header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
05 January 2026
Categories: Movers & Shakers , Profession
printer mail-detail

Hogan Lovells—David Hansom

Government contracts and procurement practice expands with London partner hire

Hogan Lovells has appointed David Hansom as a partner in its global regulatory & IP practice group, focusing on government contracts and procurement, including in the education sector. Based in London, he joins from Clyde & Co, where he led the procurement law team and co-headed the global education sector.

Hansom brings more than 20 years’ experience advising on public procurement, subsidy control and government contracting across sectors including defence, energy transition, real estate, education and healthcare. His work spans the UK, EU and GCC, and he is recognised in legal directories for his public procurement, education and healthcare expertise.

Charles Brasted, deputy practice group leader for global regulatory & IP, said Hansom’s arrival ‘strengthens our ability to advise in the ever-evolving area of public procurement and government contracts’, adding that his experience ‘aligns perfectly with our strategic priorities and client needs’.

Hansom said: ‘I’m thrilled to join Hogan Lovells and contribute to its global government contracts offering.’ He added that the firm’s ‘commitment to excellence and international reach aligns with my approach to client service and sector development’.

Categories: Movers & Shakers , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
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
Read All
NLJ this week: Surrogacy children caught in succession gap
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’
NLJ this week: Online safety law at a crossroads
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
NLJ this week: Do Mandelson and Mountbatten-Windsor meet the misconduct bar?
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
NLJ this week: Supreme Court unlocks ‘lost years’ windfall for injured children
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
NLJ this week: Finality trumps freedom in arbitration showdown
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll