Matthew Wyard, Jim Hirschmann and Rosa Thomas write for Local Government Lawyer on the framework concerning the duty to consult in public law.
Clerks Details
- Clerk Name: Sam Collins
- Clerk Telephone: 0121 289 4333
- Clerk Email: [email protected]
- Clerk Name: Tom Cox
- Clerk Telephone: 0117 928 1520
- Clerk Email: [email protected]
- Clerk Name: Gemma Faulkner
- Clerk Telephone: 020 7583 8055
- Clerk Email: [email protected]
Overview
Matthew is a public law specialist with a broad range of interests, including education and court of protection matters. More details can be found in his specialist profiles below.
He is recommended in both leading directories for all his main areas of practice. He is described as “brilliant in his field”, a “fantastically pragmatic barrister with an eye for detail” whose advocacy is “clear, concise and easy to follow” and “well beyond his year of call”. He is “good at strategic advice”, “always on top of things” and has “exemplary client care”.
Interesting or important cases in which Matthew has been involved in recent years include:
Cardiff Council v AW (ongoing): Matthew represents the respondent family in the first Upper Tribunal appeal concerning the Additional Learning Needs and Wellbeing (Wales) Act 2018.
Re: AECO [2025] EWCOP 5: successfully represented the Public Guardian in an application to remove a property and financial affairs deputy.
Re: Rwanda: Part of the counsel team quality assuring and providing operational advice to the Secretary of State for the Home Department in seeking to remove individuals to Rwanda whose asylum and protection claims had been declared inadmissible.
MM (as alternative person to C) v Royal Borough of Greenwich [2024] UKUT 179 (AAC): successfully represented the appellant in the leading authority on the approach the First-tier Tribunal should take to the question of ‘litigation capacity’ in special educational needs appeals.
FA (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWCA Civ 149: represented the Respondent before the Court of Appeal considering whether the Upper Tribunal properly applied the country guidance on sur place activities to an application for asylum by an Iranian Kurdish national.
Land Adjacent to HMP Garth and HMP Wymott (ref: 3295556): represented the Rule 5 party in this recovered appeal that concerned the proposed development of a new prison near Chorley.
THTN v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 1222: represented the Respondent in this appeal concerning the proper interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decision in AM (Zimbabwe).
AB v Newport City Council [2022] UKUT 190 (AAC): successfully represented the appellant in this appeal that confirmed the existence of a right of appeal to the Upper Tribunal against a review decision of the Special Educational Needs Tribunal for Wales.
OA v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKUT 00033 (IAC): represented the respondent in this country guidance case on Somalia.
R (Charles & Dunn) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2020] EWHC 3185 (Admin): disclosure junior for the defendant.
Nottinghamshire County Council v SF [2020] EWCA Civ 226: successfully represented the respondent in this appeal that considered the meaning of “necessary” in s37 of the Children and Families Act 2014.
D v Hampshire County Council [2020] EWHC 2916 (Admin): instructed to seek permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
For more details about Matthew’s specialist areas of practice, please see the specialist profiles below.
Away from practice, Matthew is a widely published legal author, a Chair in the Valuation Tribunal sitting on ratings appeals, the Vice Chair of the Board of Directors of a higher education institution and the Chair of the Court of Protection Practitioner’s Association.
Matthew is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. Please contact him for a copy of his privacy notice which sets out the basis upon which any personal data he may receive will be protected.
Expertise
-
Administrative and Public Law Add this expertise to your shortlist Mathew is an expert in public law and human rights. As a member of the Attorney General’s panel of counsel to the Crown he regularly acts for Central Government, as well as all manner of public authorities, regulators, companies, charities and individuals. He accepts instruments for urgent and out of hours applications, as well as in strategic, public interest, litigation.
Maintaining a deliberately broad public law practice, Matthew has advised or represented clients in issues relating to: adult social care, asylum and immigration, children’s social care, data protection, education, freedom of information, human rights, planning, pharmaceutical regulation.
Representative examples of contentious and advisory work undertaken recently include:
R (HM) v Oxfordshire County Council, AC-2024-LON-003762: drafted the summary grounds of resistance in this rationality challenge to the defendant’s failure to implement an EHC Plan in the way requested by the parent.
Re: A charitable trust: advised a charitable trust on the proposed redevelopment of land in Ealing, including the conversion of a community centre into a Class F1 learning facility.
R (LS) v Somerset Council, AC-2024-CDF-000013: advised the claimant throughout, drafted Statement of Facts and Grounds and skeleton argument in this judicial review under s42 of the Children and Families Act 2014.
R (JC) v Essex County Council, AC-2024-LON-003692: advised on and drafted the summary grounds of resistance in this challenge under s42 of the Children and Families Act 2014.
Re: FOBH: advised an action group on the proper construction of a s106 agreement and on the merits of seeking reconsideration of planning authority’s decision on Kides grounds.
R (MS) v Bradford Metropolitan Borough Council, AC-2024-LDS-000182: advised on and settled the summary grounds of resistance in this judicial review concerning an alleged breach of reg. 44 of the SENDIST regulations 2014.
FA (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWCA Civ 149: represented the respondent before the Court of Appeal which considered whether the Upper Tribunal properly applied the country guidance on sur place activities to an application for asylum by an Iranian Kurdish national.
Land Adjacent to HMP Garth and HMP Wymott (ref: 3295556): represented the Rule 5 party in this recovered appeal concerning the proposed development of a new prison near Chorley.
R (AC & EC) v Hampshire County Council, AC-2024-LON-002167: drafted the summary grounds of resistance in this challenge to the defendant’s alleged irrationality in naming a particular school in an EHC Plan, breach of s19 of the Education Act 1996 and breaches of Article 14 and Article 2 of Protocol 1 of the Convention.
R (Adams) v The Legal Ombudsman, AC-2023-LDS-000015: settled the summary grounds of resistance and represented the defendant at an oral permission hearing at which permission to proceed was refused.
R (MA) v Essex County Council, AC-2023-LON-002747: successfully secured the refusal of permission in an age assessment judicial review having drafted the summary grounds of resistance.
Re: I: advised an action group on evidence and the merits of challenging a proposed traffic management order in a London Borough.
THTN v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 1222: represented the respondent in this appeal concerning the proper interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decision in AM (Zimbabwe).
SS (India) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, CA-2023-000329: advised the respondent on the merits of this appeal to the dismissal of an Article 8 ECHR claim.
R (Lu) v The Legal Ombudsman, CO/1382/2023: settled the summary grounds of resistance in this challenge to the defendant’s dismissal of a complaint pursuant to rules 5.7(f) and (g) of its scheme rules.
R (Rad-Niknam) v The Legal Ombudsman, CO/1623/2023: settled the summary grounds of resistance in a challenge to the defendant’s refusal to consider a complaint.
R (AU) v Hertfordshire County Council, CO/779/2023: settled summary grounds of resistance concerning an alleged breach of s19 of the Education Act 1996.
R (IK) v Sir George Monoux College, CO/101/2022: advised the defendant on the merits of this challenge to a college exclusion decision in preparation for a rolled up hearing.
R (E) v Hertfordshire County Council, CO/4190/2022: settled the detailed grounds of resistance in this claim for alleged breaches of s19 of the Education Act 1996
OA v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKUT 00033 (IAC): represented the respondent in this country guidance case on Somalia.
Re: O: advised a regulator on the applicability of an international certificate of good conduct in the jurisdiction of England and Wales.
Church Street Regeneration Scheme (21/08160/COOUT) – drafted an objection to the redevelopment of land in Westminster on behalf of a local resident and advised on issues of compulsory purchase.
R (EP) v Norfolk County Council, CO/4354/2021: advised on and settled the statement of facts and grounds in a challenge to a failure to provide transport contrary to s508B of the Education Act 1996.
Nottinghamshire County Council v SF [2020] EWCA Civ 226: successfully represented the respondent in this appeal that considered the meaning of “necessary” in s37 of the Children and Families Act 2014.
D v Hampshire County Council [2020] EWHC 2916 (Admin): sought permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Re: L: advised a regulator on whether it was obliged, pursuant to the ‘Managing Public Money’ guidance, to seek to recover its costs following a successful judicial review challenge.
R (YMC) v Office of Intercollegiate Studies & Ors, CO/4810/2020: advised on and drafted the statement of facts and grounds in the first judicial review challenge to the defendant body.
R (JC) v A London Borough: drafted the pre action protocol letter in a proposed application for judicial review for breach of s42 of the Children and Families Act 2014 that sought damages for unjust enrichment.
R (A) v B Council: advised a proposed claimant on the merits of a proposed judicial review against a City Council’s charging policy for children’s social care.
R (JH) v A CCG: drafted a pre action protocol letter challenging a CCG’s breach of s3 of the NHS Act 2006 and National Framework in refusing to provide Continuing Care to a child with a life limiting condition.
Re: A Challenge Group: advised a public interest group on the merits of, and method to, seek a public inquiry into the examination arrangements during the Covid 19 pandemic.
R (AT) v An Academy: advised on the merits of a proposed application for judicial review in relation to the procedure followed when conducting a managed move.
Re: D: advised on the merits of a proposed application for judicial review against a local authority’s policy of not placing children below the age of 16 in children’s homes.
-
Court of Protection Add this expertise to your shortlist Matthew is a Leading Junior in Court of Protection and is described as “an excellent advocate” (Legal 500, 2022) whose “encyclopaedic knowledge of both English and Welsh social care law is an advantage” (Legal 500, 2021).
He undertakes the entire range of instructions in the Court of Protection in both the health & welfare and property & affairs jurisdictions and represents all parties to proceedings. More detail on each area is set out below.
In 2023, Matthew started 3PB’s Court of Protection and Community Care Podcast: CopComm.
Property and Affairs
Much of Matthew’s Court of Protection practise falls under its property and affairs jurisdiction. Matthew regularly represents the Office of the Public Guardian, local authorities, individuals, the Official Solicitor, professional deputies and trustees. He is familiar with issues such as elder abuse, inheritance tax, capital gains tax, statutory Wills, gifting, powers of attorney, deputyships, personal injury trusts.
Representative examples of Matthew’s work include:
- OPG v SH & Ors – representing the successful applicant in an application for declarations as to P’s capacity to execute lasting powers of attorney. Involved detailed legal arguments around the different relevant information for managing property and affairs/executing an LPA
- ZG v ED – advising the respondent in a contested deputyship application. Issues arising include a property sale and the capital gains implications for P’s estate
- (1) A (2) G v A professional deputy – Successfully defending a professional deputy in an application to discharge their deputyship. Issues included whether the applicant had brought the application on the correct legal basis
- OPG v RL – Successfully representing the Applicant in proceedings seeking an order to cancel the registration of an LPA due to P lacking capacity at the time it was made
- OPG v SLH & Ors – Representing the OPG in proceedings seeking to cancel the registration of an LPA and secure the granting of a professional deputy to protect P from financial abuse
- OPG v JMG – Representing the OPG in proceedings seeking to cancel the registration of an LPA due to the attorney financially abusing P.
- OPG v G – Representing the OPG in proceedings seeking to cancel a deputyship order due to financial abuse on the part of the deputy
- KSC v S Council – Defending an application which proceeded to a contested final hearing seeking to discharge a deputyship order. Involved the cross examination of an incapatious individual on their wishes and feelings which was described as “skillful” and “sensitive” by the judge.
- Office of the Public Guardian v CE - Advising and representing the defendant attorney in proceedings brought by the OPG to cancel Lasting Powers of Attorney for both property/affairs and health/welfare on the ground that P had capacity at the point of execution
- Office of the Public Guardian v MS - Advising and representing the defendant attorney in proceedings brought by the OPG to cancel registration of a Lasting Power of Attorney for health and welfare on the basis that P had capacity at the point of execution
- G v G - Advising and representing a family member opposed to her siblings application for property and affairs deputyship over their mother due to concerns about financial abuse
- Office of the Public Guardian v LK - Advising and representing the defendant attorney on an application for removal sought by the OPG
- Re: AA - Advising a HNW client in conference and in writing on the options for protecting the assets of an incapacitated family member, including considering the appropriateness of a deputyship order or the settlement of a trust structure
- Re: JS - Advising professional deputies on the proper construction of an indemnity clause within a PPO arising from a £1.7m clinical negligence settlement and on their obligations pursuant to the same
- Re: DS - Advising an attorney on the legalities and procedure surrounding the transfer of property at an undervalue within civil proceedings where the defendant had lost capacity
- GB v SW - Advising and representing the defendant family member contesting a property and affairs deputyship application on the basis of alleged historic financial abuse
- S City Council v KSC - Advising and representing a local authority in a contested application for a deputyship order over P’s property and affairs following his falling victim to online fraud. Involved issues of online romance scamming and international money laundering.
- Re: LCD - Advising a national law firm’s private client department on the risks arising out of the transfer of property from a PI trust and the appropriate method of making the transfer.
Health and Welfare
Matthew regularly represents the Official Solicitor, family members, RPRs and local authorities in the range of health and welfare matters coming before the Court of Protection. His background in public law and education law, means that he can offer consistency of representation across all areas where the protected party is an adolescent. As such, he is regularly sought after by local authorities to advise on cross over cases where social care and education responsibilities are at the fore.
Representative examples of Matthew’s health and welfare work includes:
- TQ v (1) A Health Board (2) A Local Authority – representing the LA in a complex s21A matter where P absconded from multiple care homes and travelled between England and Wales.
- H Council v JB - Advising and representing a local authority in respect of a section 16 challenge concerning P’s capacity to engage in sexual relations and make decisions concerning his education.
- B CCG v HJ & Ors - Advising and representing P, through the Official Solicitor, in a section 21A challenge concerning a Third Party Personal Health Budget, as well as an urgent issue regarding international travel.
- County Council v JAS - Advising and representing a local authority in a section 21A application within which there were issues concerning P’s habitual residence.
- B Council v PM - Advising and representing a local authority in respect of a DoLS challenge where P resides at an independent specialist college and the interplay between the education and DoLS schemes.
- Re: SB - Advising a family member and corresponding with a local authority on their behalf concerning allegations that the local authority was unlawfully preventing them from seeing their adult children.
- Re: MR - Advising and representing P in a dispute over a ward change following the Covid-19 pandemic.
- KH v S County Council - Advising a local authority on the interplay between the different regimes under the Mental Health Act 1983, s21A Mental Capacity Act and s39 Children and Families Act 2014.
- S City Council v JDC & Ors - Advising and representing a family member in this long running s21A and contact challenge.
- CEM - Representing P in a dispute over her end of life arrangements.
Inherent jurisdiction of the High Court/Safeguarding of vulnerable adults and children
Much of Matthew’s work involves safeguarding. Where appropriate, Matthew is happy to represent parties before the Family Division of the High Court in proceedings under the Inherent Jurisdiction. Recent examples include:
- Re: C – Advising a professional deputy as to safeguarding an incapacitated 16 year old from family members refusing to allow him access to court approved therapeutic support.
- E County Council v CM & Ors – Advising and representing the applicant local authority in Tier 3 proceedings concerning international abduction of an incapacious adult.
- Re: DN – representing an independent school in emergency proceedings issued under the Inherent Jurisdiction to authorize a child’s deprivation of liberty in an unregulated placement. Matthew also advised on the concurrent threatened Administrative Court proceedings against the school.
- Re: AA - representing a family member in proceedings issued under the Inherent Jurisdiction concerning International Child Abduction.
Medical treatment
Matthew is developing a medical treatment focus to his practise and is happy to advise parties to medical treatment proceedings on an out of hours/emergency basis. To date, medical treatment matters he has been involved with include:
- NT v An NHS Trust and Ors – representing a respondent in a dispute concerning P’s mental health treatment.
- Re: JC – representing the family members in a dispute concerning whether or not P should receive dental treatment.
-
Education Add this expertise to your shortlist Matthew is a trusted and respected adviser to the education sector and those operating within it, having practised in the field of education law since before his call to the Bar. He is recognised in both of the leading legal directories. Having spent a significant time practicing in Wales, Matthew is experienced in advising on the devolved education settlement in Wales.
Adopting a sector based approach, the kind of areas Matthew advises/represents institutions in includes the following:
Judicial Review: Most of Matthew’s instructions in relation to the education sector involve advising, drafting or representation before the High Court in respect of judicial reviews concerning education. He acts for claimants, defendant and interested parties before the High Court.
Governance and organisation: Having co-authored the school reorganisation chapter of the leading education law textbook, Matthew is regularly sought after to assist local authorities and other proposers with drafting documentation or advising on the process for school re-organisation. He is equally happy to advise and represent those wishing to challenge school re-organisation decisions by way of judicial review. As a non executive director of a higher education institution he is happy to advise on all manner of HEI governance issues, including registration with the Office for Students.
Data protection/information law: Benefitting from an established data protection/privacy practice, Matthew is sought after to advise schools, universities and local authorities on their data protection obligations.
SEN: Matthew regularly appear before the Upper Tribunal, First Tier Tribunal and Education Tribunal for Wales in SEN appeals. He also offers strategic advice and support to local authorities and schools in managing disputes that arise.
Equality Act claims: Whilst defending institutions before the First Tier Tribunal makes up the majority of Matthew’s equality practice, he is equally happy to appear before the County Court defending universities or schools in relation to any matter arising under the Equality Act 2010.
Breach of contract/negligence: Having spent his first few years of practice in the litigation department of a specialist education firm he has a solid track record in bringing and defending civil challenges against educational institutions including universities, and independent schools.
Land/planning issues: Matthew is familiar with the English planning law system, having appeared before Planning Inquiries and given planning advice on a variety of issues. With his knowledge of the education sector he is well placed to advise on these issues within the context of school organization (see Matthew’s property profile for more details).
Transport: Matthew has a working knowledge of the English and Welsh law on school transport and regularly advises on the same.
Regulation/reporting: Having previously been on secondment to an education regulator, Matthew is extremely comfortable advising on regulatory issues arising from school inspections, as well as obtaining urgent interim relief to prevent report publication. He also has experience in challenging Ofsted decision making in the Care Standards Tribunal, and in representing teachers before the TRA.
Examples of recent cases Matthew has been involved with within the education sector include:
- AB v Newport City Council [2022] UKUT 190 (AAC) – represented the successful Appellant in this appeal to the Upper Tribunal which clarified the law in relation to appeals from the Special Educational Needs Tribunal for Wales.
- Nottinghamshire County Council v SF & GD [2020] EWCA Civ 226 – represented the successful Respondents in the Court of Appeal in this decision clarifying the correct approach to s37 Children and Families Act 2014
- D v Hampshire County Council [2020] EWHC 2916 (Admin) – represented the Appellant before the High Court seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal
- X v L University – advising and drafting a Defence to a claim for breach of statutory duty under the UK GDPR
- M v C University – drafting and representing the defendant university in an application to strike out a claim for breach of statutory duty under the UK GDPR and misuse of private information
- F v H Council (unreported) – advised upon and settled the Summary Grounds of Resistance in this judicial review under s19 of the Education Act 1996
- U v H Council (unreported) – advised upon and settled the Summary Grounds of Resistance in this judicial review under s42 of the Children and Families Act 2014
- X v G College (unreported): representing the college against a leading education law silk in a judicial review against its decision to exclude a student.
- YMC v Office of Intercollegiate Studies (unreported): representing the claimant in what is thought to be the first judicial review challenge brought against the Office of Intercollegiate Studies.
- H v D School: Successfully representing the school in an educational negligence claim against a leading silk.
- Re: BCC – Advising a proposer on a school re-organisation project to change a school from single sex to co-educational and drafting various documentation for the same.
- Re: CSDN – Advising the appellant nursery in proceedings before the Care Standards Tribunal
- Advising a regulator on the likely enforceability of a historic covenant contained in an Abstract pre dating 1926 Advising on the legal risks associated with a public consultation
- Drafting online Government guidance in relation to registration with a regulator
- Advising an inspection authority on the limits of its powers and when it becomes functus
- Advising on the legality of amending a regulators complaints process
- Advising a regulator on the risks associated with the implementation of a new Bill
- Advising a regulator on whether a novel business idea would require registration with it
-
Cannabis and Life Science Regulation Add this expertise to your shortlist Matthew Wyard is one of a handful of barristers who specialises in the niche provision of regulatory advice in the life sciences sector. He has a particular interest in the regulations governing psychoactive medications and medicinal cannabis and has a working knowledge of the relevant international and domestic statutory regimes.
Examples of recent cases Matthew has been involved in within the cannabis and pharmaceutical regulatory field include:
- Re: A Government Department – Advising a large Central Government department on the implementation of a policy on the use of CBPMs on its premises.
- Re: D – Advising a Central Government department on the risks arising from allowing/prohibiting the use of medicinal cannabis in the workplace.
- Re: A – Providing regulatory advice to Middle Eastern and African based joint venturers looking to establish a UK distribution company for the worldwide distribution of cannabis seeds on the lawful importation of cannabis.
- Re: MJH – Providing advice in conference to a Channel Island based investment fund on the regulatory framework concerning, and risks arising from, investing in the UK based medicinal cannabis market, including on proceeds of crime.
- Re: KM – Providing advice on the application of the EU Tobacco Products Directive to UK purchasers.
- Re: L – Advising on liability and quantum arising from a data breach in the life sciences sector.
- Re: V – Advising upon, settling and drafting the settlement agreement in a dispute between the directors of, and consultants for, an international pharmaceutical company as to the apportionment of future liability between the company and consultants upon the consultants’ retirement.
Matthew is the author of a number of articles on cannabis regulation including: “Cannabis Based Medicinal Products” on Practical Law which provides an overview of the law; “Novel foods regulation: Getting your product to the UK market (including cannabis-based food products)” which reviews the law regulating novel food products in the UK; “The UK Market Authorisation for new medicinal products” and an “Update on UK tobacco law in light of Article 7 of the EU Tobacco Productive Directive”, which forbids the sale of any tobacco products with a characterising flavour.
-
Articles -
Public sector consultations
28th Nov 2023View Article -
The conduct of proceedings before the SEND Tribunal when impaired litigation capacity is being considered
24th Jun 2024View ArticleMatthew Wyard analyses the Upper Tribunal's decision in MM (as alternative person for C) v Royal Borough of Greenwich [2024] UKUT 179 (AAC) and the UT's updated guidance on mental capacity and the First tier Tribunal’s jurisdiction to make health and social care recommendations
Matthew represented the successful appellant, instructed by Geldards LLP.
-
Guidance on mental capacity and the First tier Tribunal’s jurisdiction to make health and social care recommendations
25th Jun 2024View ArticleMatthew Wyard writes about the Upper Tribunal's decision in MM (as alternative person for C) v Royal Borough of Greenwich [2024] UKUT 179 (AAC), and the important points the judgment raises in relation to the conduct of proceedings before the SEND Tribunal when impaired litigation capacity is being considered.
Matthew represented the successful appellant.
-
Court of Protection Property and Affairs Update: Irwin Mitchell Trust Corporation v (1) PW (2) the Public Guardian [2024] EWCOP 16
21st Mar 2024View Article3PB's specialist Court of Protection barrister Matthew Wyard explores the recent Court of Protection property and affairs case of Irwin Mitchell Trust Corporation v (1) PW (2) the Public Guardian [2024] EWCOP 16.
-
Court of Protection Property and Affairs Update: PSG Trust Corporation Ltd v CK [2024] EWCOP 14 and Re: P (Statutory Will) [2024] EWCOP 12
5th Mar 2024View ArticleMatthew Wyard on the recent Court of Protection property & affairs decisions of PSG Trust Corporation Ltd v CK & Re: P (Statutory Will).
In PSG Trust Corporation Ltd v CK [2024] EWCOP 14, the Court considered how a property and affairs deputy should approach the issue of whether to inform P of the value of a civil litigation settlement.
Re: P (Statutory Will) [2024] EWCOP 12 concerned an application to amend a statutory will, for which the Court had to consider if unidentified charity beneficiaries had to be served with the application to amend in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 9 of Practice Direction 9E.
-
Judicial review update: the right to file a Claimant's Reply
8th Feb 2024View ArticleMatthew Wyard has written an update on the right to file a Claimant's Reply which comes into effect on 06 April 2024.
It has long been customary practice for Claimants to file a Reply document following receipt of a Defendant's Acknowledgement of Service in judicial review proceedings. This is despite there being no provision in the Civil Procedure Rules allowing a Claimant to do so.
-
Court of Protection Property and Affairs Update: TA v the Public Guardian [2023] EWCOP 63
9th Feb 2024View Article3PB's specialist Court of Protection barrister Matthew Wyard has written on the recent Court of Protection property and affairs decision of TA v the Public Guardian, a case confirming the scope of a certificate provider’s duties when executing a LPA.
-
Judicial Review: an overview for commercial practitioners
23rd May 2023View Article3PB's public law barrister Matthew Wyard has written a practical overview of judicial review, designed to assist commercial practitioners in serving their clients with “practical, cost-effective solutions to the impact of increased regulation”.
-
Data protection for schools and higher education institutions
26th Oct 2021View ArticleData protection for schools and higher education institutions
Matthew Wyard highlights the rights of access to data from schools and colleges and specifically what constitutes ‘education data’. The new Data Sharing Code of Practice from the ICO is also scrutinised for how it assists the higher education sector in situations of crisis on campus.
-
Data protection claims: A guide for defendants
22nd Sep 2021View ArticleData protection claims: A guide for defendants
Specialist regulatory law barrister, Matthew Wyard looks at the raft of recent claims brought for breaches of statutory duty under the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018.
-
3PB’s Cyber Law Series - Ransomware attacks: a practical guide to survival
25th Aug 2021Ransomware attacks: a practical guide to survival
Specialist regulatory law barrister Matthew Wyard addresses the risk of a ransomware attack and considers the practical steps that businesses and public bodies urgently need to take in order to pre-empt such an event and what to do if disaster strikes.
-
Importation and exportation of cannabinoid products post-Brexit
5th Feb 2021View ArticleImportation and exportation of cannabinoid products post-Brexit
3PB’s Matthew Wyard, a specialist regulatory barrister has issued a briefing, in tandem with Ricardo Geada, head of the cannabis and regulatory team at law firm Mackrell Solicitors aimed at companies working within the CBD industry post-Brexit.
The briefing is a must-read for all businesses continuing to trade cannabinoid products post-Brexit and has been distributed by the Cannabis Trades Association to its members.
-
A Local Authority v GP
17th Nov 2020View Article3PB's specialist regulatory law barrister Matthew Wyard reviews the case of A Local Authority v GP (Capacity – care, support and education) [2020] EWCOP 56.
-
The Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018: An update
4th Nov 2020View ArticlePublic law barrister Matthew Wyard, who specialises in the education sector reviews the hidden extras in ‘The Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018 (Commencement No.1) Order 2020 which came into force this Monday 2 November.
-
GCSE results 2020: Key Q&As for Students and Schools
20th Aug 2020View Article3PB’s specialist education barristers Alice de Coverley and Matthew Wyard have co-authored a two-part report, for students and schools separately, about today’s GCSE results day (20 August 2020).
The guidance offers tips for students and their parents about the GCSE grade that students will receive; the appeals process in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland; Exam results Helplines available; Subject Access Requests for finding out information to support you in pushing for an appeal; grounds for appeals; Centres’ duties to students/learners.
-
A-Level results: Key Q&As for Students and Schools
13th Aug 2020View ArticleIn this article, Alice de Coverley and Matthew Wyard answer some of the most significant questions facing both students and schools on A-level results day 2020, providing practical advice on what to do next.
-
A look at the draft Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) Bill: Problems and pitfalls
8th Jul 2020View Article3PB’s specialist public law barrister Matthew Wyard has reviewed the draft Curriculum and Assessment (Wales) bill. The bill was introduced to the Senedd on 6 July 2020 without prior public consultation.
-
Novel foods regulation: Getting your product to the UK market
8th Jun 2020View Article3PB’s Public and Regulatory Law barrister Matthew Wyard has reviewed the law regulating novel food products in the UK.
-
Regulatory Update - The Tobacco Products Directive
4th Jun 2020View Article3PB’s Public and Regulatory Law barrister Matthew Wyard has provided an update on UK tobacco law in light of Article 7 of the EU Tobacco Productive Directive.
-
UK Market Authorisation for New Medicinal Products
4th Jun 2020View Article3PB’s Public and Regulatory barrister Matthew Wyard has provided an overview of the MHRA’s Market Authorisation process for bringing new products to market in the UK. Designed for the pharmaceutical industry and those advising them, this article looks at the different types of authorisation available and the process for approving medicines in the UK.
-
Practical guidance on video hearings in the SENDIST
12th May 2020View ArticleMatthew Wyard and Alice de Coverley have produced a guide to remote hearings in SENDIST including practical top tips for both practitioners and witnesses. They cover topics from using technology to adapting your approach to this new style of hearing.
-
From absolute statutory duty to reasonable endeavours: the consequences of modifying section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014
12th May 2020View ArticleMatthew Wyard considers the meaning of "reasonable endeavours" in public and private law following the modification of the LA's duty to secure special educational provision specified in an EHC Plan under section 42 to a reasonable endeavours duty, and the likely approach of the Administrative Court to applications to enforce provision in Section F via judicial review.
-
Education: The Impact of the Coronavirus Bill
20th Mar 2020View ArticleEducation law barrister, Matthew Wyard examines the impact of the Coronavirus Bill on the independent education sector.
-
Issuing an EHC Plan - the meaning of ‘necessary’ (Nottinghamshire County Council v SF and another)
12th Mar 2020View ArticleEducation and public law barrister Matthew Wyard and Paul Wyard of Sinclairslaw review Nottinghamshire CC v SF and another, a case in which the Court of Appeal held that the First-Tier Tribunal had correctly construed the meaning of ‘necessary’ in section 37(1) of the Children and Families Act 2014 (CFA 2014) in finding that it was necessary for special educational provision to be made for a child in accordance with an EHC Plan – even though the school had identified and made provisions for the child’s needs and the child was making progress at school.
This article was first published by LexisPSL on 9 March 2020.
-
RE: ACC & Ors [2020] EWCOP 9
10th Mar 2020View ArticleMatthew Wyard analyses Re: ACC &Ors [2020] EWCOP 9, a case concerning the conflicts of interests that may arise where property and affairs deputies instruct a firm with which they are associated to carry out instructions for P, or to conduct litigation on P’s behalf.
-
-
Recommendations Matthew Wyard acts for a wide range of clients, including several individuals and education institutions. He is particularly well-regarded for this work before the SEN Upper Tribunal and offers additional expertise in judicial reviews.
Strengths: "Matthew Wyard's advocacy is clear, concise and easy to follow. He is very personable with clients." "Matthew is very responsive and proactive, with great drafting and preparation skills." "Matthew is brilliant in his field, and his knowledge of both English and Welsh law is second to none."
Chambers UK 2025/Administrative and Public Law/Regions
Matthew Wyard is skilled in handling public law challenges arising from decisions made in relation to education and immigration. He is a member of the Attorney General's 'C' panel.
Strengths: "Matthew is prompt, sharp and effective." "Matthew is a fantastically pragmatic barrister with an eye for detail. He takes the complicated details of his cases and puts forward straightforward and sensible solutions. "His written work in age assessment matters is super strong. "Matthew is good at strategic advice."
Chambers UK 2025/Administrative and Public Law/Regions
Matthew Wyard is skilled in handling public law challenges arising from decisions made in relation to education. He is a member of the Attorney General's 'C' panel.
Chambers UK 2024/Administrative and Public Law/Regions
Strengths: “He is very good and knowledgeable in the education law field.”
“Matthew is very good at reviewing papers and picking up information and facts very quickly, and he is always on top of things.”Chambers UK 2024/Education/London Bar
Strengths: “He is an outstanding advocate with a fantastic grasp of complex, factual cases and a thorough and detailed knowledge of the legal framework. His client care is exemplary.”
“Matthew is capable of dealing with complex matters at a rapid pace.”
“Matthew works tirelessly for his clients and puts up quite a performance within the special needs tribunals.”Chambers UK 2023/Education/London Bar
Strengths: He is proactive, very knowledgeable and good at what he does." "His advice is excellent - comprehensive and very practical as well."
Recent work: Acted for the successful respondent in Nottinghamshire County Council v SF & Others, a challenge to the approach taken by the Upper Tribunal to a 'refusal to issue' appeal.Chambers UK 2022/Education/London Bar
Matthew Wyard is noted for his expertise in judicial reviews and in special educational needs matters.
Matthew is a shrewd advocate, often finding nuance arguments in cases which other counsel may overlook. His advocacy is very reasoned, balanced, and he has a fantastic legal mind for untested areas of the law and judicial review. One to watch.
Legal 500 2025/Education/Leading Juniors/London Bar
Mathew is a conscientious barrister who will do his utmost for his client. He is a good lawyer and a very helpful junior in the quality of his legal research and his thoughts and ideas for advancing the case.
Legal 500 2025/Court of Protection and community care/Leading Juniors/London Bar
‘His knowledge and expertise make him a natural choice to instruct on judicial review matters. He knows the Welsh legislation inside out. He is tactically very astute in such challenges and delivers advice in a timely and sensitive manner.’
Legal 500 2024/Administrative and Public Law/Leading Juniors/Wales and Chester
‘Matthew is quick to get to the crux of a case and exhibits particular expertise in cases involving special educational needs. His ability to look at a case from all sides is a particular strength.’
Legal 500 2024/Education/Leading Juniors/London Bar
‘He quickly picks the issues in the case and is particularly great in a round table meeting which includes litigants in person. He is able to clearly take the parties through the main issues, which helps to progress the matter and discussion.’
Legal 500 2024/Court of Protection and Community Care/Leading Juniors/Wales and Chester - Ranked in Tier 1
‘He is calm under pressure, very reassuring with clients and has a keen eye for detail. He is measured in his approach and has particular expertise within the area of special educational needs law within Wales. He is fast becoming the go-to barrister in this area of law, which has seen major changes over the last couple of years. He appropriately adapts his style of advocacy to the relevant forum and is respected by fellow barristers and judges alike.’
Legal 500 2024/Education/Leading juniors/Wales and Chester - Ranked in Tier 1
‘Matthew is meticulous with his preparation and has a great way with clients, putting them at ease so that they can give clear and cogent evidence. His advocacy is well beyond his year of call. ’
Legal 500 2023/Education/Leading Juniors/London Bar
'Matthew is very detailed and will go that extra step further in order to present the strongest case possible. He is very approachable and clients like him.'
Legal 500 2023/Education/Leading juniors/Wales and Chester - Ranked in Tier 1
'An excellent advocate.'
Legal 500 2023/Court of Protection and Community Care/Leading Juniors/Wales and Chester - Ranked in Tier 1
‘A junior with good client care skills, and his advice is well-considered, comprehensive and clear.’
Legal 500 2022/Court of Protection and Community Care/Rising Stars/Wales and Chester - Ranked in Tier 1
‘A strong and detailed advocate who quickly identifies the relevant issues in a case. He has the ear of the Tribunal.’
Legal 500 2022/Education/Rising Stars/Tier 1/Wales and Chester
"[...] the addition of Matthew Wyard to the team has given real fire power to their Court of Protection offering in Wales.'"
‘His in-depth knowledge of Welsh social care law is an advantage.’
Legal 500 2021/Court of Protection and Community Care/Rising Stars/Tier 1/Wales and Chester
"[...] 3PB's presence in this region comes in the form Matthew Wyard… He specialises in public law challenges in the education sector, civil claims against education institutions and special educational needs appeals."
‘One of very few barristers in the Country who has a true grasp of Welsh Education Law.’
Legal 500 2021/Education/Rising Stars/Tier 1/Wales and Chester
“Thank you again for the excellent outcome you obtained for us yesterday. This note is also very helpful. I have shared it with our wider team because I am sure that the outcome will assist with the handling of many of the other data protection claims across [the organisation] at the moment.
It was a stroke of luck for us that you were able to assist with this matter at short notice and your work is very much appreciated. ’’
Instructing Solicitor, Data protection matter“I did also want to mention that…we have received some excellent feedback recently for 3PB and thought it would be good to share this with you. I have received excellent reports from [team members] and most importantly of all, my clients, regarding the high quality and standard of the work that we are receiving…specifically in relation to…Matthew…I have worked closely with Matthew on one of my cases recently and I am hugely impressed, as are the clients, over his handline and management of the case. The clients are absolutely delighted with his professionalism, conduct and communication. This is a case where it has gone part-heard and the clients do not seem to mind a bit as Matthew has been just excellent”
Partner/Head of Education - National Law Firm''I instruct Matthew regularly and am never disappointed by the level of professionalism and knowledge he brings to each case he is instructed on. Matthew has a unique way of identifying the key issues of a case and preparing submissions in a clear and persuasive manner, in order to achieve the best result possible. I can trust that he will always provide honest and efficient advice and am happy to have good working relationship with him.''
Instructing SolicitorAs you can imagine, it is extremely stressful for families to be going through this so I just wanted to say a big thank you for supporting me through [the] tribunal. I would recommend you to anyone going through similar proceedings. We are delighted with the outcome and have not stopped smiling since!
Client, EducationFirstly, the client would like for me to pass on their gratitude to Matt for all of his assistance on this matter. They described him as “a really nice guy who fought formidably for them and have nothing but praise for the work he has undertaken’’.
Clients feedback to instructing solicitorThank you so much for recommending and introducing us to Matthew. We’ve effectively been on hold for two years waiting to hear from the Coroner’s. It was painful for us to engage again with the legal process. We appreciate that you also experienced difficult emotions. We were on a very long journey that ultimately ended in tragedy, so we’d be lying to say we weren’t dreading the meeting at 3PB.
Matthew was so professional, on point and informative. But above all, he was kind and empathetic. We didn’t feel pushed into making a decision, but ultimately, his clarity in describing the potential road ahead allowed us to make a pragmatic decision. We did leave the Chambers convinced that pushing forward was the right thing to do. However, as the night wore on, and emotions fluctuated we were able to come to the view that there is little point in pushing for an Inquest to be opened. It’s a huge weight off our shoulders and we’d be grateful if you could convey to Matthew just how pivotal he was in helping us reach this point of release.
Clients feedback to instructing solicitor
Expand recommendations