Andrew Thomas KC Represents Respondent as Court of Appeal Rejects Post-Conviction ADHD Diagnosis Appeal

Andrew Thomas KC, instructed by Rachel Adamson of Adkirk Law, successfully represented the Respondent in an appeal by a convicted fraudster who alleged that his trial was unfair because he had been suffering from undiagnosed ADHD at the time.

Lancashire businessman Andrew Pilley owned 15 companies employing over 1,000 people, with a turnover in excess of £120 million pa. He was also the owner and Chairman of a League One football club.

Mr Pilley stood trial at Preston Crown Court in 2022/23 on charges of Fraudulent Trading and Fraud. The prosecution case was that the companies had fraudulently mis-sold energy supply contracts to thousands of small businesses. Andrew Thomas and Anam Khan acted for North West Regional Trading Standards at trial.

Andrew Pilley convicted by the jury. He was sentenced to 13 years imprisonment. He was ordered to pay £11.6 million in confiscation and £4.3 million in costs.

Whilst serving his prison sentence, Mr Pilley (who is 55 years old) was diagnosed with ADHD. He appealed against his conviction on the grounds that his undiagnosed condition had impaired his performance in the witness box at trial.

Mr Pilley relied upon the evidence of Professor Susan Young of King’s College London, a leading forensic psychologist specialising in defendants with ADHD.

Professor Young gave evidence at the appeal haring. She told the Court that in her assessment Mr Pilley was suffering from ADHD and borderline low intelligence. She suggested that, in combination, these had affected Mr Pilley’s ability to answer questions at trial. They had also caused him to give a poor impression to the jury in his evidence, making him argumentative and prone to giving inappropriate answers to questions. Professor Young said that Mr Pilley should have had the benefit of an intermediary when he gave his evidence, and that it would have assisted the jury to have heard expert evidence about his condition.

The Court of Appeal rejected Mr Pilley’s appeal. Giving judgment, the Vice President, Lord Justice Edis said that the transcripts of his evidence showed that Mr Pilley was capable of giving detailed and articulate answers, and that he was able to engage with complex material. He also stated that it was clear that Mr Pilley was a highly capable and successful businessman, and that his achievements provided real-world evidence of his capacity to cope with complex information.

Andrew Thomas and Rachel Adamson were acting on behalf of Cheshire West and Cheshire Council, who had conduct of the investigation by North West Regional Trading Standards.

For more information, or to instruct Andrew Thomas KC, please contact Director of Clerking, David Wright.