David Lowe

Acted as sole counsel for the defendants / appellants in a successful appeal against a finding of breach of a warranty in a share purchase agreement (no material adverse change to the prospects of the company), following an 8 day High Court trial.

Acting for a leading real estate development group in a dispute with its former joint venture partner (with Adam Baron KC and Barnaby Lowe).

Acting for the defendant in a claim for sums allegedly due under contracts as a result of a fire that destroyed a television and radio transmission mast. With Kieron Beal KC.

Acted as sole counsel for the defendants in a claim for c.£5m relating to alleged breaches of warranties in a share purchase agreement. Following a 7 day High Court trial in January 2023, the Court dismissed five alleged breaches and upheld one. The breach that was found was later overturned on appeal. At the interim stage, David obtained an order for security for costs.

Acted for an international hotel chain in an ICC arbitration (London seat) in a claim involving allegations of misrepresentation (and latterly deceit and breach of contract) and alleged losses of c.$30m. Appeared at 9 day evidence hearing and 2 day hearing of closing submissions in 2021. Following an Award in late 2022, David acted on a s.67 and s.68 challenge to the Commercial Court. Case settled in June 2023. With Robert Anderson KC, Tom Weisselberg KC and Celia Rooney.

Acting for the defendant in a commercial claim relating to the sale of carbon credits

Acted for three defendants in a c. $1.8bn multi-defendant fraud claim that was dismissed three weeks into an eleven week trial following the claimants' admission that their claim was time-barred. Appeared unled at the trial, leading Warren Fitt (led by Tom Weisselberg QC during earlier stages of the case).

Acted for football club defending a claim for fees allegedly due under an image rights agreement in relation to Jordon Ibe. 

Acted for the Defendants in a High Court dispute over a share purchase agreement, bringing counterclaims for fraudulent breach of warranty for c.£4.4m. Settled before trial.

Acted for the Claimant in a claim for breach of contract, raising issues of contract formation and quantum, including at the 4 day trial in May 2021 (led by Guy Morpuss QC).

Acted for an undertaking in the energy sector in a claim for over £100m due to changes in law in a 5 day arbitration in March 2021, raising issues of contractual interpretation and breach of EU law rights. With Laurence Rabinowitz QC and Kieron Beal QC.

Acted for an international hotel chain in two LCIA arbitrations (London seat) against a franchisor raising issues of contractual interpretation, implication of terms, breach, causation and quantification of damages. The first arbitration consisted of three freestanding phases heard respectively in November 2018 (3 days), November 2019 (1 day), and January to May 2021 (7 days). The second arbitration was heard over five days in April 2019. Led by Tom Weisselberg QC.

Advised a Premier League club in a threatened claim by an introductory agent for sums allegedly due under an introductory agreement (settled).

Acted for a theatre production company and its directors defending a claim in deceit by a producer in a production. With Robert Anderson QC. Settled shortly before trial in 2020.

Acted for a casino defending a claim against a customer for losses alleged to have been suffered in the light of a maximum win limit clause. Succeeded in obtaining summary judgment on the claim in November 2020.

Advised two former senior executives of a football club in a dispute over unpaid fees.

Acted on behalf of an individual subject to online harassment to obtain information two Norwich Pharmacal orders to help identify the wrongdoer. With Ian Mill QC.

Advised a football club concerning its potential rights of action in a proposed multi-million pound claim against former professional advisors.

Acted as sole counsel for the claimants in a claim in deceit, breach of contract and conspiracy. The claimants alleged that the defendants induced them to invest substantial sums in real estate projects, leading to the loss of those sums and further consequential losses. Following breaches of an unless order, judgment was obtained under CPR 3.5, and an attempt by the defendant to obtain for relief from sanctions was dismissed. 

Successfully acted for two defendants in a three week High Court trial in the Chancery Division, defending claims by an investor for an account, breach of trust and knowing receipt. The claim raised issues of applicable law, and substantive issues of Swiss law. Led by Tom Weisselberg QC. David was also involved insubsequent steps to enforce the costs orders obtained by the defendants, including applications for recognition of the orders abroad and for cross-examination of the judgment debtor under CPR Part 71.

Acted for the successful Claimant in a claim for fraud and breach of contract against multiple defendants. The Claimant contended that the Defendants had deceived them into providing substantial discounts, worth over $2m, on their products. Also acted in successful applications to obtain, and (unled) for continuation of, a post-judgment freezing order.

Acted for an international hotel chain as sole counsel in an ICC arbitration (London seat) concerning the obligations of a franchisee following the termination of a hotel franchise agreement in the light of the franchisee's breach.

Acted for the Claimants in a Commercial Court claim for deceit in relation to the Defendant’s capital raising during the global financial crisis in 2008. The Claimants contend that they were told that they were getting the same deal as other investors, when in fact large undisclosed fees were secretly being paid to those investors. But for the fraud, they would have been able to negotiate a better deal. The Claimants seek damages of more than $700m.

Acted for the Claimant in a Commercial Court claim for breach of confidence and breach of trust. Settled during the course of a five day trial in December 2018.

Acted for the successful Claimants in a 10 day High Court Trial. The Claimants alleged that the Defendants manufactured and sold copy versions of the Claimant’s agrochemical products, and sued them for breach of the German unfair competition law and conspiracy to use unlawful means (including breach of the German unfair competition law and regulations on plant protection products). The case involved the obtaining of search and freezing orders at the outset and a number of interlocutory applications, including [2017] EWHC 944 (Ch), [2016] EWHC 2899 (Ch) and [2016] EWHC 2135 (Ch).

Acted for Defendant resisting a claim for damages in contract and tort alleged to have arisen out of irradiating products without having the relevant licence required under Japanese law.

In a claim for £220m in damages alleged to have arisen out of the imposition of a freezing order that was later discharged, David acted for the Defendant NCA in dealing with interlocutory matters and preparing for trial. Led by Andrew Onslow QC and Tristan Jones.

Acted for the Defendants in a High Court partnership dispute. The Defendants were successful at first instance on a preliminary issue, and again on appeal to the High Court. Led by Thomas Croxford.

A claim for close to $1bn, listed by the Lawyer as one of its top 20 cases of 2014. Appeared for the Third Defendant in this litigation on numerous occasions since July 2012, initially led by Anthony Peto QC and latterly as sole counsel. The Claimants alleged the Defendants conspired to injure and defame them, principally by way of making disclosures of allegedly confidential information and documents on a website. The Defendants denied these allegations, principally on the basis that the information on the website was true and revealed serious wrongdoing by the Claimants.

Acted for the Defendant former pension fund trustee, in a claim for over $60m. The claim raised issues of the duties owed by a trustee to the introducer of its customers, as well as issues of breach and loss. Led by Robert Anderson QC.

Acting for a leading real estate development group in a dispute with its former joint venture partner (with Adam Baron KC and Barnaby Lowe).

Acted for an international hotel chain in an ICC arbitration (London seat) in a claim involving allegations of misrepresentation (and latterly deceit and breach of contract) and alleged losses of c.$30m. Appeared at 9 day evidence hearing and 2 day hearing of closing submissions in 2021. Following an Award in late 2022, David acted on a s.67 and s.68 challenge to the Commercial Court. Case settled in June 2023. With Robert Anderson KC, Tom Weisselberg KC and Celia Rooney.

Acted for an international hotel chain in two LCIA arbitrations (London seat) against a franchisor raising issues of contractual interpretation, implication of terms, breach, causation and quantification of damages. The first arbitration consisted of three freestanding phases heard respectively in November 2018 (3 days), November 2019 (1 day), and January to May 2021 (7 days). The second arbitration was heard over five days in April 2019. Led by Tom Weisselberg QC.

Acted for an undertaking in the energy sector in a claim for over £100m due to changes in law in a 5 day arbitration in March 2021, raising issues of contractual interpretation and breach of EU law rights. With Laurence Rabinowitz QC and Kieron Beal QC.

Acted for an international hotel chain as sole counsel in an ICC arbitration (London seat) concerning the obligations of a franchisee following the termination of a hotel franchise agreement in the light of the franchisee's breach.

Acted for CPFC in successfully resisting a challenge by Mr Pulis in the High Court under s.68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to the award made by the arbitrators (see case above). Mr Pulis alleged that the arbitrators had acted unfairly by failing to take certain matters into account.

Acted for the successful Claimant (Crystal Palace FC) in an 11 day arbitration in January/February 2016 against its former manager, Tony Pulis. The Club alleged that Mr Pulis had deceived it into paying him a bonus payment early, and repudiated his contract of employment by his fraud and refusing to manage the first game of the 2014/15 season. The arbitrators awarded the Club nearly £4m in damages.

Acted for the Defendant club in a High Court claim for introduction fees by the agent of its former manager, Tony Pulis. As a preliminary matter, the Defendant disputed the jurisdiction of the High Court on the basis of an arbitration agreement between the parties.

Acting for a leading real estate development group in a dispute with its former joint venture partner (with Adam Baron KC and Barnaby Lowe).

Acted for the Defendants in a High Court dispute over a share purchase agreement, bringing counterclaims for fraudulent breach of warranty for c.£4.4m. Settled before trial.

Acted for three defendants in a c. $1.8bn multi-defendant fraud claim that was dismissed three weeks into an eleven week trial following the claimants' admission that their claim was time-barred. Appeared unled at the trial, leading Warren Fitt (led by Tom Weisselberg QC during earlier stages of the case).

Acted for a theatre production company and its directors defending a claim in deceit by a producer in a production. With Robert Anderson QC. Settled shortly before trial in 2020.

Acted for an international hotel chain in an ICC arbitration (London seat) in a claim involving allegations of misrepresentation (and latterly deceit and breach of contract) and alleged losses of c.$30m. Appeared at 9 day evidence hearing and 2 day hearing of closing submissions in 2021. Following an Award in late 2022, David acted on a s.67 and s.68 challenge to the Commercial Court. Case settled in June 2023. With Robert Anderson KC, Tom Weisselberg KC and Celia Rooney.

Acted as sole counsel for the claimants in a claim in deceit, breach of contract and conspiracy. The claimants alleged that the defendants induced them to invest substantial sums in real estate projects, leading to the loss of those sums and further consequential losses. Following breaches of an unless order, judgment was obtained under CPR 3.5, and an attempt by the defendant to obtain for relief from sanctions was dismissed. 

Acted for the Claimants in a Commercial Court claim for deceit in relation to the Defendant’s capital raising during the global financial crisis in 2008. The Claimants contend that they were told that they were getting the same deal as other investors, when in fact large undisclosed fees were secretly being paid to those investors. But for the fraud, they would have been able to negotiate a better deal. The Claimants seek damages of more than $700m.

Acted for the successful Claimants in a 10 day High Court Trial. The Claimants alleged that the Defendants manufactured and sold copy versions of the Claimant’s agrochemical products, and sued them for breach of the German unfair competition law and conspiracy to use unlawful means (including breach of the German unfair competition law and regulations on plant protection products). The case involved the obtaining of search and freezing orders at the outset and a number of interlocutory applications, including [2017] EWHC 944 (Ch), [2016] EWHC 2899 (Ch) and [2016] EWHC 2135 (Ch).

Acted for the successful Claimant (Crystal Palace FC) in an 11 day arbitration in January/February 2016 against its former manager, Tony Pulis. The Club alleged that Mr Pulis had deceived it into paying him a bonus payment early, and repudiated his contract of employment by his fraud and refusing to manage the first game of the 2014/15 season. The arbitrators awarded the Club nearly £4m in damages.

Acted for CPFC in successfully resisting a challenge by Mr Pulis in the High Court under s.68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to the award made by the arbitrators (see case above). Mr Pulis alleged that the arbitrators had acted unfairly by failing to take certain matters into account.

Acted for the successful Claimant in a claim for fraud and breach of contract against multiple defendants. The Claimant contended that the Defendants had deceived them into providing substantial discounts, worth over $2m, on their products. Also acted in successful applications to obtain, and (unled) for continuation of, a post-judgment freezing order.

Judicial review by Northumbrian Water of a decision of Ofwat concerning Ofwat's power to impose under-performance penalties against the claimant in relation to supply interruptions caused by a civil emergency event, Storm Arwen. David acted for the claimant, with Tom de la Mare KC.

Acted for the successful defendant in a claim in the Chancery Division and by way of judicial review, challenging the right of the Secretary of State for Defence to enfranchise property on the Married Quarters Estate. This claim was one of The Lawyer’s Top 20 Cases of 2023. Part of a multi-disciplinary counsel team, led by Sir James Eadie KC.

Advising the government in relation to third party costs orders.

Acted for the defendant in a judicial review claim, successfully resisting a claim at the permission stage

Advising in relation to the scope of vexatious litigation orders

Advising a public authority in relation to the mental health breathing space scheme.

Acted for the Secretary of State defending a claim for judicial review of a police information sharing policy in the immigration context.

Acted for the Secretary of State defending a claim by an IPP prisoner of a breach of Art 5 ECHR based on an alleged lack of rehabilitative opportunities.

David provided advice to the BBC in respect of its consultation and decision-making regarding the future of the over-75 licence fee (with leading counsel and Jason Pobjoy). 

The Court of Appeal allowed the Secretary of State’s appeal against the High Court’s conclusion that the “right to rent” scheme, set out in sections 20-37 of the Immigration Act 2014, is incompatible with Article 14 ECHR (read with Article 8). David acted for the Secretary of State (led by James Eadie QC and David Pievsky QC).

With Sam Grodzinski QC, David appeared for the Respondent Secretary of State before the Supreme Court in a case concerning the interpretation of the Secretary of State’s powers to segregate prisoners, and on the procedural fairness of such decisions (at common law and under Article 6 ECHR).

Acted for the Secretary of State in a challenge by way of judicial review to a decision not to grant the Claimant permission to rent under s.21 of the Immigration Act 2014, including on the basis of alleged procedural unfairness and breaches of the Equality Act 2010. Led by David Pievsky.

Acted for the Secretary of State in a challenge by way of judicial review to a decision not to grant the Claimant permission to rent under s.21 of the Immigration Act 2014, including on the basis of alleged procedural unfairness and breaches of the Equality Act 2010. Led by David Pievsky.

Acted for the Secretary of State in a challenge by way of judicial review to a decision not to grant the Claimant permission to rent under s.21 of the Immigration Act 2014, including on the basis of alleged procedural unfairness and breaches of the Equality Act 2010. Led by David Pievsky.

Acted for the Advocate General for Scotland, as a respondent to an appeal to the Supreme Court in a case concerning the duty of the government under Article 5 ECHR to provide rehabilitative treatment to indeterminate sentence prisoners.

Acted for the Defendants, resisting a claim by a former prisoner that his Article 5 ECHR rights had been breached when he was made subject to an indefinite sentence of imprisonment for public protection, when that sentence had not been available to the sentencing court.

Acted for the Secretary of State in appeals to the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal in a mental health case involving issues of statutory interpretation and Article 5 ECHR. The Secretary of State contended that the Upper Tribunal did not have power to order the Claimant to be released subject to conditions that amounted to a deprivation of liberty at common law or under Article 5. The Court of Appeal allowed the Secretary of State's appeal, and the Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal's decision. Led by Sir James Eadie QC.

Acting for the Secretary of State in a challenge by way of judicial review to the legislative scheme under the Immigration Act 2014 that imposes penalties on private landlords who rent to illegal immigrants without carrying out adequate checks. Led by Sir James Eadie QC and David Pievsky. Appeal due to be heard by the Court of Appeal in January 2020.

Acted as sole counsel for the Secretary of State for Justice, intervening in the claimant's appeal to the Court of Appeal in a case raising issues regarding the doctrine of precedent. 

Acted for the Lord Chancellor in a claim raising issues of statutory interpretation (including the application of Pepper v Hart) and human rights. The Claimant alleged, and the Defendant denied, that the current and former statutory regimes establishing civil legal aid allow for provision of legal aid for applications to the European Court of Human Rights.

Acted for the Secretary of State before the High Court (2014), Court of Appeal (2015) and Supreme Court (2016), in a case concerning the lawfulness of a proposed residence test for civil legal aid, which the Claimant alleged was ultra vires the relevant Act, and unlawfully discriminatory. Led by James Eadie QC and Patrick Goodall QC.

Appeared as sole counsel for the Defendants in a claim for judicial review by three Claimants alleging that there had been a breach of the Secretary of State’s public law duty to provide a reasonable level of systems and resources for the rehabilitation of indeterminate sentence prisoners.

The Claimant, a transgender indeterminate sentence prisoner, claimed judicial review on a number of grounds, alleging discrimination and other breaches of duty regarding the provision of rehabilitative opportunities. David acted for the Secretary of State in successfully resisting all claims.

Appeared for the Secretary of State in a case where a former prisoner alleged that the Secretary of State had breached of Article 5 ECHR by failing to provide a reasonable opportunity for rehabilitation as a result of a delay in moving him to open conditions, and had acted in breach of a number of other public law duties.

Acted for professional golf players who had signed to participate in the LIV Golf series in a challenge to disciplinary action taken against them by the PGA European Tour under the DP World Tour's "Conflicting Tournament" rules.  By their appeals, the players challenged the enforceability of those rules under UK competition and restraint of trade law.  In July 2022, a Sport Resolutions Panel suspended the imposition of sanctions until the players' de novo appeals could be heard.  A hearing took place in February 2023 and a decision was delivered in April 2023. With James Segan KC and Tom Mountford.

Acted for football club defending a claim for fees allegedly due under an image rights agreement in relation to Jordon Ibe. 

Acted for a club in application to intervene in disciplinary proceedings against another club

Advised a Premier League club in a threatened claim by an introductory agent for sums allegedly due under an introductory agreement (settled).

Advised two former senior executives of a football club in a dispute over unpaid fees.

Advised a football club concerning its potential rights of action in a proposed multi-million pound claim against former professional advisors.

Advised a Rugby League player over issues relating to the termination of his employment.

Acted for a boxer in a contract dispute with his manager at a hearing before the British Boxing Board of Control.

Acted for a Rugby Union player in an appeal against sanction in connection with an illegal tackle.

Acted for the Defendant club in a High Court claim for introduction fees by the agent of its former manager, Tony Pulis. As a preliminary matter, the Defendant disputed the jurisdiction of the High Court on the basis of an arbitration agreement between the parties.

Acted for the Defendant club in defending proceedings brought by an agent claiming to be due fees for introducing a sponsor to the club. Case settled.

Acted for CPFC in successfully resisting a challenge by Mr Pulis in the High Court under s.68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to the award made by the arbitrators (see case above). Mr Pulis alleged that the arbitrators had acted unfairly by failing to take certain matters into account.

Acted for a club in multi-million pound dispute under a sponsorship agreement. Settled at the pre-action stage following a mediation.

Acted for a Premier League club in relation to allegations of misconduct under investigation by the Premier League.

Acted for a Premier League club in an arbitration before Nicholas Randall QC, defending a claim brought by another club seeking sums alleged to be due under a transfer agreement. Case settled.

Acted for the successful Claimant (Crystal Palace FC) in an 11 day arbitration in January/February 2016 against its former manager, Tony Pulis. The Club alleged that Mr Pulis had deceived it into paying him a bonus payment early, and repudiated his contract of employment by his fraud and refusing to manage the first game of the 2014/15 season. The arbitrators awarded the Club nearly £4m in damages.

Acted for the Secretary of State defending a claim by an IPP prisoner of a breach of Art 5 ECHR based on an alleged lack of rehabilitative opportunities.

The Court of Appeal allowed the Secretary of State’s appeal against the High Court’s conclusion that the “right to rent” scheme, set out in sections 20-37 of the Immigration Act 2014, is incompatible with Article 14 ECHR (read with Article 8). David acted for the Secretary of State (led by James Eadie QC and David Pievsky QC).

Acted for the Advocate General for Scotland, as a respondent to an appeal to the Supreme Court in a case concerning the duty of the government under Article 5 ECHR to provide rehabilitative treatment to indeterminate sentence prisoners.

Acted for the Secretary of State in a challenge by way of judicial review to a decision not to grant the Claimant permission to rent under s.21 of the Immigration Act 2014, including on the basis of alleged procedural unfairness and breaches of the Equality Act 2010. Led by David Pievsky.

Acted for the Secretary of State in a challenge by way of judicial review to a decision not to grant the Claimant permission to rent under s.21 of the Immigration Act 2014, including on the basis of alleged procedural unfairness and breaches of the Equality Act 2010. Led by David Pievsky.

Acted for the Secretary of State in a challenge by way of judicial review to a decision not to grant the Claimant permission to rent under s.21 of the Immigration Act 2014, including on the basis of alleged procedural unfairness and breaches of the Equality Act 2010. Led by David Pievsky.

Acted for the Secretary of State before the High Court (2014), Court of Appeal (2015) and Supreme Court (2016), in a case concerning the lawfulness of a proposed residence test for civil legal aid, which the Claimant alleged was ultra vires the relevant Act, and unlawfully discriminatory. Led by James Eadie QC and Patrick Goodall QC.

Acted for the Secretary of State in appeals to the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal in a mental health case involving issues of statutory interpretation and Article 5 ECHR. The Secretary of State contended that the Upper Tribunal did not have power to order the Claimant to be released subject to conditions that amounted to a deprivation of liberty at common law or under Article 5. The Court of Appeal allowed the Secretary of State's appeal, and the Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal's decision. Led by Sir James Eadie QC.

Acting for the Secretary of State in a challenge by way of judicial review to the legislative scheme under the Immigration Act 2014 that imposes penalties on private landlords who rent to illegal immigrants without carrying out adequate checks. Led by Sir James Eadie QC and David Pievsky. Appeal due to be heard by the Court of Appeal in January 2020.

With Sam Grodzinski QC, David appeared for the Respondent Secretary of State before the Supreme Court in a case concerning the interpretation of the Secretary of State’s powers to segregate prisoners, and on the procedural fairness of such decisions (at common law and under Article 6 ECHR).

With James Eadie QC and Hanif Mussa, David acted for the Respondent Secretary of State in this appeal to the Supreme Court regarding the rights of indeterminate sentence prisoners under Article 5 ECHR to be provided with a reasonable opportunity for rehabilitation during the course of their sentences. The case considered the implications of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in James, Wells and Lee v UK (Application no 25119/09). 

Successfully defended a claim by a former prisoner who alleged that his detention had been in breach of Article 5 ECHR because he had been sentenced to imprisonment for public protection when, in fact, that sentence did not apply to his offence at the date he committed it. The claimant also alleged that the Secretary of State had acted in breach of Article 5 ECHR by not giving him an adequate opportunity for rehabilitation.

The Claimant, a transgender indeterminate sentence prisoner, claimed judicial review on a number of grounds, alleging discrimination and other breaches of duty regarding the provision of rehabilitative opportunities. David acted for the Secretary of State in successfully resisting all claims.

Acted for the Secretary of State, in a claim were the Claimants alleged that their rights under Article 5 ECHR had been breached due to a lack of provision of rehabilitative opportunities. 

Appeared for the Secretary of State in a case where a former prisoner alleged that the Secretary of State had breached of Article 5 ECHR by failing to provide a reasonable opportunity for rehabilitation as a result of a delay in moving him to open conditions, and had acted in breach of a number of other public law duties.

David has particular experience in relation to the Package Travel Regulations 1992. He recently advised a client on their liability under the Regulations in respect of their activities.  He also assisted Tom de la Mare QC in advising a client concerning these regulations following the Icelandic volcano eruption in 2010.

He also has experience of consumer protection legislation, including the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (and their predecessors), on which he has advised as a junior to Tom de la Mare QC and whilst on secondment to Ofgem in 2009/10.

He has advised the Advertising Standards Agency regarding the meaning of EU legislation.

He has advised a company in respect of state aid implications of a government legislative proposal in the energy sector.

He has also assisted James Eadie QC in advising as to the interpretation of EU legislation in the energy sector.

Acted for the successful Claimants in a 10 day High Court Trial. The Claimants alleged that the Defendants manufactured and sold copy versions of the Claimant’s agrochemical products, and sued them for breach of the German unfair competition law and conspiracy to use unlawful means (including breach of the German unfair competition law and regulations on plant protection products). The case involved the obtaining of search and freezing orders at the outset and a number of interlocutory applications, including [2017] EWHC 944 (Ch), [2016] EWHC 2899 (Ch) and [2016] EWHC 2135 (Ch).

Acted for the Defendants in a High Court partnership dispute. The Defendants were successful at first instance on a preliminary issue, and again on appeal to the High Court. Led by Thomas Croxford.

Acted for the Defendant club in a High Court claim for introduction fees by the agent of its former manager, Tony Pulis. As a preliminary matter, the Defendant disputed the jurisdiction of the High Court on the basis of an arbitration agreement between the parties.

Acted for an employer bringing proceedings against a former employee for damages arising out of alleged breaches of contract during the course of her employment.

Advised a rugby player over issues concerning the termination of his employment. The player considered he had been pressured to resign due to medical issues.

Acted for the Second Defendant in a High Court claim against allegations of conspiracy and inducing breach of contract, claiming losses arising out of his competing with the Claimant’s business. During this course of this litigation, David made a successful application to strike out allegations of breach of fiduciary duty.

Led by Anthony Peto QC, David acted for the Claimant in a claim against former employees joining a competitor alleging conspiracy, breach of confidence and breach of contract.