Tom Hickman

Tom has broad experience of general commercial litigation and regularly acts in commercial disputes in the High Court and County Courts. He is currently acting in a commercial dispute concerning a property development agreement in Portugal as well as in a number of media and entertainment cases (see below) as sole counsel.

• Snoras Bank v Antonov (Comm. Ct ongoing)
  Tom is representing Vladmir Antonov the former owner of a Lithuanian bank in this substantial civil fraud claim. Preliminary hearings have concerned issues relating to the interrelationship between freezing orders in different jurisdictions, criminal proceedings and extradition proceedings, and the right against self-incrimination.
• Carey Group v AIB UK Ltd and NAMA [2011] EWHC 567 and [2011] EWHC 594 (Ch)
  Tom acted for Carey Group, a group of property development companies, in an action to restrain the compulsory transfer of a banking facility to NAMA, a statutory authority in Ireland established to hold certain categories of debts after the financial crises in Ireland. The case concerned private international law issues and interpretation of banking facility agreements and was the subject of two substantial hearings in the Chancery Division. 
• Jivraj v Hashwani [2009] EWHC 1364 (Comm), [2010] 1 ALL ER 302
  Tom represented the claimant in this challenge to the enforceability of an arbitration clause which required the arbitrators to be from a certain Muslim community.  
• EuNetworks Fiber UK Ltd v Abovenet Communications UK Ltd [2007] EWHC 3099 (Ch) 
  Tom successfully represented euNetworks Fiber UK Ltd in a 12 day trial in the Chancery Division (as junior Counsel to Stephen Rubin QC). The case concerned a fibre optic network in London and raised issues of general importance on the construction of commercial contracts and rectification. Aspects of the dispute were subsequently submitted to arbitration in which Tom also acted.

Tom represents clients across the range of media and entertainment disputes, particularly in royalty and copyright disputes (including those with a European Union law dimension) and has represented clients in a number of trials and mediations in this field. For example, he acted as sole counsel in a successful mediation between a well-known boy-band and their manager.

Tom has recently advised in a case concerning the purchase of rare guitar and is currently representing Paul McCartney's publishing company in a copyright dispute.  Previous clients have included Status Quo, Mark Morrison, the former manager of the Bay City Rollers, Knife Party/Pendulum, Channel 4, MTV and Sony.

• Cheryl Cole v IPC Media & MC Harvey (ongoing)
  Tom is representing MC Harvey in a claim brought by Cheryl Cole in breach of privacy and defamation concerning an interview given by MC Harvey in 2011 in which he discussed a relationship with Cheryl Cole.
• Cartwright v Potter  (ongoing)
  Tom is representing a television production company in this dispute over a failed Joint Venture Television Production Agreement to be filmed at the Lakeside venue.
• Hayward v Tyler (ongoing)
  Tom is acting for a US record label in an on-going royalties dispute.
• Beatles' first US concert
  Advised on copyright issues concerning the lost concert in Washington in 1964.
• A well-known dance music DJ v A management company
  Acted as sole counsel for a management company in a dispute with a well-known music artist.
• Thomas the Tank Engine & Friends™ (Campbell v Hit Plc)
  Tom represented the composers of the title music in this major royalties claim (as junior Counsel to Barbara Dohmann QC and Andrew Hunter).
• Fermata do Brazil & ors v Essex Music Ltd. (Ch)
  Tom represented a major Latin American music publisher in this case concerning the construction of music sub-publishing agreements and the relationship between sub-publishers and collection societies (as junior Counsel to Robert Englehart QC). The case was heard over five days in the Chancery Division before settling.
• Wainman v Arista Records
  Tom acted for the former producer of the Bay City Rollers in this royalties claim against a major US record company.
• Reed v Saatchi and Ors   
  Tom acted for a US photographic artist in proceedings for breach of copyright and paternity rights (junior Counsel to Robert Anderson QC).

Tom’s sports law practice complements his work in the media and entertainment field. Tom has substantial experience of sports arbitrations including under the FA Rule K. Tom is currently advising a Premier League Football Club on an ongoing sponsorship dispute.

Former clients include Chelsea FC, and Liverpool FC, the RFU and the LTA.

• Williams v Cottrell Park Golf Club
  Tom has recently been acting in a dispute between a member and a Golf Club, concerning the terms and conditions of membership and disciplinary proceedings.  
• Northampton Town FC v An Agent and A Club 
  Tom represented Northampton Town FC in a successful Rule K challenge to the tapping-up of player and recovered substantial compensation.
• Brentford FC v A Club 
  Tom represented Brentford FC in a transfer fee dispute under arbitration rules. The case was settled on favourable terms.
• Chelsea FC v FIFA (2009 – 2010) 
  Tom represented Chelsea Football Club in its appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport from the decision to ban the Club from signing players for two transfer windows. The ban was lifted. Tom was junior Counsel to David Pannick QC and Adam Lewis QC. He has subsequently advised Chelsea FC on associated matters.
• Football Agent v The Football Association (FA Rule K arbitration, February 2010) 
  Acted for a football agent against the FA, represented by a leading QC, in a claim for declarations and damages by a football agent in relation to the way in which the FA had carried out its regulatory functions.  After a 3 day arbitration, the agent was successful in obtaining declarations relating to the FA’s obligation act lawfully (including in compliance with Data Protection legislation), rationally and fairly. 
• Liverpool Football Club v Reebok UK (Com Ct)  
  Tom represented Liverpool Football Club in this major sponsorship dispute as junior Counsel to Barbara Dohmann QC and Robert Anderson QC. The case settled shortly before trial. 
• RFU v Bristol Rugby (decision published on the RFU website) (RFU Tribunal) 
  Prosecuted Bristol Rugby in the first tapping-up case to be decided under the RFU rules. The case raised novel issues as to the penalties that can be imposed in sport disciplinary hearings and is published on the RFU website. 

Tom’s practice encompasses a full range of EU and competition law issues, including environmental law and procurement. Tom was seconded to the OFT in 2005/6 to work on the OFT’s price fixing action against certain independent schools. Since then, Tom has advised as sole and junior counsel on a wide range of EU and competition law questions, including the legality of certain EU and domestic takeover legislation (as junior Counsel to David Anderson QC) and advising the Bar Standards Board on competition law issues within the legal profession (with Nicholas Green QC).

Tom has given numerous talks and has published articles on the impact of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

• Great Eastern  Quays Casino Ltd & Ors v Newham London Borough Council (2011)
  Tom represented the Casino operator Aspers in this tendering dispute in 2011 relating to the first large casino licence, granted by Newham Council, under domestic and EU law. The case settled before trial.  
• A Pharmaceutical Co. v Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Authority (2011)
  Advice on legality of decisions made by MHRA and the medicinal products licensing regime under Directive 2001/83/EC.
• Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Epsom Telford Ltd [2007] EWHC 1045 (Ch)
  Represented Epsom Telford Ltd as sole Counsel in an appeal before the Chancery Division from a tariff classification of Epsom printer cartridges (acting as sole counsel). The case turned on the relationship between a number of judgments of the ECJ, in particular Turbon International [2006] E.C.R. IA-10531 (ECJ).

Tom’s practice encompasses all areas of administrative law, human rights and civil liberties, including regulatory, commercial judicial review and procurement. In addition, he regularly acts in civil damages claims against the government, including personal injury claims, and represented former detainees at Guantanamo Bay detention facility in a substantial claim against a number of government agencies.

Administrative Law

Tom has extensive experience in representing clients in the administrative court.  He regularly acts for regulatory authorities, including Ofcom and Ofgem.  Notable cases include:

• Wilson & Reilly v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2012] EWHC 2292 (Admin) (on appeal to the CA)
  Tom is currently acting for claimants in two connected cases challenging the Government's schemes imposing mandatory periods of work for people claiming jobseeker's allowance. Leave to appeal has been granted to both sides and the case will be heard by the Court of Appeal in December 2012. 
• R (South Manchester Advice Centre) v Manchester CC (2012)
  Representing Manchester County Council, Tom successfully defended judicial review proceedings brought by a legal advice centre concerning continued funding of the centre.
• R (BV) v Manchester City Council (2012)
  Tom represented Manchester City Council in a judicial review of its policy on  short-breaks for disabled children.
• R (D & S) v Manchester City Council [2012] EWHC 17 (Admin)
  Tom successfully defended the Manchester City Council from challenge to its budget (as junior to John Howell QC). 
• Buck v Architects Registration Board (2010-2011)
  Tom represented the claimant in a challenge to the fairness of decisions taken by the Architects Registration Board. The case settled before trial.
• Global Knafaim Leasing v BAA & CAA [2010] EWHC 1348 (Admin), [2011] 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 324
  This was a substantial commercial judicial review relating to the recovery of airport and air navigation charges by means of detaining aircraft. Tom represented the claimant, an aircraft leasing company whose aircraft had been detained to recover the debts of its lessee.  
• Evans v Ministry of Defence (Div Ct) [2011] EWHC 1146 (Admin)
  The Divisional Court quashed a change to the Legal Services Commission funding code relating to public interest challenges after the Ministry of Defence was found to have made representations that improperly influenced the rule change. Tom acted for the claimant.
• Bradley & Ors v Secretary of State for Pensions [2009] QB 114 3 (CA)  
  Tom represented the claimants in this successful challenge to the Government’s rejection of the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s report into the collapse of tens of thousands of occupational pension schemes and is the leading case on the Parliamentary Ombudsman. 
• R (O’Callaghan) v Charity Commission and Alexandra Palace Trustees [2007] EWHC 2491 (Admin), [2008] WTLR 117 
  Tom acted as sole counsel for the Trustees of Alexandra Palace, resisting a challenge to the lease of Alexandra Palace to a commercial developer.

Human Rights

Tom has acted in many human rights matters (see also the national security, international disputes and immigration, asylum and citizenship sections below). Recent cases include:

•  R (Omar) v Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs [2012] EWHC 1737 (Admin) (on appeal)
  Tom is currently representing claimants who are detained in Uganda facing charges of involvement in the World Cup bombings in July 2010. The claim seeks disclosure of documents held by the Security and Intelligence agencies that would, it is claimed, demonstrate that the claimants had been subject to extraordinary rendition and torture.
• Shah Zada v Ministry of Defence
  Tom is acting for a child who was stabbed by a British soldier in Afghanistan.
• Crosbie v Secretary of State for Defence [2011] EWHC 879 (Admin)
  Judicial review of a decision of the Army Board and determination of whether the Army Complaints procedures are compatible with Article 6 of the ECHR. The claim was heard over 3 days in February 2011 before Nicol J. Tom acted as sole counsel.
• Evans v SSD (Div Ct) [2010] EWHC 1445 (Admin,) [2011] ACD 11
  In 2010 the Divisional Court ruled that added protections were needed to ensure that the transfer of detainees captured in Afghanistan by British forces to Afghan authorities complied with international standards. Tom represented the claimant.

Tom has also acted in a number of applications to the European Court of Human Rights.

National Security & Terrorism

Tom has extensive experience in national security law disputes. Tom has hosted (with Professor Adam Tomkins) seminars and workshops on national security law and has spoken at conferences in Canada and Germany. He was invited to participate in the Cabinet Office's consultation on the Green Paper Security and Justice at Chatham House in 2011 and in January 2012 was invited to give evidence to the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights. Tom is currently acting in a number of national security related cases, including a substantial asset-freezing dispute. Notable cases include:

• SSHD v CC and CF [2012] EWHC 2837 (Admin)
  Tom represented CF in control order and TPIM proceedings in the Administrative Court, which were fully heard over two weeks in July. The case is subject to an application for permission to appeal. 
• Al-Rawi & Ors v Security Service & ors (2008-10)  
  Tom represented a number of victims of extraordinary rendition and torture, all former detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, in damages claims against the Intelligence Services and other Government agencies for complicity with US authorities. The case was unique in scale and involved numerous complex hearings relating to document retention, disclosure and PII (including Al-Rawi [2009] EWHC 2959 (QB)). He represented the claimants from the inception of the claims to their conclusion by mediation in Autumn 2010. The case was the subject of a statement to Parliament by the Prime Minister (Hansard, HC 6/07/10 col. 175) and subsequently by the Lord Chancellor (Hansard, HC 16/11/10 col.752).
• Binyam Mohamed v SSFCA [2010] EWCA Civ 65 & 158, [2010] QB 218
  Tom represented Binyam Mohamed in the Court of Appeal where Mr Mohamed successfully obtained disclosure of information relating to his mistreatment and torture over which public interest immunity was claimed on national security grounds. 
• AF (No 3) v SSHD [2009] UKHL 28, [2010] 2 AC 269 
  Tom represented AF in the leading case on control orders and Article 6 of the ECHR which led to the quashing of the control order imposed on AF. The case has given rise to other important judgments on the control order regime in which Tom acted ([2008] EWCA Civ 117 (CA) (status of s.3(10) hearings); [2010] EWCA Civ 869 (CA) (effective remedy)). Tom continues to represent AF in a civil damages claim. 
• SSHD v AM [2009] EWHC 3053 (Admin), [2010] ACD 29
  Tom represented AM (junior Counsel with Tim Otty QC) who was accused of being a intended suicide bomber in the  2006 transatlantic airline plot in control order proceedings. 
• G & Y v Home Office (Security Vetting Appeals Panel), 29/11/09
  Tom represented Y as sole counsel in the leading case on the jurisdiction of the Security Vetting Appeals Panel (before Silber and Burnett JJ and Sir George Newman). 
• A v B (Investigatory Powers Tribunal: Jurisdiction) [2009] UKSC 12 (SC), [2010] 2 AC 1
  Tom acted for JUSTICE in the Supreme Court as junior counsel to David Pannick QC in the leading case on the jurisdiction of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. 
• Al-Jedda v Home Secretary [2009] UKSIAC 66/2008, also [2010] EWCA Civ 212 and [2010] UKSIAC 66/2008. (SIAC and CA)  
  Tom represented the appellant in these complex proceedings in SIAC and the Court of Appeal relating to the deprivation of the appellant’s British citizenship on national security grounds. 
• JJ & Ors v SSHD [2007] QB 446 (CA), [2008] 1 AC 385 (HL) and MB v SSHD [2007] QB 415 (CA), [2008] 1 AC 440 (HL) 
  Tom acted for JUSTICE in several connected cases in which the House of Lords quashed a number of control orders imposed for breaching individual rights to liberty. 
• Hicks v Home Secretary (Amin Ct. and SIAC)
  Tom represented David Hicks, a former detainee at Guantanamo Bay, in an appeal before SIAC from a decision to deprive Mr Hicks of his British citizenship. Tom also represented David Hicks in an application in the Administrative Court to enforce the decision in R (Hicks) v SSHD [2006] EWCA Civ 400 and compel Mr Hicks’ registration as a British citizen.

Immigration, Asylum & Citizenship

Tom regularly acts in asylum and human rights cases in the immigration context and is a member of the UNHCR pro bono panel. 

• BA & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 944
  Tom acted for Bail for Immigration Detainees in this leading Court of Appeal case decided in July 2012 on the relationship between challenges to removal brought in the Administrative Court and subsequent damages claims.
• R (Wamala) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
  Tom represents the claimant, Mr Wamala, in interlinked proceedings: (i) challenge to deportation based on risk of inhuman and degrading treatment and an unfair trial in UK; (ii) civil proceedings for unlawful deportation and assault by immigration escorts.
• Al-Jedda v Home Secretary [2009] UKSIAC 66/2008, also [2010] EWCA Civ 212, [2010] UKSIAC 66/2008, [2012] EWCA Civ 358 (SIAC and CA)
  For the past four years Tom has been representing Mr Al Jedda in appeal proceedings from a decision to deprive him of his British citizenship. Following a judgment of the Court of Appeal restoring his citizenship in 2012, the case is listed to be heard by the Supreme Court in June 2012 and will be the first occasion the Supreme Court has considered the deprivation of citizenship power.
• Lumba (sub nom WL) (Congo) v SSHD [2012] 1 AC 245
  Tom represented WL as junior counsel before the Supreme Court in October 2010 in this test case on immigration detention and the law of false imprisonment. The Supreme Court overturned the judgments of the courts below and held that the claimant had been falsely imprisoned, restating the applicable law.
• Kambadzi (sub nom SK) (Zimbabwe) v SSHD [2011] 1 WLR 1299
  Tom represented the claimant in the Supreme Court in a second immigration detention case in which the failure to provide detention reviews was held to invalidate the legality of the detention.
• AMM (conflict; humanitarian crisis; returnees; FGM) Somalia CG v Secretary of state for the Home Office, [2011] UKUT 445Tom acted for UNHCR in this country guidance case on Somalia, heard in July 2011. He previously acted for UNHCR in AH (Iraq).
• R (Sukrajh) v SSHD [2011]  EWCA Civ 938
  Tom acted for UNHCT in this challenge to fast track detention in the Court of Appeal.
• RB & U (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and OO (Jordan) v SSHD [2010] 2 AC 110
  The leading case on deportation pursuant to diplomatic assurances.
• QD (Iraq) v SSHD [2011] 1 WLR 689, [2010] Imm AR 132
  Tom intervened on behalf of the UNHCR in the Court of Appeal in a case setting out guidance on the EU Qualification Directive.
• Hicks v Home Secretary
  Tom represented David Hicks, a former detainee at Guantanamo Bay, in an appeal from a decision depriving him of his British citizenship.

Tom has represented clients in a range of cases involving foreign law and international law in UK courts and foreign courts. He has recently advised the Government of Jersey on the interpretation of international agreements relating to information exchange in tax matters.

• T & T v The Republic of Moldova (ECtHR)
  Tom is representing Moldovan businessmen in applications before the ECtHR concerning “raider attacks” carried out against their assets in Moldova, which involve secret and corrupt court judgments. The claims raise fundamental issues about the rule of law in Moldova.
• Rosneft v The Netherlands
  Tom has been instructed to represent Rosneft concerning arbitral awards made in favour of Yukos Captial and proceedings concerning the enforcement of those awards in the Netherlands.
• Cyprus v Turkey (ECtHR)
  Tom has represented the Government of Cyprus in ongoing proceedings against Turkey in the ECtHR.
• Hasan v United Kingdom (ECtHR)
  Tom is acting as sole Counsel in a claim against the UK Government concerning the disappearance and death of a UK captured detainee in Iraq.
• Courten v United Kingdom, App. No. 4478/06
  Tom acted for same-sex partners in this application to the ECtHR under Article 14 of the Convention.
• Guerrero & 30 Ors, v Monterrico Metals Plc [2010] EWHC 3228 (QB)
  Tom represented thirty-one Peruvian campesinas who claimed to have been unlawfully detained and abused during a protest against one of the world’s largest mining concessions in Peru owned by a UK multinational. Tom represented the claimants over two years and in a number of pre-trial hearings (including one reported judgment on amendments to particulars of claim). The claim, brought under Peruvian law, was settled in 2011.
• Carey Group Plc v AIB Group (UK) & NAMA [2011] EWHC 594 & [2011] EWHC 567 (Ch)
  Tom represented a UK property company in proceedings to restrain the compulsory acquisition of UK banking facilities by the Irish statutory authority, NAMA. The case raised novel questions on the enforcement of foreign public laws in the UK.
• Mohamed v Jeppesen Dataplan Inc, US Court of Appeals 9th Circuit, 8 Sept 2010 (No. 08/15693)
  Tom acted as junior Counsel (to Tim Otty QC) in submitting an amicus curiae brief on behalf of the Commonwealth Lawyers Association and JUSTICE in the leading US case on the State Secrets Doctrine.
• Cayman Islands Constitution
  Tom was instructed with Jeffrey Jowell QC to advise the Government of the Cayman Islands in relation to the Islands’ new constitutional settlement and assist with drafting the bill of rights.

Tom acts both for and against professional bodies in professional disciplinary cases.

• Institute of Chartered Accountants v Kingdon, October 2012
  Tom represented an accountant in long-running proceedings on a charge of dishonesty brought by the Institute of Chartered Accountants. The case was decided in full hearing in October 2012.
• D v General Dental Council, 2011
  Tom represented the General Dental Council in judicial review challenges arising from disciplinary proceedings brought by the Council. He has acted for the General Dental Council in a number of cases.

Prizes & Scholarships

Tom’s book, Public Law After the Human Rights Act, was awarded the Inner Temple Book Prize for 2009-2011 (new author) in December 2011. 

Tom has been awarded the Cambridge University prizes for Contract law, for Equity and for Jurisprudence and the University of Toronto Prize for overall Outstanding Performance in the LLM. Tom has been awarded a number of other prizes and scholarships including a Fulbright Scholarship and a Faculty of Fellowship at the University of Toronto. 

Research and Lecturing

In 2012 Tom was appointed as a Reader in Public Law at University College London. This is a non-honorary appointment and Tom engages in lecturing and supervision of students.

From 1999 to 2003 Tom was a college tutor at Cambridge University where he taught administrative law and the law of tort. From 2002 to 2004 Tom was a Research Fellow of the British Institute of International and Comparative Law. In 2009 Tom was a visiting research fellow at the University of Toronto. 

Tom often gives lectures and seminars at conferences and on university courses. Recent talks include: “Secret Justice” University of Toronto (Sept. 2009); workshop on UK national security law at University College London (Feb. 2010); Frieburg Proceedings on Contemporary Security Agendas Against Terrorism (Max Planck Institute, June 2010); “Public Law After the Human Rights Act” (LSE Seminar, February 2011); “State Secrets, Civil Proceedings and the Rule of Law“ (Bingham Centre All Souls workshop, July 2011); “Too Hot, Too Cold or Just Right: Equality Duty case law” (University of Oxford Public Law Group, November 2011); “Security and Human Rights” (BCL Seminar, University of Oxford, January 2012). 

Tom regularly acts as peer reviewer for law journals and legal publishers. In July 2011 he was appointed Fellow of the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law with co-responsibility for its project on national security and fair trials. 

Books

• Public Law After the Human Rights Act (Hart in 2010). 
• Human Rights: Judicial Protection in the United Kingdom (Sweet & Maxwell 2008, with Sir Jack Beatson, Stephen Grosz and Rabinder Singh QC).

Law Journal Publications

• ‘Negotiable rights, what rights?’ [2012] Modern Law Review 437
• ‘Beano no more: The EU Charter of Rights after Lisbon’ [2011] Judicial Review 113 (with K. Beal)
• ‘Problems for Proportionality’ [2011] New Zealand Law Journal 303
• ‘The Substance and Structure of Proportionality’ [2008] Public Law 694
• ‘Judges and Politicians after the Human Rights Act 1998: A Comment’ [2008] Public Law 84
• ‘Proportionality: Comparative Law Lessons” [2007] Judicial Review 31
• ‘In Defence of the Legal Constitution’ (2005) 55 University of Toronto Law Journal 981
• ‘Between Human Rights and the Rule of Law: Indefinite Detention and the Derogation Model of Constitutionalism’ (2005) 68 Modern Law Review 655
• ‘Constitutional Dialogue, Constitutional Theories and the Human Rights Act 1998’ [2005] Public Law 306
• ‘The “Uncertain Shadow”: Throwing Light on the Right to a Court under Article 6(1) ECHR’ [2004] Public Law 122
• ‘The Reasonableness Principle: Reassessing its place in the Public Sphere’ (2004) 63 Cambridge Law Journal 166
• ‘Cases on the presumption of innocence and acquittals’ [2003] EHRLR 539 (with Faisal Saifee)
• ‘Tort Law, Public Authorities and the Human Rights Act 1998’ in Fairgrieve, Andenas and Bell (eds.), The Liability of Public Authorities in Comparative Perspective (BIICL: London, 2002), Ch.2
• ‘Watching Britain burn: can we demand protection from fire?’ [2002] New Law Journal 1863
• ‘Negligence and Article 6: The Great Escape?’ (2002) 61 Cambridge Law Journal 13 (note)
• ‘Clark: The Demise of O’Reilly Completed?’ [2000] Judicial Review 178
• ‘And That’s Magic!: Making Public Bodies Liable for Failure to Confer Benefits’ (2000) 59 Cambridge Law Journal 432 (note)

Other Publications & Book Reviews

• ‘Where is the Justice in the Justice and Security Bill?’ UK Constitutional Law Blog, 5th June 2012
• ‘Freedom of Expression and the Olympics’ UK Constitutional Law Blog, 3rd May 2012
• ‘Data Overprotection’ UK Constitutional Law Blog,10th March 2012
• Review: The European Court of Human Rights Between Law and Politics [2012] EHRLR 357 
• ‘The Bill of Rights Commission and the How Question‘, UK Constitutional Law Blog, 18th October 2011
• ‘The EU Charter of Rights’ Lawyer 2B, Autumn 2010
• ‘Stop your racist land grab, tribunal tells Robert Mugabe’ The Times, 5 March 2009
• Review: Essays in Honour of Michael Taggart; Essays in Honour of Mark Aronson [2010] Judicial Review 393
• Review: O. Gross & F. Aoláin, Law in Times of Crisis [2009] Public Law 175
• Review: B. Ackerman, Before the Next Attack [2007] Public Law 178
• Review: C. Harlow, State Liability – Tort Law and Beyond [2006] Public Law 418
• Review: C. Gearty, Human Rights Adjudication [2005] Public Law 210
• Review: D. Fairgrieve, State Liability in Tort (2004) 63 Cambridge Law Journal 510
• Review: J. Wright, Tort Law and Human Rights (2002) 13 King’s College Law Journal 253

Other Information:

Tom is on the Committee of the Administrative and Constitutional Law Bar Association (ALBA). He is a member of the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA), the Bar European Group and the Commercial Bar Association (COMBAR). Tom is also a member of LIBERTY, JUSTICE and Amnesty International. 

VAT registration number:  863564107