Castle Chambers

Jonathan Whitley

Back to Profile of
Jonathan Whitley


Jonathan Whitley

Public and Administrative Law

 

Jonathan is instructed to appear in Judicial Review and Case Stated procedures in the High Court in criminal and related matters. He is one of the few barristers who has actually appeared on a Habeus Corpus application and therefore understands the urgency that such applications require. In his case, Jonathan was instructed as he left Court for the day and then had to prepare the application on his way to the High Court for an out of hours application.

Examples

  • R (application of Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead)-v-East Berkshire Justices (2010) Prosecution. High Court Divisional Court. Judicial Review. Successsful Application on behalf of Prosecuting local authority to quash acquittal by Magistrates. Issue was the interpretation of “knife” in section 141A CJA 1988 in case involving sale of knife to person under 18 years
  • Application of KI for Habeus Corpus (2009) High Court Divisional Court Appeared for CPS as Interested Party
  • R(W)-v-Brent Youth Court (2006) Prosecution. Divisional Court. Judicial Review: “Grave crimes” committal heard by Youth Court prior to publication of Sentencing Guideline on Robbery: review heard after publication of Guideline. Praised by Court for pragmatic approach. Instructed by CPS Harrow especially for the Judicial Review proceedings, not otherwise involved in case.
  • R(D)-v-Nottingham Crown Court (2005) Prosecution.  High Court Divisional Court. Successfully opposed application for Judicial Review. Court held that delay of trial caused by VHCC “strike” amounted to “good and sufficient” reason to extend custody time limits. Applicant argued that state failed in its obligation to provide sufficient remuneration for Defendant’s proper representation. Instructed by CPS Nottingham solely in Judicial Review case..
  • R-v-H & C(2006) Prosecution. Court of Appeal. Successfully resisted appeal against conviction. Appeal involved absence of identification procedures where presence admitted but participation denied.
  • R-v-Y (2005) Defence. Court of Appeal. Successful appeal against sentence on basis that sentence imposed upon Defendant who pleaded Guilty to theft during aftermath of robbery was insufficiently lower than that imposed on robber.