Martin Goudie QC

Year of Call: 1996 (QC 2017)
Inn of Court: Inner Temple (Bencher 2014)
Bar of Northern Ireland: 2016

Martin Goudie QC


A new silk popular with the CPS, more unusual prosecutors and defence solicitors, too’ – Crime & Fraud – Leading Silk (Legal 500 – 2017)

He is ranked both in Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500 for his tactical approach, attention to detail and efficient case presentation.

He divides his practice between serious crime, national security and regulatory/professional discipline work.

His expertise is demonstrated by his regular selection as leading counsel in grave and financial crime cases (“Instructed in MTIC and money laundering matters” – Legal 500) as well as regularly being involved in professional discipline cases and investigations.

He has been a member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates (DV security cleared) since 2005 dealing with national security cases including TPIMS, legacy cases in Northern Ireland, cases before SIAC and those arising from financial sanctions and Guantanamo Bay.

Reported Cases

  • R v. Cuni & others [2018] 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) 18
  • Secretary of State for the Home Department v. LG, IM & JM [2017] A.C.D. 100
  • R (ono AZ) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] 4 W.L.R. 12
  • R (ono SSHD) v. SIAC [2015] 1 WLR 4799
  • R v. Reed & Others [2015] EWCA Crim 171
  • Attorney General’s Reference Nos 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 of 2014 (Deacon & Others) [2014] 2 Cr App R (S) 51
  • ZZ v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] Q.B. 820
  • R (on the application of Mohamed) v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2011] QB  218, [2009] 1 WLR 2579, 2653
  • Aamer v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2010] ACD 25
  • SSHD v. Y [2010] ACD 89
  • R v. NW [2010] 2 Cr App R 8
  • Roberts v. Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust [2009] PTSR 415
  • R v. Khan (Fahad Tariq) [2007] 2 Cr App R (S) 95
  • R v. De Oliveira (Fabio) [2006] 2 Cr App R (S) 17

The below are a number of case summaries for Martin’s respective areas of specialism:

Special Advocate Cases

  • Currently instructed as the Leading Special Advocate in a number of deprivation and deportation cases before SIAC. Instructed in KAB (Afghan seeking resettlement package), Bank Mellat (sanctions) and Rahmatullah (individual detained for over 10 years without trial and seeking damages) in the High Court.
  • Secretary of State for the Home Department v. LG, IM & JM [2017] A.C.D. 100 – Junior Special Advocate for IM & JM, the respondents had been made subject to Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPIMs). It was alleged that each of LG, IM & JM ‘are members of, and are or were senior leaders’ of Al-Muhajiroun. The Court upheld the TPIMs subject to amendments to a number of the measures.
  • Secretary of State for the Home Department v. EC & EG [2017] EWHC 795 – Junior Special Advocate for EG, the respondents had been acquitted of an offence under the Terrorism Act 2005, namely plotting to carry out an attack using knives, inspired by the murder of Fusilier Lee Rigby in 2013. A co-defendant (N) was convicted. They were made subject to TPIMs which were upheld at the review hearing.
  • Rahmatullah v. Ministry of Defence [2017] EWHC 547 (QB) – Junior Special Advocate in section 6 application by the MOD. The claimant had been detained by British forces in Iraq in 2004 before being transferred into the custody of US forces and transferred to Afghanistan. It is alleged by the Claimant that his detention had been unlawful and that he had been ill-treated while in detention. He was not released until 2014.
  • N2 v. Secretary of State for the Home Department SC/125/2015 – Junior Special Advocate for N2, the first Jordanian the UK had sought to deport following the trial of Abu Qatada in Jordan. Following submissions the SSHD accepted that there was no realistic prospect of imminently securing the deportation of N2 to Jordan and he has been granted restricted leave to remain.
  • R (ono AZ) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] 4 W.L.R. 12 – Junior Special Advocate in a challenge to the refusal of a refugee travel document following an assessment that the claimant would travel to Syria.
  • W (Algeria) and others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department – Junior Special Advocate in respect of Algerians remitted to SIAC by the Supreme Court – W (Algeria) v. SSHD [2012] 2 AC 115 in SIAC in 2012, Court of Appeal in 2013 and SIAC in 2015. Following lengthy hearings in 2015 SIAC ruled that the individuals could not be returned to Algeria.
  • ZZ v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] 2 W.L.R. 791 – Junior Special Advocate. The Court of Appeal in 2011 made a reference to the European Court of Justice (CJEU) on the question of whether an EU citizen might derive from the Directive 2004/38 a procedural right to be told the essence of the case against him on which another Member State had refused him entry in the interests of national security. At the end of 2013 the case returned to the Court of Appeal where the Court stated that the CJEU judgment meant that ZZ must be informed of the essence of the case against him and remitted the case to SIAC. SIAC considered the case in a number of disclosure hearings and a substantive hearing in 2014 before ruling against the Secretary of State and allowing ZZ to return to the UK after nearly 10 years of exclusion.
  • R (ono SSHD) v. SIAC [2015] 1 WLR 4799 – Instructed as junior Special Advocate and alone in a number of lead naturalisation and exclusion cases in SIAC. Appeared as junior Special Advocate in conjoined preliminary hearing to consider disclosure for the lead cases and in the Administrative Court when the SSHD sought to review SIAC’s preliminary rulings. This litigation has determined the standard of review to be applied within SIAC and the level of disclosure required by the Secretary of State.
  • Thames Tidewater Tunnel – Instructed in first use of the closed material procedure under section 95A of the Planning Act 2008 as the ‘appointed person’ to represent the interests of English Heritage, the Port of London, Lambeth Council and London Duck Tours Ltd as part of the development consent proceedings arising from Thames Water’s £4.1billion Thames Tidewater Tunnel project.
  • SS v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 1547 – Junior Special Advocate – definition of terrorism in domestic, EU and International law when considering a claim that SS should not be granted asylum – Article 1(F)(c) UN Refugee Convention, use of closed material in the Court of Appeal.
  • R (Binyam Mohamed) v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2011] Q.B. 218, [2009] 1 WLR 2579, 2653 – Junior Special Advocate – Relationship between the executive and the judiciary in the context of national security, torture and CIDT in the age of terrorism and the interests of open justice in a democratic society.
  • R (Shaker Aamer) v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2010] A.C.D. 25 – Junior Special Advocate – Application by a British resident detained in Guantanamo Bay for disclosure of documents held by UK Government under the Norwich Pharmacal principals as a result of allegations of torture/CIDT.
  • Secretary of State for Home Department v. Y [2010] A.C.D. 89 – Junior Special Advocate, non-derogating control order, issues included – abuse of process arising out of previous acquittal in criminal proceedings and reliance on evidence not used in such proceedings – transatlantic airline plot.
  • Clive Roberts v. Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust [2009] EWHC 1934 QB, [2009] PTSR 415 – Acted as Special Advocate on an application by Mr Roberts for disclosure under the Data Protection Act 1998 of a Psychological Report written on him by an employee of the NHS Trust for use by him at a Mental Health Review Tribunal hearing. Mr Roberts had been detained under sections 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983 since October 1989.

Significant Fraud and Money Laundering
 Cases

  • – advising company X in respect of allegations of fraud arising from a franchise agreement.
  • R v. Alexander de Rothschild Hatton – Leading Counsel for the Defendant at confiscation. Mr de Rothschild Hatton had been convicted of a number of allegations arising out of him commencing a relationship with a divorcee and deceiving her into handing over in excess of £500,000. The Crown alleged there were substantial hidden assets and that he was a serial offender committing similar offences with other women in the UK, Europe and the USA.
  • Operation Vaulter – Junior Counsel for B. Nineteen Defendants were charged in respect of a multi-national MTIC/Contra fraud and multi-million pound money laundering arising out of it committed over a number of years.
  • R v. L and Others – Defence Counsel for L in prosecution by Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Indictment quashed following submissions that only the High Court had the jurisdiction to deal with the main offending alleged, proceedings in the High Court had been stopped in 2009 six weeks before arrests were made.
  • Operation Storm – Junior Counsel for one of the Defendants in an alleged multi-national ‘boiler room’ fraud investigated by the City of London Police. No Defendant was convicted of fraud however a number fell to be sentenced for breaches of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.
  • R v. Iqbal & Others – Junior Counsel for the Defence in a long running and large scale ILA fraud. Significant disclosure issues arose out of the role of the Department for Education in this matter, the legal advice they had received and the findings of a House of Commons Committee into the collapse of the ILA scheme.
  • R v. Kurshid Faruq & Others – Junior Counsel for Khurshid Faruq. Mrs Faruq and her family were involved in the circumventing of the immigration laws by assisting members of their family to claim incorrectly that they were from war torn areas of Afghanistan or Pakistan so that they could then claim asylum and related benefits on arrival in the UK. The Crown sought confiscation orders in excess of £24m.

Murder and Attempted Murder
 Cases

  • R v. W – Junior Counsel for W who was charged with others with attempted murder following a gun fight at a party in a church hall in which at least four firearms were discharged.
  • R v. Tafari Deacon – Junior Counsel for Tafari Deacon who faced an allegation of murder relating to the killing by a gang of a young man with a shotgun. X was acquitted at half-time following a successful submission of no case to answer. Tafari Deacon was also represented in a separate trial for possessing a firearm and ammunition with intent to endanger life, see Attorney General’s Reference Nos 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 of 2014 (Deacon & others) [2014] 2 Cr App R (S) 51
  • R v. Yassin-Noor & Others – Junior Counsel for the Crown in the prosecution of seven members of the Ferrier Gang for the attempted murder of a university student who had confronted the gang after his brothers had been robbed by the gang on two separate occasions.
  • R v. Christopher Kendrick – Instructed to prosecute Mr Kendrick on three separate indictments for attempted murder, wounding with intent and robbery. All were committed within two months of him being released from a previous sentence. The attempted murder was complicated by the fact that the victim could remember little, had a history of drug abuse and had a significant amount of previous convictions for dishonesty and violence.
  • R v. Roger Vincent & Others – Junior Counsel for Roger Vincent. A huge investigation commenced following the murder of a notorious gangster in Hertfordshire with an AK-47, the first time one was used in the mainland United Kingdom. The investigation gave rise to a lengthy trial where Roger Vincent was alleged to be the gunman. The trial was complicated by the Crown’s wish to place Mr. Vincent’s previous acquittal for murder before the jury.

Significant Sexual Offences Cases

  • R v. T – Prosecution of a stepfather for sexual assault and assault by penetration of his stepdaughter between the ages of 11 and 14.
  • R v. S – Defence Counsel in respect of allegations of historical sexual abuse including rape and buggery, stretching back twenty years, against the third eldest child in a family by one of his brothers and two of his sisters.
  • R v. Moulson & Others – Instructed to prosecute four Defendants for blackmail and sexual offending against a mother and her two daughters. The victims were conditioned to live in a climate of fear, follow orders, assault each other, hand over the majority of their money and have their wages paid into a Defendant’s bank account. As part of the offending the mother and one of her daughters were forced to perform sexual acts on each other.
  • R v. Glen Cornwall & Others – Junior Counsel for Glen Cornwall. Mr Cornwall was arrested after his girlfriend alleged that he had falsely imprisoned her for nearly two weeks. During this time she said he kept her naked in a wicker basket, raped her and physically assaulted her on numerous occasions. The case was complicated by the fact that Mr Cornwall’s previous two girlfriends had made similar allegations against him, but these allegations had not lead to convictions.

Other

  • R v. Cuni & others [2018] 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) 18 – privately instructed in the Court of Appeal in respect of major conspiracy to import Class A drugs
  • – advising company Y following an incident resulting in multiple fatalities of members of the public.
  • CAA v. Amazon UK Services Ltd – Prosecution of Amazon at Southwark Crown Court for breaches of regulation 5(1) of the Air Navigation (Dangerous Goods) Regulations 2002 over a period from late 2013 to the middle of 2015.
  • R v. Dzuga & Dzuga – Defence Counsel for the first Defendant where the Defendants faced allegations of trafficking multiple individuals into and around the United Kingdom between 2005 and 2013.
  • CAA v. Iain King – Prosecution under Article 94(1)(c) of the Air Navigation Order 2005 of a flying instructor for falsely certifying a pupil applying for a Private Pilot’s Licence (Helicopters) had completed the required course of training. He also falsely certified eight days of flying which did not take place in the pupil’s logbook. The pupil’s Gazelle helicopter crashed on his first solo flight following the grant of his licence killing the pupil and his wife.
  • Operation Pacer – Leading Counsel for the first Defendant charged with conspiring to organise the theft of high-end vehicles through residential burglaries and then their shipping to countries in East and South Africa. The allegations spanned over a year and nearly sixty burglaries.
  • R v. NW [2010] 2. Cr. App. R. 8 – Definition of term ‘present together’ in violent disorder.
  • R v. H Hyland & Others – Leading Counsel for the Defence in relation to lengthy allegations of the international supply of controlled drugs, money laundering and perverting the course of justice.
  • R v. Anwar Ibrahim & Others – Junior Counsel for the Crown. This case followed an eighteen-month investigation into carjacking, car ringing, theft and insurance fraud by a number of individuals. The case involved close liaison with the fraud investigation departments of a number of large insurance companies and lead to them changing their procedures for the investigation of such matters.
  • R v. Darshan Gill & Others – Junior Counsel for Darshan Gill. Mr. Gill was part of a group accused of organising fake marriages on a large scale. Vulnerable women would be married to Indian males so that they could gain the right to remain in the United Kingdom.  If the women tried to back out they were threatened with rape and left in India without their passports or any means to survive.
  • R v. Glynn Atkinson & Others – Junior Counsel for Glynn Atkinson. This case related to a large number of serious post office robberies in which a gang held rural post office owners and their families at gunpoint, gagged and bound overnight whilst waiting for time locks on safes to be released.
  • Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates
  • Legal Assessor to the Nursing and Midwifery Council
  • Council of Management of the Pegasus Scholarship Trust
  • London Scottish (Rugby) Football Club – Head of Discipline
  • Advocacy, ethics and witness familiarisation trainer
  • Pegasus Scholar to Crown Law Office, Wellington, New Zealand (1999)
  • LL.B, University of Exeter
  • International Bar Association
  • Criminal Bar Association
  • Fraud Lawyers Association
  • CyberCrime Practitioners Association
  • Justice
  • Bar Pro Bono Unit
  • Royal Institute of International Affairs

Areas of Specialism


Serious Crime

As a criminal practitioner he undertakes the full scope of grave and financial crime, defending and prosecuting in equal measure. He is instructed regularly by numerous private firms of solicitors and the Crown Prosecution Service, including the Special Casework Unit (EAS Grade 4).

Recent defence cases have included prosecutions brought by HM Revenue and Customs, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, the United Kingdom Border Agency and the Department for Education. He has extensive experience in Very High Cost Cases.

 

National Security

He has been a member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates (DV security cleared) since 2005 dealing with national security cases including TPIMS, legacy cases in Northern Ireland, cases before SIAC and those arising from Guantanamo Bay.

He has contributed regularly to documents produced by groups of Special Advocates, including submissions to the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and was interviewed by Amnesty International as part of their investigations into the use of ‘closed material procedures’ in the UK.

 

Professional Discipline & Regulatory Law

He has wide ranging experience of regulatory and disciplinary hearings/tribunals and investigations acting for a number of regulators, individuals, companies and other bodies.

He is also experienced in providing training and assistance on regulatory issues. He has worked with and/or against the Civil Aviation Authority, Office of Rail and Road, Nursing and Midwifery Council, Royal College of Nursing, Bar Standards Board and Rugby Football Union. This has included being asked to advise on jurisdictional issues, gathering evidence from overseas, prosecutions arising out of fatal crashes, dangerous goods prosecutions (including of Sanyo and Amazon), health committees, competitions committees and appearing at internal hearings such as Reg 6 appeals. Martin is a Legal Assessor to the Nursing and Midwifery Council.

 

Other Details


Response to the Green Paper on Justice and Security in relation to Norwich Pharmacal proceedings

Lecture to the LCCSA on Serious Crime Prevention Orders