Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

United Kingdom > London Bar > Defamation and privacy > Law firm and leading lawyer rankings

Editorial

Other

Index of tables

  1. Defamation and privacy - Leading sets
  2. Leading Silks
  3. 2019 Silks
  4. Leading Juniors

Defamation and privacy - Leading sets

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3

Leading Silks

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3

2019 Silks

  1. 1

Leading Juniors

  1. 1
    • Jacob Dean - 5RBAn extremely clever, measured and tenacious advocate.
    • Aidan Eardley - 5RBVery knowledgeable on the law and excellent drafting.
    • David Glen - 11KBWThe best junior around for defendant media work.
    • Sara Mansoori - Matrix ChambersHer experience and insight is second to none.
    • Jane Phillips - 5RBReally impressive silk-level work; she is prepared to move mountains.
    • David Sherborne - 5RBFerociously bright and great at handling the most difficult situations.
  2. 2
  3. 3
    • Timothy Atkinson - Ely Place ChambersVery approachable, easy to work with and very responsive.
    • Edward Craven - Matrix ChambersHis work is precise and to the point.
    • Clara Hamer - 5RBSympathetic yet confident manner with a keen eye for detail.
    • David Hirst - 5RBTechnically gifted barrister with an exceptional ability to think outside the box.
    • Victoria Jolliffe - 5RBReliable, bright and with excellent experience.
    • Jeremy Reed - Hogarth ChambersAn experienced media and privacy litigator.
    • Julian Santos - 5RBAn incredibly safe pair of hands for a junior of his call.
    • Kate Wilson - 5RBIncredibly smart and enormously calm, she has as all the angles covered.
  4. 4

5RB is well-established for handling a wide range of media and communication law instructions including defamation, privacy, and data privacy. Described as a 'strong set with a number of experienced counsel in this area', chambers was, of late, involved in several extremely high-profile cases including Sir Cliff Richard v BBC, where Godwin Busuttil led by Justin Rushbrooke QC acted for the claimant. In Nick Brown MP v Faber & Faber and Tom BowerAdrienne Page QC and Jacob Dean acted for the claimant against the acclaimed author and publisher of Broken Vows; Andrew Caldecott QC and Clara Hamer represented the defendants. Since the resolution of this case, Caldecott QC and Hamer have joined chambers from the now dissolved One Brick Court. They arrived with Aidan Eardley, Jane Phillips, Jonathan Scherbel-Ball, Kate Wilson, and Ben Gallop, bolstering the set's ranks and cementing its place as 'the market leader in the field of defamation and privacy law'.

The multi-disciplinary Matrix Chambers fields a growing media team and is recognised as 'an increasing force in the new media law landscape'; over the course of 2018, both Catrin Evans QC and Ian Helme joined chambers from One Brick Court. Of note, the set was instructed on two landmark cases: Gavin Millar QC represented the BBC in Sir Cliff Richard v BBC; Hugh Tomlinson QC acted on the claimant side in NT1/NT2 v Google, while Antony White QC and Evans QC represented the tech giant. Solicitors say the set creates a 'direct personal relationship with the clients' and is known to be the home of privacy injunctions.

'Powerhouse' privacy set 11KBW is quickly adapting to the new media law landscape where traditional defamation claims are increasingly combined with online data privacy and information rights. Anya Proops QC represented Morrisons in the data protection, breach of confidence and misuse of private information group litigation claim brought by current and former employees which has consequently gone to the Supreme Court. In light of One Brick Court dissolving, the set welcomed David Glen and Hannah Ready, further strengthening chambers in the sector. 

Ely Place Chambers continues to take on defamation and privacy matters and is expected to become more prominent in this area of law with Timothy Atkinson's arrival from One Brick Court. The junior was instructed to act for the claimant in Irina Bokova v Associated Newspapers. Other work highlights include William McCormick QC acting for the defendants in EuroEco Fuels v Szczecin Seaports Authorities.

Interview with...

Law firm partners and practice heads explain how their firms are adapting to clients' changing needs

GC Diversity and Inclusion Report

In partnership with...

International comparative guides

Giving the in-house community greater insight to the law and regulations in different jurisdictions.

Select Practice Area

Press releases

The latest news direct from law firms. If you would like to submit press releases for your firm, send an email request to

Legal Developments in the UK

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • Court of Justice rules on source of income for Derivative Residence applications

    On 2 October 2019, the Court of Justice delivered its judgment in Bajratari v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Directive 2004/38/EC) Case C-93/18 which concerns Chen applications and the source of funds for self-sufficiency. 
  • End of the ‘centre of life test’ in Surinder Singh cases?

    In the recent case of  ZA (Reg 9. EEA Regs; abuse of rights) Afghanistan   [2019] UKUT 281 (IAC ), the Upper Tribunal found that there is no basis in EU law for the centre of life test, as set out in Regulation 9(3)(a) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (the “Regulations”). It further found that it is not to be applied when Judges assess  Surinder Singh  cases that appear before them.
  • Terms of employment as a sole representative

    In this article we examine the working arrangements of sole representatives, looking at the terms and conditions of employment that the Home Office will expect a sole representative to have in order to qualify as a representative of an overseas business.  
  • Can Sole Representatives Be Shareholders?

    The Immigration Rules require that an applicant for a  sole representative visa  is not “a  majority shareholder in the overseas business”.
  • Immigration Skills Charge - A Guide for Employers

    As a Sponsor, you may be required to pay the Immigration Skills Charge (ISC) each time you sponsor a migrant in the  Tier 2 General  or  Intra-Company Transfer (ICT) Long-term Staff  subcategory.
  • 5 FAQS about paragraph 320(11)

    In applications for entry clearance where the applicant has a negative immigration history in the UK, the application may be refused under the general grounds for refusal, which are found in part 9 of the Immigration Rules. Where an applicant has  ‘previously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Immigration Rules’,  the application could be refused under paragraph 320(11). In this post we look at five frequently asked questions about paragraph 320(11). 
  • Multiple nationality and multiple citizenship (including dual nationality and dual citizenship)

    British nationality law permits multiple nationality and multiple citizenship, including dual nationality and dual citizenship.
  • Applying for Indefinite Leave to Remain in the Exceptional Talent or Promise Category

    The  Exceptional Talent  and Exceptional Promise categories are for individuals who are recognised leaders or emerging leaders in their field of expertise. There are a number of endorsing bodies for lots of different fields of work, including  artists and musicians ,  architects ,  digital experts ,  scientists  and  academics . While there isn’t an endorsing body for every expert, the growing list means that many individuals could enjoy the flexibility that this category has to offer. 
  • PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS – CIVIL AND CRIMINAL

    Syedur Rahmanconsiders the factors that determine when civil proceedings can go ahead before,or at the same time as, criminal proceedings relating to the same circumstances.
  • Rights of appeal after the Immigration Act 2014

    The Immigration Act 2014 (“the 2014 Act”) reduced the circumstances in which the refusal of an immigration application will give rise to a right of appeal. The  explanatory notes  to the 2014 Act state that the Act was intended to restructure rights of appeal to the Immigration Tribunal. Previously, a right of appeal to the Immigration Tribunal existed against any of the 14 different immigration decisions listed in s.82 of the  Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002  (“the 2002 Act”). As explained below, whether or not the refusal of an immigration application currently generates a right of appeal depends on the subject matter of the application rather than its categorisation.

Press Releases in the UK

The latest news direct from law firms. If you would like to submit press releases for your firm, send an email request to