Jason Pobjoy

Representing the Iranian Ministry of Defence in dispute concerning the enforcement of two arbitration awards made following a dispute arising of out of contracts for the supply of Chieftain tanks and armoured vehicles to Iran in the 1970s. The arbitrators held that the UK owed the principal sum of 140 million pounds to the Iranian Ministry of Defence pursuant to those contracts (later revised down to 127 million pounds). The sums have not yet been paid as a result of the imposition of EU sanctions. A number of disputes have arisen, including in relation to the payment of interest during the period in which the sanctions have operated (with Dinah Rose QC).

Representing a number of interveners in this judicial review challenge where the Claimant seeks to challenge the legality of the Secretary of State’s decision to exclude most generators of onshore wind energy from participation in the third allocation round auction for the award of Contracts for Difference (with Kieron Beal QC).

Represented two journalists in a challenge to the European Border and Coast Guard Agency's decision to refuse to disclose information regarding border patrol ships, requested pursuant to Regulation No. 1049/2001. Appeared before the General Court unled.

Representing a large group of Mexican shareholders challenging the decision of the Single Resolution Board to refuse access to a range of documents, requested pursuant to Regulation No. 1049/2001, involving its decision to take resolution action in respect of Banco Popular in 2017.

Representing Visa in relation to interchange fees arising out of Visa card transactions in Europe. The trial before the Commercial Court was the longest competition law trial of 2016/17, and was identified as one of the top 20 cases of 2016 (The Lawyer). This was followed by a two-week appeal in the Court of Appeal in 2018. A four-day appeal will be heard in the Supreme Court in January 2020. Jason is also representing Visa in a large number of additional claims relating to interchange fees, brought by UK and European retailers (with Dinah Rose QC and Brian Kennelly QC). 

Representing Scania in relation to UK litigation arising from the Commission's decisions relating to the alleged trucks cartel. Encompasses High Court and CAT proceedings, including prospective CPO proceedings. This is anticipated to be the largest competition litigation for 2019/2020 (with Brian Kennelly QC and Andrew Trotter).

Representing a large group of Mexican shareholders challenging the decisions of the Single Resolution Board and the European Commission to take resolution action in respect of Banco Popular in 2017. This action resulted in the sale of Banco Popular to Banco Santandar for 1 euro. This is the first time that a resolution action of the Single Resolution Board has been challenged before the European Courts, and has been selected as one of four lead tests cases. The grounds of challenge include a failure to respect the shareholders' due process rights, property rights, and right to effective judicial review, and a failure to comply with the Meroni non-delegation principles. 

Advised the Competition and Markets Authority (unled) in a large-scale investigation into adult dating websites. The investigation was focused on consumer protection issues under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations, the Consumer Contract Regulations and the Consumer Rights Act, which arose in the context of an online dating company that offered niche dating websites. 

Represented Drax and Infinis in the High Court and Court of Appeal for renewable source energy generators in challenge to the withdrawal of tax relief with practical immediacy. It was alleged that the withdrawal violated applicable standards of EU law, including the principles of foreseeability and proportionality, and A1P1 ECHR. (with Michael Fordham QC).

Represented Visa in application for access to documents that had been used in a case similar to a claim Visa was defending in the Commercial Court, in circumstances where Visa had not been a party to the CAT case (with Dinah Rose QC).

Represented Imperial Tobacco in its challenge to the Standardised Packaging of Tobacco Products Regulations 2015, in the High Court and Court of Appeal. The case raised issues relating to the deprivation of property, freedom of movement, and EU intellectual property law. Appeal to the Court of Appeal pending (with Dinah Rose QC and Brian Kennelly QC).

Represented Imperial Tobacco in its challenge to the EU’s Second Tobacco Products Directive (with Dinah Rose QC and Brian Kennelly QC).

Advised the European Publishers Council and the Professional Publishers Association as to whether the European Commission’s proposal to regulate indices used as benchmarks in financial instruments and contracts was compatible with the fundamental freedoms of the press under EU law (with Michael Beloff QC, Brian Kennelly QC and James Segan).

Acted for Freedom From Torture in challenge to the UK Government’s refugee pushback policy on the basis that it was ultra vires, and incompatible with the 1951 Refugee Convention and Articles 3 and 4 ECHR. The Government withdrew the policy shortly before the hearing that was due to be heard before a Divisional Court in the week of 2 May, 2022.

Representing the Secretary of State for Justice in a series of cases challenging the 21-day reconsideration mechanism introduced following the Worboys case.

Representing ENRC in judicial review proceedings against the SFO regarding investigations into concerns of historical SFO wrongdoing, including in relation to legal professional privilege (with Mike Fordham QC, Hollie Higgins and Natasha Simonsen).

Representing a number of interveners in this judicial review challenge where the Claimant seeks to challenge the legality of the Secretary of State’s decision to exclude most generators of onshore wind energy from participation in the third allocation round auction for the award of Contracts for Difference (with Kieron Beal QC).

Jason is regularly instructed by the BBC, led and unled, to provide advice on media, regulatory and public law issues. This include issues arising under the BBC Charter, the Framework Agreement, the Broadcasting Code, the Communications Act 2003, and the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. He has also advised in respect of consultations, including the over-75 licence fee consultation.

Represented the BBC in challenge brought by former BBC employee, Mr Keighley, challenging the framework that the BBC has in place to monitor compliance with its due impartiality obligations. 

Representing the Good Thinking Society in its judicial review challenge to the Professional Standards Authority over its decision to re-accredit the Society of Homeopaths, notwithstanding the fact that some of its practitioners continue to offer CEASE therapy (a purported treatment for autism which is targeted at children) (with Hollie Higgins).

Represented the Law Society in its judicial review of cuts made by the Lord Chancellor to criminal legal aid, which resulted in the Divisional Court quashing the Lord Chancellor's decision on the grounds of unfairness and irrationality.

Represented the Secretary of State for Justice defending judicial review claim alleging that the Parole Board lacks the requisite degree of independence, following the John Worboys challenge and subsequent resignation of the Parole Board Chair. 

Represented Fair Vote Project in this high-profile claim challenging the Prime Minister's refusal to set up an inquiry to investigate irregular and unlawful conduct that sought to influence the outcome of the EU Referendum. 

Represented the Secretary of State for Justice in the Supreme Court, defending claim brought by a prisoner alleging that his extended determinate sentence, which mandates that he cannot be released until he is two-thirds of the custodial term, infringes Article 14 ECHR (with Sir James Eadie QC). 

Represented a number of unaccompanied minors challenging the significant and ongoing delay by the SSHD in determining the claimants' individual asylum claims, and the systemic delay by the SSHD in determining asylum claims of unaccompanied children more generally. Raises issues under domestic law, EU law and public international law (in particular, under the Convention on the Rights of the Child). 

Represented four prisoners (including one transgender prisoner) challenging strip searches that were carried out at HMP Peterborough. Sodexo conceded that the searches were unlawful. The claimants also alleged that the systemic problems in respect of supervision of strip searching constitutes a violation of the SSJ's positive obligations under Articles 3 and 8 ECHR.

Jason is also representing a number of prisoners at other prisons throughout the United Kingdom, that have been subject to similar strip searches.

Represented the National Iranian Tanker Company in an urgent judicial review permission application, including an application for interim relief, relating to the SSHD’s decision to vote in favour of the redesignation of NITC. Permission for judicial review granted (with Tom de la Mare QC).

Represented IGas in application for interim injunction restraining persons unknown from a range of unlawful activity against fracking operators.

Advised an environmental NGO in respect of a challenge to the decision of the Ministry of Defence to refuse to designate the Goodwin Sands as an archaeological site in light of the very large number of ships and planes that went down in this area during WWII. The issue has arisen as a result of a dredging application that has been made to build a port in Devon. The dredging will have detrimental impact on marine wildlife and the large number of ships, aircraft and crew lost at sea during WWII, during the Battle of Britain.

Represented BID and Medical Justice in case concerning immigration detention of those with mental illness (with Michael Fordham QC). 

Represented Imperial Tobacco in its challenge to the Standardised Packaging of Tobacco Products Regulations 2015, in the High Court and Court of Appeal. The case raised issues relating to the deprivation of property, freedom of movement, and EU intellectual property law. Appeal to the Court of Appeal pending (with Dinah Rose QC and Brian Kennelly QC).

Represented Drax and Infinis in the High Court and Court of Appeal for renewable source energy generators in challenge to the withdrawal of tax relief with practical immediacy. It was alleged that the withdrawal violated applicable standards of EU law, including the principles of foreseeability and proportionality, and A1P1 ECHR. (with Michael Fordham QC).

Represented an eminent surgeon from Singapore in the High Court and Court of Appeal in a challenge to disciplinary proceedings by the GMC following a finding of overcharging by the Singapore Medical Council (with Michael Fordham QC).

Represented the FRC in this case which concerns a challenge brought by auditors to a decision of the Executive Counsel to the FRC to deliver a formal complaint against the claimants. The FRC was successful in the High Court and Court of Appeal (with Michael Fordham QC).

Represented the Association of British Insurers in this Reference which concerned the legislative competence of the National Assembly for Wales to recover NHS charges from tortfeasors and the compatibility of such recoupment with Article 1 Protocol 1 (with Michael Fordham QC). 

Represented the Secretary of State for Justice in this high-profile challenge to the SSJ’s policy on the receipt of books in prison (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Represented the Secretary of State for Justice in this challenge to the SSJ’s decision to bring the costs provisions in LASPO into force in respect of mesothelioma claims (with Shaheed Fatima QC). 

Represented the Attorney General of Jersey and the States of Guernsey in this case which concerned the constitutional relationship between the Channel Islands and the United Kingdom (with Sir Jeffrey Jowell QC and Iain Steele).

Acted for Freedom From Torture in challenge to the UK Government’s refugee pushback policy on the basis that it was ultra vires, and incompatible with the 1951 Refugee Convention and Articles 3 and 4 ECHR. The Government withdrew the policy shortly before the hearing that was due to be heard before a Divisional Court in the week of 2 May, 2022.

Representing the Secretary of State for Justice in a series of cases challenging the 21-day reconsideration mechanism introduced following the Worboys case.

Representing a major art museum in the United States in relation to a dispute that has arisen in relation to a piece of art which is said to have been unlawfully obtained.

Representing a child claimant challenging the £1017 Home Office fee. That is charged to children to register as British citizens. The claimants allege that this has the effect of depriving children of a statutory right, is contrary to the child’s best interests and infringes Article 8.

Representing the AIRE Centre which has intervened in the Supreme Court in this important appeal concerning (i) the extent to which decisions of the Competent Authority may be binding on a tribunal; and (ii) the scope of the protective and investigative duties under Article 4 ECHR. 

Advising on a potential discrimination claim arising out of the absence of season ticket equivalents for part-time workers.

Advising the Equality and Human Rights Commission in connection with its work monitoring the human rights and equality implications of the Grenfell Tower tragedy including, in particular, in relation to the right to life under Article 2 ECHR, the right to adequate and dignified housing, the right to non-discrimination and equality, and children’s rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Representing RT in a challenge to Ofcom's decisions (i) finding that RT had breached its due impartiality obligations in respect of seven programmes relating primarily to the Syrian war and the Skripal poisoning; and (ii) imposing a fine of £200,000 pounds. RT alleges that the decisions are incompatible with Article 10 ECHR or, alternatively, that the due impartiality regime is itself incompatible with Article 10. The case was heard before a Divisional Court in late-2019 and judgment is pending.

Representing six families of recognised refugees residing in the UK Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia in Cyprus. They have been residing there since 1998. The claimants challenge the decision of the SSHD to refuse admission to the UK. The case raises a number of fundamental issues under public international law, including, in particular, whether the Refugee Convention applies to this British overseas territory. The claimants succeeded in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court (with Raza Husain QC, Tom Hickman and Eddie Craven).

Represented four prisoners (including one transgender prisoner) challenging strip searches that were carried out at HMP Peterborough. Sodexo conceded that the searches were unlawful. The claimants also alleged that the systemic problems in respect of supervision of strip searching constitutes a violation of the SSJ's positive obligations under Articles 3 and 8 ECHR.

Jason is also representing a number of prisoners at other prisons throughout the United Kingdom, that have been subject to similar strip searches.

Represented the Secretary of State for Justice in the Supreme Court, defending claim brought by a prisoner alleging that his extended determinate sentence, which mandates that he cannot be released until he is two-thirds of the custodial term, infringes Article 14 ECHR (with Sir James Eadie QC). 

Represented the Secretary of State for Justice defending judicial review claim alleging that the Parole Board lacks the requisite degree of independence, following the John Worboys challenge and subsequent resignation of the Parole Board Chair. 

Advising Save the Children on public international law issues arising out of alleged massacre of Rohingya children in Myanmar. This involved the preparation of a detailed advice on potential violations of the Convention on the Rights of the Child with Professor Guy Goodwin-Gill QC, which Jason subsequently presented on behalf of Save the Children at the UN Human Rights Council at its 38th session in July 2018.

Represented a number of unaccompanied minors challenging the significant and ongoing delay by the SSHD in determining the claimants' individual asylum claims, and the systemic delay by the SSHD in determining asylum claims of unaccompanied children more generally. Raises issues under domestic law, EU law and public international law (in particular, under the Convention on the Rights of the Child). 

Represented the claimants in this important case before the European Court of Human Rights, following the decision of the Supreme Court in Keyu v Secretary of State. The case addresses whether there is a human rights obligation under ECHR and/or customary international law to undertake a further inquiry into the 1948 massacre during the Malayan Emergency (with Michael Fordham QC, Danny Friedman QC and Zach Douglas QC).

Representing Ineos in application for interim injunction restraining persons unknown from a range of unlawful activity against fracking operators and their third party contractors. Ineos succeeded in obtaining the interim injunction before the High Court. The case raises issues relating to the scope of Articles 10 and 11 ECHR, the appropriateness of obtaining relief against persons unknown, the test for quia timet interim injunctions, and the scope of the various alleged torts/statutory offences. A Court of Appeal hearing is listed for early 2019.

Represented IGas in application for interim injunction restraining persons unknown from a range of unlawful activity against fracking operators.

Represented the claimant in this case challenging the UK’s policy in relation to rough sleeping in the Upper Tribunal. The UK had passed a policy which suggests that rough sleeping in an of itself constitutes an “abuse of rights” for the purposes of Article 35 of the Citizens Rights Directive. This raised issues concerning free movement rights under the TFEU.

Represented the Equality Network in its intervention in the Supreme Court in this important case involving questions as to the rights of transgender people to have information about their gender history kept private. The Equality Network submitted detailed evidence and submissions addressing the true impact that data retention policies have on the day-to-day lives of transgender people.

Represented UNHCR pro bono in the Supreme Court in this case which concerns the circumstances in which Art 8 ECHR will be engaged by a decision to prosecute a refugee for the use of false documents. The case has far-reaching implications for refugees entering the United Kingdom (with Raza Husain QC and Paul Luckhurst).

Represented a mother and son in this important appeal before the Court of Appeal which concerns the proper approach to the definition of persecutory harm under the Refugee Convention in cases involving children. The child in this case is a 5-year albino boy, who would face widespread societal discrimination if returned to Nigeria, including a risk of ritual killing. The Secretary of State conceded the appeal before the hearing.

Represented the AIRE Centre in the Court of Appeal in this case which concerns the application of Art 8 ECHR to unaccompanied refugee children in the Calais “Jungle” (with Raza Husain QC).

Represented approximately 1,400 Iraqi claimants in a series of cases in the High Court and Court of Appeal which concern, inter alia, the jurisdictional reach of Art 1 ECHR and the scope of the investigative duties under Art 3 and Art 5 ECHR, and the investigative obligations under UNCAT and customary international law (with Michael Fordham QC, Danny Friedman QC and Dan Squires QC).

Represented BID and Medical Justice in case concerning immigration detention of those with mental illness (with Michael Fordham QC). 

Representing the Secretary of State for Justice before the Supreme Court in this case which concerned whether the CFA and ATE premium regime in place prior to the Jackson reforms is compatible with Article 6 and A1P1 ECHR. In addition to acting in this case in the Supreme Court, Jason is representing the United Kingdom in proceedings in the European Court of Human Rights (with Tom Weisselberg QC).

Represented UNHCR in its intervention before the Court of Appeal in this case which concern the proper interpretation of Art 1F(b) of the Refugee Convention (with Michael Fordham QC and Samantha Knights).

Represented the Equality and Human Rights Commission in its intervention before the Supreme Court in this case which concerns the test for disability discrimination in the social housing context (with Monica Carss-Frisk QC).

Represented the Association of British Insurers in this Reference which concerned the legislative competence of the National Assembly for Wales to recover NHS charges from tortfeasors and the compatibility of such recoupment with Article 1 Protocol 1 (with Michael Fordham QC). 

Acted successfully for the Office of the Children’s Commissioner before the Upper Tribunal and Court of Appeal in this challenge to the SSHD’s refusal to return a 5-year old boy from Nigeria and his mentally ill mother on the basis that the SSHD did not adequate consider the child’s best interests. SSHD ordered to return to the family (with Monica Carrs-Frisk QC and Kate Gallafent QC).

Represented ILGA-Europe, AIRE Centre and the International Commission of Jurists in this case which concerns questions about the scope of the positive obligations to undertake effective investigation in the context of hate crimes motivated in whole or in part by an individual’s real or imputed sexual orientation or gender identity.

Jason regularly advises individuals, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and other government bodies on issues relating to State and diplomatic immunity.

Advising the Foreign & Commonwealth Office on its liability under public international law for acts that took place in a former colony.

Representing six families of recognised refugees residing in the UK Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia in Cyprus. They have been residing there since 1998. The claimants challenge the decision of the SSHD to refuse admission to the UK. The case raises a number of fundamental issues under public international law, including, in particular, whether the Refugee Convention applies to this British overseas territory. The claimants succeeded in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court (with Raza Husain QC, Tom Hickman and Eddie Craven).

Advising Save the Children on public international law issues arising out of alleged massacre of Rohingya children in Myanmar. This involved the preparation of a detailed advice on potential violations of the Convention on the Rights of the Child with Professor Guy Goodwin-Gill QC, which Jason subsequently presented on behalf of Save the Children at the UN Human Rights Council at its 38th session in July 2018.

Advising the Equality and Human Rights Commission in connection with its work monitoring the human rights and equality implications of the Grenfell Tower tragedy including, in particular, in relation to the right to life under Article 2 ECHR, the right to adequate and dignified housing, the right to non-discrimination and equality, and children’s rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Represented the claimants in this important case before the European Court of Human Rights, following the decision of the Supreme Court in Keyu v Secretary of State. The case addresses whether there is a human rights obligation under ECHR and/or customary international law to undertake a further inquiry into the 1948 massacre during the Malayan Emergency (with Michael Fordham QC, Danny Friedman QC and Zach Douglas QC).

Represented investment funds, owned by the Libyan Investment Authority, in 10-day trial, and subsequently a two-day appeal, in the Cayman Islands. The case raised a number of complex issues involving the interaction between the UN, EU, UK and Cayman sanctions regimes. The central issue was whether the dismissal of directors of the investment funds constituted a breach of those regimes (with Dinah Rose QC).

Representing the sons of the former president of Egypt and their wives, in challenging the EU sanctions imposed on the basis of alleged crimes in Egypt, notwithstanding that no evidence has been supplied to the Council in relation to the wives, the Egyptian courts have dismissed the allegations related to the sons and their single conviction, which is nevertheless spent, as well as their ongoing proceedings, are marred by flagrant violations of Articles 6 & 7 ECHR (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Represented UNHCR pro bono in the Supreme Court in this case which concerns the circumstances in which Art 8 ECHR will be engaged by a decision to prosecute a refugee for the use of false documents. The case has far-reaching implications for refugees entering the United Kingdom (with Raza Husain QC and Paul Luckhurst).

Representing the former president of Egypt in challenging the EU sanctions imposed on the basis of alleged crimes in Egypt, notwithstanding that the Egyptian courts have dismissed the allegations relating to him, and his single conviction, which is nevertheless spent, as well as their ongoing proceedings, is marred by flagrant violations of Articles 6 & 7 ECHR (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Advising the former President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, and his son, in challenging the EU restrictive measures imposed on them (with Shaheed Fatima QC).

Represented approximately 1,400 Iraqi claimants in a series of cases in the High Court and Court of Appeal which concern, inter alia, the jurisdictional reach of Art 1 ECHR and the scope of the investigative duties under Art 3 and Art 5 ECHR, and the investigative obligations under UNCAT and customary international law (with Michael Fordham QC, Danny Friedman QC and Dan Squires QC).

Represented UNHCR in its intervention before the Court of Appeal in this case which concern the proper interpretation of Art 1F(b) of the Refugee Convention (with Michael Fordham QC and Samantha Knights).

Advised on a complaint to the ILO (with Shaheed Fatima QC).

Represented ILGA-Europe, AIRE Centre and the International Commission of Jurists in this case which concerns questions about the scope of the positive obligations to undertake effective investigation in the context of hate crimes motivated in whole or in part by an individual’s real or imputed sexual orientation or gender identity.

Advised on various provisions of the Constitution of the Universal Postal Union, the General Regulations of the Universal Postal Union and the Universal Postal Convention (with Shaheed Fatima QC).

Advised on the definition of “investment” in various Bilateral Investment Treaties, and Article 25 of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States.

Represented the Application in his Communication to the UN Human Rights Committee.

Urgent Communication to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in connection with the arbitrary detention of a group of men detained in Australia in connection with suspected terrorist activities.

Advised an Australian citizen facing the death penalty in an overseas jurisdiction.

Representing Visa in relation to interchange fees arising out of Visa card transactions in Europe. The trial before the Commercial Court was the longest competition law trial of 2016/17, and was identified as one of the top 20 cases of 2016 (The Lawyer). This was followed by a two-week appeal in the Court of Appeal in 2018. A four-day appeal will be heard in the Supreme Court in January 2020. Jason is also representing Visa in a large number of additional claims relating to interchange fees, brought by UK and European retailers (with Dinah Rose QC and Brian Kennelly QC). 

Represented investment funds, owned by the Libyan Investment Authority, in 10-day trial, and subsequently a two-day appeal, in the Cayman Islands. The case raised a number of complex issues involving the interaction between the UN, EU, UK and Cayman sanctions regimes. The central issue was whether the dismissal of directors of the investment funds constituted a breach of those regimes (with Dinah Rose QC).

Representing Scania in relation to UK litigation arising from the Commission's decisions relating to the alleged trucks cartel. Encompasses High Court and CAT proceedings, including prospective CPO proceedings. This is anticipated to be the largest competition litigation for 2019/2020 (with Brian Kennelly QC and Andrew Trotter).

Representing a large group of Mexican shareholders challenging the decisions of the Single Resolution Board and the European Commission to take resolution action in respect of Banco Popular in 2017. This action resulted in the sale of Banco Popular to Banco Santandar for 1 euro. This is the first time that a resolution action of the Single Resolution Board has been challenged before the European Courts, and has been selected as one of four lead tests cases. The grounds of challenge include a failure to respect the shareholders' due process rights, property rights, and right to effective judicial review, and a failure to comply with the Meroni non-delegation principles. 

Represented Visa in application for access to documents that had been used in a case similar to a claim Visa was defending in the Commercial Court, in circumstances where Visa had not been a party to the CAT case (with Dinah Rose QC).

Representing the SFO in various aspects of its Barclays/Qatar prosecution (with Sir James Eadie QC).

Represented an employer in an urgent interim injunction application in restrictive covenant/breach of confidence claim (with Robert Howe QC).

Represented an investor in context of long-running dispute concerning payment of royalties and the enforcement of rights under various production agreements in respect of Dirty Dancing the Musical (with Andrew Hunter QC).

Advising employer on issues arising out of publication, by an ex-employee, of highly commercially sensitive information (with Tony Peto QC).

Represented Lord Archer in context of long-running dispute concerning payment of royalties and the enforcement of rights under various production agreements in respect of Dirty Dancing the Musical (with Andrew Hunter QC).

Advising overseas regulator in the context of a high-profile investigation into a company and its directors following a failure to disclose price-sensitive information to the market (with Javan Herberg QC).

3-month secondment, advising on a variety of financial services matters, including the FCA’s conduct of business rules, the FCA’s regulatory duties, and the domestic implementation of the Mortgage Credit Directive and Payment Services Directive. Jason has since been instructed by the FCA to assist in drafting various amendments to the FCA Handbook.

Representing the Ministry of Justice in an appeal against a decision of the Information Commissioner’s Office refusing access to information relating to compensation awarded to family members of Timothy Evans, who was hanged in 1950 for the murder of his baby daughter, but was given a posthumous royal pardon in 1966. 

Representing the BBC defending its decision not to release certain information.

Representing a large group of Mexican shareholders challenging the decision of the Single Resolution Board to refuse access to a range of documents, requested pursuant to Regulation No. 1049/2001, involving its decision to take resolution action in respect of Banco Popular in 2017.

Representing a major art museum in the United States in relation to a dispute that has arisen in relation to a piece of art which is said to have been unlawfully obtained.

Jason is regularly instructed by the BBC, led and unled, to provide advice on media, regulatory and public law issues. This include issues arising under the BBC Charter, the Framework Agreement, the Broadcasting Code, the Communications Act 2003, and the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. He has also advised in respect of consultations, including the over-75 licence fee consultation.

Representing RT in a challenge to Ofcom's decisions (i) finding that RT had breached its due impartiality obligations in respect of seven programmes relating primarily to the Syrian war and the Skripal poisoning; and (ii) imposing a fine of £200,000 pounds. RT alleges that the decisions are incompatible with Article 10 ECHR or, alternatively, that the due impartiality regime is itself incompatible with Article 10. The case was heard before a Divisional Court in late-2019 and judgment is pending.

Represented two journalists in a challenge to the European Border and Coast Guard Agency's decision to refuse to disclose information regarding border patrol ships, requested pursuant to Regulation No. 1049/2001. Appeared before the General Court unled.

Represented the BBC in challenge brought by former BBC employee, Mr Keighley, challenging the framework that the BBC has in place to monitor compliance with its due impartiality obligations. 

Advised a number of individuals on potential complaints and causes of action arising from statements made in Parliament, under the guise of parliamentary privilege. This has included advice on potential violations of Article 6, 8 and 13 ECHR.

Representing the Ministry of Justice in an appeal against a decision of the Information Commissioner’s Office refusing access to information relating to compensation awarded to family members of Timothy Evans, who was hanged in 1950 for the murder of his baby daughter, but was given a posthumous royal pardon in 1966. 

Representing the BBC defending its decision not to release certain information.

Representing a large group of Mexican shareholders challenging the decision of the Single Resolution Board to refuse access to a range of documents, requested pursuant to Regulation No. 1049/2001, involving its decision to take resolution action in respect of Banco Popular in 2017.

Represented two journalists in a challenge to the European Border and Coast Guard Agency's decision to refuse to disclose information regarding border patrol ships, requested pursuant to Regulation No. 1049/2001. Appeared before the General Court unled.

Representing the Iranian Ministry of Defence in dispute concerning the enforcement of two arbitration awards made following a dispute arising of out of contracts for the supply of Chieftain tanks and armoured vehicles to Iran in the 1970s. The arbitrators held that the UK owed the principal sum of 140 million pounds to the Iranian Ministry of Defence pursuant to those contracts (later revised down to 127 million pounds). The sums have not yet been paid as a result of the imposition of EU sanctions. A number of disputes have arisen, including in relation to the payment of interest during the period in which the sanctions have operated (with Dinah Rose QC).

Jason regularly advises, led and unled, companies and individuals in relation to compliance with the EU and international sanctions regimes, particularly with regard to Iran, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Ukraine and Russia. This includes advice on the impact of sanctions on commercial transactions. More recently he has advised on the implications of the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018. Much of this work is confidential, and cannot be listed here.

Representing the former president of Egypt in challenging the EU sanctions imposed on the basis of alleged crimes in Egypt, notwithstanding that the Egyptian courts have dismissed the allegations relating to him, and his single conviction, which is nevertheless spent, as well as their ongoing proceedings, is marred by flagrant violations of Articles 6 & 7 ECHR (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Representing the sons of the former president of Egypt and their wives, in challenging the EU sanctions imposed on the basis of alleged crimes in Egypt, notwithstanding that no evidence has been supplied to the Council in relation to the wives, the Egyptian courts have dismissed the allegations related to the sons and their single conviction, which is nevertheless spent, as well as their ongoing proceedings, are marred by flagrant violations of Articles 6 & 7 ECHR (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Represented investment funds, owned by the Libyan Investment Authority, in 10-day trial, and subsequently a two-day appeal, in the Cayman Islands. The case raised a number of complex issues involving the interaction between the UN, EU, UK and Cayman sanctions regimes. The central issue was whether the dismissal of directors of the investment funds constituted a breach of those regimes (with Dinah Rose QC).

Representing the wife of the former president of Egypt in challenging EU sanctions imposed on the basis of alleged crimes in Egypt, notwithstanding that no evidence has been supplied to the Council (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Representing the National Iranian Tanker Company before the General Court and Court of Justice in its application for interim relief and annulment in relation to its re-listing. The case concerns the reinstatement of sanctions on an entity in circumstances in which that entity has already won a legal challenge against a previous attempt to designate it, and the factual allegations against the Appellant have not changed. The issues before the Court raise fundamental questions about the need for effective remedies for unlawful action by the Council, and as to the proper limits on the Council’s ability to engage in unfair and abusive re-designation and re-litigation. An appeal is currently pending before the Court of Justice (with Tom de la Mare QC and Maya Lester QC).

Representing the former Chief of Staff of the former Ukrainian President in challenging EU sanctions alleging misappropriation and corruption, on the grounds of breach of human rights and lack of evidence. In 2018, Jason appeared unled in the General Court, and succeeded in obtaining the annulling the freezing of funds for Mr Klyuyev for the period March 2017-March 2018, on the basis that the Council had committed a manifest error of assessment in determining that there was a legitimate basis for listing him. Jason is currently acting for Mr Klyuyev in relation to his re-designation (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Represented Mr Klyuyev, a former Ukrainian politican, in challenging EU sanctions on the basis of a lack of evidence. Mr Klyuyev succeeded in overturning his designation, and, following extensive representations to the Council, was de-listed in early 2018 (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Represented Mr Ivanyuschenko, a prominent Ukranian businessman and former politician, in his annulment application. The Court held that the Council had committed a manifest error of assessment in determining that there was a legitimate basis for listing him, and he was subsequently de-listed by the Council (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Advising the former President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, and his son, in challenging the EU restrictive measures imposed on them (with Shaheed Fatima QC).

Represented a former Ukrainian Minister of Revenue and Duties in his challenge to EU sanctions, on the basis that the allegations made by the new administration are false and driven by the commercial interests of the new rulers in Ukraine (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Representing  Mr Ezz and his wives before the General Court in this third application to unfreeze their assets (with Brian Kennelly QC). 

Represented Mr Ezz and his wives in an appeal to the Court of Justice challenging a decision of the General Court refusing to annul restrictive measures freezing funds in the EU because of an alleged misappropriation of Egyptian State funds in connection with the Mubarak regime. The Ezz judgment is one of the leading cases in this area (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Represented the National Iranian Tanker Company in an urgent judicial review permission application, including an application for interim relief, relating to the SSHD’s decision to vote in favour of the redesignation of NITC. Permission for judicial review granted (with Tom de la Mare QC).

Represented Mr Kurchenko in an application to annul restrictive measures freezing funds in the EU because of an alleged misappropriation of Ukrainian State funds in connection with the Yanukovych regime (with Brian Kennelly QC).

Acted for Freedom From Torture in challenge to the UK Government’s refugee pushback policy on the basis that it was ultra vires, and incompatible with the 1951 Refugee Convention and Articles 3 and 4 ECHR. The Government withdrew the policy shortly before the hearing that was due to be heard before a Divisional Court in the week of 2 May, 2022.

Representing Afghan national at risk of persecutory harm in Afghanistan on account of his political activity. The claimant was returned notwithstanding that risk, and is seeking an order compelling re-entry so that he can exercise his right to an in-country appeal. 

Representing a number of families in connection with involvement in scheme which provided a route to obtain Tier 1 (Investor) visas. The cases raise issues in relation to the Tier 1 (Investor) route, Article 8 ECHR, and Article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Representing a child claimant challenging the £1017 Home Office fee. That is charged to children to register as British citizens. The claimants allege that this has the effect of depriving children of a statutory right, is contrary to the child’s best interests and infringes Article 8.

Representing six families of recognised refugees residing in the UK Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia in Cyprus. They have been residing there since 1998. The claimants challenge the decision of the SSHD to refuse admission to the UK. The case raises a number of fundamental issues under public international law, including, in particular, whether the Refugee Convention applies to this British overseas territory. The claimants succeeded in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court (with Raza Husain QC, Tom Hickman and Eddie Craven).

Represented the claimant in this case challenging the UK’s policy in relation to rough sleeping in the Upper Tribunal. The UK had passed a policy which suggests that rough sleeping in an of itself constitutes an “abuse of rights” for the purposes of Article 35 of the Citizens Rights Directive. This raised issues concerning free movement rights under the TFEU.

Representing the AIRE Centre which has intervened in the Supreme Court in this important appeal concerning (i) the extent to which decisions of the Competent Authority may be binding on a tribunal; and (ii) the scope of the protective and investigative duties under Article 4 ECHR. 

Represented a number of unaccompanied minors challenging the significant and ongoing delay by the SSHD in determining the claimants' individual asylum claims, and the systemic delay by the SSHD in determining asylum claims of unaccompanied children more generally. Raises issues under domestic law, EU law and public international law (in particular, under the Convention on the Rights of the Child). 

Represented UNHCR pro bono in the Supreme Court in this case which concerns the circumstances in which Art 8 ECHR will be engaged by a decision to prosecute a refugee for the use of false documents. The case has far-reaching implications for refugees entering the United Kingdom (with Raza Husain QC and Paul Luckhurst).

Represented the AIRE Centre in the Court of Appeal in this case which concerns the application of Art 8 ECHR to unaccompanied refugee children in the Calais “Jungle” (with Raza Husain QC).

Represented BID and Medical Justice in case concerning immigration detention of those with mental illness (with Michael Fordham QC). 

Acted successfully for the Office of the Children’s Commissioner before the Upper Tribunal and Court of Appeal in this challenge to the SSHD’s refusal to return a 5-year old boy from Nigeria and his mentally ill mother on the basis that the SSHD did not adequate consider the child’s best interests. SSHD ordered to return to the family (with Monica Carrs-Frisk QC and Kate Gallafent QC).

Represented a mother and son in this important appeal before the Court of Appeal which concerns the proper approach to the definition of persecutory harm under the Refugee Convention in cases involving children. The child in this case is a 5-year albino boy, who would face widespread societal discrimination if returned to Nigeria, including a risk of ritual killing. The Secretary of State conceded the appeal before the hearing.

Representing a large group of Mexican shareholders challenging the decisions of the Single Resolution Board and the European Commission to take resolution action in respect of Banco Popular in 2017. This action resulted in the sale of Banco Popular to Banco Santandar for 1 euro. This is the first time that a resolution action of the Single Resolution Board has been challenged before the European Courts, and has been selected as one of four lead tests cases. The grounds of challenge include a failure to respect the shareholders' due process rights, property rights, and right to effective judicial review, and a failure to comply with the Meroni non-delegation principles. 

Representing the SFO in various aspects of its Barclays/Qatar prosecution (with Sir James Eadie QC).

Represented the FRC in this case which concerns a challenge brought by auditors to a decision of the Executive Counsel to the FRC to deliver a formal complaint against the claimants. The FRC was successful in the High Court and Court of Appeal (with Michael Fordham QC).

Advising overseas regulator in the context of a high-profile investigation into a company and its directors following a failure to disclose price-sensitive information to the market (with Javan Herberg QC).

3-month secondment, advising on a variety of financial services matters, including the FCA’s conduct of business rules, the FCA’s regulatory duties, and the domestic implementation of the Mortgage Credit Directive and Payment Services Directive. Jason has since been instructed by the FCA to assist in drafting various amendments to the FCA Handbook.

Representing a number of interveners in this judicial review challenge where the Claimant seeks to challenge the legality of the Secretary of State’s decision to exclude most generators of onshore wind energy from participation in the third allocation round auction for the award of Contracts for Difference (with Kieron Beal QC).

Advised an environmental NGO in respect of a challenge to the decision of the Ministry of Defence to refuse to designate the Goodwin Sands as an archaeological site in light of the very large number of ships and planes that went down in this area during WWII. The issue has arisen as a result of a dredging application that has been made to build a port in Devon. The dredging will have detrimental impact on marine wildlife and the large number of ships, aircraft and crew lost at sea during WWII, during the Battle of Britain.

Represented Drax and Infinis in the High Court and Court of Appeal for renewable source energy generators in challenge to the withdrawal of tax relief with practical immediacy. It was alleged that the withdrawal violated applicable standards of EU law, including the principles of foreseeability and proportionality, and A1P1 ECHR. (with Michael Fordham QC).

Representing Ineos in application for interim injunction restraining persons unknown from a range of unlawful activity against fracking operators and their third party contractors. Ineos succeeded in obtaining the interim injunction before the High Court. The case raises issues relating to the scope of Articles 10 and 11 ECHR, the appropriateness of obtaining relief against persons unknown, the test for quia timet interim injunctions, and the scope of the various alleged torts/statutory offences. A Court of Appeal hearing is listed for early 2019.

Represented IGas in application for interim injunction restraining persons unknown from a range of unlawful activity against fracking operators.