Childhood and Motivation to work in Litigation
At the tender age of 15, Javed decided to become a lawyer when he witnessed the torment and disappointment of innocent people at the hands of those who are unscrupulous and unjust. He promised to follow in his grandmother’s footsteps and become a lawyer who would help people and bring them justice. She decided to fund his later studies to aid with his quest to bring justice.
His Education and Studies
Having developed his ambition to become a litigator, he studied hard, aided all the while by his grandmother, going on from the National English High School to graduate with a B.A. from Elphinstone College, University of Bombay in 1997; and then an L.L.B. from the Government Law College of Bombay in 2000.
His Litigation Experience
- In 1999 – 2002: Three years of training as a Junior Counsel in Bombay High Court on the Original Side, followed by practising civil and criminal litigation with Senior Solicitors and Senior Counsels.
- In 2002: He moved to England and worked for two and half years in the Keighley & District Citizens Advice Bureau. He then successfully completed his Qualified Lawyer’s Transfer Test at the College of Law, London.
- In 2005: The Law Society of England and Wales recognised him officially and authorised his admission to the roll of Solicitors. He then commenced his legal practice as a solicitor working for Capita PLC. There, he began as a debt, welfare benefit and employment adviser, and later he was promoted to a new role as a Senior Solicitor in the Legal Services Department within Capita PLC dealing with various Legal Expense Insurance Claims. There he advised and acted for several thousands of commercial policyholders on various claims.
- In 2008: He moved to Bristol and commenced employment with Thompsons Solicitors, where he advised and liaised with Union Representatives, attended various seminars, drafted factsheets and letters to advise union members on employment related matters, and assisted other departments by assessing claims and rejecting cases that had no reasonable prospects of success.
- In 2009 – 2010: He left Thompsons Solicitors to work for a law firm, Hull CLAC, as Supervisor of their Employment Law Department. He then moved back to Colchester and commenced his self-employment practice as a litigator with Black Stone Solicitors (Wimbledon Office). There he continued his practise as a litigator and attended several complex civil and criminal cases in various Employment and Immigration Tribunals, Magistrates Courts, Crown Courts, County Courts, Court of Appeal and High Court.
His Legal Comfort Solicitors
His ambition was finally achieved by setting up his own law firm, in October 2011. The name “Legal Comfort Solicitors” is recommended by one of his valuable clients. In 2012, he received approval that his company was recognised and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
He dedicated to his position as a Principal Solicitor and Director of Legal Comfort Solicitors. Legal Comfort Solicitors delivers high quality legal advice and litigation support to clients to protect their interest and obtain justice.
He has been described as industrious, energetic, enthusiastic, emphatic and clear with his legal techniques in advocacy. He is a very hard-working individual because of this he obtains many of his clients through personal recommendations from existing clients and his networking within the friends, families, charities, sports clubs, businesses and local communities.
He will tell you in the first meeting if your case meets any reasonable prospects of success. He has enormous experience of vigorously defending and litigating over several million pounds worth of assets. From his career he has also successfully represented government, member of royal family and charity organisations.
He has enormous experiences of settling legal dispute between the parties and acted arbitrator in various matters. Not only this but he has completely defeated a magic circle law firm in three consecutive hearings and finally before fourth hearing he has proven to the District Judge that the value of their claim is ‘zero’.
Because of his incredible insight into the law he was invited to conduct a Moot Court Competition presiding as a Judge during Semi-Final between University of Essex and University of Sussex. Currently, he is assisting and welcoming legal interns from Essex University & BPP College to learn the ropes.
He has trained many lawyers, law graduates and apprentices successfully, who are currently practising law in local, international law firms and higher courts.
He has fulfilled all his ambitions and goals on time.
1) In Civil Litigation:
- In S v H O, he acted for the Defendant in the possession hearing and successfully put the Defendant back into possession even after the house was repossessed by the lender. The lender has written off six figures from the borrower’s mortgage due to loss and damage of the chattels.
- In BC v MBS, he has represented the Defendant at the hearing and successfully defended the Part 8 Claim an Order for Sale that was struck out at the final hearing; and he recovered 100% costs of his attendance from the Claimant.
- In DBM v LH & MH, he has successfully defended a misconceived claim of misrepresentation, fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of contract claim. He gave initial advice to his client that set the bench mark of the entire defence; and majority of his advice was reflected in the judgement.
- In PL v SE, he has successfully evicted the tenant on mandatory grounds.
- In MKDP v MIA, he has successfully defended a claim at the final hearing by persuading the District Judge that his client has not entered into any credit card agreement and his client is innocent.
- In LBB v Saber, he persuaded the District Judge that the Claimant is not entitled to an order for costs.
- In Arrow v LM, he has persuaded the District Judge that the creditor is not entitled to Final Charging Order.
- In DA v SZM, he acted for the defendant and successfully obtained costs order against the claimant upon their failure to file the costs budget on time.
2) In Commercial Litigation:
- In Q v B, he has recovered six figures sum by fiercely fighting against his opponents, in this case the opponent has betrayed family friend to get access to the funds.
- In A v B, he has successfully sued the bank and obtained six figures compensation, in this case bank has terminated the contract without following due process.
- In M v T, he has recovered over six figures sum by fiercely litigating with the opponents, in this case the opponent has continuously failed to pay the amount for past 10 years.
- In HP v LP M&D Ltd, he vigorously defended a claim of unlawful eviction claim that disappointed the tenant, his solicitor, and the Legal Services Commission to an extent that they abandoned the entire claim.
- In BC v School, after thorough legal research he persuaded the Claimant that his client is entitle to full relief from business rates.
- In K v IH, acted as a mediator and resolved the case amicably without having to spent money on litigation.
- In SS v TO & RSL, acted for the company and rigorously defended costs application and presented his application notice.
- In PH v OR successfully defended the commercial contracts through mediation and resolved various commercial disputes for the same client by writing a without prejudice letters to their opponents.
- Recently, he has applied for Higher Rights of Audience; and developing his interest to build wider network in legal services through Website Contents, Google my Business, Google Reviews, Facebook, Yell and LinkedIn.
3) In Criminal Litigation:
- In Re v WK, his client was accused of possession of knuckleduster. A reasonable defence was put forward by him and his client was acquitted with costs order to recover from Central Fund.
- In Re v MH, his client was accused of common assault and resisting arrest. A reasonable defence was put forward by him and his client was acquitted with costs order to recover from Central Fund.
- In Re v AS, his client was accused of failing to provide information i.e. name of the driver at the time of the offence. A reasonable defence was put forward by him and his client was acquitted with costs order to recover from Central Fund.
- In SW v BR, his client was accused of travelling without a valid train ticket by British Railways. A reasonable defence was put forward by him and his client was acquitted with costs order to recover from Central Fund.
- In Re v CF, his client was accused of theft. A reasonable defence was put forward by him and his client received a conditional discharge and fine.
- In Re v ED, his client was accused of drinking driving. A reasonable defence was put forward by him and his client received a conditional discharge and fine.
- In Re v JF, he acted for the tenants and successfully obtained costs order from the Central Funds in a private prosecution against the landlord.
- In SUP v HO, he acted for the borrower and persuaded the Appeal Court that lender has misled the trial judge. His power of spoken words in the court is irrefutable. His speeches in the court have motivated clients to fight against injustice.
4) In Employment Litigation:
- In G v M, he was instructed to contest a constructive dismissal claim. His skill in cross examination delivered significant compensation to his client. The Employment Judge literally quoted his whole cross examination in the judgement with the employer losing their credibility.
- In SB v LBN, he successfully won a claim of unfair dismissal and failure to make reasonable adjustment claim under Equality Act 2010. He drafted an ET1 claim form that set a bench mark of the entire proceeding.
- He has assisted various clients to settle their employment dispute through mediations and settlement agreements.
5) In Family Litigation:
- In B v B, he was assigned a task of clarifying the parties and the court including LSC that there is no money in the pot.
- In I v I, he was assigned a task of clarifying the parties and the court that the divorce petition was based on incorrect statements which was subsequently withdrawn.
- In DR v JR, he persuaded the District Judge in a Financial Relief Application that wife proposal was the best proposal to achieve a clean break.
- In MC v DMS, he persuaded the District Judge that his client is entitled to 50% equity. He demonstrated by various examples that the opponent is not a credible witness. Court has accepted Mr Patel’s submission and rejected other side defence (that there was an express Declaration of Trust).
- In H v H, he acted for the Respondent and proven that the Petitioner is in breach of their undertaking to the court.
- In M v M, he acted for the Respondent and at the first hearing he settled the whole family dispute.
6) In Property Litigation:
- In D v H & M, he was assigned a task of defending a claim on the point of disclosure of documents. Through his advocacy skills, he has persuaded the Circuit Judge that his client is an honest witness and has nothing in his possession or control to disclose.
7) In Immigration Litigation:
- In MO v SSHD, he acted for the Appellant before the Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge and demonstrated that the Appellant’s sponsor has a continuous period of 5 years employment. He has defeated the Home Office, who were arguing before the Upper Tribunal to allow their appeal because as per their legal submissions the Appellant could not qualify for a permanent residence card and the First-tier Tribunal erroneously allowed the appeal on the paper.
- In BS v SS, he acted on behalf of the Appellant before First-tier Immigration Tribunal to point out breach of Human Rights committed by the Home Office. He invited the tribunal’s attention to the family law proceedings to demonstrate that the Appellant is in genuine and subsisting relationship with his partner. The tribunal also agreed with him that The Secretary of State is in breach of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 as it breaches Article 3 and Article 8 because the “situation in Iraq was a matter of public knowledge” and therefore any deportation of the Appellant is unlawful.
- In ER v SS, he has acted for the Appellant and successfully challenged unlawful deportation. He attended the bail application and proven that the HO is in breach of Human Rights. Further, he successfully won the JR and then proven to the Administrative Court that HO is in breach of the Consent Order. Thereafter, he has proven that the HO acted unlawfully when invited the Appellant to the interview without court’s order.
8) In Welfare Benefits Litigation:
- SW v DWP: At appeal, Javed overturned the decision of PIP assessment. He gave detailed written submissions. In his submissions, he pointed from various medical notes, consultation forms, assessments, reconsiderations and DWP’s submissions that the assessor did not perform her role. However, after considering his oral submissions, all three judges unanimously agreed with him. They allowed the appeal and backdated the PIP payments on the same day.
9) His Clients Reviews:
- “Thank you so much for all your hard work and effort in winning my case for me. I will be passing your details on to anyone who requires a good solicitor” – MC
- “I was very satisfied with the overall level of service, as the information and advice that I was given was very easy to understand. My advisor was listening very carefully to my legal problems and treated me fairly. I would recommend my advisor to others”. – Anonymous
- “We would like to thank you so much for your undoubted professionalism even more, your understanding of our situation. Mr Javed Patel was considerate, and friendly and we took him to our hearts our victory was gained because of him. We will have no hesitation in recommending LEGAL COMFORT to who need your help”. – SW
- “You are an exceptional solicitor with a heart of gold, thank you for listening to me dribble on for hours, I know it wasn’t easy!” – LW
“If you seek justice then look no further than Legal Comfort Solicitors” –
Last Updated: 25 May 2019