Mountford Chambers delivers a nationwide and international service to clients, who are assured quality advice, advocacy and representation at all levels.
Mountford Chambers delivers a nationwide and international service to clients, who are assured quality advice, advocacy and representation at all levels.
James has a busy Crown Court defence practice, frequently acting in cases across the criminal spectrum. He has particular expertise in cases involving drugs offences, serious violence, and fraud.
R v K and Others [Operation Vault] – Teesside Crown Court (2022)
Junior alone acting for the second of twelve defendants in a large-scale drugs supply conspiracy involving the movement of Class A and Class B drugs and hundreds of thousands of pounds across the North-East and North-West.
R v A [Operation Preto] – Isleworth Crown Court (2022)
Secured acquittal after trial of defendant charged with possession of a weapon following an outbreak of street violence.
R v J [Operation Savoy] – Chelmsford Crown Court (2022)
Junior alone acting for the second of seven defendants charged with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by providing false witness statements to the Court of Appeal.
Link to Gazette News
R v A - Reading Crown Court (2022)
Junior alone for defendant charged with possession with intent to supply Class A and B drugs.
R v H - Wood Green Crown Court (2022)
Secured acquittal of defendant charged with racially aggravated assault on security guard at supermarket.
R v M - Kingston Crown Court (2022)
Secured acquittal after trial of defendant charged with coercive and controlling behaviour, spanning multiple accusations over the course of almost two years.
R v J - Liverpool Crown Court (2020)
Junior alone acting for defendant charged with s.18 gbh and weapons possession offences following incident involving the partial amputation of a victim’s face.
R v H - Inner London Crown Court
Successful appeal against a Magistrates’ Court conviction for possession of an offensive weapon. Separately secured suspended sentence on multiple counts of theft, fraud, violence and public disorder.
James has experience acting in matters involving corporate liability and fraud and has acted on behalf of corporates and individuals facing allegations of fraud, fraudulent trading and money laundering offences. He is particularly trusted in cases involving voluminous financial records and accountancy data.
Prior to joining Chambers, in a City firm, James was involved in Serious Fraud Office investigations relating to financial institutions and insider dealing. Since joining Chambers, his advisory practice has included advising multinational entities on SFO investigations into global trading arrangements.
R v P – Ipswich Crown Court
Junior alone acting for defendant charged with fraudulent trading over a two-and-a-half-year period. A case involving extensive forensic accountancy evidence over the trading period and allegations of fraudulent dispensing of cheques and payments.
Page and Ors v The Financial Conduct Authority [2022] UKUT 124 (TCC)
Junior alone acting for four of five appellants of FCA decision notices and prohibitions. The case was one of the most substantial to be considered by the Upper Tribunal in recent years, relating to the transfer of c.1,500 retail customer pensions (totalling over £60 million) into loan notes and bonds being promoted by an unrelated entity.
Media Coverage:
FT Advisor
Practical Law
Law360
Money Marketing
Second junior to Andrew Trollope QC representing first defendant in the later stages of a five-defendant MTIC-type fraud relating to metals trading.
SFO v Company X – Investigation
Advisory appointment during the currency of a Serious Fraud Office investigation into global metals trading. Required to advise a multi-national company on exposure and engagement with the SFO’s investigation.
R v O – Maidstone Crown Court
Junior alone in case involving multiple allegations of holding and converting criminal property.
R v E – Southwark Crown Court
Secured acquittal of defendant charged with possession of articles for use in fraud on the Crown offering no evidence following representations on disclosure.
R v K – Sevenoaks Magistrates’ Court
Secured discontinuance of proceedings for possession of articles for use in fraud in case involving alleged loop devices used for bank card cloning.
James has experience across Mountford Chambers’ regulatory practice areas, and is frequently called upon to advise and act for regulated individuals and businesses across a range of industries.
Data Protection and GDPR
James is well-versed in the field of data protection; he is our designated Equality and Diversity Data officer in Chambers. James’ advisory practice includes advising regulated individuals and companies on the obligations under the UK Data Protection Regime, and investigations by the ICO. His recent experience includes advising a large national charity of the redrafting of data protection and retention policies, and the processing of data in respect of private prosecutions.
He is frequently called upon to advise upon data protection in the context of criminal proceedings, and has advised individuals and UK police forces on the remit and limitations of the UK DPA and GDPR regimes.
Finance and banking
James has significant experience in financial regulation. Prior to joining Chambers, he gains experience in a City firm in past business reviews of financial institutions, particularly looking at COBS compliance, and was involved in ‘skilled person’ reviews (under s.166 FSMA 2000) instigated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority into alleged mis-selling of interest rate hedging products by a major retail bank, and an investigation into mis-management of investment portfolios.
James acted as junior alone for four of five applicants in Page & Ors v Financial Conduct Authority [2022] UKUT 124 (TCC); one of the largest Upper Tribunal cases of recent years, relating to the transfer of c.1,500 retail customer pensions (totalling over £60 million) into loan notes and bonds being promoted by an unrelated entity. The case involved: detailed consideration of IFA duties in respect of products; due diligence; duties relating to outsourced activities and conflicts of interest; the requirements of honesty and integrity for regulated IFAs; limitation; and de facto directorship.
James has a busy confiscation practice. He accepts and is frequently called upon to undertake advisory work in respect of both the 2002 and 1988 Acts. He also frequently acts for and advises defendants and interested parties in applications for the re-consideration of confiscation orders, and enforcement orders including:
R v B – Kingston Crown Court
Acted on behalf of an interested party in a contested application to appoint enforcement receivers over a property portfolio. Successfully argued the existence of beneficial title of the interested party, avoiding the appointment.
R v R – Leicester Crown Court
Contested POCA matter. Benefit figure reduced from £340,000 to £50,000 after legal argument seeking to depart from a previously agreed (higher) figure.
R v R – Derby Crown Court
Contested POCA matter. Benefit figure reduced from £90,000 to £20,000
R v R – York Crown Court
Contested s.23 application following further investigation a number of years after the order was made.
R v J – Harrow Crown Court
Successful (opposed) s.11 POCA application
R v S – Reading Crown Court
Successful (opposed) s.11 POCA application
R v D – Westminster Magistrates’ Court
Successfully resisted application to activate default sentence where defendant owed in excess of £200,000
R v G – Westminster Magistrates’ Court
Successfully resisted application to activate default sentence where defendant owed in excess of £650,000
R v B – Westminster Magistrates’ Court
Successfully resisted application to activate default sentence where defendant owed in excess of £450,000
James is the Deputy Head of the Mountford Chambers Regulatory Practice Group, and has a wealth of experience in fitness to practise and professional disciplinary matters.
He is frequently instructed to present fitness to practise cases and professional disciplinary cases on behalf of professional regulators including the Teaching Regulation Agency, Nursing and Midwifery Council and Health and Care Professions Council. James undertook a two-and-a-half-year secondment at a Band 1 firm where he presented cases for a number of professional regulators, including the General Optical Council, the General Pharmaceutical Council and the Architect’s Registration Board. He has been called upon to advise regulators on matters of law, evidence and procedure.
James also acts for regulated professionals before disciplinary and similar tribunals, having extensive experience of the professional disciplinary process. He is frequently called upon at all stages of that process: to advise on investigations; to appear in applications for interim orders or reviews of such orders; representation at final hearings; and appeals.
James’s recent cases have included:
In addition, James has been involved in a number of cases where University students faced disciplinary action, either by the University in question, or by professional regulators. He is available to advise and provide representation in respect of such matters.
Architects
ARB v H
Case involving an architect’s online conduct towards other including potentially abusive correspondence.
ARB v S
Case involving alleged failures to have proper regard to regulations and elevation parameters, resulting in unsafe plans and civil liability.
Barristers
BSB v X
Advising a barrister client on potential liability arising from a media arrangement, including advice on the terms of the BSB handbook and recent developments in respect of social media and news commentary.
Biomedical Sciences
HCPC v B
Case involving a biomedical scientist making homophobic remarks to colleagues and allegedly attending their place of work drunk, unfit to work.
Media coverage: Daily Gazette ; Essex Live
HCPC v M
Case involving a biomedical scientist convicted of fraud.
Media coverage: The Times ; Daily Express
Hearing Aid Dispensers
HCPC v P
Acted on behalf of the HCPC in case involving multiple allegations of dishonesty and manipulation of records.
Nurses
NMC v N
Acted on behalf of a midwife accused of multiple failings during a return to work period following compassionate leave. Secured the dismissal of all allegations at facts stage.
NMC v M
Acted on behalf of a midwife who admitted to significant failings in respect of cardiotocography, contributing to patient death. Secured conditions of practice order following lengthy submissions on the clinical environment and remediation.
NMC v E
Case involving multiple allegations of lack of competence in ED setting.
NMC v B
Case involving allegations of poor medication monitoring and improper administration procedures in care home setting.
NMC v G
Case involving allegations of bullying, harassment and social media misuse.
Operating Department Practitioners
HCPC v F
Acted for the HCPC in case involving ODP convicted of possessing child pornography.
Media coverage: BBC News
Opticians
GOC v X
Case involving alleged misappropriation of documentation relating to dispensed products and harassment.
Paramedics
HCPC v Y
Acted for a paramedic previously dismissed from the service for alleged dishonesty relating to their ability to attend a red call without sufficient PPE. All allegations found not proven at facts stage.
HCPC v S
Acted for the HCPC in a case involving a paramedic’s response at the scene of a suicide.
Media coverage: The Telegraph ;The Metro
HCPC v NS
Acted for the HCPC in a case involving a paramedic’s response to a patient in cardiac distress, and adverse comments made to the Regulator.
Media coverage: The Sun
Physiotherapists
HCPC v F
Case involving male physiotherapist and alleged sexual misconduct toward female patient.
Media coverage: The Daily Mail
HCPC v K
Case involving male physiotherapist and alleged sexual misconduct toward female patient.
Media coverage: Daily Express ; The Metro ; International Business Times
Police Officers
Chief Constable of Sussex Police v Police Sergeant X
Case involving multiple allegations of abuse of position, dishonesty and failings in line-management.
Media coverage: IOPC Press Release
IOPC v Police Constable G
Investigation into officer’s conduct outside employment with the relevant police force.
Psychologists
HCPC v S
Case involving multiple allegations of historic sexual abuse.
Media coverage: The Times
Radiographers
HCPC v W
Acted for the HCPC in case involving a radiographer of self-administering drugs at their place of work and a conviction for theft of drugs and paraphernalia.
Media coverage: SOR
HCPC v H
Acted for HCPC in case involving a radiographer convicted of rape.
Media coverage: SOR
Social Workers
SWE v M
Acted of behalf of the social worker, successfully arguing against the imposition of an 18-month interim order pending completion of SWE’s investigation.
HCPC v Y
Social worker accused of multiple instances of lack of competence.
HCPC v Z
Acted for the HCPC in case involving social worker making and maintaining social media contact with vulnerable service users.
Speech and Language Therapists
HCPC v X
Lengthy case involving an SLT’s provision of care to primary school children. The case involved multiple allegations relating to the updating and monitoring of care plans, delivery of therapy, and issues surrounding dishonest completion of service user records.
Teachers
TRA v C
Teacher alleged to have inappropriately restrained pupils in a primary setting.
TRA v H
Case involving allegations of interference with student coursework and manipulation of assessment grades.
TRA v O
Case involving criminal conviction for serious sexual offences where issues of anonymity arose beyond the identities of pupils and staff.
James has significant experience of healthcare regulation, and regulation of other sectors such as rail. He has recently appeared in an inquest touching upon these areas of expertise, and is available to advise and provide representation.
Extradition
James has acted in a number of cases involving the in- and out-bound extradition of those facing criminal proceedings. He is often asked to advise on the process and procedure in respect of those abroad and facing extradition to the UK, and has acted in a number of cases in the UK opposing the extradition of individuals to requesting states.
James has also acted in proceedings relating to the issuing of arrest warrants in the UK, and advises on appeals.
Extradition
United States of America v M
Accusation extradition request relating to internet-based alleged criminality.
Poland v J
Extradition request for RP based upon conviction for fraud offences.
UK Crown Prosecution Service v W
Successfully opposed a CPS request for a European Arrest Warrant to be issued in respect of a suspect charged with causing death by dangerous driving.
Romania v S
EAW extradition request following conviction under Articles 329 and 13 of the Romanian Penal Code.
Greece v E
EAW accusation request following conviction for dishonesty offences.
Greece v U
EAW extradition request following conviction in absence for fatal offence.
Poland v M
EAW extradition request for RP said to have escaped from prison.
France v G-P
EAW extradition request following conviction in absence for cross-jurisdictional smuggling offences.
Education
Scholarships/Awards
Professional Regulation
Regulatory Compliance
Extradition
Occupational Therapist G faced fitness to practise proceedings before the HCPC following their dismissal from a hospital after a series…
Paramedic A faced fitness to practise proceedings after refusing to attend a ‘red call’ to a covid patient in cardiac…
Midwife X’s fitness to practise was alleged by the Nursing & Midwifery Council (NMC) to be impaired by reason of…
