Edward Henry QC

Call 1988 | Silk 2018

“Edward is a brilliant lawyer. An advocate’s advocate, fierce intellect, and hugely aware tactically. He’s a lateral thinker when there is a problem without a resolution and passionate about the lay client. Juries love this counsel, because they are a character of a type they don’t make any more, enthralling the court.”

Legal 500 2022 – Tier 4

“A great personality and can be fiercely combative on paper and in oral submissions. Good way with clients including some of the most difficult characters. He has an incredible eloquence. Memory and insight.”

Legal 500 2021 – Tier 4

“He really excels in front of a jury.”

Legal 500 2020

“A game changer with a fantastic grasp of experts – if you get arrested, choose him.”

Legal 500 2018

“Extremely bright, and not afraid to use it – and utterly charming too.”

Legal 500 2018

“When instructed, he really makes a difference to a case.”

Legal 500 2017

“He deploys his huge intellect with great skill.”

Legal 500 2016

“Judges find his style attractive as he can drill down to the essence of a case. Solicitors like him as he has a wonderful way of managing people’s expectations.”

Chambers & Partners 2021 - Band 4

“He has a very commanding court presence and comes across like someone at the very top of his game.” “He has a brain the size of a planet.” “A compassionate and skillful QC who goes the extra mile for his clients.”

Chambers & Partners 2020

“Edward commands the respect of judges and his peers, and it is a real pleasure to listen to him in court.”

Chambers & Partners 2018

“At his finest when he is on his feet. He has eloquence to his submissions, and he conveys his argument concisely and in an attractive manner.”

Chambers & Partners 2018

“A terrific junior with a ‘phenomenal’ track record who specialises in all areas of general crime. He is particularly known for his expertise in serious organized crime, and is highly respected for his mastery of complex legal issues, including expert evidence and abuse of process. He regularly receives plaudits from market sources for his client-handling skills.”

Chambers & Partners 2017

“He runs a silk’s practice as a junior. He is extremely knowledgeable…He has good legal skills and is convincing in court.”

Chambers & Partners 2017


One of the brightest at the Criminal Bar, Edward Henry QC has a reputation for defending cleverly, creatively, and tirelessly. Known for his brilliant legal arguments and exceptional advocacy, he is someone to have in your corner.

Edward Henry has dedicated his career to defence work. His sought out to defend the most serious and high-profile crimes at all stages of the process and is frequently instructed to adopt a case at appeal to provide the greatest opportunity of success for the client. He has a proven track record in developing procedural arguments (Abuse of Process, Disclosure and PII) which have repeatedly stopped major prosecutions. His client care is faultless, and his advocacy sets him apart, he is a tremendous criminal practitioner.

Edward is a leading specialist in defence whose practice encompasses all forms of serious crime. He has been instructed to act in over 40 murder trials, cases of terrorism (IRA, Tamil Tiger and Al Qaeda), serious sexual assault, serious drugs, money laundering, immigration fraud, people trafficking and firearms. His capacity to think outside of the box means he often argues novel and successful points of law. He has, against the odds, succeeded in staying historic sexual abuse allegations, and has successfully overturned convictions as fresh counsel on appeal.

In 2016 Edward played a decisive and leading role in dismantling the prosecution case in the widely reported “Cirencester Four” Royal Agricultural University gang rape trial in which the defendants were acquitted.

In 2015 his disclosure submissions were instrumental in forcing the Prosecution to offer no evidence against those charged with assisting Dale Cregan, the quadruple murderer, whilst he was on the run.

Edward is widely regarded for his expertise in matters involving experts and disclosure. His cross examination of a lip-reading expert, following extensive analysis of her evidence in previous cases, led to her being abandoned in other cases and he was invited to speak on Newsnight about the case.

Edward has broadcast on issues of criminal law and human rights for the BBC on The Moral Maze, Five Live, and News 24. He has also been interviewed on Newsnight and by ITN. He appeared with Koo Stark, his former client, on Daybreak in 2013 campaigning against the legal aid “reforms”. Edward is currently instructed to defend a high-profile celebrity in relation to historic Operation Yew Tree allegations.

A courtroom favourite, Edward Henry does not disappoint, he is known for his clever tactics and for being at his absolute best, on his feet.

Notable Crime cases

R v F [2015] Croydon Crown Court

Successful defence of man accused of a campaign of gunpoint rape.

R v P [2015] Chelmsford Crown Court

Successful defence of an accountant charged with sexual assault.

R v B [2015] Kingston Crown Court

Successful defence of a fruit and vegetable trader charged with two counts of large scale cannabis smuggling.

R v Koo Stark [2013]

Edward Henry represented Ms Koo Stark, the internationally renowned photographer and the former girlfriend of the Duke of York, charged with a serious art theft.

Earl of Cardigan [2014] Chippenham Magistrates Court

Edward Henry represented David Brudenell-Bruce, Earl of Cardigan in criminal proceedings.

Edward Henry QC appears for the defence in Watford samurai sword murder.

The case concerns the killing of Luke O’Connell in North Watford on 31st August 2019, who was stabbed to death with a samurai sword. Watford Observer (https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/19473792.murder-trial-luke-oconnell-stabbed-watford/

R v G [2019]

Edward Henry QC defended an individual charged with murder, and an associated GBH. The client had deep-rooted mental health problems which developed as a result of a destructive drug addiction. A defence of diminished responsibility was advanced involving complex neuro-psychiatric and neuro-biological evidence.

R v MacLeod [2019]

Edward Henry QC defended an alleged major league drug-dealer, charged with murder following an alleged punishment stabbing of a rival dealer in Brighton. The prosecution case was apparently overwhelming but a determined defence resulted in a hung jury after over 40 hours of deliberations.

Edward Henry QC defends 18-year-old acquitted of murder at the Old Bailey

Edward represented CM who was acquitted of murder and manslaughter at the Central Criminal Court.
CM and AF, both 18, were charged with murder, together with a 15-year-old youth, following the death of Mark Fontaine. Mr Fontaine died following a stabbing in Chelsea, on the 30th May 2018.
Edward and Tom were instructed by Andrew Moxon of FMW Law.

R v H [2019]

Edward Henry QC successfully defended an individual in his appeal against his conviction for rape. The application was made out-of-time as trial counsel had negatively advised. Edward found six grounds of appeal, four of which were upheld.

Able to master the most complex of cases and with incredibly astute strategic judgement, Edward Henry QC continues to be amongst the best in the field of corporate crime; his instruction makes a difference.

Edward Henry is known for his enormous intellect and sharp judgement. He is able to digest vast amounts of complex material and to efficiently communicate accessible advice and arguments, whether to a client or jury. He is frequently instructed in the most complex and high-profile cases within the field of corporate and financial crime, from investigation stage through to the highest level of appeal. He is highly respected for his mastery of complex legal issues such as expert evidence and has a proven track record in developing procedural arguments (Abuse of Process, Disclosure and PII) which have repeatedly stopped major prosecutions. His client care is exceptional, and his advocacy is revered; he is the full package and absolutely what a client should expect from a senior barrister at the top of their game.

Edward Henry has a formidable track record in the field and is frequently instructed in the most difficult and high-profile cases at all stages of proceedings, from their inception to their ultimate appeal. In recent years his work has included: drafting written submissions that successfully persuaded the Crown Prosecution Service to drop a tax fraud prosecution brought against a high profile client; the successful defence of a former CEO of the The Money Portal who faced a £60m pension fraud allegation brought by the SFO; appearing for the first appellant in the Supreme Court in a landmark test case for trade mark owners concerning whether the trade in ‘grey goods’ was criminalized by s.92 Trademarks Act 1994. Edward’s current corporate crime defence instructions include: an alleged £12.5 million fraud on a Russian oligarch; representing the CEO of a renowned charity, who is accused of fraud and large-scale theft; and representing a senior executive in the Serious Fraud Office’s investigation into bribery and corruption at Rolls Royce. Edward also regularly advises on the Proceeds of Crime Act and whether Suspicious Activity Reports should be or ought to have been made.

Edward is a regular contributor to various publications, writing on a wide range of topics within the field. Topics have included: tax evasion offences; Deferred Prosecution Agreements; piercing the corporate veil; the Bribery Act.

Despite being recognized for his impressive intellect, Edward maintains a very easy and approachable client manner; he puts people at east with his likeability as much as with his obvious skills and juries just love him.

Notable Business Crime & Fraud cases

R v M (on appeal to UKSC as MCT v R) St Albans Crown Court, Court of Appeal Criminal Division, Supreme Court

Landmark intellectual property prosecution that will decide whether the trade in “grey goods” is caught by S.92 Trademarks Act 1994.

R v Crickmore Southwark Crown Court

Represented a solicitor and Coroner of Gloucester charged with £2m theft from the practice client account.

R x X

This case concerned multiple NCA investigations into a hijacked hotel project in Mauritius, and the nearly successful sale of a £10m house in Chelsea from under the nose of its lawful owners together with other copy-cat frauds.

R v M (2017 – Ongoing) Southwark Crown Court

Police officer charged with the alleged protracted and systematic theft of cash seizures under POCA.

R v P [2017] Southwark Crown Court

Large scale fraud allegation against CEO of a renowned charity.

R v A Southwark Crown Court [2017]

£12.5m fraud allegation against the head of Russian oligarch’s private office.

R v M (on appeal to UKSC as MCT v R) [2017]

Landmark intellectual property prosecution that will decide whether the trade in “grey goods” is caught by s.92 Trademarks Act 1994.

R v X & Y

This case concerned multi-million pound fraud allegations involving company directors, and inter-related FTT tax tribunal proceedings, which is set against the background of an alleged bullion smelting fraud. Edward Henry QC is instructed by Ian Lewis of JMW Solicitors.

Dr O [2015]

Successful defence of GP accused of falsifying records and failing to treat patient in latter stages of
palliative care.

R v A [2020]

Edward Henry QC has just successfully challenged the Appropriate Authority (“AA”) of a major Constabulary, which lost two successive rulings in hard fought proceedings before a Legally Qualified Chair (‘LQC”). In consequence, the AA dropped career ending accusations against Edward’s client.
The Officer, who must remain anonymous, faced misconduct proceedings in respect of deliberately and dishonestly misattributing intelligence, derived it was suspected from an unregistered “CHIS,” to two lesser-known criminals, X and Y.
Edward mounted a sustained and determined attack on the AA, targeting shortcomings in its conduct of disclosure (which he labelled “the disclosure debacle”) and defects in its investigation of the Officer. These faults, Edward argued, were diagnostic of an irreparable systemic failure, being endemic from the outset, long before the service of the Officer’s Reg. 22 Notice, which outlined his defence.
Following disclosure submissions regarding sensitive material, the major part of the case (based upon Y’s anticipated evidence) collapsed. Thereafter, two critical rulings went in favour of the Officer. First, the LQC upheld Edward’s submissions that the AA was wrong to discontinue the disclosure exercise in respect of Y, in spite of his refusal to attend as a witness. The AA maintained that his failure to co-operate meant he “fell away” but the LQC upheld Edward’s argument that non-disclosure in respect of Y was still relevant, not redundant, and capable of amounting to a potential abuse of process. Second, the LQC refused the AA’s application for an adjournment, to analyse the material it had previously deemed irrelevant. The AA, having abandoned the disclosure exercise into Y of its own volition, without first seeking the LQC’s approval, then found itself unable to identify and disclose all the material gathered in respect of Y within the deadline set, and jettisoned the remaining allegations against the Officer made by X.
Edward, instructed by Nick Terry of Burton Copeland, assimilated a case of acute sensitivity, which had to be conducted under conditions of formidable secrecy. In close conjunction with Nick, he devised an effective strategy that homed in relentlessly upon the AA’s vulnerabilities. The case, in terms of the substantive Law, the evidence, and procedure, involved complex issues of Police Law, including many relating to European Jurisprudence, and the extent to which the CPIA applies to Police Disciplinary Tribunals.
After these proceedings weighing heavily upon him for several years, the Officer was delighted and relieved to be totally exonerated.

One of those rare barristers who combine phenomenal criminal advocacy skills with a formidable and forensic intellect, Edward Henry QC’s practice in this field has gone from strength to strength.

Edward Henry has experience of a vast spectrum of industries, their regulation and the tribunals that adjudicate on them. He exclusively defends for professionals who require his keen understanding of the nuances of their profession and the skilled execution of their case that he delivers, whether in advice or in hearing. He has an incredible success record and often manages to stop a case with his procedural arguments.

Edward Henry has considerable regulatory experience, defending police officers, solicitors, accountants, and medical professionals in the criminal courts, tribunals and beyond into related hearings in other legal areas, such as coroner’s inquests. He is favoured by unions and private paying clients alike for his commitment, client care and results.

Edward’s record before the NMC is exemplary; two of his last three cases have been stayed on abuse of process, the final case was demolished at half time when Edward demonstrated that the NMC’s witnesses had been colluding on Facebook. He was instructed by the Medical Defence Union. Edward has recently successfully refuted dishonesty charges for an accountant before the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA v P) and diverted another accountant from the disciplinary process by his advice.

Edward is most frequently before the Medical Protection Tribunal Service, representing Doctor’s at the most critical time of their career, often with outstanding success.

He also has experience of Student Disciplinary Hearings, the General Dental Council and of the Institute Of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales.

Edward’s expertise across the criminal, financial and regulatory forums place him exceptionally well to deal with any allegation a professional may face, whether brought by their regulator or another prosecuting authority; he is accomplished across all disciplines.

Notable Professional Regulation cases

GMC v Dr Z [2017]

Edward Henry recently defended Dr Z before the MPTS on charges of dishonesty and alleged clinical incompetence.
Dr Z at the outset of the proceedings admitted dishonesty to an isolated charge and two instances where his clinical competence might have been sub-optimal. At Stage 1 all of the remaining allegations of dishonesty and deficient clinical performance were found not proved. At Stage 2 only the admitted dishonesty was deemed to be misconduct, but the Tribunal accepted Edward’s submission that Dr Z was not currently impaired. The GMC then submitted that even though no impairment was found the Tribunal should impose a warning. The Tribunal upheld Edward’s submissions that given the exceptional circumstances of this case no warning was necessary. Edward was instructed by Carl Johnson of Stephensons.

Mr P (ACCA) [2017]

Edward Henry successfully refuted accusations of dishonesty re misappropriation of client money before ACCA.

GMC v Dr EB (MPTS and EWHC) [2017]

Edward Henry represented a consultant on numerous charges of dishonesty arising from his CV and response to the investigative process before he obtained legal representation.

GMC v Dr M [2016]

Succeeded in discharging conditions imposed at earlier IOT hearing.

GMC v Dr Q [2016]

Successful defence of consultant on charges of sexual assault and misconduct; short suspension in respect of other (non-sexual) matters.

Dr K (2015)

Successfully opposed conditions upon registration in relation to a consultant psychiatrist.

Notable Asset Forfeiture & Civil Recovery cases

Edward Henry QC defeats Cash Forfeiture application

Edward Henry QC saw off a cash forfeiture application for £111,000 in the case of Mrs X .
The Metropolitan Police brought the case on the basis that Mrs X had close links to an organised crime group, was laundering drug money, and had provided false explanations for cash seizures in two previous criminal proceedings. Mrs X maintained that these were her life savings, which she had withdrawn from the banks as a result of mental illness.
Edward successfully submitted that Mrs X should only forfeit monies derived from her admitted benefit fraud, which Mrs X had confessed to on oath. Accordingly, over £86,000 was ordered to be returned to her.
Edward was instructed by Simon Jowett of Gordon Shine Solicitors.

Dip Law
BA (Hons) (Cantab)

Fine Cell Work – Trustee and Deputy Chair
Release – Trustee
Judicial Appointments Commission Advocacy Group – co-opted from 2011-2015 as Bar Representative

Association of Regulatory & Disciplinary Lawyers
Bar Pro Bono Group
Criminal Bar Association Representative on Bar Council 2009-2014
Financial Services Lawyers Association
Proceeds of Crime Lawyers’ Association
Public Access Bar Association
South Eastern Circuit Executive 2006-2009

Spoke at LawNet Risk Management Seminar 2019.
Mr Henry spoke on “Criminal liability in Law firms: Money Laundering and the Criminal Finance Act – things that Law firms need to demonstrate.”

Edward Henry QC addressed the Law Officers’ Department in Saint Helier.
Edward Henry QC addressed the Law Officer’s Department in Saint Helier, Jersey on 12th June 2019 on medicinal cannabis investments and their status under the prevalent Anti-Money Laundering and Confiscation regimes.

Supreme Court rules sale of ‘grey-market’ good a criminal offence.
Edward Henry, led by Henry Blaxland QC and instructed by the Stokoe Partnership, appeared for the first appellant in this landmark test case for trademark owners. (R v M, C, T (2017)). The appellants were alleged to have imported and sold trademarked goods which had been legitimately manufactured outside the EU. Such alleged importation and sales were made without the trademark owners’ permission and this was unanimously ruled by the Court to be a criminal offence.

Edward Henry acts for Company Director in appeal against disqualification.
Acted for a company director in his appeal against a two year disqualification order imposed for contravention of The Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Regulations 2007. The appeal was successful and was quashed by the Court of Appeal.

The Equaliser: challenging cash forfeiture under POCA
Levelling the Balance of Probabilities in cash forfeiture

Cheating the public revenue (R v Lunn)
Should a series of tax cheats be charged as a single count or as a series of individual counts?

Examining deferred prosecution agreements – SFO and Rolls-Royce
Edward Henry argues that a widespread move towards entering into deferred prosecution agreements could result in a shift away from trials and open justice.

Edward Henry considers the High Court guidance on Wasted Cost Applications for Lexis Nexis
Edward Henry is interviewed by Lexis Nexis for their Lexis PSL Corporate Crime series on the implication of the decision in R v Cornish for wasted costs applications.

Edward Henry comments on NAO report on the criminal justice system.
Responding to the National Audit Office’s (NAO) report on efficiency in the criminal justice system, Edward Henry warns that the administration of justice—particularly criminal justice—is not a business and can never be run on narrow cost-centred imperatives.

Piercing the Corporate Veil.
Edward Henry examines the Court of Appeal’s decision in Boyle Transport (Northern Ireland) Ltd v R; Boyle and another v R that the judge made an error during confiscation proceedings in piercing the corporate veil and appointing an enforcement receiver.


Portfolio Builder

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

Download    Add to portfolio   
Title Type CV Email

Remove All


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