header-logo header-logo

03 December 2025
Categories: Movers & Shakers , Profession
printer mail-detail

DAC Beachcroft—Ben Daniels

Firm elects new senior partner to lead next phase of growth

International law firm DAC Beachcroft has announced the election of partner Ben Daniels as its next senior partner, with his five-year term due to begin on 1 May 2026. Daniels will succeed Virginia Clegg, whose second term concludes in April 2026, marking a planned leadership transition for the firm. A commercial litigation specialist, Daniels joined DACB in 2008 and has since held a series of senior roles, including leading departments within the commercial, technology and regulatory group and within litigation. He also currently serves as location head for the Bristol office and previously completed two consecutive terms on the LLP group board.

In his new role, Daniels will chair the LLP group board, DACB’s senior governing body responsible for setting and monitoring the firm’s strategic direction. Working closely with the board and the wider leadership team, he will play a central role in progressing long-term objectives and supporting the firm’s continued growth.

Outgoing senior partner Virginia Clegg said she was ‘very pleased to be handing over the baton’, adding that his election ‘reflects the confidence our members have in his experience, leadership and vision’. She welcomed the ‘fresh perspective and energy’ he will bring as she works with him to ensure a smooth transition in the year ahead.

Daniels said he was ‘honoured to have been elected by my partners at such an important time for the firm’ and expressed gratitude for their trust and support. His appointment follows the recent election of Helen Faulkner as managing partner in November 2025, succeeding David Pollitt after his decade of leadership.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll