Steven is a qualified Solicitor and joined Kangs in 2011 after completing a Master’s Degree (LL.M) in Criminal Law and Criminal Justice at the University of Birmingham.
He was called to the Bar in 2009.
Steven’s caseload covers a broad spectrum of work arising from a number of Kangs departments, including Regulatory, Crown Court and Sports Law.
Steven has enjoyed flying planes for a number of years and is a qualified pilot.
As the result of this recreational pursuit, he has developed an in-depth knowledge of the Rules of the Air as legislated for in the Air Navigation Order 2016 (ANO).
Breaching the ANO is a Criminal offence and such offences are prosecuted by the Civil Aviation Authority on behalf of the Crown.
Consequently, as both a pilot and a qualified Criminal Lawyer, Steven is exceptionally well placed to advise and represent General Aviation pilots (GA pilots) who face Prosecution for breaches of the ‘Rules of the Air’.
His aviation experience leads him to being particularly well qualified to assist and represent a pilot at interview under caution.
In addition to representing GA pilots, Steven is able to advise and represent individuals who control Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (Drones), the operation of which is subject to a number of the Regulations set out in the ANO.
As with GA pilots, individuals operating Drones may also be interviewed under caution and ultimately, Prosecuted for breaches of the ANO.
Steven handles a busy caseload of matters which includes:
- MTIC/Carousel Fraud
- Mortgage Frauds
- Construction Frauds under the Construction Industry Scheme
- Money Laundering
- Serious Sexual Offences
- Sections 18, 20, 47 and 39 Assaults
- Conspiracy to Supply Class A and Class B Drugs
- Firearms Offences
- Perverting the Course of Justice
- Robbery, Burglary and Theft
- Driving Offences
Steven was recently instructed to act for a British National who was prosecuted for crimes committed outside the jurisdiction (Kenya) in what is believed to be one of the first prosecutions of this type in the UK. Steven travelled to Kenya twice during the proceedings.
Steven is an Accredited Police Station Representative and attends police stations across the Midlands and the UK. Steven prides himself on the ability to provide sound and proactive advice at the police station which will often determine whether the case proceeds any further. Steven has a thorough knowledge and understanding of Police Station Law and Procedure and is happy to advise on and attend police interviews under caution anywhere in the country
- Drafting Section 18 and Section 17 Responses
- Hidden Assets
- Contested Hearings
Steven has extensive knowledge and experience in dealing with Confiscation Proceedings and Restraint Orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. This has often involved the drafting of detailed Section 17 responses which, in some cases, has resulted in the Crown either abandoning claims for Hidden Assets or in the making of Nominal Confiscation Orders. Steven often undertakes legal research for other members of the Confiscation Team on more complex areas of Confiscation and the Proceeds of Crime.
- Aviation Law under the ANO
- Health and Safety
- Food Hygiene and Environmental Health
- Football Intermediary Related Work
- Intermediary | Player | Club Contracts
- Professional Bodies
Steven is in the process of becoming a FA Registered Intermediary and undertakes some work within the Sports Law and Management department.
Since joining Kangs Steven has developed experience working in criminal law, both in practice and postgraduate academia, and samples of his recent caseload include:
Sexual Offences / SOPO
- R v C – Birmingham Crown Court
Instructed to act on behalf of a Defendant charged with rape. The Defendant was alleged to have raped his ex-partner whilst at home. Following a five day trial the defendant was acquitted. The case involved analysing a huge amount of mobile data such as text and WhatsApp messages and following the compilation of a comprehensive schedule, provided the basis for a detailed and thorough cross examination of the complainant.
- R v P – Wolverhampton Crown Court
Instructed to represent a vulnerable Defendant with learning difficulties, charged with committing an offence with intent to commit a sexual offence. Having pleaded guilty, as a direct result of the extensive mitigation obtained and put forward on his behalf, our client avoided an immediate custodial sentence for this very serious offence.
- R v H – Birmingham Crown Court
Instructed along with Helen Holder to represent the Defendant in what is believed to be one of the first prosecutions in the UK for serious sexual offences committed outside the jurisdiction (Kenya). The case was very complex and involved a 33 count indictment with multiple child complainants. Following an 8 week trial, our client was acquitted of all of the most serious offences.
- R v S – Birmingham Crown Court
Instructed to act on behalf of a Defendant charged with breaching the terms of his Sexual Offences Prevention Order and Notification Requirements. Steven represented the Defendant from his interview under caution at the police station to its disposal in the Crown Court.
- R v M – Warwick Crown Court
Following the Defendant pleading guilty to the Supply of Class A drugs, the Prosecution commenced Confiscation Proceedings and sought to recover a vehicle thought to be owned by the Defendant on the basis that (1) it was criminal property and (2) it was an available asset. There was a contested Hearing at which it was successfully argued that (1) the vehicle was not criminal property and (2) it was a conditional gift (from the defendant’s parents) for which the condition was later breached as the result of which the defendant’s parents revoked the gift. Accordingly, it was found that it was not a recoverable asset.
- R v H – Birmingham Crown Court
Acted on behalf of the Defendant charged with a Section 20 assault, the complainant having been stabbed. Following a 3 day trial, our client was unanimously acquitted.
- R v S – Birmingham Crown Court
Acted on behalf of the Defendant charged with savagely assaulting a member of the public who suffered a fractured jaw. Notwithstanding the strong Prosecution evidence, our client was unanimously acquitted by reason of self-defence.
- R v T – Stafford Crown Court
Acted for a Defendant charged with the production of cannabis which the Prosecution described as a ‘commercial entity’ after he, along with others, had rented a property in which the cannabis was produced. In the face of an immediate custodial sentence, our client received a 12 month Community Order.
Confiscation Proceedings | Restraint Orders
- R v W – Manchester Crown Court
Instructed along with Amandeep Murria to represent the Defendant who faced Confiscation Proceedings under the Drug Trafficking Act 1994, following his guilty pleas to a number of drugs offences, including Conspiracy to Supply Class A Drugs. The Crown alleged that the Defendant had benefited from the conspiracy to the tune of £10 million plus. The Crown alleged the Defendant had a number of Hidden Assets which included a number of properties, both in the UK and Caribbean. After obtaining detailed and extensive instructions from our client, a detailed statement was served which ultimately led to the Crown abandoning their claim of Hidden Assets.
- R v S – Portsmouth Crown Court
Having been instructed to act on behalf of the Defendant in the substantive proceedings (Conspiracy to Supply Class A Drugs), Steven continued to act for the Defendant in subsequent Restraint / Confiscation Proceedings. Following a forensic analysis of substantial telephone and cell-site evidence, Steven successfully argued ‘apportionment’, resulting in our client’s benefit figure being reduced by over a quarter of a million pounds.
- R v S – Birmingham Crown Court
Following the Defendant entering guilty pleas to a number of fraud offences relating to sub-standard work carried out on residential properties, the Prosecution sought a Hidden Assets Order against the Defendant in the sum of £250,000. Following a detailed Section 17 response, Steven successfully convinced the Prosecution (without the need for a contested Hearing) to abandon their claim for Hidden Assets, resulting in a £1.00 nominal Order.
- W v British Board of Boxing Control (BBBC)
Currently instructed, along with Hamraj Kang, to challenge the decision of the BBBC not to grant a professional boxer a UK licence.
Disclosure and Barring Service
Steven has also developed a busy practice in the niche area of DBS work and is regularly instructed to challenge the Police who seek to disclose certain information on an applicant’s enhanced DBS certificate. Instructions have also included challenging the Disclosure and Barring Service who seek to place the applicant on the adults and/or children’s barred lists.
- A v The Metropolitan Police
Instructed by a University employee following the disclosure of information on his Enhanced Certificate by the Met Police, notwithstanding the fact that he had never been charged with an offence. The information alleged that our client had attempted to administer a substance into the drink of a female with the intention to stupify or overpower her for the purpose of sexual activity. Following detailed submissions to the Independent Monitor, the appeal was upheld and the Met Police were directed to remove the information from the Enhanced Certificate.
- O v Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police
Instructed by a health care professional to challenge the decision of the Chief Constable to include information within an Enhanced DBS Certificate. The information related to allegations made by a number of third parties about the way in which our client allegedly treated his elderly mother over a 10 year period. Following extensive submissions, Staffordshire Police decided not to include the information on the certificate.
- S v Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police
Instructed by a lawyer to challenge the decision of the Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police to include information within an Enhanced DBS Certificate. Following extensive submissions through a detailed application of the relevant European and National Law, successfully argued that the information disclosed by Staffordshire Police in the Enhanced Certificate was (1) not relevant and (2) if it was relevant, it ought not to be included within the Certificate as it interfered with the client’s Article 8 Right to Private Life under the European Convention on Human Rights. Following the submissions, the appeal was upheld, and the Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police removed the information from the Enhanced Certificate.
- A v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police
Instructed by a medical doctor to challenge the decision of the Chief Constable to include information within an Enhanced DBS Certificate. The information related to allegations made by two separate patients at two different Hospital Trusts. The case involved the analysis of numerous reports from the Hospital Trusts involved and the General Medical Council. Following extensive submissions, Greater Manchester Police decided not to include the information on the Certificate.
- T v Chief Constable of the Metropolitan Police
Instructed to challenge the decision of the Chief Constable to include information within an Enhanced DBS Certificate. The information related to an allegation of assault against an elderly patient whilst the client was working as a health care professional within a leading London NHS Trust. Following extensive submissions, the Met Police decided not to include the information on the Certificate.
TEL: 0121 449 9888 | 020 7936 6396 | 07989 521 210 (24hr Emergency Number)