Dealmaker: Uber's Hogan Lovells lawyer on irate judges, RAF planes full of cash and that licence appeal
Hogan Lovells head of public law Charles Brasted, the lead lawyer on Uber's London licence appeal, recalls some memorable career moments
October 06, 2017 at 04:51 AM
5 minute read
Hogan Lovells head of public law and policy Charles Brasted is acting for Uber on its appeal against Transport for London's (TfL) decision to strip it of its licence to operate in London. He joined the firm in 2003 as a counsel from IT company Domus Internet Services and made partner in 2014, before succeeding Paul Dacam as public law and policy head earlier this year.
What is the most memorable case you ever have worked on and why? The Uber licence appeal could well be the most memorable, because of the sheer volume of public support that it has gained so quickly. There aren't many people in London who are not taking a personal interest in our making sure that they can continue to get to work in the morning and home at night.
Why did you become a litigator? I like arguing. I like being right. And I like being right to matter. I strongly believe that there is no more creative, problem-solving process than the clash of ideas, forcefully articulated.
What's the closest you have come to doing something other than law? Every day much of what I do is not law. One of the great things about our public law and policy practice is that we are not just lawyers or litigators but we work across law, policy and good government. That intersection is more important now that it ever has been. Before I became a lawyer, I had a brief foray into the dotcom world as a founding director of a tech startup. I learnt that having a great product and some fine minds was not enough to make a fortune.
Why work in a law firm rather than become a barrister? At first, because of the quality of the training. I always thought that once I had done that, I would transfer to the Bar. But the people, the teamwork, the support – it's addictive.
Which judge or barrister do you most admire and why? I probably owe my career in public law to former Master of the Rolls, Lord Greene, for his judgment in Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corporation. I also owe it to my wonderful, late director of studies at Magdalene College, Cambridge – Sir Derek Oulton QC, a man whose humility and kindness belied the extraordinary contribution he made to our modern justice system as Permanent Secretary to the Lord Chancellor.
What's been your proudest professional moment/moment in court? Seeing two RAF planes full of banknotes set off for Libya in the aftermath of the overthrow of Gaddafi. Whatever difficulties that country still faces, securing the release of that cash at that time was crucial to avoiding an immediate humanitarian and political crisis. That was not litigation – it was persuasion based on hard law, compelling policy. Advocacy comes in many forms and I learned a lot about diplomacy in those weeks.
…and worst day on the job? 4.25pm at the Royal Courts of Justice on deadline day, realising you don't have the fees cheque. No one in my team will ever make that mistake again.
What advice would you give to young litigators starting out? Remember that litigation is a tool, never an end in itself. It can be fun – but you must not let the fun overtake the client's objectives.
What's the best/worst thing about being a litigator? The best and worst thing about my job is that I start almost every case knowing nothing.
What's the funniest thing you've ever witnessed in court? In retrospect, seeing my beautifully prepared bundle hurled across the courtroom by an irate district judge – because the documents had been stapled. It did not seem funny to my trainee self at the time.
How do litigators differ from deal lawyers? It is what is the same that matters. We are all problem-solvers. And to succeed we must all be advocates. It does not matter whether you are negotiating across a board table, briefing a parliamentary committee, or making opening submissions – it is advocacy. And no problem gets solved without paperwork.
How much do you conform to the spiky litigator stereotype? The less time I spend being thought of as a litigator, the better. It means my client is winning. But being right and being seen to be right is a difficult habit to break.
What's the toughest ethical/moral dilemma your job has ever presented you with? I think that doing the very best job you can for your client is always the right thing to do. Our justice system and our democratic system rely on it.
What most annoys you about the legal profession? Charging by the hour.
What's your strongest characteristic…and worst trait? Believing that good enough is never good enough.
What's the worst corporate event you've ever attended? Like Groucho Marx and clubs, I tend to think that if I am invited, it is not the sort of event I would want to go to. Any 'breakfast meeting' by conference call deserves special mention, though.
Do you see yourself having a career outside law? I cannot reveal the full details now, but let's just say that our crockery and recipe collection is growing fast.
What's your favourite TV depiction of a litigation lawyer? The last time I turned on a television, David Cameron won his first general election.
What's your favourite item of clothing? Never go out without a silk handkerchief.
What's your favourite cheese? That is an unfair question. There is a cheese for every occasion.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow to Build an Arbitration Practice: An Interview with 37-Year HSF Veteran Paula Hodges
Scratching the Entrepreneurial Itch: Linklaters' AI Head On Becoming a Partner and GenAI Hallucinations
'Relationships are Everything': Clifford Chance's Melissa Fogarty Talks Getting on Big Deals and Rising to the Top
7 minute readThe 'Returnity' Crisis: Is the Legal Profession Failing Women Lawyers Returning From Maternity Leave?
8 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'America's Next Top Model' Contestant Says Ye Assaulted Her
- 2LexisNexis Responds to Canadian Professor’s Criticism of Lexis+ AI
- 3'Everything Leaves a Digital Footprint': How to Navigate the Complexities of Internal Investigations
- 4Baker McKenzie Accepts Defeat on Australian Integration With Firm's Asia Practice
- 5PepsiCo's Legal Team Champions Diversity, Wellness, and Mentorship to Shape a Thriving Corporate Culture
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250