Christopher took silk in 2014 and is considered to be one of the leaders at the Bar in his areas of expertise. He is consistently recommended by the leading industry directories Chambers & Partners UK and The Legal 500 and is routinely first choice counsel for many major law firms.
In sports law, Christopher is instructed by The Football Association in some of its biggest cases, and is appointed to the Arbitrators’ Panel of Sport Resolutions Limited.
FA v Daniel Sturridge
Represented the FA in this case. Daniel Sturridge, formerly of Liverpool FC, was accused by the FA of passing on inside information to his family. The case was initially heard over a 5 day hearing in April 2019 before a Regulatory Commission, following which some of the allegations were proved. The FA appealed against the charges which had been dismissed and also against the leniency of the ban imposed by the Commission. That appeal was concluded in February 2020, following which a number of the other charges were upheld and the ban was increased from 2 weeks to 4 months.
FA v Joey Barton
Represented the FA in proceedings brought against Joey Barton, who was charged with illicit gambling offences over a 10 year period, which included betting against his own team. Mr Barton was banned from football for 18 months, reduced to 13 months on appeal.
FA v Leeds United FC and Massimo Cellino
Represented the FA in proceedings brought against Leeds United and its former Chairman, Massimo Cellino. The Club and Cellino were charged with creating sham paperwork to hide the involvement of an unauthorised agent in transfer dealings undertaken by the club. They were found guilty at first instance, on appeal and again in arbitration proceedings brought by Mr Cellino. He was eventually banned from football for a year and fined £100,000.
Re [X] F.C
Instructed to advise the FA in relation to historical allegations at a Premier League football club. The advice given dealt with a number of technical issues under the FA’s regulations. For reasons of client confidentiality and legal professional privilege, it is not possible to give any more information about the case.