Danielle Barden

Year of Call: 2014

Danielle Barden specialises in criminal and extradition law. Danielle also practises in public, prison and civil law.

Please fill out the form below and either Danielle or one of our highly qualified Clerks will respond within 48 hours.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish a solicitor-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

Alternatively, you can call us on +44 (0) 207 332 5400


Danielle Barden specialises in criminal and extradition law. Danielle also practises in public, prison and civil law.

She regularly appears in the Crown, Magistrates’ and Youth Courts for both the prosecution and the defence in a range of criminal matters, including both general and white collar crime.

Danielle is a barrister who has a broad practice and attends the Magistrates’ Court and High Court regularly in extradition matters.

She is instructed in proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, which include confiscation and enforcement proceedings at the Crown, Magistrates’ Courts and Court of Appeal.

Professional panel appointments

  • Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) advocates panel at Level 2: South Eastern and Midlands Circuit.

Additional information

Before coming to the bar Danielle worked at a specialist criminal defence firm in North West London. She specialised in confiscation law throughout her time at the firm. During her time at the firm she also assisted in the preparation of a multi-million-pound fraud trial, an action against the police and a judicial review concerning the improper seizure and detention of cash.


  • City Law School, BPTC.
  • Cardiff University, LLB Law.

Professional Memberships

  • Middle Temple.
  • Middle Temple Young Barristers’ Association.
  • Defence Extradition Lawyers’ Forum.
  • Young Fraud Lawyers Association.

Asset Recovery, Civil Fraud & Confiscation + View All Specialist Areas

Danielle regularly appears at confiscation proceedings at the Crown Court.

She appears at enforcement proceedings at the Magistrates’ Court concerning the activation of default sentences for the non-payment of confiscation orders.

Recently she has successfully opposed the activation of a number of default sentences for clients whose outstanding confiscation orders have ranged in value from thousands to hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Cases of Note


R v F

Represented a defendant at the Crown Court accused of the commission of burglary and theft against his own sibling. The case required a delicate hand in cross-examination given the nature of the relationship between the parties involved. The defendant was acquitted of all counts.

R v W

Successfully defended a case of stalking where an allegation had been made by a drugs key worker against one of her patients. In order to succeed, detailed analysis and explanation of the law to the jury in the form of a powerful jury speech was required.

R v B

Represented a defendant at the Crown Court who was jointly accused of committing a burglary, the evidence of which relied on the account of a police dog handler.

R v P

Successfully represented a defendant at the Crown Court accused of the commission of a burglary. The issue in the case was identification. A facial mapping expert was relied on by the defence to secure the acquittal of the defendant based on a successful dispute over the quality of the identification evidence.

R v T

Represented a defendant in sentencing proceedings at the Crown Court concerning the attempted abduction of a child.


R v A

Successfully negotiated a favourable confiscation order for a defendant that reflected the accurate available amount and was significantly lesser than the originally applied for by the Crown.

R v J

Acted for the Crown in the sentencing of £144,000 fraud involving the defendant abusing the trust of his employer by using his position to purchase and sell on goods for his own benefit.


Poland v Z

Successfully represented a Requested Person in an appeal to the High Court where the issue was whether the extradition of the Requested Person was proportionate under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights given the time that remained to be served.

Germany v R

Represented a Requested Person in an appeal to the High Court made on the basis of section 12A of the Extradition Act 2003.

Poland v K

Successfully represented a Requested Person at the Magistrates’ Court in opposing extradition to Poland on the grounds of proportionality under Article 8.