Frederick represents bereaved families in coronial proceedings and has experience well beyond his call in this area, having acted in several complex and high-profile inquests (see below). He is ranked as a “rising star” by Legal 500 2023 in recognition of his work in this area.

• He was Counsel for the family in the first post-Maughan conclusion of ‘unlawful killing’ on the balance of probabilities after a five week inquest.
• He successfully obtained the rare finding of neglect from a jury in a recent prison death case.
• He has expertise in successfully resisting novel arguments about the ‘disapplication’ of Article 2 ECHR.
• He cases have resulted in numerous Prevention of Future Death Reports, both to local and national bodies such as NHS England and the Home Office. 

Because of his other areas of expertise, he is particularly suited to inquests into deaths following medical treatment (inside and outside clinical settings), deaths of those in state detention, death at the hands of police and security guards, and deaths at work.

Law enforcement and security personnel

JB (2020): A death of a young man following restraint by security staff, where the Coroner concluded that he was killed by unlawful act manslaughter, either by one person or by joint enterprise. This is thought to be the first occasion that a coroner has returned the conclusion of unlawful killing following the change to the civil standard of proof established by the Supreme Court in R (Maughan) v HM Senior Coroner for Oxfordshire [2020] UKSC 46. Coverage of the Inquest can be found on the BBC, Daily Mail, Sun, ITV, Mirror, Independent, Metro.

KM (2021): A domestic homicide of a 17 year-old girl by her ex-partner, following multiple reports to the police prior to her death from the victim and her family about the perpetrator’s escalating behaviour. The Inquest established that KM was killed unlawfully in the context of significant investigative and safeguarding failures by the police and social services. Coverage in the Times, BBC, the Sun, the Independent, the Evening Standard, the Daily Mail, the Mirror, ITV.

MT (2021): A death of a hospital patient who was restrained by a ‘bedwatch’ security guard in the presence of clinical staff.   Patient had complex medical issues which had affected his behaviour. The Inquest established that medical mismanagement caused the death and that the patient was unlawfully killed by the security guard (by unlawful act manslaughter). Coverage by Inquest here.

State Detention

AR (2019): A high-profile, two-week, Article 2 jury inquest into the death of a prisoner where the jury found that medical staff had caused the prisoner’s death by their neglect. The inquest prompted multiple referrals to professional disciplinary bodies, a Prevention of Future Deaths report being sent to the head of NHS England, and admissions of fundamental systemic failings by the responsible NHS Trust. This inquest raised also raised novel legal issues regarding juror eligibility.

DA: An Article 2 jury inquest into the death of a young prisoner who killed himself following threats made against him by other prisoners and potential failures to provide appropriate mental health care and attention.  This wide-ranging inquest is set to address the flawed interactions between the disciplinary and the healthcare side of the prison.

MN: An Article 2 jury inquest into the death of a middle-aged man who was taken into custody, presumed intoxicated.  His condition deteriorated in custody and he suffered multiple episodic seizures ultimately resulting in a cardiac arrest and death.  Custody staff, including custody sergeants, detention officers and healthcare all failed to spot tell-tale signs of the deceased’s head injury, and demonstrated a conspicuous disregard for the relevant protocols for assessing the condition of detainees. Frederick is being led by Fiona Murphy, Senior Counsel.

BP (ongoing): Advising regarding coronial procedure in relation to deaths which occur foreign jurisdictions where a body has not been recovered.

Medical inquests

PW (2019): Inquest into the death of a middle-aged man from a myocardial infarction. The deceased had undergone electrocardiograms (ECG) on and prior to the day of his death. The nursing and medical staff who reviewed the ECG had ignored indicators of the impending silent ischaemia.  The Coroner made critical findings about the assessments carried out by the nurse and the anaesthetist. The case raised complex issues of medical evidence, both in relation to the standard of treatment and whether it contributed to the deceased’s death, given that the deceased had a long and complicated medical history. 

NS (ongoing): Inquest into the death of a middle-age woman with bi-polar disorder who was sent to prison despite presenting in a highly concerning manner.  As a result of her mental instability, she refused to comply with her medication, including that which had been prescribed to address her elevated blood pressure.  She suffered a heart attack shortly afterwards. The Family contend that the mental and physical health assessments were inadequate leading to the decision to send her down the custodial pathway and in relation to the medical care and attention she received once in prison.

PM (2019): An Article 2 Inquest with a Jury about a man, known to suffer epileptic seizures, who was released from custody without his anti-epileptic medication. He suffered a seizure minutes after his release from custody and drowned in a ditch.  The main disputed issue was whether the failure to provide anti-epileptic medication had caused the partial seizure that precipitated the deceased’s collapse.

PK (ongoing): Inquest into the death of a neonate due to perinatal asphyxiation. Complex obstetric evidence regarding the final stages of the pregnancy and whether the outcome was avoidable.

Mental health-related inquests

AZ (2021): Article 2 Inquest regarding a patient who hung himself from a ligature whilst on an acute mental health ward.  The Jury found that there was a “serious failing” by the Trust to identify and remove the hinge posed a “significant risk” to patients, and that the observation of and engagement with the patient was inadequate. Both failings were found to have contributed to the deceased’s death.

DC (ongoing): Inquest regarding death of a middle-aged man at his home hours after a visit by mental health services and a previous suicide attempt.  

TH (ongoing): About the death of a patient with schizophrenia who was admitted to A&E and allowed to leave without proper observation or assessment.  About an hour afterwards, he was fatally struck by a lorry in the road.   

JE (2019): Inquest arising from the death of a middle-aged woman who jumped from a building days after a consultation with a GP regarding her worsening mood.  The Coroner recorded a narrative conclusion and summarised that the deceased was known to have chronic depression but was never referred to community mental health services even though it would have been appropriate to do so.   

RA: About a patient sectioned with an eating disorder who died from malnutrition whilst detained under the Mental Health Act. 

Social care

AS (2020): Frederick represented family of a child who was killed by his mother in relation to systemic and operational failings in the local child social care system.

JB (2019): Inquest into the sudden death of a six-month year old infant who was found lying motionless next to his intoxicated mother.  The inquest focused on the immediate circumstances of the baby’s death, including whether overlaying had occurred, as well as the broader question of whether social services should have intervened earlier to protect the child from the mother who was known to pose a risk to her children due to her mental instability, substance misuse, and neglect. 

Deaths at work/health and safety

MA: Article 2 inquest into the death of a builder who fell through a roof. Raises complex issues regarding compliance with health and safety legislation.

Frederick deals with a wide range of personal injury claims, including cases with an international dimension. He specialises in high-value catastrophic injury claims arising out of employers’, occupiers’ and public authority liability, as well as road traffic accidents. He has expertise in dealing with Claimants who lack mental capacity, the terminally ill, recently bereaved, and cases involving minors.

Frederick has considerable trial experience for someone of his call, having acted as leading counsel in several high profile inquests and associated civil claims. Frederick is currently instructed to represent a group of emergency service personnel who sustained complex psychiatric and physical injuries during and after their attendance at the Grenfell Tower Fire in 2017: Hart & Others v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and Ors (Claim No: QB-2020-002010).

Road traffic accidents

Frederick is regularly instructed in RTA litigation, including fatal, high-value, and MIB cases.  His work covers the whole spectrum of injury ranging from tetraplegia claims to brain injuries, amputations, chronic pain and fatal accidents.

He takes a pro-active approach to his work: preparing case plans and helping to tactically steer the claim through the whole litigation process wherever needed, including drafting, advising in conference, liaising with liability and medical experts and drafting the most detailed schedules of loss. 

In a recent case, he helped secure a six figure settlement for a client who sustained neuropathic pain following an accident.

Claims against public authorities

Frederick has considerable experience of claims against public authorities.  For example:

• Abuse claims. Against the police, social services and other public authorities, where the perpetrator posed an identifiable risk to the victim.  Including potential DSD-type claims for breach of Article 3 ECHR.  Currently acting on behalf of Katerina Makunova’s mother in her claim against the Metropolitan Police for failures to protect her daughter from her killer.  Also acted in claims against public authorities for failures to prevent sexual abuse of children, securing significant settlements.
• Care home negligence.  Fatal and non-fatal claims. Relating to nursing and non-nursing care.  Wide range of injuries, including traumatic injuries, pressure ulcers, osteomyelitis, mental health problems.  Recently helped secure a settlement of £60,000 following chronic neglect of resident leading to pain, suffering, and long-term injury.
• Assault claims. Against individuals and employers. Representing the mother of Jack Barnes in claim regarding his death following restraint by security staff contracted to patrol a train station in Manchester. Special expertise in complex legal issues regarding non-delegable duties and vicarious liability – published article here.
• Claims against local authorities, NHS Trusts, police forces for negligence and/or breach of Article 2 ECHR, many arising out of inquests.

Occupiers’ liability

Frederick does a full gamut of occupiers’ liability cases from routine trips in supermarkets and restaurants to catastrophic injuries occurring at swimming pools, beaches, schools and leisure centres.

Frederick has experience in dealing with claims against individual householders and against all sizes of businesses, independent contractors, and large public bodies. He has also acted in numerous cases where corporate bodies have entered liquidation/administration.

Employer Liability

Frederick regularly acts for employees in relation to the work-related incidents and stress, harassment, and bullying induced injury claims.  Recent cases include construction site falls, factory machinery accidents, and assaults by fellow employees.  He has particular expertise in dealing with allegations of contributory negligence in these cases.

Industrial Disease

Frederick has experience handling the recognised occupational disease claims, ranging from asbestos to stress and chronic pain syndromes, including carpal tunnel syndrome, trigger finger, de quervains, as well as “RSI”.  He was recently instructed in a show cause hearing in the High Court in a high-value mesothelioma claim. 

Frederick is a claimant police law specialist, regularly instructed in substantial civil claims against police forces and other criminal justice bodies. His practice includes malicious prosecution, misfeasance in public office, false imprisonment, unlawful detention, assault and battery, discriminatory policing, data misuse, defective investigations and claims for damages under the Human Rights Act 1998, the Equality Act 2010, the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR.

Frederick is often instructed in cases where civil claims sit alongside inquests, judicial review or wider public law issues. His adjacent practices in inquests, civil liberties and personal injury mean that he is particularly well placed to run claims which require a joined-up strategy across coronial proceedings, public law challenges and damages litigation. He is also experienced in claims involving complex medico-legal evidence and disclosure disputes. 

His recent work includes claims arising from the disclosure of confidential information about victims of domestic abuse, fatal failures to protect, undercover policing, religious discrimination, serious injury caused by police use of force, malicious prosecution, alleged fabrication or concealment of evidence, and group claims involving psychiatric injury. He has acted both alone and as junior counsel in high-profile and legally significant cases.

Defective police investigations and failures to protect

Frederick has considerable experience in civil claims arising from failed or defective police investigations, including claims involving domestic abuse, stalking, sexual violence, safeguarding failures, domestic homicide and failures to protect vulnerable victims. Many of these cases involve claims under the Human Rights Act, including breaches of Articles 2, 3 and 8 ECHR, as well as associated claims in negligence, misfeasance, discrimination and data protection.

In Makunova v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, Frederick represents the family in the civil claim arising from the death of Katrina Makunova, a 17-year-old girl who was killed by her ex-partner following multiple reports to the police by Katrina and her family about the perpetrator’s escalating behaviour. Frederick also acted in the inquest. Following his questioning of police officers, the jury concluded that Katrina was unlawfully killed in the context of significant investigative and safeguarding failures by the police. This case has been reported in the Times, BBC, the Sun, the Independent, the Evening Standard, the Daily Mail, the Mirror, ITV.   

Frederick also acts in civil claims arising from alleged investigative misconduct, including cases involving the destruction, fabrication, concealment or misuse of evidence. In Wahseem Fazal v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, he acted with Stephen Cragg KC in a malicious prosecution claim arising from an allegedly fabricated prosecution for drug and firearm offences. 

He has also achieved settlements in claims concerning failures to investigate sexual abuse and other serious offending, including claims brought under the procedural obligations imposed by Article 3 ECHR.

Use of force and serious injury

Frederick is regularly instructed in claims arising from police use of force, including assault and battery, excessive force, taser deployment, police dog injuries and force used during arrest or detention. These claims often overlap with issues of discrimination, mental ill-health, operational policing judgment and complex medical causation.

In Thomas Ward v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police [2024] EWHC 1297 (KB), Frederick acted for a claimant who was severely injured by a police dog. The defendant sought to rely on section 329 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 to block the claim at the outset. The High Court held that the statutory bar did not protect the defendant where there was credible evidence that officers had used grossly disproportionate force. The judgment was an important decision on the scope of section 329 and the case subsequently settled on favourable terms.

Discrimination

Frederick acts in claims involving discriminatory policing, including claims under the Equality Act 2010 and the Human Rights Act. His work includes claims concerning racial discrimination, religious discrimination, disability discrimination, stop and search, false imprisonment, arrest, detention and police use of force. He was also a contributing author to Police Misconduct: Legal Remedies, 5th edition, on this subject. 

He has succeeded in claims involving racial discrimination in stop and search, false imprisonment and assault, and has acted in claims involving disability discrimination and the treatment of people experiencing mental health crises.

Frederick has particular experience in discrimination claims which arise out of policing decisions taken in fast-moving or contested circumstances, including cases where officers rely on public order, safety or operational justifications for their conduct.

In Singh v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police acted for a practising Sikh who was repeatedly arrested and detained in connection with wearing a Kirpan outside his clothing. The case raised important issues about religious manifestation in public spaces and the application of discrimination law in the policing context. Frederick succeeded at the liability trial against West Midlands Police in 2025.

He was also instructed in a case against the police for granting bail to an individual who had a known history of deliberately transmitting HIV within the gay community, and went on to become the first person to be jailed for deliberately infecting men with HIV in the UK.

Data, privacy and undercover policing

Frederick has significant experience in police claims involving privacy, data protection and the misuse or disclosure of sensitive information. These cases often involve the intersection between policing, personal safety, Article 8 ECHR, the Data Protection Act 2018 and claims for psychiatric injury.

In XGY v Chief Constable of Sussex Police and Crown Prosecution Service [2024] EWHC 1963 (KB); [2025] EWCA Civ 1230, Frederick acts for a domestic abuse survivor whose confidential address was disclosed to her abusive ex-partner in the context of criminal proceedings. The case raises issues of major public importance about the responsibility of law enforcement agencies to protect confidential information belonging to victims of domestic abuse, and complex questions concerning advocate’s immunity, the Human Rights Act and the Data Protection Act. The case is listed before the Supreme Court in October 2026.

Frederick is also instructed in civil claims arising from undercover policing. He acts in claims brought by Pauline and Adam Wilson arising from the conduct of the undercover officer known as Mark Stone, real name Mark Kennedy, and the infiltration of their family through a deceptive relationship with Kate Wilson. He is also instructed in Eleanor Fairbraida’s claim arising from her deceptive sexual and romantic relationship with Mark Kennedy, in which liability has been admitted and quantum remains in dispute. These claims arise from information uncovered through the Undercover Policing Inquiry and raise important issues about police powers, abuse of power, privacy, autonomy and the long-term consequences of covert policing.

Complex and catastrophic injury

Frederick’s personal injury expertise is a particular strength in actions against the police involving serious physical or psychiatric injury. He is experienced in analysing complex medical evidence, testing expert evidence in conference and in court, and drafting high-value schedules of loss.

His work includes claims involving serious injury caused by police force, long-term psychiatric injury following operational policing failures, and complex group claims. In Hart and Others v Royal Borough of Kensington and Others, Frederick acted in group claims brought by police officers who attended the Grenfell Tower fire and suffered psychiatric injury. His work included quantifying complex injuries, drafting provisional schedules of loss and advising on issues relating to police policies, procedures and pension rules.

Fatal claims and deaths following police contact

Frederick acts in civil claims arising from deaths following police contact, deaths in custody and fatal failures to protect. His inquest practice gives him particular insight into the development of civil claims following coronial findings, including claims involving Article 2 ECHR, operational failings, safeguarding failures and causation.

He acts for the family and estate of Nimroy Hendricks in the civil claim arising from his fatal stabbing by his partner’s 14-year-old daughter. The inquest examined multi-agency safeguarding and risk management in the context of a profoundly traumatised child with extensive agency involvement. The Senior Coroner concluded that failures by Sussex Police to safeguard the child contributed to Nimroy’s death.

He also continues to act in civil claims arising from domestic homicide and failures to protect, including Makunova v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.

Malicious prosecution, misfeasance and defective prosecutions

Frederick has experience in claims for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office involving police forces and other prosecuting bodies. His work includes cases concerning allegedly fabricated, planted or concealed evidence, flawed charging or prosecution decisions, and the consequences of wrongful prosecution and conviction.

He was instructed as junior counsel in the high-profile Post Office Horizon civil litigation on behalf of sub-postmasters who were wrongly convicted after the Post Office provided misleading information about the Horizon accounting software. Frederick advised on claims in malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office and drafted detailed letters before claim which led to prompt and favourable settlement offers in a number of cases.

Other Notable Cases

Frederick’s police law practice is complemented by his wider public law, inquests, civil liberties and personal injury work. He is frequently instructed in cases requiring strategic judgment across different procedural routes, including civil damages claims, inquests, complaints, data protection claims and judicial review.

Frederick represents claimants in judicial review and public law claims, with particular expertise in criminal justice-related judicial review. He regularly acts in claims concerning law enforcement agencies, prosecuting authorities, prisons, coroners and other public bodies, often where public law overlaps with human rights, equality, data protection and claims for damages.

His work includes challenges to decisions of the police, CPS, IOPC, CCRC, CICA, SCA and the Secretary of State, including cases concerning cautioning decisions, decisions to prosecute, failures to prosecute rape and serious sexual offences, refusals to refer cases back to the Court of Appeal, refusals of compensation for miscarriages of justice, IOPC decisions and trafficking-related decisions. He also has experience of prison law challenges concerning religious rights, access to appropriate food and prayer facilities, the treatment of transgender prisoners and gender-based discrimination.

Frederick has particular experience in data-related public law claims, including challenges to ACRO and criminal records decisions. His private law background is a strength in cases where judicial review sits alongside claims for damages under the Human Rights Act, Equality Act or data protection legislation.

His recent cases include United Grand Lodge of England v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2026] EWHC 330 (Admin), concerning declarable associations requirements in the police vetting context.

Frederick acts on behalf of claimants in complex and high value claims arising out of spinal brain injury, catastrophic injury, and birth injury, and presently instructed in several claims with special damages pleaded at six or seven figures.  He has represented claimants who lack mental capacity, the terminally ill, recently bereaved, and minors.  He has amassed considerable experience in cross-examining expert witnesses from medical inquests.

He takes a pro-active approach to his work: preparing case plans and helping to tactically steer the claim through the whole litigation process wherever needed, including drafting, advising in conference, liaising with liability and medical experts and drafting the most detailed schedules of loss. 

Recent cases include:

• Spinal injuries. He is currently acting as sole counsel in Smith v Cardiff and Vale UHB and Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, a case concerning alleged failures to diagnose and treat an epidural abscess, resulting in significant, sustained, and irreversible neuropathic pain, which has interfered with the patient’s ability to work and care for themselves.
• Nerve damage. He is sole counsel in a case about an alleged negligent injection of a steroid into a patient’s hand, causing permanent nervous damage. The case raises an interesting legal issue about the applicable counselling standard for a patient with only one functioning hand (prior to the injection).
• Stroke and neurological conditions. He acted as junior counsel to Robin Oppenheim QC in a case where a patient suffered a stroke as a result of negligent advice to a patient with a haematological condition to refrain from taking her regular anticoagulation treatment. This case raised complex issues of causation because there were four competing theories about the cause of the stroke.  This required evidence from multiple disciplines (including stroke physicians, cardiologists, general practitioners, haematologists, and clinical pharmacists).  The case also raised a novel legal point regarding the scope and relevance of contributory negligence in the medical negligence context, as it was alleged that the patient had failed to take certain steps which would have reduced the risk of her stroke.
• Gastrological and intestinal illness.  He is advising on the merits and quantum in a complex case about a prisoner who died as a result of a perforated peptic ulcer which led to intra-intestinal sepsis. At the inquest, Frederick persuaded a jury that there were significant failures by medical and nursing staff to diagnose, treat, and refer this patient to hospital which caused his death.
• Appellate work.  Frederick acted as junior counsel on the appeal of the decision in Bass v Ministry of Defence [2020] EWHC 36, a test case about whether soldiers who contracted Q-Fever whilst posted in Afghanistan should have been provided with appropriate chemoprophylaxis.  Permission is presently being sought for a “leapfrog” to the Court of Appeal due to the public importance of this case.
• Respiratory conditions. Frederick is currently acting in a high-profile claim regarding a man who suffered a respiratory arrest following restraint by private security guards.  The case involves expert evidence from a wide range of disciplines (seven at present) in order to ascertain the cause of death.
• The scope of the duty of care.  He is currently advising on an important case concerning whether and in what circumstances the children of a patient with a genetic disorder are owed a duty of care by their parent’s doctor.
• Catastrophic birth injuries.  Frederick has assisted or acted as junior counsel to Robin Oppenheim QC on several cases where antenatal and postnatal care were sub-standard, resulting in permanent and severe brain damage to the child.  Frederick assisted by providing detailed analysis of the medical notes, drafting pleadings, formulating questions to the medical experts, and doing the interlocutory applications to resolve procedural issues.
• Failed and delayed diagnosis. He has settled pleadings and advised on the merits in relation to a claim for failure and delay to diagnose a penile injury resulting in significant pain and loss of sensation.
• Suitability of care and treatment for mentally unwell persons.  Frederick is currently instructed in a claim against a GP for her failure to refer a middle-aged woman with chronic depression who committed suicide to community mental health services prior to her death, or to provide her with suitable medication. This claim involves complex issues of breach (the risk of self-harm increased incrementally over a two-year period) and causation (to ascertain whether treatment and referral would have made a sufficient and timely difference to the Claimant’s mental health).
• Cardiological-related injury or illness. Frederick is currently acting as lead counsel in a claim against a Hospital which failed to diagnose abnormalities in a patient’s heart, resulting in a myocardial infarction (heart attack).  This claim involves complex and competing expert evidence about the clinically significant warning signs of a myocardial infarction.
• Plastic and cosmetic surgery.  Frederick advised on the quantum in relation to cosmetic alterations to a person’s face and body following a serious car accident.
• Epileptic seizures.  Frederick is acting in one claim in which an undiagnosed head injury acted as the focal point for a partial tonic-clonic seizure, resulting in a cardiac arrest and death.   In another claim, the individual suffered an epileptic seizure after healthcare staff in custody failed to arrange for the prescription of anti-epileptic medication or management of the condition in hospital.
• Dental injuries. He has acted in a case regarding dental injuries sustained during an operation under anaesthetic.

Frederick has a specialist practice in data protection, privacy and information law, with particular expertise in claims against police forces, prosecuting authorities and other public bodies. His work often arises from the unlawful handling, sharing, retention or disclosure of sensitive personal data, including in cases involving victims of domestic abuse, covert policing, police databases, criminal justice disclosure, police vetting and the protection of vulnerable people’s information.

He is regularly instructed in cases where data protection claims sit alongside claims under the Human Rights Act 1998, misuse of private information, breach of confidence, discrimination and common law torts. His wider practice in actions against the police, public law, inquests and serious injury litigation means that he is particularly well placed to advise in cases where data misuse has caused serious practical consequences, psychiatric injury or continuing risks to personal safety.

Frederick is experienced in urgent and disclosure-heavy litigation, and in developing joined-up strategies across civil damages claims, judicial review, regulatory complaints and related public law proceedings. His work includes claims concerning the Data Protection Act 2018, UK GDPR, law enforcement processing, Article 8 ECHR, the retention and dissemination of police intelligence, and the interface between privacy rights and open justice. He is also experienced in making applications for anonymity and reporting restriction orders, a subject he has written about here.

Recent and notable cases include:

XGY v Chief Constable of Sussex Police and Crown Prosecution Service [2024] EWHC 1963 (KB); [2025] EWCA Civ 1230
Frederick acts for a survivor of serious domestic abuse whose confidential address was disclosed to her abusive ex-partner in the course of the criminal justice process. The case raises issues of major public importance concerning the protection of victims’ personal data by police and prosecutors, advocates’ immunity, and the extent to which common law immunity may bar claims under the Human Rights Act 1998 and Data Protection Act 2018. The Supreme Court has granted permission in part and the appeal is listed for hearing in October 2026.

R (United Grand Lodge of England and others) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2026] EWHC 330 (Admin)
Frederick acted in a challenge to the Metropolitan Police’s “declarable associations” policy, which required officers and staff to declare current or historic Freemason membership. The case raised important issues about the collection, retention and use of sensitive membership data in the policing context, including the safeguards required when police vetting policies interfere with privacy and association rights.

Undercover policing / Mark Kennedy litigation
Frederick is instructed in civil claims arising from the conduct of the undercover police officer known as Mark Stone, real name Mark Kennedy. He advises on the data protection and privacy aspects of claims concerning the gathering, dissemination and long-term retention of confidential and highly sensitive information obtained through deceptive relationships and covert policing. The cases form part of the wider “spycops” litigation arising from material uncovered through the Undercover Policing Inquiry.

Tara Brown v Chief Constable of Lincolnshire Police
Frederick is instructed as sole counsel in data protection and misuse of private information claims concerning a police officer’s alleged unauthorised access to police databases relating to ex-partners and other associates. The case raises issues about police responsibility for rogue access to sensitive data and vicarious liability following the Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison.

Savannah O’Donnell v SB KC
Frederick advised and acted in complex UK GDPR and confidentiality proceedings against a senior barrister concerning alleged disclosure of confidential personal data in court proceedings, including advising on strike-out and civil restraint issues

Post Office Horizon civil litigation
Frederick acted in civil claims arising from the Post Office Horizon scandal, advising on misuse of private information and misfeasance in public office and drafting detailed letters before claim which led to early settlement offers in several claims.

Frederick specialises in public inquiries and inquests.  He has been instructed as sole and junior counsel in high profile and complex inquests, including where Counsel for the Inquest has been instructed (Jack Barnes Inquest).  He is ranked as a “rising star” by Legal 500 2023 in recognition of his work in this area.

He has considerable experience of working within a large team, having done so as part of his group litigation practice.  As junior counsel, he has helped manage large groups of claimants in relation to the ongoing civil litigation against the Post Office and the litigation against pharmaceutical companies regarding hormone pregnancy drugs (Primodos Litigation).

His expertise in healthcare, negligence, and injury law mean that he is skilled at analysing expert evidence and questioning of expert witnesses.

Frederick is currently instructed to represent a group of emergency service personnel who sustained complex psychiatric and physical injuries during and after their attendance at the Grenfell Tower Fire in 2017: Hart & Others v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and Ors (Claim No: QB-2020-002010).

He has recently been instructed in the litigation regarding hormone pregnancy tests which were given to women in the 1950s to 1970s, and which allegedly caused a range of devastating birth defects in their children.  Due to his expertise in medical negligence litigation, he was tasked with analysing complex medical evidence and drafting the individual particulars of claim (detailing the injuries suffered by the claimants as a result of the drug). For press coverage, see Sky News, Sun, Guardian, Times,

He worked on the high-profile Post Office Horizon civil litigation on behalf of the sub-postmasters who were falsely convicted when the Post Office provided misleading information about the Horizon accounting software.  For press coverage of the: BBC, Sky News.  Or see the Panorama documentary and the BBC Radio 4 series ‘,The Great Post Office Trial’.

He has previously advised a group of small businesses regarding business interruption insurance and whether those insureds will be covered for losses caused by the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Frederick has experience advising and acting for claimants across a wide range of employment law matters, including claims for discrimination, whistleblowing, blacklisting, and unfair dismissal. He has particular experience with cases combining employment and personal injury issues.

Frederick recently returned from a secondment at the Rail, Maritime and Transport workers’ union (RMT), where he advised members on a range of industrial disputes.

He is currently advising on several cases regarding disciplinary action (including dismissals) of employees arising from a refusal to attend work because of workplace safety concerns in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.  In one such case, he is litigating the issue of indirect discrimination by association, which is likely to be of relevance for future claimants (where, for example, they have reason to be concerned about putting family members at risk of infection).

Recently, he was instructed in a case concerning discrimination and blacklisting of a gay employee as a result of his sexual orientation, which raised complex data protection issues.