Matthew Wyard > Chambers of David Berkley KC > Bristol, England > Barrister Profile

Matthew Wyard

0117 928 1520 matthew.wyard@3pb.co.uk View profile View profile

Work Department

Public and Regulatory; Education; Family; Property and Estates.

Position

Matthew Wyard is a specialist public law barrister who “is meticulous in his preparation and has a great way with clients, putting them at ease”, “is very detailed and will go that extra step in order to present the strongest possible case” and whose “advocacy is well beyond his year of call” (Legal 500).

He has appeared in courts/tribunals of all levels up to and including the Court of Appeal and regularly appears against senior juniors and King’s Counsel.

He maintains a deliberately diverse public law practice, although the common theme that runs throughout is the examination of the relationship between the State and individuals/companies and its powers of regulation/control over them. Despite its breadth, Matthew always has “a fantastic grasp of complex, factual cases and a thorough and detailed knowledge of the legal framework, capable of dealing with matters at a rapid pace” (Chambers UK)

Matthew prides himself on “excellent, comprehensive and practical” advice as well as his “exemplar” client care (Chambers UK).

Matthew is appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel of Counsel to the Crown.

Alongside his thriving practice, Matthew sits as a Chairman in the Valuation Tribunal for England and is the Vice Chair of the Board of Thinkspace Education.

Matthew is a widely published legal author. He is a contributing author to the Education Law Handbook, the leading text for education law practitioners and a contributing editor to Clarke Hall and Morrison on Children. He regularly writes for Lexis PSL and Practical Law and has also been published in The Times Higher Education, the Education Law Monitor and the Solicitors Journal.

Matthew is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. Please contact him for a copy of his privacy notice which sets out the basis upon which any personal data he may receive will be protected.

Public and Regulatory 

Matthew is a member of the Attorney General’s C Panel of Counsel to the Crown. He regularly acts for Central and Local Government, public authorities and individuals. He accepts instructions for urgent and out of hours applications as well as international matters.

Cases of note that he has been instructed in/involved with include:

• For the Appellant in AB v Newport City Council [2022] UKUT 190 (AAC) confirming that there is a right of appeal to the Upper Tribunal against review decisions of the Special Educational Needs Tribunal for Wales.
• For Home Office in the leading Country Guidance case on Somalia: OA v SSHD [2022] UKUT 00033 (IAC).
• For the Respondent in Nottinghamshire County Council v SF & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 226 considering the meaning of “necessary” under s37 Children and Families Act 2014.
• To seek permission to appeal in D v Hampshire County Council [2020] EWHC 2916 (Admin).
• DJ v The Welsh Ministers & Ors [2018] EWHC 2735 (Admin) : challenge to the Welsh Ministers Guidance on post-16 education.
• Thilakawardhana v OIA [2018] EWCA Civ 13 : application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal and the substantive appeal.
• Zahid v University of Manchester [2017] EWHC 188 (Admin) : leading authority on the relationship between the courts and the OIA.
• DS v Wolverhampton City Council [2017] EWHC 1660 (Admin) Considering the application of s19 of Education Act 1996.
• AC v OIA (unreported) : considering the legality of the OIA’s rules.

More information on Matthew’s specific areas of interest is detailed below.

Media and Communications/ Information Rights and Investigatory Powers

Matthew advises and represents clients in the entire cross section of work dealt with in the Media and Communications List of the High Court. He has a thriving data protection practise and also regularly deals with matters giving rise to claims in misuse of private information, breach of confidence, harassment, defamation, malicious falsehood and breaches of Article 8. He has represented Central Government departments, non departmental public bodies, higher education institutions, schools, companies and individuals.

Matthew approaches his media and communications work with an insight into the media world – outside of practise he is the Vice Chair of the Board of Directors of a music school.

Alongside the more traditional aspects of his media and communications practise, Matthew also advises organisations on the regulatory obligations for obtaining and controlling information and personal data on persons of interest under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, Investigatory Powers Act 2016 and the Disclosure and Barring regime.

Recent examples of work undertaken include:

• Advising a regulator on a variety of matters including:
  • the data sharing protocol between itself and a local authority the data sharing protocol between itself and the police
  • the legality of requiring a transexual individual to obtain a new DBS certificate following their transition the indefinite retention of safeguarding information
  • the balance to be struck between data protection rights and the duty to make reasonable adjustments.
• B School: Advising a school on the merits of, and response to, a letter before claim alleging defamation.
• Re: W: Advising the defendant on and settling the Defence to a claim brought under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
• Drafting a comprehensive guide on data protection rights and privacy for internal use by a regulator in relation to the rights for third party contractors.
• B v Ministry of Defence: settling the defence in a claim in the Media and Communications List for breaches of the UK GDPR, Article 8 ECHR, breach of confidence and misuse of private information.
• S v Department for Work and Pensions: settling the defence on behalf of the DWP in a claim in the Media and Communications List for alleged failures to rectify personal data.
• H v ACAS: represented ACAS in the County Court successfully securing allocation to the Small Claims Track for a claim for breaches of the UK GDPR, breach of confidence and misuse of private information.
• Re: SN: settling a letter before claim against an international corporation for breaches of the UK GDPR that caused significant financial loss to a law firm.
• Re: Mr R BS: advising a potential claimant on the merits of a claim under Article 17 of the UK GDPR (the right to be forgotten) involving the in-depth consideration of the journalistic purposes and archiving exemptions under schedule 2 of the Data Protection Act 2018.
• Mrs B v A University: advising the university on prospects and evidence, as well as settling a defence and strike out application for a claim for breaches of GDPR, breach of confidence and misuse of private information.
• Re: LL: advising on prospects, quantum and evidence in a claim brought for breaches of the GDPR and misuse of private information.
• Re: CG: pro bono advice on whether a cyberattack constituted a breach of contract, as well as associated data protection issues.
• Re: CS: advising a leading foundation school on their obligations to disclose personal information.
• Re: A: considering a claim for malicious falsehood and breach of copyright arising out of an employment dispute.
• Re: XX: advising on the data protection obligations of a social worker in respect of potential childcare proceedings.
• Re: TSE: advising on the use of personal information by a music school within course materials.

Administrative and Public Law

Matthew is an expert in public law and judicial review. He acts for both claimants and defendants in all manner of public law disputes, and more recently has been providing strategic advice to a number of regulators. He is a member of the Attorney General’s C Panel of Counsel to the Crown so regularly acts for Central Government, but is equally comfortable advising local authorities, companies, charities and individuals. He accepts instructions for urgent and out of hours applications as well as international matters.

Matthew’s experience in administrative and public law is broad and includes: education, health, social care, immigration, asylum, freedom of information, planning, human rights, pharmaceuticals, professional regulation, commercial judicial review. He is equally comfortable providing strategic advice and support to regulators, as he is drafting and appearing in judicial review matters.

Recently, Matthew has been providing strategic advice and representation to a number of regulators/public authorities including regarding:

• The limits of an inspection authority’s vires and the point at which is became functus
• The legality and public consultation requirements of amending a regulators complaints process
• The risks to the regulator associated with the implementation of a new Bill
• Whether a novel business idea would require registration with a particular regulator
• Whether a regulator was obliged, pursuant to ‘Managing Public Money’ to seek to recover its costs following a successful judicial review challenge
• The prioritization process to consider complaints under an ombudsman scheme
• How long a regulator was required to retain various documents under the UK GDPR
• The correct interpretation of an ombudsman schemes enabling act and whether it could investigate a company, as well as an individual
• Which public body was the correct body to employ a particular individual under the statutory scheme
• Whether employees could lawfully consume medicinal cannabis in the workplace and the risks arising to the public authority
• The enforceability of a historic covenant contained in an Abstract pre dating 1926
• The legal risks associated with a public consultation
• The applicability in the jurisdiction of an international certificate of good conduct

Examples of Matthew’s recent judicial review/public law litigation work includes:

• R(F) v H Council – advised upon and settled the Summary Grounds of Resistance in this judicial review under s19 of the Education Act 1996
• R(U) v H Council – advised upon and settled the Summary Grounds of Resistance in this judicial review under s42 of the Children and Families Act 2014
• R(A) v An Ombudsman – settling the Summary Grounds of Resistance in this judicial review challenge to the ombudsman’s preliminary decision that the dispute was more appropriately dealt with by a court rather than the ombudsman
• R(L) v An Ombudsman – settling the summary Grounds of Resistance in this judicial review challenge to the legality of the ombudsman’s refusal to consider a complaint due to it being more appropriately dealt with by a court and that there were other compelling reasons not to investigate
• R(RN) v An Ombudsman – settling the Summary Grounds of Resistance in this judicial review challenge to the Ombudsman’s decision to refuse to investigate a complaint that was submitted out of time.
• Acting successfully for the Home Office in the leading Country Guidance case on Somalia: OA v SSHD [2022] UKUT 00033 (IAC).
• Representing the successful Respondent in Nottinghamshire County Council v SF & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 226 considering the meaning of “necessary” under s37 Children and Families Act 2014.
• Seeking permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal in D v Hampshire County Council [2020] EWHC 2916 (Admin).
• Topham v Ministry of Justice – Successfully represented the defendant and secured te strike out of the claimant’s Article 8 Human Rights Act challenge
• R(A) v B Council – Advising the claimant on a potential judicial review challenge to the defendant council’s direct payment scheme.
• R(H) v X CCG – Advising the claimant in relation to a potential judicial review against the CCG’s failure to secure continuing care provision for a child with a life limiting medical condition.
• R(E) v Norfolk County Council (unreported) – Settled the Statement of Facts and Grounds in this judicial review challenge which settled following the filling of summary Grounds of Resistance
• X v G College (unreported): representing the college against a leading education law silk in a judicial review against its decision to exclude a student.
• YMC v Office of Intercollegiate Studies (unreported): representing the claimant in what is thought to be the first judicial review challenge brought against the Office of Intercollegiate Studies.
• EW v S County Council : advising on and settling the response to a judicial review pre action protocol letter concerning alleged breaches of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act
• E v H County Council : advising the Defendant local authority on an expedited judicial review claim; settled the Detailed Grounds of Resistance; advising on settlement
• MA v B University : advising on the grounds for judicial review arising from a university’s failure to grant extenuating circumstances.
• JP v IAP : advising on the legality of an Independent Admissions Panel decision.
• AT v An Academy : advising on the grounds of challenge to an Academy’s procedure for conducting a managed move which successfully settled at the pre action stage
• Re: DR : advising on the merits of bringing a judicial review claim against a London Borough for maintaining a policy on not placing children below 16 in children’s homes.

Cannabis and Life Science Regulation 

Matthew Wyard is one of a handful of barristers who specialises in the niche provision of regulatory advice in the life sciences sector. He has a particular interest in the regulations governing CBD products and medicinal cannabis and a working knowledge of the relevant international and domestic statutory regimes.

Examples of recent cases Matthew has been involved in within the cannabis and pharmaceutical regulatory field include:

• Re: D – Advising a Government department on the risks and regulatory regime concerning the use of medicinal cannabis on its premises.
• Re: A – Providing advice on the domestic regulatory framework to Middle Eastern and African based joint venturers looking to establish a UK distribution company for the worldwide distribution of cannabis seeds
• Re: MJH – Providing advice in conference to a financial institution on the framework for advising a Channel Island based investment fund on investing in the UK based medicinal cannabis market, including on proceeds of crime (with Nick Cotter)
• Re: KM – Providing advice on the application of the EU Tobacco Products Directive to UK purchasers
• Re: L – Advising on liability and quantum arising from a data breach from an NHS Trust
• Re: V – Advising upon, settling and drafting the settlement agreement in a dispute between the directors of, and consultants for, an international pharmaceutical company as to the apportionment of liability between the company and consultants upon the consultants’ retirement

He is the author of a number of articles on cannabis regulation including: “Cannabis Based Medicinal Products” on Practical Law which provides an overview of the law; “Novel foods regulation: Getting your product to the UK market (including cannabis-based food products)” which reviews the law regulating novel food products in the UK; “The UK Market Authorisation for new medicinal products” and an “Update on UK tobacco law in light of Article 7 of the EU Tobacco Productive Directive”, which forbids the sale of any tobacco products with a characterising flavour.

Matthew Wyard issued a briefing with the cannabis team at Mackrell Solicitors, for businesses continuing to trade cannabinoid products post-Brexit which was also distributed by the Cannabis Trades Association to its members.

Education 

Matthew is a trusted and respected adviser to the education sector and those operating within it, having practised in the field of education law since before his call to the Bar. He is recognised in both of the leading legal directories. Having spent a significant time practicing in Wales, Matthew is experienced in advising on the devolved education settlement in Wales.

Adopting a sector based approach, the kind of areas Matthew advises/represents institutions in includes the following:

Judicial Review: Most of Matthew’s instructions in relation to the education sector involve advising, drafting or representation before the High Court in respect of judicial reviews concerning education. He acts for claimants, defendant and interested parties before the High Court.

Governance and organisation: Having co-authored the school reorganisation chapter of the leading education law textbook, Matthew is regularly sought after to assist local authorities and other proposers with drafting documentation or advising on the process for school re-organisation. He is equally happy to advise and represent those wishing to challenge school re-organisation decisions by way of judicial review. As a non executive director of a higher education institution he is happy to advise on all manner of HEI governance issues, including registration with the Office for Students.

Data protection/information law: Benefitting from an established data protection/privacy practice, Matthew is sought after to advise schools, universities and local authorities on their data protection obligations.

SEN: Matthew regularly appear before the Upper Tribunal, First Tier Tribunal and Education Tribunal for Wales in SEN appeals. He also offers strategic advice and support to local authorities and schools in managing disputes that arise.

Equality Act claims: Whilst defending institutions before the First Tier Tribunal makes up the majority of Matthew’s equality practice, he is equally happy to appear before the County Court defending universities or schools in relation to any matter arising under the Equality Act 2010.

Breach of contract/negligence: Having spent his first few years of practice in the litigation department of a specialist education firm he has a solid track record in bringing and defending civil challenges against educational institutions including universities, and independent schools.

Land/planning issues: Matthew is familiar with the English planning law system, having appeared before Planning Inquiries and given planning advice on a variety of issues. With his knowledge of the education sector he is well placed to advise on these issues within the context of school organization (see Matthew’s property profile for more details).

Transport: Matthew has a working knowledge of the English and Welsh law on school transport and regularly advises on the same.

Regulation/reporting: Having previously been on secondment to an education regulator, Matthew is extremely comfortable advising on regulatory issues arising from school inspections, as well as obtaining urgent interim relief to prevent report publication. He also has experience in challenging Ofsted decision making in the Care Standards Tribunal, and in representing teachers before the TRA.

Examples of recent cases Matthew has been involved with within the education sector include:

• AB v Newport City Council [2022] UKUT 190 (AAC) – represented the successful Appellant in this appeal to the Upper Tribunal which clarified the law in relation to appeals from the Special Educational Needs Tribunal for Wales.
• Nottinghamshire County Council v SF & GD [2020] EWCA Civ 226 – represented the successful Respondents in the Court of Appeal in this decision clarifying the correct approach to s37 Children and Families Act 2014
• D v Hampshire County Council [2020] EWHC 2916 (Admin) – represented the Appellant before the High Court seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal
• X v L University – advising and drafting a Defence to a claim for breach of statutory duty under the UK GDPR
• M v C University – drafting and representing the defendant university in an application to strike out a claim for breach of statutory duty under the UK GDPR and misuse of private information
• F v H Council (unreported) – advised upon and settled the Summary Grounds of Resistance in this judicial review under s19 of the Education Act 1996
• U v H Council (unreported) – advised upon and settled the Summary Grounds of Resistance in this judicial review under s42 of the Children and Families Act 2014
• X v G College (unreported): representing the college against a leading education law silk in a judicial review against its decision to exclude a student.
• YMC v Office of Intercollegiate Studies (unreported): representing the claimant in what is thought to be the first judicial review challenge brought against the Office of Intercollegiate Studies.
• H v D School: Successfully representing the school in an educational negligence claim against a leading silk.
• Re: BCC – Advising a proposer on a school re-organisation project to change a school from single sex to co-educational and drafting various documentation for the same.
• Re: CSDN – Advising the appellant nursery in proceedings before the Care Standards Tribunal
• Advising a regulator on the likely enforceability of a historic covenant contained in an Abstract pre dating 1926 Advising on the legal risks associated with a public consultation
• Drafting online Government guidance in relation to registration with a regulator
• Advising an inspection authority on the limits of its powers and when it becomes functus
• Advising on the legality of amending a regulators complaints process
• Advising a regulator on the risks associated with the implementation of a new Bill
• Advising a regulator on whether a novel business idea would require registration with it

Court of Protection 

Matthew is a Leading Junior in Court of Protection and is described as “an excellent advocate” (Legal 500, 2022) whose “encyclopaedic knowledge of both English and Welsh social care law is an advantage” (Legal 500, 2021).

He undertakes the entire range of instructions in the Court of Protection in both the health & welfare and property & affairs jurisdictions and represents all parties to proceedings. More detail on each area is set out below.

In 2023, Matthew started 3PB’s Court of Protection and Community Care Podcast: CopComm.

Property and Affairs

Much of Matthew’s Court of Protection practise falls under its property and affairs jurisdiction. Matthew regularly represents the Office of the Public Guardian, local authorities, individuals, the Official Solicitor, professional deputies and trustees. Representative examples of Matthew’s work includes:

• OPG v RL – Successfully representing the Applicant in proceedings seeking an order to cancel the registration of an LPA due to P lacking capacity at the time it was made.
• OPG v SLH & Ors – Representing the OPG in proceedings seeking to cancel the registration of an LPA and secure the granting of a professional deputy to protect P from.
• OPG v JMG – Representing the OPG in proceedings seeking to cancel the registration of an LPA due to the attorney financially abusing P.
• OPG v G – Representing the OPG in proceedings seeking to cancel a deputyship order due to financial abuse on the part of the deputy.
• KSC v S Council – Defending an application which proceeded to a contested final hearing seeking to discharge a deputyship order.
• Office of the Public Guardian v CE – Advising and representing the defendant attorney in proceedings brought by the OPG to cancel Lasting Powers of Attorney for both property/affairs and health/welfare on the ground that P had capacity at the point of execution.
• Office of the Public Guardian v MS – Advising and representing the defendant attorney in proceedings brought by the OPG to cancel registration of a Lasting Power of Attorney for health and welfare on the basis that P had capacity at the point of execution.
• G v G – Advising and representing a family member opposed to her siblings application for property and affairs deputyship over their mother due to concerns about financial abuse.
• Office of the Public Guardian v LK – Advising and representing the defendant attorney on an application for removal sought by the OPG.
• Re: AA – Advising a HNW client in conference and in writing on the options for protecting the assets of an incapacitated family member, including considering the appropriateness of a deputyship order or the settlement of a trust structure.
• Re: JS – Advising professional deputies on the proper construction of an indemnity clause within a PPO arising from a £1.7m clinical negligence settlement and on their obligations pursuant to the same.
• Re: DS – Advising an attorney on the legalities and procedure surrounding the transfer of property at an undervalue within civil proceedings where the defendant had lost capacity.
• GB v SW – Advising and representing the defendant family member contesting a property and affairs deputyship application on the basis of alleged historic financial abuse.
• S City Council v KSC – Advising and representing a local authority in a contested application for a deputyship order over P’s property and affairs following his falling victim to online fraud.
• Re: LCD – Advising a national law firm’s private client department on the risks arising out of the transfer of property from a PI trust and the appropriate method of making the transfer.

Health and Welfare

Matthew regularly represents the Official Solicitor, family members, RPRs and local authorities in the range of health and welfare matters coming before the Court of Protection. His background in public law and education law, means that he can offer consistency of representation across all areas where the protected party is an adolescent. As such, he is regularly sought after by local authorities to advise on cross over cases where social care and education responsibilities are at the fore.

Representative examples of Matthew’s health and welfare work includes:

• H Council v JB – Advising and representing a local authority in respect of a section 16 challenge concerning P’s capacity to engage in sexual relations and make decisions concerning his education.
• B CCG v HJ & Ors – Advising and representing P, through the Official Solicitor, in a section 21A challenge concerning a Third Party Personal Health Budget, as well as an urgent issue regarding international travel.
• County Council v JAS – Advising and representing a local authority in a section 21A application within which there were issues concerning P’s habitual residence.
• B Council v PM – Advising and representing a local authority in respect of a DoLS challenge where P resides at an independent specialist college and the interplay between the education and DoLS schemes.
• Re: SB – Advising a family member and corresponding with a local authority on their behalf concerning allegations that the local authority was unlawfully preventing them from seeing their adult children.
• Re: MR – Advising and representing P in a dispute over a ward change following the Covid-19 pandemic.
• KH v S County Council – Advising a local authority on the interplay between the different regimes under the Mental Health Act 1983, s21A Mental Capacity Act and s39 Children and Families Act 2014.
• S City Council v JDC & Ors – Advising and representing a family member in this long running s21A and contact challenge.
• CEM – Representing P in a dispute over her end of life arrangements.

Inherent jurisdiction of the High Court/Safeguarding of vulnerable adults and children

Much of Matthew’s work involves safeguarding. Where appropriate, Matthew is happy to represent parties before the Family Division of the High Court in proceedings under the Inherent Jurisdiction. Recent examples include:

• Re: DN – representing an independent school in emergency proceedings issued under the Inherent Jurisdiction to authorize a child’s deprivation of liberty in an unregulated placement. Matthew also advised on the concurrent threatened Administrative Court proceedings against the school.
• Re: AA – representing a family member in proceedings issued under the Inherent Jurisdiction concerning International Child Abduction.

Medical treatment

Matthew is developing a medical treatment focus to his practise and is happy to advise parties to medical treatment proceedings on an out of hours/emergency basis. To date, medical treatment matters he has been involved with include:

• Re: JC – representing the family members in a dispute concerning whether or not P should receive dental treatment

Property and Estates 

Alongside his thriving public law/judicial review practice, Matthew has a complimentary planning and environmental practice.

Matthew sits as a Chair in the Valuation Tribunal for England, which gives him a working knowledge of English ratings and land valuation law, as well as the principles of taxation of land. He is also appointed to the Attorney Generals C Panel of Counsel to the Crown.

Matthew is happy to accept instructions in all areas of planning and environmental law as well as related issues of highways, rights of way, covenants and easements.

Notable experience:

• Advising an Action Group on the meaning of “full time students” within a s106 agreement and advising on whether a planning committee had erred in its interpretation of the agreement.
• Advising an Action Group on whether it had grounds to challenge a local authority planning committee on Kides grounds.
• Land adjacent to HMP Garth and Wymott – Matthew (led by Josef Cannon) represented the Rule 6 party objecting to the proposed development of a new prison in the Green Belt in this inquiry Recovered by the Secretary of State. The main issue within the inquiry concerned whether the need for a new category c resettlement prison in the North West of England constituted ‘Very Special Circumstances’ for the purposes of overcoming the presumption against Green Belt development.
• Drafting an objection to a proposed Housing Regeneration Scheme in Westminster City Council on heritage, policy, transport, character and equality grounds.
• Advising on a proposed challenge to a London Borough’s proposals to put in place a traffic management scheme that would adversely impact disabled residents.
• Advising on a planning application concerning the development of a residential basement.
• Advising on a potential challenge to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) against the operator of a telecommunications mast.
• Advising upon and settling pre action correspondence in a claim against a London Borough Council under the environmental health legislation.

Regularly acting for and advising both public and private educational institutes on a variety of legal issues, Matthew has a unique insight into these institutions and the pressures they face and is well placed to advise on land and planning disputes that arise.

Career

Year of call 2014

Memberships

• Lincoln’s Inn
• Western Circuit
• Education Law Association
• Court of Protection Bar Association
• Constitutional and Administrative Law Bar Association
• UKELA

Education

• 2014:     Called to the Bar (Lincoln’s Inn)
• 2012 – 2013: Postgraduate Diploma in Law, City Law School
• 2008 – 2012: LL.B (Hons)(SW) Law, University of Surrey
• Erasmus Scholarship
• Blackstone Chambers BPTC Mooting Competition, Semi finalist, 2013