Brief relief over fraudsters’ beef

Two barristers were saved by a judicial review on 6 February from going into the legal history books for the wrong reasons.

Two barristers were saved by a judicial review on 6 February from going into the legal history books for the wrong reasons.

Michael Latham of Furnival Chambers and Elizabeth Norman of Birmingham-based KBW had been accused by convicted fraudsters Hameed Nazham and Murtaza Nazham of perjury, perverting the course of justice and tendering false statements.

If it had gone to court, it would have been the first case of this nature to be tried in the UK and would have had major ramifications within the legal profession.

The stakes being so high, Latham applied for a judicial review against Northamptonshire Magistrates’ Court to stop the summons.

Due to the serious nature of the issue, the High Court unusually heard it before three judges – Lord Justice Moses as well as Mr Justices Sullivan and Forbes.

To the justices it was a cut-and-dried case in favour of the barristers, as insufficient evidence was provided to substantiate the claims.