Jack Jennett

Call: 2015

Practice Overview | Notable Cases | Download Profile | Contact
Back to Members


Jack joined Chambers following the successful completion of his pupillage under the supervision of Molly Pinkus.

Prior to joining Chambers, Jack worked for a well-known Criminal Defence and Civil Liberties firm in Central London. Jack worked primarily in Confiscation, Asset Seizure and Forfeiture and Financial Crime. During this time, Jack played a key role defending a multi-million-pound private prosecution in relation a Serious Crime Prevention Order where millions of pounds of algorithms were said to have been stolen and stored overseas. As a result, Jack has a keen interest and experience in these areas and is comfortable handling and understanding the large amounts of financial data that arise within such cases.

Since joining Chambers, Jack has run an exclusive defence practice having been regularly instructed across a broad-spectrum of general criminal matters including matters involving serious violence, drugs, dishonesty, sexual offences, public disorder and motoring offences. Jack also has experience in regulatory/licencing matters as well as extradition.

Jack has been praised for his interpersonal skills and has represented both young and vulnerable clients being able to explain complex matters in a calm manner which is easily digestible.



“[Jack] is able to grasp issues in the case swiftly and give detailed and accurate advice to both the client and I.”

“[Jack shows] a genuine interest and a passion for the cases in which he is instructed.”

“Reliable, diligent and professional advocate.”

“He has an ability to give sound and accurate legal advice in a manner that is clear, concise and easy for clients to understand.”

“Fearless advocacy and going the extra mile for clients.”

“[Jack’s] drafting skills are extremely well written with knowledge, authority and conviction.”

“[Jack] knows how to pick up small points and make them meaningful.”

“I have the upmost faith in his skills, expertise and professionalism.”

“I have been consistently impressed with his advocacy, presentation skills and client care.”


R v CH – Woolwich Crown Court – Vulnerable client aided by an intermediary acquitted of Robbery and alternative of ABH.

R v NM – St Albans Crown Court -Instructed on multi-count Burglary matter with the purported loss exceeding £100,000. Ongoing.

R v IP – Westminster Magistrates’ Court - Elite private security guard for ultra-high net worth individuals accused of assault. Ongoing.

R v CB – Bromley Magistrates’ Court - Semi-professional Boxer acquitted of an allegation of assault against a youth.

R v LS – Northampton Magistrates’ Court – Defendant at least 64 times over the limit for Drug Driving. The Defendant plead Guilty alongside other driving offences and was sentenced to the minimum mandatory ban of 12 months together with a financial penalty.

R v TC – Bromley Magistrates’ Court – Defendant acquitted of failure to provide a specimen following the presentation of live medical evidence at trial.

R v TR – Willesden Magistrates’ Court – Defendant plead Guilty to 5 separate driving offences and was sentenced to a 12-month Conditional Discharge and 8 penalty points.

R v JDB – Highbury Youth Court – Defendant accused of Assaulting a Police Officer with camera evidence and five police officers called as live witnesses. The case was dismissed at the close of the Prosecution case after a successful submission of ‘no case to answer’.

R v RT – Highbury Youth Court – Defendant accused of Obstructing a Police Officer during a drug search. After the successful cross-examination of two officers an application of ‘no case to answer’ was made and the case was dismissed.

R v JT – Hastings Magistrates’ Court – Vulnerable Defendant full-credit given for a guilty plea on the day of trial. The Defendant was also subject to a suspended sentence for similar offences. Despite this, the suspended sentence was not activated.

R v MO – Willesden Magistrates’ Court – Jack successfully argued that a trial should not go ahead due to his concerns over the mental health of the Defendant. Upon review, it was found that the Defendant did have Mental Health issues and the matter was ultimately discontinued.

R v AS – Staines Magistrates’ Court – Defendant is a serving IPP prisoner accused of assaulting a prison guard. Jack secured a bind-over in order to reduce any potential effect on parole.

R v IS – Uxbridge Magistrates’ Court – Defendant charged with allegations of Assault. Upon the drafting of a Defence Case Statement, the matter was discontinued.

R v MM and others – Willesden Magistrates’ Court – Defendant accused of Conspiracy to Kidnap and Section 18. Jack dealt with the matter at first-appearance giving the initial legal advice to the Defendant. This case is said to have links to both overseas Cartel and Mafia.



BPTC:  "Very Competent"
LLB: 1st
Lord Denning Scholar



This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it