Khatija has a wide-ranging public law practice encompassing led and unled work across the spectrum of administrative law. In addition, she has particular expertise in judicial reviews in the area of Community Care (see the separate Community Care section below). In January 2020, Khatija was appointed to the committee of the Administrative Law Bar Association (ALBA) Committee. She has contributed to ALBA’s responses to government consultations including on the extension of the power to depart from retained EU case law and on the modification of the test for appeals from the Upper Tribunal.

Cases

• R (Article 39) v Secretary of State for Education [2020] EWCA Civ 1577 – landmark Court of Appeal ruling concerning the unlawful failure to consult in relation to the Adoption and Children (Coronavirus) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 (led by Steve Broach and Jenni Richards QC). See case note.
• Acting for the Department of Health and Social Care in a challenge brought by the Good Law Project and others to “Project Moonshot”.
• R (MI) v Waltham Forest LBC (2020) – acting for the Claimant in relation to a challenge to cuts to funding for children with SEN.
• R (AD) v Hackney LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 518 – acting with David Wolfe QC an appeal regarding the meaning and scope of section 27 CFA 2014.
• R (AD) v London Borough of Hackney [2019] EWHC 943 (Admin) – acted with Steve Broach on a challenge to Hackney’s cuts to funding for children with SEN.
• Article 39 v Secretary of State for Education (2019) – challenge to a guidance document published by DfE and addressed to local authorities, purporting to “mythbust” the rights and entitlements of children in care. The guidance was withdrawn shortly after the issue of proceedings.
• R (JA) v London Borough of Bexley [2019] EWHC 130 (Admin) – acted as sole counsel in a successful challenge to Bexley’s refusal to support a destitute family under section 17 Children Act 1989.
• R (AB) v Ealing [2019] EWHC 3351 (Admin) – acted as sole counsel in a successful retrospective section 20 Children Act 1989 challenge.
• R (ME and FE) v London Borough of Greenwich (2018) – a challenge under the Equality Act to Greenwich’s differential treatment of children whose parents have NRPF in the course of section 17 assessments. Greenwich agreed to reconsider its policy immediately after issue.
• R (WX) v Northamptonshire CC [2018] EWHC 2178 (Admin) – acted with Steve Broach in a successful challenge to Northamptonshire’s decision to close 21 libraries.
• Khatija was instructed to assist on the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.

Khatija is a highly experienced and in-demand junior in Community Care matters, having worked extensively in the area before coming to the bar. She regularly advises on all matters arising out of the Children Act 1989, age assessments, education, the rights and entitlements of children with SEND, and issues arising under the Care Act. She also provides advice and training to charities and organisations providing support to vulnerable groups.

Khatija has been a Trustee at “Become”, the charity for children in care, since 2011 and is currently the Senior Independent Trustee. Prior to joining the bar, Khatija was an advocate for children in care at the charity, “Coram Voice” for three years. Khatija was also a Tribunal volunteer for IPSEA, representing families at the SENDist Tribunal for two years.

Cases

• R (MA) v LB Croydon (2020) – judicial review concerning the use of fraud investigations as part of a section 17 assessment of need of a NRPF family (acting with Azeem Suterwalla).
• R (JA) v London Borough of Bexley [2019] EWHC 130 (Admin) – acted as sole counsel in a successful challenge to Bexley’s refusal to support a destitute family under section 17 Children Act 1989.
• R (AB) v Ealing [2019] EWHC 3351 (Admin) – acted as sole counsel in a successful retrospective section 20 Children Act 1989 challenge.
• R (MS) v Hammersmith and Fulham – acted as sole counsel in a dispute between two local authorities as to who bore the section 20 duty in respect of a vulnerable child, and successfully obtained interim relief on the basis that it was the authority in whose area she was physically present. The case subsequently settled.
• R (MRA) v Surrey County Council – sole counsel in a successful age dispute challenge, in a complex and unusual case where the child had changed his account of his age three times over a 12-month period. A fuller account of the case can be found here.
• During pupillage, Khatija assisted Ian Wise QC and Conor McCarthy on R (ZM and SK) v the London Borough of Croydon [2016] UKUT 559 – a notable case concerning the use of dental age assessments.

Khatija is regularly instructed in procurement cases before the Technology and Construction Court. As a member of the Attorney General’s C-Panel, her clients include central government departments as well as private clients.

Cases

Her notable cases include:

• Acting for the Department of Health and Social Care in a challenge brought by the Good Law Project to “Project Moonshot”.
• Acting for the Department of Health and Social Care in multiple challenges brought by the Good Law Project concerning contracts for PPE awarded in reliance upon Regulation 32 PCR 2015.
• Acting for the Department of Health and Social Care in a challenge brought by an economic operator in the context of PPE procurement.
• Acting for the Royal Parks in a challenge brought by Live Nation to the award of the Hyde Park Music Festival contract to AEG Presents.
• Acting for Her Majesty’s Passport Office in De La Rue’s challenge to the contract for the production of blue passports to Gemalto UK Limited.
• Acting for the Department of Transport in the recent high-profile “Brexit Ferries” litigation brought by P&O Ferries.

Khatija practices in the field of competition law and associated regulatory law before the Competition Appeal Tribunal and Court of Appeal. She works well as part of a team, as well as providing advice in her own right.

Recent cases include:

• Acting for Visa in a claim brought by Euronet against Mastercard and Visa concerning arrangements for ATM transactions.
• Acting for DS Smith in the Trucks litigation .
• Advising on the competition law implications of an accreditation provider prohibiting the provision of online training during the Covid-19 pandemic.
• Viasat v Ofcom [2018] CAT 18 and Viasat UK Ltd v Office of Communications [2020] EWCA Civ 624 – acting for Viasat in its appeal against Ofcom’s decision to grant authorisation for the use of 2GHz spectrum to a satellite telecommunications company.
• FX – assisted in the preparation of class action seeking damages in relation to foreign exchange cartel.

During pupillage, Khatija was supervised by Rob Williams QC and assisted on competition act enforcement work, including Balmoral Tanks v CMA and CMA v Concordia International. She was also supervised by Ronit Kreisberger QC and assisted on Flynn Pharma / Pfizer v CMA.

Cases

Khatija advises private clients in her own right on state aid matters, including more recently on the WTO Rules and the subsidy control provisions of the UK-EU trade and cooperation agreement. Her advisory work includes:

• Advising on the state aid and WTO implications of subsidies for environmentally-friendly transport.
• Khatija regularly advises on the state aid implications of grants conferred by regional investment funds, including those for community projects, maritime ports, and environmental measures amongst others.

Khatija advises and acts on a range of EU legal matters. She acted alongside Robert Palmer QC in successfully defending a Francovich claim for damages in Bioplus v Secretary of State for Health [2020] EWHC 329 (QB). In 2018, she completed a six-month secondment at the Bank of England assisting in their work to prepare for Brexit.

Cases

Khatija regularly advises and acts for the ICO, private clients and public authorities in relation to the Data Protection Act 2018, GDPR and Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Cases

Her recent cases include:

• Advising the ICO in relation to its unprecedented penalty of £20m to British Airways for a breach of the GDPR. Khatija (alongside Gerry Facenna QC and Julianne Kerr Morrison) advised throughout the investigation, Article 60 process, and final penalty decision.
• Advising the ICO in relation to its penalty of £18.4m to Marriott International Inc for a breach of the GDPR. Khatija (alongside Gerry Facenna QC and Julianne Kerr Morrison) advised throughout the investigation, Article 60 process, and final penalty decision.
• Providing advice to the ICO concerning the exercise of its regulatory powers.
• Advising and acting for private clients and government departments in claims brought for damages under the Data Protection Act 2018.
• Khatija regularly advises private clients, the ICO, and public bodies on all aspects of the Freedom of Information Act and the Environmental Information Regulations. She has recently advised on sections 23 and 24 (security matters and national security), section 35 (formulation of government policy), section 41 (information provided in confidence) section 42 (legal professional privilege), section 43 (commercial interests),
• University of Bristol v ICO(2019) – represented the ICO in a substantive hearing concerning whether the University of Bristol was obliged to disclose the salaries of its senior staff.

• Phoenicia Scholarship, Bar European Group
• Major Scholarship, Inner Temple
• Vice Chancellor’s Civic Award, University of Oxford
• Albert Hourani Prize, University of Oxford
• Exceptional Achievement Award, King’s College Cambridge

• Urdu (Advanced)
• Arabic (Intermediate)
• Gujarati (Intermediate)