The Legal 500

Chambers of Roger Farley QC

19 QUAY STREET, MANCHESTER, M3 3HN, ENGLAND
Tel:
Work 0161 833 6000
Fax:
Fax 0161 833 6001
DX:
14327 MANCHESTER-3
Email:
Web:
www.cobden.co.uk

Louise Blackwell QC

Tel:
Work 0161 833 6000
Email:
Cobden House Chambers (Chambers of Roger Farley QC)

Position

Miss Blackwell has been at the Bar for over 25 years, taking Silk in 2006. She has specialised in criminal law throughout her career and has dealt with matters of the utmost severity and complexity, acting for both the prosecution and defence. Miss Blackwell has particular experience in cases involving vulnerable witnesses. She has vast experience in dealing with women, children and men who have been traumatised by very personal crimes. These include the obvious sexual offences of the highest magnitude, but also offences of gangland kidnap, torture and murder of all types. This experience has given Miss Blackwell the skills to deal with witnesses who find the court room a difficult and hostile place. Consequently, both the law relating to the admissibility of evidence of vulnerable witnesses and the practical issues of leading evidence from such witnesses are part of her skills base. She has a very strong ability to connect with such witnesses, enabling them to give evidence well. Further, her wide experience of defending in such cases has given her an ability to cross-examine defendants with ease. Her experience allows her to read and deal with multi-agency records, with a thorough knowledge of what to ask for and how to understand such records. Miss Blackwell has particular experience of the law relating to consent, both to sexual matters and to physical violence occurring with consent during sexual relationships. Miss Blackwell has also dealt with a number of cases involving expert evidence relating to mobile telephone records. Her knowledge and understanding of this area of expertise is very large. All aspects of cell site analysis, etc are within her expertise. In particular she has dealt with cases, at the Crown Court and the Court of Appeal, which deal with the complexities of such evidence, including the leading case of R v Singh, which settled the question of implied assertions and hearsay as relating to mobile telephone material. Having a science and mathematics background, Miss Blackwell enjoys dealing with cases that require an in-depth knowledge and understanding of complex expert issues, and her years as a jury advocate have enabled her to translate these sometimes difficult matters into a form easily assimilated by the jury. Miss Blackwell is well-known for being approachable and has an excellent bedside manner. She is highly regarded by her fellow practitioners. Whether prosecuting or defending, she gives a very high level of commitment and service to both her professional and lay clients. Miss Blackwell is happy to travel to all courts both on and off the Northern Circuit, and will happily make herself available for consultations throughout the country, and at solicitors’ offices. Her specialities include: murder; serious sex offences, including rape and serial rapists, multi-complainant and multi-defendant sexual offences, with particular reference to children and other vulnerable witnesses; armed robbery; kidnapping; arson; importation and supply of Class A drugs; violent crime; gangland crime, including kidnap, torture and murder. Notable cases: R v Cottage & Jackson, Manchester Crown Court (terror campaign involving explosives); R v Singleton, Hove Crown Court (historic rape and sexual abuse); R v Rhycter, Leeds Crown Court and Court of Appeal (murder); R v Greenwood, Preston Crown Court (rape); R v West and Charisma, Manchester Crown Court (rape of a young woman by more than one perpetrator); R v Czyzewski, Manchester Crown Court (rape and assaults during a sexual relationship); R v Campbell, Manchester Crown Court (murder with issues as to brain damage and memory loss).

Career

Called 1985; Silk 2006.

Leisure

Horse riding, stage management, blues music.

Back to index

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • Update on EU Sanctions against Russia

    On 6 December 2014, Council Regulation (EU) No 1290/2014 entered into force. This regulation is the latest in a series of regulations regarding "sectoral sanctions" against Russia.
  • Slovakia: Checkmate? New law regulates protection of employees when blowing the whistle

    So far, in Slovakia there has not been in force any regulation specifically addressing whistleblowing situations in which employees report wrongdoings, such as the commission of a crime which they learnt about in connection with the performance of their employment, work or function. Certain partial aspects related to whistleblowing have been regulated by the country's data protection, criminal and labour laws. read more
  • Croatia: A look at the Strategic Investment Projects Act One Year after Implementation

    Croatia's sixth consecutive year of recession
  • AT: Transparency International – Release of 20th annual Corruption Perceptions Index

    On 3 December 2014, Transparency International, the leading civil society organisation fighting corruption worldwide, released its 20th annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). The index draws on surveys covering the views of business people, provides expert assessments, and ranks 175 countries by the perceived levels of corruption in their public sectors. The scale ranges from 0 (perceived to be highly corrupt) to 100 (perceived to be very clean). The CPI can be found under the following link .  read more...
  • Review of the Constitutional Court Decision on the Cancellation of Article 42/1 (C) of Law No. 556

    Introduction
  • Transfer and Granting of Rights under Turkish Petroleum Law: Freedom of Contract versus Regulatory R

    Especially after the drop in oil prices the companies that are in early stage of their investments have begun to get position aiming to turn into an advantageous investment and started to look to what extent the regulations allow them to transfer and grant their rights under Turkish Petroleum Law. This may be deemed also as an exit strategy for some from operational perspective as it parallels with the tendency around the world and has direct relation with oil prices. 
  • Contracting the Petroleum Operations under Turkish Petroleum Law: Scope and Limits of Liability on P

    As exception to liberty of contracting and unlike a number of other industries, Turkey's petroleum industry imposes certain obligations to petroleum right owners in contracting the conduct of the petroleum operations.  At the first glance this seems that it aims to strengthen the management of hazards by enhancing the safety however the liability imposed to petroleum right owners in case of contracting the operations still remains unclear in terms of limitation.
  • Liabilities of Primary Employer and Subcontractors in case of a Collusive Contract

    Growing economy and competitive environment in Turkey has been leading companies to seek more profitable ways to conduct their business. Therefore companies have chosen to engage in subcontracts for the purpose of reducing their costs. Yet, to serve such purpose, at some point companies have started utilizing subcontracts to limit employees' entitlements through collusive contracts. Labor Law numbered 4857 (the " Labor Law ") and Bylaw on Subcontractor dated September 27, 2008 (the " Bylaw ") regulate which services or works may be subcontracted and strictly prohibit collusive contracts. According to Article 2/7 of the Labor Law, a collusive subcontract is considered null and void. Such nullity of subcontract automatically results in primary employers being redefined as main and sole employers of employees assigned to subcontracted work. Consequently, primary employers are solely responsible for employees' rights arising from subcontracted works and technically, primary employers would not have the option to recourse to subcontractors in order to claim any compensation due to their sole responsibility.
  • Boundaries of the Turkish Competition Authority’s Investigative Powers

    Boundaries of the Turkish Competition Authority's Investigative Powers: Case Handlers vs. Personal Property
  • Potential Consequences of Acquisitions of Minority Shareholdings under Turkish Competition Law

    The acquisition of a minority shareholding may come under the Turkish Competition Authority's (" Authority ") scrutiny in two ways, mainly: 1) it may result in de facto or de jure sole or joint control, depending on the rights possessed by the minority shareholders and/or shareholding structures and past voting patterns; and 2) it may not result in control but in cross-shareholding structures amongst competitors in a concentrated market which may raise questions about coordinated effects. This article discusses the circumstances under which the abovementioned consequences may arise under Turkish competition law with references to the relevant legislation and the most noteworthy cases in this regard.