“A strong reputation for his advocacy and advisory practice.”
Legal 500 – 2020
“Very hardworking and leaves no stone unturned”
Legal 500 2018
“…thorough, flexible and very sharp…”
Legal 500 2017
“…extremely approachable and includes the client at every turn.”
Legal 500 2016
“…seemingly inexhaustible. He looks at a problem from every angle.”
Chambers 2015
“…second-to-none work ethic and strong courtroom skills.”
Legal 500 2015
“a strong advocate…praised for his drafting skills and powers of analysis; ‘…unprecedented in terms of his willingness to deal with the detail in a case. He knows his brief better than any barrister I’ve come across’…”
Chambers 2014
“Noted for his knowledge of data protection related disputes.”
Legal 500 2014
“…substantial experience in defamation, privacy, Freedom of Information and data protection cases.”
Legal 500 2013
“…’fast becoming a star at the Libel Bar’…. considerable legal acumen…”
Chambers 2013
“…Notable…”
Legal 500 2012
“…a wealth of journalistic experience, which is a ‘massive boon’ in this market”
Chambers 2012
“……‘knowledgeable and able…’, John Samson is singled out.”
Legal 500 2011
Practice areas
John has always worked innovatively and independently to protect the rights and interests of diverse individuals as well as publishers, film and TV production companies, local authorities, law firms, the police, public authorities, charities, trade unions, religious groups, private companies and public corporations.
Acting for both claimants and defendants/respondents, John is a leading junior who usually appears as sole counsel including the Privy Council, High Court, Court of Appeal, the Information Tribunal and the Employment and Employment Appeal Tribunals.
Highly experienced in all areas of media and communications law, information law and employment law, John regularly advises on both personal and commercial matters and has a well-deserved reputation for his formidable advocacy and advisory practice.
John’s understanding of the strategic integration of litigation with commercial, personal and public policy objectives is very strong, whether for a corporate defendant in Tiscali UK Ltd v BT Plc; the elected officers of a Sikh temple; a local authority facing harassment allegations in Allen v LB Southwark; dealing with Twitter attacks by business rivals or halting publication of misplaced allegations by a national consumer magazine about a CBD oil manufacturer.
This expertise extends to individual reputation management where John has represented: the brand finance adviser to a renowned model in a dispute with her former employer; a UK based neuro-surgeon in a dispute with his NHS and University employer; a sports PR adviser in disputes with an English sports association and an investigative journalist; a broker in dispute with a blue-chip investment house and the Chief Executive of an AIM listed travel company in a dispute with the Group Board.
John gained an LLB (First Class) at the Birkbeck School of Law, University of London, is a qualified and registered public access practitioner and accepts instructions as a CEDR accredited mediator.
In addition to being on the ‘Advocates’ pro bono case list, John regularly volunteers with the St George’s Cathedral pro bono legal surgery for London’s Spanish speaking community providing advice and representation on employment and immigration issues.
Media & Communications
John’s media and communications practice includes: Confidence, Contempt, Copyright, Data Protection, Defamation, Entertainment Law, Freedom of Information, Harassment, Human Rights, Injunctive Relief, Malicious Falsehood, Media Law, Pre-publication Advice, Privacy and Reputation Management.
Before joining the independent bar in 2005, John worked as in-house counsel for a niche media law practice, as an in-house lawyer for the Guardian Newspaper Group (Observer and Guardian) and as a freelance for Mirror Group Newspapers. Together with his time as a TV executive in documentaries before transferring to the bar, he has a deep understanding of journalism and media production and the associated legal issues.
As counsel at a specialist media law practice from 2001, John appeared in numerous high-profile trials including among many others: Wallis v Valentine [2003] EMLR 175, Maccaba v Lichtenstein [2005] EMLR 6; [2005] EMLR 9 (the ‘indecent proposal’ case and longest running slander trial in English legal history); Mo George v News Group Newspapers and Pell v Express Newspapers [2005] EWCA Civ 46.
Among many notable and prominent media law cases since, John acted in the long-running class action for UCATT construction workers in the blacklisting claims: Smith v Skanska & Others, a complex, 3-year, high profile High Court Group Litigation action in which he initiated claims in misuse of private information, breach of confidence and defamation, applying privacy law for the first time in an employment rather than a celebrity context. John’s clients won settlements in excess of £9million.
In the phone hacking litigation, John acted for one of News Group’s News Editors; in Sir Cliff Richard v BBC and South Yorkshire Police, he was instructed for the second defendant in a far-reaching claim for damages in privacy and for the defendant in, Barkhuysen v Hamilton [2018] QB 1015, a land dispute between village neighbours in which raucous allegations resulted in a week- long trial in slander, malicious prosecution, false imprisonment and harassment.
Other reported cases include: Ansari v Knowles [2014] CP Rep 9; Allen v LB Southwark [2008] EWCA Civ 1478 (defendant, CA); Wray v University of West Indies [2007] UKPC 14 (claimant, PC); Maccaba v Lichtenstein [2005] EMLR 6; [2005] EMLR 9 (defendant, QB); Mo George v News Group Newspapers (claimant, QB); Pell v Express Newspapers [2005] EWCA Civ 46 (claimant, CA); Tiscali v BT [2008] EWHC 2927; [2008] EWHC 3129 (defendant, QB); Charterhouse Research v Richmond Pharmacology [2003] EWHC 1099 (defendant, QB) and Wallis v Valentine [2003] EMLR 175 (claimant, CA).
Employment
John has a broad and successful practice in employment law in which he is regularly instructed in cases of breach of contract, unfair dismissal, discrimination, victimisation, holiday pay claims, TUPE, whistleblowing and interim relief.
In addition to a personal background in business as an employer before being called to the bar, John’s knowledge of media and information law is often called upon in an employment law context since issues of reputation, privacy, breach of confidence, data protection and freedom of information often overlap with workplace disputes.
John appears regularly in the higher courts and is often engaged on extended hearings and more complex and interdisciplinary matters.
His employment practice has included appellate appearances in precedent setting cases concerning:
Child-care voucher schemes which ‘divert’ existing salary – the government’s guidance was unsatisfactory; the vouchers are part of an employee’s remuneration and not a benefit to which there was an entitlement during maternity leave: Peninsula Business Services v Donaldson [2016] ICR 565, EAT
the statutory definition of ethnic origin and whether it includes a claimant’s caste or status within a caste system; the decision also makes significant observations by the President on the requirement for parties to set out the essence of their cases in the pleadings: Chandock v Tirkey (2015] ICR 527, EAT;
the retrospective entitlement to payment of an allowance in lieu of annual leave not taken on termination of employment: Sash Window Workshop v King [2105] IRLR 348, CA;
substitution clauses which distinguish a contract of employment from a contract for services establishing the principle of a sham not only where there is an attempt to deceive a third party but also where neither party intended to create the legal rights and obligations set out in the employment contract: Redrow Homes (Yorkshire) v Buckborough [2009] IRLR 34;
apparent judicial bias arising from the ET judge’s trenchant derogatory views on businesses such as that of the appellant made close to trial: Peninsula Business Services v Rees (2009) UKEAT/0333/08/RN; and
a Privacy Council declaration that an employer breached its contractual duty to give notice and its strike out application in a libel claim was dismissed and remitted to the Supreme Court of Jamaica: Wray v University of West Indies [2007] UKPC 14.
Information law
John has taken cases through the Information Tribunals (Upper and Lower tiers) including successful claims for costs against regulatory bodies and advises clients regularly on all matters concerned with data sharing, data protection, data governance, e-commerce, e-communications and freedom of information.
Regulatory information
Vat number: 468 869 568
Regulated by the Bar Standards Board
Memberships
Inner Temple
Employment Lawyer’s Association
Employment Law Bar Association
LLB (First Class), Birkbeck School of Law, University of London
Set up an initial, fixed fee, zoom conference to discuss your case with John.