Matthew Hill

Public Law

Matthew has acted in a wide range of public law cases, including those involving medical law, inquiries and inquests, national security and human rights.

He appeared in the Court of Protection on behalf of the Home Secretary in a cases concerning the best interests of Sergei and Yulia Skripal following their poisoning by the nerve agent novichok. He has been instructed in the High Court and Court of Appeal judicial review proceedings arising out of the Birmingham Inquests (1974), which concern the scope of inquests and the interrelationship of coronial and criminal proceedings.

Matthew has developed experience in matters concerning PII, including applications in the Family Court. He is the co-author, with Sir Neil Garnham, of the chapter concerning anonymity, PII and protective measures in the  Inquests Book: the Law of Coroners and Inquests (Hart Publishing, 2016)

Matthew has also been instructed on matters ranging from freedom of information requests concerning the allowances paid to former Prime Ministers, to the procedural fairness of the policies of the General Medical Council in charging disciplinary cases.

Selected Cases

• Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department UKSC (2019): on appeal from [2019] EWHC 60 (Admin): Case concerning former British citizens who travelled to Syria and are accused of involvement in terrorism and murder.
• Kamoka Litigation: Proceedings concerning unlawful actions by UK government.
• KV (Sri Lanka) v SSHD [2019] UKSC 10; on appeal from [2017] EWCA CIV 119 : Appeared in the Supreme Court in December 2018 in case concerning the correct approach to the assessment of medical evidence in asylum claims.
• FOIA Claim (2018): Successfully defended the right to privacy and confidentiality of former Prime Ministers and their employees in a claim arising from the Freedom of Information Act.
• GW v  (1) The Information Commissioner, (2) The Cabinet Office [2017] UKUT 312 (AAC): Defended the right to privacy and confidentiality of former Prime Ministers and their employees in a claim arising from the Freedom of Information Act.
• SSHD v Sergei and Yulia Skripal and anr [2018] EWCOP 6: Successful application for an order allowing the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons to obtain blood samples from two unconscious victims of poisoning by the nerve agent Novichok. (Law Pod UK, ep. 124)
• R (Hambleton and others) v The Coroner for the Birmingham Inquests (1974) [2018] EWHC 56 (Admin): High Court and Court of Appeal proceedings concerning the scope of the renewed inquests into the Birmingham pub bombings, and the question of whether they should seek to identify the perpetrators of the bombings.
• Kamoka and others v The Security Service and others: Litigation concerning allegations of UK collusion and involvement in rendition and mistreatment of claimants overseas.
• GW v (1) The Information Commissioner, (2) The Cabinet Office [2017] UKUT 312 (AAC): Matthew represented the Cabinet Office in a case concerning a freedom of information request for details of the Public Duty Cost Allowance paid to former Prime Ministers.
• X, Y and Z v United Kingdom (Application no. 32666/10): Application to the European Court of Human Rights, alleging violations of articles 3, 6, 8 and 13 in respect of a local authority’s failure to re-house a family that was subsequently subjected to violence and abuse in their home.
• CM v General Medical Council: Judicial review proceedings that led to the first successful challenge of the GMC’s ‘pilot scheme’ for charging Fitness to Practise allegations.