Property & Chancery
James Davies practices across a broad range of property and chancery work with experience of advisory work, drafting and advocacy. He has a particular interest in landlord and tenant law, including the particular issues arising on historic ground rent claims. His practice also includes litigation arising out of conveyancing both in its own right and through professional negligence claims against solicitors.
James has a significant probate practice encompassing the Inheritance Act, applications to remove executors, construction of wills, and contentious probate. When acting in Inheritance Act claims he is able to use the analytical skills he learned as an accountant.
James is authorised to accept instructions direct from businesses, professionals and individuals under the Direct Access Scheme. He has been placed in the Legal 500 for both 2012 and 2013 for Commercial and Chancery work on the South Eastern Circuit. He is “recommended for commercial disputes and insolvency matters”.
Recent work has included:
- Succesfully representing a vendor in defending a claim for the return of a deposit in a conveyancing transaction where the vendor’s notice to complete was defective.
- Advising and drafting a Counterclaim in a neighbour dispute where the client was being subjected to CCTV surveillance.
- Representing the successful claimant in a week long trial concerning whether a sitting tenant was protected under the 1954 Act and the Standard Conditions of Sale. The claimant had purchased the property having been advised it was a residential tenant. The claim was brought against both the tenant and the vendor and succeeded against both.
- Representing a beneficiary under a will in a two day trial under the Inheritance Act which involved consideration as to the extent of “reasonable” needs and whether parents could be said to have assumed responsibility to look after an adult child who had simply never left home.
- Representing the defendant beneficiary in an Inheritance Act claim based on living together and financial dependency from initial advice through to a successful mediation.
- Successfully removing an executor on the grounds of misconduct.
- Showing good cause – Leases and the costs of proceedings  NLJ 13
- Betterment - For better or worse?  NLJ 1635
- Landlord and Tenant: Déjà vu? Tenancy Deposits revisited  NLJ 1071
- Partnership Disputes  Sweet & Maxwell – with Michael Reynolds
Segar v Scott-Rees & Co.  CL 2759
Representing the Respondent firm in an appeal considering solicitor's liens in the course of active litigation where the client is unrepresented.
Everitt v Budhram  Ch 170
Representing the Responded – appeal considered the meaning of 'needs' of the bankrupt in Section 335A of the Insolvency Act along with whether the court was entitled to consider the circumstances of the making of the original bankruptcy order on an application for an order for sale.
Mastermailer v Sandison & others LTL 21/4/2011
Representing the Appellant on an appeal to the High Court Judge against the Master’s decision to order security for costs in a complex case involving serious allegations against the former directors of a public company. Consideration of the extent to which on a security for costs application the Court must assume the claim will fail. Cited in the White Book.
Howden Joinery Ltd v Brain  3999 (QB)
Representing the Respondent, as he had at trial, where James had persuaded a Recorder to cure a defect in failing to join a Part 20 Defendant by joining them under CPR 19.2. James secured the dismissal of the appeal.