Louisa is a barrister specialising in extradition, international crime and human rights law. Louisa has been ranked in Chambers and Partners since 2017 as a leader in the field of extradition at the London Bar.
"She provides very clear advice and is very impressive."
Chambers and Partners 2019.
"Exceptional client handling skills" and "very impressive written arguments."
Chambers and Partners 2018.
Louisa is also ranked in Legal 500 for her work in international crime and extradition.
‘Extremely experienced and a pleasure to work with.’
Legal 500 2019.
‘Brings tranquillity to high-pressure cases.’
Legal 500 2020.
Louisa is recognised for her hard work ethic, her ability to handle complex and sensitive cases and also her approachability.
"Her skeletons are just so professional and she is one of those people that when she goes before a judge she commands the respect of all the judges there."
"Very persuasive and very knowledgeable, she's firm in her approach when necessary."
Chambers and Partners 2017.
Professional Panel Appointments:
- Specialist Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Extradition panel: Level 2.
- Defence Extradition Lawyers’ Forum.
- Extradition Lawyers Association.
Louisa is an experienced and established specialist extradition barrister, acting both on behalf of requesting foreign governments and requested persons. She has been practicing in this area of the law since 2008 and has a breadth of experience in numerous complex cases and has a record of success in matters concerning vulnerable individuals. She works tirelessly to obtain the best possible outcomes for her clients and is noted for her approachability and hard work ethic.
Louisa’s practice involves advising and providing representation throughout all stages of the extradition process. She has a busy appellate workload and has made applications to the ECHR and dealt with ancillary proceedings, including judicial review. Louisa also regularly advises individuals and judicial authorities regarding the preparation of extradition requests made to this jurisdiction from other countries.
Recent instructions have involved a number of Part 2 jurisdictions (Moldova, Armenia, USA, India, UAE, Switzerland and Nigeria) and the full spectrum of countries under the EAW system.
Louisa has dealt with numerous extradition requests issued against individuals wanted in the US. She has dealt with both Federal and State requests at first instance and on appeal.
She has represented requested persons facing US requests and also appeared on behalf of the US Government. This means she in in the advantageous position of being familiar with the procedures adopted by the CPS in connection with the US Department of Justice in pursuing an extradition request. This knowledge and experience is invaluable when advising requested persons facing an Interpol Red Notice or extradition request from the USA.
Prior to specialising in extradition, Louisa’s practice was principally in white collar financial crime, which provides her with an insight and understanding in connection with fraud, business crime and related matters in the context of extradition.
Louisa is experienced in raising forum arguments in extradition cases, an argument that features frequently in the context of US matters and has also advised on outgoing (import) extradition requests from the US.
Louisa has experience in challenging INTERPOL Red Notices, has assisted in negotiating prisoner transfer arrangements and has coordinated successful s21B interview requests.
Cases of Note
USA v Leach
Accusation request raising issues concerning the validity of the request, dual criminality, Article 5 and Article 3.
Bowen v USA  EWHC 1873 (Admin) and  EWHC 1873 (Admin)
Civil commitment, Article 5
USA v Giese  EWHC 3658 (Admin)
Assurances, civil commitment, mental disorder, Article 5 ECHR.
USA v Brenner
Accusation request raising Article 5 issues.
USA v Mitchell
Accusation requests raising issues under Article 5, Article 3, double jeopardy, abuse of process and Article 8.
Surovy v Slovakia  EWHC 1309 (Admin)
Proportionality, exceptional circumstances under Crim PD XI para.50A.4.
Carpenter v Italy  EWHC 211 (Admin)
s12A, charging decisions.
Beczer v Poland  EWHC 1016 (Admin)
Szlachetka v Poland  EWHC 1329 (Admin)
Bulgaria v Minchev  EWHC 1925 (Admin)
Zagul v Poland  EWHC 121 (Admin)
Ostalowski v Poland  EWHC 416 (Admin)
Fresh evidence, mental health, Article 8.
Lekawski v Poland  EWHC 1049 (Admin)
Delay & proportionality.
Biesek v Poland  EWHC 124 (Admin)
Young offenders, Article 8.
Kemp v Spain  EWHC 69 (Admin)
Credit for time served, curfews and proportionality.