Vijay is repeatedly recommended in the legal directories for his expertise in Public law, Human Rights and Civil Liberties: "he commands trust and respect…” and “is very thorough in his preparation, shows confidence in court, and is…very knowledgeable and easy to work with" (Chambers and Partners 2015). Vijay was involved at the outset of the litigation in the Supreme Court appeals in Osborn & ors v the Parole Board  3 WLR 1020 (concerning fairness by decision-makers, under the common law and ECHR) and Kaiyam & ors v the SSJ  2 WLR 76 (where the Supreme Court departed from an earlier House of Lords decision and agreed that there was a duty to rehabilitate indeterminate sentence prisoners).
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
Public law (Judicial Review)
Vijay’s busy public law practice means that he regularly appears in the higher Courts. He has extensive experience in arguing cases involving international legal instruments and regularly undertakes challenges against a variety of public authorities. He is currently instructed in a case in the Court of Appeal in relation to the nature of the review that should be undertaken by an independent panel when considering the exclusion of a child. He is also involved in ongoing litigation in relation to a health authority’s funding policy and its failure to take into account NICE guidance.
Whilst Vijay's busy public law practice generally emerges from his immigration and prison law work, he advises on any public law challenge. He is passionate about representing the vulnerable against the high-handed actions of the State and will do the utmost to protect his client's best interests.
Vijay undertakes the full range of immigration and asylum work with particular experience in cases involving children or vulnerable adults. He is recommended as a leading junior in immigration law for his "thorough and detailed knowledge of the law" (Chambers and Partners 2012) and he is recognised as being "particularly good on the interplay between prison law and immigration" (Chambers and Partners 2011).
Vijay regularly appears in the Administrative Court and is experienced in drafting and presenting appeals to the Upper Tribunal, as well as the Court of Appeal. He draws on his significant public law expertise in respect of fresh claims, detention and challenges on behalf of sponsorship organisations. He also advises on claims for compensation, under the common law and Article 5 of the ECHR (arbitrary detention). He is a contributor to the 8th edition of Macdonald's Immigration Law and Practice (in relation to becoming a sponsor and challenging decisions by the Home Office) and has delivered ILPA training on Business Immigration Law (2015).
Vijay has acted in a number of key prison law cases, ranging from the Guittard case, in respect of transfers of indeterminate sentence prisoners to open conditions, to Osborn and Booth and Downs, where he has sought to challenge refusals by the Parole Board and Category A Review Team to hold an oral hearing.
Vijay's prison law practice also includes representation at Parole Board hearings. He advises on all matters, including the refusal to release a prisoner, re-categorisation (including Category A reviews), preparing minimum term representations and sentence calculation.
Civil actions against the police and other detaining authorities
Vijay has a busy practice in bringing civil actions against the police. Recent experience in this area includes a lengthy trial in relation to a claim for misfeasance against the police and matters concerning wrongful arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and trespass to person and to land. He has also been involved in data protection claims against the police. He has brought numerous damages claims under the common law and Human Rights Act for false imprisonment and breach of Articles 3, 5 and 8 including the case of Stickley v MOJ & Anor  EW Misc 24 and he assisted in a recent settlement of £18k paid to two sisters held in a police cell in Liverpool. Vijay is currently involved in an Equality Act claim against HMP where the trial will last for around 3 days and has brought numerous other claims under the Equality Act 2010.
Vijay has brought numerous damages claims: including for detention in breach of Article 5 of the ECHR following a sentencing judge’s failure to apply the law correctly, and the delayed release of a prisoner following a positive decision from the Parole Board.
Cases involving children / vulnerable clients
Vijay is recommended as “a first choice if the case concerns children or vulnerable clients” (Chambers and Partners 2012). He appears regularly in the High Court and has a great deal of experience in relation to arguments about an individual’s best interests, particularly in relation to children including urgent interim relief applications and interlocutory hearings, where a father and dying child were initially refused escorted visits whilst the father was in custody, and a case where the SSJ and other organisations were preventing all contact between a prisoner and his wife and children contrary to their wishes. In addition, Vijay’s practice in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber invariably brings him into contact with vulnerable persons. He has represented numerous individuals suffering from varying degrees of mental health problems and he recently appeared in the Upper Tribunal where he represented someone that the Tribunal accepted was a vulnerable adult (under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006), where an intermediary had to be used in order for the appellant to give evidence.
Regularly advises in this area, in respect of loss of inaccurate data, the improper storage of data and the improper refusal to disclose data held by a data controller.
- AD (Pakistan) v SSHD (ongoing) Court of appeal grants permission to appeal in realtion to adult dependant relative rule.
- R (Haney, Kaiyam, Massey and Robinson) v Secretary of State for Justice  UKSC 66 (10 December 2014) with Pete Weatherby QC.
- Downs v Secretary of State for Justice UKSC 2014/0056.
- Booth v The Parole Board and Osborn v The Parole Board  UKSC 61 - all three appeals granted - parole board breached its duty of procedural fairness to the appellant by failing to offer him an oral hearing, and was accordingly in breach of article 5(4) of the Convention.
- Downs, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice  EWCA Civ 1422 (judicial review of decision by CART (Category A Review Team) to refuse oral hearing for Category A prisoner).
- San Michael College Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 1336 (18 November 2011) (Court of Appeal overturns UKBA "unfair" and "obscure" decision-making).
- Henry v Parole Board  EWHC 2081 (Admin) (Mistake of fact: High Court quashes Parole Board decision and orders a new hearing).
- R (Bashir) v IA & Govr HMP Ryehill and SSJ  EWHC 1108 (Admin) (HDC: Muslim prisoner's voluntary fasting protected by Art 9 ECHR).
- R (Jorgenson) v Secretary of State for Justice  EWHC 977 (Admin) (recall to custody must be proportionate).
- Osborn & Booth v The Parole Board  EWCA Civ 1409 (guidance on Parole Board oral hearings).
- R (on the application of Osborn) v The Parole Board  EWHC 580 Parole Board's refusal to grant an oral hearing.
- R (on the application of Guittard) v The Secretary of State for Justice (2009) EWHC 2951 (Prison JR; SSJ acted unlawfully in respect of the transfer of IPP prisoners to open conditions.
- R (on the application of Rowen) v The Governor, HMP Kirkham and the Secretary of State for Justice (Interested Party) (3 July 2009, Admin Ct Manchester, Nicol J) CO/5471/2009 (Prison JR; categorisation and refusal of HDC decision quashed).
- R v Wilkins  EWCA Crim 1654 (Appeal against IPP sentence: permission refused by the full Court despite concerns about the length of minimum term).
- Boswell v The Parole Board & Anor  EWHC 2049 (Breach of article 5(4) (speedy hearing) by the Parole Board and Secretary of State for Justice. Court declines to grant relief on the basis of the Betteridge guidance) Judgement.
Leading Junior Administrative and Public Law: Northern and North Eastern (2016) " Highly regarded for his burgeoning public law practice that has a focus on immigration and prison law work. He regularly handles complex cases in the higher courts and has enjoyed recent success in the Supreme Court in cases concerning the ECHR. Strengths: "He takes the time to consider every possible angle on complicated matters." "He is most personable and excellent in his relations with me and my clients. He is thoughtful and thorough and has dealt with challenging novel issues." Recent work: Successfully represented the appellant in a landmark Supreme Court case which held that indeterminate sentence prisoners are given a reasonable opportunity to rehabilitate themselves under Article 5 of the ECHR." Chambers and Partners 2016
Leading Junior Civil Liberties and Human Rights: Northern (2016) "Highly regarded for the depth of his knowledge in prison law and immigration. He is widely recognised for his expertise in actions brought under Article 5 ECHR . He has a strong public law background and is frequently engaged in judicial review proceedings on behalf of children and vulnerable individuals." Chambers and Partners 2016
Leading Junior Immigration: Northern and North Eastern (2016) "A recognised human rights expert, particularly well known for his expertise in immigration cases that involve children. He is regularly instructed by clients seeking to utilise his experience in prison law to assist with immigration detention cases." Chambers and Partners 2016
Leading Junior Administrative and Public Law: Northern (2015) "Enjoys a growing reputation for the quality of his public law practice. He focuses particularly on human rights issues arising in the context of prison law and immigration. "He is a careful and effective advocate who commands trust and respect. He handles the complexities of cases very well and gives very helpful advice." Successfully brought judicial review proceedings against the Justice Secretary in relation to a prisoner who had repeatedly been denied access to his children, despite the Secretary having previously conceded proceedings on the same issue." Chambers & Partners 2015
Leading Junior Civil Liberties and Human Rights: Northern (2015) "A public law specialist who has developed a strong practice in civil liberties and human rights work, assisted by his considerable expertise in prison and immigration law. He is also an expert in cases relating to religious freedom. "He's very, very bright and a tenacious advocate." He represented the two claimants in a significant Supreme Court case concerning the right of prisoners to an oral hearing when their sentence is reviewed by the Parole Board. The case established that not allowing prisoners a hearing was a violation of procedural fairness and their rights under the ECHR." Chambers & Partners 2015
Leading Junior Immigration: Northern (2015) " An expert in cases involving detained migrants, children and the ECHR. He also has a burgeoning practice assisting organisations with obtaining sponsor licences. "He is very thorough in his preparation, shows confidence in court, and is also very knowledgeable and easy to work with." Chambers & Partners 2015
Up-and-coming Junior in Civil Liberties and Human Rights: Northern (2013) "Vijay Jagadesham is gaining plaudits for conducting a prison law practice with a recognised focus on foreign national prisoners. Sources confirm that he is "very approachable and able to turn work around very quickly". Chambers & Partners 2013
Up-ando-coming Junior in Administrative and Public Law: The Regions (2013) "Others at the set include Vijay Jagadesham, a highly rated public law practitioner, who is especially strong on immigration and prison law. He is "very bright, and good at spotting legal issues and making sure they are pursued fully." Chambers & Partners 2013
Leading Junior in Immigration: Northern (2013) "Vijay Jagadesham is widely praised by fellow practitioners and is singled out as a particularly promising counsel. His work concerning foreign national prisoners is regarded as ground-breaking and reflects the nature of his practice which centres on the interaction between immigration and human rights law." Chambers & Partners 2013
Leading Junior in Immigration: Northern (2012) "Children and immigration matters are a big part of Vijay Jagadesham's practice. He is "excellent with clients and a first choice if the case concerns children or vulnerable clients," say clients. He "has a detailed and thorough knowledge of the law". Chambers & Partners 2012
Regional Bar - Northern Circuit - Regulatory and Public Law "At Garden Court North Chambers, Vijay Jagadesham is a barrister who has flourished in the recent past and demonstrates excellent skills as an advocate" Legal 500 2011
Leading Junior in Immigration: Northern (2011) "...singled out for his 'imaginative approach to complex cases' and is particularly good on the interplay between prison law and immigration." Chambers & Partners 2011
PUBLICATIONS & SEMINARS
MEMBERSHIPS & ASSOCIATIONS
- Member of Manchester Prison Law Practitioners Group since its inception