Brick Court Chambers

+44 (0)20 7379 3550 MENU
Sarah Ford KC

Sarah Ford KC

YEAR OF CALL: 2002    YEAR OF SILK: 2017

She is excellent, super clear, very good at counselling the court … She makes technical things seem clear, she is really good."
Chambers & Partners 2024
  • .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) a
  • View Clerking Team
  • PDF/PRINTc
  • Add To Shortlisth

Sarah Ford KC was called to the Bar in 2002 and took silk in 2017. She is “extremely bright, hard working and absolutely across this area. She is extremely measured in her advice and able to guide clients through the complexities of some of the most technical areas of competition law.” (Legal 500 2024). “An extremely persuasive advocate” (Chambers & Partners 2023), “[h]er advocacy is succinct, direct and fuss-free. She cuts to the heart of the matter efficiently, avoiding unnecessary diversions.” (Chambers & Partners 2024). “Sarah is superb. She cuts through what she needs to cut through and brings it across to the Judge” (Chambers & Partners 2023). She was nominated as Competition Silk of the Year in 2022 and 2023 by Legal 500 and Competition/EU Silk of the Year 2022 by Chambers & Partners.  

Sarah is frequently instructed in leading competition cases for both Claimants and Defendants and appears in the Chancery Division, Commercial Court, Administrative Court, Competition Appeal Tribunal, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.

Sarah Ford KC was called to the Bar in 2002 and took silk in 2017. She is “extremely bright, hard working and absolutely across this area. She is extremely measured in her advice and able to guide clients through the complexities of some of the most technical areas of competition law.” (Legal 500 2024). “An extremely persuasive advocate” (Chambers & Partners 2023), “[h]er advocacy is succinct, direct and fuss-free. She cuts to the heart of the matter efficiently, avoiding unnecessary diversions.” (Chambers & Partners 2024). “Sarah is superb. She cuts through what she needs to cut through and brings it across to the Judge” (Chambers & Partners 2023). She was nominated as Competition Silk of the Year in 2022 and 2023 by Legal 500 and Competition/EU Silk of the Year 2022 by Chambers & Partners.  

Sarah is frequently instructed in leading competition cases for both Claimants and Defendants and appears in the Chancery Division, Commercial Court, Administrative Court, Competition Appeal Tribunal, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.

Sarah has excellent trial advocacy experience, having appeared most recently in trials in the CAT in the Hydrocortisone and Prochlorperazine appeals and in the High Court in Optis v Apple and Nokia v Oppo. Sarah also frequently appears in the Court of Appeal, with recent highlights including appearing for the Class Representative in the McLaren collective proceedings; for Infineon in Smart Card Chips and for BT in Le Patourel.

Sarah is instructed in numerous follow-on and standalone competition damages claims including in Citalopram for Arrow; Trucks for Volvo/Renault, Occupant Safety Systems for ZF and Smart Card Chips and DRAM for Infineon. She appeared for ABB in the High Court and the Court of Appeal in BritNed, the first cartel damages claim to reach judgment. She has appeared in appeals to the Court of Appeal in leading competition cases concerning mitigation in Ballbearings; limitation in DRAM and binding recitals/abuse of process in Trucks.

Sarah has a strong collective proceedings practice, being instructed on the Claimant side for the Class Representative in McLaren and for the Proposed Class Representative in BSV Claims Limited and on the Defendant side for JPMorgan in FX. She appeared in the Court of Appeal in BT’s appeal in Le Patourel concerning whether proceedings should be certified on an opt-in or an opt-out basis.

Sarah is also regularly instructed in FRAND disputes, and appeared in the landmark Unwired Planet case in the Supreme Court. She appeared for Optis in its FRAND dispute with Apple and for Nokia in its FRAND dispute with Oppo.

Sarah has excellent experience in pharmaceuticals and life sciences and is presently instructed for Arrow in damages concerning citalopram; for Auden/Actavis in appeals concerning hydrocortisone and for Alliance Pharmaceuticals in appeals concerning prochlorperazine. She appeared on behalf of Actavis in the Competition Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Justice of the European Union in the paroxetine pay-for-delay appeals.

Sarah is also active in telecommunications disputes, both in the regulatory sphere and private damages actions. In addition to being instructed for BT in Le Patourel she appeared for Virgin Media in an appeal before the Competition Appeal Tribunal concerning leased lines and for BT in the Pay TV appeals.

READ MORE M
Expand All
  • Competition M
    • Allergan Plc & ors v CMA [2023] CAT 56: Counsel for Auden/Actavis in appeals against finding of excessive and unfair pricing and anti-competitive agreements in relation to hydrocortisone tablets.
    • Mark McLaren Class Representative Limited v MOL (Europe Africa) Ltd & Ors [2023] Bus. L.R. 318: Counsel for the Class Representative successfully resisting an appeal against the CAT’s decision to certify collective proceedings.
    • Gemalto Holding BV & Ors v Infineon Technologies UK Limited [2023] Ch 169: Counsel for Infineon Technologies AG successfully dismissing a follow-on damages claim on limitation grounds.
    • NTN Corporation & Ors v Stellantis N.V. & Ors (CA) [2022] EWCA Civ 16: Counsel for the Claimants/Respondents, successfully resisting an appeal concerning a defence of mitigation of an overcharge by securing discounts on supplies from other suppliers in the ballbearings follow-on damages claims.
    • Le Patourel v BT Group plc & Anor [2022] Bus. L.R. 660: Counsel for BT in an appeal concerning an opt-out collective proceedings order.
    • Optis Cellular Technology LLC & Ors v Apple Retail UK Limited [2022] EWCA Civ 1411; [2023] EWHC 1095 (Ch): Competition Counsel for Optis in its FRAND litigation against Apple.
    • AB Volvo (publ) & Ors v Ryder Ltd & Anor (CA) [2021] Bus L.R. 1610: Counsel for Volvo/Renault in appeals concerning binding recitals/abuse of process in the Trucks follow-on damages claims.
    • OT Computers Ltd (in Liquidation) v Infineon Technologies AG (CA) [2021] QB 1183: Counsel for Infineon Technologies AB in an appeal concerning limitation in the DRAM follow-on damages claims.
    • Generics (UK) Ltd & Ors v Competition and Markets Authority [2021] CAT 9: Counsel for Actavis UK Limited in the Competition Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Justice of the European Union in the paroxetine pay-for-delay appeals.
    • Unwired Planet International Limited & Anor v Huawei Technologies (UK) Co Ltd & Anor (SC) [2020] UKSC 37; [2021] 1 All E.R. 1141: Competition Counsel for Unwired Planet in a landmark Supreme Court ruling on standard essential patents.
    • BritNed Development Ltd v ABB AB & Anor (CA) [2020] Bus. L.R. 1073: Counsel for ABB in the High Court and before the Court of Appeal in the first cartel damages claim to reach judgment.
    • Michael O’Higgins FX Class Representative Ltd v Barclays Bank plc & Ors [2020] CAT 9: Counsel for JPM Morgan in applications for a collective proceedings order arising out of FX trading.
    • Lebedev Holdings Limited & Anor v Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport [2019] CAT 21: Counsel for Applicants successfully arguing that the Secretary of State was out of time to make a reference in a newspaper merger.
    • British Telecommunications plc v Office of Communications [2017] CAT 25: counsel for Virgin Media Limited (intervening) in a challenge to Ofcom’s decision to impose a dark fibre remedy in the supply of leased lines.
    • BCL Old Co Ltd v BASF SE (formerly BASF AG) (SC) [2012] UKSC 45; [2012] 1 W.L.R. 2922; [2012] Bus. L.R. 1801; [2013] 1 All E.R. 457: Junior Counsel for BASF, instructed by Mayer Brown International LLP, in the first case on the Competition Act 1998 to reach the Supreme Court.
    • British Sky Broadcasting & Ors v Office of Communications (CA) [2014] Bus. L.R. 713: Junior Counsel for British Telecommunications plc in long running, high profile litigation involving Ofcom, Sky, the FA Premier League, BT and Virgin Media.
    • Purple Parking Limited v Heathrow Airport Limited [2011] EWHC 987 (Ch); [2011] U.K.C.L.R. 492: Junior Counsel for Heathrow, instructed by Herbert Smith LLP, in a claim for abuse of a dominant position.
  • EU law M
    • Competition and Markets Authority v Care UK Health and Social Holdings Ltd [2021] EWHC 2088 (Ch): Counsel for the CMA in claims under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999/Consumer Rights Act 2015.
    • Case C-307/18 Generics (UK) Ltd & Ors v Competition and Markets Authority, Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 30 January 2020: Counsel for Actavis (UK) Limited in a reference for a preliminary ruling concerning pay-for-delay in patent settlement agreements.
    • R (Alliance of Turkish Businesspeople Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (CA) [2020] 1 W.L.R. 2436: Counsel for the Appellant in an appeal concerning legitimate expectations and leave to remain under EEC-Turkey Association Agreement.
    • Acted for the United Kingdom in preliminary references to the CJEU in Cases C-176/15 Riskin [2016] 4 W.L.R. 149; C-154/15 Gutierrez Naranjo; C-388/14 Timac Agro Deutschland GmbH; C- 386/14 Groupe Steria SCA; C-241/14 Bukovansky [2016] 4 W.L.R. 45; C-10/14 Miljoen; C-420/13 Netto Marken Discount AG & Co KG [2014] Bus L.R. 981; Joined Cases C-217/13, C- 218/13 Oberbank AG [2014] Bus. L.R. 786; Joined Cases C-24/12 and C-27/12 X BV; C-12/12 Colloseum Holding AG [2013] Bus. L.R. 768; C-384/09 Prunus SARL; and C-128/08 Damseaux 
    • Recall Support Services Limited & Ors v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport [2015] 1 C.M.L.R. 38 (Court of Appeal): Counsel for the SSCMS (led by Daniel Beard KC) successfully resisting a claim for Francovich damages for the maintenance in force of a restriction on the commercial use of telecommunications equipment known as a GSM gateway.
    • Robertson v Swift [2014] 1 W.L.R. 3438 (Supreme Court): Counsel for the Office of Fair Trading (intervening) upholding the consumer’s right to cancel a contract under Directive 85/577/EEC.
    • Case C-502/15 Commission v UK (CJEU): Counsel for the United Kingdom resisting infraction proceedings concerning collection and treatment of urban waste water.
    • Case C-172/13 Commission v UK [2015] 2 W.L.R. 1418 (CJEU): Counsel for the United Kingdom (led by David Ewart KC) successfully resisting infraction proceedings concerning the compatibility of rules on cross-border loss relief with EU law.
    • Cases C-390/07 Commission v UK and C-301/10 Commission v UK (CJEU): Counsel for the United Kingdom (led by David Anderson KC) resisting infraction proceedings arising from the Waste Water Treatment Directive.
    • Marks & Spencer plc v Revenue and Customs Commissioners (No 1) [2013] 1 W.L.R. 1586 and (No 2) [2014] 1 W.L.R. 711 (Supreme Court): Counsel for the Revenue (led by David Ewart KC) concerning the compatibility of rules on cross-border group relief with EU law.
    • Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation v Revenue and Customers Commissioners [2012] 2 A.C. 337 (Supreme Court): Counsel for the Revenue (led by David Ewart KC) concerning the compatibility of rules on taxation of dividend income with EU law.
    • Vodafone 2 v Revenue & Customs Commissioners [2009] EWCA Civ 446; [2010] Ch. 77; [2010] 2 W.L.R. 288; [2010] Bus. L.R. 96; [2009] S.T.C. 1480; [2010] Eu. L.R. 110; [2009] B.T.C. 273; [2009] S.T.I. 1795; Times, June 26, 2009 (Court of Appeal): Junior Counsel for the Revenue in a case concerning the duty of conforming interpretation.
  • Telecoms M
    • Le Patourel v BT Group plc & Anor [2022] Bus. L.R. 660: Counsel for BT resisting an application for a collective proceedings order.
    • Optis Cellular Technology LLC & Ors v Apple Retail UK Limited [2022] EWCA Civ 1411; [2023] EWHC 1095 (Ch): Competition Counsel for Optis in its FRAND litigation against Apple.
    • Unwired Planet International Limited & Anor v Huawei Technologies (UK) Co Ltd & Anor (SC) [2020] UKSC 37; [2021] 1 All E.R. 1141: Competition Counsel for Unwired Planet in a landmark Supreme Court ruling on standard essential patents.
    • British Telecommunications plc v Office of Communications [2017] CAT 25: counsel for Virgin Media Limited (intervening) in a challenge to Ofcom’s decision to impose a dark fibre remedy in the supply of leased lines.
    • Recall Support Services Limited & Ors v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport [2015] 1 C.M.L.R. 38 (Court of Appeal): Counsel for the SSCMS (led by Daniel Beard KC) successfully resisting a claim for Francovich damages for the maintenance in force of a restriction on the commercial use of telecommunications equipment known as a GSM gateway.
    • British Sky Broadcasting & Ors v Office of Communications [2014] Bus. L.R. 713 (Court of Appeal): Junior Counsel for British Telecommunications plc in this long running, high profile litigation involving Ofcom, Sky, the FA Premier League, BT and Virgin Media.
    • Wholesale calls: Junior Counsel for BT, instructed by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, responding to Ofcom's statement of objections arising from a complaint by Thus Plc and Gamma Telecom Limited against BT about alleged margin squeeze in wholesale call pricing.
    • Vodafone plc v British Telecommunications plc (Court of Appeal) [2010] EWCA Civ 391; [2010] 3 All E.R. 1028; [2010] Bus. L.R. 1666: Junior Counsel for BT in disputes arising from the imposition of price controls for mobile call termination.
    • Cable   &    Wireless    (Cayman    Islands)    Limited    v    Information   and Communications Technology Authority (Cayman Islands Court of Appeal)
    • Hutchison 3G (UK) Ltd v Office of Communications [2005] CAT 39 (Competition Appeal Tribunal)
    • British Telecommunications Plc v Director General of the Office of Telecommunications [2004] CAT 8 (Competition Appeal Tribunal): first appeal to the Competition Appeal Tribunal under the Communications Act 2003.
    • Unipart Group Limited v 02 (UK) Limited & Call Connections Limited [2004] EWCA Civ 1034 (Court of Appeal).
  • Pharmaceuticals M
    • Allergan Plc & ors v CMA [2023] CAT 56: Counsel for Auden/Actavis in appeals against finding of excessive and unfair pricing and anti-competitive agreements in relation to hydrocortisone tablets.
    • Generics (UK) Ltd & Ors v Competition and Markets Authority [2021] CAT 9: Counsel for Actavis UK Limited in the Competition Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Justice of the European Union in the paroxetine pay-for-delay appeals.
    • Case C-452/06 R (Synthon BV) v Licensing Authority & Smithkline Beecham plc [2008] ECR; [2006] EWHC 1759 (CJEU, Administrative Court and Chancery Division): Junior Counsel for Synthon, instructed by SJ Berwin LLP, in a claim for damages against the Licensing Authority for wrongful refusal of a marketing authorisation in respect of Synthon's product containing the active substance paroxetine.
  • Public Law M
    • Lebedev Holdings Limited & Anor v Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport [2019] CAT 21: Counsel for Applicants successfully arguing that the Secretary of State was out of time to make a reference in a newspaper merger.
    • R (Alliance of Turkish Businesspeople Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (CA) [2020] 1 W.L.R. 2436: Counsel for the Appellant in an appeal concerning legitimate expectations and leave to remain under EEC-Turkey Association Agreement.
    • R (Sisangia) v Director of Legal Aid Casework [2016] 1 W.L.R. 1373 (Court of Appeal): Counsel for DLAC (led by Martin  Chamberlain KC) in a JR concerning the meaning of “abuse … of its position or powers” within paragraph 21 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.
    • Secretary of State for the Home Department v Davis & Ors [2016] 1 C.M.L.R. 48 (Court of Appeal): Counsel for SSHD (led by James Eadie KC and Daniel Beard KC) resisting a challenge to s. 1 Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014.
    • R (British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authors) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2015] Bus. L.R. 1435 (Administrative Court): Counsel for SSBIS (led by Pushpinder Saini KC) in a JR of the introduction of a private copying exception to copyright protection.
    • R (Tadworth and Walton Residents’ Association) v Secretary of State for Environment, Foods and Rural Affairs [2015] EWHC 972 (Admin): Counsel for SSEFRA successfully resisting a JR of a decision concerning the registration of common land.
    • R (Bickford-Smith) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2013] EWHC 3371 (Admin): Counsel for SSEFRA successfully resisting JR of a decision of the Rural Payments Agency determining the Claimant’s rights to a subsidy payment under the EU’s Single Payment Scheme.
    • R (Ware) v Neath Port Talbot Council [2007] EWHC 913 (Admin) (Administrative Court)
    • Norris v Government of the United States of America, The Secretary of State for the Home Department and Bow Street Magistrates' Court [2007] 2 All ER 29 (Divisional Court)
    • Department for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs v Feakins & Hawkins [2005] EWCA Civ 1513, [2006] BPIR 895 (Court of Appeal)
    • R (Scottish Power) v Ofgem & National Grid plc [2005] EWHC 2324 (Admin) (Administrative Court)
    • R (Takeley Parish Council) v Stansted Airport (Administrative Court)
  • Commercial M
    • Signia Wealth Limited v (1) Vector Trustees Limited (2) Ms Nathalie Dauriac-Stoebe [2018] EWHC 1040: Counsel for the Defendant parties in a dispute in the wealth management industry.
    • Standard Bank plc v Sheikh Mohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber [2011] EWHC 2866 (Comm): Junior Counsel on behalf of Sheikh Mohamed, instructed by King & Spalding International LLP, resisting a summary judgment application against the Sheikh as the guarantor under two facility agreements.
    • Berghoff Trading Limited & Ors v Rosserlane Developments Ltd & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 413 (Court of Appeal) Nobes v Berghoff Trading Limited (Commercial Court): Junior Counsel for the Berghoff, instructed by McGuire Woods LLP, in a multi-million pound dispute in the Commercial Court and Court of Appeal concerning the sale of interests in an Azerbaijani oil field.
  • Qualifications M

    Qualifications

    • LLB Law with European Law (2000) (First Class)
    • LLM (Harvard Law School) (2001)
    • Bar Vocational Course (2002)

    Career

    • Silk (2017)
    • Junior Counsel to the Crown B Panel (2012)
    • Junior Counsel to the Crown C Panel (2007)
    • Called to Cayman Islands Bar (2007)
    • Barrister, Brick Court Chambers (2003 to date)
    • Pupillage: Brick Court Chambers (2002-2003)
    • Called to the Bar: Lincoln's Inn (2002)

    Professional Membership

    • ComBar
    • Bar European Group

    Further Information

    • Chambers Bar Awards Competition/EU Junior of the Year 2014
    • Member of the Editorial Committee, European Advocate
    • Member of the Editorial Board, Global Competition Review
    • Featured in Legal Week's Stars at the Bar 2011
    • Languages: French and German
  • Publications M
    • Claims for contribution in competition damages actions: the impact of the EU Damages Directive (2015) 36 ECLR 8 p. 327
    • Contributor to Competition Litigation, UK Practice and Procedure, Mark Brealey KC, Nicholas Green KC, (2010)
    • Contributor to Civil Appeals, edited by Sir Michael Burton, Sweet & Maxwell (2013)
    • ‘The increased aggression of the EC Commission in extraterritorial enforcement of the merger regulation and its impact on transatlantic cooperation in antitrust' 29 Syracuse J. Int'l. L. & Com. 263 (2002)
  • Directory Quotes M
    • "Her advocacy is succinct, direct and fuss-free. She cuts to the heart of the matter efficiently, avoiding unnecessary diversions." (Chambers & Partners 2024)
    • "Her paperwork and drafting are very good." (Chambers & Partners 2024)
    • "I have a lot of time for Sarah. She is quietly intelligent and good to work with. I really like her." (Chambers & Partners 2024)
    • "She is excellent, super clear, very good at counselling the court, and uses good language to make transcripts. She makes technical things seem clear, she is really good." (Chambers & Partners 2024)
    • "I highly recommend her, she is very pragmatic." (Chambers & Partners 2024)
    • "Sarah is extremely bright, hard working and absolutely across this area. She is extremely measured in her advice and able to guide clients through the complexities in some of the most technical areas of competition law." (Legal 500 2024)
    • "A very effective advocate." (Legal 500 2024)
    • "Sarah Ford KC is an extremely persuasive advocate." (Chambers & Partners 2023)
    • "Sarah is superb. She cuts through what she needs to cut through and brings it across to the judge." (Chambers & Partners 2023)
    • 'Very clever and very user friendly. Offers insights beyond her years and contributes strongly to strategy discussions." (Legal 500 2023)
    • "Sarah is very strategic, hard-working, pragmatic and good at coming up with easy ways of doing things." "She is very calm, unflappable, thoughtful and strategic about her advice." "She gets across the detail and prepares well for the hearings." "Her judgement is fantastic." (Chambers & Partners 2022)
    • "Gets on top of things very efficiently, gets to the issues straight away, and presents very effectively in court."  (Chambers & Partners 2022)
    • "An able and accessible barrister who performs work to a high standard and very efficiently." (Legal 500 2022)
    • "She is a fantastically sensible, calm and a measured advocate." "She always intervenes at the right time and is very eloquent." "Very thoughtful, a great advocate and incredibly easy to work with." "Her style and analysis is very crisp." (Chambers & Partners 2021)
    • "Very impressive across a broad range of work." "A measured advocate who is sensible in her advice, she is superb." (Chambers & Partners 2021)
    • "An excellent lawyer, who is thorough and efficient, a good draftsman, and great to work with." (Legal 500 2021)
    • "Good on the law and a very able advocate on her feet." (Legal 500 2021)
    • "An able and accessible barrister who performs work to a high standard and very efficiently." (Legal 500 2021)
    • Sarah Ford KC is a well-regarded silk at the Bar for competition proceedings. She is sought after for her expertise in follow-on damages and abuse of dominance matters. (Who's Who Legal - Global: Competition 2020)
    • Sarah Ford KC is an “outstanding advocate”, applauded for her adept handling of a variety of EU and UK competition disputes. (Who's Who Legal - UK Bar: Competition 2020)
    • "Earns praise from instructing solicitors and from peers at the Bar for her role in important competition law cases in the telecoms sphere. Her practice also extends to IP matters within the telecoms sector, principally cases involving standard essential patents. She handles regulatory and advisory mandates for leading telecoms operators." "An impressive advocate who makes the best of any case and argues forcefully and effectively." (Chambers & Partners 2020)
    • "Adopts a quiet, cerebral and academic approach to advocacy when she knows that is what the judge prefers," and is "extremely helpful when you need an authoritative view on something quite technical." "She is very approachable, even with junior members of the solicitor's team, and is happy to answer queries. Nothing is too much hassle for her to deal with and she's always incredibly well prepared." (Chambers & Partners UK & Global 2020)
    • "A shining star in the field of public law." (The Legal 500 2020)
    • "She gets stuck in to her cases." (The Legal 500 2020)
    • Sarah Ford KC is “an outstanding and highly regarded advocate” say peers, and is particularly experienced in competition matters pertaining to the telecoms and pharmaceutical sectors. (Who's Who Legal - UK Bar: Competition 2019)
    • "She communicates issues very well and is very analytical." (Chambers & Partners UK & Global 2019)
    • "She's user friendly, clever and has a really elegant approach to drafting. She's effective on her feet in a calm and understated way." (Chambers & Partners 2019)
    • "She is a diligent and disciplined opponent and has the ear of the court." (The Legal 500 2018-19)
    • "High quality, steady and sensible. She is a very promising junior silk in competition law." (The Legal 500 2018-19)
    • "Her submissions are clear, well structured and persuasive, and put forward her client’s case with aplomb." (The Legal 500 2018-19)
    • "She is a deep thinker who can react to quickly moving developments and is really able to adapt to what is happening." (Chambers & Partners 2018)
    • "She is superb and is very practical and businesslike." "Always very responsive, bright and commercial." (Chambers & Partners 2018)
    • "A standout silk." (The Legal 500 2017)
    • "The astonishingly young age at which she took silk reflects her exceptional skill and talent." (The Legal 500 2017)
    • "Sarah Ford KC was rated among the most highly regarded juniors." (Who's Who Legal - UK Bar: Competition 2017)
    • "A great all-round barrister who has done a number of telecoms cases and knows how to put her client's case across." "An outstanding junior whose drafting is really excellent. She possesses extremely good judgement and is very sensible and down-to-earth." (Chambers & Partners 2017)
    • "She is extremely good on her feet and deals with difficult questions calmly and with confidence." (Chambers & Partners 2017)
    • "Great at seeing what the real issues are." (The Legal 500 2016)
    • "Very impressive in a courtroom filled with silks." (The Legal 500 2016)
    • "She dealt with a very sensitive and technical application on a new point of EU competition law and made her points calmly and authoritatively in a difficult courtroom atmosphere." (Chambers & Partners 2016)
    • “One of the calmest and technically most able lawyers, who is a pleasure to work with." "Excellent – she's hard-working and efficient." (Chambers & Partners 2015)
    • “Peers particularly applaud her for her work on behalf of BT. She has a strong and varied client base though and has handled numerous judicial review, EU and competition law cases.” (Chambers & Partners 2015) 
    • "She's fantastic at case preparation and has a wonderful understanding of litigation." "She has a really detailed knowledge of the law." (Chambers & Partners 2015) 
    • "Tenacious and clear in her advocacy." (The Legal 500 2014)
    • "She produces succinct and powerful pleadings and analysis - her perspective is always worth considering." (Chambers & Partners 2014)
    • "She is very practical and good at interacting with clients." (Chambers & Partners 2014)
    • "Sarah Ford draws on significant experience in both public law and commercial litigation when advising on a diverse range of matters. She has a "very good understanding of the nuances of what goes on in the court and the subtle undertones of what is really being said," and is praised by counsel and solicitors alike. The last year has seen her act as junior counsel for the defendants in damages claims resulting from an alleged abuse of dominance in the waste light bulb collection market." (Chambers & Partners 2013)
    • "Sarah Ford's advice is ‘concise and considered'." (Legal 500 2012)
    • "Fellow junior Sarah Ford matches Demetriou with her "in-depth knowledge and great experience." She has been acting as junior counsel alongside Mark Brealey KC for the defendant Heathrow Airport in a dispute concerning the alleged abuse of a dominant position. This case derived from a ban on the conduct of valet parking activities at Heathrow Airport forecourts." (Chambers & Partners 2012)
    • "Sarah Ford, who has been attracting increasing market attention for her "thorough drafting and fine advocacy skills that would put someone years her senior to shame." Recent work highlights for her include acting for BT in its appeal against Ofcom-stipulated call termination charges." (Chambers & Partners 2011)
    • "...up-and-comer Sarah Ford ... continues to impress with her ‘quick thinking, thoroughness and preparation.' "
    • "Sarah Ford is a youthful and "very bright" barrister who wins praise for her technical abilities and strong work ethic." (2008)
    • "...up-and-comer Sarah [Ford] was recommended as someone to keep an eye on in the competition arena, though she was also given credit for her wider European work." (2007)