James Bradford accepts instructions across all areas of Chambers’ work, with a particular interest in commercial & construction law, international arbitration, public law & human rights and European Union law.
Since being taken on as a tenant in 2018, James has already been developing an international practice with a keen focus on international arbitration work. Both during pupillage and since, James has gained experience of different international arbitration matters including, most recently, being instructed as junior counsel on a high-value international trusts arbitration (led by Elspeth Talbot-Rice QC with Andrew Holden at XXIV Old Buildings Chambers).
James has also already been instructed in a number of high profile cases in the public law sector including as junior counsel in the landmark constitutional decision of the Supreme Court in Privacy International v Investigatory Powers Tribunal  UKSC 22 (led by Sir James Eadie, Kate Grange QC and Catherine Dobson) and as junior counsel to the Infected Blood Inquiry.
As sole counsel, James has appeared regularly in county courts in a variety of civil matters and has gained a broad experience of advisory and pleading work.
Prior to coming to the Bar, James worked as a Lecturer in Law at Oxford University, teaching various undergraduate subjects including Contract Law, Human Rights Law and European Union Law to students across different colleges.
He is bilingual in Italian and has experience working on different research projects with leading Italian academics: in particular, he has assisted Prof. Guido Alpa (Professor of Civil Law, La Sapienza Università di Roma) and Prof. Attila Tanzi (Professor of International Law, Università di Bologna).
Commercial, Construction and International Arbitration
Both during his pupillage and since, James has gained experience of international arbitration matters. He is comfortable working within a larger team of barristers and solicitors on high value matters (both in construction and general commercial litigation).
- James is currently instructed in a high value international trusts arbitration (as junior counsel, led by Elspeth Talbot-Rice QC with Andrew Holden at XXIV Old Buildings Chambers). This is an ongoing matter in which James has been instructed since early 2019;
- An international arbitration determining quantum in a large scale construction dispute (assisting Rachael O’Hagan as part of pupillage).
As part of his pupillage, James gained experience of drafting statements of case, advices and legal research notes in a variety of matters across the commercial and construction sectors including:
- Jurisdictional challenges in an adjudication (preparation of advice in relation to possible grounds for challenge and drafting the response to a referral notice);
- TCC proceedings concerning defective works on a domestic property (assisted in preparation and drafting of factually and legally complex defence to the claim made);
- A financial matter involving issues of misrepresentation and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (drafting Particulars of Claim and short advice concerning various issues pertinent to the claim);
- The new disclosure rules which had been proposed in relation to the Business and Property Courts (drafting research note).
In January 2018, James was a member of the winning team from 39 Essex Chambers in the Worshipful Company of Arbitrators Mediation Skills Competition 2018.
Trusts & Commercial Chancery
James is developing a practice in international trusts work. Since starting as a tenant in September 2018, he has already gained valuable experience, having been instructed on a high value ad hoc trusts arbitration.
He is instructed in this ongoing matter in a team with Elspeth Talbot-Rice QC and Andrew Holden at XXIV Old Building Chambers. James is keen to continue developing this area.
Administrative, Public & EU Law
James has been involved in a number of high-profile cases since being taken on as a tenant in 2018:
- Junior counsel for the Interested Parties in the Supreme Court hearing of Privacy International v Investigatory Powers Tribunal  UKSC 22 (led by Sir James Eadie QC, Kate Grange QC and Catherine Dobson). The decision concerned the effect of s. 67(8) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 as well as Parliament’s ability to legislate to oust the High Court supervisory jurisdiction in certain circumstances. For more information click here.
- Junior counsel to the Infected Blood Inquiry chaired by Sir Brian Langstaff.
- Junior junior instructed by the Government Legal Department, with respect to the judicial review challenge to the third runway at Heathrow.
During pupillage, James gained experience of a number of issues involving immigration and general administrative law disputes, including the following:
- Drafting an advice on the prospects and tactics to be used with respect to a Court of Appeal hearing concerning an application for permission to judicially review an immigration decision of the Home Office;
- Drafting a Notice of Objection to an application for permission to be heard at the Supreme Court, in a case concerning Article 6 and Article 8 ECHR issues;
- Drafting a Notice of Objection to an application for permission to be heard at the Supreme Court in a matter concerning the ouster clauses and the amenability of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal to judicial review;
- Drafting a Notice of Objection to an application to reopen a decision of the Court of Appeal in light of a later decision of the Court of Appeal in Ahsan v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 2009.
Regulatory & Disciplinary
James has gained experience of a number of different regulatory matters during pupillage. Through his supervision and training, he has acquired experience of this sector by drafting a rule 11 determination in relation to an appeal before the Police Appeals Tribunal, a research note analysing the contractual implications of the membership terms of a medical defence organisation and a skeleton argument for a matter before the Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service.
During pupillage, James also assisted with a case before the Architects Registration Board and attended a number of different regulatory tribunals including the General Osteopathic Council.
James has experience appearing in county courts as sole counsel in a range of matters including disputes relating to:
- Credit hire disputes
- Quantification of damages in personal injury claims
- Road traffic accidents
- Employer liability
- Public liability
Since starting as a tenant, James has gained a wide range of experience in county court trials (small claims hearings and fast track) as well as procedural applications.
During pupillage, James has been exposed to a broad range of civil law issues and as part of this, he has gained experience of drafting:
- Research notes on recent authorities in relation to the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, contributory negligence, dependency on services and the law following Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board  UKSC 11;
- Multiple defences with respect to different clinical negligence and personal injury claims as well as a counter schedule of loss.
- A Particulars of Claim with respect to a personal injury case involving the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998;
- An advice on causation in a clinical negligence matter where there were two successive tortfeasors;
- An advice in relation to various personal injury matters including issues involving disputes over causation and contributory negligence.
Planning & Environment
During his pupillage, James has gained experience of a wide variety of work in this area including the drafting of:
- An advice involving the interpretation of the London Plan as well as the merits of an application pursuant to s. 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990;
- Research notes concerning the duty of a planning inspector to consider new evidence following the conclusion of a planning inquiry; the circumstances in which a re-consultation is required and the interpretation of s. 31(2A) Senior Courts Act 1981 in recent authorities;
- A skeleton argument for the Court of Appeal concerning the interpretation of a local plan;
- A skeleton witness statement with respect to a matter concerning a judicial review in an environmental matter;
- A statement of facts and grounds and then reply in relation to a judicial review of a decision to grant planning permission;
- An advice on the merits of an environmental law dispute involving various complex allegations of nuisance and negligence.