Home > Barristers > Amanda Weston

Amanda Weston

  • Call: 1995
Garden Court Chambers

“Thoughtful, tactical and really good at seeing the overall strategic picture. Excellent.” “She has top creative skills – she never misses a point and is well loved by the judiciary.” 

“If you were backed into a corner and wanted somebody to fight for you, Amanda would be the best one. She fights and she’s clever.”

Chambers UK 2015


LALY finalist 2013

Amanda was a finalist for the Legal Aid Barrister of the Year Award 2013.


Public and Administrative Law

Amanda practises across a wide range of public and administrative law fields with an emphasis on civil liberties and vulnerable client groups. Substantive areas of her public law practice include community care, mental health and mental capacity, unlawful detention, national security measures such as deprivation of citizenship, local authority, prison law, human rights and discrimination. She has particular in cases raising EU law in the justice and security context and challenges to government policy.

Examples of her leading cases include McNally, the successful judicial review of the Education Secretary’s decision to intervene in a teacher’s disciplinary proceedings where natural justice principles were ‘read-in’ to primary statute, and AHK on the principles which apply where the Secretary of State wishes to rely on undisclosed material in judicial review.

Civil actions

Amanda acts in the county and high courts in civil claims, often concerning false imprisonment, abuse of power, misfeasance and discrimination by the police, security and immigration services.

Court of Protection

Amanda regularly appears in the Court of Protection on behalf of vulnerable adults and their families, particularly in the context of deprivation of liberty of vulnerable adults and capacity to refuse medical treatment. She has a particular interest in cases concerning care of elders wishing to remain at home, safeguarding policy and the rights of those with learning disabilities to lead independent lives.

National Security

Having been instructed in many of the leading cases on deprivation of citizenship for national security reasons, this has become a niche specialism for Amanda who has been involved in driving the case law on procedural fairness in this developing area. She also acts in TPIM/control order cases and is instructed in the lead case pending in the Court of Appeal on the Home Secretary’s powers to certify and thereby ‘terminate’ judicial review under the Justice and Security Act 2013. Amanda was a guest on BBC Radio 4’s Law in Action in March 2013 speaking about deprivation of citizenship and the rule of law. She also writes and lectures on the subject.


Amanda has a long-standing commitment to upholding the rights of immigrants and their families. She is a regular contributor to the Legal Action Immigration Law update.

What Others Say

Amanda is rated as a leading junior in the Legal 500 and Chambers UK in the fields of Civil Liberties and Human Rights, Immigration and Court of Protection (Welfare).

“Thoughtful, tactical and really good at seeing the overall strategic picture. Excellent.” “She has top creative skills – she never misses a point and is well loved by the judiciary.” 
Chambers UK (Immigration)

“If you were backed into a corner and wanted somebody to fight for you, Amanda would be the best one. She fights and she’s clever.”
Chambers UK (Court of Protection)

“She is very tenacious and known to be a fighter on behalf of her client.”
Chambers UK 2015 (Civil Liberties and Human Rights)

“Experienced and expert; thinks outside the box.”
Legal 500 2014 (Civil Liberties and Human Rights)

“Very passionate and committed.”
Legal 500 2014 (Immigration)

“Sparky and imaginative” in the way that she deals with some of the most difficult cases involving terrorist suspects and reoffending foreign criminals. “It is important to go the extra mile and she does.” Amanda “takes the most difficult cases, and is a leading radical lawyer.”
Chambers UK 2014 (Immigration)

“She is great. She gets excellent results in court and has very good judgement. You feel you are in very safe hands.”
Chambers UK 2014 (Civil Liberties and Human Rights)

“Solicitors commend Amanda for her ‘excellent tactical acumen’ and ‘amazing eye for detail’.”
Legal 500 2013

Sources comment that “she is an amazingly dedicated barrister who works incredibly hard for her lay clients.” Amanda Weston “has expertise in cases concerning exclusion and refusal of naturalisation on national security grounds, and has recently been instructed in the Court of Appeal”. Instructing solicitors praise her intellect and “ability to always get a very good result.” Amanda has a “practice that largely revolves around vulnerable adults, and proves particularly adept at acting for private individuals. In the past year, she has acted in LB Hillingdon v Steven Neary & Mark Neary, the much-publicised case concerning a young man’s deprivation of liberty”. Solicitors observe that she brings a deft and reassuring approach to complex and distressing cases and inspires confidence in her clients.
Chambers UK 2013

“A ‘true fighter’ who displays ‘breathtaking determination at times.’ Instructing solicitors comment that she adds value to a case due to her wealth of immigration experience and the fact ‘she never misses a point.’ Weston handles complex cases for vulnerable clients where human rights issues versus government policy scenarios come into play. She is ‘recommended for her commitment to producing work of the highest standard.’ She has ‘a blend of experience in community care and immigration work which is particularly useful,’ say instructing solicitors, who further comment on her brilliance in cases concerning mental incapacity and unlawful detention.”
Chambers UK 2012

“Amanda Weston’s unflappable judgement and increasing experience make her a top choice.”
“Amanda is highly intelligent and extremely thorough.”

Legal 500 2012

“Excellent … rapidly identifies the issues and finds novel solutions.”
Legal 500 2011

Amanda Weston is “unstoppable on immigration related-issues,” sources enthuse. She was involved in a test case regarding the procedure for challenging refusals of citizenship on human rights grounds.
Amanda Weston’s administrative and public law practice focuses on human rights and immigration. Sources describe a barrister who is “highly intelligent, instinctive, creative and great fun to work with.”
Chambers & Partners 2010

“Of the juniors, Amanda Weston ‘has a wealth of experience,’ and ‘a good tactical approach.'”
Legal 500 2009

Significant Cases

Public Law

R (ota DP) v Secretary of State for Justice, permission granted, pending in Admin court
The proper status of Mental Health Tribunal decisions when considering a warrant under s.50 Mental Health Act 1983 for transfer from hospital to prison.

R ota A v SSHD
Challenge to immigration detention of a vulnerable man who lacked capacity, settled for a significant sum. This case was reported in The Guardian.

TW v LB Enfield, Secretary of State for Health Intervening [2013] EWHC 1180 (QB)
Whether s.139 Mental Health Act 1983 is compatible with Article 6/14 ECHR and the meaning of ‘reasonably practicable’ under s.11(4) MHA 1983.

R (ota BB) v SIAC [2012] EWCA Civ 1499
Whether a hearing to determine bail conditions engaged Article 6 ECHR.

R (ota AHK & others) v SSHD [2012] EWHC 1117 (Admin)
Whether the Administrative Court has the power to order a closed material procedure and the correct balancing exercise in public interest immunity hearings in challenges to refusal of naturalisation on national security grounds.

R (ota SM & others by their litigation friends) v SSHD [2013] EWHC 1144 (Admin)
Successful judicial review challenge to the Secretary of State’s policy of granting Limited Leave to Remain to children who cannot be removed from the UK.

R (ota Benmahfoud) v SSHD [2010] EWHC 2057 (Admin)
Successful challenge to detention of foreign national offender where there was no prospect of removal.

R (ota Omer) v SSHD [2010] EWHC Admin
Challenge to lawfulness of detention where decision triggering power to detain was flawed.

R (ota Daq) v SSHD [2009] EWHC Admin
Successful challenge to detention of foreign national offender.

R (ota) Appiatse & Samuels v LB Enfield [2008] EWHC 1886 (Admin)
Whether the decision to place a child on the at risk register was lawful.

R (ota) Karas & Milandinovic v SSHD [2006] EWHC 747 (Admin)
Finding by the Administrative Court that the Secretary of State had acted with ‘improper purpose’ in detaining the claimants and denying them access to legal advice. Substantial damages awarded including exemplary damages.

R (ota) N v LB Lambeth [2006] EWHC 3427 (Admin)
Successful challenge to local authority refusal to support and accommodate a destitute asylum-seeker with HIV.

McNally v SS Education & Employment [2001] EWCA ELR 348, Independent June 26 2000
Secretary of State’s powers to intervene in disciplinary proceedings, instructed by the NASUWT.

Civil Actions

AY Children v SSHD
Detention case involving longest immigration detention period of children in the UK (13 months). Settled for a six-figure sum.

S v Home Office [2011]
Unlawful detention and removal, aggravated assault by escorts. Damages in excess of £12000 awarded by court.

Court of Protection

Neary v LB Hillingdon [2011] EWHC 413 (COP)
Leading case on misuse of local authority powers to deprive a young person with autism, who lacks capacity, of his liberty.

National Security

L1 v SSHD [2013] EWCA Civ 906
Whether the Secretary of State’s conduct in deliberately delaying service of a decision to deprive L1 of his British citizenship until after he had left the UK was unlawful and an abuse of power.

R (ota Ignaoua) v SSHD [2013] EWHC 2512 (Admin)
Test case on the lawfulness of certification of a direction to exclude the claimant from the UK and whether that had the effect of unilaterally terminating the claimant’s extant judicial review.

R (ota G1) v SSHD [2012] EWCA Civ 867
Whether a decision to exclude G1 from the UK pending his appeal against deprivation of British citizenship was unlawful, and whether deprivation decisions engage EU law.

IR (Sri Lanka) & others v SSHD [2011] EWCA Civ 704
Impact of Article 8 ECHR procedural guarantees on disclosure in national security

Abu Hamza SC/23/2003 [2010]
Abu Hamza’s successful challenge to deprivation of British citizenship. This case was reported in The Telegraph.

MK (Tunisia) (R ota) v SSHD [2010] EWHC (Admin) (upheld by Court of Appeal)
Established in-country right of appeal against revocation of refugee status and leave to remain on national security grounds.

Immigration and Nationality

JCWI & ECCA (R ota) v SSHD [2010] EWHC 3524 (Admin)
Successful challenge to cap on non-European Economic Area (EEA) migrant care workers.

Calvin Broadus v SSHD
Snoop Dogg’s successful appeal against exclusion from the UK. This case was reported in the Wall Street Journal.

R (ota MAJERA) v SSHD [2009] EWHC Admin 825
Secretary of State was wrong to reject fresh claim where previous decisions had failed to take into account important evidence that the claimant was a minor.

AM (Cameroon) v AIT (No.2) [2008] EWCA Civ 100
Court underlined residual right of access to judicial review remedies in cases of breach of natural justice in the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT).

R (ota Trevor Smith aka Busta Rhymes) v SSHD
Successful challenge on behalf of Busta Rhymes and Rockcorps Inc to SSHD’s refusal to admit Busta to the UK for a concert at the Royal Albert Hall. This case was reported in The Guardian.

B v SSHD [2000] UKHRR 498
Proportionality as a question of domestic law

Seminars and Training

Amanda regularly trains and lectures on public law-related subjects.


Judicial Review: A Practical Guide, Jordans (2012) 2nd ed (co-author)

Judicial Review: Law & Practice, Jordans (2011) 1st ed (contributor)

Macdonald & Webber 5th & 6th eds (contributor)

‘A witness of truth’ Immigration and Nationality Law and Practice, Vol 12, No 3 1998


Amanda taught public law, including the theory and practice of judicial review, at Birkbeck College, University of London before being called to the Bar in 1995. Since being called to the Bar, she has specialised in judicial review and civil actions against public authorities notably in the fields of mental health and community care, immigration and civil liberties generally. She has a particular interest in representing people on the autism spectrum who face discrimination and inappropriate treatment from public authorities.