Menu My portfolio: 0

Raj is a former solicitor. He joined Matrix as a full member in 2011.

Raj specialises in public and human rights law and has a mixed judicial review and civil actions practice. His practice encompasses prison lawcivil actions against the policeequality law,  information laweducation law,  and inquests and inquiries work (in particular, concerning controversial deaths engaging the State’s responsibilities under Article 2 ECHR). He also undertakes international law work, in particular applications to the European Court of Human Rights.

Raj’s clients are predominantly individuals, but he is also instructed by NGOs, charities, central government and public authorities, regulatory bodies, and companies. Raj believes in the importance of high-quality representation and advice for all regardless of their means, and is pleased to accept instructions from legally aided clients. Where funding is not available, he will accept instructions on a pro bono basis if able to do so.

Raj is on the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Panel of Preferred Counsel.

Raj is on the Attorney General’s B Panel of Counsel and is Home Office security cleared.

  • Public Law and Human Rights
    • R(SC) v Secretary for Work and Pensions (2020 – Supreme Court judgment pending) – Article 14 ECHR compatibility of Two-Child cap on payment of child tax credit.
    • Somerset County Council v Secretary of State for Education [2020] EWHC 1675 Admin – first successful judicial review of Academy Order.
    • R(Plan B) v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWCA Civ 214 – Heathrow runway challenge.
    • R(Langford) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2019] EWCA Civ 1271- Article 14 ECHR challenge to restriction on pension eligibility for unmarried partners with undissolved moribund marriage to former partner.
    • R(DA and DS) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2019] UKSC 21, [2019] 1 WLR 3289 – Article 14 ECHR challenge to human rights compatibility of revised benefit cap.
    • R (Carmichael and Rourke and ors) (formerly MA and ors) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2016] UKSC 58, [2016] 1 WLR 4550 –Article 14 ECHR challenge to human rights compatibility of the bedroom tax by persons with disabilities and victims of domestic violence.
    • R(Tigere) v Secretary of State for Education [2015] UKSC 57, [2015] 1 WLR 3820 – Article 14 ECHR challenge to exclusion of non-nationals with time-limited leave to remain from eligibility for student loans.
    • R(Catt) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2015] UKSC 9, [2015] AC 1065 – Article 8 challenge to compatibility of retention of personal data of a peaceful protestor on a domestic extremist police database.
    • Daniel v State of Trinidad and Tobago [2014] AC 1290, [2014] 2 WLR 1154 – successful appeal to Privy Council against conviction for murder and death penalty, considering availability of provocation defence to felony murder and constitutionality of application of mandatory death penalty for felony-murder.
  • Actions against the police
    • Goodenough v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police [2020] EWHC 695 (QB) – civil claim concerning legality of fatal force used by police officers and compatibility of failures to prevent officers conferring with Article 2 ECHR. On appeal to Court of Appeal/Supreme Court.
    • M v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary – civil claim for breach of DPA, misuse of private information and breach of Article 8 ECHR arising out of police disclosure of Chaplain’s relationship with serving prisoner to employer.
    • Estate and family of Kamil Ahmad and ors v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset and ors civil claim concerning death of Kamil Ahmad, a vulnerable asylum-seeker, who was murdered by a schizophrenic neighbor living in the same sheltered accommodation unit, following a campaign of racial harassment reported to various authorities including the police.
    • Estate and family of Henry Hicks v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis – civil claim arising out of death of teenager following police pursuit of moped.
    • Mohidin and Khan v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2015] EWHC 2740 QB – High Court civil action for racially motivated assault and false imprisonment of two teenagers by TSG officers in which individual officers joined as Part 20 Defendants.
    • Estate and family of Ebrahimi v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset – civil claim concerning death of Bijan Ebrahimi an Iranian refugee who was murdered following a campaign of racial harassment which he had repeatedly reported to the police.
    • R(Catt) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2015] UKSC 9, [2015] AC 1065 – challenge to compatibility of retention of personal data of a peaceful protestor on a domestic extremist police database with Article 8.
    • Andrea Brown v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2019] EWCA civ 1924 –leading authority on correct construction of mixed claims exception to Qualified One Way Cost Shifting provisions.
  • Inquest and Inquiries work
    • Grenfell Tower public inquiry (on-going) – Raj was instructed by over 300 bereaved, survivor and residents in Phase 1 of this Inquiry and continues to act in certain modules of Phase 2 of the on-going inquiry.
    • EHRC inquiry into legal aid for victims of discrimination (2019) – instructed by EHRC to advise and assist in its inquiry.
    • Inquest into death of Darren Williams (2019) Article 2 jury Inquest into death by hanging of vulnerable prisoner subject to repeated debt-related threats. Jury returned extensive narrative criticisms relating to HMP Woodhill’s self-harm and anti-bullying processes and PFD reports made by Senior Coroner. Previously instructed in two earlier Inquests into deaths at Woodhill in which extensive criticisms were made.
    • Inquest into the death of Aston McLean Williams (2019) – Article 2 jury Inquest concerning death of suspect who was run over and trapped under a police armed response vehicle.
    • Inquest into the death of Jagdip Randhawa (2016) – Article 2 jury Inquest into the death of a student seriously assaulted by a professional boxer at large in breach of bail conditions who was then subject to serious failings in the care provided by the hospital –critical narrative conclusions regarding both the police and hospital staff’s actions and a conclusion of neglect in respect of the medical care.
    • Inquest into the death of Amy El-Keria (2016)- Article 2 jury inquest into the death by hanging of an informally detained child with serious mental health issues at hospital run by the Priory Group– highly critical narrative conclusions and a conclusion of neglect and wide-ranging preventing future death report. The Inquest led to a record fine being imposed in the subsequent HSE prosecution.
    • Dame Janet Smith (and Linda Dobbs) review into the activities of Jimmy Savile (and Stuart Hall) during their time at the BBC (2015) – instructed by BBC Trust.
    • Azelle Rodney Inquiry (2013) – instructed by IPCC in this inquiry set up under the Inquiries Act 2005 to circumvent difficulties with the disclosure of intelligence.
  • Education law
    • Somerset County Council v Secretary of State for Education [2020] EWHC 1675 Admin – first successful judicial review of Academy Order in context of academisation of key school cutting across on-going local review process to reform unviable three-tier school system.
    • R(Uka) v Secretary of State for Education (2019) – successful judicial review of student loan eligibility criteria for students with a grant of humanitarian protection
    • R(Tigere) v Secretary of State for Education [2015] UKSC 57, [2015] 1 WLR 3820 – successful Article 14 challenge to exclusion of non-nationals with time-limited leave to remain from eligibility for student loans.
    • R(London Borough of Lewisham and ors v Assessment and Qualifications Alliance and ors [2013] EWHC 211 Admin, [2013] PTSR D18 – acted for Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulations in challenge to English GCSE marks.
    • Free speech advice: Raj has over a number of years advised the National Union of Students on various issues relating to free speech in Universities, including the current EHRC free speech guidance.
    • Raj is regularly instructed in the SEND Tribunal/Upper Tribunal both in SEN and Equality Act 2010 claims.

     

  • Prison and counterterrorism
    • R(Jalil) v Secretary of State for Justice [2020] EWHC 1151 Admin and [2020] EWHC 2554 (Admin) – successful judicial review of re-categorisation and transfer of autistic terrorism-act convicted prisoner from open to closed prison conditions and refusals to return him alleging improper purpose and breaches of the Equality Act 2010. Civil claim on-going.
    • Begg v HMT [2017] EWHC 3329 Admin – challenge to asset freezing order imposed under anti-terrorism powers against Mr Begg– a former Guantanamo detainee – on the basis of support provided to Syrian opposition.
    • R(Khatib) v Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EWHC 606 Admin – judicial review of the review procedure for assignment to High Escape risk status of a Category A terrorist prisoner.
    • R(Miranda) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and ors [2014] EWHC 255 Admin, [2014] WLR 3140 – judicial review of detention (and seizure of Snowden files) of partner of Guardian journalist, Glen Greenwald, under Schedule 7 Terrorism Act 2000.
    • R(Botmeh and Alami) v Health Professions Council [2013] EWHC 1895 Admin – judicial review of the health profession’s regulator’s summary rejection of complaint regarding registrant’s use of un-validated psychological risk assessment tools to assess risk of terrorist reoffending during Parole Board process.
    • Mastafa v HMT [2012] EWHC 3578 Admin, [2013] 1 WLR 1621 – application of Article 6 and common law fairness requirements of disclosure to special advocate appellate regime to challenge terrorist asset freezing orders.
  • Pro bono
    • Raj regularly accepts instructions on a pro bono basis. This work has ranged from representing clients before the First Tier Tribunal in SEN and immigration matters, to applications for judicial review in the High Court, applications to the European Court of Human Rights, and appeals to the Privy Council.
    • Raj supervises student volunteers representing pupils permanently excluded from school who are seeking a review of their permanent exclusion via the City/Matrix Exclusions Project.
  • Previous career and academic work

    Raj holds a first class undergraduate law degree and postgraduate law degree from Oxford University. Before joining the Bar, Raj qualified as a solicitor at Sharpe Pritchard solicitors (2007). He subsequently worked as judicial assistant to the then Lord Chief Justice and Lord Justice (now Lord) Carnwath at the Court of Appeal. He has also worked for the Human Rights Department of the Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office in Melbourne, Australia.

    Raj has taught public law, and human rights law on both undergraduate and postgraduate courses, at Oxford University. He is a co-author of the Blackstone’s Guide to the Human Rights Act (7th Ed.,OUP) and ‘Judicial Review: A Practical Guide’ (Jordans). He is also a contributing author to Criminal Justice and Human Rights (3rd Ed, Sweet & Maxwell) and Prison Law (5th Ed., OUP).

    Raj accepts instructions under the Bar Council Standard Contractual Terms, details of which can be found here.

  • Articles and Downloads

Privacy Notice

Raj is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. In order to provide legal services to his clients, including advice and representation services, Raj 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 read Raj’s privacy notice in full, please see here.

Raj is regulated by the Bar Standards Board and accepts instruction 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
WHAT THEY SAY:

Raj is consistently ranked as a leader in his fields of practice.

Chambers & Partners 2020

“The go-to junior for any aspect of police law and beyond. A wise and skilled tactician who is meticulous and collegiate, and never loses sight of the wider issues, while providing consummate client care….”

“He is always the best advocate in the room at inquests.”

“He is right up there as one of the best barristers in police work. …”

“Excellent all round: he is bright, dedicated, exceptionally good with clients and communicates very well with those instructing him.”

Legal 500 2020

“‘Phenomenally bright and is very approachable. Has an easy rapport with clients.”

Chambers & Partners 2019

“…meticulous in case preparation.”

“He identifies the key issues in a case clearly and quickly.”

“Extremely bright and energetic… very approachable, very thorough in preparation, and very hands-on and strategic in planning.”

Chambers & Partners 2018

“He is a very good advocate, clear and persuasive – and juries love him.”

“His written work is excellent and he is able to absorb a huge amount of evidence quickly and methodically.”

“He is just so wonderfully calm, thoughtful and thorough.”

Chambers & Partners 2017

“He is extremely wise, great to work with and clever as hell.”

“He offers very impressive advocacy.”

“Very approachable, thorough and committed to the needs of vulnerable clients.”