Sam Lubner

Achievement:

• Attained the highest mark for Examination-in-Chief at BPP countrywide (2021)
• Tancred Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn (2020)
• Lord Haldane Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn (2019)

Profile:  

Before pupillage, Sam worked in the legal department for the Cleaners and Allied Independent Workers Union (CAIWU), where he represented trade union members in internal disciplinary hearings and in the Employment Tribunals.

Sam prosecutes and defends in the Crown Court, Youth and Magistrates’ Courts. Sam is a level 1 prosecutor on the CPS Advocate Panel.

Recent Cases – Defence:

R v A (Holborn Nightingale Court) – Secured the acquittal of a defendant charged with multiple breaches of a restraining order. After the complainant was confronted by evidence of her regularly undermining the order during cross-examination, she refused to answer further questions. The jury was directed to acquit.

R v C, M, and others (Stratford) – Four defendants were charged with wilful obstruction of Westminster Bridge during a climate change protest. Sam was able to exclude all bodyworn footage of the protest, which significantly diminished the Crown’s ability to evidence the level of disruption caused. At the close of the prosecution case, Sam submitted that without sufficiently detailed evidence on disruption, the court could not rule in favour of the Crown on the issue of proportionality. The District Judge agreed and the charges against the protesters were dismissed.

Recent Cases – Prosecution:

R v C (St. Albans) – Prosecuted a 9-count fraud and theft indictment. The defendant entered a gym on three separate occasions providing false information so he could steal credit cards and then use them to withdraw money.

R v M (Isleworth) – Prosecuted a 6-day s.20 GBH trial. The defendant, who was advancing self-defence, was of exemplary good character and the incident occurred amidst a background of allegations that the complainant had vandalised the defendant’s house and intimidated him on separate occasions. The trial involved contested medical evidence, cross-examination of multiple defence witnesses of fact, young witnesses, and non-defendant bad character.

R v M (Woolwich) – Prosecuted a s.18 GBH trial arising out of a dispute between two neighbours.

Recent Cases – Road Traffic:

R v S (Guildford) – Sam represented a boiler repairman facing a totting up disqualification. He had no dependents and had no special use for his vehicle beyond his work. In mitigation, Sam highlighted various aspects of the boiler-repair trade and explained how a disqualification would damage his long-term career prospects. The bench imposed a low-level discretionary disqualification.

R v H (Stratford) – Sam represented a driver charged with careless driving, failing to stop, and failing to report an accident. Sam submitted that as no Notice of Intended Prosecution was sent, the bench needed only to assess the defendant’s defence that he failed to stop and report because he was unaware an accident had taken place. The bench agreed and, as they were unsure of whether he knew about the accident, acquitted him of careless driving without needing to assess his standard of driving as captured by dashcam.  

Languages:

• Spanish – fluent
• Russian – intermediate