Jonathan Cowen

Jonathan accepts instructions as a leading senior junior together with one or more junior barristers in appellate cases across all areas in which he has had experience at first instance.

In his appellate and related advisory work, Jonathan draws on his experience in the cases in which he has previously been instructed in the Court of Appeal and in the Supreme Court and he also draws on his many years of experience in first instance civil and family cases. His advice to clients takes into account their prospects of success having regard to the relevant law, also taking into account the costs and uncertain outcome of litigation. Jonathan will assist in negotiating a settlement where appropriate, drawing on his considerable experience in negotiating settlements in cases in which he has previously been instructed.

Jonathan’s experience as a barrister at first instance which he will draw on in his appellate work includes: judicial review proceedings in the Administrative Court; representing local authorities, parents and guardians in care proceedings including in complex cases involving allegations of sexual abuse and non-accidental injuries; private law children cases; matrimonial finance; professional negligence claims, especially claims against solicitors; personal injury; company/commercial; employment; property.

His experience includes advising whether to continue an appeal in the Court of Appeal where other leading counsel had previously been instructed.

Details of significant appellate cases in which Jonathan has been instructed are set out in his list of notable cases below. His notable cases include appellate cases where he was also instructed at first instance in judicial review proceedings, care proceedings, committal proceedings and proceedings in the Court of Protection.

Jonathan accepts instructions where judicial review proceedings in the Administrative Court have been issued or are anticipated. He has considerable experience in dealing with judicial review claims heard in the Administrative Court; see his list of notable cases below.

Jonathan accepts instructions from public bodies, the Official Solicitor and Accredited Legal Representatives where there are proceedings in the Court of Protection. He has appeared in a number of the leading cases in this area; see his list of notable cases below. He also has experience in cases dealt with under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court.

Jonathan is a qualified mediator having undertaken his training as a mediator with the Society of Mediators. He has undertaken training in Trauma Informed Mediation.

Jonathan will act as a mediator in all areas where he has experience as a barrister including the following: claims against public bodies including judicial review claims against local authorities and other public bodies; responsible authority disputes between local authorities; family (financial remedies and children); company/commercial; employment; professional negligence; insolvency.

Jonathan will undertake mediations in person or on Zoom. For in person mediations, mediation rooms can be provided.

Jonathan is a volunteer mediator with Mediation Hertfordshire.

• In the matter of D (A Child) UKSC 2018/0064, Decision of the Supreme Court concerning the conditions for a deprivation of liberty of a young person aged 16 or 17.
• In the matter of D (A Child) [2017] EWCA Civ 1695, Decision of the Court of Appeal that a 16 year old child is not deprived of his liberty reversing decision of the Court of Protection.
• Birmingham City Council v D [2016] EWCOP 8, Decision of the Court of Protection heard in the High Court that a 16 year old child is deprived of his liberty.
• D (A Child ; deprivation of liberty), Re [2015] EWHC 922 (Fam) (31 March 2015). Jonathan Cowen successfully acted for a Local Authority in arguing that the arrangements made by a Trust for a disabled 15 year old child in a hospital which were made with parental consent did not constitute a deprivation of the child’s liberty requiring authorisation under the inherent jurisdiction.
• R(Sanneh) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and another [2013] All ER (D) 45 (Apr). Decision of the Administrative Court considering the Claimant’s challenge to the Secretary of State’s refusal to make interim payments pending final resolution of the Claimant’s entitlement to mainstream  social security benefits.
• A City Council v DC and others [2013] 1 FCR 446. Decision of the High Court, Family Division, setting out the position in relation to revocation of freeing orders where a child was unsuccessfully placed for adoption and providing guidance on the future management of applications by local authorities to revoke freeing orders.
• R(K) and others v Birmingham City Council EWCA 2012 Civ 1432, 2012 All ER (D) 74 (Nov). Decision of the Court of Appeal concerning assessment of age and other related issues.
• XCC v AA and others 2012 All ER (D) 38 August. Decision of the Court of Protection heard in the High Court concerning basis on which court should make declaration of non-recognition of marriage.
• HA v LB Hillingdon and another 2012 EWHC 291 (Admin). Decision of the Administrative Court concerning responsible authority.
• R(MWA) v SSHD and another 2011 All ER (D) 186 (Dec). Decision of the Administrative Court concerning assessment of age and related issues.
• RK v BCC and others 2011 All ER (D) 28 (Dec). Decision of the Court of Appeal concerning whether placement arrangements by a local authority for a child constitute a deprivation of liberty.
• YB v BCC 2010 EWHC 3355 COP. Decision of the Court of Protection, heard in the High Court Family Division, dealing with whether placement arrangements by a local authority for a child constitute a deprivation of liberty.
• LBL v RYJ 2010 EWHC 2665 COP. Decision of the Court of Protection, heard in the High Court Family Division, considering capacity under the Mental Health Act, 2005 and the circumstances in which it is appropriate to invoke the inherent jurisdiction.
• R(Clue) v Birmingham City Council [2010] 4 All ER 423, [2010] LGR 485. Decision of the Court of Appeal concerning local authorities’ obligations to persons unlawfully in the United Kingdom and their children.
• R (M) v Birmingham City Council 2009 EWHC 1584 (Admin). Decision of the Administrative Court concerning local authorities’ obligations under section 20 of the Children Act, 1989.
• In the matter of A (A Child) 2008, 2009 1 FLR 1. Decision of the Court of Appeal confirming burden and standard of proof in contempt of court cases.
• R(S) v London Borough of Lewisham, London Borough of Lambeth and London Borough of Hackney 2008 All ER (D) 195 (May). Responsible authority under the National Assistance Act, 1948, where dispute between different local authorities.
• R (AW, DAY) v London Borough of Croydon and London Borough of Hackney 2007 EWCA Civ 266, 2007 CCLR 189. Decision of the Court of Appeal dealing with local authorities’ obligations to failed asylum seekers.
• Re LM (a child) (care proceedings witness summons), 2007 1 FLR 1698; 2007 All ER (D) 108 (Jan). Decision of the Court of Appeal concerning whether a child should give evidence in care proceedings.
• R (B) v London Borough of Hackney 2003 EWHC 1654 (Admin) Local authorities’ obligations to infirm destitute asylum seekers under section 21 of the National Assistance Act, 1948.

Co-author: Dementia and the Law

• MA (Oxon)
• Diploma in Law, City University

• Family Law Bar Association
• Resolution
• Court of Protection Bar Association
• Administrative Law Bar Association
• Professional Negligence Bar Association

Data Protection Privacy Notice 2018