David Graham Russell, AM, RFD, QC is an Australian barrister who specialises in international tax law. He currently practises in Dubai, London, New York and Abu Dhabi, Sydney and Brisbane and is an associate member of chambers in Auckland.
David commenced legal practice in 1974. He is admitted to practise in Australia, England and Wales (Lincoln’s Inn), the Courts of the Dubai International Financial Centre, New York (as a Legal Consultant), the Singapore International Commercial Court, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea. He was appointed Queen’s Counsel in 1986.
Membership
David Russell is an associate member of chambers in Auckland. David is also the co-editor of the Oxford University Press Journal Trusts & Trustees, and Chairman of the DIFC Wealth Management Working Group.
Lecturer, Master of Business Administration Course
1985-1988
Griffith University
Advisory Board Member, Board Member
1996 – 2006
Recognition
“Having received numerous accolades, David was made a Member of the Order of Australia for his service to taxation law and legal education and gained international recognition by being awarded the Order of the Rising Sun with Gold Rays and Neck Ribbon for services to Australia-Japan relations.”
Truly the power to tax is the power to destroy. History is replete with examples of societies and civilisations which have been destroyed by their tax systems. It isn't dramatic, and it doesn't happen overnight. It is at first a barely perceptible movement, and it happens because governments lack the capacity, or the will, to insist on a world's best practice tax system. Many of the OECD member countries’ comparative economic decline owes not a little to their tax system. Only history will tell whether they have the capacity, or courage, to turn it around.
Sadly, history teaches us that more than a few political actors have, at best, a casual relationship with the truth (“pretextual” is a useful term in this regard). More fundamentally, Courts decide cases based on the evidence before them, require disclosure in appropriate cases and do not start from a pre-ordained position that one side must be telling the truth. For Courts to do otherwise would be to fundamentally undermine the rule of law and become not impartial judges in the cases before them but enablers for the powerful.
If the political class truly wish to avoid criticism of their actions on the grounds of “pretext, deceit, …illicit motives... corruption and animus” and thereby restore trust in institutions a useful course of action would be the avoidance of dishonesty and misuse of power. Suppressing the power of the Courts to deal with such matters is not a helpful starting point.