header-logo header-logo

nick_bevan

Nicholas Bevan

Partner

Dr Nicholas Bevan is a multiple award-winning solicitor and partner at both Solicitors Title LLP and Broomhead & Saul solicitors. 

He is a nationally recognised presenter and a successful law reform campaigner.  In 2017 he was awarded a doctorate in law for his ground breaking research on EU and insurance law.  He was senior counsel at an international law firm.  He persuaded the government to pass emergency legislation sanctioning the video witnessing of wills in 2020 after executing the nation’s first video will during the Covid-19 lockdown.  

Partner

Dr Nicholas Bevan is a multiple award-winning solicitor and partner at both Solicitors Title LLP and Broomhead & Saul solicitors. 

He is a nationally recognised presenter and a successful law reform campaigner.  In 2017 he was awarded a doctorate in law for his ground breaking research on EU and insurance law.  He was senior counsel at an international law firm.  He persuaded the government to pass emergency legislation sanctioning the video witnessing of wills in 2020 after executing the nation’s first video will during the Covid-19 lockdown.  

ARTICLES BY THIS AUTHOR
An emergency measure has been introduced for the witnessing of wills, but Nicholas Bevan believes there’s been a missed opportunity
Government has clarified its COVID–19 wills plans, but some misconceptions remain, as Dr Nicholas Bevan explains
Is it a misconception that a witness needs to be physically present at a will signing? Dr Nicholas Bevan reports
Dr Nicholas Bevan explains how the Court of Appeal’s ruling in MIB v Lewis casts open the floodgates to compensation

In the first instalment of a two-part feature, Dr Nicholas Bevan, reflects on the ruling in MIB v Lewis & its implications for the UK’s compulsory third-party motor insurance regime

In the second part of this special series on R & S Pilling t/a Phoenix Engineering v UK Insurance Ltd, Nicholas Bevan analyses the Supreme Court’s approach to motor policy construction

In the first of a two-part series on R & S Pilling t/a Phoenix Engineering v UK Insurance Ltd, Nicholas Bevan considers how EU-derived domestic legislation is likely to be interpreted by the courts post-Brexit

Restoration of the status quo ante: Nicholas Bevan reviews the Supreme Court ruling in Cameron v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd

Show
8
Results
Results
8
Results

MOVERS & SHAKERS

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll