Nutan Fatania

R v H, 2022

Represented the Appellant in an application to appeal against conviction. The application for leave was referred to an oral hearing. The issue involved whether the Appellant allowing the 14 year old victim to ride as a pillion passenger without a helmet, was a factor the jury could consider when determining if the driving was dangerous, as defined in law. The Court of Appeal granted leave but dismissed the appeal. The case was reported.

Court of Appeal, Criminal Division

SWE v O, ongoing

Presenting for Social Work England with allegations of professional boundaries not being maintained within a complex family unit with concerns of alleged serious domestic abuse. Following receipt of further material which shed new light on the material already obtained, I advised and drafted a full discontinuance application to be pursued.

SWE v A, ongoing

Presenting for Social Work England, in relation to the Social Worker having received convictions for road traffic matters in another jurisdiction. This involved driving without the relevant license and later driving whilst disqualified which resulted in a non-immediate custodial sentence. Consideration of the rules of evidence relating to the admission of a certificate of convictions in another jurisdiction. Current impairment is disputed. Final hearing still to take place. 

SWE v M, 2025

Presenting the case for Social Work England regarding inappropriate comments made to a very vulnerable service user regarding her suicidal ideations and behaviour in addition to allegations of dishonesty relating to retrospective case entry notes. There were legal applications pertaining to hearsay and akin to non-Defendant bad character applications.

GOC v W, 2025

Presenting the case for the General Optical Council regarding 11 allegations for 6 patients involving issues of not conducting relevant assessments and not recording matters where required. An expert was instructed to assist. At the initial final hearing, the panel raised an issue which could not have been foreseen. This required the matter to be adjourned, part-heard and I advised further on the additional work required. This involved the confirmation of relevant records from a particular witness and then reverting to the expert to provide an addendum with an updated opinion on this material.

GOC v K, 2025

Presented part of the case for the General Optical Council regarding allegations of failing to carry out relevant eye tests, failing to provide advice, failing to record and dishonesty in relation to inaccurate records kept. On the first day of the final hearing, I faced a late application by the Registrant to exclude the mystery shopper footage which had captured the Registrant in his workplace. I drafted a lengthy response arguing that this material was admissible and the panel ruled in our favour. The admission of this material assisted in proving the dishonesty alleged as part of the facts stage. 

GOC v I, 2025

Presented the case for the General Optical Council regarding allegations of failing to carry out relevant eye tests and falsifying patient records.

SWE v M, 2021

Appeared in the High Court to apply for an Interim Suspension Order to be extended for a period of 18 months whist the fitness to practise investigation was ongoing. The investigation related to criminal allegations of an intent to supply controlled drugs, convictions for driving over the limit whilst under the influence of cocaine and a subsequent conviction for possession of controlled drugs and two taser style devices. The order was granted.  

SWE v L, 2021

Presented the case for Social Work England. At the final hearing, the Panel had concluded that actions relating to misconduct and lack of competence were made out. The Service Users later died by suicide, which was concluded following inquests into their deaths. I presented the position at a review of the final substantive order review and invited the Panel to impose a Removal Order due to the lack of engagement from the Social Worker and/or any evidence of insight and remediation. As such, that current impairment remained. The Panel concluded as such. 

SWE v B, 2021

Presented the case for Social Work England. Allegations included engaging in inappropriate conduct with a service user such as shared sexualised conversations and fantasies, an inappropriate physical examination and engaging in phone contact of a sexual nature. The Social Worker only disputed that the physical examination was sexually motivated. Following evidence being adduced at the hearing, the Panel found the allegations and misconduct proved, that his fitness to practise was impaired and imposed a removal order.  

R v L, 2025

Prosecuted a Defendant for a count of causing serious injury by dangerous driving. The Defendant pleaded guilty. 

Southwark Crown Court

R v G, 2025

Prosecuted a Defendant at trial for a count of causing serious injury by dangerous driving and causing grievous bodily harm with intent to prevent the lawful apprehension of themselves. The victim suffered life changing injuries which included a significantly severe traumatic brain injury with long term irreversible consequences, spinal bone fractures, bleeding in the spleen and a broken tibia and fibula. 

Isleworth Crown Court

R v H, 2022

Represented a 19-year-old Defendant at trial for a count of causing the death of a 14-year-old pillion passenger by dangerous driving, having already pleaded guilty to being unlicensed, uninsured and aggravated vehicle taking. The Defendant was 17 years old at the time of the offence with various vulnerabilities including having Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Oppositional Defiant Disorder. Following significant mitigation being presented, the Defendant was sentenced to 2 years’ and 9 months imprisonment in total. 

Central Criminal Court

R v M, ongoing

Representing a Defendant on a 16 count joint indictment with another Defendant, where he faces allegations on at least 9 of the 16 counts. The alleged offences include possession with intention to supply class A, class B drugs and simple possession of such drugs also.

Guildford Crown Court

R v B, 2026

Represented a Defendant who pleaded guilty to a count of fraudulent evasion of a prohibition of a class B drug, namely cannabis. Significant mitigation was put forward which highlighted the Defendant’s youth amongst other personal factors, to persuade the court that a non-immediate custodial sentence was suitable. The court imposed a sentence of 13 months’ imprisonment suspended for 2 years. 

Isleworth Crown Court

R v R, 2023

Represented a Defendant facing counts of possession with intent to supply a class A drug (cocaine), possession with intent to supply a class B drug (cannabis), and possession of criminal property, namely £28,750. The Defendant entered guilty pleas to simple possession of the cocaine, possession with intent to supply a class B drug (cannabis), and possession of criminal property, namely £28,750. Representations were made to the Crown to not proceed on the most serious allegation of possession with intent to supply a class A drug (cocaine). The Crown acceded to this request. 

Croydon Crown Court

R v J, 2021

Led by Nicholas Worsley KC, represented a Defendant facing a count of conspiracy to supply multi-kilos of Cocaine, Class A drugs in an operation involving around 12 Defendants and spanning several cities. The case was split into several trials with the trial involving the lay client lasting 6 weeks. 

St Albans Crown Court

R v D, 2023

Instructed to represent the first Defendant who was jointly charged with her husband with fraud in excess of £100,000 in relation to her father’s bank accounts and residential property in South Africa, thereby including jurisdictional issues. The complainant was an elderly blind man in a wheelchair for whom a pre-recorded (s28 YJCEA 1999) cross-examination had taken place over the course of a few days. 

Aylesbury Crown Court

R v J and others, 2023

Prosecuted a three Defendants involving a bank fraud of over £100,000. Two Defendants pleaded guilty ahead of trial. The final Defendant pleaded guilty a few days into trial following some evidence having already been adduced.

Inner London Crown Court

R v H and others, 2022

Instructed as Junior Counsel by the CPS, led by Leading Counsel, Diana Wilson. Prosecuted 6 Defendants in an estimated over £100 million money laundering case involving 13 counsel and two separate conspiracies.  Count 1 was an Encrochat conspiracy with international elements and Count 2 was more domestic, conducted over different encrypted communications systems with a haulage business being used to direct the conspiracy. The case involved cell site, electronical communications evidence and numerous legal applications. The trial was listed for 8 weeks following which the jury convicted all 6 Defendants.

Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court

R v A and others, ongoing

Instructed as Junior Counsel by the CPS, led by Leading Counsel, Rhiannon Sadler. Prosecuted six Defendants for a variety of offences including a conspiracy to possess a prohibited firearm, ammunition without a firearm certificate and a class B drugs, namely Ketamine. One Defendant pleaded guilty ahead of trial to some offences. The trial was listed in early January 2026. During the first few days of the trial listing, the remaining Defendants pleaded guilty to various offences which in turn resolved the indictment. They await sentence and some also for additional matters now linked for sentence. 

Snaresbrook Crown Court

R v P, 2019

Represented a Defendant who pleaded guilty to possession of an imitation firearm with intent to cause fear of violence and was facing a minimum custodial sentence of 5 years. Successfully argued that there were exceptional reasons for not imposing the minimum term and that the Defendant was suitable for a suspended sentence order (‘SSO’). The Defendant breached the SSO weeks later by committing further offences. Nutan successfully argued that it was unjust to activate the SSO and the order was allowed to continue. 

Lewes Crown Court

R v Z, 2020

Represented a Defendant who pleaded guilty to an aggravated burglary which included a knife being carried upstairs and one of the residents being present at the time. The Crown placed the matter in Category 1 on the sentencing guidelines, with a starting point of 10 years. Successfully persuaded the court that the Defendant’s good character, young age and personal mitigation justified a significant reduction in the starting point. The Defendant was sentenced to 2 years and 7 months’ imprisonment. 

Harrow Crown Court

Grenfell Tower Inquiry, 2019-2022

R v E, ongoing

Led by Clea Topolski KC, representing a Defendant who was accused of hiring a hit man, the Co-Defendant, to kill his former partner and mother of his child. The Co-Defendant carried out an attack on the former partner where he stabbed her eight times. Both Defendants were acquitted at trial of conspiracy to murder. They were convicted of conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm. They await sentence.

Woolwich Crown Court

R v D, ongoing

Representing a vulnerable Defendant with a complex mental health background of psychosis. He is accused of attempting to murder his twin brother following a knife attack causing injuries to the neck.  

Isleworth Crown Court

R v P, 2026

Represented a vulnerable Defendant who was accused of attempting to murder his father following a spontaneous attack with a crowbar. The Defendant pleaded guilty to wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. Representations were made to the Crown to consider the particular facts of the case and the psychiatric evidence outlining the Defendant had a well-established diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder, borderline intellectual disability and some traits of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. The Crown subsequently decided to not proceed on the allegation of attempted murder. The Defendant was sentenced to a hospital order in light of his vulnerabilities. 

R v H, ongoing

Representing a Defendant facing three counts of rape against a former partner. 

Isleworth Crown Court

R v N, ongoing

Instructed as Junior Counsel by the CPS, led by Leading Counsel, David Spens KC. A 15 count indictment including 7 rape complainants, most of which are sex workers. 

Croydon Crown Court

R v A and A, ongoing

Prosecuting two Defendants, alleged to have held one of the complainants at knife point whilst the other raped the first complainant and then the other did the same. Indictment includes counts of rape, assault by penetration, threatening with a bladed article and false imprisonment. Issues of joint enterprise and clarity of evidence to distinguish between the roles held by both Defendants. 

Snaresbrook Crown Court

R v F, 2025

Represented the Defendant for counts of rape, attempted rape and sexual activity with a child in 2017 who was then aged 13 and joined with one charge of sexual activity with another child aged 14 in 2024. Psychological and psychiatric assessments were undertaken due to the vulnerabilities and younger presentation of the Defendant. Appropriate trial adjustments were made. I considered the relevant advocate tool kits for vulnerable/youth witnesses to undertake the cross-examinations. Following conviction after trial, the Defendant received a total of 10 years’ imprisonment and avoided a finding of dangerousness.

Kingston Crown Court

R v Y, 2024

Represented the Defendant for two counts of rape. There were significant legal arguments involving a voir dire and including an abuse of process argument questioning the Crown’s reliance on material which the defence submitted was inadmissible such as a DNA report provided by the French authorities. 

St. Albans Crown Court

R v B, 2019

Represented a Defendant on appeal regarding a charge of sexual assault. The two-day hearing involved cross-examining four prosecution witnesses and adducing evidence from the Appellant and a witness for the Appellant. The Appellant was acquitted. 

Guildford Crown Court

R v J, ongoing

Representing a Defendant facing an allegation of wounding with intent involving stab injuries to the complainant. 

R v A, 2022

Represented a Defendant facing a count of unlawful wounding against his former partner, namely accused of having thrown a mug at the complainant’s head resulting in a laceration above the eyebrow. At trial, Nutan adopted an effective trial strategy involving a successful non-Defendant bad character application against the complainant relating to her conduct towards the Defendant in the past. The Defendant was acquitted of unlawful wounding. 

Ipswich Crown Court

R v G, 2021

Prosecuted a Defendant who was convicted of the offence of ABH within a domestic context at the retrial. The Defendant had been recalled on his sentence of life imprisonment following a conviction for attempted murder in 2003. Pursued a prudent case strategy to adduce the bad character at the appropriate time including the conviction for attempted murder. Basildon Crown Court

R v B, 2020

Represented a Defendant who pleaded guilty to a breach of a restraining order, affray, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, assault by beating and two counts of criminal damage. The Defendant was also in breach of two suspended sentences which were offences against the same complainant as the recent offences. Despite the seriousness of the current and past offending, Nutan successfully persuaded the court to impose another suspended sentence order with a DRR attached. 

Snaresbrook Crown Court

R v E, 2018

Represented a Defendant who had pleaded guilty to committing actual bodily harm within a domestic context, dangerous driving, possession of Class A and B drugs, drink driving and a breach of a suspended sentence order (SSO). Successfully argued that it was unjust to activate the SSO and that it was appropriate to impose standalone suspended sentence orders for the remaining matters. 

Basildon Crown Court

R v M, 2018

Represented a 17 year old charged with inflicting grievous bodily harm. Successfully cross-examined the prosecution witness on his inconsistent account of how the Defendant had assaulted him resulting in a fractured foot. The Defendant was acquitted. 

Romford Youth Court

• Lincoln's Inn
• Criminal Bar Association
• Young Legal Aid Lawyers Association

• Kaplan Law School, BPTC, 2013
• King's College London, Law LLB (Hons), 2011