Practice Summary
Paul’s practice covers planning and environmental, public and local government law. He has extensive experience in the High Court and Court of Appeal, as well as at Public Inquiries.
Paul was called to the Bar in 1991. Before taking silk in 2009, he was a member of the Treasury “A” Panel, where he acted for a wide range of government departments including CLG, DEFRA, the Ministry of Justice, the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Education. In 2014 he was the legal adviser to Committee on the Review of Planning Guidance, led by Lord Taylor.
Paul joined Landmark in 2012, having previously practised from 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square.
Planning and Environment
As a specialist in town and country planning, Paul acts for developers, local planning authorities and third party interest groups at all stages of the planning process. His experience covers most areas of planning law, including residential and retail development, minerals and waste, airports, windfarms, highways, compulsory purchase and enforcement. Paul’s wider public law practice has given him a particular expertise in statutory challenges and applications for judicial review, where he has acted for claimants, defendants and interested parties.
In 2017, Paul has:
- been extensively involved in the London “basement wars” saga (in which, amongst others, he has acted for the owner of the much-publicised “stripey house” in Kensington and Chelsea)
- represented Friends of the Earth at a 3-week inquiry into proposals for open-cast coal extraction in Northumberland
- advised the Mayor of London on the latest revision of the London Plan
- help the London Russian School of Ballet obtain permission and listed building consent for a major extension to its premises
- acted for housing developers on schemes ranging from individual houses to proposals for new garden villages
- advised Nottingham County Council on its Minerals Local Plan
- advised landowners in compensation claims associated with the compulsory purchase orders for Crossrail.
Examples of Paul’s recent work in the High Court and Court of Appeal include:
- Lisle-Mainwaring v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (concerning the scope of section 215 notices)
- Lisle-Mainwaring v Carroll (application of the Mt Cook principles on the relevance of alternative proposals for a site)
- Government of France v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (challenge to lawful development certificates for basement development in London)
- Timmins v Gedling Borough Council (whether cemeteries are “appropriate” development in the Green Belt)
- Turner v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (challenge to the grant of permission for redevelopment of the Shell Centre at Waterloo, in which the test for bias and the need to disclose viability assessments were in issue)
- Jackson v Secretary of State for Communities and local Government (whether the Welwyn principle survives the introduction of Planning Enforcement Orders under the Localism Act 2011).
Other significant examples of Paul’s work can be found on the link to Paul’s cases and inquiries, above.
Public
Recent examples of Paul’s work include: representing the Appellant in the Supreme Court in Hotak v London Borough of Southwark (concerning the definition of vulnerability in the context of a local authorities housing duties under s. 189 Housing Act 1996); acting for the operator of an anaerobic digestion facility in proceedings for the judicial review of the amendments to the Renewable Heat Incentive Regulations; advising Medical Justice and successfully representing victims of torture who have been detained in breach of the Secretary of State’s own guidelines in their claims for false imprisonment; and advising the Department for Education on its Free Schools Programme.
Before life as a barrister, Paul completed his PhD in Administrative Law at Cambridge in 1989, and lectured in Public Law at King’s College, London (1989-1991) and at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand (1985).
Paul is particularly interested in human rights, and has lectured and written widely on Article 6.
Local Government
Paul has wide experience of Local Government. Recent examples include: acting for the Appellant in the Supreme Court in Hotak v London Borough of Southwark (concerning the definition of vulnerability in the context of a local authorities housing duties under s. 189 Housing Act 1996); advising a major harbour authority on the interaction between its functions and an application for modification of the Definitive Map; advising the London Mayor on revisions to the London Plan and the creation of the Old Oak and Park Royal MDC; representing the affected landowner in a dispute with Hertfordshire County Council over the extent of the highway; and representing the Appellant in the Court of Appeal in R (CJ) v Cardiff City Council (concerning the burden of proof in proof of age cases).
Qualifications
LLB (Hons) (1st Class); Gold Medal in Law: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand (1982-1985)
PhD; Tapp Scholar, Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge (1986-1989)
Recommendations
Chambers & Partners
Planning Law: “Paul is calm, collected and a brilliant advocate. He is a force to be reckoned with.” “His down-to-earth and practical advice is excellent.” (2022); “Very accessible and willing to discuss things. His advice has been very sage and he’s very good at expressing a view.” “He’s really clear on the strengths and weaknesses of the other side’s challenges and he’s well prepared.” (2021) ; “He is very amenable and flexible, super intelligent and very quick to get his head around cases.” “An outstanding lawyer, an excellent advocate, very responsive and a fantastic team player.” (2020); “has an amazing eye for detail, making him a perfect choice for judicial reviews” (2016); fits very well with clients’ aspirations” and “…slices through the other side’s arguments, it is excellent” (2015); “communicates really well, knows what he wants out of cases, and knows how to both direct people and listen to them” (2014); a “preferred counsel for planning inquiries” who is “lovely to work with, exceptionally bright and such a pleasure to be around. He is also brilliant with complex paperwork.” (2013); “an impressive court performer who is always thoroughly prepared and does a great job for his clients.” (2012); “good at inquiry work and very down to earth” (2011); “a barrister of enormous intellect” (2010); “earns widespread recognition for his impressive advocacy skills and brilliant rapport with the High Court judges” (2009); “…high-quality all-rounder…” (2007).
Administrative & Public Law: “straight-talking, cuts straight to the point, and presents his case extremely clearly” (2014); “a thoroughly impressive, all-round public law barrister. His recent highlight matters have raised important points in the context of information, environment, planning and immigration law” (2013); “ability to get straight to the heart of a matter” (and is a) “a formidable opponent who’ll keep on striving until he gets what he wants” (2012); “extremely civilised and a phenomenally good advocate” (2011); “no-nonsense approach and penetrating arguments“(2010); “a strong advocate and a pleasant person to deal with he is applauded for offering clear, solid advice” (2009); “confident and adaptable, (he) is recommended for being able to master the papers quickly, speak with authority and take the judge through his argument clearly” (2008).
Local Government Law: “a good all-rounder who is particularly strong on environment, immigration and community care cases”, “judges love him.” (2014); “excellent lawyer,” “good judgement and sound grasp of the detail in a matter.” (2012); “extremely easy to work with and a man who inspires confidence” (2011); “always sensible in his approach [he] never fails to get the job done” (2010); “ever dependable and completely rock-solid” (2009); “(he) sits right at the top of the tree” (2008).
Environment: “able to grasp quickly the ins and outs of a case” and “possesses powerful skills of analysis” and “straightforward, helpful advice” (2009)
Legal 500
Planning: “Paul is in the very top echelon of planning silks. Paul is an excellent advocate both at planning appeals and in High Court matters. He is extremely approachable, flexible and responsive. He combines real intellectual gravitas with a friendly manner which is very reassuring for clients and instructing solicitors alike.” (2022)
Inquiries
- 23/03/2018Druridge Bay Open Cast Coal Mine
- 21/06/2017Druridge Bay Open Cast Coal Inquiry
- 21/03/2017London Russian Ballet School appeal allowed, with full costs
- 21/03/2017Gibraltar Farm
- 06/06/2014Shell Centre Proposals Approved
- 23/04/2013Lydd Airport Expansion
- 14/03/2013Gateforth Mushroom Farm, Selby – Change of Use to Travelling Showpeople’s Quarters
- 01/06/2012Springfield Hospital, Wandsworth
- 02/01/2012Bryngwyn Livestock Market CPO
- 21/11/2011Merryfield Park/RAF Sopley
- 31/10/2010Veolia/Rufford Colliery Energy Recovery Facility Inquiry
- 30/05/2010Nutsgrove and French Farm Wind Farm Inquiries
- 18/05/2010Newton Lane, Ledston
- 30/03/2009Tesco Stores, Birmingham
- 01/09/2008Lightwater Valley Inquiry
- 01/02/2008A421 (Bedford to M1) Improvement Scheme
- 01/01/2008Linden Homes development in Maidenhead
- 01/11/2007Sandons Farm Inquiry
- 10/05/2007Berwick Retail Inquiry
- 25/01/2007South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework Examination
- 25/04/2006Mersey Docks & Harbour (Seaforth Terminal) Harbour Revision Order
- 21/02/2006English Partnerships – Kings Waterfront
- 01/01/2006South Cambridgeshire District Council LDF Examination
- 01/01/2006Station Road Car Park, Bromley
- 10/05/2005Buckinghamshire County Council Minerals and Waste Local Plan Inquiry
- 01/01/2005M62 (Carlisle to Gretna Green) Roads Inquiry Agency
- 20/04/2004Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan
- 01/01/2004Stevenage West
- 01/01/2004Stevenage West
- 09/07/2002Bexley UDP Review
- 09/07/2002Bexley UDP Review
- 19/02/2002Kidderminster Incinerator Inquiry
- 19/02/2002Kidderminster Incinerator Inquiry
- 19/09/2001Northern Gateway Access Road, Enfield
- 19/09/2001Northern Gateway Access Road, Enfield
- 24/04/2001One Westminster Bridge, London
- 24/04/2001One Westminster Bridge, London
- 04/04/2000London International Freight Exchange Inquiry, Slough
- 04/04/2000London International Freight Exchange Inquiry, Slough
- 27/04/1999Nottinghamshire Waste Local Plan
- 27/04/1999Nottinghamshire Waste Local Plan
- 30/06/1998Greenwich Peninsula CPO
- 30/10/1997Aylesbury Town Centre Pedestrianisation
- 01/01/1996Buckinghamshire Waste Local Plan
- 01/01/1996Castle Hill/A21 RSA Inquiry
- 05/05/1995Wycombe District Council v Williams [1995] 3 PLR 19
- 01/01/1995Eastbourne Local Plan Inquiry
- 31/10/1994M40 MSA Inquiry
- 18/10/1994Leeds U.D.P. Inquiry
- 01/01/1994M25 MSA Inquiry – Epping Forest
- 01/01/1993Redhill Aerodrome Inquiry
- 01/01/1993Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan Inquiry
Inquiries
Druridge Bay Open Cast Coal Mine
23/03/2018
This was an application by Banks Ltd for permission for an open cast coal mine at Druridge Bay, Northumberland which was called in by the Secretary of State, following Northumberland Council’s resolution to grant permission.
Rejecting the recommendation of his Inspector, the Secretary of State concluded that the national, local and community benefits of the proposal would not clearly outweigh the likely adverse impacts such as to justify the grant of planning permission. In particular, he attached “considerable negative weight” to the harm to the landscape character of the area, and “considerable adverse weight” to the negative impact on greenhouse gases and climate change. The application therefore failed to comply with para 149 of the NPPF and was contrary to para 109.
Paul Brown QC acted (pro bono) for Friends of the Earth at the four week long inquiry in May and June 2017
A copy of the decision letter and the Inspector’s report can be found here.
Inquiries
Druridge Bay Open Cast Coal Inquiry
21/06/2017
Today, after three and a half weeks of evidence, closing arguments were made in an inquiry into an application to extract 3 million tonnes of coal from an opencast mine in the hinterland of Druridge Bay in Northumberland.
The application was called in for determination by the Secretary of State who has asked to be informed, inter alia, on the extent to which the proposal is consistent with:
(a) Government policies for meeting the challenge of climate change
(b) The Written Ministerial Statement on the Central Government’s commitment to replace coal fired power stations with gas, as made by the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change on 18 November 2015;
(c) The extent to which the proposed development is consistent with the Department’s amended online guidance on renewable and low carbon energy.
It is the first time the Secretary of State has called in an application for the extraction of a fossil fuel in order to be informed about the downstream environmental effects of burning that fuel. The Applicant has argued that the coal is needed primarily to meet the demand for coal fired power stations between 2018 and 2025. Opponents, led by Friends of the Earth, have argued that there is no need for more indigenous coal and that the claimed benefits are outweighed by the adverse environmental effects.
Nathalie Lieven QC appeared on behalf of the Applicant.
Paul Brown QC and Toby Fisher appeared for Friends of the Earth.
Inquiries
London Russian Ballet School appeal allowed, with full costs
21/03/2017
The Planning Inspectorate has allowed an appeal by the London Russian Ballet School against the refusal of planning permission and listed building consent for a basement and above-ground extension to the School’s Grade II listed building in Clapham. Although finding that the extension would be “quite distinct and clearly modern”, the Inspector concluded that it was inspired by its local context and would deliver design excellence. The scheme would be a world-class ballet school, with very significant community-wide public benefits.
In awarding LRBS the full costs of the 6-day inquiry, the Inspector was particularly critical of the Planning Committee’s decision to reject the officer’s recommendation without any evidence or sufficient further inquiry, of the fact that the witness who gave evidence on the loss of historic floor plan and historic fabric had “astonishingly” never visited the site, and of the members’ view that neither the provision of recreational classes for members of the public nor the provision of places to fee-paying vocational and pre-vocational students was a public benefit – a conclusion which the Inspector observed “flies in the face of all national and policy objectives to improve the health and wellbeing of the nation.”
Paul Brown QC acted for LRBS. A copy of the decision letter can be found here, and the costs decision here.
Inquiries
Gibraltar Farm
21/03/2017
The Secretary of State has allowed an appeal against Medway District Council’s decision to refuse planning permission for 450 houses on a greenfield site at Gibraltar Farm, near Gillingham. Permission had been refused for a single reason relating to the impact of the proposal on a designated Area of Local Landscape Importance.
In granting permission, the Secretary of State noted that the Council accepted that it only had a housing land supply in the range of 2.21 to 2.79 years, and agreed with the Inspector that the shortfall in five year housing land supply was so great and the pressure on sites so significant, that it was inevitable that Greenfield land would have to be developed. Although the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the immediate area and, therefore, fail to accord with the provisions of policies of the Local Plan, these policies were out of date, and should only be afforded limited weight. The harm would not represent a critical harm to the function of the ALLI taken as a whole. Significant weight was attached to the provision of 25% affordable housing, and the economic benefits of the scheme.
The overall positive balance for the economic and social strands of sustainability from the development contrasted with the environmental role where there was clear harm to this area of countryside which is locally designated for protection. However, the development would not lead to coalescence between settlements or critical harm to the ALLI’s function. The sustainability of the appeal scheme along with the fact that the relevant policies for the supply of housing land in Medway were out of date, outweighed the landscape harm and other harm, and the adverse impacts of the scheme did not significantly and demonstrably outweigh its benefits when assessed against the policies of the Framework taken as a whole.
Paul Brown QC acted for the Appellant; Graeme Keen acted for the Local Planning Authority.
A copy of the decision letter can be found here.
Inquiries
Shell Centre Proposals Approved
06/06/2014
The Secretary of State has approved applications for planning permission, conservation area consent and listed building consent to enable the comprehensive redevelopment of the Shell Centre site, between Waterloo Station and the Thames. The proposals, which retain the iconic Shell Tower, will involve the construction of 8 new buildings (ranging in height from 5 to 37 storeys) to provide around 220,000m2 of floorspace comprising offices, up to 877 residential units, retail, leisure and community uses. The applications, which were supported by the London Borough of Lambeth, had been called in by the Secretary of State for his own determination following concerns which had been raised about the possible impact on the setting of the Westminster World Heritage Site.
Accepting the recommendation of his Inspector (Mr John Braithwaite) the Secretary of State concluded that the proposed development would be of exemplary design quality which, although it would be visible in views from St James Park and the Westminster World Heritage Site, would not harm the setting of either, or of the other heritage assets on the north and south banks of the river. It would also maximise the amount of affordable housing, and provide space for up to 2000 more office workers, thus optimising the potential for the provision of jobs and homes on the site.
Timothy Corner QC and Paul Brown QC acted for the applicant, Braeburn Estates Limited.
A copy of the decision letter can be downloaded here.
Inquiries
Lydd Airport Expansion
23/04/2013
The Secretaries of State for Transport and Communities and Local Government have approved applications for the extension of the runway and a new terminal building at London Ashford Airport, near Lydd in Kent. The applications were called in for a public inquiry after Shepway District Council resolved to grant permission.
The airport lies in close proximity to the RSPB’s bird reserve at Dungeness, and a central issue in the case was the potential impact of the expansion on the Dungeness to Pett Level SPA. Accepting the Inspector’s recommendation, the Secretaries of State concluded that there was little evidence that there would be any impact on the bird populations such as to require an appropriate assessment under the Habitats Regulations. They also rejected concerns raised by local residents about the proximity of Dungeness nuclear power station.
Barristers from Landmark were involved on both sides of the Inquiry: acting on behalf of Shepway District Council, Paul Brown QC supported the applications, while David Forsdick led the opposition on behalf of the RSPB.
A copy of the decision letter can be found here
Inquiries
Gateforth Mushroom Farm, Selby – Change of Use to Travelling Showpeople’s Quarters
14/03/2013
Paul Brown QC successfully obtained planning permission and a full award of costs against the Council at this inquiry into refusal of permission for the change of use of a former mushroom farm into permanent quarters for Travelling Showpeople. The application had been refused by Selby District Council (against their officers’ recommendation) on grounds relating to landscape impact, highways and groundwater contamination.
Inquiries
Merryfield Park/RAF Sopley
21/11/2011
Paul Brown QC successfully represented New Forest District Council at the enforcement appeal inquiry relating to the use of buildings at the former RAF Sopley, now known as Merryfield Park.
The lawful use of the site, which lies in the Green Belt and contains around 100 ex-MoD buildings, is as a ‘training and rest camp on an occasional basis’. NFDC had issued a total of 20 enforcement notices against non-conforming uses in the different buildings. A site-wide ground (a) appeal was also dismissed.
Inquiries
Buckinghamshire County Council Minerals and Waste Local Plan Inquiry
10/05/2005
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC was junior counsel to Buckinghamshire County Council.
Inquiries
Bexley UDP Review
09/07/2002
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC counsel for the London Borough of Bexley.
Inquiries
Bexley UDP Review
09/07/2002
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC counsel for the London Borough of Bexley.
Inquiries
One Westminster Bridge, London
24/04/2001
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC was junior counsel for Frogmore Developments.
Inquiries
One Westminster Bridge, London
24/04/2001
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC was junior counsel for Frogmore Developments.
Articles and Presentations
- An Update on Public Sector Pensions, Age Discrimination and the Fallout from McCloud v Lord Chancellor – webinar
- Round Up Of Recent Changes To The Regulations
- Landscape-led Planning: What’s Law Got to do with It?
- Air Quality as a Ground for Challenging Planning Decisions
- Planning for Development in the Green Belt: Practical issues
- The Proposed Changes to the NPPF
- Bristol Planning Law and Policy Conference 2017 Legal Update
- Developing Private Houses in London
- Community Infrastructure Levy and s.106 Obligations
- Growth and Infrastructure Act: Projects, Special Parliamentary Procedure and Variations
- Legitimate Expectation, Consultation and Fairness in Planning Law
- Planning High Court Challenges Practices and Procedure: Update
Inquiries
Druridge Bay Open Cast Coal Mine
23/03/2018
This was an application by Banks Ltd for permission for an open cast coal mine at Druridge Bay, Northumberland which was called in by the Secretary of State, following Northumberland Council’s resolution to grant permission.
Rejecting the recommendation of his Inspector, the Secretary of State concluded that the national, local and community benefits of the proposal would not clearly outweigh the likely adverse impacts such as to justify the grant of planning permission. In particular, he attached “considerable negative weight” to the harm to the landscape character of the area, and “considerable adverse weight” to the negative impact on greenhouse gases and climate change. The application therefore failed to comply with para 149 of the NPPF and was contrary to para 109.
Paul Brown QC acted (pro bono) for Friends of the Earth at the four week long inquiry in May and June 2017
A copy of the decision letter and the Inspector’s report can be found here.
Inquiries
Druridge Bay Open Cast Coal Inquiry
21/06/2017
Today, after three and a half weeks of evidence, closing arguments were made in an inquiry into an application to extract 3 million tonnes of coal from an opencast mine in the hinterland of Druridge Bay in Northumberland.
The application was called in for determination by the Secretary of State who has asked to be informed, inter alia, on the extent to which the proposal is consistent with:
(a) Government policies for meeting the challenge of climate change
(b) The Written Ministerial Statement on the Central Government’s commitment to replace coal fired power stations with gas, as made by the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change on 18 November 2015;
(c) The extent to which the proposed development is consistent with the Department’s amended online guidance on renewable and low carbon energy.
It is the first time the Secretary of State has called in an application for the extraction of a fossil fuel in order to be informed about the downstream environmental effects of burning that fuel. The Applicant has argued that the coal is needed primarily to meet the demand for coal fired power stations between 2018 and 2025. Opponents, led by Friends of the Earth, have argued that there is no need for more indigenous coal and that the claimed benefits are outweighed by the adverse environmental effects.
Nathalie Lieven QC appeared on behalf of the Applicant.
Paul Brown QC and Toby Fisher appeared for Friends of the Earth.
Inquiries
London Russian Ballet School appeal allowed, with full costs
21/03/2017
The Planning Inspectorate has allowed an appeal by the London Russian Ballet School against the refusal of planning permission and listed building consent for a basement and above-ground extension to the School’s Grade II listed building in Clapham. Although finding that the extension would be “quite distinct and clearly modern”, the Inspector concluded that it was inspired by its local context and would deliver design excellence. The scheme would be a world-class ballet school, with very significant community-wide public benefits.
In awarding LRBS the full costs of the 6-day inquiry, the Inspector was particularly critical of the Planning Committee’s decision to reject the officer’s recommendation without any evidence or sufficient further inquiry, of the fact that the witness who gave evidence on the loss of historic floor plan and historic fabric had “astonishingly” never visited the site, and of the members’ view that neither the provision of recreational classes for members of the public nor the provision of places to fee-paying vocational and pre-vocational students was a public benefit – a conclusion which the Inspector observed “flies in the face of all national and policy objectives to improve the health and wellbeing of the nation.”
Paul Brown QC acted for LRBS. A copy of the decision letter can be found here, and the costs decision here.
Inquiries
Gibraltar Farm
21/03/2017
The Secretary of State has allowed an appeal against Medway District Council’s decision to refuse planning permission for 450 houses on a greenfield site at Gibraltar Farm, near Gillingham. Permission had been refused for a single reason relating to the impact of the proposal on a designated Area of Local Landscape Importance.
In granting permission, the Secretary of State noted that the Council accepted that it only had a housing land supply in the range of 2.21 to 2.79 years, and agreed with the Inspector that the shortfall in five year housing land supply was so great and the pressure on sites so significant, that it was inevitable that Greenfield land would have to be developed. Although the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the immediate area and, therefore, fail to accord with the provisions of policies of the Local Plan, these policies were out of date, and should only be afforded limited weight. The harm would not represent a critical harm to the function of the ALLI taken as a whole. Significant weight was attached to the provision of 25% affordable housing, and the economic benefits of the scheme.
The overall positive balance for the economic and social strands of sustainability from the development contrasted with the environmental role where there was clear harm to this area of countryside which is locally designated for protection. However, the development would not lead to coalescence between settlements or critical harm to the ALLI’s function. The sustainability of the appeal scheme along with the fact that the relevant policies for the supply of housing land in Medway were out of date, outweighed the landscape harm and other harm, and the adverse impacts of the scheme did not significantly and demonstrably outweigh its benefits when assessed against the policies of the Framework taken as a whole.
Paul Brown QC acted for the Appellant; Graeme Keen acted for the Local Planning Authority.
A copy of the decision letter can be found here.
Inquiries
Shell Centre Proposals Approved
06/06/2014
The Secretary of State has approved applications for planning permission, conservation area consent and listed building consent to enable the comprehensive redevelopment of the Shell Centre site, between Waterloo Station and the Thames. The proposals, which retain the iconic Shell Tower, will involve the construction of 8 new buildings (ranging in height from 5 to 37 storeys) to provide around 220,000m2 of floorspace comprising offices, up to 877 residential units, retail, leisure and community uses. The applications, which were supported by the London Borough of Lambeth, had been called in by the Secretary of State for his own determination following concerns which had been raised about the possible impact on the setting of the Westminster World Heritage Site.
Accepting the recommendation of his Inspector (Mr John Braithwaite) the Secretary of State concluded that the proposed development would be of exemplary design quality which, although it would be visible in views from St James Park and the Westminster World Heritage Site, would not harm the setting of either, or of the other heritage assets on the north and south banks of the river. It would also maximise the amount of affordable housing, and provide space for up to 2000 more office workers, thus optimising the potential for the provision of jobs and homes on the site.
Timothy Corner QC and Paul Brown QC acted for the applicant, Braeburn Estates Limited.
A copy of the decision letter can be downloaded here.
Inquiries
Lydd Airport Expansion
23/04/2013
The Secretaries of State for Transport and Communities and Local Government have approved applications for the extension of the runway and a new terminal building at London Ashford Airport, near Lydd in Kent. The applications were called in for a public inquiry after Shepway District Council resolved to grant permission.
The airport lies in close proximity to the RSPB’s bird reserve at Dungeness, and a central issue in the case was the potential impact of the expansion on the Dungeness to Pett Level SPA. Accepting the Inspector’s recommendation, the Secretaries of State concluded that there was little evidence that there would be any impact on the bird populations such as to require an appropriate assessment under the Habitats Regulations. They also rejected concerns raised by local residents about the proximity of Dungeness nuclear power station.
Barristers from Landmark were involved on both sides of the Inquiry: acting on behalf of Shepway District Council, Paul Brown QC supported the applications, while David Forsdick led the opposition on behalf of the RSPB.
A copy of the decision letter can be found here
Inquiries
Gateforth Mushroom Farm, Selby – Change of Use to Travelling Showpeople’s Quarters
14/03/2013
Paul Brown QC successfully obtained planning permission and a full award of costs against the Council at this inquiry into refusal of permission for the change of use of a former mushroom farm into permanent quarters for Travelling Showpeople. The application had been refused by Selby District Council (against their officers’ recommendation) on grounds relating to landscape impact, highways and groundwater contamination.
Inquiries
Merryfield Park/RAF Sopley
21/11/2011
Paul Brown QC successfully represented New Forest District Council at the enforcement appeal inquiry relating to the use of buildings at the former RAF Sopley, now known as Merryfield Park.
The lawful use of the site, which lies in the Green Belt and contains around 100 ex-MoD buildings, is as a ‘training and rest camp on an occasional basis’. NFDC had issued a total of 20 enforcement notices against non-conforming uses in the different buildings. A site-wide ground (a) appeal was also dismissed.
Inquiries
Buckinghamshire County Council Minerals and Waste Local Plan Inquiry
10/05/2005
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC was junior counsel to Buckinghamshire County Council.
Inquiries
Bexley UDP Review
09/07/2002
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC counsel for the London Borough of Bexley.
Inquiries
Bexley UDP Review
09/07/2002
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC counsel for the London Borough of Bexley.
Inquiries
One Westminster Bridge, London
24/04/2001
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC was junior counsel for Frogmore Developments.
Inquiries
One Westminster Bridge, London
24/04/2001
Planning inquiry. Paul Brown QC was junior counsel for Frogmore Developments.