters, Clare is frequently instructed to advise in respect of non-disclosure, aggregation, successor practice and the interpretation of professional indemnity policies. Her instructions have ranged across a broad range of professions including solicitors, mortgage intermediaries, surveyors and debt recovery agents. Clare has particular interest in, and experience of, dishonesty issues and has acted for both insurers and insureds in relation to such matters.

Clare (led by Mark Cannon QC) appeared for the successful insurers in the Supreme Court case of Impact Funding Solutions Limited v AIG Europe Limited [2016] UKSC 57; [2017] AC 73. Impact considered the ambit of the “trade debts” exclusion in solicitors’ professional indemnity policies and whether it excluded a solicitor’s liability to a disbursement funding provider. The Supreme Court also gave important guidance on the construction of clauses which, while worded in terms of exclusion, do no more than to define the extent of the liability or duty to which one party of a contract is to be subject.

Other cases in this area include:

• Advising a professional indemnity insurer following a claim against its former insured arising out of unauthorised withdrawals being made from client account leading to a claim worth about £1million.
• Advising and acting for an insured valuer in an action against its professional indemnity insurers arising out of the scope of notifications made in the course of a policy year.
• Advising reinsurers on a claim (said to be worth £40million) as to whether a claim has been properly notified as a circumstance given the wording of the underlying Financial Institutions Policy.
• Advising and acting for an insurer in an arbitration concerned with whether a notification was of a specific number of transactions or was a “can of worms” type notification.
• Acting for a solicitor against whom allegations of fraud, and claims for reimbursement, have been made by insurers who provided cover in three successive years.
• Acting for an insurer (led by Justin Fenwick QC) in an arbitration to determine who had first been notified of a number of claims with a value of about £2million. The case turned on whether, in the circumstances of this case, file requests by a lender comprised a notification of circumstances.
• Acting for an insurer (led by Justin Fenwick QC) in an arbitration to determine which insurer was on risk for a number of claims which were said to have been notified as part of a “can of worms” notification to insurers.
• Acting for a professional indemnity insurer (led by Justin Fenwick QC) in a claim against their former insured: Travelers Insurance Co Ltd & Denton Wilde Sapte v Advani [2012] EWHC 623. The case was concerned with whether the former employee had acted fraudulently so as to entitle the insurer to recover costs which they had expended in defending both the former employee and her then employer in a previous action.
• Acting for a valuer’s professional indemnity insurer initially (alone) to advise on the scope of the cover and the year which was potentially on risk and then (led by the then Sue Carr QC) to advise on whether insurers were entitled to decline cover to the insureds for dishonestly failing to disclose the existence of a potential claim prior to the renewal of the policy.

Other Forms of Insurance

Clare is frequently instructed to act for insurers/insured in cases arising out of other types of policies and is familiar with the particular issues around other specialist areas of insurance such as D&O, Motor Trade, Personal Accident, EL/PL and Fire policies.

Cases include:

• Acting (led by David Turner QC) for RSA in the FCA Test Case about the response of non-damage business interruption extensions to the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Advising, pursuant to the Insurance Act 2015, on whether a fair presentation of the risk had been given and, if it had not, whether the insurer was entitled to avoid the contract the consequence of which would be that the insured was uninsured for an employee’s high value personal injury claim.
• Providing an opinion on English Law to the Belgian Court on a number of issues including in particular the operation of the Third Party (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 in relation to a claim arising out of a fire in a steam boiler.
• Advising an insurer under a Design and Construct Professional Indemnity Policy as to whether the policy covered claims for liquidated damages arising out of construction disputes.
• In 2012, the Supreme Court handed down judgment in the Employers’ Liability Policy Trigger Litigation. This was the successful culmination of several years work during which Clare (led by the then Jeremy Stuart-Smith QC and Leigh-Ann Mulcahy QC) had represented Zurich Insurance Company at a 9 week trial in front of Burton J, a 3 week hearing before the Court of Appeal and a 2 week hearing in the Supreme Court. The case was concerned with the proper interpretation of employers’ liability policies which were written on an “injury sustained” or “disease contracted” basis and whether they would respond to mesothelioma claims at the time of inhalation or when the tumour developed. The Supreme Court found, by a majority, that such policies should respond at the date of inhalation.
• Since Trigger Clare has been instructed to act on other matters concerning notifications to EL and PL insurers.

Clare is the current editor of the “Members and Managing Agents at Lloyd’s” chapter in Jackson & Powell. She regularly gives talks and seminars on insurance law.

Cases

Clare is a formally accredited mediator. She has attended numerous mediations as an advocate and is a great believer in the power of mediation to settle even those cases which, on the face of it, appear to be intractable. As a mediator, she is able to combine her professional expertise with an understanding of the realities of litigation to help parties resolve their disputes.

“Clare is an absolute, standout individual in this field.”  (Legal 500, 2022)

“Very sharp on the details; she is more than a match for more senior leading counsel.” “She is fantastic – the first name we contact for anything difficult or complicated.” “Incredibly good. She’s very practical, pragmatic and commercial. She’s good on her feet and prepared to be robust when she needs to. Clare is a delight to work with.” (Chambers & Partners, 2022)

“She is great on her feet and equally so on paper: an all-round star. Surely a silk to be. Clients and the court love her, and so do her solicitors.” (Legal 500, 2021)

“She has excellent cross-examination skills and is very detailed and thorough with her writing. A great courtroom performer.” “She is absolutely steeped in professional negligence law.” (Chambers & Partners, 2021)

“She is firm, incisive and has the ear of the court.” (Legal 500, 2020)

“A formidable junior who is relentlessly good at what she does.” “She comes up with an innovative approach to get a fantastic result, and is very user-friendly.” “She is very good at making herself available, is very responsive and understands the pressures that solicitors might be under.” (Chambers & Partners, 2020)

“She is very down-to-earth, a great communicator, and inspires confidence in the client.” “She provides a first-class service – thoroughly recommended.” (Chambers & Partners, 2019)

“She mixes great commercial acumen with an excellent grasp of black letter law.” (Legal 500, 2019)

“Reliable, thorough and good from the start of a claim through to trial. “One of the best professional negligence juniors. Extremely trustworthy and super-fast.” (Chambers & Partners, 2018)

“She provides robust and commercial advice, and is very tenacious.” (Legal 500, 2017)

“She’s extremely intelligent, and gives her advice in a very understandable way” and “She is fantastic to work with and quickly grasps the detail in large cases” (Chambers & Partners, 2017)

“She provides probably the best-drafted written advice of any junior at the Bar” and “is admired by sources who value her “high intellect” (Who’s Who Legal, 2017)

Clare specialises in all areas of professional liability with particular emphasis on lawyers, valuers, accountants and auditors, and insurance brokers. She is an experienced advocate who gets to grips quickly with what is really at issue and takes a tough line to achieve the best outcome for her client.  In 2019 she received the Chambers & Partners award for “Professional Negligence Junior of the Year”.

Clare has acted for both Claimants and Defendants in product liability cases. Her experience includes:

• Clare was instructed in a number of cases (led by David Turner QC) which arise from the supply of allegedly defective concrete for use in a variety of major construction projects.
• Acting for the Defendant in a flooding claim arising out of a faulty connection within a fridge.
• Acting for a Claimant in a flooding claim arising out of the failure of a water softener due to the joint between two parts within the softener having been wrongly designed/manufactured.
• Acting for a Defendant in a claim arising out of the installation of faulty oil tanks and a subsequent, substantial, oil leak.
• Acting for a Claimant vehicle repair centre in a fire claim arising out of the failure of a spray booth used to respray vehicles.
• Acting for a well known electrical retailer in a fire claim which fire is said to have started by reason of a faulty dishwasher which they supplied.

Clare has substantial experience in property damage claims involving such things as floods, fires, subsidence and construction works. Her experience includes:

• Clare was instructed in a number of cases (led by David Turner QC) which arose from the supply of allegedly defective concrete for use in a variety of major construction projects.
• Acting on a variety of claims, for both Claimants and Defendants, and in both a domestic and commercial context, arising out of floods which are said to be due to defective plumbing works.
• Acting for a garage owner whose garage was flooded when a culvert owned by a local authority
• Acting for a claimant in a claim arising out of the destruction of part of the highway following a road traffic accident.
• Acting for a number of claimants in the Buncefield litigation including a substantial claim for insured and uninsured losses by a haulage company and other claims which involved complex business interruption issues.

In addition Clare has substantial expertise in nuisance claims, particularly involving multiple parties. Recent examples of cases of this nature are:

• Defending a claim (led by Jamie Smith QC) made by about 300 claimants arising out of dust, noise and odour said to be emanating from an industrial unit in Kent.
• Defending a claim made by about 100 claimants in relation to the smell alleged to be emanating from a vegetable processing unit.