Melody Hadfield

Professional discipline, wasted costs and contempt proceedings

Melody has substantial experience in assisting lawyers and other professionals accused of wrongdoing or facing contempt proceedings.

Her previous instructions in this area include:

• R (on the application of Frederick Ayinde) v London Borough of Haringey [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin). Acting for the barrister in proceedings arising from the citation, in grounds of judicial review, of 5 non-existent cases. This was the first case in which the High Court issued guidance on the use of AI for legal research.
• Acting as junior counsel for a prominent firm of solicitors and two partners in relation to an investigation by the Administrative Court of a breach of a judgment embargo, where the court considered whether to institute contempt proceedings under CPR 81.6(1).
• Defending a barrister in contempt proceedings where it was alleged that the barrister had mislead the court in the course of a service charge dispute.
• Assisting a barrister with an appeal to the Court of Appeal against a wasted costs order.
• Acting for a senior partner of a law firm in connection with an investigation by the SRA in respect of disclosure issues which arose in the course of a lengthy, high-profile group litigation action.
• Assisting a partner in a firm of accountants in connection with an investigation by the ICAEW relating to alleged conflicts of interest, bias and a breach of anti-money laundering regulations.

Melody has extensive knowledge of the law relating to contempt and wasted costs. Her article on the wasted costs jurisdiction can be found here: Wasted Costs: A Whistle Stop Tour.

Professional negligence

Melody acts in claims against solicitors, barristers, accountants, auditors, insurance brokers, financial advisers and surveyors.

Claims against lawyers are a significant feature in her practice. She is well-versed in issues arising commonly in such claims including limitation and scope of duty.  She also has expertise in claims concerning the ambit of a solicitor’s retainer – this is a topic of particular interest to Melody. Her analysis of solicitors’ duties can be found here: Solicitors’ Duties: Five Key Principles.

Melody has particular experience with claims against lawyers arising from underlying commercial transactions, family court proceedings and claims arising in the conveyancing context (including claims relating to boundary issues, planning permission, rent review, service charge terms and land registry restrictions).

She has acted in a number of disputes involving multiple parties and additional claims, as well as negligence claims arising against a backdrop of (allegedly) fraudulent transactions.

Specific examples of her current and previous instructions are set out below:

• Acting for the defendant solicitors in a High Court claim by a former client for damages in excess of £6 million. The proceedings relate to the firm’s conduct of a number of arbitrations for disputes arising from an agreement about the use of a 3D holographic technology.
• Seeking reverse summary judgment, on abuse of process grounds, on behalf of the defendant solicitors, in a claim in the High Court by a former client who alleged that the firm were negligent in their conduct of family court proceedings (relating to the Children’s Act 1989).
• Henderson & Jones Limited v Ross. Assisting defendant solicitors with a claim against them in negligence arising from their involvement in the restructure of a group of companies, where it was alleged that they ought to have advised that the restructure comprised a transaction defrauding creditors under s.423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (reported at [2023] EWHC 1276 (Ch)).
• Ashraf v Lester Dominic Solicitors & Ors [2022] EWHC 621 (Ch). Acting as junior counsel for a firm of solicitors in appeal in the High Court arising in connection with alleged conveyancing fraud. The claim raised a novel issue concerning duties owed by solicitors to non-clients.
• Kingsley Napley LLP v Harris [2021] EWHC 901 (QB). Acting as junior counsel for solicitors, who successfully resisted a substantial counterclaim brought by the Defendant in relation to the firm’s conduct of financial remedy proceedings and other matters.
• Assisting a solicitor with an application in the Queen’s Bench Division, regarding non-compliance with an order for disclosure, raising issues concerning the interpretation of the order and principles governing solicitors’ liens.
• Defending a High Court claim against an accountancy practice where it was alleged that the practice had provided negligent advice in regard to whether the client’s supplies were subject to VAT. The proceedings raise issues pertaining to limitation and continuing duties, mitigation and illegality.
• Sole counsel defending a £1.1 million claim brought by the Claimant against an accountancy practice and its director, alleging negligent advice and negligent misstatement in relation to a failed investment; raising issues concerning directors’ duties, agency and authority.
• Sole counsel for a firm of solicitors in High Court proceedings, where the claimant alleged that the defendant conveyancing solicitors had failed to advise her on the effect of an overage agreement.
• Pleading a claim against insurance brokers following the theft of a luxury vehicle, where insurers had declined cover on the grounds that when the insurance was placed, the Claimant materially misrepresented the identity of the main user of the vehicle and the location at which it was kept.
• Junior counsel for insurance brokers in a policyholder’s £8.2million claim against insurers and brokers to recover losses allegedly sustained following a fire at a hotel in Scotland. The proceedings raise issues concerning misrepresentation/non-disclosure and waiver.
• Acting for a valuation panel management company in claims by a bridging finance lender against the company and a surveyor, , alleging negligence and breach of contract in respect of the valuation of a residential property. The proceedings raised issues regarding the identity of contracting parties and terms of contract.
• Assisting with proceedings brought by a show jumping trainer against a farrier for damages in excess of £2 million, arising out of the negligent diagnosis and treatment of an international show jumping horse.