Callum Munday represents clients in the Crown Court, magistrates’ courts, and youth courts on a daily basis.
Callum regularly appears in a wide range of criminal proceedings for offences involving serious violence (including domestic violence), firearms and offensive weapons, supplying drugs, robbery, burglary, and other dishonesty offences – as well as motoring offences and offences of a sexual nature.
In addition to his criminal practice, Callum has represented a number of clients in confiscation proceedings brought under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, and accepts instructions in enforcement cases, and other quasi-criminal matters.
Callum also has a growing practice in regulatory law and matters of professional discipline. Additionally, he has represented clients, and accepts instructions in inquest proceedings.
Callum is Public Access qualified and accepts regular instructions directly to represent clients facing all types of criminal proceedings, as well as confiscation matters. He has also represented clients in inquest proceedings on a Direct Access basis.
If you would like to instruct Callum on a Direct Access basis, please contact the clerks.
Callum accepts regular instructions to prosecute on behalf of the Crown Prosecution Service and Probation Service. He conducts all types of hearing in the Crown Court and magistrates’ courts, including trials, sentencing hearings, and preliminary hearings, as well as appeals against conviction and sentence.
Callum also accepts instructions to prosecute in proceedings brought by local and highways authorities.
Callum frequently represents clients in the Crown Court, magistrates’ courts, and youth courts for all types of hearing. He has particular experience in trials and sentencing hearings, as well as bail applications, first appearances, and applications relating to motoring offences such as exceptional hardship and special reasons. Callum also has extensive experience in conducting appeals against conviction and sentence.
Callum defends clients charged with all manner of serious offences, including fraud, robbery, the supply of drugs, weapons offences, serious assaults, dangerous driving, and sexual assault.
R v TL
TL was accused of assaulting his ex-partner on two separate occasions. Callum was able to expose inconsistencies in the complainant’s account, and TL was acquitted.
R v CB
CB was a youth, charged with two offences of ABH and two of possessing an offensive weapon. Callum’s cross-examination and legal submissions led to the Court accepting a submission of no case to answer in relation to two charges, and CB’s ultimate acquittal of the remaining offences.
R v NN
NN was charged with a serious assault on another woman in a nightclub, by smashing a glass into her face. After cross-examining the complainant and her two friends, Callum was able to secure NN’s acquittal.
R v KH
KH was accused of violently assaulting his partner after a night out. Callum was able to secure KH’s acquittal after cross-examining the independent witness who saw the incident.
R v KM
KM was a youth charged, along with two others, of knife and firearms offences, as well as aggravated vehicle-taking. KM was acquitted of possessing one knife and, despite the sentencing guidelines, Callum was able to secure a non-custodial sentence.
R v JS
JS was a youth who pleaded guilty to supplying Class A and B drugs, possessing a machete, and ABH. Callum was able to secure a non-custodial sentence.
R v SW
SW was accused of harassing his previous partner. After cross-examination of the complainant and both her parents, SW was acquitted after trial.
R v JJ
JJ was charged with burglary and the prosecution proceeded to trial in his absence. Nonetheless, Callum was able to persuade the Court that there was insufficient evidence, and JJ was acquitted.
Callum regularly accepts instructions to represent clients charged with all motoring offences – from speeding to dangerous driving, as well as driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
Callum has particular experience in trials, as well as exceptional hardship and special reasons applications.
R v JO
JO appealed against a decision of the magistrates’ court to disqualify him from driving. After Callum’s submissions on exceptional hardship, the Crown Court decided to remove the driving ban.
R v BS & JE
BS and JE faced a trial for racing their cars up and down a stretch of dual carriageway, which was all on video. After cross-examination of the police witness, and extensive submissions on the law, both BS and JE were acquitted.
R v EG
EG had accumulated 12 penalty points and was a ‘totter’. However, Callum was able to persuade the magistrates not to disqualify EG and he kept his driving licence.
R v PD
PD was facing a trial for using his mobile phone whilst driving. Callum’s submissions on the law resulted in the prosecution dropping the case before any evidence was even called.
R v MT
MT was a new driver who pleaded guilty to driving over double the speed limit. Callum was able to persuade the Court to impose a short 14-day disqualification rather than revoke MT’s licence.
R v BO
BO was charged with drink driving. After cross-examination of the police officers, Callum was able to secure BO’s acquittal by demonstrating the intoximeter procedures had not been followed correctly.
Callum has represented a number of clients in confiscation proceedings brought under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, as well as associated proceedings.
R v CJ
CJ had pleaded guilty to supplying Class A drugs and was being pursued in confiscation proceedings under POCA 2002. Callum was able to negotiate the ‘benefit figure’ down by over £125,000.
Callum accepts instructions to act on behalf of professionals facing disciplinary proceedings brought by their regulatory bodies. Callum also accepts instructions to act on behalf of a number of regulatory bodies themselves.
Callum has been instructed numerous times to ‘case-present’ on behalf of the Nursing and Midwifery Council in serious cases, and has conducted a number of substantive ‘fitness to practice’ hearings. He also frequently acts in interim and substantive order review hearings.