Full Breakdown
Court of Appeal Halts Contempt Case Against Barrister in Palestine Action Trial
5/14/2026, 4:06:40 AM
Appeal Decision
On 12 May 2026 the Court of Appeal dismissed contempt proceedings against Rajiv Menon KC, ruling that Justice Johnson could not refer him to the High Court without an Attorney General application, so the case was halted and returned to the trial judge.
Background to the Protest and Jury-Equity Issue
In January 2024 six Palestine Action activists broke into the Filton plant of Elbit Systems UK, a British subsidiary of the Israeli defence firm, causing criminal damage. The February trial acquitted all defendants. Menon’s closing speech cited the 1670 Bushell’s Case to invoke “jury equity”, the right of jurors to follow conscience, which Justice Johnson had barred; he later argued Menon’s remarks urged jurors to disregard his directions, prompting the contempt referral.
Key Actors & Outcomes
Rajiv Menon KC, a human-rights barrister and former head of Garden Court Chambers, defended Charlotte Head. Justice Johnson presided at Woolwich Crown Court. The retrial convicted four activists of criminal damage, with two acquitted; sentencing is set for 12 June 2026, reportedly under terrorism law.
Official Statements
Jenny Wiltshire said the appeal confirmed that Justice Johnson lacked authority to start contempt proceedings without an Attorney General referral and called the original allegation “unprecedented”. Defend Our Juries stressed jury equity as a safeguard against state overreach. Garden Court Chambers warned the case could chill barristers’ ability to represent clients. The Court of Appeal sent the matter back to the trial judge.
Criticism
Commentators called the contempt move an “unprecedented attempt to criminalise lawyers for doing their job”, warning it could erode the right to a vigorous defence and threaten the jury-equity principle.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Some sources say the activists were cleared of aggravated burglary before criminal-damage convictions; only one source mentions terrorism-law sentencing, leaving that legal basis unclear.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Rajiv is delighted that the Court of Appeal has found in his favour.” — Jenny Wiltshire, Hickman & Rose
- “This unprecedented attempt to criminalise lawyers for doing their job and representing their clients fearlessly should never be repeated.” — Jenny Wiltshire, Hickman & Rose
- “‘We are extremely concerned about the chilling effect on the Bar of the state seeking to criminalise barristers for their representation of their clients’, Garden Court Chambers stated before the ruling.” — Garden Court Chambers
- “A spokesperson for campaign group Defend Our Juries said: “For over 350 years, the right of a jury to follow their conscience has been a cornerstone of British justice, and the last safeguard ordinary people have against the abuse of state power.” — Defend Our Juries spokesperson
What’s Next
The case now awaits any further direction from Justice Johnson, who must refer it to the Attorney General to proceed. The four convicted activists face sentencing in June, and the legal community will monitor the impact on future jury-equity references.
