Philip Kazantzis
- Defence Barrister - Chambers of Philip Kazantzis
Notable Cases
NOTABLE CASES
NOTABLE CASES
Here are a few of the cases Philip has been involved in
R. v. SK - The Crown Court at St Albans - 2024 - This was a three defendant "County Lines" drugs case. The prosecution heavily relied upon various telephone schedules and maps prepared by an analyst to identify co-location between the three defendants and the alleged drugs line, in addition to "Heads-up, Heads-down" (HUHD) evidence to assert the drugs line commonly first made a cellular connection in the morning and ended it's last connection in the area of each of the defendant's home addresses throughout the conspiracy period. Philip represented the second defendant. Philip applied to exclude the prosecution produced schedules of evidence as being incomplete, unfair and unjust as they did not present the complete picture evidenced by the underlying call data. Unfortunately, in line with the Court of Appeal judgment in R. v. Foulger & others
[2012] EWCA Crim 1516, although the court ruled the material should be made more manageable for the jury, the position was that "if the defence wished they could, if they suggested the material was lacking sufficient detail or misleading, call their own expert." Ultimately, Mr. Kazantzis with the assistance of those instructing presented further telephone material during the trial, produced by a defence instructed expert to identify the prosecution shortcomings and misleading collocation maps. Cross-examination of the analyst made it clear to the jury that she was simply presenting material to show what the prosecution wanted the jury to see, being material fitting with the prosecution case theory. Much of the prosecution material was evidenced to be unreliable and inaccurate. After some seven hours of deliberations, all three defendants were found not guilty of the alleged conspiracies. Instructed by Alan Burcombe of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. MC - The Crown Court at Isleworth - 2023 - MC faced trial on a single count of causing death by dangerous driving. Although MC had pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to causing death by careless driving, the prosecution would not accept that plea. The prosecution asserted that due to the speed driven (in excess of the speed limit), an earlier undertaking manoeuvre prior to reaching the junction at which the collision occurred, the changing of lanes and gears as MC entered and crossed the junction and the lack of attention to the road ahead as he entered the junction all amounted to dangerous driving. Furthermore, the prosecution submitted that as was evidenced by the Road Traffic Collision expert, the Anti-locking Brake System (ABS) on the vehicle being driven was defective at the time, and so in addition to the manner of driving being dangerous, their case was that it was aggravated by the condition of the vehicle, of which MC must have been aware. The defence case was that MC was not aware of the defect prior to the collision and for a number of reasons, the manner of driving amounted to careless and not dangerous driving. This was a seven day trial, which resulted in MC being unanimously acquitted of the allegation of causing death by dangerous driving. Instructed by Alan Burcombe of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. CB - The Crown Court at Croydon - 2023 - This was a case of attempted murder transferred from the Old Bailey due to lack of available court time. The complainant was stabbed in excess of 20 times. It was only by the kind work of two members of the public who gave him immediate medical assistance, followed by the work of the London Air Ambulance Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) trauma team who attended and operated on him in the communal hallway of a block of flats close to the scene of the incident, that saved his life. The issue in the case was one of identification. The complainant had viewed at least one photograph of the defendant prior to making a positive identification in a controlled identification process. After three days of evidence, and with the complainant having failed to come up to proof, the prosecution reviewed the evidence following consideration of a number of legal authorities, and ultimately took the difficult decision to offer no further evidence before the jury. This resulted in a verdict of not guilty upon the judge's direction. Had the defendant been convicted, he would have likely received a sentence in excess of 25 years imprisonment. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. SAT – The Crown Court at Isleworth – 2022 – Following another trial being moved to 2024 due to lack of court time, Philip was instructed as a late return in this matter which alleged a section 18 wounding with intent. The complainant, stated he was stabbed by the defendant four times due to an argument over a £300 debt. Telephone evidence showed the defendant's phone to have travelled to Birmingham from Northolt shortly after the incident which took place a little after midnight. The defendant was arrested in Yorkshire some three months later. Those instructing conducted a substantial amount of work reviewing the served telephone evidenced and identified a similar late night trip to Birmingham had taken place just a few weeks earlier, thereby establishing that it was nothing unusual. Although the initial trial estimate was 3 days, the trial last 7 days due to the number of issues raised and the detailed cross-examination required of each of the witnesses which undermined the prosecution case. After the jury had been in retirement for almost 9 hours, the defendant was acquitted of all charges. Instructed by Jag Phull of Langfield Law.
R. v. LW - The Crown Court at Chelmsford - 2022 - A very difficult trial relating to the importation of 108.4 kilograms of class A drugs; Cocaine and Heroin. The case involved expert evidence regarding Tachograph use and missing driving periods due to the use of a magnet to disable the gearbox sensor, in addition to matters being contested in respect of the alleged manipulation of the security seal and the TIR / security cable. Philip was greatly assisted by his instructing solicitor, Alex Goscimski, who devoted a considerable amount of time to the case and attended each day at trial. In addition to the instruction of an expert to assist in challenging the Crown's evidence, Alex's own analysis of the security seal with the use of both a magnifying glass and a telephoto lens attached to a camera, resulted in the prosecution instructed expert having to concede that he was in error when he had concluded within his report, that the security seal had not previously been used. All the hard work resulted in a unanimous acquittal for their client who had been facing a substantial prison sentence if convicted. Instructed by Alexander Goscimski of Goscimski & Associates
('Polski Adwokat Londyn')
R. v. RS - The Crown Court at Guildford - 2021 - RS faced trial on counts of Sexual Assault and Assault by Penetration. Both incidents took place during a meeting in an interview room at the work place. A complaint was made to management immediately, which was followed by an internal workplace investigation. The prosecution applied to admit evidence of a previously alleged sexual assault in the workplace for which RS had received a written warning, and further applied to put previous inconsistent statements made during the workplace investigation before the jury. Philip objected to both matters in writing and in oral submissions following which the Court excluded the material. The defence was one of consent, in that RS genuinely believed the complainant was consenting, and his belief was reasonable in all the circumstances. A substantial amount of unused material relating to phone downloads had to be reviewed by Philip and was used throughout the trial to support the defence case. This was a short but difficult trial, which resulted in RS being unanimously acquitted of all charges. Instructed by Alan Burcombe of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. Dariusz URBAN - Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) [2021] EWCA CRIM 627 - Philip appeared on behalf of the appellant in an appeal against sentence. A sentence of 12 years imprisonment, including credit of 25%, for being concerned in the importation of 25 kg of heroin, was reduced to 10.5 years. Transcript available by clicking here.
The Court stated they were "grateful to Mr Kazantzis for his focused and clear submissions". Although Philip was instructed by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals, he had been instructed by Alexander Goscimski of Goscimski & Associates
('Polski Adwokat Londyn') in the lower court.
R. v. SK - The Crown Court at Southwark - 2020 - Philip represented the mother, father and brother of a defendant in Confiscation Proceedings under the direct access scheme. Philip made legal submissions in support of the third party interests of his clients in a property that had legal title in the defendant's name alone (Property A) and another property (Property B) which was registered in the names of both the defendant and of his brother. The Crown had asserted that the defendant had a 100% interest in Property A and a 50% interest in Property B. Philip was successful in arguing that the defendant only at a 33% interest in each of the properties due to the beneficial interests accorded to his clients. This had a significant impact upon the final realisable amount available for the purposes of the Confiscation Order and the financial well being of Philip's clients.
R. v. DC – The Crown Court at Isleworth – 2020 – Philip was instructed on behalf of the third defendant who faced allegations of Conspiracy to Possess, Acquire, Sell or Transfer a Prohibited Weapon, namely a firearm and the ammunition with it. The case was subject to two short trials, the first started in early January and resulted in the jury being discharged due to matters relating to the health of one of the advocates. A retrial commenced in early February, which lasted just three days. Following an in-depth disclosure application made by the defence, the prosecution offered no evidence, resulting in all three defendants being acquitted. Instructed by Jag Phull of Langfield Law.
R. v. DH – The Crown Court at Bristol – 2019 – A very difficult trial, where Philip represented the defendant as junior counsel alone, as despite the prosecution having two counsel and the case being allocated to a High Court Judge, his application for the Representation Order to be extended to permit the instruction of two counsel was refused by the Court. The defendant had pleaded guilty to several offences committed whilst in breach of licence, having been released from an earlier term of imprisonment for public protection (IPP). The defendant denied two counts of attempted murder of police officers and the alternative count of being in possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life. Armed police were approaching a property that the defendant was in, whereby he fired a shotgun out of a first-floor window. He was acquitted of the two attempted murder charges, which had a significant impact on the overall sentence. Instructed by Lesley-Anne Perry of Wells Burcombe LLP. Widely spread media coverage: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-50301124
R. v. LK – The Crown Court at Southampton – 2019 – A relatively short but serious trial where Philip’s client faced charges of conspiracy to supply class A and B drugs. The defendant had links to the address where supplies were seen on CCTV to be undertaken in his presence by his co-defendant. Furthermore, the main consignments of drugs were found within various bags contained within a rucksack, his client’s fingerprints were found on a TK Maxx bag, a black plastic bag within that and further grey and black inner bags. In addition to the difficulty regarding fingerprints, at total of £37,873 cash was found in various quantities and locations at his client’s address. The jury returned unanimous verdicts of not guilty in respect of the drugs charges faced at trial. Instructed by Steve Garratt and Raf Demczuk of O’Neill, Wright & Nash Solicitors.
R. v. AH – The Crown Court at Woolwich – 2018 – Philip was leading junior counsel, where he led Patrick Cassidy of Kenworthy Chambers. This was a trial which lasted 43 days, involving various counts of Conspiracy to Assist in the Unlawful Immigration to the UK, between 1 January 2017 and 13 December 2017, in addition to a number of Counts of Converting Criminal Property, being the proceeds of those Conspiracies between the same dates. There were in excess of 14,000 pages of served documentary evidence, in addition to a further 12,000 pages of used digital evidence, much of which related to Viber messaging and so required detailed analysis and consideration. Much of their client’s defence related to his transactions as an unregistered “Hawala” dealer. This required detailed cross-examination of the Crown’s financial expert and resulted in their client being acquitted of being in possession of £107,000 cash upon his first arrest on 15 June 2017 and a further allegation involving possession of £35,800 jointly with another two co-defendants. That was despite some admissions as to involvement in people-smuggling, made both by way of guilty plea and in covert recordings in the defendant’s vehicle before charge and whilst detained in custody. This was a very difficult trial which resulted in a number of not guilty verdicts as against their client. Instructed by Ian Anderson of A&M Solicitors.
R. v. VS – The Crown Court at Wood Green – 2018 – Philip was leading junior counsel, where he led, Graham Lloyd, a very experienced solicitor advocate in this case which lasted 25 days. The case concerned three complex frauds where the loss amounted to almost £2.5 million whilst the risk of loss before discovery was a little over £4 million. The case also involved money laundering, and possession of banking paraphernalia used in the course of the fraud, and possession of genuine and false identity documents. Philp and Graham acted for the first defendant and so had to take the lead on much of the work throughout the trial. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. IU - The Crown Court at Inner London – 2017 – A trial lasing thirty-three days, where Philip was led by Alisdair Williamson QC of Raymond Buildings, in what was a tragic murder case. The certificate extending the Representation to allow for Queen’s Counsel and Junior advocate was only granted some twelve days before trial. This was a difficult trial where their client faced charges of Murder, Conspiracy to Cause GBH, Conspiracy to Cause ABH and Possession of an Offensive Weapon. The murder alleged to have been committed on a joint enterprise basis, for which the prosecution relied on a vast number of texts and other social media messages, months of mobile phone data, in addition to many hours of CCTV evidence. Their client was acquitted of the murder charge and the alternative of manslaughter, so avoided a life sentence being imposed. Instructed by Emma Rahman and Stuart Harris of HP Gower Solicitors - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5206649/Teenage-killer-knifed-student-egg-row-jailed.html
R. v. XX – The Crown Court at Reading – 2017 – A nine-day trial, where Philip represented a 17-year old youth jointly charged with another 17-year old on a count of attempted murder with an alternative count of wounding with intent. The case arose from the youth’s plan to steal 1 ounce of cannabis from a supplier. On running off with the drugs, the dealer gave chase and was ultimately stabbed with a very large kitchen knife whilst in an altercation with the co-defendant. The dealer asserted that Philip’s client had shouted “kill him” before he had been stabbed. Issues in the case related to who had initial possession of the knife, and whether Philip’s client had shouted the words “kill him” or offered some other assistance or encouragement to the co-defendant such as by being armed with the hammer. A classic joint enterprise case. The defendants were stopped very shortly after the incident with the co-defendant found in possession of the blooded knife and the cannabis, whilst Philip’s client was found in possession of a claw hammer. Philip’s client was acquitted of both counts, whilst the co-defendant was convicted by majority of the wounding with intent count. Instructed by Reena Hunjan of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. MR – The Crown Court at Kingston – 2017 – Philip was instructed very late in this case, as previous counsel could not attend the trial. This was a case charged as Conspiracy to Supply Class A drugs, namely Cocaine. Philip’s client, was a lorry driver whose vehicle had been logged on Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) on two occasions at a place that was 30 miles off his expected route. There was also CCTV of the latter visit showing a co-defendant’s vehicle stopping by his lorry for a short period of time before both vehicles leaving the area within minutes of each other. That co-defendant ran a defence based on his belief that he was dealing in Cannabis and stated someone had placed the drugs into his vehicle. A defence witness had to be organised to give evidence over the video link from Poland. The two co-defendants were found within a flat the following day with two others who had earlier pleaded guilty. Police found some 61 kg of Cocaine within the flat. Both co-defendants were convicted by majority, whilst Philip’s client was acquitted. Instructed by Alexander Goscimski of Goscimski & Associates (http://goscimski.co.uk 'Polski Adwokat Londyn').
R. v. FG – The Central Criminal Court – 2017 – A short five-day trial following guilty pleas by two defendants and a third being severed to a trial at a later date. An allegation of conspiracy to supply class A drugs, namely Cocaine, where the defendant was one of three males that had been in a vehicle within which the drugs were found. The postcode of the “meeting place” had been sent from the defendant’s cheap Nokia phone to an unknown number. Unanimously acquitted by the jury, despite difficulties with phone evidence. Philip acted as junior counsel alone. Instructed by Lesley-Anne Perry of Wells Burcombe LLP
R. v. SL – The Crown Court at Maidstone – 2016 This client transferred representation to Philip as litigator following guilty pleas and sentence. The Confiscation proceedings were extremely complex. The Crown asserted a benefit figure of more than £22 million with identifiable realisable assets of just short of £1 million and asserted hidden assets so that the full amount of £22 million should be deemed payable. Philip spent many hours assessing various aspects of the case and instructed numerous experts on various issues including drugs valuations, phone analysis and handwriting comparison. Philip also submitted detailed skeleton arguments raising complex legal issues resulting from the defendant having been extradited from Spain to face the initial criminal proceedings. The final orders made were a benefit figure of just under £2 million with a realisable amount of £450,000.
R. v. PL – The Central Criminal Court – 2016 Philip represented the first of six defendants as junior counsel alone in a re-trial lasting some seven weeks. His client faced three allegations of false imprisonment in addition to counts of Kidnap, Robbery and possession of an imitation firearm with intent to commit an indictable offence. His client was found not guilty of the firearm offence whilst the jury were unable to decide on the remaining verdicts. The Crown decided it was not in the public interest to proceed to a third trial and so offered no evidence on all the remaining charges. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. DP – The Crown Court at Croydon – 2015 – Philip was led by Jonathan Higgs QC of 5 King’s Bench Walk in what was a very difficult gang related double attempted murder case. Complex issues relating to Gun Shot Residue, DNA and phone analysis had to be carefully scrutinised and tested at trial. After four days of deliberations, the jury acquitted their client of all charges faced by him. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. RS - The Crown Court at Southwark – 2015 – This was the Crown Currency Exchange trial which lasted 46 days. Before the Company’s collapse in October 2010 it was one of the country’s largest personal currency exchange businesses. Philip was led by Sallie Bennett-Jenkins QC of 2 Hare Court. This was a highly complex case which had over 163,000 pages of used prosecution evidence in addition to many thousands of pages of unused material. Having worked on the case since September 2013, many hours had to be set aside to meticulously work through the vast amount of material in order to fully prepare for trial. All the evidence was served electronically and this was one of the first cases to be presented before the jury electronically with the use of iPads. Instructed by Alan Burcombe of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. VL – The Crown Court at Isleworth – 2014 – The defendant was indicted on counts of Conspiracy to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm with Intent and Violent Disorder. The case related to a serious incident of public disorder in Southall Park in August 2013, during which a 23 year old man was stabbed to death and a number of others were seriously injured. Philip was leading junior advocate where he led an independent solicitor advocate, Judith Benson. The case required careful and considered analysis of a substantial amount of CCTV material and complex telephone data. A successful submission of no case to answer was made in respect of the Conspiracy Count and then after some six weeks of trial their client was acquitted of the remaining count of violent disorder. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. MM – Central Criminal Court – 2013 – Philip was the leading junior advocate where he led Steve Garratt, an independent solicitor advocate in this trial, which lasted just short of seven weeks. Throughout the proceedings, the indictment had contained counts of Murder, Manslaughter, Kidnapping, False Imprisonment, Preventing a Lawful and Decent Burial of a Body, Blackmail and Handling Stolen Goods. Philip’s client was unanimously acquitted of all the charges he faced. Instructed by Alexander Goscimski, consultant at Imran Khan & Partners.
R. v. MC – The Crown Court at Salisbury – 2013 – A case of Murder where Philip was led by Ian Glen QC. Their client walked into the offices of a solicitor who was acting for an opposing party and shot him with a sawn-off shotgun. The case raised issues of Diminished Responsibility and Loss of Control. Instructed by Suezanne King of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. IC – The Crown Court at Isleworth – 2013 – The defendant was acquitted of an allegation of rape despite the complainant asserting that she was asleep at the time and the defendant being unable to recollect having had sexual intercourse with her. The forensic evidence confirmed that sexual activity had taken place. The case involved a successful application in accordance with section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 to cross-examine the complainant about previous sexual activity and required great care in the tactical approach to the case. Instructed by Suezanne King of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. HP – The Crown Court at Harrow – 2012 – A ten handed complex Conspiracy to Burgle case which also incorporated an additional charge alleging the defendants conspiring to concern themselves in the retention and disposal of the proceeds of crime. Philip acted as leading junior advocate where he led Simon Gledhill of Thomas More Chambers. The case incorporated covert surveillance including what the Crown asserted was their client driving in an “anti-surveillance manner” and conducting “hostile reconnaissance” of prospective venues to burgle. Furthermore, their client’s phone was cell cited at the time and in the vicinity of at least two premises which were burgled as part of this conspiracy. Despite the strength of the Crown’s case their client was just one of only two defendants unanimously acquitted of all charges after a trial lasting just over four weeks. Instructed by Massimo Trebar of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. RA – The Crown Court at Reading – 2012 – This was a case alleging 6 counts of sexual activity with a child contrary to section 9(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Great care had to be taken in the cross-examination of the young complainant in addition to other family members including her younger brother. In addition a cousin who had made previous complaints of a similar nature and to whom the first complaint was made required careful probing questions to elicit what lead to the complainant opening up to her and to identify inconstancies in the evidence given. The defendant was acquitted of all charges. Instructed by Suezanne King of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. KP - The Crown Court at Southwark – 2012 – Philip acted as leading junior advocate where he led Simon Gledhill of Thomas More Chambers in a highly complex fraud case lasting 11 weeks. A successful submission at half time was made in respect of the main conspiracy count following which their client was unanimously acquitted of all other charges faced. Instructed by Sundeep Pankhania of HP Gower Solicitors.
R. v. MW – The Crown Court at Liverpool – 2012 – This was a case involving a large-scale conspiracy to bring drugs and firearms from continental Europe into England and Scotland, for onward supply. The indictment spanned a period of just over 2 years and the conspirators used two known methods to achieve their goals; one was by use of vehicles with hidden compartments and the other was by the use of human couriers or “mules”. There were in excess of 34,000 pages of used material to consider in this case. Philip was led by Icah Peart QC. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. G.B – The Crown Court at Harrow – 2011 - Philip was the sole defence advocate representing a man alleged to have committed indecent and sexual assault on his step-daughter throughout the years 2000 to 2005 whilst she was under that age of 13. This was a difficult trial requiring careful cross-examination of the complainant and her family members in addition to a friend who had apparently been told about the allegations a number of years earlier. The case involved allegations contrary to the Sexual Offences Acts of 1956 and 2003. Philip’s client was unanimously acquitted of all charges. Instructed by Suezanne King of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. M.K – The Crown Court at Snaresbrook – 2011 – Philip acted as junior alone in this six week trial before the Snaresbrook Crown Court. The case involved allegations of Threats to Kill, Possession of Firearms and Attempted Murder where the complainant was shot seven times. Despite being positively identified by the complainant, Philip’s client was unanimously acquitted of all charges.
R. v. C.T – The Crown Court at Woolwich – 2010 – The defendant was acquitted of aggravated burglary by majority verdict after a five day trial despite having been recognised by one witness at the scene and picked out on an identification procedure by a second witness. This was a classic identification case.
R. v. P.C – The Crown Court at Snaresbrook – 2010 – Acted for the Crown in a complex matter which lasted nine weeks and the press reported as a case where the defendants “made ‘James Bond-style’ lethal weapons in a ‘homemade gun factory’” .
R. v. D.P - The Crown Court at Reading – 2009 – The defendant was acquitted of all allegations faced which included, Kidnapping, Threats to Kill and ABH.
R. v. L.C - The Crown Court at Inner London – 2009 - A verdict of not guilty in respect of a s.18 GBH allegation made by the defendant’s common law wife who had received very serious knife wounds.
R. v. N.A - The Crown Court at Kingston – 2009 - A large scale people smuggling and money laundering case which lasted 8 weeks and resulted in unanimous verdicts of not guilty on both counts.
R. v. J.J - Central Criminal Court – 2008 – Philip was led junior counsel, led by Courtenay Griffiths Q.C. in the murder case of Nisha Patel-Nasri a Special Constable.
R. v. P.R. - Court-martial at Catterick Barracks - 2007 - Successfully defended in a four day rape allegation upon a fellow soldier.
R. v. J.J - The Crown Court at Croydon – 2007 – A case where a loaded prohibited firearm was found beneath the driver’s seat of the car the defendant was driving. The car itself was proved to be stolen and showing cloned number plates. Despite the obvious difficulties in the case, the defendant was found not guilty.
R. v. C.M – The Crown Court at Kingston – 2005 – Philip was led junior counsel in this matter in which his client was acquitted following a three month trial alleging conspiracy to evade the prohibition on importation of cocaine.
R. v. J.H – The Crown Court at Southwark – 2005 – Said to be the largest mail dumping fraud to date. The Crown offered no evidence against Philip’s client on the second day of trial.
R. v. DH – The Crown Court at Bristol – 2019 – A very difficult trial, where Philip represented the defendant as junior counsel alone, as despite the prosecution having two counsel and the case being allocated to a High Court Judge, his application for the Representation Order to be extended to permit the instruction of two counsel was refused by the Court. The defendant had pleaded guilty to several offences committed whilst in breach of licence, having been released from an earlier term of imprisonment for public protection (IPP). The defendant denied two counts of attempted murder of police officers and the alternative count of being in possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life. Armed police were approaching a property that the defendant was in, whereby he fired a shotgun out of a first-floor window. He was acquitted of the two attempted murder charges, which had a significant impact on the overall sentence. Instructed by Lesley-Anne Perry of Wells Burcombe LLP. Widely spread media coverage: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-50301124
R. v. LK – The Crown Court at Southampton – 2019 – A relatively short but serious trial where Philip’s client faced charges of conspiracy to supply class A and B drugs. The defendant had links to the address where supplies were seen on CCTV to be undertaken in his presence by his co-defendant. Furthermore, the main consignments of drugs were found within various bags contained within a rucksack, his client’s fingerprints were found on a TK Maxx bag, a black plastic bag within that and further grey and black inner bags. In addition to the difficulty regarding fingerprints, at total of £37,873 cash was found in various quantities and locations at his client’s address. The jury returned unanimous verdicts of not guilty in respect of the drugs charges faced at trial. Instructed by Steve Garratt and Raf Demczuk of O’Neill, Wright & Nash Solicitors.
R. v. AH – The Crown Court at Woolwich – 2018 – Philip was leading junior counsel, where he led Patrick Cassidy of Kenworthy Chambers. This was a trial which lasted 43 days, involving various counts of Conspiracy to Assist in the Unlawful Immigration to the UK, between 1 January 2017 and 13 December 2017, in addition to a number of Counts of Converting Criminal Property, being the proceeds of those Conspiracies between the same dates. There were in excess of 14,000 pages of served documentary evidence, in addition to a further 12,000 pages of used digital evidence, much of which related to Viber messaging and so required detailed analysis and consideration. Much of their client’s defence related to his transactions as an unregistered “Hawala” dealer. This required detailed cross-examination of the Crown’s financial expert and resulted in their client being acquitted of being in possession of £107,000 cash upon his first arrest on 15 June 2017 and a further allegation involving possession of £35,800 jointly with another two co-defendants. That was despite some admissions as to involvement in people-smuggling, made both by way of guilty plea and in covert recordings in the defendant’s vehicle before charge and whilst detained in custody. This was a very difficult trial which resulted in a number of not guilty verdicts as against their client. Instructed by Ian Anderson of A&M Solicitors.
R. v. VS – The Crown Court at Wood Green – 2018 – Philip was leading junior counsel, where he led, Graham Lloyd, a very experienced solicitor advocate in this case which lasted 25 days. The case concerned three complex frauds where the loss amounted to almost £2.5 million whilst the risk of loss before discovery was a little over £4 million. The case also involved money laundering, and possession of banking paraphernalia used in the course of the fraud, and possession of genuine and false identity documents. Philp and Graham acted for the first defendant and so had to take the lead on much of the work throughout the trial. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. IU - The Crown Court at Inner London – 2017 – A trial lasing thirty-three days, where Philip was led by Alisdair Williamson QC of Raymond Buildings, in what was a tragic murder case. The certificate extending the Representation to allow for Queen’s Counsel and Junior advocate was only granted some twelve days before trial. This was a difficult trial where their client faced charges of Murder, Conspiracy to Cause GBH, Conspiracy to Cause ABH and Possession of an Offensive Weapon. The murder alleged to have been committed on a joint enterprise basis, for which the prosecution relied on a vast number of texts and other social media messages, months of mobile phone data, in addition to many hours of CCTV evidence. Their client was acquitted of the murder charge and the alternative of manslaughter, so avoided a life sentence being imposed. Instructed by Emma Rahman and Stuart Harris of HP Gower Solicitors - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5206649/Teenage-killer-knifed-student-egg-row-jailed.html
R. v. XX – The Crown Court at Reading – 2017 – A nine-day trial, where Philip represented a 17-year old youth jointly charged with another 17-year old on a count of attempted murder with an alternative count of wounding with intent. The case arose from the youth’s plan to steal 1 ounce of cannabis from a supplier. On running off with the drugs, the dealer gave chase and was ultimately stabbed with a very large kitchen knife whilst in an altercation with the co-defendant. The dealer asserted that Philip’s client had shouted “kill him” before he had been stabbed. Issues in the case related to who had initial possession of the knife, and whether Philip’s client had shouted the words “kill him” or offered some other assistance or encouragement to the co-defendant such as by being armed with the hammer. A classic joint enterprise case. The defendants were stopped very shortly after the incident with the co-defendant found in possession of the blooded knife and the cannabis, whilst Philip’s client was found in possession of a claw hammer. Philip’s client was acquitted of both counts, whilst the co-defendant was convicted by majority of the wounding with intent count. Instructed by Reena Hunjan of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. MR – The Crown Court at Kingston – 2017 – Philip was instructed very late in this case, as previous counsel could not attend the trial. This was a case charged as Conspiracy to Supply Class A drugs, namely Cocaine. Philip’s client, was a lorry driver whose vehicle had been logged on Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) on two occasions at a place that was 30 miles off his expected route. There was also CCTV of the latter visit showing a co-defendant’s vehicle stopping by his lorry for a short period of time before both vehicles leaving the area within minutes of each other. That co-defendant ran a defence based on his belief that he was dealing in Cannabis and stated someone had placed the drugs into his vehicle. A defence witness had to be organised to give evidence over the video link from Poland. The two co-defendants were found within a flat the following day with two others who had earlier pleaded guilty. Police found some 61 kg of Cocaine within the flat. Both co-defendants were convicted by majority, whilst Philip’s client was acquitted. Instructed by Alexander Goscimski of Goscimski & Associates (http://goscimski.co.uk 'Polski Adwokat Londyn').
R. v. FG – The Central Criminal Court – 2017 – A short five-day trial following guilty pleas by two defendants and a third being severed to a trial at a later date. An allegation of conspiracy to supply class A drugs, namely Cocaine, where the defendant was one of three males that had been in a vehicle within which the drugs were found. The postcode of the “meeting place” had been sent from the defendant’s cheap Nokia phone to an unknown number. Unanimously acquitted by the jury, despite difficulties with phone evidence. Philip acted as junior counsel alone. Instructed by Lesley-Anne Perry of Wells Burcombe LLP
R. v. SL – The Crown Court at Maidstone – 2016 This client transferred representation to Philip as litigator following guilty pleas and sentence. The Confiscation proceedings were extremely complex. The Crown asserted a benefit figure of more than £22 million with identifiable realisable assets of just short of £1 million and asserted hidden assets so that the full amount of £22 million should be deemed payable. Philip spent many hours assessing various aspects of the case and instructed numerous experts on various issues including drugs valuations, phone analysis and handwriting comparison. Philip also submitted detailed skeleton arguments raising complex legal issues resulting from the defendant having been extradited from Spain to face the initial criminal proceedings. The final orders made were a benefit figure of just under £2 million with a realisable amount of £450,000.
R. v. PL – The Central Criminal Court – 2016 Philip represented the first of six defendants as junior counsel alone in a re-trial lasting some seven weeks. His client faced three allegations of false imprisonment in addition to counts of Kidnap, Robbery and possession of an imitation firearm with intent to commit an indictable offence. His client was found not guilty of the firearm offence whilst the jury were unable to decide on the remaining verdicts. The Crown decided it was not in the public interest to proceed to a third trial and so offered no evidence on all the remaining charges. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. DP – The Crown Court at Croydon – 2015 – Philip was led by Jonathan Higgs QC of 5 King’s Bench Walk in what was a very difficult gang related double attempted murder case. Complex issues relating to Gun Shot Residue, DNA and phone analysis had to be carefully scrutinised and tested at trial. After four days of deliberations, the jury acquitted their client of all charges faced by him. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. RS - The Crown Court at Southwark – 2015 – This was the Crown Currency Exchange trial which lasted 46 days. Before the Company’s collapse in October 2010 it was one of the country’s largest personal currency exchange businesses. Philip was led by Sallie Bennett-Jenkins QC of 2 Hare Court. This was a highly complex case which had over 163,000 pages of used prosecution evidence in addition to many thousands of pages of unused material. Having worked on the case since September 2013, many hours had to be set aside to meticulously work through the vast amount of material in order to fully prepare for trial. All the evidence was served electronically and this was one of the first cases to be presented before the jury electronically with the use of iPads. Instructed by Alan Burcombe of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. VL – The Crown Court at Isleworth – 2014 – The defendant was indicted on counts of Conspiracy to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm with Intent and Violent Disorder. The case related to a serious incident of public disorder in Southall Park in August 2013, during which a 23 year old man was stabbed to death and a number of others were seriously injured. Philip was leading junior advocate where he led an independent solicitor advocate, Judith Benson. The case required careful and considered analysis of a substantial amount of CCTV material and complex telephone data. A successful submission of no case to answer was made in respect of the Conspiracy Count and then after some six weeks of trial their client was acquitted of the remaining count of violent disorder. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. MM – Central Criminal Court – 2013 – Philip was the leading junior advocate where he led Steve Garratt, an independent solicitor advocate in this trial, which lasted just short of seven weeks. Throughout the proceedings, the indictment had contained counts of Murder, Manslaughter, Kidnapping, False Imprisonment, Preventing a Lawful and Decent Burial of a Body, Blackmail and Handling Stolen Goods. Philip’s client was unanimously acquitted of all the charges he faced. Instructed by Alexander Goscimski, consultant at Imran Khan & Partners.
R. v. MC – The Crown Court at Salisbury – 2013 – A case of Murder where Philip was led by Ian Glen QC. Their client walked into the offices of a solicitor who was acting for an opposing party and shot him with a sawn-off shotgun. The case raised issues of Diminished Responsibility and Loss of Control. Instructed by Suezanne King of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. IC – The Crown Court at Isleworth – 2013 – The defendant was acquitted of an allegation of rape despite the complainant asserting that she was asleep at the time and the defendant being unable to recollect having had sexual intercourse with her. The forensic evidence confirmed that sexual activity had taken place. The case involved a successful application in accordance with section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 to cross-examine the complainant about previous sexual activity and required great care in the tactical approach to the case. Instructed by Suezanne King of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. HP – The Crown Court at Harrow – 2012 – A ten handed complex Conspiracy to Burgle case which also incorporated an additional charge alleging the defendants conspiring to concern themselves in the retention and disposal of the proceeds of crime. Philip acted as leading junior advocate where he led Simon Gledhill of Thomas More Chambers. The case incorporated covert surveillance including what the Crown asserted was their client driving in an “anti-surveillance manner” and conducting “hostile reconnaissance” of prospective venues to burgle. Furthermore, their client’s phone was cell cited at the time and in the vicinity of at least two premises which were burgled as part of this conspiracy. Despite the strength of the Crown’s case their client was just one of only two defendants unanimously acquitted of all charges after a trial lasting just over four weeks. Instructed by Massimo Trebar of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. RA – The Crown Court at Reading – 2012 – This was a case alleging 6 counts of sexual activity with a child contrary to section 9(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Great care had to be taken in the cross-examination of the young complainant in addition to other family members including her younger brother. In addition a cousin who had made previous complaints of a similar nature and to whom the first complaint was made required careful probing questions to elicit what lead to the complainant opening up to her and to identify inconstancies in the evidence given. The defendant was acquitted of all charges. Instructed by Suezanne King of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. KP - The Crown Court at Southwark – 2012 – Philip acted as leading junior advocate where he led Simon Gledhill of Thomas More Chambers in a highly complex fraud case lasting 11 weeks. A successful submission at half time was made in respect of the main conspiracy count following which their client was unanimously acquitted of all other charges faced. Instructed by Sundeep Pankhania of HP Gower Solicitors.
R. v. MW – The Crown Court at Liverpool – 2012 – This was a case involving a large-scale conspiracy to bring drugs and firearms from continental Europe into England and Scotland, for onward supply. The indictment spanned a period of just over 2 years and the conspirators used two known methods to achieve their goals; one was by use of vehicles with hidden compartments and the other was by the use of human couriers or “mules”. There were in excess of 34,000 pages of used material to consider in this case. Philip was led by Icah Peart QC. Instructed by Jas Virdee of Virdee Solicitors.
R. v. G.B – The Crown Court at Harrow – 2011 - Philip was the sole defence advocate representing a man alleged to have committed indecent and sexual assault on his step-daughter throughout the years 2000 to 2005 whilst she was under that age of 13. This was a difficult trial requiring careful cross-examination of the complainant and her family members in addition to a friend who had apparently been told about the allegations a number of years earlier. The case involved allegations contrary to the Sexual Offences Acts of 1956 and 2003. Philip’s client was unanimously acquitted of all charges. Instructed by Suezanne King of Wells Burcombe LLP.
R. v. M.K – The Crown Court at Snaresbrook – 2011 – Philip acted as junior alone in this six week trial before the Snaresbrook Crown Court. The case involved allegations of Threats to Kill, Possession of Firearms and Attempted Murder where the complainant was shot seven times. Despite being positively identified by the complainant, Philip’s client was unanimously acquitted of all charges.
R. v. C.T – The Crown Court at Woolwich – 2010 – The defendant was acquitted of aggravated burglary by majority verdict after a five day trial despite having been recognised by one witness at the scene and picked out on an identification procedure by a second witness. This was a classic identification case.
R. v. P.C – The Crown Court at Snaresbrook – 2010 – Acted for the Crown in a complex matter which lasted nine weeks and the press reported as a case where the defendants “made ‘James Bond-style’ lethal weapons in a ‘homemade gun factory’” .
R. v. D.P - The Crown Court at Reading – 2009 – The defendant was acquitted of all allegations faced which included, Kidnapping, Threats to Kill and ABH.
R. v. L.C - The Crown Court at Inner London – 2009 - A verdict of not guilty in respect of a s.18 GBH allegation made by the defendant’s common law wife who had received very serious knife wounds.
R. v. N.A - The Crown Court at Kingston – 2009 - A large scale people smuggling and money laundering case which lasted 8 weeks and resulted in unanimous verdicts of not guilty on both counts.
R. v. J.J - Central Criminal Court – 2008 – Philip was led junior counsel, led by Courtenay Griffiths Q.C. in the murder case of Nisha Patel-Nasri a Special Constable.
R. v. P.R. - Court-martial at Catterick Barracks - 2007 - Successfully defended in a four day rape allegation upon a fellow soldier.
R. v. J.J - The Crown Court at Croydon – 2007 – A case where a loaded prohibited firearm was found beneath the driver’s seat of the car the defendant was driving. The car itself was proved to be stolen and showing cloned number plates. Despite the obvious difficulties in the case, the defendant was found not guilty.
R. v. C.M – The Crown Court at Kingston – 2005 – Philip was led junior counsel in this matter in which his client was acquitted following a three month trial alleging conspiracy to evade the prohibition on importation of cocaine.
R. v. J.H – The Crown Court at Southwark – 2005 – Said to be the largest mail dumping fraud to date. The Crown offered no evidence against Philip’s client on the second day of trial.
REPORTED CASES
R. v. Dariusz URBAN [2021] EWCA CRIM 627 - A sentence of 12 years imprisonment, including credit of 25%, for being concerned in the importation of 25 kg of heroin, was reduced to 10.5 years. Transcript available by clicking here.
R. v. Michael Williams [2012] EWCA Crim 2664 Reduction in sentence for what was described by the Court as a “massive scale importation” of class A drugs. The case also considered the impact of the aggregate sentence to be served by the defendant due to a similar conviction in Holland prior to his extradition back to England.
Catanzano v Studio London Ltd (In Administration) UKEAT/0487/11/DM – 7 March 2012 - The Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the appeal insofar as compensation for sex discrimination ought to have been joint and several between the responsible respondents. However, this did not apply to the 25% uplift. Finally, the Employment Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation for loss of earnings, on a joint and several basis, for sex discrimination, although the same loss was awarded as unlawful deductions against the employer only. Link: https://www.employmentcasesupdate.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed11896
R. v. Naeem AKHTAR [2006] EWCA Crim 3281 Reduction in sentence due to circumstances and in particular the disability and the difficulties which that created for the applicant in coping with the prison environment, the sentence of nine months imprisonment was excessive and the appropriate sentence ought to have been four months.
R. v. David ADDY [2006] EWCA Crim 2680 Sentences should have reflected the delay with its consequent anxiety and concern for the defendants. An adjustment should be made as a matter of principle but is bound to be modest.
R. (on the application of M) v. Isleworth Crown Court [2005] EWHC 363 (Admin DC.) Judicial review lies in respect of a refusal of bail in the Crown Court; and that decisions as to bail do not fall within the exclusion of judicial review in respect of "matters relating to trial on indictment" under section 29(3) of the Supreme Court [Senior Courts] Act 1981
Chambers of Philip Kazantzis
+44 (0)7961 109806
2nd Floor, 5 Holywell Hill,
St Albans
Hertfordshire
AL1 1EU
DX: 6108 St Albans
Regulated by the Bar Standards Board
Philip Kazantzis is also a door tenant at Church Court Chambers
Central Court, 25 Southampton Buildings, London, WC2A 1AL
Contact Details:
clerks@churchcourtchambers.co.uk
Tel:+44 020 7936 3637
Fax: +44 020 7583 2061
DX: 458 London Chancery Lane
clerks@churchcourtchambers.co.uk
Tel:+44 020 7936 3637
Fax: +44 020 7583 2061
DX: 458 London Chancery Lane
