Rosalia Myttas-Perris.

Barrister
Call: 2018

Present and Recent Instructions

R v CN – Representing a client charged with possession of a firearm and ammunition with intent to endanger life.
R v DM – Relying on psychiatric evidence, secured a special verdict of ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’.
HCPC – Represented a physiotherapist charged with having mental health conditions which impaired their fitness to practice. Following cross-examination of the HCPC’s expert psychiatric witness, the panel found the facts not proved.
R v DR – represented at trial a client charged with making hundreds of indecent images of children of categories A, B and C.
Manchester City Council v DW – Represented a client charged with multiple offences of breach of food hygiene regulations.
NMC v VB – Represented a nurse alleged to have physically and verbally assaulted a patient and failed to recognise their deteriorating health. Successful submission of no case to answer on the disputed charges and no impairment was found.
R v LB – Represented one of three clients charged with two counts of perverting the course of justice. The offence involved significant planning and included interfering with an ongoing criminal trial for a serious offence. Secured a suspended sentence.
R v TD – On the first day of trial successfully negotiated with the prosecution to accept a plea of common assault as an acceptable alternative to s.18 wounding with intent.
GMC v Dr AM – Represented a doctor facing serious sexual misconduct allegations. Client cleared of 17 allegations and no misconduct was found.

Qualifications

Bar Professional Training Course, City University (2018)
Politics, Philosophy and Law LLB (Hons), King’s College London (2016)

Scholarships and Awards

Ann Felicity Goddard Scholar, Gray’s Inn (2020)
Denise Pannick Scholar, Gray’s Inn (2018)
BPP Advocacy Award (not taken up) (2017)

Languages

Greek

Practice profile:

Rosalia has a busy practice specialising predominantly in criminal defence and professional discipline.

Rosalia has acted in a wide range of criminal matters, including human trafficking, violent and drug offences. She has appeared in the Court of Appeal where she successfully secured a reduction in sentence.

In her regulatory practice, Rosalia represents professionals accused of misconduct involving dishonesty, sexual misconduct and fraud, before regulators including the Nursing and Midwifery Council, the Health and Care Professions Council, the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy and Social Work England.

Rosalia previously completed a secondment with Blake Morgan LLP as a Case Manager in their Professional Regulatory department. Prior to starting pupillage, Rosalia was a paralegal in the financial crime department of Hickman and Rose LLP. She has also volunteered as an Appropriate Adult in Westminster, at the Centre for Criminal Appeals (now Appeal) and at Advocate (formerly the Bar Pro Bono Unit).

Rosalia is a contributor to the chapter on Terrorism in Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice 2023 edition.

Present and Recent Instructions

R v CN – Representing a client charged with possession of a firearm and ammunition with intent to endanger life.
R v DM – Relying on psychiatric evidence, secured a special verdict of ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’.
HCPC – Represented a physiotherapist charged with having mental health conditions which impaired their fitness to practice. Following cross-examination of the HCPC’s expert psychiatric witness, the panel found the facts not proved.
R v DR – represented at trial a client charged with making hundreds of indecent images of children of categories A, B and C.
Manchester City Council v DW – Represented a client charged with multiple offences of breach of food hygiene regulations.
NMC v VB – Represented a nurse alleged to have physically and verbally assaulted a patient and failed to recognise their deteriorating health. Successful submission of no case to answer on the disputed charges and no impairment was found.
R v LB – Represented one of three clients charged with two counts of perverting the course of justice. The offence involved significant planning and included interfering with an ongoing criminal trial for a serious offence. Secured a suspended sentence.
R v TD – On the first day of trial successfully negotiated with the prosecution to accept a plea of common assault as an acceptable alternative to s.18 wounding with intent.
GMC v Dr AM – Represented a doctor facing serious sexual misconduct allegations. Client cleared of 17 allegations and no misconduct was found.