About Us

Our Background and Expertise

Founded by Mr Mohammed Hifzur Rahman, a Law Society-accredited duty solicitor with more than eighteen years’ experience, our firm was established to give both individuals and companies the strongest possible defence.

Mr Rahman began practice in 2005 and rose to become Head of Complex Crime at City Law Chambers before founding this practice. He has defended clients in some of the country’s most demanding prosecutions, including multi-million-pound frauds, large-scale banking fraud, EncroChat conspiracies and homicide.

We hold a full Legal Aid contract and maintain a City of London duty solicitor slot, enabling us to represent any client anywhere in England and Wales, whether privately funded or legally Aided (subject to the standard means and merits tests).

Over many years Mr Rahman has built a trusted network of specialist experts—forensic scientists, digital analysts, financial investigators and medical professionals—and works with a hand-picked panel of accomplished counsel known for their dynamic and persuasive advocacy.
Together, we prepare every defence with exceptional care and rigour.

Our team is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, ensuring that your rights are protected from the very outset.

Track Record

Highlights of Mr Rahman’s notable cases include:

Operation Mecker & Berge

one of the UK’s largest immigration fraud investigations (£16.6 million). Client cleared of all revenue charges.

Operation Embossed

part of Operation Venetic, a large-scale investigation into Class A drug supply and associated money-laundering. Mr Rahman represented a client fifth on the indictment, instructing two counsel in a case led by the first-named defendant. The defence team conducted fifty-two days of legal arguments on the admissibility of EncroChat evidence at Manchester Square and Liverpool Crown Courts.

R v ZS (2022)

defended a murder charge, securing a manslaughter verdict after retrial.

Operation Sega (2021)

conspiracy to supply Class A drugs; prosecution offered no evidence and the case was dismissed.