David Hopkins

David’s administrative and public law practice is wide-ranging. He acts on behalf of claimants and defendants in judicial review claims, advises local authorities and other organisations on their public law duties and was instructed in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. Much of his recent work directly complements his financial services, construction and regulatory practices.

Cases of note

• R (Kneale) v General Medical Council (GMC) – Acting for the claimant, Dr Kneale, challenging the GMC’s decision not to refer to its Case Examiners the conduct of Dr Aseem Malhotra, who Reuters Fact Check described as having used a BBC News interview to “spread misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines”. The GMC conceded the claim following grant of permission and a costs capping order.
• R (Martin) v Professional Standards Authority (PSA) – Acting for the PSA, successfully defending a judicial review claim concerning medical education policy.
• R (Alexander-Theodotou) v Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) v Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) – Acting for the SRA, the interested party, responding to a solicitor’s claim for judicial review of the SDT’s decision to make no order as to costs following an interim hearing at the SDT.
• R (Goodall) v Financial Ombudsman Service – Acting on behalf of the Financial Ombudsman Service opposing a claim for judicial review of a final decision of one of its ombudsmen.
• R (Freeman & Ors) v Lincolnshire County Council – As junior counsel to John Pugh-Smith, acting for the claimant owners of a quarry in a judicial review of a planning authority’s decision to take enforcement action under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
• Confidential Local Authority – Advising a local authority on public law matters in relation to education, health and care (EHC) plans and the drafting of their Trans Inclusive Education Guidance.
• The Black Owned Business Alliance – Advising the Black Owned Business Alliance on the Equality Act 2010 (pro bono).

David brings practical experience of banking and financial services to his work, having previously worked for five years as a foreign exchange and interest rates derivatives structurer. He has, for counsel, an almost uniquely deep understanding of financial markets and products across all asset classes.

He acts in claims both for and against banks and other financial institutions and advises both regulators and regulated persons on compliance with the relevant legislation and regulatory framework. David has previously been seconded to both the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), giving him a deep insight into the work of the regulator and ombudsman in practice.

Cases of note

• Confidential Quincecare claim – Led by Andrew Tabachnik KC, advising the liquidators of a company which was defrauded by its former directors in a potential claim for breach of contract/ duty by the company’s bank in not refraining from making payments out of the company’s account, totalling over £12 million, at the directors’ instructions when it was on notice those instructions might be attempts to defraud the company.
• Kang & Ors v Meridian Park Limited – Ongoing in the London Circuit Commercial Court. Acting for the defendant to a £2 million claim alleging breach of the general prohibition in s 19 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) due to the defendant not being authorised to establish or operate a collective investment scheme (CIS).
• Motor Finance Commission Complaints – Led by James Strachan KC, advising the Financial Ombudsman Service Limited (FOS) in respect of complaints regarding motor finance commission paid by lenders to brokers. Particular issues include antecedent negotiations and unfair relationships under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the law on secret commissions.
• FX dispute – Acting for a claimant holiday company seeking to recover around £800,000 losses which arose as a result of its foreign exchange broker’s unauthorised trading. Settled shortly after issue in favour of the claimant.
• Confidential cryptocurrency and FX dispute – Led by Charlie Manzoni KC SC, together with Anna Lintner, advising the victims of a USD 100 million cryptocurrency and foreign exchange (FX) fraud perpetrated across multiple jurisdictions. Particular issues include obtaining Norwich Pharmacal / Bankers Trust type relief, tracing cryptocurrency assets, and private international law issues of choice of law and jurisdiction.
• Illiquid exotic assets investment fund – Advising an investment fund proposing to open a new fund investing in illiquid exotic assets on compliance with FSMA and issues concerning the FCA perimeter and the Financial Promotions Regulations, particularly with respect to collective investment schemes.
• Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regulation of peer-to-peer lenders – Advising the Financial Conduct Authority regarding the authorisation and regulation of peer-to-peer lenders, such as Zopa, Funding Circle and RateSetter. Particular issues included article 36H of the Regulated Activities Order and activities related to CISs, alternative investment funds (AIF) and deposit taking.

David is frequently instructed to represent and advise clients in all types of commercial matters, both during the initial phase of disputes and through to litigation and arbitration. David developed excellent commercial understanding and insight in his career before the Bar, where his clients ranged from FTSE 100 companies to SMEs and from high street retailers to oil and gas conglomerates.

Cases of note

• Perfect Smile Spa Ltd v Trans-Atlantic Securities Ltd & Ors – Ongoing. Acting for the first and second defendants, a financial intermediary and an accountant who is a director of the first defendant, defending a claim seeking recission of a loan agreement and damages of £1.1 million on the basis of the defendants’ alleged misrepresentations and negligent misstatements.
• Bolton & Anor v Matthews & Anor – Acting for the defendants to a claim seeking specific performance for transfer of property and additional damages, raising the issue, among others, of whether a deed restating and amending the claimants’ charge imposes a clog on the equity of redemption.
• Secretary of State for Health and Social Care & Ors v Lundbeck Limited & Ors – Ongoing in the Competition Appeal Tribunal, Case 1415/5/7/21 (T). Led by Aidan Robertson KC, acting, together with Daniel Stedman-Jones, for NHS England and NHS Wales in a competition follow-on claim against the manufacturers of the antidepressant citalopram. The manufacturers were found by the European Commission to have entered into “pay for delay” agreements, which amounted to infringements of competition law by object under Art 101 of the Treaty.
• Downey & Anor v Stevens & Ors [2021] EWHC 752 (Ch) – Acting for the defendant trustees of Magdalen Park Bowling Club in a seven-day High Court trial. The court found the contract under which the claimants alleged they were entitled to purchase the club’s land for £1 to be invalid pursuant to s 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and that, even if it were valid, it would be unconscionable for the claimants to rely on its terms.
  Judgment
  Westlaw
• Confidential charterparty dispute – Advising the owners in a charterparty dispute subject to the LMAA rules regarding the charterers’ bunkering obligations on redelivery. The charterparty was an amended New York Produce Exchange (NYPE) 1946 form and the charter itself spanned the introduction of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) 2020 Regulation.
• Remy's Ltd v Peacock and Smith Ltd (2020–2021) – Led by Richard Harwood KC, acting for a property developer in a professional negligence claim arising from services provided by a planning consultant. Settled pre-trial.
• Cheval Roc Residential Ltd & Anor v Zurich Insurance plc (2019–2020) – Led by Neil Block KC, acting for an insurer resisting a £6.5 million claim brought following the partial collapse of a cliff near to the insured property. The claim was settled prior to the hearing of a trial to determine whether Zurich was liable to indemnify the claimants.

David is familiar with and has acted in and advised on matters involving all the standard forms of contract, including JCT, FIDIC, IChemE, and NEC as well as many ad hoc contracts. He is a TECBAR accredited adjudicator and accepts appointments via the TECBAR adjudication scheme.

Cases of note

• Haase Environmental Consulting GmbH v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd – Ongoing in the TCC. Led by Paul Darling KC, acting for the defendant/ counterclaimant in a termination dispute arising out of the claimant’s appointment as process plant engineer in relation to an EPC Contract for a waste treatment plant.
• Confidential PFI cladding dispute – Instructed, led by Adam Robb KC, for a local authority in a dispute arising out of fire safety defects in residential blocks provided under a PFI contract.
• Confidential ADCCAC arbitration – Instructed, led by Adam Robb KC, and together with a team of 39 Essex Chambers counsel, for the claimants in an arbitration claim worth over USD 1.4 billion arising out of a large infrastructure project.
• Keyline Civils Specialist Limited v Brown & Anor – Ongoing in the KBD. Acting for the defendants to a claim under a personal guarantee in relation to construction materials supplied to a company which subsequently entered into administration.
• FTH Limited v Varis Developments Limited [2022] EWHC 1385 (TCC); 203 ConLR 288 – Led by Paul Darling KC, acting for the claimant contractor applying to enforce an adjudication decision in its favour. The defendant resisted enforcement on the grounds that the claimant was in a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) and that enforcing the award would deprive the defendant of security for its alleged cross-claim.
  Judgment on the National Archives website
  Report in ConLR on LexisNexis
• Various confidential Building Safety Act matters – Following the passing of the Building Safety Act 2022, David has been and is instructed in various matters acting for leaseholders, housing associations and management companies considering potential claims in regards to fire safety defects.
• Confidential delay dispute – Led by Paul Darling KC, advising the main contractor for a large mixed-use development in Singapore on the extension of time, delay and liquidated damages provisions of an amended Singapore Institute of Architects contract.

Much of David’s experience in commercial dispute resolution and construction matters has concerned the energy and natural resources sector, covering both fossil fuels and renewables. He has been recommended as a Leading Junior for Construction, Energy and Infrastructure in The Legal 500 Asia Pacific’s guides to outstanding juniors in Asia Pacific since 2019.

Cases of note

• Confidential IChemE adjudication – Contractor’s claim for costs and profit of carrying out a scheme of remedial works instructed by the employer at a renewable power plant project.
• Confidential ICC arbitration – Subcontractor’s claim for retention monies arising from an expansion project at a hydroelectric power plant in Southeast Asia.
• Confidential SIAC arbitration – Acting for the respondents in a claim brought regarding disputed payments arising from a contract to build a coal-fired power plant between a Chinese state-owned entity and various Indonesian companies.
• Confidential SIAC arbitration – Acting for the claimant in a claim concerning supply of mirrors manufactured and supplied by a European party to a solar power (concentrator photovoltaics) technology firm in China.
• Seadrill Ghana Operations Ltd v Tullow Ghana Ltd [2018] EWHC 1640 (Comm) – Junior counsel assisting Sean Wilken KC, Adam Robb KC and Stephen Kosmin in a USD 277 million claim considering whether a provisional measure issued by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in Case No 23 between Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire was a force majeure within the contract for a deepwater drilling unit.
  Judgment
• Confidential EPC contract dispute – Drafting the employer’s response to the main contractor’s claims for extensions of time and additional costs of USD 55 million arising from an engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contract for a new facility at an oil refinery in Southeast Asia.

David acts and advises in landlord and tenant, real property, and Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA) matters.

Cases of note

• Various Leaseholders v Interfit (Worksop) Limited – Ongoing. Acting in the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) for leaseholders seeking a remediation order under s 123 of the BSA against their landlord.
• Engen Technologies Limited v Building Research Establishment Limited – Acting for the tenant, who claims for, among other things, a declaration that the tenant’s rent account was not in arrears at the time the landlord purported to forfeit the lease and appropriate interim relief.
• Bolton & Anor v Matthews & Anor – Acting for the defendants to a claim seeking specific performance for transfer of property and additional damages, raising the issue, among others, of whether a deed restating and amending the claimants’ charge imposes a clog on the equity of redemption.
• Confidential BSA matter – Advising a management company, which is also the owner of the relevant property, regarding: potential claims against the developer relating to fire safety defects; whether the management company is a relevant landlord within the meaning of the BSA; and the effect of the BSA if no party is able to satisfy a remediation contribution order under s 124.
• Downey & Anor v Stevens & Ors [2021] EWHC 752 (Ch) – Acting for the defendant trustees of Magdalen Park Bowling Club in a seven-day High Court trial. The court found the contract under which the claimants alleged they were entitled to purchase the club’s land for £1 to be invalid pursuant to s 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and that, even if it were valid, it would be unconscionable for the claimants to rely on its terms.
  Judgment
  Westlaw
• Confidential commercial landlord and tenant dispute – Advising and drafting particulars of claim for a commercial tenant seeking specific performance of the repair and insurance covenants of its lease, alternatively damages, following the landlord’s failure to reinstate the premises in a reasonable time after a fire.
• Confidential leasehold enfranchisement matter – Advising a property management company regarding allegations of conflicts of interest in respect of leasehold enfranchisement under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.

David’s regulatory and disciplinary practice spans across the legal, financial and healthcare professions. He acts for both regulators and regulated persons. His trial practice covers first instance tribunal hearings, appeals to the High Court and judicial reviews. He also frequently advises clients on compliance with the relevant regulatory frameworks, regulators’ practices and procedures and how best to respond to regulatory investigations.

Cases of note

• Singh v General Medical Council (GMC) – To be heard May 2024. Acting for the GMC defending an appeal against a medical practitioners tribunal’s decision that a GP’s fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct consisting of the mismanagement of NHS pension contributions on behalf of the GP’s surgery’s staff.
• Professional Standards Authority v General Pharmaceutical Council & Ali [2024] EWHC 577 (Admin) – Acting, led by Fenella Morris KC, for the PSA appealing the GPhC panel’s decision on sanction following its finding that the second respondent had made antisemitic statements at a Quds Day march
  Judgment
• Professional Standards Authority v Social Work England & JS [2023] EWHC 926 (Admin) – Acting for the PSA, appealing a decision of a panel of adjudicators of SWE to suspend the registrant. The appeal was allowed on the ground of undercharging.
  Judgment
• Solicitors Regulation Authority Limited (SRA) v Pilkington (2023) SDT Case No 12377-2022 – Acting for the SRA in a disciplinary hearing concerning an allegation that the solicitor, who was the sole director of the Firm, had caused or allowed payments made to the Firm in respect of disbursements to be used for the running of the Firm. The solicitor further admitted he had failed to notify the SRA of the Firm’s serious financial difficulties. The SDT found both allegations proved and that the solicitor’s actions had been dishonest.
  Judgment
• Solicitors Regulation Authority Limited v Neilson (2022) SDT Case No 12347-2022 – Defending a property solicitor against allegations of misconduct in the SDT. The SRA originally alleged that the solicitor had been dishonest or reckless, but dropped these allegations the day before the hearing. Nevertheless, the SRA sought an order suspending the solicitor from practice. The tribunal determined that a suspension would be excessive and awarded the SRA less than half of its claimed costs.
  Judgment
• GMC and PSA appeal under ss 40A and 40B of the Medical Act 1983 (2022) – Led by Fenella Morris KC, acting for the Professional Standards Authority (PSA) in an appeal concerning determinations of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal in respect of a number of doctors who were all members of a WhatsApp group in which they had shared racist, misogynist and otherwise offensive messages and images. The appeal raised a wide range of issues including, among others, the boundary between doctors’ professional and private lives, the potential effect on patient safety, and, procedurally, whether the court should grant the doctors anonymity. The appeal was settled before hearing, with the doctors all agreeing to receive warnings.
• Institute and Faculty of Actuaries investigation (2021) – Acting for and advising a director of a corporate pension trustee under investigation by the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries.

David’s sports law practice leverages on his specialisms in commercial, construction, regulatory and disciplinary law. He was one of seven chambers members to be appointed by the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) to the panel providing legal advice and representation to athletes and officials in disputes arising out of the 2019 World Athletics Championships in Doha and is a member of chambers’ team of advocates on Sport Resolutions (UK)’s Pro Bono Panel.

Cases of note

• Confidential athlete – Ongoing. Acting in disciplinary proceedings for an athlete charged with use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method following alleged atypical findings in the athlete’s Athlete Biological Passport record.
• Confidential former member of a world governing body – Led by Greg Treverton-Jones KC, advising a former member of a world governing body who was sanctioned by the governing body’s disciplinary panel at a time when they were no longer a member of that body.
• Confidential athlete – Representing an athlete served notice by UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) of an apparent Domestic Testing Pool filing failure. UKAD chose to take no further action, accepting that no negligent behaviour on the athlete’s part had caused or contributed to an inaccurate address for an overseas training camp having been file.
• Downey & Anor v Stevens & Ors [2021] EWHC 752 (Ch) –Acting for the defendant trustees of Magdalen Park Bowling Club in a seven-day High Court trial. The court found the contract under which the claimants alleged they were entitled to purchase the club’s land for £1 to be invalid pursuant to s 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and that, even if it were valid, it would be unconscionable for the claimants to rely on its terms.
  Judgment
  Westlaw