Siân McGibbon

Public and Administrative

Statutory Appeals

Siân has extensive experience of acting in statutory appeals. Her recent work includes:

• Hynek v Islington (HHJ Backhouse, 12 July 2022) – Siân appeared for the successful appellant in this statutory appeal which raised novel arguments as to the rights of EU citizens with pre-settled status who claim to have ‘retained worker status’ following the end of the transition period.
• OH v Lambeth (Stephen Midwinter KC, 26 November 2021) – Siân acted for the successful appellant in this statutory appeal pursuant to s. 204 Housing Act 1996. The case raised a novel point of law as to the relevant point in time to be considered by a local authority when determining whether an applicant has a resident dependent child for the purposes of assessing priority need.
• RO v Bexley (HHJ Venn, 9 July 2021) – Siân acted for the respondent in a rare application pursuant to CPR 52.18. The appeal was struck out and the authority was awarded its costs of the proceedings.

Urgent Applications and Interim Relief

Siân accepts instructions in urgent and interim relief applications, including out of hours applications to the High Court, across her areas of expertise. Her recent instructions include:

• R (OLO, AMA, and OCO) v Redbridge (CO/488/2022) – Siân acted for the claimants in this claim for breach of section 17 Children Act 1989, which secured an increase of almost 100% in support provided to the family.
• R (NA) v Hammersmith & Fulham (CO2202/2021) – Siân acted in this application for urgent interim relief on the basis that there was ‘reason to believe’ the applicant may be in priority need pursuant to the (then newly implemented) s.78 Domestic Abuse Act 2021. The client secured interim accommodation and an order that the authority pay her costs.
• R (PG) v Hammersmith & Fulham (HHJ Lickley KC, 17 December 2021), in which she was successful in obtaining interim relief both on the papers and at an oral hearing, in the context of the spread of the OMICRON variant of COVID-19 on the grounds that the local authority had failed to take into account a material relevant consideration.

Human Rights and Civil Liberties

As a pupil Siân worked on a number of the leading cases on the application of the public sector equality duty under s. 149 Equality Act 2010 (Forward v Aldwyck Housing Group Ltd [2019] EWHC 24 (QB), London and Quadrant v Patrick [2019] EWHC Civ 1263 (QB), and Powell v Dacorum [2019] EWCA Civ 29). She was also involved in judicial review challenges under the Equality Act 2010 including the high profile challenge to the ‘Right to Rent’ policy (R (Goloshvili) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 1263).

She is presently instructed in a number of human rights matters, including:

• 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, later as led counsel in the recent three-day High Court trial). Siân continues to act in the ongoing related application to the European Court of Human Rights.
• Sheta v Redbridge (HHJ Parfitt, 31 March 2022) – Siân represented the appellant in successfully challenging the local authority’s failure to comply with s. 149 Equality Act 2010.
• R (Campbell) v Ealing (CO/1931/2022) – Siân acted for the claimant in the successful applications for permission and interim relief, and is instructed in the substantive proceedings listed for December 2022.
  The case raises a serious allegation of victimisation contrary to section 27 Equality Act 2010.

She also has a growing Caribbean practice in this area:

• Betaudier v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago [2021] UKPC 7 – Siân was instructed as junior counsel for the successful appellant in a claim against the state for wrongful arrest and unlawful detention.
• Duncan & Jokhan v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago [2021] UKPC 17 – Siân was instructed as junior counsel for the successful appellant in a claim for damages for breach of the constitutional right to liberty and security of the person.
• Ministry of Social Development and Family Services v P (JCPC 2021/0021) – Siân is instructed as junior counsel for the appellant in this upcoming constitutional appeal concerning the lawfulness of a policy in Trinidad and Tobago which restricts disability benefits to those with a ‘permanent’ condition.

Judicial Review

Siân frequently acts in a broad range of judicial review proceedings:

• R (Cort) v Lambeth [2022] EWHC 1085 (Admin) – Siân acted as led counsel for the successful claimant in challenging the authority’s failure to comply with national ‘Everyone In’ guidance.
• R (Awodola) v Association of Chartered Accountants [2021] EWCA Civ 1635 – Siân acted unled counsel for the successful claimant, later the successful respondent, in this application for judicial review. The High Court and the Court of Appeal awarded pro bono costs totalling over £25,000 to be paid to the Access to Justice Foundation.
• R (Good Law Project Ltd) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2021] EWHC 346 – Siân was instructed as 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)).

She has a strong record in dealing with difficult and sensitive cases, and has been praised in judgments for her ‘helpful and constructive’ approach:

• R (BL) v Islington [2021] EWHC 3044 (Admin) – Siân was instructed as sole counsel for the local authority in this judicial review which involved numerous ancillary issues regarding the claimant’s litigation capacity.
• R (ZOS) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Vikram Sachdeva KC, 13 July 2022) – Siân was instructed for the claimant in this successful application for judicial review of the defendant’s breach of statutory duties. She represented the claimant in successfully resisting the defendant’s application for relief from sanction following breach of the mandatory order secured in the underlying proceedings (Foster J, 31 October 2022).
• P v Ministry of Social Development and Family Services (JCPC 2021/0021) – Siân is instructed as junior counsel for the appellant in this upcoming constitutional appeal concerning the lawfulness of a policy in Trinidad and Tobago which restricts disability benefits to those with a ‘permanent’ condition.

Local Government including Local Government Finance

Siân regularly acts both for and against local authorities in a range of matters, often in complex matters in which multiple statutory duties (including under Care Act 2014, Children Act 1989, and Housing Act 1996, amongst others) are engaged. She has spent time seconded in house at a major local authority so has insight into the practical pressures and issues which face local government and the solicitors who act for them.

Siân has been involved in a number of significant cases concerning local authority powers and duties:

• Stanley v Welwyn Hatfield [2020] EWCA Civ 1458 – Siân appeared as led counsel for the appellant in this significant case. The Court of Appeal clarified the status of statutory review decisions notified out of time by the local authority, and the proper route for bringing a statutory appeal against such a decision.
• Rowe v London Borough of Haringey [2022] EWCA Civ 1370 – Siân acted as sole counsel for the appellant in the first appeal, and in the successful application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. She remained instructed as junior counsel alongside Toby Vanhegan and Justin Bates in the substantive proceedings before the Court of Appeal and she continues to act in the pending application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. The case raises issues of wider significance as to the standards of overcrowding to be applied to houses in multiple occupation.
• Zaman v Waltham Forest (HHJ Gerald, 21 July 2022) – Siân was instructed as sole counsel for the appellant in the first appeal and in the successful application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The case raises issues of wider importance regarding the adoption of ‘zoning’ policies by local authorities when moving families outside of their local area.

Procurement and Subsidy Control

Procurement and Commercial Public Law

Siân has a growing practice in commercial judicial review, and accepts instructions from both public bodies and challengers. Her recent work includes:

• Acting for the Secretary of State in the landmark Covid-19 procurement policy judicial review R (on the application of Good Law Project) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 346, led by Philip Moser KC.
• Advising on the implications of COVID-19 for procurement at local government level, in particular the use of ‘emergency’ and ‘exceptional circumstance’ provisions.
• Successfully defending a challenge to a Service Level Agreement entered by a local authority brought on the basis that the pricing structure gave rise to ‘apparent bias’ (Akinola v Bexley, HHJ Saggerson, 6 May 2021).

Siân is a member of the Lexis PSL expert panel on procurement law and her analysis of the latest cases in this area are regularly published in their commercial and public law highlights. Her recent work has included coverage of the high profile COVID-19 procurement challenges.

Planning

Siân has a growing practice in planning law and acts in a range of planning matters from the advisory stages through to final hearing. She has experience of acting for planning authorities, land owners, and individuals in a broad range of matters. 

Notable work includes:

• Thurrock v Persons Unknown (QB-2019-02738, awaiting judgment) – Siân was instructed as junior counsel for the claimant led by Tim Straker KC in this application for injunctive relief pursuant to section 187B Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
• Silochan v Cedeno (Town and Country Planning Division) (JCPC 2022/0002, awaiting judgment) – Siân appeared before the Privy Council as junior counsel for the appellants in this significant appeal which raises questions of general importance regarding the proper approach to prosecution and sentencing of planning offences.
• Advising a local authority in relation to an appeal against a decision to issue a certificate of lawful commencement of development at a site in north London which attracted substantial local controversy.

Siân is a member of the Lexis expert panel for planning law and regularly publishes analysis of the latest cases.

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.

Local Government

Siân regularly acts both for and against local authorities in a range of matters, often in complex matters in which multiple statutory duties (including under Care Act 2014, Children Act 1989, and Housing Act 1996, amongst others) are engaged. She has spent time seconded in house at a major local authority so has insight into the practical pressures and issues which face local government and the solicitors who act for them.

Siân has been involved in a number of significant cases concerning local authority powers and duties:

• Stanley v Welwyn Hatfield [2020] EWCA Civ 1458 – Siân appeared as led counsel for the appellant in this significant case. The Court of Appeal clarified the status of statutory review decisions notified out of time by the local authority, and the proper route for bringing a statutory appeal against such a decision.
• Rowe v London Borough of Haringey [2022] EWCA Civ 1370 – Siân acted as sole counsel for the appellant in the first appeal, and in the successful application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. She remained instructed as junior counsel alongside Toby Vanhegan and Justin Bates in the substantive proceedings before the Court of Appeal and she continues to act in the pending application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. The case raises issues of wider significance as to the standards of overcrowding to be applied to houses in multiple occupation.
• Zaman v Waltham Forest (HHJ Gerald, 21 July 2022) – Siân was instructed as sole counsel for the appellant in the first appeal and in the successful application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The case raises issues of wider importance regarding the adoption of ‘zoning’ policies by local authorities when moving families outside of their local area.