Select an area of expertise to find out more about our experience.
Find out more about our barristers and business support teams here.
Peter Laverack practises across Chambers’ core areas, representing Government departments, police forces, companies and individuals in various forums.
He has appeared before all levels of the English Courts and before the Privy Council, and has made representations to the European Court of Human Rights. Peter’s practice also spans public inquiries, inquests and misconduct hearings.
Before transferring to the Bar, Peter worked in the NGO and United Nations sectors and as a solicitor at Hogan Lovells, where he practised commercial litigation and arbitration. As a barrister, he continues to take instructions from corporates, in particular in public inquiries and human rights litigation. Peter also acts on constitutional and human rights matters in the English-speaking Caribbean.
Peter was appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel of Counsel in August 2021. He is recognised in Legal 500 as a Leading Junior in Administrative Law & Human Rights and Police Law, and ranked in Chambers UK for Civil Liberties & Human Rights and Police Law.
Peter is ranked in both Legal 500 and Chambers UK for Police Law. His practice for police clients spans civil litigation, judicial review, inquests, misconduct hearings and civil applications in the criminal courts.
He has defended civil claims in the County Court and High Court for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment, assault/battery, personal injury, malicious prosecution, misfeasance in public office, and for alleged breaches of the Human Rights Act 1998, the Equality Act 2010 and the Data Protection Acts 1998 and 2018. Peter also advises and represents police forces in judicial review proceedings, as claimant or defendant. He regularly represents police forces in inquests and Appropriate Authorities in police misconduct proceedings. He also acts for the National Crime Agency and the Independent Office for Police Conduct.
Peter has undertaken secondments to the legal departments of four police forces (Greater Manchester, Lancashire, West Midlands and Staffordshire, and Devon and Cornwall and Dorset), where he worked alongside in-house lawyers and responded to the day-to-day legal queries of officers from Chief Constables to PCs.
Onyema v the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (High Court (KB)) (unreported, 26 April 2024)
Counsel for the respondent at a permission to appeal hearing, which was successfully resisted, and counsel at first instance in a 5-day trial at the Central London County Court, in which the claims for false imprisonment and misfeasance in public office were dismissed.
In the Matter of ‘Officer A’ (29 September 2023)
Counsel for the Metropolitan Police Service’s Appropriate Authority in a misconduct hearing that resulted in several findings of sexual assault and attempted rape by Officer A against a female officer while off duty, and an associated finding of gross misconduct and the outcome of dismissal without notice.
Urch v the Chief Constable of South Wales Police (County Court) (unreported, 20 July 2023)
Counsel for the defendant in a 4-day jury trial at the County Court at Cardiff, in which the ‘Parker defence’ in a claim for false imprisonment was successfully deployed.
Counsel for the claimant (led by John Beggs KC), in a judicial review brought by BTP against the decision not to dismiss an officer who had used his warrant card to engage in sexually inappropriate behaviour with a passing female member of the public. The judge, allowing the claim, held that the Panel had failed to grasp the seriousness and significance of the officer’s conduct and the impact that such conduct has upon public confidence in the police.
Gedman v the Chief Constable of Cheshire Police [2023] EWHC 723 (KB)
Counsel for the defendant in High Court proceedings in London (and related proceedings at the Bristol High Court Registry) in which injunctions had been sought against the Chief Constable surrounding the execution of a warrant, seizure of property and the arrest of the claimant. Both the injunction applications and the proceedings were dismissed.
R (oao Roberts) v the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (High Court (Admin)) (unreported, 19 January 2023)
Counsel for the defendant in a re-opened permission hearing that considered the validity of the claimant’s Notice of Discontinuance and the underlying merits of his claim for judicial review of a police decision not to investigate, with a result that permission was refused by the Court.
R (oao Deacon) v Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court v the Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis [2021] EWHC 3358 (Admin)
Counsel for the Commissioner in judicial review proceedings concerning the true meaning of s.298(2) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The claimant alleged that the Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court had misapplied s.298(2) resulting in cash being forfeited from her as proceeds of crime (Peter acted in the forfeiture proceedings, too). Whipple J agreed that the magistrates had correctly applied s.298(2) and therefore dismissed the claim for judicial review.
Inquest touching the death of Katie Locke
Counsel for Avon & Somerset Constabulary in an inquest, with numerous police and NHS Interested Persons, concerning the murder of Ms Locke by Carl Langdell.
Peter is ranked in Legal 500 as a Leading Junior in Administrative Law and Human Rights, and in Chambers UK for Civil Liberties & Human Rights.
In England & Wales, Peter represents both defendants and claimants in judicial review proceedings concerning common law rights and those protected by the Human Rights Act 1998. He also acts for police forces and Government departments in civil claims under rights-based legislation, such as the Human Rights Act 1998. He also frequently appears in front of domestic courts in the Caribbean whose final appellate court is the Privy Council. He is called to the Bar of St Vincent & the Grenadines and has had ad hoc call in the Cayman Islands. Peter has made representations to the European Court of Human Rights, and has advised potential amici curiae on comparative law in an appeal to the US Supreme Court. He also advises on regional and international treaty law, such as under the American Convention on Human Rights and the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Prior to transferring to the Bar, Peter worked in the NGO sector and as a Legal Consultant to the prosecution section of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, which secured the guilty verdicts against the surviving leaders of the Khmer Rouge regime. His previous role as a solicitor included acting for corporates accused of human rights violations.
Peter has delivered talks and seminars on human rights issues in various forums, including at the UK Parliament, to EU Institutions, and at schools and universities. He has published extensively in academic journals on human rights and international law.
Willis v the Chief Constable of South Wales Police and the Ministry of Justice (County Court) (unreported, 13 November 2024)
Counsel for the defendants in an Article 5 claim (liberty) arising from the arrest of the claimant (an offender on home detention curfew) and his recall to prison due to a mistaken belief that he had breached his licence conditions. The Article 5 claim was dismissed.
Johnson & Macleish v the Attorney General of St Vincent & the Grenadines (High Court SVG) (16 February 2024)
Counsel for the claimants (led by Jason Beer KC before trial, and Joe Middleton KC at trial) in a constitutional challenge to that jurisdiction’s laws that criminalise consensual same-sex sexual intimacy, and now counsel in the subsequent appeal to the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal.
Counsel for the claimant (led by John Beggs KC), in a judicial review brought by BTP against the decision not to dismiss an officer who had used his warrant card to engage in sexually inappropriate behaviour with a passing female member of the public. The judge, allowing the claim, held that the Panel had failed to grasp the seriousness and significance of the officer’s conduct and the impact that such conduct has upon public confidence in the police.
R (oao Colours Caribbean) v the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (High Court (Admin)) (unreported, 27 April 2023)
Counsel for the claimant (led by Edward Fitzgerald KC), seeking permission to challenge in the English courts the lawfulness of a provision in the constitution of a British Overseas Territory, passed into law on the authority of the defendant. These proceedings exhausted domestic remedies, paving the way for an application to the European Court of Human Rights to challenge the provision of the constitution in that forum.
Day & Bodden Bush v the Governor of the Cayman Islands [2022] UKPC 6
Counsel for the claimants (led by Edward Fitzgerald KC and Ben Tonner KC) in a constitutional challenge regarding the absence of civil partnership and marriage for same-sex couples. Peter acted for the claimants at all stages. At first instance, the Cayman Islands’ Grand Court granted the desired relief of amending the Marriage Law to enable same-sex couples to marry. On appeal, that decision was reversed, but with the Cayman Islands’ Court of Appeal declaring that legislation must be passed to establish an institution that is functionally equivalent to marriage. That decision was upheld by the Privy Council. These proceedings resulted in the legal recognition of same-sex relationships for the first time in the Cayman Islands, via the creation of civil partnership.
R (oao Deacon) v Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis [2021] EWHC 3358 (Admin)
Counsel for the Commissioner in judicial review proceedings concerning the true meaning of s.298(2) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The claimant alleged that the Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court had misapplied s.298(2) resulting in cash being forfeited from her as proceeds of crime (Peter acted in the forfeiture proceedings, too). Whipple J agreed that the magistrates had correctly applied s.298(2) and therefore dismissed the claim for judicial review.
Jones v the Attorney General of Trinidad & Tobago¬ (High Court TT, 12 April 2018)
Legal advisor to the claimant in the landmark constitutional challenge that found unlawful that jurisdiction’s laws that criminalise consensual same-sex sexual intimacy. The judgment has been cited around the world, including by the Indian Supreme Court and other courts of the Commonwealth Caribbean.
Peter acts in sensitive and high-profile inquests including Article 2 inquests and those in front of a jury. He has acted for police forces in inquests arising from a murder, a drowning after a police pursuit on foot, a death after a collision with a police car, and responses to suicides. Peter’s recent inquests for Government departments include those arising from deaths on the prison estate and one that assessed the potential contribution of a Covid-19 vaccine to a death.
Peter contributes to 5 Essex Chambers’ Inquests Blog, most recently on ‘Submissions at conclusion of inquest: Galbraith Plus and causation submissions’. https://5essexcourt.co.uk/resources/blogs-view/submissions-at-conclusion-of-inquest-galbraith-plus-and-causation-submissions
Peter acts on behalf of and advises public bodies and private companies in public inquiries. He was junior counsel (and then sole counsel) for Building Research Establishment in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. In the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, Peter advised a Government department in preparation for expected core participant status.
Peter has an interest in Data Protection and Information Law and is available to instruct in the following matters:
Holt v Information Commissioner and the Ministry of Justice [2024] UKFTT 966 (GRC)
Counsel for the MoJ in an appeal against ICO’s decision that the MoJ was under no obligation under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to provide an amateur genealogist with a copy of an original will. ICO had held that HM Courts & Tribunals Service (for which the MoJ is responsible) holds wills as a part of its judicial function, rather than in the capacity of a public authority for the purpose of FOIA 2000. The MoJ was joined as a party to the appeal to the FTT, which upheld ICO’s decision and the MoJ’s position.
Willis v the Chief Constable of South Wales Police and the Ministry of Justice (County Court) (unreported, 13 November 2024)
Counsel for the defendants in an Article 5 claim (liberty) arising from the arrest of the claimant (an offender on home detention curfew) and his recall to prison due to a mistaken belief that he had breached his licence conditions. The mistake was held to be a data breach under the Data Protection Act 2018, but such ‘unlawfulness’ did not result in a violation of Article 5 as the post-recall detention was lawful under the original sentence of the criminal court.
The latest highlights from our Data Protection and Information Law experts are now available. The…
Discover moreWe are delighted to retain our Band 1 status for ‘Police Law’ and ‘Inquests and…
Discover moreThe Grenfell Tower Inquiry today published its Phase 2 report into the…
We are delighted to announce that Emma Price, Cicely Hayward, John Goss,…
Instructing Peter
Please contact Dan Waple if you have any questions or wish to instruct us.
Peter practises across Chambers’ core areas, representing Government departments, police forces, companies and individuals in various forums.
He has appeared before all levels of the English Courts and before the Privy Council, and has made representations to the European Court of Human Rights. Peter’s practice also spans public inquiries, inquests and misconduct hearings.
Before transferring to the Bar, Peter worked in the NGO and United Nations sectors and as a solicitor at Hogan Lovells, where he practised commercial litigation and arbitration. As a barrister, he continues to take instructions from corporates, in particular in public inquiries and human rights litigation. Peter also acts on constitutional and human rights matters in the English-speaking Caribbean.
Peter was appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel of Counsel in August 2021. He is recognised in Legal 500 as a Leading Junior in Administrative Law & Human Rights and Police Law, and ranked in Chambers UK for Civil Liberties & Human Rights and Police Law.
Civil Liberties and Human Rights
“Peter is tactically astute. He is legally impressive and on top of things.”
“Peter is highly detailed and skilled.”
“Peter is an excellent written advocate.”
Police Law
“Peter is really good at turning around advice in a very short period of time and analysing the issues in the case, coming back to you with a viable way to proceed. He’s a keen analytical mind.”
“Peter Laverack is always able to explain things clearly and easily.”
Police Law
‘Peter has an ability to remain steadfast and cool-headed when faced with testing opposition.’
‘Easy to contact and always on hand.’
Click here to view