Skip to content

Meredith Daniel

Call 2017

Personal Injury

Meredith has a broad personal injury practice spanning road traffic, employer’s liability and public liability claims. She has extensive experience in conducting fast track cases and has acted in multiple multi-track cases both led and unled. Meredith has experience in advising and representing both claimants and defendants.

Meredith has particular experience in personal injury cases where there are concerns about fundamental dishonesty and more information can be found in the section on Civil Insurance/Fraud.

As well as extensive experience representing clients at trial, Meredith is regularly instructed in a range of interlocutory applications including strike out, relief from sanctions and extension of time. Meredith succeeded at first instance, and on appeal, in an application contesting the court’s jurisdiction in a claim where the claim form was served in accordance with the notice of issue but not in accordance with the date on the claim form due to a procedural irregularity.

Meredith has experience drafting a wide range of documents in cases at a fast track and multi-track level including pleadings, schedules and counter-schedules, part 18 questions and part 35 questions.

Meredith’s cases regularly involve three or more disciplines of medical evidence. She has experience acting for claimants and defendants in cases with complex, overlapping and pre-existing medical conditions.

Meredith is regularly instructed in the following types of cases:

1)            Claims involving invisible injuries including tinnitus and whiplash. Meredith has a broad range of experience in these types of claims including conducting conferences with experts on complex matters of causation, drafting counter-schedules, advising on settlement and part 36 tactics, and conducting cross-examination of claimants based on inconsistent accounts of their symptoms.

2)            Claims involving chronic pain. This includes experience with complex claims involving disputes between orthopaedic, psychiatric and chronic pain evidence.

3)            Claims involving PTSD. Meredith has particular experience in advising and cross-examining in claims where there has been no contemporaneous reporting, or inconsistent reporting, with respect to significant psychological symptoms.

4)            Claims involving traumatic brain injuries, both led and unled.

5)            Highways Act cases concerning pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. This also includes experience of novel claims concerning liability where the claimant is using an e-scooter contrary to the Road Traffic Act at the time of the accident.

6)            She recently acted on a Highways Act claim concerning whether or not an object placed into a defect by an unknown third party and which was the point of contact in the accident was capable of constituting a dangerous defect. Meredith successfully argued that the object did not constitute the fabric of the highway and the Claimant ought, therefore, be limited to a claim in negligence.

7)            Outside of the Highways Act Meredith has experience of acting for utility companies where claimants have brought negligence claims against the utility company directly in respect of defective manholes or utility covers.

8)            Employer’s liability claims. This includes a broad range of cases including falls from height, slips, incidents involving stairs, and injuries caused by colleagues. Meredith’s work on health and safety cases assists her when advising and making submissions on what is likely to be “reasonably practicable.” Meredith has experience with claims involving repetitive strain injuries. This includes experience in cases concerning the repeated lifting of heavy objects and cases concerning the ergonomics of the claimant’s work.

9)            Cases concerning the Employer’s Liability (Defective Equipment) Act 1969.

10)         Public liability claims. This includes successfully arguing, following a significant finger trap injury, that the duty of care required of a pub did not extend to the installation of finger guards to doors in circumstances where the room was regularly used for children’s birthday parties.

11)         Dangerous dog cases. This includes drafting pleadings relating to the claimant being a trespasser in a case in which the claimant was permitted to enter the home but not to enter the room containing the dog.

Selected Cases

View full profile »


  • Hardwicke Entrance Award, Lincoln’s Inn (2017)
  • Lord Denning Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn (2016)
  • Oxford University Press Law Prize for highest graduating LLB student, University of York (2014)




  • BPTC, BPP Law School (2017)
  • LLM, Distinction (1st in year), University of York (2015)
  • LLB Law, First Class Honours with Distinction (1st in year), University of York (2011-2014)

Portfolio Builder


Select the practice areas that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download Add to portfolio
Portfolio close
Title Type CV Email

Remove All