Jamie Cockfield

Jamie has a particular interest in contentious probate, trusts and estates. During pupillage he saw or worked on:

• Guest v Guest [2022] UKSC 27: Jamie attended the Supreme Court on this landmark proprietary estoppel case. The judgment is available here.
• Dawson v Dawson [2022] EWHC 341 (Ch): Jamie attended the High Court in this 4-day trial concerning a proprietary estoppel counterclaim and claim to prove will in solemn form. The judgment is available here.
• A long-running dispute between two brothers in the High Court concerning occupation rent
• Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 claims
• The operation of the new Practice Direction concerning witness statements for trial (PD57AC)

Jamie has been instructed to:

• Advise disappointed beneficiaries on a Part 64 claim
• Advise a group of charities on the rectification of a will and a White v Jones claim
• Advise beneficiaries on an application to enforce an agreement relating to a contentious probate dispute
• Advise on a dispute concerning entitlement to a grant under an intestacy

He welcomes instructions on issues relating to implied trusts of the home and constructive trusts.

During pupillage Jamie worked on and saw:

• Pretoria Energy Company (Chittering) Ltd v Blankney Estates Ltd [2022] EWHC 1467 (Ch), a £56m case concerning contractual intention, certainty of terms and subject to contract agreements. Jamie’s article on this case (“To bind or not to bind? ‘Heads of terms’, ‘subject to contract’ and other phrases in the making of legally binding agreements”) is available here.
• A high-profile energy-related case concerning constructive trusts

Jamie has so far been instructed to:

• Advise a car dealership on a c.£100,000 contractual dispute
• Advise claimants in an equine dispute relating to the sale of goods and the passing of legal title
• Represent the claimant (in part) in a high-profile case concerning a £1m claim relating to a personal guarantee.

Jamie appears frequently in the High Court and County Court on matters concerning insolvency and restructuring. He is developing a specialism in this area and has been instructed to:

• Represent trustees in bankruptcy in the Insolvency and Companies Court in a case concerning for annulment under s. 282(1)(b) of the Insolvency Act 1986
• Represent trustees in bankruptcy in a section 282(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act 1986 annulment application, and an application relating to trustee remuneration.
• Represent company administrators seeking administration extensions (in both the High Court and Country Court)
• Advise on company restoration

During pupillage he saw a range of cases including:

• R Borra (aka R Gupta) v HMRC and another [2022] EWHC 1195 (Ch). The case involved the identity of the bankrupt and a fraudulent application to annul and the fabrication of evidence and applications, and was referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
• An energy dispute concerning constructive trusts
• Misfeasance claims under s.212, fraudulent trading claims under s. 213, and wrongful trading claims under s.214 of the Insolvency Act.
• Antecedent transaction claims

Jamie has been instructed to:

• Advise on a misrepresentation claim in a property conveyance which concerned the existence of noisy and anti-social neighbours
• Represent the Defendant in a £3.5million mortgage possession claim
• Represent parties in residential possession claims

During pupillage he worked on

• Nuisance and misrepresentation claims in property conveyances
• A long-running parking dispute between neighbours with shared communal grounds
• An adverse possession claim
• A case concerning the validity of the exercise of an option to purchase a residential property, involving issues of assignment and definitions of time periods.

Read Jamie’s Privacy Notice, Data Protection Policy and Disposal Policy.