Julian reached national attention as Counsel to the Inquiry in the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry, with The Times praising his “firm but polite cross-examination”. In recognition of this work, as well as his representation of the Chief Medical Officer in the Covid-19 Inquiry and other prominent inquests and inquiries, he was awarded the Junior of the Year award by Chambers and Partners.

He has been consistently recommended in all the leading directories, with the most recent edition of Chambers and Partners commenting: “His advocacy is phenomenal, and he has perfect judgement. Julian really is the real deal”.

Julian acts in a wide range of public law, information, media and technology (IMT) law, healthcare law and commercial law fields. As an experienced member of the Attorney General’s ‘A’ Panel of Counsel, Julian has been involved in some of the Government’s most complex and sensitive cases, including in several challenges before the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. As set out in the Expertise section below, he has appeared in cases as varied as challenges to detention by UK forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, the resettlement of the Chagos Islanders, the leading financial sanctions challenge and a data breach involving one of the world’s largest tech companies.

  • Quotation symbolHe is an exceptional advocate, who is highly persuasive and articulate. He presents complex legal arguments clearly and precisely.

    Quotation symbolChambers & Partners

  • Quotation symbolJulian is an impressive and forceful advocate with a commanding presence.

    Quotation symbolChambers & Partners

  • Quotation symbolHis advocacy is phenomenal, and he has perfect judgement. Julian really is the real deal.

    Quotation symbolChambers & Partners

Expertise

TogglePublic and Public International

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.

Quotation symbol

  • Julian is an impressive and forceful advocate with a commanding presence.

    Chambers & Partners

  • He has a first-class mind and his drafting is excellent. He is also great at instructing clients. He is clearly one of the leading public law juniors at the Bar.

    Legal 500 2023

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. Bank Mellat v HM Treasury

    [2015] EWHC 1258 (Comm), [2015] EWCA Civ 1052, [2016] EWCA Civ 452

    Instructed in both the application to set aside financial restriction decisions and the $4bn civil damages claim resulting from the earlier proceedings.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. Gubarev v Buzzfeed

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

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

  11. Gubarev v Buzzfeed

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Request by a Florida Court for the examination of Christopher Steele concerning the Trump Dossier

  12. R (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.

Download Public CV

ToggleInquests and Public Inquiries

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.

Quotation symbol

  • Julian is an impressive and forceful advocate with a commanding presence.

    Chambers & Partners

  • His advocacy is phenomenal, and he has perfect judgement. Julian really is the real deal.

    Chambers & Partners

  • Julian Blake is great. He is a real professional and knows inquiry law inside out.

    Chambers & Partners

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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.

Download Inquests & Inquiries CV

ToggleIndependent Investigations

In addition to Julian’s expertise in public inquiries, he is regularly instructed to conduct private and highly sensitive investigations. Examples of his work in this area include:

Investigation into the provision of false evidence to the High Court and Investigatory Powers Tribunal in relation to Agent X
Lead Counsel in this investigation into the circumstances resulting in the provision of false evidence to the High Court and the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in proceedings connected to ‘Agent X’. This investigation was ordered by the Prime Minister.

Investigation into the Gigabit Broadband Voucher Scheme by Building Digital UK
Instructed by Building Digital UK, an executive agency of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to carry out an investigation into the obtaining of circa £1m grants paid to a provider of Gigabit Broadband services.

  1. Investigation into the provision of false evidence to the High Court and Investigatory Powers Tribunal in relation to Agent X

    Lead Counsel in this investigation into the circumstances resulting in the provision of false evidence to the High Court and the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in proceedings connected to ‘Agent X’. This investigation was ordered by the Prime Minister.

  2. Investigation into the Gigabit Broadband Voucher Scheme by Building Digital UK

    Instructed by Building Digital UK, an executive agency of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to carry out an investigation into the obtaining of circa £1m grants paid to a provider of Gigabit Broadband services.

Download Independent Investigations CV

ToggleTechnology and Computer Misuse

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 advises tech companies on issues concerning surveillance, the Computer Misuse Act 1990 and other issues concerning bulk data collection.

In respect of computer misuse, Julian has advised AI, data analytics and crypto companies as well as others in respect of issues relating to criminal liability. He is one of a small number of barristers practicing in this field.

In recognition of his expertise in matters relating to technology Julian was instructed as 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.

Quotation symbol

  • Julian is a truly outstanding advocate with compelling written work. He has an ability to block out the noise and laser in on the nub of the issue. He has a clear understanding of commercial reality.

    Chambers & Partners

  • Julian is a very able and highly personable advocate with incisive judgement and good humour.

    Chambers & Partners

  • He is an exceptional advocate, who is highly persuasive and articulate. He presents complex legal arguments clearly and precisely.

    Chambers & Partners

  • One of the few barristers in the data protection field who offers expertise in both the regulatory and black letter law fields of information law

    Legal 500 2022

  1. Rights Watch UK v Attorney General and Cabinet Office

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    FOIA appeal about the deaths of two British nationals in a Syria drone strike.

  2. Savic v Attorney General and Cabinet Office

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    FOIA appeal about the Attorney General’s advice on military action in Kosovo.

  3. All Party Parliamentary Group of Extraordinary Rendition v FCO

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    FOIA appeal about rendition and detention in Guantanamo Bay.

  4. Re: A Subject Access Request 

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Advising a leading private client law firm on a complex DPA subject access request made by a longstanding client.

  5. Re: A FTSE 100 Executive

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Advising a prominent executive in relation to a claim under the DPA and the right to be forgotten in relation to Google search results.

  6. Various Claimants v Newham

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Representing a local authority in a claim brought by a large number of individuals affected by the inadvertent disclosure of the ‘Gangs Matrix’.

  7. Re: A global technology company

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Advising and making submissions to the ICO in respect of a Monetary Penalty Notice issued to a social media platform.

  8. ICO v Woodgate & Clark Ltd

    N/A

    ICO prosecution for offences of unlawfully obtaining personal data.

Download Information, Technology & Media CV

ToggleMedia, Privacy and Contempt

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).

Quotation symbol

  • Julian is a truly outstanding advocate with compelling written work. He has an ability to block out the noise and laser in on the nub of the issue. He has a clear understanding of commercial reality.

    Chambers & Partners

  • Julian is a very able and highly personable advocate with incisive judgement and good humour.

    Chambers & Partners

  • He is an exceptional advocate, who is highly persuasive and articulate. He presents complex legal arguments clearly and precisely.

    Chambers & Partners

  • One of the few barristers in the data protection field who offers expertise in both the regulatory and black letter law fields of information law

    Legal 500 2022

  1. Gubarev v Buzzfeed

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

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

  2. Gubarev v Buzzfeed

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Request by a Florida Court for the examination of Christopher Steele concerning the Trump Dossier

  3. Miranda v Home Secretary

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    judicial review of the use of terrorism powers to seize journalistic material.

  4. Attorney General v Hartley

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    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.

  5. Attorney General v Hartley

    [2021] EWHC 1876 (Fam), [2021] 1 WLR 6013

    Instructed by the Attorney General in contempt of court proceedings in the Family Division. This judgment is a Practice Note in the making of contempt applications after the conclusion of proceedings. The contempt involved the publication on social media of information relating to proceedings that were heard in private.

  6. Rivers v Chief Constable of Surrey and Others

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    acting for a barrister who faced proceedings for contempt of court brought by a claimant to judicial review proceedings.

  7. Operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

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

Download Information, Technology & Media CV

ToggleInformation and Data Law

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 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.

Quotation symbol

  • Julian is a truly outstanding advocate with compelling written work. He has an ability to block out the noise and laser in on the nub of the issue. He has a clear understanding of commercial reality.

    Chambers & Partners

  • Julian is a very able and highly personable advocate with incisive judgement and good humour.

    Chambers & Partners

  • He is an exceptional advocate, who is highly persuasive and articulate. He presents complex legal arguments clearly and precisely.

    Chambers & Partners

  • One of the few barristers in the data protection field who offers expertise in both the regulatory and black letter law fields of information law

    Legal 500 2022

  1. Re: A global technology company

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Advising and making submissions to the ICO in respect of a Monetary Penalty Notice issued to a social media platform.

  2. Various Claimants v Newham

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Representing a local authority in a claim brought by a large number of individuals affected by the inadvertent disclosure of the ‘Gangs Matrix’.

  3. Re: A FTSE 100 Executive

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Advising a prominent executive in relation to a claim under the DPA and the right to be forgotten in relation to Google search results.

  4. Re: A Subject Access Request 

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Advising a leading private client law firm on a complex DPA subject access request made by a longstanding client.

  5. ICO v Woodgate & Clark Ltd

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    ICO prosecution for offences of unlawfully obtaining personal data.

  6. ICO v Woodgate & Clark Ltd

    N/A

    ICO prosecution for offences of unlawfully obtaining personal data.

  7. All Party Parliamentary Group of Extraordinary Rendition v FCO

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    FOIA appeal about rendition and detention in Guantanamo Bay.

  8. Savic v Attorney General and Cabinet Office

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    FOIA appeal about the Attorney General’s advice on military action in Kosovo.

  9. Rights Watch UK v Attorney General and Cabinet Office

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    FOIA appeal about the deaths of two British nationals in a Syria drone strike.

Download Information, Technology & Media CV

ToggleHealthcare

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.

Download Health & Community Care CV

ToggleCommercial Litigation

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 Dossier
  • 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.

  1. Gubarev v Buzzfeed

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

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

  2. Lodestar v Bacardi

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Request by a California Court for documentary evidence and examination of witnesses concerning a trademark

  3. Bank Mellat v HM Treasury

    [2015] EWHC 1258 (Comm), [2015] EWCA Civ 1052, [2016] EWCA Civ 452

    Instructed in both the application to set aside financial restriction decisions and the $4bn civil damages claim resulting from the earlier proceedings.

Download Commercial Litigation CV

ToggleCorporate Crime & Criminal Justice

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.

Quotation symbol

  • The advantage he has is that he is bringing in the perspective of criminal and regulatory knowledge. You can pick up the phone and bounce ideas off him any time, and he’s an extremely user-friendly barrister.

    Chambers and Partners 2022

  • One of very few barristers who has a deep understanding of both criminal and civil litigation, experience which he deftly brings to bear in the field of data protection litigation.

    Legal 500 2021

  1. ICO v Woodgate & Clark Ltd

    N/A

    ICO prosecution for offences of unlawfully obtaining personal data.

  2. R v Timothy Power

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    insider trading by an executive of Belgo Restaurants.

  3. Revell Read v SFO

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    Britain’s biggest boiler room fraud.

  4. Roberts v United Kingdom

    2008 EWHC 1583 (QB)

    ECHR challenge to jury impartiality.

Download Corporate Crime & Criminal Justice CV

ToggleRecent cases

   

  1. HB v Secretary of State for Business and Trade & Ors

    [2025] EWHC 3205 (KB)

    Instructed by Lord Kim Darroch, the former Ambassador to the United States, in a case concerning an allegation of misfeasance in public office and various breaches of ECHR and data protection rights. The claimant was a former civil servant who had been arrested in connection with allegations concerning the leaking of diplomatic cables. The claim was successfully struck out.

  2. R (on the application of Good Law Project Ltd) v Prime Minister

    [2022] EWHC 298 (Admin)

    Instructed by the Department for Health and Social Care and the Prime Minister in this challenge to the appointments of Dame Kate Bingham, Baroness Harding and Mr Mike Coupe to healthcare roles during the Covid-19 Pandemic. This is a key case concerning standing in judicial review proceedings as well as matters of discrimination and the PSED.

  3. Attorney General v Hartley

    [2021] EWHC 1876 (Fam), [2021] 1 WLR 6013

    Instructed by the Attorney General in contempt of court proceedings in the Family Division. This judgment is a Practice Note in the making of contempt applications after the conclusion of proceedings. The contempt involved the publication on social media of information relating to proceedings that were heard in private.

  4. Gubarev & Others v Buzzfeed

    [2018] EWHC 512 (QB)

    Instructed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to intervene in the application made by Christopher Steele to set aside an order requesting that he give oral evidence pursuant to a letter of request from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The case concerns defamation proceedings arising from the publication of the “Trump Dossier”.

  5. R (on the application of AZ) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

    [2017] EWCA Civ 35

    Instructed in a challenge to the refusal of a refugee travel document following an assessment that the claimant would travel to Syria. The Court of Appeal recently handed down judgment supporting the Secretary of State’s decision not to disclose further information for reasons of national security.

  6. Rahmatullah (No 2) v Ministry of Defence, Mohamed v Ministry of Defence

    [2017] UKSC 1, [2017] 2 WLR 287

    Instructed in the Supreme Court challenge concerned the nature and content of the doctrine of Crown act of state in the context of claims relating to detention in Iraq and Afghanistan. The appeal successfully upheld this defence, which had last been applied in the 19th Century.

  7. Al Waheed v Ministry of Defence, Mohammed v Ministry of Defence

    [2017] UKSC 2, [2017] 2 WLR 327

    Instructed in the Supreme Court challenge concerning allegations that persons in Iraq and Afghanistan were unlawfully detained in breach of article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights by HM armed forces acting under mandates from the United Nations Security Council.

  8. R (on the application of Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 4)

    [2016] UKSC 35, SC, June 29 2016, [2016] 3 WLR 157

    Instructed in the Supreme Court challenge. This case considered whether, and in what circumstances, the Supreme Court may set aside a previous decision of the House of Lords. The application concerned alleged material non-disclosure concerning the resettlement of the Chagossians.

  9. R (on the application of Miranda) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis

    [2016] EWCA Civ 6, CA, January 19 2016, Times, February 19 2016

    Instructed in this well known challenge to the use of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000. The case concerns David Miranda, partner of Glen Greenwald who was detained in connection with the material taken by Edward Snowden.

  10. Bank Mellat v HM Treasury

    [2015] EWHC 1258 (Comm), [2015] EWCA Civ 1052, [2016] EWCA Civ 452

    Instructed in both the application to set aside financial restriction decisions and the $4bn civil damages claim resulting from the earlier proceedings.

  11. Roberts v United Kingdom

    Application no. 59703/13, January 2016

    Instructed as sole counsel in this challenge before the European Court of Human Rights concerning the farness of the domestic jury trial / selection system and compatibility with Article 6 ECHR.

Download Recent cases CV

Achievements

ToggleNews, Articles & Publications

Author, EU Law in Criminal Practice, OUP (2013)

Practitioner Editor, Blackstone’s Criminal Practice, OUP (2015)

Contributor, Miller on Contempt, OUP (2017)

Contributor, National Security Law, OUP (2021)

ToggleEducation

University of Cambridge, MA (Cantab)

Yale University, Fox International Fellowship

ToggleOther

Astbury Scholarship, Middle Temple

Lloyd Jacob Memorial Prize, Middle Temple

Former Editor of Varsity and President of the Junior Combination Room (JCR)

Prior to joining the Bar, Julian worked for the Foundation for Human Rights Initiative in Uganda, assisting offenders facing capital punishment. He is currently a Trustee of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust.

Insights&News

  1. Articles

    Julian Blake acts as counsel to the investigation into false evidence in Agent X case.

    View Articles

  2. News

    Julian Blake and Jack Steele appear in Reform UK elections challenge

    View News

  3. News

    11KBW awarded Set of the Year at the Chambers UK Bar Awards 2024

    View News

  4. News

    11KBW shortlisted for 5 awards at the Chambers UK Bar Awards 2024

    View News

  5. News

    Three members instructed on Covid-19 Public Inquiry

    View News

  6. News

    Julian Blake in David Fuller Inquiry Challenge

    View News

  7. News

    Julian Blake and Ruth Kennedy appear as Counsel to the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry

    View News

  8. News

    Important judgment on equalities impact of Government appointments

    View News

View more →

  • Quotation symbol

    Julian is a truly outstanding advocate with compelling written work. He has an ability to block out the noise and laser in on the nub of the issue.

    Chambers & Partners, 2025

  • Quotation symbol

    His advocacy is phenomenal, and he has perfect judgement. Julian really is the real deal.

    Chambers & Partners, 2025

  • Quotation symbol

    Julian is an impressive and forceful advocate with a commanding presence.

    Chambers & Partners, 2025

  • Quotation symbol

    He is an exceptional advocate, who is highly persuasive and articulate. He presents complex legal arguments clearly and precisely.

    Chambers & Partners, 2025

  • Quotation symbol

    Attention to detail, very user friendly. Strong intellect.

    Legal 500 2021

  • Quotation symbol

    Extremely personable and great to work with

    Chambers and Partners 2019

  • Quotation symbol

    The most user-friendly barrister I’ve ever instructed. He completely understands clients’ concerns. He’s always one step ahead and can predict things that’ll come up.

    Chambers and Partners 2019

  • Quotation symbol

    He has an enormous breadth of experience and understanding of a rapidly developing field and is very switched on.

    Legal 500 2019

  • Quotation symbol

    Very unassuming but massively hard-working, reliable and tough when required.

    Chambers and Partners 2020

  • Quotation symbol

    He is someone who is really going places. He is very sure-footed.

    Chambers and Partners 2023

  • Quotation symbol

    He is incredibly approachable and I like his can-do attitude

    Chambers and Partners 2021

  • Quotation symbol

    Highly responsive and very user-friendly

    Chambers and Partners 2021

  • Quotation symbol

    Amazingly hard-working, sensible and down to earth

    Chambers and Partners 2021

  • Quotation symbol

    Julian is phenomenal. A truly exceptional barrister. He is able to cut right through to the heart of the matter

    Legal 500 2022

  • Quotation symbol

    He has a really interesting combination of exceptional intellect as well as brilliant client skills.

    Chambers and Partners 2022

  • Quotation symbol

    He’s a very level-headed and tough litigator, is understanding and good with client management.

    Chambers and Partners 2022

  • Quotation symbol

    His key skill is his client care. He calms everyone’s nerves and also always delivers in court.

    Chambers and Partners 2022

  • Quotation symbol

    He manages to explain very difficult concepts in a way that clients understand and his drafting is very strong. He can always be relied upon to come up with novel approaches.

    Chambers and Partners 2023