header-logo header-logo

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

Quillon Law—Neil Dooley

Disputes firm expands fraud and investigations practice with partner hire

Disputes boutique Quillon Law has appointed Neil Dooley as partner from Steptoe, further strengthening its civil fraud and investigations practice. Neil’s arrival follows the addition of partner Ian Hargreaves last year and underscores the firm’s ambition to build its capabilities in large-scale, cross-border fraud litigation, commercial disputes, and white-collar investigations.

A specialist in complex, multi-jurisdictional cases involving Eastern Europe and the CIS region, Neil has acted for clients across the financial services, insurance, pharmaceutical, and property sectors. He is recognised for his strategic approach to fraud cases, particularly in securing freezing orders, tracing assets, and achieving practical commercial outcomes for clients. His experience spans commercial litigation, international arbitration, white-collar defence, WTO disputes, and asset recovery, frequently working alongside foreign lawyers and law enforcement agencies worldwide.

Neil said: ‘Over the past few years, Quillon Law has established itself as one of London’s most dynamic litigation boutiques. I am thrilled to be joining the partnership and look forward to contributing to the firm’s reputation for delivering results in complex and high-profile commercial disputes.’

Partner Mark Hastings added: ‘Neil is an exceptional litigator with an outstanding record in complex fraud and international disputes. His arrival underlines our commitment to offering clients world-class expertise and strategic insight across the full spectrum of commercial and white-collar matters.’ Neil’s appointment brings Quillon Law’s partner count to seven, marking another milestone in the firm’s continued growth.

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