Ahmed Muen

Ahmed’s Practice

Ahmed is a tenant at Holborn Chambers with a particular focus on criminal law. Ahmed practises all areas of criminal law and is regularly instructed by defence solicitors and the CPS undertaking both defence and prosecution work.


Ahmed regularly appears in the Youth, Magistrates and Crown Courts in and around London and has exposure to a varied case load within crime. Ahmed has a busy practice regularly working on matters ranging dishonesty offences, possession and supply of drugs, violent offences, sexual offences and driving offences.


Professional and lay clients have often credited Ahmed’s fearless advocacy and ability to quickly identify legal issues. Lay clients have commended his ability to build rapport with them and his emotional intelligence when dealing with their case.


Ahmed is fluent in Arabic and has strong connections within the Iraqi community, having represented and advised many of them on sensitive legal issues. Prior to becoming a tenant Ahmed visited Iraq and undertook work experience with the Iraqi High Tribunal and one of its Chief Investigate Judges.


As a pupil Ahmed was one of eight students shortlisted from Inner Temple’s 96 pupils by the inn as the one of the best advocates and was invited to compete at the semi-finals.


About Ahmed

Called to the bar – 2014

Inn of Court – Inner Temple




Areas of Expertise

Criminal Law

Immigration Law


Criminal Bar Association

Inner Temple


Notable Cases

R v E – Defendant was charged with possession with intent to supply class B and possession of 3 disguised firearms. The firearms offence carried a minimum sentence of 5 years imprisonment. Despite strong expert evidence for the Crown represententations were made before the day of trial and the charge was reduced to one of possession of a prohibited weapon, avoiding the minimum 5 year sentence.

R v R – S18 GBH trial where the Defendant was accused of stabbing his flatmate with a kitchen knife.

R v C & Others – C faced a charge of affray involving several weapons along with 2 other Defendants. The 2 other Defendants were both blaming C as the aggressor and maintained they were victims. Following a 12 day trial C was successfully acquitted and both other Defendants were convicted.

R v I – Successful defence against criminal damage and possession of offensive weapon. Following a 3 day trial the jury acquitted the Defendant in 3 minutes.

R v Herr – Represented a client who pleaded guilty to 2 counts of possession with intent to supply Class A drugs. The starting point was 4 years 6 months imprisonment. Following mitigation and representation the client received a 2 year suspended sentence avoiding immediate custody.

R v S – Successful defence of a Moroccan national charged with sexual assault on his wife.

R v N – Successful defence of Tunisian national charges with assaulting his son. Despite the client’s wife, son and daughter in law all giving evidence against him, the client was acquitted and awarded his legal costs. The trial involved several complexities as one of the witnesses was severely disabled and not able to easily communicate, therefore a careful and considered approach in questioning was required.

R v J – Successful defence of two notorious internet pranksters of impersonating police officers.

R v J – Internet pranksters charged with possession of an offensive weapon, following representations the charge was dropped.

R v A – Successful defence of an man on trial for attacking his wife. The complainant had alleged she was attacked with a ladle causing a substantial cut across her face. Following intricate cross examination the client was found not guilty.   

R v K – Defendant on trial for a total of 10 counts of possession of bladed articles and offensive weapons. Following representations made on the day of trial the offensive weapon charges were all dropped and several counts relating to bladed articles were dropped. The Defendant faced 2 charges instead of 10.

R v A – Successful defence of driving without due care and attention. Case was dismissed at half time following a cross-examination of the complainant and a successful no case to answer application.

R v G – Defending 2 charges of criminal damage and 1 public order offence. Witnesses for the Crown were 3 police officers. Both criminal damage charges were dismissed at half time following a successful no case to answer application.

R v S – Successful application following a guilty plea to ask the court to accept a case of exceptional hardship.

R v S – Successful defence of theft by finding. Case was dismissed of court following a successful no case to answer application.

R v K – Successful defence of burglary. Case was dismissed at half time after a submission of no case to answer.

R v O – Successful defence of a charge of driving whilst unfit through drugs.

R v L – Successful defence of a man charged with handling stolen goods. Despite a bad character application from the Crown which adduced over 30 convictions for theft, following cross-examination and representations the Defendant was acquitted.

R v L – Successful defence of defendant charged with possession of an offensive weapon namely an axe in public.

R v G – A charge of perverting the course of justice was reduced to wasting police time following representations on the day of trial.

R v O – Successful prosecution of s18 GBH youth trial.

R v M – Successful defence of interfering with a motor vehicle following cross-examination of a police officer and highlighting PACE code breaches.

R v H – A successful exceptional hardship was presented to the court allowing a client to keep his licence after accumulating 15 points.