David Mitchell

“A very approachable barrister with clients and a strong background in high value claims.”  The Legal 500, Defamation & Privacy 2021

In his media practice, David advises and acts in libel, slander, malicious falsehood, breach of confidence/misuse of private of information and data protection matters. His clients include private individuals, journalists, MPs, political parties, free speech organisations, central and devolved government departments, corporate bodies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and charities.

In his information law practice, David advises in respect of regulatory matters involving the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) and acts in private law data protection claims in the civil courts and public law judicial review claims in the Administrative Court. David appears before the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal in Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) appeals.

Cases of note:

• Sahota v MATV [2021] EWHC 3363 (QB) - Libel damages following trial of £60,000 plus indemnity costs and injunctions for claimant political activist. 
• Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office v Information Commissioner, Lownie & Ors (Sections 23 and 24) [2021] UKUT 248 (AAC); [2022] 1 W.L.R 1132 - Successful appeal against release of papers of Cambridge Spy, Guy Burgess, under FOIA. Leading authority on national security exemptions (led by Sir James Eadie QC). 
• Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Kevin Spacey QB/2021/00367 - Without notice worldwide interim injunction for destruction of confidential information concerning the right to anonymity under s1, Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992. Conflict of laws with US. 
• Greenstein v Campaign Against Antisemitism [2021] EWCA Civ 1006; [2021] E.M.L.R. 24 (CA) - Right to reputation of rehabilitated offender. Malice plea under s.8(5) Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. For appellant. 
• Sivier v Riley [2021] EWCA Civ 713; [2021] 4 W.L.R. 84 ; [2021] E.M.L.R. 22 (CA) - Leading authority concerning publication on a matter of public interest defence (s4 Defamation Act 2013). Successful for appellant journalist. 
• RPB v Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2019] EWHC 3852 (QB) - Successful for defendant in transferring misuse of private information and DPA claims from High Court to County Court under s.40(2) County Courts Act 1984. Transfer upheld upon claimant’s appeal. 
• Dhir v Saddler [2018] 4 W.L.R. 1; Times, 2 January 2018 - Successful for claimant following five-day slander trial concerning defendant’s statement that claimant had threatened to slit her throat. Authority on serious harm in the context of slander. 

“Has a wide employment law practice that is bolstered by his knowledge of media and public law.” “He takes a pragmatic approach and is a thorough cross-examiner.” “His knowledge of the law is first-rate and he’s an excellent advocate.” Chambers and Partners 2021.

David regularly acts in employment disputes concerning data protection, libel, privacy, freedom of expression and/or reporting issues. In the commercial context, David acts in contractual disputes including breach of confidence and restraint of trade.

Before the Employment Tribunal, David acts for employees and employers in the full range of statutory claims with a particular emphasis on complex discrimination, whistleblowing and working time cases. He has been involved in various appellate cases concerning the jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunal compared to the civil courts. 

Cases of note:

• Yorke v Glaxosmithkline Services Unlimited EA-2019-000962-BA - Successful for employer in complex disability discrimination appeal. Employment Appeal Tribunal guidance on list of issues in case management of disability discrimination claims. 
• Irwell Insurance Company Ltd v Watson [2021] I.C.R. 1034; [2021] Lloyd’s Rep. I.R. 145; Times, March 10, 2021 (CA) - Jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunal to hear claims under the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010. For appellant insurer. 
• Gemini Europe Ltd v Sawyer [2020] EWHC 3377 (QB) - Non-compete and confidential information interim injunction. For employee (led by William McCormick QC). 
• Hopkins v HMRC [2020] EWHC 2355 (QB) - Employer’s strike out of data protection claims concerning investigation of alleged serious criminality by senior civil servant. 
• London Underground Ltd v Amissah & Ors [2019] I.C.R. 1155, [2019] I.R.L.R. 545 (CA) - Successful for agency workers in group action concerning compensation under Agency Worker Regulations. 
• Thompson v Ark Schools [2019] I.C.R. 292 - Successful appeal for claimant concerning time limits in pregnancy / maternity discrimination (instructed by Equality and Human Rights Commission). 
• Robert Newbound v Thames Water Utilities Ltd [2015] I.R.L.R. 734 (CA): - Successful for employee in appeal concerning apparent bias of Employment Appeal Tribunal. 

“Able to grasp complex cases quickly. Great advocacy skills.” Administrative Law and Human Rights - The Legal 500 2023

“David is a charming but robust advocate and is an asset to his clients.” Immigration (including business immigration) - The Legal 500 2023

David’s judicial review practice principally covers immigration, nationality, EU and human rights law. He has acted in various appeals concerning the deportation of foreign national offenders and challenges against the points-based system. He also acts for colleges and universities in Tier 4 sponsorship challenges. David has conduct of national security challenges before the Special Immigration Appeals Tribunal (SIAC). 

Cases of note:

• R. (Alliance of Turkish Businesspeople) v SSHD [2020] 1 W.L.R. 2436; [2020] Imm. A.R. 1148; [2020] I.N.L.R. 564 (CA) - Successful cross-appeal concerning whether ECAA immigration guidance was capable of giving rise to a substantive legitimate expectation (led by Sir James Eadie QC). 
• R. (Karagul & Ors) v SSHD [2019] EWHC 3208 (Admin) - Replacement of statutory appeal by administrative review for ECAA applicants did not breach principle of effectiveness under EU law (led by Deok Joo Rhee QC). 
• Home Office v JA [2019] EWHC 49 (QB) - Successful appeal against finding of unlawful detention concerning eight-month-old child who had not proven his British nationality under the British Nationality (Proof of Paternity) Regulations 2006. 
• Soner Kotuk v Entry Clearance Officer, Warsaw [2019] 4 W.L.R. 10 [2019] Imm. A.R. 735 (CA) - The Court of Appeal confirmed “standstill clause” in the additional protocol to the Ankara Agreement did not apply to right of establishment. Successful for respondent (led by Deok Joo Rhee QC) 
• R. (Fire Brigades Union) v South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Authority [2018] EWHC 1229 (Admin); [2018] I.R.L.R. 717; [2018] 3 C.M.L.R. 27 - For defendant fire authority in judicial review concerning compliance of firefighters’ shift system with Working Time Regulations. 
• R. (Talpada) v SSHD [2018] EWCA Civ 841 (CA): - Successful for SSHD concerning points based system (PBS) challenge based on evidential flexibility and legitimate expectation. 
• NE-A (Nigeria) & HM (Uganda) v SSHD [2017] EWCA 239; Imm. A.R. 1077; [2018] INLR 88 (CA) - Successful in joined appeals concerning article 8 claims of foreign national offenders resisting deportation. 

In his information and media practice, David advises sportspeople and organisations in disputes concerning print and broadcast media, misuse of private information and data protection. In his employment practice, David advises and acts in disputes concerning wrongful dismissal, breach of confidence and restraint of trade. He is also experienced in statutory claims for unfair dismissal, whistleblowing and discrimination in the sports sector (Kelly v PGA European Tour – Employment Appeal Tribunal and Court of Appeal). In his media and employment law practices, David is used to acting on an urgent basis in applications for interim injunctive relief. Drawing on his expertise across these areas, David was a guest speaker at the LawInSport inaugural Motorsport Law Conference in 2021 discussing “Trusting your team and protecting sensitive data”.