The barrister who conducted Reform UK’s inquiry into whether Nigel Farage’s aides and the party broke the law in regards to impermissible donations is a former UKIP candidate who has a long-standing association with Farage.
This week, Reform published a 27-page report of an internal inquiry finding that Dan Jukes, Farage’s press adviser, and James Orr, the party’s head of policy, had not breached funding rules over foreign donations.
An undercover sting carried out by reporting group Verbatim and broadcast by Channel 4 last month had filmed both men seemingly willing to look for ways to circumvent electoral law to allow a foreign backer to donate to the party.
This involved a wealthy US donor paying a total of more than £30,000 for three polls to be commissioned producing results that would be favourable for Reform, and a conversation with the donor exploring whether how he could give £500,000 to the party through his UK-based son.
The donor and his son were both undercover reporters.
Jukes and Orr were suspended from the party and Reform launched an internal inquiry into the matter, carried out by the party’s legal secretary, Adam Richardson, and Tom Waterhouse, its general secretary.
This report cleared Jukes, Orr and the party of any allegations of breaking electoral law.
Reform’s barrister and his long-standing association with Farage
Following the publication of the report, Labour labelled it a ‘whitewash’, considering who it was carried out by.
Adam Richardson has an interesting history. The qualified barrister from 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square chambers became a member of UKIP in 2014, going on to work as its party secretary and general secretary, Cumbria Crack reports.
He then stood as north-west England UKIP candidate in the 2019 European elections.
Richardson’s legal work has seen him work on Brexit related cases, arguing that Parliament did not need to have a vote on whether to trigger Article 50 after the referendum.
He has also acted for Donald Trump, Nigel Farage and Reform mayor Andrea Jenkyns in cases.
Since becoming Reform’s barrister, he has been accused of using ‘bullying’ tactics. Richardson threatened Nation.Cymru with legal action over a story involving a Reform Senedd member and the Guardian reported a similar thing following their publication of claims made about Farage by multiple school contemporaries of his at Dulwich College.
What did Richardson’s report over electoral law allegations?
Richardson and Waterhouse’s report said no evidence had been found that Jukes or Orr “knowingly entered into or acted in furtherance of an arrangement to facilitate an impermissible donation.”
It concludes that both men “understood the polling arrangements to be lawful” and that “any donation would be subject to the party’s checks.”
The report said: “Nothing was agreed, no donations were made and no formal position was presented to the party’s finance team, and nothing was accepted. The party’s procedures for checking the identity of a donor and the source of funds were never engaged, because nothing reached them.”
Whilst the report “does not excuse” the “foolish” way in which Jukes and Orr acted by discussing donations and polling, it has found that “neither did anything that constitutes a breach of the law.”
In terms of clearing the party of wrongdoing regarding the funding of the polls, the report argued Jukes had been a “contractor” as opposed to someone at the heart of the party.
It states: “Reform UK did not commission any of the three opinion polls. It did not contract for them, was not quoted for them, was not invoiced for them and made no payment for them. It holds no record of any of those things.
This meant “the payments made to JL Partners were therefore not donations to Reform UK within the meaning of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000”.
“The polls were commissioned by Mr Jukes, a contractor with several clients other than Reform and an independent commercial relationship with the polling company, on his own account and at his own risk,” it said.
Investigations from the Metropolitan Police and the British Polling Council into the allegations made in the documentary are still underway.
Reform has said it will now take legal action against Verbatim for its investigation.
A party spokesperson said: “Following the allegations raised by Verbatim Investigations and Channel 4 on 3 September, Reform UK commissioned a comprehensive internal investigation.
“The investigation examined all relevant evidence, including witness interviews, documentary records and electronic communications.
“Having concluded the review, the investigation found no evidence that any laws were broken. Reform UK takes its obligations on governance and conduct extremely seriously.
“We consider that the production company – Verbatim – acted unlawfully and will be taking the appropriate legal action in due course.”
Barrister Who Conducted Reform Inquiry After Channel 4 Sting Is Ex-UKIP Candidate
Nigel Farage’s Reform UK is facing fresh questions over its controversial investigation into allegations of illegal political donations after it emerged that the barrister who led the inquiry was a former UKIP candidate with longstanding connections to the party leader.
The revelation has intensified criticism of Reform’s decision to investigate itself following the explosive Channel 4 undercover investigation into its senior advisers.
Adam Richardson, the barrister responsible for conducting the internal review, previously stood as a UKIP candidate in the 2019 European Parliament elections. He has also represented Farage in legal proceedings and has a long history of involvement in Brexit-related political disputes.
His background has raised questions about whether the investigation that cleared Reform of breaking electoral law could genuinely be considered independent.
The controversy is particularly uncomfortable for Farage because the party had presented its 27-page investigation as a comprehensive examination of the allegations.
However, Labour politicians and critics have argued that the findings should be treated with caution given the barrister’s political and professional connections to Reform.
Who Is Adam Richardson?
Adam Richardson is a qualified barrister who has developed a longstanding association with Britain’s right-wing political movement.
He joined UKIP in 2014 and subsequently worked as the party’s secretary and general secretary.
In 2019, he stood as a UKIP candidate in the European Parliament elections, representing North West England.
His political background is particularly relevant because UKIP was the party through which Nigel Farage originally built much of his political influence before establishing Reform UK.
Richardson has also represented Farage in legal cases and worked on Brexit-related litigation.
His previous legal clients have included Donald Trump and Reform politician Andrea Jenkyns.
Richardson’s involvement in the Reform investigation therefore raises questions about the relationship between his legal responsibilities and his longstanding political connections.
Importantly, having previously represented a political party or politician does not automatically mean that a barrister cannot provide independent legal advice.
However, critics argue that the circumstances surrounding this particular investigation deserved much greater scrutiny.
The Investigation That Cleared Farage’s Closest Allies
The controversy began after Channel 4 News broadcast an undercover investigation in September 2026.
Journalists from the investigative organisation Verbatim posed as representatives of a wealthy American businessman interested in financially supporting Reform UK.
During recorded meetings, two of Farage’s senior advisers, Dan Jukes and James Orr, appeared to discuss ways in which a substantial foreign donation could potentially reach the party.
The conversations included a proposed £500,000 contribution from an American businessman through his UK-based son.
The undercover reporters also paid approximately £32,500 for three opinion polls that subsequently produced favourable results for Reform.
The footage raised serious questions about whether foreign money could indirectly support a British political party in breach of electoral law.
Following the broadcast, Jukes and Orr stepped back from their positions while Reform launched an internal investigation.
That investigation was conducted by Richardson alongside Reform’s general secretary, Tom Waterhouse.
Their report ultimately concluded that neither adviser had broken electoral law and that Reform had not accepted an impermissible donation.
However, the identity of the person conducting the investigation has now become a major part of the controversy.
Labour Questions Whether the Investigation Was Truly Independent
The discovery of Richardson’s previous political involvement has provided fresh ammunition for Reform’s opponents.
Labour has already described the internal investigation as a whitewash, arguing that the party should not be allowed to investigate allegations involving its own senior officials.
The fact that Richardson previously worked for UKIP and represented Farage has strengthened those criticisms.
The central question is straightforward: could an investigation conducted by someone with such longstanding connections to the party reasonably be regarded as independent?
Reform has defended Richardson’s role, arguing that his professional responsibilities as a barrister require him to exercise independent legal judgment.
The party has also maintained that the investigation examined documentary evidence, electronic communications and witness interviews.
Nevertheless, the distinction between a legally qualified investigator and an independently appointed investigator is important.
A barrister can provide professional legal advice while representing a client, but that does not necessarily make an internal party investigation equivalent to an independent external inquiry.
This is precisely why critics believe the findings should not be treated as the final word on the allegations.
Richardson Also Represented Donald Trump
Another interesting aspect of Richardson’s professional background is his previous involvement in legal proceedings connected to Donald Trump.
According to investigative reporting by Byline Times, Richardson represented Trump in litigation relating to the Steele dossier and allegations surrounding Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election.
He has also acted for Farage in legal cases.
These connections have attracted additional attention because Farage has maintained a close political relationship with Trump and his wider political movement.
Richardson’s legal career has therefore brought him into contact with several prominent figures associated with the international populist right.
However, these professional relationships should be distinguished from evidence of wrongdoing.
The relevant question is not whether Richardson was entitled to represent these clients, but whether his previous associations should have been disclosed and considered when Reform decided who would conduct an investigation into its own officials.
The Report Made Seven Recommendations for Reform
Despite clearing the party and its advisers, Richardson’s investigation was not entirely complimentary about the conduct of those involved.
The report criticised some of the language used during the undercover conversations, describing aspects of the behaviour as foolish and inappropriate.
It also identified weaknesses in Reform’s internal procedures.
Among its recommendations were stronger checks on prospective donors, clearer rules governing opinion polling and improved procedures for reporting potential donations to the party’s treasury department.
The report argued that contractors working for Reform should also disclose other professional relationships where potential conflicts might arise.
These recommendations suggest that the investigation identified areas where Reform’s financial governance required improvement.
The party now faces the challenge of demonstrating that it will implement those changes.
Police Investigation Continues
Perhaps the most important point is that the internal report has not ended the wider investigation.
The Metropolitan Police are conducting separate enquiries into allegations involving potential breaches of electoral law.
The police investigation is independent of Reform’s internal review and will assess the available evidence on its own merits.
The authorities will therefore not be bound by Richardson’s conclusions.
Channel 4 News has also stood by its journalism, maintaining that the undercover investigation underwent extensive editorial and external legal scrutiny before broadcast.
Verbatim has similarly defended its reporting.
Reform, meanwhile, has indicated that it intends to pursue legal action against the investigative organisation.
The dispute is therefore likely to continue for some time.
Why This Is Another Headache for Nigel Farage
For Farage, the latest revelation creates another difficult political situation.
Reform has attempted to present itself as an alternative to the established political parties, promising greater transparency and accountability.
However, the decision to appoint a former UKIP official with longstanding connections to Farage to investigate allegations involving the party’s own senior advisers has created an obvious perception problem.
Even if the internal report ultimately proves correct, the circumstances surrounding its preparation could undermine public confidence in its findings.
Farage must now convince voters that Reform takes financial transparency seriously and that its internal procedures are sufficiently robust.
The party also needs to demonstrate that it can handle serious allegations without creating the impression that its investigations are designed primarily to protect senior figures.
With the police investigation continuing, the controversy is unlikely to disappear immediately.
Conclusion: Questions Over Reform’s Internal Inquiry Refuse to Go Away
The revelation that Adam Richardson, the barrister who conducted Reform UK’s investigation into the Channel 4 donations sting, is a former UKIP candidate has created another uncomfortable moment for Nigel Farage.
Richardson previously worked as UKIP’s party secretary and general secretary, stood in the 2019 European elections and has represented both Farage and Donald Trump in legal proceedings.
His background has prompted renewed questions about the independence of an investigation that cleared two of Reform’s most senior advisers.
Reform insists that the report was thorough and that no electoral laws were broken.
However, Labour and other critics argue that the party cannot credibly present an internally commissioned investigation as an independent verdict.
Ultimately, the Metropolitan Police will have to establish whether any offences occurred.
For Farage, the immediate problem is political rather than simply legal.
Reform has spent years criticising the established parties over transparency and accountability. Now, it faces growing scrutiny over whether it applies those same standards to itself.
And with the Channel 4 controversy still unresolved, the questions surrounding Richardson’s investigation are unlikely to go away.