David Mohyuddin KC

Call 1999


"Extremely approachable, responsive and hands on. Legal and strategic advice is always clear and robust and advocacy is first rate."

The Legal 500 2022
Photo of David Mohyuddin KC

Professional Negligence

Having practised commercial litigation since he started at the Bar, David was appointed King’s Counsel on 22 February 2016.

His work includes bringing and resisting (including on insurers’ instructions) claim against professionals acting in the fields in which David conducts his cases. Solicitors, accountants, insolvency practitioners, architects and company directors have been the subject of his professional negligence and similar cases.

By way of example, he led, as a junior, in the Court of Appeal in Denton v White [2014] EWCA Civ 906 when further guidance was given on the proper approach to applications for relief from sanction under CPR 3.9. The failing in that case was of the late filing by solicitors of a costs budget. He has advised and represented an insolvency practitioner against whom an allegation of, in effect, professional negligence had been made and successfully defended allegations of dishonesty made against professionals in a procurement context (Montpellier Estates Ltd v Leeds City Council [2012] EWHC 1343 (QB), [2012] EWHC 166 (QB)).

David has extensive experience of heavy, multi-day trials and of making urgent applications, as well as advising prior to the issue of proceedings including drafting letters before action and replies to them.

Professional Negligence Cases

Illustrative cases include:

2020: Advising a large group of claimants seeking damages from the professionals who acted for them in their failed investments in off-plan apartments

Horler v Rubin – successfully defending insolvency practitioner accused of having obtained earlier judgment by giving false evidence at trial [2019] EWHC 660 (Ch) and [2019] EWHC 2487 (Ch)

Utilise TDS Ltd v Davies & Bolton College [2014] EWCA Civ 906 Appeared for one of the respondents in the Court of Appeal where three cases were heard together and fresh guidance was issued on the way in which CPR 3.9 was to be applied on applications for relief from sanction, following the decision in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd. (Reported as Denton v TH White Ltd.)

2014: Advising a company director (with the benefit of insurance) who is subject to proceedings brought following the sale of his business to a third party in which he is alleged to have breached the warranties he gave upon the sale and to have breached the duties he owed to the purchaser whilst he was engaged as its director.

2014: Advising and representing an insolvency practitioner (with the benefit of insurance) against whom a claim of (in effect) professional negligence was made. Applied for the claim to be struck out; all allegations struck out on first hearing of application. Now in part the subject of an application to the Court of Appeal.

Montpellier Estates Ltd v Leeds City Council [2012] EWHC 1343 (QB), [2012] EWHC 166 (QB) Successfully defending huge deceit claim (£40m; trial 35 days) in context of procurement exercise for Leeds Arena. Allegations of dishonesty made against elected Councillor, Council officials and independent professionals.

Williams v Mohammed [2012] BPIR 1787 On appeal, obtaining order for production of solicitor’s file note; legal professional privilege overridden by fact that advice was sought to further fraud.