Jim Duffy
Jim Duffy’s practice spans clinical negligence, inquests and inquiries, personal injury, human rights and employment.
He is a member of the Attorney General’s ‘C’ Panel of Counsel and has particular experience of prison law claims, acting on both sides. He regularly advises in cases involving parole board decisions, security categorisations, and personal injury claims brought in a prison context.
In 2013-14 Jim acted as Judicial Assistant to Lord Reed and Lord Hodge at the UK Supreme Court and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
Jim regularly acts for families, NHS Trusts, doctors and patients in clinical negligence claims.
In July 2018, Jim was led by Elizabeth-Anne Gumbel QC for the appellant children in CN & GN v. Poole Borough Council. The Supreme Court considered whether and in what circumstances local authorities might owe a duty at common law to children at risk of harm.
He is an experienced inquest practitioner, regularly appearing for bereaved families, medical providers and government departments.
Jim is experienced in public inquiries and is instructed in the Undercover Policing Inquiry chaired by Sir John Mitting. He also appears in employment claims and has acted for claimants and government departments in cases relating to TUPE, unfair dismissal, whistleblowing and discrimination.
Prior to transferring to the Bar, Jim spent three years working as a solicitor, first qualifying in Scotland and then in England & Wales. He represented participants in the Coalition Government’s ‘Back to Work’ schemes, Kenyan nationals accused of involvement in the 2010 Al-Shabaab ‘World Cup’ bombings in Kampala, and families unlawfully detained at Yarl’s Wood Immigration Removal Centre. He also represented civilians and the families of British soldiers in claims relating to the Iraq war.
Jim graduated from the University of Glasgow in 2005 with a First in Law with French Language and the class prize. He previously spent a year at Paul Cézanne Université in Aix-en-Provence. As a Rotary Ambassadorial Scholar, he obtained an LL.M from the University of Toronto in 2007.
Jim went on to intern at the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees in Geneva before training as a solicitor at Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP.
He has carried out teaching and research in public law at the University of Glasgow and assisted the Council of Europe in relation to police brutality and the rule of law in Eastern European states. A former Editor of the UK Human Rights Blog, he continues to sit on its editorial team.
In 2016, Jim was one of four barristers in England & Wales to be selected for an exchange to the Paris Bar where he addressed the Conseil de l’Ordre des Avocats de Paris on advocates’ duties towards protected parties.
He is a member of the Attorney General’s ‘C’ Panel of Counsel and has particular experience of prison law claims, acting on both sides. He regularly advises in cases involving parole board decisions, security categorisations, and personal injury claims brought in a prison context.
In 2013-14 Jim acted as Judicial Assistant to Lord Reed and Lord Hodge at the UK Supreme Court and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
Jim regularly acts for families, NHS Trusts, doctors and patients in clinical negligence claims.
In July 2018, Jim was led by Elizabeth-Anne Gumbel QC for the appellant children in CN & GN v. Poole Borough Council. The Supreme Court considered whether and in what circumstances local authorities might owe a duty at common law to children at risk of harm.
He is an experienced inquest practitioner, regularly appearing for bereaved families, medical providers and government departments.
Jim is experienced in public inquiries and is instructed in the Undercover Policing Inquiry chaired by Sir John Mitting. He also appears in employment claims and has acted for claimants and government departments in cases relating to TUPE, unfair dismissal, whistleblowing and discrimination.
Prior to transferring to the Bar, Jim spent three years working as a solicitor, first qualifying in Scotland and then in England & Wales. He represented participants in the Coalition Government’s ‘Back to Work’ schemes, Kenyan nationals accused of involvement in the 2010 Al-Shabaab ‘World Cup’ bombings in Kampala, and families unlawfully detained at Yarl’s Wood Immigration Removal Centre. He also represented civilians and the families of British soldiers in claims relating to the Iraq war.
Jim graduated from the University of Glasgow in 2005 with a First in Law with French Language and the class prize. He previously spent a year at Paul Cézanne Université in Aix-en-Provence. As a Rotary Ambassadorial Scholar, he obtained an LL.M from the University of Toronto in 2007.
Jim went on to intern at the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees in Geneva before training as a solicitor at Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP.
He has carried out teaching and research in public law at the University of Glasgow and assisted the Council of Europe in relation to police brutality and the rule of law in Eastern European states. A former Editor of the UK Human Rights Blog, he continues to sit on its editorial team.
In 2016, Jim was one of four barristers in England & Wales to be selected for an exchange to the Paris Bar where he addressed the Conseil de l’Ordre des Avocats de Paris on advocates’ duties towards protected parties.
Practice Areas
Panel
- Contributing Author
Qualified Year
- 2012
Membership
- Professional Negligence Bar Association
- South Eastern Circuit
Education
- 2006: Diploma in Legal Practice, Glasgow Graduate School of Law
- 2005: Law with French Language, LL.B (Hons) First Class Honours and McCormick Prize for the Most
- 2007: Master of Laws (LL.M), University of Toronto
- 2012: Bar Transfer Test
2 Contributions by Jim Duffy
PRACTICE NOTES
Statutory Public Inquiries in the UK: Procedure, Roles, Evidence, Disclosure, Costs and Reporting under the Inquiries Act 2005
The way a public inquiry is run can differ markedly from one to another. Even where an inquiry is set up under the Inquiries Act 2005 (IA 2005), the accompanying rules give limited prescription on process. Likewise, formal guidance is sparse. The Cabinet Office’s Inquiries Guidance: Guidance for Inquiry Chairs and Secretaries and Sponsor Departments was characterised by a witness before the House of Lords Select Committee on the Inquiries Act 2005 as ‘frankly…no use at all’. This Practice Note concentrates on statutory, not non‑statutory, inquiries. For further context, see Practice Note: Public inquiries.
Key stages of an inquiry
the announcement of the inquiry, its terms of reference, and appointment of a chair or panel
the formal opening of the inquiry
recruiting an inquiry secretary and team, plus a solicitor to the inquiry and counsel to the inquiry
gathering and preserving evidence
preliminary enquiries, scoping work and relevance reviews—typically culminating in a detailed list of issues
disclosure, including publication of any disclosure protocols
witness statements...
Public Law
PRACTICE NOTES
UK Public Inquiries: Inquiries Act 2005 framework, ministerial powers, procedure, evidence, reports and warning letters, judicial review, ECHR investigative duties, non-statutory inquiries and reform
Purpose and aims of public inquiries
Public inquiries are typically convened to scrutinise, in depth, events that trigger widespread concern. They fall into two broad categories:
statutory inquiries—constituted under the Inquiries Act 2005 (IA 2005) or other statutory powers available to Parliamentary Commissioners, local authorities, regulators and similar bodies, and
non-statutory inquiries—such as those initiated under the royal prerogative to form a Royal Commission
Section 44(4) of the IA 2005 expressly preserves the Sovereign’s ability to establish a Royal Commission, and also safeguards any power of a Minister or other person—whether arising from statute or otherwise—to institute an inquiry outside the framework of the Act.
Depending on the applicable procedure, inquiry hearings may proceed in public or in private. Lord Justice Salmon, who chaired the 1966 Royal Commission on Tribunals of Inquiry, remarked that secrecy tends to swell the volume of evidence while diminishing its reliability (Royal Commission on Tribunals of Inquiry, 1966 Cmnd 3121, not reported by LexisNexis®).
This Practice Note primarily addresses statutory inquiries under the IA 2005 before offering a brief overview of non-statutory inquiries...
Public Law
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
