The secure CJSM email is:
Bernadette’s practice focuses on immigration, asylum, and public law challenges. She has been involved in numerous complex and long-running cases. She accepts direct access instructions and is committed to representing publicly funded clients. She regularly delivers training.
She also has experience in criminal law, family law, housing law, regulatory law and international law.
Before coming to the bar, Bernadette volunteered in immigration and housing for two and a half years at Lambeth Law Centre. She also provided outreach immigration advice to a domestic violence charity and volunteered as a restorative justice panel leader.
She is a trustee of Evolve – Foundation for International Legal Assistance and has been involved in its ongoing work, preparing written submissions for criminal appeals and re-sentencing in Uganda.
Bernadette has been ranked as a leading junior in the Legal 500 for the last four years, most recently in Tier 1: “She … is a first point of call for cases involving vulnerable clients”.
Immigration & asylum
Bernadette advises and represents in the First-tier Tribunal, Upper Tribunal, Court of Appeal in appeals involving immigration, asylum and human rights, Article 8 ECHR, deportation, EEA applications, entry clearance, nationality law including deprivation of citizenship, domestic violence, unaccompanied children and business and immigration law. Bernadette can also advise and draft challenges to refusals that attract a right of administrative review. She also advises and acts in judicial review in this area.
Bernadette can accept instructions directly from members of the public who wish to make investor, entrepreneur, student, entry clearance and family reunion visa applications. She can assist at all stages of the application.
Having gained extensive experience of criminal law during pupillage, her cross over knowledge and expertise in criminal defence is valuable in deportation cases.
Cases
- XE, LE, FE v Secretary of State for the Home Department PA/05693/2019: This long running trafficking case was resolved after the UT accepted the FtT had acted in a procedurally unfair way and remitted the case for reconsideration. Medical evidence could not be simply disregarded where a medical expert had not seen “all relevant” evidence where the evidence they had seen was comprehensive and any missing information was de minimus.
- MU v Secretary of State for the Home Department DA/00430/2017: The EEA Appellant was convicted of death by dangerous driving and sentenced to six years. She did not have permanent residence. Where the risk of reoffending was associated with driving an appellant could not be a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat if banned from driving and expressing an intention to never drive again. The UT accepted the FtTJ was entitled to come to the conclusion about risk taking into account the meaning of medium risk of harm explained in the OASys.
- AB v Secretary of State for the Home Department HU/16552/2017: Bernadette appeared as junior counsel in this successful complex deportation appeal, allowed under Article 3 ECHR.
- TA v Secretary of State for the Home Department HU/27666/2016: The appellant argued that it was an irrelevant factor when considering whether she had been trafficked, that she had chosen not to be referred through the NRM process, particularly when she had concerns about being dispersed because she was trying to maintain her accommodation to avoid disrupting her children’s lives.
- TK v Secretary of State for the Home DepartmentPA/08157/2016: The appellant claimed asylum from India, the basis of which was religious persecution, after successfully judicially reviewing the SSHD’s decision to certify TK’s claim.
- FA & six others v Secretary of State for the Home Department HU/11128/2016: It was material the SSHD only provided verification reports in respect of two of the appellants and the reports that were provided were unreferenced and unsupported by further evidence, leading to procedural unfairness. The appeals in this family reunion case were allowed.
- AB (British citizenship: deprivation; Deliallisi considered) Nigeria [2016] UKUT 451: Bernadette acted as junior counsel in this reported case concerning deprivation of citizenship appeals.
Pro bono
Bernadette has regularly done pro bono work for immigration clients.
Public law & judicial review
Bernadette acts for clients in judicial review proceedings in both the immigration tribunal and the Administrative Court in all areas of immigration and asylum law, such as refusals of further submissions and unlawful detention.
She is also able to accept instructions in non-immigration related matters.
Bernadette is able to accept instructions for emergency injunctions and to act at short notice to challenge decisions for removal or deportation.
Cases
- R (on the application of HM); R (on the application of MA and KH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWHC 2729 (Admin): Judgment considering the consequences of the decisions made by the Court in R(HM) [2022] EWHC 695 including the Secretary of State for the Home Department’s breach of the duty of candour and the extent of the obligation to provide further information to potential claimant’s affected by the SSHD’s unlawful seizure of their mobile phones.
- R (on the application of HM) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (on the application of MA and another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Privacy International intervening) [2022] EWHC 695: This was a case which concerned the Home Office’s operation of a secret policy whereby officers were to search all migrants arriving by small boat to the UK, to seize and retain their phones without allowing access to the contents, and to download all data under a secret, blanket policy until November 2020. Significant concessions were made prior to the hearing and the Court further held that there was no lawful basis to search migrants and seize their phones on a blanket basis under the provisions used by the Home Office under para.25B, schedule 2 of the Immigration Act 1971 and s.48 of the Immigration Act 2016.
- R (on the application of TLJ) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2016): This was a challenge to a decision of the SSHD not to recognise that TLJ, a Jamaican, had acquired indefinite leave to remain by virtue of being settled in the UK on 1st January 1973. TLJ was only able provide documentary evidence dating back to September 1973. He filled in the gaps in documentary evidence with witness statements from family members. The SSHD had not retained entry clearance or any other records. The SSHD initially refused the application on the basis that the witness statements were not acceptable documentary evidence but eventually accepted the evidence and withdrew objections to the challenge.
- TK v Secretary of State for the Home Department JR/7045/2015: Permission was granted at an oral renewal hearing for permission in a case the Judge on the papers considered to be a “fishing expedition”. However, despite the seemingly weak facts of the case the Appellant should be allowed time to provide evidence to substantiate his case and certification was indicated to be unlawful in those circumstances.
Family
Bernadette has experience acting for vulnerable clients in the family courts and is able to accept instructions in a range of areas, including contact and residence, care proceedings, ancillary relief and cases with a domestic violence element.
Languages
- Spanish (pre-intermediate).
Legal Directories
‘ She has a tremendous success rate with the most difficult of cases and is a first point of call for cases involving vulnerable clients. ’
Legal 500 2022
“Bernadette is accessible and engaged throughout the preparation period, her knowledge in immigration and asylum matters is excellent, she is creative, very bright, and her input is invaluable.”
LEGAL 500 2021
“A people’s barrister, with empathy and making sure clients are comfortable.”
LEGAL 500 2020