Tom Hickman QC

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 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 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 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 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 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 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.