William Norris KC

In addition to acting as one of the Chairs of Sport Resolutions’ General Panel, the National Anti-Doping Panel, World Athletics, the FA Independent Judicial Panel, and The Hurlingham Polo Association Appeal Panel, William’s particular areas of experience include

• Racing and Bloodstock: as advocate acting for leading owners, trainers over many years in cases heard by the Jockey Club and (more recently) the BHA. Later one of the chairs of the BHA Judicial Panel (resigned 2021). Litigation on behalf or owners, trainers and veterinarians as acting as advocate and as arbitrator and mediator.
• Football: advising or acting as arbitrator/disciplinary panel chair/member of football cases involving- Disciplinary matters generally including Doping- Financial Fair Play and Points Deductions/Penalties for Clubs entering administration- Transfer rules and obligations- Disputes between Agents and players/clubs/governing bodies- Betting
• Selection and Funding disputes (including arguments over venue) involving many  sports and individual athletes as well as sporting/national bodies
• Issues as to the proper and fair regulation of sport including-  Exclusion of competitors (such as those with links to Russia-  Relationship of Clubs with their governing bodies (going back to disputes between the professional clubs and the Welsh Rugby Union in the late 1990s)

William’s expertise in this area has long been recognised in the directories. He acts for claimants and defendants as well as editing the leading textbook (Kemp & Kemp) on personal injury damages.

Cases of Note

• Atmani & Others v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (ongoing) – Acting for the London Fire Commissioner on all civil claims (public and employer’s liability) claims arising out of the Grenfell Tower fire.
• Ford v Seymour-Williams [2021] EWCA Civ 1848 – Animals Act claim (claimant badly injured when rising defendant’s horse which reared as a result of an unforeseeable medical event.
• Murray v Devenish [2018] EWHC 1895 (QB) – Claim by former schoolboy alleging sexual abuse at Catholic seminary in the 1970s raising issues of limitation.
• JL v Archbishop Bowen [2017] EWCA Civ 82 – Claimant alleged sex abuse over 15-year period: issues of consent, vicarious liability and limitation in particular.
• Summers v Fairclough Homes [2012] UKSC 26] – A landmark personal injury case in which the central issue was whether a claimant’s fraud in relation to one part of the claim was fatal to the whole of the claim.
• Poppleton v Trustees of Portsmouth Youth AC [2008] EWCA Civ 646 – Leading case on the extent to which an activity centre owed a common law/supervisory duty to an adult visitor.
• Yates v National Trust [2014] EWHC 222 (QB) – Claimant, a self-employed tree surgeon, suffered catastrophic injuries when falling from a tree while working for an uninsured contractor: claim brought against owner of land which had engaged the contractor.
• Leading Counsel in various cases against motor manufacturers involving Ford, Austin Rover, JLR alleging mechanical defects causing major accidents.

William’s experience is general in this field but with a particular focus on motor manufacturers.

Cases of Note

• Crossley (and others) v Various Defendants (ongoing) – Motor manufacturers alleged to have diesel cars with defeat devices for purposes of emissions testing/controls.
• Moult v Land Rover UK [TCC – October 2005] – Claim alleging fault in computer management systems of Discovery 2.
• Klopper v JLR [2013] – Claim in relation to computer management systems of Discovery 3 (heard in Pretoria jn March 2013 and withdrawn during course of trial).
• Bufton v Hereford Council 2011 – A case which settled shortly before trial involving an allegation against a housing authority/landlord in respect of formaldehyde poisoning claimed to be attributable to the cavity wall insulation.

As a general practitioner, William has had to deal with a wide variety of different categories of claim.

Cases of Note

• Ford v Seymour-Williams [2021] EWCA Civ 1848 (Animals Act)
• Hales v Bourton Vale [2021 QBD] – Negligence claim by racehorse owner against veterinary surgeon.
• Albright & Wilson v Biachem [2002] UKHL 37 – A remarkable case involving the supply of different chemicals by different suppliers who used the same haulier to make deliveries on the same day and they were mixed by mistake causing a very big bang. But it was not clear which supplier was in breach of contract, or whether both were.
• Allen v BREL [2001] EWCA Civ 242 – A case about divisible/indivisible harm and joint/several tortfeasors where claimants had suffered VWF.
• Manchester Ship Canal Co v Vauxhall Motors [2019] UKSC 46 – Claim for relief from forfeiture in relation to a licence for drainage and historic rights under statute.
• Morris v Network Rail [2004] EWCA Civ 172 – A claim in private nuisance arising out of electrical interference with a recording studio caused by the railway’s new signalling circuits.
• Davies v Tinley & Others [2012] – A claim in private nuisance (noise) arising out of the construction and operation of the Deeping St Nicholas wind farm (settled during the course of Queen’s Bench trial)
• Wind Farm Inquiries in Scotland, England and Wales – acting for developers at Inquiry and on Judicial Review challenges
• Advice on Habitats Regulations in relation to offshore wind developments
• Albright & Wilson v Biachem [2002] UKHL 37 (contractual performance/chemical deliveries and explosion)
• Manchester Ship Canal v Vauxhall Motors [2019] UKSC 46 (drainage rights and relief from forfeiture for a licence)
• Jones & Ebbw Vale v WRU and Cardiff v WRU (fair disciplinary process and requirements of fair competition)
• O’Callaghan v Coral Racing [1998] EWCA Civ 1119 (Gambling and Arbitration
• Locobail v Bayfield Properties [2000] QB 451 (judicial bias and recusal)
• Morelli & Coyle v Times Newspapers (defamation)
• Akester and Others v DEFRA and Wightlink [2010] EWHC 232 (judicial review of decision to introduce new ferries – Habitats Regulations etc)
• R v Sec of State and EDF Energy [2008] EWHC 1847 (Admin) (judicial review of Teesside Offshore wind farm)
• Health and Safety defence and prosecutions including R v Condon and Stevens (Metropolitan Police Commissioners)

William has acted for and advised developers (and some others) in a wide-ranging series of wind farm inquiries and judicial reviews and in offshore consenting challenges and particularly where the Conservation/Habitats Regulations are involved.

Cases of Note

• Advice on Habitats Regulations in relation to offshore wind developments
• Albright & Wilson v Biachem [2002] UKHL 37 – contractual performance/chemical deliveries and explosion
• Manchester Ship Canal v Vauxhall Motors [2019] UKSC 46 – drainage rights and relief from forfeiture for a licence
• Akester and Others v DEFRA and Wightlink [2010] EWHC 232 – judicial review of decision to introduce new ferries – Habitats Regulations etc
• R v Sec of State and EDF Energy [2008] EWHC 1847 (Admin) – judicial review of Teesside Offshore wind farm

• BSE Inquiry (acting for Southwood Working Party)
• Grenfell Inquiry (supporting LFB)