GOLDSMITH CHAMBERS - Key Persons
Adil is an attorney admitted to the New York Bar since 2015. He was admitted to the Paris Bar from 2016 to 2023 (currently inactive).
He is experienced in handling high profile disputes in France, Africa, and the MENA region, and advises individuals, businesses, and sovereigns on criminal law, white-collar crime, and public international law issues. He acted as one of the leading litigators in the Cameroon post-electoral crisis, and contributed to securing the release of numerous political figures including the former President of the International Law Commission and presidential candidate Maurice KAMTO.
Adil is also regarded as a highly effective criminal law and sports law litigator, both when he is instructed as a defender or on the victim's side.
Amongst the cases that are on public record, he secured the full dismissal of all charges by the prosecution office in the case of the internationally acclaimed track and field trainer Giscard SAMBA. Mr Giscard SAMBA was also cleared of all disciplinary charges by the appellate disciplinary committee of the French Federation of Athletics. Adil also represented before French criminal courts the family of Mrs Julie DOUIB after her assassination by her partner, and was featured in several documentaries on this case, which triggered in France the "Grenelle des Violences Conjugales", the government policy summit that led to several measures in favour of victims of domestic violence.
Practice areas:
Crime, Economic sanctions, Public international law, Human rights law, Sports law
Alan specialises in civil litigation and is authorised by the Bar Standards Board to accept direct public access work and to conduct litigation.
Passionate about animal rights and a keen lover of art and music he very much enjoys taking cases in these fields.
Alan is a founder member of the Association of Military Court Advocates, a member of the Society of English and American Lawyers, and a member of A-Law.
With extensive experience of military law and media law, Alan has acted in numerous courts martial and was a lecturer at the Ministry of Defence Specialist Training School; he also provided pre-publication advice to national newspapers.
Alan enjoys writing legal articles. He was the presenter of "Legally Speaking" on Radio Exeter and has made frequent appearances on BBC Radio Cornwall for legal debate and discussion.
Alex is an experienced criminal practitioner who appears for the defence in cases of the utmost gravity and complexity. He is also a grade 3 prosecutor on the CPS list and a member of the CPS RASSO panel. He is regularly instructed to prosecute substantial drug conspiracy cases.
Alex's careful preparation and availability to provide advice mean that he is particularly valued by solicitors in cases which are complicated or unusual, and where advice on novel points of law is required.
In recent years Alex has been instructed in cases including murder, attempted murder, mortgage fraud, revenue fraud, rape, historic sexual abuse, grooming of children over the internet, importation and distribution of drugs, kidnapping, armed robbery, conspiracy to burgle, firearms and GBH with intent.
Alex is regarded as having particular expertise in representing the defendant in large and complicated confiscation cases under the Proceeds of Crime Act and regularly appears as leading junior counsel in those cases. In a number of very substantial confiscation cases he has been successful in defeating allegations of hidden assets put forward by the prosecution, and in persuading the judge to set the benefit figure much lower than asked for by the prosecution.
Amanda specialises in immigration law.
Amanda moved to Goldsmith Chambers from Mansfield Chambers in October 2015.
Prior to coming to the Bar, Amanda worked in the field of immigration and asylum law at Turpin and Miller LLP, Bail for Immigration Detainees and the Coventry Refugee Centre.
From 2009 to 2010 she worked as a Research Assistant in the Law Commission's Public Law Team. She has also previously spent time in the Malawian Legal Aid Department, working on homicide cases and developing pro bono bail and mitigation projects within Malawian Universities.
Amarjit is very professional in her approach. Her attention to detail stands her apart, always ensuring she works with all the evidence she has to hand and highlighting what can be improved along the way
Amarjit is a specialist immigration practitioner and a senior member of the Immigration and Public Law team with nearly 20 years' experience at the Bar.
Throughout her career, Amarjit has been committed to undertaking both legal aid and private work. Her practice covers a broad spectrum of immigration, asylum, human rights and nationality law in the First-Tier Tribunal, Upper Tribunal and the Court of Appeal, including appeals and judicial review challenges.
Andrew Warnock QC was retained as leading counsel in early 2018. David worked with Andrew to prepare the Statement of Facts and Issues, the Chronology and the Appellant's Case. David supervised the preparation of the bundles for the Supreme Court including the Appendix and electronic bundle. Andrew Warnock QC appeared as leading counsel at the hearing of the appeal with David as first junior and Laura Giachardi second junior.
Barry is a specialist in commercial and civil litigation particularly property related. He started his legal career as a common law practitioner. In thirty years of practice there are few areas of law where he has not been instructed.
‘She is a fearless fighter on behalf of her clients and her advocacy is outstanding. Her vast experience and sharp intellect are a lethal combination, the ultimate beneficiary of which is the lay client. She is a real asset to the immigration and public law bar, at the legal aid coalface. She has an incredible work ethic and is always a pleasure to work with.'
Chris specialises in all aspects of child and family work including public and private law.
He initially qualified and practiced as a solicitor before transferring to the Bar in 1995. Chris joined Goldsmith Chambers as a tenant having completed his pupillage there.
Daniel Coleman is a well established practitioner and he appears at all levels in Immigration law cases.
Daniel is committed to appellate work and has a special interest in cases involving both Zimbabwe and South Africa.
Daniel has numerous appearances in the Court of Appeal and the High Court.
David practices mainly in landlord and tenant, general common law and commercial litigation. Additionally, David has experience in personal Injury and professional Liability. He has extensive experience as an advocate in the county court, the High Court and the Court of Appeal. He is qualified to accept instructions directly from the public.
Practice areas
Residential and Commercial Landlord & Tenant
David Giles was counsel in the Court of Appeal. Mr Devani engaged David as sole counsel to apply to the Supreme Court for permission to appeal and a continued stay on the Court of Appeal's Order. David identified the points of law of general public importance, prepared the Notice of Appeal and drafted Grounds of Appeal. David advised Mr Devani on and oversaw his compliance with the Supreme Court's rules. David was instructed to contest Mr Wells' Notice of Objection and application for security for costs. On 6 November 2017, the Supreme Court granted Mr Devani unconditional permission to appeal.
"Dilan is a pleasure to work with. In this instance, Dilan provided clear, logical and precise advice to our client, a major IT business, in a commercial dispute involving the interpretation of some very specific clauses in the relevant contract. His advice on those clauses and potential litigation strategy led to the best, quickest and most cost effective outcome for our client in the circumstances."
Dilan Deeljur has a wide-ranging civil practice with a particular focus on commercial, property and employment law.
Dilan regularly appears in the County Court, High Court (Chancery Division and Queen's Bench Division), Employment and Property Tribunals. He has been praised by judges and clients alike for his pragmatic and straight forward approach.
Dilan has a broad range of experience in dealing with business and commercial disputes. He is regularly engaged by businesses and consumers for issues arising out of business to business and business to consumer contracts. He acts in cases requiring injunctive relief for matters such as restrictive covenants and induced breach of contract, and emergency injunction applications.
His practice in this area also encompasses commercial contracts, commercial property disputes, civil fraud, consumer law, economic torts, costs and damages. Dilan is also often instructed in land, property and tenancy matters including easement, boundary, breach of leasehold, rent and disrepair disputes.
He is currently advising a number of firms on the ‘Mercedes Emissions scandal' and on Undisclosed Commission on Insurance claims.
Dilan is widely known as a specialist in consumer credit law and financial irregularity. His previous role as Legal Counsel at a Commercial and Financial Litigation firm allowed him to develop expertise in bringing non-disclosure of commission and unfair relationship claims against major banks and insurers.
Dilan acts in Direct Public Access matters and is qualified to accept instructions directly from members of the Public where applicable.
‘Dominic is a legend in legal circles with his forensic mind and quick wit. He is excellent with clients and can think on his feet in the most difficult and complex of cases.'
‘Charlotte is an excellent and fearless advocate. She is extremely hard-working, produces excellent cogent submissions, is wonderful with clients, is a great team player and is a superb talent. She is also a highly-regarded academic.'
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the mother at a fact-finding hearing in which the mother alleged sexual abuse, which was found by the court. The father alleged that the mother controlled him by withholding sex; the judge did not find that the father was a victim of domestic abuse. The judge held, "M did not exert controlling or coercive behaviour on F during the relationship. It is hard to conceive of any circumstances in which abstaining from sexual relations could amount to controlling behaviour. There was certainly none here" [§10.1(2)]. This case shows how the family courts approach cross-allegations of domestic abuse made by parents, as well as considering the potential impact of the alleged abuse on the parent and child.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the mother at an appeal against a child arrangements order, claiming procedural irregularities. She was heavily pregnant at the time of the fact-finding hearing and was giving blood pressure readings from the witness box. Appeal dismissed.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the mother in a successful appeal brought by journalist, Louise Tickle. Ms Tickle sought permission to report matters discussed in the hearing. The judge adjourned Ms Tickle's application to report. The appellate court made clear that it will rarely be appropriate for the Court to inquire as to how the journalist became aware of the hearing and adjourning a decision about whether a case can be reported might itself be an interference with the report's Art 10 rights.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the mother in a fact-finding hearing before Mr Justice Moor. The case concerned cross-allegations made by both parents. Mother alleged domestic abuse and emotional harm caused by the father to her and the child. The father alleged parental alienation. Mother had applied for a fact-finding hearing to determine the disputed allegations and ensure a clear factual matrix for the court, professionals and the parties to work from. During cross-examination of the father, he abandoned his allegations of parental alienation [§57] and the judge found that mother had not alienated the child from the father [§78]. In addition, the judge made a number of specific findings in respect of the parent's conduct and behaviour from para 60-75 of the judgment.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented a mother at an appeal hearing in the High Court that addressed issues of sexual coercion and submission within marriage. The mother alleged that she ‘submitted' to sex in the context of a strict religious marriage and that this was a form of sexual abuse. The trial judge said, "The inherent probability of the mother silently submitting to forced sex, often multiple times a day, for several years seems to me to be low. I therefore need to consider whether there is cogent evidence to support that prospect." Despite finding the Recorder's comments about the "inherent probability" of the mother's allegations of rape to be "very unfortunate" amongst other things her appeal was dismissed.
Dr Charlotte Proudman was successful on appeal on behalf of a victim of domestic abuse, which concluded that a fact-finding hearing judgment which contained the findings of domestic abuse should be disclosed to Social Work England, the father's regulatory body (see, Re Z (Disclosure to Social Work England: Findings of Domestic Abuse) [2023] EWHC 447 (Fam) (2 March 2023)). The mother applied for a costs order against the father and SWE. Mrs Justice Knowles made a costs order against SWE noting that "SWE should have been the appellant and not the mother" (§16) and "Its conduct prior to the start of the proceedings was unreasonable" (§18).
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the mother in a second appeal in the Court of Appeal where allegations of rape were made in private law proceedings. The case concerned general propositions and the individual appeal. The appellant asserted that there should be a clear and consistent approach to rape, sexual assault and consent in family proceedings; a failure to apply a consistent approach to these issues breached Art 6, 8, 14 ECHR; an application was required if a party sought to rely on a complainant's sexual history; judges should give themselves a warning about rape myths. The individual appeal concerned the trial judge applying the criminal law to allegations of rape; no reference given to PD12J or H-N; and attributing too much weight to a resumption of sexual relations after the alleged rape. The appeal was dismissed and the approach of Knowles J to such cases used in first appeal approved, see A & Anor v B & Ors [2022] EWHC 3089 (Fam) (02 December 2022).
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the appellant mother at an appeal hearing in which she successfully set aside a child arrangements order made by consent. Findings of rape of the mother post-separation and during/after child contact and other forms of domestic abuse had already been made at a fact-finding hearing. At a further hearing to decide on contact arrangements, there were no participation directions, which meant that the mother could see the father who had raped her. The Judge encouraged the mother to agree contact arrangements directly with the father, her proven rapist. The Judge failed to address PD12J, Part 3A and PD3AA and leading case law. The child arrangements order was set aside.
Dr Charlotte Proudman was instructed by Rights of Women in a guidance case on behalf of Latin American Women's Aid, Women's Aid and Refuge. The President addressed the competing challenges when court orders needed to be served on a woman who resided in a women's refuge, especially given the concerns about the inadvertent disclosure of the refuge residential address. Guidance was given in relation to the steps that should be taken to avoid disclosure of the address to other individuals. This is one of the first cases in which ‘intersectionality' was defined with specific reference to the vulnerabilities of migrant women.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented a victim of domestic abuse who was abused by her ex-partner, a senior social worker. The mother appealed the trial Judge's refusal to disclose findings of domestic abuse to the father's regulatory body, Social Work England. The mother was successful in her appeal and the Judge handed down guidance on the court's approach to addressing applications to disclose court judgments to regulatory bodies.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented a complainant of domestic abuse at a successful appeal in which she set aside a fact-finding judgment where her allegations of rape, domestic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour were not proved. The appeal was allowed because the trial Judge failed in complying with their mandatory duty under s.63 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, PD3AA and Part 3A of the FPR 2010 in ensuring that a party who is vulnerable has participatory directions when required (such as a screen). The Judge set out the steps the court is required to take in a case where a party or witness is a victim or is at risk of being a victim of domestic abuse (see §23).
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented Florence, a 15 year old girl in an application to live with her mother. The background is that the court found domestic abuse perpetrated by the father towards the mother and the child. An expert found "alienating" behaviours by the mother. Eventually the court transferred residence of the child to the father. The child had consistently wanted to return to live with her mother. After a successful appeal, the child was separately represented and she achieved an order which allowed her to spend the majority of her time with her mother.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented a victim of domestic abuse and controlling behaviour who fled Nigeria with her child. The father made an application for the return of the child following the wrongful removal of the child from Nigeria to England and Wales. The High Court conducted a fact-finding hearing and found allegations of domestic abuse and control proved. The mother and the child have applied for asylum and their asylum claim is pending in the first-tier tribunal which is due to the heard early this year.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented a victim of domestic abuse at a fact-finding hearing where some of the mother allegations were proved. The trial Judge made comments about the mother's intelligence along with other remarks about the mother when making findings about rape and non-fatal strangulation, which the Judge found not proved. The mother successfully appealed the Judgment in A & Anor v B & Ors [2022] EWHC 3089 (Fam).
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented a complainant of rape, domestic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour in the Family Division of the High Court. Dr Proudman was successful on both grounds of appeal: first, the court failed to implement participatory directions (special measures) for the complainant when she gave oral evidence at the final hearing. Second, the Judge was wrong in refusing to hold a fact-finding hearing on the mother's allegations pursuant to PD12J and Re H-N and Others.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the Mother in a child abduction case in which the Father had applied for the immediate return of the child from India to the UK. The Mother opposed the Father's application. The court found that the child is habitually resident in India having spent around two years there. However, the court held that the legal position in respect of whether the court retains jurisdiction to make orders in respect of the child was unclear due to the ambiguity of the territorial reach of article 10 of Brussels 2. As such, the court referred the case to the Court of Justice for an urgent preliminary ruling.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented two of the four appellant mothers at the substantive appeal hearing. The Court of Appeal handed down general guidance on the family court's approach to allegations of rape, domestic abuse, and coercive and controlling behaviour. Dr Proudman had successfully applied for permission to appeal, out of time, in three of the four linked appeals, Re B-B, Re H and Re T. Dr Proudman was successful in overturning a consent order in the case of Re B-B in which the mother was coerced to accede to.
represented children's relatives whom applied for care, placement and adoption orders to be revoked. Applying for care, placement and adoption orders to be revoked is a very high test to meet. Dr Proudman was instructed on behalf of the children's family members to make this application on the basis that they had not been thorough assessed by the local authority prior to the final orders being made.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the mother in application for an FGMPO on behalf of her daughter at risk of FGM in Nigeria. The family do not have secure immigration status. The mother applied for expert assessments and the appointment of a children's guardian.
Thomas-James (2020) ‘‘Open Books': is the offshore world now safe?' The Company Lawyer, 41(12).
Thomas-James (2020) ‘Crisis and the Morality of ‘Offshore': Examining legislative calls to exclude COVID-19 financial relief to ‘tax haven' companies', The Company Lawyer, 41(8).
D. Thomas-James, ‘Does the UK need to Create a Criminal Offence of Illicit Enrichment - or is the Unexplained Wealth Order provision of the Criminal Finances Bill 2016 a welcome compromise?', in Unexplained Wealth Orders: Thoughts on Scope and Effect in the UK, The White Collar Crime Centre, 2017.
"Charlotte has excellent knowledge in the area of female genital mutilation law. She demonstrates commitment to and passion for this area of work. I have been most impressed by her professionalism and swift response especially with pro bono cases that are often at very short notice. On behalf of the families that Charlotte has supported and is continuing to support, I would like to send her our sincere gratitude".
Job Titles:
- Member of Goldsmith Chambers Inquest Team
- Specialist
Harry O'Sullivan is a specialist criminal barrister who accepts instructions to both defend and prosecute the full range of criminal cases.
Harry has a particular interest in sentencing law. He is the author of Banks on Sentence, the leading practitioner text on the subject and is the consultant editor of Halsbury's Laws of England latest sentencing and offender management volumes. Before coming to the Bar, Harry worked at the Law Commission of England and Wales on the project which produced the Sentencing Act 2020.
He is authorised to conduct work on a direct access basis and is appointed to the CPS Advocate Panel at Grade 3. Harry also accepts instructions in matters of prison law, military law, to appear in inquests and inquiries and has experience of private prosecutions.
Harry plays an active role on the South Eastern Circuit committee and was circuit junior 2023. He is also Chambers Secretary and a member of Chambers' Pupillage and Tenancy Committee.
Harry is a member of Goldsmith Chambers inquest team and accepts instructions to represent and advise interested persons and represent them before Coroners' inquests and public inquiries.
Prior to joining Goldsmith Chambers, Ian was the In-House Advocate for a nationwide provider of advocacy services in County Courts. During this time, Ian became the Head of the Landlord and Tenant Litigation Department, an advocacy trainer and a seminar lecturer. Ian has used his wide-ranging civil experience to regularly appear in the County Court, High Court (Chancery Division and Queen's Bench Division), Employment and Property Tribunals.
Since joining Goldsmith Chambers, Ian has developed a strong crime practice defending and prosecuting criminal cases in Magistrates', Youth and Crown Courts across England and Wales. Ian is regularly instructed on trial lists for the Crown Prosecution Service on the East of England Circuit.
Ian is Public Access qualified to accept instructions directly from members of the public where applicable.
Job Titles:
- Solicitor, Woolley & Co Solicitors
"Charlotte is always a pleasure to instruct and is liked by clients. She is brilliant at analysing the case, advising on all of the issues, and managing cases. She has great attention to detail and is a tough but realistic negotiator. Definitely counsel that you would want in your corner".
https://rmcsport.bfmtv.com/mediaplayer/video/maitre-adil-sahban-avocat-de-giscard-samba-mon-client-sait-qu-il-est-innocent-1055377.html
Job Titles:
- Solicitor, Harris Waters Solicitors
"Charlotte is extremely client focused, professional and enthusiastic. She is a strong advocate on behalf of her client. She is hard working and gives clear, sensible advice to clients. Charlotte communicates well with clients particularly when they are at their most vulnerable and clients report that she is kind, calm and fair in her approach. She is a first choice in any type of children proceedings and is always liked by clients".
"Charlotte is great to work with, and both reliable and efficient. Clients report that she is calm and able to explain complex matters "in plain English", which on a day at court with all its pressures is much appreciated. Her advocacy and negotiation skills are very effective. Clients give great feedback about Charlotte. What more could you ask for?"
Job Titles:
- Senior Partner, BHD Solicitors
Our first point of call when the case is complex. A delight to work with - courteous, professional and thorough.
Job Titles:
- Solicitor, Dollman & Pritchard Solicitors
"Charlotte picked up the reigns of a financial relief upon divorce case at very short notice and achieved a brilliant result, leaving the client ecstatically happy".
Job Titles:
- Solicitor, Owen White & Catlin LLP
"Charlotte is a strong and skilful advocate who works tirelessly for her clients. I have been impressed with the excellent quality of her work. I recently instructed Charlotte on a child abduction matter. She worked extremely hard and was instrumental in achieving an excellent outcome for our client including costs. I would highly recommend her".