Phil was called to the Bar in 1999, having read law at the University of Sheffield. He then undertook an MA in Biotechnological Law and Ethics.
He began practicing in criminal law in Sheffield for a well-established and highly respected firm. Having practised in Sheffield for several years he then transferred to Nottingham, again working in a large regional firm. As a result, Phil has an extensive experience of the criminal law, gained through a wide diversity of cases and clients. He frequently brings his forensic analysis of the law to advance the best interests of his clients.
In 2011 Phil cross-qualified as a solicitor and has brought his depth of experience and knowledge to VHS Fletchers solicitors. His dedicated approach to cases has not diminished over the years.
Phil obtained his Higher Rights Qualification in 2014 and has expanded his practice into the Crown Court.
R v D. Fatality. Prosecution on behalf of the Health and Safety Executive following a death at an oil refinery.
R v A. Murder. The client was charged in connection with the conduct of Nottingham’s first serial killer who was murdering homeless females.
R v S. Importation. The client was charged with being part of an international conspiracy to import millions of counterfeit cigarettes into the United Kingdom.
R v B. Road Traffic Fatality. The client was charged in connection with the death of an off-duty police officer, who had been killed by a driver working over his allotted hours.
R v J. Court of Appeal. The client successfully appealed a 3 years sentence for sexual offences. The reduction of sentence to 12 months permitted his immediate release.
2011 to 2014
R v S. Abuse of Process. The client benefitted from a successful argument relating to abuse of process where the police had given an undertaking not to pursue a prosecution.
R v W. The client contested condemnation proceedings brought by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. In depth legal arguments as to the nature of the obligation on the client as to his liability for duty on the importation of tobacco leaf.
2014 to present
R v P. Drug Supply. The client was charged with supplying a Class A drug. He received a suspended sentence despite guidelines suggesting that a sentence in the region of 4 years was appropriate.
R v B. Dangerous Dog. The client successfully contested the making of a Destruction Order against a dog that had bitten several people.
R v T. Youth Robbery. The youth client was sentenced for a robbery. The guidelines suggested that a 3 year sentence was appropriate, notwithstanding the client’s youth, but instead he received a 6 month Detention and Training Order.
R v P. Court of Appeal. Client’s sentence for drug trafficking offences reduced by court by 2 years 8 months following successful argument that it was ‘manifestly excessive’.
R v T. S18 GBH. Advocacy in allegation of serious violence where client acquitted after a 3 day trial.