Natasha Barnes

Call 2010

Photo of Natasha Barnes

  • Recommendations

    Client/solicitor testimonials and legal directory recommendations:

    2023:

    Chambers & Partners

    Ranked in:

    • Tax: “Natasha is great at cross-examining and compelling in terms of her oral submissions”. “She is very crisp and on point with submissions, and just an excellent advocate”.
    • Administrative & Public Law: “Natasha is a really excellent junior: very bright, efficient and utterly dependable”. “She is extremely good with clients and really nice to work with”.
    • Civil Liberties: “An excellent practitioner”

    Legal 500:

    Ranked in:

    • Administrative Law & Human Rights: ‘Superb written work. Excellent client skills. A very reliable team player.’   
    • Immigration: ‘Superb written work. Excellent client skills. A very reliable team player.’   
    • VAT & Excise: A rising star.

    2022:

    Chambers & Partners

    Ranked in:

    • Administrative & Public Law: ‘She is incredibly diligent, reliable and an excellent team member. It’s a really great experience working with her.’ ‘A fantastic, extremely hard-working junior barrister.’
    • Human Rights: ‘Natasha Barnes is brilliant. I would recommend her very highly.’
    • Immigration: ‘An intelligent and thoughtful junior who is impressive.’
    • Indirect Tax: ‘She argues her cases well, is bright and has great judgment.’ ‘She is hard-working and has a very strong understanding of tax law.’

    Legal 500:

    Ranked in:

    • Administrative & Public Law: ‘She is very clever and hard-working. She has great judgement – you feel much better knowing that she is in the team.’
    • Immigration: ‘Very thorough and one of the best juniors around at drafting.’
    • VAT: ‘Extremely hard working and a strategic thinker. Excellent client manner. Efficient. Responsive. A pleasure to work with. A highly talented all rounder.’

    Comments from previous directories:

    • ‘She is very responsible and always goes the extra mile. Very bright and easy to get along with’. ‘She is very responsible and always goes the extra mile.’ (C&P 2021)
    • ‘A rising star with enormous capacity for hard work. She grasps the technical detail extremely well and is superb on her feet too.’ (Legal 500 2020).

  • Beyond the Bar

    Away from work, Natasha loves the outdoors and enjoys trying to improve her cooking.

  • Education

    Called to the Bar (Gray’s Inn): July 2010

    BVC at BBP Law School, London – James Crouch Scholar

    CPE at City Law School, London – Gray’s Inn Scholar

    BA Hons in History at Cambridge – Dorothy Forster Sturman Scholar, Ligner Scholar  

  • Appointments

    Attorney General’s Panel of Civil Counsel A Counsel – September 2022

Public Law & JR

Natasha is instructed in high-profile judicial review claims and appeals in cases primarily concerning national security and immigration. She appears in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, Special Immigration Appeals Commission, High Court and Investigatory Powers Tribunal.

Cases

Supreme Court

  • AAA & Ors v SSHD: Led by Lord Pannick and Sir James Eadie KC in the ongoing challenge to the Home Secretary’s plan to transfer asylum seekers to Rwanda.
  • R (TN & US) v SSHD [2021] UKSC 41: Led by Robin Tam KC in lead case concerning the lawfulness of the Detained Fast Track Rules 2005.

Court of Appeal

  • MS v SSHD: Sole counsel against Tim Buley KC in case concerning whether a grant of interim relief should be treated as success for the purposes of costs in a judicial review.
  • GA v SSHD: Sole counsel against Stephen Cragg KC in an appeal against SIAC’s dismissal of GA’s review against the SSHD’s decision to refuse him naturalisation.
  • Third Direction Claim: Led by Sir James Eadie KC in challenge to MI5’s policy pursuant to which MI5’s agents are authorised to participate in crime. The Court stated that the case ‘raises one of the most profound issues which can face a democratic society governed by the rule of law’.
  • The ‘Child Spies’ Case: Led by Sir James Eadie KC in challenge to SSHD’s use of children as Covert Human Intelligence Sources.
  • Pham v. SSHD: Junior counsel to Robin Tam KC in a high-profile appeal against SIAC’s strike out of an appeal against the deprivation of Pham’s citizenship after he was sentenced to 40 years’ imprisonment for terrorist offences in the U.S.

Investigatory Powers Tribunal

  • Operation Venetic: Led by Sir James Eadie KC and David Perry KC in lead cases challenging the NCA’s obtaining of data from EncroChat, an encrypted criminal communications platform. This case is critical to the NCA as the data has resulted in 250 convictions and seizure of >£75m / 5,000kg cocaine.
  • Techen Claim: Led by Sir James Eadie KC in a claim challenging the way in which MI5 holds warranted data.

SIAC

  • D9 v SSHD: Sole counsel against Martin Goudie KC in a review against SSHD’s decision to exclude D9 on grounds of national security.

High Court

  • Saifullah v MOD: Instructed by the Ministry of Defence in high-profile litigation concerning allegations that British Special Forces unlawfully killed Afghan civilians.
  • R (Taggart) v Royal College of Surgeons: Acted for a consultant surgeon (led by Jeremy Hyam KC) in claim raising whether the Royal College of Surgeons is amenable to Judicial Review.