Charles Hannaford

Charles Hannaford

Call 2017

‘A pleasure to instruct and to work with. Charles is both a wonderful advocate and outstanding provider of client care. He has a keen eye for detail, and diligently prepares his cases. He is a calming and reassuring presence for clients often going through some of the toughest times of their lives. As an instructing solicitor, it is invaluable to know that the case will be handled with professionalism, and the client treated with compassion. I do not hesitate in recommending Charles to any instructing solicitor.’

Ryan Dormer, Nelson Guest & Partners

'Charlie is a very tenacious and dedicated barrister. His research skills are second to none and his ability to build rapport with clients is outstanding. His advocacy is compelling and persuasive. I would never hesitate to instruct him, particularly on a case with niche or complex legal arguments’

Jack Stewart, GT Stewart Solicitors

Expertise

Charles advocates for his clients fiercely and is not afraid to advance procedural and legal arguments at any venue. A number of legal arguments have resulted in the Crown offering no evidence against his clients.

Charles has experience in advising and resisting Quasi-Criminal orders such as restraining orders, forfeiture and restoration orders, Stalking Protection Order’s (SPO), Sexual Risk Order’s (SRO) and non-molestation orders.

Notable Crime cases


R v SG [2022] Maidstone Crown Court

Successfully appealed a conviction of domestic assault for a young and vulnerable client with ASD and no previous convictions.

R V SD [2022] Woolwich Crown Court

Secured the acquittal following an allegation of sexual assault of a vulnerable complainant at a bus stop in broad daylight. Cross examination of Crown witnesses identified multiple conflicting accounts, and a failure by the Police to consider CCTV evidence covering the incident.

R v SZ [2022] Central Criminal Court (Nightingale)

Following extensive legal argument in respect of the definition of “Subject of Her Majesty” and application of Section 57 OAPA 1861 to Pakistani nationals, the Crown offered no evidence shortly before the trial date.

R v PP [2022] Northampton Crown Court

Secured 8 months suspended sentence for being concerned in the production of cannabis. In mitigation highlighted features of exploitation, intimidation, and direction.

R v AA and others [2022] Kingston Crown Court

After a 5 day trial, all three defendants were acquitted of ABH on the grounds of self defence following a street brawl in Kingston. The complainant, who suffered wounds requiring stitches, entered into a verbal argument with D1 which turned physical involving his dog. D2 and D3 came acted in self defence of D1.

R v SB [2021] Isleworth Crown Court

Standalone suspended sentence order for perverting the course of justice.

Charles has experience challenging Law enforcement bodies and authorities in respect of seized property and decisions on restoration of goods.  Charles has also resisted a number of Quasi-Criminal civil orders such as SRO, SPO, Restraining orders and non-molestation orders.

Notable Asset Forfeiture & Civil Recovery cases


CIT v Director of Border Revenue [2022] First Tier Tax Tribunal

The lorry and refrigeration unit belonging to CIT was seized by UK Border Force following the arrest of the driver for smuggling 42 Kilos of Cocaine inside the load. The decision to refuse restoration of the vehicle and trailer back to CIT was challenged and found to be unreasonable.

Charles has experience advising on appeals against decisions of the Disclosure Barring Service to add individuals to their barred lists.

Criminal Bar Association

Portfolio Builder

Select the practice areas that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Portfolio
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)