Jenny is a highly experienced barrister and a specialist in financial regulatory work and complex civil and criminal fraud.
Jenny has been ranked in Chambers and Partners since 2014. She is ranked as a leading individual for Financial Crime at the London Bar in Chambers and Partners Directory.
"She is terrific, very bright and someone who gets to the issue quickly."
Chambers and Partners 2018.
Jenny is an expert in Missing Trader Intra-Community (“MTIC”) fraud. She spent over 10 years conducting MTIC cases in the Crown Court and for the last 7 to 8 years has been regularly instructed in related proceedings in the VAT Tribunal (First and Upper Tier). She is currently instructed as Lead Counsel in a number of multi-million pound Appeals.
Prior to developing a financial regulatory practice, Jenny conducted numerous fraud cases including mortgage fraud, insurance fraud, complex excise fraud, PAYE fraud, and advance fee fraud. She has also conducted numerous money laundering and confiscation cases.
Professional Panel Appointments
- Appointed to the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) ‘A’ Panel.
- Appointed to the Attorney General's B list of civil panel counsel.
- Assistant to the director of Education and committee member of the South Eastern Circuit.
Education and awards
- St Anne’s College, University of Oxford (MA Jurisprudence).
- South Eastern Circuit.
- Criminal Bar Association.
- Proceeds of Crime Lawyers Association.
- Women’s Fraud Network.
- Fraud Lawyers Association.
Jenny has been involved in numerous confiscation cases arising out of prosecutions for fraud. This work naturally links in with Jenny's financial work and expertise.
Prior to developing a practice in financial regulatory work Jenny specialised solely in complex fraud cases. Her particular expertise is VAT fraud, in particular MTIC fraud.
Jenny has conducted numerous types of criminal case as both a Prosecution and Defence advocate, with an emphasis on fraud.
Jenny receives regular instructions in relation to complex financial regulatory cases.
Jenny has been instructed on a regular basis for the past 7 to 8 years in regulatory proceedings in the VAT tribunal. These involve Appeals against decisions of HMRC to deny input tax. The proceedings are complex and document heavy. She recently secured a successful outcome in a £23 million Appeal leading two Juniors.
Current instructions include Appeals concerning MTIC fraud in CPU’s, carbon credits and Excise goods. She has recently been instructed in a multi-million pound Appeal involving a large multi-national company.
Cases of Note
R v Bhandari and others (2017)
Instructed as lead Counsel with one junior Counsel, representing an accountant, in a 3-month trial prosecuted by the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”). The case concerned allegations of making false or misleading statements about the value and prospects of a medical company and the unauthorised arranging of the sale of shares and making financial promotions. Our client was the only one of 5 Defendants to be acquitted.
Instructed to advise regarding the prosecution of a multi-million-pound investor fraud in Jersey (2018). Detailed consideration of Jersey financial services regulations.
R v Sweett Group PLC (2016)
Instructed by the SFO, being led by Michael Brompton QC in the first prosecution of a company under Section 7 of the Bribery Act 2010. Bribe by the Middle Eastern subsidiary of Sweett Group PLC to secure a contract of £1.6 million to oversee construction of a hotel. Company entered a plea of guilty. Total fine and confiscation £2.25 million. Advised regarding Deferred Prosecution Agreement.
R v Parma, Mori and Parma (2013)
Leading Counsel with one Junior in an inward excise diversion fraud concerning importation of wine from Italy. Revenue loss (£6 million).
R v Steele (2013)
Defending the senior partner of a Solicitors’ firm in an SFO prosecution, being led by Orlando Pownall QC - 23 million Euro fraud. Appeal against sentence in the Court of Appeal.
R v Wilson and McKay (2012)
Sole Counsel in prosecution of the directors of insurance company for fraud (£1 million). The directors ran an insurance company which issued a numerous false insurance certificates purporting to be underwritten by Lloyds of London.
Operation Tangelo 1 (2011)
Prosecution of UMBS Online Limited, a financial institution for money laundering and fraudulent trading under the Fraud Act 2006. This was one of the first major prosecutions under the Fraud Act. The bank was fined £2 million pounds and ordered to pay an immediate confiscation order of £6 million. Instructed as disclosure counsel throughout this case dealing with complex and wide-ranging disclosure issues and developing a thorough knowledge of the workings of the Electronic VAT Folder used by HMRC
R v Kusnetsov and Dostenko (2010)
£3.5 million revenue fraud using PAYE and self-assessment scheme. This case was a £3.5 million Revenue Self-Assessment fraud. There were numerous methods of committing the fraud, involving both the PAYE and Self-Assessment scheme. It was the largest case of its type to have gone to Trial. Jenny also dealt with the disclosure issues, which arose in the case and reviewed a large quantity of the unused material.
R v Chen (2009)
£7 million mortgage fraud. This case was a £7 million mortgage fraud in which the Defendant used numerous false identities in order to obtain remortgages on properties which he had purported to rent and then transferred the proceeds of the remortgage to his bank accounts.
R v Elda Beguinua (2008)
Advance fee fraud by a woman purporting to be the heiress to a multi-million pound fortune. Confiscation order (£1 million).
Operation Gnawed (2007)
£50 million MTIC fraud.
Operation Maypole and Lychees and Drive (2006)
£58 million MTIC fraud with 9 Defendants.
R v Jones and Morrissey (2006)
Money laundering £300,000 arising from MTIC fraud.
R v Omar (2005)
Court of Appeal case concerning the lifting of the corporate veil in confiscation proceedings.
Operation Dossall (2005)
£59 million MTIC fraud.
R v Hadley and Harmer (2004)
Operation Doona (2003)
£39 million MTIC fraud.
R v Turner, Ward, Mackenzie and Withers (2002)
Money-laundering arising out of VAT fraud.
R v Skidmore and others (2002)
£40 million VAT evasion fraud.
R v Nathan and Herbert (2001)
Money laundering by a Solicitor.
Decisions reported in First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) and Upper Tribunal (UT).
RBS PLC v HMRC  UKFTT 0223
Instructed by HMRC being led by Richard Atkins QC and James Puzey. This case concerns an appeal by RBS PLC against an assessment of VAT in the sum of £86 million in respect of 537 transactions in carbon credits. The appellant applied to have the assessment struck out on the basis that the assessment was not issued within the applicable time limit in Section 73(6) Value Added Tax Act (“VATA”) 1994. Following a hearing this application was dismissed. The case is ongoing.
Manhattan Limited v HMRC  UKFTT 0862
Instructed by HMRC leading two junior Counsel in a case concerning assessments in the region of £6 million in respect of transactions concerning “airtime” and an appeal against deregistration. FTT decision refusing expedition of the deregistration appeal and consolidating 5 appeals. Case is ongoing.
Expeditors Limited v HMRC  UKFTT 0804
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel. Denial of input tax (£350,000). The FTT held that the Appellant had “actual knowledge” the transactions were connected with fraud and the Appellant knew of that fact.
Rioni Limited v HMRC  UKFTT 0160 (TC)
Instructed by HMRC leading two junior Counsel. Denial of input tax (£23 million). Document heavy case - over 130 lever arch files of evidence, complex expert evidence regarding grey market, and links to criminal investigations. The FTT held that the Appellant had “actual knowledge” the transactions were connected with fraud and the appellant knew of that fact. The application by the appellant to set aside the decision of the FTT was refused on 4.10.16.
Lifeline Europe Limited v HMRC (2012) UKFTT 424 and (2014) UKUT 0135 and decision in UT regarding costs on 8.3.16.
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel in the FTT and then instructed alone in the UT. Denial of input tax (£2.5 million). Finding of “actual knowledge”. Appeal to the Upper Tribunal regarding application of Kittel to contra-trading dismissed. Application by HMRC for “unreasonable costs” against the representative in respect of its conduct in the above appeal allowed.
EMJ Telecommunications Limited v HMRC (2014) UKFTT 354
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel. Denial of input tax (£1.2 million). Finding of “actual knowledge.”
Techcomp Limited v HMRC (2014) UKFTT 979
Instructed by HMRC, leading one junior Counsel. Denial of input tax (£300,000). The nature of the trading was particularly complex and involved acquisition deals, direct export deals, broker deals and triangulation deals. Finding of “actual knowledge.”
Rigcharm Limited v HMRC (2013) UKFTT 270
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel. Denial of input tax (£2.7 million). Finding of “actual knowledge.”
Crotek Limited and Crotek Systems Limited v HMRC (2011) UKFTT 836
Instructed by HMRC being led by Michael Parroy QC. Denial of input tax (£5.6 million). Finding of “actual knowledge.”
Other cases in the FTT and UT:
B Limited v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC as sole Counsel in a case concerning VAT assessments of £750,000 against a company trading in excise goods. The case is ongoing.
P Limited v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC as sole Counsel in a case concerning a denial of input tax (£10 million) against a company and a partnership trading in metals. The liquidator abandoned the appeal in August 2016 and the appeal by the partnership is on-going.
LD v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC as sole Counsel in an appeal against a personal liability notice, which attributed liability to pay a preceding penalty assessment issued to a company to the director. Issued in respect of an inaccuracy in VAT returns. The case is ongoing.
P Limited v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel in a case concerning the denial of input tax and consequent assessments in sum of £700,000 in respect of transactions with a labour provider. The case is ongoing.
G Limited v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel in a case concerning assessments of £22.5 million VAT against a company trading in excise goods. Also a linked appeal against deregistration. Case stayed.
E Limited v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel, in a case concerning assessments of £5.8 million VAT against a company trading in excise goods. Also a linked appeal against deregistration. Case stayed.
AS v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC as sole Counsel in an appeal against unspecified assessments stated to be in the sum of £67 million by the appellant. Drafted an application to strike out. Appellant withdrew appeal.
AW v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC in an appeal against deregistration on the basis the VAT registration was being used for fraudulent/abusive purposes. Appeal was withdrawn.
D v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC leading two junior Counsel in 3 consolidated appeals. Denial of input tax (£2 million). The appellant withdrew the appeal in August 2016.
MS Limited v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel. Denial of input tax (£800,000). Appeal listed for 5 weeks in February 2016 and Appellant withdrew in late 2015.
T Limited v HMRC (FTT)
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel. Denial of input tax (£230,000). Appeal listed in February 2014 and Appellant withdrew at the commencement of the hearing.
N Limited v HMRC
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel. Denial of input tax (£6 million). The Appellant withdrew the appeal 3 months before the final hearing.
A Limited v HMRC
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel. Denial input tax (£650,000). Appeal struck out in July 2013.
T Limited v HMRC
Instructed by HMRC as sole Counsel. Denial of input tax (£1.3 million). Listed in November 2012. Appeal struck out in May 2012.
B Limited v HMRC
Instructed by HMRC leading one junior Counsel. Denial input tax (£340,000). Listed in May 2012 and the Appellant withdrew at the commencement of the hearing.
H Limited v HMRC
Instructed by HMRC as sole Counsel. Settlement pursuant to Section 85 Value Added Tax Act 1994.