Our team is comprised of some of the most experienced and reputable criminal lawyers in London..
Murray’s Partnership and Hughmans Solicitors amalgamated, having both been dominant forces in criminal law for decades. Together, the Murray Hughman team hold an outstanding reputation in the field of serious and complex crime.
“ “The best defence Lawyers in London” Client
“The best defence Lawyers in London”
“ "He is an exceptional lawyer." Chambers and Partners 2022 Guide - Grant Ambridge
"He is an exceptional lawyer."
“ "They have really strong Lawyers" Chambers and Partners 2023 Guide
"They have really strong Lawyers"
“ “Murray Hughman is extremely professional in its approach and has a real insight into problems that arise” Chambers and Partners 2023 Guide
“Murray Hughman is extremely professional in its approach and has a real insight into problems that arise”
“ “He has an incredibly good judgement and is very realistic with clients” Chambers and Partners 2023 Guide - Grant Ambridge
“He has an incredibly good judgement and is very realistic with clients”
“ "A hard working, practical and tactically astute outfit. They are thorough and experienced, and tireless in advancing the case for their clients" Legal 500 2023 Guide
"A hard working, practical and tactically astute outfit. They are thorough and experienced, and tireless in advancing the case for their clients"
“ "They provide solid and consistent advice and go the extra mile for their clients." Chambers and Partners 2022 Guide
"They provide solid and consistent advice and go the extra mile for their clients."
“ "Luke Gittos is an excellent practitioner, who combines an eye for detail with tactical judgment beyond his years. He is a pleasure to work with" Legal 500 2023 Guide - Luke Gittos
"Luke Gittos is an excellent practitioner, who combines an eye for detail with tactical judgment beyond his years. He is a pleasure to work with"
“ "Grant Ambridge engenders huge loyalty from those in his firm and he has successfully brought together two firms Murray Partnership and Hughmans under one umbrella. He has achieved it seamlessly and the firm is going from strength to strength" Legal 500 2023 Guide - Grant Ambridge
"Grant Ambridge engenders huge loyalty from those in his firm and he has successfully brought together two firms Murray Partnership and Hughmans under one umbrella. He has achieved it seamlessly and the firm is going from strength to strength"
“ “Grant is very authoritative and clients really like him” Chambers and Partners 2023 Guide - Grant Ambridge
“Grant is very authoritative and clients really like him”
“ “Thank you so very much for pursing and for obtaining a great outcome! We are so grateful, you are rather wonderful!” Client - Katie Kipps
“Thank you so very much for pursing and for obtaining a great outcome! We are so grateful, you are rather wonderful!”
Grant has worked exclusively in criminal litigation since his qualification in 2002. He has extensive experience in serious and complex offences ranging from fraud, sexual allegations, homicide, drugs and violence. He has extensive experience of all stages of the process from arrest, pre charge representation, litigation and Trial.
He has been instructed to deal with allegations/ charges brought by the Crown Prosecution Service , HMRC, National Crime Agency, Trading Standards and Serious Fraud Office.
Due to the work Grant does many cases do not reach the charging stage.
Grant has been recognised for his work by the established directory Chambers and Partners. He has been recognised in this guide year after year and most recently has been ranked a Band 2 leading individual in the 2024 guide.
What Others Say:
“Grant is brilliant – he’s got a good grasp of the fine line between being authoritative with clients as well as open and considerate, so if he’s managing expectations it can be done in a very thoughtful and considered way. He’s also got a very good sense of tactics and approach to cases generally.” Chambers and Partners 2024
“He is able to level with clients well, gain their trust and confidence and cut straight to the heart of the issues of any case.” Chambers and Partners 2024
“Grant Ambridge is a naturally intuitive lawyer who can predict where a case is going to go with startling accuracy.” Chambers and Partners 2024
“Grant Ambridge, is an excellent, old school criminal solicitor who knows his clients and has a pragmatic way of dealing with cases without ever compromising his focus on the defence. Grant knows the system, and his clients, inside out and works tirelessly to deliver them good results” Chambers and Partners 2023
R – v – NJ – Woolwich Crown Court – 2021
Represented youth charged with joint enterprise murder involving a sawn off shotgun. The defendant was found not guilty following successful legal arguments on “res gestae” followed by a half time submission of no case to answer. Martin Heslop QC and Merry Van Woodenberg 2 Hare Court instructed.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v EM – Hove Crown Court – 2014 (Murder)
Defendant charged with shooting a rival on a busy Brighton Street. Case involved a large number of eye witnesses and the instruction of Firearms experts. Following a fully contested trial the Defendant was acquitted of all charges. Simon Mayo QC (187 Fleet Street) and Leon Kazakos (2 Hare Court) instructed Counsel.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v JM – Central Criminal Court – 2013 (Murder)
Defendant charged with murdering his former partner and mother of his child. He then hid the body in the boot of his car to avoid detection. Following a full trial the Defendant was acquitted of murder. Orlando Pownall QC (2 Hare Court) and Charles Langley (2Bedford Row) instructed Counsel.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v JC – Guildford Crown Court – 2011 (Murder)
Defendant accused of murdering his employee with one punch following an argument in the work place. The Defendant was acquitted of murder. Trevor Burke QC (3 Raymond Buildings) and Charles Langley (2 Bedford Row)
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v R – Truro Crown Court – 2009 (Murder)
Defendant was accused of shaking her baby son to death whilst on a family holiday. Following a lengthy trial and the instruction of various medical experts in her defence, she was acquitted of all charges. Maura Mcgowan QC and Charles Langley (2 Bedford Row) instructed Counsel
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v H – Central Criminal Court – 2006 (Murder)
16 year old boy accused together with one other of stabbing a man outside the Mass Nightclub in Brixton.
Andrew Campbell Tiech QC and Zarif Khan (Drystone Chambers ) Instructed Counsel.
Read more via dailymail.co.uk
R v R – Central Criminal Court – 2005 (Murder and Firearms)
Defendant was charged with one other of shooting another man at a Traveller Site in Surrey. The Defendant, following a full Trial, was acquitted of all charges. Andrew Trollope QC (187 Fleet Street) and Susan Rodham (5 Kings Bench Walk) instructed as Counsel.
Read more via getsurrey.co.uk
R – v – S – Guildford Crown Court – 2023
Application by the Prosecution under s22 Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to increase the realisable assets of S, who had been convicted of the index offence some 10 years previously. S had purchased a family home in 2021 which had come to the attention of the authorities. It was submitted successfully on behalf of S that, in view of all the circumstances it would be unjust to increase the realisable figure to the full amount requested by the Prosecution .Thus allowing the defendant the option of keeping his family home.
Counsel instructed: Ben Rowe – Crucible Chambers
R – v – GK – Southwark Crown Court – 2022
GK was charged with one other in cheating the public to the sum of £5.4 million. The case focused on the proper deployment of an ‘option to tax’. The sale of property is ordinarily exempt from VAT but the option to tax permits a business to elect to charge VAT on the sale of otherwise exempt commercial property and to recover VAT on related development costs, for example, surveyors and other professional services.
Not guilty verdicts were recorded against GK when the Crown Prosecution Service offered no evidence on consideration of an application to dismiss the charges by the defence team. Gavin Irwin – 2 Hare Court instructed.
R v MR & PR – Nottingham Crown Court – 2016 (Money Laundering and conspiracy)
Ongoing proceedings for Conspiracy to Defraud and Money Laundering involving 16 defendants and in excess of 20,000 pages of evidence.
Charles Langley (2 Bedford Row) and Leon Kazakos (2 Hare Court) instructed Counsel.
R v MR – Blackfriars Crown Court – 2016 ( Money laundering )
This was a case where the first Defendant was represented. He was a businessman, in a multi-handed high value alleged money laundering conspiracy. The trial, which was expected to take six weeks, collapsed on the third day as a result of successful legal arguments and persistent disclosure requests which caused the prosecution to offer no evidence. All defendants acquitted.
Richard Wormald (3 Raymond Buildings) instructed Counsel.
R – C & C – Blackfriars CC – ongoing – (Fraud and Money Laundering)
Grant was representing 2 of 12 defendants alleged to have been involved in a large scale Diversion Fraud to the value of £8 million.
R v B AL – Southwark Crown Court – 2013 ( Fraud and conspiracy )
This was a case involving fraud and conspiracy to cheat the Revenue – The defendant was charged with defrauding HMRC by claiming Film Tax Credits and VAT for the making of a feature film “Landscape of Lies”. The case involved over 10000 pages of evidence and multiple defendants.
Orlando Pownall QC (2 Hare Court) and Charles Langley (2 Bedford Row) instructed Counsel.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v R, R and R – Croydon Crown Court – 2013 (Fraud)
This was a large scale building fraud on multiple homeowners. The value of the fraud was in excess of £500,000. Voluminous material building experts needed to be instructed to assess the quality and value of the work. Confiscation sought in excess of £3 million. This was eventually negotiated down to £300,000 for the main Defendant only.
Trevor Burke QC (3 Raymond Buildings), Charles Langley (2 Bedford Row) and Leon Kazakos (2 Hare Court) Instructed Counsel.
R v MM – Kingston Crown Court – 2012 (Fraud and money laundering)
R v M & Ors – 2011 & 2012- (Operation Vara) (Fraud)
Lead Junior Defending. Successfully defended a man accused of evasion of import Duty and VAT on gold jewellery. Over £8 million evasion involving an international investigation which moved from the UK to Europe, on to India and Dubai.
This was a case involving a conspiracy to evade import duty and VAT payable on the importation of gold jewellery. In total over £8 million was said to have been evaded. Mr Martin was led in this case by Mr Leon Kazakos and represented a defendant accused of being one of the men responsible for importing the gold Jewellery from Dubai into Frankfurt. The fraud involved the handover of the gold to another member of the conspiracy who would then import into the UK passing off the import as intra-EU trade and therefore VAT exempt. Some of these activities were observed by a covert intelligence unit of the German Police. The case involved complex VAT legal questions as well as jurisdictional issues.
Following 4 Trials the defendant was acquitted of all charges
Leon Kazakos (2 Hare Court) and James Martin (5 Kings Bench Walk) instructed Counsel.
R v HS – Birmingham Crown Court – 2011 (Fraud and money laundering)
Operation Elemi. The Defendant was charged with laundering the proceeds of large scale MTIC frauds. The case involved voluminous amounts of evidence and a lengthy trial with multiple defendants.
Read more via mynewsdesk.com
R – v – O – Inner London Crown Court – 2023
Grant represented a UBS banker charged with Voyeurism, it was alleged that O had observed a female doing a private act at Cannon Street Train Station.
Counsel Instructed : Gudrun Young KC – 2 Hare Court
R – v – JL – Southwark Crown Court – 2020
Represented former Blue Peter presenter in a historic allegation of sexual assault who was acquitted after Trial , with the Jury reaching the not guilty verdict following 23 mins of deliberation. Gudrun Young 2 Hare Court instructed.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R – v – DH – Inner London Crown Court – 2018 (Sexual Assault)
Grant represented a Nurse employed by a national charity charged with a sexual assault. Following extensive representation to the Crown Prosecution Service regarding the severe evidential deficiencies the case against DH was discontinued. Grant represented DH and subsequent Nursery and Midwifery Council hearing with regard to his eligibility to practice. Following representations at two hearings DH has been allowed to continue his career without restrictions.
Read more via getsurrey.co.uk
R v TR – Nottingham Crown Court – 2016 (Conspiracy and trafficking)
This case involved conspiracy to rape and people trafficking. The Defendant were charged with 35 other defendants to rape and traffic vulnerable persons for the purpose of sexual abuse. Following defence disclosure requests and legal argument the matter was stayed for abuse of process.
Charles Langley (2 Bedford Row) instructed Counsel.
R – v – RL – Kingston Crown Court – 2023
JH was charged with conspiracy to supply in excess of 300kg of cannabis during a 3 month period. The prosecution arose from the defendants involvement with the “encro chat” messaging network. Following mitigation advanced by Grant and Counsel the defendant was given a suspended sentence.
Counsel instructed : Hannah Thomas – 2 Hare Court
R – v – WH – Kingston Crown Court – 2022
WH is charged with 3 other for conspiracy to supply multi kilo quantities of cocaine. The case involves the “encro” phone network and its subsequent infiltration by French authorities. Oliver Renton – Crucible Chamber instructed.
R – v – JH – Isleworth – 2022
JH was charged with 9 others industrial scale production of cannabis at two separate sites in the south east of England. The case involved the “encro” phone network and its subsequent infiltration by French authorities.
R – v – GK – Southwark Crown Court – 2021
Represented the first defendant to be charged with illegally exporting (smuggling) endangered European Eels outside of the EU. A non-custodial sentence and minimal confiscation order achieved following representation in and out of court.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
Read more via mirror.co.uk
R – v – S – Nottingham Crown Court – 2018 (Conspiracy to Supply Class A drugs)
Grant together with Andrew Rootsey of the Firm represented S who was charged with others with supplying large quantities of cocaine between London and Nottingham with S being alleged to have been head of the London operation. Following a 6 week Trial S was unanimously acquitted.
R – v – MR & PR – Nottingham Crown Court – 2017 (Slavery and Fraud)
Grant was instructed to represent a father and son charged with Fraud together with their extended family who were also charged under the modern slavery provisions. Due to the sheer number of defendants and charges the case was split into three different Trials. At the conclusion Grant’s clients were the only ones not to receive custodial sentences. Charles Langley (2 Bedford Row) for MR and Leon Kazakos (2 Hare Court) for PR
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v VM – Manchester Crown Court – 2016 (Drug Importation)
Ongoing Trial for the importation of cocaine and heroin. The Defendant was charged with others of being an organiser in importing large quantities of drugs from Belgium. Investigated and prosecuted by the National Crime Agency.
James Martin (5 Kings Bench Walk) instructed as counsel.
R v MH – Manchester Crown Court – 2014 ( Conspiracy to assist an offender )
This case involved a conspiracy to assist an offender. The Defendant was charged with others of assisting the notorious Dale Cregan by helping him escape and hide after he had assassinated rivals and prior to killing two unarmed police officers. Following two trials the Crown offered no evidence due to lack of disclosure.
Tyrone Smith QC (25 Bedford Row) and Emma Goodhall (Doughty Street)
Read more via manchestereveningnews.co.uk
R – v – UC – Southwark Crown Court – 2021
Represented a metropolitan police scientist charged with multiple counts of misconduct in public office concerning the failure to store exhibits correctly and cause undue delay in police investigations. Leon Kazakos QC – 2 Hare Court instructed.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R – v – AD – Snaresbrook Crown Court – 2018 (Juries Act 1974 Offences)
Grant represented AD who pleaded guilty to researching the case he was trying during the trial period for reasons connected to that case and he intentionally disclosed this information to other members of the jury that had been obtained by research in contravention of s20A and the information had not been provided by the court. The offence in almost every circumstances result in an immediate custodial sentence. However following excellent mitigation put forward by Grant and Counsel the Court took an exceptional stance and AD’s term of imprisonment was suspended with community punishment. Fiona Robertson 2 Hare Court instructed Counsel for AD
Read more via itv.co.uk
Luke is a specialist in complex litigation
He acts for both criminal and civil clients and also represents companies and individuals during regulatory investigations.
He is regularly instructed in cases involving cross-jurisdictional transactions and international finance. He has recent experience in regulatory investigations by the FCA and has acted for companies and individuals in investigations by HMRC and the SFO.
“Luke is an excellent practitioner, who combines and eye for detail with tactical judgment beyond his years. He is a pleasure to work with” Legal 500 2023
“Luke Gittos is a delight. He is just so nice, and his client care is really good. He is clued up, confident and quite a star” Chambers and Partners 2023
“Luke is hardworking, diligent and detail oriented. He does big, complicated cases. He prepares cases very well” Chambers and Partners 2022
R v PS & ET – High value money laundering allegation
Acting for two defendants in high value money laundering allegation connected to VAT evasion on imported alcohol. The estimated loss to the Revenue is £40 million.
R v DF – Murder appeal
Instructed in relation to a murder appeal dealing with complex issues of female mental health and psychosis. Instructed on a private basis to review the findings of a previous trial team.
R v BM – Allegation of murder
Undertaking a pro-bono investigation into the conviction of an alleged member of the provisional IRA for the murder of a Police Service of Northern Ireland in 2009. Reviewing the findings of a ‘Judge only’ trial.
R v L – Allegation involving ticketing fraud
Instructed with respect to allegation involving ticketing fraud with respect to the 2015 rugby world cup worth in excess of £1 million. Client was principal defendant and was acquitted of all charges.
H and Ors v FCA – Advising in complex FCA inquiry
Advising a network of Independent Financial Advisors in the course of highly complex FCA inquiry into improper transfer of pension funds
R v P – Complex and large scale money laundering allegation
Complex and large scale money laundering allegation, involving the alleged movement of large sums to be sent to terrorist organisations in Syria.
R v P – Commercial fraud worth in excess of £500,000
Commercial fraud worth in excess of £500,000 with victims including Crystal Palace Football Club.
LT – Highly complex investigation into historic sexual abuse
Assisted client in developing argument against his extradition from South Africa having been sought in connection to a highly complex investigation into historic sexual abuse. Assisted the client’s South African legal team in an analysis of the relevant legal framework to develop an argument that his extradition would be contrary to the RSA constitution.
R v ETJ – Controlling prostitution and money laundering
Large scale allegation of controlling prostitution and money laundering across the north of England, arising out of the ownership of a chain of escort agencies. The first trial jury failed to reach a verdict. A suspended sentence was achieved following plea negotiations.
R v A – Alleged credit card fraud
Alleged credit card fraud worth in excess of £60,000, involving the targeting of vulnerable victims over the telephone.
R v L – Large scale international conspiracy to supply cocaine, cannabis and amphetamine
Large scale international conspiracy to supply cocaine, cannabis and amphetamine involving informant evidence. The Crown offered no evidence on all drugs charges following a lengthy disclosure argument.
R v N – Complex allegation of VAT and PAYE
Retrial of a complex allegation of VAT and PAYE fraud centered around the construction industry. The value exceeded £1m. Achieved a suspended sentence for the defendant following a significant concession regarding the indictment.
R v MU – 10 year prison sentence overturned on appeal
Conviction which resulted in a 10 year prison sentence overturned on appeal following criticism of previous legal team. The prosecution subsequently offered no evidence. The defendant was released from custody and faced no further charges.
R v B – Money laundering and corruption
Acted for defendant accused of laundering £18,000 and corrupting a public official. The case involved the sale of contraband in prison. The defendant was acquitted of all counts following trial.
R v T – High profile client accused of rape
Assisted Peter Hughman in securing the acquittal of a high profile client accused of rape.
R v M – Conspiracy to import 18 kilos of cocaine
Currently instructed in a series of cases involving the interception of the ‘EncroChat’ network, including one conspiracy to import 18 kilos of cocaine from a cruise ship.
R v H
Represented defendant in murder allegation.
R v H
Represented principal defendant in a joint enterprise murder allegation. Client acquitted following representations with regards to the Crown’s case on causation.
R v C
Conspiracy to produce counterfeit currency.
R v C
Currently instructed in the largest ever conspiracy to produce counterfeit currency, involving the alleged production of £53 million of false notes.
Katie specialises in heavyweight criminal litigation. She joined the firm in August 2020 having worked for over a decade at another leading law firm in the City of London.
Katie is ranked as a Band 2 Private Prosecution Lawyer. View more about our private prosecution services here.
Katie has extensive experience in the field of criminal law, representing client’s accused of offences ranging from murder, sexual assault and drug conspiracies to complex frauds and insider dealing.
Her defence practice focuses on cases brought by the Serious Fraud Office, the Financial Conduct Authority, and the National Crime Agency. She also undertakes restraint and asset freezing work arising out of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
Katie is particularly well known for her investigative skills and is celebrated for achieving excellent results for her clients. She is also experienced in bringing actions against the Police, under the Police Property Act and claims against Her Majesty’s Prison Service.
In addition to her defence work and having been involved in some of the largest privately prosecuted fraud cases in the last decade, Katie also specialises in advising on and launching private prosecution proceedings.
She advises both private individuals and corporate clients and expertly steers them through the complex process of private prosecutions. She has successfully challenged judicial review proceedings mounted by defence teams in relation to abuse of process arguments, and vigorously opposed costs applications in the relation to the same.
Katie also has extensive experience in defending individuals and companies who are the subject of private prosecution proceedings, including in the Allseas case which is still the largest investment fraud case to be brought by way of a private prosecution in the UK.
She is a member of the Private Prosecution Association and adheres to its code.
Katie is highly regarded for her success in both defence and private prosecution work. Her well-earned reputation for excellence in the field of private prosecutions is recognised by the renowned legal directory Chambers and Partners, indicating a high level of professional excellence and client satisfaction.
Katie is also a dedicated committee member of the Female Fraud Forum whose mission statement is to “spearhead change and work towards achieving gender equality across the industry.”
“She excels in her ability to put clients at ease and ensures that they are never disadvantaged regardless of their means.” Chambers and Partners 2024
“She is very well organised, extremely detail-oriented and quick to identify the sorts of issues that others might not at the beginning of a case.” Chambers and Partners 2024
“Katie is extremely efficient, clear thinking and very good with clients.” Chambers and Partners 2024
I’ve known Katie since Hughmans. I am thrilled that the two firms have merged. She works really hard to get the trust of clients and is extremely efficient. She respects counsel’s judgements and guidance” Chambers and Partners 2023
“Her preparation is outstanding and so is her client care”
“Excellent knowledge of legal issues and able to think outside the box”
“I have no hesitation whatsoever in recommending her for serious crime work”
“She is very good with clients. Clients find her empathetic and supportive. She is an excellent Solicitor in many ways. She prepares cases thoroughly and is responsive to Counsels needs” – Chambers and Partners 2022
“Thank you so very much for pursing and for obtaining a great outcome! We are so grateful, you are rather wonderful!” – Client
R v A:
Katie’s client was charged with serious Class A drug importation charges. The investigation focused on the hack of the EncroChat phone network (Operation Venetic) and attribution of that device to her client. The prosecution referred to her client as “criminal pedigree and sought to convict on the basis of cell site evidence, phone data, CCTV and witness accounts. A 5-week trial resulted in a hung jury and the matter will be retried.
R v H:
Katie represented her client who was accused of assisting another offender, accused of murder. The murder occurred after a failed attempt to burgle a residential cannabis factory, and Katie’s client allegedly drove his co-defendants away from the scene of the fatal stabbing. Through tough negotiation with the Crown Prosecution Service, a basis of plea was advanced and accepted. As a result, Katie’s client was sentenced for assisting an offender to an aggravated burglary, and having meticulously prepared her client’s mitigation, he received a custodial term of 2 years, wholly suspended for 24 months.
R v T:
Katie acted for a high-profile client accused of rape. As a result of obtaining and reviewing vital CCTV evidence, which the Police had completely overlooked, her client was acquitted after trial at Southwark Crown Court.
R v R:
Katie defended a young man charged with section 18 GBH and witness intimidation. She conducted investigations in Manchester where the alleged attack took place. She re-traced the journey, paying close attention to timings of routes, according to the complainant’s account. Her work was key in proving that the complainant’s account simply could not be true, which resulted in an acquittal for her client.
R v A:
Following a criminal complaint filed in Switzerland, A, a British national was made subject of a £12 million international criminal fraud and money laundering investigation. The CPS were asked for assistance in freezing her UK based assets. The DPP advanced an application under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (External Requests and Orders) Order 2005 and an ex parte restraint order granted. Katie was instructed and an application to discharge the restraint order was pursued. Ultimately the order was discharged, on the grounds that the duty of full and frank disclosure had not been complied with. The restraint order was overturned, and the Prosecution’s application to make a new order dismissed. Advancing a costs application, in excess of £40,000 was awarded to Katie’s client.
Katie has also represented the client, together with Swiss law firm Mangeat, at the prosecutor’s offices in Switzerland in relation to the substantive matter.
R v A:
Katie successfully defended a Bank Compliance Officer against an allegation of money laundering. A’s husband had been separately charged with several counts of fraud, committed whilst he was employed at The Commonwealth Secretariat and advising the Government of Maldives. He later assumed position an international law firm and defrauded a number of wealthy clients of the firm.
Katie wrote to the CPS inviting them to review the evidential test of the Code for Crown Prosecutors. In the unusual circumstances of this case the defence provided the prosecution with further evidence demonstrating why the mental element of the offence was not satisfied. Katie also insisted that further, specific inquiries, be conducted. As a result of the representations advanced on behalf of her client, the CPS offered no evidence. The client’s husband was convicted and sentenced to 7 years 6 months imprisonment.
R v B:
Katie’s client is indicted in relation to a complex VAT conspiracy. Her client was charged following a three-year investigation conducted by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. It is a multi-handed case, and the allegations relate to VAT repayments made to various companies between 2016 and 2018, totalling over £1.6 million.
R v C:
Katie is currently representing a client in proceedings brought under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 where the prosecution alleges a benefit figure is £34 million. The case for which her client was already convicted is a complex international drug importation brought by the NCA.
R v Zheng:
Katie represented a Chinese national in proceedings for money laundering involving the misuse of the Daigou ‘luxury items’ trading system.
R v Parvizi:
Katie worked alongside Peter Hughman in securing an acquittal in the largest ever investigation into insider dealing by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). She was responsible for much of the detailed investigatory work undertaken by the defence, in relation to which she briefed trial counsel Orlando Pownall QC and David Whittaker, both of 2 Hare Court.
R v Reilly:
Katie fought ruthlessly for this client in confiscation proceedings. The client was convicted for drug and firearm offences following the discovery of highly sophisticated, underground bunkers in Essex, where a number of firearms including AK47 assault rifles were found. The Crown argued for a benefit figure of £5.6 million, and asserted the client had available assets in the sum of £2.6 million. Katie fiercely challenged the Crown’s case, resulting in a substantially reduced benefit figure of £407,780 and £121,860 in available assets.
R v Leitz:
Her client convicted of drug trafficking offences was subject to proceedings under The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. This client had substantial assets, held across four jurisdictions, and an initial benefit figure of £2.7 million. These proceedings lasted for 3 years and as a result of thorough and tough negotiations an order was made in the sum of his benefit, which had reduced to £200,000.
R v P:
Katie’s client was charged with five counts of fraud concerning a wine investment scheme. Katie’s comprehensive analysis of the prosecution’s figures resulted in the overall value of the fraud being drastically reduced, and one count was dropped altogether, as a result of the extensive inquiries she made concerning a solicitor who had previously been struck-off the role.
R v Seabrook:
Katie defended a client in confiscation proceedings where the Crown asserted the client had hidden assets. As a result of her tough negotiations, the Crown conceded their argument just before the hearing itself, which resulted in a confiscation order being made in the sum of just £1,920.
R v K:
In 2017 Katie successfully defended her client who was the subject of private prosecution proceedings. She acted for a finance director of a company accused of theft of a consignment of plastics. Katie made representations to the CPS and asked that it take over and discontinue proceedings. The representations were successful. The private prosecutor appealed that decision and was ultimately unsuccessful, but the decision gave rise to an application for judicial review and subsequently, an important judgement on the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction in private prosecutions.
R v Sultana:
Alongside Peter Hughman, Katie defended her client, Mr Sultana who was privately prosecuted for what is still believed to be the largest investment fraud in the UK.
R v A
Katie’s client launched private prosecution proceedings against an individual for offences of theft and blackmail. Katie has successfully navigated her client’s case from investigation stage, through abuse applications in the magistrates’ and high court, and now awaits trial in the crown court. A restraint order was successfully obtained against the defendant.
R v B
Katie advised a construction company who wanted to pursue a private prosecution against one of its directors, for fraud and theft. The director had allegedly filtered payments from clients into a similarly named account. After conducting a thorough investigation Katie advised the company on the prospects of launching a private prosecution.
R v C
Katie is instructed to act for global brands who are victims of IP crime. She acted for one particular client launching private prosecution proceedings earlier this year, under the Trade Marks Act 1994. The defendant pleaded guilty and awaits sentence. A costs application has also been prepared to recover some of her client’s costs.
R v D
Katie’s client had a dispute with his neighbour which resulted in him being assaulted with a shovel. The police refused to take action, and Katie was instructed to advise on the prospects of bringing private prosecution proceedings, against her client’s neighbour. Katie reviewed the evidence and considered the selection of charges. She ultimately provided positive advice on bringing private prosecution proceedings for various offences of harassment and assault.
Katie regularly advises corporate entities in relation to private prosecutions and disputes arising from parallel civil proceedings.
Melissa has worked in criminal defence law since 2013, qualifying as a lawyer in 2018. Melissa has a busy practice defending clients accused of a wide range of offences. Melissa is a passionate criminal defence lawyer with a particular interest in representing young and vulnerable clients. Melissa is able to put clients at ease from the very outset. She understands the importance of building a trusting relationship and the importance of continuity, resulting in her regularly representing clients from the Police station interview through to trial. Melissa is respected for her meticulous case preparation and her dedication to secure the best outcome for her clients.
Melissa has been recognised for her work by the established directory Chambers and Partners. She has been recognised as an ‘Associate to watch’ in the 2024 guide.
What Others Say:
“Melissa is unfailingly dedicated, energetic, creative and well organised, with a brilliant legal brain.” Chambers and Partners 2024
“She is the epitome of leaving no stone unturned in the best interests of her clients.” Chambers and Partners 2024
“Melissa is hands-on, deals with things beautifully and cares deeply.” Chambers and Partners 2024
Melissa Ansah is a new addition to the team. We are thrilled about it. She is able to build up a rapport with the client and comes to every hearing. The client really trusts her. She has an enthusiasm for the job which a lot of people lose after they become jaded by the system. She is very efficient and on the ball. She will offer suggestions, and is proactive, enthusiastic and engaged with clients. – chambers and partners 2023
“She is junior but brilliant. I am constantly amazed at the level of work she puts into cases. She goes so far above and beyond anything i have seen from junior solicitors. She is really impressive” – Chambers and Partners 2022
R v TH – December 2021 – Central Criminal Court
The Defendant was charged with Death by Dangerous Driving. The Defence successfully argued, with the assistance of numerous expert medicolegal reports, that the correct charge was one of death by careless driving.
R v Youth Defendant – November 2021 – Central Criminal Court
Representing the only youth defendant in a multi-handed revenge attempted murder. The Defendant disputed identity. Crown dismissed the case the week before trial following a review in light of unused material.
R v JG – July 2021 – Snaresbrook Crown Court
Conspiracy to Murder. Crown offered no evidence after a written application to dismiss was submitted.
R v Youth Defendant – October 2022 – Bromley Youth Court
Client was sentenced for an offence of attempted section 18 Grievous Bodily Harm and possession of a bladed article. Defence submissions resulted in the Judge agreeing that the client was not a “dangerous offender”. The Defence relied on expert medical evidence resulting in the client being sentenced in the Youth Court to a Detention and Training Order of 20 months.
R v JB – September 2022 – Bromley Magistrates Court
The client was charged with being in possession of offensive weapons in a private place. The Crown described both knives as “zombie knives”, whose possession in a private place is prohibited by section 141 (1A) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 as amended by section 46 of the Offensive Weapons Act 2019. The Defence drafted representations submitting that neither of the knives met the statutory definition of a “zombie knife”. The representations were successful resulting in the case being discontinued before trial.
Youth Defendant – Pre Charge Work – July 2022
Lengthy representations pre-charge resulting in an 11 year old youth being diverted away from the Youth Justice System.
R v BM – January 2022 – Snaresbrook Crown Court
Allegations of conspiring to possess a firearm and ammunition. The case involved complex legal argument on the admissibility of gang evidence (which included drill music). The Crown submitted that the evidence provided important context and served to rebut the defence of innocent association with the co-defendant, who was found in possession of a loaded semi-automatic weapon. The client was acquitted.
R v SS – January 2022 – Inner London Crown Court
Client was charged with Section 18 GBH and possession of knife. A favourable basis of plea was submitted alongside a mitigation bundle including highlighting the law on delay in proceedings as mitigation as well as supportive letters / reports showing the defendants positive steps to leave his past life behind him resulted the Judge departing from the starting point of 4 years and passing a sentence of 2 years imprisonment suspended for 2 years.
R v MR – March 2021 – Bromley Youth Court
The defendant was alleged to have committed multiple robberies, the Crown discontinued the case as a result of defence legal arguments highlighting the Crown’s statutory disclosure failings.
R v JR – February 2021 – Harrow Crown Court
Possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life – acquitted after trial.
R v AM – January 2021 – Romford Youth Court
Crown discontinued charges of Robbery, Kidnap and Blackmail as a result of defence legal arguments highlighting the Crown’s statutory disclosure failings.
R v LM – October 2020 – Luton Youth Court
Represented the defendant at his sentence hearing having entered a guilty plea to his 3rd offence for possession of an offensive weapon / bladed article which resulted in the mandatory minimum sentence of 4 months detention and training. Successful in arguing that it would be “unjust” to impose the mandatory minimum sentence, the defendant was sentenced to a Youth Referral Order.
R v SB – September 2022 – Luton Crown Court
County lines drug supply. The client was vulnerable and benefited from a positive National Referral Mechanism (NRM) conclusive grounds decision. The Defence submitted that it was not in the public interest to prosecute such a vulnerable client with reference to expert reports resulting in the Crown offering no evidence.
R v DF – April 2022 Croydon Crown Court
Conveyance of List A articles into prison, namely drugs for which there are no sentencing guidelines thus required careful consideration of case law to persuade the Judge to sentence the client to a Suspended Sentence Order.
R v JR – August 2021 – Inner London Crown Court
Supplying Class A Drugs. Lengthy negotiations to persuade the Crown to accept the written Basis of Plea resulting in the defendant being sentenced as a “lessor role” and sentenced to a Suspended Sentence Order.
R v AA – June 2021 – Uxbridge Youth Court
Supplying Class A drugs and possession of a bladed article. Crown discontinued the case as a result of written representations in which it was submitted that there is not sufficient evidence for realistic prospect of a conviction nor is it in the public interest to prosecute a 15 year old boy in light of the National Referral Mechanism positive conclusive grounds decision.
R v TM – January 2021 – Wood Green Crown Court
Supply of Class B Drugs. Offence committed in breach of a Suspended Sentence Order for Class A Drug supply and sentenced to a community order concurrent with the existing Suspended Sentence Order as a result of expert medical reports and a mitigation bundle.
R v OD – September 2020 – Lewes Crown Court
County lines drug operation in Kent and Sussex, the second offence committed on bail. A medical expert report was submitted in support of mitigation resulting in the defendant receiving a Suspended Sentence Order despite the Probation pre-sentence report not supportive of a community based sentence.
Peter Hughman is recognised as a leader in the field of criminal law.
He specialises in the highest level of criminal litigation, with particular expertise in complex white collar crime and serious drug cases. He has won a series of high profile cases where the client’s previous defence team advised there was no prospect of success. He has extensive experience in defending cases brought by the Serious Fraud Office, the Financial Conduct Authority (formerly the FSA), and the National Crime Agency (formerly SOCA).
Until recently he was a Senior Partner of Hughmans Solicitors LLP, a London firm, trading with an excellent reputation for over 40 years.
He joined Murrays in 2020 as a Consultant Solicitor.
Peter is a published author (“Just How Just?“ (Martin Secker & Warburg Ltd) and “Most Unnatural: An Enquiry into the Stafford Case“ (Penguin) and is regularly asked to contribute to a range of criminal law and related matters, including the BBC’s Panorama.
Chambers & Partners has variously described Peter as follows:
With an “outstanding reputation“, the “utterly exceptional“ Peter Hughman stands out for his “ability to immediately understand the issues in a case.“
“Devastatingly good. He maintains an excellent reputation amongst peers.“
The “phenomenally intelligent“ Peter Hughman stands out for his long-standing criminal defence practice, which includes particular expertise in appellate litigation.
He is highly respected by market observers, as one source notes: “He is the doyen of criminal solicitors and has exceptional judgement and integrity.“
Leading appellate cases involving Disclosure, Entrapment, and Abuse of Process.
Complex international drug and fraud conspiracies.
Historic sexual abuse allegations made against celebrity defendants.
Emma is a dedicated criminal defence solicitor covering all aspects of criminal defence and regulatory work, and has developed a faithful client base after working in this area for 20 years and receives much of her work by way of referrals from previous clients and their families.
Emma qualified as a solicitor in 2003, initially having experience in Mental Health Law before specialising in Criminal Defence. She was one of the founding partners of LLM Solicitors Brixton.
Emma is regularly instructed in extremely serious and high profile cases. She has vast experience in dealing with Homicide, Terrorism Offences, Serious Sexual Offences, Complex Fraud and regularly acts in cases representing ‘so-called’ Serious and Organised Crime Groups. Emma is particularly adept at complex cases involving technical evidence and is known for her tenacious attitude towards the Prosecution and Police.
Emma has particular experience dealing with Youth & otherwise vulnerable Defendant’s, particularly in serious multi-handed cases. Reports are often made by them and their families commenting on her empathetic handling of cases, which leaves them feeling thoroughly supported throughout what is an extremely traumatic experience, not just for a suspect, but for many of those around them.
Emma is a member of the LCCSA, Amnesty International & Liberty Lawyers Division and Women in Criminal Law.
Met v Jalloh and Kaba – Croydon County Court (September 2022)
Secured the successful negotiation of a Gangs Injunction, sought by the Metropolitan Police , in respect of high profile musicians within the genre of Drill Music.
R v Omar – Manchester Minshull Crown Court (August 2022)
Privately instructed to defend a male accused of several rapes of a male complainant, which took place in and around Bolton City Centre. This was a sensitive case which invited extensive press coverage. The Defendant was successfully acquitted of all sexual allegations.
R v Calvin Lopoua (2021)
Youth Defendant charged as part of a multi-handed murder, acquitted of murder, convicted of manslaughter;
R v- Glodi Wabelua ( 2019)
Described as a ‘landmark’ slavery case dealing with OCG’s and county lines drug dealing;
R v Ahmed Hassan (2018)
Parsons Green Bombing- Complex Counter Terror prosecution for Attempted Murder;
Andy is an Associate Member of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (ACILEx).
A highly regarded practitioner, Andy has been defending clients accused of criminal offences since 1999.
Over almost a quarter of a century, Andy has represented clients for almost every criminal offence imaginable, ranging from simple driving offences to murder.
Andy is respected for his tactical and logical approach to cases and instils confidence in his clients with his excellent client care and ability to identify and deal with the core issues in a straightforward manner. A good communicator, Andy can explain complex issues to his clients in uncomplicated terms. He is also very well known for his robust and highly effective representation of clients at the Police Station.
Friendly and approachable, he has represented clients from every walk of life, from Surgeons to former Flying Squad Police officers to Union officials to Premiership Football Managers.
Read more via guardian.com
He embarked upon his career in criminal law in 1999 at Kaim Todner solicitors where he was heavily involved in some of the most serious and well-known cases in recent times e.g. Victoria Climbie murder.
Read more via examinerlive.co.uk
At around this time, Andy was also involved in the preparation of the oft cited case of R-v-Hoare and Pierce. The trial concerned the large-scale manufacture of amphetamine and would later became one of the important cases with regards to adverse inferences that may be drawn at trial following silence in police interview.
Read more via casemine.com
Via his links with leader of the Rail Maritime and Transport Union (RMT), Andy was instrumental in the agreement between the firm and the RMT Union to become the official criminal defence solicitors for the Union. The agreement led the firm to represent Union members nationwide for offences including manslaughter (R-v-S Leicester Crown Court, railway manslaughter, Health and safety law).
Read more via bbc.co.uk
Andy then moved on to a respected city firm and assisted in the running of their Appeals department, preparing appeals to the Court of Appeal, reviewing evidence, investigating miscarriages of justice and making representations to the Criminal Cases Review Commission that cases should be sent back for fresh appeals.
Andy went on to work as a consultant at a number of prominent and established firms listed in the top tiers of the Legal 500 and the Chambers & Partners Legal Directory before joining Murray Hughman Solicitors in 2013.
Andy continues to fight tirelessly and fearlessly for all of his clients, as he strives to obtain the best possible outcome, at the very earliest opportunity, in every case that he is instructed on.
In his spare time Andy enjoys a round of golf, running, gardening, as well as following the trials and tribulations of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club.
In 2003 Andy passed the Solicitors Regulation Authority Police Station Accreditation Scheme at the University of Cardiff. In 2005 he obtained a 2:1 Honours degree in Law from the University of East London. In 2011 Andy became an Associate Member of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives.
Since joining Murray Hughman, Andy has been instructed in a large number of serious and high-profile criminal matters, many of which have been reported in the national press.
R v John Leslie – Historic Sexual Assault, Southwark Crown Court
Andy, together with Grant Ambridge of the firm, represented the former Blue Peter presenter who was on trial after being accused of an historic sexual assault when allegedly grabbing a woman’s breast at a Christmas party in Soho in 2008. After just 23 minutes of deliberations the Jury returned a unanimous Not Guilty verdict following the week-long trial. Gudrun Young of 2 Hare Court Chambers instructed Counsel.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v R – Attempted Stranger Rape, Bladed Article, ABH, Woolwich Crown Court
The client was alleged to have held a knife against a woman’s neck whilst walking in the park and told her that he wanted sex and for her to get in the bushes. Andy instructed a psychiatrist to confirm that at the time of the allegations the client was experiencing a psychotic episode, when he was hallucinating and believed the complainant to be his dead mother whom he wanted to give a necklace to by holding it up to her neck. Sufficient doubts were raised, and inconsistencies highlighted in the evidence as to the existence of any knife and what was said by the client to the complainant. The client was acquitted of the offences. Merry Van Woodenberg of 2 Hare Court chambers was instructed Counsel.
R v B – Serious Sexual Assault, Woolwich Crown Court
Andy represented a young man charged with tying up and violently and unnaturally sexually assaulting his former partner. After a contested Trial the client was acquitted. Gavin Irwin of 2 Hare Court was instructed Counsel.
R v R – Child Sexual Trafficking and Exploitation, Nottingham Crown Court
The client was charged together with over 30 co-defendants and was accused of involvement in numerous allegations against a child of serious sexual exploitation, trafficking, rape and the possession of indecent images. The client was acquitted of all charges. Charles Langley of 2 Bedford Row was instructed Counsel.
R v Z – Sexual Activity with a child, Kingston Crown Court
The client, a 19-year-old male was charged with an offence of sexual activity with a child having started a sexual relationship with his girlfriend who was a few weeks shy of her 16th birthday. Following extensive written representations and a protracted battle with the Crown Prosecution Service the Prosecution agreed to offer no evidence against the client and he was acquitted avoiding both a trial and becoming subject to the sexual offender’s register. Emma Goodall QC of Doughty Street Chambers was instructed Counsel
R v S – Conspiracy To Commit Fraud, Inner London Crown Court
The client was alleged to open numerous financial accounts in a variety of false names, using fake and or doctored identity documents in order to acquire substantial overdraft credit from a private bank. Harry Bentley 2 Hare Court was instructed Counsel.
Read more via standard.co.uk
R v W – Fraud, Winchester Crown Court
Trading Standards prosecuted our client for offences under the Fraud Act in relation to overcharging and unnecessary building repairs being performed at numerous properties across Hampshire and Berkshire. Donal Lawlor of 197 Fleet Street Chambers was instructed Counsel.
Read more via dailymail.co.uk
R v C – Running a Fraudulent Business, Mold Crown Court
The client was accused of running a fraudulent business providing sub-standard building work across the UK to the value of over £1 million. Leon Kazakos QC of 2 Hare Court was Instructed Counsel.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v B – Fraud and Money Laundering, St Albans Crown Court
The client was accused of fraud and money laundering. He was alleged to have carried out a series of building work scams against vulnerable adults, the client was acquitted. Leon Kazakos QC of 2 Hare Court Chambers was Instructed Counsel
R v M – Conspiracy to Commit Blackmail and False Imprisonment, Southwark Crown Court
The client was one of Five men who held a wealthy businessman’s son captive for 14 hours and tortured him by pulling out his diamond teeth implants in order to extort cash from him. Leon Kazakos QC 2 Hare Court was instructed Counsel.
Read more via dailymail.co.uk
R v S – Conspiracy to Supply Class A Drugs, Nottingham Crown Court
Andy together with Grant Ambridge of the Firm represented S who was charged with others with supplying large quantities of cocaine between London and Nottingham with S being alleged to have been head of the London operation. Following a 6-week Trial S was unanimously acquitted. Susan Rodham of 5 Kings Bench Walk was instructed Counsel.
Read more via nottinghampost.com
R v C – Modern Day Slavery, Guildford Crown Court
The client was charged with modern day slavery offences, following a thorough investigation by the defence and after obtaining crucial witness statements casting serious doubts on the prosecution case the Prosecution offered no evidence against the client and he was acquitted . Leon Kazakos QC of 2 Hare Court Chambers was instructed Counsel.
Read more via getsurrey.co.uk
R v C – Kidnap and Torture, Norwich Crown Court
The case involved eleven members of the same family who had kidnapped and tortured a couple they had accused of murdering a family member. Tom Buxton of Crucible Chambers was Instructed Counsel.
Read more via bbc.co.uk
R v K – Murder, Central Criminal Court
The case involved the brutal gangland murder of a young man in South London. The client stood trial at the Old Bailey together with his five co-defendants and he was acquitted following submissions by the defence that there was no case to answer. Martin Heslop QC of 2 Hare Court Chambers and Gerwyn Wise of Garden Court Chambers were instructed Counsel.
Read more via theargus.co.uk
R v R – Modern Day Slavery, Aylesbury Crown Court
The client was accused of modern-day slavery offences against two foreign nationals including offences of holding a person in servitude, making threats to kill and subjecting them to violence. Simon Kitchen of Drystone Chambers was instructed Counsel.
Read more via sloughobserver.co.uk
R v M – Handling Stolen Goods, Nottingham Crown Court
The client was accused of handling over £1,000,000 of stolen goods as part of an alleged professional criminal enterprise, the client was acquitted. Oliver Renton of Crucible Chambers was Instructed Counsel.
R v D – Kidnap and Armed Robbery, Bristol Crown Court
The client was accused of kidnap, armed robbery, and possession of a firearm. The client was alleged to have kidnapped a business associate at gunpoint and held him captive in a desolate area of Bristol before robbing him. The client was acquitted. Simon Kitchen of Drystone Chambers was Instructed Counsel.
R v P – Conspiracy to Burgle, Birmingham Crown Court
The client was charged with conspiracy to burgle – following the instruction of defence psychiatrists who deemed the client unfit to stand trial and extensive written representations from the defence, the prosecution reluctantly agreed to offer no evidence against the client without the need for a full hearing and he was formally acquitted.
R v T – Smuggling and Money Laundering
Following a large-scale operation by the National Crime Agency the client was arrested together with a number of successful businessmen on suspicion of money laundering. This was in relation to the illegal smuggling of alcohol and the provision of an alleged money laundering service which included the placement, layering and integration of the proceeds of crime running into millions of pounds. At the time of his arrest the client was found with £50,000 in cash on his person. Following a scathing ruling by the Divisional Court, the Court confirmed that the National Crime Agency had unlawfully obtained search warrants in the case. All proceedings were subsequently discontinued against the client and his co-suspects.
R v M – Witness Intimidation, Wood Green Crown Court
The client was charged with witness intimidation having allegedly made threats to a witness in a serious assault case that they would be shot and murdered if they gave evidence in the case –The client was Acquitted. Donal Lawler of 187 Fleet Street Chambers was instructed counsel.
R v L – Perverting the Course of Justice, Maidstone Crown Court
The client, a vulnerable female, with mental health issues, was alleged to have made two false reports to Police about the theft of her car when in fact her boyfriend had taken the vehicles and crashed them before fleeing the scene. Extensive written representations were made to the Prosecution that it was not in the public interest to continue with the prosecution. The prosecution agreed and offered no evidence against the client, and she was acquitted. avoiding the possibility of a lengthy prison sentence if convicted. Joanne Kane of Sergeants Inn Chambers was instructed Counsel.
R v D – Modern Day Slavery and Perverting the Course of Justice, Mold Crown Court
Following careful scrutiny of the unused material by the defence and our insistence upon service of psychiatric reports with regards to the complainant’s mental health and the subsequent defence representations which followed, the Prosecution reviewed the case and offered no evidence against our client, and he was formally acquitted. Leon Kazakos QC of 2 Hare Court was instructed Counsel.
R v Debbie Hicks – Breach of Coronavirus Regulations and Public Order Act
Andy currently represents Debbie Hicks, a human rights protester against coronavirus lockdown related measures and campaigner for freedom of speech. Debbie currently faces trial for filming at the Gloucester Royal Hospital in December 2020 to highlight the lack of patients being treated. Andy is also representing Debbie in three further separate trials relating to her participation in anti-lockdown protests and political campaigning when coronavirus regulations were in force.
We are arguing on Debbie’s behalf that protest is not, and never has been, completely illegal during the pandemic – even under lockdown and that her continued prosecution amounts to an abuse of process. Andy is currently preparing to argue the cases before the High Court if necessary. The Sun-anti-covid-lockdown-activist-filmed-hospital Hannah Thomas and Merry Van Woodenberg of 2 Hare Court Chambers are instructed Counsel.
Read more via thesun.co.uk
020 7701 8653
1 Long Lane
Website by Reactive Graphics.