At 2TG our people are hard-working, forward-thinking and approachable. We believe our supportive culture is one of our greatest strengths.
With the set comprising around 60 barristers, we know each other well and work effectively together. We often operate in large teams with clients. Our practice management team is modern and commercial, matching barrister experience thoughtfully to clients’ requirements.
At 2TG our barristers are expert in a broad range of complementary practice areas and we enjoy repeat instructions from a variety of loyal clients.
Practised advocates from the start, all our Silks and the vast majority of our Junior barristers are recognised as leaders in their chosen fields. Many of us are at the forefront of shaping the law in our specialist areas and we pride ourselves in having excellent industry knowledge.
At 2TG our barristers have excellent experience acting across a range of industry sectors and we are able to offer advice in an informed and commercial context.
Our combination of practice area excellence and industry expertise means we possess real insight into the commercial realities facing our clients operating in these areas. Secondment plays an important part of our commitment to developing our skills and understanding.
2TG is home to award-winning accredited mediators, arbitrators, adjudicators and experts with considerable experience of alternative dispute resolution.
Our barristers are also skilled as advocates in different alternative dispute resolution procedures and work strategically with clients to understand their commercial objectives, and then to resolve litigation as cost-effectively and expeditiously as possible.
Work with an international dimension forms a significant part of many barristers’ work at 2TG.
We appear in international courts and arbitral tribunals all over the world, frequently acting on complex multi-jurisdictional disputes. We are particularly well-known for managing cross border litigation on matters of jurisdiction and applicable law and appear regularly in the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal.
At 2TG, in addition to our professional advice, we are recognised for our excellent contribution to education and development. We provide regular high-quality training.
Our reputation among the legal profession and other clients for our first-rate webinars and in-person conferences is very important to us. We also contribute frequently at industry events and as editors of leading texts and authors on topics of legal interest.
Insights
Balwah v Surgi-Med and Abdulla [2026] UKPC 31
This judgment provides the conclusion to this case after more than ten years of litigation.
The case concerns allegations of clinical negligence against a private hospital (Surgi-Med) and a private medical practitioner (Dr Abdulla) in Trinidad.
Dr Abdulla was the treating obstetrician of the claimant and his mother. Following birth, the claimant developed cerebral palsy. It was alleged that this was caused by Dr Abdulla and Surgi-Med’s negligence.
The key question at trial centred on the timing of the arrival of Dr Abdulla at Surgi-Med’s clinic on the morning of the claimant’s birth. A narrow half an hour difference in this timing was critical in understanding whether the claimant could have developed an injury resulting in cerebral palsy as a result of the defendants’ alleged negligence.
At trial, Ramcharan J resolved this factual question as to the timing of arrival in Surgi-Med and Dr Abdulla’s favour, leading to a conclusion that any breaches of duty could not have been causative of the claimant’s cerebral palsy, such that the claims against each of the defendants were dismissed.
The Court of Appeal reversed this finding of fact, substituting its own finding as to Dr Abdulla’s arrival time and made a finding of negligence against him, but maintained that any breach of duty by Surgi-Med was not causative of damage.
Before the Board, the claimant argued that the arrival time as found by the Court of Appeal should be upheld and a finding of negligence should also apply to Surgi-Med.
Following a two-day hearing in July, the Board restored the decision of Ramcharan J, dismissing the appeal against Surgi-Med and allowing Dr Abdulla’s appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision.
The Judgment includes various important statements on the proper degree of judicial deference to be applied by an appellate court and the extent to which parties can derogate from their pleaded case at trial.
Benjamin Browne KC and Finn Callow appeared for Surgi-Med Clinic Co Ltd, instructed by Harrikissoon and Company, San Fernando, Trinidad.
The judgment can be found here.