Harriet Tighe

Year of Call: 2014

Harriet Tighe
  • CV Download
  • email hidden; JavaScript is required

Harriet joined Chambers in September 2016 after completing a Criminal and Regulatory Pupillage under the supervision of Virginia Hayton.

Harriet has developed a busy criminal practice appearing in court on a daily basis. Harriet accepts instructions for prosecution and defence in both the Magistrates’ Court and Crown Court.

Harriet regularly represents defendant charged with a range of offences including:

  • Dangerous driving
  • Driving without due care and attention
  • Burglary and robbery
  • Possession and supply of Class A Drugs
  • Possession of indecent images

Harriet has represented Defendants at trial in the Magistrates’ Court for offences such as fraud, harassment, possession of an offensive weapon and failing to provide a specimen.

Harriet has conducted a number of appeals against convictions and sentence in the Crown Court. Harriet has experience of representing Defendants in Proceeds of Crime Act hearings. She also has experience of prosecuting and defending in the Youth Court.

Harriet also specialises in Regulatory Law, which includes, Inquests, Health and Safety, Licencing and Professional Discipline.

She regularly conducts inquests and pre inquest reviews on behalf of Local Authorities, as well as companies and private individuals across the UK.

She has experience of both jury and Coroner led inquests, which have involved fatal RTA’s, deaths in custody and care homes.

Harriet became an approved GMC advocate in September 2019. She has been instructed to represent the GMC on both review hearings and fitness to practice hearings. Allegations have included acts of dishonesty, criminal convictions and sexual misconduct.

Harriet regularly represents Local Authorities in relation to taxi licensing appeals.

Harriet has experience of representing individuals in a public inquiry before the Traffic Commissioner.


On a more personal note Harriet enjoys keeping active and plays for Manchester Moss Park Women’s Hockey Club.


Notable Cases

  • Inquest touching into the death of Mr O

    Represented a private hospital. Inquest concerned death of a male following routine complications from cataract surgery. Coroner gave a narrative conclusion and a neglect finding in relation to the care the deceased received at the Trust. PFD ordered for the Trust. No adverse findings made or PFD required in relation to the private hospital.

  • GMC v Dr B

    Dr B appealed the decision of the assistant registrar to withdraw Dr B’s licence to practise following Dr B’s failure to complete the revalidation process. Skeleton Argument and written submissions required in advance of the hearing. MPTS dismissed Dr B’s appeal.

  • GMC v Dr K

    Represented the GMC against a Doctor in a misconduct case. Dr K had been convicted of drink driving and dangerous driving. Dr K had previous convictions for drink driving and had not been working as a doctor since 2014. The most recent conviction had resulted in an immediate custodial sentence for. Dr K was suspended by MPTS for a period of 12 months.

  • GMC v Dr E

    Represented the GMC against a Doctor in a review hearing. Previously Dr E’s fitness to practice had been found to be impaired due to misconduct. Allegations were proven that Dr E had behaved in a sexually motivated way towards two female medical students. Dr E was suspended for a further period of 9 months to allow the doctor to develop further insight.

  • GMC v Dr Khaw

    Represented the GMC against a doctor in a misconduct case. Dr K had been convicted in Hong Kong for the murder of his wife and daughter. Dr K was erased from the medical register.


    Provided a written advice on liability for a breach of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991, specifically concerning the definition of ‘undertaker’ according to the act. Clear Channel adopted Counsel’s advice and entered an early guilty plea in order to retain credit. Miss Tighe successfully advanced in mitigation the hazard was quickly rectified and the company had carried out an investigation into the incident.


    Represented a Utilities Company in a sentencing hearing for a breach of New Roads and Street Works Act 1991. The company accepted that the road works obstructed the road and prevented access for emergency vehicles and residents.


    Represented an owner of a Shisha Café Bar who had failed to comply with s.8(1) Health Act 2006 by allowing individuals to smoke within enclosed marquees on the premises. The Defendant received a £200 Fine and was ordered to pay a contribution to the Council’s costs.


    Represented Stoke on Trent County Council prosecuting the Defendant for possession of tobacco and cigarettes that did not display the requisite health warnings. The Defendant entered a guilty plea on the day of trial on the full facts. The District Judge rejected the Defendant’s assertion that he was holding them for a friend and ordered the Defendant to pay a significant contribution towards the Council’s costs.


    Represented a motorist who had been involved with a head on collision with a motorcyclist. The Coroner concluded the motorist could not have done anything to avoid the collision because the motorcyclist had overtaken on a blind hill.


    Represented a Care Home. The Coroner accepted that the Care Home had instigated significant changes since the incident including an extensive action plan. The Coroner concluded it was therefore not necessary to issue a report under regulation 28.


    Represented a Care Home in a Pre-inquest review. Miss Tighe advised that the Care Home Manager should seek separate representation in order to avoid a conflict of interest.


    Represented MCC in an appeal against conviction where a taxi driver had been convicted on plying for hire and driving without insurance. Crown Court Appeal dismissed and Appellant ordered to pay further costs.


    Represented Capita Business Services in an appeal against conviction and Sentence. The Judge accepted the offence was strict liability and after Miss Tighe directed the Appellant and the Court to the relevant documentation the appeal was swiftly dismissed.

  • REGINA –V- IM and other

    Represented a Defendant charged with Robbery of a phone shop with two others. Made a successful half-time submission where the Judge concluded there was no evidence of a contemporaneous threat and/or violence. The case continued against one Co-Defendant who was ultimately convicted.

  • REGINA -V- JG and F

    Represented a Defendant charged with witness intimidation and assault on joint enterprise basis. The trial last 5 days and involved child witnesses giving evidence with use of special measures. The Defendants were acquitted by the Jury on both Counts.

  • REGINA -V- AR & Others

    Represented one of 8 anti-fracking protesters who were charged with obstruction of the highway and a s.241 Trade Union offence. The case involved extensive legal argument as to whether there was an actionable tort of unlawful interference. The District Judge found the ingredient of the s.241 charge were not met and acquitted all Defendants of this charge. The Defendants received either a fine or conditional discharge for the obstruct highway offence.

  • REGINA – V - Z

    Represented a Defendant at Ground Rules Hearing. The Defendant was charged with assaulting his daughter. The Magistrates acceded to Miss Tighe’s submissions that the ABE interview should be properly edited by the Crown and not simply ‘fast-forwarded’ past inadmissible sections.

  • REGINA – V- B

    Prosecuted a Ground Rules Hearing involving a vulnerable youth Defendant, whereby an Intermediary Report had been produced. Miss Tighe was responsible for drafting the directions to apply to the conduct of the intermediary, advocates and Tribunal on the day of trial.

  • REGINA - V - J

    Represented one of five youth Defendants charged with ABH [an unprovoked attack on a 14 year old in Blackpool Town Centre]. The trial lasted 3 days. The Case involved ABE interviews and conducting cross-examination via-video link. The District Judge found there were large gaps in the Crown’s case and all the Defendants were acquitted.

  • REGINA -V- T

    Represented a Defendant subject to the “Totting Up provisions” for a speeding offence. Miss Tighe argued disqualification would cause him Exceptional Hardship because the Defendant’s business would fold, he would be reliant on state benefits and he would be unable to pay child maintenance. The District Judge was persuaded and remarked it was clearly a case where Exceptional Hardship could be found. The Defendant paid nominal fine of £100 and reduced costs of £55.


  • CPS Advocates Panel – Level 2
  • GMC Approved Panel of Advocates

Professional Associations

  • Northern Circuit


  • Kenilworth School and Sports College
  • LLB English Law with French Law – First Class. University of Manchester
  • DEUF Award. (Diplôme d'Etudes Universitaires Françaises). French Legal Diploma. Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3


  • The Honourable Society of Middle Temple, Rose Scholarship for BPTC tuition fees.