Peter Doyle KC
  • Peter is a master of strategy and delivers with utmost finesse.

    Chambers UK 2025, Crime

  • His cross-examination is exemplary.

    Chambers UK 2025, Crime

  • Peter is a tactical genius with decades of experience. He is at the top of his game.

    Legal 500 2025, Crime

  • He is quietly devastating in his advocacy.

    Chambers UK 2024, Financial Crime

  • He's an excellent cross-examiner, who can change the atmosphere in the courtroom.

    Chambers UK 2024, Crime

  • He's got so much experience and he deploys it with devastating effect.

    Chambers UK 2024, Crime

  • He's very logical and structured in his advocacy.

    Chambers UK 2024, Crime

  • Peter has a calm authority in court, and a lovely and engaging manner with witnesses, judges and juries. 

    Legal 500 2024, Crime

  • He can find an argument in even the most evidentially challenging of cases.

    Legal 500 2024, Crime

  • His cross-examination is excellent.

    Chambers UK 2023, Crime

  • Tremendously well prepared and always available to answer queries, he adds value to any case.

    Chambers UK 2023, Crime

  • Peter is excellent: smooth, polished, and thoughtful.

    Legal 500 2023, Fraud: Crime

  • Peter is a hugely-experienced, skilled and patient barrister with an engaging and persuasive manner.

    Legal 500 2023, Crime

  • A very measured, thoughtful and authoritative barrister - when he speaks clients listen

    Chambers UK 2022

  • Bright, hard-working and meticulous in his work.

    Chambers UK 2022

  • Peter commands respect and attention in the court room. He is thorough in his preparation and clients warm to him.

    Legal 500 2022, Fraud Crime

  • Peter is an extremely clever and persuasive jury advocate of the highest calibre. He is a charming and highly effective jury advocate who advances his client's case rigorously and with the utmost skill. He is very well respected and liked by everyone who works with him. A genuine leader in his field.

    Legal 500 2022, Crime

  • Very thorough and argues points of law immaculately.

    Chambers UK 2021

  • His ability to analyse a case is legendary and he has a very smooth persona in court.

    Chambers UK 2021

  • A real gentleman of the profession – it is a privilege to watch him at work.

    Legal 500 2021, Crime

  • In court he is wonderfully persuasive and juries hang onto his every word.

    Legal 500 2021, Fraud

  • Always finds a new angle or a point of law that can swing the case.

    Chambers UK

  • He is very skilled at unpicking and simplifying the most complex of cases, and is always at the forefront of new law, distilling it, interpreting it and mastering it.  He is very smooth in court and charming at all times.

    Chambers UK

  • Unhesitatingly recommend him.

    Chambers UK

  • Employs his great presence in court to achieve the best result with minimum intervention.

    Chambers UK

  • Very smooth but also very tough.

    Legal 500

  • You could not hope for a more solid advocate.

    Legal 500

  • Excellent client care skills and total recall of the facts of the case.

    Chambers UK

  • An iron fist in a velvet glove.

    Chambers UK

  • A composed figure who always has the facts at his fingertips.

    Chambers UK

  • A composed figure who always has the facts at his fingertips.

    Chambers UK

  • Thorough, knowledgeable and strategically clever.

    Legal 500

  • He never shies away from complex and contentious legal arguments.

    Legal 500

  • He is always prepared for every potential argument and eventuality.

    Legal 500

  • He prepares thoroughly, has endless patience and argues the law with great authority.

    Legal 500

  • Clearly the senior intellect in court and a really good “details man” – ideal for fraud work.

    Legal 500

  • He defends senior officers in disciplinary cases.

    Legal 500

  • His excellent and perfectly paced closing speeches underline his experience and ability.

    Legal 500

  • A man of great judgement.

    Chambers UK 2020

  • He is an imperturbable silk.

    Legal 500 2020

  • Delightful.

    Chambers UK 2020

Called 1975

Silk 2002

Peter Doyle KC

Barrister

He has a reputation for taking on some of the most complex cases, both serious fraud and related cases as well as mainstream serious crime particularly murder and manslaughter cases.

An immensely experienced criminal defence practitioner instructed across a range of offences and disciplines.
Thorough, knowledgeable and strategically clever.
He never shies away from complex and contentious legal arguments.
His excellent & perfectly paced closing speeches underline his experience & ability.

Called in 1975; by 2002 when he took Silk, Peter Doyle KC had been instructed in a host of cases across a wide range of disciplines.

From employment and general contractual disputes, regulatory/discipline and criminal hearings and investigations inquests (death in custody, police fatal shootings and alleged defects in machine design and safe systems of rescue) and other health and safety disputes, to almost all aspects of criminal defence work in every ranking court including appearances before the Privy Council in appeals against conviction where the death penalty had been imposed.

He was instructed in three major Public Inquiries – Stephen Lawrence, the Marchioness Disaster and Victoria Climbie. He was also instructed to advise for the defence in the investigations following the July 2005 London suicide bombings, the May 2007 Manchester Arena bombing and the Stockwell fatal shooting of Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes.

Of particular note he was junior counsel for Ian Maxwell later acquitted of plundering pension funds, presented the leading Abuse of Process submissions and prepared the Petition of Parliament to access evidence given to it by individuals subsequently called by the Crown at trial.

As junior counsel he represented one the officers later acquitted of framing a member of the Guildford Four. He also defended a French citizen (acting as agent for British Intelligence) in his later acquittal of alleged sanction busting in connection with Russian military equipment. He conducted the lead cross-examination of his Handler.

After taking Silk, his work has largely involved defending in murder and manslaughter trials (but see the bombing and fatal shooting cases above).

His most recent cases have been for the defence in allegations of murder and serious offending and include the following examples:

  • R v Rhoad (Wolverhampton 2022): Representing the lead defendant alleged to have stolen rival charity bins across a number of counties. Issues of application and exercise by charities of powers to occupy land to raise funds and defendant’s honest but mistaken understanding of relevant regulations and his honest belief in his right to compound bins from third part sites. Need to consider complication of relevant Fundraising Regulations which required attendance as a prosecution witness of the Regulator.
  • R v X (Oxford 2023): The representation of a vulnerable girl aged 15 at the time of the alleged murder of her step-father by her mother’s live-in lover. Acquitted of murder but convicted of manslaughter. Complex family history extracted in cross-examination of the defendant’s mother who was a co-defendant. A detailed mitigation spanning the girl’s challenging life, abuse and vulnerability resulted in the imposition of a referral order.
  • R v X (Oxford 2023): Attempted murder. Autistic child defendant. Need for careful rules of engagement in the presentation of his evidence both in chief and in cross-examination.
  • R v Morrison (CCC 2023): For lead defendant in multi-handed murder on premises where drugs were believed to be present. Admitted causing fatal injuries but from behind partially opened door blocking his vision. Intention to harm but without murderous intent. Cross-examination of pathologist who accepted that the defendant’s case re causation was a possibility.
  • R v X (Aylesbury 2024): 16 year old boy at time of offence when he hit a youth a number of times on the head with a hammer. Involved with another youth. Initially indicted for attempted murder but eventually changed to s.18. Late plea of guilty. Obtained further adjournment for additional reports to be prepared. Highly intelligent youth but an earlier missed diagnosis of autism was discovered that had some relevance to his offending. Long period of custody avoided and reduced in practical terms to 8 months more than already served in secure accommodation pending his plea. Successful submissions that although a late plea the complications of advising in such a case upheld and thus greater credit given.

He presents to colleagues and professional clients alike on the practical approaches to the exercise of powers by various prosecuting authorities and the corporate penalty and reputational risks if convicted (of fraud or health and safety breaches) as well as the courts powers re Director Disqualification.

In addition to membership of relevant practitioner associations in fraud and crime he was the founding Chair of the Kalisher Trust and now the leader of its Senior Counsel Group. He4 is centrally involved in setting and marking the annual Kalisher Essay competition.

Please refer to the Directory references at the top of this Profile for his reputational standing.

Recognised in Doyles Leading Criminal Law Counsel - London 2024 list.

Professional Memberships

  • Proceeds of Crime Regulatory Association (POCLA)
  • The Association of Regulatory and disciplinary Lawyers (ARAL)
  • The Financial Services Lawyers Association (FSLA)
  • Criminal Bar Association
  • South Eastern Circuit

Articles & Publications

  • Barton and Booth v The Queen - When Judicial Opinion Converts to Binding Precedent, 30 April 2020 (click here).
  • The Stalking Protection Act 2019 - an analysis of the Act taking effect on 20 January 2020 (click here)
  • The Age of Criminal Responsibility - a comparison of England & Wales to other EU countries (click here).
  • Don't slow me down. Examines the potential unfairness in playing CCTV of fatal incident in slow motion given its tendency to give a false impression that a defendant has more time to form the required intent than was in truth the case.
  • A wrong turn. An analysis of the ruling in R v Jogee and Ruddock on the application of the principles of joint enterprise and the role of secondary parties.
  • R v Jogee. Defeating joint enterprise. A case study." (See R v A and Other ibid)
  • Controlling and Coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship.
  • Public spaces protection orders - A need for caution?
  • The SFO's operational guidance and procedures for S.2 interview. The lawyer and the interviewer.
  • The reckless senior banker - S.36 financial services (Banking reform) Act 2013.
  • Fining large corporate environmental offenders - Why size matters.
  • The absconding defendant in confiscation proceedings.
  • Tracing the proceeds of money laundering - Keeping and eye on the big picture - feeling the substance and not the width (Federal Republic of Brazil v Durant International Corporation).
  • The treatment in confiscation proceedings of VAT accounted for and or paid to HMRC - R v Harvey (2015) UKSC 73
  • New measures in the field of director disqualification - The small business enterprise and Employment Act 2015.
  • Corporate bribery investigations and the potential for mandatory or discretionary exclusion from EU public sector contracts.