Year of Call: 2006
Email Address: [email protected]
CJSM: [email protected]
Telephone: 020 7583 8055
Sunyana Sharma is an inquest and professional discipline barrister with specialist knowledge in maritime and fishing law and health and safety law. She also has experience in regulatory compliance.
Sunyana sits as an Assistant Coroner for Hampshire, Southampton and Portsmouth and as a Deputy District Judge in Civil and Family law. To read more about Sunyana’s relevant expertise, please see her specialist inquests profile.
Prior to joining Chambers, Sunyana worked for the Solicitor International Human Right’s Group (‘SIHRG’) with whom she organised the Zimbabwe Fundraising Event called 'Protecting Lawyers in Zimbabwe' in collaboration with the Bar Human Rights Committee. She also worked as part of a team in researching and drafting legal submissions on the rule of law and the importance of an impartial tribunal following the suspension of the Chief Justice of Pakistan in March 2007. In addition, she undertook an internship with the criminal justice department of 'JUSTICE', the all party law reform and human rights organisation. She assisted with the research on policy papers commissioned by JUSTICE, which included changes to the rape in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and responses to the Home Office paper on 'New powers against organised and financial crime’.
Reported Cases
[2010] EWCA Crim 109; [2011] 1 Cr App R (S) 36: The Court considered whether exceptional circumstances exist justifying the court in not imposing the required minimum sentence for the possession of firearms.
Publications
Sunyana has written for a number of publications on topics such as inquests, public law and life at the Bar. These articles include:
Sunyana Sharma is a busy inquest and professional disciplinary specialist with significant expertise in the health and safety, maritime and fisheries sectors. She also regularly advises and appears in CQC, DBS and OFSTED appeals. She has was previously appointed to the C list of Regulatory Advocates for the Health and Safety Executive, Office of Rail Regulation and the Environment Agency. She has both defended and prosecuted in various regulatory law matters, which have included collisions at sea, fisheries offences, breaches of a health and safety regulations, animal welfare and trading standards prosecutions. Furthermore, she regularly appears before various disciplinary tribunals and care and education standards tribunal.
Sunyana is regularly invited to speak on coronial law, professional discipline and regulatory matters to solicitors, colleagues and industry experts.
Secondments
Sunyana has undertaken the following secondments in the field of healthcare and financial regulation and health and safety:
Sunyana Sharma has developed a strong practice in professional disciplinary regulation following secondments as a case presenter at the Nursing and Midwifery Council (‘NMC’) and in house lawyer at the General Chiropractic Council (‘GCC’). She appears regularly in various healthcare tribunals which includes the NMC, GCC, Health and Care Professions Council (‘HCPC’), Medical Practitioner’s Tribunal Service (‘MPTS’), General Optical Council (‘GOC’), British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (‘BACP’) and General Dental Council ‘GDC’ for substantive misconduct and health hearings, interim order applications and substantive order reviews. In addition, she is regularly instructed by nursing, care homes and GP Surgery’s appealing CQC decisions before the First Tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber).
Having developed an in depth and robust understanding of the ‘fitness to practise’ regime, she takes instruction in all professional disciplinary cases.
Sunyana was seconded to the Financial Conduct Authority (‘FCA’) from 2019 to 2020 to assist in two high profile dual tracked investigations into systemic failures by two major global banks.
Recent Cases
HCPC v. x (2023): Instructed to represent practical psychologist for plagiarism allegations in a PhD thesis.
NMC v. x (2023): Represented a nurse in an interim order hearing for being charged with gross manslaughter and misconduct allegations in which responsible nurse failed to attach monitoring equipment of a child with co-morbidities and sleep apnoea, which caused and/or contributed to patient’s death.
GPhC v. PP (2022): Advised a pharmacy group for potential allegations in relation to staff at the pharmacy being unqualified and large volumes of Phenergan and Codeine Linctus going missing during COVID-19 lockdown. Pharmacy unable to account for missing medication.
BACP v. SE (2022): Representing a counsellor for misconduct allegations for conducting a joint counselling sessions for a couple with instance of domestic violence. Expert instructed to show the changing clinical approach to counselling sessions in domestic violence cases where joint sessions were permissible in certain circumstances.
GDC v. MB (2022): Instructed to represent a Harley Street dentist in 14-day misconduct case in respect of inadequate care given to five patients and inappropriate offensive communication with a sixth patient. Complexities in the case included the instruction of an expert due to the technical nature of the implants provided.
GDC v. x (2021): representing CDT for multiple allegations relating to working out of scope, breach of an interim order and various dishonesty allegations.
BACP v. x (2021): Representing a counsellor for misconduct allegations in relation to joint counselling sessions for a couple with a history of domestic violence.
GMC v. x (2020): Instructed to represent a consultant anaesthetist for incorrect and dangerous intubation pre-surgery of two patients leading to near deaths.
GDC v. SK (2020): Successfully represented a dentist in an IO hearing who faced allegations of sexual abuse.
CQC v. YSL (2020): Successfully represented care home in an appeal to cancel its registration before the First Tier Tribunal (Care Standards).
Human Givens Institute v. LM (2019): Advised an integrative therapist specialising in mental and emotional health on an appeal of the decision of the Human Givens Institute for practising out of scope.
NMC v. RP (2018): Represented a nurse for a number of failings in which he was blamed for the death of a patient. Following the week’s substantive hearing none of the allegations were found proved.
GMC v. x (2017): Represented a Doctor for carrying out medical practise whilst not holding a licence to practise.
HCPC v. KC (2017): Represented a social worker for receiving a caution for disclosing sexual photographs of his ex partner.
GOC v. AP (2016): Represented an optician for over 50 misconduct allegations relating to the adequacy of sight testing, the fitting of contact lenses, record keeping and dishonesty for a patient with keratoconus.
NMC v. JN (2015): Instructed to advise a registrant on an appeal to the High Court relating to a Substantive Order determination on dishonesty.
NMC v. PN (2015): Represented the NMC at a misconduct substantive hearing in which the registrant was undertaking shift work when signed off sick and working excessive hours, including a continuous 37 hour shift.
GDC v. IK (2014): Instructed to represent a dental technician for acting outside his scope of practice.
NMC v. KA-A (2014): Successfully represented the NMC for a 9 day substantive misconduct hearing against two nurses for restraining a vulnerable dementia patient to a hospital bed with a bedsheet and cable ties.
NMC v. AA (2014): Represented the NMC for dishonesty allegations against the Registrant who had produced and provided false references to an NHS Trust to obtain a Band 5 Nursing post. The five day substantive hearing resulted in the Nurse being struck off.
GCC v. X (2014): Represented the GCC for a substantive order review hearing of a Chiropractor who had been convicted of acts of voyeurism.
GCC v. EJ (2013): Successfully represented EJ in a four day substantive hearing for allegations of unacceptable professional conduct relating to a sexual relationship with a patient, confidentiality breaches and dishonesty.
GOC v. AP (2012): Appeared on behalf of a student optician for dishonesty allegations.
As a criminal and regulatory specialist, Sunyana has developed expertise that focuses on the maritime and fisheries sector. She regularly prosecutes, defends and advises in actions brought by the Maritime Coastguard Agency (‘MCA’). She has also defended a number of cases prosecuted by the Marine Management Organisation (‘MMO’). Her cases have included:
Her clients include: masters, owners, charterers, operators, harbour authorities and the MCA.
In collaboration with Dr Tagbo Illozue, Sunyana Sharma wrote “Fisheries Act 2020–snapshot” (LexisNexis, 2021).
Recent cases
Inquest touching death of EL (2025): Instructed by leading boat building Company which builds pleasure and sporting boats respond to a ‘Prevention of Future Death Report’ following the death of a young woman who had been a passenger on the Seadogz rib experience ride which collided with a buoy in Southampton Water.
Inquest touching the death of J & S (2024): Represented HMCG in an inquest following the deaths of two children at Bournemouth Pier. Assisted the Coroner in understanding the interplay between the Marine Accident Investigation Branch (‘MAIB’) and The Merchant Shipping (Accident Reporting and Investigation) 2012 as the inquest was required to consider whether the actions of a pleasure vessel may have caused/contributed to the deaths thereby leading to the deaths being notifiable under s.7(2)(c) of the Coroner and Justice Act 2009.
Inquest touching deaths of M, J & P (2023): Representing HM Coastguard Agency in three joint inquests following drownings that occurred during the relaxation of COVID pandemic lockdown. PFD concerns raised on the management of beach safety prior to the inquest.
Inquest touching the deaths of YMG & PLF (2021): Represented HMCG in 10 day Judge led inquest which inquired into the drowning of two fisherman following the sinking of the French fishing vessel, the Bugaled Breizh in January 2004. The inquest considered the structural safety of the vessel, adequacy of training and equipment, the possible causes of the sinking including the involvement of another vessel or submarine and the adequacy of the search and rescue of the fishermen.
R v. SG (2020): Represented a Maritime Operations Officer (‘MOO’) for their involvement in a search and rescue operation following a person in the water at New Brighton who subsequently died. Although police investigation into gross negligence manslaughter allegations against MOO, early involvement in case led to client not being arrested or charged.
MCA v. SYA Ltd & RA and MCA v. KD (2020): Represented MCA in two cases for sailing a yacht without having in force a valid small code certificate for the vessel. Technical issues raised relating to the applicability ‘Blue Code’ and MGN 280.
R v. DW & LB Ltd (2019): Representing the MCA in a double collision on the River Thames causing damage in excess of half a million pounds.
R v. DR (2019): Representing the MCA following a collision of a high speed tour boat with a buoy on the River Thames causing injury to passengers.
Inquest touching the death of NW (2018): Represented HM Coastguard Service for the MCA following a death at sea in which article 2 issues were raised following a complaint by SECAMB.
R v. F & Others (2016)
Represented the owners of a Fishing Company on a high profile three handed fisheries matter in the Falkland Islands for breaches of ss. 167 and 168 of the Fisheries (Conservation and Management) Ordinance 2005 and Regulation 61 of the Fishing Regulations Order 1987 for failing to report £184,038 of hake. Avoided a conviction of the s.168 offence which would have lead to the forfeiture of the owner’s vessel, which has been valued at £1.5million.
MCA v. Michael Stimson (2015)
Successfully prosecuted a fisherman on behalf of the MCA for harvesting shellfish from a prohibited area of Southampton Waters contrary to Regulation 19(1) of the Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013, failing to display navigation lights at night pursuant to the rule 23 of the COLREGs, displaying the Port of Registry and Fishing Numbers on his vessel despite his vessel being unregistered for a period of 2 years, contrary to s.15(3) and (5) of The Merchant Shipping Act 1995.
MMO v. Westminster Dredging Company Ltd (2015)
Represented a multi national Company for breaching s.65 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 in that it deposited dredging material in an area outside the area designated within the licence at HMNB Devonport on 31 occasions.
MCA v. Geradus Chapel (2014)
Instructed to advise the Master of a dredger for offences under the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 following a collision that led to a fatality.
MCA v. Richard Pease (2014)
Successfully prosecuted a hovercraft driver who was almost 3 x over the legal limit in alcohol whilst under passage between Southsea, Hampshire & Ryde, Isle of Wight under the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003.
MCA v. NJ (2014)
Successfully defended the driver of a rib for breaches of The Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collisions) Regulations 1996, following a collision on the Cardiff Bay.
MCA v. The Beauchamp Lodge Settlement (2014)
Prosecuted on behalf of the MCA a charity company which had failed to operate a passenger vessel with a valid passenger certificate as required under The Merchant Shipping (Survey and Certification) Regulations 1995.
MMO v. Saltire Seafoods Ltd (2013)
Represented a Fishing Company for dredging £12,500 worth of undersized scallops, a regulatory offence pursuant to The Scallop Fishing (England) Order 2012 and The Sea Fish (Conservation) Act 1967.
MCA v. Generic Enterprises Ltd (2012)
Represented Owners of a Spanish Vessel for breaches under the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 and Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1997 for Merchant Shipping and Fishing Vessels.
MCA v. Captain Koningstein (2012)
Represented the Master of a vessel who was involved in a collision with another vessel on the Thames Barrier for offences contrary to The Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collisions) Regulations 1996.
Sunyana Sharma has appeared for both the prosecution and defence in a number of health and safety cases in various tribunals and courts. She was previously appointed to the C list of Specialist Regulatory Advocates for The Health & Safety Executive, Environment Agency and Office of Rail Regulation.
Between 2017 and 2018, Sunyana was contracted to work as In House Counsel for National Grid PLC in Health, Safety and Environment. She was therefore exposed to various health, safety and environmental issues in the Electricity and Gas Industry. Her work extends to representing both local authorities as well as Companies and individuals. She has expertise in the following:
Recent cases
NNFS v. R Ltd & N (2025): Representing a residential care home and its Director for inadequate fire safety measures including failing to implement the recommendations of a fire risk assessment, failing to ensure that the premises were equipped with fire detectors and alarms, failing to maintain effective means of escape, failing to implement an evacuation plan for the premises, adequately train staff in respect of emergency or evacuation procedures and carry adequate fire safety drills.
HSE v. S Ltd (2025): Instructed to represent construction Company following the fall of an employee into a lightwell where the balustrade railings had been removed before works were carried out. Serious injuries sustained including multiple fractures and a traumatic brain injury.
HSE v. N Ltd (2025): Instructed to represented a roofing company following fall of a self employed contractor through a sky light onto a suspended roof where concerns raised about lack of training and failure to use personal protective equipment including a harness arrest fall system.
HSE v. S Ltd (2024): Represented Company that manufactured timber doors and windows following an accident at work in which employee’s finger tips were amputated when using a vertical spindle moulder when rebating lengths of wood. Prosecuted for failing to provide up to date training and provide a false fence.
HSE v. EBM (2023): Instructed to represent a managing agent following asbestos exposure at a residential block of flats.
Inquest touching death of TR (2022): Represented care home following death of young man with Dystrophia myotonica where alleged care home failed to mitigate against the risk of falls ultimately leading to death.
CQC v. P (2021): Represented a care home and its owner following the tragic death of resident who fell from an external staircase that should not have been accessible. Following written response to CQC, no charges brought under Regulation 12(1) and 22 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
HSE v. L (2021): represented Company for offence under regulation 4(1) of the Work at Heights Regulations 2005 following fall from height during a barn conversion project leading to life changing injuries.
R v. SG (2020): Represented a Maritime Operations Officer (‘MOO’) for their involvement in a search and rescue operation following a person in the water at New Brighton who subsequently died. Although police investigation into gross negligence manslaughter allegations against MOO, early involvement in case led to client not being arrested or charged.
WAL & LY v. LB of Camden (2020): Acted for Appellants in an appeal against final notices to impose civil penalties for failing to license and HMO.
National Grid PLC and National Grid Gas PLC (‘NGG’) (2017 to 2018):
Inquest touching the death of RS (2016): Represented an employee as an interested party at a three day jury inquest into the death of a colleague whilst at work following a fall through a Perspex roof on his employer’s premises.
Buckinghamshire County Council v. B Ltd & PD (2015): Represented a Company and its Director for producing and supplying an ‘unsafe product’ known as the ‘Nutkins cot bed’, attempting to pervert the course of justice and breaches of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. This was a high profile case which featured on the BBC’s ‘The One Show’ due to the near death of a child.
London Borough of Islington v. C Carnavale Ltd & Others (2015): Drafted in at the last hour to represent a Company in a complex application to dismiss for offences pursuant to regulation 4 of the General Food Regulations 2004 as enabled by the Food Safety Act 1990 relating to the traceability requirement and an offence contrary to the regulation 19(1) and 19(2) of the Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013 in respect of the processing of raw cow’s milk.
R v. SJ Norman (2015): Represented the Crown in prosecuting a slaughter house for failing to take a stem cell sample from a bovine contrary to regulation 5(a) and paragraph 8(1) of Schedule 2, Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies (England) Regulations 2010.
Ealing Borough Council v. MMC Ltd (2014): Instructed in advising a Company and its management on a local authority prosecution in relation to hygiene offences and emergency prohibition order breaches under the Food Safety Act 1990 of its restaurant.
South Weald Inns Ltd v. Brentwood Borough Council (2012): Represented South Weald Inns Ltd in an appeal of a noise abatement notice pursuant to the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
Health and Safety Executive v. MB Facilities Ltd (2012): Represented the Defendant Company for breaches of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Work at Height Regulations 2005 arising from the fall of an employee whilst working at height.
Slough Borough Council v. Bellforce Developments Ltd, Gurpartap Singh Bhullar, and Jagdeep Singh Bhullar (2012): Successfully prosecuted 3 Defendants in a 9 day appeal to the Crown Court for a local authority for breaches of s.234 and s.72 of the Housing Act 2004.
South Oxfordshire District Council v. Doris Davey (2011): Successfully prosecuted a 78 year old Defendant for 11 out of 18 offences for breach of a noise abatement notice under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
Sunyana Sharma’s experience in inquest work covers medical negligence cases, deaths at sea, fatal accidents at work and deaths in care home settings and suicides of community and voluntary and involuntary patients. .
She is well equipped to deal with a full range of inquest work as noted by her expertise in areas of professional disciplinary law, maritime law and health and safety work.
In November 2021, Sunyana was appointed as an Assistant Coroner for Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton and now combines this part-time role with her busy inquests’ caseload.
She provides added value to inquests as a result of her previous practice area of personal injury in which she conducted clinical negligence claims, work related illnesses and accidents and police misconduct claims.
Notable Cases
Alice de Coverley and Sunyana Sharma examine the decision of the Care Standards Tribunal in Mrs EI v Suffolk Childcare Agency [2024] UKFTT 00429 (HESC) in the first known case regarding the appeal of a suspension decision by a childminder agency, other than Ofsted.
Alice de Coverley, instructed by DAC Beachcroft, represented the Respondent, and Sunyana Sharma, also from 3PB, represented the Appellant, instructed by Stephensons.
Sunyana Sharma considers the Court of Appeal's decision in Disclosure and Barring Service (‘DBS’) v. RI [2024] EWCA Civ 95, which confirms the Upper Tribunal's entitlement to decide that an appellant's denial of wrongdoing was credible and constituted a mistake of fact.
Sunyana Sharma considers the High Court's decision in Sudheer Shabir v. General Medical Council [2023] EWNH 1772 (Admin), a useful reminder of the core principles that will be applied in professional disciplinary misconduct hearings and/or at the appeal stage.
Sunyana Shama looks at the case of Zuber Bux v. General Medical Council [2021] EWHC 762 (Admin) in which the opportunity is given to revisit the key duties and obligations inherent in good expert witnesses.
Sunyana Shama examines the case of Raied Haris v GMC [2021] EWCA Civ 763 in which a doctor is found to have undertaken nonclinical intimate examinations on patients without their informed consent.
Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care v Health and Care Professions Council, Roberts [2020] EWHC 1906 (Admin)
Specialist regulatory law barrister Sunyana Sharma reviews the case of Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care v Health and Care Professions Council, Roberts [2020] EWHC 1906 (Admin). Th case concerned a member of staff that had used racist language.
Beckwith v. Solicitors Regulation Authority [2020] EWHC 3231 (Admin)
Sunyana Sharma, a regulatory and criminal law barrister reviews the case of Beckwith v. Solicitors Regulation Authority [2020] EWHC 3231 (Admin). In this case, the High Court concludes that Regulator overstepped the mark into Solicitor’s private life.
Sunyana Sharma reviews the impact of the case of Maughan in the Coroner's Court.
Counsel magazine featured an article from 3PB’s specialist crime and regulatory barrister Sunyana Sharma, alongside Anjali Gohil of Guildhall Chambers, about the lack of ethnic diversity on the Western Circuit.
3PB’s specialist crime and regulatory barrister Sunyana Sharma was featured in the September 2020 issue of Counsel magazine describing her own experiences becoming a barrister as part of the Black Lives Matter campaign. In this article Sunyana describes her own experience and struggles in becoming a barrister as a young Asian female.
Sunyana Sharma of 3PB Barristers is a well-known name across the South and South West regions for her representation of healthcare units, families, police constabularies and the Maritime Coastguard Agency. She has ample experience advising on Article 2 issues, jury inquests, clinical negligence deaths and deaths in the workplace. She has additional expertise in dealing with deaths at sea, a specialist area of law. Sharma sits as an assistant coroner for Hampshire, Southampton and Portsmouth.
Strengths: "Sunyana Sharma is an excellent advocate, is very good with clients and provides a high-level service."
"Sunyana is an experienced inquest barrister. She's great with clients and instructing solicitors, and adept at dealing with complex and sensitive matters."
"Sunyana is very personable and friendly, with great client care skills. Her advocacy style is very relaxed and positive, which is ideal for inquests."
"Sunyana is able to communicate in layman's terms, so family members can be fully reassured. She really pleasant and thorough. I understand why she's so popular!"
Chambers UK 2025/Inquests and Public Inquiries/The Regions
Sunyana Sharma of 3PB Barristers maintains a strong practice in professional disciplinary regulation following secondments at the Nursing and Midwifery Council and the General Chiropractic Council. She regularly appears before healthcare tribunals acting for a range of healthcare professionals.
Strengths: "She's really good at getting to grips with the nuances of cases and asking the right questions of the client. She matches her advice and approach to cases to the client."
"Clients often appreciate her caring and empathetic nature. Her written work is to a high standard and she has excellent advocacy skills that often achieve great results."
"Sunyana has excellent communication, attention to detail and client care skills."
Chambers UK 2025/Professional Discipline/London Bar
‘Sunyana has an excellent knowledge of professional disciplinary law. Her experience and knowledge mean that she is able to quickly identify the pertinent issues in any case and has a keen eye for the finer detail.'
Legal 500 2025/Professional Discipline and Regulatory Law/Leading Juniors/London Bar
Sunyana Sharma is ranked in the Legal 500 2025/Inquests and Inquiries/Leading Juniors/London Bar
Sunyana Sharma is ranked in the Legal 500 2024/Professional Discipline and Regulatory Law/Leading Juniors/London Bar
Sunyana Sharma is ranked in the Legal 500 2024/Inquests and Inquiries/Leading Juniors/London Bar
[Sunyana Sharma is] ‘Able to assimilate large volumes of information quickly and focus on the key issues, with questioning that is succinct but focused – a highly competent barrister.’
Legal 500 2023/Inquests and Inquiries/Leading Juniors/London Bar
‘Strengths include a wealth of knowledge, strategic acumen and impeccable client care. In addition to being incredibly talented, Sunyana is also efficient, approachable, and always easy to reach and happy to advise. Instructing solicitors cannot rate the service provided by Sunyana highly enough.’
Legal 500 2022/Inquests and Inquiries/Leading Juniors/London Bar
'She understands both sides of nursing and midwifery cases.'
Legal 500 2016/Professional Discipline and Regulatory Law (including police law)/Leading Juniors
“Sunyana has conducted numerous prosecutions for us as a regulator over several years. Sunyana is a diligent hard-working barrister who provides clear advice with absolute clarity on a consistent basis.
A barrister who always appears to be pro-active, on the front foot and seemingly always one step ahead of the game. Sunyana serves us as a client timely and measured response in all instructions and is keen to work with us the regulator at an early stage in all matters.
In the court room is where you see the real deal with Sunyana, strong and robust advocacy, fast thinking and good on her feet, clearly respected by the bench and peers alike and consistently builds strong working relationships with all parties in every case we have worked on together.
In all Sunyana is hugely knowledgeable, highly effective whilst still being a delightful person to work with.”
Head of UK Maritime Investigations Team, Maritime & Coastguard Agency
“I just wanted to say a big thank you for your hard work on our recent case. Considering you only received the papers at very late notice, your knowledge and understanding of the case was outstanding. I was so impressed by your meticulous preparation and would have no hesitation in instructing you again or recommending you to any of my colleagues. Thank you again”.
Partner, Law firm
"Hardworking, intelligent, very approachable and a pleasure to work with. She is always available to speak to and bounce ideas off and is very good both at advising clients and managing their expectations".
Senior Associate, Law firm
3PB’s regulatory and inquest barrister Sunyana Sharma and Emma Cross, Chair of the Western Circuit Women’s Forum (‘WCWF’) feature in Counsel magazine’s March 2025 edition. In this article Sunyana discusses a judicial careers event organised by WCWF aimed at encouraging diversity within the judiciary. The article highlights the importance of initiatives that increase diversity and representation in the legal profession, particularly among women and underrepresented groups. It also mentions BarNone, a program designed to encourage...
Continue reading3PB congratulates its Public and Regulatory Law team for earning 3 new rankings in this year’s Chambers and Partners edition. To its existing 2 accolades for Administrative and Public Law, the team has added 2 rankings for Professional Discipline and one ranking for Inquests and Public Inquiries. Head of Group Mathew Gullick KC commented: “This significant gain in Chambers and Partners’ latest publication reflects both new and existing members of our national set of chambers,...
Continue reading3PB Barristers’ (3 Paper Buildings) Sunyana Sharma, represents His Majesty’s Coastguard (‘HMCG’) in a 2-week inquest following the tragic deaths of Joseph Abbess and Sunnah Khan who drowned whilst swimming between the red and yellow flags at Bournemouth beach on 31 May 2023 following a flash rip current. The coroner considered the risk assessments carried out by the Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole Borough Council (‘BCP’) and the RNLI prior to the accident, the cause and...
Continue reading3PB is delighted to announce 10 individual rankings for its Public and Regulatory law group across 4 Circuits (London, Midlands, Western and South Eastern). While the group sees 4 rankings confirmed for its Professional Discipline specialists in London and Western, its Inquests experts have retained 2 rankings. The Group’s Court of Protection barristers celebrate 2 new rankings in London, retaining 2 previous accolades in Midlands and South Eastern. This result, and the team’s commitment to...
Continue reading
