Prashant Popat KC

“An esteemed silk specialising in health and safety and product liability cases…He is nationally acclaimed for his ability to successfully undertake the most complex cases…”

Chambers UK 2021

Call: 1992
Silk: 2008

Tel:: +44 (0)20 7583 9020
Email:: clerks@hendersonchambers.co.uk

Prashant Popat KC is a leading specialist in the areas of product liability and group / class actions and health & safety. He combines his work in these areas with a broad commercial litigation practice and significant inquests and public inquiries. Over the past three decades Prashant has been retained in some of the largest and most significant cases in his fields of expertise and his work sector experience includes healthcare, cosmetic surgery, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, rail, aviation, oil and gas, motor vehicles, construction and demolition, mining, telecommunications, manufacturing, fire and rescue.

Prashant is amongst the very few silks at the Bar who can genuinely claim to have a practice that combines heavyweight civil and commercial work with substantial regulatory criminal trials. He is as comfortable addressing appellate Courts on the finer points of the law governing civil liability for consumer products, as he is addressing a jury in a case of corporate manslaughter following a public disaster.

He has been ranked for many years in the highest categories by the legal directories. He is “one of the silks of choice – he’s just exceptional. He has a very sharp brain and he’s great on his feet.” (C&P 2024). Additionally, he is described as “extremely able…extremely good with clients in crisis situations (and as) the first person I would go to”.

In the field of product liability “he is calm and insightful, yet robust, an approach which works well in court and with clients. He is a definite ‘go-to’ for any complex product liability…matter” (C&P 2024). He is “widely regarded as one of the foremost product liability specialists at the Bar” (C&P 2021) and described as “a very astute advocate with an excellent client manner” who is “amazingly dedicated and clever.” (C&P 2023). Likewise Legal 500 (2024) says of him “Prashant is superb and nothing puts him off his stride. He is first class with clients who love his considered and measured style.” He is described (Legal 500 2023) as “extremely capable, very good with clients” and that he “quickly masters voluminous and complex documentation-all in all first rate”.

His product liability work encompasses unitary actions and some of the largest and most involved group actions ever to proceed through the English legal system, including the NOx emissions litigation. In these mass claims he has acted for global producers and suppliers, including the largest corporations in the world, in defending claims relating to allegedly defective medical devices (respirators, hip implants, breast implants), pharmaceuticals and vaccines (Sabril, Seroxat, MMR, HiB, Vioxx, Covid-19) and products (motor vehicles, helicopters, mobile phones). In the area of group litigation the directories say his “attention to detail is second to none” and that he is “an amazingly dedicated and clever barrister” as well as a “very good advocate”.

In the field of health and safety Prashant has been awarded ‘Corporate Crime Silk of the Year’ by Legal 500 and twice been awarded ‘Health and Safety Silk of the Year’ by C&P. He is listed by C&P as a Star Individual and described by Legal 500 as “The leading most impressive advocate for health and safety, public inquiries, and inquests. Head and shoulders above all contemporaries”. He is a silk of choice for large corporate entities and C&P says of him “Prashant’s ability of dealing with cases involving large corporates is second to none”. Similarly, Legal 500 (2023) say that he is “the best in his field and is very persuasive with his cerebral attention to detail which Judge’s and clients respect and appreciate”. His health and safety practice involves trials and sentencing hearings at all levels of criminal courts, as well as inquests and inquiries, following workplace fatalities and public disasters such as Ladbroke Grove, Buncefield and Grenfell.

In addition to the high-profile rail public inquiries, Prashant has been instructed in relation to inquiries and inquests in a variety of fields, including the Grenfell Inquiry, the Covid-19 Inquiry, the Cranston Inquiry into migrant deaths, the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry and the BP In Amenas terrorist attack inquests. This work has led Legal 500 (2023) to say he is “excellent with clients and his advocacy skills are superb. He is extremely intelligent and a pleasure to work with – a rare combination”. C&P (2023) says that in this area of practice “Prashant is really good on the detail; he is very responsive and is good at condensing a lot of information down to the key points”.

Over many years he has also conducted the defence of personal injury claims, including in relation to incidents on the mainline railways, DLR, London Underground and arising from disasters such as the Leicester City FC helicopter crash and care home fatalities. He has acted in related commercial disputes and regulatory prosecutions. For his work generally, Legal 500 (2024) says he is “superb and nothing puts him off his stride. He is first class with clients who love his considered and measured style” and C&P (2024) says “he is one of the silks of choice – he’s just exceptional. He has a very sharp brain and he’s great on his feet”.

For more information about the way barristers at Henderson Chambers work, including our terms of engagement, fee transparency statement and our complaints process, please click here. Barristers are regulated by the Bar Standards Board.

Please click here for a copy of Prashant Popat’s privacy policy.

Expertise

Product Liability & Group Actions

Prashant’s product liability and group action expertise encompasses many of the largest, most involved and high-profile cases of the past 20 years. These include litigation concerning: VW NOx emissions, Covid-19 vaccine, Metal-on Metal hip implants, PIP breast implants, Thalidomide, Seroxat, MMR, Sabril, Benzodiazepines and Norplant. His commercial product liability practice includes Commercial Court and KBD litigation and arbitrations concerning a variety of products, including gastric bands, fire appliances, motor vehicles and aviation products, including the Leicester City FC helicopter crash and the Ethiopian Airlines fire.

He is one of the most experienced group litigation practitioners practicing in England and Wales. His group action work has encompassed defending a range of product liability claims. These include claims by consumers against producers in relation to any type of product from medical devices to pharmaceuticals to lifestyle products and usually involve tens of thousands of claims for many millions of pounds of damages.

Prashant’s products related work also includes commercial disputes between parties in a supply chain, encompassing claims in contract, tort and by reason of breach of statutory obligations.

His non-contentious work has encompassed advising companies on compliance with their obligations under consumer protection legislation and in relation to product safety recalls. This advice has been given in relation to a variety of products and industries (e.g. respirators; pharmaceuticals; motor vehicles; mobile telephones; bathroom products).

Prashant has been involved in some of the leading reported cases in this field, including Court of Appeal decisions on the substitution of parties after the expiry of the 10 year long stop provided by the Product Liability Directive (Re: Horne Roberts) and the seminal costs sharing appeal (Sayers v Smith Kline Beecham) and the European Court of Justice and House of Lords/Supreme Court decisions in O’Byrne v Sanofi-Aventis.

He is the co-editor of the “International Product Law Manual” published by Kluwer.

Representative cases

grid list

Various v VWAG, Audi et al (ongoing)
Group action against manufacturers of allegedly affected vehicles relating to NOx emissions. Multi-GLO litigation involving over 1 million claims against more than 1,000 manufacturers, suppliers and authorised dealers. Hearings include:
- Pan-NOx hearing before President of Kings Bench Division, Cockerill and Constable JJ, Senior Master Cook. (December 2023)
- GLO hearing before Senior Master Cook (January 2024)
- Pan-NOx CMC before Cockerill and Constable JJ (March 2024)
Various v Astra-Zeneca (ongoing)

Representing Astra-Zeneca in relation to litigation and Public Inquiry relating to Covid-19 vaccine.
Re Leonardo S.p.a (ongoing)

Representing helicopter manufacturer in relation to litigation arising from multi-fatality helicopter crash at Leicester City FC.
Re manufacturer of respirators (2024)

Representing respirator manufacturer in connection with regulatory action and product safety recall.
Crossley v VWAG, Audi et al
Group action against manufacturers of affected vehicles. Various decisions including:
- Crossley v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft [2021] EWHC 3444 (QB): Successfully defending the Claimants’ summary judgment and strike out application in respect of issues of satisfactory quality contractual claims.
- Crossley v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft [2020] EWHC 783 (QB): Trial of a preliminary issue within VW NOx Emissions Litigation as to meaning of “defeat device” in EU legislation.
- Crossley v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft [2019] EWHC 698 (QB): Determination of an application for a preliminary issues trial in VW NOx Emissions Litigation
- VW Nox Emissions Group Litigation [2018] EWHC 2308: Determination of application for costs order arising from premature application for GLO
Martin Hart & Ors v Studio E & Ors:

Multiple Claimants have issued proceedings arising from the Grenfell fire.
Lambeth v WH Smith

Prosecution for breach of food safety regulations.
John and ors v BP Plc et al

Multi party action against BP companies arising from terrorist attack in Algeria. Decisions including:

• Correa v BP Plc [2019] EWHC 232 (QB): Approval hearing in multi-party litigation against BP companies arising from terrorist attack in Algeria
Various v Smith & Nephew

Multi-party claims against manufacturer of metal on metal hip implants. Decisions including:

• Gee v De Puy International [2018] EWHV 1208 (QB): Determination of metal on metal hip implant claims (submissions made on behalf of non-party)
Norfolk County Council v Emergency One

(2018): Commercial sale of goods/supply chain dispute concerning liability for alleged defective components in fire appliance.
Various v Cloverleaf

Group action against supplier of PIP breast implants. Decisions including:

• XYZ v Various Companies (2014) EWHC 4056: Application to join insurers in litigation arising from PIP breast implants
Various v GlaxoSmithKline

(unreported): Group action against manufacturers of Seroxat
Various v SmithKlineBeecham
Group action against manufacturer of MMR vaccine. Decisions including:
- Sayers & Ors v Smithkline Beecham Plc & Ors (2006) EWHC 84 (QB)
- Afrika & Ors v Cape Plc & Ors (2001) EWCA Civ 2027
- Smithkline Beecham Plc & Anor v Horne-Roberts (2001) EWCA Civ 2006
O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur

various decisions arising out of claim against vaccine manufacturer including:

• OB v Aventis Pasteur SA (2010) UKSC 23
• Aventis Pasteur (2009) EUECJ C-358/08

Health & Safety

Prashant has been instructed by defendants in many of the largest, high profile health and safety cases of recent times. These have included corporate and individual manslaughter prosecutions such as R v Hawkins (Eastbourne Pier fall), R v MNS (Glesion mine flooding), R v Woodward (Atherstone warehouse fire), R v Ward (demolition collapse), R v CAV (collapse of aviation materials), R v. Network Rail (Hatfield rail disaster) and R v Railtrack (Slade Lane disaster). Prashant’s work for defendants charged with breaches of HSWA 1974 has included hundreds of cases including R v Stonegate (bar crushing incident), R v BMI (fatal electrocution), R v Rogers (Hanover Square window frame collapse), R v BDS (Chevron refinery explosion), R v Falcon Cranes (crane collapse), R v HOSL (Buncefield fire), R v Network Rail (Ladbroke Grove, Potters Bar, Grayrigg and Southall disasters) and R v Davison (mine poisoning). His work has encompassed incidents in industries including construction, transport, retail, oil and gas, manufacturing and, mining. His list of clients includes BT, BP, Laing O’Rourke, Network Rail, McCain, Goldman Sachs, Amey, Siemens, Berkeley Group, Thames Water and Tarmac. He is also instructed in a relation to a number of ongoing investigations including those following the Grenfell fire and the Didcot Power Station collapse.

In addition to private sector companies, his public sector clients have included Hertfordshire Fire Service and the Metropolitan Police Authority.

Prashant has been recognized as the Legal 500 Corporate Crime Silk of the Year in 2023 and twice been awarded the title of Health and Safety Silk of the year by Chambers & Partners, and been nominated on two other occasions. He was a founding and committee member of the Health & Safety Lawyers’ Association.

Representative cases

grid list

Cheshire FRS v WSP and ors (ongoing)

Prosecution under Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order of various parties following fire at retirement home.
R v Falcon Cranes (ongoing)

HSWA prosecution of crane erector following multi-fatality incident.
HSE v BAM Nuttall (ongoing)

HSWA prosecution of construction company following fatal drowning of an employee.
HSE v BMI (2023)

HSWA trial of hospital operator following fatal electrocution incident.
Durham CC v Stonegate (2023)

HSWA trial of bar operator following fatal incident involving a visitor.
ORR v Siemens (2022)

HSWA prosecution following fatality at Old Oak Common Depot.
ORR v Amey (2022)

HSWA prosecution following serious incident on the railways.
R v Hawkins (2021)

Manslaughter and HSWA trial arising from incident at Eastbourne Pier.
HSE v Leys School (2021)

Sentencing hearing of independent school.
ORR v Network Rail (2021

Sentencing hearing of Network Rail following incident at electrical sub-station.
ORR v Renown (2020)

HSWA trial arising from workplace fatigue incident.
R v Intertain (2020)

Sentencing hearing following incident at Walkabout pub.
ORR v Network Rail (2018)

HSWA trial following workplace incident at manned level crossing.
R v Hyatt (2019)

Sentencing hearing of hotel management company following explosion at Churchill Hotel.
R v Oliver Connell & Sons (2019)

Sentencing hearing following prosecution arising from death of construction worker.
R v British Cycling (2018)

HSWA trial arising from incident at sporting event.
R v BDA (2018)

Sentencing hearing following explosion at Chevron’s Pembrokeshire oil refinery.
R v St George City Limited (2018)

Sentencing hearing following incident on construction site.
R v Rogers (2017)

HSWA trial following Hanover Square window frame collapse.
R v Harsco (2017)

HSWA trial following fatality at Tata plant in Scunthorpe.
R v Tarmac (2017)

Sentencing hearing following fatality at cement plant.
R v McCain Foods (2016)

Sentencing hearing following fatality at manufacturing plant.
HSE v Averies (2016)

Environment Agency prosecution following fires in Swindon.
ORR v Network Rail (2016)

Sentencing hearing following breach of Improvement Notice concerning lineside cabinets.
R v CAV (2015)

Corporate manslaughter trial following fatality at aerospace facility.
R v 777 Demolition (2015)

HSWA trial.
R v CTAS (2015) EWCA Crim 1620

HSWA trial.
R v MNS (2014)

Corporate manslaughter trial following Glesion mine collapse.
R v MNS (2014)

Corporate manslaughter trial following Glesion mine collapse.
R v Sellafield (2014) EWCA Crim 49

HSWA sentencing appeal.

Public Inquiries & Inquests

Prashant has been retained in many high-profile public inquiries and a number of substantial inquests.

His practice in this area involves advising and representing clients in connection with all aspects of the procedures that can follow an incident leading to an inquest or public inquiry.

This experience includes the Post Office Horizon-IT inquiry Grenfell public inquiry, the In Amenas terrorist attack inquest, the inquest into the death of a young offender at Cookham Wood YOI and the inquests and/or public inquiries following the disasters at Southall, Ladbroke Grove, Hatfield, Lambrigg and Potters Bar. Prashant is currently instructed to assist parties with a significant interest in the Covid-19 inquiry, the Leicester City FC inquests and the Cranston Inquiry. He has also appeared at inquests for Interested Persons following accidents or deaths at work in industries including gas, manufacturing, mining, oil exploration, sugar refining, construction, retailing and agricultural.

In addition to private sector companies, he advises and represents public sector organisations in such inquiries and inquests, including accidents and incidents concerning migrant deaths, Fire Service personnel and patients at NHS hospitals. He also appeared in the case of R v Lin and others concerning the extent of the State’s Article 2 obligations to hold a public inquiry.

The directories say he is “The leading most impressive advocate for health and safety, public inquiries, and inquests. Head and shoulders above all contemporaries” and A leading advocate for inquests and inquiries. He pays extraordinary attention to detail and is an expert in his field. “ (C&P 2024). Further, that he is ‘Excellent with clients and his advocacy skills are superb. He is extremely intelligent and a pleasure to work with – a rare combination.’ (C&P 2023)

Representative cases

grid list

Covid-19 Inquiry (ongoing)

Acting for Astra-Zeneca in relation to Covid-19 vaccine.
Post-Office Horizon IT Inquiry (ongoing)

Representing senior former director.
Cranston Inquiry (ongoing)

Representing Home Office into deaths of migrants in a small boat crossing.
Leicester FC inquests (ongoing)

Representing manufacturer of helicopter following multi-fatality helicopter crash involving owner of Leicester City FC.
Re Grenfell fire (ongoing)

Public Inquiry.
Re Begum (2022)

Inquest following fatality on a smart motorway.
Re Gervais (2022)

Inquest following fatality of a passenger at a train station.
Re Rehan (2022)

Inquest following death of train driver at depot.
Re Roper (2021)

Inquest into death of train passenger.
Re Garrett (2020)

Inquest following death of spectator at cycling event.
Re Parker (2019)

Inquest following death of employee at Heathrow Express depot.
Re Stocker (2019)

Inquest following death of electrical technician at work in private hospital.
Re Henderson and Shaw (2019)

Inquest following double fatality on A road being maintained by Kier.
Re Cameron (2019)

Inquest following death of level crossing user.
Re In Amenas (2014)

Inquests following terrorist attack at oil facility in Algeria (inquest)
Re Kelly (2014)

Inquest following death in custody.
Re Ladbroke Grove; Re Southall

Public Inquiries.
Re Potters Bar; Re Grayrigg

Inquests.
Lin & Ors, R (on the application of) v. Secretary of State for Transport [2006]

EWHC 2575 (Admin)

Commercial

Prashant is a leading specialist in the area of commercial disputes, particularly concerning liability in respect of defective products. Over the past 2 decades Prashant has been retained in numerous significant commercial cases concerning products including the PIP Breast Implant Litigation, the Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant Litigation and the VW NOx Emissions Litigation and claims arising from the Grenfell fire and from the helicopter crash at Leicester City FC. Prashant draws on a depth of experience in disputes as between entities in complex chains of manufacture and supply.

Prashant’s commercial practice has also seen him acting in relation to significant product recalls, consequential damage claims and recovery claims. These have covered many different products and industries including aviation, gastric bands, food, motor vehicles, manufacturing, automobiles and medical research.

Prashant has advised and represented a major rail infrastructure company in the commercial recovery actions following numerous train disasters. These multi million pound claims have involved actions brought between rail industry parties seeking compensation, contributions and indemnities under the contractual arrangements governing the privatised rail industry in respect of property damage, loss of profits and penalty payments.

In these and many other cases Prashant has been instructed by insurers seeking or resisting recovery of insured losses.

Representative cases

grid list

Re Leonardo S.p.a (ongoing)

Representing helicopter manufacturer in relation to litigation arising from multi-fatality helicopter crash at Leicester City FC.
Drummond v Keolis Amey Docklands (2023)

Trial scheduled in 2023 following claim for damages arising out of trespasser being struck by train on the DLR
Crossley v VWAG, Audi et al
Group action against manufacturers of affected vehicles. Various decisions including:
- Crossley v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft [2021] EWHC 3444 (QB): Successfully defending the Claimants’ summary judgment and strike out application in respect of issues of satisfactory quality contractual claims.
- Crossley v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft [2020] EWHC 783 (QB): Trial of a preliminary issue within VW NOx Emissions Litigation as to meaning of “defeat device” in EU legislation.
- Crossley v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft [2019] EWHC 698 (QB): Determination of an application for a preliminary issues trial in VW NOx Emissions Litigation
- VW Nox Emissions Group Litigation [2018] EWHC 2308: Determination of application for costs order arising from premature application for GLO
Various Claimants v Studio E (Re Grenfell fire) (ongoing)

Various claims brought by different parties against architects of refurbished Grenfell tower.
Bantoft v Priory Group (ongoing)

Claims against Priory Hospital.
Fevore v Network Rail (2021)

Claim for losses arising from oil spillage adjactent to Network Rail land.
Estrada & ors v BP plc & ors (2019)

Consolidated actions brought by employees and contractors against BP for damages arising out of terrorist attack at In Amenas facility in Algeria.
GB Railfreight v Network Rail (2018)

Arbitration between railway parties following train derailment at Loch Treig.
Norfolk County Council v Emergency One (2018)

Commercial sale of goods/supply chain dispute concerning liability for alleged defective components in fire appliance.
Ethiopian Airlines v Honeywell; Honeywell v Tyco (2017)

Claim arising from supply of allegedly defective aviation component.
Re Smith and Nephew Hip Replacement Litigation (2017)

Claims brought against manufacturers of hip replacement prostheses.
Farraj & Anor v. King's Healthcare NHS Trust & Anor

[2006] EWHC 1228 (QB)
Brittain v. Roussel Laboratories Ltd [1998]

EWCA Civ 1832
Heller Global Vendor Finance UK Ltd v. Lancaster [1999]

EWCA Civ 1849.

What the directories say

"He is an expert in group litigation and product liability."
Chambers UK 2025

"Prashant acts very well as a supporting extension to solicitors, making sure that they have what they need to push things forward."
Chambers UK 2025

"He is second to none on group litigation strategy."
Chambers UK 2025

"He is a very experienced group litigator."
Chambers UK 2025

"Prash is a really impressive advocate with great vision for the appropriate case strategy."
Chambers UK 2025

News and articles

Articles - 19th Nov 2024

Alerter by Prashant Popat KC and Noel Dilworth -...

Instructing Prashant Popat KC

If you require help or advice please contact our clerking team

Call +44 (0)20 7583 9020
or email

Appointments

Bencher of Gray’s Inn
King’s Counsel (QC 2008)
Judicial Assistant to the Court of Appeal (1997)
Judicial Assistant to Lord Woolf when Master of the Rolls (1997)

Publications

International Product Law Manual (Kluwer) (2010)
Halsbury’s Laws Civil Procedure (2000)
A Guide to Civil Advocacy (1996)

Memberships

Health & Safety Lawyers’ Association (2005-present)
COMBAR (2004-present)

Education

MA (Oxon), First Class Hons
University Scholar
Baker & McKenzie International Scholar
Gray’s Inn Scholar

Regulatory Information

All members of Chambers are registered with the Bar Standards Board of England and Wales. For our standard contractual terms click here.

For more information about the way barristers at Henderson Chambers work, including our fee transparency statement and our complaints process, please click here.

Bar Council Number: 28477

VAT Registration Number: 564360343

Legal Status: King’s Counsel

Professional Insurance: All members of Chambers have professional liability insurance provided by the Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund Ltd. Territorial coverage is world-wide and subject to the term of the Bar Mutual. Click here for details.

Regulated by the Bar Standards Board.

Cookie	Duration	Description
_GRECAPTCHA	5 months 27 days	This cookie is set by Google. In addition to certain standard Google cookies, reCAPTCHA sets a necessary cookie (_GRECAPTCHA) when executed for the purpose of providing its risk analysis.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-advertisement	1 year	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Advertisement".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional	11 months	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy	11 months	The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.

Cookie	Duration	Description
_gat	1 minute	This cookies is installed by Google Universal Analytics to throttle the request rate to limit the colllection of data on high traffic sites.
YSC	session	This cookies is set by Youtube and is used to track the views of embedded videos.

Cookie	Duration	Description
_ga	2 years	This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
_gid	1 day	This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the website is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages visted in an anonymous form.

Cookie	Duration	Description
IDE	1 year 24 days	Used by Google DoubleClick and stores information about how the user uses the website and any other advertisement before visiting the website. This is used to present users with ads that are relevant to them according to the user profile.
test_cookie	15 minutes	This cookie is set by doubleclick.net. The purpose of the cookie is to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
VISITOR_INFO1_LIVE	5 months 27 days	This cookie is set by Youtube. Used to track the information of the embedded YouTube videos on a website.

Cookie	Duration	Description
CONSENT	16 years 6 months 16 days 15 hours 7 minutes	No description
yt-remote-connected-devices	never	No description
yt-remote-device-id	never	No description

Prashant Popat KC

Expertise

Product Liability & Group Actions

Representative cases

Various v VWAG, Audi et al (ongoing)

Various v Astra-Zeneca (ongoing)

Re Leonardo S.p.a (ongoing)

Re manufacturer of respirators (2024)

Crossley v VWAG, Audi et al

Martin Hart & Ors v Studio E & Ors:

Lambeth v WH Smith

John and ors v BP Plc et al

Various v Smith & Nephew

Norfolk County Council v Emergency One

Various v Cloverleaf

Various v GlaxoSmithKline

Various v SmithKlineBeecham

O’Byrne v Aventis Pasteur

Health & Safety

Representative cases

Cheshire FRS v WSP and ors (ongoing)

R v Falcon Cranes (ongoing)

HSE v BAM Nuttall (ongoing)

HSE v BMI (2023)

Durham CC v Stonegate (2023)

ORR v Siemens (2022)

ORR v Amey (2022)

R v Hawkins (2021)

HSE v Leys School (2021)

ORR v Network Rail (2021

ORR v Renown (2020)

R v Intertain (2020)

ORR v Network Rail (2018)

R v Hyatt (2019)

R v Oliver Connell & Sons (2019)

R v British Cycling (2018)

R v BDA (2018)

R v St George City Limited (2018)

R v Rogers (2017)

R v Harsco (2017)

R v Tarmac (2017)

R v McCain Foods (2016)

HSE v Averies (2016)

ORR v Network Rail (2016)

R v CAV (2015)

R v 777 Demolition (2015)

R v CTAS (2015) EWCA Crim 1620

R v MNS (2014)

R v MNS (2014)

R v Sellafield (2014) EWCA Crim 49

Public Inquiries & Inquests

Representative cases

Covid-19 Inquiry (ongoing)

Post-Office Horizon IT Inquiry (ongoing)

Cranston Inquiry (ongoing)

Leicester FC inquests (ongoing)

Re Grenfell fire (ongoing)

Re Begum (2022)

Re Gervais (2022)

Re Rehan (2022)

Re Roper (2021)

Re Garrett (2020)

Re Parker (2019)

Re Stocker (2019)

Re Henderson and Shaw (2019)

Re Cameron (2019)

Re In Amenas (2014)

Re Kelly (2014)

Re Ladbroke Grove; Re Southall

Re Potters Bar; Re Grayrigg

Lin & Ors, R (on the application of) v. Secretary of State for Transport [2006]

Commercial

Representative cases

Re Leonardo S.p.a (ongoing)

Drummond v Keolis Amey Docklands (2023)

Crossley v VWAG, Audi et al

Various Claimants v Studio E (Re Grenfell fire) (ongoing)

Bantoft v Priory Group (ongoing)

Fevore v Network Rail (2021)

Estrada & ors v BP plc & ors (2019)