James Arthur Sharpe

Family

James is a specialist family practitioner. He accepts instructions across the full spectrum of family work, including public and private children, and financial remedies.

James has a particular focus on cases involving children, and cases involving allegations of sexual abuse, neglect, domestic abuse, non-accidental injury, and fabricated or induced illness. He has written articles, given seminars and provided training on a range of family law topics.

Cases

Re Z (2024): Representing a father in ongoing proceedings, which includes legal argument on the transfer of proceedings to another country.
Re G (2024): Represented a local authority in a final hearing, which included legal submissions on the benefits/disadvantages of long-term foster care and adoption in a case where an older child was being placed for adoption and neither parent could provide care.
Re G (2024): Represented a father in proceedings, which included legal argument as to the proper basis for finding threshold met where a child had long-term health issues and whose parents could not provide all the care needed.
Re B (2024): Represented a father at a final hearing, which included argument on whether there should be any contact between him and his child where there had previously been significant findings made against him of sexual and physical abuse.
Re B (2024): Representing a local authority in ongoing proceedings, which includes allegations of fabricated or induced illness.
Re N (2024): Represented a local authority at a final hearing, which included legal argument as to the proper basis for establishing, first, jurisdiction, and, secondly, threshold in the context of a child who had travelled to the UK from Afghanistan as an unaccompanied minor.
Re A&F (2024): Represented a mother in a combined fact-finding and final hearing, in which the local authority’s applications for placement orders were successfully resisted.
Re B (2023-24): Represented a local authority at a final hearing in a case involving significant religious-based physical chastisement. The court heard legal argument in relation to the extent the mother’s religious convictions should be taken into account when assessing welfare, and the extent of the local authority’s obligations to assess alternative carers. In addition, there was subsequent legal argument arising from the final hearing in relation to covert recordings.
Re M-K (2023): Represented a local authority in proceedings where the mother had declined legal representation.
Re L (2023): Represented a local authority in a final hearing where there was a substantial challenge from an alternative carer, which included evidence and argument as to events abroad.
Re M (2022-23): Represented grandparents in proceedings involving a granddaughter who was beyond parental control and for whom they had been caring for under a section 8 order, which included legal argument as to maintaining parental responsibility where public law orders were sought.
Re P (2022): Represented a local authority in a fact-finding hearing where a child had significant bruising and a fracture.
Re M-N (2022): Represented a local authority in proceedings where there were significant allegations of neglect.
K v W (2022): Represented a father in a fact-findings hearing where there were cross-allegations of abuse between separated parents.
H v D (2022): Represented a mother in proceedings where she was seeking permission to remove a child permanently from the jurisdiction.
Re D-F (2022): Represented a local authority in proceedings where there were significant allegations of neglect all of which were in dispute.
Re S&B (2021-22): Represented a local authority in proceedings which included legal argument as to the test for the making of a placement order where children had been in a foster-to-adopt placement for a substantial period of time and there was a significant challenge from an alternative carer.
D v S (2021): Represented a husband in financial proceedings where there were significant issues relating to non-compliance leading to a successful application for costs.
Re B (2021): Represented children through their guardian where final orders were agreed, but there remaining a dispute as to threshold in relation to which the guardian had to take an active role.
S v S (2021): Represented a mother in private law proceedings, which required the court to determine a number of allegations of domestic abuse.
S v S (2021): Represented a wife in financial proceedings where there were allegations that properties abroad had not been disclosed.
Re G (2021): Represented a local authority in a consolidated fact-finding and final hearing, which included allegations of sexual abuse.
Re S (2020): Represented a local authority in a consolidated fact-finding and final hearing which included allegations of non-accidental injury.
Re W-W (2020): Represented a local authority in proceedings involving allegations of significant sexual abuse perpetrated by a father against his children.
Re W (2020): Represented a local authority in proceedings involving allegations of extensive physical abuse.
K & Ors v K & Ors (2020): Represented one side in an extensive family dispute over different sets of proceedings, which included multiple cross-applications for non-molestation orders and requiring factual determination of numerous allegations.
Re C (2019-20): Represented a mother (as junior) in a consolidated fact-finding and final hearing heard over 50 days involving allegations of fabricated or induced illness.
B v X (2018): Represented a wife in financial proceedings, which included determination of beneficial interest of third parties in a property as a preliminary issue.

Reported cases

Articles & Seminars

With Helen Nettleship: “Threshold Documents” [2023] Fam Law 1132
42BR seminars on drafting threshold documents and pensions in financial remedies cases