Alan is Junior Counsel to The Crown Panel of Counsel for Government work – A Panel (2011) (previously B panel 2007-2010 and C panel 2004-2007). He is Develop Vetted.

Background:

Alan practises in the areas of public law, human rights (domestic and international), immigration and asylum, Inquests, Inquiries, police and prison law, civil liberties, employment and malfeasance claims (assault, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution and misfeasance).

Although specialising primarily in public law, Inquests, police law and employment law, he accepts instructions in all of chambers’ main practice areas.

Public Law/Immigration law:

Alan acts principally for public authorities; with an emphasis on immigration and human rights. He is recommended as a leading junior in the fields of human rights and immigration law in the Legal 500 (since 2006), in Legal Experts (since 2007) and in Immigration law in Chambers and Partners since 2010.

“Alan Payne maintains a public law-focused immigration practice, and spends the majority of his time litigating in the higher courts on behalf of state authorities. His high work rate has attracted the attention and praise of his peers” (Immigration) Chambers and Partners 2013

Inquests:

Alan regularly acts in Inquests for local authorities, police, prison service and other state bodies.

Alan represented the Security Services in the Inquest into the death of Diana, Princess of Wales and Mr Dodi Al Fayed.

Recent cases include:

Kent County Council v HM Coroner for Kent (Defendant) & Mr and Mrs Barry (Interested Parties) [2012] EWHC 2768 in which a successful challenge was made of the Coroner’s decision that Article 2 was engaged.

Sumaiya Patel v Lord Chancellor & Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner West London [2010] EWHC 2220 in which it was held that the widow of one of the bombers responsible for the bombings in London on July 7, 2005 failed to show that there was a significant wider public interest in her having exceptional funding for legal representation at the inquest into the deaths caused by the bombings.

Inquiries:

Alan acted for the MPS in the Azelle Rodney Inquiry in which the Chairman’s report is due to be published shortly.

Recent cases include:

MPS v Chairman of the Inquiry into the death of Azelle Rodney and various interested parties [2012] EWHC 2783] in which the Divisional Court concluded that the chairman of a public inquiry had been entitled to find that there should be limited disclosure to the legal team of an interested party of material in relation to which the police sought a restriction order in the public interest, because disclosure was "necessary" for determination of the restriction order application within the meaning of the Inquiry Rules 2006 r.12(4)(a).

Police Law:

Alan acts on behalf of the police in Inquiries, matters relating to the IPCC, ECRC’s, detention related claims.

Recent cases include:

Desmond v Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire [2011] EWCA Civ 3

A chief constable responding to a request for information to be included in an enhanced criminal record certificate under the Police Act 1997 s.115(7) did not owe a duty of care to the person applying for the certificate.

Barry George v. Metropolitan Police Service

A challenge brought by the Claimant to the lawfulness of the decisions of the Panels, chaired by the MPS, to include him in the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) scheme. The Claimant was unsuccessful in his claim that his inclusion in MAPPA was (i) unlawful and/or (ii) unduly intrusive amounting to an infringement of his Article 8 rights, on the grounds that they are disproportionate to the aim pursued in imposing them.

Coker v IPCC & MPS & Wood [2010] EWHC 3625 in which the High Court held that the Independent Police Complaints Commission was entitled to revise its decisions as to what, if any, recommendations as to disciplinary action should be brought against a police officer.

Employment

Alan has extensive experience, both in the employment tribunal and EAT, acting primarily for the Respondent, in a wide variety of claims involving discrimination (all types), unlawful deduction of wages, unfair dismissal, equal pay, WTR, TUPE. He has also acted in a number of cases focusing on post termination restraints (both obtaining and resisting injunctions).

Noteworthy cases include acting on behalf of the Respondent in:

• DEFRA v Huish and Robertson [2005] IRLR 363;
• Chelsea F. C. in the case involving the dismissal of Mark Bosnich;
• Fulham F.C. in the case brought by Jean Tigana (employment tribunal/EAT).

Alan helped draft the employees’ handbook for Chelsea F.C.

He is also the co-author of Tolley’s Employment Tribunals Handbook – first published in October 2002. The 2nd edition (published by Tottels) came out in August 2005. The third edition is currently being drafted.

Personal Injury:

Alan has extensive experience advising, principally Government Departments, on a broad range of personal injury matters ranging from manual handling claims to claims involving injuries arising from the Iraq war, or from detention in Guantanamo.

Recent cases include:

Burn & Ors v MoJ [2012] EWCH 876 in which he acted on behalf of the MOJ in successfully defending High Court proceedings involving a claim by a number of prison guards for psychiatric injury allegedly caused by the armed escape of a dangerous prisoner.

Other areas of expertise include:

• Customs and Excise and, in particular, VAT disputes and MTIC fraud;
• Challenges to decisions of local authorities before care tribunals.

Recent cases include:

Case Law:

Immigration/Public Law

A full copy of Alan's CV in the area can be obtained from his clerks

MB & Ors v. SSHD [2013] EWHC 123

rejecting the challenge of four asylum seekers had failed to gain asylum in Malta, and had later entered the United Kingdom, they were simply individuals who had entered the UK unlawfully rather than true asylum seekers and the secretary of state was entitled to issue third country certificates and remove them to Malta under Dublin II.

EM (Eritrea) v SSHD [2012] EWCA Civ 395

The Court of Appeal confirmed that a  Member State was only required to entertain a re-application for asylum under Regulation 343/2003 art.3(2) and to refrain from returning the applicant to the state of first arrival where the risk faced by the applicant was because of a systematic deficiency in the first state's asylum and reception procedures, which the second state was aware of.

AH (Algeria) v SSHD [2012] EWCA Civ 395

The Asylum and Immigration Tribunal had erred in relying on the decision in Gurung v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] UKIAT 4870, [2003] Imm. A.R. 115, which was the relevant authority at the date of its determination but which had subsequently been disapproved. The Court of Appeal gave guidance as to the meaning of the words "serious crime" for the purposes of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 (United Nations) art.1F.

ED (GHANA) v SSHD [2012] EWCA Civ 39

An immigrant, who had been convicted of various offences, was unable to rely on the test in Maslov v Austria (1638/03) [2007] 1 F.C.R. 707, that there had to be very special reasons justifying his removal, where he had not been lawfully in the United Kingdom.

SSHD v (1) AS (SOMALIA) (2) CW (JAMAICA) (3) SD (ZIMBABWE) [2011] EWCA Civ 1319

An asylum seeker who had her claim for asylum rejected and had unsuccessfully appealed under s.82 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 against a decision of the secretary of state refusing her leave to remain in the United Kingdom had a right to appeal against the rejection of her asylum claim under s.83 when, some years later, she was granted indefinite leave to remain.

R (on the application of AR (SOMALIA)) v SSHD [2011] EWCA Civ 857

Decisions by the Home Secretary to remove a Somali national to Mogadishu and to detain him pending removal were not unlawful. At the time of the decisions, there had been no Rule 39 application to the European Court of Human Rights for emergency protection and the secretary of state was not under a legal obligation to anticipate such an application.

AQ (PAKISTAN) v SSHD [2011] EWCA Civ 833

The entitlement of points arising from the award of a degree could not be counted towards the minimum required for the purpose of the Immigration Rules r.245Z(c) if the degree was awarded after the secretary of state's decision to refuse leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Post-Study Work) Migrant. The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, s.120 did not have the effect of allowing a fresh application to be made to the Upper Tribunal relying on events since the secretary of state's decision.

FA (Iraq) v SSHD [2011] UKSC 22

Questions would be referred to the European Court of Justice about whether the European principle of equivalence required that there should be a statutory right of appeal against the refusal of an application for humanitarian protection.

SM (Afghanistan) v SSHD [2011] EWCA Civ 573

An judge had been entitled to conclude that an asylum seeker faced a risk of persecution from Hizb-I-Islami that would result in a breach of his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 art.3 if returned to Afghanistan and it had not been open to the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) to reconsider his decision.

Inquiries/Police

Alan is acting for the MPS in the Inquiry into the death of Azelle Rodney in which the Chairman is due to publish his report mid- 2013.

Desmond v Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire [2011] EWCA Civ 3

A chief constable responding to a request for information to be included in an enhanced criminal record certificate under the Police Act 1997 s.115(7) did not owe a duty of care to the person applying for the certificate.

Coker v. (1) IPCC (2) The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CO/8015/2009 LTL/16/11/10

The Court held that the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) was entitled to revise its decisions as to what if any recommendations as to disciplinary action should be brought against a police officer and the fact that it made a final recommendation that was contrary to a view that it initially formed was neither ultra vires nor irrational.

Mohidin & Khan v. (1) IPCC (2) the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘MPS’) (3) PS Wilson and Ors.

The Claimants challenged the decision of the IPCC not to recommend the institution of disciplinary proceedings against police officers in respect of allegations of harassment, assault and discrimination arising from incident in respect of which the officers had been prosecuted and acquitted. I acted for the MPS. Permission was refused. The Claimants are currently seeking permission to appeal.

Barry George v. Metropolitan Police Service

A challenge brought by the Claimant to the lawfulness of the decisions of the Panels, chaired by the MPS, to include him in the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) scheme. The Claimant was unsuccessful in his claim that his inclusion in MAPPA was (i) unlawful and/or (ii) unduly intrusive amounting to an infringement of his Article 8 rights, on the grounds that they are disproportionate to the aim pursued in imposing them.

Inquests

Alan is representing Kent County Council in the Inquest into the death of Barry Edwards (which is currently stayed pending a judicial review).

Alan represented the Security Services in the Inquest into the death of Diana, Princess of Wales and Mr Dodi Al Fayed.

Judicial reviews

R (on the application of MEAZA ASEFA) v SSHD [2012] EWHC 56

An asylum seeker's claim under Article of the ECHR was clearly unfounded once the best interests of her children were taken into account and where removal was to Italy. The essential interests of the children, including disruption to their education, would not be adversely affected by any move to Italy.

SUMAIYA PATEL v LORD CHANCELLOR [2010] EWHC 2220

The application for judicial review brought by the widow of a person suspected of being responsible for the bombings in London on July 7, 2005 against a decision refusing her exceptional funding for legal representation at the inquest into the deaths caused by the bombings, was rejected.

Independent Schools Council v. Charity Commission

A challenge brought to the guidance issued by the Charity Commission in 2010 and, in particular their decision to interpret ‘public benefit’ (in the context of the Charities Act 2006) to require schools to expand bursary provisions.

Control orders

SSHD v (1) AT and (2) AW [2009] EWHC 512

I was led by Robin Tam QC. A report relied upon by the SSHD to make a non-derogating control order against a Libyan national was misleading, as the use of the present tense erroneously suggested that he had resumed terrorist-related activities following his release from prison. Accordingly, the SSHD's decision to make the order was flawed. There was nothing in the relevant report that suggested the individual in question had resumed terrorist activities.

Employment

Alan has acted in a number of employment cases for the DWP, SOCA the Home Office and Foreign Office. In addition to standard unfair/constructive dismissal cases, and discrimination cases, Alan has recently acted in:

(i) A case involving a challenge to the lawfulness of the national security requirement that those who have access to sensitive material need to have British nationality;

(ii) A test case brought against SOCA by interpreters (who unsuccessfully sought to argue that they were employed as opposed to self-employed);

(iii) Pensions cases involving complex transfer provisions between the MET and SOCA; and

(iv) Cases involving SOCA under-cover officers with closed hearings involving information concerning highly sensitive undercover operations.

VAT Tribunals

Alan is instructed in a number of Missing Trader Intra-Community fraud appeals and has acted in more general VAT appeals.

Care Standards Tribunal

Alan has acted for the Respondent in statutory appeals brought under section 86 of the Care Standards Act 2000 (CAS) by persons who have been included on the Protection of Vulnerable Adults list (PoVA) and/or the Protection of Children Act list (PoCA).

Commercial/Civil

Commercial disputes involving breach of directors fiduciary duties/trust, arbitrations (contractual disputes involving the outsourced provision of detention centres, removal of failed asylum seekers etc.), contractual disputes involving penalty clauses, enforceability of guarantees, restraints of trade, undue influence, and disputes involving sales of goods and services.

Lectures:

Alan has lectured on a range of matters, including Human Rights issues, Immigration law and Employment law.