Contact Which Criminal Lawyer Contact page for Which Criminal Lawyer

EBR Attridge LLP Solicitors

Firm: EBR Attridge LLP Solicitors

Postal address: 23 Southampton Place, London WC1A 2BP (Map)

Telephone: 020 7842 8600


Web address:

About: This specialist criminal firm has established itself as one of the leading defence practices in the country. Its work includes defending large and complex prosecutions brought by HM Revenue and Customs, the Serious Fraud Office and the Financial Services Authority; murder, terrorism and large drugs prosecutions.

The partnership currently has five offices in London, including a specialist white collar crime department, based at 23 Southampton Place in Bloomsbury which specialises in all matters relating to serious fraud allegations and proceeds of crime matters.

The firm regularly acts in high-profile and nationally publicised cases and continues to achieve impressive results in the defence of large and complex fraud cases and other serious cases. Many of the firm’s cases are cited in Law Reports, including recent Court of Appeal authorities.

Specialisms: the firm undertakes all facets of criminal defence and regularly represents clients charged in the most serious of cases.

The white collar department brings together solicitors with substantial experience in defending allegations of serious and complex fraud and all aspects of proceeds of crime matters, including restraint orders, freezing orders, civil recovery and confiscation. The team continue to achieve impressive successes and possess the discretion and sensitivity to put at ease intelligent professional clients and the requisite incisiveness and expertise to find effective solutions and give first class advice and support.

Memorable cases:R v W and others, Divisional Court (July 2011)
Representing three claimants in judicial review proceedings leading to the quashing of illegal search warrants obtained by HMRC in December 2010 in a large operation involving numerous businesses and individuals.

R v W, M & UMBS (‘Operation Tangelo1′) (March 2011)
First on the indictment, representing ex-company director of an offshore incorporated online banking facility accused of facilitating fraudulent trade – in particular VAT ‘MTIC’ fraud. Internal (inter-customer) turnover of c. £3.5 Billion. Four year investigation by HMRC. Acquitted of all ten counts on the indictment.

R v R & Others (‘Operation Tangelo 2’) (December 2010)
HMRC prosecution collapsed at Southwark Crown Court on 3 December 2010. The case was a 17 defendant excise duty evasion prosecution which was stated by the prosecution to be the largest mounted in many years.

Representing the second defendant we instigated and led abuse of process arguments which centered upon HMRC’s fundamental inability to prosecute excise cases given their demonstrable systemic failings in relation to disclosure matters (the same failings that brought about the collapse of Operation Bedel- see below).

The prosecution (understandably) did not concede the points made in the written arguments, but instead chose at a very late juncture to offer no evidence prior to the oral abuse arguments being heard- instead proffering a ‘case specific’ justification for doing so.

R v D & W – Court of Appeal (May 2010)
Representing Mr W and additionally instructing counsel expert in European Law to address issues of the interpretation and application of domestic Regulations and relevant the EU Directives, this case has provided authoritative guidance regarding matters of establishing liability for the payment of Duty and VAT in the context of tobacco importation cases. The establishment of liability being vital, following on from the cases of R v Chambers and R v Mitchell, when establishing benefit for the purpose of making a confiscation order – notwithstanding a conviction as a conspirator in duty and VAT evasion cases. For instance a person cannot be liable to pay duty on tobacco imported by sea in a ship (and therefore the value of the unpaid duty should not form part of their benefit for the purposes of a confiscation order) unless (a) he is “holding” the tobacco at the excise duty point or (b) he “caused” the tobacco products to reach the excise point and retained a connection to the goods at that point – all questions of fact.

R v M (‘Operation Bedel’) & OTHERS (June 2009)
Alleged cheat on the Revenue (alcohol diversion fraud) and accompanying money laundering, with value alleged as up to £12m. First on the indictment.

Trial at Reading Crown Court collapsed on 11 June 2009 and HMRC forced to offer no evidence, leading to the acquittal of all defendants, after serious and systematic failures in HMRC’s ability to meet it’s disclosure obligations were exposed.

R v C & OTHERS (December 2007)
Attempt to defraud the Bank of England of £180m. Largest ever seizure of counterfeit notes. Legal arguments successfully leading to direction to jury to return not guilty verdicts in December 2007.

R v W (‘Operation Carina’) & OTHERS (December 2006)
Inward duty evasion prosecution, contemporaneous with ‘LCB’.

The case was stayed at Wood Green Crown Court in December 2006. The value of the cheat on the Revenue was alleged to be £53m and the case had been seven years in preparation: exposure of prosecutorial misconduct, leading to lack of faith in the disclosure process, was the primary reason for the stay.

R v U (‘Operation Venison’) & OTHERS (July 2005)
At the time, the largest and most expensive case ever prosecuted by HMRC (circa £110m alleged cheat). The case collapsed amid serious allegations of misconduct against senior customs officials and lawyers and after several months of abuse of process arguments, was stayed prominently in the High Court in 2005.

R -v- L
Represented the bare knuckle boxer, author of the Guvnor and inspiration for the film Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels during his trial for murder in 1992 at the Central Criminal Court.

R -v- S
Only war criminal to be tried in the UK. Alleged murder of 2000 Jews in Belorusse (former USSR) during WWII.

R -v- S
$375 million dollar bond fraud.

R -v- P
Chohan family murders.

R -v- M
Multi tonne cannabis importation.

Confiscation proceedings and successful appeal.

R -v- T
Kidnap – prosecution sought to prove offence solely from reluctant victim resgestae comment.

R -v- T
Legal definition of airgun and adaptation in firearms legislation.

R -v- A
Importation of 100 kilograms of heroin and 100 kilograms of cannabis.

R -v- C
Conspiracy re: armed robbery of £1 million plus of bank note paper.

R-v- S
Murder steroid psychosis defence established

R-v- W
Conspiracy to traffic £400 million of cocaine (RIPA, CIDA, Intercept Issues) involved 400 plus CD’s of English probe product and 17,000 plus Columbian telephone intercepts.

In the matter of X
Advised in respect of UK attempts to prosecute Rwanda genocide.

R -v- B
Babes in the Wood murder.

R -v- H
£6 million Security Express robbery.

R -v- P
Handling Brinks Matt robbery.

R v D
Administering a noxious substance with intent, Croydon Crown Court.

Senior solicitors: There are two managing partners in the firm who take a very hands-on approach to client care.
Warren Brazier

Warren Brazier is a duty solicitor, with Higher Court Rights of Audience. Warren primarily conducts very serious matters in the Crown Court.

Warren Brazier
Warren Brazier is a duty solicitor, with Higher Court Rights of Audience. Warren primarily conducts very serious matters in the Crown Court.

Vince Reveglia
Vince Reveglia is a Senior Partner with over 20 years experience as a criminal defence specialist. Over the years he has developed a substantial following based on his attention to detail and analytical approach in dealing with difficult cases whilst maintaining a personal approach in dealing with clients.

He practises exclusively in Criminal Law and has experience in dealing with all types of criminal cases including Terrorism, Murder, Complex Fraud, Drugs importation, Sexual offences to Thefts and Deception.

Steve Law
Steve continues to deal with a wide range of cases, from minor criminal matters through to the most serious work, including murder, extradition and large scale fraud. In recent years he has handled one of this country’s largest extradition cases which involved an allegation of a $5 billion dollar fraud as well as a very high profile contract killing case which centred on the most complex of forensic evidence and resulted in acquittal.

Steve continues to be a passionate believer in defendants’ rights and in the need for high quality representation.

Martin Lee
Martin has been engaged as a Criminal Defence solicitor for over 20 years, and has been involved in a large number of high profile cases throughout his career, especially prosecutions brought by the Serious Fraud Office, Revenue and Customs, FSA and DTI investigations, Police investigations, and Money laundering and Extradition proceedings.

He also undertakes Civil recovery work where restraint proceedings are brought by SOCA.

In 2005 Martin was appointed to sit on the “Very High Cost Cases Appeals Committee” to hear appeals from the decisions of Contract Managers, who regulate the work undertaken by solicitors and barristers in the largest criminal cases.

Danny Cundy
Based in Bloomsbury Office – Specialising in white collar crime; fraud; money laundering; confiscation proceedings; restraint orders; HM Revenue and Customs investigations.

Also deals with civil VAT and Duty matters, cash seizures under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and seizures of goods under the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 forfeiture provisions.

For assistance with any serious fraud or complex criminal case please email either Daniel Cundy, or Martin Lee,

Copyright © 2017 Which Criminal Lawyer