Gary Oliver
Senior Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7325
David Pievsky’s practice encompasses Public Law & Regulatory, Civil Liberties & Human Rights, Immigration & Nationality, Professional Discipline, Employment and Commercial. He has substantial experience of appearing in the High Court, Court of Appeal, and Supreme Court (principally in judicial reviews) as well as in the Employment Appeals Tribunal, the Employment Tribunals, and the County Courts.
David was appointed a QC in 2020.
Prior to his appointment, David was recognised as a leading junior by both leading independent legal directories, Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500, and was Junior Counsel to the Crown (A Panel).
Prior to his silk appointment in 2020, David was a member of the Attorney General’s A panel, and acts in a wide range of public law and regulatory areas, both for and against public bodies.
David regularly acts for the government in prison and other public law challenges, for the Parole Board and for the GMC, and has also appeared for the Bar Council, the Legal Services Ombudsman, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Commission for Racial Equality, the Legal Services Ombudsman and the Refugee Legal Centre. He regularly acts for individuals or public interest groups seeking to challenge decisions made by central government or other public bodies.
David has also works in the area of freedom of information, and financial services law, and has advised on issues relating to the Financial Services Compensation Scheme as well as disciplinary and regulatory disputes.
“He's measured and a good strategist.”
Chambers and Partners, 2022
“He is meticulous, engaged, and full of legal insights. His work on the pleadings is literally extraordinary.”
Legal 500, 2022
“Very user-friendly.”
Chambers and Partners, 2021
“Tough and capable of standing his ground in difficult circumstances.”
Legal 500, 2021
“He has a quiet authority which causes everyone in the room to calm down and listen to him.”
Chambers and Partners, 2021
“His analysis was fantastic and I had great confidence in him as a first-rate legal mind.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
“A government A-panellist instructed in difficult cases.”
Legal 500, 2019
“He demonstrated a most impressive grasp of all public law and judicial review issues.”
Legal 500, 2018
“Extremely bright and very responsive.”
Legal 500, 2017
“Very clever, hardworking and knowledgeable”
Legal 500, 2016
“Meticulous in his approach, with a calm and endearing manner in court.”
Legal 500, 2015
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). The case raised issues about the “ambit" requirement in Article 14 cases, the correct approach to justification in the context of social measures, and Parliament’s responsibility (or otherwise) for the acts of private citizens. David acted for the successful Secretary of State.
Acted as sole counsel against Hugh Mercer QC in high profile judicial review proceedings in the High Court, concerning the compatibility of UK Halal slaughter methods with European and domestic law animal welfare standards.
Acted (with James Eadie QC) for the Secretary of State. The Supreme Court considered the question of Crown Immunity and whether it applied to the prohibitions on smoking set out in Part 1 of the Health Act 2006. The Court accepted submissions made on behalf of the Secretary of State to the effect that the Crown is not bound by Statute unless that is made clear expressly or by necessary implication.
Acted for the intervening Secretary of State for Justice in this case concerning whether the state (through the police) had breached duties to conduct reasonable investigations into allegations of ill-treatment, derived from Article 3 ECHR, to women who were attacked by a private citizen (the multiple rapist John Worboys).
Acted (with Lord Pannick QC and Sam Grodzinski QC) for the London Mayor in litigation brought under the Riot Damages Act 1886 concerning the recoverability of damages for consequential loss. The Supreme Court allowed the Mayor’s appeal, ruling that such damages are not recoverable under the 1886 Act.
Acted for the General Medical Council, in judicial review proceedings concerning the proper interpretation of the Council’s rules about how to deal with the determinations of foreign regulatory bodies, and the ‘5 year rule’ applicable to allegations of impaired fitness to practise. The case also raised questions of principle relating to the procedural rules on delay in judicial review proceedings. Judgment currently awaited from the Court of Appeal.
Successfully defended a judicial review claim concerning the challenge for the authorities of assessing a prisoner’s prospects of rehabilitation, where he continues to protest his innocence of the index offence.
Acted for the successful Home Office in a case about whether privileged legal advice concerning the admissibility of intercept evidence should be released under the Freedom of Information Act.
Currently advising the government as sole counsel on a number of claims brought in the European Court of Human Rights relating to the list of individuals who are barred from working with children or vulnerable adults (2015 and ongoing).
Acted (with James Eadie QC) in proceedings arising out of HMRC’s treatment of film finance schemes.
Acted with James Eadie QC in this challenge to a Direction made under new legislative powers for regulating the publishing of publicity by local authorities. Case settled by consent.
Acted with James Eadie QC in an appeal to the Supreme Court raising jurisdictional issues under the European Convention on Human Rights; the reach of the substantive obligation to preserve life under Article 2 in the context of active military operations; and the common law doctrine of combat immunity.
Acted (with Monica Carss-Frisk QC) for the successful Applicant Police Commissioner, in a human rights dispute about the proper jurisdiction of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in a case raising allegations about the conduct of undercover police officers.
Appeared for the Secretary of State for Justice in a two week trial concerning a prisoner’s allegations of homophobic treatment at the hands of both prison officers and other prisoners.
Acted for the GMC in a case raising difficult questions about old allegations of child abuse, and whether they could be revisited in light of Rule 4(5) of the GMC’s Rules.
Acted (with Monica Carss-Frisk QC) in claims raising the status of the “neither confirm nor deny” approach to allegations made about alleged covert surveillance operations.
Acted (with Charles Bourne QC) in a case brought by Private Eye seeking disclosure of information relating to the MOD’s dealings with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Information Tribunal agreed with the MOD’s argument that release of the requested information would undermine international relations between the UK and Saudi Arabia, and dismissed the complaint.
Appeared for the CPS in a case concerning the so-called “Twitter joke trial”. The Tribunal accepted the CPS’s argument that the information sought by the claimant should not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, despite it being of interest, as it was exempt by virtue of s30(1)(c) of that Act.
Appeared for the Secretary of State for Justice in a dispute about the circumstances in which judicial review claimants should be entitled to anonymity.
David has appeared in a wide range of human rights and civil liberties cases, both for and against public bodies. For example, he has regularly acted for claimants seeking to exercise their right to protest, and others seeking to challenge a removal decision on human rights grounds. He also acts for a wide range of organisations, companies and public bodies in human rights cases.
Prior to his silk appointment in 2020, David was a member of the Attorney General’s A panel, and often acts for the government in high profile cases brought by prisoners raising issues about the right to liberty, parole and rehabilitation opportunities, the conditions of detention, and freedom of expression; and for the police in high profile public order cases about maintaining public order (such as the “kettling/containment” litigation, and claims for riot compensation arising out of the London Riots in 2012).
“He is extremely thorough and really meticulous”
Chambers and Partners, 2022
“David has an incredible grasp of the detail and is able to eloquently articulate the response in written form.”
Chambers and Partners, 2022
“Really strong on the human rights elements of the case and knows more about legal professional privilege than anyone else.”
Legal 500, 2022
“He is meticulous, engaged, and full of legal insights.”
Legal 500, 2022
“Not only is he a good technical lawyer, he's a problem solver who achieves practical solutions.”
Chambers and Partners, 2021
“He is charm personified and excellent throughout.”
Chambers and Partners, 2021
“He is very user-friendly and obviously knows his stuff.”
Chambers and Partners, 2021
“Recommended for his strategic approach to cases.”
Legal 500, 2021
“He's excellent; a fantastic advocate with a very clear mind.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
“Recommended for his strategic approach to cases.”
Legal 500, 2019
“Obviously very bright.”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“A truly brilliant mind.”
Chambers and Partners, 2018
“Highly regarded junior with a wealth of experience in the field.”
Chambers and Partners, 2018
“Very bright, gets to the heart of the matter quickly and has an unflappable nature.”
Legal 500, 2018
“He's obviously very bright. He runs a wonderful practice and enjoys a sterling reputation.”
Chambers and Partners, 2017
“A high-class advocate.”
Legal 500, 2017
“He has a mastery of the law and his advice and drafting are timely, efficient and first-class.”
Chambers and Partners, 2016
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). The case raised issues about the “ambit" requirement in Article 14 cases, the correct approach to justification in the context of social measures, and Parliament’s responsibility (or otherwise) for the acts of private citizens. David acted for the successful Secretary of State.
Acting as sole counsel for the United Kingdom in an application brought in the European Court of Human Rights. The case concerns UK legislation designed to protect children and vulnerable people by creating lists of individuals who are not allowed to work in particular sectors (e.g. children’s barred list, adults barred list). The question for the Court will be whether the operation of this legislation is compliant with Article 6 (fair trial rights) and Article 8 (right to hold a profession) ECHR.
Acted (with James Eadie QC) for the Secretary of State. The Supreme Court considered the question of Crown Immunity and whether it applied to the prohibitions on smoking set out in Part 1 of the Health Act 2006. The Court accepted submissions made on behalf of the Secretary of State to the effect that the Crown is not bound by Statute unless that is made clear expressly or by necessary implication.
Acted for the MOD in proceedings brought concerning the MOD’s anti-piracy operations off the coast of Somalia. The case raised questions of domestic, ECHR and international law.
Acted for the intervening Secretary of State for Justice in this case concerning whether the state (through the police) had breached duties to conduct reasonable investigations into allegations of ill-treatment, derived from Article 3 ECHR, to women who were attacked by a private citizen (the multiple rapist John Worboys).
Acted for the government in a claim concerning how to achieve the rehabilitation of a prisoner who is in total denial of the index offence of which he was convicted. The claim was based on Article 5(4) of the ECHR and in particular the so-called Kaiyam duty.
Successfully defended a judicial review claim concerning the challenge for the authorities of assessing a prisoner’s prospects of rehabilitation, where he continues to protest his innocence of the index offence.
Currently advising the government as sole counsel on a number of claims brought in the European Court of Human Rights relating to the list of individuals who are barred from working with children or vulnerable adults (2015 and ongoing).
Acted (with James Eadie QC) in proceedings arising out of HMRC’s treatment of film finance schemes.
Acted with James Eadie QC in an appeal to the Supreme Court raising jurisdictional issues under the European Convention on Human Rights; the reach of the substantive obligation to preserve life under Article 2 in the context of active military operations; and the common law doctrine of combat immunity.
Acted (with Monica Carss-Frisk QC) for the successful Applicant Police Commissioner, in a human rights dispute about the proper jurisdiction of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in a case raising allegations about the conduct of undercover police officers.
Appeared for the Secretary of State for Justice in a two week trial concerning a prisoner’s allegations of homophobic treatment at the hands of both prison officers and other prisoners.
Acted (with Monica Carss-Frisk QC) in claims raising the status of the “neither confirm nor deny” approach to allegations made about alleged covert surveillance operations.
Appeared for the Secretary of State for Justice in a dispute about the circumstances in which judicial review claimants should be entitled to anonymity.
David covers many Immigration and Nationality cases.
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). The case raised issues about the “ambit" requirement in Article 14 cases, the correct approach to justification in the context of social measures, and Parliament’s responsibility (or otherwise) for the acts of private citizens. David acted for the successful Secretary of State.
Advising and representing the Secretary of State in relation to Court of Appeal proceedings concerning the interests of the child as a primary consideration.
Advising as to citizenship issues under s4B of the British Nationality Act 1981, in light of erroneously issued UK passports.
David has substantial experience of acting in judicial review cases raising regulatory issues, and also in regulatory and/or disciplinary proceedings or appeals themselves.
“A good communicator and a polished advocate”
Legal 500, 2016
“He is calm, collected and a persuasive advocate.”
Legal 500, 2015
Currently advising the Financial Services Compensation Scheme as to public law issues arising out of the distinction between negligent investment advice (which is not covered by the scheme) and negligent mortgage advice (which is).
Acted for the General Medical Council, in judicial review proceedings concerning the proper interpretation of the Council’s rules about how to deal with the determinations of foreign regulatory bodies, and the ‘5 year rule’ applicable to allegations of impaired fitness to practise. The case also raised questions of principle relating to the procedural rules on delay in judicial review proceedings. Judgment currently awaited from the Court of Appeal.
Appeared for the GMC in a case about the suspension of a doctor for the improper and dishonest use of prescriptions.
Acted (with Javan Herberg QC) for an individual who had referred a decision of the FCA to the Tribunal.
Acted for the GMC in a case raising difficult questions about old allegations of child abuse, and whether they could be revisited in light of Rule 4(5) of the GMC’s Rules.
Acted for the successful GMC in an appeal against a suspension decision arising out of complaints following two medical consultations.
Acted for the successful GMC in a case about dishonesty arising out of the alleged alteration of patient notes by a doctor.
Acted for the successful GMC in an appeal against a decision to erase a doctor for failing to maintain adequate professional standards.
Acted for the GMC, successfully resisting a doctor’s application to revoke an order imposing conditions on his registration, arising out of allegedly substandard treatment in relation to a number of patients.
David acts for employers and employees in cases raising a wide range of employment law issues.
He has acted in many statutory tribunal claims and has also worked on restrictive covenant cases including injunctive work.
David’s clients have included Barclays Capital, Commerzbank, the Law Society, Linklaters, Network Rail, Tesco, Carphone Warehouse, Vodafone, ABN AMRO, Barclays, the University of Warwick, Odeon Cinemas Limited, the National Association of Head Teachers, and Manchester Airport.
David is also a member of the ELAAS scheme (and has worked with the Bar Pro Bono Unit) and has appeared several times in the EAT on a pro bono basis.
“Exceptionally bright with strong technical knowledge”
Legal 500, 2016
“Extremely commercial, practical and hardworking.”
Legal 500, 2015
Acted (with Paul Goulding QC) in two whistleblowing claims brought in the Employment Tribunal. Claims settled during the trial.
Acted for the successful Respondent employer in this case about alleged age discrimination against an employee at the Wimbledon Tennis Championship.
Acted pro bono for the Claimant in an appeal to the Court of Appeal raising questions about disability discrimination (post-Malcolm, but pre-Equality Act) and about the proper exercise of the discretion to award costs in an Employment Tribunal.
As a junior to Barbara Dohmann QC, David acted in proceedings in the Commercial Court and in the Court of Appeal which raised important issues of legal professional privilege, in the context of evidence sought pursuant to a letter of request from a United States District Court: United States of America v Philip Morris Inc and Others [2003] EWHC 3028 (Comm), [2004] EWCA Civ 330, The Times, April 16, 2004. The matter was considered by the Court of Appeal for a second time in June of 2004: [2004] EWCA Civ 1064.
David has advised and appeared in a number of other commercial cases involving breach of contract and misrepresentation. He also has experience of acting in commercial mediation.
David acted as junior to Michael Beloff QC in Court of Appeal proceedings concerning service out of the jurisdiction: The Islamic Republic of Pakistan v Zardari & Others [2007] EWCA Civ 134.
David has also worked on commercial cases in the media and entertainment field. He has worked on several cases with Pushpinder Saini QC involving the alleged copying of songs (in the music industry) or the passing off of retail products.
MPhil (Cantab)
Before coming to the Bar, David graduated in History and then completed an M.Phil in Political Thought and Intellectual History at Cambridge University. He also worked as an employment lawyer for the Free Representation Unit (FRU) prior to joining Blackstone Chambers.
David has a strong background in music and is principal second violinist in the Kensington Symphony Orchestra.
VAT registration number: 798529358
Barristers regulated by the Bar Standards Board
Gary Oliver
Senior Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7325
Derek Sutton
Deputy Senior Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7327
Adam Sloane
Deputy Senior Clerk
+44 (0) 207 8227326
Dean Tolman
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7331
Billy Brian
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7339
Marc Armstrong
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7330
Adam Fuschillo
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 8227329
Danny Compton
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7338
Sophie Floydd
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7324
Rio Sully
Clerk
+44 (0) 207 822 7299