Harrie Austin-Jones

Harrie undertakes outreach on behalf of Chambers and other organisations aimed at widening participation at the Bar. During his pupillage he was instructed pro-bono as part of his continual community engagement. 

Harrie Is a part of the Criminal Bar Association’s Equality and Diversity Committee.

Prior to the Bar, Harrie ran a construction company for seven years involved in civil engineering and contracting. He was successful in forming lasting relationships with commercial clients including government and large multinationals. Harrie is well versed in both the operational and management aspects of small-to-medium firms.

Harrie completed a successful academic career. During this time, he volunteered for several charities as a legal advisor and researcher.

Research included producing an opinion for appeal on a murder conviction and advising on the process for victims of domestic violence in the family courts.

Defence

R v C (Guildford Crown Court): Instructed to represent a client charged with intentional strangulation and assault in a domestic setting. After a 5-day trial the Defendant was unanimously acquitted on all charges.

R v A (The Old Bailey): Represented a serving prisoner who had assaulted a prison guard. After 2 days of the Crown’s case, Harrie made a submission of no case to answer given the quality of the Complainant’s evidence. The submission was successful, and the Defendant was formally acquitted. 

 R v H (St Albans Crown Court): Represented a defendant charged with actual bodily harm and threatening with a bladed article. There were two witnesses present and video evidence. After a four-day trial, the Defendant was unanimously acquitted of all charges.

R v J (Croydon Crown Court): The Defendant appeared for the first day of trial on a robbery matter. After legal argument over two days about whether the Crown could offer no evidence, the Defendant was formally acquitted. 

R v B (Isleworth Crown Court): Represented a Defendant who was charged with actual bodily harm, common assault and criminal damage. After a 5-day trial which involved video evidence from the Crown and an independent witness, the Defendant was acquitted of all but common assault. She received a discharge. 

R v C (Ipswich Crown Court): The Defendant was charged with possession with intent to supply cocaine. They were the only owner of the keys for the box where the cocaine was kept. The Defendant pleaded on the day of trial to possession of cocaine and received a small fine. 

R v A (City of London Magistrates’ Court): Client acquitted after a successful section 78 application and submission of no case to answer in an identity case. The Crown had provided high-definition video which showed the Defendant. He was alleged to have burgled £10,000 of items from a shopping centre but their flawed identification procedure was excluded. 

R v O (Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court): The Defendant was acquitted following a two-day magistrates’ court trial. The Defendant was alleged to have assaulted a bus driver and verbally abused him. 

R v Y (Luton Magistrates’ Court): A privately paying client was acquitted following a submission of no case to answer during a driving case. He was alleged to have driven under the influence of alcohol. However, procedural failings in the case led to a successful submission of no case to answer. 

R v M (Ealing Magistrates’ Court): A defendant was identified by two officers in a theft case. He had extensive bad character. A successful abuse of process application was made in relation to the disclosure failings of the Crown. The Defendant was acquitted.

Prosecution

R v G (Guildford Crown Court): Prosecuting a defendant charged with actual bodily harm. Case involved a 5-day trial where there were accusations of “doctored” footage and witness complexities.

R v B (Southwark Crown Court): The case was an intentional strangulation involving issues off PII which fell to be considered. Trial lasted 6 days with numerous applications. 

R v D, B & T (Southwark Crown Court): The Defendants were prosecuted for theft of high value items. 

R v H (Isleworth Crown Court): The Defendant pleaded to three cases across multiple indictments to various offences of violence, harassment and communications offences. The complexity required a whole day sentencing exercise. 

R v B (The Old Bailey): Prosecuting a defendant charged with attempted GBH. After two days of trial the Defendant absconded. Upon arrest, he returned to court and pleas were entered. 

R v S (Inner London Crown Court): Prosecuting an individual charged with domestic harassment and violence offences. 

Regulatory 

NMC v C: Presented in a case where the Defendant had forcefully administered medication. Submissions and evidence lasted for 7-days.

NMC v B: Presented for the NMC in a 7-day case where the Defendant had been accused of dishonesty and sexual acts with a vulnerable patient. 

NMC v R: Presented for a 5-day case involving allegations of physical violence against a patient. 

• CPS External Advocates Panel – Grade 2
• Nursing and Midwifery Council – Authorised Case Presenter
• Youth Court – registered advocate; YJLC trained 
• Vulnerable Witness Trained

• Inns of Court College of Advocacy (BTC) (2021-2022)
• Bachelor of Civil Law (BCL), University of Oxford (2020-2021)
• Law (LLB Hons), The Open University (2017-2020)
• Politics with Economics (BA Hons), Loughborough University (2009-2012)

• The Mould Senior Scholarship - Gray’s Inn
• Ann Goddard Scholarship - Gray’s Inn
• Shakespeare Memorial Scholarship – Gray’s Inn
• Hebe Plunkett Award – Gray’s Inn
• Top student Award (Class Rank: 1) – The Open University
• Top Student Public and Criminal Law – The Open University
• Winner, Gary Slapper Memorial Moot
• Runner-up, ICCA/OUP Moot

• The Honourable Society of Gray’s Inn
• Criminal Bar Association
• Young Fraud Lawyers Association