Skip to content
Follow us on Twitter

Lucy Limbrey

Year of call: 2013

VAT No: 307 8883 68 | BSB Registration Click Here

Email: Send Email | Download full CV

Lucy Limbrey joined Chambers as a tenant in September 2017. She is developing a specialist family law practice and undertakes work across the spectrum of private law, public and financial remedy proceedings.

In April 2018, Lucy won her first case in the Court of Appeal, acting as sole counsel for the successful appellant in S (A Child), before the (now) President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane.

Lucy was a delegate at Canada’s National Family Law Program in Vancouver, this July, having secured an International Grant from the Bar Council and FLBA to facilitate her attendance. There, she benefited from participation in sessions on the Hague Convention, international relocation and surrogacy, delivered by leading Canadian lawyers, enhancing her knowledge in these areas. She seeks to establish an international dimension to her practice.

Lucy’s experience of family law at the Bar, is supplemented by the year she spent at the Family Advice Scheme based at West London Family Court, representing litigants in a range of private law cases, pro bono. Upon leaving the scheme, Lucy was presented with the FAS Award for Excellence by the programme co-ordinator, HHJ Rowe QC and HHJ Middleton-Roy in recognition of the quality of her contribution.

Prior to joining Chambers, Lucy completed her primary pupillage at a leading civil and commercial law set in the Temple. She graduated with a first-class degree in law from Queen Mary, University of London and was graded ‘Outstanding’ in her Bar exams. She holds multiple scholarships from Lincoln’s Inn and a number of awards associated with her performance in public speaking and in particular mooting competitions, throughout her legal education.

What follows is a brief overview of Lucy’s practice. Those who may be interested in instructing her are encouraged to contact the clerks for further information.


Lucy has amassed wide experience of representing parties in private law matters, including Children Act and Family Law Act proceedings. She frequently acts in applications for contact and residence, specific issue orders and prohibited steps orders, at all stages of the court process. She has represented parties at multi-day fact-finding hearings, entailing the cross-examination of several witnesses, where the allegations have included physical chastisement, substance misuse, and domestic violence of the most serious kind. As an example of the latter, she is currently due to represent a father accused of having stabbed his ex-partner (the mother), in front of the parties’ young son, in a case which has already been before the criminal courts.

Her experience encompasses international relocation cases before Circuit Judges, applications for contact with a child in care, special guardianship orders and enforcement proceedings in intractable hostility and parental alienation cases. She is adept at handling cases which straddle both private and public law.


In public law proceedings, Lucy has represented clients at contested removal hearings and interim hearings in cases involving issues such as neglect, physical abuse and emotional harm.

Lucy’s time as pupil to two leading clinical negligence practitioners has equipped her with the skills necessary to carefully analyse, and thereafter robustly challenge, expert evidence. In the future, she expects this experience to prove invaluable when she comes to be instructed in NAI cases.


Lucy is increasingly instructed in financial remedy cases, from FDA through to final hearing. She has advised on the merits of costs applications and, more unusually, appeared in contested divorce proceedings.


Four months of Lucy’s pupillage was spent under the supervision of a prominent public lawyer (now QC). She gained considerable exposure to cases in the Court of Protection, High Court disputes under the inherent jurisdiction and those concerning the medical treatment of very sick children. Lucy enjoys the interplay between legal and ethical arguments that features in this area and welcomes related instructions.


In tenancy, Lucy has acquired extensive court experience in the following fields: Personal Injury, to include small claims, fast track cases, MOJ Stage 3 claims and CMCs on the multi-track; Property Law; General Civil and Commercial disputes; and Professional Regulatory cases in the NMC. She continues to accept these instructions around her family law work.


Lord Denning Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn (2012)

Hardwicke Entrance Award, Lincoln’s Inn (2013)

Buchanan Prize, Lincoln’s Inn (2013)

Ubuntu Scholarship to fund a legal internship in Cape Town, City Law School (2013)

Shelford Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn (2014)

Award for Excellence, Family Advice Scheme (2017)

Summer Conference Scholarship, ALBA (2017)

International Legal and Professional Development Grant, jointly awarded by the Bar Council and FLBA (2018)


Winner of the Graveson Moot Cup 2016, awarded by a distinguished Bench comprised of Sir Robin Auld, Mr Justice Foskett and David Travers QC, following the finals in the RCJ

Winner of the Lincoln’s Inn Open Moot 2013

Finalist of the Westminster Law Review National Debate 2013

Finalist of the ESU-Essex Court Chambers National Mooting Competition 2012

Recipient of the Scarman Shield in the ESU-Moot

Winner of the George Hinde Moot Cup 2011, as awarded at the finals by a prestigious panel including Lord Justice Burnton, Mr Justice Maddison and HHJ Paget QC

Winner of the ELSA Moot Cup 2011, awarded by Lord Neuberger

Awarded “Most Outstanding Competitor” in the ELSA Moot

Finalist of the London University Mooting Shield 2011

Awarded “Best Individual Advocate” by Lord Dyson after mooting in the Supreme Court during the penultimate round of LUMS

  • Case Profile

    S (A Child) [2018] CA (unreported)

    Successful appeal against the refusal of the appellant’s application to rely on expert evidence in the context of proceedings to discharge a care order. The Court of Appeal, comprised of Lord Justices Lindblom and McFarlane accepted that, in refusing the application, the Circuit Judge in the lower instance court had failed to articulate a fully reasoned judgment which constituted a serious procedural irregularity. Further, there existed material upon which “Counsel would, and indeed, could” advance a bias argument, though it was unnecessary for the Court to determine this issue as the appeal succeeded on the first ground. In the circumstances, the relevant order was set aside, and the appellant’s application remitted for consideration by “a fresh pair of judicial eyes”.