Pump Court

Stan Reiz KC

Call 2001
Silk 2020
Recorder 2018

“Stan is one of the best junior silks around. His strategic thinking is second to very few, and he continuously gets amazing results. He is a calm, methodical advocate, and every word lands with a punch.”

Legal 500 2024 (Fraud)

"An expert in his field and a master of his craft, Stan Reiz is not only exceptionally knowledgeable but graceful and firm in his approach."

Chambers & Partners 2024 (Crime)

"Stan is outstanding. He has an innate ability to connect with clients, with family and equally with witnesses."

Chambers & Partners 2024 (Financial Crime)

  • Criminal Bar Association
  • Fraud Lawyers Association
Directory Quotes
  • “Stan is outstanding. He has an innate ability to connect with clients, with family and equally with witnesses.” Chambers & Partners 2024 (Financial Crime)
  • “An expert in his field and a master of his craft, Stan Reiz is not only exceptionally knowledgeable but graceful and firm in his approach.” Chambers & Partners 2024 (Crime)
  • “He’s got an amazing presence that captivates the jury.” Chambers & Partners 2024 (Crime)
  • “He formulates finely structured and reasoned legal arguments – he’s just phenomenal.” Chambers & Partners 2024 (Crime)
  • “Stan is a brilliant trial barrister. He is excellent with clients and gets great results.” Chambers & Partners 2023 (Financial Crime)
  • “He navigates his clients through choppy waters, and even when facing the most adverse of circumstances he remains calm and reassuring.” Chambers & Partners 2023 (Crime)
  • “Stan is a mastermind. Intelligent and quick to respond on his feet in the courtroom. You will struggle to compete with his advocacy.” Legal 500 2023 (Fraud)
  • “Stan is a formidable advocate with a very soothing tone, which makes him stand out.”  Legal 500 2023 (Crime)
  • “A formidable advocate who is well-respected and well-regarded in the industry. A top-drawer silk who is unfazed under pressure. He is a great tactician.” Legal 500 2022 (Fraud: Crime)
  • “Stan has a methodical approach to analysing evidence. He is able to explain the law with such ease to clients and jurors which makes him so desirable to instruct as he will get results. Stan’s legal knowledge is exceptional meaning that he is well respected by Judges and other professionals in the field.” Legal 500 2022 (Crime)
  • “A highly intellectual barrister. He engages well with clients and the jury and is well respected among the judiciary.” Chambers & Partners 2022 (Crime)
  • “He has a very nice and calm manner in court.” “He has presence in court and good tactical awareness. He is also a very good cross-examiner.” Chambers & Partners 2022 (Financial Crime)
  • “He is one of the most formidable advocates out there. He is well respected and when he speaks in the courtroom everyone listens. He is very persuasive. His knowledge of the law is extraordinary and his client care magnificent. He works tirelessly to achieve the best results for his client.” Legal 500 2021 (Fraud: Crime)
  • “Stan is an amazing and underrated talent. A very smooth advocate.” Legal 500 2021 (Crime)
  • “Possesses notable expertise in cases concerning allegations of money laundering and fraud. He earns praise both for his ability to handle highly detailed cases and for his calm manner in court. He is very level-headed and meticulous. He is a very experienced and sought-after trial advocate. Stan works tirelessly for his clients to find the right solution.” Chambers & Partners 2021 (Financial Crime)
  • “A noteworthy new silk who routinely acts in organised crime cases involving drugs importation. His practice also includes murder and manslaughter cases amidst the usual diet of general criminal work. A calm and charismatic counsel who has a strong work ethic and a fantastic manner with clients.” Chambers & Partners 2021 (Crime)
  • “Possesses notable expertise in cases concerning allegations of money laundering and fraud. He earns praise both for his ability to handle highly detailed cases and for his calm manner in court. Utterly unflappable and always entirely on top of his papers. He’s meticulously thorough and very good with clients. Stan radiates confidence and he’s the kind of person judges listen to as he’s all over the facts in a case.” Chambers & Partners 2020 (Financial Crime)
  • “He exudes calm confidence, assuredly navigating cases through sometimes choppy waters.” Legal 500 2020 (Fraud)
  • “He has the rare ability to never be fazed by the hurdles faced in a criminal trial.” Legal 500 2020 (Crime)
  • “He has the intellect and ability to go shoulder to shoulder with anyone out there.” Legal 500 2019 (Fraud)
  • “He has a pleasant and charming manner both in the courtroom and with clients.” Legal 500 2019 (Crime)
  • “An experienced defence practitioner.” Legal 500 2018 (Fraud)
  • “His practice straddles drugs and fraud.” Legal 500 2017 (Fraud)

Instructing Stan Reiz KC

To instruct Stan or for any further information please contact our clerks.

Clerk: John Grimmer
Telephone: +44 (0)7776 154 664
Email: Click here

Stan Reiz KC is ranked by Chambers & Partners and Legal 500 2024 as a leader in the practice areas of Fraud and General Crime. He is regularly instructed to defend in cases involving allegations of murder, manslaughter, the large-scale importation of controlled drugs, firearms, fraud and money laundering.

Mr Reiz KC represents high net worth individuals and clients who are in the public eye such as substantial companies, athletes and musicians, as well as professionals being investigated by regulatory authorities.

Mr Reiz KC’s recent cases include representing: the alleged organiser of the highly publicised murder in Liverpool of a young woman shot in her own home with a Skorpion sub-machine gun;  a man acquitted of murder following a group attack in a city centre internet café; a man acquitted of the murder of a ‘gardener’ killed during a robbery of a cannabis factory; a man acquitted of the murder of a teenager following a collision between a car and two motorbikes; a company director facing a private prosecution for an alleged £80 million fraud and an interested party in confiscation proceedings associated with £20 million held in crypto currency.

Having been called to the Bar of the Cayman Islands, Mr Reiz also represented a defendant who was acquitted of murder and wounding in the Grand Court of Grand Cayman following a double stabbing at a bar in which one man was killed and another seriously wounded.

Practice Areas


Stan Reiz KC’s practice includes defending in a wide spectrum of financial crime cases including:

  • The mis-selling of investments using ‘boiler rooms’;
  • Offences under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and the Financial Services Act 2012;
  • Large scale commercial and residential mortgage fraud;
  • Tax fraud by corporate bodies and individuals;
  • Advance fee fraud;
  • International money laundering arrangements; and
  • Breaches of the Money Laundering Regulations by businesses.

He has represented defendants prosecuted by the Serious Fraud Office, the Financial Conduct Authority, Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs and the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. Stan has advised clients from other jurisdictions on the Bribery Act and the Proceeds of Crime Act.

Notable Cases

  • Royal Mail v M: Company director charged with conspiracy to defraud Royal Mail of nearly £80 million over a 9 year period using a network of companies offering postal services to businesses by mail consolidation.
  • R v S: Represented the alleged head of an organised crime group accused of conspiring to evade millions of pounds in duty on tobacco by smuggling cigarettes into the UK using a legitimate food importation business as a cover.
  • R v C: Represented a doctor who admitted defrauding a healthcare company responsible for managing 16 GP surgeries. C was a director of the company and had access to the bank account. Over a 6 week period, he lost in excess of £1.1 million of company money on gambling websites. C pleaded guilty and received a reduced sentence of 3 years 4 months for an offence which was described as a breach of a high degree of trust. He avoided confiscation proceedings as having obtained early legal advice, C succeeded in recovering the money he lost from the gambling companies.
  • R v X: Successfully represented a high net worth property developer acquitted of Cheating the Public Revenue out of millions of pounds in income and capital gains tax. Three years after arrest and one year after charge, detailed representations on the law and the strength of the evidence led to the prosecution offering no evidence.
  • R v M: Lead counsel for company director accused of fraudulently marketing investments in coloured diamonds.
  • R v M Lead counsel for company director accused of conspiring to commit fraud by promoting a fraudulent payday loans investment scheme.
  • R v C: Shadow director alleged to have operated a 15 million international money laundering arrangement by abusing his position as the de facto trustee of numerous charities.
  • R v S: Defendant acquitted of being concerned in the evasion of £3.4 million of duty on imported alcohol.
  • R v D: Director of a consumer goods company acquitted of fraudulently evading VAT, corporation tax and fraud.
  • R v M: Accountant prosecuted for a £5 million debt collection fraud on high net worth associates.
  • FCA v M: Defended a managing director of a PLC and practicing doctor, in a case brought by the FCA for the alleged mis-selling of shares in a primary healthcare company operating in the UK and Dubai.
  • R v S: Lead counsel for a shadow director accused of orchestrating an £8 million investment fraud associated with the sale of rare earth metals.
  • R v C: Highly publicised case in which a former model was accused of committing a £1.2 million ‘audacious’ property fraud with her mother.
  • R v L: Acted for a defendant accused of conspiracy to defraud Barclays of £40 million. Following successful negotiations with the Crown two months into the trial, the conspiracy charge was dropped. The defendant was given a suspended sentence for a lesser offence and was not made subject to confiscation proceedings.
  • R v G: Mortgage broker charged with a multi-million pound conspiracy to commit mortgage fraud involving approximately 80 properties.
  • R v S: VAT inspector and her husband accused of cheating the public revenue and mortgage fraud. Defendant
  • acquitted of the majority of offences charged.
  • R v G: Represented one of 15 defendants accused of involvement in a £35 million international money laundering arrangement.
  • R v M: Director of an escrow company accused of breaching the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 bytransferring approximately £10 million from MTIC fraud to third parties.
  • R v E: Defendant accused of laundering the proceeds of a multi-million pound advance fee fraud. The case was prosecuted following an investigation by the FBI in the United States of America.
  • R v A: Company director acquitted of conspiring to defraud HBOS.
  • R v S: Multi-million pound fine wine investment fraud.

Stan regularly acts for defendants accused of offences connected to serious organised crime such as large scale conspiracies to import controlled drugs, the commercial supply of firearms and armed robbery.

Notable Cases

  • R v D: Represented one of four defendants charged with conspiracy to supply 100kgs of class A drugs. The evidence in the case principally comprised messages obtained following the infiltration of EncroChat by the French Gendarmerie.
  • R v G: Represented the first of seven defendants in a case involving the large scale supply of class A drugs over a 3 year period. The evidence relied upon by the prosecution included EncroChat messages.
  • R v H: Lead counsel for the organiser of a ‘Breaking Bad’ cocaine smuggling operation which resulted in 350kgs of cocaine being imported into the UK. The drugs entered the UK on lorries operated by a sham poultrydistribution company. The conspirators used sophisticated anti-detection equipment including encrypted handsets and ‘spoofer’ phone technology.
  • R v C: Businessman acquitted of blackmailing an employee.
  • R v S: Conspiracy to import in excess of 100kgs of high purity cocaine into Heathrow Airport using corrupt baggage handlers.
  • R v MC: Defendant acquitted of charges associated with the kidnapping and torture of two men with a stun gun and a blow torch.
  • R v M: 19 defendants charged with the commercial supply of firearms and ammunition.
  • R v AM: Lead counsel for a prisoner already serving an extended sentence of imprisonment at HMP Wandsworth, accused of orchestrating the importation of machine guns and ammunition.
  • R v S: Defendant accused of involvement in a shooting during an armed robbery.
  • R v A: Lead counsel for a defendant charged with conspiracy to import over 100kgs of cocaine through a clearing agent in Heathrow. Following the discharge of the jury 5 months into the trial, an application to stay the indictment as a result of an abuse of process by the prosecution was granted.
  • R v CB: Lead counsel for a defendant acquitted of conspiracy to commit an arson which caused in excess of £4.5 million of damage to the M1 flyover at Apex Corner.
  • R v M: Successful submission of no case to answer for a man accused of conspiring to rob Graffs Diamonds of £40 million worth of jewellery.
Murder & Manslaughter

Stan Reiz KC defends clients accused of all varieties of homicide related offences, including allegations of murder committed with firearms, bladed articles and fire. He is experienced in analysing crime scene and pathology evidence, as well psychiatric evidence in cases in which the defence of diminished responsibility needs to be considered.

Notable Cases

  • R v G (Cayman Islands): Defendant accused of participating in a joint attack on a man in a bar who had disrespected his friend. During the violence, the man was seriously wounded and another man who intervened was stabbed to death. Defendant acquitted of murder and all related charges.
  • R v N: High profile murder of a woman in Liverpool who was shot in her own home with a Skorpion sub-machine gun. The target was her boyfriend who was not in the property at the time. The prosecution relied upon hearsay evidence from voice notes and messages on the deceased’s phone which they contended proved the defendant’s motive for organising the killing.
  • R v B: Woman accused of the stabbing murder of her boyfriend following a violent incident in her home.
  • R v I: Defendant repeatedly stabbed and killed a man on his doorstep following a trivial incident involving his daughter and cousin. Reasonable self-defence was not accepted by the jury who convicted of murder, but acquitted of possession of a blade article; consistent with the defence case that the knife used was originally in the possession of the deceased. The starting point for sentence was thereby reduced by 10 years.
  • R v N: Murder in Basingstoke on Halloween in which members of the attacking group were in possession of acid, machetes and bats.
  • R v G: Defendant drove his vehicle at more than double the speed limit in pursuit of 2 motorbikes carrying 5 teenagers. A collision occurred resulting in the death of one boy and serious injuries to two others. The issue in the case was whether he drove into them deliberately. It involved complex accident reconstruction evidence from two experts. Following trial, the defendant was acquitted of murder, manslaughter and causing GBH.
  • R v R: Defendant acquitted of the murder of a ‘gardener’ at a cannabis factory during a robbery he participated in.
  • R v W: One of nine defendants charged with murder following a group attack on an 18 year old male in an internet café. The defendant was acquitted of murder and manslaughter.
  • R v J: 18 year old with autism spectrum disorder accused of the attempted murder of a man and 15 year old girl following a shooting at a bus stop. He was acquitted of the attempted murder of the girl following a ruling by the judge that the principle of transferred malice did not apply to inchoate offences.
  • R v M: 15 year old boy captured on CCTV stabbing an 18 year old in the chest and killing him. The prosecution relied upon drill music lyrics written by the defendant in custody.
  • R v T: Defendant accused of participating in a ‘ride out’ during which a group of 8 males attended at three properties with ‘Zombie’ knives allegedly looking for rival gang members to attack. A 16 year old boy was stabbed to death in his home. The prosecution relied upon gang evidence to explain what they contended was relevant behaviour by the defendants. The Defendant was acquitted of murder and two counts of conspiracy to cause GBH. He was convicted of manslaughter.
  • R v C: Defendant accused of the revenge murder of a rival drug dealer who had kidnapped him. The deceased was shot in the head with a shotgun as he was travelling in a taxi.
  • R v G: 19 year old male accused of murdering a 16 year old boy in a group attack. The six defendants were captured on CCTV chasing the deceased and his friend. Four of the defendants produced weapons during the chase. The deceased was stabbed in the neck with a ‘Rambo’ style knife and died from the injury. Two of the defendants were also stabbed.
  • R v B: Defendant charged with the murder of a man killed in connection with a drugs ‘turf war’. Following a 4 month trial involving 9 defendants, B was acquitted of murder and conspiracy to cause GBH. She was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment. Three other defendants were convicted of murder and were sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 24 years. A fifth defendant was sentenced to 14 years imprisonment for manslaughter and conspiracy.
  • R v M: Defendant accused of the shooting murder of a property developer. The prosecution alleged that the murder was a meticulously planned execution. After a 3 month trial involving 5 defendants, M was acquitted of murder and manslaughter.
  • R v T: Defendant accused of the murder of a fellow care home resident. Following a contested fitness to be tried hearing, the court determined that he was unfit and subsequently imposed a hospital order.
  • R v M: Defendant charged with murder, kidnapping, robbery and possession of a firearm following the fatal shooting of a man at his home in Southport.
  • R v D: Defendant acquitted of murder and manslaughter following a fatal shooting at Tottenham Cemetery.
  • R v M: 14 year old boy charged with attempted murder following a stabbing outside a London tube station.
  • R v F: Youth accused of attempted murder following a group attack on a bus.
  • R v C: Attempted murder in which the defendant who suffered from a serious psychiatric disorder, repeatedly stabbed his aunt to the neck and body without provocation.
  • R v O: 18 year old defendant charged with the murder of a man at a house party.
  • R v J: Defendant accused of the murder for financial gain of his sister-in-law and arson of the family home.
  • R v M: Murder of a man with scissors in the car park of a public house.
  • R v V: Conspiracy to murder a man in an attempted ‘honour killing’ using sulphuric acid.
Serious Sexual Offences

Stan Reiz KC has represented clients across a wide spectrum of serious sexual offences cases including rape, sexual assault and offences against children. He has completed the Vulnerable Witness Training Course and is experienced in cross-examining vulnerable witnesses in cases involving allegations of serious offences.

Notable serious sexual offences cases

R v S

Defendant accused of distribution of indecent images and attempting to incite sexual activity with children online.

R v D

Defendant acquitted of raping a young woman in her home. During the trial, it was accepted by the officer in the case that there were failures during the investigation to promptly obtain important evidence which only came to light following defence requests years after the first complaint.

R v P

University Professor accused of serious sexual offences including attempted rape, against his best friend’s 8 year old daughter.

R v JS

Defendant alleged to have attacked a woman in a park and whilst on bail for that offence, raped a prostitute.

R v B

‘Archbishop’ television personality and ‘faith healer’ accused of committing serious sexual offences against numerous elderly parishioners.

R v H

Young male accused of attempting to rape his roommate’s intoxicated friend.

R v G

16 year old defendant acquitted of 6 counts of rape at knifepoint and one count of sexual activity with a child alleged to have been committed against three complainants.

R v S

Defendant acquitted of rape of his son’s girlfriend.

R v A

Defendant accused of the historic rape and indecent assault of a young girl.


Stan Reiz KC has considerable experience in appearing before the Court of Appeal in both conviction and sentence appeals, including responding to references by the Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General. He has represented a defendant in an interlocutory prosecution appeal against a terminatory ruling and in a recent case, argued that a conviction should be quashed on what was an entirely technical point unrelated to the merits of the case.

Mr Reiz is frequently asked to advise clients wanting a second opinion on whether there are grounds to appeal against their conviction and/or sentence, when he did not represent them at trial.

Notable appeals cases

R v Gray [2022] EWCA Crim 1095

Successful appeal against sentence for the former Head of Finance at an international digital media company following his guilty plea to fraud. The appeal concerned the correct approach to calculating the value of a fraud for sentencing purposes.

R v Haque (Mohammed) [2020] 1 Cr App R 12; [2020] WLR (D) 49

Instructed for an Appellant who had been convicted of Acquiring Criminal Property. The Court of Appeal accepted that the prosecution had erred and as a matter of law, charged the wrong offence. Consequently, they had no choice but to quash the conviction. The prosecution’s application for a re-trial was also refused.

R v Sutherland [2019] EWCA Crim 987

Appeal against a 20 year sentence of imprisonment for conspiracy to import industrial quantities of cocaine using the rip on/rip off method executed by corrupt baggage handlers.

R v Greene (Courtnie Spencer) [2018] EWCA Crim 480

Appeal against sentence for kidnapping.

R v Akhtar [2018] EWCA Crim 378

Successful appeal against sentence for a mortgage broker convicted of mortgage fraud.

Attorney General's Reference, R v Parish & Redford [2017] EWCA 2064 (Crim) 2017 WL 06372088

Sentence for conspiracy to transfer 5 firearms and ammunition increased from 5 years to 7 years and 4 months, but Court rejected submission on behalf of A-G that the sentence should be increased further as full credit for plea should not have been allowed.

R v Ogden & Others [2016] 1 Cr.App.R. 29

Appeal against conviction relating to the meaning of “converting criminal property”. Represented 4 appellants. Successful appeal against sentence.

R v Sulal [2015]

Appeal against conviction based on the admission of bad character evidence.

R v Newell [2015]

Successful appeal against sentence in relation to offences of armed robbery and aggravated burglary.

R v Loveridge [2014] EWCA Crim 1209

Successful appeal against sentence in relation to a conspiracy to commit armed robbery.

R v Stewart [2013]

Successful appeal against sentence for drugs and firearms offences.

R v Jabbar [2013] EWCA Crim 801

Acted as led junior in an appeal against conviction for murder based on the admission of hearsay evidence.

R v CB [2012]

Prosecution appeal against a successful submission of no case to answer.

R v Marsh [2012] EWCA Crim 3190

Application of Sentencing Guidelines for offences of wounding.


Notable regulatory cases

R v M

Representing teacher accused of misconduct in concurrent disciplinary proceedings brought by the Board of Governors of his school and the Teaching Regulation Agency.

WMP v MM Ltd

Represented a company in an application for a Closure Order.

SC v P. H. S. Ltd

Acted for the company in a trading standards prosecution arising out of sales of prohibited cosmetics.

HC v P. R. Ltd

Acted for a substantial company in a trading standards prosecution relating to the sale of 100,000 defective high visibility jackets across the UK.

CC v P. S. Ltd

Acted for the company in a trading standards prosecution.

Health & Safety

Notable health & safety cases

O Ltd

Advised a catering company being investigated for health and safety breaches at their principal business premises.

Sports Law

Notable sports law cases

R v Colin Kazim-Richards

Defended Blackburn Rovers player charged with a public order offence arising out of alleged homophobic gestures made towards Brighton and Hove Albion supporters at the AMEX Stadium during a Championship match.


Stan Reiz KC has advised and represented clients facing applications for multi-million pound confiscation orders. He has successfully argued disproportionality based on R v Waya principles resulting in significant reductions to the amounts of the confiscation orders made against his clients. Mr Reiz has also, with the assistance of expert forensic accountants, secured considerable reductions to Prosecution calculations for both benefit and available amount in complex proceedings involving corporate bodies and individuals with extensive assets.

Notable confiscation cases

R v A

Represented an interested party in confiscation proceedings against her husband following his conviction for conspiracy to produce anabolic steroids. The disputed assets concerned approximately £20 million held in cryptocurrency and properties.

R v S

Acted for a direct access client in confiscation proceedings following his conviction for breaching an enforcement notice issued in respect of one of his properties.


Defended in complex confiscation proceedings arising from the prosecution of a company director under the Financial Services Act 2012.

R v CS

£3.6 million order sought by the Prosecution reduced to £14,000 following representations as to the law and fact.

R v MS

Alleged benefit from criminal conduct of £3.7 million reduced to £266,000 following written submissions being made on apportionment.

R v S

£1.35 million order sought by the Prosecution reduced to £37,000 following legal submissions on the calculation of benefit and proportionality.

R v M

£10 million order sought by the Prosecution reduced to £29,000 following representations on the relevant law.


Applications to reduce two confiscation orders to nil under the Criminal Justice Act 1988 due to inadequacy granted following a contested hearing. The argument concerned Spanish property and contract law.

R v W

Crown’s assessment of benefit and available amount rejected by the Court following a contested hearing.


Confiscation proceedings for an offence of insider trading resolved following extended negotiations with the prosecution.

R v B

£9 million order sought by the Prosecution reduced to £300,000 after representations made.

Judicial Review

Notable judicial review cases

U v Secretary of State for the Home Department

Judicial review proceedings brought to challenge the Home Secretary’s decision to refuse to grant a Home Office Controlled Drug Licence. The application was made by a religious organisation based in Brazil to permit its UK members to ritualistically consume a tea containing a class A controlled substance. It was contended that the Secretary of State violated the Article 9 rights of the members by preventing them from practicing their religion.


Notable international cases

Re K

Advised a suspect being investigated by the DBIS for breaching the Export Control Order 2008, which regulates the international trade of arms and ammunition. He was arrested for facilitating an arms deal between two foreign countries, without a licence permitting him to do so. Following a full investigation and multiple interviews, no further action was taken against him.

Practice Areas


Portfolio Builder

Select the practice areas that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Title Type CV Email

Remove All


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)