Tom Flavin

Barrister

Tom’s practice involves work across all areas of criminal defence. In particular, he specialises in fraud, confiscation and enforcement, sports law, violence, drugs and public disorder cases. Tom is regularly instructed on serious cases in both the Crown Court and Court of Appeal. He has experience representing companies as well as individuals who are young or vulnerable. Tom has regulatory experience having acted in a number of high-profile regulatory tribunals.

Tom is instructed on a regular basis to represent high-profile clients, having recently represented individuals from sports and media backgrounds in criminal proceedings. He has experience dealing with cases that generate significant media interest.

Last year, Tom completed a secondment to the Football Association, giving him early insight in the investigation, preparation and presentation of regulatory and disciplinary law. This platform has given Tom thorough and wide-ranging expertise and experience. Tom has acted on behalf of the Football Association in a number of high-profile regulatory tribunals involving former premier league players and managers; as well as preparing advices and drafting charges for regulatory breaches.

Tom is highly sought after in the fields of motoring and road traffic law and has developed an almost exclusively private driving practice. Tom is regularly instructed in all manner of driving cases ranging from speeding and ‘drink driving’ to those involving death by careless/dangerous driving. His extensive knowledge of procedural and technical defences has enhanced his reputation as a top motoring barrister and he regularly provides advice on road traffic matters to both solicitors and barristers. He has represented high profile and high net-worth individuals in motoring offences; including professional footballers, bankers and other professionals.

Prior to coming to the Bar, Tom worked as a Crown Court usher at St Albans Crown Court. More recently he has worked for a number of commercial firms including Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP where he worked in a client facing role at a large investment bank. He then went on to work at Memery Crystal LLP as a member of their tax team, working closely with a number of multinational corporations. Whilst studying as an undergraduate, Tom was asked to represent his University at an international mooting competition; he adjudicated on the University’s internal mooting competition. Away from the law, Tom is a keen football and rugby player having captained his University team in both disciplines.

Areas of Practice

Crime
Fraud / White Collar Crime
Regulatory and Disciplinary
Sports Law
Confiscation & Asset recovery

Professional Memberships

British Association for Sport and Law
Criminal Bar Association
Young Fraud Lawyers Association

Education and Awards

BPTC “Outstanding”, BPP Law School (2012)
Law LLB (Hons), University of Liverpool (2009)
Janet Lewis Award for Outstanding Contribution (2006)

Contact

020 7067 1500
tflavin@25bedfordrow.com

General Crime

R v Al Sahli - Led junior in a people trafficking/assisting unlawful immigration case – acted on behalf of the lead defendant at Isleworth Crown Court (Led by Matt Radstone). The case involved over 150,000 pages of evidence and complex/novel points of law.
R v Mansiri - Led junior in a conspiracy to supply cocaine case involving complex phone and cell site data with a defendant in a different jurisdiction. (Led by Sebastian Gardiner).
R v UA - Led junior in a multi-handed knife-point robbery trial. The case involved young and vulnerable witnesses and juvenile defendants. (Led by Simon Pentol)
R v AA - Conspiracy to supply class A – acted on behalf of a young defendant in a case involving multiple kilos of cocaine.
R v SR - Acted on behalf of a defendant charged with conspiracy to Kidnap. The case involved firearms and torture and was heard at Luton Crown Court
R v Contostavlos (aka Dappy) - Acted on behalf of the defendant charged with assault and possession of a bladed article.
R v Uddin - Acted on behalf of the defendant charged with an offence under the Modern Slavery Act 2015.
R v CG-B - Represented a 16yo charged with multiple robberies involving imitation firearms. Following guilty pleas, dealt with a complex sentencing exercise;
R v MK - Appeal against sentence in the Court of Appeal for a large drugs conspiracy – appeal related to whether the court at first instance had given sufficient weight to the appellant’s age at the time of conviction (72yo);
R v UA - Instructed in a multi-handed robbery trial involving youth defendants and vulnerable witnesses;
R v KN - Portsmouth Crown Court – Mention to reduce sentence. Client had received a two-and-a-half year sentence for a number of serious sexual offences against children. Matter was listed for the judge to slightly reduce the sentence to take into account the defendant’s age at the time of offending. Successful defence application to further reduce and suspend the sentence to allow the defendant to partake in a sexual offender treatment programme. Sentence was suspended;
R v E - Robbery trial with a young defendant, involving cross-examination of a 13yo complainant – successful submission of no case to answer made due to a number of deficiencies with the identification evidence and a real risk of contamination
R v TS - Youth firearms trial – successful section 78 application to exclude large parts of the crown’s evidence, including admissions made by the defendant to officers at the scene, resulting in the crown offering no evidence.
R v TM - Successful application to terminate a football banning order imposed upon a well-known member of Chelsea Football Club’s ‘firm’;
R v PV - Represented an ex-premier league footballer for a number of driving offences – successfully retained the client’s licence;
R v DT - Successfully opposed the imposition of a football banning order following offences committed at West Ham Football Club;
R v NML - Acted on behalf of a well-known company for offences under the Road Traffic Act 1988;
R v M - Assault trial - Defendant acquitted on the basis of self-defence in the face of strong CCTV to the contrary which captured the incident and live evidence from independent witnesses;
R v M - Successful acquittal in a youth robbery trial, involving cross-examination of two youth witnesses;
R v HT - Common assault; assault PC; criminal damage and possession of Class A and Class B drugs trial. Successfully opposed an application for bad character evidence to be admitted and for a 999 call to be played as part of the Crown’s case under the principle Res Gestae. Successfully negotiated a basis of plea to the assault PC charge which resulted in the possession charges and criminal damage to be dropped. The defendant received an absolute discharge;
R v O - Successful acquittal where the defendant was charged with assaulting a Civil Enforcement Officer, involving lengthy non-defendant bad character arguments;
R v Y - ABE trial, defendant acquitted after trial involving CCTV evidence which captured the incident and live evidence from four prosecution witnesses, including the two complainants who were of good character.
R v Hanchard - Instructed in an attempted murder case being tried at the Central Criminal Court later this year.
Vale of Glamorgan v Asfi - Instructed on behalf of the lead defendant in a complex trading standards prosecution. The case involves alleged breaches of: The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008; The General Product Safety Regulations 2005; as well fraudulent activity.

Road Traffic & Motoring Cases

R v AG - Private case where defendant was charged with ‘drink driving’. Case involved evidence from two witnesses that the defendant had been driving and when arrested by the police he had his car keys on him. Defendant’s case was that he was not the driver of the vehicle. The defendant was found not guilty following after trial.
R v JW - Private case where the defendant was charged with ‘drink driving’. The case involved a detailed procedural defence relating to the classification of the road that the defendant was driving on; the case turned on whether the road was maintained at public or private expense. Successful legal argument was run on behalf of the defendant.
R v JB - The defendant was charged with dangerous driving. The circumstances were that the defendant drove through a red light, caused other vehicles to swerve, evaded the police and drove on the pavement. It concluded in the defendant crashing his vehicle. The defendant pleaded guilty to a lesser offence of driving without due care and attention and was sentenced to a fine.
R v P - Private case representing a former professional footballer. The defendant was charged with a variety of driving offences, including speeding and ‘drink driving’. Defendant pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a fine.
R v SK - Private case representing a prominent business owner. The defendant was charged with speeding, ‘drink driving’ and resisting arrest. Following a plea to the drink driving charge, the defendant was sentenced to a fine.
R v HJ - Private case where the defendant was charged with using a hand-held mobile phone whilst driving. At trial evidence was given by three officers that he had been observed using a mobile phone. The defendant was found not guilty at the conclusion of the trial.
R v J(B) - The defendant pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving in circumstances where he had lied to police, initially telling them that he had not been driving and had alcohol in his system. The defendant received a suspended sentence.

Civil Court Orders

R v KG - Represented a defendant at a hearing concerning the imposition of a lengthy and onerous Criminal Behaviour Order;
R v B - Successfully opposed the imposition of a civil football banning order applied for under 14B of the Football Spectators Act 1989 following complaint arising from football related violence;
R v TC - Successfully opposed the imposition of an interim Anti-Social Behaviour Order following full hearing involving lengthy submissions.

Confiscation

R v MD - A successful application under section 23 POCA to reduce the available amount figure from £7,000 to a nominal £1. Application involved written and oral legal argument on whether limitation periods apply to s.23.

Football Association

The FA v AJ – Acted on behalf of the Football Association in a complex and lengthy regulatory tribunal. The hearing concerned an alleged anti-doping violation of the FA’s regulations and involved cross-examination of the player’s expert (giving evidence via live-link from America) as well as adducing evidence from an expert instructed on behalf of the Football Association. This technical hearing required an in-depth knowledge of regulatory frameworks as well as a sound grasp of complex medical evidence;
The FA v PB – Representing the Football Association at a contested regulatory tribunal. The case concerned alleged breaches of the FA’s rules and regulations by an ex-premier league manager during the course of match. The hearing involved adducing evidence from three witnesses on behalf of the FA and cross-examination of the manager and his assistant manager. Assisted the tribunal when dealing with appropriate sanction;
The FA v KS – Acted on behalf of the Football Association at a regulatory hearing to determine the sanction to be imposed on a player charged with biting a member of the opposition during the course of a regulated match.

Healthcare Regulation

Health & Care Professionals Council v SS – currently instructed on behalf of the Registrant, a qualified and longstanding radiographer, in response to allegations of Fraud with respect to employment.

General Dental Council

GDC v AT – Instructed on behalf of the GDC in relation to proceedings against a dentist who was accused of practising without indemnity insurance over a 4-year period.
GDC v AB – Committee proceedings in response to allegations that a dentist had committed offences under the Housing Act. Instructed to draft and settle charges; advise; and represent the GDC at the final PCC hearing.
GDC v KG – misconduct proceedings against a dentist following allegations of dishonesty, including practices known as 'splitting". Instructed on behalf of the GDC.
GDC v FS – Instructed on behalf of the GDC to advice and settle charges in respect of a dentist accused of failing to co-operate with a GDC investigation.
GDC v JW – Acted on behalf of the GDC in committee proceedings against a dentist in respect of malpractice and failure to provide adequate standards of care allegations.
GDC v SH – Instructed to represent the GDC at an Interim Orders hearing in respect of a dentist, referred to the committee following her arrest for criminal offences under the Malicious Communications Act.
GDC v RG – Instructed on behalf of the GDC to present a resumed PCC hearing against a dentist who had failed to: provide adequate standards of care; properly treat and manage a patient. The case also involved breaches of doctor/patient confidentiality.
GDC v MB – Instructed to present cases on behalf of the GDC in respect of two sets of Committee proceedings against a dentist. The proceedings involved poor standards of treatment to multiple patients, failures to obtain informed consent, failures in response to patient complaints and dishonesty allegations arising from inappropriate issuing of 'Fitness to Fly' Covid-19 certificates.