Portuguese Flag French Flag Romanian Flag Polish Flag Russian Flag United Kingdom Flag

Jamie Orchard

Family Law Partner
  • "Jamie Orchard- he would float in London where many other advocates would sink. He gets it right time and again. One of the few who have their pulse on the law and is able to use that to devastating advantage."

    Legal 500 2022
  • "Jamie Orchard has a calm assurance that belies his years. One to watch out for in the future."

    Legal 500 2022
  • "Excellent."

    Legal 500 2021
  • "My experience with Viberts and Jamie was excellent. I was very happy with the speed the divorce was handled and that if I had any queries, Jamie was readily available to help me.“

    Client Feedback
  • “Personable, approachable with a gift to counsel. All great attributes for a family lawyer. Very hardworking, professional and driven.”

    Peer review – Citywealth
  • “Jamie consistently has shown he is capable in all manner of different situations relating to Family Law. He is always calm and kind and works tirelessly to achieve the best outcome for his clients.”

    Peer review - Citywealth
  • “Superb lawyer.”

    Peer review - Citywealth
  • “Always very helpful.”

    Private client review – Citywealth
  • “Jamie provides excellent advice and is highly professional in every aspect of his work. I recommend him highly for this award.”

    Private client review - Citywealth


Jamie is an Advocate in the family law team. He was promoted to Partner in February 2019 in recognition of his impressive contribution to the family law team since joining in 2014.

Jamie specialises in family law work including complex public and private children law matters as well as high net worth divorce matters. Jamie has experience in complex financial matters involving overseas assets and offshore companies. In addition he has experience in cross jurisdictional children’s matters (including Hague Convention proceedings) as well as complicated contact and residence private law children matters including parental alienation. Jamie has dealt with divorce cases involving assets worth in excess of £150million. He has also successfully defended a complex jurisdictional children law matter in the Privy Council and a number of cases in the Court of Appeal. He has also advised upon pre-nuptial agreements involving assets worth in excess of £100million.

Jamie has also been involved in complex negligence cases involving historic child abuse.

Jamie also has experience in areas such as litigation, employment and criminal law.

Jamie is recognised as a ‘Next Generation Partner’ by the Legal 500 UK 2022 and 2021 editions. He is Vice-Chairman of the Jersey Family Law Association.


Jamie is shortlisted for ‘Family lawyer of the year, Partner’ in the Future Leaders Awards 2020

Jamie was named as one of the 2019 eprivateclient Top 35 Under 35 for the Channel Islands.

Watch Jamie’s videos

Cohabiting couples: the legal rights in Jersey – Advocate Jamie Orchard clarifies the misconception that ‘common law marriage’ exists in Jersey and suggests what legal protection you may wish to put in place if you are living together but are not married.

Viberts – Transparent Guide to Divorce Process & Fees – Jess Dunsden interviews family lawyers Rose Colley and Jamie Orchard on how Viberts’ new transparent fee structure and process can reduce the financial and emotional cost of a divorce.


Q v R [2018] JRC041  Jamie represented a wife in relation to a claim brought by the husband to vary his spousal maintenance obligations pursuant to a consent order. The husband claimed that his early retirement should act as a trigger to vary spousal maintenance. Jamie successfully defended the husband’s application in its entirety and was also successful in claiming the wife’s costs of the application back from the husband. https://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreported/Pages/[2018]JRC041.aspx

C v D [2018] JCA020  Jamie represented a mother in the Court of Appeal in relation to an application by her for her costs of the father’s withdrawn appeal. The father sought to appeal a fact find judgment heard before the Royal Court which was made in the midst of the father’s substantive application for contact. A final hearing had been set down which would have used the fact find judgment as the background to the contact application. Following the father’s appeal against the fact find judgment, the final hearing dates were vacated. Shortly thereafter the father then withdrew his appeal and it was held that the father made the appeal solely for the purpose of vacating the final hearing dates. Jamie was successful in claiming the mother’s costs from the father on an indemnity basis which is a very unusual order to be made within children’s proceedingshttps://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreported/Pages/[2018]JCA020.aspx

A v B [2016] JCA098  Jamie represented a mother in the Court of Appeal in relation to the mother’s application for child maintenance. The “father” assumed legal responsibility for the child by way of a paternity declaration in Latvia although he asserted that he was not the biological father. The father claimed that the paternity declaration should not be recognised in Jersey and therefore no claim for child maintenance could be made against him. This was a novel and ground breaking case. The Court of Appeal rejected the father’s case and supported the mother’s position that the father was legally bound to pay child maintenance holding that the term “father” in the Children (Jersey) Law 2002 did not only extend to biological and adoptive fathers. This case has now been appealed to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council where the mother will again be represented by Jamie and Viberts.  https://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreported/Pages/[2016]JCA098.aspx

Q v R [2015]JRC168A Jamie acted for the husband who was appealing against an order for interim periodical payments. The husband had represented himself at the hearing before the Registrar in the lower court. Jamie was successful in the appeal application to overturn the interim maintenance payments on the basis that the Registrar had made inappropriate assumptions of the husband’s financial position. The order for periodical payments was, therefore, found to be unsafe and remitted back to the Registrar for redetermination.

U v V [2015]JRC155 Jamie acted for the wife in respect of defending the husband’s application to downwardly vary interim spousal maintenance payments pending a final hearing. This involved a complicated property development business (owned by the husband) together with extensive and complicated financial disclosure. Despite the lack of clarity in the husband’s financial position, Jamie was successful in defending his application.

A v B [2015]JRC262 This was a landmark case involving the interpretation of the term “parent” as defined under the Children (Jersey) Law 2002. This was a complicated multi-jurisdictional case involving private international law. Jamie represented the mother (a Latvian national) and was ultimately successful in persuading the court that a non-biological father (from Jersey) could be held liable for child maintenance payments in respect of a child that resided outside of Jersey’s jurisdiction. The matter was appealed by the father to the Court of Appeal (see A v B [2016]JCA098), but Viberts were again successful in having that appeal dismissed.



  • Member of the Jersey Law Society
  • Member of Resolution
  • Former chairman of the Jersey Women’s Refuge

Key Information

Department: Family & Litigation
Admitted: Advocate - 2012
Credentials: 'Next Generation Partner' - Legal 500 2022; 'Next Generation Partner' - Legal 500 2021; Shortlisted for 'Family lawyer of the year, Partner' - Future Leaders Awards 2020; ‘Top 35 under 35’ Channel Islands - eprivateclient 2019
Additional Language: Spanish and basic French
Year Joined: 2014
Education: Exeter University - Law 2:1, College of Law Guildford - LPC (distinction)
← Close
← Close
← Close
← Close