Nate Lara
Year of Call: 2024
Solicitor: 2020
Email Address: [email protected]
CJSM: [email protected]
Telephone: 01202 292102
Clerk Details
- Clerk Name: Ellie Bloomfield
- Clerk Telephone: Practice Manager
- Clerk Email: [email protected]
Overview
Nate Lara is a criminal law barrister and member of the Crime Group at 3 Paper Buildings (3PB) and accepts instructions nationally. Nate is based from 3PB's Bournemouth office, and primarily works in the Western Circuit.
Nate came to 3PB with five years’ experience as a specialised criminal law Solicitor-Advocate in Australia. Nate moved to the UK and completed a reduced six-month specialist criminal pupillage, as a transferring lawyer, with a well-known and highly regarded criminal chambers in London, before joining 3PB in March 2025.
Since joining 3PB, Nate appears everyday in the Crown Court, and has had significant success in both prosecution and defence work, across all areas of criminal law, including: violence, domestic abuse, sexual offences, property and drug offences, road traffic offences and fraud.
In Australia, Nate started his career in the prestigious graduate scheme at the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) in New South Wales (NSW), where he prosecuted serious criminal cases. After a successful period at the ODPP, Nate decided to gain experience as a criminal defence advocate across NSW.
Nate also acted as a Senior Public Servant in the Compliance, Investigation and Regulatory team at the Australian Department of Health and Aged Care. This saw him conducting investigations and acting as a decision maker on systematic, compliance and criminal breaches in the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the Aged Care System.
Outside of work, Nate is an experienced football referee and loves all aspects of the game. Nate can be found with his two border collies, Finch and Scout, on any number of the beautiful beaches around Bournemouth.
Expertise
-
Crime and Regulatory Crime Add this expertise to your shortlist Ongoing UK cases
R v TF (Southampton Crown Court): Prosecuting, defendant charged with s 18 GBH after the extended torture and violence against his elderly Mother.
R v MO (Portsmouth Crown Court): Defending, defendant charged with two separate offences of s 18 GBH against members of the public.
R v JR (Salisbury Crown Court): Prosecuting, defendant charged with serious allegations of coercive/controlling behaviour and stalking involving serious harm. The allegations span over many years and the Trial is expected to take a minimum of six days.
R v RH (Bournemouth Crown Court): Defending, defendant charged with multiple serious DA offences, including a charge of false imprisonment – which is currently subject to an Application to Dismiss.
Recent UK cases
R v PH (2026, Bournemouth Crown Court): Defending, acquittal after majority verdict, single count of threatening with a knife.
R v JM (2025, Swindon Crown Court): Defending, acquittal, allegation of a bomb hoax in a school, defendant acquitted due to confusion of his thick Welsh accent. The case attracted media attention including This is Wiltshire, The Telegraph, and Gazette and Herald.
R v KB (2025, Bournemouth Crown Court): Defending, acquittal of five counts of violence against five different complainants, four of them aged under 18.
R v AS (2025, Newport (IOW) Crown Court): Defending, acquittal, two counts of ABH after a pub fight, where two elderly complainants suffered serious injuries. Successful defence of self-defence.
R v DD (2025, Newport (IOW) Crown Court): Defending, acquittal of two counts of intentional strangulation, leading to the eventual sentence reduced by half.
R v RA (2025, Portsmouth Crown Court): Prosecuting, Defendant initially charged with serious DA offences including kidnapping. Advising on the prospects of evidence, the allegations were restructured, resulting in a guilty plea and a sentence of immediate custody.
R v TH (2025, Portsmouth Crown Court): Defending, trial of the act, after a finding that the defendant is unfit to plead, secured an acquittal on threatening with an offensive weapon (hammer) despite limited ability to cross-examine the witnesses. The defendant was sentenced on other matters to an unconditional discharge.
R v MR (2025, Bournemouth Crown Court): Defending, the defendant was initially charged with serious DA offences including false imprisonment, after successful representations on an upcoming legal argument, the prosecution accepted lesser pleas, resulting in the defendant receiving a community sentence, when he was initially facing up to 10 years’ in custody on the sentencing guidelines.
R v BO (2025, Wood Green Crown Court): Prosecuting, conviction of serious DA offences including CCB and strangulation.
R v JE (2024, Croydon Crown Court): Prosecuting, advising on a serious GBH and violent conduct offence, where only one of 13 involved individuals was identified and charged. Advising on joint criminal liability, resulting in the continuation of the charges and a substantial restructuring of the prosecution case.
Australian cases
Police v MV (2024, NSW Local Court): Acquittal, multiple serious DA offences, based on submissions regarding the admissibility of aspects of the Police investigation.
Police v CC (2023, NSW Local Court): Acquittal, ABH and wounding with a weapon, after successful submission on the compellability and capacity of the elderly complainant.
Police v DH (2022, NSW Local Court): Acquittal, army veteran charged with resisting arrest and assaulting a Police Officer, based on self-defence, proving the arresting officers were acting outside the execution of their duties.
Police v HT (2021, NSW Local Court): Acquittal, DA offences, after the prosecution sought to lead pre-recorded hearsay evidence, when a witness did not come to court.
JW v DPP (2020, NSW District Court – Appeal Division): Successfully prosecuted an appeal, after effective cross-examination of fresh evidence from an alibi witness, whose credibility was found in disrepute.
-
Sexual offences Add this expertise to your shortlist Ongoing UK cases
R v ZA (Portsmouth Crown Court): Defending, one count of rape over multiple incidents – defence of consent and reasonable belief in consent.
R v PB (Bournemouth Crown Court): Prosecuting, multiple counts of sexual activity with a child, likely requiring s 28 pre-recorded cross-examination.
R v MD (Newport (IOW) Crown Court): Defending, one count of exposure – a defence of insanity is being advanced, as the defendant was in custody and not receiving adequate mental health treatment.
R v PW (Bournemouth Crown Court): Prosecuting, multiple counts of sexual communication with a child, arising from allegations of a decoy paedophile stoppers group.
R v RW (Newport (IOW) Crown Court): Defending, multiple counts of sexual communication with a child – advancing a defence that the sexual communications were a part of a fantasy chat, and the defendant knew that he not talking to a child.
Recent UK cases
R v MK (2025, Bournemouth Crown Court): Defending, acquittal on five of six counts of sexual assault against two complainants.
R v SB (2025, Winchester Crown Court): Defending, the defendant was accused of a random sexual assault in a pub, after successful cross-examination of the complainant and three witnesses, the defendant was acquitted after majority verdict.
R v RD (2024, Maidstone Crown Court): Prosecuting, the defendant was convicted of a sexual assault against a 16 year old working in a restaurant, after the successful admission of confession evidence.
Australian cases
HH v DPP (2024, NSW District Court – Appeal Division): Successfully argued for a reduced sentence, allowing for the release of a man charged with child sex offences on appeal, after a successful argument over the sentencing judge’s erroneous application of case law, regarding the objective seriousness and mitigating factors.
Police v SO (2023, NSW Local Court): Successfully defended two charges of sexual touching, based on effective cross-examination of the complainant, and an objection to inadmissible CCTV footage.
-
Drugs Offences Add this expertise to your shortlist Ongoing cases
R v RP (Bournemouth Crown Court): Prosecuting, imitation firearm in a public place, anticipated reasonable excuse and forgetfulness matter.
R v EQ (Basildon Crown Court): Defending, production of class B drugs, defence involving expert evidence after a DNA finding 18 months after the initial arrest.
R v DC (Bournemouth Crown Court): Prosecuting, a violent robbery at a local supermarket – identification is in dispute.
Recent cases
R v HS (2026, Bournemouth Crown Court): Defending, charge of cannabis production, advised on a defence of modern slavery/duress, resulting in a guilty plea on an acceptable basis of plea and the defendant being immediately released from custody.
R v ND (2026, Portsmouth Crown Court): Defending, 15 counts of various property offences over a week long drug-fuelled spree, successful negotiated an acceptable plea resulting in a three year community sentence, where the defendant was facing a custodial sentence of 4 years.
R v GH (2025, Court of Appeal): Defending, successful argument against a manifestly excessive sentence for an offence of armed burglary. All three grounds of appeal were successful, resulting in the immediate release of the Appellant.
R v FG (2025, Bournemouth Crown Court): Prosecuting, defendant convicted of a £50,000 commercial burglary, after a defence of misidentification.
R v RP (2025, Winchester Crown Court): Defending, successfully argued a lesser role in a drug supply conspiracy, securing a sentence of just over 3 years custody, when the prosecution was seeking a sentence of 6 years.
-
Motoring offences Add this expertise to your shortlist Ongoing UK cases
R v MR (Bournemouth Crown Court): Prosecuting, careless driving causing serious injury – defence based on expert evidence.
R v AH (Bournemouth Crown Court): Defending, driving licence fraud – defence of knowledge and intent.
Recent UK cases
R v SG (2026, Portsmouth Crown Court): Prosecuting, after guilty plea, secured a custodial sentence for an offender who was repeatedly pursued by Police, resulting in a serious collision with a parked vehicle.
R v RC (2025, Portsmouth Crown Court): Prosecuting, conviction of careless driving causing serious injury, after a taxi driver collided with an oncoming Ambulance.
R v BG (2025, Weymouth Magistrates’ Court): Defending, successfully argued for the court to apply the minimum points, rather than a disqualification – allowing a professional driver to maintain his driving licence.
R v NM (2024, Brighton Magistrates’ Court): Prosecuting, conviction of a drug driver who collided with a house and then absconded from the scene and was arrested months later.
Australian cases
Police v LS (2024, NSW Local Court): Successfully argued that a client charged with high-range drink driving and negligent driving, should avoid a term of imprisonment despite a Guideline Judgment allowing community sentences in only the most extremely mitigated cases. Less than 5% of similar cases avoid full-time imprisonment.
LL v DPP (2023, NSW District Court – Appeal Division): Successfully referred (case stated) an appeal from the Local Court on the disqualification of a driver, based on an argument of the exception at law of ‘serious impact on society’, as the appellant was a crisis support worker for Indigenous people in regional areas, and her ability to drive was essential to her profession.
-
Recommendations “Mr Lara's advocacy was of a high quality throughout the week. He made focussed and persuasive submissions in respect of a bad character application. He exercised good judgement in limiting the scope of this application more narrowly than the written application which the Crown had submitted. I was impressed by his cross-examination of the defendant. It was clearly well-prepared. Thought had evidently been given to the structure. He was effective at undermining the defendant's evidence, highlighting the strengths of the prosecution case and he ensured that his case was properly put to the defendant. Mr Lara's closing submissions were delivered with confidence and again it was evident that he was well-prepared.” Judge, Wood Green CC, 2025
"I had the opportunity to sit in on this trial and see Nate’s detailed preparation and skilful handling of the trial in practice. He made a concerted effort to visit the client in his cells at every opportunity, reassure him, and ensure that his instructions were clear. This approach was critical in helping the client maintain composure and remain robust when giving evidence." Instructing paralegal, Magistrates' C, 2025
“Your ability to challenge the defence robustly while maintaining fairness and integrity was truly impressive. You ensured that the case was presented in the strongest possible manner, leaving no stone unturned in the pursuit of justice. The victims and their families could not have asked for a more determined and articulate voice in court, and I have no doubt that your efforts provided them with a sense of reassurance and confidence in the legal process.” Police Officer, Wood Green CC, 2025
“Throughout, he was polite and professional. His advocacy was clear and effective. Had he not signed his sentencing note, "Pupil Barrister", I would not have known he was a pupil.” Opposing Counsel, Snaresbrook CC, 2025
“Nate’s professional standards have been high. Nate’s personal values and standards are also high. Nate brings the above standards with him from his practice in Australia” Pupil Supervisor, 2025
“Working with Nate Lara was an absolute pleasure from start to finish. His attention to detail and reassuring demeanour throughout the entire legal process made all the difference during what was undoubtedly a stressful time for me. Nate delivered nothing short of victory in the courtroom. I am incredibly grateful for his expertise, dedication, and ultimately, for securing a favourable outcome.” Lay Client, Police v SO, 2024
“Nate Lara has helped and given me the most ideal outcome. It saved me my future employment and also ensure the whole legal process as smooth and stress free as possible.” Lay Client, R v NM, 2024
“I was told by multiple lawyers that the chances of achieving a good outcome was at most 10% and I was honestly not very hopeful. However, Nate did it. He got me the best outcome possible, which has made a deep and positive impact on my life. Thank you very much Nate.” Lay Client, R v JL, 2023
“Could not be happier with the results I received with the assistance of Nate Lara. He is very thorough and wants to achieve the best outcome possible. Highly recommend to anyone who is in an unfortunate event.” Lay Client, Police v ST, 2023
Expand recommendations
Related News
-
3PB criminal law barrister Nate Lara (pictured here) has been successful in the Court of Appeal, arguing that the original sentence imposed in the Crown Court was manifestly excessive and wrong in principle. The defendant received a sentence of imprisonment of 30 months. Nate argued that despite the aggravating features the sentence was excessive, going outside the range in the relevant sentencing guidelines, without sufficient justification for doing so. Nate also argued that the court...
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers' (3 Paper Buildings) criminal barrister Nate Lara (pictured here) has successfully secured an acquittal for his client in relation to a bomb hoax in a case heard at Swindon Crown Court. JM was charged with causing a bomb hoax at the Badbury Park Primary School in Swindon. Notably, JM accepted making the call to the school but denied making a bomb threat. In cross-examination, Nate questioned the receiver of the call, an administrator...
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers' (3 Paper Buildings) crime barrister Nate Lara has successfully secured an acquittal for his client in relation to a serious sexual offence. SB was charged with a public sexual assault in a pub, where two eyewitnesses and a complaint witness gave evidence before a jury. Nate was able to undermine each of the witnesses and ensure that a solid defence of denial was put before the jury. Following a three-day trial at Winchester...
Continue reading
