Home / People / Tim Riordan
Portrait of Tim Riordan

Tim Riordan


CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP
1-3 Charter Square
S1 4HS
United Kingdom
Languages English

Tim Riordan is a partner in our Insurance and Reinsurance Group based in our Sheffield office specialising in defendant personal injury litigation, costs, civil claims following data breaches and product liability. He works for self-insured companies, insurers and public bodies and he is particularly active in the energy, manufacturing and Local Authority markets. 

Tim defends all types of Personal Injury and Industrial Disease matters from low value to multi-million-pound catastrophic claims. Tim also advises clients with regards to policies and procedures for preventing claims and general Health & Safety advice. Tim is a strong advocate who regularly represents his clients at application hearings, case and costs management conferences and inquests, in which he cross examines witnesses and medical experts. 

Tim is the manager of the CMS costs team, dealing with all civil disputes across the firm. Tim has been instrumental in costs litigation and does not shy away from test cases such as  fixed portal costs avoidance, success fees for NIHL, CFAs, Notice to Cancel, level of ATE premiums, QOCS and importantly Bills of Costs following costs budgeting. He was also key in ensuring retention of NIHL claims within the Low Value EL/PL Protocol leading to potential savings of several million pounds for a key client. The team offers a “cradle to grave” service on all costs issues. 

Tim regularly provides bespoke training and case clinics to clients together with guidance on all types of personal injury and disease claims handling. 

Tim gives clear and concise quantum advice in relation to clients where there are high deductibles in the insurance cover. 

Tim is a keynote speaker who undertakes regular webinars for third parties such as LexisNexis. 

more less

Relevant experience

  • Defending a fatal minor secondary exposure asbestos claim.
  • Successfully defending an appeal on extending the vicarious liability test.
  • Invited to mediation on the MOJ consultation on costs in NIHL.
  • Curbing claimant conduct on fixed costs avoidance saving several million for one client.
more less


  • 2001 – LPC, Pg Dip, London Guildhall University
  • 2000 – Law Degree, LLB, London Guildhall University
more less


Court of Ap­peal tem­por­ar­ily closes door on any ar­gu­ment that pre-ac­tion...
The Court of Ap­peal has al­lowed an ap­peal re­gard­ing the du­ties owed to a cli­ent by a so­li­cit­or when ne­go­ti­at­ing the terms of a re­tain­er and has also made a de­term­in­a­tion as to the non-con­ten­tious nature...
Ac­tion­able dam­age in isol­a­tion
The de­cision in Kee­gan v In­de­pend­ent In­sur­ance Com­pany Ltd & Zurich In­sur­ance PLC [2022] EWHC 1992 (QB) con­cerns the Third Party (Rights Against In­surers) Act 2010 and may be sig­ni­fic­ant as re­gards the...
As Deep Blue Something put it – “You'll say we've got noth­ing in com­mon”
The High Court in Lon­don has de­cided that a group of circa 3,500 claims for noise-in­duced hear­ing loss can­not pro­ceed via a single claim form. Back­ground In Dav­id Ab­bott & Oth­ers v Min­istry of De­fence...
Part 45 - Fixed costs dis­ap­plied when parties con­tract out in con­sent or­der
The Court of Ap­peal has ruled out the ap­plic­a­tion of Part 45 fixed costs where parties have ex­pressly agreed on a de­tailed as­sess­ment of costs in­stead. Back­ground In Doyle v M&D Found­a­tions & Build­ing...
Ex­pert en­gin­eer evid­ence still likely re­quired in noise in­duced hear­ing...
The Court of Ap­peal has al­lowed an ap­peal against an or­der strik­ing out a per­son­al in­jury claim for acous­tic shock where the claimant had not served sup­port­ing ex­pert evid­ence by an acous­tic en­gin­eer...
Re­la­tion­ship between self-em­ployed dent­ists and dent­al prac­tice not “akin...
The Court of Ap­peal has provided help­ful ob­iter com­ments on the first limb of the test for vi­cari­ous li­ab­il­ity, namely the re­quire­ment that the re­la­tion­ship between the wrong­do­er and the de­fend­ant be...
A U-turn on the ad­di­tion of parties to the claim form after is­sue but pri­or...
A re­cent de­cision in the High Court has de­par­ted from the de­cision in Vari­ous Claimants v G4S plc [2021] EWHC 524 (Ch) in re­spect of amend­ments to a claim form post-is­sue but pri­or to ser­vice. The High...
Court of Ap­peal con­firms em­ploy­ers not dir­ectly or vi­cari­ously li­able for...
The Court of Ap­peal has ruled that the em­ploy­er is not li­able for a prac­tic­al joke car­ried out by one em­ploy­ee on an­oth­er us­ing non-work equip­ment and that was noth­ing to do with his work, even though...
Set-off in qual­i­fied one-way costs shift­ing – a shift away from de­fend­ants
The Su­preme Court has ruled that de­fend­ants owed costs in a per­son­al in­jury claim can­not set-off those costs against costs they owe to the claimant. This severely re­stricts the already very lim­ited scen­ari­os...
Part 36.17 in­dem­nity costs re­cov­er­able even where dam­ages awar­ded are nom­in­al
In a de­cision that should re­mind dis­pute law­yers of the im­port­ance of giv­ing prop­er con­sid­er­a­tion to the po­ten­tially sig­ni­fic­ant con­sequences of Part 36 of­fers, an ap­peal against a de­cision that in­dem­nity...
Fail­ure to val­idly serve a bill of costs in­val­id­ated a de­fault costs cer­ti­fic­ate
In a de­cision that should op­er­ate as a salut­ary warn­ing to dis­putes law­yers, Costs Judge Le­onard has dis­missed a claimant’s at­tempts to rec­ti­fy the po­s­i­tion where avoid­able er­rors were made in ser­vice...
CMS sig­ni­fic­antly strengthens in­sur­ance of­fer­ing with two new part­ners...
In­ter­na­tion­al law firm CMS is pleased to an­nounce the ap­point­ment of Gregor Woods as a part­ner, and the pro­mo­tion of Tim Ri­ordan to part­ner in its De­fend­ant Per­son­al In­jury team, part of the firm’s...