Jeremy Heywood

Partner

Jeremy Heywood

Expertise

Humanity

Expertise

Jeremy leads the Dispute Resolution and Business teams. The Dispute Resolution team acts for local and international clients in all manner of disputes. His areas of specialism include personal injury and clinical negligence, property and planning, employment, sanctions, and general commercial litigation. The Business team primarily acts for local individuals, companies, charities, and associations, to provide non-contentious advice and assistance on all aspects of business set-up, operation and sale.

Humanity

My father was a lawyer.  He never tried to persuade me to become a lawyer as well – he always encouraged me to find my own path.  Once it became apparent that I was not going to be a pilot, or called up to the England test team, I was really interested in two things: (1) ancient history, particularly the Romans and the Egyptians; and (2) restaurants.  I worked in restaurants throughout school and university, where I studied ancient history.  After university I went to France and worked in the hospitality industry, where I developed my love of wine (another gift from my father).  After a few years, I wanted to come home and felt a pull to study the law.

The essence of my role is to help people and businesses through difficulty and uncertainty, to help resolve disputes, and to obtain the best result in all the circumstances.  No one achieves this just by knowing the law – I think you need to know something of the wider world.  I really want to help people, whatever situation they find themselves in, without judging them or their situation, but acting with pragmatism, frankness, integrity, and empathy.  I guess ultimately, I am driven by a desire to do a good job, for my clients, my team, and my own conscience.

Professional Qualifications and Memberships

  • Advocate of the Royal Court, 2010
  • Non-practising Barrister, 2007
  • Bar Vocational Course: Inns of Court School of Law: 2007
  • Post-Graduate Diploma in Law, City University, 2006
  • MA (Hons), Ancient History, University of St. Andrews, 2003
  • Advocate of the Royal Court, 2010
  • Non-practising Barrister, 2007
  • Bar Vocational Course: Inns of Court School of Law: 2007
  • Post-Graduate Diploma in Law, City University, 2006
  • MA (Hons), Ancient History, University of St. Andrews, 2003
  • Advocate of the Royal Court, 2010
  • Non-practising Barrister, 2007
  • Bar Vocational Course: Inns of Court School of Law: 2007
  • Post-Graduate Diploma in Law, City University, 2006
  • MA (Hons), Ancient History, University of St. Andrews, 2003
  • Advocate of the Royal Court, 2010
  • Non-practising Barrister, 2007
  • Bar Vocational Course: Inns of Court School of Law: 2007
  • Post-Graduate Diploma in Law, City University, 2006
  • MA (Hons), Ancient History, University of St. Andrews, 2003
chevron_left
chevron_right
  • “BCR Law have proved an excellent and now fully trusted partner – stepping in to crises and removing the drama and ensuring focus on client value has quickly built strong ties”
    Dispute Resolution Client, Legal 500 2023
  • “We are most grateful to you and your team for working with us through this matter… Your support has been greatly appreciated.”
    Dispute Resolution Client
  • “I would like to thank you and your excellent team. I have been continually impressed with your no-nonsense approach and professionalism.”
    Dispute Resolution Client

Notable Cases

chevron_left
chevron_right
  • Property & Planning
    Ductclean (UK) Limited v Freedom Church Jersey Limited [2020] JRC 054
    The comments came in the judgment of Master of the Royal Court, Advocate Matthew Thompson, as he ruled against Ductclean (UK) Limited in a dispute over contract costs.
  • Property & Planning
    Boyle v Highfield Country Apartments Association [2017] JRC 157
    Jeremy appeared at trial for the defendant Association in defence of a claim by a member of the Association in relation to ownership of a parcel of land. The case involved consideration of the principles of contractual interpretation in Jersey law and the nature of property rights created under the Loi (1991) sur la copropriété des immeubles bâtis.
  • Property & Planning
    Fogarty v St Martin’s Cottage Limited [2017] JCA 096
    Jeremy appeared for the plaintiff before the Court of Appeal, with David Benest, in respect of the plaintiff’s application for leave to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal to the Privy Council.
  • Property & Planning
    Fogarty v St Martin’s Cottage Ltd [2016] JCA 222
    Jeremy and David Benest appeared before the Court of Appeal to represent the plaintiff regarding the costs orders following an unsuccessful appeal. The Court cited with approval the earlier decision in Flynn v Reid [2012 (2) JLR 226], in which Jeremy also appeared.
  • Property & Planning
    Fogarty v St Martin’s Cottage Limited [2016] JCA 180
    David Benest and Jeremy Heywood appeared for the appellant in this dispute concerning encroachments and the breach of restrictions. The case examined complex issues in contract law, land rights, and Jersey customary law on boundaries, reliefs, and destination de père de famille.
  • Property & Planning
    Home Farm Development Limited v HJL Holdings Ltd and Lingard [2013]
    Jeremy appeared for the respondents in an application for leave to appeal, involving questions about an advocate exceeding their instructions. The hearing addressed principles for granting leave to appeal and the nature of instructions to counsel.
  • Property & Planning
    Flynn v Reid [2012 (1) JLR 370]
    Jeremy acted for the defendant in this leading case concerning the division of property rights between unmarried cohabitees following relationship breakdown. It clarified Jersey law in relation to contract, constructive trust, proprietary estoppel, and unjust enrichment.
  • Personal Injury
    Corbin v Dorynek and Another [2022] JRC 085
    The Court found that both defendants bore responsibility for a jet-ski crash resulting in life-changing injuries. Michael Dorynek and Tyson Flath were held 60% and 40% liable, respectively, for failing to keep a proper lookout.
  • Personal Injury
    The X Children v The Minister for Health and Social Services [2018] JRC 226
    The plaintiffs claimed damages totalling £238 million for extensive abuse suffered due to the Minister’s failure to remove them from their home. The case is considered one of the highest-value personal injury claims in British legal history.
  • Personal Injury
    Piazza v Larsen Ltd [2017] JRC 153
    Jeremy appeared for the plaintiffs in resisting a strike-out application. The Court ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, noting that the defendants’ application was tactical and that the plaintiffs had attempted genuine, proportionate settlement.
  • Personal Injury
    Aukland v Minister for Health and Social Services and Cordova [2017] JRC 136
    Jeremy appeared for the defendants in a hearing regarding the exchange of expert medical evidence in clinical negligence claims. The Court ruled for simultaneous exchange on liability and sequential exchange on quantum.
  • Personal Injury
    Ure v Minister for Economic Development [2015] JRC 256
    Jeremy appeared for the defendant in a case involving personal injury at Jersey Airport. The hearing focused on procedures for the exchange of expert reports on causation and prognosis.
  • Personal Injury
    Morley v Reed [2012] JRC 127A
    Jeremy represented the defendant in a case arising from a motorcycle-car collision. The Court restated negligence and contributory negligence principles in Jersey.
  • Civil Procedure
    Design Food Limited v Vieira [2023] JRC 182
    The Employment Tribunal upheld an earlier decision awarding an employee over five months’ wages. The appeal by Design Food Ltd was rejected.
  • Civil Procedure
    XY and A Limited v Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police [2023] JRC 020
    The Court found warrants issued by the ECCU unlawful due to procedural errors. The application had cited the wrong legal article.
  • Civil Procedure
    Riba Consultaria Empresarial Ltda v Pinnacle Trustees Limited [2018]
    Jeremy successfully applied for disclosure orders from a corporate trustee to assist with recovery under a Brazilian judgment. The case clarified the Royal Court’s approach to Norwich Pharmacal relief.
  • Civil Procedure
    Pearce v Treasurer of the States [2016 (1) JLR 435]
    Jeremy was appointed amicus curiae in this costs appeal. The Court addressed whether the public could profit via Factor B uplift and the role of proportionality in taxation.
  • Civil Procedure
    Hill v Meyer [2016] JRC 060
    Jeremy appeared for the plaintiff seeking to amend pleadings in a debt recovery claim. The ruling clarified the proper execution and reassignment of debts in Jersey.
  • Civil Procedure
    Flynn v Reid [2013 (2) JLR 280]
    Jeremy appeared before the Royal Court in a case establishing the Court’s jurisdiction to make protective costs orders and setting parameters for public funding in such cases.
  • Civil Procedure
    Doorstop Ltd v Gillman and Lepervier [2012] JLR 226
    Jeremy, acting as amicus curiae, assisted the Court on legal argument concerning interest rates in debt claims. The case examined competing principles in Jersey’s customary law.
  • Civil Procedure
    Flynn v Reid [2012 (2) JLR 226]
    Jeremy represented the respondent in the Court of Appeal on the issue of costs between legally aided parties. The matter attracted interventions from the Attorney General and Law Society of Jersey.
  • Criminal
    AG v Pereira [2016] JRC 218
    Jeremy appeared for the defendant in a jury trial and at sentencing for sexual assault on a minor. He successfully argued against the use of external English counsel’s opinion on sentencing.
  • Criminal
    AG v Bree and Binnie [2016] JRC 203A
    Jeremy represented the first defendant at trial and sentencing. The Court imposed a lesser sentence than the Crown sought and declined to impose an exclusion order.
  • Criminal
    AG v Norris and Norris [2015] JRC 174
    Jeremy acted for the second defendant during confiscation proceedings following conviction for drug importation. The case considered how benefit should be calculated under Jersey law.
  • Criminal
    AG v Norris and Norris [2013] JRC 198
    Jeremy appeared at sentencing after conviction for importing nearly 250kg of cannabis resin. He persuaded the Court to depart from the Crown’s proposed sentence.

Latest

chevron_left
chevron_right
Dispute Resolution

Court Gives Guidance on Overriding Objective: Dentskevich V Strachan [2025]JRC053

Law
Law
Law
March 24, 2025
Dispute Resolution

Haut du Mont explosion: What is Gross Negligence Manslaughter?

Law
Law
Law
October 2, 2024
Dispute Resolution

The Importance of Preserving all Documents in Litigation Cases

Law
Law
Law
January 26, 2021
Dispute Resolution

“Mind your head…” – the Duties of Occupiers to Visitors

Law
Law
Law
November 30, 2020
Dispute Resolution

Force Majeure and Frustration

Law
Law
Law
April 6, 2020
Dispute Resolution

Alternative Dispute Resoution in Jersey

Law
Law
Law
September 28, 2018
Personal injury

X Children v. Minister for Health & Social Services

Law
Law
Law
June 15, 2018