Search

Experience

David has a broad public and commercial law practice. His main areas are administrative, regulatory and constitutional law, as well as estates and probate, trusts (including charitable trusts) and State taxation. David is a co-author of the forthcoming fifth edition of Principles of Australian Succession Law. He accepts briefs from private and government clients.

Before coming to the Bar, David spent ten years as a government lawyer. He was first Crown Counsel in the Office of the Solicitor-General for Tasmania and then a Senior Solicitor in the Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office. As Crown Counsel, he appeared regularly, led and unled, in trials, appeals and judicial review proceedings involving companies, trustees, taxpayers and individuals. He also appeared as junior counsel in the High Court in cases involving constitutional questions. At the VGSO, he advised on public law and regulatory matters, and was involved in judicial review proceedings and State revenue class action litigation.

David is reading with Sarah Zeleznikow. His senior mentor is Chris Young KC.

Selected matters

Estates, trusts and State taxation

• Low v Hunt (VSCA, S EAPCI 2025 0061, judgment reserved). Appeared as amicus curiae led by J McComish. The matter concerns estate administration, bankruptcy and federal jurisdiction.
• Vauban Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue (TASMC, Unreported, No M/2019/54); [2021] TASSC 40 (interlocutory appeal). Appeared unled for the Commissioner at first instance and on appeal. The matter concerned land tax on land held under a discretionary trust.
• Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust v Attorney-General (TASSC, Unreported, No S/2020/1182). Appeared unled for the Attorney-General as protector of charities. The matter concerned the Court’s jurisdiction, and a trustee’s powers, to vary a charitable trust.
• Cricket Australia and anor v Commissioner of State Revenue (TASMC, discontinued prior to hearing, M/2019/2101). The matter concerned the availability of the charitable exemption from payroll tax and the application of the grouping provisions. The applicants discontinued the proceedings following the filing of the parties’ position papers.
• Estate of Jeffrey v University of Tasmania (TASSC, Unreported, No 1024 of 2013). Appeared unled for the Attorney-General as protector of charities. The matter, which was heard in 2017, concerned disclaimer of a gift and an application to vary a charitable trust.

Regulatory and administrative law

• Mid City Education Pty Ltd v Australian Skills Quality Authority (FCA, judgment reserved, VID665/2026). Appeared led by D Bongiorno KC for the applicant. Matter concerns an appeal on questions of law from the decision of the Administrative Review Tribunal.
• Legal Profession Board of Tasmania v Disciplinary Tribunal [2022] TASSC 65. Appeared led by P Turner SC for the Attorney-General. The matter concerned a disciplinary tribunal’s power to order further investigation, and the Supreme Court’s limited jurisdiction on appeal.
• Attorney-General v Barnes [2023] TASSC 2. Appeared led by P Turner SC for the Attorney-General. The matter concerned jurisdictional error and abuse of process in the issue of coronial summonses.
• Australian National Hotels Pty Ltd v Tasmanian Liquor and Gaming Commission (TASSC, Unreported, No 1429 of 2019). Appeared unled for the Commission. The matter concerned a judicial review of gaming penalties imposed by the regulator on a licensee.
• Kons v Local Government Code of Conduct Panel (TASMC, Unreported, M 2020/152; TASSC, Unreported, No 163 of 2021). Appeared unled for the Attorney General before the Magistrates’ Court and the Supreme Court. The matter concerned a mayor’s appeal from the adverse determination of the Local Government Code of Conduct Panel.

Constitutional law

• Citta Hobart Pty Ltd v Cawthorn (2022) 276 CLR 216. Appeared led by S K Kay SC, Solicitor-General, for the Attorney General for the State of Tasmania (intervening). The matter concerned whether a State tribunal that is not a court can decide a claim once a defence of s 109 inconsistency with Commonwealth law is raised.
• Gerner v Victoria (2020) 270 CLR 412. Appeared led by S K Kay for the Attorney General for the State of Tasmania (intervening). The matter concerned whether the Constitution implies a freedom of movement capable of invalidating COVID-19 directions.
• Casimaty v Hazell Bros Pty Ltd [2022] TASSC 9 (Supreme Court); (2023) 416 ALR 163 (Full Court). Appeared led by M E O’Farrell SC, Solicitor-General, at first instance, and led by S K Kay SC, Solicitor-General, on the appeal. The matter concerned whether parliamentary privilege prevents a court reviewing a parliamentary committee’s compliance with its statute. (The State’s position was upheld in the High Court: Attorney-General (Tas) v Casimaty (2024) 419 ALR 183).

Appeals and statutory interpretation

• Bell v Tasmania (2021) 274 CLR 414. Appeared led by M E O’Farrell SC, Solicitor-General, for the Attorney General for the State of Tasmania (intervening). The matter concerned the availability of the defence of honest and reasonable mistake of fact in the schedule to the Criminal Code Act 1924 (Tas).
• Holden v Tasmania (2018) 30 Tas R 414 (Full Court). Appeared led by P Tunrer SC for the State. The matter concerned the effect of statutory transitional provisions on executive employment.
• Attorney-General v CL (2017) 28 Tas R 70 (Full Court); [2018] TASSC 23 (Supreme Court). Appeared led by M E O’Farrell SC on the appeal and unled at first instance. The matter concerned the ‘always speaking’ construction of victims of crime compensation legislation.
• Bullard v Anti Discrimination Tribunal (2020) 31 Tas R 382 (Supreme Court). Appeared led by M E O’Farrell SC, Solicitor-General, for the State of Tasmania. The matter concerned the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to review the Commissioner’s decision not to accept a complaint after the time limit for bringing the complaint had expired.
• von Stalheim v Commissioner for Tasmania Police (TASSC, Unreported, No 226 of 2018 and TASFC, Unreported, No 3108 of 2018). Appeared unled at first instance and on appeal for the Commissioner. The matter concerned advocate immunity from defamation proceedings in the court below and security for costs on appeal.
• Integrated Living v Hodgetts (2017) 29 Tas R 59 (Supreme Court). Appeared unled for the Attorney-General. The matter concerned the proper construction of workers compensation provisions.
• Gunns Ltd v Tasmania (2016) 25 Tas R 276 (Full Court). Appeared led by M E O’Farrell SC, Solicitor-General, for the State. The matter concerned whether a Minister owed a duty of care in deciding water licence applications.

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards legislation. The information referred to above has been supplied by the barrister concerned. Neither Victorian Bar Inc nor the barrister's clerk have independently verified the accuracy or completeness of the information and neither accepts any responsibility in that regard.