Hungary v L Westminster Magistrates Court
Succeeded in preventing extradition by arguing a lack of dual criminality and that it would be oppressive to extradite the client due to his ill health. This decision was not appealed.
Zapalskis v Lithuania  EWHC 1645 (Admin)
Succeeded in preventing extradition by arranging for the client to attend trial in Lithuania via video link from prison - the first time this has been done. The client received a sentence which was shorter than the length of time he had already spent in custody, so although extradition had been ordered by the High Court (after unsuccessful challenges pursuant to Articles 3 and 8), the Lithuanian judicial authority withdrew the warrant and the client was released.
Eason v USA  EWHC 604 (Admin)
Succeeded in preventing extradition on appeal. Mr Eason was sought by the FBI to stand trial for a conspiracy to defraud American banks to the value of £5 million. It was successfully argued that extradition would be oppressive due to the passage of time.
Rahim v Italy  EWHC 2748 (Admin)
Represented an Iraqi Kurdish national sought by Italy for terrorist offences; the case involved arguments relating to forum, invalidity of the warrant, dual criminality and abuse of process.
Romania v C Westminster Magistrates Court
Succeeded in preventing extradition by finding lawyers in Romania who were able to persuade the court there to impose a financial penalty and withdraw the warrant, leading to the client’s release.
Italy v C Westminster Magistrates Court
As advocate, succeeded in preventing extradition by arguing that the warrant was invalid and that there had been no decision to charge – the client was wanted for supplying drugs as a member of the mafia. This decision was not appealed.
Poland v M Westminster Magistrates Court
As advocate, succeeded in preventing extradition of a client wanted both to serve a prison sentence and to face prosecution, and who had previously absconded to Scotland. The client was discharged on grounds of dual criminality, passage of time, proportionality and Article 8.
USA v Z Westminster Magistrates Court
Represented a Latvian client sought by USA for prosecution for acts done in Portugal in connection with a global cybercrime and money laundering operation; the case involved arguments relating to forum. When the client decided not to appeal his extradition order, we liaised with US attorneys to ensure his representation in USA.
Albania v K Westminster Magistrates Court
Represented a young client sought by Albania to serve a 15 year sentence imposed in his absence for attempted murder; the client was assessed as a probable victim of modern slavery.
Southwark Crown Court, R v D
Representing client charged with together with six family members with modern slavery offence - large-scale conspiracy to traffic people from Romania in order to exploit them in UK. The case involves live evidence from Romania.
Snaresbrook Crown Court, R v S
Represented client charged with large-scale importation of GBL and supply of drugs of Class A, B and C. Negotiated a basis of plea which led to the prosecution withdrawing the GBL charge.
Inner London Crown Court, R v C
Successfully defended client against charge of conspiracy to supply 2 kilos of cocaine. Thereafter successfully argued that the client’s role as financial courier meant he should not face confiscation proceedings.
Wood Green Crown Court, R v B
Successfully defended client charged with large-scale supply of heroin; made written representations which led to prosecution offering no evidence – the client was found not guilty.
Isleworth Crown Court, R v B
Drafted a prepared statement at the police station which formed the entirety of the client’s defence at trial for a joint enterprise robbery. The client was found not guilty while all other defendants were convicted.
Wood Green Crown Court, R v B
As advocate, successfully applied to vacate the guilty plea of a Lithuanian man who had pleaded guilty to affray; obtained psychiatric reports which led to the client being found not guilty by reason of insanity.
Southwark Crown Court, R v H
Successfully defended client prosecuted by Department of Business Innovation & Skills in multi-handed case; made written representations on the inadmissibility of the client’s police interview - the prosecution offered no evidence and the client was found not guilty.
Southwark Crown Court, R v P
As advocate, successfully defended Ukrainian client against confiscation proceedings in which prosecution alleged £5 million in hidden assets; the court found no hidden assets. The case involved in-depth analysis of original evidence written in Russian.
Southwark Crown Court, R v K
Represented client charged with multi-million pound conspiracy to cheat the public revenue prosecuted by HMRC.
Southwark Crown Court, R v P
Successfully defended client in multi-handed conspiracy to assist in unlawful immigration; the case involved live evidence from India.
Kingston Crown Court, R v S
Successfully defended client accused of defrauding an elderly woman. Katy undertook her own investigation and discovered overwhelming evidence that the client was himself a victim and had been defrauded of £250,000; he also suffered with previously undiagnosed autism. On the first day of trial the prosecution offered no evidence and the client was found not guilty.
Central Criminal Court, R v S
Successfully defended client accused of joint enterprise gang related murder; client was acquitted after a submission of no case to answer.
Kingston Crown Court, R v J
Represented defendant charged in largest prosecution by DEFRA relating to the international trade in animal pharmaceutical products.
Exeter Crown Court, R v C
Successfully defended client accused of murder; client convicted of manslaughter.
Westminster Magistrates Court, R v S
As advocate, persuaded court to diverge from sentencing guidelines and impose a conditional discharge on woman guilty of possession of bladed articles in French Embassy.
Willesden Magistrates Court, R v K
As advocate, successfully challenged police’s failure to follow identification procedures in Code D of PACE thus forcing prosecution to withdraw the burglary charge and leading to client’s release.