Leeds +44 (0)113 243 3277 | clerks@newparkcourt.co.uk
Newcastle +44 (0)191 232 1980 | clerks@newparkcourt.co.uk
Scroll down for additional content.

Welcome to

New Park Court Chambers

"Regarded as ‘one of the most prominent sets for crime in the North of England’."
- Legal 500 2015

Private Client

"Clients 'would strongly recommend New Park Court Chambers to anyone looking for a strong criminal or regulatory lawyer'."
- Chambers and Partners 2016

Stephen Uttley 1984

Called 1984 – Inner Temple – BA (Hons) (Manchester)

Stephen was called to the bar in 1984 and specialises in crime and regulatory law. Stephen defends exclusively in serious crime. Stephen will fight unfalteringly on behalf of his clients and has a reputation for having a forcible court presence. Stephen has an exhaustive list of cases of importance and is often instructed as a leading junior and as junior alone in complex criminal cases. In regulatory matters, Stephen often received nominations in Health and Safety cases. He deals with a wide range of complicated HSE case including cases involving fatal accidents. Stephen also has experience in fraud-related offending and has prosecuted on behalf of BERR. In addition he appears in the Court of Appeal in relation to potentially unsafe convictions and sentences that could be regarded as manifestly excessive.

Recent cases of importance

Criminal Cases

R-v-A 2015 [Defence]. Successful defence of a man charged with robbery and possession of a firearm said to have been used during the robbery. West Yorkshire Police had investigated the case over a two-year period. The case involved issues relating to recognition and telephone evidence.

R-v-L 2015 [Defence]. Trial lasted for 5 days. It related related to offences of false imprisonment and robbery. The case involved potentially, a number of aggravating features that would have been applicable in applying the principles as laid down in the Attorney-General’s Reference No 92 of 2014 [2014] EWCA Crime 2713 in relation to the detention of the Complainant. The jury unanimously acquitted the Defendant on all matters.

R-v-A 2015 [Defence]. A three-week trial where the Defendant faced allegations of involvement in serious organised vigilante violence and one incident involved the alleged use of multiple firearms. Acquitted on all matters.

R-v-M 2015 [Defence]. Successful defence of a man charged with robbery and possession of a firearm. The case involved a robbery with the use of a firearm in 2013 involving three men, two of which had previously pleaded guilty. The case involved complex legal issues surrounding facial mapping, whether the Police had complied with their legal duties under Code D of The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and the guidance given in R. v. Smith (Dean Martin) [2009] 1 Cr.App.R. 36, CA where the Court recommended the creation of a record where a police officer purports to recognise a person viewed on a CCTV recording.

R-v-I 2015 [Defence]. Trial involving two allegations of Section 18 wounding. Acquitted of both offences.

R-v-J 2015[Defence]. Trial for an offence of a racially aggravated assault. Acquitted.

R-v-Z 2015[Defence]. Prosecution involving investigation into a number of historic sexual offences. In view of issues raised by the Defence with the Prosecution including disclosure matters, the Prosecution did not continue with the case.

R-v-D 2015[Defence]. Trial involving 4 Defendants for offences of violence and public order offences. Acquitted on all matters.

R-v-H 2014[Defence]. Trial involving an offence contrary to Section 2 SOA 2003. Acquitted.

R-v- C 2014 [Defence]. Trial for an offence of Section 18 GBH. Acquitted.

R-v- B 2014[Defence]. Trial for an offence of armed robbery. Acquitted.

R-v- J 2013[Defence]. The case involved a two year investigation by the Police in relation to the management of brothels and the trafficking of women from Europe for the purposes of sexual exploitation. Evidence was relied upon by the Prosecution from overseas. After a two week trial the defendant was acquitted of all offences involving the trafficking of women.

R-v-R 2013 [Defence]. 10 Defendants faced an allegation of conspiracy to supply heroin. Operation Leap was a cross-border Police investigation dealing with the supply of heroin and transportation of large amounts of money in Cambridgeshire, Norfolk, Lincolnshire and West Yorkshire areas. The case involved complex forensic evidence, intrusive surveillance, hi-tech analysis of communication devices and covert recordings. After a six week trial the defendant was the only Defendant to be acquitted on all matters.

R-v- A 2013 [Defence]. Trial involving offences of Section 18 and attempted Section 18. Acquitted on all matters.

R-v- K 2013. [Defence]. The case was part of an 18 month Police investigation into money laundering offences and fraud involving a number of companies. After a two week trial defendant was acquitted.

R-v- K 2012[Defence]. The trial involved offences of violence and witness intimidation which the Prosecution asserted were committed as a result of a previous murder investigation. Acquitted on all matters.

R-v- L 2012 [Defence]. Case involved offences of Aggravated burglary, robbery and Section 18 offences. Acquitted at both trials

R –v Clarke 2011 [Defence]. Drummer in the band When Giants Collide. Charged with Section 18 Wounding. Dealt with for ABH and received non- custodial sentence.

R v K 2011[Defence]. Two week trial with four other Defendants involving Section 18 wounding, rape, kidnapping and witness intimidation. Acquitted of all matters.

R v S 2011 [Defence].Leading Junior. Two conspiracies involving the importation of Glock Pistols from the USA to the UK. Defendant dealt with for his involvement with one firearm on one occasion.

R v W 2011 [Defence]. Armed Robbery. Wanted at the time of his trial on an international arrest warrant involving Interpol. Acquitted.

R v A 2011 [Defence]. Trial involving two other Defendants including offences of attempted murder, kidnapping and assault. Acquitted of main offence of attempted kidnapping.

R v W 2011 [Defence]. Dangerous driving. Represented his county and country at shot putt.

R v H 2011 [Defence]. Large scale drug conspiracy to supply drugs and the involvement of firearms. Acquitted of firearm offences.

R v D 2010 [Defence]. Large scale police operations involving conspiracies to commit dwelling house burglaries. Subject to two Police operations code named Larkwood and Yankee. Acquitted in Operation Larkwood.

R v K 2010 [Defence].Large scale conspiracy to supply controlled drugs.

R v H 2010 [Defence]. Section 18 case involving the stabbing of her boyfriend. Acquitted.

R v C 2010 [Defence]. Case involving an allegation of rape involving a number of Defendants. Acquitted.

R v J 2010 [Defence]. Historic rape case involving a number of Complainants. Prosecution not proceeded with.

R v C 2010 [Defence]. Child pornography case. Acquitted.

Re S – 2010 [Defence]. Large scale fraud investigated over a 10 year period.

R v S 2010 [Defence]. High profile rape case involving a taxi driver.

R v J & others 2009 [Defence]. Conspiracy to supply drugs, kidnapping and attempted murder in the Teesside andSheffield areas. Acquitted.

R v F and others 2009 [Defence]. High profile case involving a professional rugby league player who was prosecuted with 9 others for conspiring to supply Class A drugs over a six month period in the West Yorkshire and Liverpool areas. Acquitted

R v H 2009 [Defence]. Taxi driver prosecuted for racially aggravated offences. Acquitted.

R v A 2009 [Defence]. Prosecution arising from a feud between alleged rival drug gangs in the Teesside area. Proceedings stayed in view of the conduct of the investigating officers in failing to retain material evidence in the case.

R v P and others 2009 [Defence]. Leading Junior. Complex fraud and money laundering case involving a potential loss to the Cater Allen Private Bank in the region of 24 million pounds.

R v R and others [2009] EWCA Crim 1731 [Defence].Prosecution of 11 Defendants in a multi million pound mortgage fraud. Appeal heard before The Lord Chief Justice ofEngland andWales.

R v J 2008 [Defence]. Prosecution of a nurse for indecently assaulting another nurse. Acquitted.

R v P 2008 [Defence]. Allegations of rape and sexual assault. Acquitted after 3 week trial.

R v Y 2008 [Defence]. Defendant and others were prosecuted for conspiring to supply Class A drugs involving the largest seizure of heroin in the Teesside area.

Attorney Generals Reference 2008 [Richard Smith] [Defence]. Mr Smith was prosecuted for causing death by dangerous driving. The Attorney General was represented by Peter Wright Q.C. The case was referred to the Court on the basis that the sentence should have been 4 years rather than the 14 months imprisonment that had been imposed. Consideration given to the sentencing guidelines as specified in R-v-Cooksley and R-v-Richardson. The referral made on behalf of the Attorney General was refused by the Court.

Shahzad Hussain [2008] EWCA Crim 288 [Defence] Mr. Hussain who was one of the main defendants in a large scale drugs operation that lasted over an 18 month period inHalifax. The case was successful argued on appeal in relation to the sentence that had been imposed in applying the Attorney-General’s References Nos 66-71 of 2006 [2006] EWCA Crim 2777.

R v N 2007 [Defence]. Defendant was the main defendant in a case involving a further 18 defendants. Large scale drugs involving 7.5 million pounds worth of cocaine.

R v A 2007 [Defence] Defendant was prosecuted under the Identity Cards Act 2005. This was the first case that was prosecuted on the Northern Circuit that involved the Counter Terrorism Unit.

R v G 2007 [Defence] Defendant was a Detention Officer at the Leeds Bridewell who was prosecuted for wilful neglect of his duties. Acquitted.

R v B 2007 [Defence] Defendant was charged with murdering his partner who was a nurse. The case was a high profile case which attracted both local and national media attention in the man hunt for the defendant. The case involved complex issues in relation to aggravating features that were applicable in the case.

R v H 2007 [Defence] Defendant was prosecuted for attempted murder and possession of a firearm. The case involved complex issues in relation to cell site analysis.

R v W [2007] 1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 109 [Defence] Leading case for the tariff of sentence to be imposed for an offence contrary to Section 61 of The Sexual Offences Act 2003.

R v W 2006 [Defence]. Defendant was prosecuted for Manslaughter. Case involved issues in relation to the question of liability in relation to the advice given to the deceased when injecting himself with heroin.

R v B 2006 [Defence]. Allegation of rape involving a taxi driver. Acquitted.

R v V and 3 others 2006 [Defence]. Section 18 involving a shopkeeper and others protecting shop premises in theManchester area. Acquitted.

R v A and others 2006 [Defence]. Conspiracy to supply 1.5 million pounds worth of Class A drugs. Acquitted.

R v O 2006 [Defence]. Importation of counterfeit cigarettes. Acquitted.

R v R and others 2005 [Defence]. Three month trial involving diesel fraud and money laundering in excess of 1.5 million. Acquitted.

R v H 2005 [Defence]. Allegation of rape. Acquitted.


R v Edwin Hodge 2009 [Prosecution]. Insolvency case in relation to non-disclosure of assets inUK and abroad. Convicted.

R v Kerry Harrison 2009 [Prosecution]. Insolvency case and non-disclosure of assets. Convicted.

R v Bakish Alla Khan and Others [2008] EWCA Crim 531. [Prosecution of Michael Arshad Khan on behalf of BERR]. Leading case on persons who can sit on a jury. Case before The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales. Applications rejected by the Court in applying the principles as laid down in the House of Lords in Abdroikof. Court ruled that conviction was safe and ruled against the Appellants Grounds of Appeal.

Health and Safety Cases

R-v- Castlelite Limited and Casa Events Limited 2015. [Prosecution]. The Prosecution was as a result of an investigation following an accident where a metal framed timber clad cantilevered balcony structure collapsed from the rear first floor elevation of the residential part of the hotel resulting in serious injury being caused to 5 people who were stood on the balcony when it collapsed. The case attracted local and national media attention.

R-v- PD Teesport Limited 2015[Prosecution]. The Prosecution was as a result of an investigation by HSE following an accident at Hartlepool dock which resulted in a fatality. Although PD Teesport had pleaded guilty, the Prosecution did not accept their Basis of Plea and a four-day Newton Hearing took place at Teesside Crown Court. It was successfully argued that they had failed to provide a means of collective fall arrest during the intermediate phases of the half-stow loading operation and thereafter at a greater height. In addition, that the breach was causative of the worker’s death and that their risk assessment did not consider or follow the work at height hierarchy as laid out in Regulation 6 of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.The Company were fined £400,000. The case attracted local and national media attention.

R-v-Total UK Limited 2015 [Prosecution]. The Prosecution was as a result of an investigation by HSE following an accident at Total Lindsey Oil Refinery Immingham which resulted in an uncontrolled release of crude oil and a fire which resulted in a fatality. The case against Total UK Limited was that they failed to take all measures necessary to prevent a major accident, arising from the task of isolating a steam-out line at blinding point 23/144 beneath Crude Distillation Column 23C-1, which included the failure to undertake a suitable and sufficient process risk assessment and the failure to eliminate the risks associated with crude oil in process, which led to the release of crude oil and a fire which resulted in a fatality. The Company were fined £1.4 million. The case attracted local and national media attention.

R-v-David Lloyd Leisure Limited 2015[Prosecution]. The proceedings related to an incident that took place at their Stockton-On-Tees site. A member of the club was involved in a personal training session outside with the assistance of a personal trainer who worked for the Company. During the training session, resistance bands with handles were being used attached to a nylon Velcro strap with a metal D ring on. Whilst pulling on the nylon strap the D ring gave way and flew back at speed. As a result, his left eye was damaged to such an extent that he lost sight in it and lost part of his vision in his right eye. The Company were fined £40,000 for each offence. It was the first Prosecution relating to this type of equipment and attracted local and national media attention.

R-v-Tyne Slipway and Engineering Co. Ltd 2014. [Prosecution]. The case involved the company failing to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable the health and safety at work of one of their employees who whilst working on the maintenance and repair of a ship’s tunnel thruster was crushed to death. Convicted.

R-v-A and P Tees Ltd 2013. [Prosecution]. The case involved the company failing to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable the health and safety at work of one of their employees who was crushed to death during the ranging of the anchors and chains on a ship. Convicted.

R-v-Tata Steel UK and Vesuvius UK 2013. [Prosecution]. The case against both companies related to a death at BOS Plant Teesside Cast Products Redcar Cleveland in that they failed to discharge the duty imposed on them by Regulation 10(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. Convicted.

R v Tallent Automotive Ltd-Gestamp Automocion (formerly ThyssenKrupp Tallent Ltd) 2011. [Prosecution]. Part of the ThyssenKrupp group of companies with approximately 188,000 employees in more than 80 countries. Prosecution involved a worker who was crushed to death while clearing a jam on a production line. Company fined £100,000.

R v Warter Priory Management Limited 2008 [Prosecution] Fatal accident on a farm. Convicted.

R v Lee Betram T/A Brickwork 2008 [Prosecution]. Serious injury caused during demolition work. Convicted.

R v Bellway Homes Limited and FG Construction Limited 2008 [Prosecution] Serious injury sustained on building site. Both convicted.

Additional Information

Appointed Junior Counsel to the Attorney General’s Panel of Prosecution Advocates List A. 2012.

Bar Pro Bono Unit