Khatija has an impressively wide-ranging public law practice encompassing led and unled work across the spectrum of administrative law. She has particular expertise in judicial reviews concerning the rights of vulnerable children (see the separate Community Care section below) and acts for charities and NGOs. In January 2020, Khatija was appointed to the committee of the Administrative Law Bar Association (ALBA) Committee.

As a member of the Attorney General’s C Panel, Khatija regularly advises government departments on public law issues. Most recently this has included advising on the Northern Ireland Protocol Agreement.

Cases

• Apple Inc v Competition and Markets Authority [2023] CAT 21 –  defended the CMA’s decision to launch a market investigation into mobile ecosystems.
• R (Good Law Project) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care  (PPE) – one of the top 20 cases of 2021, successfully defended a judicial review against the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care concerning the procurement of PPE during the Covid-19 pandemic. See news here.
• R (Good Law Project) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Abingdon) [2022] EWHC 2468 (TCC) – successfully defended a judicial review concerning the procurement of anti-body tests during the Covid-19 pandemic, see case note here.
• Afghan Interpreters – in 2021 Khatija successfully represented a number of Afghan interpreters in their judicial review claims against the Secretary of State for Defence, Home Department, and FCDO, concerning the rejection of their claims under the ARAP scheme.
• British Educational Suppliers Association v Secretary of State for Education (ongoing) – acting for the Secretary of State for Education in a challenge to the decision to make available online, free of charge, sets of educational resources for use in schools.
• KMO v Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police Service – ongoing challenge to the defendant’s refusal to remove and/or correct an inaccurate ‘warning signal’ placed on the claimant’s Police National Computer record.
• CityFibre Limited v Ofcom [2022] CAT 33 – successfully represented Ofcom in a statutory appeal concerning Openreach’s fibre-to-the-premises offer.
• R (Article 39) v Secretary of State for Education [2020] EWCA Civ 1577 – successfully represented the charity Article 39 in a 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 KC). See case note.
• R (Article 39) v Secretary of State for Education [2022] EWHC 589 (Admin) – represented Article 39 in a challenge to regulations concerning unregulated accommodation for 16-17 year old children in care.
• R (BB) v London Borough of Brent (2022) – sole counsel in a successful retrospective care leaving status challenge.
• R (MI) v Waltham Forest LBC [2021] EWHC 281 (Admin) – acted for the Claimant in relation to a challenge to cuts to funding for children with SEN, led by David Wolfe KC.
• R (AD) v Hackney LBC [2020] EWCA Civ 518 – acting with David Wolfe KC 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. See news here.
• 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 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.

From 2011-2022 Khatija was a Trustee at “Become”, the charity for children in care. 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. She welcomes instructions from charities and NGOs, including on a pro-bono basis.

Cases

• R (Good Law Project) v Secretary of State for Education and Ors (2022) – representing the Good Law Project in a strategic challenge against the Secretary of State and a number of local authorities for a breach of the “sufficiency duty” under the Children Act 1989.
• R (Article 39) v Secretary of State for Education [2022] EWHC 589 (Admin) – represented Article 39 in a challenge to regulations concerning unregulated accommodation for 16-17 year old children in care.
• R (BB) v London Borough of Brent (2022) – sole counsel in a successful retrospective care leaving status challenge.
• 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 KC 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. She advises on all areas of procurement policy, including most recently in relation to sector-specific post-Brexit government procurement policy.

Cases

Her notable cases include:

• Successfully acting for the Department of Health and Social Care in a challenge brought by the Good Law Project to the procurement of PPE during the Covid-19 pandemic. One of the Top 20 cases of 2021, see news item here.
• Successfully acting for the Department of Health and Social Care in a challenge brought by the Good Law Project to the procurement from Abingdon Health of antibody testing kits during the Covid-19 pandemic. See case note here.
• Acting as sole counsel in a procurement challenge brought by Roche Diagnostics Limited against North Bristol NHS Trust and others.
• 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 regularly advising clients on competition law issues as sole counsel.

Recent cases include:

• Acting for Visa in a claim brought by Euronet against Mastercard and Visa concerning arrangements for ATM transactions. Khatija is led by Danny Jowell KC and Daniel Piccinin KC. This case is listed for a 12-week trial at the end of 2023.
• Acting for Infederation Ltd (Foundem) against Google in an abuse of dominance claim, led by Anneli Howard KC and Paul Harris KC.
• Apple Inc v Competition and Markets Authority [2023] CAT 21 –  defended the CMA’s decision to launch a market investigation into mobile ecosystems. Khatija was led by Sir James Eadie KC and David Bailey.
• CityFibre Limited v Ofcom [2022] CAT 33 – successfully represented Ofcom in a statutory appeal concerning Openreach’s fibre-to-the-premises offer. Khatija was led by Monica Carss-Frisk KC and Naina Patel.
• Acted for Belle Lingerie in a price-fixing claim brought against Wacoal, led by Anneli Howard KC (Case 1427/5/7/21).
• Acted for DS Smith in the Trucks litigation .
• 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 KC and assisted on competition act enforcement work, including Balmoral Tanks v CMA and CMA v Concordia International. She was also supervised by Ronit Kreisberger KC 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 KC 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 has a diverse data protection practice. She 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. She also advises on the compatibility of policies and decisions with fundamental ECHR rights and represents charities and NGOs before the European Court of Human Rights. She has a particular interest and expertise in data protection issues concerning vulnerable children and the education sector, and is particularly skilled at spotting data protection points in administrative and judicial review cases.

Khatija is a Lexis Nexis Expert on Article 8 ‘Right to Respect for Private and Family Life’. In 2022, Khatija spoke at the Public Law Project ‘Data Law for Public Lawyers’ Conference on the key principles of data protection law.

Cases

Her recent cases include:

• Advising, on a devilling basis, on the lawfulness of the 2022 proposed EU Regulation which allows for ‘detection orders’ to be made against online platforms to detect child sexual abuse material.
• Telegram v Russia – Khatija, alongside Eric Metcalfe, was instructed by a coalition of NGOs to prepare a statement of intervention in the high-profile appeal brought by Telegram before the European Court of Human Rights concerning Russia’s decision to block and fine the app for failing to provide the Russian government with information which would enable it to decode encrypted messages.
• Ofqual v ICO – represented Ofqual, led by Stephen Kosmin (11KBW), in an appeal before the First-Tier Tribunal concerning the award of A-Level results during the Covid-19 pandemic.
• DFE v ICO [2022] UKFTT 244 (GRC) – successfully represented the DFE in appealing a notice requiring the disclosure of information concerning School Resource Management Advisers.
• Home Office v Information Commissioner and Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants [2021] UKFTT 2020 0253 (GRC) – represented the JCWI on a pro bono basis and successfully defended the ICO’s decision to require disclosure of the Home Office’s unpublished equality impact assessment concerning the Government’s consideration of the impact of the EU Settlement Scheme on those who have a protected characteristic.
• Julia Stonehouse v ICO and Attorney General’s Office [2021] UKFTT 2019_0460 (GRC) – successfully represented the Attorney General’s Office in a FOIA appeal brought by Julia Stonehouse, daughter of the former Cabinet Minister John Stonehouse, concerning her father’s extradition from Australia, committal proceedings and trial
• Black Lion Marketing v ICO (2021) – this was the first appeal against a penalty notice issued by the Commissioner for unlawful marketing activities during the Covid-19 pandemic. Khatija, as sole counsel, successfully represented the Commissioner in defending the penalty.
• KMO v Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police Service – ongoing judicial review challenge to the defendant’s refusal to remove and/or correct an inaccurate ‘warning signal’ placed on the claimant’s Police National Computer record.
• Advising the ICO in relation to its unprecedented penalty of £20m to British Airways for a breach of the GDPR. Khatija (alongside Gerry Facenna KC 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 KC 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 and its Statutory Guidance.
• Advising and acting for private clients and government departments in claims brought for damages under the Data Protection Act 2018.
• 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)

Up and Coming in Administrative & Public Law: “She is a real independent thinker; the rigour of her work and the quality of her analysis are really strong.” “She is really impressive; clearly very hard-working, on top of the subject matter and has very good client skills.” “She is fantastic; she’s thorough in everything that she does, extremely knowledgeable and an impressive advocate.” – Chambers UK, 2023

Up and Coming in Community Care: “She is very good to work with and is very responsive.” “Khatija’s tactical awareness is great.” – Chambers UK, 2023

Up and Coming in Public Procurement: “Very responsive and very good to work with. A highly reliable barrister, who drafts very clearly and is extremely helpful across the board.” – Chambers UK, 2023

Rising star in Court of Protection and Community Care: “Khatija is a dedicated barrister with knowledge beyond her call. She is already very well respected by her peers and is a regular ‘go-to’ junior barrister for children’s rights’ cases. Equally good on her feet as she is with her written work.” – Legal 500, 2023

Rising star in Administrative Law and Human Rights: “Khatija is a dedicated barrister with knowledge beyond her call. She is already very well respected by her peers and is a regular ‘go-to’ junior barrister for children’s rights cases.” – Legal 500, 2023

Rising star in Public Procurement: “A highly effective barrister. With her strong mind and excellent written advocacy, she is one to watch.” – Legal 500, 2023

Up and Coming in Administrative & Public Law: “A fantastic junior barrister with an outstanding understanding of children and social care law.” “She identifies the strengths and weaknesses from an early stage.” – Chambers UK, 2022

Up and Coming in Community Care: “Khatija is great to work with. She really humanises clients and understands things from their perspective.” “Khatija is bright and sympathetic, really thinks around the case and fights hard to achieve the right outcome.” – Chambers UK, 2022