Jeremy Ogilvie-Harris

> People > Barristers > Jeremy Ogilvie-Harris

Jeremy is a public law and human rights barrister at Cornerstone Barristers with experience in public law, human rights and civil liberties, protest, housing, homelessness and housing allocations, welfare benefits, planning and environment, energy, and information and data protection law. He has a busy judicial review practice, mostly representing claimants.

Prior to joining the bar, Jeremy was the Public Law and Welfare Benefits Supervisor and a Housing and Benefits Caseworker at the Hackney Community Law Centre from July 2019 to May 2023. He was also the Planning Voice Caseworker at Southwark Law Centre from January to May 2023. He has an LLM in Public Law from UCL and taught Public Law at Queen Mary University from January 2022 to May 2023.

Jeremy completed pupillage with Cornerstone Barristers from October 2023 to September 2024. He was supervised by Andrew Lane, Ruchi Parekh, Riccardo Calzavara, and Jack Parker.

Expertise

Public Law and Judicial Review
Jeremy has extensive experience in public law and judicial review. He was Public Law and Welfare Benefits Supervisor at the Hackney Community Law Centre (‘HCLC’) prior to pupillage, achieved a distinction in his public law LLM at University College London, and taught public law at Queen Mary University of London.

Jeremy has experience in bringing and defending judicial review claims in the High Court, acting in County Court cases which raise public law issues, and representing both appellants and respondents in statutory appeals processes in the Court of Appeal, Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber), First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) and (Property Chamber), and County Court.

Jeremy’s cases include:

Court of Appeal
- City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council v Hasan Kazi [2024] EWCA Civ 1037: whether the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) had erred in law by deciding that the Council’s policy on civil financial penalties for Housing Act 2004 offences fettered the First-tier Tribunal’s discretion (as junior to Riccardo Calzavara).
- Webb-Harnden v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2023] EWCA Civ 992 concerning the applicability of the public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 to a suitability review of an offer of out of borough homeless accommodation to a single mother (assisting solicitor with conduct as caseworker).
- R (Akinsanya) v SSHD [2022] EWCA Civ 37 [2022] 2 W.L.R. 681 concerning the lawfulness of the EU Settlement Scheme for Zambrano carers (assisting solicitor with conduct as caseworker).
High Court
- H v Rochdale Borough Council and Rochdale Boroughwide Housing (2025) AC-2025-MAN-000264: a judicial review successfully arguing that, for the purposes of the Environmental Impact Assessment regime, the Council had failed to consider whether a series of prior approval applications constituted a “project” so that a screening opinion was required.
- A v the Energy Ombudsman Limited (2025) AC-2025-LDS-000158: resisting a judicial review claim on the basis that the Defendant is not amenable to judicial review, the claim was out of time, there is an alternative remedy and the grounds of review are not arguable.
- E v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (2025) AC-2024-LON-003546: judicial review concerning the existence and extent of the Secretary of State’s common law powers to make payments of social security.
- S v Hackney Council (2025) AC-2025-LON-001216: successfully obtaining interim relief for a secure tenant with mobility issues who could not access his flat due to the life being out of operation. The claim raises Equality Act and Human Rights Act issues.
- ABY v BCP Council (2025) AC-2025-LON-000327: successfully obtaining interim relief in a section 188(3) Housing Act 1996 judicial review relying on the public sector equality duty where the claimant had accommodation available to him but it was argued that it was not reasonable for him to continue to occupy that accommodation. The Council since accepted that ABY was homeless.
- ANS v Redbridge LBC (2024) AC-2024-LON-004058: successfully obtaining interim relief in a section 17 Children Act 1989 judicial review relying on articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights. The claim settled with a favourable result for the claimant.
- MS v Hackney LBC (2024) AC-2024-LON-003526: successfully argued that it was unlawful to apply unpublished guidance which was inconsistent with the allocations scheme (as counsel).
- MT v Waltham Forest LBC (2024) AC-2024-LON-002689: successfully obtaining interim relief for a homeless applicant where the council had misapplied section 185(4)-(5) of the Housing Act 1996 (as counsel).
- M v Wandsworth LBC (2024): successfully argued that the council had made an official error when terminating a claimant’s housing benefit (as counsel). As this case was suspected to involve the use of the Housing Benefit Award Accuracy Initiative algorithm, it has received press coverage by the Independent.
- R (A) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2023): successful claim arguing that an asylum seeker should be placed within London and the surrounding areas due to health concerns (as caseworker).
- R(RQ) v Croydon LBC (no 2) (2023): successful claim arguing there had been unlawful delay and a failure to give adequate reasons for a family’s application to join the housing allocations scheme under part 6 of the Housing Act 1996 (as caseworker).
- R(RQ) v Croydon LBC (2022): successful claim arguing Croydon LBC’s allocations scheme and application form was unlawful (as caseworker).
- R (Akinsanya) v SSHD [2021] EWHC 1535 (Admin) partially successful judicial review concerning the lawfulness of the EU Settlement Scheme for Zambrano carers (assisting the solicitor with conduct as caseworker).
Upper Tribunal
- DG v Bromley LBC [2024] UKUT 49 (AAC): whether the failure of a housing benefit officer to record information communicated orally to them was an official error of the purposes of housing benefit overpayments (as advocate).
- HM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (BB) [2023] UKUT 15 (AAC): whether the exclusion of cohabiting partners without children from claiming bereavement benefit was in breach of articles 8 and 14 and article 1 of protocol 1 ECHR (as caseworker).
- Waltham Forest LBC v PO (HB) [2022] UKUT 58 (AAC): whether the FtT applied the correct legal test for the qualified carer exemption to “bedroom tax” for housing benefit (as caseworker).
- AE v SSWP (DLA) (2021) UKUT unreported: whether the FtT had applied the correct legal test and considered the relevant medical evidence when determining a disability living allowance appeal (as advocate).
- JP v SSWP (DLA) (2020) UKUT unreported: representing a child with autism in a disability living allowance appeal, as to whether a child’s behaviour was unpredictable because the events that triggered that behaviour were themselves unpredictable (as advocate).
- JG v SSWP (IIDB) (2019) UKUT unreported: whether the FtT applied the correct legal test or gave adequate reasons in an industrial injuries disablement benefit appeal (as advocate).
First-tier Tribunal
- GH v SSWP (UC) (2025) FtT unreported: the cessation of transitional protection where a person earns less than the Administrative Earnings Threshold was unjustifiably discriminatory against disabled persons in breach of article 14 and article 1 of protocol 1 (as counsel). The FtT disapplied regulation 56 of the Universal Credit (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2014.
- YM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (UC) (2024) FtT unreported: whether the Secretary of State had complied with the statutory notice requirements when making a decision on a claimant’s housing costs (as counsel).
- FE v HMRC (CTC) (2023) FtT unreported: whether the requirement for a disabled individual to respond to a tax credit notice under section 17 of the Tax Credit Act 2002 without further support was in breach of articles 8 and 14 ECHR and article 1 of protocol 1 ECHR (as advocate).
- SE v SSWP (UC) (2023) FtT unreported: whether the exclusion of victims of domestic violence with pre-settled status but without an underlying right to reside was in breach of article 1 protocol 1 and article 14 ECHR and the EU Charter. This case was stayed behind AT v SSWP [2023] EWCA Civ 1307; [2024] 4 C.M.L.R. 10 (as advocate).
- AB v Camden LBC (HB) (2023) FtT unreported: whether a local benefits authority could unilaterally agree to discharge housing benefit functions for another local benefits authority under section 134(5) of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 (as advocate).
- LK v SSWP (PIP) (2022) FtT unreported: successfully arguing in the FtT that the past presence test for Personal Independence Payment was unlawfully discriminatory against victims of domestic violence with indefinite leave to remain under the domestic violence settlement route in breach of article 1 protocol 1 and article 14 ECHR (as advocate).
County Court
- Hynek v London Borough of Islington and (1) The Aire Centre (2) The 3Million Ltd (2024) County Court at Central London unreported: representing the council in a section 204 appeal under the Housing Act 1996 considering whether the refusal to provide homelessness assistance under part 7 was a breach of the appellant’s right to dignity protected by the Withdrawal Agreement (as junior to Andy Lane).
- GO v London Borough of Hackney (2024) County Court at Hastings unreported: representing the council resisting an application for permission to appeal to a circuit judge concerning whether the conditions for default judgment had been met at the time when a district judge set aside an order for default judgment, applying Galliani v Sartori [2023] EWHC 3306 (Comm) (as counsel).
- Folkestone & Hythe District Council v MD (2024) County Court at Canterbury unreported: whether the council had complied with the Equality Act 2010 when bringing possession proceedings against a secure tenant on the absolute ground for anti-social behaviour under section 84A of the Housing Act 1985 (as counsel).
- BA v Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead (2024) County Court at Winchester: whether a public law claim brought after the council banned the claimant from their premises should have been in the Administrative Court as a judicial review (as counsel).
Human Rights and Civil Liberties
Jeremy has a strong commitment to and experience of human rights and civil liberties law. Prior to becoming a barrister, Jeremy was the Public Law and Welfare Benefits Supervisor at the Hackney Community Law Centre (‘HCLC’) and volunteered for the Liberty Advice Line. He previously taught Public Law, which included human rights, at Queen Mary University.

Jeremy has experience of applying the ECHR, EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and international law, as counsel, advocate and caseworker, including:

Court of Appeal
- Webb-Harnden v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2023] EWCA Civ 992: concerning the applicability of the public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 to a suitability review of an offer of out of borough homeless accommodation to a single mother (assisting the solicitor with conduct as caseworker). This case raised issues of indirect discrimination against women.
- R (Akinsanya) v SSHD [2021] EWHC 1535 (Admin) and [2022] EWCA Civ 37 [2022] 2 W.L.R. 681: concerning the lawfulness of the EU Settlement Scheme for Zambrano carers (assisting the solicitor with conduct as caseworker).
High Court
- S v Hackney Council (2025) AC-2025-LON-001216: successfully obtaining interim relief for a secure tenant with mobility issues who could not access his flat due to the lift being out of operation. The claim raises Equality Act and Human Rights Act issues.
- ABY v BCP Council (2025) AC-2025-LON-000327: successfully obtaining interim relief in a section 188(3) Housing Act 1996 judicial review relying on the public sector equality duty where the claimant had accommodation available to him but it was argued that it was not reasonable for him to continue to occupy that accommodation. The Council has since accepted that ABY was homeless.
- ANS v Redbridge LBC (2024) AC-2024-LON-004058: successfully obtaining interim relief in a section 17 Children Act 1989 judicial review relying on articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The claim settled with a favourable result for the claimant.
- Local Space v NC: successfully applying to stay a warrant of eviction, where enforcement had been transferred to the High Court, relying on article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Upper Tribunal
- HM v SSWP (BB) [2023] UKUT 15 (AAC): whether the exclusion of cohabiting partners without children from claiming bereavement benefit was in breach of articles 8 and 14 and article 1 of protocol 1 ECHR (as caseworker).
First Tier Tribunal
- FE v HMRC (CTC) (2023) FtT unreported: a case in the FtT arguing that requiring a disabled individual to respond to a tax credit notice under section 17 of the Tax Credit Act 2002 without further support was in breach of articles 8 and 14 ECHR and article 1 of protocol 1 ECHR (as advocate).
- SE v SSWP (UC) (2023) FtT unreported: a case in the FtT arguing that the exclusion of victims of domestic violence with pre-settled status but without an underlying right to reside was in breach of article 1 protocol 1 and article 14 ECHR and the EU Charter. This case was stayed behind AT v SSWP [2023] EWCA Civ 1307; [2024] 4 C.M.L.R. 10 (as advocate).
- LK v SSWP (PIP) (2022) FtT unreported: successfully arguing in the FtT that the past presence test for Personal Independence Payment was unlawfully discriminatory against victims of domestic violence with indefinite leave to remain under the domestic violence settlement route in breach of article 1 protocol 1 and article 14 ECHR (as advocate).
County Court
- IK v London Borough of Enfield (2024) County Court at Edmonton unreported: successfully resisted the council’s application for an order for sale on the basis of article 1 protocol 1 and article 8 ECHR.
- Hynek v London Borough of Islington and (1) The Aire Centre (2) The 3Million Ltd (2024) County Court at Central London unreported: a section 204 appeal under the Housing Act 1996 considering whether the refusal to provide homelessness assistance under part 7 was a breach of the appellant’s right to dignity protected by the Withdrawal Agreement (as junior to Andy Lane).
Advisory work
- Advising members of a union in relation to a local authority’s pension fund investments and human rights considerations, including international law.
- Advising an activist in relation to a local authority’s review of their pension fund investments for compliance with customary international law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law.
- FS v Director for Legal Aid Casework (2024): advising on whether exceptional case funding under section 10 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2010 should be granted in a complex First-tier Tribunal welfare benefits appeal.
- YM v Director for Legal Aid Casework (2024): advising on whether exceptional case funding should be granted where the costs of work exceeded the amount of benefit that would be awarded if successful.
- CG v Director for Legal Aid Casework (2024): advising on whether exceptional case funding could be obtained for an appeal in the Information Tribunal.
Extra-curricular and academic achievements

Jeremy has experience of the application of section 10 of the Legal Aid, Punishment and Sentencing of Offenders Act 2012, under which legal aid must be granted if refusal to do so would lead to a breach, or risk a breach, of an applicant’s Convention rights. He has written on this subject for the Legal Action Group magazine. He has assisted law centres, legal advice clinics and other legal aid firms with obtaining legal aid in benefits cases.

Jeremy has a strong commitment to the rule of law and the constitutionality of legislative provisions. He contributed to the amendment of section 10 of the Nationality and Border Act 2020 in relation to the Home Secretary’s proposal to be able to deprive individuals of British citizenship without providing notice of the decision. He wrote an article for the UK Constitutional Law Association about the constitutionality of the proposed power. This was relied upon by Lord Anderson of Ipswich KC, the former Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, in negotiations with the Government to redraft the relevant provision, as indicated in a speech at Middle Temple.

While volunteering at Liberty, Jeremy advised on a wide range of human rights issues including Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, complaints to the Independent Office of Police Conduct and actions against the police, and surveillance by the security services.

Jeremy has also provided training sessions for student protestors on the interaction between their rights under articles 10 and 11 ECHR, possession proceedings and injunctions.
Housing
Jeremy has extensive experience in housing, homelessness and allocations having worked as a Housing and Benefits Case Worker at the Hackney Community Law Centre (‘HCLC’) for four years and continuing to practise housing at Cornerstone Barristers. Jeremy is also a specialist in advising and representing clients in cases where there is an intersection between housing and welfare benefits. Jeremy has experience of both mainstream (e.g. Housing Act 1996) and non-mainstream (e.g. Care Act 2014, Children Act 1989, Schedule 10 to the Immigration Act 2016, Immigration and Asylum Act 1999) accommodation law.

Jeremy has experience in the following types of housing cases acting both for local authorities and tenants/homeless applicants:
- Possession proceedings including cases which raise public law, human rights and Equality Act 2010 issues.
- Succession cases including difficult cases where applicants had no evidence and succession depended on credibility, and discretionary succession.
- Fraud and unlawfully subletting including obtaining unlawful profit orders.
- Housing allocations and homelessness judicial review claims.
- Section 202 reviews on a range of issues including priority need, eligibility, suitability, intentional homelessness, reasonableness to occupy etc.
- Section 204 appeals including reasonableness to occupy for a victim of domestic violence, the suitability of out of borough offers of accommodation and intentional homelessness.
- Housing licensing and standards cases under the Housing Act 2004.
Alongside litigation experience, Jeremy also has experience of advising on matters of policy and procedure for public sector landlords.

Jeremy has acted in the following cases:

Court of Appeal
- City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council v Hasan Kazi [2024] EWCA Civ 1037: whether the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) had erred in law by deciding that the Council’s policy on civil financial penalties for Housing Act 2004 offences fettered the First-tier Tribunal’s discretion (as junior to Riccardo Calzavara).
- Webb-Harnden v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2023] EWCA Civ 992: concerning the applicability of the public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 to a suitability review of an offer of out of borough homeless accommodation to a single mother (assisting solicitor with conduct as caseworker).
High Court
- S v Hackney Council (2025) AC-2025-LON-001216: successfully obtaining interim relief for a secure tenant with mobility issues who could not access his flat due to the lift being out of operation.
- ABY v BCP Council (2025) AC-2025-LON-000327: successfully obtaining interim relief in a section 188(3) Housing Act 1996 judicial review relying on the public sector equality duty where the claimant had accommodation available to him but it was argued that it was not reasonable for him to continue to occupy that accommodation. The Council has since accepted that ABY was homeless.
- ANS v Redbridge LBC (2024) EWHC (Admin): successfully obtaining interim relief in a section 17 Children Act 1989 judicial review relying on articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The claim settled with a favourable result for the claimant.
- MS v Hackney LBC (2024) EWHC (Admin) AC-2024-LON-003526: successfully argued that it was unlawful to apply unpublished guidance which was inconsistent with the allocations scheme (as counsel)
- MT v Waltham Forest LBC (2024) EWHC (Admin) AC-2024-LON-002689: successfully obtaining interim relief for a homeless applicant where the council had misapplied section 185(4)-(5) of the Housing Act 1996 (as counsel).
- M v Wandsworth LBC (2024): successfully arguing that the council had made an official error when terminating a claimant’s housing benefit in relation to temporary accommodation, where there were related possession proceedings relying on a mandatory ground. As this case was suspected to involve the use of the Housing Benefit Award Accuracy Initiative algorithm, it has received press coverage by the Independent.
- R (A) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2023): successful claim arguing that an asylum seeker should be placed within London and the surrounding areas due to health concerns (as caseworker).
- R(RQ) v Croydon LBC (no 2) (2023) EWHC (Admin): successful claim that there had been unlawful delay and a failure to give adequate reasons for a family’s application to join the housing allocations scheme under part 6 of the Housing Act 1996 (as caseworker).
- R(RQ) v Croydon LBC (2022) EWHC (Admin): successful claim that Croydon LBC’s allocations scheme and application form was lawful (as caseworker).
County Court
- G v Tendring District Council (2025) County Court at Chelmsford unreported: successfully representing a homeless applicant in a section 204 appeal obtaining a quashing order of the review decision on the basis that the Council had not complied with the public sector equality duty when determining that the applicant was intentionally homeless.
- G v A2Dominion (2025) County Court at Wandsworth unreported: successfully representing an occupier of social housing on the basis that A2Dominion had breached its policy on discretionary tenancies, had frustrated the defendant’s legitimate expectation and acted in breach of sections 19, 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010.
- Beale v Rezende (2024) County Court at Clerkenwell and Shoreditch unreported: representing a tenant in an appeal against a possession order made by a District Judge concerning the meaning of “in accordance with an approved scheme” in section 215 of the Housing Act 2004 (as counsel).
- Hynek -v- London Borough of Islington and (1) The Aire Centre (2) The 3Million Ltd (2024) County Court at Central London unreported: a section 204 appeal under the Housing Act 1996 considering whether the refusal to provide homelessness assistance under part 7 was a breach of the appellant’s right to dignity protected by the Withdrawal Agreement (as junior to Andy Lane).
- Southwark LBC v HD (2024) County Court at Clerkenwell and Shoreditch unreported: successfully obtaining a possession order and unlawful profit order against a tenant who was unlawfully subletting the whole of their council property for profit (as counsel).
- Camden LBC v RO (2024) County Court at Central London unreported: defending a tenant who is arguing that they had succeeded to a secure tenancy under the Housing Act 1985 (as counsel).
- Wandsworth LBC v M (2024) County Court at Wandsworth unreported: successfully resisting the council’s application to set aside an order made in their absence where a district judge had dismissed their possession claim (as counsel).
- Folkestone & Hythe District Council v MD (2024) County Court at Canterbury unreported: whether the council had complied with the Equality Act 2010 when bringing possession proceedings against a secure tenant on the absolute ground for anti-social behaviour under section 84A of the Housing Act 1985 (as counsel).
Advisory work
- Advising a local authority on the legality of obtaining warrants from the Magistrates’ Court permitting forced entry into premises let under secure tenancies.
- Advising a local authority on its forced entry procedures.
- Advising a local authority on the merits of an Equality Act 2010 claim brought by a secure tenant.
- Advising a housing association on the law of succession and potential defences to possession proceedings.
- Advising a local authority on whether an individual had succeeded to a secure tenancy in a case raising issues of assignment and surrender and regrant.
Welfare Benefits
Jeremy has over eight years’ experience of welfare benefits advice and representation. Prior to joining Cornerstone Barrister, Jeremy was Public Law and Welfare Benefits Supervisor at the Hackney Community Law Centre (“HCLC). In 2019, Jeremy was a volunteer researcher at Big Brother Watch investigating the digitisation of the social welfare sector, including the use of artificial intelligence and algorithms. He is able to consult with solicitors on obtaining legal aid funding for welfare benefits cases. His experience includes:
- Drafting template pre-action protocol letters before claim for Child Poverty Action Group;
- Representing benefits claimants in judicial review claims and understanding the delineation between appealable and non-appealable benefits decisions.
- Regularly appearing as advocate and/or representing benefits applicants in Upper Tribunal appeals;
- Regularly representing appellants in complex First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) appeals including human rights cases and appeals raising novel points of law;
- Advising members of the public, colleagues and professional clients on the interaction between welfare benefits and housing issues;
- Providing advice and training on welfare benefits issues, including obtaining legal aid funding.
Jeremy has particular experience of the applicability of the ECHR and EU law to benefits cases and of the intersection between welfare benefits and the digitisation of the public sector. His cases include:

High Court
- E v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (2025) AC-2024-LON-003546: judicial review concerning the existence and extent of the Secretary of State’s common law powers to make payments of social security.
- M v Wandsworth LBC (2024): successfully arguing that the council had made an official error when terminating a claimant’s housing benefit (as counsel). As this case was suspected to involve the use of the Housing Benefit Award Accuracy Initiative algorithm, it has received press coverage by the Independent.
- R (Day) v SSWP [2021] EWHC 608 (Admin) [2021] P.T.S.R. 1342: concerning the lawfulness of the SSWP’s policy on fine deductions from Universal Credit (assisting solicitor with conduct as caseworker). The fine deductions were applied via an automated system.
Upper Tribunal
- DG v Bromley LBC [2024] UKUT 49 (AAC): whether the failure of a housing benefit officer to record information communicated orally to them was an official error of the purposes of housing benefit overpayments (as advocate).
- HM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (BB) [2023] UKUT 15 (AAC): whether the exclusion of cohabiting partners without children from claiming bereavement benefit was in breach of articles 8 and 14 and article 1 of protocol 1 ECHR (as caseworker).
- Waltham Forest LBC v PO (HB) [2022] UKUT 58 (AAC): whether the FtT applied the correct legal test for the qualified carer exemption to “bedroom tax” for housing benefit (as caseworker).
- AM v SSWP (PIP) (2022) UKUT unreported: whether the FtT had applied the correct legal test as to whether a disability affected the appellant for the “majority of the time” under regulation 7 of the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013 (decided on the papers).
- AE v SSWP (DLA) (2021) UKUT unreported: whether the FtT had applied the correct legal test and considered the relevant medical evidence when determining a disability living allowance appeal (as advocate).
- JP v SSWP (DLA) (2020) UKUT unreported: representing a child with autism in a disability living allowance appeal, as to whether a child’s behaviour was unpredictable because the events that triggered that behaviour were themselves unpredictable (as advocate).
- JG v SSWP (IIDB) (2019) UKUT unreported: whether the FtT applied the correct legal test or gave adequate reasons in an industrial injuries disablement benefit appeal (as advocate).
- NA v SSWP (ESA) (2019) UKUT unreported: whether the FtT applied the correct test as to “substantial risk” under regulation 35 of the Employment and Support Allowance Regulations 2008 (decided on the papers).
First-tier Tribunal
- GH v SSWP (UC) (2025) FtT unreported: the cessation of transitional protection where a person earns less than the Administrative Earnings Threshold was unjustifiably discriminatory against disabled persons in breach of article 14 and article 1 of protocol 1 (as counsel). The FtT disapplied regulation 56 of the Universal Credit (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2014.
- YM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (UC) (2024) FtT unreported: whether the Secretary of State had complied with the statutory notice requirements when making a decision on a claimant’s housing costs.
- FE v HMRC (CTC) (2023) FtT unreported: a case arguing that requiring a disabled individual to respond to a tax credits notice under section 17 of the Tax Credit Act 2002 without further support was in breach of articles 8 and 14 ECHR and article 1 of protocol 1 ECHR (as advocate). It was suspected that the claimant was targeted by the Fraud and Error Assessment System Tool algorithm used by HMRC for Tax Credits cases.
- SE v SSWP (UC) (2023) FtT unreported: whether the exclusion of victims of domestic violence with pre-settled status but without an underlying right to reside was in breach of article 1 protocol 1 and article 14 ECHR and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. This case was stayed behind AT v SSWP [2023] EWCA Civ 1307; [2024] 4 C.M.L.R. 10 (as advocate).
- AB v Camden LBC (HB) (2023) FtT unreported: whether a local benefits authority could unilaterally agree to discharge housing benefit functions for another local benefits authority under section 134(5) of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 (as advocate).
- LK v SSWP (PIP) (2022) FtT unreported: the FtT accepted the argument that the past presence test for Personal Independence Payment was unlawfully discriminatory against victims of domestic violence with indefinite leave to remain under the domestic violence settlement route in breach of article 1 protocol 1 and article 14 ECHR (as advocate).
Advisory work
- FS v Director for Legal Aid Casework (2024): advising on whether exceptional case funding under section 10 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2010 should be granted in a complex First-tier Tribunal welfare benefits appeal.
- YM v Director for Legal Aid Casework (2024): advising on whether exceptional case funding should be granted where the costs of work exceeded the amount of benefit that would be awarded if successful.
Planning, Environment and Climate
- Overview
- News
Jeremy has a practice spanning planning, environmental and climate law, with a particular interest in claimant environmental and climate work. Jeremy has undertaken the following planning, environment and climate work:
- H v Rochdale Borough Council and Rochdale Boroughwide Housing (2025) AC-2025-MAN-000264: a judicial review successfully arguing that, for the purposes of the Environmental Impact Assessment regime, the Council had failed to consider whether a series of prior approval applications constituted a “project” so that a screening opinion was required.
- Representing a tenant of Newham Council in a judicial review challenge argued that the Mayor of London’s had failed to ensure that a regeneration project provides sufficient levels of social housing.
- Representing a tenant of a housing association resisting the demolition of six blocks of social housing.
- Advising a local authority on who had responsibility for maintaining a heritage site.
- Representing a local authority in the Crown Court concerning an individual fly-tipping asbestos in a 19^th century cemetery.
- Representing a squatter in a planning enforcement appeal in which the inspector accepted that a squatter had an “interest in land” for the purposes of section 174(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
Prior to becoming a barrister, Jeremy was a part-time Planning Voice Caseworker for Southwark Law Centre. During that time, Jeremy:
- Advised Extinction Rebellion on the refurbishment of council estates and the merits of challenging the decision to demolish, rather than refurbish, a council owned tower block, on climate grounds.
- Assisted a Black-British business to challenge a planning permission granted by a local authority where the decision failed to comply with section 149 Equality Act 2010.
- Assisted traders to object to a compulsory purchase order application in relation to the Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre.
- Advised traders relocated from the Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre on their rights under a section 106 agreement.
- Assisted the 35% Campaign Group to make representations on the amount of social housing which would be provided in a large-scale housing development in Southwark.
- Advised a campaign group on how a local authority’s heritage protection plans applied to a planning application.
- Advised residents of a marina as to the Equality Act 2010, Human Rights Act 1998, and planning law implications of a decision to redevelop the marina.
Energy
- Overview
- News
Energy

Jeremy’s public law practice encompassing judicial review challenges in the context of the energy sector. His cases include:
- Responding to an application for permission to bring a judicial review claim for an alternative dispute resolution company for energy suppliers and consumers (as counsel).
- Bringing a judicial review claim on behalf of secure tenants against a local housing authority that operates a district heat network. The claim raises issues concerning the regulation of district heat networks and its interaction with article 1 protocol 1, article 8 and article 14 ECHR (as counsel).
Protest
- Overview
- News
Protest

Jeremy has experience in advising and representing protests who are subject to restrictions on their right to freedom of expression and assembly. He has been instructed to advise and bring a judicial review claim challenging directions imposed under section 14 of the Public Order Act 1984 and regularly provides training and information sessions for protestors.
Information Law and Data Protection
Jeremy is developing a practice in information and data protection law. Jeremy has particular experience of representing and advising benefits claimants and homelessness/housing register applicants who have been impacted by the digitisation of the social welfare sector.

Prior to becoming a barrister, Jeremy volunteered at Big Brother Watch as a researcher investigating the use of algorithms and artificial intelligence in the social welfare sector and assisted with making freedom of information requests to police forces regarding their use of facial recognition technology.

Jeremy is a contributor to the PDP Journal, writing the freedom of information case law update.

Jeremy has acted in the following cases which raise data protection and information issues:

High Court
- M v Wandsworth LBC (2024) EWHC (Admin) unreported: successfully arguing that the council had made an official error when terminating a claimant’s housing benefit (as counsel). As this case was suspected to involve the use of the Housing Benefit Award Accuracy Initiative algorithm, it has received press coverage by the Independent.
- R(RQ) v Croydon LBC (2022) EWHC (Admin) unreported: whether Croydon LBC’s allocations scheme and application form was lawful (as caseworker). It was successfully argued that the application form discouraged lawfully entitled applicants from applying to the allocations scheme under part 6 of the Housing Act 1996.
- R (Day) v SSWP [2021] EWHC 608 (Admin) [2021] P.T.S.R. 1342 concerning the lawfulness of the SSWP’s policy on fine deductions from Universal Credit (assisting solicitor with conduct as caseworker). The fine deductions were applied via an automated system.
County Court
- X v a private operator of a prison: claim for damages against a private operator of a prison that released sensitive personal data of the claimant to another prisoner.
First-tier Tribunal
- YM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (UC) (2024) FtT unreported: whether the Secretary of State had complied with the statutory notice requirements by communicating a decision on housing costs via the online Universal Credit system (as counsel). The appeal also raised issues of automated decision making.
- FE v HMRC (CTC) (2023) FtT unreported: a case arguing that requiring a disabled individual to respond to a tax credits notice under section 17 of the Tax Credit Act 2002 without further support was in breach of articles 8 and 14 ECHR and article 1 of protocol 1 ECHR (as advocate). It was suspected that the claimant was targeted by the Fraud and Error Assessment System Tool algorithm used by HMRC for Tax Credits cases.
Advisory work
- Advising on the lawfulness under UKGDPR of using predictive data analytics to prevent homelessness.
- The Court of Justice of the European Union decides that “commercial interests” can constitute a legitimate interest under article 6(1)(f) GDPR25 Oct 2024