Redstone Chambers

Philip Sapsford QC

 

Philip Anthony Sapsford is a Queen’s Counsel called to the Bar by the Honorable Society of the Inner Temple in 1974. He has been a member of 3 Dr. Johnson’s Buildings (Chambers of the late Geoffrey Crispin QC) 1975-81, Cloisters (Chambers of the late John Platts-Mills QC) 1981-1997, Goldsmith Chambers (Head of Chambers) 1997–2009, and of 8 Gray’s Inn Square, Gray’s Inn (with Arthur Marriott QC) from 2010.

Practice

Mr Sapsford’s early practice concentrated on family law, child abduction with increasing common law work, including white collar crime. In 1986 he also began pro bono work, mainly concerned at the time with appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in death penalty cases from the British Commonwealth countries.

Mr Sapsford’s appeared as amicus before various US State Supreme Courts and the presentation of oral argument on behalf of the English Bar. This culminated in the United States Supreme Court landmark decision [5-4] of Roper v Simmons 125 S. Ct. 1183 [March, 2005] whereby the death penalty was abolished throughout all of the United States for juvenile offenders. His other fields of professional interest include international licensing work for a number of well known Italian designers and the drafting of complex international contractual obligations.

Appointments

 

• Appointed as one of Her Majesty’s Counsel, 1992

• Appointed a Recorder, 1997

• Called to the Bar in the High Court of New Zealand in 1998 and admitted there also as a Solicitor

• Appointed a Master of the Bench of the Honorable Society of the Inner Temple 2003

• Appointed as a Deputy Judge of the High Court in 2004

• Appointed to the Board of Directors of Aidan College S.A. Lavey-les-Bains in Switzerland, in 2010

 

Notable Appearances

• Oskar v Government of Australia (Nos. 1 & 2) [1988] 1 A.C. 866 (House of Lords – Extradition and procedural bars thereto)

• Pratt & Anor v Attorney General of Jamaica & Anor [1994] 2 A.C.1 (Judicial Committee of the Privy Council en banc 7 Law Lords departing from existing jurisprudence and defining “the death row phenomenon” as “…cruel inhuman and degrading treatment...”)

• Lackey v State of Texas (1995) 115 S.Ct.1421 (Supreme Court of the United States – Amicus Curiae Brief on behalf of the English Bar; the Memorandum of Justices Stevens and Breyer respected denial of certiorari on the first attempt to bring the jurisprudence of Pratt v A.G. of Jamaica into an American Federal Court)

• Guerra v Attorney General of Trinidad & Tobago [1996] 1 A.C. 397 (Judicial Committee of the Privy Council - Constitution – Fundamental Rights and Freedoms - Delay - “Cruel and Unusual Treatment or Punishment”)

• H.R.H. The Princess of Wales v Stenning (1996) High Court – appearing as Counsel for Her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales in the obtaining of a High Court injunction restraining media personnel from interfering with the privacy and movements of H.R.H. the Princess of Wales, H.R.H. Prince William (the presumptive heir to the Throne) and H.R.H. Prince Henry. The legal basis of her claim was in privacy and nuisance and was argued before the Protection from Harassment Act, 1997 came into force The Defendant was never able successfully to set aside the injunction prior to the death of H.R.H. the Princess of Wales

• Culmer v The Queen [1997] 1 W.L.R. 1296 (Judicial Committee of the Privy Council - Criminal Law – Homicide – Provocation)

• Ricketts v The Queen [1998] 1 W.L.R. 1016 (Judicial Committee of the Privy Council - Constitutional law – Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – Murder -Defendant Mute of Malice – Withdrawal of Counsel During Capital Murder Trial)

• D v P [Ruud Gullitt] [1998] 2 F.L.R. 25 (Financial Relief – Divorce – Jurisdiction - Forum Conveniens)

• Mitchell v The Queen [1999] 1 W.L.R. 1679 (Judicial Committee of the Privy Council – Constitutional Law – Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – Legal Representation – Withdrawal of Counsel During Capital Murder Trial)

• McGinnis v State of Texas [2000] U.S.S.C. 99-7870 (Supreme Court of the United States – Amicus Curiae Brief on behalf of the English Bar; International Law – Prohibition on the Execution of Children at the Time of the Offence)

• Napolean Beazley v Johnson [2002] USSC 00-10618 (Supreme Court of the United States – Amicus Curiae Brief on behalf of the English Bar, in collaboration with the University of San Francisco Law School -International Law – Prohibition on the Execution of Children at the Time of the Offence)

• Roper v Simmons 125 S. Ct. 1183 [March, 2005] Amicus Curiae Brief whereby the death penalty was abolished throughout the United States for juvenile offenders

• R v R (divorce: jurisdiction: domicile) [2006] 1 FLR 389 a domicile of choice cannot be acquired or retained by a mere declaration of the parties

• Cook v Plummer [2008] EWCA Civ 484 - Enforcement internationally of child maintenance obligations

• Miller-Smith v Miller-Smith [2009] EWCA Civ 1297 - Interpretation of s 14 of the Trusts of Land & Appointment of Trustees Act, 1996

• Ahmed v Khan [2010] EWCA Civ 290 - Application of Indian communal property customs to a Wife’s Application for all forms of ancillary relief after divorce.

 

Personal

 

• Born in Christchurch, New Zealand, on 16th December, 1948

• Married to Daniela Sapsford, a Senior Director of Sotheby’s and a world renowned author in her field

• Three children: Alexei, Beatrice, and Timothy

• A Trustee of the Otter Trust, since 1995

• Maintaining residence at Chalet En Reuvroz, Villars-sur-Ollon 1884, Switzerland

 

Mr Philip Sapsford QC is available to accept appointments as an arbitrator or mediator.