Anand Beharrylal

Year of Call: 1997  


Overview


Anand is a highly experienced general common law barrister practising criminal and civil law.

His criminal practice included prosecution and he now defends in the full range of the most serious and complex criminal cases. These include homicide, sexual offences (inclusive of child sexual offences, procuring abortions etc), firearms offences, drug importation / supply and other serious organised crime.

Business crime is a specific specialist area of Anand’s practice covering serious fraud, corruption, bribery, misconduct in public office, money laundering and confiscation proceedings. Related civil law work includes civil fraud, freezing of assets, detention of cash, condemnation proceedings, restraint proceedings and judicial review / public law proceedings.

Anand’s civil practice includes judicial review / public law, clinical negligence, commercial / company law, property law, habeas corpus for those unlawfully detained, wasted costs orders made or contemplated against solicitors, and professional negligence / misconduct of solicitors and doctors.

Anand’s practice has a Caribbean dimension. He practises in Trinidad & Tobago in both criminal (inclusive of capital murder) and civil law. He is also instructed in advisory and appellate work before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in both criminal and civil appeals from Trinidad and Tobago and other Commonwealth Caribbean territories.

Appeals


Anand has extensive experience in appellate work and practises at the highest levels. In criminal cases he appears in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) and in both criminal and civil cases he appears before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Cases

  • Republic Bank v Lochan & Another [2015] UKPC 26; All ER (D) 93 (Jun): Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Land – Possession of land appeal in Privy Council – Mortgage fraud – Expert survey evidence – Whether new claim can be raised in Reply where related to claim – Adverse possession – Doctrine of Priorities – Conflicting deeds of conveyance.
  • Regina v AJR [2013] 2 Cr.App.R. 12, CA; [2013] 2 F.L.R. 1383; Archbold 2015 at 19-353: England & Wales – Restraining Order – Whether special verdict amounts to an acquittal for the purposes of statute where the latter did not so provide – Whether criteria for making restraining order fulfilled – Whether restraining order for 5 years reasonable.
  • Calix v Attorney General [2013] UKPC 15; [2013] WLR (D) 219; TLR 16th July 2013: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – False Imprisonment – Quantum – Good character – Whether good character has an objective value – Proper assessment of damages as to reputation where successful appellant member of lower income bracket.
  • Regina v Brock [2010] EWCA Crim 1041: England & Wales – Attempted Robbery – Commission of offence at the behest of others of younger age – Low IQ – Evidence of mental age of 11 years 4 months not available at sentencing – Sentencing Guidelines for Robbery.
  • Panday v Espinet [2009] CV2007-04133: Trinidad & Tobago – Application to recuse for apparent bias – Judicial officer (Magistrate) hearing evidence and giving adverse ruling in committal proceedings – Evidence the same as evidence to be heard in pending summary trial – Whether Magistrate wrong not to recuse – Whether circumstances give rise to apparent bias and breach of constitutional rights – Judicial review.
  • Rambharose v Bovell [2009] UKPC 7: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Negligence and Estoppel by Representation of Fact – Whether vicarious liability could be a defence to an action for negligence against employee where he was found liable based on his admitted responsibility at the material time – Relevance and weight to be attached to letters written many months after critical representation made.
  • Panday v Virgil [2008] UKPC 24; T.L.R. 11th April 2008; [2008] WLR (D) 102; [2008] 3 W.L.R. 296, PC; Archbold 2015 at 7-112: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Whether finding of apparent bias in first trial is a bar to re-trial – Limitation period for repealed summary offence – Abuse of process re conduct of the executive – Abuse of process re age, state of health and inability to recover defence costs – Discretion to order costs in the appeal.
  • Lawrence v Poorah [2008] UKPC 21; Blackstone’s Civil Practice 2014 at 24.24: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Equitable doctrines of undue influence and unconscionable bargain – Sole issue before High Court whether donor of sound mind, memory and understanding – Whether Court of Appeal entitled to reverse decision of High Court on grounds not pleaded and for which permission to raise new grounds neither sought nor granted – Whether doctrine of unconscionable bargain applicable to gifts.
  • Regina v Deyemi & Edwards [2007] EWCA Crim 2060; [2008] 1 Cr.App.R 25; (2008) 172 J.P. 137; [2008] Crim LR 327; Archbold 2015 at 24-30: England & Wales – Possession of a Prohibited Weapon – Definition of possession – Concept of strict liability – Change in legal climate regarding offence of strict liability following the decisions of B v DPP [2000] 2 AC 428, R v K [2001] 3 All ER 897 and R v G [2004] 1 AC 1034 – Whether concept of strict liability affected by Articles 6 and 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
  • Regina v Drew & Others; Blackstone’s Criminal Practice 2008 at B3.208; Blackstone’s 2009 at B3.216: England & Wales – Conspiracy to Control Prostitution for Gain – Definition of “control” – Whether includes element of compulsion and/or power to exert influence over another person’s behaviour – Applicability of Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 1995) per Rose LJ on “control” for previous law.
  • Panday v Virgil [2007] MAG. APP. NO. 75 OF 2006: Trinidad & Tobago – Knowingly making a False Declaration – Appearance of bias on the part of a judicial officer (Magistrate) – International judicial standards.
  • Regina v Willis [2007] EWCA Crim 79: England & Wales – Conspiracy to Steal and Assault With Intent To Rob – Application of Sentencing Council Guidelines for Robbery – Young Offender – Departing from Guidelines – Lawfulness of concurrent sentences.
  • Regina v Crandle & Cullen [2006] EWCA Crim 2663: England & Wales – GBH With Intent – Bad character notice – Lateness of service – Procedure for application – Application of Criminal Procedure Rules – Procedure for dealing with written jury question – Prosecution counsel going beyond scope of jury question in cross-examination – Sentencing range for GBH With Intent where no disabling or permanent injuries.
  • Regina v Green [2005] EWCA Crim 2513; (2005) 149 S.J.L.B. 1350, CA; Archbold 2015 at 4-418: England & Wales – Murder and Manslaughter – Joint enterprise and intent – Role of principal and secondary – Manner in which indictment framed and case advanced to jury – Final evidential landscape – Inconsistent verdicts – Value of written aide-memoire in complex cases – Form of summing-up in complex cases.
  • Campbell v Hamlet (as executrix) [2005] UKPC 19; (2005) 66 WIR 346; [2005] 3 All ER 1116: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Attorney at law – Disciplinary Proceedings – Allegation tantamount to criminal offence – Distinction between civil and criminal standard – Standard of proof to be applied – Delay of 8 years.
  • Ramsarran v Attorney General [2005] UKPC 8; (2005) 66 WIR 280: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Constitution – Human rights and fundamental freedoms – Arrest and detention of person on warrant of commitment for non-payment of fine – Police refusal to allow detainee to communicate with lawyer – Whether contravention of constitutional rights.
  • Attorney General v Ramanoop [2005] UKPC 15; (2005) 66 WIR 334: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Constitution – Human rights and fundamental freedoms – Unlawful arrest and detention of appellant – Appellant assaulted by police constable during arrest and detention – Whether entitled to additional award for gravity of constitutional infringement.
  • Boodoosingh v Ramnarace [2005] UKPC 9; (2005) 66 WIR 287: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Assault and battery (Civil) – Fresh evidence – Perjury in judicial proceedings – Judgment tainted – Appeal to set aside whole judgment – Dismissal of appeal – Whether if perjury established, setting aside whole judgment necessarily proper remedy.

Business Crime


Anand has substantial experience in Business Crime and Property Law. This has included mortgage fraud, equitable fraud, boundary disputes, possession, conveyancing and adverse possession.

Cases

  • Republic Bank v Lochan & Another [2015] UKPC 26; All ER (D) 93 (Jun): Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Land – Possession of land appeal in Privy Council – Mortgage fraud – Expert survey evidence – Whether new claim can be raised in Reply where related to claim – Adverse possession – Doctrine of Priorities – Conflicting deeds of conveyance.
  • Lawrence v Poorah [2008] UKPC 21; Blackstone’s Civil Practice 2014 at 24.24: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Equitable doctrines of undue influence and unconscionable bargain – Sole issue before High Court whether donor of sound mind, memory and understanding – Whether Court of Appeal entitled to reverse decision of High Court on grounds not pleaded and for which permission to raise new grounds neither sought nor granted – Whether doctrine of unconscionable bargain applicable to gifts.

Confiscation


Anand has extensive experience in confiscation. He is regularly instructed in contested high value confiscation proceedings since the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 became law. His advice is often sought prior to related criminal proceedings as related issues often arise during criminal trials that require early anticipatory preparation.

Cases

  • R v Ghafoor: Confiscation proceedings in high value claim involving VAT, Corporation Tax, Excise Duty arising from multiple companies, directorships and accounts. These proceedings are ongoing.
  • R v Iqbal: Confiscation proceedings in high value claim involving gains from a fraudulent scheme involving academic undergraduate tuition and Colleges. The prosecution originally sought in excess of £1 million from the director. Following detailed analysis of the financial material resulting in concessions, legal argument and negotiation, the order was agreed in the total sum of £228,100.
  • R v Chellerpermal: Confiscation proceedings in high value claim involving VAT, Corporation Tax, Minimum Wage and Employment Law e.g. as to provision of accommodation in the course of employment. The prosecution originally sought in excess of £1.9 million from two directors. Following detailed analysis of the financial material resulting in concessions, successful legal argument and negotiation, the order was agreed in the total sum of £225,000 from each director.
  • R v Corda: Confiscation proceedings in high value claim involving Conspiracy to Supply Class A Drugs. Following detailed analysis of the financial material and successful legal argument a minimal payment was agreed.
  • CDC v Fabb: Confiscation proceedings in high value claim involving counterfeit / pirate films, games and other media. Following detailed analysis of the financial material and successful legal argument a minimal payment was agreed.

Crime


Anand has extensive experience defending in serious and complex corruption cases. His knowledge and experience of commercial and company law is an asset when advising individuals and companies alike both pre-charge and pre-trial. His attention to detail, especially in relation to complicated financial transactions and company structuring, is widely regarded and he is widely sought after as leading junior counsel in both criminal and related civil cases.

Cases

  • R v Khan & Others: Conspiracy to Commit Misconduct in Public Office. This conspiracy involved bribery, a serving customs officer, excise fraud re importation of alcohol, complex modus operandi, complex company structuring and financial evidence and circumventing HMRC approval procedures re WOWGR and MG. Anand was instructed to lead for the second defendant company director and successfully cross-examined two financial experts resulting in substantial concessions favourable to the second defendant.
  • R v Chellerpermal & Another: Human Trafficking for Exploitation and Employing Illegal Immigrants. Anand was instructed for the second defendant company director in this complex exploitation by deception involving care homes for the elderly and infirm. The case involved a successful complex legal argument in relation to the issues of constructive knowledge, the lack of threat or use of force and employment law as to the minimum wage.
  • Virgil v Panday (Trinidad & Tobago): Corruption and alleged breaches of the Integrity in Public Life Act. Anand was instructed as the led junior in a long running case alleging corruption of a former Prime Minister. The first trial was followed by a successful appeal involving the apparent bias of the then Chief Magistrate, with severe implications for the then Chief Justice where improper interference was alleged. At the re-trial the defendant was acquitted.
  • State v Galbaransingh & Others (Trinidad & Tobago): Receiving Corrupt Payment and Aiding and Abetting in Receiving Corrupt Payment. Anand is instructed as sole junior in this long running complex bribery and corruption case involving the construction of Piarco International Airport for the third and fourth defendants. The case involves complex issues of the required essential knowledge, role and involvement of multiple public bodies and companies, and the decision making matrix for determining tenders.

Fraud


Anand has extensive experience defending in serious and complex fraud cases. His knowledge and experience of commercial and company law is an asset to advising individuals and companies alike both pre-charge and pre-trial. His attention to detail, especially in relation to complicated financial transactions, is widely regarded as second as none and he is widely sought after as leading counsel in such cases.

Cases

  • R v Okunsanye & Others: Serious and complex £3m fraud against Wonga. The fraud involved the circumventing of online security procedures for obtaining payday loans using multiple false identities. Anand was instructed for the second defendant in a cut-throat defence involving the first and third defendants.
  • VOSA v Wills & Banham: Serious and complex MOT fraud. This fraud involved the owner/manager and an employee circumventing MOT computer testing protocols. Anand was instructed for the first defendant and successfully led a complex abuse of process argument involving VOSA’s prosecution policy and practice, the application of the evidential stage test, contradictory disciplinary findings, failure to disclose those findings and the application of the ex post facto principle.

International


Anand is a member of the bar of Trinidad and Tobago and has practised in that jurisdiction since 2001. His practice there encompasses both criminal and civil work with recent emphasis on general common law actions, medical / professional negligence, judicial review and constitutional law. His services are regularly sought by local attorneys for High Court trials, appeals to the Court of Appeal and appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council based in London.

Cases

  • Republic Bank (Trinidad) v Lochan & Another: Land – Possession of land appeal in Privy Council – Mortgage fraud – Expert survey evidence – Whether new claim can be raised in Reply where related to claim – Adverse possession – Doctrine of Priorities – Conflicting deeds of conveyance.
  • SH v Government of India: Contract – Alleged breach of contract for legal services in the High Court (London) – International arbitration – Status of standard terms of business – Contract terms contained in letter as basis for retainer – Whether letter to prevail in the event of conflict with standard terms – Drafting defence and counterclaim
  • State v Galbaransingh & Others: Receiving a Corrupt Payment and Aiding and Abetting in Receiving a Corrupt Payment – Knowledge of essential matters – Actual role in participation – Involvement of State or public body – Decision making matrix for determining tender for construction of Piarco International Airport (Trinidad) by a private company – Sufficiency of evidence and proper inferences

Judicial Review


Anand has substantial experience in judicial review in both criminal and civil cases. His experience includes challenging decisions of Magistrates’ and Crown Courts as well as government departments and other public bodies exercising quasi-judicial functions.

Cases

  • R v Secretary of State for Transport ex p Marathon: Judicial review of the Secretary of State for failing to take regulatory action for breaches of a statutory instrument involving environmental protection in the motor vehicle industry.
  • Oak Furniture Land v ASA Adjudicators: Judicial review of advertising review body for upholding a complaint in relation to advertising standards when their own Code of Practice did not support such conclusion and ran counter to it.
  • Panday v Espinet (Trinidad & Tobago): Judicial review of Magistrate’s decision refusing to recuse herself in a corruption case on the grounds of apparent bias.

Murder & Manslaughter


Anand has extensive experience defending in serious and complex murder cases. One of his earliest notable murder trials was in 2003 where following the trial Anand was instructed to replace a distinguished leading Silk for the appeal and secured an acquittal on a charge of murder. From his first years of criminal practice Anand has been instructed in multiple defendant cases involving extreme violence. For almost twenty years he has been regularly instructed to defend in such cases and is now regularly instructed in homicide cases both as a leading and led junior. Has vast experience in relation to the law on police interviews, identification, complex cell-site evidence, DNA, fingerprint, blood spatter, gun-shot residue and unusual medical conditions.

Cases

  • R v Mahdi: Murder involving complex medical evidence. Anand was instructed as led junior. The case involved complex expert cardio-thoracic evidence, expert blood chemical evidence and causation evidence. This required forensic cross-examination of prosecution expert evidence and amending the defence statement in light of the new expert evidence. Following a trial and re-trial the defendant was acquitted of murder and manslaughter.
  • R v Radpaul: Attempted Murder of an infant. Anand was instructed as sole counsel. The case involved complex psychiatric evidence and a complex legal argument in relation to the law on insanity. Following trial the defendant was found not guilty by reason of insanity.
  • R v Toto & Others: Attempted Murder resulting in permanent disability. Anand was instructed as sole counsel. The case involved complex cell-site and gunshot residue evidence, as well as alibi. The case also involved legally complex issues in relation to related proceedings for possession of the firearm. Following trial and appeal the defendant was acquitted.
  • R v Mohammed (Trinidad & Tobago): Capital Murder involving joint enterprise. Anand was instructed as sole counsel and formulated a complex successful legal argument to quash the indictment post-committal on the basis of insufficient evidence.

Professional Discipline


Anand has varied experience in professional discipline work, which encompasses both discipline and professional negligence. In this regard he has advised and appeared in high value claims involving serious misconduct or negligence.

Cases

  • R v Dr S: Doctor charged with offences before the GMC involving issues of probity. Anand represented the Doctor where the act was not disputed. After calling evidence and making legal submissions a minimal penalty was imposed.
  • R v Dr R: Doctor accused of multiple road traffic offences. Anand represented the Doctor where following legal argument the prosecution conceded that the charges were duplicitous or unnecessary and only one charge was appropriate.
  • Campbell v Hamlet (as executrix) [2005] UKPC 19; (2005) 66 WIR 346; [2005] 3 All ER 1116: Trinidad & Tobago (Privy Council) – Attorney at law – Disciplinary Proceedings – Allegation tantamount to criminal offence – Distinction between civil and criminal standard – Standard of proof to be applied – Delay of 8 years.

Serious Sexual Offences


Anand has extensive experience defending in serious sexual offence cases. These have included multiple defendant rape cases, child rape and sexual assault cases (including in family settings), multi-handed grooming, trafficking and prostitution cases. In recent years, as these types of cases have increased they have become a more prominent feature of Anand’s practice.

Cases

  • R v P: Anand was instructed as sole counsel. The case involved DNA evidence, adult corroborative evidence and breach of trust.
  • R v G: Rape and sexual assault of children. Anand was instructed as sole counsel. The case involved historical allegations against a father his children. Following sensitive and restricted cross-examination of children and more robust cross-examination of adult parental witnesses the case was discontinued.
  • R v IF & Others: Multi-handed grooming, trafficking, rape and sexual assault case. Anand was instructed as sole counsel for the third defendant. The case involved multiple defendants alleging trafficking for sexual exploitation. Following sensitive and restricted cross-examination, challenge to cell-site, phone data and social media evidence the defendant was acquitted.
  • R v C: Anand was instructed as sole counsel. The case involved allegations against an elderly great-grandfather. Following sensitive and restricted cross-examination of the child and robust cross-examination of the parents a financial motive was identified. The case also involved complex expert evidence on sexual/hymen injuries for the prosecution and the defence, defence expert evidence on erectile dysfunction and causation. The defendant was acquitted.

Memberships


  • Commonwealth Lawyers Association
  • Constitutional & Administrative Bar Association
  • Criminal Bar Association
  • Law Association of Trinidad & Tobago
  • Professional Negligence Bar Association
  • Property Bar Association

Qualifications


  • LLM (Lond)
  • LLB Hons