Barrister banner

Christopher Jenkins

Christopher joined chambers in October 2018 following the successful completion of pupillage. He has cultivated a broad and busy practice prosecuting and defending in serious criminal matters before the Magistrates’ Court, the Youth Court and the Crown Court.

Christopher is frequently instructed to represent individuals facing serious criminal allegations, ranging from offences of violence and dishonesty to drug and sexual offences. Clients appreciate his calm and reassuring manner both in conference and in court, as well as his ability to sensitively guide them through the criminal justice system while achieving impressive results.

He has received particular praise for his handling of young and vulnerable individuals and, as such, he is often instructed to represent those with vulnerabilities in both Youth Court and Crown Court proceedings. Christopher also has experience representing young people charged with serious offences who have themselves been the victim of exploitation.

He prosecutes in the Magistrates’ Court and Crown Court on behalf of a variety of prosecuting authorities. He is a member of the CPS General Crime Advocates’ Panel at Grade 2, and is frequently instructed to prosecute trials, appeals against conviction and appeals against sentence in the Crown Court.  He also prosecutes on behalf of private organisations, including Royal Mail and the Federation Against Copyright Theft, and has extensive experience prosecuting on behalf of local authorities, with his practice encompassing everything from benefit fraud to breaches of building regulations.

Courts-Martial

Christopher enjoys a busy practice defending members of Her Majesty’s Armed Forces in proceedings before the Court Martial. Christopher has experience defending in a range of matters, including offences involving serious violence and the supply of drugs.

Road Traffic

Christopher represents individuals charged with a variety of road traffic offences, from allegations of drink-driving to incidents where a fatality has occurred. Christopher also regularly appears before the Magistrates’ Court to advance special reasons and exceptional hardship arguments, in respect of which he enjoys an impressive success rate.

Regulatory

Christopher has a growing regulatory practice, and has experience acting for appellants in proceedings against a range of licensing authorities, including Transport for London, local authorities, and the Security Industry Authority.

Notable cases

Defence

R v L (Kingston Crown Court): Christopher represented a client charged with the production of Class B drugs. The client was living in a house that had been specifically converted into a factory used to produce commercial quantities of cannabis. The operation was valued at approximately £500,000. The client was unanimously acquitted after trial.

R v J (Woolwich Crown Court): Christopher represented a client accused of committing a sustained fraud against the Department of Work and Pensions. The client was unanimously acquitted after trial.

R v N (Inner London Crown Court): Christopher represented a client accused of ABH. The attack was allegedly witnessed by both the complainant and an independent eyewitness. Through careful and considered cross-examination, Christopher succeeded in undermining the accounts of both the complainant and the eyewitness, and the client was acquitted after trial.

R v S (Bromley Youth Court): Christopher represented a young person facing multiple charges of supplying Class A drugs. Christopher successfully advanced the defence under s.45 Modern Slavery Act 2015, and the client was acquitted of all charges after trial.

R v L (Uxbridge Youth Court): Christopher secured the acquittal of a young person facing two charges of assault. The case concerned an allegation that the client had attacked one of her classmates with a glass bottle at a house party, before assaulting the complainant’s boyfriend. The trial involved the handling of seven young witnesses and a variety of special measures. The client was acquitted of both charges after two days of evidence.

R v W (Uxbridge Youth Court): Christopher represented a young person accused of a knife-point robbery of another child.

R v B (Inner London Crown Court): Christopher represented a client at a sentencing hearing, following guilty pleas to offences of affray, assault and criminal damage. The client had forced entry into his ex-partner’s house before launching a sustained assault on her and her new partner, during which he equipped himself with a kitchen knife. Christopher successfully mitigated on behalf of the client, and, following detailed submissions on the client’s previously undiagnosed mental health conditions, the sentencing judge imposed a community order, a penalty well below the starting point set out in the Sentencing Guidelines.

R v A (Ipswich Crown Court): Christopher represented a client at a sentencing hearing, following the client’s guilty pleas to possessing ketamine with intent to supply, careless driving and drug-driving. The client had been stopped by police and had been found with quarter of a kilogram of ketamine in his car, and a subsequent blood test revealed that the level of ketamine in his blood was 17 times the legal limit. Christopher successfully persuaded the sentencing judge to impose a suspended sentence.

Court Martial

R v R (Catterick Court Martial): Christopher represented a client charged with two offences of supplying Class A drugs. The Sentencing Guidelines for such offences prescribe dismissal and imprisonment in all but the most exceptional of circumstances.  Following comprehensive and detailed mitigation, Christopher successfully persuaded the Board not to dismiss his client, and to impose a short period of detention at MCTC instead of imprisonment. 

R v S and others (Catterick Court Martial): Christopher represented one of six defendants charged with 10 disciplinary offences arising from what was said to be a systematic campaign of bullying against a junior soldier.

R v M (Catterick Court Martial): Christopher represented a client charged with ABH. The incident was committed under the influence of alcohol and involved a sustained attack resulting in substantial injuries; in the event of conviction, a sentence of imprisonment would have been almost inevitable. Christopher successfully negotiated a plea to a lesser disciplinary offence, which ensured that the client did not receive a criminal record and, following successful mitigation, Christopher persuaded the Board to impose a financial penalty.

Regulatory

F v Transport for London (City of London Magistrates’ Court): Christopher represented a client in appellate proceedings against TfL concerning the interim suspension of the client’s private hire vehicle licence. TfL were persuaded not to resist the appeal after written representations were made highlighting the fact that TfL did not have any statutory power to impose an interim suspension, and that such a sanction was therefore unlawful.  

I v Security Industry Authority (Poole Magistrates’ Court): Christopher represented a client in an appeal against the suspension of his licence following an allegation of rape made during the course of the client’s employment.

Prosecution

R v A (Croydon Crown Court): Christopher prosecuted an individual charged with a commercial burglary. The defendant was unanimously convicted by the jury after trial.

London Borough of Haringey v M (Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court): Christopher prosecuted an individual accused of benefit fraud. The fraud had been sustained over a period of 18 months and resulted in a loss of over £37,000. The defendant was convicted and committed to the Central Criminal Court for sentence, where a substantial custodial sentence was imposed.

Fenland District Council v H and CL (Peterborough Magistrates’ Court): Christopher prosecuted a company and its director for a string of commercial-scale fly-tipping offences committed over a 12-month period. Both defendants were convicted after trial, and the defendants were ordered to pay over £24,000 in fines, compensation and costs.

Royal Mail v A (Kingston Crown Court): Christopher prosecuted a defendant who had stolen nearly £50,000’s-worth of packages during the course of his employment as a postman.

Appointments and Memberships
  • CPS Advocates’ Panel: Grade 2
  • Government Legal Department’s ‘Junior Junior’ Scheme
  • Young Fraud Lawyers’ Association
  • South-Eastern Circuit
  • Bar Pro Bono Unit
Education / Professional

Education

2016: Bar Professional Training Course, City Law School

2015: BA (Hons) Jurisprudence, Keble College, University of Oxford

Scholarships and Awards

2016: Inner Temple Princess Royal Scholarship

2015: Academic Scholar of Keble College, University of Oxford

2015: University of Oxford 7KBW Mooting Prize for Outstanding Advocacy

Other Interests

Outside of court, Christopher is a keen footballer, having played competitively for 15 years. Christopher also holds a black-belt in jiu-jitsu.