ProfilePUBLIC LAW and JUDICIAL REVIEW
Dijen has over 20 years of experience, specialising in Police, Public and Employment Law.
Having originally qualified and practised as a doctor of medicine, Dijen is uniquely placed to advise on, and act in, contentious matters connected with healthcare, including employment disputes, regulatory and disciplinary issues and inquests. His medical training and experience also makes him a particularly effective cross-examiner of medical and scientific experts.
Education & Qualifications
1992 - present: Full Registration with the General Medical Council
1991 MB, BS degree (with Distinction in Surgery) [Less than 10% of all London University medical graduates gained a Distinction in 1991]
1991 Guy’s Hospital Medical School
1988 Sir Frederick Gowland Hopkins’ Prize for Biochemistry
2010: Attorney General’s Panel of Special Advocates
2009: Recorder of the Crown Court
Dijen has considerable experience in inquests where his experience as a doctor can give him the edge, especially where there are complex scientific and medical questions. Examples include deaths in custody, or following contact with the police, and unexpected deaths in hospital, both in the National Health Service and in the private sector.
Police Law and Public Law
Dijen is “first-rate” and “a real expert on police law” (Chambers UK 2014)
He advises and represents police forces and other police organisations in relation to matters of civil and public law unique to policing such as:
• Entry, search and seizure by police officers, under search warrants and/or under PACE powers;
• Police powers, including defending judicial review claims brought against police forces challenging their exercise of power
• Counter terrorism
• Defending claims brought against police alleging assault (including use of firearms), false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, misfeasance in a public office and discrimination
• Defending human rights claims
• Policing protests
• Charging organisers for the cost of providing Special Police Services at events such as football matches and large concerts
• Information Law: data protection and freedom of information.
Notable cases include:
MLIA & CLEL v Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary  EWHC 292 (QB): Lavender J: Dijen successfully defended the police (leading Mark Thomas) in a claim brought by a mother and daughter who reported serious allegations of domestic violence against the daughter’s ex-partner to police in 2005.
R (A & others) v The Central Criminal Court & Anor  EWHC 70 (Admin), Gross LJ & Ouseley J: Dijen appeared at the Old Bailey in order to apply for search warrants in a highly sensitive investigation and successfully defended claims for their quashing. The police were permitted to retain the mobile phones seized.
Ipswich Town Football Club Co Ltd v Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary  4 WLR 195: Dijen is representing the police (leading Catriona Hodge) in a claim concerning the right of police to charge for the policing of events. After judgment at first instance in its favour was overturned by the Court of Appeal, the force has launched an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Koraou v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police  QB 161, Court of Appeal: Lord Dyson MR, Laws & Kitchin LJJ: Dijen acted for the Chief Constable, defending the claimant’s appeal in one of the first two cases (the other being DSD v Commissioner of Police, with which it was heard) to reach the Court of Appeal, concerning whether Article 3 imposes an investigatory duty, the breach of which sounds in damages. The Chief Constable was successful.
Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall Constabulary v Allard  ICR 875, Court of Appeal:: with Jeremy Johnson QC, Dijen represented the Chief Constable (as he had below) in this appeal concerning overtime entitlements of police informant (source) handlers.
R (M) v Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary & Secretary of State for the Home Department  1 WLR 1176, Court of Appeal: Dijen represented the chief constable before the Court of Appeal who held that the force did not breach a sex offender’s Article 8 rights by conducting unannounced visits to assess his risk of reoffending.
R (Mackaill & ors) v Independent Police Complaints Commission & ors  ACD 19 QBD Div Ct (Davis LJ & Wilkie J): This case arose out of a meeting between Police Federation officers and the Rt Hon Andrew Mitchell MP shortly after the notorious ‘Plebgate’ incident at the gates of Downing Street which ended Mitchell’s career.
Greatrex v Chief Constable of Gwent Constabulary: Dijen acted for the chief constable whose officers had arrested a 67-year old man, who had never before been in trouble with the police and who was released without charge. Every aspect of the arrest was challenged but the focus was on necessity. After a 5-day trial before HHJ Seys-Llewellyn QC and a jury, the jury returned verdicts in the chief constable’s favour.
R (A) v Chief Constable of Kent Constabulary  EWCA Civ 1706. Enhanced Criminal Records Certificate case concerning a nurse
R (Minter) v Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary & Secretary of State for the Home Department  1 WLR 179, Court of Appeal: claimant held to be subject to the sex offenders’ notification regime for life. Dijen represented the successful chief constable
Dijen is an employment silk of 23 years’ standing
Boardman v Nugent Care Society & another  ICR 927, Court of Appeal: Dijen acted for a teacher dismissed for an assault on a pupil.
Aitken v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis  ICR 78, Court of Appeal. Disability Discrimination: the claimant police officer suffered from obsessive compulsive disorder the symptoms and signs of which made him appear dangerous. He claimed that he had been discriminated against as a result of his perceived dangerousness. Dijen successfully defended the force all the way up to the Court of Appeal.
Balu v Dudley Primary Care Trust  All ER (D) 217 (Jun): Dijen successfully represented the PCT throughout the proceedings (a hearing, and then 2 appeals) concerning a doctor accused of misconduct toward a patient. The doctor was subsequently ‘struck off’ the medical register by the General Medical Council.
Guernina v Thames Valley University  EWCA Civ 34, Court of Appeal: Dijen acted for the successful employer in an appeal concerning national terms and conditions for university lecturers.
Coors Brewers Ltd v Adcock and others  ICR 983, Court of Appeal: This concerned the question whether discretionary bonuses could be recovered as unlawful deductions under the Wages provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Dijen represented over 500 claimants in this litigation.
Scope v Thornett  ICR 236, Court of Appeal: Dijen successfully represented the charity in its appeal against a ruling of the EAT against it on the assessment of compensation. The Court of Appeal agreed that, even if there was a degree of speculation involved in the question whether the employee would have lost her job in any event, it was the duty of the tribunal to assess the probability that that would happen in determining compensation.
National Power v Young  ICR 328: Court of Appeal: Time Limits in Equal Pay claims brought in an employment tribunal.
Kapadia v London Borough of Lambeth  IRLR 699: Court of Appeal: Disability Discrimination and whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal had erred in substituting its own finding that the claimant was disabled for the employment tribunal’s finding that he was not. This was the first ever case to be supported by the Disability Rights Commission, which was later absorbed within the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
As a former practising doctor, Dijen is regularly instructed in cases involving personal injury and clinical malpractice, including professional misconduct and clinical negligence claims.
He represented a primary care trust in a case involving a doctor accused of indecently assaulting a patient in which the doctor mounted an appeal to the Administrative Court, concerning a point relating to legal professional privilege (see Balu v Dudley Primary Care Trust  All ER 217 (Jun)).
In Tyler v Easterbrook, Dijen acted for a young man who sustained a very serious brain injury in a car accident. On 30 August 2012, he represented the claimant at a joint settlement meeting at which he negotiated settlement at just over £1.2 million plus costs.
He acted for a husband and wife who sustained psychiatric injury when they witnessed their daughter being struck by a car driven by a drunk driver on Christmas morning. She succumbed to her injuries a month later and the couple recovered (in settlement) over £1 million in damages.
He was instructed on behalf of a man gravely injured when knocked off his motorcycle by a Range Rover being driven by a well-known footballer. He secured settlement just short of £1 million.
Dijen represented a former SAS soldier who was crushed by a 2-tonne machine being moved negligently by his business partner. The defendant disputed liability, alleging that the claimant had devised the negligent system of moving the machine. The liability trial in the High Court ended with the claimant succeeding on liability and recovering his costs on the indemnity basis. He settled his claim for £750,000.
“He is a creative thinker and an absolutely outstanding cross-examiner.” (Police Law) Chambers UK 2018
“An enormously impressive and engaging advocate, he is very precise both orally and in writing, and he takes no prisoners.” (Police Law) Chambers UK 2018
“Extremely bright and well prepared, but also approachable too.” Inquests and Inquiries (The Legal 500 2017)
“He is incredibly eloquent, he goes the extra mile all the time and his work ethic is immense.” (Police Law) Chambers UK 2017
“The jury likes his style, and he is intelligent and well prepared.” “His advice is spot-on and he provides a very quick turnaround of papers.” (Police Law) Chambers UK 2017
“He is very pleasant to work with and conveys confidence.” (Chambers UK 2016)
“Well regarded for cases involving the medical profession and police.” (The Legal 500 UK 2015)
“Dijen is: “first-rate”; “has sound judgement”; “is a real expert on police law” (Chambers UK 2014)
He “knows his stuff” and is “spot on in his analysis” (Chambers UK 2013)
“He has a broad employment law practice which includes industrial action, whistle-blowing and discrimination cases” (Chambers UK 2012)
Dijen is: “an all-round performer”; “making real strides in the employment law world” (Chambers UK 2011)
Dijen “has good communication skills”; “is well liked by clients”; “is very thorough and approachable” (Chambers UK 2015)
He is known for his “accessibility, speed of response and quick identification of the main issues of a case” (Chambers UK 2010)
Contact the Expert
Complete the form below to contact the expert directly.