Webb v Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary: An Overview
5th March 2018
Criminal barrister Graham Gilbert provides an analysis of Webb v Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary and examines the attempt to define what “person for the time being in charge of the dog” may mean, in the context of a dog's Conditional Destruction Order (CDO).
To view Graham's analysis, click here.
Graham Gilbert's profile can be viewed here.
Related News
-
3PB Barristers (3 Paper Buildings) have been awarded a record number of individual rankings in the 2026 edition of Chambers and Partners, reaching a total of 104 (96 last year) achieved by 86 of its barristers. The national set has doubled its number of individual rankings in 5 years (52 in 2021) and is rewarded with accolades in 22 areas of law across the London Bar as well as in the North Eastern, South Eastern,...
Continue reading -
3PB's crime and regulatory barrister Nicholas Cotter has successfully appealed the imposition of a 30-year minimum term for murder, which had been witnessed by a very young child. The case involved the use of knife resulting in a brutal killing on a public street. The full court were persuaded that whilst this was a significant case of its type the enhancement of the minimum term due to the presence of the child was excessive. The...
Continue reading -
3PB is delighted to confirm that its Crime and Regulatory Crime team remains top tier ranked in the latest Legal 500 edition for Crime (General and Fraud) in the Western Circuit with a total of 13 rankings. The crime group retains its tier 2 ranking for Business and Regulatory Crime (incl. Health and Safety) in Western. Crime clients regard 3PB as ‘a massive set with a solid stable of highly competent, persuasive and talented advocates...
Continue reading -
3PB criminal barrister Ben Thompson has successfully acted for the Crown in a serious affray involving multiple child victims. Ben prosecuted a man in his 40s who confronted nine children in a public park, brandishing a knife and threatening to “cut their hearts out.” The defendant denied having a knife, claiming instead that he was holding a vape, but the jury rejected his account after a four-day trial in Southampton. The defendant was unanimously convicted...
Continue reading
