Denise Fitzpatrick is recognised as a leading junior for Criminal Law. She has extensive experience in prosecuting and defending a wide range of serious and complex criminal cases.

Her attention to detail and capacity for hard work has secured her a reputation for consistently outstanding work. Those features, coupled with her commitment to providing the highest standards of client care, attract instructions from a broad range of clients.

Denise Fitzpatrick is an approved Advocate on Level 4 of the Crown Prosecution Service’s advocate panel for general crime. She is also on the specialist advocates’ panel for fraud (including fiscal fraud).

 

Fraud Offences

  • R v M [2022] Successful defence of a woman accused of benefit fraud at Manchester Crown Court. After the verdicts of ‘not guilty were recorded, the judge at the conclusion of the case described Denise Fitzpatrick’s case preparation as ‘extraordinary and exceptional’.
  • R v T [2022] Prosecution of a man who was convicted of fraudulent evasion of VAT, income tax and fraudulently claiming tax credits.
  • R v G and RW (2021)  Prosecution of two men who pleaded guilty to fraud following legal argument on the first day of trial. By fraudulently using bank credit card details of another person, they made purchases including lottery scratch cards, which included two winning tickets, one of which was the four-million-pound jackpot, which they then fraudulently tried to claim.
  • R v XL [2020] Prosecution of a man who was convicted of fraudulent evasion of VAT and income tax.
  • R v D [2020] Prosecution of a man who pleaded guilty to three offences of fraud concerning him supplying articles for the purposes of DNA testing to be used to commit or assist in the commission of fraud. The offences were committed when he was disputing paternity of his two sons following an application on their behalf made by their respective mothers for child maintenance.
  • R v M [2019] Successful defence of a woman who was acquitted of conspiracy to commit fraud and fraud by false representation. The alleged offences concerned multiple fraudulent applications for loans, credit cards and mobile telephones. In the fifth week of the trial at Chester Crown Court, the trial judge found no case to answer against the client.
  • R v RA [2019] Prosecution of a woman who was convicted of facilitating a breach of Immigration Law between 2012 and 2017.
  • R v F [2016] Successful defence of a man accused of making dishonest representations with a view to obtaining payments and benefits from the National Asylum Support Service. The central evidence in the trial was excluded following legal argument pursuant 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 with the result the prosecution offered no evidence.
  • R v S [2016] Prosecution of a man convicted after trial of twenty-two counts of fraud and false accounting.
  • R v C [2015] Successful defence trial of a woman accused of obtaining leave to enter and remain in the United Kingdom by deception, possession of a false identity document and obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception. A defence witness gave oral evidence over a video link from Karachi, Pakistan.

Sexual Offences

  • R v C [2022] Acquittal after trial of a man accused of rape.
  • R v T [2021] Successful defence of a man accused of historic offences of rape and indecent assault.
  • R v C [2019] Prosecution of a man sentenced for sexual assault on a woman who had a brain injury.
  • R v E [2017] Acquittal of a man accused of rape in a multi-defendant grooming trial.
  • R v T [2017] Prosecution of a man convicted after trial of historic sexual assaults.
  • R v Y [2016] Acquittal after trial of a woman accused of sexual assault by penetration.
  • R v D [2016] Acquittal after a successful submission of no case to answer of a man accused of rape and other sexual offences in a multi-defendant grooming trial.
  • R v A [2015] Successful defence of a man accused of raping a woman who had learning difficulties.
  • R v T [2014] Acquittal of a man accused of historic offences of rape in the early 1990s.
  • R v W [2014] Successful prosecution at Carlisle Crown Court of a man accused of sexual assaults on a child in the 1970s and early 1980s.
  • R v A [2013] Acquittal after trial of a taxi driver accused of sexually assaulting a passenger.
  • R v C [2013] Successful prosecution of a man convicted after trial of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity.
  • R v N [2010] Acquittal of a 14-year-old boy accused of raping a 13-year old girl, in which reports were obtained from nine expert witnesses.
  • R v W [2007] Without a leader, prosecuted a trial in which the defendant, who was accused of a sexual assault, was represented by a member of Queen’s Counsel.

Serious Crime

  • R v G [2022] Successful defence of a man accused of aggravated burglary in which the client had been accused of being one of three men who had forced their way into the home of another man whilst armed with an imitation handgun, a machete and a small axe. Whilst inside the house, the offenders had assaulted the occupant of the house and sought to steal from inside his home.
  • R v W [2022] Prosecution of a man convicted after trial of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm contrary to section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. He was subsequently sentenced to an extended sentence pursuant to section 279 of the Sentencing Act 2020 having met the criteria of a dangerous offender.
  • R v K [2022] Prosecution of a man convicted and sentenced in respect of blackmail offence as a paedophile.
  • R v G [2021] Representation of a man at confiscation proceedings regarding an offence of conspiracy to supply amphetamine over five years between 2013 and 2018.
  • R v I [2021] Representation of a man in respect of offences of breach of a forced marriage protection order, an offence of using violence, threats or coercion to cause a person to enter into a marriage, an offence of coercive and controlling behaviour in a family relationship and offences of child cruelty.
  • R v G [2021] Representation of a woman in respect of three linked offences of perverting the course of justice concerning providing false alibis.
  • R v T [2020] Prosecution of a man convicted of being concerned in the production of cannabis at three separate locations which were described by the sentencing judge as all professional operations.
  • R v M [2018] Representation of a man accused of attempted murder whose guilty plea to wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm was accepted by the prosecution.
  • R v C [2018] Representation of a seventeen-year-old involved in a conspiracy to supply Class A drugs.
  • R v NK [2017] Successful defence of a woman who was accused of controlling or coercive behaviour in a family relationship.
  • R v MT [2017] Successful defence of a woman accused of holding people in slavery or servitude and benefit fraud.
  • R v B [2017] Successful defence of a sixteen-year-old boy who was accused of rape and sexual assault.
  • R v W [2017] Led by Mark George QC, represented a man accused of murder whose guilty plea to manslaughter was accepted by the prosecution.
  • R v I [2017] Prosecution of a man convicted after trial of conspiracy to burgle high performance cars.
  • R v MB [2017] Prosecution of a man convicted after trial of armed robbery.
  • R v M and Others [2015] Successful defence of a man accused of conspiracy to hold a person in slavery or servitude, intentionally arranging or facilitating the entry into the United Kingdom of an individual intending to exploit her on her arrival and a count of facilitating a false marriage which facilitated a breach of Immigration Law.
  • R v H [2015] Prosecution of a man convicted after trial of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm.
  • R v S [2014] Successful defence trial of a man accused with four co-defendants of serious assaults including causing grievous bodily harm with intent to do grievous bodily harm.
  • R v D [2014] Following service of various applications to adduce business records as hearsay evidence, the prosecution offered no evidence in respect of six allegations of domestic violence assaults.
  • R v K, H and A [2014] Prosecution of people sentenced in respect of offences of conspiracy and assisting unlawful immigration involving ‘Sham Marriages’.
  • R v R, F and S [2013] Prosecution of three defendants convicted after trial at Burnley Crown Court for a series of assaults and witness intimidation.
  • R v B [2012] Successful defence trial of a landlord accused of contravening section 1(2) of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977.
  • R v K [2010] A prosecution trial at Manchester Crown Court at the conclusion of which the defendant was convicted of producing cannabis on a commercial scale and subsequent productive application for confiscation pursuant to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
  • R v S [2010] Successful defence trial of a woman accused of wounding a man with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.
  • R v B [2006] Defence of a man who had pleaded guilty to stealing an extremely high number of rare and valuable books from the Central Reference Library in Manchester. He avoided immediate imprisonment and received a suspended sentence of imprisonment.

Appeals

  • R v J [2022] Represented a client at the Court of Appeal whose case was the subject of an application by the Attorney General for leave under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to refer to the Court of Appeal his sentence as being unduly lenient. The case concerned sentencing historic sexual offences.
  • R v J [2021] Represented a client at the Court of Appeal on appeal against conviction in which directions were made referring the case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission for investigation regarding a potential juror irregularity.
  • R v BS [2019] Represented the prosecution in the Court of Appeal responding to an appeal against sentence concerning the approach to be taken when sentencing historic sexual offences where since the date of the commission of the instant offences the appellant had twice committed and been sentenced for similar offences. The appellant’s appeal was dismissed.
  • R v Freeman [2017] EWCA Crim 103: Represented a client whose case was the subject of an application by the Attorney General for leave under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to refer to the Court of Appeal his sentence as being unduly lenient.
  • Berg v Salford City Council [2013] EWHC 2599 (Admin) Denise FitzPatrick represented Salford City Council, the respondent in an appeal by way of case stated concerning a notice served by the respondent pursuant to section 215 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.  All eight questions of law were answered by the Administrative Court in favour of the submissions made on behalf of Salford City Council.
  • R v Baldacchino [2012] EWCA Crim 1394: Successful appeal to the Court of Appeal against sentence of an offence of conspiracy to burgle.
  • Director of Public Prosecutions v Howard [2008] EWHC 608 [Admin] Prosecuted an appeal by way of case stated concerning the definition of ‘racially aggravated’.
  • DPP v James Meakin [2006] EWHC 1067 (Admin) A successful appeal by way of case stated in which Denise Fitzpatrick was instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service. The appeal concerned issues of law regarding abuse of process and the admissibility of hearsay evidence.

 

LL.B. in Law (second class honours division one) from Lancaster University. Graduated 1999.

‘Very Competent’ on completion of the Bar Vocational Course at the Inns of Court School of Law in June 2000.

Called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple on 27th July 2000.

Level 4 Prosecutor.

Denise Fitzpatrick is an approved Advocate on Level 4 of the Crown Prosecution Service’s advocate panel for general crime.

Member of the Criminal Bar Association.

Member of the Ecclesiastical Law Society.

” she is excellent on her feet and commands the respect of the court” Legal 500

” clients relate to her and often comment that they have utmost confidence and faith in her and her abilities” Legal 500

” she is very professional , highly organised and cares deeply about her clients” Legal 500

” denise is bright, intelligent and thorough with a keen eye for detail. She is my first point of call  most cases and able to pick up anything at short notice and run with it” Legal 500

” she leaves no stone unturned when preparing a case” Legal 500

” methodical and brilliant with clients” Legal 500