Global menu

Our global pages

Close
 
Ridah Iqbal, Principal Associate

Ridah Iqbal

Principal Associate

Practice areas

  • Litigation and dispute management

Practice notes

Ridah is a Principal Associate in our litigation and dispute management practice group. She specialises in high value, complex commercial disputes for national and international clients in both the public and private sectors.

Her particular area of expertise is risk management; she has considerable experience of working closely with clients to head off sensitive and time critical issues, including in relation to contractual processes such as service credit regimes, change management, termination and exit and contractual dispute resolution mechanisms. When a dispute cannot be avoided, Ridah has extensive experience of high value and technically complex High Court litigation, as well as Mediation and other forms of ADR.

Ridah has significant experience in the Technology and Outsourcing sector, working for both suppliers and customers. She has a deep understanding of this area and the key risk areas/ sticking points that typically arise. Ridah also has experience in the retail, social housing, healthcare, pharmaceuticals and education sectors.

Examples of Ridah’s experience include:

  • Leading a £20million dispute for a public sector client concerning a failed first-in-sector SAP implementation to replace the entirety of the client’s legacy systems.
  • Advising a not-for-profit organisation on the exit from its business critical contract and the safeguarding of sensitive customer data.
  • Acting for a prominent Middle-Eastern billionaire in relation to identity theft; liaising with forensic experts to assist with tracking the perpetrators and stemming weaknesses in the client's systems.
  • Acting for a national supermarket in relation to the mismanagement of a multimillion pound in-store voucher promotion.
  • Acting for a prominent international food supplier on the termination of a multimillion pound utilities contract.
  • Helping an International Pharmaceutical company fend off a $20million claim that turned on the interpretation of the wording of its contract.