Bristol

Bristol

United Kingdom

CMS in Bristol is focused on four areas: real estate, banking litigation, insurance litigation and commercial, servicing national and international clients.

Working with some of our largest clients, particularly within the financial institutions sector, our team in Bristol leverages the strength of CMS’ other national and international offices to deliver comprehensive solutions.

Our 40 lawyers in Bristol are firmly embedded within our real estate and financial institutions sector groups and deliver cost effective and flexible services whilst maintaining the highest standard of quality.

If you would like more information about our services, please come and visit us, reach out via our online contact form or give us a call.

more less

Directions

From the Airport

Bristol airport is located 9 miles from the office.

  • Bus – buses depart approx. every 10 minutes from outside the terminal building taking you to directly into the city centre. The journey takes approx. 30 minutes.
  • Taxi – the journey takes approx. 20 minutes and costs approx £25.

By car

If you are travelling by car, please enter postcode BS1 5UE into your satnav for directions to the office.

Millennium Square car park is a short walk from the office.

By train

Temple Meads train station is located 1.5 miles from the office. 

  • Taxi – the journey takes approx. 12 minutes.

more less

Location

CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP
College Square
2 Anchor Road
Bristol
BS1 5UE
United Kingdom
Directions PDF

Feed

Show only
October 2017
CMS - Where to find us
23/10/2017
Re­new­ables after Brexit
Mu­nir Has­san, our Head of Clean En­ergy, is speak­ing on 'Prac­tic­al Steps and Con­sid­er­a­tions for Re­new­ables Pro­jects & In­vestors in pre­par­ing for Brex­it' at the Re­new­ables After Brexit con­fer­ence in Decem­ber.
22/09/2017
Real Es­tate Re­port 2017
Smart. Healthy. Agile.
23/10/2017
New Bill to pre­serve UK’s abil­ity to en­force and im­pose sanc­tions...
The Gov­ern­ment has in­tro­duced a new Sanc­tions and Anti-Money Laun­der­ing Bill in the House of Lords, the first Bill Par­lia­ment will con­sider re­lat­ing to post-Brexit ar­range­ments. The Bill is de­signed to en­able the UK to con­tin­ue to en­force ex­ist­ing EU sanc­tions.
August 2017
CMS - Facts & Fig­ures
23/10/2017
Re­gis­tra­tion is now open for the Au­tumn We­bin­ar Series hos­ted by our...
23/10/2017
Can you dis­in­her­it your chil­dren?
The rule ac­cor­ded to which one can­not dis­in­her­it one’s chil­dren must be now ad­jus­ted in an in­ter­na­tion­al con­text. . The Court of Cas­sa­tion handed down two rul­ings on 27 Septem­ber 2017 stat­ing that "a for­eign law to which the rule of con­flict of laws ap­plies.
July 2017
Your in­tro­duc­tion to CMS
20/10/2017
Treas­ury com­mit­tee in­quiry in­to the UK's eco­nom­ic re­la­tion­ship with...
The House of Com­mons’ Treas­ury Se­lect Com­mit­tee today launched an in­quiry in­to the UK’s eco­nom­ic re­la­tion­ship with the EU. Writ­ten evid­ence is in­vited. The in­quiry will con­sider, among oth­er things, trans­ition­al ar­range­ments, pre­pared­ness for 'no deal', and.
13 December 2016
CMS, Nabarro and Olswang con­firm Prac­tice and Sec­tor...
20/10/2017
Ar­bit­rat­ors us­ing ‘free-style’ ex­ped­ited pro­ced­ures
While the cur­rent trend amongst ar­bit­ral in­sti­tu­tions is to in­tro­duce fast-track rules for smal­ler cases to speed up the pro­cess and re­duce costs, the latest stats from the LCIA re­veal this is hap­pen­ing des­pite their lack of any ex­ped­ited rules.
29/06/2016
CMS ad­vises Cap­cel­lence Mit­tel­stand­spart­ner on ac­quis­i­tion...
23/10/2017
High Court has wide dis­cre­tion as to con­di­tions for con­tinu­ing freez­ing...
In Brain­box Di­git­al Ltd v Back­board Me­dia GmbH and an­oth­er [2017] EWHC 2465 (QB), the court con­sidered wheth­er a freez­ing in­junc­tion ob­tained by the claimant should be con­tin­ued and, if so, on what con­di­tions.
20/10/2017
CJC re­port re­com­mends more use of com­puls­ory me­di­ation
The Civil Justice Coun­cil Work­ing Group on ADR has de­cided against re­com­mend­ing com­puls­ory me­di­ation as a pre-con­di­tion of bring­ing or pro­gress­ing all civil lit­ig­a­tion. In­stead, it pro­poses a more se­lect­ive in­tro­duc­tion of com­pul­sion.