Gary Oliver
Senior Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7325
Tom Hickman QC is recognised as a leading barrister in public and constitutional law, international law, regulatory law, commercial law, media entertainment and sports law.
Tom was awarded Public Law and Human Rights Silk of the Year at the Chambers and Partners UK Bar Awards 2020 and was named in the country's "Hot 100" lawyers by The Lawyer magazine in 2017. Prior to taking silk, Tom was ranked by Chambers and Partners in five practice areas, in two as the "Star Practitioner".
Tom regularly advises and conducts litigation on behalf of Governments and public authorities, including regulatory bodies. Prior to taking silk, Tom was on the "A Panel" of Government Counsel and he continues to advise and conduct litigation for the UK Government in silk, including recent work for the Treasury and the Ministry of Defence. Tom also advises and acts for other Governments; examples include the Scottish Government, the Republic of Cyprus, the Government of the Bahamas and various British Overseas Territories.
Tom also acts for private clients both in challenges to acts of regulatory bodies and governments and in private commercial or sports disputes. He has experience of a wide range of courts and tribunals, including the Chancery Division, Commercial Court, arbitration and disciplinary tribunals. He has litigated many cases before the European Court of Human Rights and the CJEU and in British Overseas Territories. He has coordinated international litigation strategies and has experience of working with local lawyers on cases in countries as diverse as Norway, Cyprus, USA, Bahamas, Germany and Uganda.
He has acted in many leading cases, including for Gina Miller in both the Miller claims. He has appeared in the Supreme Court over a dozen times.
Recent cases have included claims by British Airways plc and by Manchester Airports Group to Covid-19 laws and a major arbitration between the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) which determined the ban imposed on Russian participation in international sporting events (Tom acted fro WADA). In 2021, Tom led a team that successfully challenged the housing of asylum-seekers at Napier military barracks. In 2022 he successfully acted for Reclaim These Streets in a challenge to the police decision to prevent a vigil on clapham common from being organised.
Tom is also Standing Counsel to the Investigatory Powers Commissioner's
Office (IPCO) which regulates the use of surveillance powers by law
enforcement and intelligence agencies in the UK. In this capacity, he advises the Commissioner on legal issues and represents the Commissioner in legal proceedings as well as participating in international and national discussions on surveillance oversight.
Tom is Professor of Public Law at University College London and regularly publishes articles, blogs and tweets on legal issues. Tom's evidence to parliamentary committees has been referred to in a number of committee reports, such as the House of Lords Constitution Committee's June 2021 report on the use of emergency powers during Covid-19 pandemic and the June 2022 Privileges Committee report on Select Committee's powers. In January 2020, Tom was the first person in the history of the Bundesverfassungsgericht to give oral evidence on foreign law to that Court, in the landmark BND Act case (his evidence was on interception of communication laws and oversight) (1 BvR 2835/17).
A recent blog on the misuse of guidance in response to the Covid-19 pandemic is available here. A blog on the Judicial Review and Courts Act here.
Tom has considerable experience of commercial litigation including copyright and other IP disputes, often having a connection to media, sport or entertainment or in complex cases that have a public law, international law or human rights angle.
In 2018-2019, Tom acted in a long-running passing off claim in the
pharmaceuticals sector (Glaxo v Sandoz) which generated multiple judgments of the Chancery Division.
For several years Tom acted in the leading trade marks case of Sky plc v SkyKick UK Ltd, including in a reference to the CJEU.
In 2018-19 Tom acted for Nottingham Forest FC in a dispute over the sale of the Club. The case went to the Court of Appeal..
Previous cases have included acting for Vladmir Antonov in a major asset freezing case and acting for HMRC in a dispute with Bernie Ecclestone concerning the decision of HMRC's tax settlement agreement with Mr Ecclestone.
This commercial court case challenges the the rescission of a settlement agreement between Bernard Ecclestone and HM Revenue and Customs relating to the settlement of the investigation into the sale of the rights to F1 Racing. The issues include misrepresentation and fraud. Tom represented HMRC.
Tom acted for Tate & Lyle Sugar concerning the allegedly wrongful diversion of a sugar cargo. The claim involved allegations of conversion, procuring breach of contract, deceit and conspiracy.
Tom acted for the high street retailer H&M, in successfully resisting an EU-wide injunction against the company for selling infringing brassieres contrary to a settlement agreement. Distinguishing Experience Hendrix, the court also refused to grant an account of profits.
Acted for HP Ltd in a trade mark infringement and conspiracy claim concerning the acquisition and sale of computer servers.
Tom is acting for Renault Formula 1 Team in a sponsorship dispute over the use of the YotaPhone brand. The claim is proceeding in the commercial court.
Tom acted for Gillingham FC in substantial contractual dispute concerning hospitality at the Club’s ground and hospitality facilities. The Club was awarded £1.4m in damages and costs in this contested high court action.
Claim by owner of hotel chain against an operating company for delivery-up of database information and documents and for breach of fiduciary duty.
Substantial civil fraud claim against Vladimir Antonov, the former owner of a Lithuanian Bank. The judgment of Gloster J relates to various interlocutory issues, including confidentiality rings, the relationship between freezing orders in different jurisdictions, criminal proceedings and extradition proceedings, and the right against self-incrimination.
Tom acted successfully for Fawaz Al-Hasawi in this £5m dispute over the sale of Nottingham Forest Football Club. A judgment reached in Mr Al-Hasawi's favour was upheld on appeal.
Tom is acting for the defendant, a US data migration company, in these on-going trade mark proceedings. The case has generated a number of important judgments and is currently the subject of a reference to the CJEU on the issue of the bad faith defence and the scope of the CJEU's ruling in IP Translator. An application for a reference on the compatibility of the "own name defence" with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights was refused.
Tom acted for Chelsea FC in this claim by Adrian Mutu in the European Court of Human Rights. It is the first case in which the ECtHR has considered the CAS system and its compliance with human rights standards. Judgment was delivered in 2018.
Tom acts for a global multi-level marketing company concerning the scope of Directive 2005/29/EC and the prohibition on pyramid selling schemes. Tom is involved at an advisory and strategic level, including helping to co-ordinate legal teams in several jurisdictions.
Multi-jurisdictional passing off / trade mark litigation concerning the fourth most successful pharmaceutical product in the world, the Seretide asthma inhalers. Tom acts for Glaxo. The case was the subject of a number of interim applications and judgments and was tried by Mr Justice Arnold in July 2019.
Tom was awarded Chambers & Partners Public Law Silk of the Year in 2020. Prior to taking silk Tom was a “Star Individual” in Administrative & Public Law and was public law junior of the year in 2017 (Chambers & Partners) and 2019 (Legal 500).
Tom regularly appears in the Administrative Court and appeal courts in the most difficult and high public law cases, including both Miller cases, in which he represented Gina Miller.
Tom is currently acting for the Competition and Markets Authority for two judicial review challenges to appellate decisions of the authority. He is acting for the Treasury and UK Statistics Authority in a judicial review to the changes to RPI.
Tom has acted in and advised clients in a number of disputes concerning Covid-19 laws, e.g.:
Tom has considerable experience in regulatory disputes and has acted in numerous regulatory disputes matters both for and against regulators such as Ofgem, Ofcom, the Advertising Standards Authority and the Gambling Commission.
Tom also conducts public law litigation abroad, subject to local requirements. For instance he has conducted major commercial judicial reviews in the Turks and Caicos Islands, Bahamas, Cayman Islands and the BVI. He has co-ordinated multi-jurisdictional EU/ECHR litigation concerned with alleged pyramid selling in Cyprus, Norway and the UK.
Tom is author of a leading book on public law (Public Law After the Human Rights Act (Hart 2010)) and has written extensively on and blogs journals in the UK and abroad on public law. He teaches and examines public law at UCL.
Tom has been standing Counsel to the Investigatory Powers Commissioner since 2017. In 2020, Tom was the first person to give oral testimony to the Constitutional Court of Germany in a two day hearing before that Court, as an expert witness giving evidence on the subject of the regulation of external interception of communications and intelligence service oversight.
“He's incredibly intelligent, has very creative ideas and finds a way of tackling issues.”
Chambers and Partners, 2022
“His advocacy is impressive, persuasive and highly effective, and undiminished in a virtual environment. A real star.”
Legal 500, 2022
“Tom is ferociously bright, plain speaking, client friendly and strategic.”
Legal 500, 2022
“Very professional, a very good litigator and a very good academic lawyer. Definitely a class act.”
Chambers and Partners, 2021
“A winner: astute, quick-thinking and persuasive.”
Legal 500, 2021
“He's the leading voice in matters of constitutional importance. He's authoritative, knowledgeable and capable of leading against advocates of much greater call.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
“He's the leading voice in matters of constitutional importance, and is really innovative, proactive and good to work with.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
“An extraordinary legal thinker and a star among the new silks.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
“One of the most gifted counsel around.”
Legal 500, 2019
“Produces very forceful written and oral submissions and has a fantastic senior junior practice.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“Robust adviser who is a pleasure to work with.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“He's brilliantly sharp-witted, very intelligent and articulate.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“He's come into his own in terms of advocacy on his feet.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“He's shown himself to be of equal mettle to the most senior counsel.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“He is very bright and a pleasure to work with.”
Chambers and Partners, 2018
“The star of the junior Bar and the leading voice on matters of constitutional importance.”
Legal 500, 2018
“Outstanding and adept on his feet.”
Legal 500, 2018
“A brilliant mind, academically and strategically. He is very good to bounce ideas off and is second to none for public law”
Chambers and Partners, 2017
“An innovative, strategic thinker and a robust advocate.”
Legal 500, 2017
“Combines intellect with good judgement and crisp argument”
Legal 500, 2016
“Phenomenal”
Legal 500, 2015
Tom acted for the Governor of the Cayman Islands a constitutional challenge to the Civil Partnership Act 2020. The Court held that the Governor of the Cayman Islands, in enacting and assenting to the CPA, had acted within the scope of his reserved powers under section 81 of the Cayman Islands Constitution The challenge raised constitutional issues under the Cayman Island Constitution and the means by which it gives effects to the international obligations of the United Kingdom.
Tom represented the Investigatory Powers Commission at a hearing concerned with the scope of the Commission's duty to assist the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.
Successful challenge to the legality of the Government’s policy to search, seize and retain data from the mobile phones of migrants arriving by small boat.
Tom acted for MA and KH.
Tom is acting for the Treasury and for the UK Statistics Authority in this challenge to the decision to change the calculation method for RPI brought on behalf of UK gilt holders.
Tom acted for the FDA civil service union in challenging the Prime Minister's decision that there was no breach of the Ministerial Code by the Home Secretary concerning allegations of bullying. The FDA was granted permission on the basis that it was reasonably arguable that the term "bullying' in the Ministerial Code has the same meaning as that in civil service workplace policies and therefore that the Prime Minister misapplied the Code when he concluded that absent intention conduct did not constitute bullying.
Challenge to the traffic light system for categorising countries for the purposes of the Covid-19 travel restrictions. The challenge sought the publication of information that explained the basis for categorising countries as green, amber and red.
This case was brought by a number of asylum seekers, challenging their accommodation at a Napier army barracks. The court upheld the challenge, finding that the accommodation was unsafe and unsuitable for housing asylum seekers and that for periods the claimants had been falsly imprisoned there.
Tom appeared for the Claimants in this application for interim relief concerning the planned vigil on Clapham Common in memory of Sarah Everard. Mr Justice Holgate gave a judgment in which he agreed with the premise of the claimants’ claim and he held that the Tier 4 regulations had to be read subject to Article 10 and 11 of the 1998 Act. Whilst he declined to make interim declarations, he made it clear that the police needed to consider Article 10 and 11 rights.
Challenge to decisions of the Gambling Commission in relation to fairness and due process. Permission was granted at a hearing after which the case settled.
Challenge to the Prime Minister's decision to prorogue Parliament in the lead-up to the UK's then scheduled exit from the EU on 31.10.19. Tom acted with Lord Pannick QC for Gina Miller and succeded by a margin of 11-0 in the Supreme Court.
This was a challenge to the Prime Minister’s ability to issue a declaration triggering the UK’s withdrawal from the EU without authorisation from an Act of Parliament. This case was heard by a panel of 11 Law Lords. Tom acted as junior counsel to Gina Miller in a team led by Lord Pannick QC.
Judicial review of decision by the ASA that a ‘lookalike’ passport website is misleading. Tom is acting for the Advertising Standards Agency.
Tom acted for the Government in successfully defending this challenge to the 2015 Local Government Settlement and the structure of the Local Government Grant, issues of major significance and sensitivity.
Tom acted in this challenge to the decision of the Turks and Caicos Island Airports Authority to grant permission for the development of a second Fixed Based Operation at the airport. Tom was called to the bar of the TCI and argued the case before the Chief Justice.
Acting for the General Medical Council in proceedings concerning the suspension of a doctor pending a criminal prosecution. The judgment was a significant development of the law on interim suspensions.
This was a judicial review of an ASA decision and that of the Independent Reviewer upholding the lawfulness of Tesco’s Price Promise scheme, on domestic and EU law grounds. Tom successfully defended the claim.
Tom successfully defended Manchester City Council from this challenge to the Council’s budget for allegedly failing to comply with procedural requirements including the public sector equality duty.
Acted for aircraft leasing company in this challenge to the detention of an aircraft at Glasgow airport under the Fleet Lien power.
This was a challenge to the recognition by international law and the common law of special mission immunity. It is a leading case on reception of customary international law into domestic law.
Tom acted for the Secretary of State for Transport in successfully defending this judicial review challenge to the charging regime for the Heathrow Spur as part of the Crossrail project.
This was a challenge to the new press regulatory regime under the Royal Charter on the Regulation of the Press. Tom acted for the independent press regulator IMPRESS.
Tom acted for LG in this challenge to several Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures. Tom represented LG as lead appellant throughout the proceedings, including in respect of a challenge to a relocation measure and at trial in 2017.
Tom acted for the claimant in this substantial case challenging the use of force by private immigration escorts.
Tom’s practice encompasses the full spectrum of human rights cases, ranging from class actions against governments and multinational companies, to trafficking cases, to terrorism trials in civil actions.
Tom was awarded Human Rights and Public Law Silk of the Year at the Chambers and Partners UK Bar Awards 2020.
In 2021 Tom led a team that successfully challenged the housing of asylum-seekers at Napier Barracks .
Tom has acted in a number of applications to the ECtHR, such as Hassan v UK (Grand Chamber), Big Brother Watch v UK (Chamber), Topa v Molda and Cyprus v Turkey (remedies, Grand Chamber). The last of these cases required the Turkish Government to pay the largest ever just satisfaction award for the damage suffered by the enclaved residents of the Karpas peninsula arising out of the military activities northern Cyprus in 1974 and territorial division of the country. The litigation was described by two of the Judges "as the most important contribution to peace in Europe in the history of the Court of Human Rights".
Tom has a particular expertise in the area of national security law. He has acted in numerous leading cases in the context of terrorism and torture, including for Binyam Mohamed in Binyam Mohamed v SSFCA [2010] EWCA Civ 65 & 158, [2010] QB 218, for AF in AF (No 3) v SSHD [2009] UKHL 28, [2010] 2 AC 269 in Al-Jedda v Home Secretary [2013] UKSC 62, [2014] AC 253 and Watson v Secretary of State (CA and CJEU). Tom has extensive experience in asset freezing, TPIM and control order proceedings and surveillance and interception matters.
Tom has also acted in a number of international human rights claims, e.g. in Guerrero & 30 Ors, v Monterrico Metals Plc [2010] EWHC 3228 (QB), Tom represented thirty-one Peruvian campesinos who claimed to have been unlawfully detained and seriously abused during a protest against one of the world’s largest mining concessions in Peru owned by a UK multinational.
Tom is co-author of leading texts on human rights (Beatson, Grosz, Hickman, Singh, Human Rights: Judicial Protection in the UK (Sweet & Mazwell 2008) and Hickman, Public Law After the Human Rights Act (Hart 2010)) and regularly publishes blogs and articles on the topic.
“His legal knowledge is excellent and his advocacy is phenomenal.”
Chambers and Partners, 2022
“Tom Hickman is a really superb operator. He is very clever and strategic in his thinking.”
Chambers and Partners, 2022
“He remains one of the most gifted counsel around, who identifies the most cutting edge and winnable points.”
Legal 500, 2022
“Tom is incredible, an absolute legend in a stratospheric category of barrister.”
Chambers and Partners, 2021
“A fantastic leader and is extremely smart.”
Legal 500, 2021
“Tom is a superstar.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
“Tom Hickman is fantastic. He's delightful to work with, very efficient and very astute intellectually.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
“Brilliant legal mind, practical and with a highly intellectual approach.”
Legal 500, 2019
“He's brilliantly sharp-witted, very intelligent and articulate.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“He is consistently versatile.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“The leading junior at the civil liberties and human rights Bar”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“He's shown himself to be of equal mettle to the most senior counsel.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“The standout junior at the civil liberties and human rights Bar.”
Chambers and Partners, 2018
“He is hugely impressive.”
Chambers and Partners, 2018
“He is versatile, determined and clever.”
Legal 500, 2018
“Combines tenacity and great expertise; he is a formidable junior”
Chambers and Partners, 2017
“An innovative, strategic thinker and a robust advocate.”
Legal 500, 2017
“a great, courageous advocate”
Chambers and Partners, 2016
Tom acted for the Governor of the Cayman Islands a constitutional challenge to the Civil Partnership Act 2020. The Court held that the Governor of the Cayman Islands, in enacting and assenting to the CPA, had acted within the scope of his reserved powers under section 81 of the Cayman Islands Constitution The challenge raised constitutional issues under the Cayman Island Constitution and the means by which it gives effects to the international obligations of the United Kingdom.
Tom represented the Investigatory Powers Commission at a hearing concerned with the scope of the Commission's duty to assist the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.
Successful challenge to the legality of the Government’s policy to search, seize and retain data from the mobile phones of migrants arriving by small boat.
Tom acted for MA and KH.
A claim brought by FF, a Bahraini refugee and torture survivor, who had compiled a dossier of evidence allegedly implicating Prince Nasser of Bahrain in torture during Bahrain’s 2011 pro-democracy uprising. Tom acted for the Claimant (with Isabel Buchanan).
Tom acted for the FDA civil service union in challenging the Prime Minister's decision that there was no breach of the Ministerial Code by the Home Secretary concerning allegations of bullying. The FDA was granted permission on the basis that it was reasonably arguable that the term "bullying' in the Ministerial Code has the same meaning as that in civil service workplace policies and therefore that the Prime Minister misapplied the Code when he concluded that absent intention conduct did not constitute bullying.
Tom acted for the subject of an extradition request, concerning the meaning and effect of section 20 of the Extradition Act 2003 and the continuing effect of the Framework Decision on extradition on the application of that Act post Brexit.
This case was brought by a number of asylum seekers, challenging their accommodation at a Napier army barracks. The court upheld the challenge, finding that the accommodation was unsafe and unsuitable for housing asylum seekers and that for periods the claimants had been falsly imprisoned there.
Challenge to deprivation of citizenship decision in which Tom acted for the appellant in relation to several preliminary issues that were determined in SIAC and subsequently by the CA and Supreme Court.
Tom appeared for the Claimants in this application for interim relief concerning the planned vigil on Clapham Common in memory of Sarah Everard. Mr Justice Holgate gave a judgment in which he agreed with the premise of the claimants’ claim and he held that the Tier 4 regulations had to be read subject to Article 10 and 11 of the 1998 Act. Whilst he declined to make interim declarations, he made it clear that the police needed to consider Article 10 and 11 rights.
This case concerns the application of the commercial exception in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities in the context of modern slavery. Tom is acting for the intervening party Kalayaan in the Supreme Court.
Leading case on when a claimant is likely to obtain a benefit from a judicial review such as to bring him or her within the scope of the legal aid regime.
This case concerned the fate of several refugee families who were shipwrecked in the British Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus in 1999. In 2018 the Supreme Court Ruled in favour of the Refugees that the Refugee Convention remained extended to the territory following Cypriot independence. The UK Government subsequently granted Tom's clients indefinite leave to remain in the UK. See: https://www.channel4.com/news/exclusive-refugees-marooned-for-20-years-can-finally-settle-in-uk
Tom acted in this high profile case on the scope of the Data Protection and ePrivacy Directives and their application to Member States’ data retention regimes. The case was heard by a Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice on 12 May 2016, Tom appeared for the Law Society.
Tom acted for LG in this challenge to several Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures. Tom represented LG as lead appellant throughout the proceedings, including in respect of a challenge to a relocation measure and at trial in 2017.
Tom acted for Chelsea FC in this claim by Adrian Mutu in the European Court of Human Rights. It is the first case in which the ECtHR has considered the CAS system and its compliance with human rights standards. Judgment was delivered in 2018.
Tom acted for the claimant in this substantial case challenging the use of force by private immigration escorts.
Tom acted for Big Brother Watch in an application at the European Court of Human Rights challenging the UK’s legislation governing the surveillance of communications and the implications of the Edward Snowdon disclosures about the use of TEMPORA and PRISM data.
The Court of Appeal held that the Jobseekers (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013 is incompatible with Article 6(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights, in that it had interfered with ongoing legal proceedings challenging benefits sanctions by retrospectively validating those sanctions. The Court of Appeal and Supreme Court had previously ruled that regulations introducing several ‘back to work’ schemes had been ultra vires the Jobseeker's Act 1995 (claims in which Tom also acted for the Claimants).
The Court of Appeal in Gedi held that the Secretary of State has no power to impose a curfew on immigration detainees. The case, in which Tom acted for the Claimant, has led to a change of Government policy and has major implications across immigration law.
Tom acted for the applicant in what is now the leading case on the extraterritoriality of the European Convention on Human Rights, its application to armed conflict and the relationship between the Convention and IHL.
Tom acts for CF in these proceedings concerning the abuse of process in proceedings under the Terrorism Prevention and Investigations Act 2011 and the scope of the minimum disclosure requirement.
Tom acted for Mr Al Jedda in this case in which the Supreme Court upheld an order quashing the deprivation of his British citizenship.
Tom acted for the claimant in this application for disclosure of documents to support his criminal defence in criminal proceedings against him in Uganda for alleged involvement in the 2010 bombings in Kampala.
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.
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.
Tom represents clients in particular in commercial disputes, royalty, copyright, trade mark and passing off disputes and has acted in a number of trials and mediations in the media and entertainment sector.
Tom often advises broadcasters such as the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 on copyright and contractual matters, including disputes with presenters, copyright issues and broadcasting rights. He has advised in numerous international commercial rights disputes where contracts are subject to English law.
In one of his first cases, Tom acted for the two authors of the original music to Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends in a claim to recover substantial historic royalties (Campbell v Hit Plc).
He acted for Rive Droit Music in the well-known copyright dispute culminating in Crosstown v Rive Droit Music Ltd [2012] Ch. 68 and for the former manager of the Bay City Rollers in a major royalties dispute (Wainman v Arista Records).
He later acted for the prog-Rock and classical musician Rick Wakeman in a claim to rescind a contract of copyright assignment (Wakeman v Imagem Songs & BMG) and for MC Harvey in a breach of privacy claim brought by Cheryl Cole (Cole v IPC Media & MC Harvey).
Tom acted for Ali Campbell, "Mickey" and "Astro", in a long-running band dispute over the name UB40 (Campbell v Campbell).
Other clients have included: Paul McCartney's publishing company (copyright dispute), Status Quo (passing-off dispute), INXS (publishing dispute), Oxford University Press (journal ownership dispute), Sony (copyright), Mark Morrison (police harassment), Knife Party/Pendulum (copyright), Jamiroquai (royalties), Penguin books (various).
“He has an outstanding brain.”
Chambers and Partners, 2022
“Tom gets to the nub of the question quickly and has an easy manner with clients. He is extremely bright and an excellent advocate.”
Legal 500, 2022
“He's very good on his feet and excellent at finding his way around problems.”
Chambers and Partners, 2021
“He always gives the very best analysis and advice for music-related work.”
Legal 500, 2021
“Brilliant on his feet - he is engaging with the court and is very precise.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
“He is pragmatic with top-quality written work and good advocacy.”
Legal 500, 2019
“He is very responsive and has a good way with clients”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“He is a very effective operator.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“He is a strong barrister, commercially minded and down to earth.”
Legal 500, 2018
“He is a down-to-earth barrister who instils confidence”
Chambers and Partners, 2017
“He is bright, commercial, sharp and has an analytical mind.”
Legal 500, 2017
“analytical, responsive and commercial…with great people skills”
Chambers and Partners, 2016
“He is very astute and hardworking with great legal forensic skills”
Legal 500, 2016
Tom acted in a dispute over the rights to a Mini racing championship. The case was settled in 2016.
Tom is currently acting for Ali Campbell, Astro and Mickey of UB40 in an ongoing dispute with the other founding members of UB40 over the right to use the name UB40. The claim raises passing off and partnership issues. A judgment on interim issues was handed down by the Chancery Division on 21 March 2016.
Tom acted for the writer of the screenplay, Florence Foster Jenkins, in a copyright dispute over a claim of joint authorship.
Tom is acting for the celebrated progressive rock and classical musician Rick Wakeman in a dispute over the validity of contract for copyright assignment.
Tom acted for 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.
Tom acted for the publishing company Rive Droit Music Ltd which was involved in earlier stages of this high profile litigation.
Tom acted successfully for Fawaz Al-Hasawi in this £5m dispute over the sale of Nottingham Forest Football Club. A judgment reached in Mr Al-Hasawi's favour was upheld on appeal.
Tom acts for Ali Campbell, Astro and Mickey in this passing off and band dispute between two competing versions of UB40.
Tom has a varied experience of representing clients in disputes concerning EU law and acted in many cases involving EU law both before UK courts and the CJEU. As a member of the A Panel Tom frequently advised the UK Government on the application of EU laws.
Since Brexit, Tom has acted and advised in a number of matters concerning the continuing effect of EU law and the application of the Withdrawal Agreement and Trade and Cooperation Agreements (eg in the context of state aids/subsidy control, extradition and asylum).
Tom was counsel for Gina Miller in the case of R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, concerning Article 50 of the TEU.
He represented the Law Society in the Grand Chamber of the CJEU in the Joined Cases Tele 2, and Watson v Secretary of State, concerning bulk communications data acquisition and the scope of the E-Privacy Directive.
Tom recently acted for SkyKick in the CJEU in a case concerning the bad faith defence under the EU Trade Mark Regulations (SkyKick v Sky).
Tom acted for the subject of an extradition request, concerning the meaning and effect of section 20 of the Extradition Act 2003 and the continuing effect of the Framework Decision on extradition on the application of that Act post Brexit.
Tom acted in this high profile case on the scope of the Data Protection and ePrivacy Directives and their application to Member States’ data retention regimes. The case was heard by a Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice on 12 May 2016, Tom appeared for the Law Society.
Tom is acting for the claimant in a challenge to the regime for removal of passports, based on Directive 2004/38/EC (free movement). A preliminary judgment established the applicability of EU law to the removal of passports.
Tom acts for a global multi-level marketing company concerning the scope of Directive 2005/29/EC and the prohibition on pyramid selling schemes. Tom is involved at an advisory and strategic level, including helping to co-ordinate legal teams in several jurisdictions.
Represented the ASA against Sainsbury’s Supermarkets (Tesco Intervening) in this claim concerning the interpretation of Directives 2005/29/EC and 2006/114/EC (consumer protection and advertising).
Acted for a multinational company in this challenge (which ultimately settled before a reference was made to the CJEU) to the interpretation and vires of an EU Directive.
Tom has provided extensive advice to various individuals and organizations on EU sanctions issues, including those relating to Iran and Russia/Ukraine.
Acted in various stages of this challenge to EU Zimbabwe sanctions including in relation to a damages claim.
Tom is acting for the defendant, a US data migration company, in these on-going trade mark proceedings. The case has generated a number of important judgments and is currently the subject of a reference to the CJEU on the issue of the bad faith defence and the scope of the CJEU's ruling in IP Translator. An application for a reference on the compatibility of the "own name defence" with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights was refused.
Tom’s sports law practice complements his work in the media and entertainment field and he often acts in commercial contract matters and intellectual property rights disputes.
Tom recently acted in one of the most significant anti-doping cases, WADA v RUSADA in which the CAS imposed a two year ban on Russian participation in major competitions, exercising its new jurisdiction under the WADA Code.
In 2018-19, Tom acted in litigation in the High Court and Court of Appeal concerning the sale of Nottingham Forest FC, and in 2017 for Renault/Loutus F1 team in a substantial agency dispute.
In his very first case in the area, Tom acted for Liverpool FC in a shirt sponsorship dispute with Reebok in the Commercial Court. He has since acted for many Clubs, sports bodies and professional athletes.
Tom acted as an independent reviewer of prosecutions for UK Anti-Doping.
“Really innovative and proactive, and good to work with.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
“He is very responsive and has a good way with clients”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“A talented junior.”
Chambers and Partners, 2018
“He gets good results and is both tactically and intellectually astute”
Chambers and Partners, 2017
“Frequently instructed on commercial and contractual disputes”
Chambers and Partners, 2016
“He is very gifted and very clever, and he gets right to the point. He is personable, approachable and easy to speak to.”
Chambers and Partners, 2016
Tom represented the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in this landmark arbitration concerning relating to the identification of centralised doping and anti-detection systems adopted by Russia between 2011 and 2015. The arbitration concerned whether the failure of Russia to comply with reinstatement conditions could and should result in restrictions on Russian participation in international competitions. The Court of Arbitration for Sport imposed a two year prohibition on such participation.
The issues concerned the status and effect of the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories and raised questions concerning the application of the European Convention on Human Rights and competition law under the WADA Code. Tom led the team on the interaction of such principles with the WADA Code and ISCCS and prepared the legal submissions and cross-examined the expert witnesses on these issues.
Tom is acting in a dispute between a major international sports organisation and its joint venture partner.
Tom acted in a dispute concerning an overseas national cricket association in a very high value commercial dispute over broadcasting rights relating to the national team.
In 2016, Tom advised a national broadcaster on a contractual dispute concerning rights to a major football tournament.
Tom is acting for Renault Formula 1 Team in a sponsorship dispute over the use of the YotaPhone brand. The claim is proceeding in the commercial court.
Tom acted for Chelsea FC in this claim by Adrian Mutu in the European Court of Human Rights. It is the first case in which the ECtHR has considered the CAS system and its compliance with human rights standards. Judgment was delivered in 2018.
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.
Tom acted for Gillingham FC in substantial contractual dispute concerning hospitality at the Club’s ground and hospitality facilities. The Club was awarded £1.4m in damages and costs in this contested high court action.
This commercial court case challenges the the rescission of a settlement agreement between Bernard Ecclestone and HM Revenue and Customs relating to the settlement of the investigation into the sale of the rights to F1 Racing. The issues include misrepresentation and fraud. Tom represented HMRC.
Tom acted successfully for Fawaz Al-Hasawi in this £5m dispute over the sale of Nottingham Forest Football Club. A judgment reached in Mr Al-Hasawi's favour was upheld on appeal.
Tom has advised as sole and junior counsel on a wide range of procurement and related cases. He advised the Department for Work and Pensions in a major dispute concerning the procurement of funding arrangements. He also acted for Leyton Orient FC in Leyton Orient FC v London Legacy Development Corporation, a challenge to the re-tender process for the rights to use the Olympic Stadium.
Tom represented a multi-national casino operating company in Great Eastern Quays Casino Ltd & Ors v Newham London Borough Council, concerning a super-Casino licence dispute and a consortium of banks in advice on the Eurotunnel Concession Agreement.
Tom has been instructed to advise in relation to a procurement challenge to the National Lottery Award in 2022.
Tom has acted in a number of energy related disputes concerning oil, gas, solar, wind, and biogas, off-shore decommissioning issues and licensing. Examples include:
Tom has a broad experience in litigating international law issues in domestic courts and the European Court of Human Rights.
Tom was counsel in R (Bashir) v Secretary of State for the Home Department in 2018 concerning treaty interpretation and the responsibility of the UK under international law for overseas territories.
He was also Counsel in Miller v Minister for Exiting the European Union in 2017, which concerned the relationship between the prerogative, statute and international treaties.
In Reyes v Al-Malki, Tom acted for the intervening party in a case concerning the scope of the commercial exception under the Diplomatic Privileges Act.
Indeed, Tom has acted in most of the diplomatic and head of state immunity cases of recent years: Harb, FF, Estrada Juffali, Al-Attiyah, Freedom and Justice Party. The Freedom and Justice Party case is the leading authority on the incorporation of customary international law into the common law.
Tom acted for the applicant in Hassan v United Kingdom (Grand Chamber), the leading case globally on the relationship between International Humanitarian law and human rights treaties.
“He remains one of the most gifted counsel around, who identifies the most cutting edge and winnable points.”
Legal 500, 2021
Tom acted for the Governor of the Cayman Islands a constitutional challenge to the Civil Partnership Act 2020. The Court held that the Governor of the Cayman Islands, in enacting and assenting to the CPA, had acted within the scope of his reserved powers under section 81 of the Cayman Islands Constitution The challenge raised constitutional issues under the Cayman Island Constitution and the means by which it gives effects to the international obligations of the United Kingdom.
This case concerns the application of the commercial exception in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities in the context of modern slavery. Tom is acting for the intervening party Kalayaan in the Supreme Court.
This was a challenge to the recognition by international law and the common law of special mission immunity. It is a leading case on reception of customary international law into domestic law.
Tom acted for Ms Estrada in successfully resisting a diplomatic immunity claim by the Defendant who had been appointed permanent representative of the IMO in London.
Tom acted for the claimant in this action concerning the limits of the court's jurisdiction to determine whether a diplomat is in fact engaged in diplomatic activities. The case also involved issues of sovereign immunity.
Tom acted for the Claimant in this claim concerning the scope of Head of State immunity of the former King of Saudi Arabia.
Acting for the Claimant, the court made a declaration that Prince Nasser bin Hamad Al Khalifa is not entitled to immunity from suit in the UK.
In a landmark ruling, the Grand Chamber required the Turkish Government to pay the Cypriot Government EUR 30,000,000 for non-pecuniary damages for surviving relatives of missing persons and EUR 60,000,000 for the damage suffered by the enclaved residents of the Karpas peninsula arising out of the military activities northern Cyprus in 1974 and territorial division of the country.
Tom acted for the applicant in what is now the leading case on the extraterritoriality of the European Convention on Human Rights, its application to armed conflict and the relationship between the Convention and IHL.
Tom is acting for the Claimant disputing that Special Mission Status confers immunity as a matter of customary international law or domestic English law.
This case concerned the scope of diplomatic immunity for human trafficking and modern slavery and the scope of the commercial exception under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Tom acted for the charity Kalayaan.
MA (Cambridge), First Class; LLM Hons (Toronto); PhD (Cambridge)
In 2016, Tom was awarded The Sutherland Prize for Legal History by the American Society for Legal History for the best published article on legal history in the previous year. The prize was awarded for his chapter on Entick v Carrington published in a book of essays celebrating the 250th centenary of that case in 2015.
At University, Tom was awarded the Cambridge University prizes for Contract law, for Equity and for Jurisprudence and placed top in his year also in Legal History and Tort Law. He was awarded the University of Toronto Prize for overall Outstanding Performance in the LLM. Tom has been awarded a number of other prizes and scholarships including the Selwyn College Hamson Prize, Fulbright Scholarship, Faculty of Fellowship at the University of Toronto and fellowship at Massey College.
Tom's book, Public Law After the Human Rights Act (2010) was awarded the Inner Temple Book Prize (new author) for 2008-2011: “an astonishingly mature, thoughtful and original discussion” (Baroness Hale); “always thoughtful and thought-provoking” (Lord Collins); "an admirable piece of work" (Sir Stephen Sedley).
Legal 500 Public Law Junior of the Year 2019
Chambers and Partners, Public Law Junior of the Year in 2017
The Lawyer, Hot 100, 2017
Chambers and Partners, Public Law and Human Rights Silk of the Year 2020
Public Law After the Human Rights Act (2010)
Tom is also co-author of Human Rights: Judicial Protection in the United Kingdom (Sweet & Maxwell 2008).
(Selection only. For a fuller list, please visit Tom’s UCL Law Faculty webpage)
Blog posts, case notes and short pieces
ALBA, COMBAR, LIBERTY and Amnesty International.
VAT registration number: 863564107
Barristers regulated by the Bar Standards Board
Gary Oliver
Senior Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7325
Derek Sutton
Deputy Senior Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7327
Adam Sloane
Deputy Senior Clerk
+44 (0) 207 8227326
Dean Tolman
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7331
Billy Brian
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7339
Marc Armstrong
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7330
Adam Fuschillo
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 8227329
Danny Compton
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7338
Sophie Floydd
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7324
Rio Sully
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7299