Alan is clerked primarily by Lee Johnson, Clare Sabido and Natasha Southgate.
“Without doubt one of the best barristers in the field in terms of client care, advocacy and the ability to assimilate masses of documents and present an effective case.”
Chambers & Partners
Recently acted for Dr Crosby, a former GP, who was tried at Liverpool Crown Court on an allegation of historic sexual assault on a female patient. Alan had previously acted for Dr Crosby at trial in 2004, and in GMC proceedings in 2005, concerning the same allegations.
experience & expertise
Alan Jenkins acts in cases concerning alleged criminal conduct, professional disciplinary and regulatory issues, and inquests. (For details of past cases, click on the Specialist Profiles, above left.)
Alleged criminal conduct: Alan acts for professional people, institutions, and companies. He is particularly experienced in cases involving a death, or where the charges relate to sexual misconduct or dishonesty.
Professional discipline and regulatory work: Alan acts in cases concerning doctors, dentists, solicitors, police officers and other professionals.
Inquests: Alan is usually instructed for persons whose actions / alleged failings are the focus of the hearing.
Alan has been consistently ranked by both the leading legal directories as a Tier 1 junior in professional discipline. A solicitor quoted in the current edition of The Legal 500 notes that, “he can diffuse the stickiest of issues when presenting a case.”
Other recent directory editorial has included the following:
- his cross-examination is formidable;
- a highly experienced advocate;
- has a light touch that works its magic with both witnesses and panels;
- both straightforward and approachable;
- very highly recommended;
- without doubt one of the best barristers in the field in terms of client care, advocacy and the ability to assimilate masses of documents and present an effective case;
- he inspires great confidence in the client;
- a very experienced advocate with a poised presence;
- particularly good at handling work with criminal aspects;
- his extremely smooth and persuasive style;
- an outstanding trial lawyer;
- he is very keen and highly experienced;
- he fights for his clients;
- a highly experienced advocate in medical disciplinary and related criminal matters;
- approachable, knowledgeable and efficient;
- has a light touch both in conference and in hearings;
- prepares his cases well, is excellent at cross-examination, and is completely unselfish with his time;
- noted for his specialism in representing medical professionals;
- he is excellent in terms of his preparation and his understanding of the sector.
- he is effective in maintaining a view of the bigger picture;
- he can diffuse the stickiest of issues when presenting a case;
- he acts regularly on behalf of doctors, dentists and solicitors, appearing in front of tribunals and appellate courts;
- he does particularly well representing medical professionals facing dual disciplinary and criminal proceedings; and
- Jenkins’ mature and calm courtroom style is a delight to watch and he is notably user-friendly and accessible.
I am very conscious of the potential consequences of the cases in which I am instructed, both for those people that I represent but also for the witnesses who have to be cross examined.
“As lawyers we have a duty to ensure the whole journey for the client is as comfortable as it can be, even through the difficult times.”
Professional people who are accused of serious failings, or of dishonesty or sexually predatory behaviour often feel under enormous pressure, both leading up to and during their case. They may stand to lose their professional status, and with it their job, and consequently their income, and possibly their home as well. For those facing criminal allegations, they face the prospect of a prison sentence as well. For many, the uncertainty as to the outcome of the case can be extremely stressful, and which may become nigh on intolerable as the hearing approaches.
I recognise that lawyers have a very significant responsibility to their clients to ensure that the process of preparing for, and getting through, a case is as smooth as possible, and that the stress for the client is not actually increased by his/her representatives. As lawyers we have a duty to ensure the whole journey for the client is as comfortable as it can be, even through the difficult times.
And the same is true for witnesses that need to be cross examined. For me, a “light touch” approach is both appropriate and effective. My first duty is to my client, of course, but I try to keep in mind that witnesses, too, are likely to be anxious about giving evidence, and that they will probably remember the experience of doing so for some time. To that end I avoid “roughing up” a witness just for the sake of it, and not least because doing so is unlikely to find favour with the Judge, jury or tribunal. There are subtler, and certainly gentler, ways of undermining a witness.
I recall a case some years ago in which I was defending a man accused of a number of sexual assaults on women. After I had cross examined one of the complainants my solicitor told me that “she didn’t know you were accusing her of lying, but the jury did”. I was gratified, as I was later, when my client was acquitted of the charges that he faced.
Alan adopts and adheres to the provisions of the privacy notice which can be accessed here.
For further details of Alan’s practice please click on the links to the left or contact a member of the clerking or client service.
Bar Council Membership No: 19657
VAT Registration No: 397262221