LPA Seminar

No5 Barristers’ Chambers

Contents

LPA Seminar

Monday 1st July 2024

No5 Barristers’ Chambers, Birmingham

Section 1

Members List – Page 1

Programme – Page 3

Section 2 – Page 5

Current Issues in National Policy

Sioned Davies

Section 3 – Page 25

BNG – What do LPAs need to do?

Jessica Allen

Section 4 – Page 29

Ensuring Effective Committee Hearings

Jack Smyth

Section 5 – Page 37

Planning Obligations – A Masterclass

Daniel Henderson

Section 6 – Page 51

Enforcement Update

Christian Hawley

Section 7 – Page 55

Presenting your Case at a Hearing

Howard Leithead

MembersList PlanningandEnvironment Group

ToviewordownloadmembersCVspleasevisitNo5.com

PeterGoatleyKC (Silk:2020Call:1992)

RichardKimblinKC (Silk:2016Call:1998)

RichardHumphreysKC (Silk:2006Call:1986)

PaulCairnesKC (Silk:2016Call:1980)

ChristopherYoungKC (Silk:2018Call:1997)

GordonWignall (1987)

HughRichards (1992)

SatnamChoongh (1994)

ScottStemp (2000)

JackSmyth (2007)

RowenaMeager (2007)

LeanneBuckley-Thomson (2009)

TheaOsmund-Smith (2010)

JamesCorbetBurcher (2011)

ChristianHawley (2013)

HowardLeithead (2014)

JessicaAllen (2019)

SionedDavies (2019)

OdetteChalaby (2021)

DanielHenderson (2021)

AnnaStein Pupil(2021)

TimothyJones* (1975)

CliveNewberryKC* (1978)

DouglasArmstrongKC* (1990)

AssociateTenant*

LPA Seminar

Monday 1st July 2024

No5 Barristers’ Chambers, Birmingham

Programme 2 CPD

9:30am – 10:00am Registration

10:00am – 10:10am Welcome

10:10am – 10:40am Current Issues in National Policy Sioned Davies, No5 Barristers’ Chambers

10:40am – 11:00am BNG – What do LPAs need to do? Jessica Allen, No5 Barristers’ Chambers

11:00am – 11:20am

Ensuring Effective Committee Hearings Jack Smyth, No5 Barristers’ Chambers

11:20am – 11:40am Refreshment Break

11:40am – 12:00pm Planning Obligations – A Masterclass Daniel Henderson, No5 Barristers’ Chambers

12:00pm – 12:20pm Enforcement Update Christan Hawley, No5 Barristers’ Chambers

12:20pm – 1:00pm Presenting your Best Case at a Hearing Howard Leithead, No5 Barristers’ Chambers

1:00pm – 2:00pm Network and Lunch

Sioned Davies

Call: 2019

"Advocacy at public inquiry is real strength - Sioned displays excellent qualities in terms of her prep, thoroughness, understanding of the case and relevant case law and precedents and communication skills."

London Bar, Planning, Legal 500 2023

20 junior barristers in this area of law (2023) and overall, for specialist commercial planning work (2023). She is also recognised as a Leading Junior by Legal 500.

Expertise Planning

Energy

Sioned has worked on several renewable energy matters, including solar, offshore wind and tidal schemes.

Recent instructions include:

Promoting a cross-boundary application for 30MW of solar arrays including battery storage in Babergh and Mid Suffolk. This was successful including the recovery of costs (junior to Thea Osmund-Smith).

Acting for a Local Planning Authority successfully objecting to a solar scheme at Berrington, Shrewsbury (30MW) (unled).

Acting for a Local Planning Authority objecting to a scheme at Kemberton, Telford, Shropshire (22MW) (unled).

Advising on legal issues arising from the consenting of the largest consented tidal energy scheme in the UK (240 MW). This provides a plug and play facility for commercial tidal energy operators.

Advising on legal aspects of several offshore wind projects, including habitat assessment and environmental impact assessment, and on the necessary supporting infrastructure including harbour revision orders.

Highways

Sioned has experience in advising on highways matters. This includes the assessment of evidence and appearing at hearings dealing with specialist highway issues.

Current and recent instructions include:

Acting for a large logistics developer making submissions about the status of the adoption of roads in the context of s.78 planning appeal.

Advisory work for National Highways in a planning appeal.

Acting for a Local Authority making stopping up applications in the magistrates court.

Planning Judicial and Statutory Reviews

Sioned regularly advises on the merits of bringing a High Court challenge, and on the defence of such claims.

Recent instructions include:

Acting as junior counsel defending the grant of planning permission in the High Court on behalf of the promoters and developers of a site with consent for over 2500 houses in Worcestershire (junior to Peter Goatley KC) Bentley Pauncefoot Parish Council v Redditch Borough Council & Anor [2023] EWHC 456 (Admin)

Acting as junior counsel defending the grant of planning permission for over 2200 houses on behalf of the Local Planning Authority. The challenge related to the provision of NHS contributions (junior to Hugh Richards) Worcestershire Acute NHS Trust v Malvern Hills District Council & Ors [2023] EWHC 1995 (Admin)

Defending the grant of planning permission for a crematorium in the Green Belt (junior to Peter Goatley KC) WathenFayed v SSLUHC [2023] EWHC 92 (Admin). Currently on appeal to the Court of Appeal. Challenging the Screening Direction of the Secretary of State concerning a point of interpretation of the EIA Regulations BW Farms Ltd v SSLUHC [2024] EWHC 217 (Admin) (unled)

Acting for the Interested Party in a Statutory Review in respect of a challenge to an Inspector s decision to refuse planning permission for a quarry NRS Saredon Aggregates Ltd v SSLUHC [2023] EWHC 2795 (Admin) (unled)

Acting for the Claimant in relation to a Judicial Review of a Decision of NRW to grant consent for a commercial operator on the River Wye Townley v NRW [2021] EWHC 2391 (Admin) (unled)

Sioned also has experience in seeking injunctive relief in the higher courts on her own and led. She was junior counsel in obtaining a Route Wide Injunction for trespassers on the HS2 line (Junior to Richard Kimblin KC)

Major Infrastructure

Sioned has gained broad experience of infrastructure planning and consenting regimes in both England and Wales.

Throughout her pupillage, she gained experience of challenges to major infrastructure projects, including offshore decommissioning projects in the North of England, to HS2, Drax Power Station, and the North London Heat and Power Project.

Recent instructions include:Advising on a Transport and Works Act Order on the development of a commercial tidal energy demonstration zone.

Early advice on compulsory purchase and compensation relating to the development of HS2.

Advising on Permitted Development rights in relation to ports for EV import/export.

Seeking injunctive against persons unknown and several named defendants in relation to HS2.

Minerals & Waste

Sioned has experience acting for promoters and objectors of mineral and waste projects, both in inquiries and in courts.

Recent experience has included:

Acting as junior counsel to Richard Kimblin KC in an application for a sand and gravel quarry in the Dorset AONB.

Acting as junior counsel to Richard Kimblin KC promoting a major quarry in South Wales for high PSV gritstone. The application was a called-in inquiry into the Welsh Ministers and was successful including in the recovery of costs.

Advising on the evidence base behind the release of a site constrained by a waste designation through a Local Plan process in West London.

Reviewing climate change assessments (Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions), and environmental assessment.

Acting for a Rule 6 Party in successfully resisting the grant of planning permission for minerals development in Worcestershire following a two-week inquiry in Worcestershire.

Plan-making

Sioned advises on allocations and prospects of bringing forward development through Plans. She is able to assist in making representations at the plan-making stage for all stakeholders. She is familiar with scrutinising the evidence base required to promote or challenge sites in a Local Plan, including Neighbourhood Plans. She also has experience of legal challenges to plans.

Recent instructions include:

Assisting the Home Builders Federation (HBF) in relation to the evidence in a Local Plan and the allocation of residential development sites.

Assisting a LPA with defending a legal challenge to a Local Plan.

Advising on the statutory powers associated with the adoption of a Local Plan.

Planning Appeals

Sioned has considerable experience in representing all stakeholders at planning appeals including both as sole and junior counsel.

This includes acting for a wide range of clients including residential, commercial, energy and minerals developers, public bodies

and other interested parties.

This also involves a full range of issues including need (including housing and supply) heritage, landscape, flood risk, highways, ecology, landscape, and carbon.

Recent instructions include:

Acting for Westminster City Council in the two-week inquiry into the Secretary of State s call-in of the application for the redevelopment of 458 Oxford Street, M&S flagship store. Key issues include heritage and sustainability assessment (unled).

Acting for Tritax Symmetry at Symmetry Park for employment development including complex archaeology, heritage and highways issues (unled).

Acting for a Local Planning Authority in resisting the development of playing fields for 33 residential dwellings on the Wirral (unled) (ongoing)

Successfully acting for a Local Planning Authority in resisting the development of 44 units of retirement living housing (unled)

Acting as Junior Counsel in a cojoined planning inquiry concerning rival crematoria developers in the Green Belt (junior to Peter Goatley KC).

Successfully acting in a 9-day inquiry for 700 dwellings and commercial space including the recovery of costs (junior to Christopher Young KC).

Successfully acting in a 9-day inquiry for mixed-use development for 216 homes, 1600 square metres of commercial space in London (junior to Christopher Young KC).

Successfully acting as junior counsel promoting a major quarry in South Wales. The application was called into the Welsh Ministers and included the recovery of costs (junior to Richard Kimblin KC).

Successfully acting in a two-week inquiry for the grant of a recreational surf lagoon in the Green Belt (junior to Paul Cairnes KC).

Successfully acting for a Rule 6 Party in resisting the grant of planning permission in Worcestershire for minerals development.

Planning Enforcement

Sioned has experience in planning enforcement. This includes advising on the evidence, investigation and service of enforcement notices and acting for appellants at hearings and inquiries.

Recent instructions include:

Acting for the Police as a Rule 6 Party in relation to a two-week enforcement inquiry concerning the Zig Zag Building, Glastonbury.

Acting for Local Planning Authority in bringing planning injunctions in the High Court and the County Court relating to unlawful development in the Green Belt.

Acting for a Local Authority in respect of an appeal of a statutory nuisance case.

Residential

Sioned has considerable experience in advising on residential development, both in her own capacity and as part of a team.

Sioned has appeared in a wide range of successful residential appeals including across London, the south east, south west, midlands and Wales, and in areas with particular planning constraints including in Green Belt and AONB.

Key issues have included housing land supply/need, heritage, landscape, affordable housing, drop-in permissions, selfbuild/custom build, ecology and biodiversity net gain, and planning obligations.

In her own right, she has advised several housebuilders on different aspects of the development life cycle including Bloor, St Modwen, BDW, Redrow and Greymoor Homes.

Current and recent instructions include:

Promoting the development of 42 dwellings in Mole Valley (unled) Heritage is a key issue.

Promoting the development of 125 dwellings in the Green Belt, Hertfordshire (junior to Christopher Young KC).

Acting for a Local Planning Authority in resisting the development of playing fields for 33 dwellings on the Wirral (unled).

Successfully acting for a Local Planning Authority in resisting the development of 44 units of retirement living housing on the Wirral (unled).

Successfully resisting the development of 30 dwellings together with Howard Leithead in Malvern Hills. Sioned dealt with the housing land supply position.

Successfully acting in a 9-day inquiry for 700 dwellings and commercial space including the recovery of costs, in Coventry (junior to Christopher Young KC).

Successfully acting in a 9-day inquiry for mixed-use development for 216 homes, 1600 square metres of commercial space in Enfield, London (junior to Christopher Young KC).

Successfully acting as junior counsel defending the grant of planning permission in the High Court on behalf of the promoters and developers of a site which was granted planning permission for over 2500 houses in Worcestershire (junior to Peter Goatley KC) BentleyPauncefootParishCouncilvRedditchBoroughCouncil&Anor[2023] EWHC 456 (Admin).

Successfully acting as junior counsel defending the grant of planning permission on behalf of the local planning authority for the over 2200 houses. The challenge relates to the provision of NHS contributions (junior to Hugh Richards) WorcestershireAcuteNHSTrustvMalvernHillsDistrictCouncil&Ors[2023] EWHC 1995 (Admin).

Biodiversity Net Gain

Sioned advises on issues resulting from the introduction of mandatory Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG). She advises developers and public bodies on the practicalities of BNG and as part of a wider natural capital offering.

She is available for talks and training on this rapidly developing area of law.

Accreditations

Kate Bertram Prize for academic distinction (University of Cambridge) for top-rated departmental research paper.

John Frederic Whitehouse Award for highest marked law dissertation (UCL) Bentham Award for high academic achievement (UCL)

Memberships

UKELA

Planning and Environmental Bar Association

Administrative Law Bar Association

Young Compulsory Purchase Association

Young National Infrastructure Planning Association

Appointments

Government Legal Department Panel of Junior Junior Counsel

Welsh Government Junior Barrister Public Law Scheme

Chair of National Agricultural Youth Charity (under 21)

Qualifications

BPP Law School Bar Professional Training Course Very Competent (2019)

University of Cambridge Environmental Law and Policy (MPhil) First Class Honours (2018)

University College London (UCL) Law (LLB) First Class Honours (2017)

Languages

English Welsh (fluent)

Current Issues in National Policy

Presented by -Sioned Davies, Monday 1st July 2024, No5 Barristers’ Chambers, Birmingham

2023 –2024 and beyond

Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 (26 October 2023)

National Planning Policy Framework & WMS (19 December 2023) And the small matter of a General Election…

The Critical Themes:

(1)Housing

 Targets, nutrients, density/brownfield, Green Belt, plan-making

(2) Environment & Benefits Case

 Affordable housing, mix, care, BNG & other environmental issues

(3)Renewables

 Wind (onshore and offshore, solar)

Where are we now?

•Housing project compared to last year

•New homes registered down by a fifth on the year (first three months toend ofMarch)

•Median House Price

•(x8 average; x12 in London)

Source: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wet-weather-and-costly-mortgages-fuel-fall-inhousebuilding-7n9xpzj0f

Focus (1) Targets

•1.5 million vs 1.6 million

•Changes to the NPPF §11?

•What next for the Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

What would Labour do?

 Recognises the softening of the Standard Method

 Has talked about “reversing” the changes

 “mandatory targets that bite on individual local planning authorities”

Souce: https://www.planningresource.co.uk/article/1865403/labour-quickly-reverse-nppf-revisionsintroduce-mandatory-housing-targets-councils

Focus (2) Nutrient Neutrality

•Both parties saying that they are going to act

•Conservatives indicating that they will “abolish” nutrient neutrality

•Labour –“committed to a solution”

Focus (3): Cities & Brownfield

 Urban uplift –not changed

 Practical problems - see B’ham, Bristol, Coventry, London

Conservatives?

 Urban uplift –now in NPPF

 Expert review of London Plan - “brownfield first”

 Suggested “presumption in favour ofbrownfield”

 Part of the consultation on brownfield policy

 London Plan authorities with no 5YHLS

 PIFSD largely applies

 Will brownfield presumption make any difference?

Labour?

 Also touting a “brownfield land passport” - How does this differ from Permission in Principle?

 Unlikely to be an answer to the shortfall

Changes to Green Belt have grabbed headlines

But more illusory than real?

Does NPPF 145 change all that much?

How permanent is the change?

Focus (4): Green Belt

NPPF 145

“there is no requirement for Green Belt boundaries to be reviewed or changed when plans are being prepared or updated. Authorities may choose to review and alter Green Belt boundaries where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified, in which case proposals for changes should be made only through the plan-making process. Strategic policies should establish the need for any changes to Green Belt boundaries, having regard to their intended permanence in the long term, so they can endure beyond the plan period.”

NPPF 145

There was formally no requirement to review Green Belt boundaries before

And the same strategic issues remain that motivated Green Belt release before

The urban uplift has made the position even worse

Local Plan Submissions

Consultees may challenge an absence of Green Belt Review or Green Belt release irrespective of NPPF 145

Question the “sustainability” or permanence of the change, especially where Green Belt release may be required into 2025

Labour Party Position on Green Belt

Strident in relation to GB matters

“A Labour government will:

-End the Tory green belt free-for-all.

-Release more low-quality green belt land and ensure development on it helps meet local affordable housing need.

-Protect, enhance and open up high-quality green belt land.”

Will Grey Belt solve the problem?

 Knight Frank Study –12% of England is GB Land

 11,000 PDL Sites –less than 1% of the GB

 40% of those in London (4,612)

- Followed by Mersey/Manchester - B’ham(1,351 Sites)

- South West & Yorkshire (1,129 Sites)

Source: https://www.knightfrank.com/research/article/2024-01-29-the-housebuilders-back-the-labour-party

Appeals in the GB

Majority of GB appeals since mid-2023 have been dismissed –see Colney Heath 2 (3323099)

Specialist housing is seeing better prospects –Bottisham (3324141)

However unmet figures are climbing and will continue into early 2025 Opportunities for appeal?

Focus (5): Current & Future Plan-Making

During 2023, the Local Plan system seemed on verge of collapse –64 LPAs delayed or withdrew

However a notable increase in Reg 18 consultation and even submission of Plans at the turn of the year

Many opportunities now opening to engage with plan-making process

Transitional Provisions

NPPF (2021) will apply to plans who reach Reg 19 stage before 19 March 2024 (i.e. 3 months)

After 19 March, NPPF (2023) applies

True effect of this change will emerge at examination

Benefiting from NPPF 76

If an LPA wants to benefit from NPPF 76 then they will have to demonstrate a 5 year supply at the local plan examination

And that they made their position clear at the Regulation 19 stage

“Clear evidence” will be required to demonstrate deliverability

Neighbourhood Plans

Enhanced protection for Neighbourhood Plans

NPPF 14 strengthened -5 year protection

Plan must still contain policies and allocations to meet its identified housing requirement

NPPF paragraphs 67-68

Plan-making from the main parties

 Little more from the Conservatives - much of the same?

 Labour –have said that they expect plans to be in place - Also suggested that there will be penalties for those who don’t comply.

New Local Plans

Schedule 7 not yet in force however sets a clear direction of travel -even with a change in Government

New Section 15B and C of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

Mandatory Requirements

 Every authority must adopt a Local Plan

 The Local Plan must be prepared in accordance with their published Local Plan Timetable

 The Local Plan must contain mandatory content in respect of housing development

National Development Management Policies

 Notably, the Local Plan must set out policies in relation to amount, type and location of, and timetable for development in the LPA’s area.

 Moreover, the Local Plan “must take account of an assessment of the amount, and type, of housing that is needed in the local planning authority’s area”

 The Local Plan cannot “be inconsistent with or (in substance) repeat any national development management policy.”

The New System

New Section 38(5C)

s38(5C) “If to any extent the development plan conflicts with a national development management policy, the conflict must be resolved in favour of the national development management policy.”

Allocations and Designations

Changes point to a world where Local Plans are dominated by allocations and protective designations

NDMPs cover much of the heritage, landscape, flood risk etc policy constraints

And also promote stronger benefits case

NDMPs

 Could be speedy - including on priorities for labour, including LP preparation.

 Prompt action from LPAs

 Labour could use this system - Brownfield, Green Belt, AH etc.

Other significant points to note

 New Towns / SUEs -from Labour - how likely to deliver?

 Infrastructure Levy –from Conservatives

 Both parties see changes to Infrastructure Planning - Laboursee critical to growth - Conservatives –NPS’ to be kept up to date, restricting legal challenges.

Topic 2: Environmental Issues and Development “benefits”

A growing list of requirements for developments

Any future Government will ask for more

Affordable housing will be critical

Also older persons need and self-build/custom-build

Affordable housing

 Well-reported issues with the Affordable Homes Programme

 Both parties have said that they will tackle this.

Older Persons Need

New Section 15LB

“(2) The Secretary of State must issue guidance for local planning authorities on how their local plan and any supplementary plans (taken as a whole) should address housing needs that result from old age or disability.”

Expect further details on methodology in 2024

Self-Build and Custom-Build

Section 123 LURA now in force from 31 January 2024

1)Self-build and custom-build demand figures are now cumulative

2)Only genuine CSB permissions will qualify as “development permission” that meet the need (or met it historically)

Environmental Benefits

Expect Government to push for sustainability and climate change benefits across all schemes

Good design will be intricately connected with energy efficiency, water use and long-term climate resilience

 Onshore wind -”doubling”

 Solar –“tripling”

 Offshore wind –“quadrupling” Current Issues in National Policy

Sioned Davies sda@no5.com

Jessica Allen

Expertise

Planning

Jessica has experience of a range of planning matters and welcomes instructions in all areas of planning law. She is particularly interested in matters arising at the intersection of planning law and environmental law.

Her recent instructions include:

Petitioning the HS2 (Crewe Manchester) Bill Select Committee for a four-platform underground through station at Manchester Piccadilly (led);

Acting for the appellant in an inquiry into a 234-home residential scheme on greenfield land raising affordable housing, landscape, townscape and flood risk issues (led by Peter Goatley KC);

Acting for the appellant in an inquiry into a major storage and distribution scheme on greenfield land raising landscape and heritage issues (led by Peter Goatley KC);

Acting for the appellant in an inquiry into the alleged change of use of land from a single dwellinghouse with ancillary commercial and equestrian uses to a mixed use comprising a dwellinghouse, a commercial use and a further residential use of a caravan (led by Hugh Richards);

Advising a local authority on a proposed application for an order under section 77 of the Building Act 1985 in relation to a Grade II

listed building;

Advising a local authority on potential options to resolve an incompatibility between a Class Q approval and a Section 52 agreement;

Advising a local authority on the lawfulness of its decision to issue a protected site licence;

Advising a landowner on a proposed application to vary an order made under section 77 of the Building Act 1985 in relation to two Grade II listed buildings;

Advising a landowner on the enforceability of a series of breach of condition notices;

Advising a developer on the grounds for terminating an agreement for lease in light of draft Section 106 obligations (led);

Advising a developer on the viability of a Section 73 application seeking variation of an approved plans condition as a means of consolidating a series of applications in respect of the same land (led);

Advising a developer on whether the conversion of an agricultural building into a residential building constituted Class Q permitted development (led);

Advising a developer on the lawfulness of a local planning authority s approach to EIA screening of connected developments (led);

Advising a developer on whether Section 73 applications proposing changes to EIA development would need to be accompanied by an environmental statement (led); and

Advising central government on potential options to amend planning policy and legislation in a Crown Dependency (led).

Planning Judicial and Statutory Reviews

Jessica has particular experience of the conduct of planning judicial and statutory reviews.

Her recent instructions include:

Acting for the claimant community group in a judicial review of a council s decision to grant planning permission in circumstances where a supplementary planning document on development in an area of outstanding natural beauty had not been taken into account;

Acting for an individual claimant in a judicial review of a council s decision to grant planning permission on grounds that the planning officer had misinterpreted local policy and reached a conclusion without evidence;

Acting for the defendant council in a judicial review of its decision to grant planning permission on grounds that it failed to take material considerations into account and there was procedural irregularity;

Acting for the defendant council in a judicial review of its decision to impose a traffic regulation order without lawful consultation;

Preparing pre-action correspondence for an individual claimant in relation to a proposed judicial review of a council s decision to grant planning permission on grounds that it had breached its duties under the Equality Act 2010;

Preparing draft pleadings for the claimant developer in a judicial review of a council s decision to publish a local plan review without lawful consultation (led);

Preparing draft pleadings for the interested party in a judicial review of a council s decision to grant of planning permission on grounds including that a background document had not been published in accordance with section 100 of the Local Government Act (led);

Advising an individual on the merits of a judicial review of a council s decision to grant planning permission in circumstances where the comments of a wildlife officer had been misquoted and reasons were not given for departing from the views of a statutory consultee; and

Advising central government on the validity of a general vesting declaration and its amenability to legal challenge (led).

Jessica has also been a marshal to the Supervising Lord Justice for Planning, Lord Justice Lindblom, in a planning matter before the Court of Appeal, and to Mr Justice Holgate in a planning judicial review hearing in the High Court.

Awards

Accreditations

Sir John and Lady Sophie Laws Scholarship (Bar European Group, 2023)

Fox Scholarship (Harold G. Fox Education Fund, 2021)

Human Rights Law Bursary (Human Rights Lawyers Association, 2019)

David Karmel European Scholarship (Gray s Inn, 2019)

Kingsland Cup (Francis Taylor Building, 2019)

Wildlife Law Bursary Award (UK Environmental Law Association, 2018)

Dean s Scholarship for Academic Excellence (City Law School, 2018)

Wilfred Watson BPTC Scholarship (Gray s Inn, 2018)

Law Faculty Prize for Comparative & Global Environmental Law (University of Oxford, 2018)

Mansfield Graduate Award (Mansfield College, 2018)

Student Essay Prize (UK Centre for Animal Law, 2018)

Punch Coomaraswamy Prize (University of Nottingham, 2017)

Andrew Less Essay Prize (UK Environmental Law Association, 2014)

Memberships

UKELA (UK Environmental Law Association)

PEBA (Planning and Environmental Bar Association)

Gray s Inn

Appointments

Convenor of the Environmental Litigation Working Party (UK Environmental Law Association) Reporter (European Human Rights Reports)

Qualifications

Bachelor of Civil Law Distinction (University of Oxford, 2018)

BA (Hons) Law with French and French Law First Class (University of Nottingham, 2017) Diplôme d Études du Droit de l Union Européenne (Université Toulouse 1 Capitole, 2016)

Languages

French (Advanced)

Publications

J. Allen, The dawn of mandatory biodiversity net gain (2024) 141 UKELA e-law Journal 17

J. Allen and E. Montlake, Response to the OEP Call for Evidence on Protected Sites for Nature (Environmental Law Foundation, 2023)

H. Narulla, J. Allen et al., Office for Environmental Protection Draft Strategy and Enforcement Policy Consultation (Oxford Sustainable Law Programme, 2022)

J. Allen, Legal and institutional frameworks for protected areas: France, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom (WWF Greece, 2020)

J. Allen et al., De-extinction, environmental regulation and nature conservation (2020) 32(2) JEL 309

J. Allen, The human dimension of nature conservation (2019) 114 UKELA e-law Journal 17

Pro Bono

Jessica is committed to access to justice and has provided pro bono advice on several claims for judicial review on an urgent and nonurgent basis. She is happy to accept instructions pro bono in appropriate cases. In 2024, Jessica was nominated as Junior Pro Bono Barrister of the Year.

Other Information

Jessica was raised in a single-parent household and attended local state comprehensive schools in the North of England. She is the first in her family to be called to the Bar. In her free time, she enjoys rock climbing, hiking, and playing the piano.

Jack Smyth

Call: 2007

"Jack's written advice is thorough. He structures his advice and line of arguments extremely well and has always responded promptly and succinctly. He has very good interpersonal skills -very approachable and makes himself available"

Legal 500 awarded Jack the prestigious honour as Legal 500 UK Regional Junior Barrister of the year 2018. Its Judges noted: 2017 was Smyth s tenth year of call and he continues to punch above his weight across a number of practice areas. He frequently acts for prominent clients such as Secretaries of State and makes frequent successful appearances in the higher courts

Jack was also rated as a Top Tier grade 1 barrister in Planning law in the Midlands in 2017.

Jack has a strong practice across the piste in Planning and Environmental law with a particular interest in High Court challenges and enforcement.

Jack has been appointed by the Attorney General as Junior Counsel to the Crown for the Midlands (formerly known as the Treasury Solicitors Panel). As a result, he frequently finds himself in the High Court defending the decisions of Planning Inspectors.

Jack has been appointed as a Drainage Member of the Lands Tribunal (Wales). He is the youngest appointee to the tribunal. In that role, he adjudicates on disputes which revolve around boundaries, the causes of flooding and the best solution to be found to mitigate harm. In that guise, he is experienced with scrutinising competing expert evidence in an area of the law which is both technical and fact-specific.

Gypsy Traveller Law

His forte is successfully representing Councils and residents groups in resisting gypsy traveller sites. He has represented residents

groups in two high profile gypsy cases in the Midlands which have both featured on Midlands Today and in the national press: Beausale and Meriden. He often obtains injunctions.

Planning Judicial and Statutory Reviews

Jack is adept at advising potential Claimants and Defendants on a wide range of High Court challenges including Judicial Reviews and statutory challenges (such as s288 and 289 claims). He has a reputation for turning work around at short notice and providing hard-headed, commercial advice to clients.

Historic Heritage

He has extensive experience of advising and providing advocacy in the area of built heritage, in particular, the impact of new development upon Conservation Areas and Listed Buildings. Recent cases include a 2-week inquiry against a Silk on behalf of a residents group resisting the demolition of a large building in a Conservation Area to make way for a large supermarket development (the appeal was dismissed) and successfully representing a local authority at an appeal for residential development within the setting of a listed mill. On the enforcement side, recent cases include advising an architect being investigated for unauthorised works to a Listed Building and a home owner facing a joint prosecution by Historic England and the local authority for the gutting of a Listed Building and the excavation of an Ancient Scheduled Monument.

Injunctions

He commonly obtains injunctive relief in respect of unauthorised breaches of planning control. This is done on an emergency basis for anticipated breaches and also to compel compliance with enforcement notices and conditions attached to planning permissions. He regularly finds himself in the High Court for injunctions and is used to advising at short notice and undertaking emergency injunctions. Recently, Jack completed a long-running injunction in respect of the illegal tipping of waste on land in the open countryside. During the course of the litigation, a witness was sent to prison for 28 days for perjury following Jack s crossexamination. In light of the defendant s failure to obey the injunction, he was committed to prison for 12 months for contempt. This is the longest sentence ever imposed for breach of a planning injunction.

Planning Enforcement

Jack is considered to be one of the go-to barristers for enforcement matters, with a particular expertise in injunctive proceedings. He is experienced in advising on paper, appearing at inquiries and in the Court system, including Criminal proceedings. Cases include Enforcement prosecutions, Temporary Stop Notices, Injunctions (Gypsies and Travellers), CLEUDs, Tree Preservation Orders, Environmental issues pursuant to EPA including noise and odour abatement notices, Statutory nuisance, POCA, Committals for breaches of court orders and Breach of Condition notices.

Statutory Nuisance

He frequently advises appellants and local authorities in respect of statutory nuisance. He is experienced with interrogating

technical expert evidence in respect of noise and odour. Recent successes include prosecuting a restaurant in Leicester for failing to obey an abatement notice for odour and resisting an appeal made by a Working Men s Club in Cannock in respect of a noise abatement notice.

Residential

Jack is experienced with dealing with residential development appeals for appellants, local authorities and residents groups and frequently appears at Public Inquiries and Informal Hearings. Jack has experience of a range of issues relating to residential applications including 5 year supply, viability, Green Belt, heritage and landscape.

Awards

Accreditations

Legal 500 UK Regional Junior Barrister of the year , 2018

Rated as a Top Tier grade 1 barrister in Planning law in the Midlands, 2017

The Jules Thorn Scholarship by Middle Temple, 2006

Ranked in Tier 2 Legal 500 2022

Memberships

Middle Temple; awarded the Jules Thorn Scholarship (2006)

HELA

UKELA

Appointments

Deputy District Judge

Qualifications

Degree in Politics from the Durham University, First Class Honours

Graduate Diploma of Law, with Distinction LLB

Publications

Local Government Lawyer: Injunctions: a no-brainer? The quickest, easiest, cheapest and most effective way to enforce compliance

How to Prosecute a Breach of an Enforcement Notice: A Practical Guide

Listed Building Prosecutions: A Practical Guide

Ensuring Effective Committee Hearings

Presented by Jack Smyth

Monday 1st July 2024, No5 Barristers’ Chambers, Birmingham

A Video Example of How it Can All Go Wrong…

The Chairman of Council is err the Chairman of the Council”

The Objective –High Quality Decision Making

 Well-trained & engaged Members informed by a strong officer’s report

 Supporters & objectors are given a fair opportunity to put their case

 Focus on the main issues without getting distracted by immaterial considerations or lower order micro-disputes

The Pitfalls of Committee Hearings

 The conduct of hearings has become increasingly conspicuous and ‘scrutinisable’ with video links & transcripts

 Procedural irregularity/unfairness (including who can be a decision maker)

 Errors/misunderstandings creep in and go uncorrected

 In the heat of the discussion, Members say something which upon reflection they wish they had not

How the ‘Loser’ of the Hearing can use it Against the Council

 Refusal: the remedy is an appeal to PINS where the Inspector is likely to have a limited appetite for assessing the quality of the original decision but it could help the appellant to mount a costs application

 Approval: the remedy is a claim for JR which must be brought within 6 weeks of the decision (not the resolution) where the key attacks will be:

-An inadequate or misleading officer’s report

-An error/misunderstanding which went uncorrected

The Expectations of Officer Reports Mansell

Lindblom LJ :

“The principles are not complicated. Planning officers’ reports to committee are not to be read with undue rigour, but with reasonable benevolence, and bearing in mind that they are written for councillors with local knowledge: … Unless there is evidence to suggest otherwise, it may reasonably be assumed that, if the members followed the officer’s recommendation, they did so on the basis of the advice that he or she gave: … The question for the court will always be whether, on a fair reading of the report as a whole, the officer has materially misled the members on a matter bearing upon their decision, and the error has gone uncorrected before the decision was made. Minor or inconsequential errors may be excused. It is only if the advice in the officer’s report is such as to misdirect the members in a material way—so that, but for the flawed advice it was given, the committee’s decision would or might have been different—that the court will be able to conclude that the decision itself was rendered unlawful by that advice.”

Top Tips

 If you faithfully follow your constitutional arrangements / standing orders, you won’t go far wrong (“Read the standing orders! Read them and understand them!”)

 Ensure that all Members are properly trained so they know exactly what the quasi-judicial role entails and have a familiarity with they key principles of planning, the NPPF and the elements of the LP

Top Tips

 Clearly written officer’s report which provides the ‘raw material’ for Members to make their decision –it need not be overly long

 Beware the important formulae around heritage issues

 Correct any errors/misunderstandings before the vote (a supplementary report; an additional comment during the officer’s oral presentation or an oral intervention)

Top Tips

 Whilst Members ought not to be discouraged from thrashing out the issues and speaking their mind during the course of the debate (that is the whole purpose of holding a “live” event), they should be mindful that everything they say may be recorded and poured over.

 Members ought to behave, and speak, judiciously and moderately

 Once the policy/legal framework is understood, it almost always boils down to weight

Ensuring Effective Committee Hearings

Presented by Jack Smyth js@no5.com

Daniel Henderson

Call: 2021

role, he worked on a number of significant appeals concerning important points of Public and Planning law, as well as a number of firstinstance judicial review challenges before the Divisional Court. He completed pupillage at a highly-ranked criminal set in London, and appeared daily in the Magistrates and Crown Court, both prosecuting and defending in criminal trials, applications for civil behaviour orders, and environmental and education prosecutions.

Prior to commencing pupillage, Daniel studied for undergraduate and postgraduate degrees in Law and Public Law, obtaining several academic prizes. Daniel also spent time volunteering at Advocate (formerly the Bar Pro Bono Unit), assisting as the first point of contact for vulnerable individuals seeking pro bono representation. Outside of the law, Daniel is a keen musician, and has spent many years singing in choirs all over the world, including as a Choral Scholar in the Choir of King s College, Cambridge.

Expertise

Planning

Daniel joined Chambers as a Probationary Tenant in September 2023, and is developing a broad and varied practice as part of the Planning and Environmental team. He accepts instructions across all areas of Planning and Environmental law, and has experience of acting for developers, local authorities and NGOs, both advising and appearing in court and at inquiry.

As to court work, Daniel has appeared in the High Court (both led and unled) representing both claimants and local authorities. He has

experience of drafting statements of facts and grounds for claimants, and both summary and detailed grounds of resistance for defendants. Daniel also has experience of appearing in the Crown Court and Magistrates Court at trials, sentencing hearings, and other procedural applications. As to inquiry work, Daniel is presently instructed on behalf of developers promoting a variety of large-scale residential schemes, and a solar farm. Daniel is also developing a strong advisory practice, advising individuals, developers, NGOs and local authorities on a wide range of procedural and substantive matters.

Prior to joining Chambers, Daniel was the Judicial Assistant to Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Holroyde in the Court of Appeal, and worked on a number of significant Planning and Environmental appeals. He also gained considerable experience of first-instance challenges in the Divisional Court, and applications for permission to appeal from the Planning Court and Administrative Court.

Planning Judicial and Statutory Reviews

Daniel has experience of all stages of High Court challenges, including drafting statements of facts and grounds, drafting both summary and detailed grounds of resistance, appearing at oral renewal hearings, and appearing at full hearings. He has appeared in the High Court on a number of occasions, both led and unled. He has experience acting for public authorities and for claimants, and has appeared in the Planning Court and the Administrative Court more generally, including before the Divisional Court.

Daniel is also a member of No5 s Public Law team, and as a result, his work on judicial review challenges before the High Court extends well beyond the Planning and Environmental context. He is therefore well- placed to advise and act on a broad spectrum of matters in a local government and Public Law context, and is very familiar with the procedure on applications for judicial review. Daniel is also a member of the Government s Junior Junior panel of counsel.

Daniel also has experience of appellate challenges, having worked as a Judicial Assistant at the Court of Appeal on a diverse range of planning matters, including Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and the Communities v Smith [2023] EWCA Civ 514 on the role of Appeal Planning Officers; East Quayside 12 LLP v Newcastle upon Tyne City Council [2023] EWCA Civ 359 on the heavily contested redevelopment of Newcastle quayside; and various other appeals on the interpretation of the NPPF, local and regional planning policies, and the GPDO. He also has experience of applications for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal from the Planning Court.

Planning Appeals

Daniel is currently instructed on a range of planning appeals across the country, and has experience acting in relation to a number of large-scale residential schemes. Recent instructions at inquiries include promoting residential schemes of 151 affordable homes in Welwyn Hatfield, and 330 homes in Windsor and Maidenhead.

Daniel also has experience of advising both appellants and local authorities pre-appeal on prospects of success on a wide variety of potential appeals, including under s.78, and in respect of s.73 applications and CLEUDs. He also has experience of advising on strategic next steps post-appeal, including on the prospects of success of challenges by way of judicial review or under s.288.

Planning Enforcement

Daniel s background and experience at the Criminal Bar means he is ideally placed to advise on all matters relating to enforcement prosecutions, and to appear at trial. Daniel has considerable experience of appearing in the Magistrates and Crown Court, and has conducted over 100 trials, a large number of sentencing hearings including ancillary applications for related orders under the

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, and numerous other procedural applications. He has also appeared unled in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).

Daniel is currently instructed to advise and act in a number of s.179 prosecutions, appearing for a range of local authorities. He has experience of dealing with a variety of difficult and complex points of law and procedure arising in the course of such cases, and is well-placed to advise on such matters.

Accreditations

Scarman Prize (City University)

Oxford University Press Prize (City University) Asbury Scholarship (Middle Temple) Lawyers Alumni Prize (London School of Economics)

Anniversary Scholarship (London School of Economics)

Qualifications

MA (Hons) Law (2019) (University of Cambridge) (2.i)

LLM Public Law (2020) (London School of Economics) (Distinction, 1st in year)

Bar Vocational Studies (2021) (City University) (Distinction, 2nd in year)

Changes and Amendments: A Case Law Update

 Section 73 applications

 Hillside and severability

 Amending at appeal

 Unrelated to changes and amendments, but important: - Finch and the issue of “indirect effects”

Section 73 applications

Presented by - Daniel Henderson

Section 73 applications: a reminder

 Section 73 TCPA 1990 –amending conditions of an existing PP.

 Key limitation in Finney – “fundamentally inconsistent with description of development”

Section 73 applications: a new limitation?

 “Substantially different” from original PP?

 “More than minor material amendment” to original PP?

 Two recent cases have given conflicting views:

- R (Armstrong) v SSLUHC [2023] EWHC 176 (Admin)

- R (Fiske) v Test Valley Borough Council [2023] EWHC 2221 (Admin)

R (Armstrong) v SSLUHC [2023] EWHC 176 (Admin)

 Section 73 application to change design of dwelling from “irregular shape” and “modern architectural style” to “alpine-lodge style” with “overhanging dual-pitched roof”.

 Council –Refused. “Completely alters nature of development”, to one which “differs materially” from approved permission.

 Inspector –Dismissed. “Nature of the development proposed would be substantially different to that allowed by the existing PP”.

R (Armstrong) v SSLUHC [2023] EWHC 176 (Admin)

 High Court –Unlawful (James Strachan KC).

 No limitation on s.73 applications to “non-fundamental variations” or “minor material amendments”.

 PPG wording to the contrary an “impermissible gloss” and “liable to confuse”.

 PPG subsequently amended.

R (Fiske) v Test Valley BC [2023] EWHC 2221 (Admin)

 Section 73 application to remove substation from solar farm scheme.

 Council –Granted.

 Challenged before High Court on the basis that it “fundamentally altered” the development originally permitted.

R (Fiske) v Test Valley BC [2023] EWHC 2221 (Admin)

 High Court (Morris J) –Unlawful.

 “Balance of caselaw” and statutory scheme suggests that there is a further limitation, namely that s.73 applications cannot involve a “fundamental alteration” of the permission.

Section 73 applications: going forward

 Developing area of caselaw, likely to be further authority to come. - Fiske to be heard by the Court of Appeal in October

 Section 110 LURA 2023 –“Applications for permission not substantially different from existing permission”.

Hillside and severability

 PP does not authorise further development if compliance becomes physically impossible

 Materiality test –is departure material in context of scheme as a whole?

 Treat PP for multi-phase developments holistically, unless “clear contrary indication”

 Not triggered by mere incompatibility with the terms of another, implemented, permission

Hillside: the basics

Hillside update (1): Fiske [2023] EWCA Civ1495

 AnothercasearisingfromMrsFiske’sattemptstostopasolarfarm

 Relyingon Hillside, allegedincompatibilitybetween - (a)PPforanewsubstationonpartofthewidersiteAND - (b)underlyingPPforthewidersolarfarm

Hillside update (1): Fiske [2023] EWCA Civ1495

 CA, upholding HC, dismissed the appeal

 Incompatibility not a mandatory material considerationfor LPA in consideration of the second application

 It is for the developer to choose which scheme to develop (or neither)

Hillside update (2): Dennis [2024] EWHC 57 (Admin)

 OutlinePPforredevelopmentofAylesburyestateinLondon

 DeveloperconsideredoutlinePPwasseverable

 LPAgranteds96Aapplicationfornon-materialamendmenttoinsert “severable”intodescriptionofdevelopment

Hillside update (2): Dennis [2024] EWHC 57 (Admin)

 HCsaid outline PP single PP with provisions for phasing

 Applying Hillside, phasing provisions insufficient to amount to “clear contrary indication”

 s96A granted unlawfully –material departure from authorised scheme

Amendments at appeal

Bramley Solar Farm Residents Group v SSLUHC [2023] EWHC 2842 (Admin)

 Challenge to Inspector’s decision to grant permission for a solar farm, on grounds including that the scheme had been amended at appeal, with new consultation only carried out by the developer.

 High Court –Lawful (Lang J).

- Inspector correctly applied Wheatcroft as explained in Holborn Studios - Inspector not acting irrationally in concluding that the modifications were minor.

Bramley Solar Farm Residents Group v SSLUHC [2023] EWHC 2842 (Admin)

 Key takeaway –Confirmation of two limitations on ability to amend at appeal stage, taken from Holborn Studios [2020] EWHC 1509 (Admin)

 (1) Substantive –“Substantial” or “not in substance that which was originally applied for”

 (2) Procedural –Whether allowing amendment would amount to unlawful procedural unfairness

R (Finch) v Surrey County Council [2024] UKSC 20

Finch: Facts

 Concerned Horse Hill oil well in Surrey

 Mandatory EIA

 Council scoping opinion –Must consider direct GHG release during lifetime of project (scope 1) and downstream emissions (scope 3).

 Developer –Produced an EIA considering only direct GHG release.

 Council Officer Report –Accepted limitation.

Finch: Facts

 Key phrase –“direct and indirect significant effects of the proposed development”.

 High Court –Lawful. (a) Downstream emissions incapable of falling within scope of an EIA or (b) Downstream emissions capable of falling within scope of an EIA, but matter of planning judgmentfor LPA.

 Court of Appeal –Lawful.

 By a 2-1 majority.

 Applying (b) but disagreeing as to outcome.

 Supreme Court –Unlawful.

 By a 3-2 majority, rejecting both (a) and (b).

Finch: Supreme Court Judgment

 “Effect of a project” = a question of causation which admits of only one answer (on these facts).

 Crucial to the reasoning:

 Agreed fact that it was “inevitable” that the extracted oil will be refined, and then burned as fuel.

 Agreed that the emissions can easily be quantified.

 Combined with broad wording of EIA Directive, and informative + publicfacing purpose

 = Downstream scope 3 emissions must be assessed.

Finch: Impact

 Important to split this into two:

 (1) Impact on oil well schemes.

 (2) Impact beyond oil well schemes.

 Two significant limitations:

 (1) Scope of application

 (2) Nature of assessment

Finch: Impact on oil well schemes

 Straightforward

 Scope 3 emissions must be assessed as part of EIA

Finch: Impact beyond oil well schemes

Limitation 1: Scope of Application

 (1) Only applies to major developments requiring EIA

 (2) Only applies directly to oil well schemes, or cases with analogous ‘downstream effects’

 (3) Remains an informative process, not a consenting process

Finch: Impact beyond oil well schemes

Limitation 2: Nature of Assessment

 (1) Effects must be capable of meaningful assessment [77], [138] - Sufficient information at all - Sufficient information to quantify

 (2) Must be “determinacy as regards future use” [120]-[126]

 (3) Effects must still be “significant” [138]

Finch: How to approach EIA scoping

 Vast majority of cases –no immediate change.

 Cases with ‘downstream’-type impacts:

- Now capable of being considered “direct or indirect effects”.

- If (1) feasible, (2) meaningful, and (3) likely to be significant, try to assess.

- Remember that there is no requirement to assess where it would be “impossibly onerous and unworkable”.

Changes and Amendments: A Caselaw Update

Presented by - Daniel Henderson dhe@no5.com

Christian Hawley

Call: 2013

"Christian Hawley is the go-to person for tackling difficult problems with creative solutions." "Christian has an acute ability to spot the real implications of legal difficulties on the operation of our business."

Expertise

Planning

Compulsory Purchase

Christian advises landowners and local authorities in relation to all aspects of the CPO process including: those affected by HS2, 1. empty dwellings, 2. redevelopment schemes, 3. compensation (for example, in relation to a compensation settlement for a commercial car dealership arising from the 4. construction of a new relief road).

Planning Judicial and Statutory Reviews

Christian regularly advises landowners / developers, local planning authorities and third parties in relation to potential challenges to planning decisions (and how to avoid them). Early engagement often allows for steps to be taken to secure the desired outcome without recourse to the courts.

Where an early result is not achieved Christian has experience across the full range of planning matters which come before the courts.

Plan-making

Christian has appeared at numerous Local Plan EiPs representing the interests of landowners, developers and promoters at all stages of the plan-making process including consultation / evidence base submissions, call for sites, Examination submissions / advocacy, potential challenges. Christian has also advised extensively in relation to the preparation and adoption of SPDs (both for developers / landowners / promoters and local planning authorities).

Planning Appeals

Christian has extensive experience advising in relation to all aspects of planning appeals including appearing for appellants, local planning authorities and third parties at Hearings and Public Inquiries.

To maximise the prospects of a successful outcome it is critical to ensure early engagement in the process, Christian regularly advises in relation to matters yet to be appealed right through to the final disposal of a case and every point between.

Christian acts in relation to all planning matters including residential development (see Residential section for more details), enforcement (see Enforcement), certificates of lawfulness, employment / logistics, infrastructure (including Motorway Service Areas) and Gypsy and Traveller appeals.

Planning Enforcement

Christian has extensive experience in dealing with planning enforcement matters having acted for landowners and local planning authorities from the identification of planning issues through to enforcement appeals. Christian is also well-versed in dealing with related matters including requests for information, applications for certificates of lawfulness and addressing s215 clean up notices. Christian is able to advise at all stages and regularly appears in enforcement appeals and subsequent challenges.

Examples include:

Securing the quashing of an enforcement notice in relation to a large site which had been redeveloped to provide fishing 1. lakes. The notice alleged an unlawful material change of use including the winning, working, storage and sale of minerals; the unauthorised importation, storing, processing and deposition of waste materials; use of the land for the storage of plant (including crushers and processors); storage of plant (and parts) for hire; residential use; mechanical repairs and maintenance along with the unauthorised erection of various buildings, formation of lakes and creation of a haul road. Securing the quashing of an enforcement notice in relation to the erection of a stable block / riding school waiting room. 2. The notice alleged the unauthorised erection of a single-storey residential dwelling.

Successfully defending an enforcement notice in relation to land associated with a residential development which the 3.

landowner had secured and sought to prevent access by the public. The notice was upheld requiring the cessation of use of the land as private open space and returning it to use as public open space.

Planning Injunctions

Christian has extensive experience in dealing with planning injunctions acting for both landowners and local planning authorities including Gypsy & Traveller and Travelling Showpeople injunctions and injunctions requiring compliance with development control / enforcement action.

Residential

Christian regularly advises and acts for residential developers (both led and un-led) on a wide range of sites ranging from proposals for small developments through to schemes of 900 and 1,000 dwellings.

Christian also advises regularly on post-permission issues such as the interpretation and discharge of planning conditions, the interpretation and effect of s106 agreements, revisions to existing consents, drainage and highways matters.

Accreditations

BPP / Broadway House Chambers Public Law Prize 2013 College of Law / Freeth Cartwright Environmental Law Prize 2011

Qualifications

BPTC Very Competent, BPP Leeds 2011-2013

GDL Commendation, College of Law Chester 2009- 2011

Postgraduate Diploma in Surveying Distinction, University of Reading 2009-2011 BA (Hons) History and Politics 2.1, University of York 1996-1999

Howard Leithead

Call: 2014

"Howard quickly absorbs the detail and identifies the key issues. His calm and clear advocacy is authoritative and persuasive. His personable approach and ability to lead a team adds value and direction."

Howard regularly writes articles and speaks about planning and environmental issues. He provides expert analysis articles for Lexis®PSL, appears on No5 Planning Podcasts, takes part in webinars, and gives papers at seminars and conferences. He has also contributed to several specialist publications, including the NAPE Planning Enforcement Handbook.

He is committed to education and training and is involved in training professional witnesses for planning inquiries, coaching law students at Inner Temple and elsewhere, and judging mooting competitions.

Expertise

Planning

Howard is involved in a variety of development work. Much of his work is focused on helping clients to obtain or oppose grants of planning permission, including at the planning application stage, in appeals to the Secretary of State, and in challenges in the High Court and the Court of Appeal.

He further deals with a range of other matters, such as disputes over the interpretation of planning permissions and listed building consents, s.106 agreements, lawful development certificates, applicability of permitted development rights (such as in relation to domestic projects, agricultural buildings and barn conversions), use class disputes, implications of the granting of planning permissions by

mistake, and issues that arise in the context of mineral permissions.

In addition, Howard further maintains a busy enforcement practice. He advises and represents both local planning authorities and those against whom enforcement action is being taken, both in appeals against enforcement notices and in court proceedings.

Compulsory Purchase

Howard is interested in compulsory purchase disputes and represented the Secretary of State for Transport in valuation references to the Upper Tribunal concerning properties compulsorily purchased to facilitate the development of the new HS2 Euston Station.

Highways

Howard regularly deals with on highways issues within the context of planning inquiries. In addition, he advises and represents clients on a range of technical issues, such as the obligations of highway authorities and in relation to enforcement action.

Planning Judicial and Statutory Reviews

Howard represents clients in judicial reviews and statutory reviews under s.288. In addition to the wide range of clients that he represents in appeals, he represents the Secretary of State in the High Court as a member of the Attorney General s C Panel of Counsel in London.

Recent cases include:

R(WhitleyParishCouncil)vNorthYorkshireCountyCouncil[2023] EWCA Civ 92, led by Richard Kimblin KC, represented the claimant parish council in its judicial review challenge of a decision to grant planning permission to a developer to extract pulverised fuel ash.

R(Curran)vLondonBoroughofLewishamCouncilandNetworkRailInfrastructureLimited(High Court, 2022), represented the claimant who challenged the defendant local planning authority s decision to grant prior approval for the significant development of Hither Green Railway Station under permitted development rights.

R(Besser)vBrightonandHoveCountyCouncil(Court of Appeal, 2020), led by Christopher Young KC, represented the developers of a proposed development that included a new synagogue in opposing a judicial review claim in the High Court (unled) and the Court of Appeal.

Section 289 appeals and injunctions

In the High Court, Howard typically represents clients in s.289 appeals, applications for injunctions under s.178B and contempt proceedings.

Recent cases include:

StuartPartnersLtdvSecretaryofStateforLevellingUp,HousingandCommunities(High Court, 2024), represented the Secretary of State in an appeal under s.289 against the decision of an inspector to uphold and enforcement notice concerning the development of an agricultural site for commercial purposes.

PeakDistrictNationalParkAuthorityvKohanzad(High Court, 2023), represented the local planning authority in its application for a final injunction to enforce against the development of a holiday retreat/eco-village in breach of planning

control on a large site in the Peak District National Park. R(Dhanji)vSecretaryofStateforLevellingUp,HousingandCommunitiesandHarrowCouncil(High Court, 2023), represented the claimant in conjoined s.288 and 289 appeals involving developments at his residential property.

Minerals & Waste

Howard has advised clients in projects relating to minerals and waste, such as the interpretation of minerals permissions, periodic reviews, and the need for new waste facilities, including in the Green Belt.

Planning Appeals

Howard represents clients in both planning inquiries and hearings. He has recently been instructed in appeals concerning proposals for residential development and proposals for the development of a hotel, a prison, agricultural land, gypsy and travellers sites, and a battery energy storage system.

Howard is familiar with all the main topic areas for which expert evidence is required in planning inquiries, such as heritage, highways, landscape, Green Belt, flood risk, housing land supply, viability, accessibility, noise, and light. He is experienced in working with teams of expert witnesses and in cross examining the witnesses of opposing parties.

Beyond development, Howard has represented clients in appeals concerning footpaths and rights of way.

Recent appeals include:

Land off Haywood Way, The Close, Cleeve Prior, Worcestershire WR11 8LF, APP/H1840/W/23/3317390, 13 December 2023, represented a parish council who objected to the proposed change of use of the site to use as a residential caravan site for gypsy families. There was already a residential caravan site on land adjacent to the appeal site and the main issues of the appeal were concerned with whether proposal was of an appropriate scale for the location and its impact on the living conditions of nearby residents.

Land adjacent to HMP Gartree, Welland Avenue, Gartree, Market Harborough, Leicestershire LE16 7RP, APP/F2415/W/22/3300227, called in by Secretary of State), 15 November 2023, represented the local planning authority in an appeal concerning the proposed development of a new national Category B prison of up to 82,555 square metres. The main issues included the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, whether the site was a site location having regard to accessibility, and the need for the proposal. It was a highly controversial appeal, which attracted parliamentary interest and which was reported by national and local media.

Land off Barkby Road, Queniborough, Leicestershire LE7 3FB, APP/X2140/W/23/3316574, 9 November 2023, represented the local planning authority in an appeal concerning the proposed development of 150 dwellings and associated infrastructure. The issues in this appeal included whether proposed modifications to the proposal constituted a revised scheme, harm to landscape and visual impact and the impact of the scheme on an area of local separation.

Land at Buckingham Hotel, 1-2 Burlington Road, Buxton, Derbyshire SK17 9AS, APP/H1033/W/22/3302879, 15 August 2023, represented the local planning authority in an appeal concerning an appeal to redevelop a historic hotel. This was an unusual scheme for the Buxton in that it was proposed to demolish and rebuild a historic hotel and it involved considerable evidence on the structural condition of the existing hotel and the optimum viable use of the building.

Land at (OS 8579 4905) Post Office Lane, Kempsey, Worcestershire, APP/J1860/W/22/3313440, 14 August 2023, represented the local planning authority in an appeal involving a proposal for 30 dwellings. The main issues in this appeal, which sat for more than two weeks, the impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the local area was of particular significance and housing land supply on which the evidence was particularly complex.

Land at Loughborough Road, Burton on the Wolds, Leicestershire, PP/X2410/W/22/3310932, 26 July 2023, represented the local planning authority in an appeal concerning a proposal including the development of 56 dwellings. The main issues included the effect of the proposal on character and appearance and on various heritage assets and whether the site represented an appropriate location taking into account accessibility of services.

Land at Broadway Lane, Fladbury, Pershore, Worcestershire WR10 2QF, APP/H1840/W/22/3313745, 22 June 2023, represented the local planning authority in an appeal involving a proposal to develop 34 affordable dwellings. In this appeal the main issues concerned the scale and type of development and the scope for future accessibility to services and facilities.

Land off Leconfield Road, Nanpantan, APP/X2410/W/22/3304644, 5 May 2023, represented the local planning authority in an appeal concerning the proposed development of up to 30 dwellings. The main issues included the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the site and the local area and the effect on biodiversity.

Land at 8-10 Station Road, Shirehampton, Bristol BS11 9TT, APP/Z0116/W/22/3305852, 5 April 2023, represented the developer in an appeal involving the proposed development of 21 dwellings. This appeal raised numerous issues, including the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, heritage assets, and on green infrastructure and biodiversity.

Land North of Barking Road, Needham Market IP6 8EZ, APP/W3520/W/22/3308189, 31 March 2023, represented the developer in an appeal involving a proposal for up to 279 dwellings. In this appeal, the main issues included the impact of the proposal on highway safety, landscape character and the appearance of the surrounding area, and on residential amenity as a result of noise and light from an adjacent football club.

Land at Rush Lane, Dosthill, Tamworth, APP/R3705/W/22/3290788, 25 January 2023 represented the Rule 6 major construction suppliers in opposing the proposed development of up to 189 dwellings. Costs were awarded to the Rule 6 party against the appellant following its withdrawal of the appeal.

Planning Enforcement

Howard is involved in a wide range of enforcement work. He is skilled at providing clear advice and advocacy and is focused particularly on helping clients to find practical solutions in an area where the law can be particularly complex.

Appeals

Howard acts for both developers and local planning authorities in appeals to the Secretary of State against enforcement notices under s.174 and appeals against decisions to refuse lawful development certificates under s.195.

Recent appeals include:

Land at Graddfa Industrial Estate, Colliery Road, Llanbradach, Caerphilly, CF83 3 QS, CAS-01852-Y1C3K9 and CAS-01884-X4P5V8, 17 January 2024, represented the local planning authority in conjoined appeals against an enforcement and against the authority s decision to refuse to grant a lawful development certificate in relation to the development of a large industrial site.

Land at Brindwood House, Millthorpe Lane, Holmesfield, Derbyshire, APP/R1038/C/21/3288613 and 771, 4 January 2023, represented the local planning authority in appeals against enforcement notices involving development in the Green Belt

Land at 13-15 Walm Lane, Willesden Green, London, APP/T5150/C/18/3209760 and 1506, 19 April 2022, represented the developer in appeals against enforcement notices concerning the development of a restaurant

Cases

Howard represents clients in courts from the magistrates work to the High Court and the Court of Appeal. His work divides broadly

into (a) civil cases, such as s.289 appeals, applications for injunctions under s.178B, contempt proceedings, and appeals against s.215 notices, and (b) criminal prosecutions in the magistrates court and the Crown Court.

Recent cases include:

BromsgroveDistrictCouncilvSouthsideProperties(Midlands)Ltd(County Court, 2023), represented the local planning authority in its application for an interim injunction under s.187B to restrain the development of a site in the Green Belt for industrial and commercial purposes.

RvAlgulandN.R.AlgulLimited(Crown Court, 2023), represented the defendants in a complex prosecution concerning multiple enforcement notices.

R(Dhanji)vSecretaryofStateforLevellingUp,HousingandCommunitiesandHarrowCouncil(High Court, 2023), represented the claimant in conjoined s.288 and 289 appeals involving developments at his residential property.

HHM20LtdvManchesterCityCouncil(magistrates court, 2023), represented the appellant owner of a Grade II listed theatre challenging a s.215 notice that required extensive works.

Residential

Much of the development work Howard is involved in concerns residential development. In appeals he advises and acts for both developers and local planning authorities as well as interest groups and other objectors.

This focus has enabled Howard to obtain considerable experience of the issues which arise and his willingness to act for different parties helps him to understand issues and to pre-empt arguments made by other parties.

Awards

Accreditations

Major Scholarship, Inner Temple Exhibition Award, Inner Temple Lightfoot Prize, University of Cambridge Senior Scholarship and Tripos Prize, Trinity College, Cambridge

Memberships

Planning and Environment Bar Association (PEBA)

United Kingdom Environmental Law Association (UKELA) Inner Temple

Appointments

Howard is appointed to the Attorney General s C Panel of Counsel in London.

Qualifications

GDL and BPTC, City University, London MPhil, Trinity College, Cambridge (Distinction) BA (Hons), Trinity College, Cambridge (First Class)