The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon
Work 020 7632 4300
Fax 020 7836 7975

London: Public sector

Administrative and public law
Administrative and public law - ranked: tier 4

Saunders Law

The team at Saunders Law has an established reputation for bringing civil cases against police and prison institutions on behalf of clients claiming wrongful treatment. Regular instructions involve abuse claims, medical negligence, false imprisonment and breaches of Article 8 of the ECHR. The team is representing core participants in a number of key public inquiries, such as the Grenfell Tower Inquiry and the Undercover Policing Inquiry. Judicial review applications also form a core part of the practice, with recent mandates involving claims against the Criminal Cases Review Commission, the Independent Police Complaints Commission and the Crown Prosecution Service. Further mandates for the firm include challenges to coroners' decisions, appeals against the Electoral Commission and claims concerning the disclosure of personal data. Practice head Nia Williams regularly handles cases against the police and prisons relating to abuse of power, discrimination and deaths in custody.

Practice head(s):Nia Williams

Key Clients

Darren Grimes

Family affected by the Windrush scandal

Jalloh Ibrahima

Michael Mansfield QC and Azhar Khan (Undercover Policing Inquiry)

Core participants in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry

Family of Kyle Maher

Group claim against Sodexo (HMP Peterborough)

Work highlights

  • Instructed by Darren Grimes to appeal a £20,000 fine issued by the Electoral Commission for alleged Brexit irregularities.
  • Advising a family in relation to the Home Office's Windrush compensation scheme and related legal matters.
  • Acting for Michael Mansfield QC and Azhar Khan as core participants in the inquiry into undercover policing.
  • Representing a number of core participants involved in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.
  • Representing 47 clients in a claim against Sodexo, arising out of 150 unlawful breaches of national strip search policy.

[back to top]

Civil liberties and human rights
Civil liberties and human rights - ranked: tier 3

Saunders Law

Saunders Law is skilled in handling complex inquiries and actions against the police, led by practice head Nia Williams. The team is also experienced in undertaking work related to deaths in custody, where Ruth Mellor and Ceri Lloyd-Hughes are particularly active. Among other core members of the team are Jag Bahra and Ellie Cornish, who is leading the representation of the families in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.

Practice head(s):Nia Williams

Other key lawyers:Jag Bahra; Ceri Lloyd-Hughes; Tessa Hutchinson; Ellie Cornish; Ruth Mellor

Key Clients

Two core participants in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry

More than 200 clients in the Hillsborough misfeasance group litigation

Family of Terry Smith

Michael Mansfield QC and Azhar Khan in the Undercover Policing Inquiry

Participants in a group claim against Sodexo (HMP Peterborough)

Jollah Ibrahima

L and others (a family affected by the Windrush scandal)

Isaac Itiary



Family of Kyle Maher

Daniel Lewis

Family of Nuno Cardoso

Buhari Nasar

Work highlights

  • Representing core participants in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.
  • Acting for survivors and family members in the civil proceedings for misfeasance against South Yorkshire and West Midlands Police arising out of the Hillsborough disaster and the ensuing cover-up.
  • Representing the family of Terry Smith in the inquest into his death in police custody.
  • Representing Michael Mansfield QC and solicitor Azhar Khan, who are core participants in the inquiry into undercover policing.
  • Acting for Ibrahima Jalloh in a test case on the scope of the tort of false imprisonment and Article 5(1) of the ECHR and the appropriate measure of damages for an unlawful curfew.

[back to top]

Further information on Saunders Law

Please choose from this list to view details of what we say about Saunders Law in other jurisdictions.


Offices in London

Legal Developments by:
Saunders Law

  • Putting a name on it - business disclosure requirements

    An e-trader, or merely a business which uses its website as a shop window, may be conducting an otherwise honest, lawful and legitimate business but unless they comply with domestic and European regulations properly identifying the name and address of the trader or trading enterprise, they could find themselves at the wrong end of a criminal prosecution.
    - Saunders Law Partnership

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 ‚Äėcentre of life test‚Äô 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 ‚ÄúRegulations‚ÄĚ). 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 ‚Äúa¬† majority shareholder in the overseas business‚ÄĚ.
  • 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 ¬†‚Äėpreviously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Immigration Rules‚Äô,¬† 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. 

    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 (‚Äúthe 2014 Act‚ÄĚ) 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 ¬†(‚Äúthe 2002 Act‚ÄĚ). 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.