Ned Sproston
Call: 2014
Ned Sproston
MPhys (Master of Physics)
PGCE (Secondary Education)
GDL (Distinction)
BPTC (Very Competent)
Lincoln’s Inn
Legal Aid Supplier Number 02FEJ
Contact
T: 01274 722 560 or 0113 246 2600
Ned is a Family and Civil practitioner, predominantly practising in the field of Private Children. He receives a significant volume of instructions in contested hearings such as Finding of Fact Hearings and Final Hearings. In addition to this, Ned’s practice also covers Ancillary Relief, Schedule 1 Children Act cases and, TOLATA. In the civil sphere, Ned takes on Road Traffic Accident cases and other Personal Injury claims. Ned does not generally practice in Public Children cases but will remain with a client under circumstances where a Private case enters the Public Law arena part way through..
Ned is a qualified civil and commercial mediator and is available for instruction in that capacity. Please enquire about this with our clerks if this is a service you might consider.
Reputation
“Never one to shy away from knotty issues, Ned’s forensic and calm approach to complex private law cases is reassuring to clients and practitioners alike. He is always approachable and on-hand to discuss any issue of the case no matter how small. A pleasure to work with" (Partner at Local Firm)
Expertise
Family
Private Children - Over 80% of Ned’s workload covers Private Children matters covering the spectrum of issues. Ned has a reputation as an advocate who is able to quickly get to grips with a trial bundle and separate “the wheat from the chaff”. As a former secondary school teacher, Ned is experienced working with young and/or vulnerable people and is good at helping lay clients consider (and hopefully accept) what can sometimes be difficult truths, in a sensitive manner.
Ancillary Relief, Schedule 1 Children Act, and TOLATA – A significant minority of Ned’s workload covers these areas of the law and he is happy to accept appropriate instruction accordingly. Ned is very ethically minded and aware of the importance of trying to reach a fair settlement at an early stage if possible.
Civil
Personal Injury – Ned regularly accepts instructions in this area and has found that his background in Physics sometimes comes in handy when trying to analyse and argue the mechanics of a road traffic collision when causation is in dispute.
Ancillary Relief, Schedule 1 Children Act, and TOLATA – A significant minority of Ned’s workload covers these areas of the law and he is happy to accept appropriate instruction accordingly. Ned is very ethically minded and aware of the importance of trying to reach a fair settlement at an early stage if possible.
Clerks
Edward Sullivan
Call: 2015
Edward Sullivan
Qualifications: LLB Hons: 2:1
Qualifications: BPTC: Very Competent
Memberships FLBA and Inner Temple
Contact
T: 01274 722 560 or 0113 246 2600
Edward has a busy practice covering all areas of family law with a focus on disputes relating to children.
Before pupillage, Edward commenced his legal career as a court clerk at Leeds Magistrates' Court. He then progressed to the role of a justices' legal adviser with His Majesty's Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) in Sheffield Magistrates' and Family Court, advising magistrates on law and practice in Criminal and Family Law. Edward's legal training was overseen by experienced justices' legal advisers and the Judicial College.
Edward completed a family law pupillage in Sheffield under the tutelage of the head of the family law team.
Reputation
Expertise
Family
Private Law Children: Edward is instructed in private children matters, including findings of fact hearings, including and up to the most serious such as allegations of assault, rape and alleged sexual touching of children. Edward is comfortable advising vulnerable clients, negotiating with litigants in person and is interested in cases with a jurisdictional issue or the consideration of international mirror orders.
Public Law: Edward regularly appears on behalf of local authorities, parents and children. He appears before magistrates, the district and circuit bench and, on occasions, the high court in urgent case management and issues resolution hearings.
Edward has advised on appeals in private law matters and appeared in the appeal court and the High Court on behalf of a public body regarding disclosure.
Notable Cases
Family
Care, Circuit Judge, representing the local authority at a contested first hearing, through cross-examination of the mother, persuaded the court that there were no safeguards the court could put in place to protect the child. The court found the initial threshold was crossed, and the child remained in a care placement.
Private Law, appeal court, representing the grandparents in their appeal, found that the order allowing the grandparents to have contact only after the child had finished a leisure activity was wrong. The court went on to order that the child should have contact on a fortnightly basis to progress to weekly contact, with additional time in school holidays.
Private Law, Circuit Judge, representing a parent, Edward, had successfully persuaded the court that it had the jurisdiction to keep a temporary port order in place until at least a contested hearing when the parent with care of the child sought to fly to the UAE.
Clerks
Lydia Pearce
Call: 2017
Lydia Pearce
Bradford University BA Hons
ULaw York GDL
BPP Leeds BPTC
Middle Temple Harmsworth Scholar GDL
Middle Temple Harmsworth Scholar BPTC
Blackstones Entrance Exhibition Award
Legal Aid Supplier Number 02FXD
Contact
T: 01274 722 560 or 0113 246 2600
Lydia Pearce has been a tenant of Broadway House Chambers since completing pupillage in 2018 and now works exclusively in Criminal Law.
With previous experience in family and civil law, Lydia is able to appreciate the ways in which these other areas of law can impact criminal cases.
Before coming to the Bar Lydia worked for West Yorkshire Police as a Detention Officer whilst studying law part time over 6 years. Before pupillage Lydia was seconded to work with the National Police Chiefs’ Council on the pre-charge bail provisions of the Policing and Crime Act 2017. Lydia’s arguments were successfully used to make changes to the bill prior to royal assent. Lydia’s guidance document to implementation was disseminated to UK police forces and used by BBC reports on the impact of pre-charge bail.
Reputation
Client Feedback:
‘Lydia has made an outstanding entrance to the bar with a seemingly unparalleled zeal and dynamism. Lydia commands a solid presence in court and has strong, dependable advocacy skills. A down to earth approach coupled with meticulous attention to detail almost certainly assure Lydia a very illustrious future. I would certainly tip Lydia as a star who will rise very quickly.’
‘Lydia has excellent client care skills. Lydia is a diligent barrister who is skilled at empathising and reassuring vulnerable clients whilst remaining dedicated to achieving a fair and just outcome.’
‘Both myself and the social work team were very happy with Lydia’s representation. It was clear Lydia was fully prepared and on top of the brief. I am sure we will work together again’
‘I was very impressed with Lydia's grasp of the case, at short notice, and the way Lydia dealt with the hearing, for which both I and my client are grateful.’
Expertise
Criminal
Lydia appears in the Crown Court to both defend and prosecute in a range of matters including assault, sexual offences, weapons, dishonesty matters and drugs. She is known for thorough preparation and being able to respond quickly to changing instructions.
Defence
Lydia has been briefed on a range of criminal defence cases and is particularly skilled in working with vulnerable or juvenile clients.Lydia defends cases from Magistrates' Court to Crown Court maintaining involvement (where possible) across the lifetime of matters including PTPHs, preliminary hearings including S28 pre-recorded evidence and trials. Lydia works closely with instructing solicitors and is happy to have conferences in advance of hearings to ensure readiness. Lydia is equally happy to take last minute instructions where required.
Prosecution
Lydia is instructed in a range of prosecution cases and regularly works for the CPS, Probation Service, SIA and local authorities.Lydia prosecutes cases from Magistrates' Court to Crown Court maintaining involvement (where possible) across the lifetime of matters including PTPHs, preliminary hearings including S28 pre-recorded evidence and trials. Lydia will regularly draft documents and advise on matters outside of court hearings.
Notable Cases
Defence
R v GT (2024): Instructed as Junior Counsel for the defence, led by Abigail Langford. Ms Pearce is instructed as junior counsel in a case of child sexual offences. The indictment has 27 counts covering offending over 20+ years and 5 complainants. In the trial it is anticipated that Counsel will play an active role including cross examination of witnesses, disclosure requests and any applications which may arise.
R v X (2023): Reduction of sentence on appeal to the Court of Appeal, sentence was reduced from 12 months immediate custody to 6 months suspended.
R v X (2023): Securing a not guilty verdict for client accused of producing of methamphetamine due to a successful submission to dismiss the case.
R v O (2023): Defendant pleaded guilty to aggravated vehicle taking, drug driving, failing to attend court bail and being in breach of a suspended sentence order. Prior to these offences the defendant had received a suspended sentence order (24m suspended for 24M) in July 2020 for possession with intent to supply cocaine and heroin. Following mitigation advanced by Ms Pearce, the defendant was sentenced to a community order and the suspended sentence was not activated.
R v M (2023): Ms Pearce was instructed to represent defendant who was charged with Handling Stolen Goods value £10,000+. Lydia carefully researched the defence, collated a bundle of defence evidence and secured agreed facts which undermined the prosecution case. The defendant was acquitted by the jury in less than an hour. .
R v X: Acquittal for a juvenile client on a count of burglary dwelling prior to the client attending court by making successful submissions under S78 of PACE and the overriding objective.
R v X: Mitigated a sentence for a drink driver who provided a sample 3 times over the legal limit after having stopped the car on a moving motorway during a rainstorm, very nearly causing a pile up. Sentenced to community order and driving ban.
Prosecution
R v S & B(2023): Ms Pearce prosecuted 2 separate matters arising from the same incident, a fight. B was charged with S18 assault. The jury convicted him in less than 2 hours and he was sentenced to 5 years immediate custody.
R v D (2023): Defendant pleaded not guilty in the supply of class A drugs. In his evidence he claimed not to be the person on incriminating video footage, relying on his prominent left hand tattoo which was not on his left hand in the video. By inspection of the logo on his top in the video, Ms Pearce was able to prove that the video had been inverted and that the hand in the video was his non-tattooed right hand. He was convicted by the jury.
Lydia was instructed by Leeds City Council in their first ever prosecution of a landlord under Section 1(2) of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977. She successfully secured a conviction and a custodial sentence against the defendant.
Prosecuted an appeal against sentence on behalf of Bradford City Council under animal welfare law, the appellant appealed his original sentence of 20 weeks immediate custody, but this was upheld by the Crown Court.
Instructed to prosecute on behalf of Bradford Council under public health legislation a property landlord for waste left in the curtilage of his rental property, the defendant was blind and therefore unable to check if the waste had been collected or not, he was also unrepresented at trial. Lydia worked with the Council sanitation workers, Council legal officers, a trusted and accredited waste removal company and the defendant collaboratively to solve the public health issue and not pursue the matter through the courts.
Clerks
Harry Wiltshire
Call: 2015
Harry Wiltshire
Bath University, BA Hons Business Administration
GDL and BPTC, BPP Leeds
Middle Temple, Harmsworth Scholar
Legal Aid Supplier Number 02GCI
Contact
T: 01274 722 560 or 0113 246 2600
Harry is experienced in representing both Claimants and Respondents in the employment tribunal, he regularly appears in cases dealing with unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, unlawful deductions, discrimination, whistle blowing and employment status.
Harry accepts instructions in private law children matters. He regularly deals with contested final hearings and multi day finding of fact hearings, including issues such as domestic violence and relocation.
Harry is developing a growing matrimonial finance practice, he is regularly instructed to undertake Financial Dispute Resolution Appointments and Final Hearings.
Harry is registered with the Bar Council to undertake direct access work.
Harry is a member of Broadway House Chambers Business, Property and Probate Team. Prior to Pupillage Harry ran his own business, he has a strong understanding of the pressures involved in the management of a SME and is comfortable dealing with commercial disputes.
Prior to pupillage Harry competed as a professional athlete. Harry is Deputy Head of Sports, Media and Entertainment Team. He has gained experience of contractual disputes and disciplinary proceedings in the sporting arena. He has also been involved in the representation of athletes in anti-doping and disciplinary proceedings before governing bodies, Sports Resolution UK and the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
Reputation
Expertise
Employment
Harry regularly represents both Claimants and Respondents in the Employment Tribunal. He accepts instructions to advise, undertake drafting and attend hearings. Harry deals with a wide range of issues, including: employment status, unfair dismissal, discrimination (including disability and sex), whistleblowing detriment and holiday pay.
Sport
Prior to pupillage Harry spent 15 years competing as a professional athlete regularly representing Great Britain at international level. Harry’s experience as an athlete gives him a huge advantage when approaching sport cases and makes him a very appealing choice for lay clients in the sports arena.
Harry has experience of sports contract disputes and disciplinary proceedings. He has been involved in the representation of athletes in anti-doping and disciplinary proceedings before governing bodies, Sports Resolution UK and the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Harry is on the panel of regional Rugby Football Union prosecutors.
Harry works closely with Adam Willoughby, Head of the Sports Law Team. Harry has assisted him in dealing with contractual matters on behalf of Rugby Football League Teams and the preparation of anti-doping cases on behalf of athletes who have returned adverse analytical findings.
Harry’s Sports Law practice is complimented by his special interest in employment and contractual law.
Family Law
Harry practices in private children law and financial remedy.
Notable Cases
Mr AY Ali v Salix Homes and Michael Page International Recruitment Limited Case No. 2404266/2018
Successfully represented a recruitment agency over a four day hearing securing a finding that they could not have dismissed an agency worker on the grounds of a protected disclosure, when they had no knowledge of the disclosure at the time of dismissal. The case also raised a breach of contract, direct discrimination and worker/ employee status.
Mrs C Tantrum -v- Ashville College and others 180078/2018
Successfully argued at a three day hearing that the Claimant was an employee rather than a self employed sports teacher working at a private school. The finding meant that the matter settled following a judicial mediation. The case raised issues of protected disclosures, an unfair dismissal, holiday pay and unlawful deduction from wages
Smith -v- Bradford District Care NHS
Representing the Claimant at a three day hearing dealing with claims of indirect discrimination on the grounds of disability, as well as harassment and failure to make reasonable adjustments.
Mr J Bassey -v- HMRC
Junior Counsel representing the respondent at a three week tribunal dealing with 88 allegations of harassment and racial discrimination.
Ms KJ Badon -v- The Secretary of Health & Social Care
Junior Counsel representing the Respondent at a two week hearing, where the Claimant alleged she was subjected to a detriment to deter, punish or prevent trade union activity.
Mr A Poznaski -v- Exceed Logistics Limited 2600570/2018
Represented the Claimant who asserted that he had been unfairly dismissed following an allegation of fuel theft. Secured a finding for the Claimant in relation to an unlawful deduction from wages.
Daniel Alden -v- Skinnergate Cycles Stockton Limited 2501655/2018
Successfully represented the Respondent securing the dismissal of the claim as out of time and through failure to comply with Court Orders. Disability also considered.
Clerks
Paul Dormand
Call: 2013
Paul Dormand
BPP Manchester – GDL
Manchester Metropolitan University – BPTC
BPP Cohen Scholar
Middle Temple Harmsworth Scholar
Contact
T: 01274 722 560 or 0113 246 2600
Paul completed pupillage in September 2019. He is a member of the Family and Employment Teams. He regularly contributes to Chambers’ talks and conferences.
“I am using Paul on a tricky Private Law Children matter and I am very impressed with his teamwork approach. We are a small practice and it is very good to have Counsel who engage with their instructing solicitor throughout the life of the case” – Solicitor
"Paul Dormand is excellent at what he does and also an amazing person. He is very thorough, understanding, honest, trustworthy and his ability to relate to and empathise with others is remarkable. I highly recommend Paul for he is an excellent barrister and truly a genuine person. Paul has been so patient with me in this difficult time. He took the time to hear all of my concerns and clearly, concisely outlined all the different courses of action including the positives and negatives with each choice. Working with Paul was incredibly easy. He listened attentively and made me feel at ease. I could not have asked for better representation. Thank you" Client Feedback
Before coming to the Bar, Paul worked as a professional musician and teacher, performing with orchestras and ensembles all over the world.
Reputation
"Paul Dormand is excellent at what he does and also an amazing person. He is very thorough, understanding, honest, trustworthy and his ability to relate to and empathise with others is remarkable. I highly recommend Paul for he is an excellent barrister and truly a genuine person. Paul has been so patient with me in this difficult time. He took the time to hear all of my concerns and clearly, concisely outlined all the different courses of action including the positives and negatives with each choice. Working with Paul was incredibly easy. He listened attentively and made me feel at ease. I could not have asked for better representation. Thank you" Client Feedback
“I am using Paul on a tricky Private Law Children matter and I am very impressed with his teamwork approach. We are a small practice and it is very good to have Counsel who engage with their instructing solicitor throughout the life of the case” – Solicitor
Paul regularly presents webinar on behalf of Chambers’ Family and Employment Law Team.
Expertise
Family
Paul accepts instructions in all areas of family law, including children and finance work. Paul also accepts instructions in Court of Protection and Forced Marriage cases.
Private Children: Paul is regularly instructed to represent in private children matters, including contested applications and complex, multi day findings of fact and final hearings, often involving extremely vulnerable clients and litigants in person.
Public: Paul is instructed by Local Authorities, parents, and children in care proceedings at District and Circuit level, including case management, contested interim, and final hearings.
Financial Remedy: Paul also accepts instructions for applicants and respondents at all stages of financial remedy proceedings and is available to advise in writing or conference.
Employment
Paul accepts instructions to represent both Claimants and Respondents in the Employment Tribunal and is a member of the Government Legal Department Junior Junior Scheme. Paul has given talks at Broadway House Chambers Annual Employment Conferences on unfair dismissal and Equality Act issues during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Clerks
Jenna Chaplin
Call: 2015
Jenna Chaplin
University of Sheffield, LLB Hons 2:1
University of Law, BPTC Very Competent
Middle Temple
Contact
T: 01274 722 560 or 0113 246 2600
Jenna has a busy practice in all areas of Family Law.
Jenna accepted tenancy at Broadway House Chambers after successfully completing her pupillage under the supervision of Peter Hampton and Matthew Rudd.
Prior to pupillage, Jenna worked as a paralegal at a firm of solicitors. This has enabled her to develop the skills to advise clients, prepare cases thoroughly and focus on the real issues in a case.
Reputation
• How to get the best out of remote court hearings (2020)
Expertise
Family
Jenna has represented both Applicants and Respondents at all stages of financial remedy proceedings including Financial Dispute Resolution Hearings and Final Hearings. She is happy to advise in conference and in writing.
Jenna is instructed in all aspects of private children disputes for both parents and extended family members. Jenna appears in front of both District Judges and Circuit Judges alike.
Jenna’s caseload regularly involves the following areas:
- Private disputes as to child arrangements
- Applications for relocation of the children both domestically and internationally
- Applications for orders preventing the removal of a child from the jurisdiction
- Finding of Fact Hearings involving allegations of domestic abuse and parental alienation
- Applications for orders determining the child’s schooling
Notable Cases
Family
JP v LM (2022)
Jenna represented a mother in a Finding of Fact hearing against a litigant in person. The father denied the entirety of the mother’s allegations. The father was found to have committed multiple acts of serious physical violence against the mother and acted in a way which amounted to controlling behaviour.
LS v IB (2021)
Jenna represented a mother at a Final Hearing in a case where the child lived with his paternal aunt. The Social Worker did not recommend progressing contact. The mother sought for contact to be progressed to include overnight stays. After cross-examination of the Social Worker, the Judge indicated that she would order overnight stays, due to the responses provided by the Social Worker. The parties agreed a stepped order to include overnight stays.
EP v TS (2021)
Jenna represented a mother at a Final Hearing, having represented the mother for over 2 years during lengthy court proceedings. The Social Worker had initially recommended overnight stays for the mother. By the time of the Final Hearing, the recommendation for overnight contact had been revoked due to a change in social worker. Furthermore, in evidence at the Final Hearing the Social Worker said that she was no longer opposing an SGO. After contested evidence, the Magistrates concluded that overnight contact was in the child’s best interests and implemented alternative weekend overnight contact in addition to extended periods of school holiday contact. The Magistrates refused to grant the application for a SGO.
LM v CM (2021)
Jenna represented a wife at a Final Hearing in finance proceedings. The wife was inviting the Court to sell the family home. The husband sought a Mesher Order for at least 5 years. After a contested hearing, the Judge ordered the immediate sale of the family home with an equal division of the proceeds.
Clerks
Keith Allen
Call: 2017 (Solicitor 2004)
Keith Allen
Deputy District Judge
Mental Health Tribunal Judge
Contact
T: 01274 722 560 / 0113 246 2600
Keith was called to the Bar in 2017 having qualified as a solicitor in 2004 and then a solicitor advocate in 2011. Keith has appeared on behalf of defendants at the Crown Court since 2011 and since being called to the Bar accepts instructions as either prosecution or defence advocate.
Reputation
Expertise
Crime
Keith has experience in dealing with cases where significant parts of the evidence are recovered from computer equipment or the internet using forensic techniques.
Keith is also experienced in dealing with defendants with mental health difficulties where assistance is required to properly communicate with clients or where disposals such as section 37/41 are being considered under the Mental Health Act.
Keith has successfully represented clients at the Court of Criminal Appeal and before the Administrative Court.
Notable Cases
Crime
CW-v-DVSA
Administrative Court – Acted as an advocate for the Driver Vehicle Standards Agency on an appeal by Case Stated in which the appellant was arguing that the continuing professional competence provisions were ultra vires and should be struck out. DVSA was successful in defending the claim
R-v-TH
Bradford CC – Acted for the defendant alleged to have stolen over £75,000 in cash from a gentleman that she cared for. The defendant was acquitted after trial.
R-v-DB
Leeds CC – Defence advocate for the lead singer of Black Lace. His confiscation order was agreed at a £1 available amount.
R-v-M
Leeds CC – Defence advocate for a man accused of making indecent images of children. Initially, the allegation was that there were over 3000 indecent images, but following defence submissions, this was reduced to around 800. At trial, Keith acted in defence of the accused who was found not guilty.
R-v-N
Leeds CC – Defended a man charged with armed robbery. A case in which the section 28 protocol applied Keith secured an acquittal after trial despite claims the man was identified as being present by eyewitnesses and forensic evidence.
R-V-P
Hull CC- Advocate for a male accused of several sexual offences against a young child. The defendant was ruled not fit to stand trial, and a finding of fact hearing took place. The jury failed to deliver a verdict on one of the four counts alleged and the defendant was sentenced to a section 37/41 hospital order.
R-v-W
Leeds CC – Acting as an advocate for a man accused of making over 150 indecent images of children. The case was listed for trial, but following representations made to the Crown by Keith the Crown reviewed the case and offered no evidence. The evidence in the case included admissions by the defendant that he had used chat rooms to contact persons over the age of 16. At early hearings, the Court had tried to claim that the defendant did not have a defence to the charge at law.
R-v-K
Leeds CC – Defence of a man accused of Section 18 assault by kicking. Despite accounts from independent witnesses and CCTV of the defendant demonstrating air kicks shortly after the incident Keith secured an acquittal after trial for the defendant who required an interpreter throughout proceedings.
Magistrates’ Court
R-v-BR
Harrogate MC – Acted for a man accused of multiple offences of criminal damage. The alleged tyre slasher was identified from CCTV by one of the victims. During the trial, Keith made several submissions to the Court on the admissibility of evidence and was ultimately able to argue that it would be unsafe for the Court to rely upon the content of the CCTV and the identifications made as a result of it. In part, these arguments were based on significant failings of the police investigation. The case attracted considerable press interest in nearly all national newspapers.
R-v-JM
Leeds MC – Acted in defence of a lady accused of neglect of her son. Following submissions made by Keith, the case was dismissed by the Court after the prosecution closed its case. Keith was instructed on this case after another firm of solicitors advised the defendant, incorrectly, to merely accept the allegation.
R-v-SW
Harrogate MC – Acted as defence solicitor for a man accused of assaulting his daughter. Keith made representations to the Crown that they should drop the case. However, the Crown reviewed the case and indicated that they would proceed despite the representations. Following cross-examination of the complainant, it was accepted that the complainant was the aggressor. Keith made submissions of no case to answer, and a not guilty verdict returned without any evidence called on behalf of the defence.
R-v-D
Leeds YC – Keith appeared before the Youth Court and argued successfully that the prosecution should be halted as an abuse of process on the basis of delay and manipulation by the CPS of the charging decision.
R- v-TM
Central Criminal Court – Provided advice and representation at the police station through to trial to Thomas Mair the man convicted of the killing of Jo Cox MP. Acted as defence solicitor throughout the trial which was allocated to the terrorism lists at the Central Criminal Court.
Clerks