I am a Senior Consultant Solicitor, Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE), and specialist in litigation involving allegations of misconduct or criminality. My experience includes representing those charged with serious fraud, murder and extradition, as well as general criminal offences. I represent clients at all stages of criminal proceedings and in cases concerning complex, multi-jurisdictional proceedings.
I am a detail-oriented, tactical and proactive litigator and frequently provide bespoke, pre-emptive advice to clients who anticipate impending investigations.
I have a proven track record for successfully defending in heavy weight criminal matters and my work is primarily referred through personal recommendation.
My practice areas include:
AML and ABC Compliance
Private Hire Licensing Appeals
As a Certified Fraud Examiner, I am able to carry out internal investigations and advise individuals, businesses and charities on anti-money laundering (AML) and anti-bribery & corruption (ABC) due diligence and policy review, as well as represent them in substantive proceedings before the criminal courts. I can also assist with the prevention and detection of fraud and white collar crime.
I represent organisations in regulatory inquiries and assist those facing criminal liability. Where the case requires it, I will coordinate a team of lawyers representing individuals or organisations.
I have represented politicians, company directors, doctors, lawyers, accountants and other professionals who seek the best possible representation to robustly, but discretely, safeguard their reputations and careers. I have an excellent record of securing alternative disposals to prosecutions.
Please note that all reserved legal activities, including conducting litigation and representation at Court, is provided through firms authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (“SRA”), and with whom I consult.
WHAT OTHERS SAY
NCA v NA: Successfully represented accountant in allegations of money laundering, modern slavery and immigration offences, as well as cash seizure proceedings.
HMRC v GY & CY (Operation Fajita): Representing individuals in allegations of large scale evasion of duty excise on tobacco products, and discharge/variation of Account Freezing Orders.
R v HA & Others: Representing individuals in allegations of Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice, involving large number of fraudulently returned Notice of Intended Prosecution ("NIP") tickets.
R v AA & Others: Represented lead defendant in large-scale cyber fraud operation.
R v MG: Successful defence in allegations of vehicle finance fraud.
R v PF (Operation Spitz): MHRA prosecution concerning supply of unauthorised medicinal products.
R v RH & Others: Conspiracy to steal high value motor vehicles involving extensive use of cell site analysis and ANPR evidence (Operation Sherwin).
R v JP: Successfully represented television producer in allegations of historic, large value benefits fraud.
R v FR: Highly publicised death by dangerous driving.
R v DM: Successfully representing Solicitor accused of causing death by dangerous driving.
R v SH: Son accused of murdering his mother.
R v PK & Others: 38-handed conspiracy to supply firearms to undercover police officers in one of London’s largest undercover operations (Operation Peyzac).
R v MA: Successful defence in joint enterprise GBH.
R v NG: Robust defence of a 70 year old man in historic sexual abuse allegations, involving use of expert evidence of false and transferred memories. The prosecution were forced to discontinue their case.
R v RK: Represented Barclays bank 'insider' in fraud and money laundering conspiracy.
R v A: Successful defence of foreign MP alleged to have committed high value, historic benefits fraud. The case involved forensic analysis of bank accounts, legal arguments concerning 'ownership' of capital, and the instruction of prominent benefits experts.
DWP v P: Allegations of benefit fraud (undeclared work and capital) with the benefit overpayment amounting to c. £45k. A prosecution was avoided upon Abbas’ detailed written representations.
R v MR: Successful defence in allegations of possession with intent to supply high purity Class A drugs.
R v B & G: Successfully represented mother in ‘baby shaking’ allegations which included complex medical and legal arguments concerning causation.
R v O & O: Represented mother acquitted of 'baby shaking' allegations.
Sweden v SA: Extradition accusation warrant pertaining to large scale tax fraud.
Czech Republic v RB: European arrest warrant (EAW) issued by the Czech Republic in respect of fraud allegations from 2006. Extradition refused, finding that surrender would be oppressive, and an exceptionally severe interference with private and family life rights; as protected by Article 8 of the ECHR.
ML v Italy: Divisional Court appeal relating to whether the requesting state has flagrantly breached the Appellant’s fair trial rights under article 6 ECHR by convicting the Appellant at first instance while he was legitimately defending extradition proceedings.
R (SA) v HM Coroner for Bridgend (South Wales): Representing the family of the deceased in a Judicial Review of the Coroner’s decision to order an invasive post-mortem based on arguments that the interference with the deceased’s body offended Convention rights, including the fundamental tenants of the religious beliefs of the family and the deceased. The case involved detailed consideration of the alternatives to an invasive post-mortem, including the use of CT/MRI scans, toxicological analysis and external examination.
GPhC v ZH: An appeal to the High Court concerning allegations heard by the GPhC Fitness to Practice Committee following a BBC Undercover Operation.
IM v TFL: Successful appeal to the Central Criminal Court against TFL's decision to revoke private hire licence.