JAY GAJJAR
Year of call: 2014
013

Barrister at Law, the Honourable Society Of Middle Temple

Jay was called to the Bar in 2014 and is a member of the Honourable Society of Middle Temple.

Jay’s broad practice covers a range of areas including Immigration, Civil, Employment, Commercial and Family Law with a particular focus on judicial reviews and general public law. He is known for his dedication to cases and his forensic approach to evidence.

EXPERTS YOU CAN TRUST

EXPERIENCE & BACKGROUND

Jay has successefully presented cases before the First-Tier Tribunal, Upper Tribunal, High Court and Court of Appeal covering all aspects of immigration and asylum law. He is known for his work in complex cases where his clients have faced allegations of dishonesty, deception and bad faith including the Government’s use of paragraph 322(5) of the Immigration Rules in tax dishonesty cases.
Jay’s interest in employment law led him to becoming a barrister. He accepts instructions in all areas of employment law, has appeared before the Tribunals and is available to provide detailed and honest advice, both in writing and in conference.
Jay accepts instructions across a broad spectrum of civil litigation matters and has covered small claims, cryptocurrency fraud and appeared in high value, multitrack trials listed for several days. He is known for his forensic approach to cross-examination. His work also including landlord and tenant, building disputes and he has appeared in both trials and appeals.
Jay has a wealth of experience in representing clients in family hearings including private children matters and non-molestation applications.
Jay read law at the University of Sussex and graduated with an upper second-class (2:1). He went on to complete a Masters in International Trade Law at the University of Sussex, graduating with a Distinction before completing his second Masters in International Commercial Law at University College London (UCL), also graduating with a Distinction. He went on to train as a barrister at BPP Law University, completing the course with an overall score of Very Competent and several Outstanding grades.
  • 2014  Bar Professional Training Course (BPP Holborn) – Very Competent
  • 2013  Master’s in International Commercial Law (UCL) – Distinction
  • 2012  Master’s in International Trade Law  (The University of Sussex) – Distinction
  • 2008  LLB From The University of Sussex
  • Gajjar, J. ‘Your Dominion or Mine? A Critical Evaluation of the Case Law on Freedom of Establishment for Companies and the Restrictions’, (2013) 24(2) International Commercial and Company Law Review 50.
 
  • Gajjar, J. ‘The Doctrine of Insurable Interest in Life Insurance’ (2013) 127 British Insurance Law Association 1.
  • Gajjar, J. ‘The Carrot and the Stick: The Issue of Directors’ Remuneration and the Scope for Employee Participation, a Comparative Analysis’ (2014) 25(1) European Business Law Review 103
  1. R (on the application of Wahid) v ECO [2021] EWCA Civ 346 – Jay appeared before Lady Justice Carr and Lord Justices Henderson and David Richards in a successful challenge against a refusal of permission to bring judicial review proceedings in an entry clearance challenge involving an allegation of dishonesty.
  2. Jallow v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWCA Civ 788 – Jay appeared as Lead Counsel before Lady Justice King and Lord Justices Lewis and Baker in a deportation appeal in which he was granted permission to appeal from the Upper Tribunal.
  3. R (on the application of Akram) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ 1072 – Jay appeared before Lord Justice Hickinbottom and Lady Justice Carr in an application to re-open an appeal under CPR 52.30 following a previous refusal of permission.
  4. R (on the application of London St Andrews college) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 2496 – Jay obtained permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal before Lady Justice Arden as she then was and went on to be led at the substantive appeal.
  5. DK and RK (Parliamentary privilege; evidence) India [2021] UKUT 61 – a hearing before the President and Vice President in relation to the admissibility of an APPG report as evidence in statutory appeals.
  6. Abbasi (rule 43; para 322(5): accountants’ evidence) Pakistan [2020] UKUT 27 – Jay appeared before the President of the Upper Tribunal, Mr Justice Lane and UTJ Lindsley instructed at the late stages of an appeal hearing after the Upper Tribunal had previously allowed a 322(5) appeal and then sought to reopen the matter following a tip off that the Appellant’s evidence was potentially forged.
  7. R (on the application of Ahmedi) [2020] UKAITUR JR058632019 – a successful substantive judicial review claim before UTJ Keith (permission was granted on Jay’s written grounds by UTJ Norton-Taylor) challenging a decision that an individual was not a genuine entrepreneur.
  8. R (on the application of Dommati) [2019] UKAITUR JR032732018 – a successful substantive judicial review claim before UTJ Jackson following a permission hearing before UTJ Allen. Jay appeared for the Applicant on both occasions in relation to an allegation of dishonesty.
  9. Ejiogu (Cart cases) Nigeria [2019] UKUT 395 – a hearing in the Upper Tribunal following a Cart judicial review application in the High Court.
  10. R (on the application of Hoxha and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (representatives: professional duties) [2019] UKUT 124 – representation of an OISC firm at a Hamid hearing.
  11. R (on the application of Vida Nsiah) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (CO/3227/2018) – a successful substantive judicial review claim challenging the lawfulness of detention. Jay appeared before David Edwards QC at the substantive stage and Alex Bailin QC at the permission stage.
  12. R (on the application of Habib) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (JR/1638/2018) – a successful substantive judicial review decision regarding paragraph 322(5) of the Rules before Mr Justice Lane and UTJ Perkins.
  13. R (on the application of Khan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Dishonesty, tax return, paragraph 322(5)) [2018] UKUT 384 – a successful substantive judicial review claim regarding dishonesty in tax declarations vis-à-vis paragraph 322(5) of the Immigration Rules. Jay appeared before UTJ Finch at the permission stage and Mr Justice Martin Spencer at the substantive hearing.
  14. R (on the application of Modi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (JR/3645/2018) – a successful substantive judicial review against a decision under paragraph 322(5) of the Immigration Rules before UTJ King.
  15. R (on the application of Shaik) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (JR/8324/2017) – a successful substantive judicial review challenge to an allegation of dishonesty under paragraph 322(5) of the Rules before UTJ Canavan.
  16. R (on the application of Omaththage) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (JR/3399/2018)– a successful substantive judicial review challenge UTJ Blum under paragraph 322(5) of the Immigration Rules
  17. AS v AA – Jay appeared in a civil trial where he successfully argued on behalf of the claimant that the sale of cryptocurrency had been conducted through fraudulent misrepresentation.
  18. NQB v MH and others – Jay represented the claimant in a multitrack trial in the Central London County Court where he argued that the defendants had harassed the claimant, breached a contractual agreement for the payment of dowry and caused her pain, suffering an personal injury; the decision of this case is awaited.
  • English
  • Gujarati
  • Hindi