Joseph Evans#14290

Joseph Evans

Solicitor-Advocate (Partner), Charles Russell Speechlys LLP
Joseph is a solicitor-advocate who undertakes all aspects of commercial litigation work, specialising in insolvency disputes.

Joseph assists officeholders with their investigations into insolvent companies and individuals, both in the UK and overseas, with a view to recovering misappropriated funds for the estates. Joseph works on cases involving fraud, misfeasance, negligence and tax avoidance.

Joseph often acts for claimants on a contingent basis where appropriate. Joseph also has a specialist practice advising stakeholders on structuring alternatively-funded cases, including implementing litigation funding and CFA/DBA arrangements.

Contributed to

6

Conditional fee agreements—definition and requirements
Conditional fee agreements—definition and requirements
Practice Notes

This Practice Note explains the nature of a Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA), which is an agreement for funding litigation, and what requirements must be complied with in order for a CFA to be enforceable. It also considers the information which can be included in a CFA but which is not required. The consequences of failing to comply with the requirements are covered, together with cancellation rights under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

Damages-based agreements (DBAs)
Damages-based agreements (DBAs)
Practice Notes

This Practice Note explains what a damages-based agreement (DBA) is. It sets out the requirements for a valid DBA and considers the use of hybrid DBAs and potential conflicts of interest. It also provides information on inter partes costs and how they are dealt with and considers the Civil Justice Council’s final report on advice on litigation funding.

Legal professional privilege in insolvency
Legal professional privilege in insolvency
Practice Notes

This Practice Note considers some common practical issues which arise in relation to legal professional privilege (LPP) in the context of corporate and personal insolvency processes and insolvency proceedings.For information on the general principles associated with privilege including the rationale for those principles, see Practice Note: Privilege—general principles.For information on LPP generally including the various criteria for both legal advice privilege and litigation privilege and the exceptions to privilege, see Practice Note: Legal professional privilege in civil proceedings.General principles—corporate insolvencyIn a corporate context, the privilege in a document vests in the company. An insolvency office-holder appointed over the company, who stands in the shoes of the company, is accordingly entitled to recover and review documents which exist from the period prior to the company entering the insolvency process.In respect of any such documents recovered, the office-holder may maintain or waive any claim to privilege which the company could formerly have maintained against third parties. For information on waiver of privilege by the office-holder, see ‘Waiver

Litigation funding reform—from Jackson to PACCAR and beyond
Litigation funding reform—from Jackson to PACCAR and beyond
Practice Notes

This Practice Note provides an overview of the various proposals for the reform of litigation funding and the measures enacted to give effect to them.

Simple worked examples of DBAs
Simple worked examples of DBAs
Practice Notes

This Practice Note provides two simple examples of how a Damages-Based Agreement (DBA) will work in practice applying the provisions in the Damages-Based Agreements Regulations 2013 (DBA Regulations 2013), SI 2013/609. The aim of the examples is to enable you to understand how a DBA works and the potential for conflict that may arise between yourself and a client depending on whether the matter settles early or runs through, eg to trial.

Third party litigation funding—a guide for dispute resolution practitioners
Third party litigation funding—a guide for dispute resolution practitioners
Practice Notes

This Practice Note provides information on third party or commercial litigation funding (TPF) explaining what it is and why it is important for providing access to justice. It introduces contract-based pure funding agreements (also known as commercial funding or professional funding or third party funding agreements) and distinguishes these types of funding arrangements from retainer-based agreements, such as conditional fee agreements (CFAs) and damages based agreements (DBAs). It considers the issues with champerty and maintenance that have held back litigation funding in the past and what changes have taken place in modern times. It also introduces some of the key issues TPF generates to include disclosure issues, security for costs, non-party or third party costs orders and enforceability.

Practice Areas

Panel

  • Contributing Author

Experience

  • Charles Russell Speechlys (2021 - Present)
  • Gateley (2014 - 2021)

Qualifications

  • LLB (2013)
  • LPC and LLM (2014)

Education

  • University of York (2010-2013)
  • University of Law (2014)

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