Richard Moules

Call: 2005
Download CV

Practice Summary

Richard was called in 2005. He specialises in planning & compulsory purchase, environmental, and public law.  He undertakes work for private developers, central and local government, public bodies and interest groups. He is a member of the Attorney-General’s “A” panel of counsel.

Planning

Richard’s planning practice encompasses all aspects of planning both at inquiries and hearings and in the Higher Courts. He also advises clients on all aspects of planning law, including policy formulation, development control and enforcement. Richard regularly advised on s.96A and s.73 applications for major development schemes. 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).

(i) Planning Inquiries: Richard’s planning inquiry experience is wide ranging with a particular focus on large retail schemes (including recently having successfully acted in successful called-in inquiries for a designer outlet centre (Scotch Corner) and a shopping centre extension in England’s first business neighbourhood plan area (Intu Milton Keynes)). Richard is also acting for the developers in the Cribbs Causeway Mall call-in and in December 2017 he successfully acted for the Secretary of State defending the called-in Tollgate, Colchester decision.

(ii) Examinations in public: Richard has appeared at several Core Strategy examination hearings for developers and interest groups. He has also advised a number of local planning authorities on issues related to preparation of Development Plans.

(iii) High Court planning work: His most recent high-profile planning cases include:

Richborough Estates Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2018] EWHC 33 (Admin) (successfully defending the Written Ministerial Statement on Neighbourhood Planning);

Gladman Developments Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWHC 2768 (Admin) (on the implications of air quality and the ‘ClientEarth’ judgment for planning decision-making –one of the top 10 cases of 2017 in Planning Magazine);

R. (on the application of Mars Jones) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy[2017] EWHC 1111 (Admin) (successfully defending the North Wales Wind Farm Connection (Correction) Order 2017 DCO for a 17.4km high voltage pylon route to connect a number of wind farms in North Wales to the grid).

(iv) Planning Act 2008 and infrastructure: Richard regularly acts for Government defending challenges to Planning Act 2008 decisions (e.g. R. (on the application of Mars Jones) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [2017] EWHC 1111 (Admin) and R. (on the application of Mynydd y Gwynt Ltd) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [2016] EWHC 2581 (Admin); [2017] Env. L.R. 14). He has also acted for the Marine Management Organisation in the DCOs: Thames Tideway Tunnel; Hinckley Point C; Preesall Underground Gas Storage Facility.

Richard has considerable airport-related experience. He acted for the Department of the Environment in Northern Ireland at inquiry concerning the expansion of flights from Belfast City Airport. He advised London City Airport on its planning application for expansion, advised Bristol City Airport on expansion under permitted development rights and advised Foster+Partners in relation to the environmental implications of the proposed Isle of Grain airport (‘Boris Island’).

In terms of other infrastructure, Richard promoted a CPO to regenerate Peckham Rye Station & its environs and advised on the making of harbour revision orders for the Port of Dover.

(v) CPO: Richard advises on compulsory purchase and compensation issues. He promotes CPOs through public inquiries for development schemes, including for town centre redevelopments. His most recent major CPOs include successfully promoting: Peckham Rye Station (£30m scheme); Southall Gasworks Site (London Mayor’s first CPO);  Whitgift Croydon (for a Westfield & Hammerson joint venture shopping centre); and Lewisham Gateway (transport and town centre regeneration). Richard has also defended a number of High Court challenges to CPO orders including Swish Estates Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWHC 3331 (Admin). In the field of CPO compensation, Richard has acted for Nottingham City Council in a multi-million pound CPO compensation claim, he is currently acting in relation to the compensation claims arising out of the Southall Gasworks CPO acted for the Highways Agency in CPO compensation claim in respect of Bedford Bypass and the for Olympic Delivery Authority and Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport in relation to compensation claims arising out of the London Olympic & Paralympic Games.

(vii) Rights of way and highways: Richard has acted in a number of rights of way inquiries and regularly advises on highways issues including highways orders under the Highways Act 1980. He acted for the successful developer obtaining a stopping up order to facilitate the Intu Milton Keynes shopping centre extension. Richard is also acting for the City of London and Southwark LBC in arbitrations against TfL concerning the vesting of GLA roads, and the associated litigation (Southwark LBC v Transport for London[2017] EWCA Civ 1220 –permission granted to appeal to the Supreme Court).

In Wheeler v Norwich Magistrates, on an appeal by way of case stated, Richard successfully for the Ramblers’ Association and established that the Magistrates’ Court lacked jurisdiction to award costs to 3rdparties (usually the landowner) in complaints under the Highways Act 1980.

(viii) Marine Regulation (including Harbours and marine licensing): Richard’s marine work covers a number of marine regulatory matters including statutory harbour powers, harbour dues, harbour orders, marine licensing and marine planning.

Richard advises on all aspects of marine regulatory law.  His clients include ports, harbours, local authorities, regulators and interest groups.  He has particular expertise in the following areas:

  • Interpretation of and compliance with statutory harbour powers
  • Harbours dues and use of revenue
  • Marine licensing
  • Marine planning
  • EIA
  • Water regulation
  • Environmental permitting

Recent/ongoing cases include:

  • Richard acted successfully for the interested party defending the first judicial review brought of the Marine Management Organisation: see R. (Humber Oil Terminals Trustee Ltd) v Marine Management Organisation [2012] EWHC 3058 (QB).
  • Advising a statutory harbour authority in relation to its statutory harbour powers connected with harbour dues and other charges.
  • Advising a statutory harbour authority in relation to a number of claims against it connected with the levying of harbour dues.
  • Advising in respect of a challenge against a statutory harbour authority based on a failure to comply with statutory harbour duties and misappropriation of harbour funds.
  • Acting for the Marine Management Organisation defending its decision to grant a licence for marine dredging near Devonport Naval Base
  • Advising the Marine Management Organisation in relation to its licensing guidance and in relation to data sharing
  • Thames Tunnel: Acting for the Marine Management Organisation at the DCO hearings
  • Advising the Marine Management Organisation in relation to the drawing up of the first Marine Plans.
  • Hinckley Point C: Acting for the Marine Management Organisation at the DCO hearings
  • Acting for the Environment Agency at 2 week inquiry in test cases concerning its approach to water permitting

Environment

Richard’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 also been involved in a number of cases concerning marine environmental issues.

(i) EIA: Richard has appeared in a number of important cases on EIA including: Bent v Cambridgeshire CC[2017] EWHC 1366 (Admin) (assessment of quarry noise); R. (on the application of Waters) v Breckland DC [2016] EWHC 951 (Admin) (enforcement and EIA); R. (on the application of Community Against Dean Super Quarry) v Cornwall Council [2017] EWHC 74 (Admin) (enforcement and EIA); and R (on the application of Oldfield) v SSCLG [2014] EWCA Civ 1446 (cumulative assessment). He regularly advises developers, planning authorities and interest groups on the adequacy of environmental statements.

(ii) SEA: Richard acted for the Government reviewing the SEAs produced prior to the revocation of Regional Strategies, he also advises local authorities on SEA for plan-making.

(iii) Air quality: Richard has particular expertise in air quality issues (affecting both human and ecological receptors). He acted in High Court cases such as Gladman Developments Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWHC 2768 (Admin) and Wealden DC v SSCLG [2017] EWHC 351 (Admin).

(iv) Habitats and species protection law: recent cases include Wealden DC v SSCLG  [2017] EWHC 351 (Admin) (habitats and air quality); R. (on the application of Mynydd y Gwynt Ltd) v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [2017] Env. L.R. 14 (appropriate assessment & red kite); R (McMorn) v Natural England [2016] Env. L.R. 14 (licensing shooting buzzards). Richard has acted in numerous planning appeals concerning habitats and species protection issues. Richard advises on all legal aspects of habitats and species protection. He has worked on a number of high profile appeals and High Court cases in relation to shooting estates and shooting rights (including Walshaw Moor); RSPB v SSCLG [2014] EWHC 1523 (Admin)(appropriate assessment and airport development affecting birds).

Richard advised Natural England and a consortium of local planning authorities in relation to the Thames Basin Special Protection Area. He also regularly advises the Marine Management Organisation on habitats issues in relation to its licensing and enforcement decisions.

(v) Fracking: Richard has advised the Government on the drafting of secondary legislation regulating fracking.

(vi) Nuisance & other property/environmental issues: Richard often acts in property cases involving environmental law aspects. He is currently acting as junior to Tom Weekes QC in relation to a nuisance claim by residents who claim the Tate Modern extension is a nuisance/infringes their right to privacy. Richard successfully represented United Utilities Water Plc in the Supreme Court in a case concerning the right of utility companies to discharge into private watercourse (led by Jonathan Karas QC) (Manchester Ship Canal Co Ltd v United Utilities Water Plc[2014] 1 W.L.R. 2576)

(vii) Enforcement including civil sanctions: Richard regularly advises the Environment Agency in relating to environmental permitting decisions and enforcement, and acts for the Agency at inquiry defending their enforcement decisions. He advised the Environment Agency on its policy for accepting enforcement undertakings.

(viii) Environmental permitting and licensing: Richard regularly advises the Environment Agency in relation to environmental permitting issues. He acted for the Environment Agency at 2 week inquiry in test cases concerning its approach to water permitting

(iv) Waste: Richard regularly advises on complex waste issues. He is currently acting for the Environment Agency in a challenge to its end of waste decision-making in relation to waste oils.

(x) Water & flooding: In addition to advising developers and planning authorities on flooding issues in the planning context, Richard acted for the City of London defending its decision to proceed with the £17m Ponds Project on Hampstead Heath: R. (on the application of Heath & Hampstead Society) v City of London [2015] P.T.S.R. 987. Richard successfully represented United Utilities Water Plc in the Supreme Court in a case concerning the right of utility companies to discharge into private watercourse (led by Jonathan Karas QC) (Manchester Ship Canal Co Ltd v United Utilities Water Plc[2014] 1 W.L.R. 2576). Richard also regularly advises on environmental permitting affecting water and acted for the Environment Agency at 2 week inquiry in test cases concerning its approach to water permitting.

Public

Richard has a wide-ranging public law practice beyond planning and environmental cases. His public law practice includes social security, education, regulatory, local government (including local government finance), EU law and all aspects of human rights law.

Richard has lectured and published widely on the subject of public law.

Property

Richard’s property work relates closely to his planning and environmental practice and includes proceedings in respect of injunctions for nuisance and trespass arising out of the development of land; disputes in respect of s106 agreements and restrictive covenants; and disputes arising out of development agreements which are conditional upon planning consent being obtained.

Qualifications

Richard read law at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge (BA 2001; LLM 2003 (First Class). He was awarded the Alexander LLM Scholarship and the Huston Putnam Lowry LLM prize.

Since 2003 Richard has been a supervisor in administrative law teaching students at a number of Cambridge colleges. Richard obtained the BVC (Outstanding) from the College of Law in 2004 and was awarded the Baron Van der Heyden De Lancey Prize by Middle Temple, and the 1 Essex Court Prize for Advocacy by the College of Law, 2004.

Recommendations

“He’s very good: he’s commercial, picks up the points quickly and is a very clear, confident and thorough advocate. A barrister who’s going places.” Chambers & Partners, 2018 – Planning

“A clear, confident and thorough advocate. He’s going places.” “He is really clear, receptive to a good dialogue and very easy to work with. He tailored his advice to precisely what I wanted.” “He’s technically excellent and knows his way around.” Chambers & Partners 2018 – Environment

“He is very bright, very approachable and unflappable.” Legal 500, 2017 – Environment

“He is able to retain an extraordinary amount of information and use it to his advantage.” Legal 500, 2017 – Planning

Publications

Richard was a Fellow of Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge and a Newton Trust Lecturer at the University of Cambridge. He has lectured and published widely in the areas of public, planning and environmental law, including his books Actions Against Public Officials: Legitimate Expectations, Misstatements and Misconduct (2009, Sweet & Maxwell) and Environmental Judicial Review (2011, Hart). He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia of Planning Law.

Inquiries

Cribbs Causeway Mall call-in

05/09/2017

Acting for developer.

:

Inquiries

Intu Milton Keynes call-in

05/09/2017

Acting for developer.

:

Inquiries

Peckham Rye Station CPO

31/01/2017

Acting for Southwark LBC.

:

Inquiries

Secretary of State grants planning permission for new designer outlet centre at Scotch Corner

02/12/2016

The Secretary of State has granted two planning permissions for alternative proposals for a new fashion outlet centre at Scotch Corner, at the junction of the A1(M) and the A66 in North Yorkshire. A copy of the decision can found here.  The larger of the two consented schemes would have a total gross internal floor area (GIA) of some 23,381 sq. m comprising 84 Class A1 Retail units with mezzanine floors; 8 Class A3 Food & Drink units and 1,291 car parking spaces and would generate some 700 jobs. ​ The smaller scheme would have a GIA of 16,178 sq. m comprising 70 Class A1 Retail units with mezzanine floors, of varying size; 8 Class A3 Food & Drink units and 1,138 car parking spaces and would create 500 jobs.  The schemes were supported by the Local Planning Authority, Richmondshire District Council, but opposed by a number of local authorities on grounds of (inter alia) retail impact on local town centres.  The Secretary of State concluded that the scheme passed the sequential test and would not harm the vitality and viability of local town centres, noting that even on Darlington Borough Council’s case (a 6.9% impact) the impact would not be significantly adverse.

Christopher Katkowski QC and Richard Moules represented the developer, Scotch Corner Richmond LLP.

Robert Walton represented Richmondshire District Council.

:

Inquiries

Southall Gasworks CPO

08/07/2015

Promoting the Mayor of London’s first CPO for the GLA.

:

Inquiries

Whitgift CPO Croydon

03/02/2015

Jointly instructed by Croydon LBC and the joint venture between Westfield and Hammerson.

:

Inquiries

Javelin Park Inquiry closes

29/01/2014

Closing submissions were heard today in the Javelin Park Energy from Waste (EfW) Inquiry which has sat for 6 weeks. The called-in appeal followed Gloucestershire County Council’s decision to refusal of planning permission for an EfW plant to process approximately 190,000 tonnes of non-hazardous residual waste on a site affecting the setting of the Costswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

David Elvin QC and Richard Moules acted for Gloucestershire County Council as waste planning authority, Zack Simons acted for Stroud District Council.

:

Inquiries

Rushden Lakes call-in

25/06/2013

Acting for developer.

:

Inquiries

Walshaw Moor Estate Inquiry

10/01/2012

On Tuesday 10th January 2012 an inquiry opened into an appeal by Walshaw Moor Estate in respect of a notice of modification of consent issued by Natural England under s. 28E(6) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended).

The Appellant either owns or has the benefit of sporting rights leased to it over approximately 6475ha of Walshaw Moor and Lancashire Moor. It mainly manages the land as a driven grouse moor. The challenged notice of modification of consent seeks significantly to restrict certain management activities such as prescribed burning of heather and grazing.

The land in question forms part of the South Pennine Moors SSSI, the South Pennine Moors SAC and the South Pennine Moors SPA. The inquiry will examine not only important questions of moorland ecology, grazing and burning of heather for grouse rearing, in areas of blanket bog and heathland habitats, but also the Secretary of State’s powers and duties under the Habitats Directive and Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Despite earlier contrary statements, Natural England now seeks to ban all burning on blanket bog, whether previously burned or not.

The inquiry is due to sit until 4 February 2012.

David Elvin QC, James Maurici and Richard Moules are appearing for the Appellant.

:

Inquiries

Cribbs Causeway Mall call-in

05/09/2017

Acting for developer.

:

Inquiries

Intu Milton Keynes call-in

05/09/2017

Acting for developer.

:

Inquiries

Peckham Rye Station CPO

31/01/2017

Acting for Southwark LBC.

:

Inquiries

Secretary of State grants planning permission for new designer outlet centre at Scotch Corner

02/12/2016

The Secretary of State has granted two planning permissions for alternative proposals for a new fashion outlet centre at Scotch Corner, at the junction of the A1(M) and the A66 in North Yorkshire. A copy of the decision can found here.  The larger of the two consented schemes would have a total gross internal floor area (GIA) of some 23,381 sq. m comprising 84 Class A1 Retail units with mezzanine floors; 8 Class A3 Food & Drink units and 1,291 car parking spaces and would generate some 700 jobs. ​ The smaller scheme would have a GIA of 16,178 sq. m comprising 70 Class A1 Retail units with mezzanine floors, of varying size; 8 Class A3 Food & Drink units and 1,138 car parking spaces and would create 500 jobs.  The schemes were supported by the Local Planning Authority, Richmondshire District Council, but opposed by a number of local authorities on grounds of (inter alia) retail impact on local town centres.  The Secretary of State concluded that the scheme passed the sequential test and would not harm the vitality and viability of local town centres, noting that even on Darlington Borough Council’s case (a 6.9% impact) the impact would not be significantly adverse.

Christopher Katkowski QC and Richard Moules represented the developer, Scotch Corner Richmond LLP.

Robert Walton represented Richmondshire District Council.

:

Inquiries

Southall Gasworks CPO

08/07/2015

Promoting the Mayor of London’s first CPO for the GLA.

:

Inquiries

Whitgift CPO Croydon

03/02/2015

Jointly instructed by Croydon LBC and the joint venture between Westfield and Hammerson.

:

Inquiries

Javelin Park Inquiry closes

29/01/2014

Closing submissions were heard today in the Javelin Park Energy from Waste (EfW) Inquiry which has sat for 6 weeks. The called-in appeal followed Gloucestershire County Council’s decision to refusal of planning permission for an EfW plant to process approximately 190,000 tonnes of non-hazardous residual waste on a site affecting the setting of the Costswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

David Elvin QC and Richard Moules acted for Gloucestershire County Council as waste planning authority, Zack Simons acted for Stroud District Council.

:

Inquiries

Rushden Lakes call-in

25/06/2013

Acting for developer.

:

Inquiries

Walshaw Moor Estate Inquiry

10/01/2012

On Tuesday 10th January 2012 an inquiry opened into an appeal by Walshaw Moor Estate in respect of a notice of modification of consent issued by Natural England under s. 28E(6) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended).

The Appellant either owns or has the benefit of sporting rights leased to it over approximately 6475ha of Walshaw Moor and Lancashire Moor. It mainly manages the land as a driven grouse moor. The challenged notice of modification of consent seeks significantly to restrict certain management activities such as prescribed burning of heather and grazing.

The land in question forms part of the South Pennine Moors SSSI, the South Pennine Moors SAC and the South Pennine Moors SPA. The inquiry will examine not only important questions of moorland ecology, grazing and burning of heather for grouse rearing, in areas of blanket bog and heathland habitats, but also the Secretary of State’s powers and duties under the Habitats Directive and Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Despite earlier contrary statements, Natural England now seeks to ban all burning on blanket bog, whether previously burned or not.

The inquiry is due to sit until 4 February 2012.

David Elvin QC, James Maurici and Richard Moules are appearing for the Appellant.

:
icon-accordion-chevron icon-arrow-left icon-arrow-right icon-chevron-down icon-chevron-left icon-cross icon-download icon-letter icon-linked-in icon-phone-outline icon-phone icon-search icon-search icon-select-chevron icon-top-right-corner icon-twitter