Year of Call: 2020
Areas Of Work:
2020: BPTC/LLM -The University of Law (graded Outstanding/Distinction)
2018: GDL – The University of Law (graded Distinctions in every module)
2017: MA CANTAB – Cambridge University
2013: BA CANTAB – Cambridge University
Awards, scholarships, and prizes
2020: The University of Law (Bloomsbury) BPTC Award for Drafting
2020: The University of Law (Bloomsbury) BPTC Award for Resolution of Disputes Out of Court
2019: William Shaw BPTC Scholarship
2019: The University of Law BPTC Advocacy Scholarship
2018: The UK Environmental Law Association Andrew Lees Essay Competition Winner
Following successful completion of pupillage, Samuel joined 9 KBW as a Probationary Tenant in 2021. Samuel has considerable experience in criminal matters in a wide variety of cases and level of offences, both prosecuting and defending in the Crown, Youth and Magistrates Courts.
Samuel has acted in cases involving allegations of serious violence and sexual offences, weapons and drugs, conspiracy to commit burglary, fraud and other acquisitive crimes. Samuel also regularly acts in a wide range of road traffic matters and civil matters including Sexual Risk Orders and Stalking Protection Order applications.
Crown Court Cases
R v S: instructed to represent at trial a client charged with burglary, who denied entry as a trespasser. The Crown ultimately accepted a plea to theft and offered no evidence in respect of the burglary.
LA v G & G: defended at PTPH in a potentially cut-throat multi-handed fraudulent trading private prosecution brought by local authority trading standards.
R v C: mitigated for a defendant charged with dwelling burglary, conspiracy to commit seven dwelling burglaries (including the theft of firearms) and dangerous driving of the getaway vehicle.
R v W: prosecuted the sentence of a defendant charged with two dwelling burglaries and perverting the course of justice.
R v G: advised and defended at the PTPH of a care-home director charged with six counts of fraud, alleged to have defrauded the business and three individual patients out of a total exceeding £200,000.
Magistrates’ Court cases
R v M: defended a client accused of driving his car directly at the complainant. The client was initially arrested for attempted GBH with intent, then charged with assault and dangerous driving. Persuaded the prosecution to drop the assault and accept a plea to dangerous driving on the basis that the defendant did not intend to use the car as a weapon. The Defendant was sentenced to no additional time beyond that for which he was in any event recalled for on other matters.
R v O: secured the acquittal of a young man charged with assaulting an emergency worker following lengthy cross-examination of three police witnesses.
R v L: instructed to re-open a conviction and argue special reasons on behalf of a woman charged with driving without insurance. Convinced the Crown not only to consent to re-opening, but to offer no evidence as the reasons were so compelling that there was no public interest in prosecuting.
R v A: secured the conviction, following a contested trial, of a man charged with assaulting a worker in Gregg’s bakery, causing ABH.
R v T: successfully opposed a prosecution adjournment application, ultimately forcing the Crown to offer no evidence in respect of a client charged with theft and assault by beating.
R v P: persuaded the prosecution to allow a defendant charged with breach of a closure order to be remitted to the police station and dealt with by way of a police caution.
R v W: secured the acquittal of a woman charged with possession of a bladed article on the basis of a legal argument that she had not had it in a public place until officers dragged her into the street.
R v H: Represented at first appearance a man charged with two raping two women. Advised on plea and made a successful bail application.
R v AH: secured the acquittal, following a contested trial, of a man charged with failing to provide the details of the driver of a vehicle who said that his replies must have been lost in the post.
Samuel also practices regulatory law and accepts instructions to present cases for the Nursing and Midwifery Council. He has experience writing regulatory advice in niche areas ranging from the consumer regulations pertaining to trading schemes, to the movement of animals between different tuberculosis risk zones.
Animal welfare, by-product, wildlife and dangerous dogs offences
R v E: persuaded the court that exceptional circumstances justified imposing a conditional discharge and no Dog Destruction Order in the case of a dangerously out of control dog that had bitten a person causing an injury requiring hospitalisation. This despite a previous bite incident and circumstances which the court found would ordinarily have justified a starting point of a 6-month custodial sentence and destruction of the dog.
R v B: instructed at short notice to defend a man whose Staffordshire Bull Terrier, who was already the subject of a recent Contingent Destruction Order following a previous attack, was then involved in a further serious attack in breach of that CDO. Persuaded the court not to make an immediate Dog Destruction Order and instead to adjourn the case to allow for an expert witness to assess whether the dog would be a danger to the public, if re-homed to an experienced person at a sanctuary for dogs with behavioural issues.
S v H: instructed at the early stages of proceedings to advise on and conduct the first appearance in a private prosecution brought by a volunteer at a dog rescue centre against a dog foster carer who had allegedly malnourished dogs and left them in squalid conditions.
Samuel has a particular interest in animal welfare law and defending cases where animals are at risk of destruction. During his first-six pupillage he assisted counsel in cases involving the prosecution of a construction company for knowingly demolishing the roost of a protected bat species. He also assisted counsel instructed to prosecute a farmer charged with welfare and animal biproduct offences arising out of the conditions on his farm. He is a member of the UK Centre for Animal Law and a volunteer at Advocates for Animals, the UK’s only specialist animal law firm. His work with Advocates for Animals has involved drafting advice on cases relating to arguable systematic failures by the state relating to salmon farming and fast-growing broiler chickens.
Samuel made legal and national news headlines as a pupil when, owing to his vegan beliefs, he declined to wear the traditional horsehair wig of the profession and instead invented the world’s first plant-based wig out of hemp.
Experience Prior to Pupillage
Prior to pupillage, Samuel worked as a Magistrates’ Court and Crown Court case worker for the UK’s largest legal aid defence firm. He worked on a range of serious offences from murder to child sex offences to fraud. This allowed him to gain a full insight into the pressures faced by Instructing Solicitors from arrest to disposal of a case. Having worked both in Chambers and within a busy legal aid solicitors’ firm, he knows how best to work with Instructing Solicitors to prepare each case to the highest standard.
The Criminal Bar Association
Young Legal Aid Lawyers
The UK Centre for Animal Law
Mr Samuel March is regulated by the Bar Standards Board, holds a current practising certificate and his details can be found on the BSB’s Barrister Register https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/regulatory-requirements/the-barristers'-register/
Mr Samuel March holds insurance cover for all legal services supplied through professional indemnity insurance with the Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund (BMIF) The coverage is worldwide subject to their terms which are available on their website https://www.barmutual.co.uk/
Mr Samuel March is registered with the Information Commissioners office under the Data Protection Act https://ico.org.uk/
If you are not satisfied with the service that Mr Samuel March provides you can make a complaint to Chambers. Information on Chambers Complaints Procedure is available on Chambers website www.9kbw.com/about-us/complaints-procedure
If you are not satisfied with the response you receive from Chambers you may complain to the Legal Ombudsman (This must be done within the time limits set out) The contact details can be found on the Legal Ombudsman’s website http://www.legalombudsman.org.uk/