Robert Dynowski


Robert is a Partner of the firm and Head of the Criminal Department.

He originally trained as a Barrister and practiced at the Bar from 1989 to 1992. He subsequently cross qualified as a solicitor, and has been at Steel and Shamash since 1995.

Robert has a wide and extensive knowledge in criminal law. He tends to specialise in the more complicated and serious cases including Murder, Conspiracy to Defraud and Money Laundering.

Robert is often approached to advise and represent individuals during the course of police investigations involving extremely complicated and sensitive matters, and his involvement has led to many successful conclusions.

Robert is on the panel of solicitors instructed by the National Union of Teachers to represent its members when subject to criminal investigation or prosecution. He has been extremely successful in avoiding prosecutions in an extremely sensitive area.

In 2012 Robert was retained to represent members of the Canadian Olympic Team/Association during the course of the Olympics.

Robert is recommended in the Legal 500

Steel & Shamash 'does heavyweight crime very well' with Rakesh Bhasin and Robert Dynowski both recommended (2014)

'hardworking and progressive' it counts various former MPs among its clients. Rakesh Bhasin, Robert Dynowski and Carl Newman are highly regarded. (2013)


  • Member of the Criminal Law Solicitors' Association

Notable recent cases include:-

R v H (2012/2013) - Robert represents a Defendant who is one of eight charged with various offences arising from the Murder of a young man by shooting. The allegation is that the Murder is a tit-for-tat response following the stabbing of H a few weeks previously.

R v S (2012/2013) - Robert successfully represented this 18 year old Defendant charged alongside her boyfriend with Possession of two Firearms and a significant quantity of expanding Ammunition. The ammunition had been used only a few weeks earlier when officers had been fired upon. Although such offences normally attract a minimum sentence of 5 years' imprisonment, following conviction the Defendant was in fact sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment.