We use cookies to offer you a better experience and analyse site traffic.

By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.

Our strength
is in our groups

Areas of Expertise

View Full Profile

Richard Gregory

Call 2000
Telephone 020 7831 0222
Email richard.gregory@42br.com


Profile Privacy Notice vCard


"He has a respectful manner in court and is very detail-oriented." – Chambers and Partners 2021

"An incredibly thorough barrister who shows phenomenal attention to detail." Legal 500 2021

Ranked in UK Bar Chambers 2021     Legal 500 logo

Richard Gregory is an established personal injury and clinical negligence practitioner, with particular experience in claims involving catastrophic injuries.

Richard has been recommended for his work in the field of personal injury in both Chambers & Partners UK and the Legal 500 for a number of years.

Most recently he has been described in those directories as being “very bright and thorough in all written advice, excellent in relation to quantum issues and calm under pressure” (Chambers UK: 2018) and “Excellent on quantum issues and more obscure points of law” (Legal 500: 2017).

Please click on the individual Personal Injury CV or Clinical Negligence CV for further information.

In addition to the most recent entries in the legal directories referred to above, Richard has been described in earlier editions as:

Being ‘recognised for his abilities in catastrophic injury’ litigation and having ‘fantastic attention to detail’. It was also commented that he is ‘well prepared, confident and capable’ and ‘you can always rely on his technical expertise’ (Chambers UK: 2017)

He is charming and makes clients feel at ease’ (Legal 500: 2016)

‘He is always available and turns papers around so quickly. He is a very sharp barrister’ (Chambers UK: 2016)

Highly regarded by Solicitors’ (Legal 500: 2015)

‘A very proficient high-value accident practitioner who shows great dexterity when handling difficult spinal damage and fatality claims’ and ‘He’s an almost perfect junior, who is very good on paper, extremely thorough and highly conscientious. He is carving out a niche in MIB and difficult RTA claims’ (Chambers UK: 2015)

‘Excellent attention to detail’ (Legal 500: 2014)

‘He’s very smart and very personable, and he doesn’t leave any stone unturned’ and ‘He’s a trusted and valued professional, who can be relied upon to bring success’ (Chambers UK: 2014)

‘Makes his debut in this year’s rankings in recognition of the praise bestowed on him by commentators, who particularly admired his ‘extremely thorough and detailed written advice’ (Chambers UK: 2013)

Qualifications and Memberships

  • BA Jurisprudence, Hertford College, University of Oxford
  • BVC, Inns of Court School of Law
  • PIBA – Personal Injury Bar Association
  • APIL – Association of Personal Injury Lawyers
  • AVMA – Action Against Medical Accidents

Clinical Negligence

Richard undertakes work in the field of clinical negligence. This is an increasingly active part of his practice and dovetails neatly with his personal injury practice. He regularly accepts instructions in relation to a wide range of clinical negligence claims, including those relating to accident and emergency medicine, orthopaedic surgery, general and colorectal surgery, oncology, general practice, psychiatry, obstetrics and gynaecology.

Richard also has experience of attending inquests arising out of deaths which have occurred in a care home or hospital setting.

Clinical Negligence: Notable Cases

A sample of Richard’s concluded and ongoing clinical negligence cases are set out below:

  • SD (a child) v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust: (2016 – ongoing): Instructed on behalf of the Claimant in relation to a claim arising out of a misdiagnosis of right sided hemi-hypertrophy and the delayed diagnosis of left hip dislocation caused by developmental dysplasia.
  • MM v Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust: (2016 – ongoing): Instructed on behalf of the estate of the deceased and her dependants under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 in connection with a claim arising out of the delayed diagnosis of recurrent sidewall cervical cancer.
  • JS (a child) v Derby Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: (2015 – ongoing): Instructed on behalf of a Claimant in connection with a failure to either aspirate or remove a haemorrhagic ovarian cyst with the result that she experienced further episodes of acute abdominal pain and later required the removal of her right ovary and fallopian tube.
  • RV v Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust: (2013 – 2015): Instructed on behalf of the estate and the dependent husband and children under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. The Deceased was admitted for an induced labour and despite exhibiting flu like symptoms at a time of heightened H1N1 swine flu activity, the Trust failed to prescribe anti-viral medication contrary to the clinical guidelines which were in force at the time. It was later established that the Deceased had contracted swine flu and tragically she passed away 4 weeks after giving birth to a healthy girl. Following the exchange of witness statements, expert evidence and joint statements and shortly before an Assessment of Damages Hearing was due to commence, the claim settled at a Joint Settlement Meeting for £400,000.
  • In the matter of EN: (2013): Represented the family of a man who was admitted to hospital for a fractured hip, who developed pneumonia and later died. The Coroner returned a narrative verdict in which he found that the cause of death was hospital acquired pneumonia contributed to by pulmonary oedema, ischaemic heart disease and multiple scelorsis. The Coroner identified a failure to monitor, review and investigate the deceased’s condition appropriately and concluded that these ‘gross failings’ had contributed to the deceased’s death.
  • RL v Ashford & St Peters NHS Trust: (2012-2013): Instructed on behalf of the Claimant. An endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) was inappropriately undertaken as a diagnostic test and with a view to biliary sphincterotomy, despite the resolution of previously reported abdominal pain and normal ultrasound and liver function tests. During the procedure, the Claimant’s biliary tree was damaged causing peritonitis and pancreatitis, leading to acute sepsis and subsequently renal failure requiring regular haemodialysis. The Claimant was subsequently compromised for £300,000.
  • CAT v Epsom & St Helier University NHS Trust: (2011): Instructed as Junior Counsel in relation to the quantum of a claim brought on behalf of a Claimant who suffered from cerebral palsy as a result of negligence in the management of his mother’s labour. One of the issues in the case was the means of valuing the accommodation claim, given the Claimant’s shortened but very uncertain life expectancy and in particular whether there were more satisfactory alternatives to the Roberts v Johnstone formula. After a contested hearing against Leading Counsel, Richard secured permission to obtain expert evidence with a view to challenging the assumptions underlying the Roberts v Johnstone formula. The claim was subsequently compromised at a Joint Settlement Meeting on the basis that the Claimant would receive a lump sum award of £2.8m and periodical payments ranging from £68,600 to £220,000 per annum. 
  • IBA v Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals NHS Trust: (2010-2011): Instructed as Junior Counsel for the Claimant who developed severe cerebral palsy as a result of the mismanagement of his mother’s labour. The means of valuing the accommodation claim was again in issue, as the Claimant’s life expectancy was adversely affected but uncertain. Following a contested hearing, Richard obtained permission to acquire expert evidence from a financial expert with a view to challenging the assumptions underlying the Roberts v Johnstone formula. The claim was subsequently compromised at a Joint Settlement Meeting on the basis of a lump sum award of £2.2m and periodical payments ranging from £235,000 to £260,000 per annum.

News & events