David Rees KC > Chambers of Penelope Reed > London, England > Barrister Profile
5 Stone Buildings Offices
5 Stone Buildings
LINCOLN'S INN
LONDON
WC2A 3XT
England
- Set Profile
- Go to...
David Rees KC
Position
Barrister with a traditional Chancery practice encompassing trusts, probate, wills, adminstration of estates, family provision and capital taxation. Has a particular specialisation in Court of Protection and mental capacity work including cross-border incapacity cases and is regularly instructed by the Official Solicitor to represent persons lacking mental capacity: Reported cases include: Parry & Others v HMRC [2017] UKUT 4 (TCC) (Inheritance Tax on transfer between pension schemes); Watt v ABC [2016] EWCOP 2532 (Use of personal injury trust as alternative to deputyship); Re D [2016] EWCOP 35; [2016] COPLR 432 (Appeal against decision to dispense with service of statutory will application on affected party); Re Vindis Deceased (2016) (Application by widow for provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 in substantial estate); Lloyd v Jones & Others [2016] EWHC 1308 (Ch) (Contentious probate; testamentary capacity and want of knowledge and approval); Re PJV; PJV v Assistant Director Adult Social Care Newcastle City Council & Another [2015] EWCOP 87 and [2016] EWCOP 7 (Interaction between roles of the Court of Protection and Criminal Injury Compensation Authority where award of compensation is to be held on trust for an incapacitated person); Aidiniantz v Riley [2015] EWCOP 65; (Extensive welfare and deputyship dispute); Re PD; Health Service Executive of Ireland v CNWL [2015] EWCOP 48 (Recognition and enforcement of order of Irish High Court by Court of Protection which has the effect of depriving person of their liberty in England and Wales. Whether affected party needs to be joined as a party); Health Service Executive of Ireland v PA & Others [2015] EWCOP 38; (Recognition and enforcement of order of Irish High Court by Court of Protection which has the effect of depriving person of their liberty in England and Wales); Re XZ; XZ v The Public Guardian [2015] EWCOP 35 (Limits to the role of the Public Guardian in regulating restrictions and conditions in a lasting power of attorney); An English Local Authority v SW & Others [2014] EWCOP 43 (Cross-border jurisdiction of the Court of Protection. Meaning of “habitual residence” in the context of Schedule 3 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005); Re Gladys Meek; Jones v Parkin & Others [2014] EWCOP 1 (Statutory will in the context of significant financial abuse by deputies having taken place); Re AB [2014] COPLR 381 (Principles upon which the Court of Protection should act where dispensing with service on a party affected by a statutory will application); Baker Tilly v Makar [2013] EWHC 759 (QB) (Need for medical evidence when assessing capacity of a litigant in civil proceedings); Re HM [2012] WTLR 281 (Appointment of deputy preferable to personal injury trust); Re G (TJ) [2011] WTLR 231 (Application of “best interests” principle in relation to statutory gift applications and role of “substituted judgment” under Mental Capacity Act 2005); Re D [2012] Ch 57 (Extent to which Court of Protection should authorise statutory will to forestall contentious probate proceedings); Re MN [2010] WTLR 1355 (Leading authority on Court of Protection’s international jurisdiction. Extent to which Court of Protection entitled to have regard to “best interests” on application to recognise and enforce order of foreign court in relation to incapacitated person); Baker v H [2009] WTLR 1719 (Test case on the criteria for setting the level of security bonds for deputies); Re P [2010] Ch 33 (Application of “best interests” principle in relation to statutory will applications); Re J [2010] Ch 33 (Registration of EPA appointing successive attorneys)
Career
Called 1994, Lincoln’s Inn; QC 2017; Deputy Chancellor Diocese of Leicester 2014; Recorder 2012; Junior Counsel to the Crown (B panel) 2001-07; General editor Heywood & Massey ‘Court of Protection Practice’; Frequently lectures on issues relating to the Court of Protection. Member of the Lord Chancellor’s department working group 2002-03 (reviewing the operation of enduring powers of attorney); member of the working party advising the DCA on the Court of Protection Rules 2007; member of the Court of Protection Rules Committee and the Court Users’ Group.
Memberships
Chancery Bar Association; ACTAPS; STEP; Ecclesiastical Law Society. Honorary member Solicitors for the Elderly.
Education
Sherborne School, Dorset; St Anne’s College, Oxford (1993 BA Hons).
Lawyer Rankings
London Bar > Court of Protection and community care
(Leading Silks)Ranked: Tier 2David Rees KC –5 Stone Buildings ‘David is an outstanding barrister and communicator, making complex issues easy to understand with a practical approach and seeking solutions that benefit the client.’
5 Stone Buildings’ ‘highly able and highly experienced barristers’ have ‘considerable strength-in-depth’ in representing family members, health bodies, local authorities and protected parties in financial and welfare disputes before the Court of Protection. Tracey Angus KC has successfully represented a claimant in Gladstone v White, a claim to set aside gifts made to his attorney and attorney’s removal as a trustee of a heritage property valued at £10m. ‘Incredibly impressive barrister’ David Rees KC is acting for Gopichand Hinduja in Hinduja v Hinduja, a welfare and property and affairs case involving issues related to the validity of lasting powers of attorney and a care package provided to the claimant’s brother, S. P. Hinduja, as well as issues of open justice in the Court of Protection – the brothers having shared the top spot in the 2022 Sunday Times Rich List.
London Bar > Private client: trusts and probate
(Leading Silks)Ranked: Tier 2David Rees KC –5 Stone Buildings ‘David is an exceptional lawyer and is a go-to silk. He is technically excellent in both strategy and his subject matter. He is a level head and calming influence in some very difficult client situations.’