Landmark Chambers

landmarkchambers.co.uk

Aaron Walder

Aaron is a highly regarded advocate and litigator, who has established a specialist practice in all forms of Property Law, along with matters suitable for the Chancery Division such as Company Law and Insolvency, over the last 20 years. Aaron has significant experience in appellate jurisdictions including appearing un-led in several groundbreaking and high profile cases in the Court of Appeal. Aaron is acknowledged and recommended in Chambers and Partners as a leading junior in Real Estate Litigation and is also consistently recommended by Legal 500 as a leading junior in Property Litigation, where he has been described as “a fantastic advocate”, “clearly highly intelligent and has a thoughtful approach to work”, and “very bright and knowledgeable and doesn’t go down without a fight”. His practice can be broken down into five key areas. Commercial Landlord and Tenant; Agricultural Land; Residential Landlord & Tenant; Real Property; and the interpretation of documents, and clauses within them, generally. He regularly gives talks and presentations on new and interesting developments within those fields. His specialist knowledge is recognised by his current appointment as the consultant editor of all volumes of Halsbury’s Laws: Landlord and Tenant. He has been involved in a number of high profile matters including acting for many well known developers and house builders, local authorities, and large infrastructure providers including HS2, Transport for London, Network Rail, the Highways Authority, the Environment Agency, as well as various departments of His Majesty’s Government. In many of his recent cases he has been instructed as sole counsel with silks appearing against him. Outside of the law, Aaron is a keen sportsman. He is a member of the MCC, Middlesex CCC, and a season ticket holder at Harlequins RFU. He also retains a season pass at the French ski resort of Les Deux Alpes, and tries to get there for as many weekends as work will allow during the winter.

Admas Habteslasie

Admas specialises in public and human rights law, property law and international law. Admas has a busy practice spanning public law (acting for claimants and interveners) and property law. Admas has extensive advocacy experience in the County Court, Tribunals and High Court, and regularly acts in high-profile and complex cases across his areas of specialism, including appellate litigation in the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. Prior to joining Chambers, Admas spent a year as the judicial assistant to Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court and worked in Syria and Jordan for the UN Refugee Agency. Admas speaks fluent Arabic.

Alex Shattock

Alex practises in public, planning and environmental law. He has a particular interest in public interest litigation. Alex is a public, planning and environmental law practitioner. Environmental law: Alex is ranked in the Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners for environmental law. He has been instructed on cases concerning climate change, pollution, environmental protests, pesticide regulation, protected habitats, invasive species, and animal rights. His clients include NGOs and campaigners such as Animal Equality, Campaign for National Parks, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, ClientEarth, Compassion in World Farming, the Environmental Law Foundation, Extinction Rebellion activists, Fossil Free London, the Good Law Project, Friends of the Earth, Rights: Community: Action, the RSPB, Transport Action Network, WWF-UK, and Urban Squirrels. Public law: Alex’s public law practice is broad and includes discrimination, human rights, education, community care and immigration matters. His clients include individuals (such as vulnerable children, destitute asylum seekers, migrants, homeless persons, and persons with disabilities), and public bodies such as state schools. Planning law: Alex’s clients include individuals, community groups, local authorities, consultants and developers. He has previously been ranked as one of Planning Magazine’s top-rated junior barristers under 35. Alex accepts direct access and pro bono instructions where appropriate. He is a legal reviewer for the charity Freedom From Torture and has done a lot of work for the Environmental Law Foundation. Alex has a doctorate in public international law from Cambridge, as well as law degrees from Oxford and LSE. During his doctorate he researched the legality of military intervention in civil wars. His previous work experience includes teaching economics, working in a secure prison, and working at the Law Commission on its driverless cars project. In his spare time he enjoys films, video games, and Scandinavian heavy metal music. He also enjoys picking up heavy objects and putting them back down again.

Alex Goodman KC

Alex Goodman KC is ranked in Legal 500 (2024) in tier 1 for all his core areas - planning, environment, local government, immigration, and administrative and human rights law and is described as “one of the best advocates of his generation”. He frequently appears in the higher courts and recently led the successful appeal about open space in the Supreme Court in Day v Shropshire. He was awarded the Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year Outstanding Achievement award in 2021. He was appointed to the EHRC’s ‘A’ Panel in 2019. He is the Joint Head of Landmark Chambers’ Public Law Group. Alex acts for any client: developers, individuals, local authorities, central government, NGOs. He is particularly known for public interest litigation. His broad practice includes: planning, environment, public law, public Interest litigation, human rights and civil liberties, immigration, discrimination and equality, Local Government, climate change, habitats and public inquiries. Alex wrote the Atkins Court Forms edition on Common Land and Village Greens. Alex helped set up Medical Justice, a charity working with immigration detainees (of which he was chair for five years) and a human rights NGO Kindred which he helped establish initially to organise advice to migrants in Northern France during a career break 2015-2018. Alex is a former councillor at the London Borough of Camden. International work As a fellow of the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law Alex has worked on the constitutions of Myanmar, Palestine and The Gambia. He is currently instructed on climate change cases in South America and East Africa.

Alistair Mills

Alistair is an associate member of Landmark Chambers. Alistair was called to the bar in 2011 and his areas of practice are planning, environmental, and public law. He is the author of Interpreting the NPPF: the New National Planning Policy Framework (Bath Publishing, 2018). In 2019 and 2020 he was ranked by Planning Magazine in the list of the top-rated planning juniors under 35. He has appeared in leading cases in the Court of Appeal. He has been a member of the Attorney General’s Panel of Civil Counsel (C Panel) since 2017 (moving up to the ‘B’ panel on 1 September 2021). The Legal 500 said of Alistair in 2020: “Alistair is a highly skilled advocate, he is very thorough with both submissions and advice, is very responsive to queries and is able to quickly digest complicated issues and pull out key points.” European Union Law Alistair’s practice raises matters of European Union law. In the context of planning and environmental law, the decision of the Court of Appeal in R (Shirley) v SSHCLG [2019] EWCA Civ 22 included arguments on the interpretation of the Air Quality Directive. The social security cases SSWP v MC [2019] UKUT 84 (AAC) and IG v SSWP [2016] UKUT 176 (AAC) concerned the EU harmonisation regime for social security benefits.

Andrew Byass

Andrew is a leading planning and public law specialist, whose experience includes general planning law, environmental law, compulsory purchase, and a broad range of public law matters. Andrew has a broad inquiry, court and advisory practice, which spans all areas of his expertise and includes experience at every level of court and tribunal. Having qualified as a barrister and solicitor in Australia in 1997, Andrew returned to the Bar in 2010. He has worked in various legal roles in both the private and public sector in Australia, the United States and the UK. Immediately prior to returning to the bar, Andrew worked as a senior solicitor in central government undertaking public law litigation. Andrew has a wide client base, which includes major developers and landowners, central government, NHS trusts and CCGs, local authorities, NGOs, and individuals. He is consistently ranked as one of the top junior planning barristers in the country. Recent case highlights include: • Appearing in Parliament for a group of Manchester authorities, in respect of their petition for the HS2 station at Manchester Piccadilly to be underground, rather than at the surface as proposed in the Phase 2b Bill. • Acting for Lendlease in respect of an application for planning permission for a major regeneration scheme in Tottenham, including the proposed provision of over 2,600 new homes, including in respect of the challenge to the grant of planning permission by Tottenham Hotspurs Football Club. • Acting for HS2 in respect of a large compensation claim for land acquired for the new high-speed railway, involving claims for both land acquisition and injurious affection and disturbance. • Acting for a developer promoting a 15 storey tall building in Camden, and successfully obtaining planning permission following a public inquiry. • Acting for a developer promoting a waste recycling facility on a site on the outskirts of Winchester, and successfully obtaining planning permission following a public inquiry. • Appearing in the Supreme Court in a highly significant case concerning conflict of laws, and in particular what applicable law should apply to a claim alleging involvement by the Government in the detention and mistreatment abroad of a foreign national.

Andrew Parkinson

Andrew's practice focusses on planning and environmental law principally related to housing, infrastructure, commercial/retail development and CPOs. Andrew specialises in planning and environmental law focussing on housing, commercial and energy-related schemes. He frequently appears at Inquiries and has appeared in Court at all levels up to the Supreme Court. Andrew is a specialist planning barrister with particular expertise in housing, commercial and energy development. The directories describe him as “a superb advocate, with excellent cross-examination skills” providing “written advice of the highest order” (Chambers and Partners), having “a complete mastery of the details of a case” and being “extremely popular with clients” (Legal 500). Andrew’s planning practice includes both Inquiry and Court-based work. He has an extensive client-base, including some of the UK’s leading developers and housebuilders, land promotors, landowners, Central Government and a number of local authorities. He is a member of the Attorney General’s “B” Panel of Counsel. Some of the schemes Andrew has acted on recently include: • Leverhulme Vision: Seven co-joined appeals for 788 new homes in the Green Belt. Appeared for the developer (with Christopher Boyle KC) at the Inquiry which spanned over seven weeks. • Chiswell Green: Co-joined Green Belt appeal for 721 new homes, recovered by the Secretary of State. Appeared for the local planning authority at the Inquiry. • Holborn Studios: Acting for the developer (with Sasha White KC) for this commercial-led development in London. • Many greenfield planning appeals: Regularly acts and appears at Inquiry for both developers and local planning authorities in edge of settlement planning appeals, particularly in the Green Belt, settlement gaps, and those raising landscape/heritage/highways issues. • High Street West Regeneration: Advising and appearing for the local planning authority in various challenges relating to this major mixed-use regeneration scheme (including almost 3,000 new homes). As well as this Inquiry work, Andrew also has a busy Court practice including numerous un-led appearances in the High Court and Court of Appeal. Notably, this has included: • Compton Parish Council v Guildford Borough Council [2019] EWHC 3242 (Admin) the leading case on “exceptional circumstances” for Green Belt release (for Martin Grant Homes). • Barton Park Estates v SSHCLG [2022] PTSR 169: Court of Appeal decision clarifying the I’m Your Man principle and the proper approach to determining whether there has been a material change of use (for the Secretary of State). • R. (Juden) v London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2021] EWHC 1368 (Admin): the leading case on the correct interpretation of NPPF policies protecting veteran trees (for the Claimant). • R. (on the application of Friends of the Earth Ltd and others) v Heathrow Airport Ltd [2020] UKSC 52: Supreme Court challenge to a third runway at Heathrow Airport (for Friends of the Earth). • Davison v Elmbridge Borough Council [2019] EWHC 1409 Admin: the leading case on the materiality of quashed planning decisions (for the Claimant).

Andy Creer

The primary areas of Andy's practice are real property, commercial Landlord and Tenant, and the Electronic Communications Code. She works for institutional landlords like the BA Pension Trustees, Lunar SARL, U&I and BNP Paribas, and for many high-profile tenants including Leon Restaurants, Hermes, Ted Baker and for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. She has trial experience of opposed and unopposed lease renewals under the 1954 Act. She has advised on expert evidence and merits on dilapidations claims on office, industrial and warehousing, and mediated a £3.5m dilapidations claim involving Ford Castle. Many of Andy’s cases involve site development whether it be specific issues like the enforceability of restrictive covenants, rights to lights claims or site aggregation strategies. She has conducted expert determinations (both as a party and as an expert) in cases involving the interpretation of lease provisions and disputed overage clauses and has acted as a legal assessor in an arbitration. She has advised the National Trust, Her work on property damage has included sinkholes and landslips. She ran the first trial in England & Wales involving Japanese knotweed and her subsequent articles on liability have been cited by DEFRA (Risk & Policy Analysts Report, September 2020) and in the latest RICS Guidance “Japanese Knotweed & Residential Property” (1st edition Jan 2022). Recommended as a leading property junior by both Chambers UK and Legal 500, Andy is noted for her excellent forensic analysis skills and incisive witness handling. One expert building surveyor compared the experience to being “cross-examined by a smiling Doberman”. Andy came to the Bar after a successful career in industry, latterly as the director of an international manufacturing company. This experience, allied with her first degree in business and finance, means she provides clients with commercially-focused advice. In her spare time her creative outlet is writing quizzes and compiling puzzles. Her ‘dingbats’ have become a popular Christmas tradition. Reported Cases: • Panton & Ors v Brophy & Ors[2019] EWHC 1534 (Ch) – obtained a vesting order for new trustees of the Thames Tradesmen Rowing Club • London Borough of Camden v Morath & Ors [2019] UKUT 0193 (LC) – instructed via Advocate (BPBU) on behalf of a leaseholder seeking to resist a variation of her lease under s.35 of LTA 1987. • Evolution (Shinfield) LLP & Ors v BT PLC [2019] UKUT 0127 (LC) – first trial of a claim to determine an agreement under Part 6 of the New Code (led by Brie Stevens-Hoare QC) • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council v Punj Lloyd Ltd [2018] EWHC 3776 (Admin) – successful respondent to an appeal by way of case stated in respect of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 where the Council relied on a landlord’s specifically enforceable obligation against a guarantor to take an overriding lease to claim £1.2m in rates. • Red & White Services Ltd v Phil Anslow Ltd [2018] EWHC 1699 (Ch) – endorsement of a costs cap for future incurred costs. • Williams v Network Rail Infrastructure Limited [2017] UK CC Cardiff (02.02.17) – on proximate nuisance caused by Japanese knotweed. • Farrar v Leongreen Ltd[2017] EWCA Civ 2211 – on whether a claim for mesne profits and a claim for possession against a trespasser are based on the same cause of action (‘claims in trespass’). • Spielplatz Ltd v Pearson[2015] EWCA Civ 804 – consideration of annexation of structures following the House of Lords decision in Elitestone v Morris [1977] 1 WLR 687. • Thandi v Sands [2014] EWHC 2378 (Ch) – dispute over beneficial interest in portfolio of 16 properties following bankruptcy. • Swan Housing Association Ltd v Gill [2012] EWHC 3129 (QB) - on the county court’s jurisdiction in cases involving adverse possession in light of the Land Registration Act 2002. • Aksu v LB Enfield [2012] EWCA Civ 60 – renewal tenancy opposed on ground (b). • Murphy v Wyatt [2011] EWCA Civ 408 – whether the Mobile Homes Act 1983 provided security of tenure retrospectively to a tenancy which did not preclude the siting of a caravan on a 1.7 acre site. • Chelsea Building Society v Nash [2010] EWCA Civ 1247 – effect of a lender’s settlement with one debtor on their joint liability.

Anjoli Foster

Anjoli has been ranked third in Planning Magazine’s list of top-rated planning barrister’s under-35 and eighth in the top-rated juniors. Clients describe her as a real pleasure to instruct, and that she leads client teams with sensitivity and clear direction. Anjoli's practice focuses on all aspects of planning and environmental law, including housing, commercial and retail, infrastructure, energy, compulsory purchase and enforcement work. She frequently appears in planning appeals and in the Planning Court. Her clients include a range of national and regional housebuilders and land promoters, central government, local planning authorities, and environmental groups. Anjoli is consistently rated as one of the top junior planning barristers in the country. She is ranked by Planning Magazine as the 2nd ‘Top-Rated Junior Under 35’ and the 8th ‘Top Rated Junior’. She was also selected by a panel of judges as one of The Planner’s Women of Influence. Her practice focuses on all aspects of planning law, including housing, commercial and retail development, infrastructure, energy and compulsory purchase. She frequently appears in planning appeals, local plan examinations and hearings in the High Court and Court of Appeal. Her clients include a range of national and regional housebuilders and land promoters, central government, and local planning authorities. Some of the notable high-profile cases Anjoli has been instructed on include: • Use Class E and new permitted development rights: instructed by the government in the High Court and Court of Appeal to defend the widely-discussed legal challenge to the amendments to the General Permitted Development Order and the Use Classes Order, which introduced new permitted development rights to build upwards and the new Use Class E. • Brighton Marina: acted in the significant public inquiry into the proposed development of 1,000 residential units at the Brighton Marina, consisting of nine buildings ranging from 8 storeys to 28 storeys in height. The decision was called-in by the Secretary of State and was one of the first appeal decisions by the Secretary of State on the approach to the updated NPPF on design matters. • Newcastle Quayside: appeared in the public inquiry, and subsequently the High Court and Court of Appeal, concerning a dispute over proposals for 289 apartments in a 14 storey building on the iconic Newcastle Quayside. The contentious matters particularly included quality of design, impact on heritage assets and living conditions. • Holocaust Memorial, Westminster: represented the Government in a legal challenge to the decision-making on the “called in” planning application for the UK Holocaust Memorial in Victoria Tower Gardens. • Barnet House: a public inquiry into proposals for mixed residential and commercial development in Whetstone town centre, London, consisting of several buildings, including a 14 storey tower. • Tenterden, Kent: promoted a scheme for 145 houses, country park and sports pitches on greenfield land. Successfully represented the developer at the three-week planning inquiry, the legal challenge to the grant of permission, and the associated public rights of way inquiry. • Surge of Power (Jen Reid) statue, Bristol: represented the appellant in an appeal into the installation of a statue of a black female protestor, following the toppling of the statue of slave-trader Edward Colston. The appeal raised highly topical issues of contested heritage and diversity and inclusivity in public spaces. • Great Wolf Water Park, Bicester: acted in this substantial three-week public inquiry concerning proposals for the country’s largest water park. Due to public interest this inquiry was streamed live on YouTube, receiving over 1,000 viewers per day. • Kennington, Lambeth: promoted over 250 residential units, including a 29-storey tower, in central London, on behalf of the developer at a planning inquiry. • Mornings Mill Farm, Wealden: represented the developer in an inquiry promoting proposals for comprehensive development including 700 houses, 8,600 sqm of employment floorspace, a medical centre and a school. In her spare time, Anjoli is an active tennis player, representing her county of Warwickshire, as well as the All England Lawn Tennis Club and Cumberland Lawn Tennis Club. Prior to joining Landmark Chambers, Anjoli was a Law Scholar at Keble College, Oxford University. She graduated with a first-class degree and went on to obtain a distinction in the Bachelor of Civil Law also at Keble College, Oxford. She also spent a year working at the Law Commission.

Ashley Bowes

Dr Ashley Bowes specialises in all aspects of the development and use of land, including planning, property, licensing and local government law. Ashley has particular expertise in resolving public access to land disputes, involving the sub-specialisms of rights of way, village greens, commons and highways law. He is a member of the Attorney General’s B Panel of Junior Counsel to the Crown, in which capacity he represents the UK Government in his areas of specialism and was shortlisted by Chambers and Partners as Environment/Planning Junior of the Year 2018. Ashley provides legal and strategic advice at every stage of the development consent process: from navigating local plan examinations, handling access and restrictive covenant issues, through to contested planning applications and appeals and onto litigation in the courts. Ashley is the General Editor of Sweet & Maxwell’s Journal of Planning & Environment Law and the author of Oxford University Press’s textbook, A Practical Approach to Planning Law, as well as being a contributor to Butterworths Planning Law Service, the Routledge Handbook of Comparative Planning Law and to Cornerstone on the Planning Court (2nd Ed). In 2021, Ashley contributed to the Landscape Institute’s Technical Guidance Note 02/21 Assessing Landscape Value Outside National Designations. In 2019, Ashley was co-opted to the Planning and Environment Bar Association Committee. He was elected as Treasurer in 2024. In 2020 he coordinated PEBA’s response to the Government’s Independent Review of Administrative Law. Ashley brings his diverse industry experience as a local authority member, running a planning consultancy and lecturing in property law to provide: • Early advice on likelihood of obtaining permissions or licenses • Tailored consultations on design and content of applications • Responding to local authority and resident objections • Advice on conducting public consultations • Promoting applications at hearings and public inquiries • Challenging adverse decisions through the courts • Amending permissions or licenses • Tailored in-house advisory work (for example, assisting a local authority prepare a local plan, or undertake a SHMAA) • Specialist in-house training (for example, public inquiry training) • Conference case law updates (for example to the RTPI annual conference).

Barney McCay

Barney has a particular interest in public, planning and environmental, EU, public procurement and state aid law. Barney accepts instructions across all Chambers' areas of practice. Barney’s current and recent work includes: • National Lottery litigation: Acting for the Gambling Commission in a challenge to its award of the Fourth National Lottery Licence (led by Sarah Hannaford KC). The claim was dismissed on the basis that the claimant did not have standing. See IGT v The Gambling Commission [2023] EWHC 1961, [2023] EWHC 1420 (TCC) and [2023] EWHC 2226 (TCC). Press coverage here. • Supreme Court homelessness intervention: Acting for Crisis in a strategic intervention that concerned the relief that should be granted after a local authority has breached its “full” homelessness duty (led by Justin Bates). See Croydon LBC v Imam (Crisis intervening) [2023] UKSC 45. Press coverage here. • Asylum accommodation challenge: Acting for the claimant in a challenge to the Home Secretary’s decision to use a former RAF airfield to accommodate asylum seekers (led by Alex Goodman KC). See R (Clarke-Holland) & Ors v SSHD & Ors [2023] EWHC 3140 (Admin). Press coverage here. • Procurement and subsidy control: Advising and acting for economic operators and contracting authorities (local and central government) on the procurement and subsidy control implications of development agreements, land acquisitions, supplier relief, and funding arrangements. • Planning judicial review: Acting as sole counsel in proceedings before the High Court which challenged an authority’s decision to grant permission for restaurant development. The claim was successful. See Ariyo v Richmond LBC [2023] EWHC 2278 (Admin). • EU-derived and human rights: Advising a national charity on the implications of the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill for environmental protections, and acting on behalf of the Aire Centre in deportation proceedings involving EUSS issues before the Upper Tribunal. • NHS trust funding: Acting for an interested party to resist a claim for judicial review that concerned the circumstances in which an NHS trust was entitled to section 106 contributions (led by Zack Simons). The claim was dismissed. See R (Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust) v Malvern Hills DC [2023] EWHC 1995 (Admin). Press coverage here. • Portland ERF Inquiry: Acting as sole counsel for two R6 parties at a three-week public inquiry which considered whether an energy recovery facility should be constructed on the Isle of Portland in close proximity to the Bibby Stockholm Barge and Jurassic Coast World Heritage Site. Press coverage here. Barney graduated from Cambridge with a degree in History and Politics (First Class). He was awarded Gray’s Inn’s top scholarships to undertake the GDL (Distinction) and Bar Course (Outstanding). Barney also has an LLM from the UPenn (Distinction) and was awarded/offered a Thouron Fellowship and Fulbright Award. Before joining Landmark, Barney worked in competition and state aid policy and as a political adviser to an MP. After converting to law, Barney worked as a Judicial Assistant to Lord Justice Bean in the Court of Appeal on cases which involved media, equality, public, information, commercial, and EU law.

Ben Fullbrook

Ben specialises in planning, public and environmental law. He is ranked for Planning Law by Chambers and Partners and listed as a Leading Junior by Legal 500. He is also appointed to the Attorney General’s B Panel of counsel. Ben regularly appears in the High Court and at planning inquiries and examinations. He has also appeared unled in the Court of Appeal and acted in matters in the Supreme Court. Ben’s clients have included individual claimants and defendants, developers, environmental groups, local authorities and government departments Ben’s notable recent cases include: • Moakes v Canterbury City Council [2024] EWHC 1272 (Admin) – a challenge to a wine-related development in Canterbury which focused on inter alia the question of consultation and prejudice. Ben acted for the claimant. • R (Greenpeace) v Secretary of State for Energy Security and Climate Change [2023] EWHC 2608 (Admin) - a leading case on Strategic Environmental Assessment in the oil and gas context. Ben acted for the successful Secretary of State, led by Richard Turney KC. • R (Widdington Parish Council) v Uttlesford District Council [2023] EWHC 1709 (Admin) - a claim relating to inter alia the treatment of “fall back” development as a material consideration in planning decisions. Ben acted for the successful claimant. • R (Cabinet Office) v Chair of UK Covid-19 Inquiry [2023] EWHC 1702 (Admin) - a high profile challenge by the Cabinet Office to the decision of the Covid-19 Inquiry to require the former Prime Minister and others to provide unreacted WhatsApp messages to the Inquiry. • R (FMA) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 1579 (Admin) - a challenge raising issues of importance relating to Home Office immigration guidance and Article 6 ECHR. • R (Friends of West Oxfordshire Cotswolds) v West Oxfordshire District Council [2023] EWHC 901 (Admin) - A claim relating to the discharge of conditions attached to a planning permission. Ben acted for the successful claimant. • R (Humane League UK) v Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs [2023] EWHC 1243 (Admin) - a challenge relating to the keeping of meat chickens in the UK. Ben acted as junior counsel to the successful Defendant. • R (Ibrar) v Secretary of State for Levelling Up Housing and Communities [2022] EWHC 3425 (Admin) - a leading case on the procedure for challenging planning enforcement appeal decisions. • R (ALO) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] ACD 120 - a claim relating to the refusal of entry clearance for an Afghan translator on national security grounds. • Warwick DC v Secretary of State for Levelling Up Housing and Communities [2022] EWHC 3425 (Admin) - a leading case on the interpretation of NPPF Green Belt Policy. • R (Swire) v Canterbury City Council [2022] JPL 1026 (Admin) a one of the most significant Planning Court cases of 2022 relating to the meaning of the words “in accordance with”in planning permissions. Ben was led by Dan Kolinsky KC. • R (Elan-Cane) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] 2 WLR 133 (SC) - Ben was instructed by Fair Play for Women to apply to intervene in the Supreme Court’s hearing SSHD’s refusal to include a non-gendered marker on a passport, as an alternative to male and female. • Finney v Welsh Ministers [2020] 1 All ER 1034 (CA) - a challenge to the interpretation of s.73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and one of the most significant planning judgments of 2019. Ben successfully represented the Appellant as sole counsel. Ben also successfully resisted an application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. • Dulgheriu v Ealing LBC [2020] 1 WLR 609 (CA) - a challenge to an order by the local council excluding protestors from the vicinity of an abortion clinic. Ben acted for the Claimant (led by Philip Havers KC). The claim raised significant issues in relation to Articles 9, 10 and 11 ECHR. • R (Langton) v SSEFRA [2019] 4 WLR 151 (CA) - a challenge to the Secretary of State’s policy on badger culling, raising important points about the Conservation of Species and Habitats Regulations (led by Richard Turney). Ben also has extensive experience in public inquiries having acted as junior counsel to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) in 2018-2022 and for individuals involved with the COVID-19 Inquiry. Prior to joining Landmark, Ben worked for five years as a civil service fast streamer at the Ministry of Defence. His work spanned various aspects of defence and security policy and included liaison with foreign governments, dealing with public law challenges, and the application of international human rights law. Ben was also involved with the government’s effort to plan for the 2012 London Olympics.

Brooke Lyne

Brooke is a specialist property barrister with a successful practice covering real estate matters and commercial and residential landlord and tenant disputes. Brooke recently appeared (being led) for the successful landlord in the Supreme Court in Aviva Investors Ground Rent GP Limited v Williams & ors [2023] UKSC 6. Brooke was recently described in the legal directories as "razor sharp in her legal analysis and advice, Brooke’s advocacy style is pragmatic, attentive and highly effective." She is frequently called upon to advise or act in complex matters often involving esoteric areas of property law. For example, Brooke has advised on security of tenure under the Rent (Agriculture) Act 1976 and the Rent Act 1977; and she advised and acted in a claim for possession of freehold land arising from non-payment of a rent charge. Brooke is also often called upon to advise on complex issues relating to the proper construction of leases or other documents. In recent years, Brooke has worked on a number of cases involving trespass to the roofs and external parts of iconic buildings by urban explorers looking to obtain social media content and notoriety. In 2022 Brooke successfully obtained an interim injunction in the High Court to protect the Centre Point Tower in Central London from urban explorers. The matter is expected to proceed to a final hearing in 2023. Brooke is regularly instructed in a wide range of commercial landlord and tenant disputes. Brooke has acted in numerous commercial rent arrears cases; lease renewals and dilapidations claims. Brooke is currently involved in several complex forfeiture claims involving high-value commercial premises. Brooke has extensive experience of leasehold disputes in the First-tier Tribunal, particularly those involving cladding and remediation works. Brooke has been instructed to advise various clients on the implications of the Building Safety Act 2022 and is involved in some of the first applications for remediation orders to reach the tribunal in 2023. Brooke recently appeared (being led by Simon Allison) for the successful landlord in the Supreme Court in Aviva Investors Ground Rent GP Limited v Williams & ors [2023] UKSC 6; a case concerning the scope of the tribunal’s jurisdiction in leasehold service charge disputes about the apportionment of service charges. In 2020, Brooke acted for the successful landlord in Trecarrell House Limited v Rouncefield [2020] EWCA Civ 760 (being led by Justin Bates); a case about whether a landlord’s failure to provide a tenant with a gas safety certificate prior to occupation was fatal to the landlord’s ability to ever serve a s.21 notice. Brooke regularly films webinars, gives lectures and writes about property law issues. In the past year she has covered a range of topics including forfeiture, interim possession orders, orders for sale and possession and lease renewals of business tenancies. Brooke is the co-author of On Your Feet: A Practical Guide to Civil Advocacy.

Camilla Lamont

Camilla is a leading senior junior who specialises in all aspects of real estate litigation, but with a particular focus on commercial property and property development. She is also an established mediator. Camilla has been consistently recognised as a leading junior in real estate litigation by Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners, and as a national and global leader by WWL UK Bar and WWL Global Real Estate. She has twice been named Real Estate Junior of the Year at the Chambers UK Bar Awards, in both 2017 and 2021, and is currently ranked as a Tier 1 senior junior in real estate litigation. Camilla has a well established reputation in the field as a user friendly adviser and advocate who combines intellectual acumen with an understanding of the commercial realities facing clients. Her clients include developers, institutional landlords and national retailers as well as individuals. She has appeared in high profile property cases in both the High Court and Court of Appeal. Her practice covers all aspects of real property including conveyancing and title disputes. She regularly acts for clients in relation to development agreements as well as options, restrictive covenants, easements and rights to light that affect property development. She also handles property related environmental and professional negligence claims. Her landlord and tenant practice encompasses, amongst other things, dilapidations, tenant default and insolvency, forfeiture, break clauses, rent review, service charges, ESG and 1954 Act renewals. Camilla also has considerable experience in disputes relating to the management of both residential and commercial premises. Camilla has previously held posts as a tutor and lecturer of land law, equity & trusts and commercial leases at Oxford University. In 2019 she was appointed a fellow of the Society for Advanced Legal Studies (University of London) and is a member of its advisory board. She has published widely in her field and has been an editor of Hill & Redman on Landlord and Tenant since 2002. Appointments As the former Chair of both Landmark Chambers’ Equality and Diversity and Wellbeing Committee and Retention of Women Working Group, and a current member of Chambers’ Management Committee, she takes a keen interest in diversity, inclusion and wellbeing at the Bar. Camilla is also committed to pro bono work which she accepts through Advocate (formerly the Bar Pro Bono Unit). She has been one of Advocate’s Senior Reviewers for property and landlord and tenant cases for a number of years. She has previously sat on the Independent Decision making Body (IDB) of the Bar Standards Board and served as Vice Chair of its Qualifications Committee Camilla has been a qualified mediator since 2009 and accepts instructions to act as a mediator in relation to property disputes. She is on the Chancery Bar Association’s panel of pro bono mediators.

Carine Patry KC

Carine Patry KC is a public and administrative law specialist. In addition to her specialism in public and administrative law, Carine also has a wide-ranging planning and environmental law practice. Prior to commencing practice she worked at the New York State Defenders Association (New York Office) and also completed a stage at the European Court of Human Rights. Carine was appointed to the Attorney General’s A Panel of Junior Counsel to the Crown and she continues to act for the government in significant cases. Carine is a CEDR-accredited mediator. Carine is an IPSEA (Independent Panel for Special Educational Advice) adviser and representative. Carine is fluent in French.

Charles Bishop

Charles practises across all areas of public, planning, infrastructure and environmental law. Charles practises across all areas of public, planning (including infrastructure) and environmental law. He has appeared in a number of high-profile cases. His notable work includes: • COVID-19 care homes challenge – Acting for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and Public Health England in R (Gardner) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2022] PTSR 1338, [2022] EWHC 967 (Admin), a policy challenge relating to certain decisions around care homes at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic (in a team led by Sir James Eadie KC). The case was listed as one of The Lawyer’s top 20 cases of 2020. There were two interlocutory hearings concerning applications for specific disclosure (including of WhatsApp messages) and cross-examination ([2021] EWHC 2422 (Admin)), and the use of expert evidence and parliamentary materials ([2021] EWHC 2946 (Admin)). The case was widely reported in the press, including by the BBC, Sky News, the Telegraph, the Guardian, and the Daily Mirror. • Brexit – Acting for the proposed intervener, the3million, in a judicial review claim brought by the Independent Monitoring Authority for the Citizens’ Rights Agreements (led by Galina Ward KC and instructed by the Public Law Project) against the Secretary of State for the Home Department in respect of her implementation of the EU Settlement Scheme. • Napier Barracks – Acting for the claimant in a successful challenge to the Town and Country Planning (Napier Barracks) Special Development Order 2021 which grants planning permission for use of an army barracks in Kent as asylum accommodation (led by Alex Goodman with Alex Shattock) in R (Hough) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWHC 1635 (Admin). Lieven J held that the Secretary of State had breached the public sector equality duty in making the Order. The case was reported on the front page of the Sunday Mirror, in the Guardian and Planning Magazine. An appeal has been lodged in respect of other matters. • Rent repayment orders – Acting for the intervener, Safer Renting, in Rakusen v Jepsen [2022] 1 WLR 324, the leading case on rent repayment orders under the Housing and Planning Act 2016 (led by Justin Bates). Permission to appeal was granted by the Supreme Court in May 2022. • East Anglia ONE North offshore windfarm – Acting as junior counsel for the claimant SASES (led by Richard Turney) in a judicial review of the grant of development consent for the East Anglia ONE North and East Anglia Two offshore windfarms (reported in the East Anglian Daily Times). Permission has been granted on all grounds. Charles is a trustee and the Secretary of Rainbow Migration, a charity that supports LGBTQI+ people through the asylum and immigration system. Immediately prior to starting at Landmark, Charles provided research assistance in relation to a wide variety of public law cases, including R (Miller) v College of Policing [2020] 4 All ER 31. He was also the Legal and Parliamentary Officer at the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA) from 2019-2020 where he provided analysis on all areas of immigration, asylum and nationality law. He regularly advocated on behalf of ILPA members in high-level meetings with politicians, the civil service, the judiciary and other NGOs. In particular, he led on ILPA’s work relating to the ending of free movement following Brexit, including with Parliamentary lobbying on the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020, the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Act 2020 and various pieces of secondary legislation. Charles regularly assisted with ILPA’s Strategic Legal Fund. He is well-placed to advise NGOs and charities on strategic legal challenges. Before the Bar course, Charles worked as a paralegal at Wesley Gryk Solicitors, a leading immigration firm, where he assisted with cases spanning the full range of immigration, asylum and nationality law. He previously volunteered with the Anti Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit (ATLEU), Stonewall Housing, the Communities Empowerment Network and Citizens Advice. During his studies, he spent a year abroad at the Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris II) and undertook an internship at the Académie Diplomatique Internationale.

Christopher Boyle KC

Christopher specialises in Town and Country Planning, Compulsory Purchase, Environmental and Infrastructure Law. Christopher was called to the Bar (Lincoln's Inn) in November 1994 and he was appointed King's Counsel in March 2013. He joined Landmark Chambers in 2007. For nearly 30 years, he has specialised in Town and Country Planning, Compulsory Purchase, Environmental and Infrastructure Law, acting principally for developers, landowners and scheme promoters. For over 25 years, Christopher's practice been dominated by the promotion of major housing schemes across the country, at section 78 and local plan. These include past and present promotion of 2,000 houses at Sayor Common, 1000 in Cambridge, 4,500 in the Wirral and many schemes of around 100-500 units taking advantage of para 11 of the NPPF. Christopher has a recognised expertise in the issues of housing, 5-year land supply local plan and neighbourhood plan matters. At Dawlish he defeated the first ever neighbourhood plan to reach examination. His case Woodcock Holdings v SSCLG represents a milestone case in the approach to the then para. 14 of the NPPF. He regularly appears for landowner and developer interests in promoting strategic sites. His clients include many of the Country’s largest house-builders: Barratt/David Wilson, Berkeley Homes, Crest Nicholson, Persimmon, Croudace, Gleeson Developments, Wates and Rydon Homes among others. He also regularly acts for landpromoters landed estate and landowners directly promoting their own sites. His work with the Prince’s foundation and the Build Better Build Beautiful commission gives him an insight into the government’s ‘beauty agenda’ and landowner legacy scheme and Design coding. Town centre regeneration CPOs and retail work has encompassed protecting and extending retail landownership for major investor/owners across the country. Christopher was a founder member of the Compulsory Purchase Association, wrote the PEBA Consultation response to the IPC/DCO process in the 2008 Act and has been involved throughout his practice in significant infrastructure promotion. This has included hybrid bill (Central Railways), TWA (eg the Second Tyne Tunnel; the £500m Mersey Gateway Bridge), and conventional planning and highways CPO.

Christopher Jacobs

Christopher has a mixed public law, property and planning practice. Christopher advises and represents clients at all levels from the Supreme Court to the First-tier Tribunal. Christopher has particular experience in public inquiries. Most notably he currently represents 156 subpostmaster Core Participants in the Post Office Horizon IT public inquiry. He has also represented core institutional and complainant core participants in IICSA and the Brook House Inquiry. In property law, Christopher has acted in a number of cases involving water courses and riparian rights and specialises in this area. In planning law matters, Christopher has acted in a number of significant public inquiries dealing with compulsory purchase orders and urban regeneration schemes. He acted for the objectors to a regeneration scheme in the Aylesbury Estate CPO Public Inquiry. He also acts in relation to judicial and statutory review of planning decisions.

Dan Kolinsky KC

Dan's practice covers planning, local government, public law and rating. He is an experienced Supreme Court advocate and is noted for his advocacy, teamwork and clarity. Dan sits as a Deputy High Court judge and Recorder. He is a CEDR-accredited mediator. Dan is an experienced advocate at all levels of the Court system, tribunals, and inquiries. His clients include central government, local government, developers, interest groups, ratepayers, commercial organisations, individuals, and NGOs. He has appeared in leading cases on affordable housing, planning contributions, green belt and the interpretation of planning policy including two planning Supreme Court cases. He has appeared in six Supreme Court rating cases. Planning Dan is an experienced planning inquiry advocate. He has extensive experience in High Court planning cases for claimants, developers, local and central government. He has particular expertise in regeneration projects in London, for example the regeneration of the Elephant and Castle (Southwark) and High Road West Masterplan (Haringey) and affordable housing viability, for example representing LB Islington in the Parkhurst Road case. He accepts instructions on behalf of developers, local planning authorities, statutory bodies, local groups or any other participant in the planning process. He has appeared as advocate in the Supreme Court in two recent cases; Lambeth v Secretary of State, and R (Samuel Smith Old Brewery) v North Yorkshire County Council. He was advocate for the successful local planning authority in the leading case on NHS planning contributions R (University Hospitals of Leicester NHS) v Harborough District Council. He advises planning authorities in respect of local plans and infrastructure projects. Rating Dan frequently appears in non-domestic rating cases acting for ratepayer, valuation officers and billing authorities. He has considerable experience in cases relating to whether the rating list entries are correct, exemption issues, completion notices, unoccupied rates disputes, valuation issues and collection/enforcement. He has appeared in six recent Supreme Court cases (Nuffield Health, Cardtronics, Iceland, Monk, Woolway and UKI Kingsway). He was made an honorary member of the Rating Surveyors’ Association in 2017. He has recorded a series of rating podcasts linked below: • The Supreme Court’s decision in the ATM cases – key points • Completion Notices • Using judicial review to bring rating challenges • Preparing expert evidence in rating cases �� Collection and enforcement of non-domestic rates • Home offices and non-domestic rates • Rating law history. Environment Dan has extensive experience of High Court challenges to complex environmental projects (including waste facilities) – acting for and against the decision making bodies. Public Law (including Local Government) Dan is a versatile public lawyer who has acted in a wide range of areas across all aspects of judicial review, local government, regulatory law, welfare benefits and funding challenges. He is a suitable choice for a case which needs an experienced advocate who is willing to work as part of a team and bring clarity and focus to the oral presentation of a case. He advised the Airports Commission throughout his process. Before he took silk, he served on the Attorney General’s Panel of Junior Counsel (A, B and C panels) for 12 years. Advocacy before Tribunals Dan has extensive experience appearing in before the Upper Tribunal and First-tier Tribunals across a full range of areas including education, care standards and all aspects of social security law. Mediation and Other Projects Dan is interested in mediation (participating or acting as mediator) and is willing to be considered for specific projects which required an experienced KC with his skill set and experience. Approach to Work Dan’s style is collaborative and unstuffy. He wants to understand what his clients are seeking to achieve and establish clear parameters about what is realistic. He manages his time to deliver the best service possible for his clients. Life outside of Chambers Dan is a keen cyclist and enjoys walking. He has been involved in school governance for 18 years and was the Chair of the Board of Directors of BMAT Education, an 11 school multi-academy trust based in Essex and East London.

David Nicholls

David is a property litigator, with more than 20 years’ experience as trial counsel and appellate advocate in all manner of real estate disputes. His practice encompasses the whole range of property litigation, with a particular focus on commercial property. David’s busy practice focuses on commercial property litigation. He is frequently instructed as a trial advocate in relation to a wide range of property disputes. David specialises in disputes relating to: • land ownership (adverse possession, boundary disputes, trusts of land, and land registration and conveyancing issues) • land rights (restrictive covenants, easements, profits, highways, and party wall matters) • landlord and tenant (commercial and residential) • commercial property (including property development, insolvency, mortgages, charging orders and securitisation). David is particularly interested in competing land rights and the resolution of disputes relating to the development and use of land, acting for developers and other landowners in the strategic planning and successful implementation of the potential development of land, using the tools of litigation where necessary. Such cases typically involve rights such as easements and restrictive covenants and may require obtaining necessary the consents. In one recent High Court case (2022), David successfully acted for the commercial leaseholder of a development site who sought a declaration that the freeholder had unreasonably refused consent for the proposed development. David is often instructed in the context of neighbour disputes, whether residential or commercial. Typical cases may concern land ownership, such as boundary disputes and adverse possession claims; or they may involve building work, such as party wall cases. David is a co-author of ‘Party Walls: Law and Practice’ (4th ed.) and has significant expertise in party wall matters, including appealing awards and obtaining urgent injunctive relief. In one case, David successfully obtained a mandatory injunction after a four-day trial requiring the removal of the offending structure (Ormiston-Kilsby v Fattahi (2019) (Oxford County Court). David’s expertise extends to all aspects of real estate law and landlord and tenant law, including insolvency and professional negligence disputes. David has many years’ experience in dealing with land securities such as mortgages and charging orders, and he is fluent in relation to the application of insolvency law to property disputes. He acts for companies and individuals, bank and office-holders. With regard to landlord and tenant disputes, typical instructions include: • Representing a tenant of a flagship store in Central London in connection with its multi-million pound claim against the landlord for multiple breaches of the lease (2025). • Acting for a commercial landlord in a three-day trial opposing a tenant’s claim that the landlord had unreasonably refused consent for change of use (2022). • No Curfew Limited v Feiges Limited [2018] EWHC 744 (Ch) (High Court): David acted for the successful Defendant in this challenge by the landlord to a rent-review arbitration on the ground of mistake. David is particularly adept at responding swiftly to urgent instructions, including last minute applications for injunctive relief, or even last minute instructions as trial counsel. For instance: • In June 2023, David successfully obtained an urgent injunction with less than 24 hours’ notice to restrain an imminent sale of development land in a complex and long-standing contractual dispute. • In September 2022, David was instructed to take over a right of way case four days before the start of a three-day trial when the previous barrister was taken ill. The case involved nearly a dozen witnesses and half a dozen experts, plus documentation exceeding 20 lever arch files. David was able to achieve a successful outcome for his clients in their claim which concerned the weight and width of vehicles that could use a 200m track providing access to a Welsh sheep farm (Lamport v Jones (2022) (Cardiff County Court). David is regularly instructed in the Tribunals and Courts in relation to claims for rights of way and on land registration issues, such as adverse possession. David is the consultant editor of two volumes of Halsbury’s Laws: Auction (vol. 4 (2020)) and Mortgage (vol. 77 (2021)).

David Holland KC

David's practice encompasses all aspects of property litigation, costs and professional negligence. The core of David's practice is all forms of property litigation. He also practises in the areas of professional negligence and costs. David is one of the best known practitioners in his field. He has immense experience of litigation and advocacy in front of all types of court and tribunal all the way up to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. He acts for all types of clients in all types of disputes within his specialist areas. His clients range from individual householders to the largest property developers and landowners. He has represented local authorities, firms of solicitors and representative bodies. David can accept instructions under the Bar Council’s Public Access scheme. David has been ranked in the legal guidebooks as a leading practitioner in his fields for many years and is currently ranked in the highest band/tier in both Chambers and Partners and Legal 500 for property litigation. He was previously named the Real Estate Silk of the Year at the Chambers and Partners Bar Awards. In the Chambers and Partners Guide 2024 for Real Estate Litigation, David is described as “A superb advocate and lovely to deal with." and as “the barrister that you want by your side for highly complex matters. He is an excellent advocate and brilliant when dealing with cross-examination”. In the Costs Litigation section of the Chambers and Partners Guide he is described as “a master in the courtroom - he's an incredible advocate” and as having “a great ability to cut through masses of detail and find a way to the heart of the case. He is fantastic both in his paperwork and on his feet in court." David sits as a Deputy High Court Judge in the Chancery Division. He is also a Recorder and sits as a part-time Judge of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber). He also acts as an arbitrator and expert. David is a member of both the MCC and Surrey CCC. He is also an Arsenal season ticket holder.

David Smith

David's advocacy and advisory work on behalf of both the public and the private sectors focussing on planning and related matters. Planning David's practice has developed from a specialism in both landlord and tenant and planning. His planning inquiry work embraces both shorter and longer public inquiries. For the longer inquiries this tends to involve multi-disciplinary teams of consultants ranging from the technical to the creative. His inquiry and advisory work covers a wide range of topics and has embraced a considerable number of mineral proposals (both deep mine and opencast), many road proposals, a number of deep sea ports, several major airport inquiries, and a proposal for a large intermodal freight exchange. David’s inquiry work also features many aspects regularly found in complex Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) cases, such as air quality and emissions/depositions, noise, blasting, ecology and habitats, waste, flooding and water quality.

David Elvin KC

David practices in planning, environmental and public law, as well as property related matters. He is a highly experience court and inquiry advocate. David has appeared frequently in the High Court and Court of Appeal in England & Wales and in Northern Ireland, the Lands Chamber and the Supreme Court. David has been nominated for the Planning and Land Use Silk of the Year in the Legal 500 Awards 2024. He has also appeared in the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Court of Appeal and Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong. Before taking silk, David was a member of what is now the “A Panel” of Treasury Counsel. He is called to the Bar of Northern Ireland and appears before the NI Courts and the Planning Appeals Commission. David appears frequently in court and at inquiries at all levels and provides advisory and advocacy services for a wide range of clients, private and public. During his time as Treasury Panel counsel, he appeared in many planning and public law cases and acted for a wide range of government departments and bodies. As well advising and representing private and commercial clients he has continued to act for central and local government, regulators and other and public bodies both in England & Wales and in Northern Ireland since taking silk. David also sits as a Deputy High Court Judge in the KBD (Admin and Planning Courts and London Circuit Commercial Court) and as a Recorder in the Crown Court as well as an arbitrator, expert and mediator. He is a Bencher of the Middle Temple. David’s practice began in property law which expanded while a junior to include planning, environment and public law. He still undertakes property work, most frequently that closely related to public law issues and planning e.g. easements and covenants, electricity wayleaves, the statutory overriding and discharge of third party rights, compulsory purchase and compensation, countryside, agricultural and wildlife issues as well as trespass and protest cases (most recently the litigation against Insulate Britain). David's planning and environmental work covers a wide range of planning work including housing, commercial, heritage, ecology, infrastructure, climate change, energy, minerals and waste and local plans and David has been particularly involved in waste, energy, environmental assessment and habitats issues recently (including water stress/neutrality issues and nutrient neutrality). Public law work includes compulsory purchase and compensation, highways and public rights of way, local government law and disputes over electricity wayleaves and easements. Recent cases include R (Finch) v Surrey CC [2024] UKSC 20 (EIA and “downstream” effects of oil production), Re No Gas Caverns Ltd's Application for Judicial Review [2024] NICA 50 (undersea gas storage, NI constitutional law/executive referral), Protect Dunsfold Ltd v Sec of State [2024] JPL 183 (gas exploration and climate change), R. (Wyatt) v Fareham BC 83 [2023] P.T.S.R. 1952 (habitats assessment and nutrient neutrality), Secretary of State for Transport v Curzon Park Ltd [2023] 1WLR 2762 (HS2 CPO compensation – certificates of appropriate alternative development), Arnold White Estates Ltd v Forestry Commission [2023] PTSR 242 (interrelationship between planning and forestry felling licences), Jones v MOD [2022] Env LR 13 (noise nuisance claim against RAF fast jet training), National Highways Ltd v Springorum [2022] EWHC 205 (QB) (committals for breaches of injunctions preventing highways trespass), Wild Justice v Natural Resources Wales [2021] Env LR 24 (wildlife licensing), Southwark LBC v. Transport for London [2020] AC 914 (vesting of London strategic highways) and Canterbury CC v Secretary of State [2019] JPL 1321 (habitats mitigation following People over Wind). Recent major inquiries: opposing the Immingham Eastern Ro-Ro Terminal DCO (hearings 2023, continuing), promoting the City of York Local Plan at examination (2019 onwards), Whitechapel Bell Foundry (restoration and reuse of heritage assets) (2020/21), Portland Energy Recovery Facility Inquiry (December 2023, energy from waste plant on the Isle of Portland), Northacre Energy from Waste Facility (2022/3) (energy from waste plant in Wiltshire) and Loxley Exploratory Gas Well, Dunsfold (2021-2) and opposing the Barking Vicarage Fields CPO (unviable town centre CPO) (2022).

David Blundell KC

David specialises in all areas of public law, human rights, European Union law, environmental and planning law. David regularly appears in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. He frequently acts as sole counsel on behalf of the United Kingdom Government in proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and has represented the United Kingdom in proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights. David is ranked as a leading barrister in six different areas in the main legal directories: Administrative Law, Environment, EU Law, Immigration Law, Local Government Law and Planning Law. The 2015 Planning Magazine survey ranked him as a top-rated planning junior. The 2009 Planning Magazine survey ranked him in the top 10 planning barristers in the country under 35. David has been nominated for the Human Rights and Public Law Silk of the Year in the Chambers and Partners Bar Awards 2024 and he was named the Immigration Silk of the Year at The Legal 500 UK Bar Awards 2023. David was shortlisted for the Chambers and Partners Human Rights and Public Law Junior of the Year award in both 2018 and 2016, and for the Legal 500 Public Law Junior of the Year award in 2018. In 2015, he was appointed to the Attorney General’s A Panel of Junior Counsel to the Crown, after 5 years on the B Panel and 3 years on the C Panel before that. He was also on the Treasury Solicitor’s former list of counsel specialising in Freedom of Information issues until its incorporation into the main Attorney General’s Panels. He regularly works on national security cases. David began practice in 2004, after spending a year working as a Judicial Assistant to the Law Lords (Lord Nicholls and Lord Rodger). He is the Joint Editor of the leading public law journal Judicial Review and was a Visiting Lecturer in European Community law at City University. David is fluent in French, and has good German, basic Czech and Slovak and is learning Farsi.

David Forsdick KC

David specialises in planning, environmental and local government law (and associated public and property law) routinely acting in high stakes disputes: “a renowned local government silk with extensive expertise across a plethora of public and environment law issues” who “has taken on a number of eye-catching planning cases in recent years”: Chambers and Partners, 2023. David is consistently highly rated in the legal directories across his specialisms, recent recommendations have described David as “hugely impressive”; “a fantastic talent”; “really frighteningly astute” and “so focused, intelligent, sharp and responsive and very practical”. David regularly appears in the Planning and Administrative and higher Courts, the Lands Chamber and at public inquiry and advises major players in his areas of expertise including large city and county councils, commercial developers and landowners and some of the main environmental NGOs as well as individuals and community groups.

David Lock KC

David is an associate member of Landmark Chambers. David Lock was called to the Bar in 1985 and made a KC in 2011. He was a public law specialist until he generally retired as a practising barrister at the end of 2022. During his career he was awarded ‘Public Law Silk of the Year’ at the 2020 Legal 500 UK Bar Awards. He now sits part time as a Deputy High Court Judge in the King’s Bench and Family Divisions and also as a Recorder in the Crown Court, as well as serving as a Visiting Professor in Practice at the London School of Economics. David is joint editor (with Hannah Gibbs) of the leading practitioner’s book, “NHS Law and Practice” (2018). A second edition is in the process of being written and will be published in late 2023. He is also one of the authors of the Landmark Guide to the Law on Police Pensions. Outside legal work. David has served as a Member of Parliament and was a Legal Minister in the UK government between 1999 and 2001. He has also served as Chair of national and regional public bodies, as well as conducting sensitive investigations for public bodies. Currently he is the Chair of the Board of Trustees of the Prisoners of Conscience Charity and serves as an expert member of the BMA Ethics Committee. Along with his wife, Dr Bernie Gregory, he has taken extended periods of time away from legal work annually for the last 10 years to amble across obscure parts of the world on a bicycle (and now on trikes) see www.slowcycling.uk for details. David was selected by the Birmingham Law Society to be their ‘Barrister of the Year’ in 2011.

Edward Arash Abedian

Ed practises across all of Landmark’s specialisms, including public, planning, environmental and property law. He appears regularly in the County Court, tribunals and Magistrates’ Court, acting for both claimants and defendants. Ed accepts instructions across all areas of public, planning, environmental and property law. He has acted for individuals, developers, local authorities and other public bodies, community groups and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). His recent public law instructions include: • Junior Counsel, led by Fiona Scolding KC, in the UK Covid-19 Public Inquiry. • Acting for the appellant in the Upper Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) in a challenge to the Overlapping Benefits Regulations as they apply to payments of state pension and Carer’s Allowance. • Representing appellants in the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) in protection and human rights claims, and EU Settlement Scheme claims. • Bringing a judicial review of a local authority’s breach of the main housing duty under the Housing Act 1996. • Drafting judicial review grounds to challenge a decision to revoke indefinite leave to remain following a successful human rights appeal against deportation. The Home Office granted the Appellant indefinite leave to remain in response. His recent planning and environmental work includes: • Appearing as sole counsel on behalf of a town council (Rule 6 Party) in a public inquiry into proposals to deliver 48 retirement living homes and convert a non-designated heritage asset to a community use. • Acting for the developer at a planning inquiry involving a proposal for a mixed use 14-storey building, including a hotel, in Lambeth, London. Led by Neil Cameron KC. • Acting for LB Islington in an appeal relating to a proposed temporary change of use of the existing buildings at Archway Campus to non-residential artist studios and exhibition space. Led by David Forsdick KC. • Acting for the successful developer at a planning inquiry concerning a proposal for 296 dwellings in the Green Belt in Basildon, Essex. Led by Zack Simons. • Acting for the Department of Environment, Food & Rural Affairs in a series of judicial review challenges to restocking notices issued under the Forestry Act 1967. Led by Zack Simons. • Successfully prosecuting a 1-day trial in the Magistrates’ Court for planning enforcement offences under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Ed accepts pro bono instructions where appropriate. He undertakes pro bono work with Bail for Immigration Detainees and Advocate. He is a member of the editorial team for the Encyclopedia of Housing Law and Practice. Prior to the Bar, Ed was a senior analyst at an international cybersecurity company. He is therefore well placed to advise in relation to cases raising information rights and data protection issues. The proud son of Colombian and Iranian parents, Ed speaks fluent Spanish and Farsi.

Ellodie Gibbons

“An understated but formidable opponent”, Ellodie is a specialist leasehold barrister, particularly known for her expertise in leasehold enfranchisement, but with a practice spanning all aspects of landlord and tenant law and areas of real property. Ellodie is a specialist leasehold barrister with particular expertise in leasehold enfranchisement, service and administration charge disputes, right to manage and rights of first refusal. She also deals with related areas of law such as easements, restrictive covenants, property related professional negligence and commercial landlord and tenant. Ellodie has extensive experience in all aspects of landlord and tenant work, including: • Acting for freeholders and leaseholders of houses under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 • Residential leasehold management and disputes under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 • Rights of first refusal, the variation of leases, the appointment of a manager and freehold acquisitions (particularly in the case of missing landlords) under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 • The extension of leases and acquisition of freeholds via collective enfranchisement under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993; and • The Right to Manage under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. Ellodie also deals with more general leasehold issues such as the interpretation of covenants and appeared in the leading Supreme Court case on the reasonableness of withholding consent under a qualified covenant, a case which concerned mixed use property and the enfranchisement risk of a change of use. Ellodie is equally happy to deal with non-leasehold easements and covenants and has considerable experience advising on the release of restrictive covenants affecting not only leasehold, but also freehold, land under section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Ellodie acts for a broad range of clients, including the Great Estates, Crown tenants, groups of leaseholders, Local Authorities, developers, ground rent investors, high net worth individuals, housing associations and other charities and educational establishments. Ellodie’s work covers the length and breadth of England and Wales and she regularly travels to, or attends remote hearings in, areas with a high density of flats, such as the south coast, or leasehold houses, such as the Midlands. Ellodie has experience of appearing before the courts at all levels and the First-Tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal of the Property Chamber. However, she also understands the importance of keeping matters out of court, particularly as the majority of her work involves advising on transactions or acting in disputes in which the parties will be obliged to have a continuing relationship following the conclusion of that dispute. In this regard, she often reviews, drafts or advises on the validity of notices and advises on valuation issues or the terms of leases and transfers. Ellodie has also been praised by mediators for her approach to mediation. Ellodie regularly speaks and writes on landlord and tenant matters. She is a contributor to ‘Service Charges and Management’ (Sweet & Maxwell) and is co-author of ‘Leasehold Enfranchisement Explained’ (RICS Publishing), a book which seeks to explain the legal aspects of enfranchisement for valuers but has been used widely by lawyers wanting an accessible guide to the subject. Whilst ‘Leasehold Enfranchisement Explained’ is now out of print, its content appears, and is regularly maintained by Ellodie, on iSurv, the RICS best practice website. Ellodie’s enthusiasm and aptitude for dealing with the valuation aspects of leasehold enfranchisement has been further developed by her work on the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024. Up until the passing of the Act, Ellodie was a member of the Law Commission’s Residential Leasehold and Commonhold team with particular responsibility for the reform of the valuation provisions.

Evie Barden

Evie’s experience spans the range of property disputes, with a particular focus on commercial and agricultural property disputes as well as cases regarding security interests and co-ownership of land. She frequently appears in the High Court and County Court. Evie is ranked as up and coming in Chambers and Partners 2023 edition. She has a diverse property practice. In 2022, she was: junior counsel for the successful Claimant in the, now leading, constructive trusts and unjust enrichment decision in Fattal v Fattal [2022] EWHC 950 (Ch); sole counsel in Kirby v Electricity North West Ltd [2023] EWHC 75 (TCC), a case regarding the valuation of loss following damage to agricultural land; and junior counsel in the High Court challenge to an expert determination of service charges in Pearson plc v Shell International Trading & Shipping Co Ltd. She has a broad advisory practice. Recent highlights include: the interplay of ground (f) in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and rights under trusts; potential action and liability by a landlord for pollution of watercourse by an insolvent tenant; whether receivers of multi-million pound residential property were bound by certain tenancies; the impact of the sanctions regime on a tenant’s leasehold obligations; a co-ownership dispute arising following the breakdown of an alleged business partnership; and, the valuation approach to mooring rights under a licence. Evie has considerable trial experience, particularly in cases under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 and cases involving security interests. In 2022 and 2023, she was instructed at trial: on a claim involving undue influence in the grant of a mortgage; on a claim where borrowers alleged mutual mistake in the grant of a mortgage; on a ground (g) case for a tenant under the 1954 Act; on a rent and interim rent under the 1954 Act regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic; on a constructive and resulting trust claim; on a claim regarding the existence of an agricultural tenancy and the quantification of the tenant’s lost crops; and on a From an insolvency and company law perspective, in recent years she has advised on a number of cases regarding the impact of the insolvency of developers, particularly for off-plan purchasers and she regularly acts on cases involving dissolved companies, such as in connection with the Scarborough Group litigation against Bank of Scotland, where she (along with James Ayliffe KC) obtained orders appointing receivers over causes of action so that proceedings could be commenced prior to the restoration of the prospective claimants. She also routinely advises administrators and landlords on claims for permission to forfeit in administration and claims to pay rent and other sums as expenses of the administration. Evie is a contributor to the third edition of Gough on Companies Charges. Her notable experience includes: • Advising on a number of COVID-19 related cases, including those relating to the enforceability of covenants during the period, frustration of leases, and recovery of rent and other arrears in light of various moratoria. • Acting for the Chief Land Registrar in Longe v Chief Land Registrar [2020] EWHC 1517 (Ch), a successful application for summary judgment against a claim for Norwich Pharmacal relief and/or that the Land Registry had been involved in an unlawful means conspiracy and collusion. • Acting for the successful respondent in Dao v Falmouth House Ltd [2020] EWHC 609 (Ch), an appeal against a master’s decision striking out a claim under the Arbitration Act 1996 on the basis that the claim form had been served out of time and the test in CPR r.7.6(3) had not been met. • Representing the freeholder of a central London block of flats on a number of claims including in a three day trial in the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and on an appeal to the Upper Tribunal. • Advising and drafting proceedings for the landlord of a shopping centre against a supermarket regarding the construction of service charge provisions in the lease of the supermarket’s unit. • Acting for a bank in relation to a number of mortgage possession proceedings, including in respect of a number of forthcoming claims involving undue influence allegations and issues about subrogation and equitable charges. • Along with Zia Bhaloo KC, acting as junior counsel for the claimant in a claim for declarations and an account into the sums due to the claimant in respect of rent, estimated to be between £9 million and £11 million, arising out of several hundred residential properties which the claimant supplied to a local housing authority pursuant to oral agreements. • Along with Zia Bhaloo KC, acting as junior counsel for a tenant in a claim for declarations and an injunction restraining construction works at a shopping centre being carried out in derogation from grant and/or in breach of lease which the tenant estimated would cause multi-million pound losses as well as reputational damage. • Acting for a landlord at all stages, including successfully at trial, in a claim for possession of a Kensington mews house following forfeiture, in which the tenant alleged fraudulent misrepresentation and deceit. • Acting for a foreign state in respect of an application for relief from forfeiture of a commercial property in central London. • Advising and drafting proceedings for injunctive relief in respect of trespass and breaches of the Party Wall etc. Act 1996. Acting for a number of property development companies in obtaining various orders for possession of development properties in London occupied by trespassers. • Drafting proceedings and appearing at trial for a licensee of agricultural premises in relation to a claim that the license had been frustrated. Evie is a contributor to the forthcoming edition of Gough on Company Charges. She is an expert on the dissolution of companies, regularly advising on issues and appearing in applications relating to dissolution and restoration of companies. Her recent experience includes: • Regularly appearing on applications to suspend the dissolution of companies following the release of the liquidator in CVL, including in relation to putative group action proceedings in the High Court arising out of solicitors’ negligence relating to property fraud. • Regularly advising and appearing on applications arising out of the registration of company charges. Advising on the obligations of company directors for the purposes of proceedings in the Beth Din. • Advising on a prospective unfair prejudice petition where a director in a quasi-partnership was accused of stealing the company’s conﬁdential information. • Advising a company director on the consequences of potential breaches of permission from the court to act as a director while disqualiﬁed.

Fiona Scolding KC

Fiona's practice involves public and administrative law, social welfare law and human rights in a variety of contexts. Fiona has expertise in issues relating to safeguarding, protection of children and vulnerable adults, education, healthcare, community care and equalities legislation in a variety of contexts. Fiona has a particular interest and understanding of concerns and complaints relating to governance, standards and organisational culture, monitoring and inspection. She is interested in policy development as a tool for cultural change and improved outcomes for individuals. She is used to undertaking work with significant media and public interest on sensitive topics. She has spent much of her time in silk involved in public inquiries under the Inquiries Act 2005 or undertaking investigations and reviews in sectors where she is an expert. She was lead counsel to three different investigations at the Independent Inquiry for Child Sexual Abuse – relating to the Church of England and Church in Wales, schools in England and Wales and a plethora of other religious institutions resulting in four investigation reports: • The residential schools investigation report – March 2022 • Child protection in religious organisations and settings investigation report – September 2021 • The Anglican Church Investigation Report – October 2020 • Anglican Church Case Studies: Chichester/Peter Ball Investigation Report – May 2019. Fiona then represented 297 individuals and the Hepatitis C trust in the Infected Blood Inquiry, which involved understanding and analysing all aspects of the provision of healthcare, including the role that central government plays in its management and operation of the NHS as well as a number of quangos. She has also undertaken high profile reviews for a leading public school in respect of sexual harassment and misogyny between pupils (published March 2022 on the Westminister website) and for an NHS Trust about governance of maternity care (Published on Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Trust website). She has undertaken several internal reviews concerning complaints linked to governance, oversight, appointment, standards and equalities in a number of different organisations in the public sector. Fiona has been recommended for her work in education law for over 20 years in the directories and is also recommended in the following areas: administrative and public law, civil liberties and human rights, Court of Protection and local government. Fiona has been on the EHRC Panel of Counsel since its inception and was appointed to the Attorney General's B Panel of Junior Counsel from 2013 to 2017, before taking silk. Fiona is a Deputy District Judge and Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals) Chamber. Fiona is joint head of the 54-strong public law group at Landmark Chambers. Fiona is on the advisory board of SACPA (a safeguarding advisory group providing training and advice to organisations) and is involved in a number of initiatives relating to improving safeguarding in various organisations in the United Kingdom. Fiona Scolding KC sits on the panel of strategic legal advisors. She undertakes work for the Bar Pro Bono Unit and other organisations.

Galina Ward KC

Galina is a specialist public and property law barrister, frequently instructed in cases at the intersection of those specialisms. Galina acts for a wide range of individuals, corporate and public bodies, and charitable and professional organisations, from tribunals up to the highest courts. She has appeared in numerous high profile cases concerning issues as diverse as the availability of relief from forfeiture of a licence, the rateability of ATM sites and the alleged discriminatory impact of welfare reform measures. Galina’s practice encompasses the full spectrum of public and property law. Prior to taking silk, she was a member of the Attorney General’s “A” Panel of junior counsel and was described in Legal 500 as “one of the very best juniors at the Administrative Bar” and in Chambers and Partners as “always a very impressive opponent”. In silk, Galina continues to act regularly both for and against central and local government and other public bodies. Her recent public law work has focused on healthcare and community care, including disputes between public bodies about which is responsible for funding care in various situations. She has also appeared in a number of the leading cases on the interpretation of the Withdrawal Agreement and citizens’ rights post-Brexit. Her property law work has a strong cross-over with her public law expertise, and includes a number of cases in which the use of land by public bodies is subject to human rights or other statutory restrictions. Galina has been recognised for many years as a leading practitioner in education law, and has extensive experience of judicial review claims in education matters, ranging from exclusion and admissions to school organisation and university funding issues. Her work also includes acting on behalf of public bodies tasked with regulating those who work in education, as well as representing those subject to that regulation. She has represented the Department for Education in a number of strands of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse and more recently in the Covid-19 Inquiry.

Georgina Fenton

Georgie's practice focuses on public, planning and environmental law. Her public law work includes matters concerning human rights, education, community care, court of protection and immigration. Georgie has extensive experience appearing in SEND hearings and is developing a strong practice in Claimant immigration and asylum matters. Her notable work includes: • Junior Counsel alongside Miranda Butler and Hannah Gibbs to Fiona Scolding KC instructed by Leigh Day representing 300 core participants in the Infected Blood Inquiry into the contaminated blood scandal of the 1970s and 1980s. Georgie drafted a substantial section of the final submissions on behalf of the Leigh Day core participants. • Acting as sole counsel for the AIRE Centre to successfully win an appeal in the Social Entitlement Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal against a decision taken by the SSWP to refuse a Slovakian national and victim of modern slavery universal credit on the grounds that he did not have a qualifying right to reside. • Representing a local authority in Court of Protection proceedings regarding the ongoing care arrangements for a service user • Acting as sole counsel in a number of planning inquiry appeals on grounds A, C, D and F concerning applications for CLEU and enforcement notices. • Representing both Claimants and local authorities in a number of Special Educational Needs and Disability hearings in the First-tier Tribunal regarding sections B, F and I of a child’s Education Healthcare Plan. • Drafting judicial review grounds for the Environmental Law Foundation to challenge the revocation of an Environmental Traffic Regulation Order. The grounds were later successful in the High Court (R. (Keyhole Bridge User Safety Group) v Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council [2021] EWHC 3082 (Admin)). Georgie regularly contributes to Landmark’s Health and Social Care blog and has had an article published in Judicial Review concerning Fratila and another v SSWP [2021] UKSC 53. Georgie has also delivered training to the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants on Asylum Law and Practice. Prior to starting pupillage, Georgie was a judicial assistant in the Court of Appeal to Lord Justice Lindblom and assisted on a variety of planning cases. Most notably, Georgie assisted with the writing of the judgment for the Heathrow Airport expansion case, which was the first significant ruling in the world on the Paris Climate Agreement (R. (on the application of Plan B Earth) v Secretary of State for Transport [2020] EWCA Civ 214). Prior to and during her legal studies, Georgie volunteered with Communities Empowerment Network, Reprieve and Citizens Advice. In her spare time, Georgie plays netball and volunteers with Refugee Community Kitchen and West London Welcome.

Graeme Keen KC

Graeme is a specialist in planning, environmental, compulsory purchase and public law. He has extensive experience as an advocate at Public Inquiries, Hearings and Examinations. Graeme's clients include developers, landowners, local planning authorities and he is instructed by solicitors and planning consultants. His practice covers advocacy and advisory work and he frequently appears at Public Inquiries, Hearings and Examinations. Graeme is currently instructed on a range of matters including: the promotion at appeal of several housing developments in England, including in the Green Belt and National Landscapes (AoNB), the promotion of a c.1,300 home development on MoD land in Kent, several logistics and industrial developments and two Local Plan Examinations. Graeme is listed in Planning Magazine’s Top Rated Planning Silks 2023, Chambers and Partners and Legal 500.

Guy Williams KC

Guy is a specialist planning barrister with particular expertise in planning and compulsory purchase inquiries and compensation claims. His practice covers s78 appeals and enforcement appeals, with a focus on residential and mixed-use development. Guy Williams won the award for Planning and Land Use Junior of the Year at the 2022 Legal 500 UK Bar Awards. Guy appears very regularly at planning inquiries in relation to all kinds of development. He acts for developers, local authorities, public bodies and interest groups and has a wide experience of appeals, called-in applications, enforcement matters and compulsory purchase inquiries. He has a particular caseload at inquiries for housing schemes, including where housing land supply is in issue. He acted for the Government on a number of cases on the proper interpretation of the NPPF (e.g. Paul Newman New Homes Limited on the triggers for the tilted balance; City and Country Bramshill on the approach to less than substantial heritage harm, and isolated hew homes in the countryside; Chichester DC relating to the NPPF and neighborhood plans). He has a real interest in cases raising heritage issues, and appeared in the Court of Appeal in the leading case on heritage matters City and Country Bramshill Ltd v SSHCLG [2021] 1 WLR 5761. He also specialises in judicial review and statutory challenges relating to planning and local government in the higher courts. Guy has an extensive practice in all matters relating to compulsory purchase, from advising acquiring authorities and developers on strategy and promoting CPOs, to all matters of compensation arising from compulsory acquisition. Guy promoted the Brent Cross, Cricklewood CPOs for the London Borough of Barnet delivering a new mixed use town centre, a new Thameslink station and 7,500 homes. He is also advising HS2 limited in relation to a number of claims for compensation arising out of the first stage of the HS2 rail link from London to Birmingham, including those the subject of recent argument before the Supreme Court in Secretary of State for Transport v Curzon Park Limited and others. He has appeared in several high profile compensation cases (such as Bishop v TfL). Guy Williams won the award for Planning and Land Use Junior of the Year at the 2022 Legal 500 UK Bar Awards. Rating and Valuation He also has an active rating practice, including the litigation relating to the rating of ATMs that went to the Supreme Court in 2020, and the recent clarification by the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) of the scope of the mode or category of occupation in SSE Plc v Moore (Valuation Officer) [2023] UKUT 24 (LC). For many years Guy has been identified as a leading junior in Chambers and Partners, the Legal 500 and Planning magazine’s Legal Survey (ranked in tier 1 in Chambers and Partners for at least the past three years). Cases Guy regularly appears in the Higher Courts in claims for judicial review and statutory challenges focused on planning and was on the Attorney-General’s A panel for 5 years prior to taking silk. As such he defended numerous challenges under sections 288 and 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and under section 23 of the Acquisition of Land Act. Recent cases include: • Manchester Ship Canal Company v SSEFRA [2022] EWHC Admin: a challenge to the Secretary of State’s confirmation of a CPO authorizing the discharge of water from a sewage treatment facility into the Manchester Ship Canal raising issues of the scope of the protections afforded to the Ship Canal Company, and human rights and proportionality issues. • Secretary of State for Transport v Curzon Park Ltd – in the Court of Appeal (2022) and Supreme Court (2023): a preliminary issue as to the proper approach to the determination of applications for certificates of appropriate alternative development relating to the planning potential of land in Birmingham acquired to deliver HS2. • Abbotskerswell PC v SSHCLG [2021] Env LR 28: a s288 challenge to the grant of permission for a major mixed-use development raising issues of climate change and green house gases, and the interpretation and application of the Habitats Regulations and Appropriate Assessment including mitigation. • City and Country Bramshill Ltd v SSHCLG [2022] 2 P&CR 5: Court of Appeal case on a s288 challenge where the key issues were the meaning of ‘isolated housing in the countryside’ and the proper approach to the heritage balance in cases of less than substantial harm in light of the statutory duties for listed buildings and conservation areas. • Keep Bourne End Green v Buckinghamshire Council [2021] JPL 181: a High Court statutory review of the decision of the Council to adopt the Wycombe Local Plan focusing on the decision within the Plan to remove land from the Green Belt for housing purposes and whether there were exceptional circumstances for doing so based on housing need. • Paul Newman Homes Ltd v SSCHLG [2021] PTSR 1054 Court of Appeal decision on a s288 challenge where the critical issue was the meaning of the phrase “where there are no relevant development plan policies or the policies most important for determining the application are out of date” in the NPPF for the purposes of triggering the tilted balance. • Dill v SSHCLG [2020] PTSR 907 Supreme Court decision on the ability for an appellant to raise on an appeal against the refusal of listed building consent and/or a listed building enforcement notice the question of whether the item was a listed building or not a building at all; and what the correct approach was to determining whether something was a building in that context. • R (on the application of BACI Bedfordshire Ltd v Environment Agency [2020] Env LR 16: Court of Appeal decision on a judicial review of the issue of an environmental permit under the Environmental Permitting Regulations for a waste incinerator raising issues of mistake of fact and/or irrationality based on scientific error. • Chichester DC v SSHCLG [2020] 1 P&CR 9. Court of Appeal decision on a s288 challenge on the proper interpretation of Neighbourhood Plan policies seeking to limited development outside of the settlement boundaries and whether or not a development may be contrary to the underlying purpose of the plan but not contrary to its policies in a way that weighs in the planning balance. • Norman v SSHCLG [2019] Env LR 14: High Court decision on a s288 challenge relating to the correct policy approach to the assessment of the odour impacts of an intensive poultry farm.

Gwion Lewis KC

Gwion is a leading barrister in the areas of planning, environmental and public law and took silk after only 16 years in practice. Described by clients as a “force of nature”, he has an established reputation as a litigator, with solicitors consistently commending him for his “brilliant” advocacy, “fearsome” cross-examination and being “a pleasure to work with” (Chambers & Partners). Gwion regularly appears in high-profile litigation in his areas of expertise. He is most widely known for acting for the successful party in the Hillside Parks litigation about multiple planning permissions for the same land, arguably the most significant planning case to reach the Supreme Court in the last 20 years. Gwion’s practice also received national attention when a former Secretary of State conceded in the High Court that he had acted with apparent bias when granting planning permission for the Westferry Printworks redevelopment in east London. Gwion acted for the successful party, Tower Hamlets Council. Gwion’s clients are diverse. He purposely retains a broad client base in both the private and public sectors so that his clients benefit from his understanding of how different parties are likely to approach a problem. Planning inquiries are a major part of his practice. Gwion has extensive experience of acting for developers in appeals raising difficult issues in relation to design, architectural quality, cultural heritage and viability, especially in and around London. For further details of these cases, please click on the ‘Planning’ tab above. Highly technical planning and environmental appeals where experts disagree about environmental impacts also feature heavily in Gwion’s practice given his “forensic” approach to evidence and “ability to rapidly absorb, filter and distil” technical material (Chambers & Partners). Gwion regularly acts for leading national housebuilders across England and Wales, including Persimmon, William Davis and Bloor, and has achieved many successful outcomes for boutique residential developers in both urban and rural locations. Since taking silk, Gwion has acquired further expertise in promoting market-leading retirement schemes at appeal. Current clients include KYN (a dementia care home and research centre in Cambridge) and Elysian Residences. He also works frequently with clients from the retail sector. Recent successes include a series of judicial reviews for the Midcounties Co-operative to overturn planning permissions granted to a competitor, and defeating a rival developer’s proposal to demolish the Homebase store in Saffron Walden. In addition to acting in planning appeals, Gwion has considerable experience of the development consent process for large infrastructure projects, having acted for Natural Resources Wales, the Welsh environmental body, in all the high-profile Welsh DCO hearings of the last 10 years (including the proposal for a new nuclear power station on the Wylfa site on Anglesey; the Awel y Môr offshore windfarm near to the north Wales coast; and the proposal for the world’s first man-made, energy-generating tidal lagoon at Swansea Bay). Gwion enjoys long-standing relationships with many public bodies in England and Wales, building on his previous experience as a member of both the Attorney-General’s ‘A’ Panel of Counsel, and the Welsh Government’s Panel of Junior Counsel, before taking silk. He is regularly instructed by the Environment Agency in judicial reviews and environmental permitting appeals and is currently leading the Agency’s climate change officials in defending the first tranche of civil penalties imposed on aircraft operators under the UK’s new Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme. Gwion’s regular local authority clients include (to name only a few) Hounslow Council, Tower Hamlets Council, Chichester District Council, Torbay Council, Mid Sussex District Council, South Hams District Council and the South Downs National Park. In the recent directories, a local authority client praised Gwion for his consistently “punchy” and “succinct” written advice that makes “complicated cases look straightforward despite difficult points” (Chambers & Partners). His work for local authorities spans the full range of their functions, including education, elections and ethical standards. Gwion is based in London but welcomes instructions from all parts of the United Kingdom and from international clients. He is Welsh-English bilingual.

Hafsah Masood

Hafsah specialises in public and administrative law. Hafsah is a public law specialist with expertise across a range of areas, including immigration and asylum, EU law, human rights, and equality and discrimination law. She also has a thriving civil practice covering private law claims against public authorities, professional negligence claims, and employment disputes, acting for both employers and employees in the private and public sector and regularly appearing in the employment tribunal. Hafsah��s practice has a strong international element. She has experience of appeals in the Privy Council and has undertaken work in a number of overseas jurisdictions, including the Bahamas, Trinidad and Tobago and Gibraltar. She has been admitted to the Bar of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court in the British Virgin Islands. Hafsah is on the Attorney General’s A Panel of Junior Counsel.

Hannah Gibbs

Hannah specialises in public law, planning and environmental law, local government law and human rights. Her broad experience in public law makes her a strong choice for any judicial review or statutory challenge. Hannah has acted as sole or junior counsel in litigation in the High Court, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court, County Court and various tribunals, including the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability). She regularly acts for clients in planning appeal hearings and inquiries, some of which have concerned major residential, regeneration and infrastructure projects. Her recent inquiries (as junior counsel) include the Howbury Park Strategic Rail Freight Interchange, the Whitechapel Estate, and the Sainsbury’s Foodstore in Whitechapel. Hannah’s public law practice has a particular emphasis on medical law and law of the NHS. She is currently instructed as junior counsel to David Lock KC to represent a large group of core participants in the upcoming Infected Blood Inquiry into the contaminated blood scandal of the 1970s and 80s. She is the author and editor, along with David Lock KC, of NHS Law and Practice, published by Legal Action Group. It is the first comprehensive guide to the structures and frameworks of the NHS and has been described by Sir James Munby as “truly a ground-breaking book” which “no one who needs to understand NHS law could afford to be without”. NHS Law and Practice explains the legal relationships between NHS commissioners and primary care, community and acute providers of NHS services, as well as explaining the structure of NHS regulation. It provides a detailed guide to enforcing patients’ legal rights around NHS continuing healthcare, patient choice and personal budgets. Hannah also teaches medical law to undergraduates at the London School of Economics, dealing with various legal and ethical matters such as medical malpractice, health resource allocation, mental capacity, mental health, informed consent, organ donation, abortion, assisted dying, fertility treatment and genome editing.

Harley Ronan

Harley’s practice encompasses property, planning and environmental law. He is regularly instructed to appear as sole counsel in the FTT, the County Court and the High Court. Harley’s practice covers all aspects of property, planning, and environmental law. He is regularly instructed to appear in the FTT, the County Court and the High Court for both claimants and defendants, and is particularly well-placed to act in cases where property and planning issues interact. He has a busy advisory practice across all aspects of the law relating to the use and development of land. Harley’s notable work includes: • Acting (with Justin Bates) in a “leapfrog” appeal to the Supreme Court concerning the right to manage • Acting as sole counsel for a defendant in High Court injunction proceedings under s. 187B of the TCPA 1990 • Acting (with John Litton KC) for the appellant in planning inquiry for 150 homes • Acting for the successful respondent at trial in a boundary dispute: Ali v Kamara-Abu & Navarskis [2023] UKFTT 00580 (PC) • Acting (with Justin Bates) for the successful appellant a service charge in the Upper Tribunal: Orbit Housing Association Ltd v Robert Vernon [2023] UKUT 156 (LC) • Acting for a respondent in a strike out application for non-compliance with a costs order. The case clarified the extent of the court’s power to do so. Prior to coming to the Bar, Harley worked in legal research and law reform across property and planning law. He was a Research Assistant in Law Commission’s Property, Family and Trusts team, where he worked on reforming the law of commonhold. Harley also worked at as a Research Assistant at the University of Oxford on a project exploring onerous obligations imposed by developers on new build estates, and as a Research Assistant at the University of Kent on a leasehold reform project for the Welsh Government. Harley also has first-hand experience of local government, working in the Urban and Social Regeneration department of a unitary authority. Harley has a PhD in law which focused on property law and housing. While completing his doctoral research, Harley taught property law and equity and trusts to LLB and LLM students. Harley is a member of the Attorney General’s “Junior Junior” scheme, and a member of Advocate’s panel of barristers. Harley graduated top of his class in Law, and won a number of university awards for his performance in his final year exams. He received one of Gray’s Inn most prestigious Bar course scholarships (the Baroness Hale of Richmond Scholarship). He was also awarded a scholarship by the Erasmus Mundus Consortium to complete a Master’s degree in Urban Studies at the Universities of Brussels, Vienna, Copenhagen and Madrid.

Harriet Wakeman

Harriet’s practice spans public law and human rights, inquests, public inquiries, costs, and planning and environmental law. Harriet is recognised as a leading junior (Chambers and Partners, 2024) and a ‘Tier 1 Rising Star’ (Legal 500, 2024). She has been appointed to the Attorney General’s Panel of Counsel (C panel). Harriet is described in the leading legal directories as a “talented advocate” and an “extremely strong practitioner” who is “exceptional in mastering large volumes of material (including complex technical evidence)” and whose work is “of the highest quality”. Her submissions are “superb – detailed and compelling” and “watertight”. She has an “immense work ethic, and is confident and conscientious” and “her attention to detail and recall of facts is incredible”. In 2020, Harriet was nominated for Advocate’s Young Pro Bono Barrister of the Year. Harriet has experience acting for an array of clients, including individuals, charities, large corporations, district councils, and government. Harriet acts for both claimants and government in her public law work. In her inquest work, Harriet acts for bereaved families, government departments and other interested persons, as well as acting as counsel to the inquest. Harriet is regularly instructed in high-profile and sensitive matters, as well as cases involving a national security element. She has been instructed in cases in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. Notable recent and current instructions include: • R (Imam) v London Borough of Croydon: Counsel for Crisis (led by Justin Bates) in an intervention before the Supreme Court which concerns the nature of the duty owed by local authorities to homeless people, and specifically, the relief that should be granted after a local authority has breached its “full” homelessness duty. • R (AT) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Counsel for the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (led by Jason Coppel KC) before the Court of Appeal in this case which concerns the entitlement of an EU citizen residing in the UK post-Brexit to social security benefits, and the applicability of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights post-Brexit. • Counsel to the Inquest into the death of Mr Thomas Orchard (led by Nicholas Moss KC). Press coverage here. • Counsel for the Secretary of State for the Home Department in the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry (led by Cathy McGahey KC). Dawn Sturgess died in 2018 having been poisoned by Novichok after the attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury. Press coverage here. • Counsel for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (led by Samantha Broadfoot KC) in a judicial review challenge concerning errors in Covid-19 PCR testing at the Immensa laboratory in Wolverhampton. • Counsel to the Inquests (led by Jonathan Hough KC) in the ‘Bugaled Breizh’ Inquests, concerning the sinking of a French fishing trawler in 2004. Press coverage here. • Counsel for the Defendant (led by David Blundell KC) in the linked challenges to the Secretary of State’s policy of intercepting migrant boats in UK waters, stopping them and redirecting them to France. • Counsel to the Brook House Inquiry (led by Brian Altman KC). Press coverage here. • Counsel for the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry (led by Jason Beer KC). Press coverage here. Prior to coming to the Bar, Harriet worked as the stagiaire to Judge Christopher Vajda at the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg.

Hashi Mohamed

Hashi has been consistently listed as one of the highest rated planning barristers in England and Wales. Hashi’s practice focuses on all aspects of planning and environmental law, including housing, infrastructure, enforcement, development consent orders (DCO), and compulsory purchase work (CPO). Hashi appears on behalf of claimants and defendants and specialises in all aspects of planning and environmental law. He undertakes work on behalf of a diverse range of clients including housebuilders and major landowners, SMEs and individuals, as well as local planning authorities across England and Wales; including at hearings and inquiries, local plan examinations, High Court and the Court of Appeal. He is ranked by Planning Magazine in the top 10 of ‘Top Rated Juniors’ in 2023. Hashi is a published author of two critically acclaimed books; People Like Us; What it Takes to Make it in Modern Britain (Profile Books, January 2020) and A Home of One’s Own: Why the Housing Crisis Matters (Profile Books, September 2022). He is the Chair of Coin Street Housing Cooperative on the South Bank, responsible for 220 high quality affordable, social housing, including in the OXO Tower. Hashi is fluent in Somali and French.

Heather Sargent

Heather practises primarily in planning and compulsory purchase, environmental and EU law. Heather is the only junior barrister included in the Planning Law Survey 2024’s list of the highest-rated barristers for commercial and retail. She is one of The Planner Magazine’s 2024 Women of Influence. She has also been listed as one of the top five juniors by the Planning Law Survey for the past five years and has been ranked in both Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500 for several years. Her experience includes: • Acting for Marks and Spencer on the redevelopment of its flagship Marble Arch store • Acting for both developers and local planning authorities on numerous central London tall building schemes • Advising the promoter of the Euston Over-Station Development • Advising Gatwick Airport on its proposed DCO to bring its existing standby runway into routine use • Defending two judicial review challenges to the 2019 NPPF for MHCLG • Defending six judicial review challenges to the Airports NPS (which provides policy support for a third runway at Heathrow) for the Secretary of State for Transport • Appearing at the London Plan examination (for the London Borough of Enfield) and for site promoters at the Guildford, Wealden, Tandridge and Welwyn Hatfield Local Plans • Advising the acquiring authority on a CPO for a £37m road scheme (sole counsel) and acting for the acquiring authority on both the Tunbridge Wells Borough Council (Calverley Square) CPO (theatre, civic centre and office scheme) and the London Borough of Enfield (Alma Estate Regeneration) CPO • Acting for both appellants and local planning authorities on major housing schemes including Wisley Airfield, Guildford (2,000 units); Peel Hall, Warrington (1,200 units); and two sustainable urban extensions in Northampton • Retail inquiry work (for both appellants and local planning authorities) • Acting for retirement home providers on appeal • High level judicial review and statutory challenge court work, including numerous appearances before the Court of Appeal as sole counsel. Heather is a member of the Attorney General’s B Panel of Counsel and of the Welsh Government’s B Panel of Junior Counsel. She is an Assistant Editor of the Encyclopedia of Planning Law and Practice, for which she focuses on heritage matters.

Isabella Buono

Isabella specialises in planning, environmental and public law. Before joining Landmark, she spent nearly two years as the Judicial Assistant to the President of the Supreme Court, Lord Reed of Allermuir. She acts for a wide range of public and private sector clients, including housebuilders, land promoters, central government, local authorities and residents’ groups. Isabella is ranked in Planning Resource Magazine’s annual survey of top-rated juniors under 35 and top-rated juniors overall. Her recent planning, environmental and compulsory purchase work includes: • High Road West, Tottenham: Isabella acted (unled) for objectors to the High Road West CPO in Tottenham • B&Q, Cricklewood: Isabella acted for the developer at the call-in inquiry for the B&Q site, Cricklewood (1,049 homes in buildings up to 18 storeys), led by Sasha White KC. • R (Llandaff North Residents’ Association) v Cardiff Council and others [2023] EWHC 1731 (Admin): Isabella acted (unled) for a community group challenging the grant of planning permission for a new sewage pumping station on EIA grounds • Mead and Redrow v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities [2024] EWHC 279 (Admin): Isabella acted for Redrow Homes (led by Zack Simons) and Mead Realisations (led by Charles Banner KC) in two linked claims concerning the flood risk sequential test • R (University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust) v Harborough District Council: Isabella acted for Leicestershire County Council in the leading case on section 106 contributions for NHS services, led by Zack Simons. Isabella’s public law work includes: • R (Law Society of England and Wales) v Lord Chancellor [2024] EWHC 155 (Admin): Isabella acted for the Lord Chancellor in the Law Society��s challenge to the Government’s response to the Independent Review of Criminal Legal Aid, led by Sir James Eadie KC, Catherine Dobson and Adam Boukraa • An NHS Trust v ST: Isabella is acting for the respondent Trust (led by Vikram Sachdeva KC and Catherine Dobson) in an appeal concerning the statutory test for capacity, which is due to be heard by the Court of Appeal in May 2024. Before joining Landmark, Isabella spent nearly two years as the Judicial Assistant to the President of the UK Supreme Court, Lord Reed of Allermuir. At the Supreme Court, Isabella gained experience of a wide range of issues across her main areas of practice, including in: • Heathrow Airport Ltd v Friends of the Earth [2020] UKSC 52 (on the Government’s approach to international climate change commitments when designating the Airports National Policy Statement) • R (Begum) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 7 (on the rights of an individual deprived of British citizenship after traveling to Syria and aligning with ISIS) • R (SC) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2021] UKSC 26 (on the compatibility of the two-child benefit cap with articles 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights). Alongside her practice, Isabella teaches EU Law at St Edmund’s College, Cambridge. She has taught EU Law at Cambridge since 2017 and was elected as a Bye-Fellow of St Edmund’s in 2021.

Jacqueline Lean

Jacqueline has the classic Landmark practice, encompassing all matters concerning the use and development of land. Jacqueline has significant experience of planning and infrastructure projects, and is particularly well placed to advise on the real property, and landlord and tenant issues, which may need to be addressed when promoting, or implementing, proposed development. Similarly, she regularly advises on property matters, which include an interface with planning, environmental, regulatory or ratings issues. Her cross-discipline practice is illustrated most clearly by her involvement in the HS2 project, which has including promoting both the Phase 1 and Phase 2A Bills through Parliament; the legal challenges to the decision to proceed with the project and application of land acquisition policies, non-statutory compensation schemes and the Compensation Code. Jacqueline has acted as sole, or junior, counsel in Courts and tribunals at all levels, including the Supreme Court, the Aarhus Compliance Committee, and Parliamentary Select Committees.

James Neill

James' practice spans the full scope of public law, with particular expertise in planning and environmental, public procurement and subsidy control matters. James is ranked in Chambers and Partners and Legal 500 most recent directory guides as a leading junior in public procurement law. He joined Landmark Chambers from Allen & Overy, where he spent five years focussing on commercial judicial review, planning and environmental, procurement litigation and international arbitration, particularly in the renewable energy, regulated utilities and infrastructure sectors. Prior to joining the Bar, James worked in the House of Lords in the Opposition Whips Office as the lead researcher in constitutional and legal affairs, working with the Shadow Front Bench and Shadow Lord Chancellor. He also served with the Coldstream Guards on a number of operational tours, during which time he trained and qualified for the Bar.

James Hanham

James’s expertise and experience is as deep as it is broad meaning that his approach to a property dispute is three dimensional and is directed to being both practical and commercial. James is a trusted litigator and adviser. He has appeared in a number of reported decisions which demonstrate the breadth of his property litigation expertise. James's work in the Courts (Court of Appeal, Business and Property and County) and the Property Chamber Tribunals appearing both as a junior and sole Counsel has been in cases against leading silks in the field. His abilities as an advocate are regularly praised by clients and commented upon by judges. His lay clients have ranged from developers (large and small), construction and engineering companies, public authorities, banks, private equity investors, landed estates, LLPs and of course individuals (both sole and in partnership). He accepts work on a public access basis.

James Maurici KC

James practices in planning, environmental law, and public law. James practices in planning, environmental law, and public law. His practice regularly encompasses retained/ assimilated EU law and international law. James was called to the Bar of England and Wales in 1996, and the Bar of Northern Ireland in 2009. Planning law James’s planning practice encompasses all aspects of planning including advisory, advocacy at inquiries and hearings and advocacy in the Higher Courts. He has considerable experience of Development Plan examination hearings. His practice also encompasses compulsory purchase and compensation, harbours, highways, rights of way, commons registration and village greens (both inquiries and in the Higher Courts). Environmental law James’s environmental law practice is wide-ranging, covering matters such as habitats and species protection, contaminated land, air quality, waste, access to environmental information, statutory and common law nuisance and all aspects of environment impact assessment, strategic environmental assessment and environmental permitting. He has considerable expertise in climate change litigation. He has also been involved in cases concerning marine environmental issues. He regularly advises and engages in cases concerning access to environmental information. He has also appeared many times before the UNECE Aarhus Compliance Committee in Geneva. Public law His public law practice is very wide ranging. He has appeared in a number of high-profile public law cases including: • R (Sharon Shoesmith) v Ofsted and Others [2011] 1459 • R (Bradley and others) v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions [2009] 114 • Ken Livingstone v Adjudication Panel for England [2006] 45 • R v. Bow Street Magistrate, ex p. Pinochet Ugarte (No. 2) [2000] 1 119 • The Alconbury litigation [2003] 2 295. Retained/ Assimilated EU law James regularly advises and appears in cases concerning retained EU law. Before Brexit he regularly appeared in the Court of Justice of the European Union and the General Court of the European Union (formerly the European Court of First Instance) on environmental matters. International In addition to his extensive European Court practice (see above) James has made several appearances before the UNECE Aarhus Compliance Committee in Geneva. He has acted in cases going to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Professional Memberships: James was a member of the Attorney-General’s London Panels of Junior Counsel to the Crown from 1999-2013. He also served on the Welsh Assembly Government’s Junior Counsel Panel from 2009 to 2013. James has in the past chaired the Steering Groups for Planning, Environmental and Public Law at Landmark Chambers. In April 2021, James was appointed to the Council of NIPA. He is jointly leading and co-ordinating (with Ben Copithorne) the working group on Growing and Engaging a diverse membership. James was previously a part-time College Lecturer in European Law at Hertford College, Oxford.

Jenny Wigley KC

Jenny's practice is focused on planning and environmental law and non-domestic rating (local government tax). Jenny appears regularly in planning inquiries and in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court in judicial review and statutory review claims including those related to climate change, adequate consultation, legitimate expectation, water, heritage, Habitats Regulations, EIA, SEA, air quality, s.106 obligations and conditions, the GPDO, enforcement, interpretation of policy and adequacy of reasons. Of notable interest, Jenny represented the successful claimant in the statutory review challenge to all the Green Belt allocations in the Leeds Site Allocations Plan. She also recently represented a community interest group in four successful High Court challenges relating to the protection of a local playing field. Jenny represents developers, public interest groups, campaign groups, local authorities and central government agencies. She is currently advising a large unitary local authority in defending refusals of applications by HS2 under Schedule 17 of the High Speed Rail (London – West Midlands) Act 2017. She is also representing National Highways in the High Court in statutory reviews of highway schemes. Additionally, she advises in relation to DCOs. Jenny has also recently represented hotel owners and Government contractors in successful High Court injunction proceedings (both defending against an application for a planning injunction and obtaining an injunction against protesters) relating to the emergency housing of asylum seekers. On the non-domestic rating side, her practice includes cases in the Valuation Tribunal, Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) and the Higher Courts, including in the landmark Divisional Court cases concerning empty rates relief (Makro, Kenya Aid, Digital Pipeline, Pall Mall and Public Health England). She recently represented the ratepayer in a case concerning the valuation of museums (Hughes (VO) v. Tyne & Wear Museums and Archives [2022] UKUT 206 (LC)) and she represented the Valuation Officer in the leading case concerning the valuation of tenant’s fit-out works in commercial offices (Bunyan (VO) v. Acenden Limited [2023] UKUT 17 (LC)). Jenny was formerly a solicitor at Stephenson Harwood.

Joe Thomas

Joe is a specialist planning, environmental and public law barrister with particular expertise in planning law, education law, immigration law and public inquiries. Joe has represented Claimants, Local Authorities, Parish Councils, Community Groups and Property Developers. Joe has been repeatedly instructed to appear unled in the High Court, Upper Tribunal, Court of Protection and Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Tribunal. Joe is regularly instructed to appear in planning inquiries alongside and against established silks. Joe has appeared in large-scale planning inquiries both led and unled including the increase of flights at Luton airport, large scale developments on the Green Belt and the construction of residential towers in London. Joe has particular experience cross-examining expert witnesses with specific experience with cross-examining experts on daylight and sunlight impacts, landscape and visual impact assessments, highways as well as viability assessments. Joe has been repeatedly instructed to assist with high-profile public inquiries. Particular highlights from Joe’s unled practice before the High Court and Upper Tribunal include: • R(Strack) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v Laing Homes [2023] EWHC 655 (Admin): Judicial Review regarding the identity of rights-holders for Town and Village Greens and how that feeds into an application for deregistration and exchange. This case considered the interpretation of Government Policy as well as the nature and extent of the relevant inhabitants right to undertake nature conservation. Joe represented the Claimant (n.b. this case is due to be heard by the Court of Appeal in January 2024). • R(Wells) v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council [2022] EWHC 3298 (Admin): Judicial Review into extent of Local Authorities’ duty of inquire when making planning decisions, specifically whether they are required to undertake site visits to adjoining premises before making planning decisions. This case considered the law on legitimate expectation, mistakes of facts, Tameside duty of inquiry as well as Wednesbury unreasonableness. Joe represented the successful Local Authority. • TC and BW v London Borough of Islington [2021] UKUT 196: Appeal to the Upper Tribunal concerning into the extent that First-tier Tribunals must make reasonable adjustments for parents to participate in hearings before the First-tier Tribunal. Joe represented the parents pro-bono. Particular highlights from planning inquiries include: • Land at Marshcroft – East of Tring (APP/A1910/W/22/330992): A “called-in” appeal against refusal for planning permission for an exceptionally large windfall development outside the plan process (1,400 dwellings) on the Green Belt. Key areas in dispute were the extent of the impact of the proposed development, the proper approach to the ‘very special circumstances’ under the National Planning Policy Framework, and the extent of harm to landscape and visual receptors. Joe represented the Combined Objectors group unled. • Land to the North of Bradmore Way, Bradmore Way, The Brookmans Estate, Brookmans Park (APP/C1950/W/22/3307844): An appeal against refusal for planning permission for a housing estate within the Green Belt for 125 dwellings. Key areas of dispute were the impact upon the Green Belt and the number of ‘purposes’ impacted as well as the extent of harm on landscape and visual impact. Joe represented the successful Combined Objectors group unled. • 17-37 William Road, London NW1 3ER (APP/X5210/W/21/3284957) An appeal against planning permission for a 15-storey tower for purpose built student accommodation. Key issues included the impact of the development on daylight and sunlight, fire safety, design and heritage. Joe represented the London Borough of Camden (led by Sasha Blackmore). • Expansion of flights from Luton Airport from 18 million passengers per annum (mppa) to 19 million passengers per annum: A “called-in” appeal for variation of conditions to retrospectively approve an increase in passenger numbers from Luton airport. The key areas of dispute were carbon emissions, noise impacts and enforcement. Joe represented the Combined Objectors group unled. • Land east of Elsenham, to the north of the B1051, Henham Road (APP/C1570/W/19/3243744). An appeal against refusal of outline planning permission for 350 dwellings, one form primary school and Early Years and Childcare setting. The key areas of dispute were highways impacts, landscape and visual impact and the application of policy in the context of an absence of five years housing supply. Joe represented the successful developers (led by James Maurici KC). Particular highlights from Joe’s work for public and private inquiries include: • Infected Blood Inquiry – Joe was part of the team of counsel representing the Department of Health; Joe assisted in the preparation of an extensive witness statement concerning the context for clinical policy decisions taken in the 1970s and 1980s (led by Eleanor Grey KC). • Westminster School – Following ‘everyone’s invited’, Joe undertook research, analysis and drafted parts of the final report and recommendations concerning reviews of policies, training and development of curriculum for sex and relationships education (led by Fiona Scolding KC). • Post Office Horizon IT inquiry – Joe is a member of the counsel team representing Post Office Limited. Joe has assisted in reviewing witness statements, undertaking detailed research into extant policies and practices and providing input into drafting submissions (led by Kate Gallafent KC and Simon Henderson) Joe is passionate advocate of equal opportunities and access to the bar. Joe regularly undertakes pro-bono representations through Advocate. He has also regularly provided strategic advice to community and campaign groups on a pro-bono basis. Joe is a contributory editor to Garner’s Environmental Law and previously contributed to the Journal of Planning & Environment Law and Planning magazine. He is also a contributor to the Health and Social Care Insight which is a monthly newsletter covering the latest update on developments in health and social care law from Landmark Chambers. Prior to becoming a barrister, Joe successfully completed the Teach First leadership development program. Joe is a school governor at two schools.

Joel Semakula

Joel practises across all three of Chambers’ main practice areas with a focus on planning, infrastructure, environmental and property law. Joel practises across all three of Chambers’ main practice areas with a focus on planning, infrastructure, environmental and property law. Given his commercial background, he has a particular focus on claims with a commercial element. In appropriate cases, Joel accepts instructions on a direct access and pro bono basis. He has significant experience in obtaining injunctions and contempt proceedings to protect land and buildings from trespass and nuisance, particularly by protesters. He is very familiar with the intricate procedural and legal issues which arise in relation to claims brought against ‘persons unknown’. In this field he has recently acted for National Highways, Shell and Exolum in response to direct action by groups such as ‘Insulate Britain,’ ‘Extinction Rebellion’ and ‘Just Stop Oil.’ Click here for more information on Joel's Commercial/Arbitration work.His most recent instructions include: • Wilkinson v LB Enfield v Tottenham Hotspur Ltd(KB): Acting for Tottenham Hotspur Football Club (led by James Maurici KC) in High Court proceedings resisting an application for judicial review of LB Enfield’s decision to dispose of open space land to the Club engaging s.123 of the Local Government Act 1967. • Acting for Fareham Borough Council (led by Tim Corner KC) in judicial review of decision of Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to place the Council in “special measures” pursuant to s.62A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. • Acting for Weston Homes PLC (led by James Maurici KC) in judicial review of refusal of planning permission by Secretary of State’s Inspector following the Claimant’s s.62A application for planning permission for up to 96 dwellings in Uttlesford. • Acting for the Civil Aviation Authority in the examination hearings for the Gatwick Airport expansion DCO. • Acting for National Highways in the examination for the DCO for the A66 Northern Trans-Pennine Project including providing specialist advice in respect of alternative route selection, equalities & discrimination and compliance with environmental legislation. • Acting for the commercial developer (led by John Litton KC) in a ten-day planning inquiry appealing the decision to refuse planning permission for up to 424 residential dwellings in Uckfield, where the key issue was impact on ancient woodland. • Acting for the commercial developer (led by Zack Simons) in a seven-day planning inquiry appealing the decision to refuse planning permission for up to 150 residential dwellings in St Albans, where the key issue was impact on the green belt. • Acting for Warwickshire County Council in an opposed Cycle Track Order hearing convened pursuant to s.3 of the Cycle Tracks Act 1984. • Acting for the Appellant in his appeal before the Upper Tribunal against the decision of the Disclosure & Barring Service to include him on the Adult’s and Children’s Barred Lists. • Shell UK Ltd v Persons Unknown and ors [2023] EWHC 1229 (KB): Acting for Shell in the High Court (led by Myriam Stacey KC) in applications to continue three interim injunctions to restrain unlawful protest activity at a range of its sites. This is leading case on non-party challenges to ‘Persons Unknown’ Injunctions • Acting for a residents' group in the Mole Valley Local Plan examination challenging the soundness of a draft plan on green belt grounds. • R. (on the application of Annington Property Ltd) v Secretary of State for Defence [2023] EWHC 1154 (Admin): Assisting with High Court proceedings (led by Zia Bhaloo KC and James Maurici KC) in high value (approx. £8Bn) leasehold enfranchisement and judicial review. • Successfully appeared, unled, for a Rule 6 party in a five-day planning inquiry, which was one of the first appeals to challenge a proposal for Discounted Market Sale housing where key issues were Rural Exception Sites and Very Special Circumstances for Green Belt development (APP/D3640/W/20/3248358). Before commencing legal studies, Joel was an investment banker with Morgan Stanley in New York. Joel, therefore, brings a wealth of commercial experience to his practice at the Bar. Following his legal studies, he was the Judicial Assistant to Lady Justice Gloster (as she then was) and Lord Justice David Richards (as he then was) at the Court of Appeal where he assisted on cases covering commercial, chancery, public and international law. Away from the law, Joel can be found performing on a comedy stage or volunteering with initiatives that support social mobility.

John Male KC

John is experienced in property law, planning and compulsory purchase. John was appointed as a Recorder in 2003, sitting in the County Court trying civil cases. He was appointed as a Deputy High Court Judge in 2014, sitting in the Chancery Division and now in the Business and Property Court. John is experienced in all areas of property law, especially rent reviews concerning commercial property, and valuation disputes relating to the development and sale of land. After more than 40 years as a barrister litigating property law, planning and compulsory purchase disputes, John is now focused on using ADR to resolve such disputes. He acts as the dispute resolver in property disputes, whether as arbitrator, independent expert, legal assessor, or mediator. Highlights include acting as the sole arbitrator (with a valuation assessor) in what was then the largest ever open market rent review in Hong Kong about a logistics facility in the container port at Kwai Chung; acting as the sole arbitrator in the highways arbitration which went on appeal in London Borough of Southwark and Another v Transport for London [2018] UKSC 63 where his award was upheld by the Supreme Court and described by the Court as “admirable”; and arbitrating and mediating a large number of property and valuation related disputes.

John Litton KC

John is a leading silk in the areas of town and country planning, environmental law, highways, compulsory purchase & compensation and administrative law. John's highly regarded domestic practice is complemented by a successful international practice encompassing planning and commercial work. He also practices in a broad range of civil and commercial litigation matters including complex rating cases. John was called to the Bar in 1989 and was appointed to the Attorney General’s A Panel of Treasury Counsel for seven years before taking Silk in 2010. John regularly appears at public inquiries. In addition to this, John frequently appears in the higher courts in England & Wales (including the Upper Tribunal), Northern Ireland, Hong Kong (including the Lands Tribunal and Town Planning Appeal Board), the Cayman Islands and the BVI. He is called to the Bar in Hong Kong, Northern Ireland, the Supreme Court of the Eastern Caribbean (British Virgin Islands) and appears by ad hoc admission in the Grand Court and Court of Appeal in the Cayman Islands. He is a member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and an Associate Member of the Hong Kong Institute of Arbitrators. Advisory and other Advisory work includes advising Government RE: the review of National Policy Statements on Energy and National Networks, challenges to NPSs, interpretation of Building Regulations, interpretation of s.106 agreements and claims made under such agreements, planning enforcement, s.215 notices under the TCPA 1990, challenge to neighbourhood plan, on-shore wind development, challenges to DCOs, co-living development, strategic planning, interpretation of commercial contracts, rating, planning appeals in the Cayman Islands, foreign law expert, expert determination under a s.106 agreement. In addition to his core areas, John has acted for local authorities in relation to negligence claims, including Wooldridge v Torridge District Council. He has advised on nuisance claims relating to Japanese Knotweed. John also advises on planning related property issues including restrictive covenants and easements and has considerable experience in mass trespass litigation. International work John’s work in Hong Kong, Cayman Islands and the BVI encompasses a broad range of civil matters including commercial litigation, judicial review, town planning and rating. Recent Cases in Hong Kong • Join Smart v Director of Environment – Representing Director of Environment in Hong Kong Court of Appeal in challenge to grant of environmental permit. Now on appeal to Hong Kong Court of Appeal (November 2021). • Join Smart Ltd v Town Planning Board – Representing Town Planning Board in Hong Kong Court of First Instance in a challenge to refuse amendment to Outline Zoning Plan. Now on appeal to Hong Kong Court of Appeal (June 2021). • Mayer v AFI Limited – application for permission to appeal to Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (March 2020). • HCA 3014 of 2016 – strike out application in Hong Kong Court of First Instance. • CLP Power Hong Kong Ltd v Commissioner of Rating and Valuation – John represented CLP in the Court of Final Appeal (and earlier in the Lands Tribunal and Court of Appeal) in relation to its rating appeal including the construction of s.8 & 8A Rating Ordinance (February 2017). • Town Planning Board v Town Planning Appeal Board – John acted for the TPB in the Court of Final Appeal on the construction of s.16 of the Town Planning Ordinance and jurisdiction of the Town Planning Board to review its decision under s. 17 in relation to an application to fulfil planning conditions (January 2017). • Mayer Corporation Development Limited v Alliance Financial Intelligence Limited (HCCL 2/2016) – John acted for the applicant in the Court of First Instance on an application to strike out an action seeking to set aside judgments allegedly obtained by fraud (November 2016). • Jonnex International Ltd. v Town Planning Board (HCAL 130/2015) – John acted for the TPB in the Court of First Instance on an application for judicial review seeking to challenge a decision refusing to modify the Sai Ying Pun & Sheung Wan Outline Zoning Plan (September 2016). • Song Lian Zhong v Chan Sze Wai HCA 277/2013 – John acted for the plaintiffs in the Court of First Instance in a 3 week trail for fraudulent misrepresentation (July/August 2016). Recent Cases in the Cayman Islands and BVI • King Bun v Lau – 5 week trial in Commercial Court in British Virgin Islands representing a former director in a derivative action brought by minority shareholder for breach of directors’ duties relating to sale of a subsidiary company at an undervalue. (November/December 2019, July 2020 and February 2021). • China Energy Development Holdings Ltd v Totalbuild Investments Holdings Group Ltd (Cause No. G0094/2015) and Energy International Investments Holdings Ltd v China International Energy Investments (Hong Kong) Ltd (Cause No. G0112/2015) (2014 – 2016) – John acts for the plaintiffs in two claims relating to breaches of warranty and misrepresentation arising out of cooperation agreements entered into with China National Petroleum Company for the exploitation of mineral resources in China. There have been a number of interlocutory proceedings and hearings for injunctions, service out of the jurisdiction, substituted service and discovery of documents. Trials likely in 2017/2018 (Cayman Islands). • Lai Yueh-Hsing v Mayer Holdings Limited (FSD86/2014) (2013 – 2014) – creditors winding up petition. The proceedings include an application for appointment of interim receivers, the hearing of the petition and an appeal to the Cayman Court of Appeal (Cayman Islands). • Li En Qiang v Nova Direct Investment Ltd (2016) – claim for the recovery of proceeds of redemption and remaining shares in an investment fund against a BVI company. Application challenging to Court’s jurisdiction (BVI). • China NTG Investments Ltd v Great River Corporation (2014) – proceedings for the appointment of an interim receiver and an application for a stay of proceedings (BVI).

Jonathan Wills

Jonathan specialises in property and planning law, and is often instructed on cases where there is a crossover between those two areas. He has a particular specialism in matters relating to the Electronic Communications Code. Jon is a property litigation barrister, with a particular specialism in the Electronic Communications Code. His experience in the planning field means that he is particularly well-placed to advise on property matters with a planning law element to them.

Julia Smyth

Julia has a strong public and EU law practice, particularly in the ﬁelds of social security, EU free movement and immigration. Julia is a public law, EU and ECHR specialist. She frequently appears unled in high-profile cases, and is praised by the legal directories as being “a truly excellent public law specialist," who is “phenomenally gifted", “extremely clever and very effective”, as well as “phenomenally hard working" and “approachable and responsive." Julia won the award for ‘Human Rights and Public Law Junior of the Year’ at the Chambers UK Bar Awards 2022. Prior to returning to self-employed practice in 2012, Julia had a successful career as a senior government lawyer. She is recognised by the legal directories as bringing her “experience as counsel for various government departments to claimant work, giving practical insights into how public bodies make decisions on the ground.” Julia has particular expertise in EU and Withdrawal Agreement law, human rights and civil liberties, social security, health, immigration and free movement law, as well as experience in a broad range of other areas including education, police pensions, parking regulation and environment law and animal welfare.

Justin Bates KC

Justin's practice covers all aspects of housing, property and local government law. He is the Deputy General Editor of the Encyclopaedia of Housing Law and is the author or co-author of a number of other books and annotated statutes. In recent years, Justin has given evidence on housing law reform to the All Parliamentary Committees on both Legal Aid and the Private Rented Sector; the Welsh Assembly on the Renting Homes (Wales) Act; and the House of Lords on housing and the Equality Act 2010. He co-drafted the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 for Karen Buck MP and continues to provide legislative and policy support to the Shadow housing team. He has appeared on various BBC news and current affairs programmes discussing housing law. In 2019/20, he worked on the Right to Manage reform proposals produced by the Law Commission. Justin is an active supporter of Advocate (the Bar Pro Bono Unit) and, in 2020, was nominated for the “Pro Bono Junior of the Year” award.

Katharine Elliot

Katharine has a diverse practice, encompassing planning, environment and public law, particularly Court of Protection, mental health, education, election and tax matters. Katharine is a strong and accomplished advocate, who appears in the Magistrates’ Court, County Court, High Court, Court of Protection, First-tier and Upper Tribunals, coroners’ courts and professional disciplinary panels, both as junior counsel and in her own right. Katharine was appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel in 2021. Prior to and since her appointment, she has been instructed by both the GLD and HMRC to act in complex, high value litigation alongside leading counsel. She also has extensive experience in private and public inquiry work, including acting as junior counsel to the Dame Linda Dobbs Review commissioned by Lloyds Banking Group. Katharine’s extensive knowledge of trusts, probate and general private client law makes her exceptionally well placed to advise in cases where public and private law issues meet. She also handles cases at the interface of public and criminal law. Katharine accepts public access and pro bono instructions where appropriate. A strong believer in promoting both access to justice and diversity at the Bar, Katharine regularly accepts pro bono instructions through Advocate, is a session leader and mentor for BME Legal and champions access to legal work experience for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. She is also a tutor with The Access Project, a charity which supports students from disadvantaged backgrounds to access top universities. Beyond the Bar, Katharine sings as a soprano with the Collegium Musicum of London Chamber Choir and previously sang with the London Symphony Chorus. She is a keen rugby union fan and played for Haringey Rhinos RFC until she retired from the sport in 2019. She also enjoys a casual game of netball. A keen linguist, Katharine speaks Italian and French and has studied German, Russian and Mandarin.

Katharine Holland KC

Katharine Holland KC MA BCL (Oxon) DipICArb FCIArb practice encompasses all aspects of property litigation. Directory quotes say Katharine is “a pre-eminent expert in her ﬁeld”, “phenomenal”, “goes the extra mile” and “gives clients a super, fabulous service”. Katharine has appeared in a wealth of reported cases during her career involving all types of property litigation disputes and many of which have been high profile. She is experienced in acting in all courts and tribunals to the highest level and is regularly instructed on complex advisory matters. In 2003, Katharine obtained the first injunction to be granted against ‘persons unknown’ in the context of trespass and protest demonstrations in the Hampshire Waste case. Since then, Katharine has acted on many trespass cases relating to all types of sectors. She is a CEDR Accredited Mediator and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and in 2009 received a Diploma in International Commercial Arbitration. The current 2023 Legal 500 says "An incredibly intelligent silk, Katharine is committed to providing a first-class service to her clients. Her advocacy skills have undoubtedly been the deciding factor in winning some particularly difficult cases." and the 2023 Chambers & Partners says "Katharine is willing to give up her time and be available late into the evening to assist. She is our go-to person for urgent matters. Katharine is incredibly personable.". Other past directory references have included: "very bright, innovative and passionate about what she does." "Katharine always goes the extra mile. She is responsive, quick and forceful on her feet." "She goes after every point with everything she’s got and she has a real determination to win." "She continues to be an excellent silk." "A very strong advocate who obtains a client’s confidence and respect very quickly. Her ability to get to the heart of a dispute never ceases to impress. An absolute class act and an excellent team player." "Simply astonishing to watch on her feet." "Sources agree that Holland dazzles in court... astonishing to watch on her feet – she is razor-sharp and one of the best cross-examiners around." "Her ability to devour a lengthy and complex brief and summarise it in a few short paragraphs is mindblowing." "A firm favourite of countless solicitors who agree that she is phenomenal and delivers consistently time and again. A fearsome fighter. Katharine is a hugely committed barrister. When you are up against it and need someone to really knuckle down there is no-one with more commitment or energy." "Retains a first tier ranking with plaudits: can’t praise her enough, a team player, extremely knowledgeable, her paperwork is excellent, a barrister you want on your side, especially if you expect to go twelve rounds with the other side.... a superb fast-thinking trial advocate and ferocious cross-examiner." "Pulls out all the stops to win your case and is recognised by instructing solicitors and opponents as a superb, fast- thinking trial advocate."

Katherine Traynor

Kate practices across Chambers’ main practice areas, with a focus on property law. She also has expertise in insolvency, tax, and commercial litigation, which is allied with specialist costs expertise. Kate is a specialist property barrister with particular expertise in interrelated areas, including tax, insolvency, and rating law. She frequently appears in the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chambers), the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), the High Court and the County Court and has recently appeared unled before the Court of Appeal. Prior to joining Chambers in December 2021, she practised in Manchester and Liverpool as a specialist business and property barrister. She continues to accept instructions and regularly appears as Counsel in Manchester and Liverpool. In early 2021, Kate established a social group for junior lawyers, she has recently grown the social group, now known as ‘the Junior Lawyers’ Social Group’. Before coming to the Bar, Kate worked for two national law firms practising in the commercial and costs departments, respectively. In 2019, she worked for Bond Turner Limited as a costs negotiator, where she worked on a variety of cost litigation matters. Before that, she worked for DWF Costs as a costs advisor. In 2018 she worked for DWF LLP as a commercial paralegal, where she worked on a variety of commercial litigation matters. In 2017, she worked for a boutique law firm, Hodge Halsall Solicitors, where she assisted the Managing Partner on a range of legal issues. Kate has a growing practice in planning, compulsory purchase, valuation, and rating law. She is currently undertaking her ATT and CTA exams, which offers a niche specialism in revenue law. Copies of her CV are available upon request. Kate is often instructed as sole counsel, frequently appearing in the County Court, First-tier Tribunal and High Court, as well as acting on several cases as a junior. She has a busy trial practice but also appears in application hearings – especially for summary judgment and strike out, interlocutory applications and CCMC hearings. Kate is a member of the editorial team for the Encyclopedia of Housing Law and Practice (Sweet & Maxwell). Recent cases: • Kate recently appeared unled for the Respondent in Smith v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities [2023] EWCA Civ 514 on the principle of costs and successfully opposed the making of a costs order against the Respondent. • Kate recently appeared (being led by Justin Bates) for the Appellant in Avon Ground Rents Limited v Canary Gateway (Block A) RTM Company Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 616; a case concerning the issue of whether a shared ownership lease where the tenant has not “staircased” to 100% interest but is a term more than 21 years was a “long lease” for the purpose of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. • In 2022, Kate assisted with an appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) in Riverside CREM 3 Ltd v Unsdorfer and others [2022] UKUT 98 (LC) (led by Justin Bates), a case on whether a challenge to the FTT’s power to vary a management order could be raised for the first time on an appeal. • Advising on and drafting an application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal in the context of how the right to manage applies to a residential terrace and the interpretation of ‘premises’ for the purpose of s.72, Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (led by Justin Bates). • Advising on and drafting the claim documents in the High Court, in respect of a debt action brought under regulation 20 of the Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement) (Local Lists) Regulations 1989, in the context of an alleged rate avoidance scheme (led by David Forsdick KC).

Katie Helmore

"She has an amazing knack of cutting through and really getting to the fundamental points that a client needs to hear and understand." "An excellent junior who always impresses our clients." Katie is a specialist property litigator who is recognised for her commercial approach and versatile practice. Katie has a successful and established property practice encompassing all aspects of commercial and residential property litigation and including complementary areas of planning, rating and valuation and environmental law. Katie acts for a wide range of clients across the full spectrum of property litigation including individuals, large estates, developers, charities, local authorities, large commercial organisations, local authorities and retailers.

Katrina Yates

Katrina is an outstanding property barrister, who specialises in real property and commercial landlord and tenant litigation and is highly ranked as a leading junior in the legal directories. Katrina has a busy property litigation practice and is particularly strong on disputes involving land registration, commercial landlord and tenant, and planning law issues that arise in the real estate context. Her practice encompasses: • Development work (including overage, options, and promotion agreements) • Commercial landlord and tenant (including forfeiture, landlord’s consents, dilapidations, rent review, and disputes under the 1954 Act) • Land registration (including alteration, rectification, indemnity and judicial review) • Sale and purchase disputes (including misrepresentation, forfeiture of deposits, and disputes over vacant possession) • Rectification of contracts and deeds • Adverse possession and boundary disputes • Easements • Restrictive covenants • Nuisance • Trusts of Land • Property-related professional negligence. Katrina has significant experience acting in commercial disputes for large institutional clients, including property investors, developers, and household name retailers. With a background of experience in complementary areas of planning law, she is the counsel of choice for development work, or any property litigation case which has a planning law element. Since 2020, she has also been appointed to the prestigious Attorney-General’s A Panel of Junior Counsel. In that capacity, she regularly advises central government departments on property issues of public importance and is standing counsel to the Chief Land Registrar. During her career at Landmark, Katrina has developed extensive breadth and depth of written and oral advocacy experience in the Senior Courts, including in the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, the High Court, as well in the First-tier Tribunal, the Upper Tribunal, and the County Court. Her varied experiences have also previously taken her into the magistrates’ courts, the Crown Court, and public inquiries, from which she has developed agility and clarity as an advocate. Recent and notable appearances include: • Bay Dining Ltd v BNP Paribas Depositary Services Ltd (22 March 2023): successfully acted for BNP Paribas in defence of an application for relief from forfeiture of a commercial lease. • Campbell v Chief Land Registrar [2022] EWHC 200 (ChD), before HH Judge Hodge KC: struck out multiple unmeritorious claims which sought to contend that various mortgages were invalid for failure to be executed by the lender as well as the borrower, based on a misapprehension of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989, s.2. Also obtained an extended civil restraint order against one litigant, which led to the making of a general civil restraint order on 2 March 2023 by Edwin Johnson J. • Littler v Linden Ltd (29 March 2022): defended a developer against a claim for an injunction, which sought the removal and relocation of a foul drainage system. • Billings & Billings v Coyde Construction Ltd(2021): trial as to the validity and construction of an easement, which included a challenge to whether the easement had been properly registered so as to bind successors in title. • R (HCP Hendon Ltd) v Chief Land Registrar [2020] EWHC 1278 (Admin), before Martin Spencer J: successfully defended the Registrar’s decision to register a new lease as a concurrent lease, and in so doing clarified the law on the manner in which the Property Register to leasehold title can be relied on for the purpose of establishing the scope of the demise. • Coventry Parkside Development Ltd v Uninn Parkside Development Ltd (Claim No. PT-2020-000075): acted for the defendant in an application for an injunction to restrain an airspace trespass caused by a crane oversailing an adjacent development site. • Halfords Ltd v Turret Property Investments Ltd (County Court at Sheffield, Claim No. C01BS690): successfully represented Halfords at a trial of its business lease renewal claim, which included a rarely fought dispute as to the valuation of the new rent. • Antoine v Barclays Bank UK Plc & Chief Land Registrar[2018] EWCA Civ 2846 [2018] EWHC 395 (Ch): successfully defended the Chief Land Registrar in the High Court and in the Court of Appeal in relation to a claim for rectification of the registrar, following the setting aside of a court order that had been obtained by fraud. • R (Best) v Chief Land Registrar [2016] QB 23 (CA): with Jonathan Karas KC, acted for the Registrar in this landmark Court of Appeal case testing the novel question of whether an adverse possession application is valid, where the possession on which the applicant relies to establish his claim constitutes the criminal offence of squatting in a residential building, under s. 144 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. Other experience: Katrina sat on the University of Bristol’s Law School Advisory Board between 2013 and 2016 and is a guest LLB land law lecturer. She is a regular contributor to the Civil Court Service (the “Brown Book”) and the Civil Court Practice (the “Green Book”). When she is not working at the law, Katrina is a keen singer and violinist who performs whenever she has the chance. She also enjoys learning languages and travelling, most recently taking-up surfing in Portugal and Morocco.

Kimberley Ziya

Kim is building a practice across all three of Chambers main practice areas with a focus on property, planning and environmental law. Kim has a particular interest in areas of overlap between planning and property law including rights to light, restrictive covenants and permitted development rights. Her notable work includes: • FirstPort Property Services Limited v Settlers Court RTM Company Ltd & Ors [2019] UKUT 0243 (LC): instructed in the first “leapfrog” appeal from the Upper Tribunal (Property Chamber) to the Supreme Court in a case concerning the operation of the statutory Right to Manage regime. The Supreme Court has granted permission to appeal and the appeal is to be heard in November 2021. Led by Simon Allison. • AEW UK REIT Plc v Sportsdirect.com Retail Ltd: instructed for Sports Direct in proceedings to determine whether rent was payable under the terms of its Lease for periods in which the leased premises were forced to close in compliance with government restrictions imposed in response to the coronavirus pandemic. Led by Katharine Holland KC. • Jarvis v Evans [2021] 1 W.L.R. 24: acted for the landlord (supported by the National Residential Landlords’ Association) in an appeal concerning the licencing regime for landlords in Wales under the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. Led by Justin Bates. • R (on the application of Zins) v East Suffolk Council: acted for the claimant in the judicial review of a planning permission granted to PGL Travel Ltd for the creation of a new activity lake within a countryside estate used as a children’s outdoor activity centre. Led by David Forsdick KC. • Acting for the successful developer at a public inquiry concerning the proposed redevelopment of 70 “Airey” houses near Leeds (APP/N4720/W/20/3250249). Led by Sasha White KC. • Advising on questions of noise nuisance, rights to light, restrictive covenants and rights of way arising following the grant of planning permission. • Appearing for tenants and landlords before the County Court and First-tier Tribunal in cases concerning rent and service charge arrears, possession, forfeiture and tenancy deposits. Kim accepts instructions on a direct access and pro bono basis in appropriate cases. She is a member of the Attorney-General’s baby junior scheme and part of the editorial team for the Planning Encyclopedia. Prior to joining Chambers, Kim was a Research Assistant in the Law Commission’s Property, Family and Trusts team, where she worked on projects relating to Charity Law, Easements, Covenants and Profits, and Leasehold Enfranchisement. Before that Kim spent nine months at a boutique litigation firm in Los Angeles where she assisted with all aspects of cases covering civil fraud, employment, tort, probate and public law.

Leon Glenister

Leon is well-established as a leading barrister at the UK Bar, practising across public, planning and environmental law. Leon is ranked across Chambers and Partners and Legal 500 in six areas: Administrative and Public, Education, Planning, Environmental, Local Government and Social Housing law. He is described as “one of the best public lawyers of his generation”, having “a superb ability to present complex technical issues clearly and persuasively”; and that it is “always reassuring to have Leon on your side rather than against you”. Leon regularly acts in complex cases of a national profile, including in the Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights. Recent instructions include challenges involving: the scope of the right to autonomy, environmental issues arising from HS2, ownership transfers of GP surgeries to US-based companies, the EU Settlement Scheme and the COVID vaccination rollout. He has recently been instructed on significant planning cases including on the Silvertown Tunnel, PINS use of planning officers and the ‘bridge to nowhere’ case. Leon has been nominated for the Planning and Land Use Junior of the Year and Public Services and Charities Junior of the Year in the Legal 500 Awards 2024. Previous cases include the challenge to Ofqual’s grading system for the 2020 A-level exams, the Alfie Evans litigation, the challenge to the NHS Accountable Care Organisation contract and the challenge to the Yorkshire Ripper’s move from Broadmoor to prison. Leon is a tutor in Administrative Law at the University of Cambridge. He is co-author of a free guide to special educational needs law, the ‘Noddy Guide to SEN’, and a lead author on the second edition of 'NHS Law and Practice (LAG, forthcoming). He is a contributing author to 'Children's Social Care Law' (LAG, 2018) and 'Adult Social Care Law' (LAG, 2019). Away from law, he is a Governor of Dr Challoner’s Grammar School. He is proudly of mixed heritage, with a British father and Malaysian-Chinese mother.

Luke Wilcox

Luke Wilcox has an established practice, specialising in planning, rating and valuation, highways and property law. As a planner, Luke appears regularly both in public inquiries and in legal challenges in the Courts (including appearing unled against silks). He acts for developers, LPAs and the Secretary of State. He has particular experience in housing, heritage, highways and valuation/viability matters in the planning field. Luke is recognised as one of the leading rating practitioners in the country. He has appeared four times in the Supreme Court, advises and acts for clients from multinational corporations to central government departments, and regularly lectures at national rating events. He also practices in related taxation fields where property valuation issues arise. Luke maintains a busy property practice, with a particular expertise in property valuation matters (primarily rent review) and cases concerning rights of way (both public and private).

Matthew Henderson

Matthew practices in planning and environmental, property and public law (including non-domestic rating and public procurement law). Matthew acts for developers, local authorities and a range of individuals and interested parties. He frequently appears in the High Court, public inquiries and examinations, both led and unled. In 2020, Matthew was ranked in Planning Magazine’s top 10 planning juniors under the age of 35.

Matthew Reed KC

Matthew practices in planning, environmental, local government and property law. Matthew appears in all the courts of record including the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, Divisional Courts and the High Court as well as the criminal courts, Parliament and the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). He acts for developers, local authorities and NGOs. He has appeared in over 50 reported Court cases and 100 significant inquiries and hearings. Matthew's practice ranges from planning, to environmental law, property and local government. In the planning sphere, Matthew has since 2008 been consistently ranked as a leading barrister in the planning sections of Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500. He is also ranked as a leading silk for planning work and in the top 10 silk for commercial and retail work in the Planning Magazine’s 2024 Legal Survey. Matthew is the consultant editor of the compulsory purchase volume of Halsbury’s Laws. Matthew’s recent 2022/23 work has comprised: • A housing development project involving 3000 houses in the north of England • An appeal relating to a major minerals site in Essex • A new road compulsory purchase project in the Midlands • Energy from waste power stations in Essex and north London • A transport and works act order in southern England • Development agreement arbitrations relating to schemes in London • Developments affecting grade 1 listed buildings • Habitat regulations cases • Local plan promotion for a London Borough • Local plan objections in the Midlands. In the field of environmental law, Matthew is ranked in Chambers and Partners as a leading silk. During 2022/3, he has been dealing with many of the issues arising from nutrient loading in the river system, whether from point source or diffuse pollution, advising local authorities, NGOs and private organisations on the issue. In 2023, Matthew’s property practice has generally related to the cross-over between planning and property, having been involved in litigation on a number of development agreements and options. He has also advised on cases addressing the enforceability of restrictive covenants and easements.

Matthew Fraser

Matthew has a broad practice in planning law, environmental law and public law. Matthew regularly appears in courts of all levels, as well as representing a range of clients in public inquiries and hearings. He has extensive experience acting for and advising private individuals and businesses, local authorities, central government departments, other public bodies, NGOs and interest groups. Matthew is ranked by the legal directories in both administrative/public law and planning law. • In Legal 500 (2024), he is ranked in Band 3 among “Leading Juniors” for Administrative Law and Human Rights, and in Band 4 among “Leading Juniors” in Planning Law • In Chambers and Partners (2024), he is ranked in Band 5 for Planning Law • Matthew has been ranked among the top barristers in planning law under the age of 35 in the Planning Magazine’s annual Legal Surveys since 2018 Notable court work Highlights of his court practice include: • Marks & Spencer v Secretary of State for Levelling-Up, Housing and Communities (AC-2023-LON-002520) – statutory challenge against refusal of planning permission for redevelopment of flagship Oxford Street store • R (Pickering Fishery Association) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2023] EWHC 2918 (Admin) – claim for judicial review against approval of River Basin Management Plan • R (Pearce) v West Berkshire Council [2023] EWHC 209 (Admin) - claim for judicial review against the grant of planning permission for a new sports facilities • R (Finch) v Surrey CC [2022] PTSR 958 – Scope of requirement to carry out environmental impact assessment in relation to greenhouse gas emissions • Kaitey v SSHD [2022] 3 WLR 121 – whether conditional immigration bail can be imposed on a person if it would be unlawful to detain them • Antoniades & Ors v Administrator of the Sovereign Base Areas (JR/1, 4 & 5/2015) – represented the successful Administrator resisting a claim for judicial review brought by locally employed civilians in the Sovereign Base Areas (Judgment, 22 June 2022) • Monkhill Ltd v SSHCLG [2021] PTSR 1432 – Meaning of policies providing a “clear reason for refusal” in National Planning Policy Framework para. 11(d) • Peel Investments (North) Ltd v SSHCLG [2021] PTSR 298 – Whether a time-expired plan is “out of date” under para. 11(d) of the National Planning Policy Framework • Tower Hamlets LBC v SSHCLG  [2020] PTSR 111 – Interpretation of National Planning Policy Framework para. 196 on harm to heritage assets • RR v SSWP  [2019] 1 WLR 6430 – Major constitutional case in the Supreme Court about what remedy a tribunal can grant to victims of the bedroom tax – acted for the successful appellant • Dover DC & China Gateway International Ltd v CPRE Kent  [2018] 1 W.L.R. 108 – Leading case in the Supreme Court concerning the duty on local authorities to give reasons for planning decisions Notable inquiries/hearings Highlights of his practice at inquiries/hearings include: • Former Gas Works, Dartmouth – block of flats scheme with flood risk and design issues (October 2023) • Land South of Mill Road, Sandbach – recovered appeal in respect of reserved matters approval for 160-home scheme (September 2023) • Little Chalfont, Buckinghamshire – represented the successful landowner in gaining planning permission for a 380-home scheme in the Green Belt due to "very special circumstances" following a 7-day public inquiry (March 2023) • Grove Farm, Havering – represented the successful landowner in appealing against 21 enforcement notices and securing planning permission for large-scale industrial development in the Green Belt on the basis of "very special circumstances" (January 2023) • 458 Oxford Street, London – represented the main objector (SAVE Britain's Heritage) opposing the re-development of M&S's flagship store at a two-week public inquiry for the called-in application (October 2022) • Warren Golf Club, Maldon – represented the successful council resisting a scheme for luxury holiday lodges at a golf club in a two-week public inquiry (June 2022) • Thistle Quay Hotel, Poole – represented the successful council at a two-week public inquiry resisting a major mixed-use residential, hotel and commercial scheme in the historic Poole quayside (June 2022) • West Berkshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan – represented the successful council promoting their new plan at public examination hearings (February 2022) • Loxwood Road, Alfold – represented the successful developers at a public inquiry securing planning permission for 99 homes in the Surrey countryside (December 2021) • Cheshire East Site Allocations DPD – represented the successful council promoting their new plan at public examination hearings (October 2021) • Broad Road, Hambrook – represented the successful developer promoting a scheme for 118 homes at a public inquiry (September 2021) • Whitstable Oyster Company – represented the successful oyster company at a two-week public inquiry appealing against an enforcement notice requiring the removal of inter-tidal trestles used for the cultivation of oysters (August 2021)

Matthew Dale-Harris

Matthew is a planning and environmental law specialist. Matt/Matthew is a planning and environmental law specialist. He is ranked by Legal 500 as a leading junior in both Planning and Environmental Law and has been appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel of Junior Counsel. He is the Editor of the Environment section of the Civil Court Practice and assists the editors of the Planning Encyclopaedia. Matthew’s planning practice focuses on housing and infrastructure work (as well as CPO). He has acted for a range of developers including national housebuilders such as Taylor Wimpey and land promoters like Catesby Estates as well as specialist and boutique developers like Optivo and Acorn Developments. He also has a busy practice working for local authorities and regularly appears in development management and enforcement appeals around the country. As panel counsel, he regularly acts for the DHLUHC, DEFRA and the Environment Agency. Some of the schemes Matt is currently or has recently been instructed on (in relation to the planning application, planning appeal, CPO and/or legal challenge stages) include: • Wisley New Settlement. Appeal for Taylor Wimpey against non-determination of application 1,730 home development in Surrey on the Former Wisley Airfield (with James Maurici KC) • Park, Bolton. The redevelopment of a Grade II registered park and garden in the Bolton Green Belt to provide a championship standard golf course capable of winning a bid for the 2031 Ryder Cup along with up to 1,036 dwellings. • Westbury Energy from Waste Incinerator. An appeal against refusal of a major EfW incinerator in Wiltshire (led by David Elvin KC) • NEXT distribution centre, Dowding Way, Epping. A new regional distribution hub next to the M25. Matt successfully defended the LPA’s refusal of permission. • Whitfield Urban Extension, Dover. A major urban extension for the development of up to 6,750 homes (with David Elvin KC). • Whitechapel Bell Foundry. A controversial redevelopment of a historic bell foundry in the East End of London. Matthew acted (with Rupert Warren KC) for the objector, Reform Heritage. • Loxley-I gas exploration well, Surrey Hills. An exploratory borehole targeting the Lozley Gas Discovery in the High Weald Basin, one of the largest accumulations of natural gas in England (with David Elvin KC). • Capital House, Southwark. Redevelopment in the immediate context of the Shard and Guy’s Hospital to provide a 39-storey building housing up to 905 student accommodation units (with Russell Harris KC). • Land north of Flitch Way, Braintree. A 120 unit scheme on the edge of Braintree, Essex. Matthew acted for the successful developer. • Roman Quarter Project, York. A mixed use redevelopment in York town centre involving the controversial excavation of Roman strata below the city and creation of a new archaeological attraction. He also acts for local authorities in relation to their plans and has been instructed (with Matthew Reed KC) by London Borough of Enfield in respect of their emerging local plan. As an environmental lawyer, Matthew acts frequently for government (DEFRA, EA, MMO) as well as NGOs and corporates. He is regularly instructed in relation to water matters (see his specialist Expertise page) including for water companies, harbour authorities and the EA. He also works across broader countryside matters and continues to act for both landowners, regulators and representative bodies such as the British Association of Shooting and Conservation or Moorlands Association on matters of importance to landowners such as the management of peat, game birds, pest control and water abstraction. He is experienced in public rights of way of village green litigation both in relation to appeals under the 1981 Act and disputes in the courts. He is also often instructed in relation to development related property and compensation work including CPO compensation claims and litigation and advice relating to s.106 agreements as well as overage and other forms of development contracts. Matthew’s most significant cases and inquiries can be accessed by clicking the links to the right, for more detail of his practice in specific areas please also click the links under ‘Expertise’. Matthew is a member of the UK Environmental Law Association and the Planning Bar Association.

Mattie Green

Mattie Green is a specialist property barrister with experience in all areas of real property and residential and commercial landlord and tenant. Mattie is a specialist property barrister with particular expertise in commercial landlord and tenant, residential landlord and tenant and real property disputes. Mattie enjoys a busy court practice before a variety of tribunals and regularly appears as sole counsel in the High Court, the County Court, and the First-Tier Tribunal. She has also been led in the Upper Tribunal and the Court of Appeal. In 2023, Mattie appeared as sole counsel in an appeal concerning the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 and the Civil Procedure Rules (Peterson and Blake v Howard de Walden Estates Limited [2023] EWHC 929 (KB). Mattie successfully represented the landlord at first instance and on appeal. Mattie was also junior counsel in Dell v 89 Holland Park Management Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 1460 acting for the successful respondents. Other recent work includes: • Advising in relation to the Building Safety Act 2022, including advising a large well-known developer on the “Accountable Person(s)” and “Principal Accountable Person” under the Building Safety Act 2022 for several of its developments in which it retained a proprietary interest. • Advising receivers appointed by one of the top four banks in relation to secured assets under a complex and high value facility agreement. • Advising a landowner as to the implications of a restrictive covenant and the merits of an application under section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925. • Appearing in the High Court in relation to an application to remove an executor from a will and subsequent proceedings for contempt of court following the executor’s failure to comply with court orders. • Drafting applications and appearing in the First-Tier Tribunal in relation to applications under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 168(4) of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, and section 14 of the Housing Act 1988. Mattie also has experience with professional negligence claims in relation to high-value mixed-use development projects. Before coming to the Bar, Mattie worked in the construction team at a London-based law firm and gained experience in relation to high-value mixed-use and commercial developments, cladding disputes, adjudication, and contractual disputes. Recent cases and advisory matters have included the following: • Real property, including rights of way, restrictive covenants, boundary disputes, land registration and trusts of land (including TOLATA disputes). So far in 2024, Mattie has successfully represented two applicants in multi-day contested adverse possession trials. • Mortgages, including proceedings in the County Court and the High Court, advising LPA receivers and lenders, consumer protection legislation and undue influence. • Commercial landlord and tenant proceedings, including claims for and opposing relief from forfeiture, Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 renewals (opposed and unopposed), dilapidations and breach of covenant. • Residential landlord and tenant, including service charge disputes, possession proceedings, unlawful eviction, disrepair, breach of covenant and tenancy deposit claims. Mattie is experienced in drafting applications and appearing in the First-Tier Tribunal in relation to applications under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 168(4) of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, and section 14 of the Housing Act 1988. • Mattie’s experience of possession claims includes: claims relating to forfeiture following a section 168(4) determination (including applications for relief from forfeiture by the lessee and mortgagee and issues of waiver), section 8 claims, section 21 claims, claims against trespassers, claims by executors, mortgage possessions claims, claims by receivers, and claims against property guardians. • Enfranchisement, right to manage and rights of first refusal. • Wills and probate matters with a property aspect, including removal of executors. • Procedural matters, including jurisdiction and service.

Melissa Murphy KC

Melissa specialises in planning and environmental work. She has a proven track record in high profile cases (Westferry Printworks, Bramshill, Aylesbury Estate, HS2, Knightland). She has a particular interest in heritage, with clients including The National Trust, the Duke of Northumberland and the Mayor of London/GLA. Before taking silk, Melissa was the top planning barrister under 35 for two years running, and top 3 as a senior junior. She is now the most highly ranked female KC in the country (Planning Magazine) and described as “a brilliant advocate” (Legal 500). Melissa is the elected Vice Chair of the Planning & Environment Bar Association. She is on the organising committee for the JPLC Oxford Conference.

Miranda Butler

Miranda has a broad public law practice spanning immigration, human rights, detention and public inquiries. Miranda has a broad public law practice spanning immigration, human rights, detention and public inquiries. Notable highlights of Miranda’s practice include: • Acting for Women for Refugee Women and a former detainee in the Court of Appeal, challenging the lack of in-person legal assistance at Derwentside IRC, led by Alex Goodman (R (Women for Refugee Women and SPM v SSHD [2023] EWCA Civ 764). • Acting for the Project for the Registration of Child as British Citizens in its Supreme Court challenge to the Home Secretary’s mandatory fee of £1,012 for children to register as British citizens (R (PRCBC & O) v SSHD [2022] UKSC 3). • Representing a victim of trafficking in her Court of Appeal challenge to a negative conclusive grounds decision (R (LM) v SSHD [2022] EWCA Civ 977). • Representing the claimant in a systemic claim concerning the arrangements made by the Home Secretary for the support of victims of trafficking (EOG and KTT v SSHD [2022] EWCA Civ 306). Miranda is a Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge, sitting in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber on a part time basis alongside her practice. She is one of the youngest Deputy Upper Tribunal Judges ever appointed. Prior to joining Landmark, Miranda worked as the Judicial Assistant to Lord Kerr JSC at the Supreme Court. She has also worked at the European Court of Human Rights. She has worked on both the Infected Blood Inquiry and Covid Inquiry, led by Fiona Scolding KC. Miranda is ranked in both public law and immigration: • In Legal 500 2023, Miranda is ranked in Band 3 for Administrative Law and Human Rights and Band 4 for immigration: “She is very intelligent, able to quickly analyse the strength and weaknesses of a case and gives expert guidance on the necessary case preparation groundwork. She has an encyclopaedic knowledge of immigration law and she is an extremely skilled and talented advocate.”; “Miranda is brilliant. She is level headed and brings clarity to complex cases. A junior with excellent judgment.” • In Chambers and Partners 2024, Miranda is ranked in Band 4 for Administrative and Public law and in Band 3 for Immigration: “She will go far; she is very hard-working and smart”; “Miranda is determined, and good at drafting and exploring new areas, no matter how complex it is.” Miranda was shortlisted for ‘Legal Aid Barrister of the Year’ at the 2024 Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year Awards. In 2023, she was also shortlisted for the Legal 500 UK Bar Awards ‘Immigration 'Junior of the Year' and for the Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year’s ‘Newcomer of the Year’ award in 2020. In 2022 Miranda co-founded the Ukraine Advice Project, which provides free legal advice for those fleeing the conflict in Ukraine. The Ukraine Advice Project has won numerous awards including the Pro Bono Initiative of the Year at 2022 Advocate Awards.

Miriam Seitler

Miriam practises in all areas of property litigation landlord and tenant, and real property. Her particular areas of specialism include the Electronic Communications Code, landlords' consents and leasehold enfranchisement. Miriam regularly appears in the County Court representing parties in possession proceedings, including forfeiture claims, and has acted as sole Counsel in numerous fast track and multi-track trials. She also has extensive experience in the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) dealing with residential property matters. Miriam has recently and regularly advised on or acted in cases in the following areas of property litigation: • Electronic Communications Code • Specific performance of a contract for the sale of land • Service charge disputes • Costs in a service charge context • Forfeiture and relief from forfeiture • Eviction of a Rent Act tenant • Possession proceedings under the Housing Act 1988 • Opposed lease renewals under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 • Vesting orders under the 1993 Act • Priorities of interests in a registered land context • Validity of collective enfranchisement/lease extension notices • Enforcement of a party wall award • Access to Neighbouring Land Act 1992 • Urgent trespasser claims in the County Court and High Court • Discharge/modification of restrictive covenants • Easements • Land registration • Professional negligence (in a property litigation context). Miriam has had the opportunity to be led by senior members, as follows: • With Toby Watkin KC in the High Court concerning a claim by the tenant that the landlord has unreasonably withheld consent to assign. • With Tom Weekes KC in a claim concerning the construction of a lease and derogation from grant. • With Toby Watkin KC for the landlord in an opposed lease renewal under the 1954 Act involving grounds (c), (f) and (g). • With Katharine Holland KC in a contractual dispute in the High Court (Chancery Division). • With Myriam Stacey KC on a case concerning the general boundaries rules and implied and prescriptive easements. • In Iceland Foods Limited v Aldi Stores [2016] EWHC 1134 Miriam appeared in the High Court, led by David Holland KC, before Mr Justice Mann on an issue concerning the construction of a lease. Miriam is a contributing editor of Hill and Redman’s Law of Landlord and Tenant (Residential Tenancies, Division C) and a regular contributor to Estates Gazette in a joint column, “Moot Point.” She presents regularly at Chambers seminars.

Myriam Stacey KC

Myriam practice covers all areas of property litigation. She has extensive experience of contentious disputes, appearing in a wide variety of courts and tribunals at all levels. Before taking Silk, Myriam was consistently recognised in the leading UK Legal directories and was ranked as a Band 1 junior by Chambers and Partners since 2016. Myriam is co-Chair of the Property Group at Landmark Chambers. She is frequently involved in high-profile disputes. Myriam is regularly, and repeatedly, instructed by developers and landowners in connection with disputes relating to the development of land and has considerable experience in advising and acting for such parties including in relation to the construction of development agreements and Section 106 Agreements and disputes related to options, overage provisions, rights to light and other real property issues including easements, restrictive covenants and rights to light. In addition, Myriam is involved in rapidly evolving areas of property law. For example, she is currently instructed by the Department of Levelling Up and Communities in relation to claims under the Building Safety Act 2022 and in the past few years, has accumulated extensive experience of the complex procedures and legal issues arising in respect of applications and claims against ‘persons unknown’, involving a range of different types of protests, and has regularly appeared on behalf of a range of landowners in the High Court as well as in the Court of Appeal and the Divisional Court (eg in National Highways v Heyatawin [2021] EWHC 3093; National Highways v Buse [2021] EWHC 3404; National Highways v Persons Unknown [2023] EWHC 1073; [2023] EWCA Civ 182; Shell UK Ltd v Persons Unknown [2023] EWHC 1229); Exolum Pipeline System Ltd v Persons Unknown [2023]). Myriam also has extensive experience of landlord and tenant disputes, ranging from 1954 Act claims, and disputes concerning the rights and liabilities under leases. Myriam’s landlord and tenant practice covers both commercial and residential property and claims involving guarantees. She recently appeared in the Court of Appeal (AGHR Ltd v Kane Laverack [2023] EWCA Civ 42 in an appeal involving allegations of breach of a user clauses in residential lease and claims for damages). She also has extensive experience in advising clients in relation to issues and disputes arising out of the Land Registration Act 2002, boundary disputes and adverse possession claims. She recently appeared in the Privy Council in an important claim concerning the inter-relation occupational rights and Torrens system of title by registration (Chitolie v St Lucia National Housing Corporation JCPC 2022/0064). She also has experience dealing with disputes under the Electronic Communications Code 2017 and appeared on behalf of the operator in the Upper Tribunal and Court of Appeal in Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Ltd v Compton Beauchamp Estate Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 1755. In addition to her litigation practice, Myriam is often instructed to advise in relation to difficult points of law arising from transactional work. Myriam is valued for her technical ability, her ‘hands-on’, collaborative and commercial approach, her leadership skills and her extensive experience as a trial advocate. Myriam has dual French–English nationality, three children, two dogs and enjoys yoga, running and hill walking in her spare time.

Natasha Jackson

Natasha is ranked as a leading barrister in her specialism of public, administrative and human rights law. She also practices in related areas of environmental and planning law. Natasha is a public law barrister, with a practice focused on human rights, administrative law, constitutional law and immigration. She has appeared in cases in the Supreme Court, Privy Council and Court of Appeal (led and unled), and has significant advocacy and public inquiry experience. Natasha is regularly instructed in high-profile and test cases for a range of individual claimants, NGOs, companies, regulatory clients and Government, and is appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel of Junior Counsel. She also acts as counsel to the Iraq Fatality Investigations, an Article 2 inquiry chaired by Dame Anne Rafferty into civilian deaths in Iraq involving British forces. She has led the counsel team since 2021, and conducted the questioning of witnesses at the live-streamed public hearings. Some recent cases include: • Asylum support: Natasha has acted as junior counsel to a group of asylum seekers in a claim successfully challenging widespread and systemic breaches in the asylum support system: R (SXK, K, NY and AM) v SSHD [2023] EWHC 1876 (Admin). She also acts, as led and sole counsel, to claimants who have been refused or denied asylum support. • Afghanistan litigation: Natasha is instructed in cross-Government litigation concerning the relocation of Afghan citizens to the UK, including in cases with a national security dimension. Reported cases include: R (KA) v (1) FCDO (2) SSHD (3) SSD [2022] EWHC 2473 (Admin), R (CX1) v (1) SSD (2) SSHD [2024] EWHC 94 (Admin), R (CX1) v (1) SSD (2) SSHD [2024] EWHC 94 (Divisional Court), R (LND1) v (1) SSHD (2) FCDO [2024] EWCA Civ 278. • Withdrawal Agreement / EU law litigation: Natasha has acted in a number of the leading cases concerning the interpretation of the Withdrawal Agreement and EU law in the wake of Brexit. Reported cases include: Celik v SSHD and (1) Aire Centre (2) Here for Good (3) Independent Monitoring Authority [2023] EWCA Civ 921, Siddiqa v ECO and (1) Independent Monitoring Authority (2) Aire Centre & Here for Good [2024] EWCA Civ 248, (1) Akinsanya (2) Aning-Adjei v SSHD [2024] EHC 469 (Admin), R (Mendes) v SSHD [2020] EWCA Civ 924. Her advice is also regularly sought on various aspects of the Retained EU Law Act. • Mental health responsibilities: Natasha appeared as junior counsel in the Supreme Court in a case concerning the responsibility for funding after-case service for those detained under the Mental Health Act: R (Worcestershire County Council) v SSHSC [2023] UKSC 31. She is also a contributor to the second edition of ‘NHS Law and Practice’ (LAG, forthcoming). • Public / Art 2 / Art 3 Inquiries: Natasha is expert in the investigative duties arising under Articles 2 and 3 of the ECHR, and on jurisdictional issues related to those duties, and regularly advises on and litigates these issues. She acts as counsel (leading the counsel team) to the Iraq Fatalities Investigations. She is also instructed on behalf of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in the Covid-19 Inquiry. • Legality of Covid legislation: Natasha has experience acting in constitutional motions from Commonwealth jurisdictions concerning the scope and application of constitutional rights. She recently acted on behalf of the Attorney-General of Trinidad and Tobago in the landmark linked appeals relating to the constitutionality of the Coronavirus Regulations 2020 and the scope of the legislative savings provisions contained in the Constitution: Suraj & Ors v AG of Trinidad & Tobago [2022] UKPC 26. • Ombuds / regulatory: Natasha acts as standing council to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA), the Ombuds scheme for the higher education, and has advised and acted in a number of judicial review claims against OIA decisions. She has also been instructed in judicial review proceedings against the Charity Commission, following her successful high-profile representation as junior counsel to Camila Batmanghelidjh, the CEO of the children’s charity Kids Company, in the 10-week directors disqualification trial arising out of the charity’s collapse: Re Keeping Kids Company [2021] EWHC 175 (Ch). Natasha has a strong international dimension to her work. In addition to regular instructions in the Commonwealth Caribbean and Privy Council, she advises (often pro bono) on a broad range of issues under private international, international humanitarian and human rights law. In 2023, she acted as a Trial Observer the Bar Human Rights Committee in the Israeli military courts in the Occupied West Bank. She is a member of the Geoffrey Nice Foundation working group on the role of international judicial mechanisms in post-conflict society and holds an Inner Temple Pegasus Scholarship to work with the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in Beirut on transitional justice and engagement (cancelled due to COVID-19). Natasha is a Governor at The Bridge School, a special needs multi-academy trust in Holloway. Prior to joining the Bar, she worked at the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in Switzerland and for the United Nations Development Programme. She also taught Public and Constitutional Law at the London School of Economics. She speaks Spanish (including study at the University of Havana), French (conversational) and Levantine Arabic (conversational). She is currently learning Italian.

Neil Cameron KC

"Neil takes complex issues and simplifies them so that they are easily understood by clients, inspectors, judges and opponents! He is able to address the most bizarre left field questions and answer them easily and in a reassuring way." - Legal 500 Neil has extensive experience in planning, compulsory purchase, parliamentary and environmental work. He was joint head of Landmark Chambers from 2015-2018. He sits as a Deputy High Court Judge, including in the Planning Court. Major planning inquiries include Custom House (Grade 1 listed building in the City of London), The Tulip (305 m tall visitor attraction in the City of London), Cribbs Causeway (retail), Burgess Business Park (residential and commercial mixed use) King’s Lynn incinerator proposal (energy from waste), Leeds NGT (Transport and Works Act). He has deep knowledge and experience in residential schemes at section 78 appeals and at local plan examinations. He has acted for retirement housing developers over many years. He acted in Parliament on petitions in relation to Crossrail and HS2. In 2023 he appeared for the Greater Manchester local authorities on the HS2 Phase 2b Bill. He promoted the Middle Level Act 2018 in the House of Commons and House of Lords opposed bill committees. Court appearances include: Supreme Court: • R (Wright) v. Forest of Dean and Resilient Severndale [2019] UKSC 53 (whether payments to a community benefit fund are a material consideration) • Dover District Council v. CPRE [2017] UKSC 79 (the duty on local planning authorities to give reasons) • Morge v. Hampshire County Council [2011] UKSC 2 (consideration of the Habitats Directive -2011) Court of Appeal: • Peel v. Hyndburn (interpretation of retail planning permissions), • Loader v. Rother District Council (interpretation of paragraph 74 in the NPPF, and consultation requirements). High Court: • LB of Islington v. Secretary of State (challenge to Class J permitted development rights). • Westminster and English Heritage v. Secretary of State (challenge to a decision not to call in an application). • Orbital Shopping Park v. Swindon Borough Council (whether additional retail floorspace is liable to CIL). Chambers and Partners 2023 "He is outstanding. Neil combines a very pragmatic and approachable style with superb legal skills and technical expertise." "He is calm and measured and an excellent technical lawyer." Legal 500 2023 ‘Neil takes complex issues and simplifies them so that they are easily understood by clients, inspectors, judges and opponents! He is able to address the most bizarre left field questions and answer them easily and in a reassuring way.’

Nicholas Taggart

“… has an encyclopaedic knowledge of property law and rolls up his sleeves and gets stuck into the detail. Definitely my go to barrister if I want the right answer” - Legal 500. Nic Taggart has been acknowledged by both Chambers & Partners and Legal 500 as a top-tier “leading junior” barrister in real estate litigation for over 18 years. Principally a specialist in commercial real estate law, Nic also likes getting involved in the more recherché areas. Nic deals with just about every aspect of commercial real estate, with an emphasis on commercial landlord and tenant work, such as dilapidations, rent reviews and lease renewals under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. Being, at heart, an anarchist, Nic has undertaken many cases under “Ground (f)” of the 1954 Act (including the leading case of S Franses v. The Cavendish Hotel (London) and disposed of a few guarantees under the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 (including the leading case of K/S Victoria Street v. House of Fraser). Nic also has experience and expertise in the usual land law disputes, involving restrictive covenants, easements (including rights of light), boundary disputes, land registration matters, including adverse possession, overage and development disputes, trespass and nuisance claims. Nic also has a particular specialisation in respect of conveyancing issues, arising before or after the transaction. He enjoys getting stuck into some more recherché aspects of real estate, such as mines and minerals, manorial and customary rights, utility wayleaves and property aspects of infrastructure provision, riparian rights, the real estate aspects of canals and harbours, and drainage. He also has experience and expertise in disputes involving property-related professional negligence, acting for claimants and insurers. Nic is qualified and experienced as an arbitrator and as a legal assessor, but lacks the disposition to be a mediator. For laughs, he is an editor of Hill & Redman’s Law of Landlord and Tenant (contributing to the chapters on termination, possession and business tenancies), a member of the editorial boards of both The Conveyancer and Property Lawyer and The Journal of Building Survey, Appraisal & Valuation, and a past member of both The Law Society’s Conveyancing and Land Law Committee and the RICS Dilapidations Steering Group. He is a regular speaker at Property Litigation Association and RICS events and provides in-house training for a number of solicitors firms. He appreciates that he needs to get out more. Away from the law, Nic is a devotee of proper relaxation. His interests include photography, reading military histories, listening to music not popular since the 1980s and doggedly supporting the Williams F1 team.

Nick Grant

Nick specialises in planning and infrastructure, compulsory purchase, and environmental law. Nick is on the Attorney General’s C-panel of counsel and is ranked in the Planning Resource Magazine’s top-rated planning juniors and top-rated planning juniors under 35 (top 5), as well as the directories, in the Legal500 as a leading junior in planning and environmental law, and as a “rising star” for local government work. Nick specialises in planning and infrastructure, compulsory purchase, and environmental law. He is particularly experienced in residential (particularly older persons accommodation) and large energy infrastructure work. He has appeared at all levels: in public inquiries, the First-tier Tribunal, Upper Tribunal, High Court, Court of Appeal, and Supreme Court. He has appeared as sole counsel in each save for the Supreme Court. He also represented the United Kingdom (again both led and unled) before the UN’s Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee. He assisted with the Banner Review of legal challenges to NSIPs. He is on the Attorney General’s C-panel of counsel, is regularly ranked in Planning Resource Magazine’s top-rated planning juniors and top-rated planning juniors under 35 (top 10), and is ranked in the Legal500 as a leading junior in planning and environmental law, and as a “rising star” for local government work. Prior to starting pupillage, Nick was Judicial Assistant to Lady Justice Arden (now Lady Arden) in the Court of Appeal. Before that, he taught Environmental Law at UCL during his BPTC. While studying for an LLM at Harvard Law School, he was a Senior Editor for the Harvard Business Law Review Online, clerked (equivalent to being a Judicial Assistant) for three judges in the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, and represented prisoners before disciplinary tribunals. He is a contributor to the 4th edition of Friston on Costs and A practical guide to planning law and rights of way in National Parks, the Broads, and AONBS (Law Brief, 2020). He was previously an editor both of Garner’s Environmental Law and the Encyclopaedia of Housing Law and Practice. Nick is direct access qualified and regularly undertakes pro bono work through Advocate, the Environmental Law Foundation and the KCL Human Rights and Environment Clinic.

Paul Brown KC

Paul's practice covers planning and environmental, public and local government law. His clients include national and regional housebuilders and other developers, local planning authorities, central government, environmental groups such as Friends of the Earth and private individuals. He has extensive experience in the High Court and Court of Appeal, as well as at Public Inquiries and Hearings. Recent, high profile cases include: RAF Scampton and RAF Wethersfield: instructed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department in defending the challenges to the use of these two sites to house asylum seekers Ashchurch Rural Parish Council v. Tewkesbury Council: instructed by the appellant in the Court of Appeal hearing on this successful challenge to the Environmental Impact Assessment of the “bridge to nowhere” Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities v. Smith: instructed by PINS in the Court of Appeal in this challenge to the use of Appeal Planning Officers to assist Inspectors in making appeal decisions West Cumbria Coal Mine: instructed by Friends of the Earth in their objection (on climate change grounds) to the development of a new coal mine in Cumbria. Appeared at the inquiry in 2021, and instructed in the subsequent High Court challenge R (Rights:Community:Action) v. Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities: instructed by the claimant in the widely publicised challenge to the amendments to the General Permitted Development Order and the Use Classes Order, which introduced new permitted development rights to build upwards and the new Use Class E. Westferry Printworks: instructed by Westferry Developments Ltd to promote the redevelopment of this site near Canary Wharf to provide 1524 new homes in 5 stepped towers. Rother Valley Railway CPO: instructed by local landowners to object to the compulsory purchase of their land to extend the route of a heritage steam railway. Paul’s recent local plan work includes Mid-Sussex Site Allocations DPD (for the LPA); St Albans Local Plan and Maidstone Borough Local Plan (acting for supporting developers); Tandridge Local Plan and Tunbridge Wells Local Plan (acting for objectors). Before taking silk in 2009, Paul was a member of the Treasury A Panel, where he acted for a wide range of government departments including DCLG, DEFRA, the Ministry of Justice, the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Education. In 2014, he was the legal adviser to the Committee on the Review of Planning Guidance, led by Lord Taylor. A member of the Joint Planning Law Committee responsible for organising the Oxford Planning Conference for more than 10 years, he chaired the Planning and Environmental Bar Association and was Joint Head of Landmark Chambers between 2019 and 2022.

Peter Sibley

Peter is building a practice with a particular focus on property law and interrelated areas including rating law and insolvency law. Peter joined Landmark as a tenant on 1 October 2021; after the completion of his 12-month pupillage. Peter regularly appears in, and advises in respect of, property related matters in County Courts, the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). Peter is a member of the Attorney-General’s baby junior scheme. Prior to joining Chambers, in 2019 and 2020, Peter worked as a paralegal in the real estate litigation department of Mishcon de Reya LLP where he worked on a variety of property litigation matters. Before that, he worked as a paralegal at a boutique sports law firm, Morgan Sports Law. In 2017 and 2018, Peter was a judicial assistant in the Court of Appeal to Lord Justice Patten where he assisted on cases covering property, tax and EU law. Peter holds two first class law degrees from the University of Cambridge. In his spare time, he enjoys cycling and walking.

Philip Nathan

Philip specialises in Asylum and Immigration law. Philip joined chambers in April 2010 from 36 Bedford Row. First called to the Bar in 1996, Philip practised crime for three years until leaving the Bar to join the Refugee Legal Centre in 1999. He moved to Sutovic & Hartigan Solicitors in 2000, taking on a broader range of immigration work. Philip returned to the Bar in January 2003 and ever since he has specialised in Asylum and Immigration law. In the Administrative Court by way of Judicial Review, Philip has had recent success in diverse areas such as the appropriate interpretation of the test applied in refusals of fresh claims (AS (Sri Lanka)), unlawful detention following previous compliance with temporary admission (Shylolibavan) and ensuring Home Office compliance with the various EU Directives on asylum law, in particular the right to work provisions of the Reception Directive (ZO (Somalia) and Others). Philip also acts regularly for Appellants before the Immigration and Asylum Chambers of both the First Tier and Upper Tribunals and thereafter on further appeal to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. In this regard he has had notable success in ensuring Home Office compliance with policy statements (Shkembi v SSHD (CA) and IA (Mauritius) (AIT)) and in particular helping to settle the correct interpretation to the various maintenance provisions of the Immigration Rules (MK (Somalia) v ECO (CA) and Mahad and Others v ECO (SC). Philip is an avid sports fan, previously enjoying skiing, playing regular golf, cricket and tennis and watching AFC Wimbledon, all severely hampered by relatively recent arrival of two young boys. He also enjoys playing the cello, film, and theatre.

Rebecca Sage

Rebecca is a specialist property and planning barrister whose practice builds upon her extensive previous experience as a solicitor. Rebecca has a busy practice in the County Court, High Court and First-tier Tribunal. She also undertakes inquiry work, including planning enforcement and compulsory purchase. She has been led in the High Court and Court of Appeal on both property and planning matters. Rebecca qualified as a solicitor in 2015. Her career as a solicitor included working at Magic Circle and City firms as a transactional real estate lawyer on high-value deals for clients including investment funds and developers. Rebecca also worked as a law reform lawyer at the Law Commission where she contributed to the Commission’s projects on enfranchisement and right to manage and undertook a review of the Commission’s recommendations to reform the law of forfeiture. Rebecca’s experience before coming to the Bar includes working as a lawyer in the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government. In that role, she advised on local and neighbourhood planning and the 2018 revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework. As a result, she has a thorough understanding of the legislative process and Ministerial decision-making, as well as the genesis of planning policy. Rebecca is frequently instructed to advise on complex areas of property law, often involving the construction of leases or other documents; on housing matters including claims for possession; on service charge disputes; and on conveyancing issues including land registration and easements. On the planning side of her practice, Rebecca has experience acting (both led and unled) for appellants and local authorities at section 78 and enforcement inquiries. She regularly advises on potential challenges to the grant or refusal of planning permission and on enforcement matters. Regularly providing lectures and training on property and planning law issues, in the past year, Rebecca has spoken on a range of topics which include planning case law in 2023, notices in possession proceedings, the law of forfeiture, the Building Safety Act 2022, leasehold reform, and planning law issues in property litigation. Rebecca is a contributor to Garner’s Environmental Law, for which she writes the chapter on the management and shipment of waste, and also headnotes for the Journal of Environmental and Planning Law. She is a member of the Attorney General’s junior junior scheme; the Property Bar Association; and the Planning and Environment Bar Association.

Reuben Taylor KC

Reuben Taylor KC specialises in all aspects of Planning, Environmental, Compulsory Purchase and Compensation Law. Reuben practices throughout England and Wales and acts for many leading developers as well as central Government, local authorities and individuals. He has particular expertise in the High Court and Court of Appeal, and in advisory work and advocacy on planning appeals. He has developed a particularly strong reputation for dealing with noise, road traffic, air quality and other technical environmental impact issues. He has been an editor of the Sweet & Maxwell Planning Law Encyclopaedia and a contributor to Atkin’s Court Forms and Butterworths’ Compulsory Purchase & Compensation Service and he was the joint Head of Landmark Chambers from 2020 – 2023. In his spare time, Reuben loves to play bass guitar in a hard rock band and tennis with his teenage boys.

Richard Drabble KC

Richard Drabble is an associate member of Landmark Chambers. Richard was called to the Bar in 1975, took silk in 1995 and practises in public law. He has appeared in many leading human rights and environmental cases. Richard is a Bencher of Inner Temple; a former Chairman of Administrative Law Bar Association (ALBA) and a current member of the Bar Council's Law Reform Committee (previously Vice-Chair). His practice has a particular emphasis on social security, immigration, environmental, planning, local government and human rights law. He has appeared at all levels of the domestic court system, including the Supreme Court and House of Lords. He has also appeared before the ECtHR in Strasbourg (for example in Chapman v UK; Stec v UK; and Tsfayo v UK) as well as the CJEU (for example in Stewart v SSWP [2012] PTSR 1; and the Grand Chamber hearing of the joined cases of Tele 2 Sverige and Watson and others v SSHD [2017] QB 771). He appeared in Trinidad in Jones v AG in a successful constitutional challenge to the law criminalizing homosexual activity; and before the Privy Council in The Minister of Home Affairs (Bermuda) v Barbosa [2019] UKSC 41. He has recently appeared in the Supreme Court in cases raising important human rights issues, including KV (Sri Lanka) v SSHD [2019] 1 WLR 1849; Kiarie v SSHD [2017] 1 WLR 2380; and IT (Jamaica) v SSHD [2018] 1 WLR 5273. In terms of social security, Richard appeared in the Supreme Court in the challenges to both versions of the benefits cap; and for the claimants in the bedroom tax case of R (Carmichael) v SSWP [2016] 1 WLR 4550 and the later case on remedies RR (Appellant) v SSWP [2019] 1 WLR 6430. He is instructed by Sainsburys to resist the Valuation Officers appeal concerning the rating of supermarket ATMs in the Supreme Court in March 2020. Richard appeared as (very) junior counsel in CCSU v Minister for the Civil Service (GCHQ). He acted for the government in connection with the decision to grant planning permission for Terminal 5 at Heathrow; with a judicial review challenge to the Airports White Paper; and resisting a challenge by Greenpeace to consultation on nuclear policy. Richard is listed in five practice areas in the most recent directory guides. He is also a “Star of the Bar” in that edition, with the comment that he is “quite simply one of the most talented and influential public lawyers of the last forty years”. Richard also lectures frequently on public law matters, particularly on human rights issues in planning.

Richard Moules KC

Richard specialises in planning and compulsory purchase, environmental, and public law. Richard was named the Planning and Land Use ‘Junior of the Year’ at the Legal 500 Bar Awards 2023. He undertakes work for private developers, central and local government, public bodies and interest groups. He has been on the Attorney General’s A Panel of Junior Counsel since 2018 and has acted for the Government in many of the most significant planning and environmental cases over the last five years. Richard is consistently ranked as one of the top junior planning and environmental law barristers in the country. Some of the recent high-profile cases Richard has been instructed on include: Supreme Court R (on the application of Finch) v Surrey CC (June 2023) - leading Nicholas Grant for the Secretary of State in a significant Environmental Impact Assessment case. The issue is whether an Environmental Impact Assessment for a commercial oil extraction project must consider the downstream greenhouse gas emissions arising from the oil’s eventual combustion by third party consumers. Fearn v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery [2023] 2 W.L.R. 339 - led by Tom Weekes KC acting for residents successfully arguing that overlooking from the Tate Modern’s viewing platform is an actionable nuisance. Manchester Ship Canal Co Ltd v United Utilities Water Ltd (March 2023) - led by Jonathan Karas KC and James Maurici KC in a case about whether private watercourse owners can sue sewerage undertakers in trespass or nuisance in respect of sewage discharges, or whether the statute provides exclusive remedies for the regulators (Court of Appeal: [2023] Ch. 1 & High Court [2021] 1 W.L.R. 5871). Secretary of State for Transport v Curzon Park Ltd [2023] UKSC 30 - led by David Elvin KC in a case about compulsory purchase compensation arising from the HS2 scheme. The issue concerned the relevance of other parties’ applications for Certificates of Alternative Development (“CAAD”) when deciding a CAAD application for the subject site. (Court of Appeal [2021] P.T.S.R. 1560 Upper Tribunal [2020] UKUT 37 (LC)). C G Fry and Son Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up Housing and Communities [2023] EWHC 1622 (Admin) - leading Nicholas Grant in a case concerning the lawfulness of carrying out appropriate assessment at the condition discharge stage post-Brexit which has been granted a leapfrog certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court. Privy Council Lake v Attorney General of Anguilla [2022] UKPC 33 – led by Richard Clayton KC in a case about the correct valuation method for valuing land acquired by compulsion to extend an airport runway. Chitolie v St Lucia National Housing Corporation (July 2023) - led by Myriam Stacey KC in a case concerning land registration and the protection of overriding interests of occupiers in St Lucia.

Richard Turney KC

Richard specialises in planning, environmental and public law. Richard has a broad court, inquiry and advisory practice and a wide client base, including major developers and landowners, central Government, local authorities, NGOs, and individuals. His experience as an advocate spans every level of court and tribunal from the magistrates to the Supreme Court. He is a appointed to the Attorney General’s A Panel of Junior Counsel. He is also consistently ranked as a top junior in planning and environmental law in the directories. In 2019 and 2020, Planning Magazine ranked him as the top planning junior at the Bar, being described by one solicitor as “one of the best advocates of his generation”. Richard previously taught public law as a tutor and lecturer Cambridge, SOAS and UCL. He now regularly gives lectures and training in all areas of his practice. Prior to joining the Bar, Richard worked as a research assistant at the Law Commission during which time he worked on projects relating to the reform of the Housing Acts and the regulation of residential landlords, as well as monetary remedies in public law.

Richard Clarke

Richard is an experienced and versatile advocate who specialises in all aspects of property litigation. Richard is a specialist property barrister whose practice spans the full range of property litigation. He has extensive experience in residential and commercial landlord and tenant cases, as well with cases concerning easements, covenants, boundaries and adverse possession. Richard acts for both landlords and tenants and his clients include government agencies, local authorities, portfolio landlords and individuals. Richard regularly acts unled in complex and high-value litigation, including at appellate level. His recent reported cases include R (Sensar Ltd) v Chief Land Registrar [2021] 4 W.L.R. 36, a judicial review concerning the operation of s73(5) of the Land Registration Act 2002, and Football Association Premier League v Lord Chancellor [2021] 1 W.L.R. 3035; [2021] Costs L.R. 415; [2021] 2 Cr. App. R 16 (Divisional Court), an appeal concerning whether the investigate costs of a private prosecution are recoverable. He regularly acts for and advises parties on applications for landlord consent under residential leases. His cases include acting for a tenant challenging their landlord’s refusal to grant consent to alterations. He successfully acted for a landlord challenging a substantial fine issued by a local authority under s249A of the Housing Act 2004, with the Tribunal reducing the fine by over 90%. Richard has significant experience of service charge claims before the First-tier Tribunal. Richard is the author of ‘A Practical Guide to Alienation, Alteration and User Covenants in Commercial Property’ (July 2023, Law Brief Publishing), a book for solicitors and surveyors on the workings of covenants in commercial property.

Robert Walton KC

Robert undertakes work for private developers, central and local government, public bodies, private objectors and interest groups. Robert is consistently rated as one the top planning barristers in the UK in the Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners directories. The latest edition of the Legal 500 describes Robert as, “Astute and highly commercial. Fantastic with clients. Able to distil highly complex legal issues into crystal clear strategic advice. Undoubtedly one of the very best in his field and a pleasure to instruct and work with”. Planning Robert’s planning work principally focuses on advising clients in preparation for, and appearing at public inquiries, hearings and in the higher courts. He also advises clients on all aspects of planning law, including policy formulation, development control and enforcement. Public Law Robert has a wide ranging public law practice including all aspects of judicial review / statutory challenges, challenging and defending decisions of central and local government as well as other bodies whose decisions are amenable to challenge in the courts. Environment Robert’s environmental work covers all aspects of environmental law, including regulatory and enforcement work. Compulsory Purchase and Compensation Robert’s compulsory purchase work centres on advising and representing acquiring authorities in respect of the making and securing of compulsory purchase orders. He also acts for private objectors to CPO schemes. Robert specialises in compensation work, both for compensating authorities and claimants.

Rupert Cohen

Rupert has a highly successful property and chancery practice allied with a specialist knowledge of costs law. Rupert has a successful property and chancery practice allied with a specialist knowledge of costs law. He was appointed Junior Counsel to the Crown (Attorney General’s A Panel) in 2020 and is an ADR Accredited Mediator. He is described in the directories as “a fantastic advocate, frighteningly clever and an absolute pleasure to work with. My go to junior for complex or tricky points of law.” (Legal 500 – Property Litigation, 2022). “A go-to guru for costs cases at the junior level.” (Legal 500 – Costs Litigation, 2022). “A costs wizard who is clearly very able. Clients love him as he is both succinct and confident.” (Chambers & Partners – Costs Litigation, 2021) “Direct, commercial and a joy to work with.” “He has such a phenomenal way with words and on his feet.” (Chambers & Partners – Real Estate Litigation, 2021). He is also ranked in both Chambers & Partners 2022 and Who’s Who Legal 2021 as a “leading mediator” and described as “a noteworthy mediator with particular expertise and experience in substantial property disputes” (Chambers & Partners – Mediators, 2022), in addition to “He is very good at thinking strategically as well as on the technicality of law. He is fantastic on his feet.” “Rupert is calm and very polished. He is diplomatic with clients.” (Chambers & Partners – Real Estate Litigation, 2022) Recent cases: • Aviva Investors Ground Rent GP Ltd v Williams [2023] UKSC 6 • Belsner v CAM Legal Services Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1387 (led by David Holland KC) • FirstPort Property Services Ltd v Settlers Court RTM Co Ltd [2022] UKSC 1 • Pigot v Environment Agency [2021] EWCA Civ 213 (led by Richard Turney) • Lejonvarn v Burgess��[2020] EWCA Civ 114 • Mirchandani v Lord Chancellor [2020] EWCA Civ 1260 • Global Assets Advisory Services Ltd v Grandlane Developments Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 1764 • West v Stockport NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWCA Civ 1220 (led by Nick Bacon KC).

Rupert Warren KC

Rupert Warren KC is the head of Landmark Chambers’ Planning Group. Rupert is a leading specialist in planning and related areas of public law. Rupert was called to the Bar in 1994 and took silk in 2012. He is rated in Band 1 in both Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners. Rupert acts for many leading developers, landowners, promoters and investors, as well as central Government, local authorities and individuals. He has particular expertise in the High Court and Court of Appeal, complex advisory work and advocacy in major planning appeals. Residential development continues to form a core part of Rupert’s practice, including in the promotion of new settlements (in Essex, Kent, Hampshire and West Sussex), major urban extensions through Local Plans and applications (in Kent, Durham, Cambridge, Bristol, Oxford and around London). He continues to advise on residential-led development particularly in London, as well as residential projects across the country. These include major town centre schemes in central Manchester, Reading, Kingston and Guildford. Design, heritage, water/nutrient neutrality, BNG and carbon feature heavily in these projects. For many years Rupert has advised and represented the market leaders in the field of retirement and later years residential development, including McCarthy Stone, Life Story, Inspired Villages, BUPA, Minton and Guild Living/L&G. In London he successfully challenged part of the Mayor’s residential SPG on behalf of the sector as well as leading on its London Plan representations. Rupert advised government for some years in relation to the Oxford-Milton Keynes-Cambridge Arc and continues to be involved in many projects across that area, including North Cambridge, extensions to the north and south of Oxford, infrastructure-related residential and mixed-use schemes from Buckinghamshire to Norfolk In London, Rupert is recognised as a leader in the field of complex mixed use development projects, often featuring tall buildings and heritage context as well as commercial/mixed uses. Over the last few years his caseload in London has been heavy, including representing Mitsubishi Estate in the called-in inquiry into the redevelopment of the ITV site on the South Bank, the called-in Berkeley/St Edward’s re-development of the Tesco/Homebase sites in Hounslow and the appeal consent for residential development opposite Hampton Court (Jolly Boatman site). He advised and represented the City of London on its Salisbury Square Fleet Street project, currently under construction, Canary Wharf Group on Isle of Dogs proposals and advised on the consents (including through appeal) at Glengal Quay and Crossharbour District Centre. Rupert is also expert in retail, commercial, Life Sciences/R&D, logistics and data centre development. Over the last few years, he has advised and represented major online retailers, strategic logistics developers/stakeholders such as SEGRO, IM Properties and Prologis, and data centres developers (including major applications and appeals both east and west of London, in the Thames Valley corridor). He is working on appeals and applications in both Oxford and Cambridge involving substantial provision of Life Science floorspace and offices. His experience embraces DCO work (for instance advising and representing government on the Hinkley Point C new nuclear proposal), railfreight proposals, road schemes, and town centre CPOs (he was involved in the schemes now known as Grand Arcade, Cambridge, Bath Southgate and Cabot Circus Bristol). Rupert advised the Coalition Government on the first NPPF in 2011-12, its successor on the major revision in 2017-18, and the current Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government on the latest revisions to the NPPF in 2024 and NDMPs. He advised on the PD changes in 2020-21 and successfully defended the legislative changes in the Court. As a result, he has a particular expertise in national policy formulation, interpretation and legal challenge.

Russell Harris KC

Russell specialises in planning and environmental work. Russell is now involved in most of the UKs highest-profile development schemes. Russell is particularly experienced in preparing for and acting at large public inquiries. He is noted for his ability to understand large volumes of technical evidence, to formulate effective cross-examination of expert witnesses and to present a client’s case clearly and effectively. Russell has been selected as Planning Silk of the year a number of times: most recently at the October 2022 Legal 500 UK Bar Awards. Russell sits on the Wales Assembly Government Planning Forum. He has been appointed a Special Advocate by the Attorney General and is a Bencher and trustee of Gray’s Inn. When not at work, he spends most of his time on the Atlantic Ocean. He is also a WRU rugby coach. Russell will be participating in a charity bike ride to Cannes for MIPIM 2024 which will take place on Wednesday 6 March. Further details, including how to donate, may be found on his JustGiving page here.

Samantha Broadfoot KC

Samantha is joint head of the Public Law Group at Landmark Chambers. Samantha’s practice encompasses a wide spectrum of cases with a public law angle including: • Health care – pharmaceutical regulation, hospital downgrades, NHS charging schemes, NHS investigations. • Education – academisation process, SEN, exclusion, Ofqual issues. • Immigration – systemic challenges, business, EU, removal, human rights, asylum. • Human Rights – across a range of fields including family law & parentage, surrogacy, regulating access to police DNA databases, discrimination, UNCRC. • Disciplinary / regulatory / code of conduct – e.g. proceedings before SDT, BSB, as well as challenges to decisions of such bodies & others, e.g. LSO. • Local authority – allocation of responsibility (‘who pays’), community care, powers, conduct issues. • Welfare – PIP. • Inquests – air accidents, marine accidents and hospital deaths • Public international law – questions of public international law arising out of the creation of the Republic of Cyprus and the Sovereign Bases Areas. • Health care – pharmaceutical regulation, hospital downgrades, NHS charging schemes, NHS investigations. • Education – academisation process, SEN, exclusion, Ofqual issues. • Immigration – systemic challenges, business, EU, removal, human rights, asylum. • Human Rights – across a range of fields including family law & parentage, surrogacy, regulating access to police DNA databases, discrimination, UNCRC. • Disciplinary / regulatory / code of conduct – e.g. proceedings before SDT, BSB, as well as challenges to decisions of such bodies & others, e.g. LSO. • Local authority – allocation of responsibility (‘who pays’), community care, powers, conduct issues. • Welfare – PIP. • Inquests – air accidents, marine accidents and hospital deaths • Public international law – questions of public international law arising out of the creation of the Republic of Cyprus and the Sovereign Bases Areas. Samantha is individually ranked in the directories in Administrative and Public Law and in Immigration. She is a contributor to the textbook NHS Law and Practice (2018). She is also a Recorder and sits in the Crown Court. She was appointed as a member of the European Human Rights Commission’s Panel in January 2020. Samantha acts for individuals and campaign groups seeking to bring public law challenges, as well as for a range of clients from central and local government, and regulators. She acts across the range forums, from judicial review and statutory appeals, to disciplinary matters and inquests. Prior to becoming a KC in February 2017, she was appointed to the Attorney General’s A panel of Junior Counsel. This was following her previous appointments where in 2001, Samantha was appointed to the Attorney General's C Panel of Junior Counsel and in 2005, to the B Panel. In 2008, she was appointed to the Bar Standards Board Complaints Committee. In 2019, she was appointed as legal counsel to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s B Panel.

Sasha White KC

Sasha is a planning specialist with particular expertise in planning inquiries and High Court work. NOMINATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND NOTABLE MATTERS: • Nominated for Planning Silk of the Year by Legal 500 for 2020 and 2024 • Identified as one of the top Planning Silks practicing in England and Wales in the Legal 500, Chambers and Partners and Planning Magazine, where he was ranked third in the country in the latest Planning Law Survey • He has been described as a “Excellent in every way – expertise, experience, advocacy and diligence” and “Sasha is without parallel the best planning [K]C to work with” [Legal 500 2022] and “Sasha is absolutely the best, he is a pleasure to work with and always makes everyone at ease, even junior members of the client team” [Legal 500 2023] • And “a true legend of the Planning Bar” and who “is the best silk I know for cross-examining” [Chambers and Partners Guide to the Bar 2022] • As a Junior he was stated to be “the leading Planning junior in the UK” by Legal 500 in 2003 and identified as the number one Planning Junior in the UK by Planning Magazine for 8 consecutive years from 1996-2004. • Hosted the RTPI National Annual Planning Awards of Excellence – 2021 and 2022. • Has won 38 of his last 41 planning appeals and High Court cases. [As at 1/10/2023] • Previously Head of the Planning Group at Landmark Chambers [2020-2023] • Founder member of and Panelist for “Have we got planning news for you” which has produced over 80 episodes and been watched by over 100,000 since March 2020. • Author of “Planning Appeals” – Central Law Publishing 1997. • Took 4 years away from work to be the primary parent for his three children [2003-2007]. PROFESSIONAL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE PAST 5 YEARS: In the past 8 years since 2015 Sasha has: • Been instructed by 8 of the top 10 planning solicitor firms. • Been instructed by 9 of the top 10 UK housebuilders. • Been instructed by 8 of the top 10 UK retailers. NOTABLE INSTRUCTIONS IN THE PAST 5 YEARS: • Won permission for 200 houses in Chichester in August 2023. • Won permission for 150 units in Waverley in May 2023. • Won permission at appeal for 215 units in Swindon in December 2022. • Promoted 1000 units in London Borough of Barnet in March 2023 at Call in Inquiry. • Won permission for 500 houses in the Green Belt in Little Chalfont in March 2023. • Won planning permission at appeal for 1400 homes in Bury St Edmonds in 2022. • Won planning permission for 150 houses in Tenterden in April 2022. • Won 11 appeals for Churchill Homes in 2021-23. • Won permission in St Helens for 1 million square feet of B8 in Green Belt in October 2021. • Won permission in Bath for major mixed-use development of 400 units in 2021/22. • Instructed to represent Tower Hamlets Council on the highest profile case of 2020/1 involving Westferry Printworks and the Secretary of State accepting “Apparent Bias”. • Appeared as advocate in over 100 public inquiries under the Planning Acts. • Successfully defended grant of permission for the largest permission in Southwark. • Did the first housing planning appeal in 2020 to deal with the effect of Covid 19. • Successfully promoted Newcastle and Gateshead Core Strategy involving 40,000 homes. • Promoted over 75 Housing Appeal Schemes ranging in size from 50 to 5000 units. • Been instructed by the Government through the Homes and Communities Agency in England and the Department for Social Development in Northern Ireland. • Advised on 5 major settlements and garden villages all in excess of 5000 units. • Been instructed by the leading members of the Land Promoters Development Forum. • Appeared for LPA in a major inquiry [Sunderland] for an EFW proposal February 2020. • Won Permission for a major redevelopment in the LLDC in November 2019. • Won the Inspectors recommendation to refuse the Westferry Printworks proposals for a major redevelopment scheme of 1500 homes in January 2020. • Won planning permission for the largest town centre redevelopment in 2019 in the UK. • Advised a major London Authority [2019/2020] on the biggest scheme in their history. PREVIOUS CAREER HIGHLIGHTS: • Promoting the major expansion of Liverpool Airport in 1995 with Lionel Read KC. • Appearing in the 12 party Peterborough Retail inquiry in 1996 led by Stephen Morgan. • Advising Tesco Stores from 1997-2015 on over 200 retail schemes. • Supporting at appeal the expansion of Brent Cross in 1999. • Winning permission at call in inquiry for the new Newcastle Falcons Stadium in 2002. • Winning permission for 450-unit housing on most investigated site in UK - 2008. • Winning permission at appeal for new Tesco led by Russell Harris KC in Wiltshire in 2009. • Winning in the Supreme Court with Neil Cameron Q.C. in Morge v HCC in 2010. • Winning planning permission for 500 student units at appeal for UCL in 2010. • Appearing for the North Yorkshire County Council in a gas-processing factory in 2011. • Protecting the planning permission for stadium for FC United in the High Court in 2012. • Protecting the planning permission for the redevelopment of Old Trafford Cricket Ground in the Court of Appeal in 2013 led by Christopher Katkowski KC. • Winning permission on appeal for 1000 houses in North Tyneside for Persimmon and the Duke of Northumberland in 2013 and 2014. • Promoted 6 development plans [1996-2019]. PERSONAL: • Current Non-Executive Director of the Professional Cricketers Association [2020-]. • Current Non-Executive Director of Kent County Cricket Club [2023-] • Previously Director of Middlesex County Cricket Club [2019-2022] • Run 4 marathons [London (2016, 2019, 2021), NYC (2017),] and 15 half marathons. • Cycled from Land’s End to John O’Groats in August 2020 raising £17,000 for the Samaritans. • Cycling from Dover to Durness in August 2023 across 14 days and 1500 kilometres. • Playing member of Aston Rowant Cricket Club 4th XI. [2011-Present] • Member of: MCC, Middlesex CCC, Kent CCC, Warwickshire CCC, Surrey CCC, Western Province CC, Primrose Hill CC, Huntercombe GC, RAC, Alnmouth GC and Turnberry GC. • Chair of the Home Counties Premier Cricket League [2022-] • Season Tickets -Rangers FC, Arsenal FC, Murrayfield, Twickenham, Lords, Edgbaston, Oval. • Read Law at Trinity College Cambridge [Vice-President of the CU Law Society [1988-1989].

Sasha Blackmore

Sasha specialises in difficult, sensitive cutting-edge public law at the intersection with environmental, planning and rights-based law. Sasha also has a strong reputation internationally in marine work. Sasha has appeared at all levels up to the Supreme Court and has extensive experience of judicial review proceedings, statutory appeals and planning inquiries. Sasha appears regularly in the Administrative Court and the Planning Court. The directories' comment that Sasha is "incredibly client focused, accessible and extremely personable whilst diligent and forensic in detail.” Sasha has a particular interest in environmental-related matters in public and planning law, and spent time on a Pegasus scholarship in Australia and New Zealand examining their system of environmental and planning courts. Sasha has also been a Trustee and Director of Forum for the Future and has been a Trustee and Director of the United Kingdom Environmental Law Association as a member of the Governing Council. Sasha spent her first year of tenancy as a Judicial Assistant to the Law Lords (Lord Scott of Foscote, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury), working on cases before both the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords and the Privy Council. She gained substantial experience of appellate advocacy and judicial practice during that year. Cases she worked on in the House of Lords as a judicial assistant included, R v. London Borough of Bromley, ex parte Barker [2006] UKHL 52 and Belfast City Council v Miss Behavin Limited [2007] UKHL 19. In September 2020, Sasha was appointed to the Attorney General’s A Panel of Junior Counsel. She is also one of a small number of barristers appointed to the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Panel Counsel in 2019. Sasha Notable cases include: Interpretations of planning permissions • Lambeth v SSHCLG [2019] UKSC 33 - Sasha acted in leading Supreme Court case on the interpretation of planning permissions • Dunnett v SSCLG[2017] EWCA Civ 192 - Sasha acted in leading Court of Appeal case on the interpretation of a planning condition to exclude the GPDO/UCO. Housing • Jelson v SSCLG[ [2018] EWCA Civ 24] (sole Counsel below) - Sasha acted in important Court of Appeal cases on “five year housing land supply” (“5YHLS”) and in the “East Bergholt” line of cases. • R(East Bergholt PC )(No. 2) v Babergh DC [2019] EWCA Civ 2200 - Sasha acted in the Court of Appeal on permission to appeal refused by the Supreme Court. • Sasha has also acted in a range of other housing cases. Rights-based public law • McKay v All England Lawn Tennis Club [2020] EWCA Civ 695 - permission to appeal refused by the Supreme Court, this was an article 6 right to a fair trial, committal for breach of Order to disclose information and declaration of incompatibility. • Sasha has acted in a range of licence-based cases, e.g. acted in leading case for Home Office sponsorship licence revocation R(Taste of India Ltd) v SSHD [2018] EWHC 414 (Admin) (and many other cases in this area) • Sasha has acted in a range of cases for Department of Education restricting school’s licences to operate e.g. most recently Promised Land v SSE [2021] UKFTT 0057 (HESC); • Sasha has act for DWP in recoupment cases; A1P1 cases including a variety of fisheries cases in the High Court including R (Greenpeace) v SSEFRA [2016] EWHC 55 • Sasha is acting in Castelucci v Gender Recognition Panel and Minister for Women and Equalities [CO/4347/2022), Article 8 case about a non-binary individual seeking gender recognition in the UK’s binary system and declaration of incompatibility (now led by Sir James Eadie) (current) in three forums • Sasha acted in test cases on certification for removal to an EU Member State based on Article 8/Article 3 ECHR rights and other associated Tribunal litigation (NA (Sudan) v SSHD [2016] EWCA Civ 1060. Gypsy & Traveller • Recent examples include Nixon v SSHCLG [2020] EWHC 3036 - a high-profile challenge by 2 Claimants in national press (13 grounds, 19 issues and 39 sub-issues). Planning and National Security work • Crest Nicholson v West Berkshire DC and Secretary of State for Defence and others [2021] EWHC 289 (Admin) [2021] 2 WLUK 193 - a significant challenge by major housebuilders to the increased protection zone around an important nuclear military asset. • Sasha also does other national security work. Marine, Harbour, and Water law • R.( Tarian Hafren Severn Shield Cyf) v MMO [2022] EWHC 683 - a challenge to the construction of Hinckley Point C, the first nuclear power station in a generation • Thomson v MMO [2019] EWHC 2368 - a high-profile challenge across national media to the regeneration of Dover Port related to dredging in the “Goodwin Sands” off of Dover • The “Powell” line of cases challenging major development in Brighton Marina, including the important [2017] EWHC 1491 on actionable interferences with public rights of navigation, and [2015] EWCA Civ 650 whether Private Act provided continuing powers. International marine work • Sasha is acting in multi-billion international environmental fisheries adjudications in the Pacific Ocean, Atlantic Ocean, Indian Ocean and North Sea in London, New York, Dubai and Madrid (subject of Netflix documentary (Seaspiracy) & Select Committee inquiry) • Sasha is acting in cases on revocation of the UK “flag” on vessels • Sasha acted in R(Guernsey) v SSEFRA [2016]EWHC 1847 - an important case about the scope of improper motive and fisheries policies between the UK Government and the Bailiwick of Guernsey.

Scott Lyness KC

Scott Lyness specialises in all aspects of planning and environmental law including infrastructure, energy, housing, commercial and retail. His varied practice encompasses appearances at planning inquiries and examinations and in the Higher Courts. Scott’s varied practice encompasses all aspects of planning both at inquiries and examinations and in the Higher Courts. He has particular expertise in providing strategic and detailed technical advice to guide large-scale and complex development proposals through the consent process, as well as preparing for and appearing at major planning inquiries and examinations. Throughout his career he has been rated highly in professional directories. He was nominated for Chambers and Partners; Planning Junior of the Year in 2016. Chambers and Partners (2024) say he is “well respected by the client. They trust him with the detail of a complex case”; he is “meticulous, extremely popular with clients and very reassuring. He was described (2023) as "savvy and tenacious”; “his appeal work is pragmatic and highly effective;" “his energy levels and commitment are off the scales. He leaves nothing to chance;" "He is thorough, self-sufficient, client-focused…”. The Legal 500 (2024) say that: “Scott is extremely user-friendly and approachable. He is impressive on his feet with a brilliant advocacy style. He is well-liked by clients, with a calming manner which is a key strength. He will always go above and beyond what is required, meaning he will always get stuck in. He is a genuine pleasure to work alongside”. Scott’s practice covers major infrastructure and energy-related proposals, including cases covered by the NSIP regime. His work has covered a range of developments including railways, nuclear power stations, gas storage facilities, onshore and oﬀshore wind farms and solar arrays. His substantial and varied housing experience includes advice on housing need and supply, as well as the wide range of issues commonly associated with residential proposals, including affordable housing and viability. He appears regularly for both housebuilders and local authorities at planning inquiries. His extensive regeneration experience has included public inquiries into city centre regeneration schemes, often involving issues relating to compulsory purchase, residential and retail development, office and employment floorspace, listed buildings and conservation areas, section 106 obligations and detailed technical issues relating to noise, air quality and transport. He has considerable expertise of cases involving tall building proposals, particularly in London, which often raise heritage issues. He has significant experience in promoting and objecting to development plans at examination stage, and in advising on emerging policy. He advises and acts frequently on environmental issues including EIA and habitats. Notable cases Scott has been instructed on include: • Appearing for Historic England at the public inquiry to oppose the “Tulip” (Foster & Partners), a 305m tall visitor attraction in the City near the Tower of London World Heritage Site. • Acting for Highways England in relation to their proposals for a 10-mile dual carriageway and new junctions on the A428 between Black Cat and Caxton Gibbett. • Representing the University of Cambridge in connection with proposals for a new station to serve the Cambridge Biomedical Campus. • Appearing for York City Council at the examination into its Local Plan. • Appearing at public inquiry to promote a scheme for Market Square, Basildon, involving 492 build-to-rent properties in mixed use development up to 17 storeys. • Advising Gatwick airport on proposals to reposition its northern runway to allow dual runway operations. • Advising petitioners on the HS2 Phase 2b: High Speed Rail (Crewe – Manchester) Bill 2022. He was called to the Bar of England and Wales in November 1996 and to the Bar of Northern Ireland in 2005. He is Chair of Chambers’ Pupillage Committee.

Siân McGibbon

“Siân is very sharp. She is excellent at using public law principles to craft a winning strategy in difficult cases” (Legal 500, 2023). Siân is a specialist public law barrister with a busy practice spanning all aspects of administrative, human rights, and local government law, as well as related areas of planning and environmental law. Siân joined Landmark Chambers in 2023 and has continued to build a busy practice spanning all aspects of administrative, human rights, and local government law, as well as related areas of planning and environmental law. She has extensive experience of working as sole counsel and as part of a team, and has appeared in more than 20 reported cases including five before the Court of Appeal and seven before the Privy Council. She has been ranked as a ‘rising star’ in administrative and human rights law in Legal 500, 2023 and 2024. Directory testimonials recognise her as “an amazing junior” and particularly as “excellent at using public law principles to craft a winning strategy in difficult cases”. She is direct access qualified and welcomes instructions on this basis in appropriate cases across all her practice areas. Before coming to the Bar, Siân studied law at Oxford University and worked for the Ministry of Justice as judicial assistant to Lord Justice Hamblen (as he then was) in the Court of Appeal, where she gained insight into the judicial perspective on the court’s day to day work and proceedings. Beyond her practice, Siân maintains a strong academic interest in public law. She is assistant editor of the Judicial Review journal, and is currently completing a PhD at University College London, where her doctoral research complements her practice in public law. Her work is supervised by Professor Richard Rawlings and Dr Michael Veale. Reported Cases • R (Webb) v. London Borough of Bromley [2023] EWHC 2091 (Admin) – Siân acted for the London Borough of Bromley, initially as sole counsel (in successfully resisting permission on five of six grounds at the oral renewal hearing) and subsequently alongside Paul Brown KC in successfully defending the substantive claim. • Peters v. Permanent Secretary [2023] UKPC 23 – Siân was instructed as junior counsel in this Privy Council appeal against a decision to dismiss an application for judicial review of secondary legislation which restricted access to disability assistance to those with a ‘permanent’ disability. • Zaman v. London Borough of Waltham Forest [2023] EWCA Civ 322 – Siân acted for the successful appellant, initially as sole counsel (in the county court and in securing permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal), and later as junior counsel alongside Jamie Burton KC. The Court of Appeal ruled that the respondent authority had failed to evidence compliance with its policy when taking the decision to move the appellant and her family 170 miles from their previous home. • Silochan v. Cedeno [2023] UKPC 5 – Siân acted for the appellant before the Privy Council in this challenge concerning the interpretation and application of the Trinidad and Tobago Town and Country Planning Act. • R (Campbell) v. Ealing London Borough Council [2023] EWHC 10 (Admin) – Siân acted as sole counsel for the claimant in this judicial review of the defendant’s breach of duty under Care Act 2014. Siân acted in the successful application to the Court of Appeal and remains instructed in the forthcoming appeal. • Rowe v. London Borough of Haringey [2022] EWCA Civ 1370 – Siân acted for the appellant initially as sole counsel (in the county court and in securing permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal) and subsequently as led counsel (in the substantive proceedings before the Court of Appeal). • R (ZOS) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWHC 3567 (Admin) – Siân was sole counsel for the successful claimant in this application for judicial review, and acted in the enforcement proceedings which followed the Secretary of State’s breach of the mandatory order. • Jogie v. Sealy [2022] UKPC 32 – Siân was junior counsel for the successful appellant in this appeal to the Privy Council concerning the application of the doctrine of relation back and succession rights under Land Tenants (Security of Tenure) Act. • Solomon v. Solomon [2022] UKPC 34 – Siân was junior counsel for the appellant in this appeal to the Privy Council concerning the powers of the Registrar of the Trinidad and Tobago High Court. • R (ZLL) v. Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities [2022] EWCA Civ 1059 – Siân was instructed as junior counsel, led by Jamie Burton KC, in this appeal which raised questions of wider importance on the determination of academic appeals and relief in judicial review proceedings. • Sharaky v. Clearspring Ready Homes [2022] EWHC 2019 (QB) – Siân acted for the claimant, initially as sole counsel in the successful application for interim relief and subsequently as led counsel in the three-day High Court trial. She remains instructed in the subsequent ongoing application to the European Court of Human Rights, led by Toby Vanhegan. • R (Cort) v. London Borough of Lambeth[2022] EWHC 1085 (Admin) – Siân acted for the successful claimant in this successful application for judicial review of the defendant’s refusal to provide the claimant with accommodation under the national ‘Everyone In’ initiative during the Covid-19 pandemic on the basis of failure to take into account relevant considerations. • R (ZLL) v. Secretary of State for Housing, Communities, and Local Government[2022] EWHC 85 (Admin) – Siân was instructed as junior counsel for the claimant, led by Jamie Burton KC, in this application for judicial review of the MHCLG’s decision to withdraw the ‘Everyone In’ policy adopted in response to the Covid-19 pandemic and in the successful application to Fordham J for permission to appeal. • R (BL) v. London Borough of Islington [2021] EWHC 3044 – Siân acted for the London Borough of Islington in resisting the application for permission to seek judicial review and in resolving complex preliminary issues concerning the claimant’s mental capacity. • Association of Chartered Certified Accountants v. Awodola [2021] EWCA Civ 1635 – Siân appeared unled for the successful respondent, opposite a leading silk, and secured a pro bono costs order of £25,000.00 for the Access to Justice Foundation. • Duncan & Jokhan v. Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago [2021] UKPC 17 – Siân acted for the successful appellants in this constitutional appeal against the Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago, led by Anand Beharrylal KC. • Betaudier v. Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago [2021] UKPC 7 – Siân acted for the successful appellant in this appeal claim for damages for unlawful arrest and detention, led by Anand Beharrylal KC. • R (Good Law Project) v. Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2021] EWHC 346 – Siân was junior counsel for the Secretary of State in this high profile Covid-19 procurement policy challenge, led by Philip Moser KC and instructed by the Government Legal Department. Also instructed in the consequential dispute over the appropriate form of relief ([2021] EWHC 505 (Admin)). • R (Awodola) v. Association of Chartered Accountants [2020] EWHC 3059– Siân acted for the claimant in this successful application for judicial review, and in the subsequent successful application for litigant in person and pro bono costs orders ([2020] EWHC 3369). • Stanley v. Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council [2020] EWCA Civ 1458 – Siân acted for the appellant in this significant case clarifying the validity and legal status of review decisions notified out of time by the local authority.

Simon Allison

Simon is a specialist property practitioner. He is described in the Legal 500 as an excellent advocate and one of the best barristers in the property field. Simon is a specialist property practitioner. He is described in the Legal 500 as an excellent advocate and one of the best barristers in the property field. Simon relishes all forms of advocacy, and has appeared in all levels of court and tribunal including recently appearing twice in the Supreme Court. He is widely recognised as a specialist in leasehold management, forfeiture and service charge cases, and has appeared in a number of the leading cases in this area. Simon has been nominated for the Real Estate Junior Barrister of the Year in the Chambers UK Bar Awards 2024 and Property and Housing Junior Barrister of the Year in the Legal 500 Awards 2024. He was also shortlisted for Barrister of the Year at the Enfranchisement and Right to Manage Awards 2022. Simon is frequently instructed across the full range of real property disputes, including landlord and tenant, issues of adverse possession, restrictive covenants, land registration and easements. He regularly advises on a range of issues arising out of development agreements, including joint venture agreements, options and overage, as well as on issues at the intersection of property and insolvency law. His clients include developers, land owners, financial institutions, leasehold management companies, ground rent investment companies, local authorities, Right to Manage companies, LPA receivers and surveyors. Simon is favoured by solicitors for his practical common sense commercial advice; he is regularly instructed to represent clients at mediations and other forms of ADR. Simon is a past Treasurer and Secretary of the Property Bar Association, having served in each role for three years. In 2021, Simon was appointed as a fee paid Judge of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber), assigned to the Land Registration division. Before coming to the Bar, Simon worked for ten years providing (through his company) technical, design and production services to clients in the entertainment, film, corporate hospitality and motor industries, both in the UK and abroad. He has considerable commercial experience. Simon spends his spare time entertaining his children, ideally combining this with his interests in cycling, cars, collecting photography books and working on his house (a thatched former cow shed).

Sophie Gibson

Sophie is a barrister with expertise in land-related matters spanning property, planning and public law. She accepts instructions across Chambers' areas of practice with a specialist interest in the use of land and Chancery (traditional and commercial) issues. Her notable recent work includes: • Sole counsel for the successful Respondent in a two-day trial in the Land Registration Division of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) addressing joint ownership, proprietary estoppel, and common intention constructive trusts in the domestic consumer context against a controversial factual background. The judgment is available here. • Sole counsel for the successful Appellant developer in a planning enforcement inquiry brought on grounds (d), (f) and (g) of s.174 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a Notice alleging material change of use from a single dwellinghouse to four flats. The Decision Letter was issued only three days after the inquiry closed and can be found here. • Junior counsel (led by Justin Bates KC) for the Respondent in the Court of Appeal seeking to uphold the decision of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) in Assethold Ltd v 159-167 Prince of Wales Road RTM Co Ltd [2023] UKUT 220 (LC), [2024] L. & T.R. 2 concerning estoppel and RTM costs under section 88 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. • Representing landlords, tenants and executors in complex residential and commercial possession proceedings regarding tenancies under the Housing Acts 1980, Housing Act 1988 and both Parts I and II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. • Drafting and advising on pleadings, notices and counter-notices on enfranchisement, right to manage and rights of first refusal under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967, Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 and Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. • Advising tenants on how to protect their use of communal gardens from both a property and planning perspective, including advice on strategy for opposing the landlord’s intended rooftop development. • Advising a local authority on whether it holds open space land on statutory or charitable trusts, as well as the validity of restrictive covenants purportedly granted pursuant to section 33 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 and their modification under section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925. • Planning enforcement in the Magistrates’ Court for both prosecution and defence, from first appearance to trial. • Advising and representing in court landowners in neighbour disputes regarding nuisance, easements, water rights, and trespass. • Advising on the enforceability of section 106 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 planning obligations imposed upon leasehold land. Sophie is an editor of the Encyclopedia of Housing Law and Practice (Sweet & Maxwell) and has previously assisted with Snell’s Equity (Sweet & Maxwell) and Land Law: Text, Cases and Materials (OUP). Sophie is a member of the Attorney General’s “junior junior” scheme and acts for both claimants and defendants. Sophie joined Chambers in October 2023 following the successful completion of pupillage. She was supervised by Simon Allison, Richard Turney and Alex Goodman KC developing a broad practice in line with Chambers profile. During pupillage, Sophie worked on cases across Landmark’s core practice areas with particular expertise in property litigation, planning appeals, hearings and inquiries, judicial review, and public rights of access to land. Before joining Landmark, Sophie graduated from the University of Oxford with first-class undergraduate and postgraduate Law degrees receiving numerous academic scholarships and prizes. As a student, she won the Landmark Chambers Property Law Mooting Competition 2018. After graduation, Sophie worked in academia as a Research Assistant and Admissions Tutor at the University of Oxford. She undertook complex research into all areas of property law, landlord and tenant, equity and trusts, and the overlap between property law and human rights. She assisted with the new editions of the practitioners’ text Snell’s Equity (Sweet & Maxwell) and textbook Land Law: Text, Cases and Materials (OUP). Sophie specialised in ‘post-Grenfell’ fire safety issues, service charges and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 as an editor of and contributor to the University’s Housing After Grenfell Blog, a forum for discussion about housing and law-related matters with a particular emphasis on fire safety. She edited and managed the University’s Property Law Blog, a platform for debating property theory, land law, trusts, equity, personal property, charities, landlord and tenant and housing. Sophie also worked as a Legal Support Assistant at Matrix Chambers. In this role she gained extensive experience as a legal researcher, working on commercial, civil, public and human rights matters at a leading set. Sophie worked closely with the Practice Management team, gaining insight into client relations and the internal workings of chambers. As a result, Sophie is well-placed to provide an all-round service to clients. She also edited and contributed to the UK Supreme Court Blog.

Stephen Whale

Stephen has an extensive practice in all aspects of planning and environment law, local government law, highway law, public law and licensing law. Stephen is one of the highest ranked juniors for Planning in the country in both the Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners. Stephen has an extensive practice in all aspects of planning and environment law, local government law, highway law, public law and licensing law. He regularly advises and represents developers, local authorities, interest groups, government agencies and the Secretary of State. Stephen has a great deal of experience at planning inquiries and hearings, as well as DCO examinations, together with all court levels from the magistrates’ court up to the Supreme Court. He is licensed to accept direct instructions by way of Public Access. Stephen has many reported cases to his name. He has been highly ranked in the leading directories for both Planning and Licensing over many years. Stephen is the author of the enforcement section in the Encyclopaedia of Planning Law. Stephen was called to the Bar by Gray’s Inn in 1999. He was appointed to the Attorney General’s Panel of Junior Counsel between 2007 and 2020, culminating in five years on the A Panel.

Stephen Morgan

Stephen specialises in planning and related fields of law including villages greens, highways and common land. His work covers the whole range of planning matters and developments of all of natures and scales, including currently a new settlement of up to 10,000 dwellings in South East England. Stephen adopts a strategy led, solution seeking approach to assist his private and public sector clients. Those he works with include many developers, land owners, housebuilders, minerals and waste operators, local residents and he also works frequently with local authorities and parish councils. To seek to provide the best possible assistance to his clients, he seeks to keep up to date on all decisions and relevant happenings, along with emerging procedural, legal and policy changes. Stephen’s practice as a specialist planning barrister also includes extensive experience of village greens, highways, advertisements, heritage assets and compulsory purchase and compensation. His work covers hearings, inquiries, criminal and civil courts, including advising and appearing in judicial review and statutory challenge proceedings. Stephen’s experience covers the whole range of residential, retail, leisure/community and commercial developments (including urban extensions as well as major regeneration schemes), as well the other specific types of development and projects, including major infrastructure projects and in particular waste and energy facilities; his work covers the regulatory aspects (under the various regimes and Directives) as well as the planning issues. He has for several years for example been acting for the promoter of a new settlement of up to 10,000 houses together the extensive associated infrastructure in the south-east of England, which has required many technical as well as planning solutions. Stephen’s work spans all planning and related aspects including – developing strategy before and after the necessary consents are sought; in relation to development plan proposals; advising on responding to officers and other consultees; getting around objections; considering conditions or covenants to cover concerns; legal agreements; assisting in written representations as well as hearings, including appearances and in preparing for and appearing at inquiries. Stephen is very familiar with and enjoys the challenge of “technical” aspects of development such as highways, noise, air quality, dealing with nitrates from residential schemes, contamination and archaeology. He also has extensive experience in design issues in relation to the whole range of development types. This work covers not just planning application appeals and call-ins but also enforcement notice appeals, certificate of lawfulness appeals, listed buildings enforcement notices. Stephen’s village green work involves him in advising commons registration authorities and sitting as an inspector; advising and appearing at inquiries on behalf of applicants and objectors; he has also appeared in the High Court and Court of Appeal in relation to these matters. As well as promoting schemes, Stephen has also always worked with local authority teams – including in relation to applications, appeals and formulation and promotion of development plans, which he has done throughout his career.

Tim Buley KC

Tim Buley KC specialises in all areas of public and regulatory law, human rights, and planning and environmental law. Tim is recognised as a leading silk across eight areas in Chambers and Partners 2024 and the Legal 500 2024. Comments about Tim include that he is “clearly one of the most talented public lawyers of his generation of rising silks”, “a great advocate”, and that “when he’s your opposition, your heart sinks because he is so good”. Tim’s practice covers the full range of public law work, from commercial and regulatory matters, planning and the environment, through constitutional and EU law, local government and healthcare, to civil liberties and human rights, immigration, and social welfare. He is equally experienced acting for and against public bodies, and for commercial interests and individuals. The breadth of his practice is demonstrated by his clients, who include commercial organisations and developers, regulators, individuals, NGOs and pressure groups, most central government departments, devolved administrations, many local authorities, and a wide range of independent and non-departmental public bodies. Tim has appeared as leading counsel at all levels of the UK court system including numerous appearances in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and Administrative and Planning Courts, as well as in public inquiries and tribunals. He has also appeared in the Court of Justice of the European Union and the General Court. He has well over 250 reported cases across his practice areas. Tim is a Special Advocate and a member of the Welsh Government’s Panel of King’s Counsel and the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Panel of Counsel. Prior to appointment to silk, Tim was a member of the Attorney-General’s A-Panel of junior counsel to the Crown and he continues to act for the government in significant cases. He is Developed Vetted. In Autumn 2022, he was appointed as a Deputy Judge of the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber).

Timothy Morshead KC

Tim practices in real estate law across its full gamut. Tim has appeared in many of the leading property cases, including interpretation of contracts as well as the valuation, rating, planning and public law issues which arise. He also has expertise in the fields of nuisance, professional negligence, compulsory purchase, highways, town and village greens and local government law. Tim has been nominated for the Real Estate Silk of the Year in the Chambers UK Awards 2024. Tim’s recent cases include Darwall v National Park Authority (camping on Dartmoor), Esso v Breen (protester injunctions) and Circus Apartments v Canary Riverside (single largest piece of litigation currently, or ever, underway in the LVT). His reported cases reflect the diversity of his practice and many will be familiar to practitioners across a broad range of fields: eg Cobbe v Yeoman’s Row (proprietary estoppel), Chartbrook v Persimmon (contractual interpretation), Arnold v Britton (contractual interpretation), Peacock v Custins (easements), Regency Villas (easements), TfL v City of London (highways), Woolway (VO) v Mazars (rating). Tim was featured by The Times as “Lawyer of the Week” for his work on protester injunctions in November 2022. For about two decades, he has consistently been ranked and described favourably in the directories. As a junior barrister, Tim progressed through the Attorney-General’s panels of Treasury counsel culminating in the “A Panel”. This gave him privileged experience of advising in a variety of areas of law with land (usually) as the common thread – and also of appearing in Courts and Tribunals at all levels, at hearings, trials and appeals. In silk, Tim’s work remains focused on the full gamut of real estate law, where he advises and appears in some of the most challenging and complex cases, often involving “crossover” issues where two or more disparate areas of law must be brought together. He has expertise in all aspects of conventional “Chancery”-type property law and landlord & tenant law, including its equitable aspects such as proprietary and other estoppels and constructive trusts, as well as rating law and valuation, rent review, land valuation, compulsory purchase and compensation law, planning law, the law of nuisance, tort law generally including the economic torts, highways law, local government law and public law - and professional negligence in these fields. Tim provides advisory and advocacy services for private and commercial clients, central and local government bodies and other public bodies. Much of his work is highly sensitive. Advocacy and Litigation Experience Tim is an experienced litigator with appearances in a variety of tribunals including the Supreme Court, House of Lords, the Privy Council, the Court of Appeal, the High Court (Chancery Division, King’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court, Commercial Court, Administrative Court), the County Court, the Lands Tribunal (now the Upper Tribunal, Lands Chamber), various Valuation Tribunals and Leasehold Valuation Tribunals and planning and other statutory and non-statutory inquiries. He is an experienced cross examiner of factual and technical/ expert evidence. Tim also has experience of sitting as a non-statutory inquiry inspector, arbitrator and legal assessor. He is a qualified ADR group mediator. Notable cases Over the past few years his main reported cases have been these: Supreme court: • Southwark London Borough Council and City of London Corporation v. Transport for London [2018] 3 WLR 2059: real estate/ highways: Tim acted for TfL in this appeal concerning the meaning of the word “highway”: does it mean just the “top two spits” as had been thought and held below? Or can it include the whole interest in the land covered by the surface of the highway? • Regency Villas Title Ltd v. Diamond Resorts (Europe) Ltd [2018] 3 WLR 1603: real estate/ easements: a case concerning the legal characteristics of an “easement”. • Cardtronics Europe Ltd v. Sykes [2019] 1 WLR 2281: rating: whether ATMs situated in shops are liable to rates. Tim acts for HMRC and permission to appeal to the Supreme Court has been granted with a hearing due in March 2020. •Iceland Foods Ltd v. Berry [2018] 1 WLR 1277: rating: a case concerning the interpretation of the Plant and Machinery Regulations in relation to Iceland’s air conditioning equipment. • Woolway (VO) v. Mazars LLP [2015] AC 1862: rating: this case is the leading modern authority on the identification of the “hereditament” in rating. • Arnold v. Britton [2015] AC 1619: contracts/ real estate: this case about a lease is a leading modern authority on the interpretation of contracts. Older House of Lords cases: • Chartbrook Limited v. Persimmon Homes Limited [2009] 1 AC 1101: contracts/ real estate: this case about an overage agreement is a leading modern authority on the interpretation of contracts. • Cobbe v. Yeoman’s Row Management Limited [2008] 1 WLR 1752: real property/ equity: this was a case about proprietary estoppel. • Waters v. Welsh Development Agency[2004] 1 WLR 1304: compulsory purchase: this case established the modern principles applicable to identifying “the scheme” for the purposes of applying the Point Gourde principle. Court of Appeal: • Darwall v. Dartmoor NPA [2023] EWCA Civ 927: camping on Dartmoor. • Darwall v. Dartmoor NPA [2023] Ch 141: Camping on Dartmoor: first instance. • Breen v. Esso Petroleum Co Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1405: injunctions / committal for breach / aggravating factors. • Point West GR Ltd v. Bassi[2020] 1 WLR 4102: statutory interpretation / procedure. • Anixter Ltd v. Transport Secretary [2020] 1 WLR 2547: statutory interpretation / compulsory purchase. • Cardtronics Europe Ltd v. Sykes[2019] 1 WLR 2281: rating: see above. • Jones v. Oven [2018] All ER(D) 65: real property: interpretation of covenant. • Dudley Muslim Association v. Dudley MBC [2016] 1 P&CR 10: public law and real property: this case concerned the relationship between public law concepts and ordinary contract law. • Swift 1st Ltd v. Chief Land Registrar [2015] Ch 602: real property: this case concerned the fraud/forgery provisions of the Land Registration Act 2002. • Beech v. Kennerley [2012] 9 EG 150: real property: easements. • R ota Milton Keynes Council v. Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government [2012] JPL 728: public law: this case concerned the law of legitimate expectations. Older cases of importance in their fields: • Real estate: Silkstone v. Tatnall [2012] 1 WLR 400, Franks v. Bedward [2012] 1 WLR 2428, Batsford Estates(1983) Co Ltd v. Taylor [2006] 2 P&CR 5, Starmark Enterprises v. CPL Distribution Ltd [2002] Ch 306. • Rating: Bradford (VO) v. Vtesse Networks Ltd [2010] RA 69. • Planning/ minerals: R ota Bleaklow Industries Ltd v. SSCLG [2009] 2 P&CR 21). High Court: • Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v. Breen [2023] EWHC 2013 (KB): protester injunctions / rights of protest / economic torts / unlawful means conspiracy / lawful means conspiracy. • Quitain (Wembley Retail Park) Ltd v. Persons Unknown [2023] EWHC 1509: construction sites / tall buildings / cranes / injunctions. • KBC Developments LLP v. Wavin Ltd [2023] EWHC 153 (Ch): contractual interpretation / highways / highways agreements / interpretation of planning permission. • Pall Mall 3 Ltd v. Network Rail [2021] 2 P&CR 11: land vesting bona vacantia / easements. • R ota Principled Offsite Logistics Ltd v. Trafford Council [2018] RA 499: rating: rates mitigation / empty rates. Upper Tribunal: Harding v. Secretary of State for Transport [2017] RA 271: compulsory purchase: whether the “hereditament” covered by the blight provisions included both elements of a property used for equestrian purposes even though separated by a road. Clients Tim’s clients include major landholdings, large commercial organisations, supermarket operators and other retailers, branches of the central government, governmental and quasi-governmental agencies, banks, pension funds, charities, local authorities and statutory bodies, as well as private individuals and companies. Tim was appointed to the Treasury A Panel until taking silk. He is an experienced trial and appellate advocate, including in the Supreme Court / House of Lords and Privy Council.

Timothy Corner KC

Tim Corner KC specialises in planning, compulsory purchase and public law, including local government and environment law. He is a former Chairman of the Planning and Environment Bar Association and sits as a Deputy High Court Judge in the Administrative Court. Tim’s planning work embraces all types of development. He appears regularly in the higher courts and in the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) as well as in inquiries, examinations and hearings. He is listed by Chambers & Partners as a top tier planning silk. Tim’s recent cases in court include: • Secretary of State for Transport v Curzon Park Ltd [2023] UKSC 30, [2023] PTSR 1564 (Supreme Court, compulsory purchase, whether when an application for a Certificate of Appropriate Alternative Development-“CAAD”-is determined in relation to a site, applications for CAADs on other land can be taken into account) • R (Spitalfields Historic Buildings Trust) v London Borough of Tower Hamlets & Old Truman Brewery Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 917, (Court of Appeal, lawfulness of standing orders preventing Planning Committee members from voting on a planning application if they were not present when the application was previously considered by the Committee) • R (Transport for London) v London Tribunals [2023] EWHC 2889 (Swift J, lawfulness of TfL issuing parking fines based on CCTV evidence and relationship between judicial review and statutory review provisions) • Hayle Town Council v Cornwall Council and Burrington Estates (Hayle) Ltd and Progress Land (Hayle 3) Ltd [2023] EWHC 389, (Lane J, whether a planning application had to be reconsidered by the Committee following a change of circumstances) • Wild Justice v Natural Resources Wales [2021] Env L.R. 24 (High Court, judicial review challenge to licences to cull wild birds) • Sawkill v Highways England [2020] EWHC 801 (Dove J, Development Consent Orders, general principles of statutory construction) • Burgos and Amayo v Secretary of State [2019] EWHC 2792 (Jay J, lawfulness of Secretary of State’s decision to confirm compulsory purchase order at Seven Sisters) • Leicester University v Secretary of State [2016] JPL 709 (Supperstone J, relevance of extrinsic evidence in interpreting planning permissions) • Turner v Secretary of State [2015] EWCA Civ 582 (Court of Appeal, bias in public law). As a Deputy High Court Judge Tim regularly deals with planning cases in the Administrative Court. His recent judgements include Bounces Properties v Secretary of State [2023] EWHC 735 (Inspector’s duty to seek views of parties on points not raised in the evidence), Strongroom Ltd v London Borough of Hackney [2023] EWHC 488 (costs where a planning judicial view settles), R (Wells) v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council [2022] EWHC 3298 (Inspector’s duty to inspect property of an objecting third party), R (Buxton) v Cambridge City Council [2022] JPL 487 (listed buildings, relevance of reversibility of alterations) and R (G) v Thanet DC [2021] EWHC 2026 (bias, appropriate assessment, delegation to officers). Tim appeared for the Welsh Government at the examination of the Wylfa Newydd Development Consent Order and recently acted for HS2 in a major compulsory purchase compensation claim in the Upper Tribunal. Recent public inquiries and Local Plan examinations include appearance at the Bedford Local Plan examination for O & H Ltd (4000 homes in a new settlement) and inquiries for Berkeley (new riverside development in Reading, new school and housing in the Surrey Green Belt), BMOR (12 and 14 storey residential development in Vauxhall), Sainsbury’s (new stores with major residential above in Ilford and Whitechapel), Haringey Council (Wards Corner CPO, large scale regeneration) and Canary Wharf and Qatari Diar (Southbank Place development behind the London Eye). He has also recently secured allocation for 5000 new homes and 30h. of employment in the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan, on behalf of O&H Ltd. Tim is listed by Chambers & Partners as a leading silk in planning law (top tier) and by the Legal 500 as a leading silk in planning and environment law.

Toby Watkin KC

Toby is an established and experienced practitioner dealing with all areas of property-related work. Toby has appeared in significant cases in the Supreme Court, Privy Council, Court of Appeal in relation to property related matters, and regularly appears in the High Court, the County Court and all the specialist property courts and tribunals in England and Wales. Toby is also co-Chair of the Property Group at Landmark Chambers. Toby is instructed in all areas of property litigation, including Real Property Disputes, Conveyancing and Land Registration, Landlord and Tenant disputes, issues relating to Mortgages & Receivers, and Property-related Professional Negligence. He has significant experience of cases involving the Electronic Communications Code (new and old). He regularly lectures and writes on property-related matters. Toby is frequently involved in very high-profile property litigation. In the last few months he has appeared in two major cases on the law of easements: Regency Villas v Diamond Resorts (whether a general right to use recreational facilities within a resort was capable existing as an easement – judgment of the Supreme Court awaited) and Starham v Greene King [2018] EGLR 8 (whether a general right to ‘use’ land was capable of existing as an easement or restrictive covenant, or was a mere licence). In 2017 Toby acted for the successful landowner in a multi-million pound dispute with a national housebuilder relating to the remediation of land in the Northeast for housing development. In 2018 he acted for the successful landlord (London Borough of Southwark) in relation to high-profile litigation relating to the Dulwich Hamlet Football Club, which was widely reported in the national press. He has significant experience in obtaining injunctions to protect land and buildings from trespass, either by protesters or by ‘urban explorers’. He is very familiar with the intricate procedural and legal issues which arise in relation to claims brought against ‘persons unknown’. In this field he has recently acted for Chelsea Football Club (Chelsea FC v Brewer & Orts, 2017) the Bullring, Manchester Arndale, Brent Cross and 12 other major shopping centres (Intu v Taylor & Otrs (LTL 27.4.18)) and a number of tall buildings under construction across the City of London (Multiplex Construction v. Law & Otrs). He is valued for his hands-on, commercial approach to problems, for his clear advice, and for his great experience as a trial advocate. Toby also has wide experience of Alternative Dispute Resolution, and is both an ADR Group accredited mediator and a qualified arbitrator (MCIArb: AHKIArb). As well as his litigation practice, Toby is often asked to advise in relation to points arising from transactional work, and drafted of tenancy agreements and other instruments for a large social landlord, as well as the disciplinary rules for two professional bodies. Toby also assisted in the drafting of the Funding Code under the Access to Justice Act 1999. In 2005, Toby was appointed as Secretary to the Investigation Committee of the Academy of Experts (its disciplinary investigation body). He is also a qualified ADR Group Accredited Mediator. Toby joined Landmark Chambers in 2010 after many years in Lincoln’s Inn. Toby’s wider interests include classical music (listening and performing), sailing and cycling.

Tom Morris

Tom is a sought-after junior for trials and appeals, with a wide-ranging property, commercial and costs litigation practice. In January 2023 he was sole counsel for the successful respondent in the landmark Supreme Court appeal in Jepsen v Rakusen, having appeared unled for the successful appellant in the Court of Appeal. In recognition of the success of his practice, he is the most junior of the six barristers shortlisted to be 'Junior of the Year' across the whole of the Bar of England and Wales in the 2023 Legal 500 UK Bar Awards. Tom is instructed as sole counsel for the respondents to two upcoming appeals to the Court of Appeal: one on the scope of the freezing order jurisdiction, the other on the applicability of the Limitation Act to interest on judgment debts. He is instructed as junior counsel to Timothy Morshead KC by the appellants to the Supreme Court in Darwall v Dartmoor National Parks Authority, a landmark appeal concerning public rights to camp in the national park. Since the start of the year, he has appeared as sole counsel for the successful respondents in two High Court appeals, has been instructed as sole counsel by the appellants in three further High Court appeals, and has appeared as sole counsel in three appeals in the property chamber of the Upper Tribunal. In the last twelve months, he has been instructed in a fraud trial in the High Court and in numerous multitrack trials and interim applications in the county court involving complex disputes of fact and law – particularly injunction and freezing order applications, boundary disputes, landlord consent disputes and other landlord and tenant disputes. Although Tom is a specialist in property litigation, his practice ranges widely and encompasses costs, development and highway disputes, commercial disputes and insolvency. He has appeared in test cases on a range of issues which, on several occasions, have changed or clarified the law. For example, as sole counsel, Tom has: • persuaded the Court of Appeal and then the Supreme Court that the practice in the First-tier Tribunal (affirmed by two Upper Tribunal decisions) of making Rent Repayment Orders against superior landlords was based on an incorrect interpretation of the Housing and Planning Act 2016. • persuaded a High Court Judge in the commercial court that section 24(2) of the Limitation Act 1980 limits the recovery of Judgments Act interest to six years’ worth (a point apparently thought ‘hopeless’ by the Senior Costs Judge and now on appeal to the Court of Appeal). • successfully obtained a freezing order in the Chancery Division in support of a potential costs order, involving a departure from the previous law (now on appeal to the Court of Appeal). • appeared in the first appeal to the Upper Tribunal on the meaning of “house” within Part 3 of the Housing Act 2004 (an appeal to the Court of Appeal settled shortly before it was due to be heard). • resisted a High Court appeal against a successful application to set aside a bankruptcy petition based on the (novel) argument that an arguably unreasonable refusal by a landlord to consent to the assignment of a commercial lease gave rise to a cross-claim in damages capable of being set off against the relevant arrears of rent. • successfully resisted an appeal against a Deputy Master’s decision to order security for costs. Led by Justin Bates, Tom also appeared for the successful landlord in the appeal and cross appeal to the Court of Appeal concerning execution of documents by corporate landlords, which clarified the law relating to the signing of section 8 notices and deposit protection certificates. Tom (also led by Justin Bates) is also appearing in an upcoming appeal to the Court of Appeal to reconsider whether courts can order parties to participate in alternative dispute resolution. As a costs litigator, Tom has acted for many years on behalf of the paying party in the 100-day detailed assessment of a bill of costs in the sum of over £60 million (partly led by Ben Williams KC) before the Senior Costs Judge. Tom’s client’s considerable success (on an indemnity basis assessment in which, for example, profit costs were reduced by almost 40%) was recognised in the court making a ‘different order’ on the costs of the detailed assessment. A dispute over interest culminated in a hearing before Mrs Justice Dias in the Commercial Court in which Tom’s interpretation of section 24(2) of the Limitation Act 1980 prevailed. Tom is also regularly instructed by HM Government, on behalf of the Lord Chancellor, in appeals relating to the law of litigation funding. He has been appointed to the C panel as a result.

Tom Weekes KC

Tom is a leading property silk. He is ranked in “Band 1” for property litigation in Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners. And he was named “Legal 500, Property and Housing Silk of the Year 2023” and “Chambers UK, Real Estate Silk of the Year 2023”. Tom has appeared in significant cases in the Supreme Court, the Privy Council and the Court of Appeal. And he regularly appears in the High Court, the County Court and the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). His recent cases include Fearn v Tate Trustees [2024] AC 1 (succeeded in a groundbreaking Supreme Court case establishing that the Tate was liable in nuisance for operating a viewing platform at Tate Modern so as to enable visitors to engage in viewing/photography into flats), Bath Rugby Ltd v Greenwood [2023] 1 P&CR 6 (succeeded in the Court of Appeal establishing that Bath Rugby’s ground is not subject to restrictive covenants that might impede the development of a new stadium) and Reeve v McDonagh [2024] EWHC 439 (Ch) (succeeded in the High Court establishing that restrictive covenants do not prohibit the erection of a replacement house at Sandbanks, Poole). Recommendations in the legal directories include: • “...very driven and fantastic in submissions…and incredibly easy to work with." (Chambers and Partners, 2024). • "…a deep thinker and strategist” (Chambers and Partners, 2024). • “…the person clients go to when they have a ridiculously complex case” (Chambers and Partners, 2023). • “…undoubtedly one of the leading property barristers in the country” (Legal 500, 2023). • “…a leading specialist in restrictive covenants…he is user-friendly and very bright” (Chambers and Partners, 2022). • “Carving out a name as the primus inter pares for property development disputes” (Legal 500, 2020). • “He is brilliant – very reactive, straightforward, practical and commercial” (Chambers and Partners, 2020). Tom regularly appears in cases about the development of land. He advises developers at an early stage about private law impediments to developments. Tom has appeared in many leading cases about restrictive covenants: including cases brought under section 84(2) of the LPA 1925 about the enforceability or interpretation of covenants; applications to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) under s.84(1) of LPA 1925 for the discharge/modification of covenants; and cases about whether consent has been unreasonably refused. As the co-author of Rights of Light: The Modern Law (Jordans, 2015, 3rd ed), Tom is a leading specialist in the field of rights of light. He has also appeared in cases about whether developers have succeeded in exploiting drafting loopholes to avoid paying overage; in disputes about options; and in cases about whether developers can escape from contracts to buy sites. In relation to land ownership, Tom has appeared in many cases (including leading Court of Appeal authorities) about adverse possession, land registration, trusts of land and boundaries. And he has acted in many conveyancing disputes (including cases about whether contracts of sale have been rescinded for misrepresentation). Having succeeded the leading modern case about nuisance (Fearn v Tate), Tom is instructed in the full range of nuisance disputes (relating to such things as noise, vibrations, smells and light). In the field of commercial landlord and tenant litigation, Tom acts on lease renewals and in litigation about forfeiture, dilapidations, rent reviews and consents. He has appeared in many cases about whether tenants have satisfied break conditions. As the author of Property Notices (LexisNexis, 2021, 3rd ed), he regularly acts in cases about the service and validity of notices (including break notices). Tom accepts instructions under the Public Access Scheme.

Tom Jefferies

Tom Jefferies is an experienced specialist in property litigation with a niche expertise in leasehold enfranchisement. He no longer appears in planning inquiries and appeals, but has brought his experience to bear in cross practice litigation raising planning and highways issues, such as enforcing planning obligations and disputes over obligations to use reasonable endeavours to obtain planning permission. He relishes court hearings and has appeared at all levels from the LVT to the House of Lords, frequently against silks. He is a CEDR accredited mediator, and takes great satisfaction helping parties reach a settlement out of court. Tom accepts instructions under the Public Access Scheme.

Zack Simons

Zack is the top-rated junior planning barrister in the country (Planning Magazine Legal Surveys 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024). Zack's practice focuses on housing, infrastructure, commercial development, and compulsory purchase work. He appears regularly in planning appeals at inquiries and hearings local plan examinations, compulsory purchase order inquiries and court hearings in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. The directories rate him as “exceptionally talented”, “an absolutely brilliant barrister” (Chambers and Partners), “in high demand” (Who’s Who Legal), “a joy to work with”, “fantastic”, a “brilliant advocate” (Legal 500), "mould-breaking", "a go-to person", "simply brilliant" and "a star advocate" (Planning Magazine). Zack has been nominated for the Environment and Planning Junior Barrister of the Year in the Chambers and Partners Bar Awards 2024, as well as for the Planning and Land Use Junior Barrister of the Year in the Legal 500 Bar Awards in both 2022 and 2024. He is a Tier 1 ranked “leading junior” in Legal 500. Zack is an Honorary Associate Professor at the Bartlett School of Planning, UCL. Zack is also the creator of “planoraks”, where he publishes posts on UK planning law, litigation, appeals and plan examinations.

Zia Bhaloo KC

Zia’s mastery of all areas of real estate litigation, combined with a commercial chancery background that gives her an outstanding grasp of property insolvency, has led authoritative sources to brand her “the pre-eminent property litigation silk". Renowned as “ruthless in cross-examinations”, Zia is a specialist property litigation and commercial chancery barrister, whose broad practice encompasses all areas of real property and landlord and tenant work. Equally expert in a range of related chancery disputes, including company and insolvency matters, she boasts specialist experience in telecoms litigation, and social housing. When a case demands the best, few can rival Zia’s expertise. Clients and instructing solicitors rave about her “incredibly sharp legal brain,” her “user-friendly and pragmatic” approach, and her devastating courtroom skills, with one labelling her “the best cross-examiner I have ever seen.” These abilities are complemented by written advocacy “so exceptional that the opposing side will often do everything to avoid going to trial,” while her renowned commitment to client service makes her the complete package. Focussed on the fields of real property and landlord and tenant , her practice spans the whole property litigation field. Zia has considerable experience in rent review, valuation issues generally, the 1954 Act, easements, dilapidations, service charges, and overage disputes, as well as litigation involving sale, ﬁnance and development agreements, including development disputes with significant planning elements. Release fee damages is another field in which she has a particular interest and experience. Zia’s wealth of specialist knowledge sets her apart from the competition. With her background in commercial chancery work, she has noteworthy expertise in company and insolvency law, making her a natural choice for disputes arising from property insolvencies. Niche mines and minerals and telecoms law knowhow, and close familiarity with social housing matters round off her broad practice. In all of these areas, Zia has experience of high-level litigation, appearing in courts at all levels, including the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, in large important cases. These don’t come larger than R (on the application of Annington Property Ltd and others v Secretary of State for Defence [2023] EWHC 1154 (Admin) 1155 (Ch). This widely reported matter, named as one of The Lawyer’s Top 20 cases of 2023 and Top Ten appeals of 2024, relates to the sale and leaseback of 55,000 dwellings on 765 sites used to house military personnel, for £1.662 billion. It arises from the MoD’s decision to serve enfranchisement notices under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 in relation to eight properties as test cases. Annington’s challenge to these notices raised a number of complex questions under the 1967 Act and the Landlord & Tenant Act 1954, heard with a judicial review. Though undoubtedly her largest case, this is far from Zia’s only important recent matter, with other reported highlights including Almacantar (Marble Arch) SARL v Railway Pension Exempt Unit Trust [2021] EWHC 2385 (comm) on the interpretation of an agreement for sale, stamp duty and estoppel by convention and Howard and others v Chelsea Yacht and Boat Co Ltd [2020] EWHC 12 (Ch), on whether the Chelsea Yacht & Boat Co had breached its River Works Licence and committed a criminal offence. Zia has represented clients in mediations for over 25 years and is an ADR Group accredited mediator. She has successfully mediated numerous large and multi-party disputes. Zia was born in Tanzania, grew up in Kenya, and speaks Swahili and Cutchi.

Legal 500

Our Team

FAQs

Marketing Resources

Newsletters

Contact us