All Barristers

James Horne

Year called:


James is in demand as one of the leading juniors on circuit for his vast experience in serious fraud and regulatory work, offering a true cradle to grave service.

James has considerable experience defending all categories of fraud (carousel, boiler room, MTIC work) and often undertakes work well before charge to advise at the pre-interview stage.

James has extensive experience of both defendant and prosecuting crime at the highest levels of seriousness for 14-years.


R v AL – Bribery & Corruption (£18m) – Southwark Crown Court – AIG D&O Police Funded – SFO prosecution – First prosecution of human defendants alongside a successfully brokered Deferred Prosecution Agreement with a corporate – has incorporated abuse of process (provenance/delegation), complex section 8/disclosure arguments, successful Judicial Review proceedings re: Legal Professional Privilege (reported as R v. XYZ), and will culminate in a 3-month trial.

R v. IW – Fraud (£1m) – Birmingham Crown Court – CCU prosecution in combination with NHS Protect – Prosecution of senior and eminent GP for misdirecting internal funds – achieved a suspended sentence by virtue of securing an agreed basis of plea that allowed me to (i) mitigate on the unusual basis that the fraud was altruistic, and (ii) call evidence in the form of a number of beneficiaries of D’s groundbreaking mental health work.

R v. GB / PB – VAT Fraud (£1.5m) – Northampton Crown Court – Private – HMRC prosecution – Prosecution of father and son business for evading VAT – seeking to reduce VAT liability from £1.58m to £348k with the assistance of forensic accountants.

R v. CM – Fraud (£50m +) – Cardiff Crown Court – VHCC CCU prosecution – Prosecution arising from alleged fraud against Welsh Assembly for misuse of improperly obtained grant funding on huge scale.

Serious Crime Work

R v. PK – Firearms (in the context of a conspiracy to murder) – Teeside Crown Court – CCU prosecution – Multi-handed prosecution of individual said to have test fired gun used in a conspiracy to murder – prosecuted by and co-defended with 5 silks – acted as junior alone – acquitted after 8-week trial.

R v. JW – Rape – Derby Crown Court – Prosecution of individual alleged to have raped 4x sisters over a 40-year period – trial involved extensive cross-examination of vulnerable witnesses, complicated bad character issues, and autrefois convict/acquit arguments (that were successful in staying a number of counts) – 3-week trial.

R v. SS – Murder – Nottingham Crown Court – Involved in two trials by virtue of successfully appealing and quashing the first conviction on grounds of fresh evidence – 6-week trial (x2).

R v. PS – Death by Dangerous – Sheffield Crown Court – Successful in staying the prosecution case after lengthy cross-examination and analysis of deficiencies of available expert evidence (collision reconstruction).

R v. IA – Gross Negligence Manslaughter – Nottingham Crown Court – Prosecution of registrar and nurses arising from the death of Jack Adcock from sepsis following deficient treatment/care – Hadiza Bawa-Garba was the leading co-defendant (a high-profile case which has led to High Court considerations re: fitness to practice).

Operations: Duchess/Stalingrad/Feast/Zephyr/Emerald – Derby/Nottingham Crown Court – Instructed by EMCCU – Multi-handed prosecutions of large numbers of OCGs (up to 15-handed) – £1,000,000+ importations of heroin/cocaine – culminating in lengthy trials.

Regulatory Work

Have experience, particularly over the past 3-years (in the context of private practice), of dealing with a number of different types of regulatory work.

R v. RH – Contraventions of Health & Safety Legislation and Construction Regulations – Sheffield Crown Court – HSE prosecution – prosecuted by a silk – Prosecution of individuals following the collapse of a building in Sheffield whilst up to 10 people were inside it.

R v. JH – Responding to HMRC regulatory investigation (on-going).

R v. SP – Successfully responding to NMC and DBS regulatory investigations (obtaining a favourable outcome in the first and quashing the second).

R v. ST – Successfully responding to an FCA investigation (and quashing it through the suggested use of undertakings)