In any virtual or hybrid hearing, the video conferencing provision is a critical component. So, the decision regarding which video conference solution to select is an important one, which should be considered very carefully. The chosen solution must work seamlessly alongside other services that are critical to delivering a successful hearing. But with such a wide array of video conferencing tools to choose from – and none of them designed specifically for the complexities of a hearing – determining the right one can be a difficult decision.
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.×
We take care of everything on your behalf, providing the video conference solution that meets your requirements. Using our requisite technical expertise and legal know-how we will ensure seamless implementation for your litigation or arbitration hearing.×
We have the requisite skills and technical expertise to work with any VC platform, so we can work alongside court provided/mandated solutions or augment those solutions as required to meet sometimes very specific requirements.×
We work closely with venues around the world and have established, trusted collaborations in place with key partners for arbitration proceedings - the International Arbitration Centre (IAC) and the International Dispute Resolution Centre (IDRC) in London and Maxwell Chambers in Singapore.This means we are expertly placed to deliver seamless hearings for our mutual clients, whether they are fully virtual, traditional in-person hearings, or a hybrid of the two.
Complete the form to access the document.×
At Opus 2 we are completely agnostic regarding video conferencing solutions. This approach enables us to ensure that you use the right platform that most closely matches your requirements.
A number of different platforms are available, and they each have their pros and cons in the context of a hearing. It’s important to recognise that these tools are general-purpose video conferencing platforms designed to deliver a broad spectrum of communication capability, from remote team meetings to multi-day virtual events for 1,000+ attendees.
These tools are not designed specifically for hearings, and therefore need to be adapted if they are to be implemented for litigation or arbitration hearings. Opus 2 has the requisite technical expertise and understanding of the legal process to make this happen, regardless of which video conferencing tool is selected.
Since March 2020, Opus 2 has conducted over 1,100 virtual hearings with more than 48,000 Realtime connections. Whilst facilitating these hearings at locations around the world, our platform has hosted over 690,000 documents which enable legal teams to manage key evidence, facts, work product, and securely share and collaborate with colleagues and clients.
virtual hearings since March 2020
Our flexible, tailored solution is designed to offer you the most appropriate solution for your needs:
We'll deliver the end-to-end solution fully tailored to your requirements.
Our preferred approach for International Arbitration through trusted collaboration with key venue partners.Learn more
Our highly skilled and experienced team will ensure a smooth integration.Learn more
We will also work alongside other third-party providers not listed above.
We know that every hearing is different, so we start the process by establishing the exact requirements of your hearing. We will look at all aspects, evaluate each solution in detail and equip you with an in-depth understanding of what’s possible. At the end of our process, you’ll have all the information you need to make an informed decision about which video conferencing tool most closely addresses your hearing’s specific needs.
We also offer a range of additional services for virtual or hybrid hearings:
We provide or support interpretation services for any virtual or hybrid hearing delivered by Opus 2. Your dedicated virtual hearing manager will set up the video conferencing platform to facilitate interpretation. If you have a preferred interpreter, we can work with them directly. Alternatively, we are able to offer full interpretation services for your hearing.
By design, our managed video feed provides a hassle-free, cost-effective solution enabling venues or hubs hosting simultaneous speakers to connect to the Opus 2 video conferencing provision for any hybrid hearing.
Our self-managed static video pack is designed to provide a simple solution for a venue or a hub with just one speaker, two speakers sitting adjacent or multiple consecutive speakers, i.e. speakers that can swap/rotate to reuse a speaking ‘podium’ when required. You will receive a pack containing the equipment with the necessary instructions to setup. Our support team will be available for help and guidance remotely. We will also conduct full testing remotely ahead of the hearing to ensure you are ready and that everything is working in time and you are ready for day 1.
Our virtual speaker pack can be couriered to any speaking participant who is joining the hearing remotely on their own from the home or office. You will receive a pack containing the equipment with necessary instructions to setup. Our support team will be available for help and guidance remotely. We will also conduct full testing remotely ahead of the hearing to ensure you are ready and that everything is working in time and you are ready for day 1.
Given its importance in any virtual or hybrid hearing, the decision regarding which video conferencing solution to select is a crucial one. Here are a few factors to consider that will inform which video conferencing solution is best suited to your hearing:
Large hearings may require more control and the ability to manage speaking vs. non-speaking participants.
Some platforms offer greater flexibility in relation to the layout on-screen and how it can be organised for each participant
Whether the hearing requires users to be managed via a waiting room or the ability for participants to retire to breakout rooms during the hearing.
Some platforms allow greater flexibility and permission control for managing EPE, such as allowing parties to present directly or annotate the evidence on screen.
Interpretation may impact the platform choice depending on what type of service is required by the parties.
If a video live stream is required, for public access for litigation, for example, this may impact the platform choice.
Whether particular security policies prevent the use of some video conferencing platforms, that may limit the choice available of recommended platforms.
“What we liked most about the Opus 2 offering was the streamlined, fully integrated platform, and the clarity of costings. We were able to tailor the solution to our exact requirements for this particular case, and the case preparation process would be less time-consuming.”Shirlene Leong Fullerton Law Chambers
“And in the cases I’ve been involved with, that have used the Opus 2 software, I’ve found the Moderator to be extremely useful as it allows me to concentrate purely on the case in hand, and not be distracted by the technology.”Simon Gault Arbitrator