Court of Appeal and Covid-19

Trisan Hyatt acted in an appeal regarding hybrid hearings, and the circumstances in which they should be held during the current pandemic. In her 'short and effective' submissions, she emphasised the position of the children C (Children : Covid-19: Representation):

Read more

CORONAVIRUS

Chambers remains open, and our barristers continue to accept instructions. Please contact us by email at clerks@5pumpcourt.com in the first instance or use our clerks' direct lines (shown in their profiles). After 5.30pm please call 07976 368031. Thank you for your patience.

Contact details

The easiest way to contact our clerks is by email at clerks@5pumpcourt.com or by telephone. Please call our family clerks on 020 7632 7852 or 020 7632 7851; our civil clerk on 020 7632 7862 and our criminal clerk on 020 7632 7853. After 5.30pm please call 07976 368031.

Remote court hearings

During the current lockdown, courts are conducting hearings remotely. We have many members with extensive experience of remote hearings, who can advise on preparation and tactics and effectively represent clients at such hearings. We are able to host hearings and conferences by Microsoft Teams or Zoom. Contact us at clerks@5pumpcourt.com for more information

International adoptions

Dr Onyoja Momoh acted in the matter of AMDK v NA [2020] EWHC 1548 (Fam) concerning the recognition of a Ugandan adoption. The reported judgment is now available, and has been adopted as a precedent in Ugandan law.

Read more

Black Lives Matter

5 Pump Court Chambers stands firmly against racism in any form. We are proud of the diversity of our Chambers, and believe that diversity makes us stronger. We also accept that there is always more we could do, and we are ready to listen and to learn.

CA success

Mark Eldridge represented the Crown in the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division. The Court refused permission to appeal on the ground that an aggravated burglary of which the Defendant had been convicted was an abuse of process. The Defendant argued that his bad character should not have been before the jury. It was held that he had sought deliberately to give a false impression to the jury.