the guide to PLANNING LAWYERS 2013￿14 2 ￿￿ JUNE ￿￿￿￿ PLANNING LAWYERS INTRODUCTION Legal brie￿ng

rey areas abound in the interpretation The government’s new tax on development pro- of planning legislation and policy. The posals, the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), Ggovernment’s ongoing programme of is another growth area for the legal trade. Many planning reform and delays in develop- lawyers are advising clients on how local authority ment plan adoption are among factors creating a CIL charging schedules will affect their schemes. climate of uncertainty in which parties on all sides Others are helping councils ensure their charge see opportunities to press their own interests. rates pass the soundness tests set by ministers. The threat of litigation hovers over almost any These are just some areas where legal expertise major development or infrastructure proposal or is proving essential for parties seeking to realise local authority planning policy. In this climate, their aspirations through the planning system, lawyers have a key role to play in whether they are developers, local authorities or ensuring that schemes and third parties. A clear steer on the best sources of policies are fire-proofed legal advice is vital for anyone trying to nego- Contents against legal challenge. tiate this minefield. The Guide to Planning The government has Lawyers aims to help in two ways. 05 THE PLANNING TEAM taken steps to curtail First, it offers an element of peer re- Law firms are Editorial the scope for chal- view via our annual Planning Law T 020 8267 4381 advising on many of the E [email protected] lenge, but these may Survey. In April, we asked lawyers and UK’s biggest schemes W PlanningResource@ make little difference planning consultants to nominate so- 09 haymarket.com to the volume of liti- licitors whose planning work they hold Business is Supplement editor gation. Most lawyers in high regard and individual so- Bryan Johnston boosted by housing and Supplement production editor predict that the new licitors and barristers whose infrastructure projects Keith Parish rules capping costs or- work exemplifies best plan- Supplement sub editor 13 Alice Hall ders against unsuccessful “Lawyers have ning law practice. We re- Services A guide to the Supplement layout claimants will encourage judi- a key role to ceived responses from Dennis Sterne range of planning legal Planning editor cial review challenges on planning play in ensuring 284 experts in the field, specialisms Richard Garlick and environmental grounds. including 83 solicitors Cover images that schemes 17 Alamy Some feel that ministers’ general and policies are in private practice, 125 Directory Full details for reluctance to use call-in powers on safe from legal barristers, 42 consult- solicitors and barristers Advertising controversial proposals supported by ants and 34 local author- offering planning advice T 020 8267 8126 local authorities leaves disappointed challenge” ity lawyers – the fullest E fawad.minhas@haymarket. com objectors little option but to test their response ever. The findings

Subscriptions arguments through the courts. This ap- are set out in our features sec- T 08451 557355 plies perhaps most prominently in the hous- tion (see pages 5-12). E haymarketuk@ subscription.co.uk ing field, where lawyers see clear signs of market Second, the Guide provides a summary on the W www.haysubs.com confidence returning. services offered by nearly 200 law firms and cham- Planning is published by Haymarket Business Media, Back issues The Planning Act 2008’s development consent bers on planning, environmental and commercial 174 Hammersmith Road, T 01733 385170 order (DCO) procedure for nationally significant matters (see pages 13-16). Finally, the directory sec- London W6 7JP E backissues@ infrastructure projects is now in full swing. Sev- tion contains contact details for each organisation © Haymarket Business Media johndentonservices.com W www.mags-uk.com eral schemes approved so far face judicial reviews. (see pages 17-31). We hope this publication will Reprints Lawyers in this arena have built up valuable expe- point you towards reliable and productive advice. T 020 8267 4752 Bryan Johnston, Consultant Editor, Planning // List rental rience in managing the DCO application process T 020 8267 4607 and making sure the documentation is sound. [email protected]

￿￿ JUNE ￿￿￿￿ 03 4 ￿￿ JUNE ￿￿￿￿ PLANNING LAWYERS SOLICITORS

pinion about the best sources of advice on planning can shift rapidly over time. As On top ever, our annual peer review of the sector Oshows a few firms of solicitors climbing the lower rungs of the ratings ladder, and others fall- ing back (see table, page 6). Yet there is consistency in the top tier, with only one new entry in this year’s of the law top ten and three new entries in the top 20. This year, retains pole position. Its involvement in projects including Lon- don’s Thames Tideway Tunnels and Yorkshire’s White Rose carbon capture and storage project has Our rankings cemented its position as a key infrastructure player. of the highest rated But partner Tim Pugh points to “trophy develop- ments” such as the University of Cambridge’s ex- planning law ￿rms and pansion project and a track record in resisting legal individual solicitors give challenges as key elements of the firm’s offer: “Our work reflects a shift towards a smaller number of some useful pointers to nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) and other high-value schemes.” the best sources of expert Infrastructure, energy, commercial and residen- advice. Huw Morris tial development are the main strands of activity for Eversheds, national head of planning Stuart reports Andrews reports. The firm is promoting the High Speed Two (HS2) rail link, currently facing a Court of Appeal challenge, while it is exploring the legal TOM CAMPBELL TOM Berwin Leighton Paisner: planning team remains top of the law firm ranking with focus on large-scale infrastructure projects and track record on judicial challenges

￿￿ JUNE ￿￿￿￿ 05 PLANNING LAWYERS SOLICITORS

implications of new forms of energy supply in its work on energy firm Cuadrilla’s shale gas explora- Top rated planning law ￿rms 2013 tion programme in Lancashire. Major mixed-use projects feature heavily in SJ Ber- Rank Rank Company Rank Rank Company win’s current workload. Judicial review is another 2013 2012 2013 2012 staple: the firm is acting for HS2 Action Alliance on 1 1 Berwin Leighton Paisner 26= 32= Ward Hadaway its challenge to the HS2 route. Head of planning and 2 2 Eversheds 32= 37= ASB Law environment Simon Ricketts identifies environmen- 3 4 SJ Berwin 32= 44= Cripps Harries Hall tal assessment, the Community Infrastructure Levy 4 5 34= Blake Lapthorn (CIL) and compulsory purchase as growth areas. 5= 8 Bircham Dyson Bell 34= 44= DMH Stallard Pinsent Masons partner Richard Ford says the 5= 3 34= Dundas & Wilson firm’s London team has expanded fast on the Olym- 7 6 International 34= 27= Paul Winter & Co pic Park legacy scheme, the Earls Court mixed-use 8 9= DLA Piper 34= 44= Shoosmiths development and Croydon’s Whitgift Centre redevel- 9 7 SNR Denton 34= 55= opment. The firm is also advising on 20 development 10 11 Ashurst 34= consent orders (DCOs) under the NSIP regime. 11 16= 41= 32= Clifford Chance At Bircham Dyson Bell, up three places in this 12 9= Marrons 41= 32= CMS Cameron McKenna year’s top ten, 70 per cent of the work revolves 13= 14 Clyde & Co 41= Geldards around major infrastructure schemes, including HS2 13= 12 Nabarro 41= 32= K & L Gates and Transport for London’s Northern Line extension 15= 19= Bond Dickinson 41= Linda S Russell and London river crossings programmes. “Policy, 15= 13 Wragge & Co 41= 27= Mills & Reeve practice and procedure are constantly evolving in 17 19= Forsters 41= Weightmans this area,” says head of major projects Robbie Owen. 18 32= (LG) 48= Aaron & Partners partner Matthew White 19 Blandy & Blandy 48= 22= DAC Beachcroft says knowledge gained during his team’s involve- 20 22= Squire Sanders 48= 37= DWF ment in EDF Energy’s Hinkley Point nuclear plant 21 16= Richard Buxton 48= 37= Gateley DCO, approved in March, is feeding through into 22= 27= Sharpe Pritchard 48= work in the offshore wind, shale gas and aviation 22= 22= Winckworth Sherwood 48= Michelmores sectors. This spring the firm successfully defended 24= Lewis Silkin 54= 44= a court challenge to ministerial consent for the re- 24= 37= Richard Max & Co 54= 44= Clarke Willmott generation of Crystal Palace Park in south London. 26= 22= 54= 44= Freeth Cartwright Hogan Lovells International’s current work var- 26= 44= Ashfords 54= 44= Keystone Law ies from major mixed-use projects in London to a 26= 16= Norton Rose 54= 37= Reynolds Porter Chamberlain rail freight interchange in Hertfordshire and an 18- 26= 27= 54= 37= Speechly Bircham kilometre gas pipeline in Yorkshire. Head of plan- 26= 15 Walker Morris 54= 44= Walton & Co

THE TOP FIVE PLANNING SOLICITORS

￿ SIMON RICKETTS ￿ STUART ANDREWS ￿ MICHAEL GALLIMORE ￿ IAN GINBEY ￿ TIM SMITH

Hailed as “the thinking man’s Rated as a “very effective Hogan Lovells International’s Steering CALA Homes’ Barton This Berwin Leighton Paisner planning lawyer”, Ricketts is communicator”, Eversheds’ head of planning is rated Farm urban extension project partner takes a “stimulating busy advising on major mixed- head of planning advises for his “strategic insight” on in Winchester through a series approach” to work ranging use projects at Kettering and the Crossrail 2 project team flagship London projects such of legal obstacles has sealed from Halite Energy’s gas Houghton Regis. As well as and acts for Cuadrilla on as the Olympic Park legacy the Clyde & Co planning storage project in Lancashire acting for objectors to the its shale gas exploration scheme, the Shell Centre team leader’s reputation as a to proposed extensions at the High Speed Two rail link, he is programme. Andrews helped redevelopment and King’s “determined fighter”. Ginbey Westfield London shopping supporting a legal challenge Lend Lease secure approval Cross Central. He is acting has also helped win consent centre. Smith has also helped to the Wealden local plan and for the Elephant and Castle for developer Helioslough to redevelop the Silverstone clients defend judicial reviews representing British Land in regeneration in Southwark, on its Radlett rail freight racing circuit and acted for involving a neighbourhood judicial review proceedings and is working on Oxford’s interchange plans and for Grainger in resisting a court plan in Buckinghamshire, relating to the extension of the Barton urban extension and Royal Mail on schemes bid to overturn permission for London’s first Jewish free Surrey Quays shopping centre redevelopment plans for at Mount Pleasant and its Wards Corner regeneration school and regeneration in Southwark. Twickenham Station. Paddington. scheme in Haringey. schemes in west Wales.

06 ￿￿ JUNE ￿￿￿￿ PLANNING LAWYERS SOLICITORS

ning Michael Gallimore says his team is also advising widely on CIL charging schedules. Top rated solicitors 2013 DLA Piper partner Howard Bassford reports that his team is very active in the infrastructure field, cit- Rank Rank Company ing work to improve grid connections in Cumbria 2013 2012 and a tidal energy lagoon planned for Swansea Bay. 1 1 Simon Ricketts SJ Berwin, London “The market is sorting itself into firms that can do 2 4 Stuart Andrews Eversheds, Birmingham infrastructure projects and those that can’t,” says 3 3 Michael Gallimore Hogan Lovells International, London Bassford. He also sees a revival in market demand 4 6 Ian Ginbey Clyde & Co, London for residential development advice. 5 2 Tim Smith Berwin Leighton Paisner, London ’ planning work ranges from wind farms 6 15= Robbie Owen Bircham Dyson Bell, London to waste facilities, residential and retail schemes, 7 5 Matthew White Herbert Smith Freehills, London local plan and High Court tasks and a broad range 8 13= Martha Grekos Eversheds, London of economic development advice. Partner Stephen 9= 25= Clare Fielding Lawrence Graham, London Ashworth says the firm has reviewed more than 50 9= 43= Tim Taylor Forsters, London CIL charging schedules for retailer Sainsbury’s. 11= Howard Bassford DLA Piper, London Housing, retail and infrastructure are the most 11= 17= Nigel Hewitson , London active areas for Ashurst’s team, says partner Trevor 13= 9= Stephen Ashworth Dentons, London Goode. The firm’s work covers high-value housing- 13= 11= Paul Winter Paul Winter & Co, London led schemes in London, town centre projects in 15= Julian Boswall Burges Salmon, Bristol Guildford, Hereford and Portsmouth, the mayor of 15= 11= Duncan Field Wragge & Co, London London’s aviation strategy and ongoing advice to re- 15= 7 Iain Gilbey Pinsent Masons, Birmingham tail firms Westfield and Tesco. 18= 25= Karen Cooksley Winckworth Sherwood, London At Bristol law firm Burges Salmon, up five places 18= Judith Damerell Lewis Silkin, London in this year’s table, partner Gary Soloman highlights 18= Gary Soloman Burges Salmon, Bristol wind farms, nuclear and road schemes as key areas. 21= 23= Brian Greenwood Osborne Clarke, London Current assignments include the Galloper wind farm 21= 13= James Good Berwin Leighton Paisner, London off Suffolk and advising Isle of Anglesey Council on 21= Paul Maile Eversheds, Birmingham Horizon’s plans for a new nuclear plant at Wylfa. 21= 43= Tim Pugh Berwin Leighton Paisner, London “Housebuilding is coming back and we are seeing 21= 8 Stephen Webb SJ Berwin, London more compulsory purchase activity,” says Soloman. 26= 43= Claire Dutch Hogan Lovells International, London Marrons’ infrastructure portfolio includes a pro- 26= 17= Trevor Goode Ashurst, London posed extension to the Daventry International Rail 26= 25= Tim Hellier Berwin Leighton Paisner, London Freight Terminal, a rail freight interchange at East 26= 28= Richard Lloyd Eversheds, Manchester Midlands Airport and pipeline and harbour facili- 26= 43= Angus Walker Bircham Dyson Bell, London ties for a proposed potash mine in North Yorkshire. 31= 22 David Cox Dentons, London Senior principal Morag Thomson also cites judicial 31= 28= Richard Ford Pinsent Masons, London review work and renegotiation of section 106 agree- 31= Karen Jones Blandy & Blandy, Reading ments to ensure scheme viability as mainstays. 31= 17= Simon Stanion Marrons, Leicester Nabarro partner Martin Evans agrees that viability 31= Peter Taylor DLA Piper. Birmingham is now a huge factor in lawyers’ workload. “There is 31= 9= Morag Thomson Marrons, Leicester simply no fat on most current projects. We’ve been 37= John Bosworth Ashfords, Bristol inundated with instructions to advise on CIL and 37= 28= Richard Buxton Richard Buxton, Cambridge mitigation strategies,” he says. 37= 17= David Hardy Eversheds, Leeds Highlights of the past year for Clyde and Co include 37= 17= Jonathan Riley Pinsent Masons, Manchester securing permission for CALA Homes’ Barton Farm 37= 28= Marcus Trinick QC Eversheds, Cardiff urban extension in Winchester. Partner Ian Ginbey 37= 15= Andrew Williamson Walker Morris, Leeds says planning litigation is a large part of his team’s 43= 43= Sebastian Charles K & L Gates, London work, “in part due to the uncertainty over the direc- 43= Mark Challis Bircham Dyson Bell, London tion of planning policy under this government”. 43= 28= Barry Jeeps Stephenson Harwood, London Wragge and Co’s planning team’s workload covers 43= Nick McDonald Pinsent Masons, Leeds expansion plans for London Luton and London City 47= 36= Francesca de Vita Watson, Farley & Williams, London airports, a rail freight exchange in west London, the 47= 43= Claire Fallows Speechly Bircham, London Crown Estate’s St James’s Market scheme in central 47= 36= Richard Max Richard Max & Co, London London and St Modwen’s regeneration package for 47= 23= Andrew Thomas Wragge & Co, Birmingham the Longbridge car plant in the West Midlands. 51= 28= Tony Curnow Ashurst, London May’s merger of Bond Pearce and Dickinson Dees 51= Daniel Farrand , London as Bond Dickinson has created a 25-strong planning 51= 43= David Goodman Squire Sanders, Leeds team which practice head Claire Brook says “will 51= Mark Howard Michelmores, Exeter combine strengths in housing, regeneration, devel- 51= Stephen McNaught Dundas & Wilson, London opment consent orders, compulsory purchase, re- 51= 28= Patrick Robinson Burges Salmon, Bristol newables, energy from waste and transport”. 51= Huw Williams Geldards, Cardiff

￿￿ JUNE ￿￿￿￿ 07 8 ￿￿ JUNE ￿￿￿￿ PLANNING LAWYERS BARRISTERS

Top rated planning silks 2013 Leading Rank Rank Chambers Silk 2013 2012 1 1 Martin Kingston QC 1992 2 2 Christopher Katkowski QC Landmark Chambers 1999 3 3 Ian Dove QC No5 Chambers 2003 counsel 4 4 Morag Ellis QC Cornerstone Barristers 2006 5 13= Rupert Warren QC Landmark Chambers 2011 6= 5 David Elvin QC Landmark Chambers 2000 6= 21 Peter Village QC Thirty Nine Essex Street 2002 8 11= Jeremy Cahill QC No5 Chambers 2002 9 10 Simon Bird QC Cornerstone Barristers 2009 10= 6 Tim Corner QC Landmark Chambers 2002 Top planning 10= 7 Russell Harris QC Landmark Chambers 2003 barristers are facing 12 9 Robin Purchas QC Francis Taylor Building 1987 13= 19= Mark Lowe QC Cornerstone Barristers 1992 heavy workloads 13= 19= Paul Tucker QC Kings Chambers 2010 15 Richard Harwood QC Thirty Nine Essex Street 2013 promoting major 16 James Maurici QC Landmark Chambers 2013 projects and resisting 17 24= Douglas Edwards QC Francis Taylor Building 2010 18= 11= Michael Humphries QC Francis Taylor Building 2003 challenges to approved 18= 16= Gregory Jones QC Francis Taylor Building 2011 schemes, Bryan 18= James Strachan QC Thirty Nine Essex Street 2013 18= 13= Stephen Tromans QC Thirty Nine Essex Street 2009 Johnston ￿nds 22= 16= Neil Cameron QC Landmark Chambers 2009 22= Andrew Tait QC Francis Taylor Building 2003 24= 45= Craig Howell Williams QC Francis Taylor Building 2009 24= 16= Nathalie Lieven QC Landmark Chambers 2006 26 28= Tim Mould QC Landmark Chambers 2006 27= 45= Thomas Hill QC Thirty Nine Essex Street 2009 27= 37= Tim Straker QC 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square 1996 his year’s Planning Law Survey produced 29= 8 Paul Brown QC Landmark Chambers 2009 no change in the top four positions for 29= 33= James Findlay QC Cornerstone Barristers 2008 the most highly rated planning Queen’s 29= 24= Christopher Lockhart-Mummery QC Landmark Chambers 1986 Counsel (QC). However, Rupert Warren 32= 37= David Manley QC Kings Chambers 2003 T 32= 33= Stephen Sauvain QC Kings Chambers 1995 QC climbs into fifth place just two years after tak- ing silk, and Peter Village QC appears in the top ten 32= Sasha White QC Landmark Chambers 2013 for the first time. 35= 15 Neil King QC Landmark Chambers 2000 Martin Kingston QC, who again tops the rank- 35= 37= Suzanne Ornsby QC Francis Taylor Building 2011 ings (see profiles, page 12), cannot remember a 35= 49= John Steel QC Thirty Nine Essex Street 1993 busier time on large-scale projects and sees no sign 38= 22= Gordon Nardell QC Thirty Nine Essex Street 2010 of demand slackening. “Clients want advice on the 38= 22= Richard Phillips QC Francis Taylor Building 1990 prospects of success but more particularly on how 40= Christopher Boyle QC Landmark Chambers 2013 projects should be shaped, their fit with the Nati- 40= 33= John Litton QC Landmark Chambers 2010 onal Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the 42= 53= Clive Newberry QC Francis Taylor Building 1993 timing of applications and development plan rep- 42= 49= Paul Stinchcombe QC Thirty Nine Essex Street 2011 resentations,” he finds. 44= Richard Clayton QC 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square 2002 Major retail and leisure schemes feature strongly in 44= 31= Vincent Fraser QC Kings Chambers 2001 Christopher Katkowski QC’s workload. Katkowski 44= W Robert Griffiths QC 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square 1993 notes a marked increase in legal challenges to per- 44= 33= William Hicks QC Landmark Chambers 1995 missions granted by local authorities. “Ministerial 44= 49= John Hobson QC Landmark Chambers 2000 call-ins are so few and far between that disgruntled 49= 24= Richard Drabble QC Landmark Chambers 1995 objectors are taking to the courts more and more, 49= 56= Richard Glover QC Francis Taylor Building 2009 however weak their cases might be,” he says. 49= 37= David Holgate QC Landmark Chambers 1997 Ian Dove QC is also seeing plenty of court ac- 49= 56= Richard Humphreys QC Francis Taylor Building 2006 tion, including successful outcomes on housing-led 49= 31= Rhodri Price Lewis QC Landmark Chambers 2001 schemes in Gloucestershire, North Somerset and 49= 28= Guy Roots QC Francis Taylor Building 1989 Cheshire. Dove reckons his court workload has 55= 45= Anthony Crean QC Kings Chambers 2006 doubled over the past three years. “Government has 55= 37= Robert McCracken QC Francis Taylor Building 2003 identified a need for growth and development and 55= 37= William Norris QC Thirty Nine Essex Street 1997

￿￿ JUNE ￿￿￿￿ 9 Planning/Environment Set of the Year 2012

Planning Environment Public Law Local Government Infrastructure Compulsory Purchase and Land Valuation Regulatory Licensing Education Ecclesiastical Town and Village Greens

Andrew Tait QC Mark Hill QC James Pereira Cain Ormondroyd Robin Purchas QC Simon Phillips QC* Hereward Phillpot Annabel Graham Paul Guy Roots QC Andrew Newcombe QC Leo Charalambides Sarah Sackman Richard Phillips QC Douglas Edwards QC Alexander Booth Rebecca Clutten Charles George QC Gregory Jones QC Saira Kabir Sheikh Ned Westaway Clive Newberry QC Suzanne Ornsby QC Prof Andrea Biondi Isabella Tafur Kevin de Haan QC Robert Fookes Jeremy Pike David Graham Robert McCracken QC Philip Petchey Melissa Murphy George Mackenzie Michael Humphries QC Timothy Comyn Juan Lopez George Bartlett QC** Gerald Gouriet QC James Rankin Denis Edwards David Matthias QC Meyric Lewis Richard Honey Richard Humphreys QC Dr Charles Mynors Jeremy Phillips

Craig Howell Williams QC Andrew Fraser-Urquhart Mark Westmoreland Smith *Also at New Park Court Chambers, Leeds Richard Glover QC Gary Grant Dr Pavlos Eleftheriadis ** Arbitrator

Francis Taylor Building London EC4Y 7BY DX: 402 LDE T 020 7353 8415 F 020 7353 7622 E [email protected] www.ftb.eu.com