Raglan Ashton

A specialist criminal and regulatory practitioner with a national practice and proven track record for success. Fiercely independent, he is highly motivated and professional, possessing a single minded approach to his client’s interests, whilst being totally committed to every case.

Often considered to be persuasive and formidable as an advocate, by clients and peers alike, he combines natural, highly effective skills with real industry. His fierce reputation as a trial advocate plays testament to his natural ability in this area. With a meticulous approach to preparation, he will always go the extra mile; placing great emphasis on winning the trust of his clients. Raglan is notably alive to the differing needs of all court users, be they children, vulnerable adults and/or professionals. He is well attuned to the sensitivities required for those of differing cultural, religious and racial backgrounds.

Raglan has a particular interest in appeals primarily to the Court of Appeal and Divisional Court including judicial review and case stated. He advises against wrongful conviction, excessive sentencing and unfair confiscation orders. He has extensive knowledge of Proceeds of Crime including asset recovery and the representation of third parties.

Raglan is routinely instructed in the following cases:

  • complex fraud
  • homicide and related offences
  • rape and serious sexual offences
  • drug offences
  • terrorism offences
  • money laundering and proceeds of crime
  • human trafficking and modern slavery
  • disciplinary and professional misconduct
  • regulatory offences
  • trading standards

Raglan’s previous experience includes work as a Chancery Associate at the Royal Courts of Justice before being called to the bar. Taking great delight in empowering others, he is a pupil supervisor who enjoys teaching and inspiring young barristers.

Raglan Ashton

Outside of his professional career, Raglan has a keen interest in sport and voluntarily represents the interests of the Rugby Football Union in disciplinary and procedural matters

Solicitors and other practising lawyers are invited to contact the clerks on: +44 (0)115 824 9090

Contact form

Share this page:         Turn on Javascript!

Recent Cases

Raglan regularly conducts high profile, complex cases locally and nationally. Notable cases include:

R v Mility (2020): muti-defendant, county lines drugs/ firearms case with over 47,000 pages of evidence. 
R v Bartholemew (2019): leading counsel, secured acquittal in attempted murder charge. The Defendant was convicted of causing GBH with intent.
R v CT (2018): Causing death by dangerous driving; case involved multiple loss of life and had national interest. 
https://www.itv.com/news/2018-08-07/jail-for-woman-who-killed-fiance-and-daughter-six-in-crash-while-over-limit

R v Needham and others (2016) EWCA Crim 455: Special Court (Court of Appeal): Resolved inconsistencies resulting from custodial sentences upon length driving disqualifications
R v Arun Thear (2014): Multi-handed international fraud with over a 250,000 pages of evidence.
R v Dennis Anderson (2013): Alleged historic rape of step-children; case turned on calling of expert evidence that established that complainant had fabricated account.
R v Smith and Others (2011) EWCA Crim 1772: A leading case concerning the proper structure and formulation of Sexual Offences Prevention Orders.
R v Peters (2011) All ER 118: Case concerning appropriate sentence for international drug trafficking.
R v Thuy-An Mao (2011): Manslaughter case involving complex medical evidence relating to burn injuries.
R v Roger Gordon (2011): Multi-handed murder where complex issues of cell-site analysis and consideration of legal issue of joint enterprise
R v Brendan O’Dell (2010): Murder case concerning dying declarations made by the deceased at the scene and the compellability of spouse giving evidence against partner.
R v Nelson (2007) All ER 447: Successful appeal against the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment for public protection in relation to an armed robbery; the judge erred in fact specific judgement when assessing the degree of future risk of serious injury to the public posed by the Appellant.
R v Fairhurst (2004) EWCA 315: Case concerning the legitimate expectation given to the Appellant where the judge made an unlawful assertion to the Appellant about appropriate sentence.