Will Durrands

Barrister

Will is a committed criminal defence barrister dedicated to the best interests of his clients. His approachable, friendly and easy-going manner allows him to quickly build rapport with lay clients. Will is often instructed in cases involving organised crime, firearms, serious violence and large-scale drug supply, alone or as a led junior.

Will is an intelligent and perceptive advocate, targeting punchy and persuasive submissions as the situation requires.

Will has a growing practice instructed by insurance companies for client in road traffic cases.

Background

Prior to joining Chambers, Will gained a number of years’ experience working at two leading London human rights and criminal defence firms where he gained experience in all areas of criminal law, extradition, public law and regulatory matters.

Publications

Contributor to the book Human Rights in Criminal Law (1st Ed, 2023), writing the chapter on Article 9 of the ECHR (Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion).

Qualifications

BPTC (Outstanding), UWE Bristol
GDL (Merit), UWE Bristol
BSc Hons. Biology, University of Manchester

Memberships

Criminal Bar Association
South Eastern Circuit

R v IJ: Led junior for youth defendant in multi-handed attempted murder and firearms trial arising out of a series of ‘tit for tat’ attacks in Watford described by the police as gang warfare. BBC.
R v MB: Led junior for the first defendant in two trials involving the ‘reverse smuggling’ of migrants from the UK to France. The first trial addressed the human trafficking itself with the second dealing with the complex money laundering behind the OCG. Times.
R v NA: Successful submission of no case to answer in s.18 and violent disorder case where NA was seen on footage fighting with a complainant who received multiple stab wounds to his lung and liver.
R v FM: Acted for vulnerable man accused of knife offences on three days and s.18 GBH on the second day. The case included successful s.78 PACE arguments to exclude ID evidence, hostile witnesses, bad character and hearsay. FM was acquitted of the s.18 GBH.
R v CL: Possession of imitation firearm with intent to endanger life case after a phone with CL’s DNA on it was found at the scene of a drug related shooting in Hertfordshire. The case involved expert gunshot residue evidence.
R v DC: Sole defence counsel in a 9-handed ‘Insulate Britain’ protest case involving the blocking of the Dartford Tunnel. Prosecuted by silk and junior.
R v AB: Acted for a well-known YouTuber who was unlawfully arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000. The case was dismissed at half time following cross-examination of the arresting officer.
R v JA: Junior alone in 4-week conspiracy to commit armed robbery trial. JA was alleged to have been part of a group of young men from London’s Latin American community committing a number of robberies on the city’s transport network. Acquitted. Daily Mail.
R v NT: Junior alone in a case involving attempted GBH and possession of firearms with intent to endanger life. The allegation involved a 13-hour siege of a property with the defendants firing at and throwing projectiles onto police vehicles surrounding a tower block. BBC.
R v NA: Led Junior acting for the first defendant charged with possession of firearms with intent to endanger life in a case involving complex legal argument over the admissibility of gang evidence and the status of police ‘expert’ witnesses.
R v MS: Led Junior. Acting for MS charged in a conspiracy to supply class A drugs in a complex case involving extensive conventional phone and EncroChat evidence.
R v EL: Cultivation cannabis case acquitted after arguing a s.45 Modern Slavery Act defence.
R v AW: D sentenced to 6y after guilty pleas to conspiracy to supply 88kg of cocaine and 38kg of MDMA.
R v SW: D charged with ABH and non-fatal strangulation, successful abuse of process argument and submission of no case to answer led to part of the indictment being stayed and a not guilty verdict being entered on the remaining count.
R v DC: Sole defence counsel in multi-handed Insulate Britain case prosecuted by silk and junior.
R v DM: multi-handed s.18/violent disorder, successful application to vacate earlier plea to s.18 ultimately resulting in an acceptable plea to s.20. D was sentenced to a community order.
R v TB: D acquitted after trial facing allegations of racial abuse of Manchester United players at the FA Cup Final.
R v AB: Acted for a well-known YouTuber who was unlawfully arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000. The case was dismissed at half time following cross-examination of the arresting officer.
R v JA: Junior alone in 4-week conspiracy to commit armed robbery trial, acquitted (DM link to sentence for those convicted).
R v NT: Junior alone in a case involving attempted GBH and possession of firearms with intent to endanger life. The allegation involved a 13-hour siege of a property with the defendants firing at and throwing projectiles onto police vehicles surrounding a tower block (BBC link).
R v NA: Led Junior acting for the lead defendant charged with possession of firearms with intent to endanger life in a case involving complex legal argument over the admissibility of gang evidence and the status of police ‘expert’ witnesses.
R v AM: multi-handed s.18/20 GBH, violent disorder and bladed article trial, acted for D1.
R v MS: Led Junior. Acting for D charged in a conspiracy to supply class A drugs in a complex case involving extensive conventional phone and EncroChat evidence.
R v ZG: D1 in multi-handed cannabis cultivation case, acquitted.
R v EL: D charged with cultivation cannabis, acquitted after trial after running a s.45 Modern Slavery Act defence.
R v AW: D sentenced to 6y after guilty pleas to conspiracy to supply 88kg of cocaine and 38kg of MDMA.
R v HM: D with complex mental health issues sentenced to time served after acceptable pleas were entered on two indictments containing 15-counts alleging, inter alia, burglary with intent to commit GBH and affray.
R v LH: D charged with aggravated burglary involving CCTV, cell site and DNA evidence, acquitted after 9-day trial.
R v SW: D charged with ABH and non-fatal strangulation, successful abuse of process argument and submission of no case to answer led to part of the indictment being stayed and a not guilty verdict being entered on the remaining count.
R v IC: D charged with s.18 GBH, acquitted.
R v SB: D charged with defrauding Hilton Hotels.
R v ZG: D acquitted after trial on charges of cultivation of cannabis.
R v RN: D was charged in a conspiracy to supply class A drugs alongside three others and possession of a bladed article alone. He received a suspended sentence after entering a late guilty plea.
R v WE: D was charged with the burglary of a cannabis factory on a joint enterprise basis, his co-defendant had pleaded guilty and D was arrested running away from the scene with his vehicle parked at the back of the property. D was acquitted after trial.
R v PM: D sentenced to a Suspended Sentence after defrauding his co-directors out of £100k.
Youth Court
R v A: D was charged with burglary and possession of a bladed article and had a number of complex developmental, emotional and psychological difficulties. D was acquitted after trial following successful s.45 Modern Slavery Act submissions.
R v B: Acted for a youth convicted after trial of a knifepoint robbery committed whilst subject to a YRO with ISS for a separate knifepoint robbery. Successfully persuaded the Court not to sentence RD to custody but instead issue a further YRO.
R v D: D was originally charged with a s.18 GBH (stabbing), the CPS were persuaded to accept a plea to s.20 GBH. D was sentenced to a referral order.
Protest Rights
R v LD: Animal Rebellion, allegations of criminal damage against Harrods and Aston Martin.
R v AD: Extinction Rebellion, in this two-day appeal against a conviction for criminal damage arising out of the original XR protests in 2018 at the venue for the AGM of a global coal mining company.
Extinction Rebellion: Will has represented a number of XR activists charged with obstructing the highway and criminal damage offences from several of the group’s rebellions.

R v CE: Led junior for the second defendant in a boiler room fraud re-trial. CE was said to have been a close associate of the first defendant and integral in the establishment of companies defrauding victims be selling worthless property bonds. Acquitted.
R v PM: PM was sentenced to a Suspended Sentence after defrauding his co-directors out of £100k.

Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry: Instructed between March 2022 and September 2023, working as part of a team of junior counsel in a disclosure review addressing various Rule 9 requests on work streams largely relating to the conduct of Post Office investigators and prosecutors.