Adam Clemens specialises in clinical negligence, personal injury and police law/judicial review. He has substantial trial and inquest experience. He also has a niche practice in bailiff law, and has guided some of the main players through the sea change in the law of road traffic penalty recovery introduced in April 2014 by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. He has represented the Metropolitan police in a series of human rights and judicial review challenges brought by the late Brian Haw to the legislative regimes covering demonstrations in Parliament Square. He advises on policy matters, including human rights, data protection and information sharing.
He is currently active in judicial review challenges to entry and search warrants in the counter-terrorism sphere, and recently appeared in an Upper Tribunal test case on the construction of the 2008 Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme with implications for cases of historic sexual abuse.
Described as a “deadly” advocate, he has excellent trial management skills with an attractive, yet destructive, cross-examination style.
Adam is married with two teenage daughters.
Adam’s practice is Claimant focused and includes birth, and acquired, brain injury. Substantial interim payment applications are a regular feature of his work where present and future capital needs are delicately balanced. Where several parties may be liable -GPs, specialists or in the prison setting where responsibility for medical provision is often blurred – he is decisive on which parties, and issues, should be pursued.
He regularly speaks at AvMA events, has a particular interest in the human rights components of clinical negligence and recently chaired an Obstetrics and Gynaecology conference. He establishes an excellent rapport with clients, allows them to have their say, and gives whatever time is necessary for them to understand legal and medical jargon. His trial management skills, and handling of experts, takes the pressure off both his clients and solicitors.
As a highly experienced trial advocate, he is ideally suited to inquests, particularly infant deaths, where tact and subtlety, as well as an ability to get to the real issues, are key.
Adam regularly represents families at Coroners inquests with a focus on infant and elderly deaths. He is familiar with “track and trigger” protocols where scores on vital signs should lead to an escalation and involvement of medical staff, but frequently do not.
He has a broad judicial review practice.
Adam’s practice is roughly an equal Claimant/Defendant split in terms of workplace and road traffic accidents. He represents claimants where the injury is sustained abroad. He acts in high value road traffic accidents, often for the Metropolitan Police, where officers on emergency calls – and so exempt from normal traffic regulation – collide with, and injure or kill, other road users.
Adam is a recognised leader in the field of police law. He represents the police in civil actions alleging assault/battery, personal and psychiatric injury, usually Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. CS spray and Taser injuries are common. Unlike a conventional personal injury trial – which is Judge only – civil actions against the police are often heard by a jury, and require a more subtle approach. That is so because the jury has a power to award aggravated or exemplary damages to reflect the circumstances in which the injury happened.
Adam also represents the police in fatal/non-fatal road traffic accidents.
Adam represents families of those killed in workplace accidents such as falls from height and releases of toxic gas. He appears for the Metropolitan Police in fatal road traffic accidents.
Adam acted pro bono for the claimant in a personal injury action where he fraudulently claimed that his serious ankle injury was caused by tripping in a pothole. He had in fact fallen from a wall when drunk; a matter discovered late and only after an admission of liability. The case is reported: Havering London Borough Council v Mark Bowyer  EWHC 2237 (Admin). The claimant was sentenced to a short term of immediate imprisonment.
Adam has advised the Metropolitan Police in a series of alleged “crash for cash” claims.
Adam is a recognised leader in the field of police law. He is part of a core group which is able to draw on the talent and expertise of established criminal and public law teams.
His practice spans:
His public law practice, generated substantially by his police work, has expanded to include a wide range of judicial review challenges.
Adam’s judicial review practice developed from his appearance for the Metropolitan Police in the series of challenges by the late Brian Haw, and those who took over his demonstration, to the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 and then the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011. Those cases went directly to the tension between Article 10 and 11 rights of freedom of expression and assembly, and the political will to regulate those rights, and impose restrictions on demonstrations in Parliament Square. There is ongoing litigation.
His judicial review now spans:
Adam regularly represents families at inquests into deaths in custody. Recent inquests include a case of a man smuggling strychnine into custody at a Crown Court, having been sentenced to a term of imprisonment, and a female lifer hanging herself a matter of days before release. Adam has recently been instructed by G4S after a death in a private prison where the cause of death is presently unknown, but may be epilepsy related.
For more information please contact our clerks by calling +44 (0) 20 7242 3555 or by email.
Adam is committed to protecting and respecting the privacy of individuals. In order to provide legal services, including advice and representation services, Adam needs to process personal data. This will include client’s personal data and the personal data of others who feature in the course of any matter upon which he is instructed.
Please click here to see how Adam will, absent any other arrangement with those instructing him, fulfil any Joint Controller responsibilities he may have under relevant data protection legislation.