Some recent instructions include:

• R v LH (2026) – Instructed as junior counsel in a 3-month Class A drug conspiracy trial on behalf of a vulnerable young mother who was alleged to have run the day-to-day operation of the street-dealing arm of the conspiracy.
   
• R v LVD (2025) – Secured acquittal for the production of cannabis raising the modern slavery defence. Following an 8-day trial, the jury acquitted the defendant who had been working in debt bondage to a Vietnamese gang in a cannabis farm in less than 2 hours.
   
• R v AH (2026) – Instructed for one of four Palestine Action protesters, accused of having conspired to criminal damage against Elbit’s headquarters. The defendants had hammers, power drills, and angle grinders on them and arrived on a cherry picker in an attempt to enter the roof. The jury was hung.
   
• R v BB (2025) – Obtained a writ of habeas corpus and an emergency release order before a High Court Duty Judge, the judgment can be read here. The prison had refused to process the release of BB as no staff was available after hours. The prison’s unlawful detention would have led to BB missing the birth of his child, were it not for the successful overnight application for release.
   
• R v AJ (2025) – Stayed the prosecution of a modern slavery victim for abuse of process. Her client, who was a child at the time, was found working in a trap house full of drugs and weapons. The judge stayed his case as there had been “a wholesale failure” to apply the CPS guidance on modern slavery.

Some recent instructions include:

• Poland v AG (2026) – Polish extradition request discharged by the DJ, and this decision was upheld on appeal to the High Court. Louise successfully argued that the Polish authorities summoned the RP in violation of international law and denied him a retrial, barring his extradition under s.20 Extradition Act 2003.
   
• MK v Slovakia (2026) – Warrant withdrawn after permission to appeal was granted and a High Court judge indicated that the s.20 conditions did not appear met and Slovakia had to gather better evidence to succeed.
   
• CA v Romania (2026) – Instructed on appeal raising a novel Article 5 point. In granting permission, the High Court indicated that the case is likely to set precedent, invited fresh evidence and submissions as to whether a Divisional Court should decide the matter, and allowed Louise to bring a KC on board.
   
• Ukraine v RL (2026) – Currently instructed as junior counsel resisting extradition for a political prosecution in Ukraine.
   
• Brazil v MM (2026) – Currently instructed as junior counsel resisting extradition to Brazil where the client is at risk of solitary confinement and inhuman and degrading treatment.
   
• North-Macedonia v ET (2026) – Currently instructed as junior counsel resisting extradition to North-Macedonia for an elderly and seriously ill client.
   
• Portugal v DD (2025) – Resisted extradition of a British citizen accused of murder, led by Ben Cooper KC. They argued that the Portuguese Public Prosecutor was not a judicial authority as required under s.2 of the Extradition Act 2003 and the District Judge discharged the first Portuguese warrant on that basis.
   
• HT v USA (2025) – Instructed as junior counsel on appeal to resist extradition of the “Hollywood con queen” who is to stand trial in California for several counts of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. 

Louise co-authored the Extradition chapter of the forthcoming edition of Human Trafficking and Modern Slavery: Law and Practice. She is currently instructed in multiple extradition cases where modern slavery victims are requested to be extradited in relation to offences committed as a consequence of being trafficked. 

Louise is also a member of the DELF Committee.

Louise has substantial experience in the Court of Appeal for her level of call and is a regular contributor to Doughty Street’s Criminal Appeals Bulletin. Recent successes include:

• R v CM (2026) – The Court of Appeal reduced a 21-month sentence for grievous bodily harm to 12 months’ after Louise successfully argued that the judge had wrongly categorised the offence, rendering the sentence manifestly excessive.
   
• R v SH (2025) – SH had been convicted for the production of cannabis and had been sentenced to a high-level community order. Louise persuaded the Court of Appeal that this sentence was manifestly excessive in light of his time spent on remand, resulting in the Court quashing his sentence and replacing it with a conditional discharge. The Court praised Louise for her “admirably clear and succinct written and oral submissions”, the judgment can be found here.
   
• R v MM (2025) – MM had been sentenced to several years in prison for breaches of a criminal behaviour order and related minor criminality. Louise successfully argued that this sentence was manifestly excessive and the Court re-sentenced her client to time served, leading to his immediate release. 

Louise has completed the ICCA Advocacy for Children in Conflict with the Law training and has taken part in several training sessions on child defendants organised by the Youth Justice Legal Centre to assist children with the utmost skill and care. Recent successes include:

• R v VB (2026) – Made a successful submission of no case to answer regarding rape and sexual assault allegations by children aged 10 and 13 years old against her 16-year-old client who was a looked-after child with learning disabilities.
   
• R v ST (2026) – After a year of writing representations, insisting on crucial disclosure regarding her client’s exploitation, and making multiple abuse of process submissions in both the Crown Court and the Youth Court, the Crown ultimately conceded that there was insufficient evidence against her 15-year-old client who had been found to be a modern slavery victim by the SCA. The Crown therefore discontinued all charges, including supply of Class A drugs, PWITS Class A, and possession of a bladed article.
   
• R v JO (2024) – Secured acquittal for possession of an offensive weapon. The vulnerable child defendant was alleged to have carried a large machete when he committed a robbery in a modern slavery context.
   
• R v EO (2025) – Persuaded the Crown to discontinue proceedings against her client for robbery in light of his mental health difficulties.
   
• R v ST (2025) – Successfully defended a child defendant charged with possession of a bladed article. In an unrelated matter for ST, the Crown discontinued a charge relating to attempted arson following legal argument.

Louise advises the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (SJP, Colombia’s transitional justice tribunal) on international criminal law in high-profile cases against FARC leaders. She is currently advising on the possibility of bringing charges for environmental crimes and anti-personnel mines, both under international criminal law and under the Peace Accord between the Government and the FARC. 

This role follows her successful Yale Robina Fellowship at the SJP as Judge Lemaitre Ripoll’s Legal Assistant. Spending a year at the Court in Bogotá, she advised on a range of international criminal law questions and assisted in drafting the precedent-setting pre-trial ruling in the macro-case against the FARC for kidnapping, which included Ingrid Betancourt’s case. She also delivered workshops to demobilised FARC members making field trips and assisted in liaising with victims to pursue restorative justice. Louise performed all of this work in Spanish.

Further, Louise has recently been working on a range of cases with an international dimension:

• Providing research and drafting for a legislative initiative to strengthen the prevention of and protection from atrocity crimes;
   
• Drafted an advice to a Kenyan NGO for war veterans advising on redress for sexual abuse by UK military personnel stationed in Kenya;
   
• Drafted submissions on war crimes and crimes against humanity to the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar;
   
• Assisted in drafting submissions to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the climate emergency’s effects on children’s rights;
   
• Assisted in drafting an advice on international legal remedies for a denial of access to justice in Trinidad and Tobago;
   
• Conducted legal research for a terrorism prosecution in the Seychelles;
   
• Conducted legal research for a murder appeal in Bermuda; and
   
• Conducted legal research for an advice on religious freedom and discrimination. 

Additionally, Louise teaches human rights seminars at her alma mater, KU Leuven. She has been focusing on the intersection between human rights and environmental law, and human rights and humanitarian law.

Louise is also a member of the Bar Human Rights Committee’s Executive Committee and in this capacity, she works pro bono on a variety of international human rights issues.

Prior to coming to the Bar, Louise also developed a broad expertise in international criminal law and international human rights law:

• Advocated as a member of the Yale Lowenstein Human Rights Clinic on behalf of three men who were arbitrarily detained in Afghanistan in the context of the American war on terror. Submitted briefs and appeals to the Special Rapporteurs on Torture and on Arbitrary Detention, the UN Human Rights Committee, and the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention;
   
• Represented clients during deportation interviews in an immigration detention centre in Texas as a student attorney in the Dilley Pro Bono Project;
   
• Reviewed and analysed French-language claims in the investigation into the Central African Republic as a pro bono legal consultant to the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court;
   
• Contributed to Professor Jan Wouters’ book “International Law: A European Perspective” as a research assistant; and
   
• Interned at the Belgian Embassy in Washington D.C.