James Davies has a civil practice specialising in commercial, chancery and property matters. He appears regularly in the County Court and the High Court on interlocutory applications as well as fast track and multi-track trials. Further details of his specialist areas of practice can be found under his Commercial Group and Property & Chancery Group profiles.
Before coming to the Bar James qualified as a Chartered Accountant. His professional practice included the audit of family owned companies (in particular construction businesses) and professional partnerships. James continues to remain up to date with industry developments and is able to apply his commercial experience to many of his cases.
James contributed to the Bar Council response to the DCA Consultation Paper “The Law on Damages”. The Bar Council team was led by one of our then Heads of Chambers Tim Lamb QC (now His Honour Judge Tim Lamb QC). James also worked on the Chancery Bar Association’s response to the Ministry of Justice consultation on “Solving Disputes in the County Court”. He is the co-author, along with Doctor Michael Reynolds, of “Partnership Disputes” published by Sweet & Maxwell.
James 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”.
• 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 Respondent – 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.