Mussadak Mirza
Barrister
Mussadak is a senior London-based barrister, with over 20 years’ experience in litigation and advisory work across the UK and the Gulf.
His domestic practice focuses on industrial disease litigation, with particular expertise in noise-induced hearing loss claims arising from the coal mining, steel, rail, shipbuilding and construction sectors. He is nationally recognised for his work in military claims, having acted for hundreds of former and serving personnel from the British Army, Royal Navy, and Royal Air Force.
In addition to his domestic practice, Mussadak has a growing international arbitration and offshore practice in Gulf jurisdictions. He is increasingly involved in matters governed by English law with an international element, and advises on merits, strategy, and dispute resolution.
He is a visiting lecturer at Bait Al Qanoon (BQ) in Oman, and visits the Sultanate regularly to deliver knowledge transfer, professional development, and comparative legal training.
As UK Lead of the Omani British Lawyers Association (OBLA), Mussadak promotes professional collaboration between the UK and Oman. He delivers webinars in partnership with the British Omani Society (BOS) and the cultural attaché of the Omani Embassy in London.
He lectures state entities in the Gulf and multinational corporations on international best practice in governance, sanctions risk, and regulatory compliance. He regularly publishes articles on legal developments in Oman for OBLA, BOS and BQ, and contributes to the organisation of international legal conferences in the region.
Practice Areas
Panel
- Contributing Author
Qualified Year
- 2004
Membership
- The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple
- Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, London (CIArb)
- International Bar Association (IBA)
- Omani British Lawyers Association (OBLA)
- British Omani Society (BOS)
Qualifications
- Bar Vocational Course (2004)
- MSc (2003)
- BA (Hons) (2002)
Education
- Inns of Court School of Law, London (2003 to 2004)
- University of Oxford (2002 to 2003)
- University of Manchester (1999 to 2002)
3 Contributions by Mussadak Mirza
PRACTICE NOTES
Military personal injury claims: Crown and combat immunity, negligence, ECHR Article 2, AFCS/CIC(O), Smith v MOD, Overseas Operations Act limitation, training accidents and specific injuries
This Practice Note outlines the routes for personal injury redress for injured serving and ex-service members, embracing claims founded on statute as well as compensation schemes under domestic law and the European Convention on Human Rights. It considers claims arising from incidents in combat operations and training, plus specific conditions including non-freezing cold injury, noise-induced hearing loss, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), psychiatric harm related to bullying or harassment, and parading injuries.
The history and suspension of Crown immunity
It is helpful to examine the evolution of the law governing military claims closely.
Until 1987, section 10 of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 (CPA 1947) barred service personnel from pursuing any civil actions against the Crown for death or personal injury attributable to other members within the British Armed Forces. Sections 1 and 2 of the Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act 1987 (CP(AF)A 1987) state that CPA 1947, s 10 is disapplied, but permit the Secretary of State for Defence to re-activate it, from time to time, where deemed 'necessary or expedient' in specified statutory circumstances...
PI & Clinical Negligence
PRACTICE NOTES
NIHL in civil claims: diagnosis, exposure thresholds, asymmetry and quantification under CLB (2000), LCB (2016) and MLC (2022) guidelines
The principal source consulted by medicolegal specialists and the courts when diagnosing noise‑induced hearing loss (NIHL) is Coles, Lutman and Buffin’s ‘Guidelines on the diagnosis of noise‑induced hearing loss for medicolegal purposes’, issued in April 2000 (the CLB Guidelines). The same authors subsequently produced the ‘Guidelines for Quantification of Noise‑Induced Hearing Loss in a Medicolegal Context’ in 2015 (the LCB Guidelines), as the CLB document addressed diagnosis only and could not be used to quantify NIHL. Both sets of guidance are reviewed in this Practice Note, which also touches briefly on the ‘Guidelines for Diagnosing and Quantifying Noise‑Induced Hearing Loss’ by Moore, Lowe and Cox, published in 2022 (the rM‑NIHL Guidelines).
The 2000 CLB Guidelines
NIHL claims are challenging because demonstrating that a claimant:
was exposed to hazardous workplace noise, and
has hearing impairment
is insufficient, on its own, to satisfy a court that occupational noise caused the loss. Noise‑related damage usually affects the higher frequencies; however, age‑related hearing loss (presbyacusis) predominantly involves the same frequencies. Robust guidelines are therefore essential to assist experts and the courts in distinguishing NIHL from presbyacusis...
PI & Clinical Negligence
PRACTICE NOTES
Noise-Induced Hearing Loss Claims: Interpreting Audiograms, Distinguishing Presbycusis, and Applying Noise Exposure Metrics to Causation, Breach and Quantum
STOP PRESS
This Practice Note is currently undergoing routine quality control to uphold accuracy and reliability. An audiogram is a chart displaying the sounds an individual can hear and, in noise‑induced hearing loss (NIHL) claims, it is used to assess a claimant’s hearing capability. It is a key diagnostic tool for identifying hearing loss. Practitioners should also review the claimant’s medical and employment records to consider whether alternative causes, such as medication, hobbies or medical conditions, might account for any loss.
Basic pointers on audiograms
Competence in reading and interpreting audiograms is vital for both claimant and defendant practitioners in NIHL cases. Where an audiogram does not indicate NIHL, the claimant’s solicitor should make clear that no claim can be pursued. The claimant will usually have had an audiogram conducted by their GP, their employer, or both. An audiogram typically comprises one or two sheets in graph form, produced by an expert who plots hearing ability at various frequencies...
PI & Clinical Negligence
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
