Scarlett Milligan

“Her written work is meticulously researched and practical on every level. She is always on top of the most recent case law in the given area, and she demonstrates experience beyond her call.” (Chambers and Partners, 2025)

“Scarlett is exceptionally impressive and unbelievably hard-working.” (Chambers and Partners, 2025)

“Scarlett has a fiery determination to achieve the best possible results for her clients. She is courageous, bold, and clients love her. She is highly determined and fiercely bright.” (Legal 500, 2025)

“Scarlett is exceptionally bright. She has a meticulous approach to getting to the bottom of very complex issues, and provides advice that is both legally and commercially sound.” (Legal 500, 2024)

Scarlett’s expansive public law and civil liability practice, acting for both claimants and defendants, has given her both a broad and deep understanding of civil liberties and human rights claims, and the various forums and forms in which they may arise. Scarlett is recognised by the directories as a leading junior in this area, and is typically instructed as sole counsel in high-value and high-profile litigation concerning breaches of human rights, up to and including in the Court of Appeal.

Scarlett is adept at advising on, and acting in cases concerning, the full breadth of the ECHR articles, from both a domestic standpoint as well as advising on Strasbourg case law and proceedings.

She has a particular expertise in claims arising from fatal accidents, homicides, physical and domestic abuse, sexual abuse and bullying/harassment (including within the military), torture and mistreatment, and psychiatric injury. Many of these claims have a substantial overlap with her civil liability, inquests, and public inquiries practice.

Scarlett was instructed in The Estate of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah v (1) Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, (2) Department for Transport, (3) Department for Health and Social Care (HC, 2024), the first private law claim for damages brought against the Government in respect of air quality, and takes a keen interest in the development of this area of law.

Cases of note:

• R (AA and HT et al) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (HC, 2025) – Scarlett (led by Colin Thomann KC) acted for the SSHD in these challenges to decisions to hold an independent inquiry, as opposed to a statutory inquiry, into the events at the Manston Short-Term Holding Facility in 2022. The case concerned the procedural requirements of Article 3 ECHR, and whether those requirements could be satisfied by a non-statutory inquiry. The proceedings were settled, and the independent inquiry began its work in March 2025.
• NR v South Wales Police (HC, 2025) – advising the Claimants on damages claims for breaches of Articles 3 and 8 ECHR arising from police failures to take steps that may have prevented sexual abuse of a minor at the hands of a stepparent. Scarlett has extensive experience in cases of sexual abuse against a variety of state actors and agents, acting for both claimants and defendants; see her recent webinar on the case of Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police [2024] UKSC 33.
• The Estate of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah v (1) Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, (2) Department for Transport, (3) Department for Health and Social Care (HC, 2024) – acting for the three central government departments (led by David Barr KC and Colin Thomann KC) in a claim concerning whether or not the Government could be held liable for air quality, whether in common law negligence or pursuant to the Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 2, 3 and 8 ECHR).
• R (Koro) v County Court at Central London and the Crown Prosecution Service [2024] EWCA Civ 94 – Scarlett acted as sole counsel in proceedings concerning whether or not the claimant had received a fair hearing, in accordance with his Article 6 ECHR rights, in proceedings against the CPS. The Court of Appeal found that the CPS had taken an inappropriate approach to the litigation, and that there had been a number of serious errors in the administration of the Claimant’s litigation. Scarlett’s approach – of providing the Court with a full appraisal of the complex factual position (including stating clearly where errors had been made) and of all applicable statutes and case law relating to the various points raised by the litigation – was praised by the Court of Appeal (“Her written and oral submissions were of the highest quality and extremely helpful, while maintaining a rigorously neutral stance”). The Court relied on her for considerable assistance, including the provision of a subsequent note on the Court’s powers, which the CPS were ordered to consider alongside the Court’s judgment. Scarlett’s approach and neutrality has since been recognised and endorsed by the Privy Council as being reflective of “internationally recognised principles of judicial independence and impartiality” (The Special Tribunal v The Estate Police Association [2024] UKPC 13).
• Advising (with Emily Formby KC) on the compliance of Jersey’s Fatal Accident Laws with claimants’ Article 14 ECHR rights, when read with Article 8 and Article 1 of Protocol 1 ECHR.
• Re: inappropriate care and treatment of disabled children (HC, 2024) – advising and acting in (led by Steve Broach KC) a case concerned with the inappropriate care and treatment of disabled children, including assault and neglect, contrary to Article 3 ECHR, as well as in common law negligence.
• Re: Joe Pooley (deceased) v Suffolk County Council and the Ministry of Justice – acting for Suffolk County Council in issuing a robust application to strike out a claim arising from the tragic death of Joe Pooley (featured on Netflix’s ‘When Missing Turns to Murder’), in which the Claimants had failed to properly particularise, or apply recent case law, on why a duty in negligence would arise, or why the council’s actions would amount to a breach of Article 3 ECHR, particularly in circumstances where the coroner had dismissed arguments that the council’s actions caused or contributed to the death. Scarlett’s application resulted in the claim against the council being withdrawn immediately.
• Re: TGS (deceased) v Sheffield Health and Social Care NHS Trust – advising the Trust on a claim for Article 2 and Article 8 damages further to the suicide of a mental health patient, who had been released into the community. The case concerned the boundaries for liability following the cases of Rabone v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust [2021] UKSC 2 and R (Maguire) v HM Senior Coroner for Blackpool and Fylde et al [2023] UKSC 20.
• MB v The Parole Board for England and Wales (2024) – acting for the Parole Board in defending a claim for damages for alleged unlawful delay in the management of a case before the Parole Board, contrary to Article 5 ECHR.
• Representing the bereaved family of Michaela Hall, who was murdered by her partner following an extensive history of domestic abuse. Scarlett acted for Micheala’s son and parents in a long-running inquest in which the Senior Coroner for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly gave a 57-page judgment, recording a number of state failings on the part of adult and children’s social services, police, and probation, who incorrectly assessed the risk posed to Michaela and, resultingly, did not take steps to manage her murderer’s risk in the community. Michaela’s case featured in a Panorama documentary into probation failings and Netflix’s ‘My Lover, My Killer’. Scarlett has a number of other ongoing cases concerning domestic abuse and homicide victims, typically involving police, probation and/or the local council.
• SK v Ealing Clinical Commissioning Group and London Borough of Ealing – acting (led by Victoria Butler-Cole KC) for SK in a claim for damages for breaches of Articles 5 and 8 ECHR further to a failure to obtain a court order authorising SK’s deprivation of liberty.
• Representing the bereaved family of Matthew Boorman, who was murdered by his neighbour. The murder was witnessed by Matthew’s children and his wife, who was also stabbed by his killer. The murder followed an extended history of anti-social behaviour and complaints, as well as the murderer informing police, only one day earlier, that he would murder Matthew.
• R (Bailey and Morris) v Secretary of State for Justice [2023] EWHC 555 (Admin) – acting for the SSJ (led by James Strachan KC) in a case concerning changes to the Parole Board Rules which prevented Ministry of Justice employees from giving the Parole Board a recommendation as to whether or not a prisoner should be released into the community. The Divisional Court found that the rule change was intra-vires, but nonetheless unlawful due to what the Court concluded was the improper purpose of the (then) SSJ, Dominic Raab, namely the intentional suppression of relevant witness evidence which interfered with a judicial process and contravened Article 6 ECHR. In subsequent judgments, the Divisional Court held that the contempt of court jurisdiction applies to Parole Board proceedings ([2023] EWHC 821 (Admin)), but decided not to initiate any contempt proceedings on the facts of the case ([2023] EWHC 1438 (KB)). Scarlett subsequently acted as sole counsel in R (Chiswick) v Secretary of State for Justice [2024] EWHC 1223 (Admin), concerning whether or not Parole Board hearings affected by the Bailey rule change were procedurally unfair.
• A and A v Ministry of Justice (HC, 2023) – acting for two high-profile prisoners convicted of terrorism offences, who alleged to have been the subject of torture and racial discrimination contrary to Articles 3 and 14 ECHR.
• R (The Anti-Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit) v Secretary of State for Justice (2022) – Scarlett was instructed by the SSJ (led by Galina Ward KC) in a challenge to the lawfulness of the system for identifying and protecting potential victims of modern slavery in the criminal justice system, alleged to be contrary to Article 4 of the ECHR. The substantive proceedings were followed by a judgment ([2022] EWHC 1962 (Admin)) on the retrospective variation of costs capping orders.
• Re: Insurance Company (HC, 2022) – advising, as sole counsel, on the prospects of bringing Article 1 Protocol 1 claims in respect of Compensation Recovery Unit (“CRU”) payments where contributory negligence has been found or factored into a settlement figure, following the litigation in R (Aviva Insurance Ltd and Swiss Reinsurance Company Ltd) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2021] EWHC 30 (Admin).

“Extremely thorough, expert knowledge of law and procedure, delightful to work with” (Legal 500, 2025)

“Scarlett’s approach to evidence is meticulous and she is a fantastic advocate, support and all round super person. A real team player who solicitors feel lucky to work with” (Legal 500, 2025)

“Scarlett is an exceptional advocate with a vast array of knowledge and experience” (Chambers and Partners, 2025)

“Her knowledge and experience far exceeds her years. Scarlett is equal parts passionate and pragmatic and is the complete package” (Chambers and Partners, 2024)

Scarlett has a broad personal injury, clinical negligence and civil liability practice which has strong connections to her work in the fields of inquests, inquiries, and human rights. She is recognised by the directories as a leading junior in all of these areas.

Scarlett is one of the few leading juniors with a high-value and high-profile caseload that straddles work for claimants and defendants equally, including in sensitive areas of instruction such as sexual abuse. She considers this to be an imperative part of her renowned ability to guide lay and professional clients alike through the litigation process as effectively as possible, having full regard to the likely concerns and priorities of all parties to the litigation. This approach enables her to have frank conversations with her opponents, and to cut through where there has previously been an impasse, maximising the opportunity for prompt and successful settlements for her clients.

Scarlett regularly acts as sole counsel in multi-million High Court litigation involving multiple parties (such as the litigation involving professional rugby union players who have sustained brain damage due to concussive injury), novel causes of action (such as the case of The Estate of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah v (1) Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, (2) Department for Transport, (3) Department for Health and Social Care (HC, 2024), concerning the potential liability of government departments for the role of air quality in a young girl’s death), complicated injuries (including brain injuries and psychiatric illness), and complex heads of loss (such as military pensions, accommodation claims, and ‘wealth creator’ fatal accident claims). Her appointments to the C and then B Panel of Attorney General’s Civil Council have given her significant experience in claims which raise issues of applicable law, forum and crown immunity.

Scarlett is known equally for her caring and compassionate manner with injured or bereaved claimants, and her ability to be robust and fight her client’s corners when necessary, leading to clients praising her as being “the complete package”. Cognisant of the detriment to all parties of unnecessarily extended litigation, rather than simply ‘going through the motions’, Scarlett often advises on the making of early applications to hone the Court’s and parties’ attention on the areas of the claim that have legal merit (if any), such as early applications for strike out, summary judgment, and declarations – whether in respect of an entire claim or part of it. She is a firm believer that the Court’s case management powers should be utilised, fairly, to eliminate hopeless claims and arguments, making the court service effective and accessible to as many people as possible.

Scarlett has particular expertise in civil claims arising from fatal accidents, homicides, physical and domestic abuse, sexual abuse and harassment, torture and mistreatment, psychiatric injury, and secondary victim claims (many of which involve civil claims for breaches of the Human Rights Act 1998, on which Scarlett also has considerable expertise).

Scarlett’s clinical negligence caseload tends to focus on claims involving loss of life and/or psychiatric injury, with her cases often exploring the boundaries of the state’s liability for mental health patients. In cases where there has been a loss of life, Scarlett’s multi-disciplinary expertise means she can offer clients assistance in the stages leading up to an inquest or investigation, through to the resolution of any subsequent civil claim.

Scarlett’s health and safety experience, and her expertise in claims arising from the built environment (both of which overlap with her personal injury and inquests/inquiries expertise), are described in further detail in ‘Cladding, Building Defects, and Health and Safety Litigation’ below.

In November 2019, Scarlett co-authored “A Practical Guide to the Law of Driverless Cars”, authoring the chapters on how the areas of negligence, product liability and employers’ liability will be impacted by, or require change as a result of, new automated technologies. As a result, she has significant expertise in civil claims concerning technology, automation and artificial intelligence. Click to read Scarlett’s blog on the UK’s Automated Vehicles Act 2024 and watch her webinar on the Law Commissions’ report on automated vehicles.

Cases of note:

• Rugby Union brain injury litigation (HC, 2025) – Scarlett is instructed (led by Susan Rodway KC) on behalf of a number of professional rugby union players for brain damage sustained by concussive injuries during their professional careers.
• NR v South Wales Police (HC, 2025) – advising the Claimants on damages claims for breaches of Articles 3 and 8 ECHR arising from police failures to take steps that may have prevented sexual abuse of a minor at the hands of a stepparent. Scarlett has extensive experience in cases of sexual abuse against a variety of state actors and agents, acting for both claimants and defendants; see her recent webinar on the case of Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police [2024] UKSC 33.
• G v Ministry of Defence (HC, 2025) – acting for the Ministry of Defence in a claim for alleged clinical negligence in surgery, resulting in complex regional pain syndrome.
• B v Ministry of Defence (HC, 2025) – acting for a Claimant in a bullying and harassment claim arising from service in the armed forces.
• M v Ministry of Defence (HC, 2024) – advising the Ministry of Defence on a clinical negligence claim arising from vaccination status within the armed forces
• The Estate of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah v (1) Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, (2) Department for Transport, (3) Department for Health and Social Care (HC, 2024) – acting for the three central government departments (led by David Barr KC and Colin Thomann KC) in a claim concerning whether or not the Government could be held liable for air quality, whether in common law negligence or pursuant to the Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 2, 3 and 8 ECHR).
• Lariam group litigation (HC, 2024) – acting (led by Neil Block KC and Nicola Greaney KC) for the Ministry of Defence in group litigation brought by serving and ex members of the armed forces for alleged clinical negligence in the prescription of anti-malarial drug Lariam, said to have caused psychiatric injury.
• Advising (with Emily Formby KC) on the compliance of Jersey’s Fatal Accident Laws with claimants’ Article 14 ECHR rights, when read with Article 8 and Article 1 of Protocol 1 ECHR.
• Re: inappropriate care and treatment of disabled children (HC, 2024) – advising and acting in (led by Steve Broach KC) a case concerned with the inappropriate care and treatment of disabled children, including assault, neglect, and in common law negligence.
• Re: Joe Pooley (deceased) v Suffolk County Council and the Ministry of Justice – acting for Suffolk County Council in issuing a robust application to strike out a claim arising from the tragic death of Joe Pooley (featured on Netflix’s ‘When Missing Turns to Murder’), in which the Claimants had failed to properly particularise, or apply recent case law, on why a duty in negligence would arise, particularly in circumstances where the coroner had dismissed arguments that the council’s actions caused or contributed to the death. Scarlett’s application resulted in the claim against the council being withdrawn immediately.
• Re: TGS (deceased) v Sheffield Health and Social Care NHS Trust – advising the Trust on a claim for Article 2 and Article 8 damages further to the suicide of a mental health patient, who had been released into the community. The case concerned the boundaries for liability following the cases of Rabone v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust [2021] UKSC 2 and R (Maguire) v HM Senior Coroner for Blackpool and Fylde et al [2023] UKSC 20.
• Representing the bereaved family of Michaela Hall, who was murdered by her partner following an extensive history of domestic abuse. Scarlett acted for Micheala’s son and parents in a long-running inquest in which the Senior Coroner for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly gave a 57-page judgment, recording a number of state failings on the part of adult and children’s social services, police, and probation, who incorrectly assessed the risk posed to Michaela and, resultingly, did not take steps to manage her murderer’s risk in the community. Michaela’s case featured in a Panorama documentary into probation failings and Netflix’s ‘My Lover, My Killer’. Scarlett has a number of other ongoing cases concerning domestic abuse and homicide victims, typically involving police, probation and/or the local council.
• AB v Ministry of Defence (HC, 2023) – advising the Ministry of Defence on employers’ liability and vicarious liability claims for sexual abuse, arising from historic events at Deepcut Barracks. Scarlett also advised and acted in subsequent contribution claims brought by the MoD against convicted perpetrators of abuse.
• Representing the bereaved family of Matthew Boorman, who was murdered by his neighbour. The murder was witnessed by Matthew’s children and his wife, who was also stabbed by his killer. The murder followed an extended history of anti-social behaviour and complaints, as well as the murderer informing police, only one day earlier, that he would murder Matthew.
• ED v Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust (HC, 2023) – advising (led by Victoria Butler-Cole KC) the litigation friend of an autistic man with a learning disability on personal injuries arising from alleged mistreatment during retrains and excessive detention whilst in hospital.
• N v B (HC, 2023) – advising defendant re-insurance company on quantum dispute arising out of industry induced mesothelioma.
• P v B (CC, 2023) – advising and acting for defendant security company on liability following an individual setting themselves on fire in a public building, resulting in a bystander’s claim for psychiatric injury premised upon the rescuer principle.
• Re: Jack Bristow (HC, 2023) – advising the bereaved family of Jack Bristow who tragically died when his work vehicle was hit by a tree during Storm Eunice.
• C v Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office – advising on liability, quantum and applicable law for personal injury arising from consulate operations in Jerusalem.
• F v JL (HC, 2022) – Scarlett acted for the defendant in a high-value asbestosis personal injury claim. The quantum arguments were complicated, raising difficult questions of law such as whether or not the claimant’s business model was asset-based or one of wealth creation, the treatment within a fatal claim of assets placed in a tax-efficient trust for the benefit of the dependants (creating the potential for double recovery), and the need to look beyond the terms of a discretionary trust. Scarlett’s work and advice, acting against a leading asbestosis silk, resulted in the claim settling for less than half the pleaded value.
• H v Royal Sun Alliance (CC, 2022) – Scarlett, acting for a non-party insurance company, took the court through the lengthy and complex procedural history of a case that had relentlessly been pursued against the wrong defendant, amidst a number of procedural errors that meant the claim had not been validly served. The Claimant’s legal team continued, without proper foundation, to insist that the errors were the fault of the RSA and suggested that issues previously determined by the Court at an earlier hearing had not been. Scarlett’s involvement ensured the Court was properly appraised of what had gone before and resulted in wasted costs orders being made against the Claimant’s solicitors.
• B v Ministry of Defence (CC, 2022) – advising the Ministry of Defence on an alleged fraudulent mental health claim, arising in the context of specialist security operations, requiring extensive special measures to prevent disclosure of witness identities and operation locations.
• Re: Insurance Company (HC, 2022) – advising, as sole counsel, on the prospects of bringing Article 1 Protocol 1 claims in respect of Compensation Recovery Unit (“CRU”) payments where contributory negligence has been found or factored into a settlement figure, following the litigation in R (Aviva Insurance Ltd and Swiss Reinsurance Company Ltd) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2021] EWHC 30 (Admin).

‘Exceptional in every area – Scarlett’s advice is solid, robust and considers all angles, her drafting work is exceptional and her legal analysis is invariably flawless.’ (Chambers and Partners, 2025)

‘She is excellent with clients and clearly really cares about her work. Someone that will definitely fight her corner – a tenacious advocate’ (Chambers and Partners, 2024)

‘A confident, impressive and dedicated barrister who leaves no stone unturned.’ (Legal 500, 2024)

‘Scarlett is a highly skilled advocate and she is compassionate with the families she represents’ (Chambers and Partners, 2024)

Scarlett is a leading and in-demand junior, instructed in many of the most high-profile inquests, inquiries and investigations of the day. Scarlett acts for individuals, families, corporations and government departments. She regularly appears as sole counsel in long running and extremely complex Article 2 inquiries and jury inquests, typically against opponents of far more senior call. She regularly gives training on inquest law.

Scarlett’s extensive inquiry experience means she is well versed in considerations of privilege, confidentiality, and other disclosure related concerns. She has a “meticulous” eye for detail and extensive experience on the various documentary platforms, which together means she is often credited with finding a ‘needle in the haystack’ or ‘silver bullet’ among hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of documents.

As a leading public law junior, Scarlett is also instructed in judicial review challenges concerning inquests and inquiries, often appearing against silks and on behalf of significant parties, such as bereaved families at the heart of inquests/inquiries, the Chief Coroner, His Majesty’s Court’s and Tribunals Service, and various Secretaries of State.

Scarlett is known among her clients both for her caring and compassionate manner with individuals (who may be bereaved or seriously hurt by the subject of an inquest or inquiry), as well as her ability to be bold, robust and fight her clients’ corners in legal argument, leading to clients praising her as offering “the complete package”.

Scarlett holds strong views on the importance of the duty of candour and of providing the Court / an Inquiry with full and frank assistance and, accordingly, is often instructed to act and advise in sensitive cases, or those in which a sensible and frank approach is needed to identify, fairly, where things went wrong, and how to put things right going forward.

Cases of note (Inquiries):

• The Nottingham Inquiry (ongoing) – Scarlett acts for an individual CP in relation to Valdo Calocane’s healthcare.
• R (AA and HT et al) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (HC, 2025) – Scarlett (led by Colin Thomann KC) acted for the SSHD in these challenges to decisions to hold an independent inquiry, as opposed to a statutory inquiry, into the events at the Manston Short-Term Holding Facility in 2022. The case concerned the procedural requirements of Article 3 ECHR, and whether those requirements could be satisfied by a non-statutory inquiry. The proceedings were settled, and the independent inquiry began its work in March 2025.
• The Infected Blood Inquiry (2022-ongoing) – Scarlett was instructed on behalf of infected and affected victims who campaigned for over 40 years for the establishment of the Inquiry. Scarlett’s work was central to the team’s extensive representations on the structure and efficacy of the licensing regime for blood products throughout the time period of interest to the Inquiry, and the viability of civil claims for the same (a specialist subject overlooked by many other CP groups). The legal team that Scarlett was part of (including Sam Stein KC of 39 Essex) took a lead role in assisting the Inquiry with its scrutiny of the evidence of former and current members of the Cabinet, including the then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, in summer 2023. Scarlett’s team was responsible – with other CP groups – for submitting to the Inquiry that its terms of reference, which covered government responses and compensation, enabled the Inquiry to remain ‘live’ further to the ‘final’ report being published. This submission was the foundation of the Inquiry’s recent (2025) report and hearings on the Government’s approach to compensating the infected and affected.
• The Grenfell Towery Inquiry (2017-2024) – Scarlett was instructed as junior counsel to the Inquiry shortly after its inception in 2017, and was heavily involved in the Inquiry until the publication of its final report in 2024, working alongside Richard Millett KC, Andrew Kinnier KC, and Kate Grange KC.
  • In Phase 1, Scarlett was trusted with some of the most sensitive documentation and promoted to the role of disclosure counsel. In this role, she managed a large team (of up to 50 individuals) of paralegals and other junior barristers (many of whom were of a more senior call than her) tasked with the Inquiry’s document review, to ensure that all were conducting high-standard work and were appraised of developing areas of interest and importance to the Inquiry.
  • In Phase 2, Scarlett was a leading junior on the LFB preparedness module (Module 5). She assisted with the cross-examination of a number of senior public servants (including former LFB Commissioners Andy Roe, Dany Cotton, Ron Dobson and Sir Ken Knight) and former fire officials and ministers (including Brandon Lewis MP). Working with Andrew Kinnier KC and leading computer science expert Christopher Johnson (now Chief Scientific Adviser in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology), Scarlett did extensive work in the field of emergency service radio communications, and on the national work required to improve the robustness and reliability of communications in the emergency services.

• The Covid-19 Inquiry (2023) – Scarlett (led by Sam Stein KC and Fiona Scolding KC) was instructed by the Department of Health and Social Care as part of a bespoke counsel team put in place to assist with the evidence of Matt Hancock, the former Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, during modules 1 and 2 of the Covid-19 Inquiry. The scale of the evidence and information to be digested and analysed was vast, and done at speed, given the Secretary of State’s heavy involvement in the ‘key decisions’ throughout 2020-2022, which were the subject of Module 2.

Cases of note (Inquests):

• Re TT (deceased) (2025) – advising a bereaved family ahead of the first inquest to examine contaminated blood products further to the report of the Infected Blood Inquiry, in which Scarlett also acted for infected and affected individuals (see above)
• Re HMP Lowdham Grange deaths (Binfield, Karbauskas and Richards, 2024) – covering for Jenni Richards KC, on behalf of Sodexo, in these long-running Article 2, jury inquests into deaths that occurred in HMP Lowdham Grange following the transfer of the prison from private provider Serco to private provider Sodexo in February 2023. Scarlett’s B and C Panel appointments mean she has extensive experience in prison-based inquests.
• R (Bryan) v HM Assistant Coroner for Buckinghamshire [2024] EWHC 26 (Admin) – Scarlett was instructed as sole counsel by the Chief Coroner to represent him as an interested party in a judicial review arising out of the inquest into the tragic death of Leighane and Melsadie Redmond. The claim challenged the accuracy of the Chief Coroner’s Law Sheet No.1 on Unlawful Killing further to the case of R (Maughan) v Coroner for Oxfordshire [2020] UKSC 46, which altered the standard of proof for findings of suicide and unlawful killing. The Divisional Court accepted that the Law Sheet was accurate and noted the helpfulness and neutrality of Scarlett’s submissions: “while scrupulously maintaining neutrality as between the various different interests, [the Chief Coroner] has made helpful submissions about the relevant and applicable principles with which we are concerned”.
• His Majesty’s Senior Coroner for Sefton, Knowsley and St Helens v Kay et al [2024] 5 WLUK 233 – Scarlett acted for the Senior Coroner who sought and obtained an order quashing an inquest pursuant to Section 13 of the Coroners’ Act 1988, further to the receipt of fresh evidence as to the deceased’s state of mind.
• Re MT (deceased) – representing the bereaved family of a man with aortic dissection who was told by an A&E registrar to attend his GP and take Gaviscon. Scarlett has conducted a number of inquests involving heart-related healthcare deaths, including another deceased man whose ECG was not checked before he was told to go home and who subsequently died of a pulmonary embolism.
• Re Angel (deceased) – Scarlett acted for the bereaved family of a woman, an NHS Service Manager, who took her own life while suffering extreme stress as a consequence of being subject to an extensively delayed and mishandled investigation into allegations made against her in her workplace. The deceased’s treatment was found to have been unacceptable and unfair when judged against the standards that had recently been set out in the letters from Baroness Dido Harding to NHS Trusts in respect of, inter alia, the NHS’ workforce and disciplinary processes.

• Representing the bereaved family of Michaela Hall, who was murdered by her partner following an extensive history of domestic abuse. Scarlett acted for Micheala’s son and parents in a long-running inquest in which the Senior Coroner for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly gave a 57-page judgment, recording a number of state failings on the part of adult and children’s social services, police, and probation, who incorrectly assessed the risk posed to Michaela and, resultingly, did not take steps to manage her murderer’s risk in the community. Michaela’s case featured in a Panorama documentary into probation failings and Netflix’s ‘My Lover, My Killer’. Scarlett has a number of other ongoing cases concerning domestic abuse and homicide victims, typically involving police, probation and/or the local council.
• Representing the bereaved family of Cariss Stone, a 19-year-old who took her own life while detained under the Mental Health Act, having been known to the NHS Trust for several years and awaiting a progression plan between institutions. The inquest heard evidence that observations of Cariss were not undertaken every 5 minutes, and the NHS Trust admitted that its system of managing observations on the ward was confusing, inadequate and unsafe. The jury in her Article 2 inquest recorded deficiencies in her treatment.
• Re: Oliver McGowan (deceased) – advising, on a pro bono basis (led by Victoria Butler-Cole KC and Steve Broach KC), Oliver’s bereaved parents on the inquest findings, and fresh evidence arising from other independent reviews. Oliver was a young man of 18 with cerebral palsy, epilepsy, autism and learning disabilities who died after receiving antipsychotic medication in hospital. Oliver’s death, and the work of his parents who have campaigned tirelessly since his death, has resulted in specialist training and a code of practice being issued in his name.
• Re: Jack Bristow (deceased) – acting for the bereaved family of Jack Bristow who tragically died when his work vehicle was hit by a tree during Storm Eunice.
• HM Senior Coroner for South London v HM Assistant Coroner for South London [2022] EWHC 1388 (Admin) – Scarlett acted for the Senior Coroner in an application made pursuant to Section 13 of the Coroners’ Act 1988, the provisions of which had not been considered since their amendment in 2013. The High Court held that the effect of the amendments were that, when an inquest’s conclusion is quashed, it is not necessary to require a fresh inquest to be held, and it is open to the court to remit the matter back to a new coroner for reconsideration of the conclusion based on the evidence already elicited by the inquest.

“Scarlett has a fiery determination to achieve the best possible results for her clients. She is courageous, bold, and clients love her. She is highly determined and fiercely bright.” (Legal 500, 2025)

“Scarlett is exceptionally bright. She has a meticulous approach to getting to the bottom of very complex issues, and provides advice that is both legally and commercially sound.” (Legal 500, 2024)

Scarlett acts for complainants, registrants, trusts and organisations, and regulators in all of her key practice areas, and is developing a practice in regulatory and disciplinary hearings, including those in an education setting. She regularly represents Ofsted and is on the panel of counsel regularly instructed by the Disclosure and Barring Service.

Scarlett’s unique combination of strong expertise across inquests and inquiries, personal injury and clinical negligence, and public/administrative law makes her an ideal junior to advise clients throughout all stages of complaints and connected proceedings. Her advice is always alive to the potential for, and repercussions upon, further proceedings, whether civil claims for damages, or public law challenges to the lawfulness and fairness of regulatory and disciplinary proceedings.

Scarlett is known for her ability to navigate the sensitive issues that arise in disciplinary and regulatory proceedings, without distracting from or diluting the strong legal arguments that claimants and defendants need to make; she is equally recognised for her ability to be “compassionate” and “caring” with clients, as well as being “tenacious” and “bold” when the need arises. This, combined with the breadth of her multi-disciplinary assistance, has led to clients praising her as being “the complete package”

Cases of note:

• B v Ofsted – acting for Ofsted in an appeal of a decision to cancel a registration (ongoing).
• S v Ofsted – acted for Ofsted in its successful defence of an appeal to a decision not to grant a waiver in respect of a disqualification by association.
• R (the British Medical Association) v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 960 (Admin) – Scarlett acted (led by Jenni Richards KC) for the BMA in its challenge to the GMC’s use of the term “medical professionals” to encompass doctors as well as physician associates and anaesthetist associates, and to only issue a single set of professional standards, on the basis of patient confusion and public safety risks.
• Re: KA – advising a child and her parents on misconduct allegations made against the child for online activity. The school had not given any fair consideration to the role of other students and even school staff in causing harm, nor the (significant) role of the child’s disabilities which had not been adequately catered for by the school. Owing to Scarlett’s early intervention prior to the misconduct hearing, all allegations and disciplinary proceedings against the child were dropped.
• R (Options UK Personal Pensions) v Financial Ombudsman Service [2024] EWCA Civ 541 – Scarlett acted (led by James Strachan KC) for the successful Financial Ombudsman Service in a challenge to the Ombudsman’s decision awarding compensation to a consumer who opened a self-invested personal pension (“SIPP”) with Options, having been introduced by an unregulated entity. The Ombudsman found that there was a failure to carry out due diligence on the introducer or the investment and that Options had not acted in accordance with good industry practice and its regulatory obligations. The Claimant unsuccessfully argued that the Ombudsman Service had made errors of law and/or acted unreasonably in departing from common law principles regarding contracts and negligence. The case was reported by the media to be worth £25m, in light of similar claims against the Claimant’s operating group.
• JI v Disclosure and Barring Service – Scarlett acted for the successful DBS in an appeal to a decision to place the appellant on the children’s barred list, further to her having placed a 2-year-old in a highchair in the outdoors, when it was cold and raining, as punishment for having been screaming in excitement.
• SKA v Disclosure and Barring Service – Scarlett acted for the successful DBS in an appeal to a decision to place the appellant consultant on the adult’s and children’s barred list, following him having been convicted of assault for slapping an inpatient, known to have mental health conditions and a fear of hospitals, when she was in an agitated state having come round from major surgery.
• Re Angel (deceased) – Scarlett acted for the bereaved family of a woman, an NHS Service Manager, who took her own life while suffering extreme stress as a consequence of being subject to an extensively delayed and mishandled investigation into allegations made against her in her workplace. The deceased’s treatment was found to have been unacceptable and unfair when judged against the standards that had recently been set out in the letters from Baroness Dido Harding to NHS Trusts in respect of, inter alia, the NHS’ workforce and disciplinary processes.

Scarlett acts and advises in procurement challenges for both suppliers and contracting authorities, and regularly delivers training on all aspects of the Procurement Act 2023. She has particular knowledge and expertise of the new debarment and exclusion provisions within the Act, and is currently advising the government on aspects of the regime’s operation (led by Kate Grange KC).

Scarlett’s procurement expertise spans a number of sectors and overlaps with a number of her other practice areas, including but not limited to construction products and the built environment, health provision, and data and technology services. She co-authored (with Kate Grange KC) the construction products chapter in Dovar and Sawtell on the Building Safety Act (Sweet & Maxwell, 2025), which explains how the new debarment and exclusion provisions are intended to act as an important aspect of regulation of construction products in the UK.

“Exceptional in every area – Scarlett’s advice is solid, robust and considers all angles, her drafting work is exceptional and her legal analysis is invariably flawless.” (Chambers and Partners, 2025)

“She is excellent with clients and clearly really cares about her work. Someone that will definitely fight her corner – a tenacious advocate” (Chambers and Partners, 2024)

“A confident, impressive and dedicated barrister who leaves no stone unturned.” (Legal 500, 2024)

Scarlett has extensive experience advising and acting in criminal health and safety litigation, civil liability claims for health and safety or property damage, and inquests and inquiries arising out of fatal accidents in the built environment.

Herinstruction as Junior Counsel to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry (having been instructed in 2017 through to the publication of the Inquiry’s Phase 2 report in 2024) means she has been at the forefront of, and has a solid and broad understanding of, some of the most pressing and complicated legal issues that have arisen in the built environment, as well as recent changes to the regulatory and legislative landscape, including the Fire Safety Act 2021, Fire Safety Regulations 2022, and the Building Safety Act 2022.

Scarlett’s civil liability practice includes claims for property damage, insurance and re-insurance disputes (including scope of policy coverage disputes, and civil fraud claims connected with insurance policy claims), construction and leaseholder related claims (including building liability orders, remediation orders, and remediation contribution orders), and professional negligence claims for defects in the built environment.

Scarlett’s expertise in respect of the regulation of construction products post-Grenfell overlaps significantly with her procurement expertise. She co-authored (with Kate Grange KC) the construction products chapter in Dovar and Sawtell on the Building Safety Act (Sweet & Maxwell, 2025), which explains how the new debarment and exclusion provisions are intended to act as an important aspect of regulation of construction products in the UK, alongside forthcoming construction product regulations.

She has also contributed to the Building Safety Act chapter of the forthcoming 5^th edition of Wilmot-Smith on Construction Contracts, written with Kate Grange KC, David Sawtell, Samantha Jones and Rachel Sullivan).

Scarlett also regularly delivers training and seminars in chambers on these topics

Cases of note:

• R v HT (2024, ongoing) – acting for an individual defendant charged with health and safety breaches arising out of use and handling of chemicals within a hotel chain.
• C v P and I (HC, 2024, ongoing) – acting for one of three defendants to a property damage and personal injury claim, arising out of the allegedly negligent construction of balcony walkways in a block of flats.
• R v ET (2023, ongoing) – advising one of three defendants charged with health and safety offences further to catastrophic injury on a construction site.
• R v PB (2022) – advising a potential defendant to HSE enforcement proceedings at the pre-charge and interview stage, in respect of construction site practices allegedly breaching health and safety standards. Scarlett’s advice resulted in no further action being brought against her client.
• R v H (2019) – advising a background insurance company throughout criminal proceedings for dangerous driving, and subsequent High Court civil litigation.

• The Grenfell Towery Inquiry (2017-2024) – Scarlett was instructed as junior counsel to the Inquiry shortly after its inception in 2017, and was heavily involved in the Inquiry until the publication of its final report in 2024, working alongside Richard Millett KC, Andrew Kinnier KC, and Kate Grange KC.

• R v SG (2017) – assisting a background insurance company throughout criminal proceedings concerning alleged health and safety breaches in the identification and removal of asbestos.

Scarlett has a developing practice and interest in environmental law. Scarlett was instructed by the central government departments (led by David Barr KC and Colin Thomann KC) in The Estate of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah v (1) Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, (2) Department for Transport, (3) Department for Health and Social Care (HC, 2024), the first private law claim for damages brought against the Government in respect of air quality. The claims were brought in reliance upon common law negligence and the Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 2, 3 and 8 ECHR).

Scarlett has a developing practice and interest in sports law, particularly in its intersection with personal injury, health and safety, and broader civil liability law. Scarlett is currently instructed (led by Susan Rodway KC) in the Rugby Union brain injury litigation, on behalf of a number of professional rugby union players for brain damage sustained by concussive injuries during their professional careers.