£100bn judicial review challenge to the Government’s Covid-19 mass asymptomatic testing programme, referred to as ‘Operation Moonshot’.
Appeal and cross-appeal concerning the fees charged to children applying to register as British citizens.
The judicial review of the 10pm hospitality curfew, imposed by the Government in response to the Covid-19 pandemic.
The judicial review of the Parole Board’s decision to release Ian Simms, who murdered Helen McCourt in 1988 and who has refused to reveal the location of her remains.
A statutory review of the Home Secretary’s decision to impose terrorism prevention and investigation measures (TPIM) on QT, a member of Al-Muhajiroun (also known as ALM).
A very high-profile and important judicial review of the Environment Secretary’s decision to prevent the introduction of badger culling in Derbyshire in 2019, involving allegations that the Prime Minister and his partner Carrie Symonds improperly interfered in the decision-making process.
The leading case concerning the circumstances in which a court can reject a foreign government’s assurances concerning treatment following extradition.
An important and high-profile challenge to the fees charged to children applying to be registered as British citizens.
R (Al-Enein) v Home Secretary  EWCA Civ 2024;  1 WLR 1349;  Imm AR 553;  INLR 365
An important Court of Appeal case upholding the lawfulness of the Secretary of State’s good character policy in connection with applications for naturalisation as a British citizen.
JS (Uganda)  EWCA Civ 1670;  1 WLR 43;  Imm AR 258;  INLR 67; The Times, 10 January 2020
The leading Court of Appeal authority concerning the meaning of “refugee” in the 1951 Refugee Convention and the circumstances in which refugee status may be withdrawn on the grounds that the reasons for the initial grant of asylum no longer endure.
Nicholas Chapman acted for the Home Secretary in this important Court of Appeal case concerning the approach to the assessment of evidence of vulnerable appellants, the weight to be attached to an unaccompanied child’s failure to claim asylum in the first country of refuge, and the compatibility of the statutory adverse credibility assumption with the Dublin III Convention.
Nicholas was instructed by the Home Secretary at Court of Appeal level in this successful defence of an appeal concerning the time limits for costs appeals from the Upper Tribunal and the proper interpretation of CPR Part 52.
Nicholas acted for the Home Secretary in lead judicial review challenges to the processing of asylum claims of unaccompanied children brought to the UK from the Calais Jungle.
Successfully responding to a judicial review challenge to the Home Secretary’s decision to cancel a British passport on national security grounds.
Successfully defending a judicial review claim concerning the vires of the Home Secretary’s naturalisation policy and the true interpretation of the British Nationality Act 1981.
Acting for all 7 defendants in this private law damages claim involving allegations of UK government and intelligence agency complicity in the extraordinary rendition and torture of the former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and his pregnant wife. Nicholas principally focused on foreign law aspects of the claim and disclosure.
Nicholas was instructed by the Home Secretary at Court of Appeal level in this appeal concerning the residual discretion to grant near-miss immigration applications.
Instructed by CPS Head Office in these high-profile multi-million pound asset recovery proceedings heard at the Old Bailey.
Judicial review of the Home Secretary’s decision to revoke the trusted sponsor status of the Bow Mosque.
Nicholas acted for HMRC in the successful defence of this £100m civil tax appeal, involving allegations of fraud in the carbon credits market.
Instructed by the Home Secretary at Court of Appeal level in successful response to an appeal brought by an unaccompanied asylum-seeking child on the basis that he had suffered historic injustice at the hands of the Home Office.
Nicholas acted for HMRC in this important case concerning the lawfulness of information notices requiring production of documents by post or email.
Nicholas represented HMRC in its successful defence of this important and high value tax appeal concerning the question of whether donations to a charity in exchange for membership benefits represented consideration for taxable supplies.
Nicholas was instructed at Court of Appeal level by CPS Head Office in relation to the high-profile appeal of the former governor of Delta State, Nigeria and his former solicitor, involving allegations of police corruption and prosecutorial misconduct.
Nicholas successfully defended this strategically important Frankovich damages claim in the High Court, which concerned the question of whether the “repayment supplement” represented an effective remedy in compensation of incorrectly withheld VAT which could have been lucratively reinvested.
Nicholas successfully represented the Home Secretary in this false imprisonment damages claim before Simon J.
Instructed by CPS Head Office at Supreme Court level in the high-value costs proceedings following a high-profile appeal.
Nicholas was instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills to advise Lloyds TSB in connection with the high-profile banking fraud involving the distressed assets division of HBOS.
Nicholas acted for HMRC in this £5m Chancery Division claim against a man convicted of high-profile modern slavery offences.
Nicholas was instructed at Court of Appeal level to represent HMRC in the successful defence of this appeal, the leading case on the applicability of the Kittel anti-abuse principle in circumstances in which transactions are indirectly connected with fraudulent tax losses.
Leading counsel for HMRC in the successful defence of these complex linked civil tax appeals, worth £3.3m, involving allegations of fraud.
Megantic Services Ltd v HMRC  STC 1000;  UKFTT 492 (TC);  UKFTT 0120 (TC)
Nicholas acted for HMRC in the successful defence of this highly complex civil tax appeal worth £28m. The hearing, which lasted 7 months, is the longest within the tribunal system. The case, which involved allegations of serious VAT fraud, was the first piece of government litigation to feature electronic preparation and presentation of evidence. It gave rise to a number of leading authorities, all in favour of HMRC, including on the admissibility of opinion evidence in tribunal proceedings and of material obtained pursuant criminal mutual legal assistance.
Successfully defending a judicial review claim concerning the Home Secretary’s policy for prioritising backlogged applications.
Instructed by the Home Secretary at Court of Appeal level in the successful defence of these two leading cases concerning corrective remedies in the context of the Home Office’s failure to comply with its legal duty to endeavour to trace the family members of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. The cases established that there is no “bright line” principle in relation to risk. Subsequently instructed to lead a series of related judicial review challenges in the High Court.
Defending a juror prosecuted in the High Court for social media postings relating to the case he was trying.
Nicholas acted for the SFO in its first international corruption prosecution, a case concerning the corruption of the governor of a South East Asian central bank to secure contracts worth A$200 million for the provision of polymer banknotes.
R v Sander  1 Cr App R 6;  1 WLR 2511;  1 WLR 1
Acting for HMRC in the money laundering prosecution arising from one of its largest ever investigations. Tried by a protected jury. Gave rise to 3 leading authorities relating to jury tampering, judge-only trial and the use of closed evidence in criminal bail proceedings.
Advising the Financial Reporting Council concerning its investigation into the circumstances surrounding the flotation and subsequent collapse of a former AIM new company of the year, with a market capitalisation effect of around £150m.
Advising the Financial Reporting Council in relation to its investigation into advice given to the trustee of the First Quench Pension Fund concerning its proposed transfer.
24th February 2021
The campaigning group Good Law Project and its fellow claimants have withdrawn their high-profile judicial review challenge to the Government’s Covid-19 mass asymptomatic testing programme, referred to as ‘Operation Moonshot’. Nicholas Chapman acted for the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care.
18th February 2021
The Court of Appeal has today handed down judgment in important appeals concerning the lawfulness of the fees charged to children seeking to register as British citizens. Nicholas Chapman acted for the Home Secretary.
12th February 2021
The Senior Coroner for South Yorkshire (East District) has suspended the inquest into the death of Nargis Begum, and will refer the matter to the CPS to consider whether Highways England should face corporate manslaughter charges.
Mrs Begum, 62, was a passenger in a vehicle which broke down on the M1 in 2018, on a stretch of “All Lanes Running” smart motorway without a hard shoulder. She and her husband had exited the vehicle and were waiting for help when their stationary car was hit by another vehicle, pushing it into Mrs Begum and causing fatal injuries.
The CPS has confirmed that the driver involved in the collision will not face prosecution, following an earlier referral from the Senior Coroner after an initial Pre-Inquest Review in December 2020.
View External Link
1st February 2021
The High Court has today refused a group of claimants permission to apply for judicial review in their high-profile challenge to the Government’s Covid-19 mass asymptomatic testing programme, referred to as ‘Operation Moonshot’. Nicholas Chapman acted for the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care.
3rd December 2020
The G-A-Y nightclub chain today withdrew its high-profile challenge to the Government’s decision to impose a “curfew” within the hospitality industry. Mr Justice Lane had previously refused permission to apply for judicial review in October. Nicholas Chapman acted for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care.
23rd October 2020
The High Court has today refused the G-A-Y nightclub chain permission to apply for judicial review of the 10pm national curfew. Nicholas Chapman acted for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care.
1st September 2020
Marie McCourt has lost her judicial review claim against the decision of the Parole Board to release Ian Simms, who murdered her daughter Helen McCourt in 1988 and who has refused to reveal the location of her remains. Nicholas Chapman represented the Parole Board. Marie McCourt has led a high-profile nationwide campaign for a change in the law – known as Helen’s Law – to prevent the release of murderers who refuse to reveal their victim’s whereabouts.
10th July 2020
Cathryn McGahey QC and Nicholas Chapman, instructed by the Treasury Solicitor, successfully represented the Home Secretary in a challenge to her decision to impose a TPIM on “QT”, a member of the proscribed Islamist terrorist organisation Al-Muhajiroun.
13th May 2020
Nicholas Chapman appeared on behalf of the Environment Secretary in his successful defence to the judicial review of the decision to prevent the introduction of badger culling in Derbyshire in 2019. The high-profile and important case, which has been widely reported in the press, involved allegations that the Prime Minister and his fiancée Carrie Symonds improperly interfered in the decision-making process.
7th May 2020
Nicholas Chapman appeared on behalf of the Home Secretary in her successful appeal to the Court of Appeal in this leading case concerning the circumstances in which a court can reject a foreign government’s assurances of humane treatment following extradition.
19th December 2019
Nicholas Chapman, instructed by the Treasury Solicitor, appeared on behalf of the Home Secretary in important and high-profile judicial review proceedings concerning the fees charged to children applying to be registered as British citizens.
28th November 2019
Nicholas Chapman, instructed by the Treasury Solicitor, successfully represented the Home Secretary in R (Al-Enein) v Home Secretary, an important appeal concerning the lawfulness of the good character policy for British citizenship applications.
25th October 2019
Nicholas Chapman, instructed by the Treasury Solicitor, successfully represented the Home Secretary in JS (Uganda), the leading Court of Appeal case concerning the meaning of “refugee” in the 1951 Refugee Convention and the circumstances in which refugee status may be withdrawn.
Nicholas Chapman Appointed to the Attorney General ‘A’ Panel
17th July 2019
TGC offers congratulations to Nicholas Chapman on his elevation to the Attorney General’s London ‘A’ Panel of Junior Counsel with effect from 2 September 2019.
16th May 2019
TGC are delighted to announce that Nicholas Chapman, Sian Reeves and Emily Wilsdon have been recommended for appointment to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s panel of Counsel: England and Wales. Nicholas Chapman has been appointed to the A Panel, and Sian Reeves and Emily Wilsdon to the B Panel.
Nicholas Chapman joins Temple Garden Chambers
22nd October 2018
Temple Garden Chambers is delighted to announce that Nicholas Chapman has accepted an invitation to join Chambers.
Nicholas has a broad civil, criminal, regulatory and public law practice with an emphasis on substantial, complex and high-profile litigation relating to commercial crime and other financial and corporate wrongdoing, tax, human rights and national security matters.
I need to process personal data in order to provide legal services and to conduct my professional practice as a barrister. This includes the personal data of my clients and third parties.
The security of personal data is extremely important to me. This Privacy Notice describes the information I may collect about my clients and third parties, how it is used and shared, and your rights which may arise in relation to it.
I am registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as a Data Controller for the personal data that I hold and process as a barrister. My registration number is Z899188X.
The way in which I process personal data is regulated by data protection law, including the General Data Protection Regulation 2016 (“GDPR”) and the Data Protection Act 2018 (“DPA 2018”).
PROCESSING PERSONAL DATA
The legal basis upon which I process personal data is as follows:
- Where my client has consented to me processing his or her personal data, my legal basis for processing it is based on consent.
- Where consent has not been given for the processing of personal data, my legal basis for any such processing is based on my legitimate interests in conducting my professional practice and in providing legal services.
- Where I process special category personal data or criminal offence data, as defined in the GDPR and DOPA 2018, this is on the basis that it is necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims or because a court is acting in its judicial capacity. In some cases, including inquiries, it may be for reasons of substantial public interest.
I may process personal data for the following reasons:
- To provide legal services and conduct my professional practice as a barrister.
- To keep accounting records and for the purposes of office administration.
- To take or defend legal or regulatory proceedings or to exercise a lien.
- To respond to potential complaints or make complaints.
- To check for potential conflicts of interest in relation to future potential cases.
- To promote and market my professional services.
- To carry out anti-money laundering and terrorist financing checks.
- To train other barristers and when providing work-shadowing opportunities.
- To respond to requests for references.
- To publish legal judgments and decisions of courts and tribunals.
- As otherwise required or permitted by law.
TRANSFERS TO THIRD COUNTRIES AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
I may occasionally transfer personal data to third countries and international organisations where necessary and lawful.
The GDPR and DPA 2018 set out your rights in connection with any of your personal data that I process. In particular you may:
- Ask me to provide access to personal data I hold about you.
- Ask me to delete personal data I hold about you.
- Ask me to restrict the purposes for which I process your personal data.
- Ask me to correct any inaccuracies in the personal data I hold about you.
This is not intended to be an exhaustive summary of your legal rights. Various exemptions may apply. More information is available on the ICO website: https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/
In order to exercise any of your rights in connection with the personal data I process, please contact me at email@example.com or by writing to me at Temple Garden Chambers, 1 Harcourt Buildings, London, EC4Y 9DA.
If you are unhappy with the way I have dealt with you or your personal data, you have the right to lodge a complaint with the Information Commissioner, ICO, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
You may opt out of receiving emails and other messages from my Chambers by following the instructions in those messages.
- See how often you access our website;
- Remember user preferences and settings.
CHANGES TO THIS NOTICE
I may update this Privacy Notice in future. If I do so I will publish the updated Notice on my Chambers website profile.