The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon
Work 020 7770 6584
Fax 020 7504 8717

London: TMT (technology, media and telecoms)

Media and entertainment (including media finance)
Media and entertainment (including media finance) - ranked: tier 4

Hansel Henson

Hansel Henson's 'enormously helpful, responsive and agile' digital media and IP boutique has 'outstanding knowledge of IP law, which is coupled with good common sense and commercial acumen'. It is adept at a range of instructions in the IP and digital sphere, where it acts for clients across the gaming, fashion, sport, travel, retail and entertainment sectors. The team is instructed on a range of matters such as digital marketing and advertising, app and computer software development, regulatory matters, online publishing and broadcasting, and brand communication. The team is regularly engaged on cross-border instructions and advises Future Games of London (wholly owned by Ubisoft) on takedown and brand protection work.

Practice head(s):David Hansel; Tom Henson

Other key lawyers:Sarah Wells


David Hansel has outstanding commercial judgement, common sense, clear articulation and understanding of problem statements.

Tom Henson is an extremely safe pair of hands; he meets deadlines and has excellent understanding of technical law.

Tom Henson and Sarah Wells are extremely dedicated and helpful; they are quick to respond, and clients can always rely on their thorough, high-quality work.

The personal approach taken by the lawyers is a real differentiator.


Key Clients

Future Games of London

Hutch Games

Conversion Factory



Another Place Productions

Sixt Rent A Car

Samarkand Global

Enterprise Technology Management Limited t/a dDaaS

Robot Squid

Work highlights

  • It advises Hutch Games on a variety of development and production contracts, including a mobile gaming app development agreement with Formula One Digital Media .
  • It advises Conversion Factory on a variety of commercial contracts, including provision of its services to clients such as a major player in the UK fashion space.
  • Represented UNRD in two financing rounds, as well as ongoing assistance in drafting and negotiating a variety of commercial contracts, including agreements with social media influencers.
  • Advises Hubber in relation to brand protection and commercial contract matters, which includes advice in relation to its forthcoming hair dresser chair rental app.
  • Advises Another Place Productions on various development and publishing contracts and brand protection work.

[back to top]

Further information on Hansel Henson

Please choose from this list to view details of what we say about Hansel Henson in other jurisdictions.


Offices in London

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. 
  • End of the ‚Äėcentre of life test‚Äô 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 ‚ÄúRegulations‚ÄĚ). It further found that it is not to be applied when Judges assess ¬†Surinder Singh ¬†cases that appear before them.
  • 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.  
  • Can Sole Representatives Be Shareholders?

    The Immigration Rules require that an applicant for a¬† sole representative visa ¬†is not ‚Äúa¬† majority shareholder in the overseas business‚ÄĚ.
  • 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.
  • 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 ¬†‚Äėpreviously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Immigration Rules‚Äô,¬† the application could be refused under paragraph 320(11). In this post we look at five frequently asked questions about paragraph 320(11).¬†
  • 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.
  • 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. 

    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.
  • Rights of appeal after the Immigration Act 2014

    The Immigration Act 2014 (‚Äúthe 2014 Act‚ÄĚ) 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 ¬†(‚Äúthe 2002 Act‚ÄĚ). 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.