Daniella Adeluwoye

Daniella regularly defends in both the Magistrates’ Court and Crown Court, where she has represented clients charged with a range of offences such as serious fraud, violent disorder, drugs, weapons, serious violence, stalking, and theft. She has recently secured acquittals on charges of knife possession, battery, sexual assault, indecent exposure, and various driving offences, including dangerous driving, being in charge of a vehicle with excess alcohol, and operating a handheld mobile phone while driving.

She has also successfully argued for the dismissal of charges such as attempted robbery, assault by beating, using violence to secure entry into property, and threatening to damage property. The judiciary has praised her advocacy as “elegant”, noted how she “forcibly” advanced her client’s mitigation, and commended her for the manner in which she articulately elicited her client’s evidence in the courtroom.

Daniella’s calm and confident temperament puts clients at ease as she quickly grasps both the key issues and the finer details of the case in order to provide sensible advice.

R v WI - Acted for a defendant charged with violent disorder, possession of a bladed article in a public place (a machete), and possession of a prohibited weapon (a sword) in a private place. The defendant caused serious physical injury to two persons, and this was his ‘second-strike’ offence. Following Daniella’s assertion that the third count was misconceived in law, the Crown offered no evidence. Outcome - following guilty pleas entered to the remaining matters, Daniella carefully advanced considerable mitigation against the backdrop of several convictions. The sentence was successfully mitigated down to 25 months’ imprisonment — towards the very bottom of what the Court could have imposed.

R v AS - Acted for a defendant charged with possession of a (large) knife and affray. Following review of Daniella’s robust defence case statement, the Crown offered no evidence. In that statement, Daniella challenged the admissibility of the CCTV footage, which the Crown sought to rely on to establish her client’s identification. She also contended that no formal identification procedures had been undertaken.

R v PD - Acted for a defendant who had pleaded guilty to breaching a restraining order and Class A drug possession. Daniella successfully argued that the lead offence was a Category 3 Harm, rather than a Category 2 Harm; this position was initially disputed by the Crown but accepted at the sentencing hearing. The Judge at the Crown Court expressed that Daniella’s sentencing note was “helpful” and that she “should be commended on [her] thorough preparation” and “spot-on submissions". Outcome - Daniella secured a 12-month community order for each offence to run concurrently.

R v CD - Acted for a youth defendant who had pleaded guilty to ABH (the youth defendant had hit another youth with a glass bottle on the head twice, causing injury). Outcome - secured a referral order.

R v BL - Acted for a youth defendant charged with attempted robbery in a multi-handed case. The Crown alleged that around four to five teenagers approached a delivery driver on an electronic bike, attempted to steal the bike and his mobile phone, and made verbal threats. Upon the police’s arrival, the teenagers ran away; Daniella’s client and his co-defendant were apprehended separately shortly afterwards. The youth defendant made no comment in interview. Outcome - Following cross-examination of the Crown’s witness by Daniella and her co-counsel, they successfully argued that there was no case to answer.

Daniella undertakes work in financial remedy proceedings and in both private and public children law. During her pupillage, she completed a secondment at a boutique family law firm in the City, where she was exposed to complex high-net-worth divorce cases. She also accepts instructions to advise on issues of habitual residence and domicile in jurisdictional disputes.

Highlights of recent work include:

SM v GS - Daniella was recently instructed on an ongoing jurisdictional dispute where habitual residence was disputed. At the final hearing, HHJ Hess, the Lead Judge of the London Financial Remedies Court, commended the representatives for the “excellent level” in which they had represented the parties and for their “appropriate and focused cross-examination”.

Highlights of recent work include:

SL v SSHD (FFT) - Daniella successfully argued that the removal of her client to Nigeria would result in unjustifiably harsh consequences for her such that it would constitute a breach of Article 8.

BK v SSHD (FTT) - Successful appeal on asylum and human rights grounds on behalf of a Kurdish asylum seeker.

Daniella welcomes instructions in all these areas. She clerks school admission appeal panels, advising panel members on the applicable legal test.

Daniella undertakes a range of work in the County Court, including trials on the small claims track. She is developing a practice in dog ownership claims under the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977 and accepts instructions in pre-trial hearing applications and TOLATA.

Daniella welcomes instructions in all areas of property and housing law. She accepts instructions in possession claims with an Inheritance Act 1975 element.