Adam Heppinstall#2050

Adam Heppinstall

Adam is a common law/commercial Barrister with a very wide range of clients and specialisms. As Junior Counsel to the Crown since 2004 he has advised and represented a very large number of public bodies on a range of issues. These include local authorities, housing associations, charities, social enterprises and relating organisations. He also advises (where there is no conflict) companies and businesses contracting or otherwise interacting with public bodies, whether in relation to procurement, information law or general contractual issues. His practice covers public, regulatory and information law as well as personal injury, employment and more general commercial law issues. He has environmental, health & safety, trading standards, inquests, flooding and water drainage, chemical and pharmaceutical and traffic commissioner regulatory experience. He has appeared in most Chambers of the First-tier and Upper Tribunals. The Legal 500 describe Adam as “Very much a silk in waiting with fantastic client and people skills” and Chambers UK say that “He is extremely calm and knowledgeable and has excellent judgement. He is a terrific team player; he rolls his sleeves up and gets into the detail” and as “tactically astute” and “the “very bright” Adam Heppinstall who provides ‘clear, sensible advice’ and brings “a spirited approach to his cases”. He was a Judicial Assistant to the Court of Appeal. He is the Vice-Chair of a local housing association (Greenwich Housing Society.) He lives in Dulwich with his two children and two labradors.

Contributed to

21

An introductory guide to damages in judicial review
An introductory guide to damages in judicial review
Practice notes

This Practice Note provides an introductory guide to applications for damages in judicial review proceedings, with reference to examples from case law. It examines the circumstances in which an application for damages may arise and the considerations for a public authority dealing with an application. It also includes a checklist summarising the key considerations for defending a damages claim in judicial review proceedings.

Avoiding a judicial review
Avoiding a judicial review
Practice notes

This Practice Note sets out some practical tips for a public body to consider during the decision-making process, with a view to reducing the risk of challenge by judicial review. Both robust decision-making processes and prompt handling of claims pre-action and through alternative dispute resolution will save time and costs downstream. This Practice Note also deals with the steps a public body can take to protect itself and includes a checklist of matters of good practice to help reduce successful permission applications.

Costs for judicial review—general principles
Costs for judicial review—general principles
Practice notes

This Practice Note sets out the general position on costs in judicial review proceedings with reference to some specific examples such as cases involving official bodies and immigration cases.

Costs for judicial review—protective costs orders (PCOs), judicial review costs capping orders (JRCCOs) and interveners
Costs for judicial review—protective costs orders (PCOs), judicial review costs capping orders (JRCCOs) and interveners
Practice notes

This Practice Note considers the principles and procedure for the issuing of protective costs orders (PCOs) in public law proceedings and judicial review costs capping orders (JRCCOs), which replaced PCOs for judicial review claims in 2016. It also explains the rules on costs for interveners in judicial review proceedings.

Duty of candour and disclosure requirements in judicial review
Duty of candour and disclosure requirements in judicial review
Practice notes

This Practice Note examines the duty of candour in judicial review, with a particular focus on the defendant’s obligations. All parties to judicial review proceedings are under a general duty of candour to disclose facts and information relevant to the proceedings. The general duty of candour places a particular burden on public authorities to evidence relevant information in order for the court to evaluate the facts, without being reminded to do so. Failure to disclose, even where the information will assist the claimant’s case, can lead to specific disclosure requests and affect the outcome of the case including punitive cost orders.

Judicial review time limits—extensions and urgent cases
Judicial review time limits—extensions and urgent cases
Practice notes

This Practice Note explores the time limits for judicial review. In particular, it looks at the circumstances in which the Administrative Court has agreed to hearing cases that are out of time, allowing applications for extensions and the circumstances for urgent judicial review cases.

Practice Areas

Panels

  • Case Analysis Panel
  • Q&A Panel

Qualified Year

  • 1999

Membership

  • ALBA
  • COMBAR
  • LCCBA
  • ARDL
  • ELBA
  • ELA
  • PBA
  • Member, UK Constitutional Law Association, Associate Fellow, Society of Advanced Legal Studies, Member, Medico-Legal Society, Royal Society of Medicine (Senior Associate), Assoc. CIPD

Education

  • MA (Oxon) Balliol College, Oxford

If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.