Robert Sharp

Before joining chambers, Robert worked in the housing and litigation team at a London local authority and regularly conducted hearings concerning possession claims, anti-social behaviour injunctions, access injunctions, disrepair, challenges to allocation decisions and s.204 appeals. 

Robert has also worked on s.204 appeals during his first six, drafting grounds of resistance and skeleton arguments on behalf of respondent local authorities. 

As a County Court advocate, Robert conducted mortgage possession hearings and acted in private landlord and tenant disputes.  

During his second six, Robert has expanded his practice to include work for tenants:

• defending possession proceedings
• bringing claims for disrepair, and
• applications for a Rent Repayment Order in the First Tier Tribunal.

He has acted for local authorities:

• to secure Anti-Social Behaviour injunctions and closure orders, and
• in defending claims brought under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

During the non-practising period of his pupillage, Robert spent a great deal of time in the Family Court and may take instructions for either public or private family matters. 

• He assisted with contested adoption order applications and is familiar with applications for interim care orders and child arrangements orders.
• He also worked on cases where the local authority secured a Forced Marriage Protection Order. 

Robert has assisted with several cases concerning the deprivation of liberty of young people with learning disabilities, and their transition into the jurisdiction of the Court of Protection.  

In his second six, Robert has acted for applicants and respondents in:

• applications for non-molestation orders brought under the Family Law Act 1996, and
• Child Arrangements Order proceedings brought under the Children Act 1989.

A large part of Robert’s non-practising pupillage period was spent in the Court of Protection. He observed dozens of hearings dealing with the full range of matters that the Court of Protection deals with, including contested applications made under s.16 Mental Capacity Act and s.21A, and the transition of 16-17 year olds subject to deprivation of liberty, into the court’s jurisdiction.

During his second six Robert has conducted complex COP hearings involving s.21A challenges, and deprivation of liberty determinations following the Supreme Court decision in A Reference by the Attorney General of Northern Ireland [2026] UKSC 16.

Robert has an interest in transparency and access to justice in the Court of Protection. He has written for the Open Justice Court of Protection Project on the practicalities of bringing appeals against capacity and best interests decisions.  

Robert can take instructions in the Employment Tribunal and can assist with mediations. He is on the Whistleblowers UK legal panel and has a particular interest in cases with a whistleblowing element or where an employee has been dismissed due to publications on social media. 

During his first six, Robert assisted Ryan Anderson in a pro bono wages claim in which £25,000 was secured for the successful Claimant.

In his second six Robert conducted the subsequent costs hearing and secured a pro bono costs order for £8,700.

Robert is a member of the Government Legal Department’s ‘junior junior’ scheme, and has taken instructions from central government departments on matters relating to immigration and false imprisonment.

Robert worked on many public law matters during the non-practising part of his pupillage, including:

• a challenge to a local authority decision to apply for a care order
• a challenge of a local authority’s administration of an EHCP
• ‘ordinary residence’ disputes, and
• the recovery of fees from former care home residents under the Care Act 2014. 

While working as a local authority litigator, Robert frequently advised officers on their PSED (public sector equality duties), human rights matters and decision-making under the homelessness provision of the Housing Act 1996. 

As a litigant in person (before joining chambers) Robert brought a judicial review against a decision of the schools adjudicator – the 1st examination of the meaning of ‘fairness’ in the Schools Admissions Code. He argued the case against five experienced barristers for the defendant and intervenors and was granted permission to bring the claim and secured a public interest costs-capping order. 

“… impressive in marshalling his arguments.” – David Lock KC, sitting as a High Court Judge.

Robert is experienced in general civil litigation and as a County Court advocate he conducted small claims trials and case management hearings concerning contractual disputes, road traffic accidents, and claims under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

In pupillage, Robert has assisted on construction disputes, unjust enrichment and a challenge to a will. During his second six he is instructed on a compensation claim brought against a local authority and for an SME bringing a claim of employee fraud.

As a local authority litigator, Robert advised on high-value contractual disputes. These included recovering a six-figure sum from a national restaurant chain for a Covid-era debt, and recovery of a six-figure sum from another public body related to a major rail infrastructure project.   

Robert can advise on all stages of debt recovery litigation and enforcement, including return of goods. He has experience of securing Civil Restraint Orders, bankruptcy orders, and applications brought under Part 25 of the Companies Act 2006.

Robert can advise potential litigants on the merits of bringing or defending claims in defamation or privacy. He is available to assist senior counsel with media and communications list claims in the High Court and at the appellate level. During his second six he has drafted particulars of claim in defamation and malicious falsehood, concerning a defamatory online review.

Between 2009 and 2012, Robert managed the Libel Reform Campaign for English PEN, which secured the Defamation Act 2013 and the Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021. 

Robert provided research support to the defendants’ legal team in the long-running libel case Serafin v Malkiewicz [2020] UKSC 23, the first consideration of the section 4 public interest defence in the Supreme Court. He was also part of the legal team in the subsequent ECHR claim Malkiewicz v UK 39449/21  which successfully argued that there had been a violation of Article 10 on account of the operation of the UK’s costs regime. 

Press freedom was a major theme of Robert’s work at English PEN. He managed the legal interventions in Rhodes v OPO [2015] UKSC 32  (opposing an injunction on publishing a book) and R (Miranda) v SSHD [2016] EWCA Civ 6 (concerning the misuse of anti-terrorism legislation to interfere with journalistic sources). 

Robert’s experience as a local authority lawyer gives him invaluable experience in Human Rights Act 1998 and Equality Act 2010 claims. He advised officers on their statutory obligations and managed numerous cases where human rights claims were successfully resisted. He is happy to assist claimant individuals and defendant public bodies with these claims. Several of the housing matters on which he is currently instructed include defences brought on human rights and equality grounds.

While working for English PEN, Robert ran campaigns for hundreds of individuals who had suffered human rights abuses abroad. He is eager to continue this work in a legal context, applying the knowledge of international human rights courts gained during his master’s degree. 

Robert can draft appeals and responses within the SEND Tribunal. 

He is a school governor with ‘link’ responsibility for inclusion and SEND. He sits on independent panels convened to hear complaints brought against multi-academy trusts. Previously he volunteered for the Communities Empowerment Network, advocating for families affected by school exclusions.  

While working as a litigator at the Royal Borough of Greenwich, Robert had conduct of a complex human rights claim relating to a child’s EHCP, securing a dismissal of the substantive claim and a dismissal of the claimant’s subsequent appeal. 

In R (Sharp) v the Office of the Schools Adjudicator (Secretary of State for Education Intervening) [2023] EWHC 1242 (Admin) Robert brought a judicial review against a decision of the schools adjudicator. He argued the case in person against five experienced counsel for the defendant and intervenors. He was granted permission to bring the claim and secured a public interest costs-capping order. The case was the first examination of the meaning of ‘fairness’ in the Schools Admissions Code. It also established that there are circumstances where a regulator or adjudicator may hold public bodies to promises made ultra vires. 

• Bar Practice Course LLM (University of Law) 2021-22, Distinction/Very Competent 
• Graduate Diploma in Law (University of Law) 2019-21, Distinction 
• BA Philosophy and Politics (University of York) 1998-2001, 2:1 

• Bar Human Rights Committee 

• Human Rights Lawyers Association 

• Constitutional and Administrative Law Bar Association 

• CoPBA (Court of Protection Bar Association) 

• SHLA (Social Housing Lawyers Association) 

Privacy_Notice_Robert_Sharp_20260309