Rosemary Jackson KC

Commercial (non-construction)

• Multi-party dispute concerning follow-on claims for damages consequent upon OFT finding of abuse of dominant position.

• Claim for misrepresentation and breach of warranty in relation to due diligence processes for Sale and Purchase Agreement.

• Breach of copyright claim in relation to housing development.

• Breach of confidentiality claim in relation to introduction to a land purchase opportunity.

• Dispute concerning alleged shortfall in throughput achieved by design and supply of a dry batching mixing and blending systems for foodstuffs.

• Dispute concerning liability for fines imposed by the European Court for anti-competitive (cartel) practices.

• Disputed success fee on settlement of major insurance litigation.

• Dispute related to validity of market research data.

Conciliations 

• Conducted a conciliation over 6 weeks in relation to the termination of a prestigious civic regeneration project.

• Conducted ICE conciliation in respect of adverse physical conditions encountered during demolition works.

Construction 

• Several disputes up to 6 parties and £160m arising from settlement of concrete slabs/piles in industrial premises.

• £2bn dispute relating to a complex infrastructure project.

• Disputes relating to heave and environmental damage to waterways and SSSIs as a result of using steel slag fill.

• Final account disputes.

• Delay and disruption claims – JCT, NEC and bespoke contracts.

• Alleged design and construction defects in curtain-walling, overcladding, thermal insulation, roofs, air-conditioning, windows, kitchen equipment, acoustics, drainage.

• Asbestos removal.

• Non-compliance with conditions of planning permission.

• Payment dispute under Term Contracts pursuant to Framework Agreement.

• Dispute concerning responsibility for spread of fire through newly built premises.

Energy (onshore and offshore, oil, gas, electricity)

• Mechanical equipment and pipework installation and erection for a Fischer Tropsch design
  reactor – compensation events (NEC3).

• Subsea pipeline trenching and backfilling dispute – site investigation information.

• Dispute relating to cathodic protection to undersea oil pipeline.

Engineering (civil, structural, process, mechanical and electrical)

• Delays and compensation claims (NEC), final account disputes (FIDIC, FCEC).

• Design of dehumidification and air-conditioning plant, ventilation and smoke/fire safety systems.

• Alleged negligence in carrying out non-destructive survey to locate underground features, interpretation of standard terms and conditions.

• Disputed responsibility for defects in lift installation in a school.

• Disputes relating to ground engineering, site investigations, anchor piling works, combo-piles and diaphragm walls.

• Dispute relating to scope of design requirement in project management of the M & E works in a design and build contract for a military field hospital.

• Dispute relating to performance of baggage handling/security screening equipment.

• Dispute relating to ground and surface water design, and landslips during conversion of a
  disused quarry to landfill site.

Facilitation 

• Facilitated a 3-party commercial settlement meeting under an NHS PFI contract.

• Facilitated at 3 day workshop for Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot business leaders, politicians and leaders of civic society promoted by Engi and UNDP under the Participatory Peacemaking Project for Cyprus.

Independent Chair

• Appointed July 2016 as Independent Chair of Euston and Camden Community Group engagement meetings in reltion to HS2.

Insurance

• Dispute concerning construction of Professional Indemnity policy and extent of cover.

• Claim by contractor against Professional Indemnity insurers for indemnity against sums paid to employer in respect of alleged negligence in design of conversion of derelict institutional building–sub-floor ventilation.

• Claim by buildings insurer against surveyor in respect of excessive rebuilding costs due to negligent design and contract administration.

• Dispute concerning the consequences of a piling rig overturning.

International

• Disputes up to 5 days’ duration relating to projects in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Cayman, Denmark, Egypt, Georgia, India, Jordan, Libya, Madagascar, Qatar, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, West Indies.

Party Wall

• Protracted dispute between individual householders about validity and correctness of party wall
  award, quantum of compensation, ancillary issues.

• 8-party dispute concerning party wall awards, boundary dispute and 5 separate professional
  negligence claims.

PFI

• Facilitated legal workshop in relation to a dispute arising out of cancellation of a PFI project.

• Disputed sub-contract formation for mechanical and electrical works (PFI).

• Dispute concerning calculation of contribution payable towards Unitary Service Charge (USC) under a PFI project.

• Evaluation and mediation of a dispute concerning alleged design defects in a PFI hospital redevelopment.

• Dispute concerning defects in BSF PFI Schools construction.

Process Plant

• Alleged defects in design and construction of sequencing batch reactor.

• Disputed variations in sub-contract for supply and installation of chemical dosing rig.

• Disputed final account for construction of desalination plant.

• Alleged defects in water evaporation and ph correction plant for volume reduction of hazardous waste water.

• Dispute concerning termination of a contract for installation of a biofuels plant.

• Dispute concerning Microbially Induced Corrosion (MIC) due to SRB in condenser.

• Alleged negligence in provision of COMAH report.

• Disputes relating to performance of anaerobic digesters.

Professional negligence

• Allegedly negligent performance of architects, engineers and quantity surveyors’ duties.

• Solicitor’s negligence – failure to issue proceedings in time.

• Solicitor’s negligence – drafting of settlement documentation in divorce proceedings.

• Solicitor’s negligence in conduct of TOLATA proceedings.

• Alleged negligence by architects in advising prospective developer prior to land purchase.

• Alleged negligence by architects providing design services to design and build contractor – delay and alleged defects.

• Alleged negligence and breach of contract in carrying out asbestos surveys and COMAH reports.

• Alleged negligence by Party Wall surveyors and engineers.

• Alleged negligence by funder’s monitoring surveyors.

Transport (rail and underground infrastructure and rolling stock)

• Claim for increased costs under contract for disposal of contaminated spoil from civil engineering works to improve underground railways – hazardous and non-hazardous waste.

• Claim for damage to railway infrastructure due to water run-off from adjacent quarry.

• £200m dispute in respect of compensation events and other issues in relation to a major railway infrastructure project.

Water

• Dispute re water damage to properties under construction, allegedly due to escape of water during mains diversion, or from leaking.

• Alleged defects in design and build of sewage treatment works – dosing and odour control.

• Sewer collapse – effect of pre-existing condition of sewer and/or overlying spoil heaps.

• Subsidence after alleged blockage of surface water drain.

• Damage to, and blockage of, deep sewer after compression grouting – dynamic probing, protection of buried services – construction of contract.

• Responsibility for supply and payment of water supplies to industrial estates, method of charging.

• Design and construction of plant producing polished water.

• Disputes relating to compensation events in installation of pump shafts and water mains under NEC3 form of contract.

• “Clearly the pre-eminent mediator of her generation. There is no other construction mediator that is anywhere near her class.”

• “As you know, we work with many mediators from all around the world, but your responsiveness, attention to detail, care and follow-ups were just outstanding”.

• Always well prepared and demonstrates a detailed and clear understanding of the dispute. She is, therefore, able to assist the parties by making clear evaluations of their strengths and weaknesses. In doing so, she is skilled both on legal principles but also commercial issues…. I would consider her one of my “go-to” mediators.”

• “She was excellent and helped achieve a great settlement. The Claimant and Defendant have ongoing separate contractual relationships and Rosemary was fantastic at negotiating a settlement without inflaming the parties, so that their other business activities could continue despite the claim at hand. Rosemary had a sound grasp of the technical data and legal/factual issues in dispute. She has a wealth of experience and adopts a commercial approach to mediation, taking on board the parties issues and providing sensible advice and guidance through the day. My clients were particularly pleased as they did not feel under any pressure to settle at a point beyond their bottom line, however, the common sense approach adopted by Rosemary in dealing with the offers passing back and forth resulted in a satisfactory settlement for both parties. Rosemary has a fantastic reputation and it is well deserved. Both I and my clients will definitely instruct Rosemary in the future”.

• “I think she has all the usual mediator qualities – whether lawyer or non-lawyer – in considerable quantity. She has them genuinely and does not have them in a forced or artificial way. She comes across as empathetic without appearing over touchy-feely, for example.”

• “Rosemary brought her extensive skills and experience to bear on the process right from the start. She read the papers thoroughly, suggested ways to make the process more likely to produce a successful outcome, and quickly gained the clients’ confidence on both sides. When the process threatened to result in deadlock, it was Rosemary who found a way to cut through the differences, leading to an overall settlement.”

• “My client and their team were really positive about the experience of having you as mediator and maintained that positive attitude throughout the two day process. Thank you for your hard work and for keeping up such a pace! It was the most active mediation I have ever been in! I will recommend you to my colleagues and look forward to working with you again.”

• “You possess some special qualities which make the process of mediation calm with down to earth humanity, and I thank you very much for this. Whilst the whole litigation process has been a very wearing one for me I can honestly say you helped me with focusing on the issues to consider. At long last I feel the burden on [us] is now released so that we can get on with our lives”.

• “[the client] had no expectations as the parties were so entrenched so the fact that the parties reached a settlement is extreme credit to the mediator. He was enormously impressed with her – her manner was spot on throughout the day. She made it feel as though the parties were leading, obviously they weren’t but it was done in a charming way you couldn’t help but to go with it. The mediator drove it forward. She was well prepared and knew the case inside out at the start of the day, she asked the parties “How can I best help you to achieve a settlement position?”. Although there was still a gap between the parties towards the end, the mediator gave her perspective on an appropriate settlement figure (with the parties’ consent) . This helped focus the parties, the actual settlement figure was almost the same figure.”

• “Clients very impressed by you as mediator (as was I), and pleased with settlement. I have to say I think you should put it into one of your “settled the unsettlable” case studies. You really were very good indeed. Excellent level of preparation. [My lay and professional clients] were enormously impressed by the depth of knowledge, your familiarity with the various reports, but also that you had a proper understanding of the overall picture of the case. Your delivery of the [requested] evaluation was also very impressive. You exuded an air of such complete confidence in yourself, your knowledge, your expertise and the process that it all seemed very easy. As regards sensitivity to commercial issues, this was brilliantly done – [the clients’] confidence and trust in you were cemented by your approach, and they really felt that you had understood their position”.

• “My clients and the whole team have nothing but admiration for the calm, firm and resilient way in which you dealt with what must have appeared to have been an intractable dispute and entrenched parties. Although I had explained to my client that mediation works even in the most difficult of circumstances there were times when I really thought that we would not conclude an agreement. That we did is down to your skill and steel.”

• “You kept going when I’m pretty sure both parties had given up and for that I am eternally grateful. You managed to resolve a situation in 6 hours that had been going for 20 months which is a testament both to the mediation process and your expertise. Without your help I would no doubt have been bankrupted by the cost of the litigation process and would have had to have gone through another year or two of legal hell. Thank You doesn’t seem to be enough”.

• “Rosemary – you were brilliant. Really, really appreciated your approach and input. I have done about 40+ and you were way up there as absolutely “magic”. [The client] liked/respected you and that was the clincher”.

• “You did a wonderful job yesterday. You did not have an easy task, yet you managed to start a momentum and kept it going to a successful conclusion, by applying just the right amount of pressure when necessary, and comforting very tired, weary, and hungry people as the day wore on – and all without showing any signs of fatigue or frustration.”

• “I would like to thank you for the part you played in this settlement and for the competent and professional manner that the mediation was run. ……. On the whole … to say you impressed me greatly is an understatement. You knocked my socks off!”

• “Very many thanks for the way you dealt with things at the mediation and subsequently. You were very busy and proactive during the day (something that we do not see in all mediators) and I think that intensity of effort really helped bridge the gap between the parties.”