Bryony Goodesmith
Bryony Goodesmith
Solicitor
“Your hard work, guidance, and support throughout this process have meant a lot to us. This decision gives our family the safety and stability we need to move forward. We cannot thank you enough for fighting so hard for us to get this great result.”
Client
Background
Bryony qualified in 2024, having trained at DPG. She specialises in public law challenges and civil damages claims, with a focus on the rights of survivors of exploitation and on migrants’ rights.
Expertise
Bryony works primarily on public law challenges, regularly representing highly vulnerable survivors of exploitation and torture in challenges to government decisions and policies, and on challenges including in relation to asylum accommodation and support provisions. She has worked on a number of strategic cases including in relation to the rights and recognition of survivors of exploitation.
In addition, Bryony works on civil damages claims including on behalf of individuals facing injustices relating to the No Recourse to Public Funds condition, as well as on a variety of data breach and discrimination claims.
Bryony has experience in complex group litigation, and was part of a wider DPG team challenging the Home Office’s so-called Rwanda policy. The judicial review challenges and resultant unlawful detention damages claims were live for nearly 4 years, having concluded in 2026 with substantial damages awarded to each client; during this time, Bryony also worked on a number of concurrent judicial reviews for the same cohort of clients, including in relation to their identification as survivors of exploitation and on numerous support challenges.
Bryony is also a supervisor for the firm’s PAP Project, assisting frontline organisations with challenging unlawful decisions by public bodies.
Sample Cases
R (PS & Anor) v SSHD JR-2026-LDS-000012 – a challenge to refusals of leave to remain for survivors of exploitation, brought on the basis that the Home Office’s guidance failed to refer decision-makers to their discretion to grant this specific form of leave to remain for individuals with skilled worker visas (https://freemovement.org.uk/vts-leave-skilled-worker-leave-varied/).
R (ETX) v SSHD [2025] EWHC 294 (Admin) – a challenge to the Home Office’s three refusals to reinstate our client’s support under the Modern Slavery Victim Care Contract following his recognition as a survivor of exploitation (https://freemovement.org.uk/high-court-finds-three-home-office-decisions-refusing-to-reinstate-trafficking-support-were-unlawful/).
R (SAG & Others) v SSHD [2024] EWHC 2984 (Admin) – a challenge to the Home Office’s system for deciding Change of Conditions applications, in which the Court found that the Home Office’s approach breached Article 3 ECHR (https://www.dpglaw.co.uk/news/high-court-declares-home-office-immigration-decision-making-system-unlawful/).
R (ASY & Others) v The Home Office [2024] EWCA Civ 373 – a test case on the entitlement to compensation under Article 3 ECHR following the imposition of the No Recourse to Public Funds condition imposed on each client’s leave to remain in the UK (https://www.dpglaw.co.uk/news/court-of-appeal-judgment-on-home-offices-article-3-duties-in-nrpf-context/).
R (HA & Others) v SSHD [2023] EWHC 1876 (Admin) – a challenge to the Home Office’s practice of withholding payments from pregnant women and young children under 3 years old, in which the Court found that the Home Office was legally required to make such payments (https://www.dpglaw.co.uk/news/the-home-office-broke-the-law-by-withholding-payments-from-pregnant-women-and-young-children/).