Tom Tabori

Year of call:
2011
Email:
tom.tabori@39essex.com

Clerks:
+44 (0)20 7832 1111

“Extremely bright and can advise really well in a number of different areas of law. Unafraid of a challenging case and bold with arguments and approach. Willing and able to consider all angles of a case. Thorough and approachable.”
Legal 500 2022

Tom Tabori is a specialist public law barrister, with expertise in human rights law, education law, electoral law, immigration law, equalities law, information rights, and regulatory law. He is a judicial review and statutory appeal specialist, but also acts and advises in damages claims against public bodies.

He is listed by Legal 500 as a Leading Junior. He is Band 1 ranked by Chambers and Partners for Election Law.

Administrative and Public


Tom is interested in all areas of public law, particularly civil liberties and human rights, equalities, education, social security, immigration and asylum, housing, community care, electoral, regulatory and disciplinary, and actions against the police.

He appears for both claimants/applicants and defendants/respondents, and was appointed to the Attorney General’s London C Panel in January 2019 and the London B Panel in July 2021.  He was appointed to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s C Panel in May 2019.

  • Tom has particular expertise in human rights law and was on the executive committee of the Human Rights Lawyers Association (HRLA) for two years (2017-2019). His recent instructions in this area include:
  • Advice in relation to s 9(3) HRAclaims against the MOJ and Lord Chancellor for deprivation of liberty caused by judicial error, and compatibility of the judicial immunity at s 2(5) of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 with art 6.
    • Counsel for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in art 14 with arts 5 and 8 challenge to the vaccine exception in the Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel and Operator Liability) (England) Regulations 2021: R (White and others) v SSHSC.
    • Counsel for the respondent local authority in art 4 trafficking, forced criminality and child protection case R (H) v Swindon BC [2021] EWCA Civ 1836.
    • Junior counsel (led by Zane Malik QC) in Supreme Court stage of arts 3 and 8 deportation case concerning the internal relocation alternative: SC (Jamaica) v SSHD.
    • Counsel for the Secretary of State for Education in art 14 with A2P1 challenge to the Education (Student Support) Regulations 2011: R (Hossain) v SSEd.
    • Sole counsel for the SSHD in appeals concerning Iraq identity documents and art 3: MA (Iraq) v SSHD [2021] EWCA Civ 1467.
    • Junior counsel for the SSHD in arts 3, 8 and 14 challenges to NRPF Policy: W, A Child v SSHD [2020] 1 W.L.R. 4420 (DC) and ST (A Child) v SSHD [2021] EWHC 1085 (Admin) (DC).
    • Junior counsel for the LA in challenge to model of funding provision for visually impaired pupils (led by Deok Joo Rhee QC), C relying on A2P1 and art 14. Subsequent successful resistance to appeal in the CA: ZK v Redbridge LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 1597.
  • Tom takes instructions in all areas of electoral law. He is Band 1 ranked in this area by Chambers and Partners. He is the author of ‘A Practical Guide to Election Law’ (Law Brief Publishing: Minehead, Sep 2020) (Consultant Editor: Timothy Straker QC). He has appeared on BBC News to discuss electoral law. He has advised the Boundary Commission of England, the Cabinet Office, the Electoral Commission, office holders, elected representatives, candidates and private club members.
  • Tom has experience of advising central government on constitutional law matters, including the existence and scope of prerogative and third source powers.
  • Tom’s education law practice spans SEN law, discrimination claims, independent school damages claims, higher education claims in contract and educational negligence, illegal schools, civil liberties and human rights-based challenges, with particular expertise in appellate and judicial review proceedings. His recent instructions include:
    • An appeal concerning the EEA residence card criterion of dependency on an EEA national to meet essential needs, and whether and when education amounts to an essential need for purposes of extended family member residence rights: Shawinder Singh v SSHD [2022] EWCA Civ 1054.
    • Instructed by Ofsted in challenge to an inspection report and its publication.
    • Appearing for Secretary of State for Education in art 14 with A2P1 ECHR challenge to the Education (Student Support) Regulations 2011.
    • Appearing for independent school in successful application for summary judgment in civil claim against it.
    • Successful internal appeal on behalf of university student against Student Finance England decision.
    • Junior counsel for the successful claimants in judicial review of a local authority’s (i) publication of discontinuance notices in respect of three special schools and (ii) its prior pre-publication consultation, including obtaining JR protective costs order.
    • Appearing for the successful university in a claim for judicial review of its decision to reject a research proposal by a master’s student into ‘reverse gender assignment’, claiming breach of art 10 ECHR and academic freedom: see here.
    • A JR of an LA’s model of funding provision for visually impaired pupils (led by Deok Joo Rhee QC) ZK v Redbridge LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 1597.
    • Appearing for a university defending a judicial review claim for refusal to award a CAS to an overseas student.
    • Appearing on behalf of a student claiming damages for harassment, disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, breach of contract and educational negligence.
    • Appearing on behalf of a regulator intervening in JR proceedings brought by a student claiming breach of articles 10 and 11 ECHR by the university that had withdrawn him from his social work course.
    • A JR of an academy school refusal to re-admit student following suspension.
  • Tom has a broad practice in immigration, asylum, trafficking and nationality law, particularly judicial review, but also in statutory appeals. His recent instructions include:
    • An appeal concerning the EEA residence card criterion of dependency on an EEA national to meet essential needs, and whether and when education amounts to an essential need for purposes of extended family member residence rights: Shawinder Singh v SSHD [2022] EWCA Civ 1054.
  • Junior counsel (led by Rory Dunlop QC) in appeal concerning whether the continued refusal to grant leave to remain to a failed asylum seeker, who had been subject to immigration bail in the UK for over 20 years, amounted to a disproportionate interference with his ECHR art 8 rights: SSHD v R (AM (Belarus)) [2022] EWCA Civ 780.
    • Junior counsel (led by Zane Malik QC) in Supreme Court stage of arts 3 and 8 deportation case concerning the internal relocation alternative: SC (Jamaica) v SSHD.
    • Counsel for the SSHD in appeals concerning Iraq identity documents and art 3: MA (Iraq) v SSHD [2021] EWCA Civ 1467.
    • Junior counsel for the SSHD in art 3 and art 14 with 8 challenges to NRPF Policy: W, A Child v SSHD [2020] 1 W.L.R. 4420 and ST (A Child) v SSHD [2021] EWHC 1085 (Admin) (DC).
    • Country guidance cases concerning Iraq and Sri Lanka (sur place activities).
    • R (SD) v SSHD, CO/5213/2018, 1.10.19: successful defence of conclusive grounds decision.
    • R (Ahmed) v SSHD [2019] EWCA Civ 1070: the Court of Appeal holding that the Immigration Rules para 276B(v) ‘disregard’ did not bridge gaps between periods of lawful temporary residence such as to entitle persons to claim “10 years continuous lawful residence” under para 276B(i)(a).
    • Bhandari v SSHD [2019] EWCA Civ 129: Appeal to the Court of Appeal against UT PTA refusal in case concerning fairness in operation of the Points Based System, in relation to the 60-day policy applied to Tier 4 student migrants, when their college sponsors has its licence revoked.
  • Tom takes instructions in actions against the police, including cases involving battery, assault, articles 3 and 5 ECHR, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution and wrongful arrest. Tom has also advised in relation to s 9(3) HRA damages claims against the MOJ and Lord Chancellor for judicial action leading to unlawful deprivation of liberty.
  • Tom accepts instructions in all aspects of prison law. He acts for both prisoners and the Parole Board and Secretary of State. He was recently instructed on behalf of the Parole Board in a claim for art 5(4) ‘Faulkner’ damages, and he acted in the successful challenge to interference with a prisoner’s confidential and privileged correspondence, leading to compensation and policy change by the prison in question, and a challenge to a Category A Review Team (“CART”) categorisation decision.
  • In inquest law, Tom has acted for next of kin, a hospital trust and a care home. He is a specialist on PIR legal questions, such as the applicability of art 2. He is also experienced in advising on ECF legal aid matters. His inquest experience includes deaths in custody, in mental health detention, and in hospital (post-surgery and premature births).
  • Tom accepts instructions in all areas of information law, including FOIA, GDPR/DPA 2018, the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR), and the torts of misuse of private information and breach of confidence. His recent instructions include:
    • Junior counsel for the CPS in the 2017 and 2021 Maurizi v IC and CPS appeals against ICO decisions in respect to FOIA requests for CPS-Sweden/Ecuador/US communications in relation to the extradition of Julian Assange.
    • Advising on liability and quantum in relation to a data breach whereby a solicitor accidentally disclosed sensitive personal data of adopting parents and child, leading to security risk.
    • Drafting pleadings in twin civil claims against an unincorporated association and Oxbridge college for disclosure, cessation and damages.
    • Drafting response to Information Rights Tribunal appeal on behalf of HM Treasury, concerning the FOIA exemptions for communications with members of the Royal Family [s 37 FOIA] and personal data [s 40 FOIA].
    • Appearing for DEFRA before the Information Rights Tribunal in an appeal against a decision of the Information Commissioner concerning its application of reg 12(4)(e) EIR (‘internal communications’) to a request for disclosure of ministerial briefings.
    • Advising a Government department in relation to a threatened claim for damages for breach of the GDPR/DPA and for alleged misuse of private information and confidentiality.
    • Advice on the application of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 (“PECR”) and GDPR to a contract for provision of marketing services.
    • Advice on the application of the DPA 2018, sch 2 para 5, to requests for disclosure of recorded calls to an insurer.
    • Advice on the DPA implications of an employer’s drug-testing policy.
    • Drafting submissions for a local authority in its FTT appeal against Information Commissioner finding that the authority could not rely on the exceptions under reg 12(5)(e) and (f) EIR.
    • Advice on a regulator’s power to share data with another regulator.
    • Advice in respect of an ICO complaint concerning personal data stored in an app.
  • Tom’s community care practice involves all aspect of JRs of local authority Care Act 2014 and Children Act 1989 powers and duties, from eligibility assessments to withdrawing care, to NRPF issues, ordinary residence advice and Secretary of State referrals, duties to former relevant children, location of placement of released young offenders, and age assessments. Tom spent six months on part-time secondment to Medway Council, advising on all aspects of its community care powers and duties. He also takes instructions in closure challenges and appeared (led by Jamie Burton) for a service user of day centre services proposed for closure as part of a local authority’s reconfiguration of community care services: R (AA) v Rotherham MBC [2019] EWHC 3529 (Admin).
  • Tom has extensive experience of advice and representing in cases involving equalities law. This experience includes the following:
    • Securing the Employment Tribunal’s first appointment and payment of a registered intermediary for a claimant without mental capacity.
    • Advice and pleadings in claim for damages for breach of Equality Act duties held by the managers of premises and controllers of let premises.
    • Drafting pleadings in a race and discrimination claim arising from a PhD student’s viva examination.
    • Advice on the Equality Act 2010’s interaction with the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and the consultation on amendments to the latter.
    • Civil and JR claims of breach of ECHR rights read in conjunction with art 14 ECHR, in educational and immigration contexts.
    • Multiple disability discrimination claims against schools, including, recently, JL v GB of Cherry Lane Primary School [2019] UKUT 223 (AAC), where he persuaded the UT(AAC) that r 12(3)(a) of the FTT(HESC) Rules was invalid and to direct that the Tribunal Procedure Committee consider the matter.
    • Tom also has particular expertise in the PSED, having been instructed in a number of cuts/closure JRs, including as junior counsel for the SSHD in challenge to her NRPF Policy, as junior counsel for C in a successful challenge to closure of special schools, as junior counsel for C in a challenge to closure of an adult day centre: R (oao AA) v Rotherham MBC [2019] EWHC 3529 (Admin). He appeared as junior counsel for D in a successful defence of a challenge to an LA’s funding of special educational provision for visually impaired children: R (ZK) v LB Redbridge [2021] ELR 238 (CA)]. ZK involved successful resistance to UKSC PTA application concerning the applicability to systemic challenges of the observations on the PSED by Lord Brown in R (McDonald) v Kensington and Chelsea RLBC [2011] PTSR 1266.
  • In social security law, Tom advised a disabled tenant in relation to applications for exemption from the bedroom tax and discretionary housing benefit (DHB), both proving successful. His past instructions have included an appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) of wide significance. The appeal was selected to determine a point of law arising in a number of appeals concerning the Employment and Support Allowance Regulations 2008. Tom appeared successfully on behalf the appellant applicant for ESA. He has also recently acted for appellants in housing benefit case raising interesting legal questions as to the application of the housing benefit criteria in scenarios of parents letting to their disabled children.
  • Tom accepts instructions in all aspects of mental health law. His recent instructions include:
    • Acting as junior counsel for an NHS Trust defending an art 2 JR challenge to its investigation into a suicide;
    • An application for a displacement order;
    • Human rights damages claims for unauthorised deprivation of liberty and another for care home abuse;
    • Representing applicant patients and respondent hospital trusts at mental health tribunals;
    • Advice in an inter-authority s 117 aftercare dispute;
    • Advice on the FTT’s powers to order conditional discharge where the conditions would amount to a DOL.

Human Rights Law


Tom has particular expertise in human rights law and was on the executive committee of the Human Rights Lawyers Association (HRLA) for two years (2017-2019). His recent instructions in this area include:

  • Advice in relation to s 9(3) HRA claims against the MOJ and Lord Chancellor for deprivation of liberty caused by judicial error, and compatibility of the judicial immunity at s 2(5) of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 with art 6.
  • Junior counsel (led by Rory Dunlop QC) for the SSHD in appeal concerning the circumstances in which an individual in “limbo”, due to lack of leave to remain and no current prospect of being deported from the UK, may be entitled under art 8 to some form of status pending their removal: SSHD v R (AM (Belarus)) [2022] EWCA Civ 780.
  • Counsel for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in art 14 with arts 5 and 8 challenge to the vaccine exception in the Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel and Operator Liability) (England) Regulations 2021.
  • Counsel for the respondent local authority in art 4 trafficking, forced criminality and child protection case R (H) v Swindon BC [2021] EWCA Civ 1836.
  • Junior counsel (led by Zane Malik QC) in Supreme Court stage of arts 3 and 8 deportation case concerning the internal relocation alternative: SC (Jamaica) v SSHD.
  • Appearing for Secretary of State for Education in art 14 with A2P1 challenge to the Education (Student Support) Regulations 2011.
  • Counsel for the SSHD in appeals concerning Iraq identity documents and art 3: MA (Iraq) v SSHD [2021] EWCA Civ 1467.
  • Junior counsel for the SSHD in art 3 and art 14 with 8 challenges to NRPF Policy: W, A Child v SSHD [2020] 1 WLR 4420 and ST (A Child) v SSHD [2021] EWHC 1085 (Admin) (DC).
  • Successful defence of JR of an LA’s model of funding provision for visually impaired pupils (led by Deok Joo Rhee QC), C relying on A2P1 and art 14. Subsequent successful resistance to appeal in the CA: ZK v Redbridge LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 1597.
  • Appearing for the successful university in a claim for judicial review of its decision to reject a research proposal by a master’s student into ‘reverse gender assignment’, claiming breach of art 10 ECHR and academic freedom of expression: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/19/proposal-research-trans-regret-rejected-university-fear-backlash/.
  • Junior counsel for the Lord Chancellor in art 8 and A1P1 with art 14 challenge to civil legal aid means test disregards.
  • Acting for the claimant in false imprisonment and art 5 claim against a magistrates’ court, involving the first consideration of art 6’s application to the courts’ immunity at s 2(5) Crown Proceedings Act 1947.
  • Appearing for the successful university in a claim for judicial review of its decision to reject a research proposal by a master’s student into ‘reverse gender assignment’, claiming breach of art 10 and academic freedomsee here.

Election Law and Parliamentary and Public Affairs


Tom takes instructions in all areas of electoral law. He is the author of ‘A Practical Guide to Election Law’ (Law Brief Publishing: September 2020) (Consultant Editor: Timothy Straker QC). He is Band 1 ranked in this area by Chambers and Partners. He has appeared on BBC News to discuss electoral law. He has advised the Boundary Commission of England, the Cabinet Office, the Electoral Commission, office holders, elected representatives, candidates and private club members. His work in this area has included:

  • Advice on the Boundary Commission’s consultation duties under the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 and their performance during the pandemic.
  • Advice on a Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards inquiry and referral to the Committee on Standards, and on subsequent proceedings before the Committee.
  • Advice on the donations-reporting obligations of a registered party, breach, regulatory enforcement, and county court appeal prospects.
  • Advice on the PPERA concept of ‘members associations’ and disclosure obligations under PPERA.
  • Advice on the application of equalities law to party registration provisions.
  • S 86 RPA 1983 High Court application for relief to a Parliamentary candidate and their agent in respect to errors in a return as to election expenses.
  • Advice on elections within private members’ clubs and is Assistant General Editor of Shackleton on the Law and Practice of Meetings, 15th Edition (Thomson Reuters: 2020).
  • He has advised on controlled donations to holders of relevant elected office, in relation to overseas visits.
  • He has advised on parish council elections and the scope for co-opting.
  • Advice on questions arising out of a Community Governance Review conducted under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, and its interaction with the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009.

Education


Tom’s education law practice spans SEN law, discrimination claims, independent school damages claims, higher education claims in contract and educational negligence, illegal schools, civil liberties and human rights-based challenges, with particular expertise in appellate and judicial review proceedings. His recent instructions include:

  • An appeal concerning the EEA residence card criterion of dependency on an EEA national to meet essential needs, and whether and when education amounts to an essential need for purposes of extended family member residence rights: Shawinder Singh v SSHD [2022] EWCA Civ 1054.
  • Acting for Ofsted in JR challenges to inspection reports.
  • Acting for the Secretary of State for Education in art 14 with A2P1 ECHR challenge to the student finance regulations, in the High Court and CA.
  • Acting for the defendant professional examination body in JR of its decision that doctor candidate had failed intercollegiate speciality examination for promotion to consultant.
  • A2P1 ECHR denial of education claims, including a JR (for the defendant LA) and a civil claim (for the claimant child).
  • Multiple disability discrimination claims against schools, including, JL v GB of Cherry Lane Primary School [2019] UKUT 223 (AAC), persuading the UT(AAC) that r 12(3)(a) of the FTT(HESC) Rules was invalid and to direct that the Tribunal Procedure Committee consider amendment.
  • Successful internal appeal on behalf of university student against Student Finance England decision.
  • Junior counsel for the successful claimants in judicial review of a local authority’s (i) publication of discontinuance notices in respect of three special schools and (ii) its prior pre-publication consultation, including obtaining JR protective costs order.
  • Appearing for the successful university in a claim for judicial review of its decision to reject a research proposal by a master’s student into ‘reverse gender assignment’, claiming breach of art 10 ECHR and academic freedom: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/19/proposal-research-trans-regret-rejected-university-fear-backlash/.
  • A JR of an LA’s model of funding provision for visually impaired pupils (led by Deok Joo Rhee QC), and in the pending appeal.
  • Appearing for a university defending a judicial review claim for refusal to award a CAS to an overseas student.
  • Appearing on behalf of a student claiming damages for harassment, disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, breach of contract and educational negligence.
  • Appearing on behalf of a regulator intervening in JR proceedings brought by a student claiming breach of articles 10 and 11 ECHR by the university that had withdrawn him from his social work course.
  • A JR of an academy school refusal to re-admit student following suspension.

Immigration, Asylum, Trafficking and Nationality


Tom has a broad practice in immigration, asylum, trafficking and nationality law, particularly judicial review, but also in statutory appeals. His instructions have included:

  • Counsel for the SSHD in Court of Appeal proceedings concerning whether education can amount constitutes an ‘essential need’, for purposes of an extended family member showing dependency on an EEA national sponsor prior to coming to the UK.
  • Junior counsel (led by Zane Malik QC) in Supreme Court stage of arts 3 and 8 deportation case concerning the internal relocation alternative: SC (Jamaica) v SSHD [2022] 1 WLR 3190
  • Counsel for the SSHD in appeals concerning Iraq identity documents and art 3: MA (Iraq) v SSHD [2021] EWCA Civ 1467.
  • Junior counsel for the SSHD in art 3 and art 14 with 8 challenges to NRPF Policy: W, A Child v SSHD [2020] 1 W.L.R. 4420 and ST (A Child) v SSHD [2021] EWHC 1085 (Admin) (DC) and subsequent civil caim.
  • Country guidance cases concerning Iraq (identity documents) and Sri Lanka (sur place activities).
  • R (SD) v SSHD, CO/5213/2018, 1.10.19: successful defence of conclusive grounds decision.
  • R (Ahmed) v SSHD [2019] EWCA Civ 1070: the Court of Appeal holding that the Immigration Rules para 276B(v) ‘disregard’ did not bridge gaps between periods of lawful temporary residence such as to entitle persons to claim “10 years continuous lawful residence” under para 276B(i)(a).
  • Bhandari v SSHD [2019] EWCA Civ 129: Appeal to the Court of Appeal against UT PTA refusal in case concerning fairness in operation of the Points Based System, in relation to the 60-day policy applied to Tier 4 student migrants, when their college sponsors has its licence revoked.

Information Rights and Data Protection


Tom accepts instructions in all areas of information law, including FOIA, GDPR/DPA, the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR), and the torts of misuse of private information, breach of confidence and defamation. His recent instructions include:

  • Advising on post-Brexit legislation and international agreement governing cross-border data transfers for law enforcement purposes.
  • Junior counsel for the CPS in the 2017 and 2021 Maurizi v IC and CPS appeals against ICO decisions in respect to FOIA requests for CPS-Sweden/Ecuador/US communications in relation to the extradition of Julian Assange.
  • Appearing for HSE in EIR appeal arising from requests for information relating to regulatory response to demolition and construction works.
  • Advising an organisation in respect to a potential claim by them or their employees in defamation, misuse of private information and harassment, in relation to allegations of, inter alia, racism.
  • Acting for the Committee on Climate Change in appeal against Information Commissioner decision notice.
  • Acting for HMT in a FOIA appeal against ICO dismissal of complaint against its handling of FOI request.
  • Appearing for DEFRA before the Information Rights Tribunal in an appeal against a decision of the Information Commissioner concerning its application of reg 12(4)(e) EIR (‘internal communications’) to a request for disclosure of ministerial briefings.
  • Advising a Government department in relation to a threatened claim for damages for breach of the GDPR/DPA and for alleged misuse of private information and confidentiality.
  • Advice on the application of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 (“PECR”) and GDPR to a contract for provision of marketing services.

Regulatory and Disciplinary


Tom accepts instructions in all areas of regulatory and disciplinary matters.

  • Advice to the Equality and Human Rights Commission on a threatened judicial review of decision not to take formal investigative or enforcement proceedings.
  • He has acted as Independent Counsel, instructed by the Competition and Markets Authority, to advise on a dispute as to the application of legal professional privilege to documents obtained under warrant,.
  • In healthcare law, he recently prosecuted on behalf of the General Chiropractic Council at its Professional Conduct Committee. He has represented the General Dental Council at the Interim Orders Committee. He recently appeared on behalf of the Health and Care Professions Council, intervening in a JR of a university decision to withdraw a student from a course on fitness to practise grounds.
  • In financial services law, he spent six months at the FCA, advising on a wide range of regulatory and disciplinary matters. He also successfully represented the FCA at its Regulatory Decisions Committee.
  • In electoral law, he was seconded to the Electoral Commission for two days per week in July and August 2017, advising the regulator on a range of matters, from party registration, to party officers, to the scope of the regulator’s powers. For more detail on recent instructions, see above section on electoral law under ‘Public Law’.
  • In the (8th) edition of Harris on ‘Regulatory and Disciplinary Proceedings’, he drafted the ‘Healthcare’ chapter (with Alison Foster QC and Peter Mant), the chapter on ‘The Hearing’ (with Gregory Treverton-Jones QC and Jonathan Auburn), and the chapter on Disclosure and Confidentiality (with Gregory, Alexis Hearnden and Peter Mant). He also contributed to the healthcare chapter of the recent re-edit.
  • In disciplinary law, he drafted the pleadings and appeared at the preliminary hearings on behalf of a major international charity’s defending a claim by an expelled former trustee, involving issues of contract law, disciplinary procedures, natural justice and human rights. He has also acted as legal adviser to a university student disciplinary committee at an internal disciplinary hearing.

Actions against the Police


Tom takes instructions in actions against the police, including claims involving battery, assault, breach of arts 3 and 5 ECHR, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution and wrongful arrest. In a similar area, Tom has also advised in a negligence and false imprisonment claim against a magistrates’ court. He has also advised in proposed civil actions against the Home Office arising from arrest by UK Border Force officers.

Prison Law


Tom accepts instructions in all aspects of prison law. He has acted for the successful claimant in JR challenge to interference with a prisoner’s confidential and privileged correspondence, leading to a change of policy within the prison, drafted grounds in a JR challenge to a Category A Review Team (“CART”) categorisation decision, and in claims for Faulkner art 5(4) damages for delayed Parole Board hearing.

Equalities Law


Tom has extensive experience of advice and representing in cases involving equalities law, from the Equality Act 2010’s interaction with the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and the consultation on amendments to the latter, to disability discrimination claims against schools, race discrimination by universities, local authority administration of disabled parking bays, and in the employment law context.

Tom equalities law experience includes the following:

  • Representing the Secretary of State in challenge to the lawfulness of her NRPF policy.
  • Tom also has particular expertise in the PSED, having been instructed in a number of cuts/closure JRs, including as junior counsel for the SSHD in challenge to her NRPF Policy, as junior counsel for C in a successful challenge to closure of special schools, as junior counsel for C in a challenge to closure of an adult day centre: R (oao AA) v Rotherham MBC [2019] EWHC 3529 (Admin). He appeared as junior counsel for D in a successful defence of a challenge to an LA’s funding of special educational provision for visually impaired children: R (ZK) v LB Redbridge [2021] ELR 238 (CA)]. ZK is notable for confirming (at first instance and in UKSC PTA refusal) the applicability to systemic challenges of the observations of Lord Brown in R (McDonald) v Kensington and Chelsea RLBC [2011] PTSR 1266 on the forerunner to the PSED.
  • Securing the Employment Tribunal’s first appointment and payment of a registered intermediary to assist a claimant lacking mental capacity to give and follow evidence.
  • Advice and pleadings in claim for damages for breach of Equality Act duties held by the managers of premises and controllers of let premises.
  • Drafting pleadings in a race and discrimination claim arising from a PhD student’s viva examination.
  • Advice on the Equality Act 2010’s interaction with the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and the consultation on amendments to the latter.
  • Civil and JR claims of breach of ECHR rights read in conjunction with art 14 ECHR, in educational and immigration contexts.

Multiple disability discrimination claims against schools, including, recently, JL v GB of Cherry Lane Primary School [2019] UKUT 223 (AAC), where he persuaded the UT(AAC) that r 12(3)(a) of the FTT(HESC) Rules was invalid and to direct that the Tribunal Procedure Committee consider the matter.

Art and Cultural Property


Tom is an experienced public and civil law practitioner, on the B-Panel of the Attorney General and C-Panel of the Equality and Human Rights Commission. He has particular expertise in judicial review, but also civil claims in contract and tort. His recent cases include claim in the tort of conversion, where he acted for the successful regulator defendant. He is assistant editor of Shackleton on the Law of Meetings, editing chapters including charity law. Before coming to the Bar, he had a number of jobs in the arts, including as Arts Promotions Officer at The Black-E in Liverpool, during European Capital of Culture 2008, which involved liaising with funding bodies including Arts Council England, and clients including the BBC.

Employment


  • Tom has expertise in whistleblowing / protected disclosure law and successfully represented the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in a JR challenge arising from alleged gap in protection and seeking an inquiry into the same.
  • Tom successfully appeared for the first claimant to secure ET appointment and funding of a registered intermediary to enable an incapacitous claimant to bring and take part in proceedings.

Defamation


  • Tom has advised a prospective claimant in relation to allegations against them of, inter alia, racism.

Recommendations


“Extremely bright and can advise really well in a number of different areas of law. Unafraid of a challenging case and bold with argument and approach. Willing and able to consider all angles of a case. Thorough and approachable.” (Legal 500, 2022)

“He is very reliable and very bright.” (Legal 500, 2021)

Call +44 (0)20 7832 1111 for more information

Barrister portfolio

Close

Click the + icon next to any barrister to add their profile to this portfolio.

Barrister Call CV Email

3