Jonathan’s practice covers public and local government law including cases heard in the Court of Protection. He has experience in healthcare law, particularly where public law and best interests issues arise.
Jonathan is regularly instructed to advise public sector senior executives in complex cases. He also has experience in commercial disputes, other civil disputes and family law.
He is Head of our Public Law Group.
In October 2018, Jonathan appeared for the respondent in the Supreme Court in D (A Child) UKSC 2018/0064 which concerned the conditions for a deprivation of liberty of a young person aged 16 or 17.
If you would like more information regarding Jonathan’s practice, please contact his clerks or call +44 (0)20 7405 6114.
- Public Law and Local Government
Jonathan’s experience includes cases which are dealt with in the Administrative Court and are concerned with local authorities’ obligations in relation to children and cases dealt with in the Court of Protection. He has experience in cases dealt with under the Mental Capacity Act, 2005, cases where deprivation of liberty issues arise and applications brought under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court.
Jonathan has experience in healthcare law, particularly where public law and best interests issues arise.
- 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)  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  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  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  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.
- 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 theAdministrative 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  4 All ER 423,  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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Company and Commercial
Jonathan has experience in a wide range of disputes between companies and individuals. His cases include: representing a company director in proceedings in the High Court and in proceedings in the Court of Appeal involving a group of banks where the director sought to pierce the corporate veil and representing company directors in claims relating to guarantees of company liabilities.
Jonathan has represented business clients in numerous commercial and contractual disputes. He has experience in negotiating settlements and resolving disputes in a cost effective way which achieves a favourable outcome for his clients.
Jonathan responds quickly with commercially focused advice and can obtain without notice and other forms of interlocutory orders.
Jonathan’s family practice covers all aspects of Child Law, including care proceedings and child abduction. Jonathan has represented local authorities, parents and guardians in care proceedings including complex cases involving allegations of sexual abuse and non-accidental injuries. He also has experience in ancillary relief, including cases where the Serious Fraud Office seek a criminal confiscation order in relation to matrimonial assets. His work also includes related areas such as public interest immunity.
- A City Council v DC and others  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 unsucessfully placed for adoption and providing guidance on the future management of applications by local authorities to revoke freeing orders.
- 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.
- 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.
- Professional negligence
Jonathan has been instructed in a considerable number of professional negligence cases, mainly acting for solicitors in property and personal injury related disputes.
- Personal injury
Jonathan has been instructed extensively in personal injury cases, both claimant and defendant.
- MA (Oxon)
- Diploma in Law, City University
- Professional memberships
- Family Law Bar Association
- Professional Negligence Bar Association
- Additional professional information
Jonathan has lectured on loss of chance in professional negligence claims and personal injury claims.
- Privacy Notice