Francis Taylor Building

Charles’ practice spans all areas of Chambers’ work, with a particular focus on planning and environmental, public law, non-domestic rating and compulsory purchase. He 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 in his own right and as junior counsel. Charles is ranked by Legal 500 as a “rising star” for planning

Recent and ongoing court work includes:

• R (Okedina) v Royal Borough of Greenwich – Series of applications for judicial review seeking to challenge grant of planning permission for comprehensive redevelopment of an estate providing up to 254 dwellings;
• Guildford Borough Council v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities [2023] EWHC 575 (Admin) – Successful challenge to the decision of the Secretary of State to grant planning permission on basis of misinterpretation of Green Belt policy concerning the meaning of “original building”;
• Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council v Troika Developments Ltd [2023] (KBD) – As junior counsel, successfully defended an appeal against the decision of the County Court that a strip of land was not highway. Charles was also instructed as junior counsel in the County Court trial on behalf of the successful claimant;
• R (Kinsey) v London Borough of Lewisham [2022] EWHC 1774 and R (Helen Kinsey) v London Borough of Lewisham [2021] EWHC 1286 – Junior counsel for the defendant in two judicial reviews against the decision of a local planning authority to grant planning permission for the demolition of existing buildings to provide 110 residential units;
• Build Hollywood v London Borough of Hackney [2022] EWHC 2806 (Admin) – Leading case concerning the issue of who is a “person with an interest in the site” for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007;
• London Borough of Hackney v JCDecaux (UK) Ltd [2022] EWHC 2621 (Admin) – Leading case concerning the approach a court should take in determining whether a display of advertisements is continuous;
• National Highways Limited v Insulate Britain – Obtained a series of injunctions to prevent the group Insulate Britain protesting on the country’s strategic road network;
• R (Red Lion Leisure Ltd) v South Cambs DC – Successfully resisted an application for judicial review against a grant of planning permission for a hotel near the Imperial War Museum;
• R (Boruch Roth) v London Borough of Lewisham CO/1049/2021 – Sole counsel for the defendant in a judicial review against the decision of a local planning authority to exercise their discretion under section 70C of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to decline to determine the Claimant’s application for planning permission;
• R (Swainsthorpe Parish Council) v Norfolk County Council CO/4064/2020 – Sole counsel for the claimant in a judicial review against the formal response of a highways authority, the first case to consider the scope of the duty imposed upon a statutory consultee under the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015;
• R (Julia Ewans) v Suffolk District Council [2021] EWHC 511 (Admin) – Sole counsel for the claimant in a judicial review against the grant of outline planning permission for the erection of up to 300 dwellings;
• Sevenoaks District Council v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2020] EWHC 3054 (Admin) – Junior counsel for the claimant in a judicial review against the decision of a planning inspector that a draft local plan had to be withdrawn as the local authority had failed to comply with the Duty to Cooperate;
• Wokingham BC v Scott [2019] EWCA Crim 205 – Junior counsel for the appellant in one of the leading cases concerning the enforcement powers available to a local planning authority when seeking to prosecute breaches of planning control and the correct exercise of those powers;
• R (Shiva) v London Borough of Lambeth [2019] EWHC 2387 (Admin) – Junior counsel for the defendant in an application for permission for judicial review which sought to challenge a part of the Westminster Bridge Road Regeneration Scheme. Permission was refused by both the High Court and Court of Appeal;
• East Hertfordshire District Council v Docherty and Ors [2019] EWHC 2292 (QB) – Charles acted for the successful party in committing 19 individuals for contempt of an injunction obtained to prevent breaches of planning control;

Recent and ongoing public inquiry and examination work includes:

• Glory Hill, Holtspur – upcoming planning appeal concerning the provision of three football pitches and associated facilities in the green belt;
• Willow Way, London – six day inquiry concerning a mixed use scheme (comprising 60 residential units and 1,401 sqm of employment floorspace) on a plot forming part of a wider site allocated as Local Employment Land (identified as a LSIS in the emerging local plan);
• Quinbury Farm, Braughing – three day combined planning and enforcement hearing concerning the demolition and proposed erection of buildings in the rural area beyond the green belt;
• Former Staple Hill Infants School, South Gloucestershire – four day inquiry for the redevelopment of a site to form 42 retirement apartments;
• Barn Springs, Andover – two day enforcement hearing concerning a change of use and redevelopment of land located within a gap between settlements;
• HM Prison Grendon, Grendon Underwood – two week inquiry concerning the construction of a new Category C prison to create provision for 1,468 prisoners;
• Barnet Local Plan review – Charles acted for the London Borough of Barnet (with Gregory Jones KC and Flora Curtis) in the promotion of the Barnet Local Plan
• Dun Roamin, Buckinghamshire – three week inquiry into 21 conjoined appeals for the continued use of land as Gypsy and Caravan plots
• Homestead Farm, Bothenhampton– four day inquiry concerning an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for the demolition of a farmhouse in a conservation area and the erection of a 4-bedroom low carbon house;
• Land west of Finchampstead Road, Wokingham  and Land off Finchampstead Road, Wokingham – four day inquiry concerning development of up to 80 dwellings outside of a settlement boundary and a Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace.

Alongside appearing in the High Court and Planning Inquiries, Charles frequently appears in specialist tribunals such as the Valuation Tribunal for England. Charles has also appeared in and welcomes instructions to appear in the magistrates’ court and to appear in front of local authority committees (most commonly for licensing matters).

Before coming to the Bar, Charles read Philosophy and Theology at Oxford University. He completed the GDL and the Bar Course at City University. Charles was a paralegal at a specialist planning and environmental law firm.

In appropriate cases, Charles is happy to work on a pro-bono basis.