Jim is an experienced criminal practitioner. He accepts instructions across the full spectrum of criminal matters. He is particularly valued for his direct advice and ability to deal with complex cases clearly and with compassion.
His longstanding road traffic defence practice has seen him represent high-net worth clients and those running complex medical defences, including non-insane automatism
R v CE [2019] Basildon Crown Court
CE was to be sentenced for stabbing a teenager 11 times. The Court was persuaded to impose a determinate sentence and not find dangerousness provisions were met.
R v SF [2018] Peterborough Crown Court
SF was prosecuted for offences in Cambridgeshire and North London relating to a string of high-value car thefts. The case relied on DNA and cell-site evidence.
R v AN [2017] Birmingham Crown Court
AN was prosecuted for faking her own death to defraud a life assurance policy. The case was reported in the national press.
Jim’s practice in serious fraud straddles both the criminal courts and First-Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber). He has a particular expertise and a growing practice in MTIC and other VAT fraud matters appealed to the Tax Chamber arising from HMRC Kittel and Ablessio decisions. His knowledge in these complex and specialist proceedings leaves him well-placed for instruction on matters involving wider tax fraud and cases arising from allegations of cheating the revenue.
R (on the Application of SSC) v HMRC [2021] EWHC 3174 (Admin)
Jim acted as one of two junior counsel for HMRC. The hearing on the issue of interim relief was reported, and is a landmark decision on the issue of interim relief in cases of VAT deregistration under the Ablessio principle.
R v MA [2019] Southwark Crown Court
MA was prosecuted for conducting complex maintained line fraud against elderly victims.
Jim is regularly instructed in matters before the Crown and Magistrates Courts to prosecute or defend regulatory crime. His experience across regulatory regimes outside of crime, his time at the CPS and his knowledge of road traffic have led to instructions involving driving standards, environmental protection, and animal cruelty. He has also been instructed in cases prosecuted by local authorities involving benefit frauds, and Trading Standards investigations.
Drawing particularly on his road traffic and CPS experience, he is also regularly instructed on behalf of the DVSA in respect of both licensing and fraudulent tachograph cases in the Crown Court. These data-heavy cases require particular understanding of how to carefully present complex data to the court and juries.
Jim has a developed practice in asset forfeiture. His practice encompasses both post-conviction applications under POCA 2002 arising from convictions in the Crown Court, but also civil applications in the Magistrates Court, where he appears regularly for police forces and other parties.
Jim’s expertise in this field has also seen him deliver training and lectures on the subject and advise forces on issues of statutory interpretation.
R v Daniels [2024] EWCA Crim 1395
Instructed on appeal following the making of a “forfeiture” order by the Crown Court. Arguments before the Court of Appeal focussed on the interpretation of s.143 PCCSA (as then was) and the interface between the criminal appellate jurisdiction and civil remedies to recover wrongfully retained property.
R v OD [2019] Reading Crown Court
Instructed following conviction to deal exclusively with the complex POCA proceedings arising from offences of money laundering spanning a number. The case had a complex international element.
R v FO [2018] Central Criminal Court.
Successfully argued on a s. 23 appeal that the defendant should not be liable as an available asset for foreign property confiscated by authorities abroad was not recoverable.
Jim has a significant experience in the field of professional regulation and professional discipline proceedings. He has appeared for both regulators and registrants in proceedings before a number of healthcare regulators including the NMC, HCPC, GOC and GPhC. He has also acted for teachers before the TRA, and is presently instructed on ongoing matters before both teaching and healthcare regulators. Having spent time with Band 1 firms in this field on secondment, he is keenly aware of the litigation process involved with professional discipline matters and accepts instructions at all levels of proceedings. He is also available for instruction to advise regulators on procedure, standards and enforcement.
Jim has also developed a practice defending police officers before disciplinary panels. He is regularly instructed at an early stage and can assist with drafting and early engagement, often to the benefit of his clients.
Jim has also appeared in the High Court in respect of Interim Order proceedings arising from regulatory investigations.
Recently, Jim has also received instructions in the field of sports regulation and anti-doping, advising on investigations in this field.
NMC v CH [2023]
Appeared for the Registrant in an emotionally charged case involving medicines administration errors on a neonatal intensive care ward, and allegations of dishonesty arising from them. Jim successfully defended all contested allegations, and despite an initial sanctions bid of a strike-off, his client ultimately received a conditions of practice order.
TRA v SO [2023]
Jim acted for the teacher in a case where serious allegations of conduct with students were alleged. The contested allegations were found not proven, and Jim was able to persuade the panel to make a recommendation of a prohibition order which could be reviewed after only 2 years.
SWE v MT [2023]
Defended a Social Worker in a case which involved legal argument touching on the SRA v Beckwith decision. Jim was successful in persuading the panel to dismiss all allegations at half-time
Appeared for the regulator in lengthy and complex case involving sexual misconduct by a practitioner psychologist.
HCPC v SW [2021]
Presenting on behalf of the HCPC in a case where the paramedic withheld care on the basis of discrimination
GOC v GT [2021]
Presenting on behalf of the GOC before a panel asked to adjudicate on the issue of jurisdiction for virtual hearings.
Jim has a growing practice in public law arising from his work in police actions, professional regulation and tax matters. He is an experienced practitioner in the Administrative Court and has also appeared in the Family Division relating to complex intra-jurisdictional issues arising from criminal investigations.
Jim is also regularly instructed to deal with civil and anti-social behaviour injunctions in the County Courts.
Jim has also been instructed to advise on private prosecutions across the criminal spectrum. His experience as a former CPS prosecutor means that he has a particular understanding of application of the full code test and disclosure regimes.
As a result of his background working for the PCS, Jim is also increasingly sought after to act as disclosure counsel in large investigations. He is able to advise on investigatory approach, as well as conducting full disclosure tasks. He is also well-versed in disclosure software and systems.
On 10 January 2024, Ritchie J handed down the Court’s decision in the case of Balachandra. The Court’s determination was,…
Ben Townsend, partner at Stewarts Law, is interviewed on the case of Czernuska v King. Speakers:Christina Courquin, Mountford ChambersJim Olphert,…