Skip to content

Jack Murphy

Call 2013

"Very experienced, much beyond his years. Very legally and tactically astute, good eye for detail, understands strategy, and is very well prepared. Highly recommend."
(Legal 500, 2022)

Jack has developed a specialist criminal regulatory law, personal injury, and inquest law practice.

He has extensive court experience. As part of his civil practice, he regularly appears in the County Court for trials and interlocutory hearings; as well as in front of Queen’s Bench Masters. He has been led in the Upper Tribunal and Court of Appeal. As part of his criminal regulatory practice, he regularly appears in both the Magistrates’ and Crown Courts. He is developing a particular expertise in inquest work, and has acted as sole counsel in several complex, multi-day inquests.

Before coming to the Bar, Jack read History at Christ Church, Oxford. Aside from the law, he is a keen sailor, skier and walker.

Criminal Regulatory & Environmental

Jack’s specialist practice encompasses health & safety, environmental, and motor offences. He welcomes instructions on behalf of defendants and potential defendants, and he regularly appears in the Magistrates’ and Crown Courts for both trials and sentencing hearings.

His health & safety work covers a broad range of industries and issues, and he has represented a range of corporate clients, from micro companies to very large organisations with turnovers in excess of £1 billion.

Selected cases include the following:

  • He is currently being led in a multi-handed gross negligence / corporate manslaughter prosecution;
  • Acting as sole counsel at sentence for a company with turnover in excess of £300 million, and obtaining a favourable fine;
  • Being led in a s.47 wilful neglect Crown Court trial involving the near-fatal drowning of a vulnerable pupil at a specialist school, in which a conditional discharge was obtained;
  • Being led in a prosecution of an Approved Inspector under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, in which the prosecution offered no evidence following legal submissions on the applicability of the Order; and

Jack is also developing an environmental law practice, and he has particular experience of prosecutions under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Recent work in this area includes successfully defending Waitrose and a large national housebuilder in statutory nuisance prosecutions.

Jack’s motor offences work includes regular trials and sentencing hearings for careless driving; and he has experience of fatal offences, as well as s.170 Road Traffic Act failure to report / failure to stop offences.

Jack’s regulatory practice is complimented by his experience of inquest law, personal injury, professional negligence and clinical negligence work.

Inquests & Public Inquiries

Jack has a specialist inquest law practice. He has acted as sole counsel in several complex multi-day jury inquests opposite more senior counsel.

He is instructed by national and international healthcare providers, construction and infrastructure companies, public bodies, and families. He has expertise regarding deaths in healthcare or custody; unlawful killing, including cases held after the Supreme Court decision in Maughan; cases with HSE or Police involvement; and Article 2 ECHR inquests.

Selected work includes:

  • Acting for the former operators of the Manchester Metrolink tram system in a sensitive inquest involving the death of a young man following a cardiac arrest, suffered during a contentious physical restraint performed on him by four Metrolink contractors in central Manchester. This was one of the first cases concerned with unlawful killing and the lowered standard of proof following Maughan. Jack’s submissions on the application of Article 2 ECHR and his client’s work policies were accepted by the Senior Coroner, and no adverse findings were made in regards to his client at the conclusion of the inquest. The case attracted national media coverage: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-56203332
  • A complex 1-week jury inquest involving several linked diving deaths off the Kent coast;
  • A 1-week inquest concerned with the drowning of the user of a bath hoist, in which Jack acted for the hoist servicing provider that had serviced the hoist one month previously. No adverse findings were made against the servicing provider;
  • A 4-week inquest for the London Ambulance Service;
  • A 2-week prison death inquest for the custody and transport contractor GeoAmey, concerned with the management of drug and alcohol withdrawal; as well as another 2-week prison death inquest for the same client, involving suicide.

He has also been instructed in relation to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, in relation to which he was led by Keith Morton QC and Adrian Darbishire QC.

His criminal regulatory and personal injury work compliments his inquests practice.

Personal Injury

Jack has a busy defendant personal injury practice, encompassing both casualty and industrial disease claims. He regularly drafts pleadings, provides advice on liability and quantum, and undertakes settlement negotiations in cases ranging in value from £50,000 to c.£500,000.

Recent selected work includes:

  • Advising on both liability and expert evidence in an occupational asthma claim pleaded in the region of £400,000, involving a novel mode of alleged exposure (a domestic battery), and raising fundamental questions of foreseeability and remoteness. At the CCMC Jack successfully persuaded the court to order a split trial and grant permission for expert engineering and occupational hygiene evidence. This evidence subsequently led to Claimant discontinuing the claim.
  • A chronic pain syndrome case valued in excess of £400,000, which Jack was able to compromise for a global figure less than £150,000.
  • Successfully defending a Noise Induced Hearing Loss claim on limitation grounds, despite the defendant not having advanced any positive evidence of forensic prejudice. HHJ Vosper QC found that information elicited from the claimant in cross examination was sufficient evidence of the prejudice faced by the Defendant,

His cases regularly involve three or more disciplines of expert medical evidence, or claimants with complex pre-existing medical conditions. Several of his more recent cases have involved occupational stress and psychiatric injury.

Jack also accepts instructions on behalf of Claimants.

Civil Fraud

Jack is frequently instructed in cases involving concerns of fraud: to conduct trials, proof witnesses, advise on prospects, and settle pleadings. Much of his fraud work arises out of road traffic accidents or public liability personal injury claims, and he has successfully defended several low velocity impact, induced accident and exaggerated injury claims at trial. He also more general insurance fraud work.

Jack has extensive experience of fundamental dishonesty, QOCS, and s.57 CJCA 2015 applications. He has obtained several dishonesty findings following cross-examination at trial. He has also obtained four dishonesty findings without trial following discontinuance, one of which being the first instance dishonesty finding in Rayner v Raymond Brown Group (2016) CC (Oxford) (Judge Harris QC) 03/08/2016, referred to in the leading case of LOCOG v Sinfield [2018] EWHC 51 (QB).

Clinical Negligence

Selected Cases

A significant proportion of Jack’s inquest work involves clinical aspects and deaths in health and social care settings, and he is frequently instructed to represent healthcare providers at inquest hearings.

In addition to his inquest work, Jack accepts instructions from defendant NHS Trust, private healthcare providers, and professional bodies, as well as claimants in clinical negligence claims.

Much of his clinical negligence work involves complex medical conditions, with recent cases involving: complex regional pain and psychological injury following the alleged-negligent insertion of an intrathecal opiate delivery device; sudden heart failure as a result of previously-controlled hypokalaemia; the development of complex incisional hernias by a bariatric patent following routine surgery; and a significant case of body dysmorphic disorder with uncertain causes.

Recommendations


“He’s meticulous in his approach and has a lovely manner about him with clients and the courts.”

Chambers & Partners, 2022

“Very experienced, much beyond his years. Very legally and tactically astute, good eye for detail, understands strategy, and is very well prepared. Highly recommend.”

Legal 500, 2022

“He is on top of the detail, he gets the issues and he works extremely hard.”

Chambers & Partners, 2022


Portfolio Builder

Close

Select the practice areas that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download Add to portfolio
Portfolio close
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


Click here to email this list.