Administrative and Public Law

"This niche Birmingham firm is well regarded for its work representing individuals in human rights claims. It enjoys a strong reputation for its representation of claimants affected by the \war on terror, having acted for Iraqi civilians and the families of British soldiers killed in Iraq. The firm has expertise in international human rights law and acts for Daoud Mousa and nine others in the Baha Mousa public inquiry."

KEY INDIVIDUALS Philip Shiner leads the team and is considered to be "committed, driven, determined and admirable."

Band 1 (Philip Shiner)

Band 2 (Firm)


Civil Liberties

"This public law firm is renowned for its cutting-edge work defending the human rights of individuals connected to the Iraq war. It recently won success in the landmark ECHR case which condemned the UK government for breaching international human rights law for subjecting two Iraqis to the fear of execution in Iraq."

"KEY INDIVIDUALS Philip Shiner is an outstanding civil liberties solicitor who handles "terrific, ground-breaking cases" and "never gives up fighting for his clients." Dan Carey has emerged as a force in his own right. He is praised for his involvement in significant human rights cases including Al-Sweady, Evans, Al-Haq and the Baha Mousa Inquiry."

Star Rating (Philip Shiner)

Associate to Watch (Dan Carey)

Band 2 (Firm)

Chambers and Partners
 
 

PIL: Press Statement on Katia Zatuliveter, the alleged Russian spy, winning her deportation appeal

On 2nd December 2010, our client, Katia Zatuliveter was arrested, detained and served with a deportation order. The order was made because MI5 assessed that she was and is an agent of the Russian Intelligence Services. Katia has always protested her innocence and remained in the UK to fight this appeal.

Today in an historic judgment, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) has exonerated Katia and overturned the deportation order. The Judging Panel of three which included Sir Stephen Lander, the former Director General of MI5, found on the balance of probabilities that Katia is not and never was a Russian agent. The Court did not reach that conclusion by a narrow margin. The Security Services’ case was found to be wanting at every stage: there simply was no evidence to support their case. Indeed many of the factors relied upon by the Security Services led the Court to an opposing conclusion.

During these proceedings the Home Secretary has been allowed to present the bulk of her evidence to a closed court away from public scrutiny. Katia, on the other hand, has been forced to lay out every intimate detail of her life in the full glare of the media. For her the last year has been a Kafkaesque nightmare, living under strict bail conditions, attempting to prove a negative (that she is not and never has been a Russian spy) in proceedings where she cannot see the evidence against her. It is testament to the wealth of evidence she has submitted that the Court has found in her favour.

Katia is, of course, delighted by the judgment and hopes to now put this episode behind her. However, it should not have taken twelve months of costly legal proceedings to reach today’s outcome. If the Security Services, like the Court, had rigorously analysed the available evidence, they would have never concluded that she was a Russian spy and we would be not here today.

Tessa Gregory of Public Interest Lawyers added:

"Our Security Services are supposed to be responsible for protecting us against serious threats to national security. It is therefore extremely worrying that they have chosen to waste their time, at great public expense, needlessly and unfairly pursuing an innocent young woman. Their case was built entirely on speculation, prejudice and conjecture. It was amateur, poorly researched and compared very unfavourably to the professional counter-espionage work conducted by FBI in recent years.

We trust that the Government will reflect very carefully on today’s judgment which raises serious concerns as to the standards of professionalism and competency within our Security Services."

The judgment is available at:

http://www.siac.tribunals.gov.uk/Documents/zatuliveter_substantive_29Nov11.pdf


Other stories

Click on a story to read

  BBC: Baha Mousa book and Marie Colvin honoured by Orwell Prize ...
  HIGH COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO PROCEED WITH JUDICIAL REVIEW IN AFGHAN KILLINGS CASE...
  Guardian: British soldier under investigation for murder over shooting of young Afghans...
  Guardian: Labour abstention on workfare bill prompts party infighting...
  The Independent: First Al-Sweady witnesses to appear...
  DWP seeks law change to avoid benefit repayments after Poundland ruling...
  Judicial Review launched against Birmingham City Council over cuts to "Shelforce" - a supported disa...
  The Times: Lawyer of the week – Tessa Gregory...
  BBC: Al-Sweady inquiry opens in UK into deaths of Iraqis...
  Birmingham City Council threatened with Judicial Review proceedings over cuts to 'Shelforce' - a sup...
  Open Democracy: Home Secretary, please call off the attack on kidney patient Roseline Akhalu ...
  Court of Appeal Rules that the Government’s “Back to Work” Regulations are Unlawful and Must Be Quas...
  Verdict on Government’s “Back to Work” schemes will be handed down tomorrow, Tuesday 12 February 201...
  Verdict on Government’s “Back to Work” schemes will be handed down on Tuesday 12 February 2013 at 10...
  BBC: New Iraq abuse cases by British forces go to High Court...
  Public Interest Lawyers respond to false reports in the Sun Newspaper regarding cases relating to Af...
  Legal Challenge to Doncaster Mayor's Decision to Reduce Library Funding wins Permission to Appeal...
  Observer: Is Britain guilty of systemic torture in Iraq?...
  Ali Zaki Mousa (no.2) and Others v Secretary of State for Defence...
  Legal Challenge to Cuts to North Somerset Youth Services Wins Permission to Appeal...
  New Statesman: The trials of Roseline Akhalu...
  Maya Evans case: secret courts, torture and avoiding embarrassment...