+44 (0)2920 375020
Twitter icon
LinkedIn icon
Facebook icon

Simon Hughes

Year of Call: 
“He is a very methodical and thorough advocate”
The Legal 500
Home//Barristers//Simon Hughes

Areas of Expertise

Vertical Tabs

Personal Injury

Personal Injury

He has a wide-ranging practice with extensive experience in advising in Road Traffic, Public Liability (including occupier’s liability), Animals Act and Product Liability claims. He has a particular interest in accidents at work and the six pack regulations and appears on a weekly basis in claims of this nature in courts across South Wales and beyond on both the Fast and Multi Tracks. He has appeared before the High Court  and the Court of Appeal in relation to such claims.  

Simon has extensive experience in industrial disease claims (WRULD’s, ONIHL and HAVS) and experience in this field has been recognised in the Legal 500.

Simon is experienced in CRU appeals and appears on a regular basis before the Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel.

He has a strong paper based practice that includes written advices, the drafting of pleadings and the settlement of schedules. He is committed to the prompt return of papers and the maintenance of high client care and service standards.

Simon was previously an author of Butterworth’s Personal Injury Litigation Service Division I with responsibility for the sections on Future Loss and Fraudulent Claims amongst others within Division I of that publication.


  • Acted for the Defendant in liability trial. Claim brought seeking substantial damages for personal injury when Claimant slipped on gravel on public highway emanating from Defendant’s drive. Instructed from early stage by Defendant’s home insurer. Claim pursued in nuisance and negligence. Substantial factual and legal issues. Viewed as a case of significance to insurers due to size of claim, potential costs liability and consequences for its home insurance policies generally. Claim dismissed.
  • Acted for the Claimant in relation to a serious brain injury suffered following electric fault sparking gas explosion at Claimant’s place of work. Liability only trial for 3 days. Substantial issues of expert evidence at liability trial. Neither expert could identify causative effect of missed inspections on subsequent electric fault following Claimant’s expert having substantially shifted position at Joint Statement. Breach of duty established but issue was burden of proof in relation to causation under Electricity at Work Regulations 1989. Claim would have been likely to fail in negligence. Claim succeeded and matter proceeded to quantification and subsequently settled. Quantification process involved 12 separate experts.
  • Acted for the Claimant in a trial on limitation and liability. The central issue for the  court was an application to exercise its discretion pursuant to Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 to allow the Claimant to bring a claim for NIHL arising from the use of high frequency tone sets while in the employ of British Telecom. The case was of particular significance to the national firm of instructing solicitors as it was seen as the first of a number of claims raising similar issues. Primary limitation period extended and case succeeded at trial. A trial of a similar claim beginning the following week was settled the following day.
  • Acting for Claimant in relation to claim in respect of significant injury to Claimant who was 22 years old at time of accident. Injury suffered to shoulder at work. Claimant who worked in heavy labour was unable to continue with physical work and was transferred to desk work. Evidence is that Claimant’s condition will continue to deteriorate such that he is likely to find himself disabled under the Equality Act 2010 within 15 years and if a future operation is unsuccessful he is likely to lose effective use of his right arm. Substantial Schedule of Loss pleaded and matter is ongoing.
  • Acting for the Defendant. in claim where Claimant sought damages for permanent injuries affecting his capacity for work. Significant issues of credibility following disclosure of surveillance evidence and competing views between the medical experts. Matter settled day before 3 day trial when Claimant accepted he could not prove symptoms beyond that alleged by Defendant.
  • Acted for the Claimant in a claim where a Claimant who suffered a relatively minor fall at work went onto develop significant psychological symptoms which affected her capability to continue to work. Significant volume of medical opinion as to causation of symptoms and attribution to index accident. Experts on behalf of Claimant and Defendant in respect of 6 different medical disciplines. Matter listed for 5 day trial and settled shortly before for £375,000
  • Acting for the Defendant. Substantial value road traffic collision. Substantial issues of fact and likely need for accident reconstruction evidence. Claim is ongoing and likely to be listed for trial by end of the year.
  • Acting for the Claimant who suffered a back injury when attempting to transfer a patient into the rear of bus.  Substantial issues as to causation and the potential effect of an alleged accident that took place in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.  Claim succeeded. Defendant has indicated that it is seeking permission to appeal on effect of Judges finding as to the nature of the injury suffered and whether it was open to him, on the basis of the medical evidence disclosed, to conclude that the Claimant’s injuries were attributable to such an incident.
  • Acting for Claimant in case of severe multiple injury road traffic accident resulting in Claimant being confined to high dependency unit for a period of weeks and subsequent criminal conviction on the part of the Defendant.  Advised in writing, conference and drafted schedule. Expert reports obtained from consultants in Orthopaedics, Neurology, Ophthalmics, Psychiatry and General Surgery. Case settled for in excess of £250,000.
  • Acted for the 4th Defendant in relation to a relatively low value slipping claim where 5 separate Defendants were pursued by Claimant. While value was low factual issues were complex and matter was listed for 5 day trial. Attended numerous preliminary hearings and applications. Claimant discontinued against 4th Defendant at a late stage and agreed to pay its costs.
  • Acted for the Claimant who suffered severe multiple injuries in a motorcycle accident. Initial concerns regarding capacity which required investigation. Case ultimately settled for substantial six figure sum. 
  • Acted for Claimant in 2-day trial. Issues in relation to breach of duty, causation and quantum.  As a result of cross-examination of the First Defendant’s first witness the First Defendant called no further evidence. Both Defendants were found liable and damages were assessed in excess of the Claimant’s offer made before issue of proceedings.
  • Recommended in respect of personal injury litigation in the “Legal 500” annually since 2011. Specifically recognised in previous editions for expertise in Industrial Disease work. Described in current edition as “a very methodical and thorough advocate”.


For further information please contact our clerks, who will be able to help you with any questions.
+44 (0)2920 375020

chambers and partners
Top Tier Set 2019