Giles Grant is a C-List Specialist Regulatory Advocate.
Health & Safety
Giles is currently instructed in proceedings arising out of a workplace accident at a quarry when a concrete mixing truck collapsed during a wheel replacement causing fatal injuries.
Giles has been instructed on behalf of North Lincolnshire Council, Local Safeguarding Children Boards, Healthcare Providers, The Police and family members in inquests. In these proceedings Giles has gained significant experience of working with and cross examining a range of expert witnesses. He takes pride in dealing with such matters with the appropriate sensitivity and consideration whilst ensuring that the interests of his clients are fully advanced.
Giles has a specialist interest in firearms and shotgun certificate appeals. He is regularly instructed to advise and represent in contested appeals as well as accepting instructions to advise and represent appellants.
Building on experience working in firearms licensing has enabled Giles to develop a wider interest in public licensing law, in particular in relation to cases concerning public safety and serious allegations of misconduct.
- Inquest touching the death of JP (2020): Death of a young girl who’s body was discovered in a cemetery
- Inquest touching the death of TLS (2020); Representing the healthcare provider self inflicted ligature death whilst in custody
- Inquest touching the death of WMJ (2020): Impatient with Mental Health Services who was discharged to community care and following the decline in his mental health had taken to sleeping near a railway line and was tragically hit by a train.
- Inquest touching the death of MR 2019: Giles represented South Yorkshire Police. Motorcycle collision. The deceased had been diagnosed with Glaucoma and had been advised to inform the DVLA
- Re: Alty, Preston Crown Court 2013: Giles successfully opposed the appeal against the revocation of firearms certificate of a retired police officer who had been acquitted of charges of domestic violence and historic sexual abuse. This case involved detailed legal argument as to the burden of proof and admissibility of evidence in such proceedings.
- Inquest Re Hutchinson (deceased), Sunderland Coroner’s Court 2013: Instructed by the family members of the deceased, Giles cross examined several expert witnesses including a Home Office approved pathologist, a Professor of radiology and consultant oncologists as well as a number of nurses and other medical staff in relation to the appropriate treatment of terminal cancer patients. As a result of evidence heard, the Coroner made a number of recommendations to the responsible hospital trust.
- Re: Aldous House Hotel, Huddersfield Magistrates’ Court 2014:After being the venue for a number of child grooming and sexual abuse offences the police objected to the granting of a license to the owner this premises who was alleged to have been complicit in hiding the identities of those involved. Representing the co-directors of the business on appeal from the council, Giles successfully argued that a premises license could be granted with new conditions.
- Re: SG (a child) (deceased) 2015, Stockport Coroner’s Court: Giles was instructed to represent a local authority and a local safeguarding children board in a case which involved contested legal arguments about disclosure and public interest immunity where a potential conflict arose between the public coronial proceedings and a confidential Serious Case Review process. This was a complicated case involving a large number of public agencies and required particular sensitivity to issues of mental health, domestic violence and safeguarding.
- Re: Appleton, Preston Crown Court 2016: Giles successfully opposed the appeal against the granting of a shotgun certificate heard before Mr Justice Sweeney. This case involved analysis of mental health treatment records, police intelligence information and a police Superintendent was called to give evidence. This case ultimately turned on the evidence elicited from the Appellant as to his unresolved underlying emotional difficulties. The Judge stated that Giles had cross examined the appellant with appropriate restraint but to great effect.