EXPERIENCE & EXPERTISE

David practises primarily in home insurance property damage recovery, acting for insurers in claims arising from defective products, construction defects and water damage incidents. He has successfully recovered losses from international manufacturers and retailers under the Australian Consumer Law, builders under the Domestic Building Contracts Act, and water authorities under the Water Act.

David appears regularly in the Magistrates' Court, County Court, Supreme Court of Victoria, Federal Court and VCAT. His experience across multiple jurisdictions is valuable in property damage disputes, which often involve complex factual, technical and liability issues.

Known for his commercial and pragmatic approach, David has secured high-value settlements and successful litigation outcomes for insurer clients. He focuses on understanding each client's objectives from the outset, providing practical advice, responsive service and clear communication throughout the life of a claim.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

David’s skillset has resulted in great outcomes in a variety of jurisdictions and law that pertains to different causes of property damage and motor vehicle recoveries.

Examples of David’s experience include:

• Achieving dismissal of a claim brought by an insured’s tenant in VCAT
• Recoveries against third party builders for the supply of services and goods under the Domestic Building Contract Act 1995
• Successfully running matters to judgment in the courts against major international manufacturer’s of goods under the Australian Consumer Law
• Overcoming liability denials from water authorities, owners corporations and individuals to obtain full recoveries under the Water Act 1989
• Consistent record of successful outcomes in concertina motor vehicle collisions
• Receiving instructions with liability already admitted, then through investigations identified fraudulent claims. In one instance, resulting in obtaining an order for his client’s defence costs exceeding the plaintiff’s original claim
• Pressing the issue of insufficient discovery to three separate costs orders in one matter, culminating in the plaintiff’s solicitors withdrawing and claim abandonment.