Look who’s back – Goodhead returns to challenge ex-firm


Goodhead: Focus is not on the past

Tom Goodhead, who was ousted last year as the boss of Pogust Goodhead (PG), is leading efforts to wrestle control of the case away from it, he confirmed yesterday.

“My return is about serving the clients and ensuring that hundreds of thousands of people have the representation they deserve,” he said in a statement.

There was an indication that he was involved when Bailey Glasser International (BGI) – a new joint venture between an English law firm run by former PG staff and US firm Bailey & Glasser – announced at the start of the month that the client committee last week decided to change solicitors.

PG is challenging its authority to do this and an expedited hearing is due in three weeks’ time.

BGI is a trading name of Edward McCourt & Co, a City law firm that has a “commercial cooperation agreement” with Bailey & Glasser.

Since February, Edward McCourt & Co has been owned by Jeremy Evans, who up to that point had been a senior partner at PG. Tom Goodhead was briefly a director of Edward McCourt last November.

Mr Goodhead, a barrister, set up what was originally called SPG Law in 2018 in Liverpool and initiated the Mariana Dam litigation the same year

He was pushed out a year ago during a messy public fall-out with allegations flying on both sides.

Mr Goodhead claimed this was because he was resisting pressure from PG’s funder, Gramercy, to accept a settlement he thought would have “vastly undervalued” the dam claim.

As well as former PG partners Jeremy Evans, Faranak Ghajavand and Guy Robson, BGI has instructed senior barristers who have worked on the case since the start of the trial, including Alain Choo Choy KC and Andrew Fulton KC.

BGI said that, in total, more than 15 lawyers with experience on the case were joining.

Mr Goodhead said: “It is an extraordinary honour to return to this case. My focus is not on the past, nor on a dispute between law firms.

“It is on the people affected by Mariana, on the justice they have been waiting for over a decade, and on ensuring that the case is in the strongest possible position going forward. I feel an enormous responsibility to help conclude what we started eight years ago.”




Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog


Beyond the PII premium – rethinking risk

Professional indemnity insurance renewal is often treated as an annual pricing exercise. But it is also a chance to show how effectively you identify, manage and mitigate risk.


The AI governance gap in law firms and why it matters now

A third of law firms are already using AI tools with no formal policy in place to govern how AI gets used, what data goes into it, or who’s accountable when something goes wrong.


Information isn’t oversight – lessons from the PM Law review

The PM Law review’s real findings perhaps point to a failure mode applying to any organisation sitting on scattered risk information.


Loading animation