The Legal 500 > Burges Salmon LLP > Bristol, ENGLAND

Burges Salmon LLP

ONE GLASS WHARF, BRISTOL, BS2 0ZX, ENGLAND

Tel:: Work 0117 939 2000
Fax:: Fax 0117 902 4400
DX:: 7829 BRISTOL

Email:

Web:: www.burges-salmon.com

Bristol, Edinburgh, London

Burges Salmon is the independent UK law firm which delivers the best mix of advice, service and value. Everything the firm does is driven by the needs of its clients. By focusing on the markets and areas of expertise where the firm has extensive knowledge and experience, Burges Salmon is able to achieve the best outcomes for clients, who range from large organisations, entrepreneurial businesses and public sector bodies to private individuals and families. The firm is trusted to help them with everything from everyday legal needs to their business critical issues and all points in between.

With offices in Bristol, Edinburgh and London, the firm's people work wherever clients need them to be, both within the UK and internationally. By having one base for all of its people, Burges Salmon maintains a collaborative and cohesive culture which underpins the quality of its work and client service. In short, the firm hires, trains and retains the best people to work together to serve clients and provide them with the best possible experience.

The firm works across the UK. Burges Salmon has lawyers who are qualified to work in all three legal jurisdictions in the UK - England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Burges Salmon also works internationally. Across the word, the firm works with a select number of like-minded independent law firms - the firm's preferred law firm network. Burges Salmon is confident in its own model. In a rapidly changing world, clients instruct Burges Salmon because the firm offers a different experience: unrivalled expertise, excellent service and exceptional value.

The firm competes at the top of the legal market, working for wealthy private individuals, entrepreneurial businesses, large corporates, institutions and public bodies. The firm provides these sophisticated clients with a wide range of services, often at critical moments when astute legal advice and commercial guidance is needed. Working collaboratively, in partnership with clients, Burges Salmon forms its thinking around their needs to ensure delivery of the right solutions when it matter.

Burges Salmon's clients include organisations such as The John Lewis Partnership, The Financial Services Compensation Scheme, FirstGroup, HSBC Bank plc, Virgin, Costain Group, The Crown Commercial Service, Babcock International Group and Highways England.

Number of UK partners: 92
Number of other UK fee-earners: 367

Above material supplied by Burges Salmon LLP.

Search News and Articles

Legal Developments by:
Burges Salmon LLP

Restoring environmental damage: putting a price on ecosystem services

On 7 August 2009 a 40-inch pipeline ruptured, spilling 5,400 cubic metres of crude oil into the soil and groundwater of La Crau nature reserve in southern France, a habitat protected under French and European law. The operator had to excavate and replace 60,000 tons of soil, install 70 wells to pump and treat groundwater and 25 pumps to skim oil from surface water, at a cost in the region of €50m. However, this was just the primary remediation (that is, restoring the site to the state it would have been if the damage had not occurred). The operator was also required to compensate for the damage to the habitats and the loss of the ecosystem services that would otherwise have been provided by La Crau nature reserve. Measures included purchasing land outside of the nature reserve and contributing to its management for a period of 30 years (over €1m), monitoring the water table for 20 years (over €500,000), monitoring fauna over three years (€150,000) and rehabilitation in accordance with best available ecological techniques (nearly €2m). Overall, the compensatory restoration (to compensate for the amount of time that the ecosystem was impacted) and complimentary restoration (to compensate for elements of the ecosystem that had been permanently lost) came to more than €6.5m.  

- Burges Salmon LLP

Legal Developments in the UK

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to

Court of Justice rules on source of income for Derivative Residence applications

On 2 October 2019, the Court of Justice delivered its judgment in Bajratari v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Directive 2004/38/EC) Case C-93/18 which concerns Chen applications and the source of funds for self-sufficiency.

- Richmond Chambers
End of the ‘centre of life test’ in Surinder Singh cases?

In the recent case of ZA (Reg 9. EEA Regs; abuse of rights) Afghanistan [2019] UKUT 281 (IAC ), the Upper Tribunal found that there is no basis in EU law for the centre of life test, as set out in Regulation 9(3)(a) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (the “Regulations”). It further found that it is not to be applied when Judges assess Surinder Singh cases that appear before them.

- Richmond Chambers
Terms of employment as a sole representative

In this article we examine the working arrangements of sole representatives, looking at the terms and conditions of employment that the Home Office will expect a sole representative to have in order to qualify as a representative of an overseas business.

- Richmond Chambers
Can Sole Representatives Be Shareholders?

The Immigration Rules require that an applicant for a sole representative visa is not “a majority shareholder in the overseas business”.

- Richmond Chambers
Immigration Skills Charge - A Guide for Employers

As a Sponsor, you may be required to pay the Immigration Skills Charge (ISC) each time you sponsor a migrant in the Tier 2 General or Intra-Company Transfer (ICT) Long-term Staff subcategory.

- Richmond Chambers
5 FAQS about paragraph 320(11)

In applications for entry clearance where the applicant has a negative immigration history in the UK, the application may be refused under the general grounds for refusal, which are found in part 9 of the Immigration Rules. Where an applicant has ‘previously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Immigration Rules’, the application could be refused under paragraph 320(11). In this post we look at five frequently asked questions about paragraph 320(11).

- Richmond Chambers
Multiple nationality and multiple citizenship (including dual nationality and dual citizenship)

British nationality law permits multiple nationality and multiple citizenship, including dual nationality and dual citizenship.

- Richmond Chambers
Applying for Indefinite Leave to Remain in the Exceptional Talent or Promise Category

The Exceptional Talent and Exceptional Promise categories are for individuals who are recognised leaders or emerging leaders in their field of expertise. There are a number of endorsing bodies for lots of different fields of work, including artists and musicians , architects , digital experts , scientists and academics . While there isn’t an endorsing body for every expert, the growing list means that many individuals could enjoy the flexibility that this category has to offer.

- Richmond Chambers
PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS – CIVIL AND CRIMINAL

Syedur Rahmanconsiders the factors that determine when civil proceedings can go ahead before,or at the same time as, criminal proceedings relating to the same circumstances.

- Rahman Ravelli Solicitors
Rights of appeal after the Immigration Act 2014

The Immigration Act 2014 (“the 2014 Act”) reduced the circumstances in which the refusal of an immigration application will give rise to a right of appeal. The explanatory notes to the 2014 Act state that the Act was intended to restructure rights of appeal to the Immigration Tribunal. Previously, a right of appeal to the Immigration Tribunal existed against any of the 14 different immigration decisions listed in s.82 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (“the 2002 Act”). As explained below, whether or not the refusal of an immigration application currently generates a right of appeal depends on the subject matter of the application rather than its categorisation.

- Richmond Chambers