Simon Hughes

An excellent barrister and a safe pair of hands across the entire spectrum of personal injury matters.

Legal 500 2023

Simon Hughes

  • Called in 2003

Personal Injury

Simon’s practice covers the full range of Personal Injury work. he is instructed by many of the leading personal injury firms in the country in relation to claims of significant value and importance.

He has extensive experience in relation to cases involving fatalities, catastrophic injuries and chronic pain and he is recommended in the leading directories for this work.

Simon also regularly appears in inquests arising from a contemplated personal injury claim.

View full profile >>

Notable Cases


Cowley v LW Carlisle & Company Ltd
Acted for the Defendant in respect of a first and then second appeal before the Court of Appeal. Issue as to the status of the dissolved and unrestored Defendant in the context of an historical industrial disease claim. Instructed by insurer to resist appeal against first instance Judge’s decision to strike the claim out. Viewed as a case of particular significance for insurers and one of considerable value across the insurer’s book. Appeal successfully resisted before Circuit Judge and thereafter before Court of Appeal. Claimant’s solicitors ordered to pay the wasted costs of the appeal.

L v 01408357 LTD (3) and E LTD (4)
Acted unled for Third Defendant in successful resistance of appeals in relation to dismissal of personal injury claim on grounds of limitation. Difficult arguments raised as to capacity on behalf of Claimant who lost capacity during currency of proceedings. Fourth Defendant represented by Leading Counsel. Appeal dismissed by Andrews J. (High Court/Q.B.D)

AE (Executor of RE – deceased) v CS (1) SRI Ltd (2)
Acted for Claimant in relation to tragic claim in respect of the death of mother and wife in road traffic accident. Acted alone in opposition to Leading Counsel. Claims under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 and the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 compromised at over £600,000. Child’s significant personal injury claim is ongoing. (High Court/Q.B.D)

Read more

ERS Ltd v SA
Acted for the Defendant in fraudulent claim brought following admitted significant road traffic accident. Issue as to who was driver at material time with no witnesses beyond parties and car burnt at scene. Acted for Defendant in respect of 4 day trial, subsequent committal proceedings and application to purge contempt (High Court/ Q.B.D.)

RM (by way of Litigation Friend MM) v VWM Ltd
Acted for the Claimant in relation to significant head injury resulting in loss of capacity. Claimant had no recollection of events and no witnesses. Defendant alleged injury most likely caused by pre-existing medical conditions. Matter settled shortly before 5 day contested liability trial at R.C.J. Lump sum award subsequently approved by Mr David Locke Q.C. sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge. (High Court / Q.B.D.)

AK v MGT Ltd
Acting alone for a Claimant who suffered a severe arm injury rendering him permanently unfit for physical work when he fell 30 feet through the roof of the Defendant’s premises while at work. Liability disputed. Schedule of Loss advanced to £1.1M. (High Court / Q.B.D)

DW v CT Ltd
Acted for the Claimant in a fatal road traffic accident claim. Deceased was a high earner and father to two school aged children. Defendant raised significant issues in relation to likely period of dependency and career progression. (High Court / Q.B.D)

JS v PCC
Acted for the Claimant in a claim where a Claimant who suffered a relatively minor fall at work went onto develop significant psychological symptoms which affected her capability to continue to work. Significant volume of medical opinion as to causation of symptoms and attribution to index accident. Experts on behalf of Claimant and Defendant in respect of 6 different medical disciplines. Matter listed for 5 day trial and settled shortly before for £375,000 (High Court/Q.B.D.)

SMS v SP Ltd
Acted for the Defendant in claim following property collapse. Claims for pain disorder and permanent inability to work. Claim advanced to over £500k. Matter settled on morning of trial following receipt of Defendant’s Skeleton Argument for a fraction of pleaded sum.

DB v NCS Ltd
Acted for the Defendant in respect of three day trial arising out of accident alleged to have occurred when Claimant fell at work. Defendant accepted breach of duty if fact of accident proved but alleged that claim was dishonest and accident happened when Claimant was at home. Claim dismissed and QoCS waived pursuant to CPR 44.16.

JK v SG Ltd (1) and TS Limited (2)
Acted for the Second Defendant in 5-day liability trial in relation to a collision between picker trucks at Defendant’s warehouse resulting in amputation of Claimant’s large toe. Issues in relation to responsibility of the Second Defendant for training and instruction along with culpability of Claimant by way of horseplay.

JB (Executor of SB – deceased) v NCC (1) GW (2)
Acting for the Claimant, in a fatal accident at work. Deceased stepped into path of digger due to inadequate traffic division. Ongoing HSE investigation. Liability and contributory negligence in issue. Instructed to attended Inquest. Very high value claim.

RR v CICA
Successful appeal against decision of Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority to refuse an award to a man left with ‘locked-in syndrome’ following an assault. Quantum ongoing.

HC v CVUHB
Acting for a Claimant who suffered two sexual assaults by her physiotherapist during treatment following the birth of her child. Breach of duty admitted. Claimant left suffering significant psychiatric symptoms as a result.

JS v NK
Acted for Claimant in case of severe multiple injury road traffic accident resulting in Claimant being confined to high dependency unit for a period of weeks and subsequent criminal conviction on the part of the Defendant. Advised in writing, conference and drafted schedule. Expert reports obtained from consultants in Orthopaedics, Neurology, Ophthalmics, Psychiatry and General Surgery. Case settled for in excess of £250,000.

Read less

If you would like to instruct Simon Hughes or would like help or advice in doing so, please call and talk to our excellent clerking team, led by Chief Executive/Director of Clerking, Paul Cray. Our phone number is +44 (0)20 7583 9241. Alternatively, please email us at chambers@farrarsbuilding.co.uk

For more information about our clerking team, please click here for the clerks page.

Appointments & Memberships


  • Recorder (Wales)
  • Deputy District Judge (Midlands)
  • Pupil Supervisor
  • Pupil Supervisor trainer for Wales & Chester Circuit
  • Previous contributing Author of Butterworth’s Personal Injury Law and Practice
  • Part-time Lecturer Cardiff Law School (2013-14)

Education & Qualifications


  • Ysgol Friars, Bangor
  • University of Liverpool
  • Bar Vocational Course, The University of Nottingham

 

Directory Quotes


“Simon is always efficient with the papers, gives good, clear advice and is willing to address any query that may arise from his advice in a timely manner.” “He is very good on his feet and methodical in his approach.” “Simon is measured, reliable and thorough.” “He is a safe pair of hands and can be trusted with the most sensitive and complex cases.”
“Simon is an all-round excellent barrister.” Chambers UK 2025 – Tier 1

‘Simon has the great balance of analyzing complex and technical issues and evidence but also has excellent client care skills.’ Legal 500 2025

“He has an outstanding ability to argue difficult cases.” Chambers UK – Tier 2

Simon is an excellent barrister and a safe pair of hands across the entire spectrum of personal injury matters. A superb cross-examiner, very thorough and knowledgeable, and excellent with clients.’ Legal 500 – Band 1, Leading Junior for Personal Injury

“particular expertise in cases involving industrial disease and fatal accident claims. He is also regularly instructed in cases involving elements of fraud.” Chambers UK – Tier 2

“…very calm and considered which helps put clients at ease. He is pragmatic and sensible, taking into consideration the difficulties with litigated case loads, as opposed aggressive and antagonistic which does not necessarily serve in the best interests of the client.”  Legal 500 – Band 1