Iain Steele

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending a judicial review challenge by the "British Airways Killer". The claimant was due to be released on licence at the halfway point in his sentence. However, the Secretary of State exercised a new power to detain prisoners who are considered to be dangerous past halfway and instead to refer them to the Parole Board. The claimant sought judicial review on numerous grounds including that the statutory threshold for the power was not met, unjustified departure from the Secretary of State’s published policy, and bias arising from an appearance that ministers and senior civil servants had been too close to a campaign by the victim’s family and friends to keep the claimant in prison. Following an expedited 2 day hearing, Ritchie J dismissed the claim on all grounds.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending this statutory appeal against an order prohibiting the appellant from teaching. The appellant was an evangelical Christian with strong views on gender identity, homosexuality, the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, and the role of men and women in society. The case arose from the conflict between the appellant’s beliefs and his professional duties as a teacher. A professional conduct panel found the appellant guilty of misconduct which included deliberately misgendering a transgender pupil in the classroom and outing him on national television. On appeal, the appellant's central argument was that the panel's decision infringed his Articles 9 and10 ECHR rights. Pepperall J dismissed the appeal on all grounds.

Acted for the claimants in this challenge to the LME's unprecedented action of cancelling agreed trades in the nickel market. The claim raised numerous public law and human rights issues and sought over $450m in damages.

Acted for the Charity Commission in successfully defending this appeal against its decision to register LGB Alliance as a charity. The case raised issues about whether the statutory test for charity status is met by a body whose views on certain issues concerning sexual orientation and transgender rights are considered controversial by some people. The appeal, which attracted considerable media attention, was heard over the course of 7 days in September and November 2022.

Acted for Ofsted in this appeal about whether the Freedom of Information Act requires it to disclose comments from parents about schools in relation to its inspection activities. The case raised important issues about whether anonymity and confidentiality can be guaranteed for parents. The Information Commissioner conceded the appeal when it was part-heard, in light of Iain's additional written submissions.

Acted for the FCA in this judicial review challenge to its approach to an application made under s.28A of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The application invited the FCA to assess compensation for loss caused by an alleged breach of the general prohibition in entering into a loan agreement. The case raised important issues about whether the FCA is entitled to await the outcome of litigation in which the same issues will be decided as those which the FCA would itself need to decide in order to determine the s.28A application.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending the first appeal against a refusal to grant an exemption from the ban on dealing in ivory under the Ivory Act 2018.

Acted for the Parole Board in this challenge to its handling of the claimant’s case. The case raised novel issues concerning the Board’s powers to reconsider and/or set aside its own decisions and the extent to which it is functus officio after taking a decision.

Acted for the Secretary of State in this challenge to the decision to recall the claimant to prison for breach of his licence conditions. The case raised issues regarding delay and alternative remedies as well as the correct approach in law to recall decisions.

Acted for the RCS in successfully arguing that RCS invited review reports commissioned by healthcare organisations are not amenable to judicial review.

Acted for the College of Policing in defending this challenge to the retention of records about a suspect who was below the age of criminal responsibility at the time of the alleged offence. The challenge was against both the Met Police, which had retained the records, and the College of Policing, which is responsible for relevant guidance.

Acted for the Secretary of State in defending this appeal against a restriction preventing the appellant's school from accepting new pupils. The case raised issues about the interpretation and application of the statutory standards which independent schools must meet.

Acted for Ofsted as an interested party in this judicial review challenge to the Secretary of State's decision to terminate the funding agreement for an academy. The case settled when the decision was withdrawn following a positive Ofsted inspection on the academy.

Acted for the Fundraising Regulator in successfully defending this judicial review challenge to its handling of the claimant's complaint about a charity.

Acted for the defendant in successfully resisting this judicial review challenge to its decision-making regarding access to leisure facilities. The case raised issues including delay and amenability to review.

Acted for one of the appellants in these appeals to the CMA against Ofgem's RIIO-2 price control decision, which sets the revenues transmission and gas distribution companies are entitled to collect from customers until April 2026. Eight appellants brought appeals under s. 11C of the Electricity Act 1989 and s. 23B of the Gas Act 1986 challenging various aspects of the price control, including Ofgem’s decisions on the cost of equity, the cost of debt, the outperformance wedge, ongoing efficiency, the efficiency benchmark and the licence modification process.

Acted for the successful claimants in this challenge to the PPF's  decision as to how it would pay their pensions, and accrued entitlements, in the light of the CJEU ruling in Hampshire v Board of the Pension Protection Fund [2019] ICR 327. The Court of Appeal upheld Lewis J's ruling that the provisions in the Pensions Act 2004 that capped the amount of compensation payable gave rise to unjustified discrimination on grounds of age, contrary to the pensioners' directly effective rights derived from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as being contrary to A1P1 and Article 14 ECHR, such that those primary legislative provisions fell to be disapplied.  

Acted for the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's Executive in one of the first licensing cases to be decided following a contested hearing in front of the HFEA's Licensing Committee.

Acted for Ofsted in defending its decisions and actions in relation to a high profile school inspection. Ofsted's inspection report identified serious failings at an independent Steiner school, in light of which the school agreed to remain closed indefinitely. The father of a pupil brought the claim on behalf of a wider group of parents who were aggrieved by the report and alleged that Ofsted had an "anti-Steiner agenda". They instructed Michael Mansfield QC and challenged the entire factual basis of the inspection findings. However, in light of the grounds and evidence filed by Ofsted, the claimant withdrew the claim and paid Ofsted a substantial sum in costs.

Acted for Dumfries & Galloway Council in this difficult case regarding the provision of accommodation under the Immigration Act 2016 to a foreign national following his release from prison. The case raised a range of complex issues concerning prison law, immigration law and civil liberties.

Acted for the Secretary of State for Education in an appeal highlighting the stricter approach the courts are now taking in disciplinary cases where the regulated person fails to attend the hearing.

Acted for the defendant qualification awarding body in successfully resisting a challenge to its decision to withdraw accreditation from a provider on grounds of malpractice.

Acted for the Secretary of State for Education in an important case regarding governmental powers to supplement statutory procedures with non-statutory guidance and directions.

Acted for the Secretary of State in a series of claims brought by prisoners concerning alleged interference with their legal mail by prison staff.

Acted for the Charity Commission in successfully defending an appeal against its decision declining to remove three Jewish charities from the Charities Register. The Appellants argued that the charities were complicit in the displacement of Palestinians from their property in Israel. The First Tier Tribunal held that none of the Appellants had standing to bring the appeal.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending a statutory appeal by a teacher who had been the subject of a prohibition order. The case raised an interesting point about apparent bias in relation to the decision being taken on behalf of the Secretary of State by the Chief Executive of the Teaching Regulation Agency, which also has a role in investigating and presenting cases against teachers.

Acted for the defendants in this important challenge to the reconfiguration of the way in which NHS services are commissioned and paid for. The central issue was whether the Health and Social Care Act 2012 permits commissioners and providers of services to agree a new form of payment mechanism called a “Whole Population Annual Payment” (WPAP) linked to the number of people living in the relevant area. The claimant represented a campaign group which objects to the WPAP on the ground that it abandons the concept of “payment by results” and reverts to the concept of a block contracting arrangement, where providers are paid a fixed payment without reference to the number of patients they actually treat. Kerr J dismissed the claimant’s argument that a WPAP is not a lawful payment mechanism. The Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal. 

Iain was instructed in this case as specialist public law counsel (alongside a pensions silk) by the Trustee of the BT Pension Scheme. The Trustee was an interested party in a challenge brought by BT against the Treasury’s decision to implement an extension of the indexation of certain benefits in public sector pension schemes in a way which BT said had greatly increased BT’s liabilities in respect of the BT Pension Scheme. BT argued that it was unlawful for the Treasury to reject various alternative means of protecting public sector pensions which would not have had a read-across to the BT Pension Scheme. The claim failed.

Acted for the Charity Commission in the first case to consider the scope of its statutory power to direct a charity to change its name. The grounds for giving a direction include that a charity’s name is “too like” the name of another charity. The Upper Tribunal accepted the Commission’s argument that the First-tier Tribunal had applied an unduly narrow test in this regard. The words “too like” should be given their ordinary meaning; that is a broad and open-ended meaning rather than a meaning focusing entirely on visual or aural similarity. It is legitimate also to consider similarity in meaning of the words used in the two names.

Acted for GEMA in advising on complex EU law issues and later successfully defending an appeal to the CMA under section 173 of the Energy Act 2004. The case focused on the interpretation of an EU Regulation which sets a cap on the maximum amount of transmission charges that can be imposed on electricity generators. The main issue was whether GEMA had correctly interpreted an exclusion whereby charges “for physical assets required for connection to the system” do not count towards the cap. GEMA concluded that charges in respect of cables running to offshore windfarms were within the exclusion. On that basis, there had been no breach of the cap in 2015-16 and GEMA therefore rejected a proposal that generators receive a rebate of around £120 million. The CMA dismissed an appeal by two large generators and upheld GEMA’s decision.

Acted for Unison in its successful judicial review challenge to the fees regime for employment tribunal cases. In a landmark ruling, a seven-judge Supreme Court unanimously held that the fees regime unlawfully breached the fundamental constitutional right to access to justice.

Acted for the claimant in this successful judicial review challenge. The Supreme Court accepted her argument that the provision of approved premises (formerly known as probation hostels) directly discriminates against women contrary to the Equality Act 2010.

Acted for Southern Water in a judicial review challenge to the EA’s refusal to engage in discussion regarding certain business investment areas for Southern Water’s sewage treatment works and overflows. The EA’s stance was said to be based on the need to avoid the risk of prejudicing an ongoing criminal investigation. However, it stood to cause serious detriment to Southern Water in preparing its business plan for the purposes of Ofwat’s price control process. The case settled following a stay of proceedings to enable negotiations between the parties.

Acted for the JACO in successfully defending a challenge to its decision not to uphold the claimant’s complaint regarding the processes followed by the Judicial Conduct Investigation Office. The JCIO had previously rejected a complaint made by the complainant against a senior judge. The case raised issues regarding the ambit of the JACO’s statutory functions.

Acted for Ofsted in defending judicial review proceedings in respect of an inspection report concerning the claimant’s nursery. The case raised issues concerning interim relief and the lawfulness of publishing an adverse report prior to an internal complaints procedure being completed.

Acted for the Attorney General in defending a claim concerning the lawfulness of the advice given to the Government in relation to the decision to pursue military action in Iraq. The claim was dismissed by the High Court and the Court of Appeal.

Acted for Tom Watson MP in his challenge to powers under the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 to require retention of communications data by public telecommunications operators. The challenge succeeded in the Divisional Court on the basis that the Act does not contain sufficient safeguards to protect the right to privacy. The Court of Appeal referred the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union, which gave a ruling upholding Mr Watson's arguments.

Acted for the Law Society as intervener in support of this successful judicial review challenge to the ‘residence test’ for civil legal aid.

Appeared in the Court of Appeal as sole counsel for the Charity Commission in what is now the leading case on the alternative remedy principle in judicial review.

Acted for the NCA in a judicial review claim brought by two Burmese nationals who were convicted of murdering two British citizens in Thailand. The case concerned the UK’s policy on providing assistance to countries that retain the death penalty.

Acted for the Charity Commission in its successful appeal against the First-tier Tribunal’s approach to the time limits for challenging Commission decisions.

Acted for the claimants in this successful judicial review of a decision to withdraw free bus travel from pupils of faith schools (but not Welsh language schools), on the ground of indirect race discrimination.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending this statutory appeal against an order prohibiting the appellant from teaching. The appellant was an evangelical Christian with strong views on gender identity, homosexuality, the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, and the role of men and women in society. The case arose from the conflict between the appellant’s beliefs and his professional duties as a teacher. A professional conduct panel found the appellant guilty of misconduct which included deliberately misgendering a transgender pupil in the classroom and outing him on national television. On appeal, the appellant's central argument was that the panel's decision infringed his Articles 9 and10 ECHR rights. Pepperall J dismissed the appeal on all grounds.

Acted for the claimants in this challenge to the LME's unprecedented action of cancelling agreed trades in the nickel market. The claim raised numerous public law and human rights issues and sought over $450m in damages.

Acted for the Charity Commission in successfully defending this appeal against its decision to register LGB Alliance as a charity. The case raised issues about whether the statutory test for charity status is met by a body whose views on certain issues concerning sexual orientation and transgender rights are considered controversial by some people. The appeal, which attracted considerable media attention, was heard over the course of 7 days in September and November 2022.

Acted for the Governor of HMP Bure in this challenge to prisoners’ access to pornography. The claimant was denied access to numerous pornographic photographs sent to him by his partner. He alleged that this interfered with his Article 8 ECHR rights.

Acted for the Secretary of State in this challenge to the handling of video footage of searches carried out on prisoners. The case raised complex issues regarding the requirements of Article 8 ECHR and the Data Protection Act 2018.

Acted for the College of Policing in defending this challenge to the retention of records about a suspect who was below the age of criminal responsibility at the time of the alleged offence. The challenge was against both the Met Police, which had retained the records, and the College of Policing, which is responsible for relevant guidance.

Acted for the Home Secretary in this challenge to the treatment of historical convictions for homosexual activities that would be lawful today. Convictions for certain offences could be ‘disregarded’ but others could not, leading to a challenge on Article 8 and 14 ECHR grounds.

Acted as sole counsel for the UK Government in this Strasbourg challenge to the UK's compliance with Article 6 in the context of the enforcement of foreign judgments.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending this statutory appeal against an order prohibiting the appellant from teaching. The case raised important issues about the interplay between the statutory teacher misconduct regime and separate legislation governing teachers' pensions, as well as issues regarding compliance with Convention rights.

Advised Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services in relation to its thematic inspection of the policing of protests. This work involved reviewing the range of existing police powers and criminal offences relevant to protest activities and advising on proposals for reform, with a particular focus on compliance with human rights.

The inspection report is available at Getting the balance right? An inspection of how effectively the police deal with protests - HMICFRS (justiceinspectorates.gov.uk). 

Acted for Dumfries & Galloway Council in this difficult case regarding the provision of accommodation under the Immigration Act 2016 to a foreign national following his release from prison. The case raised a range of complex issues concerning prison law, immigration law and civil liberties.

Acted for the successful claimants in this challenge to the PPF's  decision as to how it would pay their pensions, and accrued entitlements, in the light of the CJEU ruling in Hampshire v Board of the Pension Protection Fund [2019] ICR 327. The Court of Appeal upheld Lewis J's ruling that the provisions in the Pensions Act 2004 that capped the amount of compensation payable gave rise to unjustified discrimination on grounds of age, contrary to the pensioners' directly effective rights derived from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as being contrary to A1P1 and Article 14 ECHR, such that those primary legislative provisions fell to be disapplied.  

Acted for the defendant in successfully resisting a judicial review claim in respect of prison conditions, alleging violations of Articles 3, 8, 9 and 14 ECHR. The claim was brought by a Muslim prisoner who argued that his human rights were being violated by being confined in a cell with a toilet which did not have a lid, and being required to pray in close proximity to the toilet.

Advised the Solicitor General in relation to a pre-action protocol letter threatening judicial review proceedings in respect of his decision not to provide his authority for the claimants to seek a fresh inquest concerning the death of their son. The deceased had committed suicide but his parents argued that the police and health services might bear some responsibility. The case raised issues regarding whether Article 2 ECHR was arguably engaged in the circumstances such as to require a “Middleton” inquest.

Iain acted for Unison in its successful judicial review challenge to the fees regime for employment tribunal cases.

In a landmark ruling, a seven-judge Supreme Court unanimously held that the fees regime unlawfully breached the fundamental constitutional right to access to justice. The Court quashed the statutory Order which imposed the fees.

Iain was not involved in the lower courts, but because of his expertise in this area he was instructed alongside Dinah Rose QC to argue the case in the Supreme Court.

This is one of the most important civil liberties and human rights cases of recent years.

Acted as sole counsel for the UK Government in an application challenging decisions by the Courts of the Bailiwick of Guernsey (a UK Crown Dependency). The case raised issues under Article 6 ECHR.

Acted for Tom Watson MP in his challenge to powers under the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 to require retention of communications data by public telecommunications operators. The challenge succeeded in the Divisional Court on the basis that the Act does not contain sufficient safeguards to protect the right to privacy. The Court of Appeal referred the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union, which gave a ruling upholding Mr Watson's arguments.

Acted for the Charity Commission in the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal, successfully defending a challenge to its decision to open a statutory inquiry into a Jehovah’s Witness charity. The case raised issues concerning Articles 9, 11 and 14 ECHR.

Acted for the NCA in a judicial review claim brought by two Burmese nationals who were convicted of murdering two British citizens in Thailand. The case concerned the UK’s policy on providing assistance to countries that retain the death penalty.

Acted for Liberty in its intervention in this appeal concerning whether coercive stop and search powers under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 are compatible with fundamental rights.

Acted for Liberty in its intervention in this appeal concerning whether coercive stop, search, question and detention powers under Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 are compatible with fundamental rights.

Acted for the mother of a soldier who was killed in Iraq in 2003, who was seeking an Article 2 ECHR compliant inquiry into the circumstances of her son’s death. 

Acted for JUSTICE in its intervention in the latest case to consider the extra-territorial application of the ECHR as regards British soldiers on duty abroad, successfully arguing that the English courts should adopt a wider approach following the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights in Al-Skeini v United Kingdom.

Acted for the General Medical Council as an interested party in this human rights challenge to the MPS’s decision to disclose certain material about a doctor to the GMC.

Acted for the applicants before the European Court of Human Rights in a case concerning the scope of the positive obligation to protect life under Article 2 ECHR. Iain previously appeared in the domestic proceedings: Van Colle v Chief Constable of the Hertfordshire Police [2008] UKHL 50, [2009] 1 AC 225.

Acted for the claimant in this successful challenge to police action at a demonstration in London in November 2011. The Court’s judgment makes clear that police powers to prevent a breach of the peace cannot be used for other purposes such as data gathering.

Acted for the applicants in this case before the European Court of Human Rights concerning the compatibility with Article 5 ECHR of “kettling” of protestors and others by the police at the May Day 2001 demonstration in Oxford Circus. 

Acted for the claimants in a high-profile judicial review challenge to the policing of the Climate Camp demonstration held during the G20 summit in London in April 2009, raising issues of whether the police containment (or “kettling”) of the Climate Camp and associated use of force were unlawful.

Acted for an Interested Party in a challenge to the ban on selling cigarettes through vending machines, based on Article 34 TFEU (free movement of goods) and Article 1 of Protocol No.1 to the ECHR (right to property). 

Acted for the claimants in this challenge to the LME's unprecedented action of cancelling agreed trades in the nickel market. The claim raised numerous public law and human rights issues and sought over $450m in damages.

Acted for the FCA in this judicial review challenge to its approach to an application made under s.28A of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The application invited the FCA to assess compensation for loss caused by an alleged breach of the general prohibition in entering into a loan agreement. The case raised important issues about whether the FCA is entitled to await the outcome of litigation in which the same issues will be decided as those which the FCA would itself need to decide in order to determine the s.28A application.

Acted for one of the appellants in these appeals to the CMA against Ofgem's RIIO-2 price control decision, which sets the revenues transmission and gas distribution companies are entitled to collect from customers until April 2026. Eight appellants brought appeals under s. 11C of the Electricity Act 1989 and s. 23B of the Gas Act 1986 challenging various aspects of the price control, including Ofgem’s decisions on the cost of equity, the cost of debt, the outperformance wedge, ongoing efficiency, the efficiency benchmark and the licence modification process.

Iain was instructed in this case as specialist public law counsel (alongside a pensions silk) by the Trustee of the BT Pension Scheme. The Trustee was an interested party in a challenge brought by BT against the Treasury’s decision to implement an extension of the indexation of certain benefits in public sector pension schemes in a way which BT said had greatly increased BT’s liabilities in respect of the BT Pension Scheme. BT argued that it was unlawful for the Treasury to reject various alternative means of protecting public sector pensions which would not have had a read-across to the BT Pension Scheme. The claim failed.

Acted for GEMA in advising on complex EU law issues and later successfully defending an appeal to the CMA under section 173 of the Energy Act 2004. The case focused on the interpretation of an EU Regulation which sets a cap on the maximum amount of transmission charges that can be imposed on electricity generators. The main issue was whether GEMA had correctly interpreted an exclusion whereby charges “for physical assets required for connection to the system” do not count towards the cap. GEMA concluded that charges in respect of cables running to offshore windfarms were within the exclusion. On that basis, there had been no breach of the cap in 2015-16 and GEMA therefore rejected a proposal that generators receive a rebate of around £120 million. The CMA dismissed an appeal by two large generators and upheld GEMA’s decision.

Acted for Southern Water in a judicial review challenge to the EA’s refusal to engage in discussion regarding certain business investment areas for Southern Water’s sewage treatment works and overflows. The EA’s stance was said to be based on the need to avoid the risk of prejudicing an ongoing criminal investigation. However, it stood to cause serious detriment to Southern Water in preparing its business plan for the purposes of Ofwat’s price control process. The case settled following a stay of proceedings to enable negotiations between the parties.

Acted for SSE in the first appeal to the Competition and Markets Authority under section 11C of the Electricity Act 1989. The appeal challenged GEMA’s price control decision for electricity distribution network operators for 2015-2023.

Acted for Western Power in its judicial review challenge to GEMA’s decision to impose upon it a very substantial financial penalty.

Acted for Ofcom in a judicial review of its decision that Channel 4 was not in breach of the Broadcasting Code in respect of the “Big Fat Gypsy Weddings” programme.

Acted for Sainsbury’s in a judicial review challenge to the ASA’s failure to uphold a complaint about misleading comparative advertising by a competitor. The issue was whether a retailer can fairly and lawfully compare the prices of two products when one product is different in its ethical or environmental profile.

Acted for Ofcom in a judicial review of its decision to impose a £105,000 fine for breaching the regulatory code of conduct. The Court dismissed an apparent bias challenge based on the fact that Ofcom employees who had investigated the case remained present with the panel of decision-makers during their deliberations.

Acted for Ofcom in a judicial review of its decision to impose a £130,000 fine on a broadcaster for breaching the regulatory code of conduct. The case raised issues concerning apparent bias and Article 1 of Protocol No.1 to the ECHR.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending this statutory appeal against an order prohibiting the appellant from teaching. The appellant was an evangelical Christian with strong views on gender identity, homosexuality, the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, and the role of men and women in society. The case arose from the conflict between the appellant’s beliefs and his professional duties as a teacher. A professional conduct panel found the appellant guilty of misconduct which included deliberately misgendering a transgender pupil in the classroom and outing him on national television. On appeal, the appellant's central argument was that the panel's decision infringed his Articles 9 and10 ECHR rights. Pepperall J dismissed the appeal on all grounds.

Acted for the RCS in successfully arguing that RCS invited review reports commissioned by healthcare organisations are not amenable to judicial review.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending this statutory appeal against an order prohibiting the appellant from teaching. The case raised important issues about the interplay between the statutory teacher misconduct regime and separate legislation governing teachers' pensions, as well as issues regarding compliance with Convention rights.

Acted for the Secretary of State in this statutory appeal by a teacher against a prohibition order made following findings of an inappropriate relationship with a pupil.

Acted for the Secretary of State for Education in an appeal highlighting the stricter approach the courts are now taking in disciplinary cases where the regulated person fails to attend the hearing.

Acted for the Secretary of State for Education in an important case regarding governmental powers to supplement statutory procedures with non-statutory guidance and directions.

Acted for the JACO in successfully defending a challenge to its decision not to uphold the claimant’s complaint regarding the processes followed by the Judicial Conduct Investigation Office. The JCIO had previously rejected a complaint made by the complainant against a senior judge. The case raised issues regarding the ambit of the JACO’s statutory functions.

Acted for the GDC as respondent to an appeal against the decision made by its Professional Conduct Committee to grant an application by a former dentist for his name to be restored to the Dentists Register. The High Court gave an important decision on the extent to which “under prosecution” of a professional disciplinary case can lead to a successful appeal. 

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending a statutory appeal by a teacher who had been the subject of a prohibition order. The case raised an interesting point about apparent bias in relation to the decision being taken on behalf of the Secretary of State by the Chief Executive of the Teaching Regulation Agency, which also has a role in investigating and presenting cases against teachers.

Acted for the FCA in the Upper Tribunal in appeals against decisions relating to a range of regulatory breaches by an investment management firm. The case raised important issues regarding regulatory standards in the financial services sector in relation to integrity and the management of conflicts of interest.

Acted for the GMC in defending a judicial review challenge to a decision not to investigate complaints about several doctors that were raised more than five years after the events in question.

Acted for the GMC in an appeal against the sanction imposed by a Fitness to Practise Panel.

Acted for the General Medical Council as an interested party in this human rights challenge to the MPS’s decision to disclose certain material about a doctor to the GMC.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending this statutory appeal against an order prohibiting the appellant from teaching. The appellant was an evangelical Christian with strong views on gender identity, homosexuality, the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, and the role of men and women in society. The case arose from the conflict between the appellant’s beliefs and his professional duties as a teacher. A professional conduct panel found the appellant guilty of misconduct which included deliberately misgendering a transgender pupil in the classroom and outing him on national television. On appeal, the appellant's central argument was that the panel's decision infringed his Articles 9 and10 ECHR rights. Pepperall J dismissed the appeal on all grounds.

Acted for Ofsted in this appeal about whether the Freedom of Information Act requires it to disclose comments from parents about schools in relation to its inspection activities. The case raised important issues about whether anonymity and confidentiality can be guaranteed for parents. The Information Commissioner conceded the appeal when it was part-heard, in light of Iain's additional written submissions.

Acted for the Secretary of State in defending this appeal against a restriction preventing the appellant's school from accepting new pupils. The case raised issues about the interpretation and application of the statutory standards which independent schools must meet.

Acted for Ofsted as an interested party in this judicial review challenge to the Secretary of State's decision to terminate the funding agreement for an academy. The case settled when the decision was withdrawn following a positive Ofsted inspection on the academy.

Acted for Ofsted in defending its decisions and actions in relation to a high profile school inspection. Ofsted's inspection report identified serious failings at an independent Steiner school, in light of which the school agreed to remain closed indefinitely. The father of a pupil brought the claim on behalf of a wider group of parents who were aggrieved by the report and alleged that Ofsted had an "anti-Steiner agenda". They instructed Michael Mansfield QC and challenged the entire factual basis of the inspection findings. However, in light of the grounds and evidence filed by Ofsted, the claimant withdrew the claim and paid Ofsted a substantial sum in costs.

Acted for the Secretary of State in this statutory appeal by a teacher against a prohibition order made following findings of an inappropriate relationship with a pupil.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending this statutory appeal against an order prohibiting the appellant from teaching. The case raised important issues about the interplay between the statutory teacher misconduct regime and separate legislation governing teachers' pensions, as well as issues regarding compliance with Convention rights.

Acted for the Secretary of State for Education in an appeal highlighting the stricter approach the courts are now taking in disciplinary cases where the regulated person fails to attend the hearing.

Acted for the defendant qualification awarding body in successfully resisting a challenge to its decision to withdraw accreditation from a provider on grounds of malpractice.

Acted for the Secretary of State for Education in an important case regarding governmental powers to supplement statutory procedures with non-statutory guidance and directions.

Acted for Ofsted in defending its decisions and actions in relation to a high profile school inspection. The challenge, which raised numerous grounds including apparent bias against Steiner schools, was withdrawn following the grant of permission.

Acted for the Secretary of State in successfully defending a statutory appeal by a teacher who had been the subject of a prohibition order. The case raised an interesting point about apparent bias in relation to the decision being taken on behalf of the Secretary of State by the Chief Executive of the Teaching Regulation Agency, which also has a role in investigating and presenting cases against teachers.

Acted for Ofsted as an Interested Party in this case arising from Ofsted’s decision to cancel the registration of six children’s homes operated by the Claimant. The First-tier Tribunal had dismissed an appeal and the Upper Tribunal refused permission to appeal. The Claimant sought judicial review against the Upper Tribunal. Permission was refused. 

Acted for Ofsted in defending judicial review proceedings in respect of an inspection report concerning the claimant’s nursery. The case raised issues concerning interim relief and the lawfulness of publishing an adverse report prior to an internal complaints procedure being completed.

Acted for the claimants in this challenge to the LME's unprecedented action of cancelling agreed trades in the nickel market. The claim raised numerous public law and human rights issues and sought over $450m in damages.

Acted for the FCA in this judicial review challenge to its approach to an application made under s.28A of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The application invited the FCA to assess compensation for loss caused by an alleged breach of the general prohibition in entering into a loan agreement. The case raised important issues about whether the FCA is entitled to await the outcome of litigation in which the same issues will be decided as those which the FCA would itself need to decide in order to determine the s.28A application.

Acted for the FSC in successfully obtaining strike out and summary judgment on various claims brought against it in respect of alleged failures to regulate a mortgage provider.

Advised a firm in relation to potential judicial review challenges against the FOS.

Acted for the FCA in the Upper Tribunal in appeals against decisions relating to a range of regulatory breaches by an investment management firm. The case raised important issues regarding regulatory standards in the financial services sector in relation to integrity and the management of conflicts of interest.

Acted for the FSA in successfully obtaining strike out and summary judgment on various claims, including on the basis that it was an abuse of process for the claimant to seek an adjudication on the validity of the FSA’s public law decision to cancel his permission other than on a reference to the Upper Tribunal.

Acted for the FSA in successfully obtaining strike out and summary judgment on various claims brought against the FSA and the claimant’s former financial advisors.

Acted for one of the appellants in these appeals to the CMA against Ofgem's RIIO-2 price control decision, which sets the revenues transmission and gas distribution companies are entitled to collect from customers until April 2026. Eight appellants brought appeals under s. 11C of the Electricity Act 1989 and s. 23B of the Gas Act 1986 challenging various aspects of the price control, including Ofgem’s decisions on the cost of equity, the cost of debt, the outperformance wedge, ongoing efficiency, the efficiency benchmark and the licence modification process.

Acted for the successful claimants in this challenge to the PPF's  decision as to how it would pay their pensions, and accrued entitlements, in the light of the CJEU ruling in Hampshire v Board of the Pension Protection Fund [2019] ICR 327. The Court of Appeal upheld Lewis J's ruling that the provisions in the Pensions Act 2004 that capped the amount of compensation payable gave rise to unjustified discrimination on grounds of age, contrary to the pensioners' directly effective rights derived from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as being contrary to A1P1 and Article 14 ECHR, such that those primary legislative provisions fell to be disapplied.  

Acted for Rentokil Initial Plc as an Intervener in this challenge by one of its commercial rivals to the CMA's decision in relation to Rentokil's acquisition of Cannon Hygiene Ltd.

Acted for GEMA in advising on complex EU law issues and later successfully defending an appeal to the CMA under section 173 of the Energy Act 2004. The case focused on the interpretation of an EU Regulation which sets a cap on the maximum amount of transmission charges that can be imposed on electricity generators. The main issue was whether GEMA had correctly interpreted an exclusion whereby charges “for physical assets required for connection to the system” do not count towards the cap. GEMA concluded that charges in respect of cables running to offshore windfarms were within the exclusion. On that basis, there had been no breach of the cap in 2015-16 and GEMA therefore rejected a proposal that generators receive a rebate of around £120 million. The CMA dismissed an appeal by two large generators and upheld GEMA’s decision.

Acted for Unison in its successful judicial review challenge to the fees regime for employment tribunal cases. In a landmark ruling, a seven-judge Supreme Court unanimously held that the fees regime unlawfully breached the fundamental constitutional right to access to justice.

Acted for Tom Watson MP in his challenge to powers under the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 to require retention of communications data by public telecommunications operators. The challenge succeeded in the Divisional Court on the basis that the Act does not contain sufficient safeguards to protect the right to privacy. The Court of Appeal referred the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union, which gave a ruling upholding Mr Watson's arguments.

Represented the union before the domestic courts and the CJEU in this challenge to the compatibility of UK domestic legislation with the Collective Redundancies Directive.

Acted for the Secretary of State in this case concerning the eligibility to UK social security benefits of individuals who have ceased to be economically active and have left the UK for another Member State. The case raised issues concerning the correct interpretation of Council Regulation 1408/71, which the Supreme Court referred to the CJEU.

Acted for SSE in the first appeal to the Competition and Markets Authority under section 11C of the Electricity Act 1989. The appeal challenged GEMA’s price control decision for electricity distribution network operators for 2015-2023.

Instructed with Lord Pannick QC to act for Aimia in resisting HMRC’s argument, following the Supreme Court’s first judgment in this matter, that there should be a second reference to the CJEU. The Supreme Court accepted Aimia’s submission that a second reference was not required or justified.

Acted for an Interested Party in a challenge to the ban on selling cigarettes through vending machines, based on Article 34 TFEU (free movement of goods) and Article 1 of Protocol No.1 to the ECHR (right to property). 

Acted for Ofcom in defending an appeal to the Competition Appeal Tribunal against Ofcom’s determination of a dispute between TalkTalk and BT. The appeal was ultimately withdrawn.

Acted for the claimant in a High Court procurement challenge to a decision to exclude it from tendering for certain contracts to be awarded by the Skills Funding Agency.

Acted for the claimant in this successful judicial review challenge. The Supreme Court accepted her argument that the provision of approved premises (formerly known as probation hostels) directly discriminates against women contrary to the Equality Act 2010.

Acted for Unison in its successful judicial review challenge to the fees regime for employment tribunal cases. In a landmark ruling, a seven-judge Supreme Court unanimously held that the fees regime unlawfully breached the fundamental constitutional right to access to justice.

Represented the union before the domestic courts and the CJEU in this challenge to the compatibility of UK domestic legislation with the Collective Redundancies Directive.

Acted for the claimants in this successful judicial review of a decision to withdraw free bus travel from pupils of faith schools (but not Welsh language schools), on the ground of indirect race discrimination.

Acted for 251 women who brought equal pay claims seeking to compare their pay to that of men employed by the same local authority at different establishments. The Supreme Court upheld the claimants’ appeal, holding that they were entitled to rely on their chosen comparators under the Equal Pay Act 1970, properly construed, and that in any event that Act must be read as permitting the comparison by virtue of directly applicable EU law.

Iain also represented women who had succeeded in a similar claim against another local authority in resisting an appeal to the Supreme Court in the case of City of Edinburgh v Wilkinson [2011] CSIH 70. The case settled before the hearing.

Acted for the claimants in resisting an appeal to the Supreme Court by the Council which concerned the proper construction and application of the statutory grievance procedure. The case settled shortly before the hearing.

Acted for the club in seeking an interim injunction to require Suffolk Constabulary to continue to supply special police services for home matches. Suffolk Constabulary agreed to do so on the day of the hearing.

Acted for UK Athletics in a dispute concerning the international broadcast rights to athletics events held in the UK.

Advised The Football League on issues concerning club ownership and The League’s Fit and Proper Person test, in the wake of Silvio Briatore’s ban from Formula One by the FIA and questions as to the ownership of Notts County and Leeds United.

Advised The Football Association on a personal injury claim brought by a retired player.