Public Law

Shaheen has appeared in many significant public law challenges with a focus on Prisons, Healthcare, Public Consultations and Religious Discrimination.

“What stands out about Shaheen is her incredible thoroughness as an advocate.” “An intelligent and detailed practitioner who provides very helpful advice.” (Chambers & Partners 2023)

“Shaheen Rahman KC is an extremely experienced special advocate. She is very skilled in national security cases.” “She is very responsive, which is very helpful, and she also understands national security issues.” (Chambers & Partners 2022)

“She is incredibly experienced, always a step ahead.” (Legal 500 2022)

“Seamlessly switches from being very calm and reassuring with clients to extremely powerful in court. She is a brilliant and extremely committed advocate.” “She has the tactical skill and strategic ability to work in a very difficult system and maintain everyone’s trust.” (Chambers & Partners 2021)

“She is incredibly experienced, always a step ahead.” (Legal 500 2021)

“A particularly savvy operator and tough person to be against.” “An excellent public lawyer who specialises in issues of government secrecy, and in representing people in difficult circumstances.” “She’s incredibly effective and utterly charming.” (Chambers & Partners 2020)

“A special advocate of choice.” (Legal 500 2018)

“Always on top of the paperwork and tenacious in court.” “Shaheen is very good on her feet – she doesn’t bang on but just fights for her clients.” (Chambers & Partners 2018)

“A superb advocate, who is utterly formidable on her feet.” (Legal 500 2018)

“Very thorough and clear about the client’s responsibilities and liabilities. Informative and clear advice.” (Chambers & Partners 2017)

“She is bold, aggressive and intellectual – she gets great results.” (Chambers & Partners 2016)

“Handles a range of public law matters arising from national security and healthcare judicial reviews. She often acts in closed material proceedings and is commended for the results she obtains as a special advocate.” (Legal 500 2014)

Selected Cases

  • JJ [2023]: Lead Special Advocate in ongoing civil damages case with allegations of torture.
  • AZ [2023]: Lead Special Advocate in ARAP case where challenge succeeded.
  • E10 [2023]: Lead Special Advocate in ongoing SIAC deprivation case.
  • AH v A Health Trust & MOJ [2023]: For Claimant in ongoing claim under HRA and EQA regarding food provision during Ramadan.
  • QX v SSHD [2023] EWHC 1221 (Admin): Special Advocate in ongoing challenge to reporting obligations under a temporary exclusion order.
  • Z3 v SSHD [2023]: Special Advocate in ongoing SIAC case and JR concerning deprivation of citizenship, bail and habeas corpus.
  • C8 [2022]: Ongoing SIAC deprivation case linked to Begum.
  • C6 [2021]: First example of strike out of SSHD’s case in SICA due to non-compliance.
  • Infected Blood Inquiry [2020]: Instructed on behalf of a Professor of Haematology.
  • North Tyneside Council v North Tyneside CCG [2018]: For the CCG in challenge under s256 of the NHS Act 2006, also alleging failure to comply with duty of inquiry and the PSED.
  • Rahmatullah & Ali v MOD &Ors [2019] EWHC 3849 (QB): Special advocate in civil claim alleging mistreatment and unlawful transfer to US custody by UK state.
  • Belhaj & Boudchar v Jack Straw & Others [2017] EWHC 1861: Special Advocate in settled claim alleging complicity in extraordinary rendition and torture.
  • R (Black) v SSJ [2017]; [2016] 3 WLR 28, [2015] 1 WLR 2963: For Claimant in Supreme Court case considering whether Crown Immunity applies to the smoking ban introduced by the Health Act 2006.
  • SSHD v LG, IM & JM [2017] EWHC 1529: Special Advocate in challenges to TPIMs by three alleged members of the proscribed organisation ALM.
  • Bushell v MMHSCT [2016]: For the Trust in challenge to a decision to withdraw services after a public consultation exercise with arguments based on the public sector equality duty.
  • R (MR) v SSHD [2016] EWHC 1622: Special Advocate in challenge to the removal of the Claimant’s passport under the Royal Prerogative on grounds of suspected terrorist activity.
  • M2 v SSHD [2015] SC/124/2014: Special Advocate in deportation case before the Special Immigration Appeals Commission.
  • CF v SSHD [2014] 1 WLR 4240: Special Advocate in Control Order/TPIM case with allegations of abuse of process. SSHD granted permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.
  • R (Serdar Mohammed) v MOD [2014] 1 WLR 1071: Special Advocate in proceedings seeking extended moratorium on transfer of UK detainees to Afghan authorities in view of risk of torture.
  • R (Hussain) v MOJ [2013] EWHC 4706: For Muslim prisoner in human rights challenge of refusal to provide methadone outside daylight hours during Ramadan.
  • B2 v SSHD [2013] EWCA Civ 616: Special Advocate in deportation case concerning statelessness.
  • AT v SSHD [2012] EWCA Civ 42: Special Advocate in Control Order case remitted due to insufficient disclosure under Article 6.
  • AM v SSHD [2011] EWCA Civ 710: Special Advocate in long running Control Order case involving consideration of standard of disclosure and what constitutes fresh TRA.
  • R (Bhutta) v HM Treasury [2011] EWHC 1789: Special Advocate in Asset Freeze case with consideration of standard of disclosure.
  • SSHD v Al Saadi [2009] EWHC 3390: Special Advocate in Control Order case where the order was revoked.
  • R (Brooks) v SSJ & Ors [2010] 1 Prison LR 266: For Claimant in challenge concerning failure to make arrangements for prisoners to attend hospital appointments.
  • SSHD v AF, AM, AN &AE [2009] 2 WLR: Special Advocate in Control Order case where the Court of Appeal considered whether a minimum level of disclosure was required.
  • R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator [2004] UKHL 26: For Intervener, Justice, in case concerning extraterritorial effect of Convention rights.
  • R (Hopley) v Liverpool Health Authority NHSLA & DOH [2002] Lloyd’s Rep Med 494: For the Defendant in case where it was determined that a health authority’s decision not to pay damages in periodical payments was not amenable to judicial review.
View full profile »
Portfolio [0]
Barrister Portfolio
Barristers / Name Call CV Email

Remove All

to email this list of barristers to a colleague.