Tim Baldwin is ranked in Chambers UK for Social Housing and Community Care and is also identified as a leading junior in the Legal 500 for Social Housing; Court of Protection and Community Care; and Administrative Law and Human Rights.
Tim is known for his fierce commitment to representing vulnerable, marginalised and disadvantaged clients including Gypsies, Travellers and Asylum Seekers concerning accommodation and support needs. His practice is focused in the Court of Appeal, High Court, and complex cases in the County Courts.
Tim is the co-chair of Housing Law Practitioner Association, is a member of the LAPG advisory panel, is an editor of the Community Care Law Reports and is a representative on the ACO user group. Tim is co-convenor of the Garden Court Chambers Court of Protection Team.
Administrative and Public Law
Overview
Tim is highly regarded for his social welfare and public and administrative law practice, which includes housing, community care and social welfare, Court of Protection and DOLS, civil liberties, human rights and inquests, planning, general administrative and public law, commercial judicial review and judicial review of regulatory bodies and Ombudsman cases.
He has appeared in a number of reported cases in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, High Court, and Upper Tribunals, as well as significant inquests.
Notable Cases
Past notable cases can be viewed below. Click here to see a list of recent notable cases.
Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, High Court and Upper Tribunals
R (on the application of SO) v Thanet DC [2023] EWCA Civ 298; [2023] 1 WLR 3462:
Judicial review in the Court of Appeal concerning a novel point of law concerning the rights of Gypsies and Travellers given permission to camp on local authority land. Reported in Times law reports and article in Solicitor’s Journal.
R (on the application of SO) v Thanet DC (Costs) [2023] EWCA Civ 526:
Reported costs decision arising identifying the approach to determination of liability and interim costs orders.
Jepsen and others v Rakusen [2023] UKSC 9:
A test case concerning the protection and enforcement of the rights of vulnerable tenants using Rent Repayment Orders (“RROs”) against Rogue Landlords. This concerned a complex analysis of Statutory construction. The Supreme Court has found that "RROs" can only be made against immediate landlords. This departs from tribunal decisions which found that an RRO could be made against a superior landlord as well as an immediate landlord. The Supreme Court considered the statutory scheme may not have worked as intended. This case was followed with interest by landlords using the rent-to-rent model. Following the judgment on instruction by the Department of Levelling up and Communities to assist in instructing Parliamentary Counsel to introduce and amendment into to Renters (Reform) Bill to capture superior landlord under RROs and to increase the period of liability for 2 years thus reversing the effect of the Supreme Court decision.
Dassy Jones v (1) Welsh Ministers; (2) Rhondda Cynon Taff County BC (Administrative Court (Planning (Wales)) CO/2809/2023:
A successful statutory appeal where the rights of the Travellers children were not lawfully balanced against highway safety issues in planning enforcement proceedings.
R (on the application of Teresa Maher) v (1) First Tier Tribunal (Mental Health), (2) The Lord Chancellor and (3) Secretary of State for Justice (Defendants) and RWM (Interested Party) [2023] EWHC 34 (Admin):
A successful and novel point of law concerning the rights of victims of crime in Mental Health Tribunals. Also reported in the Guardian newspaper.
R (on the application of EL) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea [2022] EWHC 3185 (Admin):
Defendant had not acted in breach of its allocation scheme or in breach of its duties under the Housing Act 1996 Pt VI after it had failed to secure alternative accommodation for an individual with physical and mental health disorders who had been rehoused under the Grenfell Rehousing Policy after the Grenfell fire caused him to be evacuated from his previous premises.
A v Secretary of State for Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ 858:
A novel successful 2nd appeal challenging the procedural impropriety in deportation proceedings. Also reported in the Telegraph and the Sun newspapers.
London Borough of Hackney v Okoro [2020] EWCA Civ 681, [2020] 4 WLR 85:
A successful novel test case led by Stephen Knafler QC in the Court of Appeal as to whether the stay on possession proceedings under Covid 19 applied to appeals. A complex issue on construction of the stay. Widely reported.
Burgos and Amayo v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and London Borough of Hackney [2019] EWHC 2792 (Admin): Challenge to a Compulsory Purchase order to the demolition of Latin Village in Tottenham. Further litigation on the of market licence management led to a collapse of the CPO and an adoption of the community plan.
UK Oil & Gas Investments Plc & Ors v Persons Unknown Who Are Protestors and others [2018] EWHC 2252 (Ch):
One of the junior counsel led by Stephanie Harrison QC represented named Defendants. The transcript is available here. This case was widely reported in the media, including Drill and Drop, ITV news, BBC news and Channel 4.
R (Hakima Alemi) v Westminster City Council [2015] EWHC 1765 (Admin):
Led by Jan Luba QC for the Claimant where the Defendant council's allocation scheme for social housing was declared unlawful and quashed in that it suspended the ability of a homeless family to bid for social housing. The transcript has been made available. This case has also been reported in Inside Housing, the BBC, the Independent, the Local Government Lawyer and in local news in West End Extra. With the Labour Party calling on the Council to rethink its entire housing policy as a result.
R (AM) v London Borough of Havering and London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2015] EWHC 1004 (Admin):
Led by Jan Luba QC for the Claimant where the Defendant Councils' actions were declared unlawful following successful judicial review application by a homeless family. Mr Justice Cobb described the actions of the two councils as "shameful" which led to a vulnerable family being forcibly evicted on to the streets. The transcript has been made available. This case has also been reported in Inside Housing, Evening Standard, Nearly Legal and Family Law.
SA v Disclosure and Barring Service [2013] UKUT 93 (AAC):
Test case of three judge panel to determine the meaning of "relevant conduct" pursuant to paragraph 9 of schedule 2 to Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 and whether theft alone constituted relevant conduct. The transcript has been made available.
R (W) v (1) Dr Fintan Larkin, (2) Secretary of State for Justice and others [2012] EWHC 556 (Admin):
Warrants for transfer to prison and the requirements of a Responsible Clinician in completing s. 50 Mental Health Act 1983 (as amended) proforma. The transcript has been made available.
JP v Birmingham and Solihull MH NHS Trust. Appeal number HM/535/2010 (Unreported 30 July 2010) (Administrative Chamber Upper Tribunal):
An appeal for JP based on challenge to the reasons given by a First Tier MHT refusing discharge of a patient detained under s 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983. The challenge was based on a failure to give adequate reasons for preferring the evidence of the Responsible Clinician and the detaining authority over the evidence of independent experts by applying BB v South London & Maudsley NHS Trust [2009] UKUT 157 (AAC) which was similar on the facts. The transcript has been made available.
R (Salami) v Parole Board; R (Robinson) v Secretary of State for Justice [2009] EWHC 2251 (Admin):
Representing the Claimant (Salami) where the Court held the rights of two long-term prisoners under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 art.6 were not breached as a result of the amendments to the early release provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 1991 Pt II by the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. The transcript has been made available. The Court of Appeal upheld this decision in R (Robinson) v Secretary of State for Justice [2010] EWCA Civ 848.
Lexi Holdings v Luqman and others [2009] EWHC 496 Ch:
Represented the second Defendant in contempt proceedings in a major commercial fraud of over £65million.
R (H) v Guildford Youth Court [2008] EWHC 506 (Admin):
A successful judicial review application for the Claimant leading to a quashing of a conviction under s 20 OAPA 1861 in respect of a refusal by the Youth Court to stay proceedings as an abuse of process. Essentially the judge quashed the conviction on the papers, with the CPS conceding the case and the Instructing Solicitor taking judgment.
R (Surat Singh) v Stratford Magistrates' Court & Others [2007] EWHC 1582 (Admin); [2007] 1 WLR 3119; [2007] 4 All ER 407; [2008] 1 Cr App R 2; [2007] ACD 72; The Times, March 27 2007:
A challenge by way of judicial review of the exercise of a district judge's discretion to refuse to allow the claimant to advance the defence of insanity in summary only proceedings. Leading case as to identifying the common law defence of insanity in summary proceedings. The transcript has been made available.
R v DPP; B v DPP [2007] EWHC 739 (Admin), The Times, March 27 2007:
Also reported in the robbery sections of Archbold and Blackstones. An appeal by way of case stated which concerned proof of intention, mens rea and the use of implied force in robbery by reference to the fortitude of the victim.
Contact Tim
Community Care Law
Overview
- Housing cases where the tenant has mental health issues and specialist community care needs or in complex cases involving welfare benefits
- Complex cases concerning social care for adults or children
- Asylum support and care provision for migrants
- Advice and representation in cases involving persons who lack capacity in all jurisdictions
Notable Cases
Past notable cases can be viewed below. Click here to see a list of recent notable cases.
R (on the application of JG by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor) v Bristol City Council (Defendant) and Secretary of State for the Home Department (Interested Party) CO/1241/2016 (unreported) 11 August 2016:
A successful judicial review challenge to an age assessment of an unaccompanied minor from abroad. To learn more click here.
R (AM) v London Borough of Havering and London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2015] EWHC 1004 (Admin):
Led by Jan Luba QC for the Claimant where the Defendant Councils' actions were declared unlawful following successful judicial review application by a homeless family. Mr Justice Cobb described the actions of the two councils as "shameful" which led to a vulnerable family being forcibly evicted on to the streets. The transcript has been made available. This case has also been reported in Inside Housing, Evening Standard, Nearly Legal and Family Law.
Buckinghamshire County Council (Appellant) v Kingston Upon Thames Royal London Borough Council (Respondent) & (1) SL (By her litigation friend the Official Solicitor) (2) National Society for Epilepsy (3) Secretary of State for Health (Interested Parties) [2011] EWCA Civ 457:
Led by Stephen Knafler QC. The Court of Appeal held, on dismissing Buckinghamshire's appeal, that a local authority, in moving a person whose care it had funded into supported housing in another local authority's area following a needs assessment had been under no duty to consult the other local authority. The transcript has been made available.
Contact Tim
Court of Protection
Overview
- Considerable experience specialising in Court of Protection proceedings concerning health and welfare decisions, accommodation and DOLS issues for applicants and all respondents, including emergency applications and instruction by the Official Solicitor.
- Recent cases have concerned disputes over residence, contact and care together with DOLS and court authorisation of deprivation of liberty including damages claims for false imprisonment.
Notable Cases
BST (by the official solicitor) v Darlington BC, 2020: DJ Eldergill consideration of capacity and living in India Concluded
NF (by the Official Solicitor) v Derby CC. May 2018 – March 2019: DJ Price. Complex hoarding issues linked to possession proceedings.
SD v RD (by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor) v London Borough of Redbridge v NHS Redbridge CCG v Care Home Case 1275114T (From 2020 – 2023) High Court: Mr Justice MacDonald, Mr Justice Hayden and Mr Justice Peel
Gloucestershire City Council v AB & Anor [2022] EWCOP 42 (03 October 2022) (bailii.org) Before HHJ Hilder
Contact Tim
Housing Law
Overview
- Housing cases where the tenant has mental health issues and specialist community care needs or in complex cases involving welfare benefits
- Complex cases concerning social care for adults or children
- Representation of vulnerable tenants in local authority possession proceedings
- Tenant claims against local authorities and landlords, especially for disrepair and unlawful eviction
- Homelessness and allocation of social housing
- Advising on the lawfulness and completeness of schemes for allocation of social housing
- Regulatory enforcement against landlords
Tim is an elected member of the Housing Law Practitioners Association executive and was appointed co-chair in 2024. He was also a member of the HLPA subcommittee created to assist tenants in the Grenfell Tower tragedy in 2017.
Notable Cases
Past notable cases can be viewed below. Click here to see a list of recent notable cases.
Jepsen and others v Rakusen [2023] UKSC 9: A test case concerning the protection and enforcement of the rights of vulnerable tenants using Rent Repayment Orders (“RROs”) against Rogue Landlords. This concerned a complex analysis of Statutory construction. The Supreme Court has found that "RROs" can only be made against immediate landlords. This departs from tribunal decisions which found that an RRO could be made against a superior landlord as well as an immediate landlord. The Supreme Court considered the statutory scheme may not have worked as intended. This case was followed with interest by landlords using the rent-to-rent model. Following the judgment on instruction by the Department of Levelling up and Communities to assist in instructing Parliamentary Counsel to introduce and amendment into to Renters (Reform) Bill to capture superior landlord under RROs and to increase the period of liability for 2 years thus reversing the effect of the Supreme Court decision.
R (on the application of EL) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea [2022] EWHC 3185 (Admin): Defendant had not acted in breach of its allocation scheme or in breach of its duties under the Housing Act 1996 Pt VI after it had failed to secure alternative accommodation for an individual with physical and mental health disorders who had been rehoused under the Grenfell Rehousing Policy after the Grenfell fire caused him to be evacuated from his previous premises.
London Borough of Hackney v Okoro [2020] EWCA Civ 681, [2020] 4 WLR 85: A successful novel test case led by Stephen Knafler QC in the Court of Appeal as to whether the stay on possession proceedings under Covid 19 applied to appeals. A complex issue on construction of the stay.
Yildez v London Borough of Hackney [2019] EWCA Civ 1331: Court of Appeal case concerning succession rights of tenants.
London Borough of Islington v Dyer [2017] EWCA Civ 150: Case defining the requirements of a notice pursuant to s 128 Housing Act 1996 to terminate an introductory tenancy. A transcript is available and to learn more click here.
R (Hakima Alemi) v Westminster City Council [2015] EWHC 1765 (Admin): was led by Jan Luba QC for the Claimant where the Defendant council's allocation scheme for social housing was declared unlawful and quashed in that it suspended the ability of a homeless family to bid for social housing. The transcript has been made available. This case has also been reported in Inside Housing, the BBC, the Independent, the Local Government Lawyer and in local news in West End Extra.
R (AM) v London Borough of Havering and London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2015] EWHC 1004 (Admin): was led by Jan Luba QC for the Claimant where the Defendant Councils' actions were declared unlawful following successful judicial review application by a homeless family. It was ruled that the local authority responsible for assessing the needs of children in these cases should be the borough in which the family were actually living, and the local authority responsible for providing housing whilst an assessment of the children's needs takes place, should be the authority that had placed them there. The transcript has been made available. This case has also been reported in Inside Housing, Evening Standard, and Family Law. The appeal by Havering and Tower Hamlets was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 17 November 2015 as academic see Legal Action Magazine February 2016 page 45 for the report.
Buckinghamshire County Council (Appellant) v Kingston Upon Thames Royal London Borough Council (Respondent) & (1) SL (By her litigation friend the Official Solicitor) (2) National Society for Epilepsy (3) Secretary of State for Health (Interested Parties) [2011] EWCA Civ 457: was led by Stephen Knafler QC. The Court of Appeal held, on dismissing Buckinghamshire's appeal, that a local authority, in moving a person whose care it had funded into supported housing in another local authority's area following a needs assessment had been under no duty to consult the other local authority. The transcript has been made available.
County Court: Homelessness Appeals
Razzaq Barakate v London Borough of Brent (Appeal County Court at Central London) Case: C40CL187
Represented the homeless appellant in a unique and novel decision in a successful appeal against a decision by Brent to discharge its duty owed to the appellant under s 193 Housing Act 1996 by providing permanent private rented sector accommodation in Birmingham.
The appellant applied as a homeless family to Brent Council on being made homeless from private rented sector accommodation due to the impact of a housing benefit cap. The appellant's application was accepted and was owed the full housing duty on the 29 July 2014. In consideration of the ruling in Nzolameso v Westminster [2015] UKSC 22, together with Guidance and giving judgment, the judge held in respect of grounds 1 and 2 of the Appeal that it is incumbent on a local authority not merely to investigate the particular needs of a family but, where far distant locality would have a considerable impact on the family's medical, educational, employment or social connections, to investigate the likelihood of more suitable accommodation coming available within a reasonable time. See transcript, coverage in Legal Action Magazine (April 2017 p.42) and Nearly Legal blog.
S v London Borough of Waltham Forest C40CL020 (Central London County Court)
Represented the Appellant. The appellant had left her home due to severe domestic violence which had left her with chronic mental and physical health problems. She had been provided with supported accommodation in a specialist refuge. This was coming to an end and she applied to Waltham Forest as homeless The Judge allowed the appeal.
Waltham Forest had not lawfully applied the test of vulnerability from Hotak and had not completed a composite assessment, as it had not taken into account the risks of harm presented to the appellant arising out of the risk of loss of specialist support and accommodation, which rendered the appellant significantly more vulnerable than an ordinary homeless person of robust health.
Further, while Waltham Forest had accepted the appellant's disabilities had arisen out of domestic violence but had only considered the protected characteristic of disability in their PSED assessment. The assessment had failed to address the protected characteristic of sex which was directly linked to domestic violence, given the judgment of Lady Hale and Lord Neuberger in Hotak, such that it could not be said the PSED had been lawfully discharged. See Nearly Legal blog.
Qoraishi v City of Westminster (Central London, Mayors & City County Court): A00MY346
Represented Mr Qoraishi, a former "vulnerable" asylum seeker who had been subject to torture, and who successfully appealed the Local Authority's decision not to provide him with homelessness assistance. Initially the City of Westminster, after an assessment, decided that Mr Qoraishi was not vulnerable within the meaning of the test in Pereira and Osmani. HHJ Hornby allowed Mr Qoraishi's appeal and quashed the review decision by the City of Westminster and remiited for reconsideration. See Legal Action magazine report (page 55).
Konodyba v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (Wandsworth County Court): 8WL02932
Represented the Appellant at Wandsworth County Court in a homelessness appeal concerning eligibility of a Polish A8 national who was not classified as "worker" under domestic regulations. The essence of this appeal was that the case fell within the scope of the case of Ibrahim v Harrow LBC in reliance on the "Baumbast doctrine" and should be stayed and the decision in the case of Parker v Brent BC 7WI04442 (LAG 26 December 2008) in the Central London County Court.
HHJ Behar disagreed and upheld the decision of the local authority. However the point remained open (see Konodyba v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea [2009] EWCA Civ 890. The transcript has been made available.
Other County Court Cases of Interest
Del Rio Sanchez v Simple Property Management F010CL101 (2020): Before HHJ Clarke. Novel case concerning unlawful eviction which identified the legal status of Accommodation clubs and sham letting. See Nearly Legal blog.
Strawberry Vale Residents v Peabody Trust COOCL493 (Central London County Court).
Test case concerning the liability of Peabody Estate to provide gas services to the tenants, leaseholders and freeholders. Case arose when a gas supply via a network was operated by Peabody who failed to have proper gas safety regulations in place. Originally 5 claimants now subject to a Group Litigation Order application with an additional 49 claimants.
Unique point of law as to liability of Landlord to operate and supply gas to residents. Also has involved Martin Westgate QC (Doughty Street Chambers) for residents. The case settled in favour of the Claimants with payment of £30,000 of damages and payment of costs. See Garden Court news article.
Assured Property Services v Olatujoye (County Court at Edmonton) Case D00ED913
Represented Defendant tenant. This was an application to set aside a possession order made in respect of an assured shorthold tenancy provided to a homeless application. The possession order was made pursuant to s 21 of the Housing Act 1988. The set aside concerned a unique and novel point of law in respect of the construction of gas safety regulations. Regulation 36(6) of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 require the landlord to give (a) a copy of the gas safety record to each existing tenant of premises to which the record relates within 28 days of the date of the gas safety check; and (b) a copy of the last gas safety record made in respect of each appliance or flue to any new tenant of the premises before the tenant occupies those premises.
In relation to regulation (a) above, regulation 2(2) of the Assured Shorthold Tenancy Notices and Prescribed Requirements (England) Regulations 2015 applied It was submitted that Regulation 36(6)(b) does apply and is intended to be given to a new tenant before they occupy and is intended to be part of the prescribed requirement. As such if the latest gas certificate was not in fact given to the tenant before they occupied this cannot be rectified later. The regulation as drafted applies to both limbs of regulation 36(6).
Contact Tim
Inquests and Inquiries
Overview
- Inquests for families of patients who have died in detention, particularly those subject to detention for psychiatric care, or with learning disability
- Representation for prisoners and others detained by the state in addition to inquests concerning deaths in custody
Notable Cases
Past notable cases can be viewed below. Click here to see a list of recent notable cases.
Inquest touching on the death of Robert Edwards (Suffolk Coroner, 2013): For more information, please see the INQUEST press release.
Inquest touching on the death of Brian Quaintmere (Southwark Coroner, 2015): Critical narrative decision of failures concerning death while in psychiatric care.
Inquest touching on the death of Matthew Westgarth (Doncaster Coroner, 2016): Critical narrative decision in respect of NHS failures in discharge from psychiatric hospital without a care plan.
Inquest touching on the death of Brian Hull (Liverpool Coroner, 2016): Inquest of death in HMP Walton reported in Liverpool Echo, BBC and on failures identified in PPO report commented on in the Liverpool Echo.
Inquest touching on the death of Jerome Rogers (Croydon Coroner, 2017): Inquest of death of young man who took his own life after the visit of bailiff enforcing motoring tickets reported in the Guardian, Daily Mirror, Daily Mail and Evening, together with a campaign to address suicide amongst young men and has led to a renewed campaign to change the law on bailiff powers and enforcement, see report of 14 March 2017 'Taking Control' by StepChange Debt Charity.
This was also dramatised by the BBC in the drama Killed By My Debt.
Inquest touching on the death of Maia Schroder-Lewis (Avon Coroner, 2024): Inquest of Cardiff university medical student in the community. Deceased persons family have expressed disappointment and frustration that it was an uncritical conclusion in relation to the treatment she received from Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership (AWP), South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (SWASFT) and Montpelier Health Centre. Reported by INQUEST and leading to independent inquiry Independent inquiry launched into Bristol woman's tragic death - Bristol Live (bristolpost.co.uk) and reported in the Times Cardiff student struggled to get mental health support before suicide (timeshighereducation.com)
Contact Tim
Mental Health Law
Overview
- Representing patients at Mental Health Review Tribunals, in judicial review claims, nearest relative displacement applications and unlawful detention claims.
Notable Cases
Past notable cases can be viewed below. Click here to see a list of recent notable cases.
R (on the application of Teresa Maher) v (1) First Tier Tribunal (Mental Health), (2) The Lord Chancellor and (3) Secretary of State for Justice (Defendants) and RWM (Interested Party) [2023] EWHC 34 (Admin), Rights of victims of crime in the Mental Health Tribunal.
R v Aitchison [2016] EWCA Crim 739: Represented the appellant in a successful appeal in the Court of Appeal quashing a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) and substituting it for a hospital order with restriction post Vowles. The transcript of the judgment has been made available.
R (W) v (1) Dr Fintan Larkin, (2) Secretary of State for Justice and others [2012] EWHC 556 (Admin): Warrants for transfer to prison and the requirements of a Responsible Clinician in completing s. 50 Mental Health Act 1983 (as amended) proforma. The transcript has been made available.
JP v Birmingham and Solihull MH NHS Trust. Appeal number HM/535/2010 (Unreported 30 July 2010) (Administrative Chamber Upper Tribunal): An appeal for JP based on challenge to the reasons given by a First Tier MHT refusing discharge of a patient detained under s 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983.
The challenge was based on a failure to give adequate reasons for preferring the evidence of the Responsible Clinician and the detaining authority over the evidence of independent experts by applying BB v South London & Maudsley NHS Trust [2009] UKUT 157 (AAC) which was similar on the facts.
R (Surat Singh) v Stratford Magistrates' Court & Others [2007] EWHC 1582 (Admin); [2007] 1 WLR 3119; [2007] 4 All ER 407; [2008] 1 Cr App R 2; [2007] ACD 72; The Times, March 27 2007: A challenge by way of judicial review of the exercise of a district judge's discretion to refuse to allow the claimant to advance the defence of insanity in summary only proceedings. Leading case as to identifying the common law defence of insanity in summary proceedings.
Contact Tim
IMMIGRATION: ASYLUM AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Overview
- Complex cases concerning social care for adults or children including age disputes.
- Asylum support, accommodation and care provision for migrants
- Right to rent and issues associated with housing for migrants and asylum seekers.
Notable Cases
A v Secretary of State for Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ 858; test case 2nd appeal in the Court of Appeal concerning procedural defects in deportation proceedings.
R (on the application of MJ) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CO/4769/2020 High Court in Cardiff: Represented the Claimant in a judicial review claim where the Claimant was street homeless and destitute and suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and was in receipt of special treatment in Bristol. The Claimant was not an asylum seeker or failed asylum seeker but was a person from abroad. The dispute concerned that despite the Secretary of State accepting the Claimant was entitled to accommodation and support under paragraph 9(3) of schedule 10 of Immigration Act 2016 to prevent a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights the Claimant was left without accommodation and support in Bristol with deteriorating mental health. This is an example of approximately 50 judicial review claims in 2020 – 2021 challenging lack of provision of support to migrants such as in R (MW) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CO/1083/2020; SXO v SSHD (CO/2915/2021) and R (MK) v Secretary of State for Home Department as described on this web page.
R (on the application of JG by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor) v Bristol City Council (Defendant) and Secretary of State for the Home Department (Interested Party) CO/1241/2016 (unreported) 11 August 2016: A successful judicial review challenge to an age assessment of an unaccompanied minor from abroad. To learn more click here.
Contact Tim
Planning Law
Overview
- Planning, particularly representing Gypsies and Travellers
- Development, particular concerning provision of social and affordable housing
- Planning Enforcement against private and social landlords
- Environmental cases, disputes over land use, "fracking" and mineral extraction
- Pollution, air quality and climate change
Notable Cases
Dassy Jones v (1) Welsh Ministers; (2) Rhondda Cynon Taff County BC (Administrative Court (Planning (Wales)) CO/2809/2023: A successful statutory appeal where the rights of the Travellers children were not lawfully balanced against highway safety issues in planning enforcement proceedings.
Contact Tim
Property Disputes
Provides advice and representation in respect of disputes concerning and property including:
- Property and use of land disputes including matters before the Land Adjudicator (Property Chamber): boundary disputes, restrictive covenants, easements, adverse possession, rights to light and others.
- Issues for leaseholders: all Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (Property Chamber) disputes (enfranchisement, lease extension, right to manage, and service charge disputes) right to buy and right of first refusal, lease variations.
- Disputes about title to property and other property rights: trusts of land including Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996, proprietary estoppel and similar claims
- Commercial landlord and tenant issues: Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 disputes including advising on security of tenure and contracting out, termination and renewal; compensation, alterations and dilapidations, breaches of covenant, rent review assignment, renewals, rent review, and service charges issues, and disclaimer, forfeiture or surrender.
Contact Tim
Prisoners’ Rights
Overview
Provides advice and representation to prisoners in respect of challenges to parole decisions and adjudications. Civil claims in respect of infringement of prisoner's rights an and discrimination claims. Mental health cases involving prisoners.
Notable Cases
R (W) v (1) Dr Fintan Larkin, (2) Secretary of State for Justice and others [2012] EWHC 556 (Admin): Warrants for transfer to prison and the requirements of a Responsible Clinician in completing s. 50 Mental Health Act 1983 (as amended) proforma.
R (Salami) v Parole Board; R (Robinson) v Secretary of State for Justice [2009] EWHC 2251 (Admin): Representing the Claimant (Salami) where the Court held the rights of two long-term prisoners under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 art.6 were not breached as a result of the amendments to the early release provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 1991 Pt II by the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.
The transcript has been made available. The Court of Appeal upheld this decision in R (Robinson) v Secretary of State for Justice [2010] EWCA Civ 848.
Contact Tim
Romani Gypsy and Traveller Rights
Overview
Provides advice and representation in respect of challenges to planning decisions and unauthorised occupation of land. In particular judicial review claims.
Notable Cases
R (on the application of SO) v Thanet DC [2023] EWCA Civ 298; [2023] 1 WLR 3462: Judicial review in the Court of Appeal concerning a novel point of law concerning the rights of Gypsies and Travellers given permission to camp on local authority land. Reported in Times law reports and article in Solicitor’s journal.
R (on the application of SO) v Thanet DC (Costs) [2023] EWCA Civ 526: Reported costs decision arising identifying the approach to determination of liability and interim costs orders.
Dassy Jones v (1) Welsh Ministers; (2) Rhondda Cynon Taff County BC (Administrative Court (Planning (Wales)) CO/2809/2023: A successful statutory appeal where the rights of the Travellers children were not lawfully balanced against highway safety issues in planning enforcement proceedings.
