Amy Mullen#13000

Amy Mullen

Solicitor, Weightmans
Amy has experience working on a broad variety of legal disputes, ranging from contractual disputes (including breach of contract and breach of restrictive covenant claims across a variety of different sectors and industries), unfair prejudice claims, directors and shareholder disputes, as well as various GDPR, defamation and intellectual property claims.

Amy’s experience ranges from assisting client’s with pre-action advice and settlements to managing cases all the way through to trial. Amy has worked on cases of various values and complexities in County Courts, the High Court as well as the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. Notably, Amy was part of the team representing UK Trucks Claim Limited within the Supreme Court case R (on the application of PACCAR Inc and others) v Competition Appeal Tribunal and others [2023] UKSC 28, a landmark case concerning the enforceability of litigation funding arrangements. 
Contributed to

2

Investigation and asset tracing for office-holders
Investigation and asset tracing for office-holders
Practice Notes

This Practice Note, produced in partnership with Russell Hill of Squire Patton Boggs (UK) LLP, and Mark Surguy and Amy Mullen of Weightmans LLP, looks at investigation and enquiry into a company’s assets for insolvency office-holders, the equitable process of tracing, substitution and practical considerations for asset tracing.

Litigation Co-operation Agreement
Litigation Co-operation Agreement
Precedents

This Precedent and its associated Drafting Notes offer guidance on drafting a litigation co-operation (LCA) agreement between co-claimants. It addresses various issues that commonly arise when parties are bringing a claim together including but where only one firm of solicitors is permitted to appear on the record as acting for all parties: liability for costs and fees; how the fees of the solicitors who are on the record for the claimants are to be paid; how any costs awards, damages and/or settlement are to be apportioned; the extent to which the parties are required to co-operate with each other in progressing the litigation (including in relation to disclosure, evidence generally, complying with rules, practice directions and court orders, settlement etc); indemnities in the event they do not co-operate; confidentiality, both as between themselves and as between the other parties; privilege etc. It also incorporates various boilerplate provisions. This agreement is not suitable for class claims or group actions. It is likely to be suitable for a limited category of cases where co-claimants do not want to use the same firm of solicitors. The scenario chosen in this precedent is co-claimants who were formerly under common ownership in a corporate group but owing to a re-organisation the ownership of the co-claimants is no longer the same. The precedent is confined to two claimants but could be adapted to accommodate more than two.

Practice Area

Panel

  • Contributing Author

Qualified Year

  • 2020

Experience

  • Weightmans LLP (2018 - Present)

Qualifications

  • Law (LLB) (2015)
  • LPC (2016)

Education

  • Newcastle University (2012-2015)
  • Northumbria University (2015-2016)

If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.