7 Harrington Street

7 Harrington Street

Show options

England

Barristers

search
Laura Bassinder

Laura Bassinder

Practice Areas Miss Bassinder has specific experience in personal injury claims arising out of: \tRoad traffic accidents, particularly with regard to LVI and allegations of fraud/fundamental dishonesty and phantom passenger(s); \tCredit hire, including complex arguments in respect of enforceability; \tWorkplace accidents, with an interest in claims relating to working from height, electrocution and machinery; \tIndustrial disease, specifically NIHL, HAVS, and repetitive strain injury; \tAlleged breaches of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957/1984, particularly against schools, hospitals and supermarkets; \tAccidents on public highways; and \tDefective products. Miss Bassinder has experience of personal injury claims arising out of cosmetic treatments, for both Claimants and Defendants. She has a special interest in claims involving historic physical and sexual abuse, particularly with regard to abuse perpetrated whilst in care. In addition to her personal injury practice, Miss Bassinder regularly acts for both tenants and landlords in possession proceedings and claims under the Defective Premises Act 1972, Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, and Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018. Miss Bassinder accepts instructions to draft pleadings, skeleton arguments and Part 35 questions, and advises on quantum, liability and procedure. She ensures a swift turnaround of paperwork. She is happy to advise at the early stages of proceedings, and conference with lay and expert witnesses. Miss Bassinder provides training and seminars upon request.  
Jamie Baxter

Jamie Baxter

Practice Areas Crime Mr Baxter is a specialist criminal practitioner who joined Chambers in March 2016 following a successful completion of his pupillage under the supervision of Mr Martin Reid. He is instructed by the Prosecution and Defence both as a Led Junior and Junior Alone. Mr Baxter understands the importance of client care and prides himself in being an approachable advocate who is determined to provide the best possible result for his client. He is accustomed to dealing with paper heavy cases and taking cases on short notice. He is happy to advise both his lay and professional clients throughout all stages of the proceedings and uses modern technology to present cases to the jury in the most efficient way. Mr Baxter has been instructed in cases involving vulnerable witnesses/defendants, including cases requiring the use of ABE interviews and issues of fitness to plead/stand trial and is experienced in dealing with cases involving expert evidence including telephonic, forensic, medical and accountancy. Mr Baxter also has a keen interest in POCA/confiscation proceedings having appeared in a number of interim hearings, final disposals and for third-party individuals affected by the proceedings. He is also instructed in regulatory, disciplinary and licensing matters including taxi, security industry and firearms licensing appeals. Areas of Practice Described as having an ‘engaging and authoritative manner’ Mr Baxter has quickly established himself a busy and diverse Crown Court practice and is instructed by both the Prosecution and Defence in equal measure. He has been a Level 3 CPS advocate for a number of years already and is authorised to Prosecute cases arising out of Operation Venetic (Encrochat cases). Mr Baxter has appeared in numerous trials in the Crown Court, many of which made regional and national news, including: \tMurder – including manslaughter and attempted murder. \tCausing death by dangerous driving and careless driving \tDrugs: Possession with intent to supply Class A & B drugs (including conspiracy), conveying prohibited articles into prison and production offences; \tFirearms & Offensive Weapons: Including conspiracies to sell/transfer firearms, possession of firearms and explosives, possession of ammunition and threatening with a bladed article; \tModern Slavery: Offences requiring persons to perform forced/compulsory labour and human trafficking. \tOAPA offences: Section 18, Section 20 and Section 47 assaults and an offence under Section 29 (throwing corrosive fluid on a person with intent to do grievous bodily harm); \tTheft Act offences: Burglary (including conspiracy to burgle), robbery, handling stolen goods and aggravated vehicle taking; \tSexual offences: Including inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, sexual assault and outraging public decency; \tFraud/Financial: Revenue (income tax and VAT) and non-revenue fraud offences, money laundering and possessing criminal property; \tMiscellaneous: Conspiracy to cause explosions, misuse of computers act offences, violent disorder, affray, threats to kill, escape, perverting the course of justice, contempt of court and dangerous driving; and \tPOCA: All stages including arguments as to benefit, available amount, third party interests, hidden assets and final hearings. Notable Cases Murder / Homicide \tR v MW: Led Junior for the defence representing a 19 year old male accused of the knifepoint murder of a rival drug dealer. \tR v TK: Led Junior for the defence representing a man accused of the joint-enterprise murder of a man at a taxi rank in Liverpool. TK was ultimately acquitted of both murder and manslaughter and convicted of a section 47 assault. \tR v LW: Junior Alone defending a young woman accused of attempting to murder her best friend and best friend’s partner. \tR v AC: Junior Alone prosecuting a defendant accused of causing the death of an 11 year old girl by dangerous driving. Convicted after trial.   Drugs and Weapons Offences \tMalaga 1 – Junior alone prosecuting a multi-handed conspiracy to sell/transfer firearms and possessing firearms with intent to endanger life arising out of Encrochat and surveillance \tMalaga 2 - Junior alone prosecuting a multi-handed conspiracy to possess firearms and grenades linked to a drug dealing enterprise in Manchester. \tGeladi – Led Junior for the prosecution in a case multi-handed conspiracy involving the robbery of 20kg of class A drugs between rival drug gangs in Manchester and Liverpool. The case involved the Encrochat and cell site expert evidence. \tCicilian 1 & 2 – Led junior for the prosecution in two multi-handed drugs conspiracies. The cases involved issues as to disclosure (both s.8 and PII), abuse of process and resulted in a successful prosecution of all defendants on trial. \tKodak: Representing a Merseyside based defendant as part of a 5kg (category 1) conspiracy to supply Class A drugs to Bournemouth as well as possession of a disguised firearm. Case made national news and involved a large amount of surveillance and telephone evidence/billing. Following a successful Newton hearing the defendant’s role, and sentence, was significantly reduced. \tEarnest: Representing a female alleged to be involved in a County Lines drugs conspiracy in Carlisle alleged to be acting as a street dealer. Acquitted after trial. \tBugbear: Representing a Merseyside based defendant as part of an allegation of conspiracy to supply Class A drugs. The case involves issue surrounding forensic evidence. The Defendant was acquitted following a successful submission of no case to answer. \tR v AC – Instructed to prosecute two defendants for conveying prohibited articles into prison (drugs and telephones) using drones. The case involved expert evidence in relation to GPRS data obtained from the devices. Modern Slavery \tMaster – Led Junior for the prosecution involving allegations of conspiracy to require workers to perform forced/compulsory labour in car washes and human trafficking.   Serious Violence \tOp.Brent – Junior for the Defence (Richard Pratt QC leading) representing the principal defendant in an allegation of conspiracy to rob and wounding with intent whereby the defendant was alleged to have arranged for his neighbour to be shot by associates. The defendant was acquitted after trial. \tSydney – Led Junior for the defence in a case lasting 3 months. First on the indictment whereby the allegation was conspiracy to cause explosions in order to steal from ATM machines. The case involved in excess of 10,000 pages of evidence and was heavily reliant on telephone and attribution evidence between conspirators. The case also involved an argument of autrefois acquit. \tKirkhill – Led Junior for the prosecution in eight trials relating to large scale public disorder outside St Georges Hall, Liverpool in February 2016. A total of 56 defendants were convicted who were affiliated to extreme left and right wing organisations. \tR v BW – Instructed to defend in a S.18 trial whereby the allegation was a slash to the face with a Stanley Knife following an earlier robbery.   Fraud/ Proceeds of Crime \tBurnbank – Prosecuted a nine-handed POCA final hearing following a trial for conspiracy to import and supply Class A drugs. Benefit figures ranged up to £400,000. \tGlobelake – Junior alone prosecuting a multi-handed POCA hearing following convictions for fraud. Benefit figures were in excess of £500,000 and the case involved arguments as to hidden assets and the application of the assumptions. \tManzini – Led junior for the prosecution in a multi-handed fraud trial relating to the theft of mail followed by numerous fraudulent applications for credit cards/personal loans. Value in excess of £100,000. \tR v IA – Prosecuted a Yemeni national for offences of possession false travel documentation with improper intent. Miscellaneous \tJava – Represented a young male for sentence following guilty pleas to 10 offences contrary to the misuse of computers act following an extensive investigation by the cyber crime unit. Offences involved complex issues of DOS and DDOS attacks by the use of a stressor, which the Defendant would sell, causing an overload of traffic on servers and temporary incapacitation. Over 200,000 attacks took place. Sentenced to 2 years suspended for 18 months. \tR v JW – representing a man accused of casting a destructive substance with intent to cause GBH (spitting Mercury) at a police officer contrary to S.29 OAPA 1861. Successful acquittal after a 4 day trial despite cogent police evidence. \tR v LM – Defending in a shoplifting case which involved the defence of non-insane   automatism brought about by the Defendants diabetes. Following legal arguments and expert evidence, the case was ultimately dropped against the Defendant.
Matthew Bolt

Matthew Bolt

A criminal and military law specialist with deep common law roots, Matthew combines a deep knowledge of the law and procedure with extensive advocacy experience in the Crown Court, Court Martial and the appellate courts. Matthew is steeped in the Service Justice System and regularly advises members of the Armed Forces in relation to professional matters (Major Admin Action, Service Complaints and CDT fails) as well as representing them in the Court Martial. Instructed at the very outset of cases, he is a specialist in Pre Charge Engagement, a seasoned trial advocate and has a particular interest in appellate work. Described as “hands on, easy to work with”, and someone who “quickly gets to the heart of a case and adds value”. He is a “high calibre advocate” who is “an oracle of all things technical”.   Crime Matthew is an experienced advocate, prosecuting and defending serious crime. Regularly instructed to defend those charged with serious sexual offences and professionals facing potentially career ending allegations. He builds strong teams and ensures no stone is left unturned in their defence. Matthew provides advice from the earliest stages, working closely with solicitors as part of pre charge engagement advising on defence evidence, lines of inquiry and drafting representations against charge. He provides tactical acumen and practical suggestions to support clients from the very beginning. Regularly instructed to represent professional clients including police and members of the Armed Forces, Matthew well understands the particular challenges involved in defending those who will face regulatory proceedings as well. An experienced appellate advocate, beyond his call, he provides second opinions and advice to those seeking to overturn their convictions or reduce their sentences.   Military Law The Service Courts Matthew is an experienced Service Courts practitioner who has successfully represented defendants charged with a wide variety of criminal offences. Recognised as one of the leading experts in Service law in the UK, Matthew defends at all levels in the Service Justice System. He has a particular flair for appellate work, being involved in some of the most consequential appeals of recent years. he appeared for the successful appellants in the leading case of R v SH [2019] EWCA Crim 1863 which established that defendants in the Court Martial had the right to apply to have cases against them dismissed. Prior to this it had been thought that no such power existed in the Service Justice System following the Armed Forces Act 2006. He represented the Director of the Military Court Service in the recent case of R v Bhoyroo [2023] EWCA Crim 1625   Other advisory work In addition to his defence practice Matthew regularly advises in relation to professional matters (Major Admin Action, Service Complaints and CDT fails). Highly experienced in advising Service personnel as well as drafting representations on their behalf. He also advises the Judge Advocate General in relation to sentencing and matters of procedure, and the Director of the Military Court Service in relation to modernisation of the Service Justice System. He is a leading proponent of Pre Charge Engagement. He provides advice from the earliest stages, working closely with solicitors, clients and assisting officers advising on defence evidence, lines of inquiry and drafting representations against charge. Ever mindful of the professional and pension consequences of cases, he provides tactical acumen and practical suggestions to support clients from the very beginning.   Notable/Recent Cases Crime R v H (Swindon) – Defended a soldier involved with 7 others in smuggling cigarettes from Afghanistan via the military mail for onward sale R v U (Birmingham) – Successfully defended a man accused of rape and affray during a lockdown breaking house party R v H & Others (Gloucester) – Successfully defended a 17 year old charged with 10 others with involvement in county lines drug dealing. R v M & Others (Maidstone) – Successfully defended woman charged with aiding the violent robbery of local drug dealer by an armed gang. R v E (Bristol) – Led junior in the successful defence of a 17 year old accused of murdering a “professional robber of drug dealers”. R v I (CCC) – Led junior defending a man accused of the manslaughter and rape of a woman. Matthew was involved from the pre-charge stage. R v P (Isleworth) – Represented a man intercepted whilst importing over 50kgs of cannabis R v W (Oxford) – Represented a man accused of attempting to murder his mother in law   Military Law R v LCpl B Defended a soldier charged with sexual assault having won a contested s.41 application on the issue of the manner of consent. B was acquitted. R v LCpl H Represented a soldier charged with GBH where Service injuries had led to memory loss of the incident concerned. H was acquitted. R v Ex-LH B The JAG was persuaded to stay as an abuse of process a prosecution brought for a Service offence as a device to avoid breaching SPA policy relating to prosecuting summary only matters. R v FO D Successfully defended a pilot accused of ABH having deliberately struck the testicles of a colleague during “Mess Games”. R v Maj L Represented an officer at sentence charged with conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline following a serious injury to one of his soldiers on exercise. R v Pte Murphy [2020] EWCA Crim 1898 Instructed after conviction. M’s conviction for administering a noxious substance was quashed after failures in the judge advocate’s summing up were identified. R v Ex-Maj Heslop [2021] EWCA Crim 1464 A compensation order was quashed on the basis that a close reading of the relevant JSP showed the MoD had in fact suffered no loss. R v Ex-Pte Kida (2025) Following submissions CMAC reduced Pte K’s sentence by 50% permitting his immediate release. Re. Sgt H Drafted written representations resulting in the overturning of the decision to terminate a soldier’s service. Re. PO B Successfully argued that a sailor who failed a CDT should be retained in the Royal Navy. Re. Lt Col M Accused of negligent performance of a duty. Pre Charge representations led to M not being charged. AGAI67 proceedings were subsequently defeated and no sanction imposed.
Michael Brady KC

Michael Brady KC

Serious Crime. Since taking Silk in March 2020, Michael Brady KC has been instructed to both prosecute and defend in a number of high-profile murder cases, including R v Skana a case that concerned the killing of a 7-year old girl in a park in Bolton. This case, as with a number of other cases in which Michael has been instructed, involved complex considerations of the defendant’s mental illness. Other cases such as R v Rowen (aka Glennon), a case where the defendant decapitated his cousin with an axe, have caused Michael’s reputation in Silk to become quickly established. Michael also practises from 9 Bedford Row and Cornwall Street. Michael accepts private work and has successfully represented a number of defendants on this basis. Equally comfortable defending or prosecuting, Michael has an approachable and down to earth manner enabling him to communicate with clients and juries alike such that the real issues are identified with concision and clarity. Away from the court room Michael has been asked to, and is in the process of establishing, the Northern Circuit Chapter of the Kalisher Trust. Following his work for this well-renowned Trust, Michael has accepted an invitation to become a Trustee. The Kalisher Trust aims to help bright youngsters from disadvantaged backgrounds achieve their potential through advocacy and to help those with the requisite ability and ambition to develop careers as barristers at the criminal bar.   Notable/Recent Cases R v Adamson Murder Instructed to defend one of 3 defendants in relation to the murder of the deceased in a case of mistaken identity. R v Awla Murder Instructed to defend one of 10 defendants in connection with the murder of the deceased who allegedly raped a family member. R v Jeremy & Others Murder Instructed to prosecute 5 young men in connection with the robbery and murder of a random stranger. R v Evitt & McGlacken Murder Instructed to prosecute the 2 defendants who murdered the deceased, then decapitated and dismembered him before disposing of the body parts in a nearby park. R v Castle & Castle Murder Instructed to prosecute husband and wife in relation to the murder of a 13-month-old boy they were in the process of adopting. R v Correia and Others Murder Instructed to defend one of 13 young men convicted of murdering a 16-year old boy arising from a gang feud. R v O’Brien & Others Murder Instructed to prosecute 3 defendants convicted of murdering the deceased by repeatedly stabbing him before leaving the body in a canal. R v Heni Manslaughter Instructed to prosecute the defendant alleged to have struck the deceased leaving him incapacitated in the road who was then killed when subsequently run over by a taxi. Complicated issues of causation arose. R v Peake and Others Murder Instructed to defend one of 5 defendants alleged to have murdered the victim of a robbery. R v Brown & O’Casey Murder Instructed to prosecute 2 drug dealers who murdered the deceased while engaged in a confrontation in his home. R v Rowen Murder Instructed to defend a seriously mentally ill young man who decapitated his cousin. R v Skana Murder Instructed to prosecute this tragic and high-profile case that involved the defendant cutting the throat of a 7-year old child in the presence of her mother and father. The trial revolved around issues of the defendant’s mental illness. R v Holden Murder Instructed by the Crown at short notice to prosecute in a case that arose from long-standing animosity between defendant and deceased. Another example of the defendant’s mental illnesses and personality disorders played a significant role. R v Bitton & Dixon Murder Instructed by the Crown to prosecute in a neighbour dispute that arose during the Covid 19 “lockdown.” R v Ward & Smith Murder Instructed as leading junior for the Crown in a case made difficult by the absence of witnesses and the vulnerability of the defendant Ward who suffered from a range of mental health and learning difficulties. Murder conviction secured. It was during this case that that Michael took Silk. R v O’Donnell Conspiracy to Murder Instructed to prosecute as leading junior. All 6 defendants were represented by QC and junior. A very significant undertaking that involved appearing at the CACD during the trial to appeal a terminating ruling. The CA described Michael’s performance as “powerful”. Positive comment was also made about Michael’s written submissions which “eased the path of the court.”
Hannah Brookfield

Hannah Brookfield

Miss Brookfield is an established practitioner and was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple in 2011. She practices in all areas of Civil Litigation, primarily those involving cases of personal injury with a focus on cases involving serious injury. Practice Areas Miss Brookfield has extensive experience in all areas of personal injury litigation including high value claims. She conducts work on both the fast track and the multi-track on behalf of both Claimants and Defendants. Miss Brookfield has particular experience in the following areas: Road Traffic Cases – including fraud, low velocity impacts and credit hire. Serious and Catastrophic Injury Public Liability Cases Employer’s Liability Cases Occupier’s Liability Cases Costs Litigation Miss Brookfield is experienced in representing parties at all stages of litigation from pre issue to trial. Miss Brookfield offers a fast, high quality and reliable service. She ensures that all paperwork is returned promptly and ordinarily within a matter of days. Miss Brookfield drafts pleadings and advices in relation to both liability and quantum including detailed Schedules of Loss. She has extensive experience of advising and drafting in cases involving serious and fatal accidents. She provides practical and robust advice in light of the cogency of the evidence and the inherent risks of litigation and any advice that Ms Brookfield provides also takes account of the wider commercial implications of a case.  
Bernice Campbell

Bernice Campbell

Practice Areas Crime \tProsecution \tDefence \tAssault, Robbery and other violent crime \tBurglary & Theft \tDrug Trafficking Offences \tEnvironmental Law \tFirearms \tFraud & Money Laundering \tHeavy Crime \tLicensing \tLocal Government Legislation \tMurder/Manslaughter \tPolice \tRevenue & Customs Offences \tSerious Sex Cases Areas of Practice Bernice is a specialist criminal practitioner. She has a wide ranging experience prosecuting and defending cases at all levels. She regularly undertakes cases concerning violence, drugs, sexual offences, motoring law, dishonesty offences, burglary, fraud, harassment and public offences. In addition she has developed particular knowledge and expertise in cases involving vulnerable witnesses. She is known for her strong advocacy style which is complemented by her ability to handle the most sensitive of cases. Bernice is acutely aware that the provision of proper advice and representation requires a high level of commitment to the client as well as experience, expertise and approachability. Notable Cases \tR v CW Rape \tR v JF   Kidnapping \tR v HJ   Sexual assault on child \tR v AW  Child grooming \tR v KL    Ill treatment of someone with unsound mind \tR v WM  Class A drugs conspiracy
James Cliff

James Cliff

Practice Areas Civil Personal Injury James has considerable experience of all types of Personal Injury litigation. He is regularly instructed to act in high value claims concerning employers and occupiers liability and as a result he has been placed on the approved counsel panel for J Sainsbury plc and is regularly instructed to represent them in complex and high value multi-track cases. James also acts for both Claimants and Defendants in Product Liability cases, including but not limited to, breaches of Sections 2 and 3 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 arising out of defective consumer and commercial products. James deals with cases from the advisory stage, pleadings, the interlocutory stage (including costs-case management) through to trial. He is happy to consider acting on a conditional fee basis and can arrange to turn papers around on short notice on request. Regulatory James has attended interim hearings in serious and fatal accident cases, representing both corporate and individual defendants. He has assisted leading Counsel by providing both research and advice in relation to gross negligence manslaughter and corporate manslaughter charges. James grounding in personal injury litigation, combined with his increasing experience of regulatory work, has made him very familiar with the provisions of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and the statutory regimes it has introduced. Inquests James represents companies, public bodies and individuals at inquests. He has extensive experience of cases that arise out of accidents at work and road traffic accidents as well as dealing with Article 2 inquests. Notable Cases Personal Injury Neary & Neary v Bedspace Resource Ltd (2015): James acted on behalf of both Claimants. This case raised the novel question as to whether each Claimant was entitled to an award of fixed costs under CPR 45.29B, or are they limited to one award of fixed costs between them? His Honour Judge Pearce ruled that where there are multiple successful Claimants within the same claim, their legal representative is entitled to the equivalent number of fixed fees and trial advocacy fees. James was therefore able to recover costs for each Claimant. Pickard v Wincanton Group Limited & J Sainsbury Plc: James represented J Sainsbury Plc who were the second Defendant in a multi-track case in which the Claimant had been crushed during a HGV delivery. The Claimant withdrew his case against J Sainsbury plc following James submissions in relation to the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. Baljit Singh Mann v J Sainsbury Plc: James represented J Sainsbury plc who were the Defendants in a very high value multi-track case which involved a Claimant who, as a result of the Defendants negligence, was alleging he had developed Complex Pain Syndrome. Mr Stephen Storr v (1) Opus Industrial Services Limited (2) AMEC Group Plc:  Represented second Defendant in a scaffolding collapse matter in which the Claimant was injured. Matter settled against the second Defendant following James submissions in relation to whether the Claimant was carrying out Construction Work within the meaning of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 at the relevant time and if said regulations applied to the second Defendant. Mrs Karen Hipkiss v West Midlands Travel Limited: Acted on behalf of the Defendant in a complex and sensitive case involving facial scaring and disfigurement. Mr Leslie Tassell v Amey Services Ltd: Represented Claimant at a trial on quantum in a complex multi-track case in which the Claimant had lost most of his hearing due to an explosion at the plant where he worked. Desmond Anyigwi v Lean On Me Ltd: Representing the Claimant in a multi-track matter in which the Claimant, whilst working as a carer in a patients home, tripped and fell. As a result of the fall he suffered blunt trauma to the right eye resulting in a traumatic macular hole in his right eye. As a result of this, his vision has been recorded at being 6/60 (10% of the normal range). Tobias v Easyjet Plc: Represented a quadriplegic Claimant who suffered a scrotal injury which resulted in him not being able to have any further children.   Regulatory R (HSE) v Amec & Buro Happold: James assisted Mr. Ageros of Crown Office Chambers, who was acting on behalf of a major multinational construction company in both an inquest and trial. This concerned a fatality during a large CDM project, which resulted in the company being charged with breaches under the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974. This was a tremendously complex case which involved live evidence from 40 witnesses and many thousands of documents. R (HSE) v W Carroll and Sons Ltd: James worked on behalf of the Defendant company who were charged with an offence of failing to comply with a health and safety duty, namely the duty to conduct its undertaking in such a way as to ensure that non-employees were not exposed to risks to their health and safety, contrary to section 3(1) and 33(1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 after a sub-contractor was seriously injured when he fell from a roof while carrying a bag of asbestos board. As a result of the fall, he was rendered tetraplegic and will be confined to a wheelchair for the rest of his life. James provided an advice on plea, basis of plea and conducted the Newton trial.   Inquests Jordanna Goodwin and Megan Story (both deceased): Inquest into the deaths of two 16-year-olds, who were killed in a car crash in South Yorkshire. The crash also claimed the lives of three other teenagers. The inquest attracted both national and local media coverage including BBC and ITV news, the Metro and the Sheffield Star. The Redfern Inquiry into Human Tissue Analysis in UK Nuclear Facilities: James was appointed by Michael Redfern QC as part of a team to investigate concerns that body tissue, including bone and organs had been removed from deceased nuclear workers for tests without the consent of relatives.
Maxwell Cope

Maxwell Cope

Background Maxwell was called to the Bar in 2019 and became a tenant at 7 Harrington Street Chambers following successful completion of his pupillage under the supervision of Emma Fisher. Before coming to the Bar, Maxwell worked as a county court advocate for LPC Law. During this time, Maxwell undertook a wide variety of County Court hearings including small claims, mortgage possession, bankruptcy, infant settlement and return of goods. Whilst studying for his Master of Laws, Maxwell won the National Medical Law moot. This saw him compete in many rounds against 21 other Universities in a clinical negligence case. Maxwell is developing a broad and busy practice across Chambers’ specialisms with a strong focus on Criminal and Civil Law.   Practice Areas Civil Maxwell has extensive civil law experience and has undertaken small claims, fast track, and multi-track trials. Despite his junior call, Maxwell has developed a very busy practice. He is approachable and user-friendly and this has no doubt assisted in his undertaking work normally reserved for those far beyond his call. Maxwell understands and appreciates the particular needs and demands of personal injury clients and always endeavours to turn around his paperwork in a short period of time. Where a case has particular urgency, he is able and willing to expedite even further the completion of papers. Maxwell accepts instructions to advise, draft pleadings and represent clients in relation to a broad range of civil matters. He has recently been involved in the following areas: \tConsumer Credit Act \tContracts \tCosts Litigation \tCredit Hire \tEmployers Liability \tHousing Disrepair \tLandlord & Tenant \tNuisance Actions \tOccupier’s Liability \tPersonal Injury \tPPI \tProfessional Discipline & Negligence \tRTA \tSporting Accidents \tStress at Work   Crime Maxwell has acted in complex multi-day trials and frequently acts for both prosecution and defence in the Crown and Magistrates’ courts. He is currently a Level 2 CPS panel advocate. During his pupillage, Maxwell has conducted a number of trials for both the prosecution and defence and has been instructed in private motoring matters – such as advancing exceptional hardship and special reasons arguments. He works well with solicitors and provides thorough and diligent advice. He has recently been involved in the following areas: \tAssault, Robbery and other violent crime \tBurglary & Theft \tConfiscations (Including Proceeds of Crime, cash and asset forfeiture) \tDrug Trafficking Offences \tDisciplinary & Regulatory Proceedings \tFirearms \tGeneral Crime \tMotoring Offences   Notable Cases Civil A v P: Two-day multi-track employer’s liability trial involving issues of work equipment, training and risk assessments, and allegations of dishonesty; A v K: Complex relief from sanctions application concerning matters with the Damages Claims Portal; C v R: Represented two Claimants in a Fast Track road traffic accident trial.   Crime  R v H: Two-day special reasons appeal at Liverpool Crown Court. R v M: Sentence at Carlisle Crown Court involving Arson with recklessness to endanger life, fraud and making a false statement. R v K: Represented two defendants in a two-day s.47 assault trial at Liverpool Magistrates Court.
Megan Cox

Megan Cox

Areas of Practice Miss Cox was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn in July 2022. Miss Cox joined chambers in 2023 after successfully completing a common law pupillage under the supervision of Mr Nick Cockrell.   Crime Miss Cox accepts instructions in all areas of criminal law. Miss Cox frequently acts for both the prosecution and defence in a wide range of matters in the Crown and Magistrates’ courts. Recent cases involve sexual offences, drugs and assault. Miss Cox also accepts instructions in the Youth Court for a range of matters.   Family Public Law Miss Cox represents parents, children and Local Authorities in public law proceedings. She has experience of cases involving physical abuse, sexual abuse, domestic violence and neglect. Miss Cox has experience in deprivation of liberty applications under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction.   Private Law Miss Cox also regularly represents parents in private law proceedings including applications for child arrangements orders, prohibited steps orders, non-molestation orders and occupation orders.
Paul Coyne

Paul Coyne

Background Paul Coyne joined Chambers in 2022.   Whilst working in conjunction with Coyne Learmonth, Paul joined LPC Law to accelerate his development where he continued to do stage 3’s and disposal hearings along with mortgage possession hearing, Landlord and Tenant disputes, a broad horizon of civil applications and RTA fast track trials.   Paul undertook a role as a file handler at Coyne Learmonth Solicitors at the conclusion of his training contract dealing with RTA claims. His role then developed into an Advocacy role where he began by undertaking the firms stage 3 hearings which developed into disposal hearings and general applications.   A training contract with Armstrongs and Whitfields Solicitors comprised of RTA personal injury, conveyancing and contract law.
Isabella Denn-White

Isabella Denn-White

Areas of Practice   Miss Denn-White was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple in July 2021. Miss Denn-White joined chambers in September 2022 after successfully completing a common law pupillage under the supervision of Miss Sarah Holt.   Crime   Miss Denn-White is currently a Level 2 CPS panel advocate and frequently acts for both prosecution and defence in the Crown and Magistrates’ courts.   Family   Public law Miss Denn-White has acted for the local authority and parents in a variety of public law family matters including interim removal hearings and final hearings and is experienced in drafting the associated written work. Private law Miss Denn-White has represented parents in private law proceedings in applications concerning child arrangement orders, prohibited steps orders and non molestation orders.
Frank Dillon

Frank Dillon

Practice Areas Crime Frank Dillon is a former solicitor and Higher Courts Advocate whose professional life has been spent exclusively in the practice of Criminal Law. He has also lectured extensively to the profession at in-house seminars and on behalf of CPD providers such as Liverpool Law Society, Byrom Training and Crimeline Training. As a solicitor he regularly advised suspects at police stations, in respect of allegations ranging from relatively minor offences of theft and assualt to extremely grave and complex allegations such as rape, robbery, conspiracy to supply drugs and murder. Notable Cases In addition to preparing thousands of cases in the Magistrates' Court, Mr Dillon prepared many Crown Court cases of considerable gravity and complexity in which Counsel (and often Leading Counsel) were involved. Those serious cases in which he was involved as a litigator include the following: \tR -v - H & H: Aggravated Burglary and Indecent Assault. Issues of identification and forensic evidence. Acquitted. \tR -v- M: Murder, in a special hospital, of one patient by another. Issues of Diminished Responsibility. Reduced to Manslaughter. \tR -v- McH: Murder, of a customer, by a prostitute in the course of a robbery. Issues of forensic evidence, identification and intent. Reduced to Manslaughter. \tR -v - D: Conspiracy to Murder. Murder by shooting of a "Hell's Angel" in a drug - related feud. Case went to two re-trials. \tR -v- McC: Murder in the course of a street fight. Issues of self-defence and of lack of intent. Reduced to Manslaughter. \tR-v- C: Murder of female partner by male who found her in compromising situation with another man. Successful application for bail by Frank before Magistrates. Issues of provocation at trial. \tR-v- S: Murder of a 9-year-old child by a 13-year-old defendant. A case which attracted national, and indeed international, media attention. An extremely delicate and sensitive approach to the case was required over a period of many weeks until eventually sufficent trust was built up with the defendant to enable necessary instuctions to be obtained. \tR-v- A: Murder, in the course of a robbery in his own home, of a gay male who had been befriended by the two defendants with a view to robbing him. In the course of the robbery they placed him in a trunk and closed the lid, before leaving the premises. The victim was unable to extricate himself from the trunk and suffocated to death. Issues of lack of intent. \tR-v- G: The brutal murder of a widow in her eighties, in her own home, in the course of a burglary. Complicated issues relating to forensic evidence. \tR-v - W: Large scale conspiracy to import Class A drugs, Issues relating to disclosure and directed surveillance. \tR-v- A: Murder by stabbing in the course of a "drug-deal gone wrong". Issues of joint enterprise and lack of intent. Acquitted of Murder, convicted of manslaughter. \tGovt. of Australia -v - K: Extradition case involving the largest-ever importation of ecstasy into Australia. Complex issues involving jurisdiction, RIPA, duress and exclusion of evidence. \tR-v- R: Murder by stabbing of a lodger. Issues of provocation. Reduced to Manslaughter. \tR-v-H: Murder by stabbing in the course of apparent horseplay. Issues of lack of intent. Reduced to Manslaughter. \tR-v-N: Murder by a diagnosed schizophrenic. Issues of diminished responsbility. \tR-v-A: Murder, with a blunt instrument, by a 19-year-old, of his abusive father. Issues of diminished responsibility and attachment disorder. Reduced to manslaughter. \tR-v-M: Murder, with a hammer, by a 15-year-old, of his father. Issues of diminished responsbility and attachment disorder. Reduced to manslaughter. Exceptionally, the defendant was sentenced to a Supervision Order. \tR-v-O: Large-scale drug trafficking and money laundering. Successful application for severance to leading to acquittal. Magistrates' Court Advocacy For many years Mr Dillon defended individuals, from all walks of life, charged with a wide variety of offences, and conducted many, many trials, bail applications, sentencing hearings, committal proceedings and interim hearings. The experience of having to deal with a long list of cases on a daily basis, often with little time to prepare, has equipped him with the ability to think on his feet and to make quick decisions. Crown Court Advocacy Since aquiring the Higher Rights (Criminal) qualification in 2002 Mr Dillon has appeared for the Defence before the Crown Court on many occasions and has conducted numerous trials, plea hearings, sentences, bail applications and interim hearings. He has also appeared before the Court Of Appeal on occasions. Amongst the more notable cases in which he has appeared as advocate are the following: \tR-v-G: Murder. Led Junior. Stabbing in the course of a street robbery. Issues of identification and forensic evidence \tR-v-B: Indecent assault and theft. Acquitted \tR-v-D: Historic penetrative sexual abuse upon a 4-year-old victim. Successful pre-trial application to adduce evidence from a memory expert. \tR-v-J: Historic sexual abuse of relatives involving two complainants, male and female, making complaints independently of one another. Acquitted. \tR-v-W: Rape and S.47 assualt by male defendant upon long-term female partner. Issues of self-defence, bad character, corroboration, consent. Acquitted. \tR-v-O: Defendant charged with assualt in context of an incident giving rise to charges of murder against co-defendants. Prosecuted by Queens Counsel. Acquitted. \tR-v-D: Lead defendant in large-scale drugs conspiracy involving an organised team of street dealers. Complex issues of hearsay evidence and telephone attribution. \tR-v-C: Operation Halstead. Large-scale drugs conspiracy. Acquitted. \tR-v-O: Lead Defendant in 12 - defendant trial involving bank fraud. \tR-v-W: Operation Sabine. Led Junior in large-scale drugs conspiracy- described as "biblical"by the sentencing judge- complex issues relating to disclosure and interpretation of evidence generally. Prosecution relented in face of disclosure application and withdrew most serious charge. \tR-v J: Operation Redstart: Led Junior. Conspiracy to supply drugs on a huge scale, also involving a large cache of firearms and large-scale money-laundering. Prosecution withdrew most serious charge in course of negotiation. \tR-v-F: Murder x 2 of elderly victims, in their own homes, by a taxi-driver in the course of robberies. Led Junior. Issues of diminished responsibility and whole life/30-year tariff. \tR-v-B: Schizophrenic patient at special hospital accused of assualt upon staff. Acquitted. \tR-v-E: Lead defendant in serious firearms conspiracy involving the supply of sub-machine guns, silencers and ammunition.
Megan Gilchrist

Megan Gilchrist

Miss Gilchrist was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of Inner Temple in July 2015 and successfully completed pupillage in October 2017. CrimeMiss Gilchrist acts for both the Prosecution and Defence in a number of areas of criminal law both in the Magistrates and the Crown Court. Family Miss Gilchrist has acted for the Local Authority in a number of interim case management hearings and interim removal cases. She has also undertaken a number of private law children applications.
Scarlett Gilmartin

Scarlett Gilmartin

Miss Gilmartin specialises in family law. She has gained experience across a wide range of family law proceedings, at all levels, up to and including the High Court. Miss Gilmartin regularly appears in matters before both the County Court and the High Court. Miss Gilmartin is content to advise in conference in advance of hearings, and give guidance and support to both solicitors and clients. Miss Gilmartin is content to draft position statements, threshold documents, skeleton arguments, as well as assist in relation to Part 25 applications.   Public Law Miss Gilmartin acts on behalf of the Local Authority, parents, intervenors and children through their Children’s Guardian at all stages of public law proceedings. Miss Gilmartin has appeared in a range of urgent hearings, cases management hearings, interim contested removal hearings, finding of fact hearings, issues resolution hearings as well as multi-day final hearings. Miss Gilmartin accepts instructions in relation to Deprivation of Liberty Order applications under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction, Wardship, Secure Accommodation Orders, Jurisdiction, Designation, Placement Orders, Discharge of Care Orders, Forced Marriage Protection Orders, leave to oppose the making of an Adoption Order, Special Guardianship Orders and applications for a declaration pursuant to Part 19 of FPR 2010. Miss Gilmartin has conducted matters concerning non-accidental injury, sexual abuse, physical abuse, significant emotional harm, alcohol and substance misuse, honour based abuse, domestic violence, mental health, fabricated induced illness/ fictitious illness, neglect and infant death. Miss Gilmartin has acted on behalf of clients who are vulnerable, require the use of an intermediary, have mental health diagnoses, learning disabilities and clients who require the use of an interpreter. As a language graduate, Miss Gilmartin has experience of simultaneous translation in Spanish during her university studies, and takes a keen interest in linguistics in the context of family law proceedings.   Private Law Miss Gilmartin represents parents, grandparents, special guardians, the Local Authority and 16.4 Children’s Guardians at all stages of private law proceedings from FHDRA through to finding of fact hearings and final hearings. Miss Gilmartin accepts instructions across the full range of private law matters, including Child Arrangements Orders, Prohibited Steps Orders, Specific Issue Orders, Enforcement, Variation and costs. Miss Gilmartin has experience of relocation, s.37 directions, significant safeguarding concerns, domestic abuse, emotional abuse, alcohol and substance misuse, sexual abuse and intractable contact disputes. Miss Gilmartin also has experience in relation to applications concerning the acquisition and/ or removal of parental responsibility, as well as declarations of parentage.   Injunctive relief Miss Gilmartin acts in all matters brought under the Family Law Act 1996.   Finance Miss Gilmartin acts in ancillary relief proceedings.
Isabelle Haddad

Isabelle Haddad

sabelle is a CPS Level 2 Panel member for General Crime and Serious Crime. She has developed a busy practice prosecuting and defending in cases involving a wide range of offences including drugs, violence, fraud, firearms and sexual offences. She has acted as Led Junior and is confident when handling complex matters of law and issues relating to disclosure. She also has experience of contested POCA proceedings.   Notable/Recent Cases Drugs and Firearms Offences: \tR v AH (2025): Prosecuted defendant charged with conspiracy to transfer firearms and conspiracy to supply multi-kilogram amounts of Cocaine. Case involved EncroChat material and firearms expert. \tR v KB (2025): Prosecuted conspiracy to supply Cocaine in Lancashire area. \tOperation Rhino (2025): Represented defendant in multi-handed case involving conspiracy to produced and supply 70kg of Cannabis. Basis of plea submitted. Suspended sentence imposed. \tOperation Lemonlike (2024): Led Junior for prosecution in case involving the importation of 1.3 tonnes of Cocaine into the UK (street value of £140 million). \tOperation Chelsea (2024): Led Junior for prosecution in Conspiracy to Supply Class A and B drugs in the Lancashire area. \tR v DW (2024): Represented defendant charged with possession of an imitation firearm resulting in an armed police response. Case involved fitness to plead issues. Community order imposed following sentence. \tR v AA (2023): Prosecuted defendant charged with PWITS Class A and Class B drugs and possession of criminal property. Convictions secured following trial. \tR v AF (2023): Represented defendant at sentence charged with PWTIS Class A drugs (1.2 kilograms of Cocaine) and possession of criminal property. Successfully advanced ‘lesser role’ at sentence.   Violence: \tR v CN (2024): Prosecuted defendant charged with S.18 wounding involving a machete attack at a nightclub. Conviction secured following trial. \tOperation Album (2024): Led Junior for prosecution in case involving multiple kidnaps, possession of a firearm and theft of cryptocurrency by an Organised Crime Group. \tR v BC (2023): Suspended sentence for 20 year old defendant who pleaded guilty to S.20 inflicting grievous bodily harm. Presented mitigation as to the defendant’s previous good character, young age, efforts to rehabilitate himself, as well as references from parents and employer; eight month suspended sentence imposed. \tR v AO and JS (2023): Represented both mother and son charged with 6 counts of criminal damage and possession of an offensive weapon. One charge discontinued after legal argument, acquitted on all other charges after trial.   Theft and Fraud: \tOperation Zagreb (2023): Junior Alone representing defendant (SC) charged with conspiracy to defraud, valued at £1.2 million pounds, and money laundering. Multi-handed-handed case brought by the North Yorkshire Trading Standards. No evidence offered in relation to SC at half time on conspiracy to defraud. Following extensive mitigation, suspended sentence imposed on remaining charge at sentence. \tR v JC (2023): Represented defendant charged with a number of thefts and attempted thefts of Audis from car showrooms. Case brought on CCTV/ ID evidence of a police officer. Written application, advanced under Section 78 PACE, to exclude the purported controlled identification of the officer. No evidence offered by the Crown in response.   POCA: \tR v BL (2024): Led Junior for prosecution in POCA proceedings involving a Benefit Figure of £2 million.   Sexual Offences: \tOperation Lytton (2025): Led Junior for defence in Rochdale grooming case involving historic allegations of rape.
Peter Harthan

Peter Harthan

Personal Injury Peter Harthan is an experienced and proficient advocate practising across all areas of personal injury work. He takes a mixture of Multi-Track and Fast Track work particularly in relation to: Coroner’s Inquests, particularly in respect of Industrial Disease Fatal Accidents Serious Orthopaedic and Spinal Injury Brain Injury Clinical Negligence Employer’s Liability, including industrial disease and exposure to hazardous substances Road Traffic Cases, including the more specialist areas of fraud, low velocity impacts and credit hire Public Liability Claims Occupier’s Liability Product Liability   Peter regularly takes instruction in high value (>£100k) cases and has acted in; A brain injury caused by negligent exposure to Carbon Monoxide poisoning leading to life changing symptoms A fairground accident ride malfunction causing multiple injuries. Partial loss of a foot following a Fork Lift Truck injury. Poisoning by exposure to hazardous chemicals in cleaning product production. Fracture of multiple vertebrae and permanent restriction of movement caused by fall from height. Crushing of forearm in an industrial presser causing lifelong disability   Employment Peter has a growing practice in Employment Law and takes instructions for both Claimants and Respondents appearing both in the EAT and providing written advices. Peter has a growing practice in Employment Law and takes instructions for both Claimants and Respondents appearing both in the EAT and providing written advices.
Natasha Johnson

Natasha Johnson

Miss Johnson was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of Middle Temple in July 2014 and successfully completed pupillage in December 2017. Prior to commencing pupillage, Miss Johnson worked as a Legal Assistant in a firm of solicitors specialising in Family Law. Since joining chambers as a tenant her practice includes; Representing both parents and children in both private public law and family law proceedings. Representing Local Authorities in public law proceedings. Cases including - contested final hearings, interim removals, cases involving non accidental injuries, cases involving allegations of sexual abuse, neglect, cases with issues in respect of designation, finding of fact hearings and cases with issues in respect of jurisdiction. Miss Johnson also has experience in adoption cases and cases involving an international element. Experience in applications for non molestation orders and occupation orders. Giving advice, guidance and support to solicitors and clients. Carrying out legal research and drafting up legal documents including opinions, threshold documents, schedules of findings, advice and statements. Negotiating settlements. Examining and cross examining witnesses. Keeping up to date with national and international current affairs, law and policy.
Daniel Jones

Daniel Jones

As a member of the Bar of England and Wales since 1994 (and called to the Bar of Northern Ireland) Dan Jones is known for his “no-nonsense” approach to cross-examination, his clarity with clients, and his persuasive advocacy. Believing that preparation wins cases, he has a keen eye for detail, through an often-noted ability to maintain his focus, and that of those around him, on the real issues in a case. Dan has extensive experience as a leading, led and sole junior, advising, and now primarily defending in the whole spectrum of criminal cases (i.e. general and serious crime, Homicide, offences of serious violence, firearms, drugs offences, terrorism, sexual offences, confiscation, restraint & asset recovery proceedings, commercial crime and fraud, money laundering, and road traffic offences). Beyond criminal law, he has a business background (which makes him an ideal lead lawyer in fraud cases) and particular expertise in social security, child support law, and regulatory work. As well as accepting both private and publicly funded instructions in England Wales and Northern Ireland, Dan is able to accept direct access work.
Tariq Khawam

Tariq Khawam

Mr Khawam joined chambers after being called to the Bar in 2024. He is an experienced Criminal Law practitioner having worked in the field since 1988 as an outdoor clerk. He qualified as a solicitor in 2005, became a Higher Courts advocate in 2010, and was called to the Bar in October 2024. He brings a wealth of experience having been involved in all manner of criminal cases, as litigator and advocate, including murder, robbery and other serious violence, drugs supply and sexual offences. Having defended for the majority of his career, he is now on the CPS Advocates Panel.
Martin Kingerley KC

Martin Kingerley KC

Martin Kingerley KC is a family law barrister who specialises in the law relating to children. His practice encompasses the most serious and complex private and public law cases. Martin is also renowned for his expertise in respect of surrogacy, assisted conception other aspects of the HFEA 2008 and he regularly advises and represents parents and fertility clinics both within the UK and internationally. Martin is much sought after in cases which involve fact-finding hearings in respect of domestic abuse, parental alienation, intractable disputes and domestic and international relocations. Martin is Head of the Children Team at 36 Family. In 2018, Martin was appointed as a Recorder. He sits as a Judge in the Family Court on the South-Eastern Circuit   Notable/Recent Cases Re Z (Embryo Adoption: Declaration of Non-Parentage) [2018] EWFC 68, [2018] 4 WLR 169 Acted for pro bono for the successful applicant mother. Advised on, sought and obtained a declaration of non-parentage in this important authority which highlights the pitfalls and legal implications of undertaking fertility treatment outside the UK. BT & GT (Children: Twins-Adoption) [2018] EWFC 76 Represented twins, via their children’s guardian, in these factually and legally complex proceedings. Following findings of ‘incompetence and social work failings of the local authority’ advised on and obtained significant damages for breaches of the twins’ human rights. Re C (A Child) [2016] EWHC 3473 (Fam) High Court proceedings which clarify the extent to which children in care are able to consent to being deprived of their liberty. PD, SD, JD and X County Council [2015] EWHC 4103 (Fam) In these complex and emotionally sensitive proceedings, Martin acted for the local authority and sought clarification as to the extent to which an adopted child (who was diagnosed with gender dysphoria) was permitted to exclude his adoptive parents from all aspects of his life including relating to medical treatment. In the Matter of the HFEA 2008 (Cases A-H Declaration of Parentage) [2015] EWHC 2602 (Fam) – Munby P – Groundbreaking multi party litigation concerning declarations of parentage in cases of assisted conception.
Fraser Lindsay

Fraser Lindsay

Practice Areas Civil Catastrophic Injuries Mr. Lindsay has a wide experience of Claims where injury has been caused in the workplace, public places (to encompass Highways Act and Occupiers’ Act litigation), road traffic collisions etc. and where the claim is of significant value and complexity.  He has an impressive past and present caseload of claims involving catastrophic injuries instructed by both Claimant and Insurer clients.   Mr Lindsay regularly represents both Claimants and Defendants on matters of significant value and complexity as shown by following recent examples;   A (2017): Represented the insurer of a taxi driver who had knocked down and killed a 19-year old Claimant.  The family brought a claim under the Fatal Accidents Act for the loss of the dependent care and financial support provided by the Deceased to her family.  The Claim was pleaded at £200,000 and settled at mediation for £40,000; L (2019): Mr. Lindsay represented an insurer Client in a claim where the Claimant had sustained a traumatic brain injury after being knocked down by a driver who was subsequently prosecuted for dangerous driving. Due to the severity of her brain injury the Claimant sought significant past and future lost earnings from her inability to return to work in the care sector.  Further claims were brought for future care and assistance and provisional damages to encompass future migraine treatment.  The claim was pleaded at £500,000, but settled at the JSM for £150,000; M (2019): Represented a Claimant who suffered significant pelvis and leg injuries following a road traffic accident.  The Claim settled at JSM for £180,000; and C (2020): Represented a Claimant who had sustained a significant injury to his eye that had resulted in a loss of visual field vision and an inability to perform his work as a mechanic.  He had lost his Class 2 licence and could not undertake overtime to test the vehicles on which he worked.  Settled at JSM for £155,000.00. (2019). Represented a Claimant who had suffered fractures to his spine and pelvis after being crushed by a reversing vehicle.  The Claimant was unable to return to his previous employment and would be limited to light duties in a non-physically demanding role.  The Claim settled at a JSM in the sum of £190,000.00. (2019 to Date) Representing a female Claimant in her 20s who has suffered a significant back fracture and facial scarring in a road traffic accident.  The Claim is pleaded in excess of £250,000.00, as the Claimant is unable to return to her pre-accident employment and will have to retire 10-years earlier than planned.  The matter is listed for trial in 2022. (2019 to Date). Representing a Claimant who was electrocuted on a building site.  The case involves 4 Defendants and a liability dispute.  The Claimant will not be able to return to any form of work and requires significant daily care.  The Claim is pleaded in excess of £500,000.00. (2019 to Date) Representing a Claimant who has suffered a severe leg injury following a public liability accident.  Liability is in dispute.  The Claim is pleaded at £800,000 and is listed for a 5-day trial in 2022. (2020) Represented a Claimant who suffered a significant fracture to his dominant elbow in a workplace accident.  By reason of the aforesaid, the Claimant is unable to return to his pre-accident employment as a site manager and is treated as disabled.  After conference, the Claim settled for £100,000.00. (2020) Represented the applicants in a long-standing neighbour dispute at mediation.  The applicants were seeking an injunction and damages under the Harassment Act following a break-down in their relationship with their neighbours, with allegations on both sides of trespass, nuisance and threats/abuse. (2020 to Date). Representing a Claimant who has suffered significant knee injuries that have necessitated a reconstruction and will require future revision.  The Claimant, in his 30s, will not be able to return to work and is classified at disabled.  The Claim is pleaded in excess of £300,000.00; (2020). Represented a Claimant in a chronic pain case, who was injured after what appeared to be a fairly innocuous road traffic accident.  The Claim settled after conference for £50,000.00. (2020) Represented a Claimant who suffered a crush injury to her dominant right hand in a workplace accident, resulting in the loss of her thumb.  The Claim settled after conference and negotiations for £120,000.00. (2020). Briefed to represent a Claimant who suffered an injury to his right dominant shoulder in a workplace accident.  The matter settled in the week before the start of the 3-day trial. (2020 to Date). Representing a Claimant who as an infant was involved in a road traffic accident.  The Claimant suffered a serious leg injury, which now requires him to use orthotics for life.  By reason of his period of recovery/rehabilitation, the Claimant missed a significant period of schooling and did not reach his academic potential.  The Claim is pleaded at £400,000.00. (2020) Represented a Claimant who suffered significant lower limb and eye injuries in a Claim against an uninsured driver.  Claim settled after conference at £125,000.00. (2020) Represented a Claimant who suffered a significant crushing injury at work.  The Claimant was required to retrain to allow her to work and adapt to her limitations.  Claim settled for £300,000. (2021) Representing an insurer in a Claim where the Claimant contends that she is suffering with complex regional pain syndrome to the foot.  The Claim is pleaded in excess of £250,000.00.  The insurer is alleging that the Claimant is fundamentally dishonest. (2021 to Date). Representing the Ministry of Justice at a multi-day trial that is due to be listed in 2022.  The Claim involves an alleged serious back injury that was caused by an accident at work. (2021). Represented a Claimant who suffered an injury at a building site where liability was in dispute.  The Claimant will be unable to return to his pre-accident occupation and will need to retrain in a less manual role.  The Claim settled after conference for £190,000.00. (2021) Represented Ministry of Justice in a Claim brought by a former employee for alleged injuries sustained at work.  The Claimant alleged that he is suffering with chronic pain and will be unable to return to work.  The Claim was pleaded at £1,000,000.00 and settled at a JSM for £315,000.00.   Mr. Lindsay is known for his detailed Schedules of Loss, for both Claimants and Defendants and his meticulous approach to the calculation of both past and future losses.   Mr. Lindsay has extensive experience working with experts to ensure the meticulous preparation of cases from Part 35 Questions to trial.   Road Traffic Accidents Mr. Lindsay has a broad practice encompassing both Claimant and Insurer clients.  On behalf of Claimants Mr. Lindsay is known for the careful scrutiny and testing he puts Claimants through. He has for many years acted for Claimants in circumstances where their credibility has come under severe attack by reason of an allegation of fraud and/or LVI and/or causation. In such scenarios he is trusted by those firms who instruct him to robustly test the reliability of Claimants in conference and is known for his pragmatic approach in advising both clients and Solicitors as to the likelihood of success. He has extensive experience advising multiple Claimants in circumstances where express pleadings of fraud are made.  Further, he is more than capable of analysing vast amounts of data to ensure that Claimants are appropriately prepared and tested prior to trial. On behalf of his Insurer clients Mr. Lindsay has extensive experience defending claims where fraud, low velocity impact or dishonesty are alleged or suspected.  He has successfully secured findings of fundamental dishonesty and the setting aside of QOCS protection to obtain an award of costs for his Insurer clients.   Mr. Lindsay can be trusted to adhere to strict timetables for the production of Defences (of varying complexity), Part 35 Questions to medical and engineering experts and other necessary documentation e.g. Part 18 Requests. Prior to trial Mr. Lindsay is willing to assist with advising Solicitors and Insurers on strategy, and the success or likelihood of findings of fraud or fundamental dishonesty.   Credit Hire   For many years Mr. Lindsay has enjoyed a balanced practice acting for both Claimants and Defendants in cases involving substantial claims for credit hire. He is more than familiar with the necessary requirements that credit hire agreements must adhere to ensure that such are found to be enforceable by the Court. He has advised credit hire providers of deficiencies that exist in their agreements to ensure that such comply with the statutory requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974/2006. In recognition of the complexities that can surround this area of law Mr. Lindsay has delivered seminars on recent cases/developments in credit hire litigation, as well as refresher training on those common arguments that one sees in such claims.   Public Liability/Occupiers Liability   Mr. Lindsay is regularly instructed to represent Claimants in respect of claims emanating from accidents on the public highways.  He is fully familiar with the statutory duties under the Highways Act 1980 and the leading cases in the area.Aside from straightforward tripping cases, Mr. Lindsay is commonly asked to advise in the interpretation of the duties of Local Authorities, particularly the definition of those highways deemed to be ‘maintainable at public expense’ and where McGeown Defences are raised. He has successfully pursued claims alleging breaches of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957/1984 against schools, hospitals, restaurants, supermarkets, shopping centres etc. As part of his Defendant practice Mr. Lindsay has defended claims for occupiers, including shops, supermarkets, landlords etc., in circumstances where at trial the Court has been persuaded that reasonable steps had been taken to prevent injury. Mr. Lindsay is known, not only for his knowledge of the relevant law, but also his ability to provide pragmatic advice dependent upon the individual details of each case.   Employers Liability   Mr. Lindsay has developed a broad practice in the field of Employers Liability claims, dealing with matters of varying complexity for both Claimants and Defendants including claims for bullying, repetitive stress injuries, vibration white finger/HAVS etc. Mr. Lindsay has represented both workers and employers in wide fields of industry.   Landlord and Tenant/Housing   In the field of housing Mr. Lindsay has significant experience acting for both Tenants and Landlords on possession proceedings and claims under the Defective Premises Act 1972 and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.  For many years he has represented Local Authorities and social landlords in claims of disrepair, involving personal injuries and property damage.He is known for his common sense approach to such claims and is trusted to offer sensible advice to clients.   “Very amenable and approachable barrister who thinks outside the box.  Excellent understanding of social landlords obligations, and very good in dealing with claims arising from alleged defective premises.” Partner BLM Housing Department.   For Tenants, Mr. Lindsay is often instructed to draft pleadings in cases brought under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act.  He is knowledgeable on the quantification of general damages in such cases. Mr. Lindsay has experience of claims for unlawful eviction and the quantification of losses for the same.   Other Areas of Practice   Mr. Lindsay has previously advised and represented clients at trial in the following areas; Claims involving consideration of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 and for breaches of the implied terms of quality under the Sale of Goods/Services and Consumer Rights legislation; Holiday injuries/Package Tour Claims; Nuisance; Animals Act; Pursuing and defending claims for injunctive relief and damages under the Protection of Harassment Act 1997; Professional negligence against Solicitors following under settlement; The pursuit and defence of medical agency fees on behalf of Solicitors; and Trespass to the Person
Louise McCloskey

Louise McCloskey

Background Louise McCloskey is exclusively a criminal practitioner and handles all aspects of criminal law in the criminal courts at all levels. She has built up a strong and diverse practice. She is regularly instructed by both prosecution and defence. Those who instruct her include; the Crown Prosecution Service, Probation, HM Customs and Excise, The Civil Aviation Authority, Arriva, the DSS, the Post Office and Local Authorities. She has experience of both prosecuting and defending ASBO’s, SOPO’s and football banning orders. In addition to this she has been involved in the training of officers from the department of work and pensions in relation to benefit fraud cases.
Caitlin McLachlan

Caitlin McLachlan

Miss McLachlan began her pupillage in September 2024 under the supervision of Mr William Beardmore. Crime  Miss McLachlan accepts instructions in all areas of criminal law, she regularly acts for both the prosecution and defence in a wide range of matters in both the Magistrates’ Court and Crown Court. Miss McLachlan also accepts instructions in the Youth Court for a range of matters. Family Public Law  Miss McLachlan accepts instructions to represent parents, children and Local Authorities in public law proceedings. Private law  Miss McLachlan also accepts instructions on behalf of parents in private law proceedings including applications for child arrangements orders, prohibited steps orders, non-molestation orders and occupation orders. Civil Miss McLachlan accepts instructions in all areas of civil litigation.
Renn Moucarry

Renn Moucarry

Practice Areas Family Private Law – Matrimonial Finance and Private Law Children Miss Moucarry is a specialist family practitioner with significant experience in all aspects of private family law including complex financial matters ancillary to divorce involving pension and company assets, hostile section 7 applications relating to children including relocation disputes and Family Law Act 1996 injunctive applications.   Family Public Law – Legal Aid and Care Proceedings Miss Moucarry accepts instructions to act on behalf of all parties in public law applications, having represented Local Authorities and parents in care, supervision, adoption, and placement applications dealing with complex issues relating to domestic violence, parental alienation, neglect, and sexual abuse.   Areas of Practice Miss Moucarry was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of Gray’s Inn in 2021. She commenced a reduced pupillage in September 2021 supervised by Leanne Targett Parker. Prior to commencing pupillage, Miss Moucarry practiced as a solicitor at leading Northwest firms ranked in the Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners, specialising in all areas of private Family Law with clientele from the Middle East, North America, Australia and Europe. Miss Moucarry was short-listed for ‘Legal Professional of the Year’ in the Women in Business Awards 2019. Miss Moucarry has been described as a “hard-working, committed and supportive Counsel”.   Testimonials “I am writing this review in regard to the outstanding performance we received from Renn Moucarry. She had been highly recommended and I am so delighted that she was, as in our opinion we could not have had anyone to of done more for us. Renn was at all times very professional, realistic & easy to approach. She at no time gave us any false promises but assured us she would do her best. She far surpassed our expectations and got us a very positive outcome in court. Despite the court being Friday afternoon just before Christmas, we did not expect to hear from her until the New Year. She knew how anxious we would be regarding the outcome and made the time to call us to put our minds at ease over Christmas. This was above and beyond what we had expected but we were so grateful that she was so conscientious and decent that she had the empathy to understand what it meant to us to hear the news. I cannot speak highly enough of her work ethics or her ability to act for us in court. Without hesitation I can highly recommend her as a barrister for her excellence and her compassion for what we were going through. I would like to take this opportunity to once again thank her.” – Client
Rachel Oakdene

Rachel Oakdene

Areas of Practice Miss Oakdene joins chambers after being called to the Bar in July 2018. Prior to being called to the Bar Miss Oakdene was a Higher Court Advocate and Assisitant Solicitor in  a Liverpool firm.  As a Higher Cout Advocate Rachel predominatly prepared and dealt with Crown Court Cases. Rachel has conducted many jury trials and appeared before the Court of Appeal Criminal Division on a number of occasions. Practice Areas Crime \tDefence \tAnti-Social Behaviour Orders \tAssault, Robbery and other Violent Crime \tBurglary and theft \tConfiscation (including Proceeds of Crime and Asset Forfeiture) \tDrug Trafficking Offences \tFirearms \tFraud and Money Laundering \tMurder/Manslaughter \tSexual Offences \tTrading Standards Offences   Miss Oakdene was previously a Sessional Lecturer at Liverpool John Moores University where she dealt with evening tutorials on the LPC course in the area of criminal law and practice/procedure. She was also an Assessor for the Advocacy Examination.
Margarett Parr

Margarett Parr

Family Miss Parr’s practice is primarily focused on family law, including ancillary relief, injunctive relief and public and private law children applications. Miss Parr has appeared before the Court of Appeal.Children Miss Parr specialises in family law and has appeared in the Court of Appeal and High Court. Miss Parr represents parents, children and Local Authorities in care and adoption proceedings. She has experience of complex cases involving sexual abuse, non-accidental injury, substance misuse, mental health issues and neglect. She has experience in deprivation of liberty applications under the Court’s inherent jurisdiction. In private law proceedings, Miss Parr represents parents and children and is experienced in dealing with intractable contact disputes, impacable hostility and international relocation.   Finance Miss Parr acts in ancillary relief proceedings, including those involving pensions and company assets. Miss Parr is thorough in her presentation of cases and is noted for her client care including her approachable and sympathetic manner. Margaret is content to advise in conference in advance of hearings.
Danielle Paton

Danielle Paton

Counsel with a practice in civil, family and criminal law. Immigration, personal injury, RTA, employer’s liability/occupier’s liability, claims against highways authorities. Representation of parties in private law children applications (directions/final hearings) in the County Court and the family proceedings court. Representation of parties in case proceedings in the family proceedings court. Experience of representing an intervenor in a finding-of-fact hearing in relation to non-accidental injury in the High Court.Immigration Danielle has represented the UK Border Agency as a presenting officer in the First-Tier Immigration Tribunal, where she gained particular experience in dealing with asylum law and human rights.  She has also represented individuals in immigration matters in the First and Upper Tier Tribunals.  Personal Injury Danielle represents Claimants and Defendants at trial and interlocutory hearings in cases allocated to the fast and multi-track, with particular experience in: RTA Employers' liability/Occupiers' liability; Claims against highways authorities. She accepts instructions to draft pleadings and advise on liability, quantum and other procedural matters and aims to return instructions swiftly.
Suzanne Payne

Suzanne Payne

Suzanne completed her pupillage in 2017. Suzanne is a mature entrant to the Bar following a 28-year career in the police service, in the Merseyside and South Wales area. She brings with her an in-depth knowledge of police investigations and procedures as a result of her various roles within the police service. During her career she was seconded to the National Crime Squad, now National Crime Agency, instructing at all levels of surveillance, disclosure and other covert policing techniques.   Notable/Recent Cases SEXUAL OFFENCES 2021 R v LJ, Cardiff Crown Court: Suzanne defended LJ who faced one count of an historic sexual offence, indecent assault, when the complainant was between 5-7 years old and LJ 13-15 years old. The complainant gave evidence and was cross examined in the initial trial before it was abandoned due to Covid. The trial started again some weeks later with the defendant being acquitted following a unanimous verdict. 2020 R v WR: Suzanne defended WR who faced three historic allegations of gross indecency against a 7-year-old child when he was 17 years old, for whom he babysat. Through careful cross examination of the complainant, she accepted that she couldn’t be sure that one of the allegations had indeed taken place. WR was acquitted of all three allegations. 2019/2020 R v MH: Suzanne acted for MH who faced ten counts of sexual assault against four male complainants; three of whom were members of staff at an industrial site MH managed. The fourth was an 18-year-old male who made a complaint that he had been sexually assaulted by MH on his first day of work at the site. Following a seven-day trial, MH was acquitted of nine counts, relating to the three members of staff, with the jury unable to reach a verdict on the final count relating to the 18-year-old male. The CPS sought a retrial on the one count. A retrial was heard in February 2020, following a brief retirement, the jury acquitted MH. 2019 R v CF: Suzanne successfully defended CF who faced two counts of Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm and one of sexual assault against his former partner. He was acquitted of sexual assault and one count of ABH. The defendant received a suspended sentence despite being in breach of a community order for a similar offence.   VIOLENCE 2021 R v BL, Bolton Crown Court: Suzanne defended BL who was charged with a single offence of Assault occasioning Actual Bodily Harm. She stated that she has acted in self defence when she punched the complainant once to the face. She was found not guilty. 2021 R v BB, Mold Crown Court, Prosecution: Suzanne was instructed by the North Wales Complex Crime Unit as a disclosure junior in a complex murder investigation. The investigation included covert policing tactics and evidence of a cell confession which required careful consideration regarding potential Public Interest Immunity applications, telecommunications evidence and CCTV evidence. Her knowledge of such covert tactics from her previous career assisted in her role as disclosure junior when considering disclosure. BB was found guilty. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum tariff of 18 years. 2020 R v JH: JH pleaded guilty to an offence of Arson, whilst a serving prisoner he set fire to his mattress causing some damage to the cell and two charges of assaulting the prison officers who dealt with him. He was a vulnerable young man with many difficulties including mental health issues from a very early age. Suzanne worked closely with her instructing solicitor to obtain as much background information regarding JH’s vulnerabilities, which she used in her mitigation. JH received a suspended sentence order of 14 months. In sentencing the Judge told JH that it was only Suzanne’s mitigation that persuaded him against imposing an immediate custodial sentence of 20 months. 2017 R v SB: Suzanne was instructed in an appeal against conviction from the Magistrates Court. The Appellant had been convicted of two common assaults against her 13-year-old daughter and a common assault against her husband in the Magistrates Court. Suzanne made a successful half time submission of no case to answer for all 3 counts. SB’s conviction was quashed.   DRUGS 2021 R v MP, Liverpool Crown Court, Defence: MP pleaded guilty to two counts of Possession with Intent to Supply Class A drugs (heroin and cocaine). He was 17 at the time of the arrest however was not charged until he turned 18. With persuasive mitigation and credit for his guilty plea, MP received a sentence of 2 years imprisonment suspended for 2 years, with rehabilitation requirements. 2021 R v NC, Preston Crown Court, Defence: NC case pleaded guilty to Possession with Intent to Supply Class A drugs. The Prosecution sought to place him in a leading role, however by providing relevant authorities, Suzanne persuaded them that NC was a significant role. A leading role would have resulted in a starting point of 8 years 6 months. NC was found to be in a significant role, with a starting point of 4 years 6 months, he was sentenced to 40 months 2 weeks after credit was allowed for his plea. 2021 R v PJ, Liverpool Crown Court, Defence: PJ was found in possession of 60 wraps of Class A  drugs in her coat. Her mobile telephone contained messages which the Prosecution asserted were consistent with drug supply. She faced 2 counts of Possession with Intent to Supply Class A drugs and 2 counts of possession of controlled drugs of Class A. PJ was acquitted on all four counts.   BURGLARY 2020 R v LF: LF faced a single count of domestic burglary. If convicted he would have fallen within section 111 of the Powers of the Criminal Courts (Sentencing Act) 2000, and subject to the minimum term of imprisonment. Suzanne successfully applied to exclude forensic evidence. In her cross examination of the Officer in the Case, she was able to show that important lines of enquiry had not been pursued and highlighted discrepancies between his evidence and that of the civilian witnesses. LF was acquitted. He fell to be sentenced for a number of theft (shoplifting) and fraud offences, which were of some age, and received a community-based sentence with a curfew requirement. Suzanne was successful in the Court of Appeal where she argued that the imposition of the curfew requirement was wrong in principle and manifestly excessive. The curfew requirement was removed from the community order. 2018 R v CW & RJ: Suzanne prosecuted RJ who faced seven counts of burglary dwelling and attempt burglary dwelling. He was convicted of all seven counts and received a minimum sentence of three years imprisonment by virtue of his previous convictions for similar burglaries. His co-accused pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing and received a suspended sentence.   MOTORING 2021 R v CL, Ashton under Lyne Magistrates Court, Defence: CL a serving Police Officer was charged with careless driving. Whilst travelling into work she was involved in a road traffic collision with a pedal cyclist, the cyclist sustained life changing injuries. Expert evidence for both the Prosecution and Defence suggested that her vision would have been temporarily impaired due to the weather conditions at the time. CL was acquitted.   MISCELLANEOUS 2019 R v EW: Suzanne defended a female charged with Perverting the Course of Justice during a two week trial. EW’s husband and another male stood trial with her. They had been charged with robbery and kidnapping. The Crown alleged that EW provided a false alibi for her husband, stating he would have been with her at the relevant time. By careful analysis of cell site data from the mobile phone belonging to EW’s husband, Suzanne was able to show that the data did not support the Crown’s case. EW was the only defendant acquitted.
Andy Scott

Andy Scott

Andy is a criminal barrister, having appeared as leading junior, led junior and junior alone in lengthy jury trials of the utmost gravity and complexity in all aspects of serious and heavyweight criminal work. He has a wealth of experience of advocacy at all levels from jury trials through to the Appellate courts. Andy has practised extensively in all areas of criminal law representing the facing the most serious charges in cases involving: murder; attempted murder; gang related violence; terrorism; high-end drugs importation and supply; firearms offences; fraud; money laundering; people trafficking; serious sexual offences; and multi-million pound confiscation under POCA. He has substantial defence practice, frequently representing members of alleged National and International Organised Crime Groups, specialising in cases involving serious organised crime and fraud. Andy accepts instructions throughout the UK and, where necessary, those involving international jurisdictions. Serious and complex drug importations and distribution have for a long time featured in Andy’s practice. He has, for many years, been involved in cases involving large scale and sophisticated conspiracies concerning the movement of drugs into, and around, the UK. Most notably, a recent case involving conspiracy to import heroin, where the amount of drugs being imported from Turkey was in excess of 200 Kilograms, with a value of £166 million. Instructed consistently in substantial and complex cases of fraud which, by definition, entail dealing with voluminous case papers requiring extensive and detailed case preparation. Dedicated and extremely passionate about the work he undertakes, Andy applies a determined approach to each individual case. His meticulous attention to detail coupled with an inherent strong work ethic ensures that he is able to provide all of his lay and professional clients with an exceptional service. He works closely with professional clients at every stage of a case and is always available to provide advice and support throughout the preparation of the difficult and sensitive cases in which he is involved.   Courts-Martial Having appeared in military courts for the Defence throughout his career, Andy defends serving men and women from all three arms of Services (Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force) dealing with cases of the utmost gravity across the whole range of military and civilian offences. Andy is able to provide advocacy and advice in the following types of military cases: Courts Martial in the UK (at ‘CMCs’) or abroad; Appeals to the Courts Martial Appeal Court; and Cases involving service personnel before UK Civilian Courts.   Sports Law Andy also has experience in matters of Sports Law and can provide representation, throughout the majority of sports, for athletes appearing before their respective governing bodies in relation to regulatory matters.
Laura Scott

Laura Scott

Laura has joined 7 Harrington Street Chambers as a door tenant, combining her practice with a Senior Lecturer role at Manchester Metropolitan University, where Laura is the Unit Leader for Civil Advocacy and Opinion Writing/Practical Legal Research.   Prior to joining chambers, Laura gained experience working for both Claimants and Defendants within in-house advocacy teams. During this time, Laura gained extensive experience in a range of personal injury litigation, including road traffic accidents/credit hire claims, employer’s/public liability claims and clinical negligence matters.   Laura has also previously received instructions in employment law claims.
Ben Stanley

Ben Stanley

Background Ben completed pupillage with the CPS in Merseyside in 2020 and was an advocate for the CPS in the Magistrates Court and the Crown Court. Ben has been at the independent bar for over a year, developing a successful criminal practice of both Prosecution and Defence work at Harrington Street. Ben worked in the CPS Crown Court team charging and managing cases. Ben has an in-depth knowledge of the CPS and has dealt with cases starting as early as advising on police investigations and up to dealing with sentences and ancillary orders. Prior to qualifying, Ben engaged in charity work providing support and assistance to vulnerable persons, skills which he has developed to establish a foundation for working with a wide range of clients.   Practice Areas Crime Ben accepts instructions in all areas of criminal law and enjoys a busy practice. Ben acts for the Prosecution and Defence in all matters of criminal law including offences against the person, drug offences, sexual offences and more. He has a wealth of experience in both the Crown Court as well as the Magistrates Court. Ben is a Category 2 CPS Panel Advocate and has Prosecuted and Defended in a range of Crown Court jury trials. Ben has also represented both the Probation service and Defendants in relation to Probation hearings. Ben is approachable and professional. Ben has prosecuted and defended at the North Liverpool Community Justice Centre dealing with cases involving mental health issues.   Recent Cases R v R: Acquittal for a Defendant charged with wounding with intent, and affray. R v P: Successfully opposed dangerousness submissions regarding a Defendant found guilty of multiple counts of strangulation. R v J: Secured a 24-month suspended sentence prosecuting a misconduct in a public office case. The case was covered in the Express & Star. R v M: Secured a suspended sentence order for a Defendant charged with 11 counts including two counts of possession with a bladed article. R v A: Secured an absolute discharge for a Defendant with significant mental health difficulties charged with public order offences. R v M: Successful prosecution of protestor under COVID regulations. One of the earliest successful prosecutions under this legislation. R v S: Represented a youth Defendant, who suffered from mental health difficulties, for a trial of threatening another with a bladed article. Raised objections to the Crown’s application for an adjournment due to ongoing issues, and upon the adjournment being refused no evidence was offered by the Crown. R v T: Successful prosecution of multiple domestic assaults. With the aid of an interpreter, Ben assisted a vulnerable victim (who had learning difficulties) through his evidence to secure a guilty verdict. R v W: Successful prosecution under Animal Welfare Act in which a Defendant had neglected their dog.
Caleb Suggitt

Caleb Suggitt

Mr. Suggitt was called to the Bar in 2024 by the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple and joined chambers in September of the same year. He is currently undertaking a common law pupillage under the supervision of Mr Nick Cockrell. Prior to his legal career, Mr. Suggitt gained invaluable experience within the criminal justice system, having investigated and presented evidence in several high-profile trials across the Northwest, including cases involving firearms murders, attempted murders, and manslaughter. Building on this foundation, Mr. Suggitt is developing a dynamic practice, with a particular focus on Criminal Law. He accepts instructions in all areas of criminal representing the Prosecution and Defence in Magistrates’ and Crown Court proceedings. In addition to his criminal law practice, Mr. Suggitt also accepts instructions in family law matters, representing local authorities, children, and parents in public law proceedings, as well as parties involved in private family law cases. Furthermore, he is active in Civil Law, representing both Claimants and Defendants in a range of civil disputes.
Sean Sullivan

Sean Sullivan

Sean is an experienced, calm and focused barrister who both prosecutes and defends allegations of serious crime. He prepares his cases with great care, gives insightful advice and is a convincing jury advocate. Sean regularly handles allegations of murder, rape, serious organised organised crime (including drugs and firearms) and financial crime. He is a grade 4 prosecutor (including RASSO). As well as accepting private and publicly funded instructions, Sean is able to accept Direct Access work. He is a tenant at 9BR Chambers, London.   Notbale/Recent Cases Homicide R v M [2025]: murder prosecution where defendant unfit to stand trial due to mental health issues. R v B [2024]: murder defence in drugs related shooting. R v G [2023]: murder defence where defendant suffering from serious mental health issues. R v R [2021]: murder defence representing alleged hitman.   Sexual offences R v L [ongoing] leading junior prosecuting defendant accused of multiple sex offences against six different girls over a decade long period. R v M [2024] defence of a 17 year old accused of gang rape, false imprisonment and a firearms offence. Sean’s submission of no case to answer, based solely upon the credibility of the complainant after his cross-examination of her, was successful resulting in not guilty verdicts being entered in relation to all three defendants. R v M [2023]: prosecution of a double rapist.   Serious organised crime R v K & others [2022 – 2025]: prosecuting over twenty defendants alleged to be part of an organised crime group involved in the supply of drugs, possession of firearms and an attack on the police involving an attempt to retrieve seized drugs and firearms. R v H [2023]: defending a man accused of being the equal partner of the ringleader of a conspiracy to import cocaine into the United Kingdom. The drugs weighed over 1.5 tonnes and had a street value of more than £100 million. The prosecution’s case relied upon close personal and professional links to the ringleader, telephone communication and covert recordings. Sean attacked and undermined each aspect of the prosecution’s case arguing that their interpretation of the evidence was simply incorrect. The defendant was found not guilty on all counts.   Appeals R v N [2023]: Sean was successful in having a conviction for grievous bodily harm with intent quashed by the Court of Appeal. Sean was not involved in the original trial, but on reviewing the case advanced an appeal based upon disclosure failings by the police and prosecution counsel and errors made by the trial judge. The appellant was released from serving a custodial sentence.
Gemma Thomas

Gemma Thomas

Areas of Practice A robust and principled barrister, since her call to the bar in 2010 Gemma has cultivated a busy practice in both family and civil matters. Dealing regularly with issues involving children and finance on divorce Gemma is able to provide clients with a fully rounded service from start to finish. She is experienced in all stages of litigation from first appointment / directions hearings through to contested final hearings. She is happy to accept instructions to advise on paper or by phone and regularly attends ex-parte hearings on short notice. Gemma is qualified to accept instructions direct from the public. This can assist professional clients where conflicts of interest or funding problems arise.   Children Act Gemma is regularly instructed by parents, grandparents and children in cases involving complex issues of fact or law, in particular domestic violence (current or historic). Well known for her conscientious approach to client care, Gemma’s clients can expect to be guided through the litigation process at every stage. Gemma has appeared in the High Court (including the Royal Courts of Justice) in serious and complex wardship, abduction and deprivation of liberty cases. Injunctions Things happen quickly and unexpectedly in family proceedings and Gemma makes herself available to solicitors and clients to provide advice on the making of and merits of non-molestation orders and occupation orders. She has vast experience of prosecuting and defending these applications at Court and is commended for her thorough approach.   Financial Remedy Gemma accepts instructions to advise spouses in relation to their financial settlement during the divorce process. This may be in conference at the outset of the claim, maintenance pending suit applications, section 37 applications, variations, enforcement and of course final hearings. She adopts a pragmatic approach to cases and is a strong negotiator. Gemma’s background in civil litigation compliments her family practice and means she is called on to advise and represent cohabiting couples in TOLATA claims and to draft pre and post nuptial agreements.
Rachael Wake

Rachael Wake

Practice Areas Family Care Miss Wake is experienced in public law applications, having represented Local Authorities, Parents and Guardians in interlocutory and final hearings. In that capacity she has dealt with issues such as designation, deprivation of liberty and jurisdiction. Miss Wake has also acted in finding of fact hearings relating to issues of domestic violence, non -accidental injuries and sexual abuse, and is experienced in drafting the associated written work such as threshold criteria and schedules of findings.   Private Law Miss Wake also has significant experience representing parents in private law children applications, as well as having undertaken instructions in applications for non-molestation and occupation orders.
Sarah Watters

Sarah Watters

Practice Areas Civil Personal Injury Contract RTA Credit hire   Family Public Law Child Cases Private Law Child Cases     Areas of Practice Sarah has extensive experience in all areas of personal injury litigation with a particular emphasis on the following Road Traffic cases – including the more specialist areas of fraud, low velocity impacts, and credit hire. Public Liability claims – with a particular emphasis on tripping claims Occupier’s Liability claims Employer’s Liability claims Costs litigation Sarah can conduct litigation on both the fast track and multi track on behalf of both Claimants and Defendants . Miss Watters is routinely involved at all stages of litigation, from the provision of preliminary advice through to the conclusion at trial. She also regularly instructed to draft pleadings, schedules, and advices in repsect of both liability and quantum in all of the aforementioned areas and can offer a quick turnaround of papers in relation to the same. Sarah also has particular experience in relation to high value personal injury claims, and is frequently instructed to advise in relation to the valuation of significant and/or unusual injuries often involving complex loss of earnings claims. In addition, she is regularly invited to provide lectures and litigation training to firms of solicitors, with a particular emphasis on the CPR, valuation of damages, and costs litigation.