This week marks the six-month anniversary since the General Data Protection Regulations took effect. Quentin takes a look back over this time to see whats changed.

Quentin explains the complex and often confusing interrelationship of planning enforcement law and criminal law and how it can impact upon any criminal prosecution by Local Planning Authorities (LPAs).

It is an offence to let a HMO without a licence. If you do so, the Local Housing Authority will have two options. The first will be to impose a civil penalty of up to £30,000 under section 249A of the Housing Act 2004. The other option open to the Local Housing Authority is to pursue a prosecution against you under section 72 of the Housing Act 2004.

If you have entered a plea of Guilty and feel that you were not truly admitting your guilt or that there was a problem in the procedure leading up to the entering of the plea you may have ground to vacate your guilty plea.

Quentin put forward a good defence to the claim by the prosecution leading to the prosecution entering into negotiation with the defence and eventually brokering a settlement on behalf of his client of £141,000, an enormous reduction from the £1.12M initially claimed.

As a professional person, CK could not afford a criminal conviction as it would likely result in her losing her livelihood. As a result of Quentin's intervention, the prosecution took time to review the matter and came to a decision not to continue the prosecution.

Learn how Quentin was able to enter a revised plea with the resulting sentence being that his client was released from custody that day to go home with his family. Both FA and his family were delighted with the result.

Defendants who are otherwise law abiding people get caught out telling stupid lies to the Police and Courts without realising the dire consequences of getting caught.

In the New Test of Dishonesty the defendant can no longer use his own standards or what he understands the standards of society to be as a defence.

To what extent is someone protected over adverse comment that could be said to be free speech? Barrister Quent Hunt gives his views.