David has expertise in the Bribery Act and 20th Century anti-corruption legislation together with related issues of jurisdiction, corporate attribution, compliance, and adequate procedures.

David is instructed on behalf of E Ltd, an international mining company, under investigation by the SFO on suspicion of facilitating multi-billion dollar acquisitions through corrupt payments to government officials. This work has included:

• Managing a team of 10 paralegals undertaking a privilege review;
• Advising on jurisdictional issues, corporate liability, AML risk and challenges to MLA proceedings; and,
• The impact and relevance of DOJ and SEC proceedings against a large New York-based hedge fund.

David is also instructed to advise Alstom Network UK, a UK subsidiary of a French company, prosecuted by the SFO on charges of overseas corruption in connection with contracts obtained in overseas jurisdictions connected with national infrastructure and energy projects.

David has appeared at first instance and in the Court of Appeal, both led and alone, in complex fraud and money laundering cases.  Examples include:

• R v W and others (2017) Defending a financial advisor in £350m tax fraud (film investment scheme) listed for trial in 2018 (led jnr.).
• R v N and others (2016) Defending an accountant in a large-scale immigration fraud and money laundering connected with the collapse of Carefirst 24 Ltd against a two-counsel prosecution team. (Sole Jnr)
• R v MT and others (2013/2015) Defending in two indictments: (i) high-value telecoms fraud (ii) the first UK prosecution for operating unlicensed wireless telegraphy equipment under the Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006, where the principal submission centred on HMG’s ineffective implementation of the European Directive governing the regulation of radio spectrum (led jnr).
• Re C Financial Services Ltd (2015) Instructed by HM Attorney-General for Jersey to lead and advise an investigation into the manipulation of share capital in offshore companies involving prominent financial institutions in the Channel Islands.

In 2014 David was appointed to the Attorney-General’s Regulatory List. David has expertise in health and safety legislation and advises both sides on all aspects of procedure, the instruction of experts, and trial tactics.  David is also regularly instructed in cases prosecuted under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.  Examples include:

• R v Shaftsbury Care Group Ltd (2016) A prosecution following a fire at a care home in which a resident was trapped relating to a corporate failure to put in place fire safety precautions.
• HSE v ATC Lasham Ltd (2014) prosecution for breaches of the Health and Safety at Work Act and the Work at Height Regulations (several falls by workers from aircraft undergoing repair and maintenance

David has prosecuted, defended and advised individuals and corporates on offences under the Companies Acts and Insolvency Act. Examples include:

• Re K LLP (2016) Advised a prominent property investment on restructuring and insulating the parent company from liability arising from the acts or omissions of subsidiaries.
• Re E Ltd (2016) Advised on the potential criminal liability of company directors relating to a Directors Solvency Statements in the context of a capital reduction process.
• R (LS) v Department for Business Innovation and Skills (2014) Application for judicial review relating to the fairness and legal basis for the enforcement of a confiscation order against an undischarged bankrupt (jnr. alone).

David has always practiced in the criminal courts and has a strong record in jury trials and summary trials across the range of criminal offences, including drugs, firearms, and violence.

• R v A (2015) Defended sexual abuse of a stepdaughter over a three-year period (jnr. alone).
• R v Garrett and others (2014) Defended one of 10 defendants in a conspiracy to cause criminal damage case; the damage was alleged to have been caused during the “urban exploring” of London, which included accessing disused underground stations and climbing the Shard. Following two weeks of legal argument the prosecution offered no evidence against his client (jnr. alone).