CPS General Crime Panel Level 2
Instructing Alex Davidson
To instruct Alex or for any further information please contact our clerks.
Alex prosecutes and defends in a broad range of criminal matters, appearing in the Crown Court, magistrates’ courts, and youth courts. Alex has experience across the spectrum of criminal offences, including serious violence, fraud, drug offences, sexual offences, and motoring offences.
Prior to coming to the Bar, Alex was a lawyer at the Law Commission of England and Wales. He was responsible for writing the Law Commission’s search warrants report, several of the recommendations in which were implemented through amendments to the Criminal Procedure Rules. Alex also contributed to the Law Commission’s reviews of confiscation, anti-money laundering, official secrets legislation, online communications, and sentencing, the latter of which led to the enactment of the Sentencing Act 2020. Alongside working at the Law Commission, Alex was a teaching associate in jurisprudence and legal theory at Queen Mary University of London.
Alex provides case law and legislation updates for Blackstone’s Criminal Practice, giving him a breadth of knowledge in criminal law, evidence, and procedure. Alex has developed a particular expertise in investigatory powers. He has authored articles and case commentaries in leading publications, produced material for the Judicial College, contributed to Blackstone’s Criminal Practice, and is currently writing a practitioners’ text on investigatory powers to be published by Oxford University Press. Alex has delivered talks at legal conferences as well as to the legal profession, medical profession, media organisations, and government departments.
Alex has worked in an advisory capacity to several organisations. He has advised UK government departments in relation to environmental law and terrorism legislation, and the United Nations in connection with terrorism and money laundering investigations. He is currently a legal adviser to the All-Party Parliamentary Group on War Crimes, assisting with its work on the Rwandan Genocide.
Alex also spent time working as a paralegal at Corker Binning where he assisted with cases spanning international corruption, fraud, extradition, and regulatory investigations. These included working on the biggest FCA insider dealing case to date (Operation Tabernula), the biggest HMRC direct tax fraud case to date (Operation Amazon), the SFO’s international corruption investigation into Alstom, and the FCA’s regulatory investigation into Forex manipulation.
Alex has volunteered with a number of organisations. He has successfully represented clients in appeals before the Social Security Tribunal with the Free Representation Unit. Alex has also volunteered with the British Institute of Human Rights, assisting in the provision of human rights training for the Care Quality Commission, and the International State Crime Initiative, assisting with research into the enforcement of human rights by minority groups facing persecution.
Alex has a busy defence practice acting on behalf of individuals and companies charged with a range of offences in the Crown Court, magistrates’ courts, and youth courts. Alex also accepts instructions to prosecute on behalf of the Crown Prosecution Service and Probation Service.
R v LS
LS was charged with an attempted dwelling burglary. The court acceded to a submission of no case to answer after cross-examination of the witnesses drew out inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case.
R v BB
BB was charged with possessing a bladed article in a public place. Full admissions were made in interview. A successful submission of no case to answer was made on the basis that there was insufficient evidence that BB had the knife ‘with him’ for the purpose of the applicable statute.
R v JGM
JGM was charged with resisting a constable in the execution of his duty and did not attend his trial. Following a successful application to exclude JGM’s police interview under section 78 of PACE, the court was persuaded that there was no case to answer on the basis of there being insufficient evidence that the constable exercised his powers lawfully and thus was acting in the execution of his duty.
R v SS
SS was charged with assaulting an emergency worker and refused to leave his cell to attend his trial. The court was persuaded in SS’s absence that there was no case to answer on the basis that the acts of another officer amounted to an intervening act.
R v ND
ND was charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm in a domestic context. Following lengthy cross-examination of the complainant, the court acceded to a submission of no case to answer.
R v SQ
SQ was charged with assault by beating during a protest march and did not attend his trial. There was mobile phone footage capturing the entire incident. After a successful application to admit non-defendant bad character, Alex made a successful submission of no case to answer following concessions made by prosecution witnesses in cross-examination.
R v LH
LH was charged with stalking his ex-partner over a period of 20 months. Alex made a successful submission of no case to answer on the basis that, following concessions made by the witnesses, there was insufficient evidence to prove that the course of conduct pursued amounted to stalking.
R v HS
HS pleaded guilty to inflicting grievous bodily harm without intent at his first appearance. The offence involved a group attack in which multiple facial lacerations were caused. The magistrates’ court was persuaded to retain jurisdiction and impose a suspended sentence order with no requirements.
Alex has a particular interest in fraud and financial crime. He worked on several SFO, FCA, and HMRC investigations as a paralegal at Corker Binning. Alex also contributed to numerous law reform projects at the Law Commission which intersected with financial crime, including anti-money laundering and confiscation.
Alex regularly writes on financial crime topics. He has written case reports for the Lloyd’s Law Reports: Financial Crime and the Criminal Law Review on topics including fraud offences, corporate criminal liability, Unexplained Wealth Orders, Deferred Prosecution Agreements, and SFO investigatory powers. He also provided legal research for the latest edition of Insider Dealing: Law and Practice (Oxford University Press, 2020).
R v MP
MP was charged with fraud by false representation. The Crown offered no evidence after issues relating to the provenance and continuity of evidence were highlighted.
Alex has appeared at several stages of confiscation proceedings. His experience of the confiscation regime is supplemented by his work contributing to the reform of Part 2 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 at the Law Commission of England and Wales.
London Borough of X v X Ltd
Alex drafted written advice and appeared on behalf of a company against whom confiscation was sought following guilty pleas to numerous environmental offences.
R v VP
Alex represented VP during confiscation proceedings following his conviction for several fraud offences which featured losses totalling £440,000. The benefit figure determined was considerably below the alleged value of the fraud offences. The criminal lifestyle provisions were not applied.
Alex has experience representing individuals in all manner of road traffic offences, including those which feature technical arguments and expert evidence. Alex’s clients have included sport stars and high net-worth individuals.
Alex is responsible for providing case law and legislation updates to the road traffic offences section of Blackstone’s Criminal Practice. He therefore has a detailed knowledge of the law governing road traffic offences, including procedure, evidence, and sentencing.
R v RH
RH was charged with driving whilst unfit. The court was persuaded that there was no case to answer after cross-examination of the healthcare professional drew out shortcomings in the Field Impairment Test.
R v SB
SB was charged with drink driving. The court acquitted SB following a trial after Alex successfully persuaded the court that the reading was caused by post-driving alcohol consumption, thereby rebutting the statutory assumption under section 15(2) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
R v SM
Special reasons were successfully argued on behalf of SM, a businessman who pleaded guilty to offences of driving whilst uninsured and permitting another to drive whilst uninsured. No points were endorsed on SM’s licence and disqualification was avoided.
R v EO
Exceptional hardship was successfully argued on behalf of EO, a sports coach, who required his car to travel to work. No period of disqualification was imposed.
R v JM
Exceptional hardship was successfully argued on behalf on JM, an entrepreneur who required his car to visit clients. No period of disqualification was imposed.
R v ES
Exceptional hardship was successfully argued on behalf of ES, a business owner who required his car to travel to work. No period of disqualification was imposed.