**Coal Tycoon David Lewis Faces Scrutiny Over Alleged Assault on Solicitor Amid Mine Controversy**
David Lewis, the multimillionaire at the centre of long-running disputes over the now-closed Ffos y Fran opencast coal mine, has recently found himself embroiled in a new controversy—this time in the courts. The 68-year-old businessman, sole director of Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd, was cautioned by police following an alleged physical altercation with Robert Davies MBE, a respected solicitor with over half a century’s experience in the legal profession.
The confrontation, which reportedly occurred in May 2024, is understood to have stemmed from ongoing civil litigation involving Lewis’ business interests. Mr Davies, founder and chair of RDP Law in Newport, claimed the incident unfolded outside his firm’s offices after providing evidence in a High Court case relating to companies controlled by Lewis. According to Mr Davies, Lewis confronted him with a barrage of insults before physically pushing and restraining him, actions that allegedly resulted in a lasting scar to Davies’ neck.
In his account to police, Mr Davies described how Lewis allegedly cornered him, physically pinned him against a lobby window, and forcefully held him by the neck while accusing him of betraying him in court. The veteran solicitor stated that he attempted to defuse the situation, but Lewis persisted, causing physical injury which he attributes to either a ring or fingernail during the altercation.
Following a police investigation, Gwent Police initially issued Lewis with a conditional caution for assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH), requiring him to attend a victim awareness course. However, Mr Davies states that Lewis failed to comply with the conditions set, leading to prosecution proceedings. Yet, when the matter came before Newport Magistrates’ Court this week, the prosecution abruptly dropped the case. The stated reason was that the statutory six-month window for common assault charges had elapsed, sparking frustration and questions from Mr Davies and legal observers.
Legal ambiguity lies at the heart of the issue. No time limit exists for prosecuting ABH, but common assault is constrained by a narrow timeline. Mr Davies speculates that, after initially charging ABH, the Crown Prosecution Service reconsidered the charge as common assault—only to realise the window for prosecution had closed. While prosecutors have not provided a detailed public explanation, this has left Mr Davies dismayed, especially given that CCTV footage and an email from police confirm the assault took place and that Lewis initially admitted his actions by accepting a caution.
“The facts are beyond dispute—Lewis assaulted me, and it was caught on CCTV. He even accepted a caution. For him to now escape legal accountability is utterly unacceptable,” Mr Davies commented following the case’s collapse. He has called on both Gwent Police and the CPS to clarify their handling of the legal proceedings, expressing dissatisfaction at what he sees as a denial of justice.
Lewis, when approached outside the court, firmly denied accepting a caution, asserting he had been acquitted. However, WalesOnline reports that documentary evidence from police confirms the caution was indeed issued. Lewis’ solicitor advised him not to comment further when pressed on the matter.
This incident comes at a time of heightened scrutiny for both Lewis and Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd. The Ffos y Fran mine, which extracted 11 million tonnes of coal and provided 86% of the UK’s coal output before its closure in November 2023, has been the focus of environmental and community concern. The company is currently facing possible legal action from the Coal Action Network due to disagreements over land restoration, with accusations that it is failing to honour its original commitments.
Lewis’ business career has seen previous controversy. Back in 2003, he was convicted of fraudulently obtaining £88,000 by deception, with the court describing him as a ‘pathological gambler’. Despite having later repaid the funds, the case left questions over some of his business practices.
With the Ffos y Fran site still the subject of intense debate and campaigners calling for accountability, these latest events have added to the public and legal scrutiny facing Lewis. Both Gwent Police and the Crown Prosecution Service were contacted for comment on the circumstances surrounding the prosecution, but had not responded at the time of publication.
As the community and legal professionals seek answers, the situation raises broader questions about the application of justice, corporate accountability, and the responsibilities of those entrusted with significant industrial and environmental legacies. For now, the story remains unresolved—but it is clear that public interest in both the actions of David Lewis and the ongoing fate of Ffos y Fran is far from fading.