Philip is frequently instructed in complex and test cases in community care matters, regularly appearing in the reported cases in this field.
He regularly advises, and appears on behalf of, parties in cases concerned with accommodation and service provision, discrimination, and other matters leading to judicial review proceedings. Philip has a detailed and comprehensive knowledge of public law and is able to provide prompt, accurate and thorough advice and representation. Despite his skill in the courtroom he is always alive to the need for consideration of appropriate settlement where that is in his client’s best interest, and recognises that some cases are better resolved ahead of contested litigation.
Philip has a very successful practice of urgent assistance in applications for interim relief before the Administrative Court, with paper decisions frequently granting the order sought on behalf of his client.
Philip’s work includes judicial review actions concerning, amongst other things, the statutory duties of local authorities (and of the Home Office) regarding accommodation provision, its adequacy, and timeliness; services and support available to disabled and vulnerable persons; educational needs provision; needs assessment provision; and former looked-after children’s provision of accommodation, care, or support; as well as age assessment and the requirements of Merton/caselaw and relevant guidance.
Philip is also very experienced in handling cases which raise issues under the Human Rights Act 1998, those invoking wider international human rights instruments, or raising questions of constitutional significance. His work also includes claims for discrimination engaging the protections of the Equality Act 2010 and/or Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950. In cases that involve deprivation of liberty in the course of local authority provision he is able to draw on a background experience with various forms of detention and cases that involve issues of capacity.
In addition, Philip conducts inquests arising from deaths within care settings and where local authority (or other health service) provision is in issue, including those where Article 2 ECHR investigative duties may arise.
Philip has a wealth of experience in public law matters across a wide-range and variety. He has considerable experience in drafting and advocacy in matters that have gone before the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and Administrative Court.
Training Delivered
13 October 2015, Judicial Review Seminar for Local Authorities
Consultation Duties (an examination of the Supreme Court decision in Moseley v Haringey LBC [2014] 1 WLR 3947 and subsequent decisions); The New Permission Hurdle (of Section 84 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015); And Time-limits (application of the Court of Appeal’s decision in R (Hysaj) v SSHD [2015] 1 WLR 2472 to public law proceedings).
He has outstanding knowledge and tactical ability and provides excellent client service.
Chambers UK 2023
The outstanding prison law junior. He is very committed to his clients and always willing to go the extra mile. His performances in court are always whole hearted even when the court is obviously against him.
Legal 500 2023
Strengths: "Possibly the most enthusiastic barrister I know. He really does go the extra mile for his clients." "He's an excellent advocate who provides in-depth insights."
Recent work: Acted for the claimant in a successful judicial review against Kent County Council which concerned a point of principle in age disputes and quashed the challenged assessment
Chambers UK Bar (2021-2022) -Administrative & Public Law
“Absolutely fantastic in his work. His written work is flawless, his advice creative and with deep understanding of novel points of law. Instructing solicitors have been very impressed and would jump at the chance to instruct him again.”
Legal 500 (2021-2022) - Inquests and inquiries
“…He is very committed to his clients and always willing to go the extra mile…”
Legal 500 (2021-2022) - Administrative and public law (including elections)
“He's very committed and great at turning round urgent work”
Chambers UK Bar (2020-2021) - Administrative & Public Law - London
“…He is very committed to his clients and always willing to go the extra mile. His performances in court are always whole hearted...”
Legal 500 (2019-2020) - Administrative and public law (including elections) (Leading Juniors)
Notable Cases
R (AB) v London Borough of Brent [2021] EWHC 2843 (Admin); [2021] 10 WLUK 311
A local authority had acted unlawfully when it refused to accommodate under s.20 of the Children Act 1989 three putative unaccompanied child asylum seekers pending completion of an age assessment, after the Home Office had placed them in adult accommodation under s.98 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. There had been no justification for the local authority's departure from non-statutory guidance that children and young people were to be looked after under s.20 while the age assessment process was completed.
R (M) v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2021] EWHC 2241 (Admin); [2021] 8 WLUK 30; [2021] WLR (D) 460
A local authority had not lawfully assessed the age of an Afghan asylum seeker who claimed to be a child. The first assessment had been conducted in a procedurally unfair manner, and that unfairness had not been cured by a further assessment which simply incorporated and built on the earlier assessment.
R (RM) v Manchester City Council (CO/1844/2020), Administrative Court at Manchester
Two-day hearing on 3 and 4 December 2020. Administrative Court considered a guidance document used by this local authority, and apparently also by others. The guidance addressed a short-form inquiry to determine whether to proceed with a full Merton-compliant age assessment in the case of an unaccompanied asylum seeker whose age is unknown. Mr Rule's argument that the pro forma entitled ‘Guidance on Making a Provisional Decision on Age’ was unlawful was successful. The questions asked did not properly reflect the known margin of error to age assessments conducted in such an abbreviated manner. HHJ Sephton QC, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, declared the guidance to be unlawful.
R (SN, by the Official Solicitor) v Nottingham City Council and Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (CO/3941/2019)
Interim relief and permission hearing. Case concerned the question of who should accommodate a man who had significant medical needs following a road traffic accident, but who was an EU national who had not applied for EU Settled Status prior to lodging his claim but did so prior to the permission hearing. Issues over mental capacity. Issues over who could determine immigration status. Consideration given to R (Clue) v Birmingham City Council [2011] 1 WLR 99 at paras. 61, 63, 66; and R (Kimani) v Lambeth LBC [2004] 1 WLR 272. Upon subsequent grant of Indefinite Leave to Remain, giving rise to a material change of circumstance, a further decision was taken by the Defendant and the matter settled post-hearing.
R. (Knights) v. Secretary of State for Justice [2017] 4 W.L.R. 134, C.A. (Civ. Div.); [2017] EWCA Civ 1053; [2017] All ER (D) 96 (Aug)
Appeal from judicial review proceedings alleging that as a consequence of the duration of detention and/or amendment to the IPP sentencing regime, continued detention was in breach of the ECHR.
Reported Cases
R (M) v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2021] EWHC 696 (Admin); [2021] P.T.S.R. 1195; [2021] 3 WLUK 830; [2021] WLR(D) 254
2021
Where an asylum seeker challenged an age assessment conducted by the local authority, arguing that it was procedurally unfair and legally flawed, an application by the local authority for an unless order that his claim be struck out if he did not consent to the preparation of an expert report on his teeth and age was misconceived. Expert evidence on such matters was irrelevant to the exercise to be conducted by the court in the judicial review process. The evidence to be considered in the judicial review is the evidence which was before the decision makers at the relevant time.
R. (Henry) v National Probation Service [2020] EWHC 1246 (Admin), [2020] A.C.D. 81, QBD; CLW/20/28/18
Interim relief which would have allowed a man who had been imprisoned for public protection and subsequently released on licence to stay overnight at his family home during the COVID-19 lockdown instead of at accommodation approved by the probation service was refused. The risks of him staying in the family home permanently before the further necessary work around violence and triggering behaviour had been completed outweighed the risk of infection in moving between two properties and his loss of opportunity to stay overnight at his family home and share childcare duties.
R (AB) v Kent County Council [2020] P.T.S.R. 746; [2020] 4 All ER 235; [2020] EWHC 109 (Admin); [2020] WLR(D) 52; [2020] All ER (D) 106 (Jan); [2020] 1 WLUK 152
A local authority's abbreviated age assessment was unlawful because it was based on AB’s physical appearance and demeanour, failed to adequately acknowledge the potential margin for error and to give AB the corresponding benefit of the doubt and to proceed to conduct a full Merton-compliant Age Assessment. In AB’s particular case the council’s suggested age range of between 20–25 being consistent to physical appearance and demeanour was insufficient to take account of the ‘margin of error’ required to be observed when disputing age. The local authority should have conducted a "Merton compliant" assessment. The Administrative Court ordered that a fresh assessment be conducted by independent social workers within a required timeframe.
Equalities and Human Rights Commission Panel of preferred counsel appointee.
Philip is a selected expert for the Lexis Nexis PSL Q and A public law panel.
Called to the Bar of the Cayman Islands (2017)
Admitted to the International Criminal Court’s list to work on cases proceeding at the Hague
Pupil supervisor (2010)
Awards
2017 winner of Legal Aid Barrister of the Year, awarded by the Legal Aid Practitioner's Group at the Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year Awards
2019/2020 and 2017/2018 Nominated for Barrister of the Year by the Modern Law Awards
Memberships
Administrative Law Bar Association
Criminal Bar Association
Bar Human Rights Committee
Human Rights Lawyers Association
