Richard Holland read law at St Anne’s College, Oxford and studied at BPP Law School, Leeds. Called to the bar in 2012, he is a confident advocate who has appeared in legally and factually complex cases, both led and alone, well ahead of his year of call. Commanding respect in court, whilst at ease with lay and professional clients, Richard ensures each case receives bespoke advice and timely attention. Richard has been a member of New Park Court Chambers since September 2015, having successfully completed his pupillage in chambers under the supervision of Nicholas De La Poer.

Richard is experienced in both prosecuting and defending trials in the Crown Court, with a particular expertise in confiscation proceedings. He is familiar with drafting grounds of appeal.

Notable Cases

  • Operation E (2019)

    Successful prosecution of 6 defendants by Matthew Donkin and Richard Holland, instructed by the Northumbria CPS Complex Case Unit, followed a five-week trial before HHJ Batiste at Newcastle Crown Court.

    The defendants faced charges of conspiracy to possess a firearm with intent to endanger life, relating to two shootings in the west-end of Newcastle in January 2018. The prosecution were able to successfully prove that all defendants had conspired to shoot through the windows of a house with a shotgun with intent to endanger life on 4 January, and separately that all three defendants who faced this charge had shot through the windows of another house on 8 January, using a rifle and shotgun, as part of an ongoing feud with another faction.

    The case involved the calling of evidence from a wide range of expert witnesses giving evidence on the examination and comparison of firearms and ammunition, DNA and fingerprint comparison, Cell-site and RF surveys, and CCTV image comparison.

    For more details, see here:


  • R v Islam (2018)

    Two and a half week defence trial before Mr Recorder Palmer at Leeds Crown Court, representing one of two defendants, a third defendant having pleaded guilty at an earlier occasion.  Instructed by Abdul Iftikhar of Kamrans Solicitors.  Allegations of conspiracy to defraud – £110,000 fraud against Vodafone to obtain mobile telephones and tablets – and acquiring criminal property – £1.2m of credits from the sale of 5179 items representing £1.3m of sales through  The Defendant was of previous good character.

    The Prosecution contended that the lack of receipts in the possession of the Defendant, together with the fact 25 telephones and an iPad – all fraudulently obtained from Vodafone in earlier incidents – being found at his address, the fact he had not registered for VAT and was selling telephones through the account for an undervalue, led to the irresistible inference that a substantial proportion of the sales represented the laundering of stolen or fraudulently obtained goods.

    Working together with a Forensic Accountant, Richard was able to demonstrate to the jury that the Defendant had an innocent explanation for the fraudulently obtained telephones being in his possession, and that the Prosecution contention that there was an irresistible inference that most of the Defendant’s sales on were from crime was unsafe in all the circumstances.

    Further details of the case can be found here:

  • Operation Cluster (2017/18)

    Led as Second Junior prosecuting a nine-handed modern slavery and people trafficking case. Extensively involved and responsible for the disclosure aspects of the case both before and during the trial. Present throughout the trial, working closely with the police team and leading Counsel in managing the presentation of the case.

    Further details of the case can be found here:

  • R v Ajaz (2017)

    Co-defended in a money-laundering trial before Bradford Crown Court relating to a gentlemen discovered with two co-accused in a darkened car park next to a car containing £50,000 in cash. Defendant gave evidence admitting lying in his police interview and defence statement on several occasions. Acquitted.

  • Operation Rumble (2017)

    Prosecuting, led in a complex ten-handed prosecution before HHJ Tremburg at Hull Crown Court. The Defendants were alleged, over a period of 3 days, to have targeted the elderly to obtain their life savings in a fraud exploiting a fault in the telephone system. Two Defendants proceeded to trial (six pleading at the start of the trial and two earlier in the proceedings). The Prosecution case at trial consisted almost entirely of telephonic and cell site evidence, requiring significant preparation to present an engaging case for the jury to follow and understand. Was responsible for cross-examining the second Defendant.

  • R v Brzezinski (2017)

    Defended, alone, in proceedings against a man alleged to have forced two Polish workers into forced or compulsory labour. Defendant elected to plead guilty before the start of the trial to amended counts negotiated on his behalf.

  • R v Seweryn Szmyt & Others (2017)

    Defended, alone, in a multi-handed conspiracy to subject complainants to forced or compulsory labour, before HHJ Ashurst at Newcastle Crown Court over a period of 7 weeks. The Defendant was alleged to have supported his father (and ringleader) in the trafficking of persons from Poland into the United Kingdom before putting them to work in recycling plants. Involving complex financial and telephonic evidence, Richard successfully broke a telephone attribution made by the Prosecution by careful analysis of the underlying billing material. Was the only Counsel in the trial without a leader.

  • R v AC (2017)

    Richard appeared before the Court of Appeal representing a youth Defendant subject to an extended sentence of imprisonment. The appeal was heard by a panel which included the Lord Chief Justice, and was allowed on both grounds advanced. In the course of their judgment, the Court commended Richard’s submissions as “realistic and economic”, “sensitive and sensible” and “effectively argued”.

    The case was reported under the citation [2017] EWCA Crim 1554

  • R v O’Keefe (2016)

    Defended in a trial before HHJ Mairs on behalf of a Defendant charged with causing grievous bodily harm arising from a one-punch jaw break outside a pub in Huddersfield. Successfully argued the Defendant feared for his safety and was acting in self-defence.

  • R v Nisa Ul Haq, Hajrah Sarfraz & Others (2015)

    Multi-handed conspiracy to traffic persons into the United Kingdom for the purpose of exploitation, acting as a led-junior on behalf of the Second Defendant. The Defendant was alleged, together with her sister and other family members, to have recruited and then exploited tailors brought into the United Kingdom from Pakistan through long hours, withholding pay and forcing complainants to pay “taxes” to remain in the United Kingdom. The trial took place at Leeds Crown Court over the course of 9 weeks before HHJ Kearl QC, with a large number of complainant witnesses giving evidence through an interpreter, and included issues of immigration law and witness intimidation.

Richard is familiar with drafting court pleadings, and is happy to quickly draft advice in urgent matters. He has appeared in fast track and small claims’ trials.

Richard has a particular interest in clinical negligence work. Before joining Chambers, Richard managed his own caseload at Irwin Mitchell solicitors in the clinical negligence and product liability teams, covering cases where quantum ranged from £10,000 to over £200,000. Cases involved representing Claimants in various metal-on-metal hip litigations, representing a Claimant who had received a transplant of Hepatitis E contaminated platelets, and representing a Claimant pursuing damages arising out of the failure of his defective ICD leads.

As Counsel in clinical negligence work, he has conducted conferences with client, solicitor and expert, advised on the evidence, drafted particulars of claim and advised on settlement. Recent cases have involved issues surrounding the necessity of a caesarean section, failure to treat infection to the eye necessitating evisceration, and failures in monitoring a patient’s foot injury, leading to a Type 2 pressure ulcer on the heel and ankle

Richard has a keen insight and understanding into the tactical elements involved in litigation before the issuing of proceedings, strategies involved in successful negotiation, and understands the importance of work both outside as well as inside Court in achieving a successful outcome for the client.

Richard takes instructions in regulatory matters, including professional discipline, regulatory compliance, inquests, health and safety and licensing.

Richard’s experience with clinical negligence work means he has a significant cross-over experience in inquests where medical professionals are said to have some role in a death.

Richard is particularly aware of the issues and sensitivities in cases involving the revocation of private hire taxi licenses, having represented a number of taxi drivers in revocation appeal proceedings in the Magistrates and Crown Courts. One significant matter involved the appeal against the decision of a local council to refuse a taxi driver his license due to his stepdaughter having made allegations (which she subsequently retracted) that he sexually abused her.

In 2019, Richard provided pre-charge advice to a local authority considering prosecution under Health and Safety legislation of a fast-food restaurant where a young employee had been burned in the course of their duties.

In 2018, Richard was led in a final hearing before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, representing a senior solicitor, in a three-week long hearing relating to alleged overcharging. Richard was extensively involved in the preparation, tactical considerations, and pleading of the client’s case, as well as the interlocutory applications that preceded the final hearing.

Separately, Richard prepared advice for a company regarding its regulatory responsibilities and the effect of EU Product Safety Directives when importing mobile telephones from fellow EU countries and replacing chargers so that the products could be sold on the UK market.

In 2017, Richard was instructed to advise a local authority about their options in a prosecution relating to the infringement by the defendants of Planning Enforcement Notices.

Practice Areas

Appointments & Memberships

  • CPS Level 3 Prosecutor


  • BPTC (Outstanding), BPP Law School (2011-2012)
  • MA (Oxon) Jurisprudence (BA - First Class, Hons), St Anne's College, Oxford University (2008-2011)

Privacy Notice

Shortlist Builder


Select the Practice Areas that you would like to download or add to the shortlist

Download Add to shortlist
Portfolio close
Title Type CV Email

Remove All


Click here to email this list.