The Legal 500

Chambers of William Clegg QC

Work 020 7440 8888
Fax 020 7242 1738

London Bar

Within Business and regulatory crime (including global investigations), 2 Bedford Row (William Clegg QC) is a second tier set,

2 Bedford Row is ‘a great set' that marks a significant increase in corporate crime matters. It is recognised for its ‘strength in depth', and benefits from allied strengths in fraud and general crime.

[back to top]

Within Crime, 2 Bedford Row (William Clegg QC) is a first tier set,

With a ‘great deal of strength in depth', 2 Bedford Row is, for many, ‘easily the best criminal set in the country, where it is never a problem instructing quality counsel'. Members have acted on many of the most high-profile cases in the UK in recent years, including murder of private Lee Rigby, and the IRA prosecution regarding the Hyde Park bombing. Around 50% of chambers’ instructions are now privately funded.

[back to top]

Within Fraud: crime (including money laundering and asset forfeiture), 2 Bedford Row (William Clegg QC) is a first tier set,

2 Bedford Row contains ‘an abundance of quality advocates who are in high demand'; ‘tenants are clearly carefully chosen for their practical insight and ability'. Members act in an advisory capacity to major international corporations as well as appearing in many of the major ongoing fraud disputes. In 2013, these included a £70m tax fraud and a $1bn counterfeit document fraud.

[back to top]

Within Health and safety, 2 Bedford Row (William Clegg QC) is a third tier set,

2 Bedford Row is ‘the best all-round criminal set in the country', where members successfully acted for Southwark Council in the inquest into the Lakanal House tower block fire. William Clegg QC continues to represent high-profile public and private sector bodies.

[back to top]

Within Professional discipline and regulatory law (including police law), 2 Bedford Row (William Clegg QC) is a third tier set,

Praised for its ‘user-friendly and organised' approach, 2 Bedford Row ‘has a wide range of solid regulatory performers at various levels of call at its disposal', and is best known for its work in the healthcare sector.

[back to top]

Within Set overviews: England and Wales,

2 Bedford Row is ‘one of, if not the single, best criminal set in the country, with a significant number of very able silks and a very strong junior bench'. Aside from its enviable reputation in crime and fraud, it is well respected for regulatory, health and safety, and sports law. In addition, chambers is also praised for encouraging diversity and promoting counsel from a range of backgrounds. ‘The clerks are efficient and always prepared to be flexible in order to accommodate the client.' Senior Clerk John Grimmer ‘brings years of experience to the post and presides over a very reliable and efficient team that is always happy to help'. Clerks Paul Rodgers and Lee Bartlett are also recommended; Rodgers is ‘absolutely first class; he really understands the needs of his clients', and Bartlett is ‘friendly and quick to respond'. Offices in: London

[back to top]

Within Sport, 2 Bedford Row (William Clegg QC) is a third tier set,

2 Bedford Row acts for the FA and RFU, and football clubs such as Chelsea FC and Newcastle FC. Jim Sturman QC advised Russian football club PFC CSKA Moscow on matters relating to a UEFA charge of racism.

[back to top]

Legal Developments in the UK

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

    In the recent case of Newbury v Sun Microsystems [2013], the defendant argued that an offer to settle proceedings was ‘in principle' only and that a binding contract could not be formed until further terms had been agreed and a formal contract had been signed. It supported this argument by referring to a statement, in the offer letter, that the settlement was to be ‘recorded in a suitably worded agreement'. 

  • Behind the corporate veil: is that all there is?

    That companies have an existence entirely separate to that of their shareholders and directors is a foundational principle of English law and commerce.

  • 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. 

  • The role of arbitrators in EU antitrust law

    In May 2014, it will be ten years since Regulation No 1/2003 entered into force. When the legislator of the European Union adopted this Regulation on 16 December 2002, its main objective was to decentralise the enforcement of the two main provisions of EU antitrust law, Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (now Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)). Where do the arbitrators fit in this picture?

  • New Immigration Bill, October 2013: cause for concern or appeasing public sentiment?

    The year 2013 has seen a string of reforms to the immigration system by the current coalition government. On 10 October, the government published a Bill aimed at continuing its drive to reduce net migration figures. 

  • New Schengen EU Regulations: impact on short-stay visa visitors

    The publication on 26 June 2013 of the European Union Regulation EU 610/2013 modified the incumbent Regulation EU 562/2006 in relation to third country nationals (ie non-EU citizens) and those travelling on a short-stay visitor visa, as well as those who do not require a visa to enter the Schengen area, Romania, Croatia and Bulgaria. Exceptions include EU and EEA nationals travelling to other EU/EEA states within the Schengen area together with foreign nationals holding either long-stay or residence permits for their destination Schengen countries.

  • New revised guidelines for administrators in pre-pack sales

    Pre-pack sales by administrators are now used frequently enough for most people in business to be aware of them and many have come across them in their business lives. A small amount of controversy still attaches to pre-packs, but it is probably right to say that they are now an accepted part of the UK business scene as a useful means of rescuing a business in difficulty and preserving some or all of the jobs connected with the business.
    - Druces
  • Silence is not always golden

    In PGF II SA v OMFS Company 1 Ltd [2013], the Court of Appeal considered, for the first time, whether a failure by a party to respond to an invitation to mediate should be treated as an unreasonable refusal to mediate - previous cases having focused on situations where there had been an express refusal to do so. 

  • Continued uncertainty for international manufacturers in the US

    For manufacturers that export, a key strategic issue for in-house counsel is assessing the risk of being sued in another jurisdiction - particularly the US. 

  • Parking rights: here to stay? Consent might be the surprising answer 

    In the field of the acquisition of easements by prescription, little has caused more consternation over the last decade or so than the question of whether a right to park cars can be acquired by twenty years user as of right. The types of property capable of being adversely affected range from individual residential units all the way up to major development sites. The establishment of such a right can have a devastating impact on the value of the burdened land.