Jeremy Benson KC
Call: 1978 | Silk: 2001
Personal profile
Jeremy Benson KC is a pre-eminent silk with over thirty years’ experience both prosecuting and defending in fact-heavy, complex cases of considerable importance.
He has been ranked in the legal directories every year since 1990. He is currently ranked as a leading silk in Crime, Fraud, corporate and vat. His practice demonstrates a breadth of experience in varied arenas, which produces a refreshing, knowledgeable and useful perspective to cases. He is recognised for his strategic, practical and tenacious approach.
Jeremy has been sitting as a judge since 1994. He is a tutor judge at the Judicial College. He is frequently called upon to teach various advocacy courses worldwide, including the American Bar Association advocacy course in Florida, the Keble College Annual Advocacy Course and the teacher trainer advocacy course at Middle Temple. He teaches Chambers’ pupils.
Recommendations
Legal 500: Ranked: Tax (Corporate and VAT) and Crime
Chambers UK: Ranked: Crime and Fraud
― Chambers UK (2023)Jeremy Benson KC is a fine lawyer with a reassuring courtroom presence and a very easy manner. Judges trust him and juries like him.
― Legal 500 (2023)Very-balanced, professional and to the point. Jeremy is very open to being persuaded of an alternate view and is a great sounding board on more challenging cases.
― Legal 500 (2022)Jeremy’s cross examination of both civilian eye-witnesses and expert witnesses is both skilful and meticulous: he never asks an unnecessary question and at times left witnesses oblivious to the ground they had conceded.
― Legal 500 (2022)In legal argument he has the respect of the judge and in his closing speeches hold the attention and interest of the jury. He leads an inclusive team, taking on board views of solicitors as well as those of junior counsel.
― Chambers UK (2022)He is always very helpful, approachable and pragmatic. He is a balanced voice of reason who is prepared to be challenged and happy to consider alternative views.
― Legal 500 (2021)Jeremy’s cross examination of both civilian eye-witnesses and expert witnesses is both skilful and meticulous: he never asks an unnecessary question and at times left witnesses oblivious to the ground they had conceded. In legal argument he has the respect of the judge and in his closing speeches holds the attention and interest of the jury. He leads an inclusive team, taking on board views of solicitors as well as those of junior counsel.
― Legal 500 (2021)A very pragmatic and measured approach. A refreshing willingness to collaborate with the instructing solicitor on strategy. A genuine desire to assist and is incredibly approachable and available! In court, able to offer succinct and clear arguments with gravitas.
― Legal 500 (2021)An exceptional advocate.
― Chambers UK (2021)His enthusiasm and work ethic are commendable. He is straightforward and takes no prisoners.
― Legal 500 (2020)He has the gravitas one would expect of a senior silk.
― Legal 500 (2020)His experience and knowledge make him an exceptional advocate.
― Legal 500 (2020)His experience and knowledge make him an exceptional advocate.
― Chambers UK (2020)He has the patience of a saint and is very good at dealing with very awkward situations.
― Legal 500 (2017)He always demonstrates attention to detail combined with excellent advocacy.
― Legal 500 (2017)His judgement on case strategy is excellent and his advice is prompt and sensible.
― Legal 500 (2017)An excellent advocate.
Murder & Manslaughter
Jeremy is frequently briefed in complex murder trials, often involving complicated scientific, psychiatric or medical evidence.
He is familiar with the processes, procedures and approaches required for expert evidence and is adept at witness-handling and being appropriately sensitive to the issues and to the personalities involved.
Featured cases
- R v B and others (2022) – Instructed for the prosecution in this case involving members of a renowned South London gang, charged with attempted murder.
- R v DM (2022) – Instructed for the prosecution. The defendant murdered his partner, disposed of her body and covered her with acid by the A3 in Guildford. [Press Report]
- R v S (2021) – Instructed for the prosecution. The defendant (17) murdered a 16-year-old boy, who had attacked him with a knife.
- R v B and others (2021) – Instructed for the prosecution. Four defendants were convicted of either murder or manslaughter as a result of a machete attack, which took place in 2006. There had been a previous trial in 2007. The deceased was in a coma after the attack and died 13 years later. There were complex disclosure and abuse of process issues.
- R v O (2021) – Instructed for the prosecution in this case concerning possession of a firearm by a popular drill artist.
- R v H (2021) – Instructed for the prosecution in this large-scale money laundering case.
- R v M (2020) – Instructed for the defence in this conspiracy to murder case.
- R v B (2020) – Instructed for the defence. The defendant attempted to murder four people.
- R v R (2019) – Instructed for the defence in this case concerning the attempted murders of prison officers at three different prisons. A defence of insanity was put forward.
- R v D and others (2018) – Instructed for the defence in this case concerning five defendants, all under 18 at the time of the offence, involved in a group stabbing in East London. [Press Report]
- R v DD and others (2018) – Instructed for the defence in this multi-handed murder in Boston (Lincs). The case involved complex DNA and blood spatter evidence. [Press Report]
- R v B and C (2017) – Instructed for the defence in this M25 Cobham Services murder. [Press Report]
- R v KB (2017) – Instructed for the defence. [Press Report]
- R v Alison Tomlin (2016) – Instructed for the defence. Pathological evidence could not identify how or when the deceased had died, nine days before his body was found in his flat. Scientific evidence showed that the defendant was present after his death. Complex arguments were presented concerning forensic evidence and the circumstances of death, bad character submissions and legal argument on whether it was possible to properly convict where the prosecution brought defendants to trial in the alternative. [Press Report]
- R v Alam (2015) – Instructed for the prosecution. Six under-18s were charged with murder by stabbing with a knife. The caes involved detailed cell-site analysis, detailed CCTV analysis, detailed forensic evidence, arguments of self-defence and submissions on bad character. [Press Report]
- R v X and three others (2015) – Instructed for the defence in this case concerning a 16-year-old girl accused of murder and of attempting to pervert the course of justice between charge and trial. This case involved stringent cross-examination of the main prosecution witness and complex legal issues regarding joint enterprise. This legal argument was later approved by the Court of Appeal. [Press Report]
- R v T (2014) – Instructed for the defence in this five-handed murder of an Italian student and attempted murder of another. The case involved complex forensic evidence and developed into a four way “cutthroat”. [Press Report]
- R v MR (2012) – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning a solicitor who was found to have murdered his wife with a dumbbell. [Press Report]
- R v F (2012) – Instructed for the defence in a murder by stabbing, during a group attack. The defendants had been previously convicted of the attempted murder of the deceased who had died two years and two months after the original attack. There were complex issues as to causation.
- R v N (2012) – Instructed for the defence in a manslaughter case concerning “Shaken Baby Syndrome”. Ten medical experts and detailed and complex cross-examination were involved.
- R v Foye (2011) – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning a second homicide, whilst serving life imprisonment for murder. There was an issue as to the burden on the defence to establish diminished responsibility is consistent with Art. 6 ECHR [2013] EWCA Crim 475. [Press Report]
- R v J T and others (2011) – Instructed for the defence in this case concerning a contract killing/assassination. This case involved cross-examination of an informant and complex telephone evidence.
- R v C H (2010) – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning the attempted murder of two Metropolitan Police officers, and aggravated burglaries where a firearm was discharged.
- R v H (2010) – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning the manslaughter of a young child by her father, involving complex medical evidence.
- R v SY – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning a first-year university student, accused of attempted murder by deliberately driving his car at the complainant, who was severely injured and unable to give evidence.
Serious & Organised Crime
Jeremy’s practice includes dealing with large-scale drug allegations, people trafficking and robberies.
Featured cases
- R v B and others (2022) – Instructed for the prosecution in this case concerning members of a renowned South London Gang charged with attempted murder.
- R v DM (2022) – Instructed for the prosecution in this case concerning a defendant who murdered his partner, disposed of her body and covered her with acid by the A3 in Guildford.
- R v S (2021) – Instructed for the prosecution in this case concerning a defendant (17) who murdered a 16-year-old boy, who had attacked him with a knife.
- R v B & others (2021) – Instructed for the prosecution. Four defendants were convicted of either murder or manslaughter as a result of a machete attack, which took place in 2006. There had been a previous trial in 2007. The deceased was in a coma after the attack and died 13 years later. There were complex disclosure and abuse of process issues.
- R v O (2021) – Instructed for the prosecution in this case concerning possession of a firearm by a popular drill artist.
- R v H (2021) – Instructed for the prosecution in this large-scale money laundering case.
- R v M (2020) – Instructed for the defence in this conspiracy to murder case.
- R v B (2020) – Instructed for the defence. The defendant attempted to murder four people.
- R v R (2019) – Instructed for the defence in this case concerning the attempted murders of prison officers at three different prisons. A defence of insanity was put forward.
- R v H (2019) – Instructed for the prosecution in this case concerning money laundering.
- R v D and others (2018) – Instructed for the defence in this case concerning five defendants, all under 18 at the time of the offence, involved in a group stabbing in East London. [Press Report]
- R v DD & others (2018) – Instructed for the defence in this multi-handed murder in Boston (Lincs). The case involved complex DNA and blood spatter evidence. [Press Report]
- R v B and C (2017) – Instructed for the defence in this M25 Cobham Services murder. [Press Report]
- R v KB (2017) – Instructed for the defence. [Press Report]
- R v Alison Tomlin (2016) – Instructed for the defence. Pathological evidence could not identify how or when the deceased had died, nine days before his body was found in his flat. Scientific evidence showed that the defendant was present after his death. Complex arguments were presented concerning forensic evidence and the circumstances of death, bad character submissions and legal argument on whether it was possible to properly convict where the prosecution brought defendants to trial in the alternative. [Press Report]
- R v Alam (2015) – Instructed for the prosecution. Six under-18s were charged with murder by stabbing with a knife. The caes involved detailed cell-site analysis, detailed CCTV analysis, detailed forensic evidence, arguments of self-defence and submissions on bad character. [Press Report]
- R v X & 3 Others (2015) – Instructed for the defence in this case concerning a 16-year-old girl accused of murder and of attempting to pervert the course of justice between charge and trial. This case involved stringent cross-examination of the main prosecution witness and complex legal issues regarding joint enterprise. This legal argument was later approved by the Court of Appeal. [Press Report]
- R v T (2014) – Instructed for the defence in this five-handed murder of an Italian student and attempted murder of another. The case involved complex forensic evidence and developed into a four way “cutthroat”. [Press Report]
- R v MR (2012) – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning a solicitor who was found to have murdered his wife with a dumbbell. [Press Report]
- R v F (2012) – Instructed for the defence in a murder by stabbing, during a group attack. The defendants had been previously convicted of the attempted murder of the deceased who had died two years and two months after the original attack. There were complex issues as to causation.
- R v N (2012) – Instructed for the defence in a manslaughter case concerning “Shaken Baby Syndrome”. Ten medical experts and detailed and complex cross-examination were involved.
- R v Foye (2011) – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning a second homicide, whilst serving life imprisonment for murder. There was an issue as to the burden on the defence to establish diminished responsibility is consistent with Art. 6 ECHR [2013] EWCA Crim 475. [Press Report]
- R v J T & Others (2011) – Instructed for the defence in this case concerning a contract killing/assassination. This case involved cross-examination of an informant and complex telephone evidence.
- R v C H (2010) – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning the attempted murder of two Metropolitan Police officers, and aggravated burglaries where a firearm was discharged.
- R v H (2010) – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning the manslaughter of a young child by her father, involving complex medical evidence.
- R v SY – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning a first-year university student, accused of attempted murder by deliberately driving his car at the complainant, who was severely injured and unable to give evidence.
- R v LC – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning the largest non-terrorist importation of guns and explosives (hand-guns, machine guns, silencers, grenades and rocket propelled grenades, Semtex and wireless detonators) investigated by the Anti-Terrorist Branch.
- R v W J H – Instructed for the defence in a SOCA six month probe and observation case. One million ecstasy tablets and 15kg of cocaine were recovered. The defendant had a conviction quashed six years earlier because of police corruption and the planting of evidence.
Sexual Offences
Throughout his career Jeremy has been instructed in many cases that involve sexual allegations, and for over ten years, he has sat as a Recorder, trying rape cases and other serious Sexual Offences.
Featured cases
- R v K (2019) – Instructed for the prosecution in this case concerning a number of sexual assaults by a well-known professional football coach.
- R v A (2017) – Instructed for the defence in a case concerning a defendant charged with running brothels in London, and the rape and sexual assault of eight sex-workers. [Press Report]
- R v P H -Instructed for the defence in a case concerning a defendant who suffered from severe learning difficulties. He was accused of raping two young girls. Both of them were suffering from learning difficulties. The second allegation arose when the defendant was released on bail having initially been in custody for three months. Both girls had previously made false allegations of rape.
Fraud
Featured cases
- Operation Borzoi/Operation Bayweek (2016-2021) – Two 18-month interconnected operations into large scale money laundering, VAT fraud, duty fraud and alcohol diversion fraud, involving 12 defendants. Covert investigation techniques were employed and approximately 20,000 pages of electronic material were generated.
- R v FK and six others (2016) – Instructed for the prosecution in this case relating to a mortgage fraud on Barclays International IOM, involving both legal and financial professionals.
- HMRC v B (2017) – Representing HMRC in the first ever (£6m) penalty case involving MTIC fraud, in the First-Tier Tribunal (Tax). The issue was whether the legislation (now repealed) could be interpreted to apply to MTIC fraud. HMRC succeeded at first instance.
- Lakonia Ltd v HMRC (2015) – Representing HMRC in this case concerning an appellant who was a sophisticated MTIC trader. There were approximately 160 files, involving seven contra-traders, operating over a four-year period. This formed part of the “Malaga Cell” which caused Revenue losses of £200m. Actual knowledge of the fraud was found. Jeremy acted for HMRC in other Malaga Cell cases.
- HMRC v Infinity Distribution Ltd – Instructed to represent HMRC in an interlocutory appeal against a decision of the first tier tribunal (tax) to exclude evidence of fraud by third parties. The case involves participation in MTIC fraud linked to Operation Inertia, another proven MTIC fraud.
Tax & Insolvency
Jeremy has appeared regularly on behalf of HMRC in both the First-Tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal (tax chamber) as well as the Court of Appeal Civil Division. He advises on evidential matters of general application in VAT fraud cases. He is adept at understanding complex fiscal operations and actions within a commercial context.
Jeremy was instructed in the first series of civil carbon credit MTIC cases which involve high profile commodity and financial companies.
Featured cases
- Umaad Butt v HMRC [2019] EWCA Civ 554 – Civil penalty imposed on a director.
- CCA Distribution (in administration) v HMRC [2017] EWCA Civ 1899
- Umaad Butt v HMRC (2017) UKUT 0325 (TCC)
- Lakonia Ltd v HMRC (2016) UKUT 0362 (TCC)
- HMRC v Infinity Distribution Ltd (2015) UKUT 0219 (TCC). [2016] EWCA Civ 1014
- CCA Distribution Ltd v HMRC (2015) UKUT 0513 (TCC)
- Ebuyer v HMRC (2014) – Acting for HMRC against Ebuyer (the largest online UK retailer of electrical goods) in an appeal challenging HMRC’s denial of £6.5m input tax and assessment of £5.5m arising out of an allegedly fraudulent tax loss.
Judicial Review
Jeremy acts in and advises on Judicial Reviews.
Featured cases
- R (Parashar) v Sunderland Magistrates’ Court [2019] EWHC 514 (Admin) – Providing guidance as to when it is appropriate to apply for judicial review during the interlocutory stages of proceedings in the magistrates court.
- DPP v S [2018] EWHC 544 (Admin) – “Best evidence rule” and the use of copy documents.
- Decani [2017] – EWHC 3422 (Admin)
- R (on the application of Decani) v City of London Magistrates Court (2017) – unreported.
- R (on the application of Bourne) v Scarborough Magistrates Court [2017] EWHC 2828 (Admin)
- R (on the application of Hassani) v West London Magistrates Court [2017] EWHC 1270 (Admin)
- DPP v Manchester and Salford Magistrates Court and Blakeley (2017)
- DPP v Manchester and Salford Magistrates Court and Whyte [2017] EWHC 1708 (Admin)
- R (on the application of Jordan Russell Towers) v the Criminal Cases Review Tribunal (2012)
Education
- BA (Hons), Essex University
- PGCE, St Peter’s College, Birmingham
Professional appointments
- Tutor Judge, Judicial College (2015)
- Bencher, Middle Temple (2002)
- Recorder (1997)
- Assistant Recorder (1994)
Memberships
- CBA
- South Eastern Circuit
- HSLA