Overview
Nathan’s practice focuses exclusively on criminal law. He has experience in a wide range of serious matters involving both youths and adults across the country and is known for his client care, easy-going demeanor, and natural advocacy.
Criminal Defence
Nathan has a busy practice exclusively based in the criminal courts. He has experience defending in a wide range of matters and is known for his client care, easy-going demeanor, and natural advocacy. He is trial counsel for clients facing serious allegations involving kidnap, firearms, and serious violence with intent.
Having worked in care, Nathan is compassionately attuned to the needs of vulnerable clients and has completed the specialist vulnerable witness training.
Nathan welcomes any chance to expand his youth practice and has been trial counsel in notably complicated cases lasting multiple days. Nathan quickly builds a rapport with young clients while remaining a fierce professional advocate in court. Particularly, Nathan is experienced in cases of youths subjected to exploitation by criminal gangs.
Nathan is able to advise and represent respondents in relation to quasi-criminal orders such as Sexual Harm Prevention Orders, Criminal Behaviour Orders, and Football Banning Orders commenced either before or after proceedings.
Criminal Prosecutions - Private & Public
Nathan is a grade 2 prosecutor and has acted in multiple jury trials, including multi-handers. Nathan has experience prosecuting cases involving domestic violence from his time acting in the specialist courts but has also received instructions involving protest law, armed robbery, stalking, sexual offences, POCA, drugs, and offences against the person.
When acting on behalf of outside authorities Nathan is happy to advise on issues such as charges, procedures, and ancillary orders.
Nathan can advise and represent applicants in relation to quasi-criminal orders such as Sexual Harm Prevention Orders, Criminal Behaviour Orders, and Football Banning Orders commenced either before or after proceedings.
Asset Forfeiture, Confiscation & Civil Fraud
Nathan has experience prosecuting and defending in cases involving POCA, final hearings and enforcement, and welcomes instructions in this area.
Nathan also has experience acting in forfeiture proceedings and is keen to develop this area of his practice.
Professional Panel Appointments
- CPS Advocate Panel Member: Grade 2.
Additional Information
Education
- Philosophy, BA, Lancaster University.
- Graduate Diploma in Law, The University of Law.
- Bar Practitioners Training Couse/ LLM, BPP University.
Awards and Scholarships
- Advocacy Scholarship: BPP.
- J. B. Montagu Scholarship: Middle Temple.
- University of Law Moot.
- Kalisher Trust Advocacy Training Scholarship.
Nathan’s previous career was in psychiatric care, working in front-facing and managerial roles in secure hospitals.
Before pupillage, Nathan was a legal officer at the Free Representation Unit (FRU), specialising in social security law, where he oversaw a team of volunteer lawyers and students whilst balancing his own cases in the First-tier and Upper Tribunal.
When not in court, Nathan promotes the bar and a career in law to non-traditional students and has coached school debating teams with the Kalisher Trust.
Cases of Note
2024 Cases:
R v XY (Highbury Corner Magistrates Court)
Successful acquittal of adult client accused of theft following a defence under section 45 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015.
2023 Cases:
R v LW (Basildon Crown Court)
Successful prosecution of triple carjacking following a week-long trial in a case involving vulnerable victims.
R v JF (Southwark Crown Court)
Successful application to dismiss in case of organised armed street robbery of a high-value Rolex watch. Despite a unique bicycle linking the client to the crime, the court was persuaded that there was insufficient evidence of identification.
R v DM (Aldersgate House Crown Court)
Successful prosecution for possession of a bladed article following a three-day trial.
R v SA (Inner London Crown Court)
Successful acquittal of a client accused of obstructing a drug search and assault on an emergency worker via choking following an application of no case to answer.
R v AW (Basildon Crown Court)
Persuaded the court not to pass a mandatory minimum for domestic burglary following a plea on the day of trial. The client instead received a suspended sentence with MHTR. The sentencing judge remarked upon the persuasive and impactful mitigation advanced.
R v KC (Bristol Crown Court)
Client entered guilty pleas for two separate cases involving dangerous driving and PWITS B. The client was also accused of two separate PWITS A cases. Following representations, the crown offered no evidence on both class A cases. On passing a suspend sentence the judge remarked that Nathan ‘had the case at his fingertips’ and that the client owed him a ‘great debt’.
R v WD (Chelmsford Crown Court)
Client was sentenced for armed robbery of a vulnerable person and police chase with a car crash. Successful mitigation led to a sentence of 32 months.
R v PP (Southend Magistrates’ Court)
Successful submission of abuse of process in allegation of domestic violence.
R v DM (Westminster Magistrates’ Court)
Successful defence of a two-day stalking trial for a very vulnerable client.
R v SH (Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court)
Successful defence of client accused of ABH in which CCTV showed the alleged attack from meters away.
R v XX (Uxbridge Youth Court)
Successful defence of possession of a bladed article under section 45 Modern Slavery Act 2015.
2022 Cases:
R v UB (Woodgreen Crown Court)
A young client did not attend court due to fears of gang reprisals. Subsequently, UB was brought before the court for contempt. Submissions on the client’s behalf led to the matter not being put and withdrawn by the court.
R v SS (Bristol Crown Court)
Successful prosecution in a two-day appeal against conviction for failing to abide by dispersal order in a ‘Kill The Bill’ protest.