Robert Walton KC

Planning

Robert works across the full spectrum of planning law, including policy formulation, promotion of development schemes and enforcement.  Examples include:

Policy formulation

Notable caseload includes:

• Advice / promotion through EiP in respect of Core Strategies / DPDs: Eastbourne; Hastings; West Berkshire; Wokingham; North Yorkshire; South Oxfordshire; Hastings, Harrogate.

Promotion of development schemes

• Employment: Paddington Cube (Sellar Property Group), Severnside (Severnside Distribution Land Limited), Cuerden Strategic Site (Eric Wright Group), 500 White Hart Lane (Tottenham Hotspur), Welton Bibby (Midsomer Norton Retail Estates Ltd); Finsbury Tower, (Finsbury Tower Estates Ltd) Great Malborough Street (Hendersons).
• Energy from Waste: new plants at Shrewsbury, Cardiff and Bristol; Integrated Waste Recycling Facility, Berkshire.
• Heritage: Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site; Spitalfields regeneration; USAF Upper Heyford; the Gherkin; Waterloo regeneration; Elephant and Castle regeneration; residential development in Bath City Centre.
• Housing: Very extensive experience of promoting open market and affordable housing schemes across the country , e.g. 1,000 unit mixed used scheme in London, 600 unit scheme in Stevenage.  Very extensive experience of promoting smaller schemes, e.g. 150 units in Wiltshire.  Very extensive experience of promoting specialist housing and care facilities for numerous operators, including in the Green Belt in e.g. Cheshire and Solihull.
• Housing allocations: Berkhamsted (35 hectare urban extension site); Cole Green (proposed urban extension to Welwyn Garden City); Exmouth (350 dwellings, 1.5ha employment land); Brandon; Axminster; Liphook; Petersfield, South Oxfordshire.
• Paragraph 80 houses: Surrey, Cornwall.
• Hydrocarbons / Oil: West Sussex, Derbyshire.
• Incineration: Addenbrookes Hospital.
• Mining: Coal: Thoresbury Colliery (UK Coal); Portland Stone: (Portland); Potash (North Yorks, £1.7bn mine).
• Transport Infrastructure: Metrolink Manchester (Trafford Line extension, TWA application); Trolleybus scheme, Leeds (TWA application).
• Retail: retail outlet centres Scotch Corner; J27 M5; retail: Blossom Street London (British Land), Eden Walk Richmond (British Land).
• Stadiums: Tottenham, Arsenal.
• Tourist destination facilities: Eden Westwood J27, M5.
• Wind farms: North Norfolk (off shore), Powys (on shore).

Compulsory Purchase and Compensation

Notable caseload includes:

• Ideal Homes (Hayes) Ltf v Transport for London
• Clearvalley v Transport for London
• Tamworth Borough Council CPO
• BT Plc v Kent County Council
• May v North Yorkshire CC
• Treats Food Ltd v London Underground Ltd
• Cladding Consultants Ltd v Dorset County Council
• Khurana v Transport for London
• CPO for Integrated Waste Recycling Facility, Padworth
• CPO for town centre regeneration, Newbury
• Objection to flood alleviation CPO, Marlow
• Objection to listed building CPO, Dewsbury
• Axa Sun Life Plc and Freightliner Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport
• Valley Heights Service Station, Merthyr Tydfil
• Denwood Properties Ltd v Gateshead MBC
• Abbey Investments Ltd v London Development Agency [2011] RVR 18; [2011] J.P.L 76
• Launagrove Ltd v Crossrail Ltd
• Khurana v Crossrail Ltd
• Cosmichome Ltd v Transport for London
• Bridgeford Garden Centre v Highways Agency
• Strollgate Ltd v Transport for London
• Heath v London Borough of Lambeth.

Planning Enforcement and Injunctions

Enforcement notice / stop notices in respect of: change of use from retail to residential; cessation of scrap yard use; removal of island from a lake; demolition of “Class E” outhouse; alteration of dwellinghouse roof; cessation of restaurant use; removal of marquee; removal of stables; removal of houseboat; demolition of residential extension; cessation of residential use; cessation of garden use; removal of static caravans; cessation of equestrian use; and demolition of house.Injunctions: R (Cherkley Campaign Ltd) v Mole Valley DC [2014] EWCA Civ 567; Trillium v Tower Hamlets LBC [2011] EWHC 560 (Admin); West Sussex County Council v Lawson Hunt Developments Ltd [2011] Claim no: HC10CO1901.Revocation / modification orders: eg Portland Stone Firms Ltd v Dorset County Council [2015].

Environment

Notable examples of Robert's environmental work:

• Advising Utilities Company in relation to claim for minerals compensation pursuant to Schedule 14 of the Water Industry Act 1991.
• Compulsory Purchase under the Water Industry Act 1991.
• Energy from waste incinerator at Addenbrookes Hospital.
• Enforcement action by Council, in conjunction with Environment Agency, in respect of industrial use of greenfield site in Wokingham.
• Habitats: Gatwick Airport, Ashdown Forest SAC.
• Noise abatement proceedings in respect of the East London Line Extension; noise impact case in relation to summertime concerts at the Emirates Stadium, London.
• Pollution prevention proceedings in respect of sewage discharge from caravan park.
• Environment Agency proceedings in respect of Oak Processionary Moths.
• Building Act 1984 proceedings in respect of demolition of Billingham House, Middlesbrough.
• Minerals extraction: Guildford, Nottinghamshire, West Berkshire, Somerset.
• Waste schemes at Newbury, Shrewsbury, Bristol, Cardiff and Guildford
• Wastewater Treatment Works, East Sussex.

Public and Administrative

Robert has extensive experience of judicial review and statutory challenges in relation to national and local governmental decisions, in particular in relation to planning and environmental law. Examples include:

• Acting for developer, defending judicial review challenge to grant of planning permission for new green belt sports facilities
• Acting for local residents challenging Council’s decision to grant planning permission for basement development in London
• Acting for local planning authority defending challenge brought to Council’s decision to adopt development plan
• Acting for developer defending statutory review proceedings brought in respect of Inspector’s decision to grant planning permission for new school facilities
• Acting for Council in respect of judicial review of decision to grant planning permission for new theatre and council offices
• Acting for developer defending challenge to grant of permission for major mixed use scheme in central London
• Acting for developer defending judicial review of Secretary of State’s decision not to call in major planning application
• Acting for developer defending judicial review of Council’s decision to grant permission for major mixed used scheme in London
• Acting for developer defending judicial review of Council’s decision to grant permission for new housing scheme in London
• Acting for Council resisting statutory challenge to Inspector’s decision to grant planning permission for hydrocarbon exploration in highly sensitive landscape.

Cross-practice

Landmark's barristers often work at the intersection of our core practice areas; bringing a wide range of skills, knowledge and experience to bear on a particular dispute or issue facing a client.

Our focus is always on achieving the best possible outcome for our client. By viewing the client's objectives in a holistic way - and not purely through the lens of one rigidly-defined legal area - we deliver the best possible advice and representation in complex matters that engage multiple specialist areas of law. 

Whether it's providing support as an individual cross-practice barrister or a cross-disciplinary team of Landmark counsel, we are able to draw on an outstanding array of complementary skillsets and knowledge bases. This often achieves a better result than instructing multiple barristers from different specialist sets. This also improves the quality of client care through increased levels of communication, quicker response times, and a coordinated approach to clerking and fees, made possible by our team-based cross-practice approach.

Please contact our practice management team for more information.

Energy

Highways and Rights of Access