×
Jonathan Glasson
MEET:

Jonathan Glasson QC

“An extremely thorough and imaginative lawyer” and “a great communicator who is dedicated to his clients”

Legal 500, 2021
Called: 1996 | Silk: 2013

Jonathan Glasson QC practises in an eclectic and broad range of work. His practice includes human rightspublic lawimmigration and asylumInquests and Inquiriesextradition and mutual assistanceinternational lawmedia and information law, product liability and clinical negligence.

Jonathan had been recommended in civil liberties, immigration, Inquests and Inquiries, clinical negligence, product liability, and personal injury by Chambers and Partners and Legal 500. He is Develop Vetted and has acted in a large number of national security cases. Jonathan has also acted as a Special Advocate before the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) and the Parole Board.

Since 2012, he has also been instructed as Counsel to the Tribunal in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in a significant number of cases. He has acted as Counsel to the Tribunal in the claims brought by Privacy International concerning computer hacking and malware by the intelligence agencies. He was also Counsel to the Tribunal in the claims by Belhaj and Amnesty International concerning the interception of material protected by Legal Professional Privilege. He is currently instructed in the challenge by Reprieve and Privacy International to the “Third Direction” concerning the oversight of agents who engage in criminal activity. He is instructed by the Tribunal in the recent challenge by Liberty to serious failures that have been identified in relation to MI5’s handling of data.

Jonathan has been instructed in a significant number of high profile inquests and inquiries, including the Azelle Rodney Inquiry, the BSE Inquiry, the Bloody Sunday Inquiry, the Mark Duggan Inquest and the In Amenas inquests. He is instructed in the inquest into the death of Kieran Doherty in Northern Ireland.

Jonathan has a broad range of ECHR experience and has a particular expertise in ECHR challenges arising from the Russian Federation and the CIS. He is instructed on a range of cases from the Russian Federation concerning politically motivated criminal prosecutions. He has acted for Mikhail Khodorkovsky the former Chief Executive Officer of Yukos, in Strasbourg proceedings since 2005.

Jonathan has been instructed in asylum claims brought in the UK as well as in Germany and in Cyprus. He has advised on related extradition proceedings in those cases as well as mutual assistance requests in Cyprus and Switzerland. Legal 500 has recommended Jonathan in immigration commenting that he was ‘an expert in high-profile Russian and CIS cases’ and that he ‘has insight, understanding and a speedy ability to suggest innovative approaches’. He has acted in a large number of immigration cases involving national security, most recently the case of Shamima Begum which was heard in the Supreme Court in 2020.

Jonathan has been instructed in many of the leading product liability cases and has a particular expertise in pharmaceutical product liability.

Jonathan is a Contributing Editor to the Butterworth’s Personal Injury Litigation Service (and author of the sections on Product Liability and Psychiatric Injury) and is the co-author of the Blackstone’s Guide to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. In February 2007, Jonathan was appointed to the A Panel of Junior Counsel to the Crown which was the earliest date for such an appointment. He was appointed Silk in March 2013, one of the most junior in call to be appointed. In 2017 he was appointed to sit as a Chairman of Disciplinary Panels convened by the Council of the Inns of Court.

Jonathan has particular expertise in ECHR challenges arising from the Russian Federation and the CIS. He is instructed on a range of cases from the Russian Federation concerning politically motivated criminal prosecutions. He has acted for Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the former Chief Executive Officer of Yukos, in Strasbourg proceedings since 2005. Jonathan has a broad range of other ECHR experience. He was instructed by the UK Government in Pritchard v United Kingdom (first Iraqi military case to be considered subsequent to the Al-Skeini judgment).

Jonathan is instructed by the Department of International Trade to defend export licensing decisions to Saudi Arabia for use of arms in the conflict in Yemen –R. (on the application of Campaign Against Arms Trade) v Secretary of State for International [2019] EWCA Civ 1020 20 Jun 2019.

He was instructed by the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence in a challenge brought by 3 Afghan nationals claiming to have worked as spies for the UK Government: K, A and B v Secretary of State for Defence; [2016] EWHC 1261 (Admin);  [2017] EWHC 830 (Admin).

Jonathan was instructed by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in relation to the challenge to the “ouster clause” in RIPA and the question as to whether the Tribunal is amendable to judicial review: R. (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal Supreme Court [2019] UKSC 22 15 May 2019.

Jonathan was instructed by the UK Government in the Karadzic case in the ICTY at The Hague. He has also been instructed by the Ministry of Defence in relation to ambit of questioning of a senior UK witness at ICTY.

Jonathan was instructed by the Attorney General to act as Amicus to the Court of Appeal in Mohan v Mohan [2013] Fam Law 959 concerning the interplay of Article 6 and the privilege against self-incrimination in divorce proceedings. He was instructed by the Ministry of Defence in Guardian and Times Newspapers v Soldiers AF [2009] 1 WLR 1015 when the Court of Appeal granted anonymity to five Special Forces personnel in proceedings against them for conspiracy to defraud, as there was a real and immediate risk to the lives of two of the soldiers if any one of the five was identified.

He was instructed by the Independent Police Complaints Commission in the Court of Appeal challenge to conferring by police officers following a death involving the police – Duggan and Delezuch v ACPO and Chief Constable of Leicestershire [2014] Inquest L.R. 267. Jonathan was instructed by the claimants in the Vincent Tchenguiz judicial review litigation against the Serious Fraud Office: R (on the application of Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees & Ors) (Claimant) v (1) Central Criminal Court (2) Director of Serious Fraud Office (Defendant) & Vincent Tchenguiz (Interested Party): R (on the application of (1) Robert Tchenguiz (2) R20 Ltd) (Claimant) v (1) Director of Serious Fraud Office (2) Commissioner of City of London Police (3) Central Criminal Court (Defendant) [2013] 1 WLR 1634.

Jonathan also acted in R (U and XC) v SIAC (2009) EWHC 3052 (QB), concerning whether SIAC was entitled to rely on closed evidence when considering bail applications and whether SIAC was amenable to judicial review.

Jonathan has a long-standing practice in acting both for individuals and for the Government in complex and high profile immigration cases. He was instructed by the Home Secretary to defend the challenge brought by Shamima Begum to the Home Secretary’s decision to deprive Begum of her UK citizenship. (Begum v SSHD [2020] EWCA Civ 918 [2020] 1 W.L.R. 4267 (judgment from Supreme Court pending) . He has a particular expertise in complex asylum cases from Russia and from the CIS.  Legal 500 recommended Jonathan in this area: ‘He has very good people skills, which clients appreciate.’ and commented that he was ‘an expert in high-profile Russian and CIS cases’ and that he ‘has insight, understanding and a speedy ability to suggest innovative approaches.’

Jonathan has a pre-eminent reputation in inquests and inquiries. He has been recommended as a Leading Silk by Chambers and Partners in Inquests and Public Inquiries and described as having “a tremendous insight into coronial law and first-class judgement in difficult cases” and as being “one of the best at this type of work, he is a very economical in his advocacy. He never says anything he doesn’t need to and this is an approach that works.”  He is similarly recommended by the Legal 500.  Jonathan has regularly advised the Attorney General on high profile inquests, including the inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly and the inquests into the deaths arising from the disaster at the Hillsborough Stadium.

Jonathan is instructed by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in relation to the forthcoming inquest into the death of the dissident republican Kieran Doherty. He was instructed by the Foreign Secretary in the inquests arising from the deaths at In Amenas in Algeria heard before HHJ Hilliard QC in 2014-2015.

Jonathan acted for the Independent Police Complaints Commission at the Inquest into the death of Mark Duggan and in the ensuing judicial review challenge to the inquest. Jonathan was instructed by Ministry of Defence in the Inquest into the shooting down of HERCULES XV179 that led to the largest single loss of life in Iraq.

Jonathan has been instructed by a number of Coroners in relation to judicial review claims. Most recently he acted for the coroner in R. (on the application of Adath Yisroel Burial Society) v HM Senior Coroner for Inner North London  Divisional Court [2018] EWHC 1286 (Admin) 25 Jun 2018 [2018] 4 Costs L.R. 749  [2018] Inquest L.R. 118.

Jonathan has regularly acted for families at inquests, he acted for the family at the inquest into the death of Andrejz Rymarzak where the Jury returned a neglect verdict with 9 separate findings of gross failures by the Metropolitan Police and the London Ambulance Service. Jonathan acted for the family of a diabetic prisoner in a successful challenge to an Inquest verdict of “natural causes” in R v HM Coroner for Lincoln ex p Hay [2000] Lloyd’s Rep Med 264.

He is the coauthor with Julian Knowles QC (now Mr Justice Julian Knowles) of the Blackstone’s Guide to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.

Jonathan has a long-standing expertise in public inquires. He acted for the families of the victims of v CJD before the BSE Inquiry chaired by Lord Phillips. He acted for witnesses at the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. Jonathan was instructed by the IPCC at the Inquiry into the death of Azelle Rodney before Sir Christopher Holland. The Legal 500 2017 edition recommends Jonathan as a Leading Silk in Public Inquiries describing him as ‘Immensely diligent and extremely client-friendly.’

Jonathan has also acted in specialist appeals arising from the Animal Scientific Procedures Act.

Jonathan has been instructed in numerous SIAC appeals and Administrative Court proceedings under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 and Terrorism Prevention Investigation Measures Act.  He was lead counsel for the Government in L1 v Secretary of State for Home Department (no 1) and (no.2) where the Court of Appeal considered whether the decision to wait until the appellant was outside the country to deprive him of his citizenship was an abuse of process.  He was also lead counsel in L2 v Secretary of State (deprivation of citizenship) and D2 v SSHD (refusal of entry clearance to Chechen implicated in the plot to kill Israilov and alleged to present a risk to the live of Zakayev, the Chechen Prime Minister in exile).  Jonathan also led in Zatuliveter v SSHD (parliamentary aide and lover of Mike Hancock MP accused of being an agent of the Russian Intelligence Services).

Jonathan has been frequently instructed by a number of other government departments on national security issues.

Jonathan is regularly instructed as Counsel to the Tribunal in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal on a number of cases raising complex issues under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA). He is acting as Counsel to the Tribunal in the challenge by Privacy International concerning Bulk Personal Datasets and Bulk Communications Data and was instructed in the challenge concerning Computer Network Exploitation (“malware” and “hacking”).  In 2014-2015, he was instructed as Counsel to the Tribunal in the cases brought by Belhaj and Amnesty International challenging the interception and use of LPP material.  Jonathan is also instructed by the Tribunal in the challenge to the “Third Direction”, concerning the use of covert human intelligence sources to engage in criminality. In 2020 he was instructed to act as Counsel in the challenge brought by Liberty and Privacy International to MI5’s handling of data.

Legal 500 2020 describes Jonathan as “an expert national security litigator, with particular experience in handling complex and highly sensitive cases.” Chambers and Partners recommended him as “very thorough, and certainly a trusted pair of hands for matters concerning the Official Secrets Act.”

Jonathan has been instructed in a number of high-profile cases, including acting for the Secretary of State in R (Mallya) v Government of India and Another (1) [2019] EWHC 1849 (Admin). He acted for the Ministry of Justice in Stopyra v District Court of Lublin, Poland [2012] EWHC 1787 (Admin). Jonathan also acted for the Secretary of State in Patel v State of India and SSHD [2013] EWHC 819 (Admin) and in Mallya v State of India

Jonathan has advised on extradition proceedings in Cyprus and Germany as well as mutual assistance requests in Cyprus and Switzerland.

Jonathan has a long-standing expertise in clinical negligence and medical law. He was briefed for the claimant in Christopher Clunis v Camden and Islington Health Authority [1998] 1 WLR 1093 where the claimant sought damages arising from his own act in killing another whilst in community care.

He was also briefed for claimant in Briody v St Helen’s & Knowsley AHA [2002] QB 856 (whether damages for costs of surrogacy recoverable). He also acted for the family in Simms and PA v Another [2003] 1 All ER 669 where the court ruled that it was in the best interests of two young people to receive highly experimental treatment for their otherwise terminal illness.

He is author of “psychiatric injury” section in Butterworths’ Personal Injury Litigation Service.

Jonathan has been instructed in many of the leading product liability cases and has a particular expertise in pharmaceutical product liability. He is recommended as a Leading Silk in this area by Chambers and Partners 2016 where he is described as “A very clever man” and as “a bright spark who is very good and engaged.”

The origin of the expertise was his heavy involvement in in the Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease/Human Growth Hormone Litigation where he was led by Robert Owen QC (subsequently Owen J) and Stephen Irwin QC (now Irwin LJ) Jonathan was generic first junior counsel in the litigation brought on behalf of recipients of growth hormone which contained the agent which causes CJD as well as those who have suffered psychiatric injury as a consequence of being told that they may develop CJD in the future. He was subsequently instructed in the BSE litigation and the BSE Inquiry.

Jonathan advised on the Roaccutane, Minocin and Seroxat pharmaceutical groups action He was also instructed on the Northwick Park Clinical Trials Litigation. He has advised the Medical Research Council on a no-fault compensation scheme.

Jonathan was instructed for the claimants on ASR Dupuy defective hip replacements litigation. He was also instructed by claimants suing Shell for the oil spill in Bodo in Nigeria:  the Bomu-Bonny Oil Pipeline Litigation (Bodo Community) v Shell SPDC (TCC, 2014).

He is author of Product Liability Section in Butterworths’ Personal Injury Litigation Service.

Jonathan was instructed by Treasury Solicitors in the PTSD Litigation (The Times, 29 May 2003). The Litigation comprised two groups of actions brought by soldiers from the Falklands, Northern Ireland, the Gulf and Bosnia who unsuccessfully claimed negligence on the part of the Ministry of Defence in failing to detect and treat their psychological problems following battle.

Jonathan was a Special Advocate in SIAC in Loutchansky and in a Parole Board case heard after Roberts. He has regularly been instructed as Counsel to the Tribunal in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal where part of his function is similar to that of a Special Advocate.

2013: Queen’s Counsel

2007: Junior Counsel to the Crown, A Panel

2002: Junior Counsel to the Crown, B Panel

2000: Junior Counsel to the Crown, C Panel

2017: Appointed to sit as a Chair of the Bar Disciplinary Panels convened by the Council of Inns of Court

19911993 College of Law Lancaster Gate (Solicitor (Hons))

19841987 New College Oxford MA Hons English Language and Literature

Contributing editor, Butterworths Personal lnjury Litigation Service

Blackstone’s Guide to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009

19931995 Trainee Solicitor, Taylor Joynson Garrett

19952007 Doughty Street Chambers

Chair of Disciplinary Tribunals, Bar Tribunal and Adjudication Service and Council of the Inns of Court.

Jonathan is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. In order to provide legal services to his clients, including advice and representation services, Jonathan needs to collect and hold personal data. This includes his client’s personal data and the personal data of others who feature in the matter upon which he is instructed. To view Jonathan’s privacy notice in full, please see here.

Jonathan is regulated by the Bar Standards Board and accepts instructions under Standard Contractual Terms. To find out more information on this and the way we work at Matrix, including our fee transparency statement, please see our see our service standards

DIRECTORY RECOMMENDATIONS

"Jonathan is an extremely thorough and imaginative lawyer, with in-depth knowledge of asylum and human rights law."

"A great communicator who is dedicated to his clients."

"Good judgment, excellent knowledge of the law with huge experience in national security work."

Legal 500 2021

"An expert national security litigator, with particular experience in handling complex and highly sensitive cases."

"Painstaking and thorough preparation as well as deep knowledge of the relevant law and practice."

Legal 500 2020

"Instructed on some of the most sensitive and high-profile cases."

"Immensely diligent and extremely client friendly."

"Appears in all of the most sensitive and high-profile cases."

Legal 500 2018

"He has very good people skills, which clients appreciate."

Legal 500 2017

"Excellent courtroom advocacy."

"Very charming, knowledgeable and pleasant to work with."

Chambers & Partners 2017

"Very clever man."

"First-class judgement in difficult cases."

"One of the best at this type of work."

Chambers & Partners 2016

"Very thorough, and certainly a trusted pair of hands for matters concerning the Official Secrets Act."

"He is a very fair counsel who is highly effective."

"Very level-headed individual who doesn’t get flustered by the big challenges that arise in these cases."

Chambers & Partners 2015

"A new silk with a very broad practice and expertise in many international jurisdictions."

"Extremely well prepared and has a huge intellect. Very clever, he knows the law and is extremely personable. He’s well regarded by all the top solicitors. It’s obvious he’s very bright but it’s his personality that really shines out."

Chambers & Partners 2014

"An impressive new Silk."

Legal 500 2013
Matrix Chambers
24 HOUR ASSISTANCE
+44 (0)20 7404 3447
Jonathan Glasson
Called: 1996 | Silk: 2013

“An extremely thorough and imaginative lawyer” and “a great communicator who is dedicated to his clients”

Legal 500, 2021

MAIN AREAS OF PRACTICE

  • Civil Liberties and Human Rights
  • Crime
  • Commercial Law
  • Commercial Public Law
  • Extradition and Mutual Assistance
  • Health and Safety
  • Immigration, Asylum and Free Movement
  • Investigations
  • Investigatory Powers
  • Local Government Law
  • Media and Information Law
  • Police, Inquests and Prison
  • Public Law: Information, Data and Privacy
  • Public International Law
  • Public Law
  • Sanctions

Jonathan Glasson QC

Contact Jonathan: jonathanglasson@matrixlaw.co.uk | +44 (0)20 7404 3447

Contact Jonathan's Practice Team (Team T): TeamT@matrixlaw.co.uk


Jonathan Glasson QC practises in an eclectic and broad range of work. His practice includes human rightspublic lawimmigration and asylumInquests and Inquiriesextradition and mutual assistanceinternational lawmedia and information law, product liability and clinical negligence.

Jonathan had been recommended in civil liberties, immigration, Inquests and Inquiries, clinical negligence, product liability, and personal injury by Chambers and Partners and Legal 500. He is Develop Vetted and has acted in a large number of national security cases. Jonathan has also acted as a Special Advocate before the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) and the Parole Board.

Since 2012, he has also been instructed as Counsel to the Tribunal in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in a significant number of cases. He has acted as Counsel to the Tribunal in the claims brought by Privacy International concerning computer hacking and malware by the intelligence agencies. He was also Counsel to the Tribunal in the claims by Belhaj and Amnesty International concerning the interception of material protected by Legal Professional Privilege. He is currently instructed in the challenge by Reprieve and Privacy International to the “Third Direction” concerning the oversight of agents who engage in criminal activity. He is instructed by the Tribunal in the recent challenge by Liberty to serious failures that have been identified in relation to MI5’s handling of data.

Jonathan has been instructed in a significant number of high profile inquests and inquiries, including the Azelle Rodney Inquiry, the BSE Inquiry, the Bloody Sunday Inquiry, the Mark Duggan Inquest and the In Amenas inquests. He is instructed in the inquest into the death of Kieran Doherty in Northern Ireland.

Jonathan has a broad range of ECHR experience and has a particular expertise in ECHR challenges arising from the Russian Federation and the CIS. He is instructed on a range of cases from the Russian Federation concerning politically motivated criminal prosecutions. He has acted for Mikhail Khodorkovsky the former Chief Executive Officer of Yukos, in Strasbourg proceedings since 2005.

Jonathan has been instructed in asylum claims brought in the UK as well as in Germany and in Cyprus. He has advised on related extradition proceedings in those cases as well as mutual assistance requests in Cyprus and Switzerland. Legal 500 has recommended Jonathan in immigration commenting that he was ‘an expert in high-profile Russian and CIS cases’ and that he ‘has insight, understanding and a speedy ability to suggest innovative approaches’. He has acted in a large number of immigration cases involving national security, most recently the case of Shamima Begum which was heard in the Supreme Court in 2020.

Jonathan has been instructed in many of the leading product liability cases and has a particular expertise in pharmaceutical product liability.

Jonathan is a Contributing Editor to the Butterworth’s Personal Injury Litigation Service (and author of the sections on Product Liability and Psychiatric Injury) and is the co-author of the Blackstone’s Guide to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. In February 2007, Jonathan was appointed to the A Panel of Junior Counsel to the Crown which was the earliest date for such an appointment. He was appointed Silk in March 2013, one of the most junior in call to be appointed. In 2017 he was appointed to sit as a Chairman of Disciplinary Panels convened by the Council of the Inns of Court.

Human Rights and Public Law

Jonathan has particular expertise in ECHR challenges arising from the Russian Federation and the CIS. He is instructed on a range of cases from the Russian Federation concerning politically motivated criminal prosecutions. He has acted for Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the former Chief Executive Officer of Yukos, in Strasbourg proceedings since 2005. Jonathan has a broad range of other ECHR experience. He was instructed by the UK Government in Pritchard v United Kingdom (first Iraqi military case to be considered subsequent to the Al-Skeini judgment). Jonathan is instructed by the Department of International Trade to defend export licensing decisions to Saudi Arabia for use of arms in the conflict in Yemen –R. (on the application of Campaign Against Arms Trade) v Secretary of State for International [2019] EWCA Civ 1020 20 Jun 2019. He was instructed by the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence in a challenge brought by 3 Afghan nationals claiming to have worked as spies for the UK Government: K, A and B v Secretary of State for Defence; [2016] EWHC 1261 (Admin);  [2017] EWHC 830 (Admin). Jonathan was instructed by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in relation to the challenge to the “ouster clause” in RIPA and the question as to whether the Tribunal is amendable to judicial review: R. (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal Supreme Court [2019] UKSC 22 15 May 2019. Jonathan was instructed by the UK Government in the Karadzic case in the ICTY at The Hague. He has also been instructed by the Ministry of Defence in relation to ambit of questioning of a senior UK witness at ICTY. Jonathan was instructed by the Attorney General to act as Amicus to the Court of Appeal in Mohan v Mohan [2013] Fam Law 959 concerning the interplay of Article 6 and the privilege against self-incrimination in divorce proceedings. He was instructed by the Ministry of Defence in Guardian and Times Newspapers v Soldiers AF [2009] 1 WLR 1015 when the Court of Appeal granted anonymity to five Special Forces personnel in proceedings against them for conspiracy to defraud, as there was a real and immediate risk to the lives of two of the soldiers if any one of the five was identified. He was instructed by the Independent Police Complaints Commission in the Court of Appeal challenge to conferring by police officers following a death involving the police – Duggan and Delezuch v ACPO and Chief Constable of Leicestershire [2014] Inquest L.R. 267. Jonathan was instructed by the claimants in the Vincent Tchenguiz judicial review litigation against the Serious Fraud Office: R (on the application of Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees & Ors) (Claimant) v (1) Central Criminal Court (2) Director of Serious Fraud Office (Defendant) & Vincent Tchenguiz (Interested Party): R (on the application of (1) Robert Tchenguiz (2) R20 Ltd) (Claimant) v (1) Director of Serious Fraud Office (2) Commissioner of City of London Police (3) Central Criminal Court (Defendant) [2013] 1 WLR 1634. Jonathan also acted in R (U and XC) v SIAC (2009) EWHC 3052 (QB), concerning whether SIAC was entitled to rely on closed evidence when considering bail applications and whether SIAC was amenable to judicial review.

Immigration

Jonathan has a long-standing practice in acting both for individuals and for the Government in complex and high profile immigration cases. He was instructed by the Home Secretary to defend the challenge brought by Shamima Begum to the Home Secretary’s decision to deprive Begum of her UK citizenship. (Begum v SSHD [2020] EWCA Civ 918 [2020] 1 W.L.R. 4267 (judgment from Supreme Court pending) . He has a particular expertise in complex asylum cases from Russia and from the CIS.  Legal 500 recommended Jonathan in this area: ‘He has very good people skills, which clients appreciate.’ and commented that he was ‘an expert in high-profile Russian and CIS cases’ and that he ‘has insight, understanding and a speedy ability to suggest innovative approaches.’

Inquests and Inquiries

Jonathan has a pre-eminent reputation in inquests and inquiries. He has been recommended as a Leading Silk by Chambers and Partners in Inquests and Public Inquiries and described as having “a tremendous insight into coronial law and first-class judgement in difficult cases” and as being “one of the best at this type of work, he is a very economical in his advocacy. He never says anything he doesn’t need to and this is an approach that works.”  He is similarly recommended by the Legal 500.  Jonathan has regularly advised the Attorney General on high profile inquests, including the inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly and the inquests into the deaths arising from the disaster at the Hillsborough Stadium. Jonathan is instructed by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in relation to the forthcoming inquest into the death of the dissident republican Kieran Doherty. He was instructed by the Foreign Secretary in the inquests arising from the deaths at In Amenas in Algeria heard before HHJ Hilliard QC in 2014-2015. Jonathan acted for the Independent Police Complaints Commission at the Inquest into the death of Mark Duggan and in the ensuing judicial review challenge to the inquest. Jonathan was instructed by Ministry of Defence in the Inquest into the shooting down of HERCULES XV179 that led to the largest single loss of life in Iraq. Jonathan has been instructed by a number of Coroners in relation to judicial review claims. Most recently he acted for the coroner in R. (on the application of Adath Yisroel Burial Society) v HM Senior Coroner for Inner North London  Divisional Court [2018] EWHC 1286 (Admin) 25 Jun 2018 [2018] 4 Costs L.R. 749  [2018] Inquest L.R. 118. Jonathan has regularly acted for families at inquests, he acted for the family at the inquest into the death of Andrejz Rymarzak where the Jury returned a neglect verdict with 9 separate findings of gross failures by the Metropolitan Police and the London Ambulance Service. Jonathan acted for the family of a diabetic prisoner in a successful challenge to an Inquest verdict of “natural causes” in R v HM Coroner for Lincoln ex p Hay [2000] Lloyd’s Rep Med 264. He is the coauthor with Julian Knowles QC (now Mr Justice Julian Knowles) of the Blackstone’s Guide to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. Jonathan has a long-standing expertise in public inquires. He acted for the families of the victims of v CJD before the BSE Inquiry chaired by Lord Phillips. He acted for witnesses at the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. Jonathan was instructed by the IPCC at the Inquiry into the death of Azelle Rodney before Sir Christopher Holland. The Legal 500 2017 edition recommends Jonathan as a Leading Silk in Public Inquiries describing him as ‘Immensely diligent and extremely client-friendly.’ Jonathan has also acted in specialist appeals arising from the Animal Scientific Procedures Act.

National Security and Surveillance

Jonathan has been instructed in numerous SIAC appeals and Administrative Court proceedings under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 and Terrorism Prevention Investigation Measures Act.  He was lead counsel for the Government in L1 v Secretary of State for Home Department (no 1) and (no.2) where the Court of Appeal considered whether the decision to wait until the appellant was outside the country to deprive him of his citizenship was an abuse of process.  He was also lead counsel in L2 v Secretary of State (deprivation of citizenship) and D2 v SSHD (refusal of entry clearance to Chechen implicated in the plot to kill Israilov and alleged to present a risk to the live of Zakayev, the Chechen Prime Minister in exile).  Jonathan also led in Zatuliveter v SSHD (parliamentary aide and lover of Mike Hancock MP accused of being an agent of the Russian Intelligence Services). Jonathan has been frequently instructed by a number of other government departments on national security issues. Jonathan is regularly instructed as Counsel to the Tribunal in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal on a number of cases raising complex issues under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA). He is acting as Counsel to the Tribunal in the challenge by Privacy International concerning Bulk Personal Datasets and Bulk Communications Data and was instructed in the challenge concerning Computer Network Exploitation (“malware” and “hacking”).  In 2014-2015, he was instructed as Counsel to the Tribunal in the cases brought by Belhaj and Amnesty International challenging the interception and use of LPP material.  Jonathan is also instructed by the Tribunal in the challenge to the “Third Direction”, concerning the use of covert human intelligence sources to engage in criminality. In 2020 he was instructed to act as Counsel in the challenge brought by Liberty and Privacy International to MI5’s handling of data. Legal 500 2020 describes Jonathan as “an expert national security litigator, with particular experience in handling complex and highly sensitive cases.” Chambers and Partners recommended him as “very thorough, and certainly a trusted pair of hands for matters concerning the Official Secrets Act.”

Extradition

Jonathan has been instructed in a number of high-profile cases, including acting for the Secretary of State in R (Mallya) v Government of India and Another (1) [2019] EWHC 1849 (Admin). He acted for the Ministry of Justice in Stopyra v District Court of Lublin, Poland [2012] EWHC 1787 (Admin). Jonathan also acted for the Secretary of State in Patel v State of India and SSHD [2013] EWHC 819 (Admin) and in Mallya v State of India Jonathan has advised on extradition proceedings in Cyprus and Germany as well as mutual assistance requests in Cyprus and Switzerland.

Clinical Negligence / Medical Law

Jonathan has a long-standing expertise in clinical negligence and medical law. He was briefed for the claimant in Christopher Clunis v Camden and Islington Health Authority [1998] 1 WLR 1093 where the claimant sought damages arising from his own act in killing another whilst in community care. He was also briefed for claimant in Briody v St Helen’s & Knowsley AHA [2002] QB 856 (whether damages for costs of surrogacy recoverable). He also acted for the family in Simms and PA v Another [2003] 1 All ER 669 where the court ruled that it was in the best interests of two young people to receive highly experimental treatment for their otherwise terminal illness. He is author of “psychiatric injury” section in Butterworths’ Personal Injury Litigation Service.

Product Liability

Jonathan has been instructed in many of the leading product liability cases and has a particular expertise in pharmaceutical product liability. He is recommended as a Leading Silk in this area by Chambers and Partners 2016 where he is described as “A very clever man” and as “a bright spark who is very good and engaged.” The origin of the expertise was his heavy involvement in in the Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease/Human Growth Hormone Litigation where he was led by Robert Owen QC (subsequently Owen J) and Stephen Irwin QC (now Irwin LJ) Jonathan was generic first junior counsel in the litigation brought on behalf of recipients of growth hormone which contained the agent which causes CJD as well as those who have suffered psychiatric injury as a consequence of being told that they may develop CJD in the future. He was subsequently instructed in the BSE litigation and the BSE Inquiry. Jonathan advised on the Roaccutane, Minocin and Seroxat pharmaceutical groups action He was also instructed on the Northwick Park Clinical Trials Litigation. He has advised the Medical Research Council on a no-fault compensation scheme. Jonathan was instructed for the claimants on ASR Dupuy defective hip replacements litigation. He was also instructed by claimants suing Shell for the oil spill in Bodo in Nigeria:  the Bomu-Bonny Oil Pipeline Litigation (Bodo Community) v Shell SPDC (TCC, 2014). He is author of Product Liability Section in Butterworths’ Personal Injury Litigation Service.

Personal Injury

Jonathan was instructed by Treasury Solicitors in the PTSD Litigation (The Times, 29 May 2003). The Litigation comprised two groups of actions brought by soldiers from the Falklands, Northern Ireland, the Gulf and Bosnia who unsuccessfully claimed negligence on the part of the Ministry of Defence in failing to detect and treat their psychological problems following battle.

Special Advocate

Jonathan was a Special Advocate in SIAC in Loutchansky and in a Parole Board case heard after Roberts. He has regularly been instructed as Counsel to the Tribunal in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal where part of his function is similar to that of a Special Advocate.

Appointments

2013: Queen’s Counsel 2007: Junior Counsel to the Crown, A Panel 2002: Junior Counsel to the Crown, B Panel 2000: Junior Counsel to the Crown, C Panel 2017: Appointed to sit as a Chair of the Bar Disciplinary Panels convened by the Council of Inns of Court

Education

1991 – 1993 College of Law Lancaster Gate (Solicitor (Hons)) 1984 – 1987 New College Oxford MA Hons English Language and Literature

Publications

Contributing editor, Butterworths Personal lnjury Litigation Service Blackstone’s Guide to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009

Career

1993 – 1995 Trainee Solicitor, Taylor Joynson Garrett 1995 – 2007 Doughty Street Chambers

Appointments

Chair of Disciplinary Tribunals, Bar Tribunal and Adjudication Service and Council of the Inns of Court.
Jonathan's Privacy Notice

Jonathan is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. In order to provide legal services to his clients, including advice and representation services, Jonathan needs to collect and hold personal data. This includes his client’s personal data and the personal data of others who feature in the matter upon which he is instructed. To view Jonathan’s privacy notice in full, please see here.


DIRECTORY RECOMMENDATIONS

"Jonathan is an extremely thorough and imaginative lawyer, with in-depth knowledge of asylum and human rights law."

"A great communicator who is dedicated to his clients."

"Good judgment, excellent knowledge of the law with huge experience in national security work."

Legal 500 2021

"An expert national security litigator, with particular experience in handling complex and highly sensitive cases."

"Painstaking and thorough preparation as well as deep knowledge of the relevant law and practice."

Legal 500 2020

"Instructed on some of the most sensitive and high-profile cases."

"Immensely diligent and extremely client friendly."

"Appears in all of the most sensitive and high-profile cases."

Legal 500 2018

"He has very good people skills, which clients appreciate."

Legal 500 2017

"Excellent courtroom advocacy."

"Very charming, knowledgeable and pleasant to work with."

Chambers & Partners 2017

"Very clever man."

"First-class judgement in difficult cases."

"One of the best at this type of work."

Chambers & Partners 2016

"Very thorough, and certainly a trusted pair of hands for matters concerning the Official Secrets Act."

"He is a very fair counsel who is highly effective."

"Very level-headed individual who doesn’t get flustered by the big challenges that arise in these cases."

Chambers & Partners 2015

"A new silk with a very broad practice and expertise in many international jurisdictions."

"Extremely well prepared and has a huge intellect. Very clever, he knows the law and is extremely personable. He’s well regarded by all the top solicitors. It’s obvious he’s very bright but it’s his personality that really shines out."

Chambers & Partners 2014

"An impressive new Silk."

Legal 500 2013