Recommended in Legal 500, 2024 – Crime (General and Fraud)

Ranked in Tier 1 for Crime in Legal 500 (2023) and in Chambers & Partners (2023)

“A very experienced silk who is tactically very astute” Legal 500 (2023)

“Abdul Iqbal QC is a well-regarded criminal defence barrister. He is noted for his expert handling of complex murder, arms trafficking, money laundering and serious organised crime cases (Chambers & Partners 2022)

“His advocacy is flawless and he is very clever with a ferocious work ethic. He is fearsome in cut-throat situations. His witness handling skills are superb. ’

(Legal 500 2022 Ranked: Tier 1)

“His advocacy is superb and he commands the respect of judges and fellow professionals.” The Legal 500 (2021)

“Very experienced in defending in heavyweight criminal matters.” – The Legal 500 (2019)

“He maintains absolute mastery over the facts.” – The Legal 500 (2017)

“An outstanding silk, and a thorough and inspired cross-examiner.” – The Legal 500 (2016)

“Very thorough in his preparation and management of the facts.” – The Legal 500 (2015)

“Leading Silk In Crime… The Paragon Of Legal Excellence” – The Legal 500 – 2014

Abdul Iqbal KC is a favoured choice of counsel among both solicitors and lay clients. He is widely recognised for his skilful, tactical and robust advocacy in the most complex cases. He took Silk in 2014 after years of being instructed as leading counsel in high-profile cases where Queen’s Counsel had been instructed by other parties in the case.

Abdul has built a very large and successful defence practice focused on the most serious criminal cases, such as homicide, high-value complex commercial fraud, serious organised crime, terrorism, and large-scale international drug trafficking. He also has specialist expertise in confiscation and deprivation of assets issues arising from these areas of criminal work.

Abdul previously practised as a pharmacist, and has a particular interest in cases involving expert medical or paramedical evidence. He is noted for his ability and experience in cross-examining expert witnesses on the most complex areas of evidence.

He has defended in a series of sensitive cases where professionals (solicitors, accountants, doctors, pharmacists) have been charged with criminal or regulatory offences.

Court of Appeal

Abdul regularly reviews serious and complex cases and advises upon the prospects of seeking to overturn, before the Court of Appeal, potentially unsafe convictions sustained in cases where he has not appeared at first instance. He also regularly reviews serious cases and advises as to whether a sentence can be regarded as manifestly excessive so as to be successfully appealed before the Court of Appeal.

Approach

Abdul is noted for his ability and judgment to quickly and reliably identify the real and decisive issues in ‘very heavy’ cases. He excels in offering clear, concise and tactically focused advice in the most complex and voluminous cases

Notable cases

Homicide/attempted murder

• R -v- GL [2022], Sheffield Crown Court [Operation Mason Mike]. Allegation of murder. The case involved admissions of guilt recorded by a car “dashcam” device that (unbeknown to GL) captured him making admissions of involvement in the unlawful fatal violence. The case involved a “cut throat” defence between the two defendants and their respective intent at the time of using the fatal violence. The case also involved a wide range of issues as to Jogee joint enterprise and involved complex disclosure, hearsay, bad character, and cross-admissibility considerations. GL was acquitted of murder.
• R -v- MAH [2022], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Paracress]. Several defendants charged with murder and attempted murder arising from large-scale public disorder in Bradford city centre. MAH, one of the youngest of the defendants, was found not guilty of murder and guilty of the lesser offence of unlawful act manslaughter. The evidence included a very large amount of evidence including complex CCTV footage, joint enterprise liability, and admissibility of bad character arguments.
• R -v- IR [2022], Birmingham Crown Court [Operation Sarmatic]. Group violence between organised crime groups including arson, carjacking at gunpoint and ultimately fatal violence by stabbing. Complicated chronology including complex factual and expert evidence to link various strands of the prosecution case.
• R -v- RD [2021], Manchester Crown Court [Operation Malachite]. Multiple defendant joint enterprise homicide involving competing gangs in Manchester. “Jogee” joint enterprise issues. RD was acquitted of murder on the basis of lack of specific intent.
• R -v- PB [2021], Hull Crown Court [Operation Everton]. Fatal group violence in Hull relating to drug dealing. Murder by stabbing. Admissibility of identification evidence challenged on the basis of breaches of PACE Codes of Practice. Ultimately, Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 Chapter 2 agreements led to reduction of sentence.
• R -v- WB [2021], Leeds Crown Court [Operation Posthaven]. Murder of his own mother by WB whilst suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. Complex psychiatric evidence led to the making of a Hospital Order.
• R -v- MIK [2021], Manchester Crown Court [Operation Landseer]. Alleged murder by shooting involving organised crime groups. Complex scientific and forensic evidence linking various defendants to the fatal violence.
• R -v- ZK [2021], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Filtergill]. Defendant alleged to be a hired gunman involved in multiple firearm and robbery offences including attempted murder. Cross-admissibility and severance issues.
• R -v- MJK [2021], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Paperpond]. Multi-handed alleged murder of a drug user during purchase of drugs. Bad character issues. Cut-throat defences involving introduction of reprehensible behaviour. Jogee joint enterprise issues
• R -v- AK [2021]. Leeds Crown Court [Operation Puntstoke]. Multi-handed alleged murder and attempted murder after group violence. Admissibility arguments as to alleged incriminating hearsay comments made to a third party. Jogee-type joint enterprise issues.
• R -v- AW [2020], Leeds Crown Court [Operation Patonabbey]. Attempted murder of six pedestrians by use of a motor vehicle after arguments at a social club. Introduction of reprehensible behaviour dating back almost 20 years as “similar fact evidence”.
• R -v- VC [2020], Central Criminal Court [Operation Melrose]. Conspiracy to unlawfully traffick migrants in breach of immigration law that ultimately led to the manslaughter of 39 Vietnamese migrants in Essex in October 2019. Complex international jurisdictional issues. Anonymous and sensitive witness evidence.
• R -v- SK [2020], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Peatminster]. The alleged murder of the victim due to an ongoing dispute. Violence over a number of hours alleged by multiple defendants. Recording of some of the violence by the defendants. Cut-throat defences. Issue of causation and Jogee joint enterprise.
• R -v- SD [2019], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Helix]. Conspiracy to murder. Firearms offences. Drug trafficking offences leading to revenge shooting in Newcastle. Firearms sourced in South Yorkshire. Detailed tracking of defendants across the north of England. Multiple bad character and hearsay arguments. Cut-throat defences leading to acquittal of SD.
• R -v- CG [2019], Sheffield Crown Court [Operation Carlton]. Murder by stabbing. Multiple defendants. Drug trafficking background. The victim was lured to the location of the fatal incident by a co-defendant and was stabbed to death on the street after a short pursuit. Jogee joint enterprise issues.
• R -v- UN [2019], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Panarm]. Conspiracy to murder. Animosity generated by a road traffic accident involving family members. Death threats followed by the sourcing of a firearm and shooting in the street of the victim. Issues of transferred malice and Jogee joint enterprise.
• R -v- SAA [2019], Preston Crown Court [Operation Sweden]. Murder. Long-term anti-social behaviour. Defendants armed with a machete and various blunt weapons attacked the victim and his family members. Large-scale public disorder. Issues of admissibility of poor quality CCTV footage. Jogee joint enterprise arguments at trial.
• R -v- AKK [2019], Leeds Crown Court [Operation Paddon]. Murder. Financial dispute led to hammer attack causing fatal head injuries. AKK approached passing police officers and admitted the offence. Conflicting psychiatric evidence as to the partial defence of diminished responsibility.
• R -v- KH [2019], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Foreville]. Attempted murder and firearms offences. The defendants were manufacturing “slam guns” by ordering and assembling component parts. A dispute over the theft of a car led to the discharge of a slam gun into the front room of the victim’s house when multiple occupants were present. Complex intelligence analysis. Legal arguments as to requisite knowledge and intent.
• R -v- NH [2019], Sheffield Crown Court [Operation Chlorine}. Murder. Drug trafficking background. NH used a golf club to cause fatal skull fracture. Jogee joint enterprise arguments. Complex medical evidence as to nature of injuries and nature of weapon used. Cut-throat defences.
• R -v- OB [2019], Birmingham Crown Court [Operation Zori]. Murder. Three Eastern European men beat to death the victim and record part of the offending. Offences committed whilst heavily intoxicated. The victim was abandoned outside the defendants’ address. Covert surveillance evidence utilised by the prosecution. Complex pathological evidence as to nature of assault and cause of death. Issues of causation and Jogee joint enterprise.
• R v DI [2018], Preston Crown Court [Operation Pearl]- Conspiracy to murder. Alleged revenge shooting to eliminate rival drug dealers. The defendant supposedly hired a hitman from West Yorkshire who shot the victim in the face at point blank range. Successful challenges to each strand of the circumstantial evidence implicating DI of the offence.
• R -v- SD [2018], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Helix] – Shooting in Newcastle alleged to be intimidation in relation to drug trafficking. Cut-throat defences involving successful admission of reprehensible behaviour of co-defendants.
• R -v- AA [2018], Leeds Crown Court [Operation Panderwick] – unlawful detention and murder of the defendant’s wife followed by attempted destruction of the body by burning. Complex neurological and pathological evidence as to ultimate time and cause of death. Cut-throat defences involving the utilisation of covertly recorded prison conversations.
• R -v- MT [2018], Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court [Operation Florence] – murder of the defendant’s mother-in-law by multiple stabbing. Medical issues as to bone density and force used to inflict fatal wounds.
• R v DJ [2017], Leeds Crown Court (Operation Posestoke). Allegations of double murder by arson.
• R v MZ [2017], Bradford Crown Court. Double murder involving the defendant fleeing the jurisdiction to Pakistan. First extradition from Pakistan to the United Kingdom to face trial in over 10 years. Complex arguments as to the legality of the Pakistani extradition proceedings.
• R v ZK [2016], Warwick Crown Court (Operation Bridge). Successful defence of charges of murder, wounding with intent, and violent disorder. Murder by stabbing to the neck and slashing to others within a nightclub in Coventry.
• R v DW [2015], Preston Crown Court, (Operation Albany) – Conspiracy to murder. Attempted execution by shooting to the head and upper body with a sawn off shotgun. Allegations of serious criminality on the part of the victim.
• R v JW & Another [2014], Bradford Crown Court – Attempted murder involving allegations of an ordered execution and slashing of the throat with damage close to the carotid artery.
• R v DI [2014], Bradford Crown Court (Operation Plummen) – Murder involving allegations of marital infidelity. Voluntary repatriation to the UK to face trial.
• R v BMO [2014], Leeds Crown Court (Operation Pipeville) – Revenge murder by stabbing within the Kurdish community.
• R v LD & Another [2014], Leeds Crown Court – Manslaughter of 4-month-old baby found with multiple fractures, bite injuries and skin burns. Complex multiple medical evidence as to causation of death.
• R v AH [2014], Sheffield Crown Court (Operation Koat) – Murder by stabbing and decapitation of the victim whilst she was still alive.
• R v AS [2013], Leeds Crown Court (Operation Pillarmen) – Pre-planned murder of an associate of the defendant by the slashing of his throat outside his family home.
• R v AS & others [2012], Bradford Crown Court (Operation Peranga) – 64-year-old woman charged with double murder and the disposal of the bodies in a rural location.
• R v AA & another [2011], Leeds Crown Court (Operation Parilla) – Conspiracy to murder. Alleged arrangement for the victim to be shot whilst she was visiting family in Pakistan.
• R v OR & others [2011], Stafford Crown Court – Conspiracy to murder. Group pre-planned action to execute the victim by shooting for unknown motives.
• R v MNA & another [2011], Leeds Crown Court (Operation Paea) – Alleged murder (during heightened racial tensions locally) by Asian men by punching and stamping to the head of the victim.
• R v JI [2011], Bradford Crown Court – Homicide of a vulnerable passenger by taxi driver driving away, causing her to jump to her death.
• R v AM [2010], Bradford Crown Court (Operation Stanton) – Triple murder of occupants of house by arson.

Terrorism

• R -v- XX (pseudonym) [2022], Leeds Crown Court [Operation Stormable]. A child defendant charged with engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts and disseminating terrorist publications. The defendant was alleged to have, together with another male, researched the manufacture of explosive devices, and purchased weapons and other equipment in preparation for a terrorist attack. Complex social media and associated evidence running to over half a million messages alone. Complex ideology, theology, political and mindset evidence.
• R -v- SS [2022], Central Criminal Court. Preparation of terrorist acts, membership of a proscribed organisation, undergoing weapons training. Allegations that SS was a member of “IS” whilst in Syria and that he received instruction on the use of live firearms. Capture of SS by Turkish Armed Forces. Admissibility of comments later made by SS to Sky News about his acts. Issues of duress.
• R -v- LH [2020]. Allegations of far-right extremist propaganda circulated by LH involving incitement to commit crimes against various sections of the community. Issues of intent. Complex expert evidence as to computer material and its genesis.
• R v Kahar, Eshati and others [2016] EWCA Crim 568. Appeared as leading counsel in the guideline Court of Appeal judgment (handed down by the Lord Chief Justice in a  5-member court) relating to sentencing for terrorism offences contrary to section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006 (“Preparation of terrorist acts”). The judgment can be found here:
• R v GH [2017], Leeds Crown Court [Operation Polyamine] – Engaging in conduct in preparation for acts of terrorism. Undercover police operation seeking to infiltrate active terrorist sympathiser networks. Active support for the proscribed organisation “ISIS”. Preparation and active steps to travel to Syria to engage in active warfare.
• R v SC [2015], Central Criminal Court, (Operation Casebox) – Engaging in conduct in preparation for acts of terrorism. Active support for the proscribed organisation “ISIS”. Preparation to travel to Syria to engage in active warfare. Successful arguments as to dangerousness.
• R v AE [2015], Central Criminal Court, (Operation Bravely) – Possession of material for terrorist purposes and/or likely to be of use to persons engaged in terrorism. Purchase of over 1,000 tons of heavy gauge ammunition for $28.5 million for onward transport by air from Italy to Libya for use by the Zintan militia in the ongoing civil war.

Serious fraud/financial crime/corruption

• R -v- MI & MMG Ltd [2023], Manchester Crown Court. Prosecution of the company directors and limited liability company for fraudulent trading linked to the operation of car parking facilities near Manchester Airport. Issues of scope of alleged fraudulent trading, quantification of loss, and categorisation of the offending for sentencing purposes.
• R -v- HR [2022], Leeds Crown Court [Operation Larkshot]. Allegations of at least £260 million being laundered via gold trading companies across the United Kingdom. Linked to the successful prosecution of Nat West Bank for the laundering £400 million from one customer.
• R-v- DD [2020], Leeds Crown Court. Practising Solicitor charged with false accounting, fraud and conspiracy to pervert the course of public justice. Allegations of forged documents and false entries placed in business records.
• R v SI [2016], Snaresbrook Crown Court – Serving councillor charged with long-term housing scheme fraud upon the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.
• R –v- FH [2016], Southwark Crown Court, [Operation Kadenza] – Banking and cyber fraud valued in excess of £100 million. Lead counsel for the main defendant charged with complex multi-layered fraud and tiered international money laundering of the proceeds of the fraud.
• R -v- AB [2015], Teesside Crown Court, (Operation Bamburgh 2) – Large-scale national property fraud involving financial and estate agency professionals fabricating and distorting financial information so as to deceive financial institutions and legal professionals
• R v MA & Others [2014], Manchester Crown Court – Chartered accountant charged with fraud upon the NHS. Allegations of false accounting, complex falsification of documents, and operation of a closed market. Proceedings stayed as an abuse of process after serious prosecution disclosure failures relating to 3 terabytes of seized digital material.
• R v GS & Others [2014], Bradford Crown Court (Operation Bellum) – Bank fraud and money laundering involving the provision of loan facilities to fabricated or impecunious applicants by corrupt internal bank employees.
• R v RK & Others [2014], Southwark Crown Court (Operation Harvest) – Conspiracy to defraud (boiler-room fraud’) involving allegations of international fraudulent ‘share’-trading and money laundering by a complex corporate structure.
• R v DC & Others [2013], Leicester Crown Court (Operation Gain) – Mortgage, land registry and conveyancing fraud with associated international money laundering involving corrupt solicitors using the stolen identities of bona fide solicitors.
• R v JL & Others [2013], Nottingham Crown Court (Operation Wickerball) – Serious organised international fraud and money laundering of UK state benefits by Eastern European citizens using fake or falsified identities.
• R v SAO [2013], Liverpool Crown Court (Operation MFB) – Leading counsel for the defence in an international tax fraud involving over £100 million of reclaimed VAT on complex financial transactions.
• R v WK & Others [2012], Bradford Crown Court – Laundering of large sums of money over a decade. Large property portfolio and complex financial affairs requiring expert interpretation and reconstruction of financial affairs.
• R v YH & Others [2012], Hull Crown Court (Operation Ocean Breeze) – Leading counsel for the defence for the first and principal defendant; international intellectual property rights advance fee fraud (‘Duracell Energy Drink – Procter & Gamble’).
• R v MAJ & Others [2011], Manchester Crown Court (Operation Enigma)  – Alleged international money laundering fraud involving in excess of £170 million of funds transmitted abroad by money-services business.
• R v SA & Others [2011], Southwark Crown Court (Operation Podium) – Law undergraduate alleged to have defrauded the Olympic Delivery Authority of sums in excess of £2.4 million.
• R v SD & Others [2010], Leeds Crown Court – Large-scale alleged tax evasion on purchase of high-value cars by disabled drivers using tax-avoidance regulations.

International drugs/firearms/people-trafficking

• R -v- MVM [2022], Manchester Crown Court [Operation Tradite North / Operation Wakeforest]. Alleged international trafficking of industrial levels class A and B controlled drugs from the Netherlands to the United Kingdom. Admissibility in the UK of covertly intercepted conversations in the Netherlands.
• R -v- VC [2020], Central Criminal Court [Operation Melrose]. Conspiracy to unlawfully traffick migrants in breach of immigration law that ultimately led to the manslaughter of 39 Vietnamese migrants in Essex in October 2019. Complex international jurisdictional issues. Anonymous and sensitive witness evidence.
• R -v- MB [2018], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Trafalgar] – Importation of multi kilo quantities of class A drugs. Covert recording devices placed in home of suspects pursuant to intrusive police surveillance. Abuse of process arguments relating to pre CPIA 1996 disclosure failings on part of prosecution.
• R v NK [2018], Peterborough Crown Court [Operations Trojan and Forward] – regional and national trafficking of multi kilo quantities of class A drugs involving organised crime groups operating in Cambridgeshire and neighbouring counties. Complex covert surveillance, telecommunication and financial evidence as to companies operated by the defendant.
• R v RA [2018], Leeds Crown Court [Operation Fillview] – Conspiracy to possess firearms, ammunition and silencer with intention to endanger life. Alleged planned gun offending related to drug trafficking. Events on 2nd January 2017 when armed West Yorkshire Police Officers shot dead Yasser Yaqub at the Ainley Top junction of the M62. The case involved complex legal argument about disclosure of police intelligence that led to the armed police response leading to the death of Yasser Yaqub. The case also involved complex disclosure, hearsay, bad character, and cross-admissibility considerations.
• R v AR [2018] – secured the unanimous acquittal after trial of RA who was charged with conspiracy to possess firearms and ammunition with intent to endanger life. Please click here for media coverage
• R v SD [2018] – secured not guilty verdicts in gun violence trial.
• R v IA & Others [2014], Bradford Crown Court (Operation Custard Apple) – Multiple importations of heroin hidden in wooden cargo imported via the international postal system
• R v WK & 2 Others [2014], Leeds Crown Court (Operation Borage) – Importation of 245kg of heroin via the international cargo delivery system.
• R v JM & Others [2014], Nottingham Crown Court (Operation Lineal) – Large-scale regional and national distribution of class-A drugs from the East Midlands. Employee of solicitors’ practice indicted. Issues of legal professional privilege and abuse of process.
• R v NS & Others [2014], Bradford Crown Court (Operation Block) – Large-scale conspiracy to facilitate breaches of UK immigration law by falsification and fabrication of documents in relation to overseas applicants seeking UK entry clearance.
• R v GK & Others [2014], Sheffield Crown Court (Operation Babbage) – International conspiracy to facilitate breaches of immigration law. Alleged ‘sham’ marriages. Fraudulent documents allegedly produced to support multiple ‘marriages’ to ensure UK citizenship was granted to non-EU citizens, under false pretences.
• R v RH & Another [2013], Leeds Crown Court – Multiple importations (around 100kg) of heroin hidden in woven carpets. Issues of public-interest immunity, complex surveillance and telephonic evidence.
• R v MI & Others [2013], Leeds Crown Court (Operation Bizarre) – Principal defendant involved in multiple large-scale importations of cocaine from Peru and Ecuador. Issues of the admissibility of material obtained using foreign legal provisions and convictions sustained abroad.
• R v UH [2012], Bradford Crown Court (Operation Giltford) – Organised live firearms and ammunition distribution regionally for the purposes of serious organised crime.
• R v MI & Others  [2011], Bradford Crown Court (Operation Lapworth) – Leading counsel for the defence; one of the principal defendants in large-scale importation of Glock firearms from the USA and distribution within the UK to organised crime groups.
• R v MFH & Others [2010], Bradford Crown Court (Operation Prime) – International conspiracy to kidnap and blackmail involving the drugging, gagging and beating of the victim over several days. US$2m ransom-demand made in China. Inter-jurisdictional co-operation led to the detection and arrest of the perpetrators.

Serious crime

• R -v- BK [2019], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Dalesway]. One of the lead defendants in a multiple defendant trial involving allegations of long-term sexual abuse of children in local authority accommodation. Allegations centred around a local authority home. Complex evidence as to the actions of local authority staff and the police.
• R v YH & Others [2014] EWCA Crim 228, [2014] All ER (D) 255, Court of Appeal Criminal Division – Leading Court of Appeal judgment on the principles to be applied and procedure to be adopted in ‘absconder’ appeal cases.
• R v DH (2012) Leeds Crown Court – Serial rapes and other serious sexual assaults of stepdaughters over several years; complex medical and scientific evidence.
• R v BB & Others [2011] Leeds Crown Court (Operation Pelatos) – Murder by shooting with associated allegations of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.
• R v MK [2011] Bradford Crown Court – Multiple rape and serious sexual assault of a schoolgirl who had been groomed by MK and another.
• R v MD (2011) Leeds Crown Court (Operation Recall) – Cold case; rape of student over 25 years ago; reliance upon pre-DNA scientific evidence and bad character.
• R v MS & Another [2011] Bradford Crown Court – Principal defendant charged with unlawful entry into a young mother’s home followed by her torture, degradation, detention over hours, and serial multiple rape.
• R v CN & Others [2006] EWCA Crim 314, Court of Appeal Criminal Division – Large conspiracy to burgle and handle stolen goods involving ‘Hanoi’ burglaries and the dissipation of stolen cars in the North of England.
• R v NM & Others [Att Gen Ref 8, 9, 10 of 2002, 2003 1 Cr. App R. (s) 57], Court of Appeal Criminal Division – Guidelines on sentencing for kidnapping cases.

Private client work

• R -v- AB [2022], Nottingham Crown Court. International people trafficking conspiracy involving complex communication evidence between alleged co-conspirators. Instructed to argue categorisation of culpability and harm relating to the offending for sentencing purposes.
• R -v- MI & MMG Ltd [2023], Manchester Crown Court. Prosecution of the company directors and limited liability company for fraudulent trading linked to the operation of car parking facilities near Manchester Airport. Issues of scope of alleged fraudulent trading, quantification of loss, and categorisation of the offending for sentencing purposes.
• R -v- SA [2020], Bradford Crown Court [Operation Note]. Large-scale immigration fraud by use of “proxy” test takers thereby breaching immigration rules. Complex psychiatric history of defendant. Multiple psychiatric evidence as to diagnosis, prognosis, and residual responsibility. Hybrid order.
• R -v- NA [2020], Derby Crown Court. Pharmaceutical wholesaling and retailing businesses. Alleged breaches of licensing conditions on the wholesale supply of class C controlled drugs via the wholesaling businesses. Restraint order issues as to proportionality of restraint of trade.
• R -v- SKN [2019], Hull Crown Court. Causing grievous bodily harm with intent. Stabbing at a party involving attendees of a local private school. Multiple identification evidence witnesses. Arguments as to admissibility of various strands of evidence allegedly linking SKN to the stabbing.
• R v ZH (2016), Leeds Crown Court – Successful defence of Chartered Accountant charged with offences of violence and public disorder.
• R v TH (2016), Leeds Crown Court – Successful defence of male nurse charged with sexual offences relating to two care assistants in private nursing homes.
• R v SA (2016), Snaresbrook Crown Court – Serving Councillor charged with serial housing fraud upon the local authority.
• R v MH (2015), Manchester Crown Court – Successful defence of Chartered Accountant charged with serious fraud.

Public Access

Abdul Iqbal KC may accept Public Access work, where he can be instructed directly by a member of the public rather than a solicitor.