Today sees the launch of the new Tuckers Solicitors website which has been re-designed from the bottom up with our clients in mind. Among the key new features are detailed lawyer profiles, enabling visitors to the site to get to know our lawyers and their specialisms. We are also now able to process payments online meaning that instructing us could not be simpler.

Partner Jim Meyer said,

"I am very proud of the new website which is the culmination of a great deal of work on the part of many of our excellent staff. The rights and needs of the individual have long been of central importance to what we do; the new website has been designed around this philosophy."

More to follow.

As reported in the national press Tuckers solicitors are representing Jack Tweed at his trial in defending an allegation of rape. Jack Tweed has today given evidence in his defence, making a detailed denial of the accusation made by the female complainant."

The article can be found here.

Lotfi Raissi is being represented by Jules Carey of Tuckers, who is quoted as saying,

The court of appeal pulled no punches in asserting that there was a considerable body of evidence to suggest that the Met and CPS were responsible for serious defaults that resulted in Raissi's detention at Belmarsh.

These documents demonstrate, unequivocally, that the blame lies with the British authorities. He has waited seven years for an apology and watched four home secretaries come and go without receiving it. He is hopeful that his wait is finally up.

The world's leading independent legal directory Chambers and Partners has once again ranked Tuckers Solicitors as being 'top ranked' for the work that we do, saying,

"Tuckers has an enviable reputation as a leading UK law firm specialising in criminal litigation and civil liberties."

Among the highlights in this year's edition is praise for several of our lawyers who are themselves ranked among the best in the country.

Senior Partner Franklin Sinclair, himself noted by the publication as being "one of the most established practitioners in the region." said,

"The praise we have received from Chambers and Partners has been hard earned and is well deserved.

Whilst we are grateful for the glowing review, we recognise that it is our hard work that has led to this. It is our aim to maintain but also improve upon our high standards, ensuring we remain at the top of our game."

Like Lotfi, Mohamed, his wife and daughter were awoken by police officers pounding on his door in Hounslow at 3.00am. He opened his door to a team of police officers who immediately arrested him for involvement in the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US. Mohamed was told to undress and put on a forensic white suit before he was handcuffed and led out to an unmarked police car. He was driven to Paddington Green Police station where he was held incommunicado and detained for approximately 42 hours before being released without charge.

The Court of Appeal considered the reasons given by the Metropolitan Police to justify the arrest and ruled that “they amount only to the fact that he and Lotfi were close brothers, that they lived not very far apart and that each had access to the other’s house. In our judgment, that was not enough”. The arrest was therefore unlawful.

The family’s solicitor Jules Carey of Tuckers Solicitors stated that the amount of damages Mohamed would receive from the Commissioner had not yet been determined. Mr Carey stated that he hoped a sum could be agreed so as to avoid further litigation in this case.

Mohamed said “I feel very relieved that this ordeal is almost over. We lost a lot, not just my freedom. My wife lost her job with Virgin Airlines when I was arrested and my health and our family life were put under terrible pressure. I hope a line is drawn under this chapter soon so that we can all move on”.

Like Lotfi, Mohamed, his wife and daughter were awoken by police officers pounding on his door in Hounslow at 3.00am. He opened his door to a team of police officers who immediately arrested him for involvement in the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US. Mohamed was told to undress and put on a forensic white suit before he was handcuffed and led out to an unmarked police car. He was driven to Paddington Green Police station where he was held incommunicado and detained for approximately 42 hours before being released without charge.

The Court of Appeal considered the reasons given by the Metropolitan Police to justify the arrest and ruled that “they amount only to the fact that he and Lotfi were close brothers, that they lived not very far apart and that each had access to the other’s house. In our judgment, that was not enough”. The arrest was therefore unlawful.

The family’s solicitor Jules Carey of Tuckers Solicitors stated that the amount of damages Mohamed would receive from the Commissioner had not yet been determined. Mr Carey stated that he hoped a sum could be agreed so as to avoid further litigation in this case.

Mohamed said “I feel very relieved that this ordeal is almost over. We lost a lot, not just my freedom. My wife lost her job with Virgin Airlines when I was arrested and my health and our family life were put under terrible pressure. I hope a line is drawn under this chapter soon so that we can all move on”.

Civil Liberties

Best of the UK (Band 4) Jules Carey (Band 3)

Crime

London (Band 1) Jim Meyer (Band 1) Richard Egan (Band 2) Philip Smith (Band 3)

North West (Band 1) Franklin Sinclair (Band 1)

West Midlands (Band 1) James Turner (Band 1)

Fraud: Criminal Best of the UK (Band 4) Jim Meyer (Band 4) Richard Egan (Band 4)

Police Law: Mainly Claimant

Best of the UK (Band 1) Andre Clovis (Band 1) Jules Carey (Band 1) Keiron Walsh (Band 2)

The schemes give the Treasury far reaching powers to impose asset freezes on people they have reasonable grounds for suspecting “may be” terrorists or on those listed by the UN Security Council. The five British nationals bringing this challenge who have been designated under the Orders have had their assets frozen, are only allowed to access enough money to meet basic expenses, and are compelled to account to a civil servant for every penny they spend. They are subject to unprecedented levels of intrusion and control without end or review. They require permission for all economic activity, however modest. The complex regime governed by permissions and licences is not merely harsh but at points absurd. We have the madness of civil servants checking Tesco receipts, a child having to ask for a receipt every time it does a chore by running to the shops for a pint of milk and a neighbour possibly committing a criminal offence by lending a lawnmower.

None of the Applicants has been given proper reasons why they have been subjected to this oppressive and draconian regime by the State. None of them have convictions for terrorism and they all deny any links to terrrorism. The Orders introduce criminal offences for breaching these sanctions with a maximum penalty of 7 year imprisonment. An offence is commited not only if the designated person fails to comply with the restrictions but also if other people who have been notifed of their designation give them funds or economic resources.

In a February 2006 speech Gordon Brown, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, set out his vision for new measures to be implemented for the Treasury to become “a department for security”:

By being tough on security, with strengthened resources and powers, and tough on accountability, with safeguards for individuals and oversight through Parliament, we can make Britain safer and more secure while affirming our very British commitment to the liberties of the individual and showing we will never sacrifice the very values terrorism wishes to destroy.

The court ruling today has shown that the Government is willing to sacrifice the fundamental rights and liberties of its citizens, including the fundamental constitutional right that only Parliament can take away basic freedoms, when they think it convenient to do so. They have dishonoured their pledge of accountability and oversight through Parliament.

For more information please contact:

• Birnberg Peirce Solicitors – Henry Miller - (for A,K and M) – 020 7911 0166

• Public Law Solicitors – Anne McMurdie - (for Q) – 0121 256 0326

• Tuckers Solicitors – Jules Carey - (for G) – 020 7388 8333

The case citation is: -

A,K.M, Q and G –v- Her Majesty’s Treasury Case nos: PTA 13,14,15,17 & 19/2007

The majority of firms in Manchester had no desire to sign up to a contract where it is unlikely we will be able to remain profitable, and that could only result in huge losses, cuts in service, cuts in staff and cuts in quality.

However, we felt very isolated despite firms in all the other urban areas voicing the same concerns as ourselves, but unable to take collective action because of the government’s anti-competition laws.

We have lost a significant opportunity to stand up to a government that has treated us with contempt, refusing to negotiate and cancelling meetings at the last minute for political reasons.

We are fighting with both hands tied behind our backs against the Legal Services Commission, which has no understanding of the legal aid market or the needs of business and in which the profession has lost all confidence.

We must ensure that, next time, we are better prepared to try and safeguard whatever remains of the hard-working, caring network of criminal defence lawyers or the state will be able to further suppress the weak and vulnerable in our society."