Adam Richardson

A regular presence at the Royal Courts of Justice, Adam has built a positive reputation with judges, Masters, and staff by displaying a commitment to hard work, a quick grasp of the salient concepts and a willingness to go the extra distance.

He has appeared for individuals and banks in PPI-related hearings, post-Plevin, Plevin-plus, early neutral evaluations, dispute resolution hearings and final hearings.

In addition, Adam has drafted hundreds of advices on prospective claims for the rescission of loan contracts on the grounds that a lender had paid a fully secret commission to a broker or procured a broker’s breach of fiduciary duties for the purposes of Sections 140A – 140C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Similarly, Adam has drafted numerous advices on prospects of success of Plevin/PPI/mis-selling claims for banks and individuals, occasionally assisting with obtaining litigation funding.

Recently, Adam litigated the scope of the legal duty of a recipient bank to check the details of the account sent against its own records to prevent fraud before this became a regulatory matter.

This experience has resulted in him acting on behalf of large companies (on and off panels) and individuals in large money disputes, particularly where there are allegations (or likely to be allegations) of impropriety, dishonesty, or misrepresentation.

Featured Cases:

Shamsan v 44–49 Lowndes Square Management Co Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 436

Appearing in the Court of Appeal (led by Paul Mitchell KC), Adam acted in a case concerning whether a property management company could owe a novel duty of care to a tenant in respect of losses caused by a third party worth £7 Million. The appeal raised difficult questions about the incremental development of duties of care in a contractual matrix and the limits of assumption of responsibility. The case involved high-value losses and required careful navigation of the boundary between contract and tort.

Yousufi v Matharu [2025] EWHC 917 (KB)

This appeal arose from a long-running commercial dispute involving allegations of deceit and unlawful means conspiracy said to have caused significant business loss. Acting for the appellant, Adam addressed the viability and proper formulation of economic tort claims, including the recoverability of loss of a chance and lost profits. The case involved complex questions of pleading and the extent to which such claims should be permitted to proceed.

President Donald J Trump v Level Law Ltd

This case arose out of the unsuccessful first instance decision in President Donald J Trump v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd and concerned a professional negligence claim relating to the conduct of that litigation. Acting for President Trump, Adam was instructed, led by Jacqueline Perry KC, in proceedings concerning the duties owed by legal advisers in the conduct of high-value and politically sensitive claims. The case involved advising on matters particular to heads of state in the context of cross-border litigation.

Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) & Libyan Arab Foreign Investment Company (LAFICO) v. Kingdom of Belgium - International Arbitration

Adam has advised and represented the Libyan Investment Authority (LIA), Libya’s sovereign wealth fund, together with its subsidiary the Libyan Arab Foreign Investment Company (LAFICO), in a high-profile arbitration against the Kingdom of Belgium. Brought under the 2004 Belgium-Libya Bilateral Investment Treaty, the dispute concerns the Belgian authorities’ prolonged judicial attachment and freezing of approximately €15 billion of sovereign LIA assets held through Euroclear in Brussels.

This exceptionally complex matter sits at the intersection of multiple overlapping legal regimes, including international investment treaty protections, UN sanctions imposed on Libya following the 2011 revolution, principles of sovereign immunity, state responsibility for judicial and prosecutorial acts, and parallel criminal proceedings that included the issuance (and subsequent withdrawal) of Interpol Red Notices against senior LIA executives. The claims allege serious breaches of fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, and protection against unlawful expropriation, raising cutting-edge questions about the safeguards afforded to foreign sovereign wealth funds in the context of international sanctions and cross-border asset recovery.

This high profile arbitration exemplifies the significant challenges faced by sovereign investors in multi-jurisdictional disputes and continues to attract considerable attention in the field of investment treaty arbitration and public international law.

Adam enjoys a busy chancery practice, whether contentious or noncontentious. He frequently advises and advocates on matters in the Higher Courts. He often is asked to write for Lexis on the field of breach of confidence.

Adam’s work in this area has recently included a multi-million pound intrafamily dispute over the estate of a wealthy property owner, with the added complexity of an extant family trust containing Covid-impacted core assets.

Adam will always act in the best interest of his client, even if that means recommending alternative dispute resolution or negotiating an amicable settlement, and is never afraid to take a matter to full trial where the facts support it or the client is determined to do so.

Frequently instructed on urgent injunctions, freezing orders, asset recovery, tracing and disclosure orders, Adam is adept at using all the tools at the disposal of the chancery courts to give a sensible and positive outcome for his clients.

Featured Cases:

Vachha v Hamilton [2020] EWHC 3728 (Ch)

This case concerned an application for speedy trial and 12 individual injunctions against 16 individual directors and a company itself. This was brought by a former director who was attempting to seize the company. This involved complex interactions between company law and the law of unincorporated associations. Upon having the application defeated in its entirety and having to meet a very comprehensive cost order the Claimant then discontinued the entire claim within an hour after losing the hearing effectively bringing the matter to an end.

Bay Mining Consultants Ltd v Patel and others [2021] EWHC 1607 (QB)

This case concerned allegations of breach of various obligations between international corporate entities and individuals including breach of trust, breach of fiduciary duties, assignments and the inherent powers of the Court to make Civil Restraint Orders of its own motion.

Honnor v Honnor & Honnor [2020] EWHC (CH)

This was an acrimonious Inheritance and trust dispute, involving allegations of tax fraud and theft. Family assets were measured in the millions and the instructions came just as Covid was wreaking havoc on the world economy, this added a layer of complexity around the properties involved.

With an enviable record in defeating winding-up petitions, as well as acting in more complex advisory matters (including some complex recent work on the impact of the solicitors’ equitable lien where a company has entered administration), Adam is regularly instructed by insolvency clients and solicitors on their last roll of the dice, or to prevent them from getting to that point.

Adam’s keen eye and background in accountancy has led to him becoming preferred counsel for a number of insolvency practitioners wishing to pursue directors who have acted in breach of their duties, to recover funds for creditors and, in cases of fraudulent preference, transactions at an undervalue and dishonesty. He has advised in cases involving complex jurisdictional challenges.

Adam has saved a number of companies from insolvency with successful, urgent injunctions restraining either advertising in the Gazette or the laying of a petition. He retains flexibility in his practice in order to be able to act on a moment’s notice where circumstances require it.

Adam acted for the companies in the well-publicised administration of Cambridge Analytica and SCL Group at the peak of the scandal, and successfully secured an order for administration, in spite of the majority of the company’s assets being seized by the Information Commissioner’s Office, in a three day-long hearing in the Rolls Building.

Featured Cases:

VG Trustee (Jersey) Ltd v JPT [2020] FJ79/20

This was a legally complex case involving the Foreign Judgments Act 1933, this matter saw Adam resist the registration of a six-figure debt on the rarely invoked ground of public policy.

Cambridge Analytica (UK) Limited, Scl Group Limited, Scl Analytics Limited, Scl Commercial Limited, Scl Social Limited, Scl Elections Limited, [2018] EWHC 3447 (CH)

Over the course of a rigorous three-day hearing, Adam successfully obtained an administration order for several companies under the ‘Cambridge Analytica’ banner, after a significant media controversy and ICO seizure forced the companies towards insolvency. This was aggravated by matters that continued to unfold in the press at the same time as the hearing, which required quick thinking and dynamic advocacy.

MBS Recovery Ltd v Quinney [2025] EWHC 546 (Ch)

This appeal concerned the use of statutory demands in circumstances where the underlying debt was disputed and arose out of ongoing commercial proceedings. Acting for the appellant, Adam addressed the proper limits of insolvency processes and the extent to which they may be deployed tactically in support of substantive claims. The case required careful analysis of the relationship between insolvency procedure and contested civil liability.

Adam has acted in a number of seminal cases involving the establishment of cyber principles, not least the much-publicised Cambridge Analytica matter, and he is counted amongst the UK’s most prestigious data protection and cyber law barristers. This reputation has been bolstered by co-authoring the leading academic text on cyber crime, now in its second edition. He is frequently asked for commentaries on developing cyber cases by Lexis and others.

With sanctions for data breaches becoming more expensive, and obligations in data processing more complex, Adam is at the digital coalface of this fast-developing field of practice. He has advised many companies, both nationally and internationally, on the application of historic legislation to cutting edge technologies where the law has not yet caught up.

Adam is a mainstay of many innovative and novel tech companies, as well as advanced marketing companies and national political parties seeking more compliant canvassing techniques.

Featured cases:

UKIP v Information Commissioner (information notice) [2019] UKUT 62 (AAC)

The first and only case to challenge the limits of the Information Commissioner’s powers to demand information through the use of Information Notices that carry sanctions. This case concerned the Data Protection Act 1998 and explored the requirements for a lawful information notice.

Cambridge Analytica (UK) Limited, Scl Group Limited, Scl Analytics Limited, Scl Commercial Limited, Scl Social Limited, Scl Elections Limited, [2018] EWHC 3447 (CH)

Over the course of a rigorous three-day hearing, Adam successfully obtained an administration order for several companies under the ‘Cambridge Analytica’ banner, after a significant media controversy and ICO seizure forced the companies towards insolvency. This was aggravated by matters that continued to unfold in the press at the same time as the hearing, which required quick thinking and dynamic advocacy.

United Kingdom Independence Party Ltd V Richard Braine & Ors [2020] EWHC 1794 (QB)

This concerned the grant of a without-notice, interim injunction to restrain the publication of any information that may have been taken by virtue of a data breach. This was underpinned by a claim based on breach of directors’ duties, breach of confidential information and conspiracy to injury by unlawful means.

Cox v Information Commissioner & Anor [2024] UKFTT 863 (GRC)

Acting for the appellant, Adam successfully challenged the refusal of a Freedom of Information request relating to the identification of establishments licensed to conduct scientific procedures on animals. The case involved balancing transparency against asserted risks to health and safety, and required the Tribunal to engage with both open and closed material. The appeal resulted in an order for disclosure in a sensitive and contested regulatory context.

Cox v Information Commissioner & Anor [2025] UKFTT 323 (GRC)

This appeal concerned the disclosure of inspection material under FOIA and the application of multiple exemptions relied upon by the Home Office. Acting for the appellant, Adam was involved in proceedings which ultimately resulted in disclosure of the requested material and consideration by the Tribunal of its jurisdiction in circumstances where the dispute had become, on one view, academic. The case highlights practical and procedural issues that frequently arise in information rights litigation.

President Donald J Trump v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd

This case concerned a data protection claim arising from the processing of President Trump’s personal data in memoranda within the so-called “Steele Dossier”. The proceedings raised issues of limitation, amendment, accuracy, and the proper scope of claims under the DPA 1998, the DPA 2018 and the UK GDPR, in a politically sensitive context involving matters particular to heads of state. Adam acted for President Trump at the appellate stage of the proceedings, led by Jacqueline Perry KC.

With almost a decade’s experience of advising political parties, both local and national, Adam has established himself as the first point of contact in advanced politico-legal disputes. From actions based on breach of terms between parties and members, to election petitions, to leave to pay applications, and everything in between, Adam has been leading counsel on a number of large political matters and has helped the law develop.

With a strong advisory practice, political parties value Adam’s sensible input which always advises the law with an eye to the politics of any given outcome. Adam has defended political parties from actions by its own members and is also able to advise on how best to prevent problems from occurring in the first place. He regularly advises on matters involving the Electoral Commission or the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Since 2014 onwards the field of data protection has never been so relevant in politics today. Adam was at the forefront of advising stakeholders on how best to comply with the new data protection regulations in campaigning, and has assisted in liaising with the Information Commissioner’s Office and the Electoral Commission throughout the process.

Adam has also assisted in many cases involving political parties bringing actions against each other, and has assisted in setting the law in that field.

Featured Cases:

Barron MP & Ors v Collins MEP & Anor [2018] EWHC 253

This case regarded a protracted dispute between two political parties after a defamation case ended and asked whether a third party costs order should be made. Ultimately the judge decided that political benefit is a valid consideration under Section 51 – Senior Courts Act 1981.

Moore v Royal Mail Group Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 2320 (KB)

This case arose out of a closely contested parliamentary by-election and involved an attempt to strike out an election petition at an early stage. Acting for the successful candidate, Adam was required to navigate the highly technical statutory framework governing election petitions, resisting arguments which sought to expand the scope of permissible respondents beyond that provided for by the Representation of the People Act 1983. The case engaged fundamental questions as to the limits of the Court’s jurisdiction in electoral matters and the proper use of petition proceedings.

Moore v Pochin & Anor [2025] EWHC 3012 (KB)

This was a full trial of an election petition raising serious allegations of irregularity in the counting process, including claims of systemic error and interference. The case required detailed forensic analysis of both witness and video evidence of the count itself, alongside careful application of the stringent statutory test for setting aside an election result. Acting for the successful candidate, Adam was involved in defending the integrity of the electoral process in a politically sensitive and factually complex dispute.

Moore v Royal Mail Group Ltd & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 1378

This appeal concerned whether defects in an election petition relating to service and form were fatal or capable of cure by the Court. Acting in the Court of Appeal for the successful candidate, Adam addressed the interaction between the strict procedural requirements imposed by electoral legislation and the Court’s broader procedural powers under the CPR. The case is notable as the first Court of Appeal decision in an election petition in over two decades, since Ahmed v Kennedy (2002), and required the Court to confront the limits of procedural flexibility within a strictly statutory jurisdiction.

Goodwin & Rawlinson [2026] EWHC 565 (KB)

This was an urgent application brought on the eve of polling day in a parliamentary by-election, seeking relief from an inadvertent breach of the statutory imprint requirements. Acting for the applicants, Adam appeared in a time-critical setting requiring immediate engagement with the statutory scheme and the discretionary jurisdiction of the Court under the Representation of the People Act 1983. The case illustrates the need for rapid, pragmatic advocacy in the context of live electoral events.

Nigel Farage MP, ex parte (Leave to Pay Application under the Representation of the People Act 1983) (unreported)

This case concerned an application for leave under the Representation of the People Act 1983 in respect of unpaid election expenses. Acting for Nigel Farage MP, Adam addressed the statutory framework governing candidate liabilities and the circumstances in which the Court may grant relief in relation to non-compliance with electoral finance requirements.

Dame Andrea Jenkyns v North Kesteven Electoral Registration Officer 

This case concerned voter registration and the statutory residency qualification. Acting for Dame Andrea Jenkyns, Adam was instructed in relation to a challenge to her electoral registration, requiring detailed consideration of the legal test for residence and the evidential basis upon which an Electoral Registration Officer may determine whether an individual is entitled to be registered. She went on to win that election.

Adam has acted for both employers and employees in a number of employment matters and has an estimable record in appealing to judges and lay tribunals.

Adam also advises on prospects of employment cases both before and after issue. He has a great ability to separate important facts for the tribunal while administering days-long cross-examination and submissions.

He has advised in-house lawyers, HR functions and independent HR experts on the adequacy of internal protocols for dealing with matters that arise within Employment Law, and always has an eye to commercially sensitive decisions such as settlement to minimise reputational or legal impacts.

Featured Cases:

John Martin v Prudential Distribution Ltd and others [2020] UKET 1305866/2019

This was a two week-long, fact-heavy Employment Tribunal matter, involving age and disability discrimination, unfair dismissal, victimisation, protected disclosures (whistleblowing), and breach of contract against a senior executive valued at £2.5 million.

Mr P Broome v Sally-Ann Gosling t/a Riding Farm Equestrian Centre

Adam defended an equestrian centre against claims of harassment, discrimination, and failure to make reasonable adjustments in a 6-day hearing.

Mr Michael Fuller v ACASA Limited (1) & Apex Prime Care Limited (2)

In this matter Adam defended two Respondents who managed care homes against a former employee who brought an action based on direct discrimination due to sex, sexual orientation and disability as well has harassment, victimisation and protected disclosures 7-day hearing.

Roskams v Reform 2025 Ltd (ET Case No. 6023345/2024)

This case concerned whether a parliamentary candidate for a political party could qualify as an employee or worker for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and Equality Act 2010. Acting for the respondent, Adam successfully argued that no contract existed between the parties and that the claimant’s activities as a candidate were undertaken in pursuit of aligned political objectives rather than as “work” in the legal sense. The Tribunal held that it lacked jurisdiction to determine the claims and dismissed them in their entirety.

Articles for Lexis Nexis

Articles for LexisNexis

10.07.2023 – Invasion of privacy, contempt of court, and unjustified interference with the right to a fair trial prior to charging decisions (WFZ v British Broadcasting Corporation)

26.06.2023 – Anonymity, privilege and the law of unincorporated associations (Taylor and others v Evans (as representative of the Labour Party))

01.03.2023 – Breach of confidence and fiduciary duties — a matter of evidence (Clements v Frisby)

07.12.2022 – A sobering reminder of the obligation on parties’ lawyers to read very carefully and to understand the effects of injunction orders.’ (QRT v JBE)

15.11.2022 – Breach of confidence is equitable wrong even without positive harm (Weiss Technik UK Ltd v Davies)

25.08.2022 – The sealing of Royal Wills vs principles of open justice (Executor of HRH Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh (Deceased) v Guardian News and Media)

07.07.2022 – The Investigatory Powers Act 2016—still incompatible with European jurisprudence (R (on the application of National Council for Civil Liberties (Liberty)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and another)

09.05.2022 – Consumer protection associations can bring representative GDPR actions in EU (Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd v Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände)

13.12.2021 – Advocate General’s opinion—standing of consumer group to bring claims under the EU GDPR (Facebook Ireland Ltd v Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände—Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV)

08.11.2021 – The investigatory powers tribunal declines to give general guidance, but Legal Professional Privilege endures (Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs)

27.01.2021 – Are confidential information protections still fit for purpose? (Travel Counsellors Ltd v Trailfinders Ltd)

24.03.2020 – Trade Secrets—Our first look at the Regulations in action?— Trailfinders Ltd v Travel Counsellors Ltd and others [2020] EWHC 591 (IPEC)

20.08.2019 – Lawfulness of bulk hacking powers under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (R (Liberty) v Secretary of State for the Home Department)

Cyber Crime: Law and Practice 1st and 2nd Editions

Cyber Crime: Law and Practice, now in its second edition, tackles the fastgrowing topic of cyber crime and covers a wide range of issues from electronic fraud, data, interception of communications, cyber stalking, online theft and intellectual property to more involved topics like malicious communications and the rules of evidence relating to cyber crimes and computers.

The second edition contains updated information on: New offences under the Computer Misuse Act 1990, Investigatory Powers Act 2016, Data Protection Act 2018 and GDPR, and new CPS guidance on prosecution of offences relating to social media.

Using detailed case studies, examples and statutory extracts, the author explains all aspects of cyber crime and computer crime. Cyber Crime: Law and Practice provides a practical, easy-to-follow guide for practitioners in the field, as well as those in law enforcement and academia.

With Foreword by Ian Dyson, Commissioner of the City of London Police, National Lead on Cyber-Crime.