Year of Call: 2011
Inn of Court: Inner Temple
Stephanie Hayward
Stephanie is a highly persuasive, charismatic jury trial advocate.
She invests time analysing evidence, developing case narratives and thoroughly preparing her advocacy.
She has been instructed as sole counsel for trials involving serious offences including armed robbery, aggravated burglary and grievous bodily harm.
She is on the CPS general crime and CPS specialist fraud panels, both at level 2.
Stephanie is a conscientious junior. She was led in the first UK multi-handed conspiracy to defraud the Redundancy Payments Service. During the trial Stephanie drafted responses to multiple s.8 disclosure applications. Following 9 convictions at the conclusion of the trial, Stephanie drafted the Prosecution sentencing note. Subsequently, Stephanie was entrusted to prosecute alone one of the Defendants severed from the main trial. She has experience of confiscation proceedings under POCA. In 2019, Stephanie was led in a protracted conspiracy to ring and sell stolen vehicles at Southwark Crown Court for which she reviewed over 20,000 pages of telephone material.
Stephanie complements her prosecution work with defence work. She has defended allegations of serious violence. In R v N, an allegation of grievous bodily harm, Stephanie carefully elicited disparities in the prosecution’s identification evidence to the extent that the jury was unable to reach a verdict. Stephanie is happy to advise in conference and prepare defence case statements.
Stephanie’s employment law background means she empathises with the stresses faced by Registrants appearing before their professional bodies. A skilled tribunal advocate, Stephanie has successfully represented clinical scientists, paramedics, nurses, midwives, social workers & physiotherapists in substantive and interim hearings for allegations of misconduct and fraud. She also case presents for the Nursing and Midwifery Council.
Charter Chambers and its members are regulated by the Bar Standards Board
Significant Cases
Crime
Serious violence
R v E (2019) – prosecuted retrial for sustained domestic assault occasioning ABH, following conviction for perverting the course of justice in original trial. Rigorous cross-examination revealed to the jury the subtle psychological, emotional and ultimately physical abuse levelled against the Complainant, through painstaking analysis of chat logs and text message evidence. Defendant convicted.
R v A (2019) – prosecuted multiple counts of armed robbery, involving cell-site evidence. Defendant pleaded to 4 counts on first day of trial.
R v N (2019) – defended charge for s.20 grievous bodily harm where Defendant was alleged to have punched and broken Complainant’s jaw outside a nightclub. In the face of robust cross-examination, Complainant was insistent that Defendant had punched his jaw. Homing in on inconsistencies in the identification evidence of subsequent prosecution eye-witnesses meant the jury was unable to reach a verdict.
R v E (2019) – represented Defendant at sentence following conviction for multiple counts of possessing firearms and ammunition with intent to endanger life and supply of Class A drugs.
R v R (2018) – sole prosecution counsel in aggravated burglary trial where Defendant lived in the same block of flats as Complainants and was alleged to have punched and pepper-sprayed two of them before threatening both with an imitation firearm concealed with a sock.
R v B (2017) – prosecuted Defendant charged with robbing her grandmother. Defendant convicted.
Fraud and dishonesty
R v C (2019) – prosecuted alone Defendant severed from multi-handed conspiracy to defraud the Redundancy Payment Service to the value of over £700,000 (Operation Chum).
R v B (2019) – defence counsel (led) in multi-handed, large-scale conspiracy to ring and sell stolen vehicles with theft value exceeding £700,00.
R v M (2018) – Operation Chum. Junior prosecution counsel in multi-handed conspiracy to defraud the ‘Redundancy Payment Service’, a Government Agency making payments to workers owed money when their employers become insolvent. The Defendants submitted false claims by forging and creating identities to the value of over £700,000. 9 convictions. POCA proceedings followed.
R v M (2018) – Operation Curate. Linked VAT fraud to Operation Chum where first Defendant had taken over the VAT affairs of a company and falsely claimed over £100,000 in VAT refunds after the death of the Director.
R v S (2018) – prosecuted charge for perverting the course of justice where Defendant had supplied Police with his brother’s details to evade prosecution. Defendant convicted. https://www.charterchambers.com/news/unanimous-verdict-on-perverting-the-course-of-justice/
Regulatory
PG v NMC (2020) – the Registrant accepted accessing patient records without any clinical purpose and conceded that this amounted to a breach of the NMC Code of Conduct and therefore misconduct. As a consequence, the NMC submitted that the Registrant’s fitness to practise was impaired and intended to apply for a suspension order. Stephanie elicited strong evidence of the Registrant’s remedial efforts as well as the insights gained, to the extent that the Panel felt able to return a finding of no impairment, ending the hearing 2 days early.
GC v NMC (2019) – successfully defended allegation of fraudulent entry on the Register. Despite Registrant’s admission of “incorrect entry”, Panel imposed no sanction.
BP v HCPC (2019) – successfully defended Clinical Scientist in substantive hearing involving misuse of the “EEVA” – a system which monitors embryo development. Allegation of misconduct found not proved. Despite Registrant’s admission of failing to transport liquid nitrogen safely, Registrant’s practice was not found to be impaired.
ES v HCPC (2019) – represented paramedic suspended from practice for admitted cannabis use (outside of work duties). Pursuant to advice which Registrant followed, secured early lift of suspension order at substantive order review.
RC v HCPC (2018) – successfully persuaded Panel that despite allegation of assault an interim order was neither necessary nor in the public interest. Panel imposed no interim order.
LP v NMC (2018) – successfully persuaded Panel to reframe interim conditions of practice order reflecting Preceptorship programme enabling Registrant Midwife to remain in work, having unsuccessfully applied for numerous midwifery roles.
GC v HCPC (2018) – successfully persuaded the Panel to lift interim conditions of practice order after showing that Registrant Physiotherapist’s practice was no longer impaired.
Qualifications
- LL.B (Hons), University of Reading
- BPTC, Kaplan Law School
- Kalisher Scholarship (2016)
- Inner Temple Exhibition Award (2011)
- Duke of Edinburgh Scholarship (2011)
- CPS general crime panel, level 2
- CPS specialist fraud panel, level 2
Affiliations
- Criminal Bar Association
- South Eastern Circuit
- Women in Criminal Law
Stephanie runs “Behind the Gown” an organisation set up to combat harassment and bullying at the Bar, following the emergence of global movements like #MeToo and #TimesUp. https://www.behindthegown.com/
Alongside the Bar Council, Stephanie is working to develop solutions to some of the issues surrounding the retention of women at the Bar.
Stephanie marked the centenary of women in law on December 23 2019 by producing and releasing a film highlighting some of the key issues affecting women at the Bar. The film garnered much praise and attention from the wider profession. https://www.criminalbar.com/resources/news/monday-message-23-12-19/
The film can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAC1H8sIFlM&t=943s
Areas of Specialism
Crime
She is a Grade 2 CPS Advocate and completed a secondment with the CPS in July 2017. She defends at all levels of court.
Employment & Regulatory Law
She successfully secured an adjournment of a Social Worker Registrant’s Final Hearing before the Health and Care Professions Council in Birmingham. She has a keen interest in the medical professions and aims to use her experience from the Employment Tribunal to develop a practice in regulatory work.
Instructed by FRU, she secured compensation for a claimant alleging unfair dismissal, having firstly established her ‘employee’ status. She also secured over £15,000 compensation on behalf of a care worker following a three-day hearing encompassing claims for whistleblowing, unfair dismissal and sex discrimination.
She has acted as a voluntary advisor on the Employment Law Telephone Advice Service (ELTAL) offering free advice to members of the public facing issues at work. She is also regularly instructed by Irwin Mitchell for advice on the merits of claims.
Prison & Public Law
Interested in the criminal justice system more holistically, she also received a Kalisher Scholarship sponsoring a secondment with The Parole Board in the Ministry of Justice. Within the Litigation Team, she successfully defended a judicial review challenge made against the Board, linked to a decision not to direct the release of a prisoner.
She also dealt with hundreds of claims for compensation from prisoners due to the delay in having their oral hearings heard under Article 5 (4) ECHR.
Her interest in prison law work was borne out of representing a prisoner recalled for breaching license conditions at HMP Wayland. She has also represented youths in adjudications at Feltham YOI.