Julian Blake

Julian has a broad public law and public international law practice spanning the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. He advises governments, corporations and individuals on judicial review challenges, draft and final legislation and challenges to the decisions of ombudsmen, regulators and other public authorities.

Examples of Julian’s work in this field includes the following:

• R (Good Law Project Ltd) v Prime Minister. Julian appeared for the Prime Minister and Department for Health and Social Care in this challenge to the appointments of Dame Kate Bingham, Baroness Harding and Mr Mike Coupe to healthcare roles during the Covid-19 Pandemic.
• British Airways, easyJet and Ryanair v Secretary of State for Health . Julian appeared for the Secretary of State in this challenge to the COVID-19 ‘quarantine’ provisions in the Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel) Regulations 2020.
• Serdar Mohammed v Ministry of Defence . Julian appeared in the Supreme Court on behalf of the Ministry of Defence in this case concerning the detention of a suspected Taliban commander in Afghanistan.
• Rahmatullah v Ministry of Defence . Julian appeared in the Supreme Court on behalf of the Ministry of Defence in in this case concerning the transfer of a Pakistani national captured by British forces in Iraq.
• Bancoult v Foreign and Commonwealth Office (No.4). Julian appeared in the Supreme Court on behalf of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in a case concerning the resettlement of the Chagos Islanders.
• Bank Mellat v HM Treasury. Julian acted for the Treasury for six years in this long running litigation concerning financial restrictions on a bank and measures against the Iranian financial system.
• AZ (Syria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department. Julian represented the Secretary of State as sole counsel in a challenge to the refusal of a refugee travel document following an assessment that the claimant would travel to Syria and was a risk to UK national security.
• MAB v Secretary of State for the Home Department. Julian represented the Secretary of State as sole counsel in a challenge to the refusal of refugee status on the basis that the applicant had been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
• Gubarev v Buzzfeed. Julian represented the Foreign and Commonwealth Office as sole counsel in the application made by Christopher Steele to set aside an order requesting his evidence in connection with the ‘Trump dossier’.
• R (David Miranda) v Secretary of State for the Home Department. Julian represented the Secretary of State in this challenge to the use of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000. The case concerned the partner of Glen Greenwald who was detained in connection with the material taken by Edward Snowden.

In addition to Julian’s general public law practice, he also regularly appears in public inquiries. (see the ‘Inquests and Inquiries’ section below).

Julian also regularly acts in challenges against regulators and ombudsmen. He has acted in matters concerning the Financial Ombudsman Service, the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner, the Information Commissioner and MedCo.

Julian has particular expertise in inquests and inquiries work and has a broad range of experience. Examples of his work includes:

The COVID-19 Inquiry
Julian acts on behalf of the Office of the Chief Medical Officer, including Professor Sir Chris Whitty, Professor Sir Jonathan Van Tam and Professor Dame Jenny Harries. Julian is also instructed separately on behalf of former Chief Medical Officer, Professor Dame Sally Davies.

The Post Office Horizon Inquiry
Julian acts as Counsel to the Inquiry in this statutory Inquiry established to gather a clear account of the implementation and failings of the Horizon IT system at the Post Office.

Dawn Sturgess Inquiry
Julian has been instructed in the Inquiry into the death of Dawn Sturgess arising from the poisoning of Sergei Skripal in Salisbury.

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry
Julian acted for the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy in this public inquiry into the circumstances leading up to and surrounding the fire at Grenfell Tower on the night of 14 June 2017.

The Brook House Inquiry
Julian was lead counsel for the Home Office in this inquiry into the mistreatment of detainees at Brook House Immigration Removal Centre which followed an undercover Panorama documentary.

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse
Julian acted for a local authority and a group of charitable and religious organisations in this long running inquiry into child sexual abuse.

The Infected Blood Inquiry
Julian acted for a range of Trustees of the Alliance House Organisations (charitable trusts that supported the victims of infected blood) and professional advisors to the Organisations.

MA & BB v Secretary of State for the Home Department
Julian represented the Home Office in this leading case on the investigative requirements contained within Article 3 ECHR.

Miah v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care
Julian represented the Secretary of State in this challenge by the family of a victim of necrophiliac David Fuller who were seeking a statutory public inquiry to investigate the circumstances relating to his prolific offending.

Inquest into the death of Ella Kissi-Debrah
Julian appeared in this ground-breaking inquest into the death of a young child suffering from asthma. It is the first Article 2 ECHR inquest to examine the role of air pollution as a cause of death.

Inquest into the death of Sudesh Amman
Julian represented the Metropolitan Police in this Inquest into the death of man who was fatally shot by the Police in the course of a terrorist attack in Streatham High Street in February 2020.

Inquest into the death of Osman Ahmednur
Julian appeared for a local authority in this inquest into the death of a young asylum seeker. The inquest addressed issues concerning a ‘suicide cluster’ of young Eritrean asylum seekers.

Inquest into the death of Naser Ahmed
Julian acted for a local authority in this inquest into the death of a child at school following an allergic reaction. The inquest brought to national attention issues surrounding the use of an epi- pen.

With a background in criminal litigation and national security matters Julian is also experienced at advising in connection with the privilege against self-incrimination (and seeking undertakings from the Attorney General) and the use of sensitive material before inquests and inquires.

Julian has a wide-ranging background in matters relating to Information Technology. In line with Chambers’ leading ranking in proceedings under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA) Julian regularly acts in data law disputes involving the technology sector. He also regularly advises tech companies on issues concerning surveillance, the Computer Misuse Act 1990 and other issues concerning bulk data collection.

In recognition of his expertise in this field Julian is currently Counsel to the Inquiry in the Horizon Post Office IT Inquiry, a statutory inquiry into matters relating to bugs, errors and defects in the Horizon system.

Julian has substantial experience in matters relating to the media, including contempt of court, data protection, privacy and information law. He regularly advises and appears on behalf of individuals, the government and corporations before the High Court, County Court and Tribunals.

Examples of his work in this field include:

Gubarev v Buzzfeed – letter of request in US defamation proceedings concerning publication of Christopher Steele’s “Trump dossier”.

David Miranda v Home Secretary – judicial review of the use of terrorism powers to seize journalistic material.

Attorney General v Hartley – acting for the Attorney General in this contempt of court case concerning the publication on YouTube of information relating to family court proceedings. The case defined the procedure by which such proceedings should be brought.

Rivers v Chief Constable of Surrey and Others – acting for a barrister who faced proceedings for contempt of court brought by a claimant to judicial review proceedings.

Operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta – acting for a defendant media company in matters concerning the criminal investigation into phone hacking, corruption and misuse of private information.

See below for further information on Julian’s work in Information Law (covering the Data Protection Regulation, Data Protection Act 2018, and Freedom of Information Act 2000).

Julian is an experienced practitioner in proceedings under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA) and Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). He has appeared in several of the leading appeals before the Upper Tribunal and advises individuals, corporations and governments on information rights issues and disputes.

The most recent edition of Legal 500 recommends Julian as a Leading Junior and describes his practice as follows: “He has an enormous breadth of experience and understanding of a rapidly developing field and is very switched on.”

Examples of his work in this field include:

• Re: A global technology company – Advising and making submissions to the ICO in respect of a Monetary Penalty Notice issued to a social media platform.
• Various Claimants v Newham– Representing a local authority in a claim brought by a large number of individuals affected by the inadvertent disclosure of the ‘Gangs Matrix’.
• Re: A FTSE 100 Executive – Advising a prominent executive in relation to a claim under the DPA and the right to be forgotten in relation to Google search results.
• Re: A Subject Access Request – Advising a leading private client law firm on a complex DPA subject access request made by a longstanding client.
• ICO v Woodgate & Clark Ltd – ICO prosecution for offences of unlawfully obtaining personal data.
• All Party Parliamentary Group of Extraordinary Rendition v FCO – FOIA appeal about rendition and detention in Guantanamo Bay.
• Savic v Attorney General and Cabinet Office – FOIA appeal about the Attorney General’s advice on military action in Kosovo.
• Rights Watch UK v Attorney General and Cabinet Office – FOIA appeal about the deaths of two British nationals in a Syria drone strike.

Julian has a burgeoning healthcare practice as a result of his expertise in related fields, in particular public law, public inquiries and inquests.

This has resulted in his instruction to represent the Office of the Chief Medical Officer in the COVID-19 Inquiry. In this role he represents Professor Sir Chris Whitty, Professor Sir Jonathan Van Tam and Professor Dame Jenny Harries. Julian is also instructed on behalf of former Chief Medical Officer, Professor Dame Sally Davies.

Julian regularly acts for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in matters as wide ranging as judicial reviews seeking to challenge a failure to instigate an inquiry (Miah v Secretary of State, concerning the activities of necrophiliac David Fuller) to challenges to the COVID-19 Regulations (Francis v Secretary of State). Julian also acts for the NHS, including in relation to alleged breaches of data protection legislation.

Julian’s commercial practice has a strong focus on sanctions, advising companies, individuals and governments on potential liabilities as well as challenges to listings and financial restrictions measures. He was instructed for several years in the long running Bank Mellat litigation, including the $4bn damages claim in the Commercial Court and multiple appearances in appellate courts.

In its recommendation, Chambers and Partners 2019 cited Julian’s work “ in significant PIL cases including challenges against the imposition of financial sanctions”.

Because of Julian’s background in public international law he is also regularly called upon to act and advise in matters concerning the taking of evidence for use in foreign proceedings, including under the Hague Convention and the Evidence (Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions Act) 1975. This includes:

• Gubarev v Buzzfeed [2018] EWHC 1201 (QB) – Request by a Florida Court for the examination of Christopher Steele concerning the Trump
• Lodestar v Bacardi – Request by a California Court for documentary evidence and examination of witnesses concerning a trademark
• Bank Mellat v HM Treasury – Requests under Council Regulation (EC) 1206 (to a German Bank) and CPR Part 34.13 (to a Malaysian Bank).

Julian also regularly advises on matters concerning disclosure of commercially or legally sensitive material and has managed large disclosure exercises on behalf of corporate and government clients.

Julian is also experienced in sensitive corporate investigations. This includes being instructed for over 12 months by a multinational media company in relation to an internal investigation into allegations of interception of communications, corruption and misuse of private information. Julian’s criminal practice makes him well placed to advise on issues where both commercial and potential criminal liabilities overlap.

For the first decade of Julian’s career, he appeared regularly in the Crown Court, both prosecuting and defending. He has subsequently developed a niche criminal practice, concentrating on public law challenges to corporate criminal investigations, data protection offences and other complex matters relating to the criminal justice system.

Examples of his work in this filed include:

ICO v Woodgate & Clark Ltd – ICO prosecution for offences of unlawfully obtaining personal data.

R v Timothy Power – insider trading by an executive of Belgo Restaurants.

Revell Read v SFO – Britain’s biggest boiler room fraud.

Roberts v United Kingdom – ECHR challenge to jury impartiality.

Julian also acts in other matters relating to criminal justice more broadly, including inquests into the death of prisoners, challenges to prison categorisations and complex criminal appeals. He was an author of EU Law in Criminal Practice (Oxford University Press) and has acted as a practitioner editor of Blackstone’s Criminal Practice.