Matthew Slater > Ten Old Square > London, England > Lawyer Profile

Ten Old Square
Ten Old Square

Work Department

Private Client: Trusts and Probate, Private Client: Personal Tax, Commercial Litigation, Administrative and Public Law


Matthew Slater’s practice covers a wide range of Chancery, Commercial and (as one of the Attorney-General’s ‘A’ Panel Counsel) Public Law work. He undertakes the full-range of domestic trust, probate and estate litigation as well as advising and acting for investment funds, banks and investors. In addition, he is often instructed when the Government becomes involved in commercial disputes.

Matthew also has wide experience of substantive appeals before the Court of Appeal, appearing for both commercial and governmental clients.


Called 2005; Appointed to Attorney General’s ‘A’ Panel in June 2017. Formerly a Fellow at Yale Law School, Matthew was, between 2012 and 2015, a Lecturer in Law at Oriel College, Oxford, teaching trusts and public law. In addition, between 2012 and 2014, he was the Visiting Professor of Trusts at the Institute of Law in Jersey and a member, with the Deputy Bailiff, of the three-man Board of Examiners for the Jersey Advocates Exams.Matthew Slater is a member of the editorial board for the Wills & Trusts Law Reports.

Reported cases:
Larsen and Volaw v Comptroller of Taxes and States of Jersey
[2015] JRC 244: Legality of Tax Information Exchange Agreement between Jersey and India. Medsted v Canaccord (ongoing, Commercial Court): Multi-jurisdictional commission dispute arising out of derivatives trading. Freedman v Freedman [2015] EWHC 1457 (Ch): Equitable mistake concerning trusts; difference between ignorance, mistake and disappointed expectations. Buzzoni v HMRC [2013] EWCA Civ 1684: Gifts with reservation of benefit, legal test for being ‘excluded or virtually excluded’. Globalised Corp v HMRC [2012] UKFTT 556 (TC): MTIC fraud; overlap between CPR and FTT Rules. Rogge v HMRC [2012] W.T.L.R. 537: Tax treatment of settlor-interested trusts. Barclays Trust Company v HMRC [2011] EWCA Civ 810: First Court of Appeal authority on disabled person’s trusts. Julian Frost v HMRC [2010] UKFTT 344 (TC): Estoppel against the Crown; legitimate expectation. Contrast Graphics v HMRC [2010] UKFTT 289 (TC): Interrelationship between flat-rate schemes under s. 23B, VATA 1994 and claims for repayment under s. 73 (2), VATA 1994. Peter Lyon v HMRC [2010] SFTD 175: Vires challenge to VAT (Cars) Order 1992. Baynes v Hedger [2008] EWHC 1587 (Ch): 1975 Act claim, rectification, incidence of administration expenses and IHT.

Commercial Litigation:

Project Dusk: Aviation litigation, injunctive relief, claims arising out of the Icelandic banking crisis. Whessoe v Dale: Claim for breach of fiduciary duty against the directors of global oil services business. Comprised during trial. Derwent Holdings Ltd v Trafford Borough Council [2011] All ER (D) 159 (Mar): Litigation arising out of the redevelopment of the Old Trafford Ground and on appeal [2011] EWCA Civ 832. HBI Playtex Bath v DBA Lux (LCIA arbitration (No. 8154)) : Trademark dispute arising out of LBO. Close v Wilson [2011] EWCA Civ 5: Recoverability under gaming contract; restitutionary remedies. Lane v Robinson [2010] EWCA Civ 384: Pre-contract deposit and lock out agreements. Automobile World Ltd v Lombard [2009] EWCA Civ 379: Implied terms in hire purchase agreement.

Government Litigation:

R (Hassett & Price) v SSJ [2017] EWCA Civ 331 – Matthew Slater appeared successfully for the Secretary of State for Justice in this important judicial review which upheld the legality of a recent Government prison policy. Mackay v SSJ (2014): Case compromised by Secretary of State before Supreme Court in following a change to the challenged policy. Matthew was instructed to draft the revised policy, advise SSJ on its implementation and to handle the 10+ cases which had been stayed behind Mackay. He is also instructed in the lead case challenging the revised policy: R (Hassett and Price) v SSJ [2015] EWHC 3723 (Admin) (pending before Court of Appeal). R (Cain) v SSJ [2013] EWHC 900 (Admin): Prisoners’ rights, particularly procedural rights. R (Lynch) v SSJ [2012] EWHC 1597 (Admin): Circumstances in which, post-DM v SSJ [2011] EWCA Civ 522, common law fairness requires an oral hearing in front of the Category A Review Team. R (Boylan) v Parole Board [2012] EWHC 1233 (Admin): Procedural rights before Parole Board. R (Willoughby) v SSJ [2011] EWHC 3483 (Admin): Effect of tariff expiry on procedural rights. R (Flinders) v SSJ [2011] EWHC 1630 (Admin): Human Rights Act damages, level of case management powers are required for the Parole Board to be an Article 6-compliant. R (oao Downs) v SSJ [2011] EWCA Civ 1422 (Admin): One of only two CA cases on when High Security Prisoners are entitled to oral hearings. R (Longmire) v Secretary of State for Justice [2011] EWHC 1488 (Admin): When a dispute of fact will call for an oral hearing before the Director of High Security. Decision maker’s procedural discretion.


BA Hons (Oxford)