The secure CJSM email is:
Anna has a busy and varied practice. This allows her to maintain real expertise across multiple areas of law and in different forums from the First-tier Tribunal and County Court up to the Court of Appeal. Her cross-cutting knowledge means that no aspect of her client’s situation is overlooked. She is approachable to clients and clearly explains her legal advice. In court she is persuasive and is able to respond with agility as a hearing develops, because of her thorough grasp of the law and careful preparation.
Anna joined 1MCB as a tenant in 2009 after successfully completing her pupillage in chambers. She is committed to chambers’ ethos of ensuring that all members of society can enjoy access to justice through first-class representation. She therefore accepts instructions from legally aided clients and particularly prides herself on ensuring vulnerable clients have the best possible experience of the justice system.
Before coming to the Bar she both worked at a leading immigration & human rights solicitors’ firm (Wesley Gryk LLP) and volunteered with Camden Community Law Centre, the Immigration Advisory Service and the Free Representation Unit. She continues to undertake pro bono work for Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID) and the Hackney Winter Night Shelter legal clinic.
She accepts instructions on a direct public access basis in appropriate cases.
Anna practises housing law with a particular emphasis on representing tenants in social or private housing.
She is frequently instructed in possession cases and has successfully defended all types of claim: from those brought on grounds of rent/mortgage arrears to those where anti-social behaviour is alleged or where there is little security of tenure. Her clients benefit from her sound knowledge of welfare benefits law as she also represents claimants in the First-tier and Upper Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber). She is instructed in disrepair claims and those involving unlawful eviction and harassment.
Anna is also a recognised expert in homelessness matters. She is the author of Chapter 1, ‘Homelessness’ in LexisNexis’ online textbook ‘Social Housing Law in Practice’. She is instructed in County Court appeals but also acts in judicial review matters, including obtaining urgent interim relief when necessary. Because of her immigration law expertise, Anna is especially well placed to advise on disputes concerning eligibility for homelessness or housing assistance.
Anna represented Ms Tuitt in the Court of Appeal in an appeal against an outright possession order made because of the anti-social behaviour of her 17 year old son. Although the Court of Appeal upheld the possession order, Anna was ultimately able to persuade the County Court to vary that order, allowing Ms Tuitt to remain in her home of 25 years.
Viridian Housing v TJ (2015) – County Court
Anna was able to successfully defend a possession claim where the tenant’s housing benefit was stopped for almost one year causing arrears of thousands of pounds to accrue. The housing benefit authority had refused TJ’s claim because it did not accept that he had the necessary immigration status. Anna’s dual expertise in immigration law came to the fore in arguing her client’s case. Working with two colleagues in chambers and the team at Lambeth Law Centre, TJ was able to demonstrate that he had indefinite leave to remain in the UK – despite the absence of a document from the Home Office confirming the same – and his housing benefit claim was back-dated allowing him to clear all the arrears.
Southwark LBC v GB and MC (2015) – County Court and High Court (Admin)
Anna successfully defended a possession claim brought against a vulnerable care-leaver who was accused of unlawful sub-letting. By an additional claim in the proceedings Anna’s client was able to regain access to his home after he had been ousted by a former friend.
In concurrent proceedings Anna was able to obtain an urgent out of hours injunction to secure temporary accommodation under the Housing Act 1996 for her client when he became street homelessness while still excluded from his home.
Anna represented Ms Brooks in this important case (discussed on ‘Nearly Legal’ blog here) in which the High Court examined the circumstances in which the duty to provide accommodation pending enquiries, under section 188 of the Housing Act 1996, comes to an end and the circumstances in which a local authority can be said to have performed the duty. Anna obtained interim injunctive relief which meant that Ms Brooks and her two daughters no longer had to sleep in their van.
Anna is able to advise and represent clients in community care matters under the Care Act 2014 or the Children Act 1989, including cases where her client has ‘no recourse to public funds’.
Anna has wide experience of other property litigation particularly landlord and tenant matters. She accepts instructions in disputes concerning leasehold property (especially forfeiture), disputes over business leases governed by the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, TOLATA matters and in boundary disputes.
Because of her experience of civil litigation, Anna is also instructed in a variety of other civil claims including contractual disputes and debt claims.
Immigration & asylum
Anna acts for applicants, both private and publicly funded, in immigration and asylum matters. She regularly appears in the First-tier and Upper Tribunal for appeals, in the High Court and Upper Tribunal in judicial review matters and has appeared in the Court of Appeal.
Having worked at a leading immigration solicitors firm, Wesley Gryk LLP, before coming to the Bar she has experience of the full spectrum of immigration cases including: asylum (she has particular expertise in claims brought by Ahmadi Muslims and those based on sexual orientation) deportation, human rights claims, EU law cases, entry clearance, applications under the points-based scheme (including cases effected by the ETS scandal) and nationality matters.
Anna has particular experience in cases involving unlawful immigration detention and volunteers as a pro bono advocate for Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID).
In addition, Anna is often able to use her knowledge of immigration law to enhance her practice in other areas for example when advising non-UK nationals about their entitlements under social security or housing law
- MAA (Sudan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CO/2015/1868 Anna obtained permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal in a Sudanese asylum claim which raised issues as to the application of the Upper Tribunal’s country guidance and the meaning of ‘persecution’ in the Refugee Convention. Appeal allowed by consent;
- NS (Angola) v Secretary of State for the Home Department C5/2013/3157 Anna obtained permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal in a complex EU law revocation appeal where the Secretary of State had sought to avoid implementing the outcome of an earlier appeal by purporting to make a fresh decision to revoke NS’s residence card. Appeal allowed by consent;
- R (on the application of Deep) v Upper Tribunal (IAC) CO/723/2014 In a rare ‘Cart’ type judicial review of the refusal of the Upper Tribunal to grant permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, Anna was granted permission by the High Court. The case involved a points based scheme appeal and raised a point of wider public importance concerning the proper ambit the Upper
- Philipson (ILR- not PBS: evidence)  UKUT 00039 Anna represented Ms Philipson when the Home Office refused to grant her indefinite leave to remain. She was a work-permit holder, working in the UK as a care worker. The Upper Tribunal allowed the appellant’s appeal and cast doubt on the fairness of the Home Office decision. The Tribunal also gave guidance on how considerations under Article 8 of the ECHR should be approached in such cases;
- Ferrer (Limited appeal grounds; Alvi)  UKUT 00304 (IAC) Anna represented Ms Ferrer in a second case involving a care worker, to whom the Home Office refused indefinite leave to remain. Allowing the appeal the Upper Tribunal considered the implications of the Supreme Court case of R (on the application of Alvi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department. The Upper Tribunal discussed the proper method for interpreting provisions in the immigration rules holding that where the provisions in question are ambiguous then it is legitimate to interpret them by assuming that parliament is unlikely to have sanctioned rules which treat a limited class of persons unfairly and disclose no policy reason for that unfairness. The Upper Tribunal also gave guidance on procedural matters.
- Diploma in French – University of Cambridge (2001)
- BA (Hons) History – Clare College, University of Cambridge (2002)
- Graduate Diploma in Law (Distinction) – City University (2006)
- Bar Vocational Course – College of Law (2007)
- Inner Temple Exhibition
- Inner Temple City University Prize
- Foundation Scholarship (Clare College)
Hobbies & interests
- Hill walking and trekking
- Travel, particularly to India where she has volunteered for a development charity based in Tamil Nadu
- Assistant Explorer Scout Leader
Contributing author: ‘Social Housing Law in Practice’ (2016 – LexisNexis’ online textbook).