Public Access
In appropriate cases Senate House Chambers offers Public Access to clients without the need to instruct a solicitor first
Under the Public Access rules, members of the public seeking legal advice in relation to either a specific piece of work or full representation in proceedings can instruct a barrister directly.
Full details of the scheme are available on the Bar Council’s website.
This may include advice, representation or a written opinion on a specific issue. We tailor our service by providing a suitably qualified and experienced barrister to meet your specific needs whilst ensuring that costs are kept to a minimum.
Such is the dramatic impact of government cuts to legal aid that few people will now qualify for funding in most private family law applications. We understand that careful management of the privately funded costs of proceedings is essential for public access clients. The members of our Public Access team are specialists in their areas of law, and the benefit of instructing us directly is that we can provide the support, advice and assistance to guide you through the legal process in a cost effective way. Our specially trained public access clerks are responsible for the efficient management of this important part of our business.
Our barristers cannot conduct litigation for you, unless they are specifically trained to do so. Litigation involves issuing applications at court, filing and serving documents such as statements and court bundles. However, our Public Access barristers can provide assistance and guidance drafting these documents.
In the majority of cases we charge a fixed fee for each piece of work undertaken, which is payable no later than 5 working days in advance and outlined in the Terms of Business sent to you when instructions have been confirmed.
The table below sets out an estimate of the range of fixed fees which vary depending upon the complexity of your matter and the seniority of the barrister you would like to instruct.
| First Hearing Dispute Resolution Appointment/Dispute Resolution Appointment | Final Hearing | Final Hearing Refresher (subsequent days) | Hourly rates / Conferences |
|---|---|---|---|
| £450 – £2,000 | £850 – £5,000 | £450 – £2,500 | £125 – £350 per hour |
The above fees are not inclusive of VAT, and the rates charged will depend on the matters such as the individual barrister’s level of experience and the issues in the case. These matter will be discussed with you before a fee is confirmed and agreed.
Any additional fees will be set out in the Terms of Business. An example of additional fees may include assistance with drafting some types of documents, completion of court forms which would be charged at hourly rates or travel to a Court more than 40 miles outside the radius of Senate House Chambers would also be charged at hourly rates for travel plus mileage, all of which would be confirmed in the client care letter issued at the time.
As a rough guide, proceedings under the Children Act 1989 can take six to twelve months to resolve. This does not include possible appeals and there are exceptional cases were matters may take longer to conclude. We are obliged to make you aware that a barrister cannot undertake legal aid work under the Public Access Scheme unless a solicitor has instructed that individual. If you wish to obtain clarification as to whether you are eligible for legal aid before instructing us we would recommend that you consult a solicitor for the purpose of carrying out a legal aid eligibility check.
We would refer you to the Government’s online guidance for further information.
Prior to accepting instructions, it will be necessary for us to have an initial 30 minute free of charge meeting with you in order to assess whether your case is suitable for the Public Access scheme.
How do I instruct – please download and complete the enquiry form. Alternatively please contact us on 01604 210979 or email am@senatehousechambers.com
-
Stuart YeungYear of Call: 1989
Specialist areas
Adoption and Special Guardianship
Care Proceedings
Child Arrangements
Profile
Stuart Yeung is an experienced child law practitioner specialising in public and private law proceedings. Stuart acts on behalf of local authorities, parents, children and intervenors on the Midlands Circuit. Acting on behalf of local authorities usually involves numerous parties and complex issues arising out of serious non-accidental injury and/or death and complex medical issues. Stuart employs a proactive, careful and sensitive approach to his preparation, has good case management skills and the ability to identify key issues and communicate effectively with professional and lay clients alike.
Stuart’s experience and current practice includes cases involving:
• Serious non-accidental injury
• Fabricated and/or induced illness, including hospital intervenors
• Female Genital Mutilation
• Sexual abuse
• Concurrent criminal proceedings
• Human Rights Act claims arising from public law proceedings
• Chronic neglect
• Drug and alcohol abuse (including FDAC proceedings)
• Adoption
• Special Guardianship
• Domestic Violence
• Child arrangements (formerly residence and contact) disputes, including intractable contact disputes
Education
University:
Leicester Polytechnic (1988) LL.B (Hons)
Law School:
Inns of Court School of Law (1989)
Memberships
Family Law Bar Association
Inner Temple
Midlands Circuit
Stuart is able to take instructions under the Public Access scheme.
Stuart is a registered pupil supervisor
Cases
Re W-A (Children: Foreign Conviction) [2022] EWCA Civ 1118
A County Council v CAFCASS [2019] EWHC 2369 (Fam)
Northamptonshire County Council v AB & CD [2019] EWHC 1807 (Fam)
-
Penny Van SpallYear of Call: 1998
Specialist areas
Adoption and Special Guardianship
Care Proceedings
Child Arrangements
Domestic Violence
Profile
Penny Van Spall is an experienced child law practitioner specialising in both public and private law proceedings. Penny comes from a previous background of being a social worker and also a probation officer. Penny is able to deal with empathy and clear advice to those who struggle with capacity or mental health issues as well as those who are professional and articulate. Penny will work in an open fashion with clients and their instructing solicitors, assisting clients to understand the process and issues whilst also listening carefully to their respective instructions.
Penny acts on behalf of local authorities, parents, children’s guardians, competent children and intervenors in a wide range of cases including:
• Serious non-accidental injury
• Fabricated and/or induced illness
• Female Genital Mutilation
• Sexual abuse
• Concurrent criminal proceedings
• Children/ families where special educational needs
• Chronic neglect
• Drug and alcohol abuse (including FDAC proceedings)
• Adoption including adoptions with international elements
• Special Guardianship
• Domestic Violence
• Child arrangements disputes, including both live with and contact disputes
Education
Sunderland Polytechnic…BA(Hons)Communications Studies
Sheffield University…CQSW and Post Graduate
Diploma in App Socio Studies
Nottingham Law School…CPE
Nottingham Law School….Bar Vocational Course
Memberships
Family Law Bar Association
Midland Circuit
Gray’s Inn
What our clients are saying
Penny Van Spall is described as an experienced advocate who is skilled at dealing with difficult issues in a straight forward manner. Penny is a child focused and empathetic advocate who will give difficult advice when required. Penny works hard to explain matters to clients.
Cases
F v F (2007 EWHC 2543 [FAM]
-
Elizabeth GooderhamYear of Call: 2001
Specialist areas
Adoption and Special Guardianship
Care Proceedings
Child Arrangements
Domestic Violence
Profile
Elizabeth Gooderham is a very experienced advocate who, after an early career at the bar undertaking both criminal and family law now specialises solely in all aspects of child-care law.
Elizabeth specialises in public and complex private law proceedings. Elizabeth is a thorough and detailed advocate with an ability to get to the heart of the matter. She has a sensitive and understanding approach when dealing with vulnerable clients, including those with mental health difficulties, young parents and competent children.
Elizabeth acts on behalf of local authorities, parents, children’s guardians, competent children and intervenors in a wide range of cases, including:
• Serious non-accidental injury
• Sexual abuse
• Concurrent criminal proceedings
• Chronic neglect
• Drug and alcohol abuse (including FDAC proceedings)
• Parents with mental health difficulties
• Adoption
• Special Guardianship
• Domestic Violence
• Child arrangements disputes
• Parental alienation
Education
University:
University of Derby (2000)
Law School:
Inns of Court School of Law (2001)
Memberships
Family Law Bar Association
Inner Temple
Midland Circuit
-
Jenna AllenYear of Call: 2002
Specialist areas
Adoption and Special Guardianship
Care Proceedings
Child Arrangements
Domestic Violence
Profile
Beginning her career in the Criminal Courts, and later expanding and developing her practice to specialise in Public (Care) and Private Law Children matters, Jenna has earned her a deserved reputation amongst solicitors and the judiciary as a formidable advocate. Her wealth of experience extends across all tiers of the judicial system, from the Magistrates and Youth Court, through the Crown and County Court to the High Court and Court of Appeal.
As an advocate for Parents, Intervenors and Children/Guardians, Jenna is adept at handling cases involving:
• Domestic Abuse – representing both victims and perpetrators
• Sexual Abuse
• Severe Neglect
• Vulnerable parents, including those with learning disabilities
• Drug/alcohol addictions and dependency issues
• Intractable contact disputes
Education
Leicester University, LLB Hons (2001)
Nottingham Law School; Bar Vocational Course – Very Competent (2002)
Appointments and Memberships
Lincoln’s inn
Midland Circuit
• Bar Council’s Direct Public Access scheme
• Jenna is a registered pupil supervisor
What our clients are saying
Jenna is a diligent, committed and effective advocate who always strives to achieve the best outcome for those she represents whilst giving well-founded and realistic advice. She is known for her ability to effectively deal with conflict and potential hostility. A particular strength is her ability to skilfully challenge expert and professional witnesses.
-
Samantha DunnYear of Call: 2008
Specialist areas
Adoption and Special Guardianship
Care Proceedings
Child Arrangements
Profile
Samantha Dunn is an experienced and established family law practitioner that has specialised primarily in care proceedings. Samantha provides clients with frank but sensitive advice enabling them to make informed decisions throughout the duration of the case. Samantha thoroughly cares about the work that she undertakes and will often go ‘above and beyond’ for the benefit of her lay and professional clients. She is a tenacious and persuasive advocate adept in both negotiation and court room advocacy skills.
She has experience representing a number of Local Authorities, Guardians, parents and other interested parties / intervenors in cases involving:
• Serious non-accidental injuries (fractures – including baby-shake cases, bruising, sexual abuse cases);
• Physical and sexual abuse of children and / or adults;
• Fabricated and/or induced illness;
• Female Genital Mutilation;
• Chronic neglect, emotional and psychological abuse;
• Drug and alcohol abuse (including FDAC proceedings);
• Adults or children with learning difficulties and / or disabilities;
• Domestic Violence / Domestic Abuse (including honour-based violence);
• Adoption;
• Special Guardianship;
• Child arrangements disputes, including intractable contact disputes and alienation;
Samantha is qualified to accept instructions on a Direct Access basis.
Education
University:
University of Derby (2007)
Law School:
University of Nottingham (2008)
Memberships
Family Law Bar Association
Middle Temple
What our clients are saying
Samantha is renowned for her no-nonsense straight-talking approach. She has excellent client care skills and will provide clients with firm but sensitive advice to ensure they are equipped and empowered to make the right choices throughout their litigation.
Cases
Re W-A (Children: Foreign Conviction) [2022] EWCA Civ 1118
T (A Child: Fact Finding) [2014] EWFC B115 (12 September 2014)
NCC v L & Anor [2014] EWHC 4828 (Fam) (21 July 2014)
-
Charlene Hendersonyear of Call: 2009
01604 210 979
Specialist areas
Adoption and Special Guardianship
Care Proceedings
Child Arrangements
Domestic Violence
Profile
Charlene practices exclusively in children matters, covering all aspects of private and public children’s work in the family field. Charlene began her practice in both crime and family; her mixed practice has equipped her with knowledge of the crossover between the criminal and family jurisdictions. Charlene conducted her last ever criminal case in the Court of Appeal.
Charlene has experience in representing local authorities, parents, interveners, related parties, children’s guardians and competent children at all stages of care proceedings. She appears before all levels of the judiciary, including in the High Court and Court of Appeal. Her work in this field includes:
• Fact finding hearings comprising serious non-accidental injury (‘shaken’ baby allegations, multiple fractures and multiple bruising).
• Fact finding hearings involving sexual abuse allegations.
• Re-litigation/challenge to historic findings.
• Drug and alcohol abuse, including FDAC proceedings.
• Mental illness or learning difficulties, including when the client is represented by the Official Solicitor.
• Representation of young clients.
• Serious domestic violence.
• Chronic neglect.
• Removal from jurisdiction.
• High conflict cases (parental alienation and malign influence).
• Appeal hearings.
Public Access scheme:
Charlene regularly accepts instructions under the Public Access scheme.
Education
University:
University of Sussex (2008)
Law School:
BPP London (2009)
Memberships
Family Law Bar Association
Lincoln’s Inn
What our clients are saying
Charlene takes a dedicated approach to all of her cases and has a reputation for representing clients with passion and conviction. She has a fierce tenacity in the courtroom and has been described as an “impressive advocate” with an “astonishing command of her case”. Her knowledge, preparation and organisation of papers has been referred to as “exceptional”.
Cases
Re Z (A Child: Committal Proceedings) [2020] EWFC B5
-
Andrew DuncanYear of Call: 2011
Specialist areas
Adoption and Special Guardianship
Care Proceedings
Child Arrangements
Domestic Violence
Financial Remedy Proceedings
Profile
Andrew has developed a strong reputation in all areas of Family Disputes. He is regularly instructed in complex private and public law cases. He has developed a reputation as a fearless advocate who dispenses with advice in a frank and down to earth manner.
Professional clients can expect Andrew to be a team player, who goes the extra mile and values the importance of working together. Andrew is instructed across all levels of court allocation. He regularly deals with complex physical and sexual abuse allegations, and within the private law sphere has developed a trusted reputation for cases involving complex parental alienation.
Andrew represents Parents, Local Authorities, Children (directly or through their guardian), intervenors, grandparents and divorcees. Andrew without doubt has an ability to get straight to the point, he is a strong negotiator, and a resolute cross examiner.
Andrew is regularly instructed in cases involving complex issues such as; international relocation, parental alienation, significant substance misuse, mental health issues, domestic violence and non-accidental injury.
Andrew has participated as both Appellant and Respondent in many appeal hearings. A number of those appeals have resulted in re-hearings being directed.
Andrew also regularly accepts instructions directly from members of the public under the Direct Access scheme and sees many referrals as a consequence of his successes.
Education
University:
University of Sussex LL.B (Hons) Law (2009):
University of Edinburgh LL.M Law (2010)
Law School:
BPP Law School (London)
Bar Professional Training Course (2011)
Memberships
Family Law Bar Association
The Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn
What our clients are saying
Andrew is well known for getting results and having a strong presence in the court room. Known for good communication skills, robust advice, and a forensic cross examiner.
Cases
Bedford Borough Council v CD & Ors (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 3298 (Fam)
Bedford Borough Council v CD & Ors (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 1996 (Fam)
Re B [2023] Andrew represented a Local Authority in a legally complex case where there was a positively assessed special guardian, and a known prospective adopter, neither of which the child lived with at the time of the final hearing. Andrew successfully obtained care and placement orders on behalf of the Local Authority following legal argument.
Re DS [2022] Andrew represented a father where allegations were made of the most serious form of sexual abuse against both him and his brother in law. After a 10 day fact find where two sets of care proceedings were consolidated, no findings were made against Andrew’s client, who was exonerated, immediately allowed to return to the family home and the care proceedings were dismissed.
Re LM [2022] Andrew, led by Kings Counsel, gave difficult advice to compromise an appeal brought against his client in the Court of Appeal, recognising the decision of the first instance Judge and the actions of his client was not sustainable in law.
Re RM [2022] Andrew represented a father where significant historic findings had been made against him at an earlier fact find hearing and an application for further assessment of him had been refused. Following Andrew’s cross examination at the welfare hearing where care and placement orders were sought, the Judge acceded to Andrew’s application for expert risk assessment and an adjournment of the final hearing for that assessment to be completed.
Re D [2022] Andrew represented maternal family members during a lengthy welfare hearing at the High Court to determine where a child would live following the killing of her mother by the father. The father was held on remand for murder throughout the duration of the trial.
Re C [2022] Andrew sought an order for adoption on behalf of foster carers in a very complex case where the foster carers had cared for a child for almost 3 years at the time of the hearing, but where there was a positively assessed family member and the added complexity of linked care proceedings in relation to a sibling child being heard at the same time.
Re E [2021] Andrew represented a mother, led by Queens Counsel, where the parents were in the pool of possible perpetrators following discovery of two rib fracture during a routine X-Ray. Andrew’s team brought about the withdrawal of the case by the Local Authority and the parents were exonerated.
Re T [2021] Andrew successfully sought the transfer of living arrangements for two sibling children from the mother to the father where there had been earlier findings of parental alienation and a failed therapeutic process.
Re RN [2021] Andrew successfully sought findings on behalf of his client of the falsification of various allegations of domestic abuse including that the mother had falsified an allegation of attempted murder.
Re L [2021] Andrew dealt with a complex conjoined cases where the birth parents sought contact with a previously adopted sibling group in private proceedings at the same time as adoptive family were involved in public law proceedings following the breakdown of the adoptive placement.
Re CE (2020)
Andrew appeared for a mother, accused of parental alienation as assessed by a psychologist. Andrew was instructed late in the proceedings when a fact find, and welfare hearing were listed. His advice, and representation brought about agreement to the proceedings and resulted in the vacating of the fact find hearing and the child remaining in the care of his client.
Re B (2020)
On behalf of the children, Andrew successfully opposed an appeal brought by the parents and the children were removed into foster care and the conclusion of the appellate process.
Re TE (2020)
Andrew represented a father who faced a number of allegations of domestic violence over a decade. Following the fact find hearing the court found those allegations not proven and went on to find the mother was the aggressor in the relationship.
Re J (2020)
Andrew appeared as junior for a father to the sibling of a murdered child in the High Court. The case involved complex issues of non-disclosure, significant police disclosure, and a forensic enquiry into the conduct of foster carers at the welfare stage.
Re P (2019)
Andrew acted for the children where he sought the transfer of living arrangements of two children who were living with the mother to their father’s care. This was a complex parental alienation case where the mother had previously made serious allegations of abuse against the father. The children were successfully transitioned at the conclusion of the case.
Re H (2019)
Andrew appeared for a mother who made allegations of significant domestic violence and coercive control, including gaslighting and influence of the child. The proceedings had jurisdictional issues and the court ultimately found all the allegations made by the mother proven.
Re RJ (2018)
Andrew represented a father in a parental alienation case who faced twelve allegations of physical abuse against his child made by the mother. The court found none of these allegations proven and went on to find that the mother had alienated the children from the father and that the child was at risk of significant harm in the care of the mother.
Re PD (2018)
Andrew appeared on behalf of the mother and successfully sought an order for no direct contact between a child and her father. The court made the order sought by Andrew following his cross examination of a consultant psychiatrist, community psychiatric nurse, and CAFCASS officer who had all recommended that there be direct contact between the father and the child.
Re HW (2017) On behalf of a father, Andrew successfully appealed the decision of the lower court to make care and placement orders following a final hearing. The appeal consisted of two days of legal argument and was opposed by both the Local Authority and the children’s guardian. The appeal was allowed, and the matter listed for rehearing.
Re EW (2016)
Andrew, acting for a local authority, successfully appealed the decision of a District Judge to adjourn care and placement order applications for a further six months to allow time for the mother to engage in further theory. This was following a fully contested 7-day trial. The appeal consisted of two days of legal argument and was opposed by the legal teams on behalf of the mother and father.