2 Bedford Row is, for many easily the best criminal set in the country.Legal 500 2015
Our barristers have accepted instructions to act both for the claimant and defendant in a variety of cases where there has been a claim for judicial review.
Search warrants, decisions made by courts, tribunals and regulators as well as primary and secondary legislation that is incompatible with EU law or the European Convention on Human Rights can all be challenged by judicial review proceedings in the High Court. This mechanism is an important safeguard in preserving the rule of law and protecting against administrative excess.
Several members of chambers have specialist knowledge and experience of advising and conducting judicial review proceedings in cases originating from criminal and quasi-criminal investigations, as well as challenging decisions by bodies whose public functions impact upon individuals and companies.
Claimants who have instructed members of 2 Bedford Row include individuals and companies that have been affected by public-law decisions made by the police and the HSE, magistrates, judges and various tribunals.
Previous claimants have also sought to challenge decisions by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), the Legal Services Commission (LSC), the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) and the Lord Chancellor.
In addition to challenging decisions or orders made by courts and tribunals, tenants of 2 Bedford Row have been involved in challenging the lawfulness of search warrants obtained in criminal proceedings and in respect of evidential matters, such as the admission of hearsay evidence.
Barristers at 2 Bedford Row have frequently been instructed by public bodies who seek to defend the decision in the High Court and by entities who are regarded as ‘Interested Parties’, such as the Crown Prosecution Service and privately-run prisons.
Members of chambers have also been instructed in claims not directly linked to other proceedings, such as the separation of an imprisoned mother from her child and a challenge concerning prisoners’ access to the media.
Members have defended in cases where they acted at first instance and also when the body has decided to instruct counsel from 2 Bedford Row especially for the appeal.
For further information and enquiries please contact our clerks team.
+44 (0)20 7440 8888
Christine Agnew QC and Charlotte Brewer appeared on behalf of Leslie McLeod before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on 24th October 2016. They successfully argued that Mr McLeod’s…
Jim Sturman QC acted for Holman Fenwick Willan (James Clibbon and Paul Wordley instructing) who successfully challenged the endorsement of a warrant granted by the Scottish Court and endorsed by…
Judicial Review of the Crown Court’s jurisdiction to order the retention of unlawfully seized material, pursuant to s.59 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001.
Judicial Review of the decision to close a magistrates’ court.
Judicial Review involving the compatibility of the Plant Protection Product Regulations 2011 with EU Regulation 1107/2009 (settled out of court).