Gemma Lindfield

Year of Call: 2002

Gemma is an experienced extradition, family, criminal and public law barrister with a particular focus on human rights. Gemma has been instructed in some of the most complex and high-profile extradition cases.

Please fill out the form below and either Gemma 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

Overview

Gemma is an experienced extradition barrister and has been involved in some of the most complex and high-profile cases. She frequently appears in the High Court on matters of complexity. She is ranked in Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500 for extradition.  

"A lawyer with gravitas who is well liked by the judges."

"She fights for her clients." 

Chambers and Partners 2019.

Gemma also appears in judicial review and public law matters and she has a particular interest in Human Rights and international cases. 

‘She appears in cases with human rights elements.’

Legal 500 2019.

"She is really down to earth and a great lawyer."

Chambers and Partners 2018.

Gemma is an experienced family law barrister and is regularly instructed in all aspects of family law.

Seminars and lectures

Gemma frequently delivers presentations on extradition to solicitors, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), Interpol. She is also quoted in the media in publications such as The Times and the Guardian and appears on Sky News. Gemma successfully applied for Rule 39 interim relief from the European Court of Human Rights to prevent the removal of a Polish single mother sought on an EAW for possession of 5 grammes of amphetamine. Gemma argued that it would be disproportionate for her to be extradited and that her Article 8 rights would be breached.

 "She gives clear, robust advice to the clients, especially the difficult ones."

"She's very hard-working, and has a good grasp of the broad landscape."

Chambers and Partners 2017.

  • Gemma is a grade 3 appointed panel advocate on the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) list.
  • Gemma is on the CPS Specialist list for Extradition: Grade 3.

Professional Memberships

  • Extradition Lawyers Association.
  • Family Law Bar Association.

Judicial Review & Public Law + View All Specialist Areas

Gemma’s practice often involves appearing at the appellate courts, and Gemma is therefore skilled at Judicial Review and Public law cases and instructions.

Cases of Note

Waltham Forest LBC v F [2014] EWFC 13

Advising on the procedure to be followed in Rwanda where a Special Guardianship Order was made in respect of child’s relatives there.

Bedfordshire Police v RU and another (2013)

Acted for a respondent in the first ever committal proceedings for breach of a Forced Marriage Protection Order.

B v A (2013)

Advising on the impact of immigration status in the context of family proceedings and appearing in the High Court on this issue

Enfield v A and M (2013)

Successfully representing a Respondent Mother in care proceedings that involved complex allegations of sexual abuse.

Lincoln CC v S and L (2012)

Representing a Respondent Mother in lengthy care proceedings concerning a baby with a non-accidental brain injury.

Extradition

Rwanda v. Brown and others (ongoing)

Junior counsel for Rwanda in ongoing extradition proceedings where five men are sought so that they may be prosecuted for genocide and crimes against humanity.

Richards v. Ghana [2013] EWHC 1254 (Admin)

Successfully represented Ghana where prison conditions were argued.

Sadiku v Albania (2013)

Successfully represented the requested person who was convicted of murder in Albania and sentenced to 23 years imprisonment. The court found that the requested person’s confession had been elicited through torture and discharged him on the basis that extradition would be oppressive by reason of his mental health, namely PTSD.

Sweden v Assange

Represented the Swedish Judicial Authority in this high profile case.

Asztalos v. Hungary [2011] 1 W.L.R. 252

Represented the Respondent in the unusual situation where the Appellant had been extradited in error prior to appeal.

Patel v Office of the Attorney General [2011] EWHC 155 (Admin)

Represented the Respondent where it was argued that the Appellant was not an accused person.

Rozanski v District Court of Suwalki [2014] EWHC 135 (Admin)

Successfully sought late admission of a psychological report on the Appellant’s daughter resulting in discharge under Article 8.