Find the answers to your court transcriptions questions; whether relating to admin court, criminal court, civil court or private transcriptions.
If you would like an update on the status of your request, please contact us via the relevant email address.
We are open from 9 am to 5:30 pm, Monday to Friday.
Such cases are handled by another Opus 2 department. Please contact firstname.lastname@example.org for assistance with your request.
You can find court contact details here.
There are essentially three stages to our transcription process: Pre-transcription, Transcription and Post-transcription. There are slight variations in the process depending on whether or not your transcript relates to a court hearing.
In the pre-transcription stage, we provide a transcript cost estimate. If you are happy with the estimate, we ask you to confirm your wish to proceed and make the appropriate payment. Unless the transcript is paid for at public expense, you are an existing client with whom we have a prior arrangement or you are a government body, we must receive payment before we can proceed to transcribe.
You must send Form EX107 to the court (and a copy to us, please see the relevant email address) to request permission for the transcript. If the court grants permission, the signed EX107 is sent to us together with the recording. Depending on when the hearing was held, the recording will be sent to us either on a CD or as an electronic file. On receipt of the recording, we check to ensure we have been sent the correct recording and we identify when the hearing or (part(s) of the hearing) begins and ends – we refer to this as "verification".
The recording is normally sent to us at the same time payment is made. At this stage, you should also tell us whether you have any specific requirements in relation to how you would like the transcript to be set out (for example, how you would like the speaker to be labelled and whether you require timestamps). If you are unsure of the format, please see here for examples of our standard format. Once the recording is received it will be verified (i.e. we will check to ensure the recording is as expected in terms of length and audio quality).
Once the recording is verified it is assigned to a transcriber for transcription within the chosen turnaround time. This closes the Pre-transcription stage.
The transcription stage commences once the recording is assigned to a transcriber or transcribers. Depending on the length of the recording and to ensure that we can offer you the best turnaround time, the transcript may be completed by more than one transcriber. All our transcribers work to the same standards, so the transcript will be seamless.
We move to the next stage once the draft transcript is produced.
In the post-transcription stage, the draft transcript is reviewed in detail by our staff. We refer to this as "quality checking". All transcripts are quality checked to ensure compliance with our strict quality standards.
Where a transcript relates to a court hearing, unless the transcript is a judgment, it will be released to you once it has been quality checked. Where the transcript is a judgment it is first sent to the judge for approval. We do not have any control over the length of time it takes to approve the judgment. The judgment will be released to you once it has been approved by the judge.
A transcript that does not relate to a court hearing will be released to you once it has been quality checked.
If payment is due but was not made in the Pre-transcription stage, an invoice will normally be issued within 10 working days of you receiving the transcript. Payment is required within 30 days. Your order will be closed once payment is made.
Anyone can order a transcript. However, the court’s permission is required before we (or anyone) can produce the transcript.
Transcripts are ordered by completing Form EX107. The EX107 is the form used to request the court's permission for a hearing, or part(s) of a hearing, to be transcribed. The form should be completed and sent to the court where the hearing took place and copied to us at the relevant email address (details of which are located here). For further information please refer to the Guidance Note.
We will provide an estimate of the cost for the transcript. If you are happy with the estimate, we ask you to confirm your wish to proceed and make the appropriate payment. Unless the transcript is paid for at public expense, you are an existing client with whom we have a prior arrangement or you are a government body, we must receive payment before we can proceed to transcribe. We will commence transcription once we receive payment and the court signed EX107 together with the recording.
A court hearing cannot be transcribed by two different companies, so we would be unable to assist. We recommend that you liaise with the original transcription company to attempt to resolve your dissatisfaction.
If the transcript does not relate to a court hearing, we would be happy to review the audio to see if we can assist. Please contact us to request an estimate. It would be useful if you also provide a copy of the existing transcript and details of what you find unsatisfactory about it to email@example.com or as a hard copy to Opus 2 Digital Transcription, 5th Floor, 5 New Street Square, London, EC4A 3BF.
Alternatively, you can send the recording electronically, via our Opus 2 Transfer platform. Opus 2 Transfer is our secure file transfer platform through which we can securely send and receive data. It is easy to use - all you need is an email address. Please contact us for further information.
We cannot transcribe if we do not have the court signed EX107.
The court may be able to assist you in obtaining the information you need. We recommend that you contact the court where the proceedings/hearing took place for assistance. You can find court contact details here.
Unless the court themselves submit the EX107, the EX107 that you submit must be accompanied by a sealed court order showing that the court has ordered the transcript to be paid for at public expense.
Where a transcript is paid for at public expense, the court (as the party paying for the transcript) becomes the transcript requestor. As such, the transcript will be provided to the court and the court will then distribute it as appropriate.
Not all transcripts require judge’s approval. However, occasionally a judge may direct that the draft transcript is referred to him/her for approval. Where this occurs, the draft transcript is sent to the judge for review to ensure he/she is satisfied with the content. The transcript is released only once the judge has given approval.
There is no set timeframe for the judge to approve the transcript. The time taken depends on the judge and his/her schedule. For this reason, our turnaround times do not include the approval time.
If the wrong recording is sent to us, we will contact the court to request the correct recording. The turnaround time will begin when we receive the correct recording.
We are unable to provide a copy of the recording to you. However, you can contact the court to request permission to listen to the recording yourself. You may have to attend the court to listen to the recording.
We are unable to release information about requests made by another party.
One possible reason is that we are the only company authorised to produce the transcript. We are the exclusive transcript providers for hearings held in the North East Crown Courts. A list of the North East Crown Courts is found here. Similarly, we produce all judgments from the London Administrative Court. If your transcript request relates to a hearing in one of these courts you can obtain the transcript only from us (which the court should be aware of) and it is likely that, in an effort to expedite the process, the court sent the request to us rather than require you to amend your request.
Alternatively, it may be that your request relates to a hearing that we have already transcribed. If that is the case, the court would have sent the request to us for a copy of the transcript to be provided to you.
Opus 2 is the exclusive transcription provider for Crown Court hearings in the North East region. You cannot obtain a transcript from another provider.
We have exclusive responsibility for transcribing Administrative Court judgments. You cannot obtain the transcript from another provider.
We are unable to transcribe extracts of 20 minutes or less.
Opus 2 court reporters (alternatively referred to as loggers) are sometimes required to attend hearings in the Administrative Court, at the judges' request. The court reporter is responsible for noting relevant information to aid the transcription that will follow the hearing. The court reporter does not take part in the proceedings.
This depends on the court. The court may have destroyed the recording, but it is possible that they have retained it. We recommend that you contact the court to find out. You can find the contact details of the court here.
Please let us know as soon as possible by contacting us by email or phone. Our contact details are here.
No charge will be incurred if you cancel your order before the recording is assigned to a transcriber.
If you decide to cancel your order after the recording has been allocated you will be charged for the number of folios completed at the time of cancellation.
Any refund due will be reimbursed within 10 working days of cancellation.
We offer a variety of timeframes, as detailed below. Our service levels are strictly subject to availability, although we will make every effort to accommodate your request if possible.
Each service has a different charge rate, which varies depending on the jurisdiction. Please contact us for the rate applicable to the service levels.
If your transcript does not relate to a court hearing we may be able to offer a 24-hour turnaround. Please contact us to discuss.
Unless exceptional circumstances arise, the transcript will be provided to you within the turnaround time selected. The turnaround time begins from the date we receive the recording or payment (where upfront payment is required), whichever is later.
The exception to this is a transcript of a judgment. A judgment must be approved by the judge. We do not have any control over the time taken for approval, therefore this time is not included in our turnaround timeframe. The judgment will be sent to you once it is approved.
There is no set timeframe for the judge to approve a judgment. The time taken depends on the judge and his/her schedule. For this reason, our turnaround times do not include judgment approval time.
Your completed transcript will be sent to you by e-mail as a Word document. It will be sent to the email address detailed on the EX107. If you do not have an email address the transcript will be sent to the postal address detailed on the EX107.
We provide the transcript to you as soon as we can, in accordance with the timeframe you have selected. However, this is dependent on receipt of the recording from the court and, where the transcript is a judgment, approval of the judgment. We do not have any control over either of these events.
If you have not received the transcript within the timeframe you expected, it may be that we await either the recording from the court in order to start transcription, or (if the transcript is a judgment) the judge's approval of the transcript in order to release it.
If you would like an update on the status of your request, please email us and we will revert to you.
You do not have to order the whole hearing. Depending on the jurisdiction, you can order one or more of the following types of transcription:
Unless otherwise directed by the court, judgments are produced as intelligent transcripts which are subject to the judge's approval.
All other aspects of the hearing are produced as verbatim transcripts unless otherwise directed by the court.
We can transcribe from a video. We can transcript the actions, as well as the words that are spoken. Please contact us on firstname.lastname@example.org for a cost estimate.
The information needed depends on the transcript type. However, in general, it is useful to have the following information:
All our staff agree to maintain confidentiality as a condition of their employment. All our transcribers sign a statement of compliance, data protection confidentiality and security agreement. Confidentiality is always maintained, in accordance with our data protection policy.
There is no fixed cost for a transcript. The cost depends on the number of folios and the turnaround time selected.
The actual number folios are not known prior to transcription, even if the length of the recording is known. This is because the rate of speaking varies from person to person, so the recording’s length is not a precise basis for determining the cost. Therefore, prior to transcription, we can provide only an estimate of the likely cost. Our estimate reflects what is, in our experience, the average number of words spoken during an hour-long recording. The number of folios can ultimately be more, or less, than our estimate.
Please see below for the current rates applicable to court transcripts at the respective service levels. Please contact us for rates applicable to other transcripts.
Folio rate exc. VAT (one folio is 72 words)
Turnaround (from date of receipt of audio)
Civil & Family
Administrative Court & Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
2 working days
3 working days
7 working days
12 working days
The ultimate cost depends on the number of folios and the turnaround time selected. We do not know the number of folios prior to transcription; therefore, prior to transcription, we cannot know the ultimate cost. Although the length of the recording may be known, the actual folio will not be known until the transcript is completed. This is because the rate of speaking varies from person to person, so the recording’s length is not a precise basis for determining the cost. Therefore, prior to transcription, we can provide only an estimate. Our estimate reflects what is, in our experience, the average number of words spoken during an hour-long recording. The number of folios can ultimately be more, or less, than our estimate.
Any overpayment will be reimbursed to you via BACS transfer, or by cheque if that is your preference, within 7 working days.
We accept payment by BACS transfer or debit/credit card. We accept all major credit cards. Please note a 3% fee is applicable to payments by credit card.
We cannot accept cash payment or payments via PayPal.
Payments received after 5pm will be processed the following working day. Please quote our reference (this can be found on the estimate sent to you) when making payment. We ask that you also email us to let us know that you have made payment. Please see our email addresses here.
Please call us if you wish to make a payment by debit or credit card. Our contact details are here.
If the payment you have made is less than the final cost, we will ask you to top up the balance before the transcript is released to you.
We send a payment request to the person and address (postal or email) detailed on the EX107. We cannot send the request to any other party. If you would like someone else to make the payment on your behalf you are free to make the arrangement with that person, but our correspondence must be directed to you.
We invoice based on the information contained on the EX107 form; specifically, question A13 which asks for details on whether the invoice will be split. Where the costs are split, before transcription can commence each party must provide confirmation of their agreement to their share of the cost and, where relevant, make their share of the payment.
If Form EX107 does not contain details of a cost split (including details of the parties to pay the costs and their email addresses) the invoice will be issued only to the requestor named at question A1 or A14, as appropriate. Requests to split the costs cannot be processed once transcription has commenced.
Where a transcript has been produced and invoiced, subsequent transcript requests will be charged at a copy rate. The copy rate is charged per page, rather than per folio. The current copy rate is £0.42 plus VAT per page.
There is no charge for simply submitting the EX107. Charges begin to incur once the recording has been allocated to a transcriber. If you decide to cancel your order after the recording has been allocated you will be charged for the number of folios completed at the time of cancellation.
The charge rate is the same for intelligent and verbatim transcripts.
We appreciate any feedback you wish to provide. Please send your feedback to email@example.com, quoting your reference number. Please accept our thanks in advance.
We take complaints about our work, staff, and levels of security very seriously. We view complaints as not only an opportunity to put things right for you but also to learn and improve for the future.
We can consider complaints about the work, and levels of service we provided.
Please note that we cannot consider complaints about:
If you are unhappy about how we have handled your transcription request please send details of your complaints to firstname.lastname@example.org. We will investigate your complaint and ensure that we revert to you, either by phone or in writing, with our findings.
In the first instance, contact us and let us know why you think the transcript is inaccurate. We ask that you specify, in writing, where within the transcript you have identified an inaccuracy. For example, if you think a name is spelt incorrectly, please state which paragraph has the incorrect spelling.
Once we receive the details, we will review the transcript and we may re-listen to the recording to assess the accuracy of the transcript. If we identify any inaccuracies (which, we are happy to say, is rare) we will make the appropriate corrections. If we are unable to identify any flaws with the transcript we will confirm this to you and recommend the next step. If your concerned that transcript does not capture everything that was said in the hearing, we will usually recommend that you contact the court to request permission to listen to the recording at the court.
Complete the form below to receive your information pack via email.×
Complete the form below to notify the Opus 2 Eversheds Sutherland account manager and Propel Team of your upcoming hearing.×
Complete the form to contact the team about working with us on your virtual hearings.×
Complete the form to receive the virtual hearing checklist straight to your inbox.×
Complete the form to access the guide and receive it straight to your inbox.×
Complete the form to access the guide and receive it straight to your inbox.×
Complete the form and a member of the Opus 2 team will be in touch shortly to arrange your demo.×
Complete the form and a member of the Opus 2 team will be in touch shortly to arrange your demo.×
Once active participants receive their tech pack, our technical team will be on hand to assist with the installation of the equipment, or to provide training and technical support.
You will have access to technical support via email, over the phone or via remote desktop access.×
For virtual arbitration proceedings, we collaborate with a number of leading arbitration venues around the world to augment their own video conferencing solutions. Together our experienced teams will help you prepare for your virtual hearing with confidence and ensure the smooth-running of proceedings.×
Complete the form ato receive the timeline directly to your inbox.×
Bio goes here×
Please complete this form and the appropriate person will be in touch with assistance.×
Natalie is a senior associate in the Commercial Litigation team at Stewarts. She is also a solicitor advocate (Higher Courts Civil Proceedings).
Natalie has a broad practice spanning complex high value commercial litigation, arbitration and investigations, which often involve multiple jurisdictions. She has experience of acting for major corporates and financial institutions from a wide range of sectors.
Natalie was President of the Junior London Solicitors Litigation Association (2018 – 2020), which represents over 1,200 junior civil and commercial litigators in London. Natalie is an elected Committee Member of the London Solicitors Litigation Association and is a solicitor representative member of the Rolls Building Disclosure Working Group which proposed the new rules on disclosure for the pilot in the Business and Property Courts in England and Wales.
Natalie has written articles for legal press, given talks and appeared on panels on a variety of subjects including the Business and Property Courts disclosure pilot, legal technology, and best practice for handling disputes at an early stage.×
Chris is a partner at Herbert Smith Freehills and is the current President of the London Solicitors Litigation Association (the LSLA), which has over 3000 members and helps to shape civil justice reform and promote best practice in litigation. He is also currently a member of the working group led by Baker J which is looking into possible reforms for trial witness statements in the Business and Property Courts.
Chris' experience spans various sectors and geographies, but he has a particular focus on disputes work involving banks and financial buyers. His experience includes advising on complex contractual disputes, class actions, shareholder and joint venture disputes, partnership and LLP disputes, economic torts, fraud and conspiracy, asset tracing, professional negligence, insolvency disputes, employment-related disputes and privacy and defamation issues.
Chris was described as having a ‘formidable reputation’ in Legal 500 UK 2020. He has also previously featured in The Legal Business Disputes Yearbook and among Legal Week’s list of Litigation Rising Stars.×
Sir Robin sits in the Commercial Court, the Administrative Court, and the Court of Appeal Criminal Division. He is the Judge responsible for interim applications in the Queen’s Bench Division. Before appointment to the High Court, he sat as a Recorder in the Crown Court for 15 years, and as a Deputy High Court Judge in both the Commercial Court and the Chancery Division. He is a qualified mediator and has sat as an arbitrator. He was elected a Bencher of Middle Temple in 2004 and was Chairman of the Commercial Bar Association (2005-7).
Sir Robin was involved in rewriting the Commercial Court Guide as part of the Woolf Reforms. He was a member of the Aikens working party on “supercases”. With Sir William Blair, he worked successfully to secure the new Queen’s Counsel system. With others, he led work to bring about the Rolls Building – the world’s largest dedicated business dispute resolution centre. He is a member of the Financial Markets Law Committee, and of the Law and Ethics in Finance Project led by Sir William Blair. He is Chairman of the International Committee of the Judicial College of England & Wales.
A member of the Civil Justice Council, Sir Robin chairs its continuing work on access to justice for those without means. Within the HMCTS Reform Programme he chairs the Litigants in Person Engagement Group (LIPEG). He has a career-long involvement in the encouragement and coordination of legal pro bono work, nationally and internationally, and is on the board of a number of charities in the field, including the Bar Pro Bono Unit and the National Pro Bono Centre. He was awarded the CBE in 2007 for service to pro bono legal services.
Outside the law, Sir Robin has been closely involved with children’s hospices and children’s palliative care, and is a former Chairman of the UK umbrella body in this field.×
Ed Ed Crosse is a partner at Simmons & Simmons LLP with over 20 years’ experience of handling complex financial and civil fraud related disputes.
Ed was President of the London Solicitors Litigation Association 2016–2018, an association which represents the interest of over 2,900 litigation solicitors in London. He is an elected member of the Law Society Council, representing the City of London. He has played a leading role for the profession on significant court reform initiatives by participating as the solicitor representative on judge–led working groups, including the Rolls Building Disclosure Working Group and was involved in the drafting of the new rules on disclosure for the pilot in the Business and Property Courts in England and Wales.
Crosse is a Partner in the Financial Markets Litigation team at Simmons & Simmons LLP. Ed has over 20 years experience of handling complex financial and civil fraud related disputes. Ed joined Simmons in 2012. Prior to that he worked at Clifford Chance for 10 years and one other leading City firm.×
Mrs Justice Cockerill was called to the Bar by Lincoln’s Inn in 1990 and appointed Queen’s Counsel in 2011. She practiced at the Commercial Bar from 1991 to 2017, gaining wide experience in international commercial law in a variety of courts and arbitration tribunals. Her specialisms at the Bar included the full range of disputes which arise from shipping and international trading transactions, ship and yacht building cases, insurance and reinsurance claims, conflicts of law and compelled evidence in civil proceedings. She is the author of “Compelled Evidence in Civil Proceedings” (2012 OUP).
Mrs Justice Cockerill was appointed as a Deputy High Court Judge in 2015 (Administrative and Commercial Courts) and as a High Court Judge in November 2017. She is assigned to the Queen’s Bench Division and sits in the Commercial Court, Technology and Construction Court and Administrative Court as well as the QB General list.×
On 1 July 2014, Jackie van Haersolte-van Hof became Director General of the LCIA. Previously, she practised as a counsel and arbitrator in The Hague, at her GAR 100 boutique HaersolteHof. She set up HaersolteHof in 2008 after three years as counsel in the international arbitration group at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer in Amsterdam.
From 2000 – 2004 she was with De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek in The Hague, and before that with Loeff Claeys Verbeke in Rotterdam, which she joined on her qualification in 1992.
She continues to sit as arbitrator and has handled cases under the ICSID, ICC, LCIA and UNCITRAL Rules, as well as those of the Netherlands Arbitration Institute (NAI), and UNUM, the Institute of Transport, Arbitration & Mediation, and at the Royal Dutch Grain and Feed Trade Association, based in the Netherlands. She is on the ICSID roster of arbitrators and was and is a member of several ICSID Annulment Committees.
She was also involved in setting up the arbitral process for the Claims Resolution Tribunal in Zurich, which analysed claims from Holocaust survivors over dormant accounts in Swiss banks.
She is a professor of arbitration law at Leiden University and a member of GAR’s editorial board. Her 1992 PhD thesis on the application of the UNCITRAL Rules by Iran-US Claims Tribunal was one of the first books to be published on the subject.×
Richard is a partner and Solicitor Advocate in the London CDR team. He advises on complex high value multi-jurisdiction disputes in sectors including aviation and defence, energy, engineering and consumer. Clients include: the leading Global Diversified Industrials, other large multi-national companies and governments.
Richard's work includes: designing corporate dispute resolution systems, pre-action proceedings, injunctions, regulatory (including competition law) claims, mediation, arbitration and the other forms of dispute resolution, including a number of virtual hearings.
Key recent experience: acting for the Malaysian Ministry of Finance in multi-billion dollar claims arising out of the 1MDB scandal; acting for IOEC in recovering $87m following a fraud committed by former management under the cover of international sanctions; and acting for one of the pre-eminent Asian based global logistics providers in parallel DIFC-LCIA arbitration and commercial court proceedings relating in claims arising from a multi jurisdiction logistics contract.
Recognised by Chambers and Partners where he is described as "tenacious, and he gives opponents the tactical runaround. He's a past master at interlocutory skirmishing and he leaves no stone unturned for the client", "Impervious to pressure", "a very commercial lawyer who's switched-on to how to achieve what the client wants", "the kind of person you would want on your side in a tight corner" and "his helpfulness, professionalism and sound advice are stunning".×
Leigh-Ann Mulcahy QC of Fountain Court Chambers (London & Singapore) was called to the Bar of England & Wales in 1993, the Bar of the Republic of Ireland in 1998, and was appointed a QC in 2009.
Leigh-Ann is acting for the Financial Conduct Authority in The Financial Conduct Authority v Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd & ors which is the first case to proceed under the Financial Markets Test Case Scheme. The case seeks to achieve legal certainty as to whether non-damage business interruption insurance covers/extensions respond to COVID-19 losses.
She is recognised by the legal directories as a Leading Silk in the fields of Insurance & Reinsurance, Professional Negligence, Product Liability and (in Asia) for Commercial Disputes. She was nominated by Chambers & Partners for Insurance Silk of the Year in 2016.
She has advised and acted for the UK Government for over 25 years and held the appointment of First Counsel to the Welsh Government between 2013 and 2016.
In addition to her advocacy and advisory practice, Leigh-Ann sits as a Deputy High Court Judge, a Senior Decision-Maker for the Guernsey Financial Services Commission and as a commercial arbitrator. She is a Fellow of the British Royal Statistical Society and a CEDR-accredited mediator. She has also been an international advanced advocacy trainer for over 18 years.×
Rachael Mulheron is Professor of Tort Law and Civil Justice at the Law Department, Queen Mary University of London, where she has taught since 2004. Her principal fields of academic research and publication concern Torts, Medical Negligence, Class Actions jurisprudence, and Civil Justice. From 2009–18, Rachael was a member of the Civil Justice Council of England and Wales, and since then, has served as research consultant to that body. Rachael has been involved in collective redress reform for many years, assisting Government and rules-drafting committees. Prior to her academic career, Rachael practised as a litigation solicitor in Brisbane, Australia.×
Sir Andrew Baker was called to the Bar by Lincoln’s Inn in 1988, after a State school education in Scotland and higher education at Merton College, Oxford (reading Mathematics), the City University, London (reading Law) and the Inns of Court School of Law (for Bar Finals). He practised at the Commercial Bar from 1989 to 2016, with particular specialisms in dry shipping, international sale of goods, insurance and reinsurance, conflict of laws, arbitration and international banking/derivatives. He was appointed a QC in 2006, acted regularly as arbitrator as well as counsel, was made a Recorder of the Crown Court in 2012 and was authorised to sit as a Deputy High Court judge in May 2016, before his appointment as a High Court judge on 1 November 2016.
He is a co-author of the 6th and 7th Editions of “Time Charters” in the Lloyd’s Shipping Law Library, and between June 2009 and June 2016 was one of the Series Editors for that Library. STRA×
Sonia Tolaney QC is a member of the Chambers of Lord Grabiner QC, One Essex Court, and is currently the elected Chair of the Commercial Bar Association.
Sonia was called to the Bar by Middle Temple in 1995 and appointed Queen’s Counsel in 2011. She has acted in a large number of the landmark commercial and financial disputes of the last two decades and is well known for her “incredibly compelling advocacy”, “lethal cross examination” and “great tactical sense and litigation ability”. In recent years, she was named Commercial Litigation Silk of the Year (by both the Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners) and Banking Litigation Silk of the Year (Chambers & Partners).×
In 2013 Sonia was made a Bencher of Middle Temple. She was one of the founders of the Temple Women’s Forum, which aims to inspire and promote opportunities for women at the Bar. In 2016, Sonia was appointed a Deputy High Court Judge, sitting in the Commercial Court.×
Sir Julian Flaux was called to the Bar in 1978 and practised at the Commercial Bar from 1979 to 2007 specialising in disputes involving insurance and reinsurance, shipping, international trade and professional negligence. He was appointed a QC in 1994, an Assistant Recorder of the Crown Court in 1997, a Recorder in 2000 and Deputy High Court Judge in 2002.
He was appointed a High Court Judge in May 2007. He was Presiding Judge of the Midland Circuit from 2010 to 2013. He was Judge in Charge of the Commercial Court from July 2014 to December 2015 and President of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission from January to December 2016.
He was appointed a Lord Justice of Appeal in December 2016. He was appointed Lead Judge for International Relations in November 2019.
In February 2020, he was appointed as the Supervising Lord Justice of the Commercial Court for a four year term.×
Richard Blann is Head of Group Litigation and Conduct Investigations at Lloyds Banking Group where he advises senior executives on strategy and conduct of major litigation matters. Since joining Lloyds in 2010 he has been a frequent court user, taking over 20 cases to trial in the courts of the UK, US and Australia.×
Opus 2 are the exclusive transcription provider for Crown Court hearings in the North East region. The North East region consists of the following courts:
Charlotte Tan is a member of Brick Court Chambers. She was called to the Bar in 2008 and has a diverse commercial practice, with a particular focus on civil fraud, international arbitration, international trade and finance and private international law.
In 2014, Charlotte was selected in Legal Week’s “Stars at the Bar” as one of ten junior barristers "recognised for their exceptional abilities”. She has been ranked in the directories for several years as a leading junior in Commercial Dispute Resolution and Shipping/Commodities where she has been described as “incredibly hardworking and…clearly exceptionally clever”, “outstanding” and “a highly regarded junior who is trusted by top silks to handle big-ticket matters. She has experience of acting in huge fraud, insurance and shipping cases, and is viewed as someone who punches well above her level of call”.
She is currently a member of the Commercial Bar Association Executive Committee.×
Complete the form and a member of the Opus 2 team will be in touch shortly to arrange a demo and discuss pricing.×