Jim Hirschmann practices in Court of Protection, health, social care and education law. He has a particular interest and expertise in public law challenges related to his core practice areas (see more details on his expertise in these areas below). Many of his cases involve acting for or against local authorities.
Jim is hardworking, thorough and adept at explaining complex law in straightforward terms. This is reflected in comments from solicitors such as "a huge thank you for everything you have done on this case which went far and beyond" and comments from judges about Jim’s advocacy as “helpful” and “extremely clear.”
Outside of busy work demands, Jim enjoys sport with a particular interest in rugby, running and squash. He likes travelling and has an armchair interest in philosophy.
Jim is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. Please contact him for a copy of his privacy notice which sets out the basis upon which any personal data he may collect about you, or that is provided to him, will be processed. He will provide a copy of this to you within two working days of receiving the request.
Jim Hirschmann's family law practice is focussed on advising local authorities and parents in disputes over children and has a public emphasis. His family caseload is complemented by his expertise in judicial review, education law and the Court of Protection.
Care and adoption
Jim accepts instructions from local authorities, parents, wider relatives (including prospective guardians) and children who are involved in care proceedings. He has experience of cases involving non-accidental injury to the subject child. He is regularly instructed in cases involving the inherent jurisdiction of the high court often related to issues of forced marriage, deprivation of liberty and secure accommodation orders.
With a Master of Laws (LLM) in public law, he is well placed to consider challenges against the decisions of local authorities (including judicial reviews and claims under the Human Rights Act 1998).
Notable cases include:
B v F - acted for a local authority that sought authorisation for the deprivation of liberty in relation to a young person found in a property known for heavy drug usage, including heroin. The case involved circumstances where there was no suitable secure accommodation unit nor children’s home available. The inherent jurisdiction of the High Court was invoked to protect the young person whilst attempts to secure a more suitable placement continued.
G v H - acted for the local authority in a five day fact-find hearing and up to final hearing. Significant findings were made against the parents in relation to serious non-accidental injuries suffered by the child including a lip laceration, left radial shaft fracture, an injury to the left femur and multiple bruises. The case involved consideration of ambiguous expert medical evidence. Adoption and placement orders were ultimately made.
F v M - acted for a local authority in a contested seven day final hearing involving allegations of corruption, drug abuse, domestic violence and peripheral serious organised crime. The local authority’s care plan was endorsed and the final order that they sought was made.
B v Y - instructed to act on behalf of a local authority who sought an emergency protection order. The case related to children who had been exposed to prolonged neglect. The order was granted.
Re FL (a Child):  EWCA Civ 20 - as a pupil, assisted in the successful defence of a special guardianship order in favour of a maternal grandmother.
"A huge thank you for everything you have done on this case which went far and beyond".
“Thanks for arranging Jim to cover the hearing yesterday. He was brilliant.”
"Thank you so much.You have been absolutely fantastic.....You are very professional, very helpful and have guided me so well in this case."